• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2011 NBA Draft Was Supposed to Have Been Weak

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

gratefuldead

NBA Starter
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
3,540
Reaction score
3,271
Points
113
i was just looking at 2011 draft. people thought it was going to be weak but some real players came out. redraft would be maybe:

1) Kyrie
2) Kawhi
3) Klay
4) Jimmy Bulter
5) Mirotic
6) Nic Vucevic
7) Chandler Parsons
8) Isaah Thomas
9) Tristan Thompson
10) Valanciunas
11) Kenneth Faried

Then you have like a bunch more guys who i think could have gone in any order

Kanter, Brandon Knight, Reggie Jackson, Morris Twins, Shumpert, Montejunas, Alec Burks, Tobias Harris, Norris Cole, Kemba

hell of a draft honestly in retrospect

Im glad we got TT but we missed on a whole bunch of dudes
 
its just nuts how many players came out of that draft who are either starters, all star level or good rotation guys.
 
its just nuts how many players came out of that draft who are either starters, all star level or good rotation guys.

Even more so that most of the guys being hyped are not on that list above. Most of those guys were projected to be solid but not great.

So many guys that were solid in college really broke out when they got to the NBA.
 
Sort of painful that we picked TT over Kawhi Leonard. But I don't think we could have developed Leonard effectively -- he was extremely raw coming out of college. Nobody saw how really good he was going to be, although there were some signs there (size and strength -- he had one of the largest wingspans ever measured and was super big and strong for a SF -- combined with general athleticism).
 
Khawi and Jimmy Butler are examples of what happens when you have a good organization with a good situation and most importantly the player is willing to work their ass off. No way Tristan goes that high.
 
Sort of painful that we picked TT over Kawhi Leonard. But I don't think we could have developed Leonard effectively -- he was extremely raw coming out of college. Nobody saw how really good he was going to be, although there were some signs there (size and strength -- he had one of the largest wingspans ever measured and was super big and strong for a SF -- combined with general athleticism).

I don't think anyone could have anticipated him becoming as good as he has, although there were people (including myself) who were totally fine with drafting him fourth. Everything I read about him pointed to him becoming at least a solid NBA player. I do agree that Leonard probably wouldn't have developed effectively playing under Byron Scott, although Mike Brown would have loved him.
 
TT was the sacrifice needed to bring Lebron back. Im ok with it. We should all begin to accept that fact.

The overall depth for 2011 was outstanding.

Kyrie
Kanter
Thompson
Big Daddy V
Knight
Walker
Klay Thompson
Alec Burks (solid before injury)
Morris Twins
Leonard
Vuvecic
Shumpert
Tobias Harris
Monte whatever
Faried
Mirotic
Reggie Jackson
Norris Cole
Jimmy Butler
Parsons
Isiah Thomas

plenty of other solid bodies in between.
 
Say it with me guys... THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A WEAK DRAFT.

It's just a narrative front offices put out there to cover their asses because 90% of them are clueless in terms of projecting and evaluating talent.

Players (up to at least the All-Star level) are there in every single draft.

Scouts just have to do their JOB in finding them.

It also why trading draft picks (esp. first rounders) is NO NO in my GM book.
 
i was just looking at 2011 draft. people thought it was going to be weak but some real players came out. redraft would be maybe:

1) Kyrie
2) Kawhi
3) Klay
4) Jimmy Bulter
5) Mirotic
6) Nic Vucevic
7) Chandler Parsons
8) Isaah Thomas
9) Tristan Thompson
10) Valanciunas
11) Kenneth Faried

Then you have like a bunch more guys who i think could have gone in any order

Kanter, Brandon Knight, Reggie Jackson, Morris Twins, Shumpert, Montejunas, Alec Burks, Tobias Harris, Norris Cole, Kemba

hell of a draft honestly in retrospect

Im glad we got TT but we missed on a whole bunch of dudes
kawhi is #1 in a redraft

Sort of painful that we picked TT over Kawhi Leonard. But I don't think we could have developed Leonard effectively -- he was extremely raw coming out of college. Nobody saw how really good he was going to be, although there were some signs there (size and strength -- he had one of the largest wingspans ever measured and was super big and strong for a SF -- combined with general athleticism).
don't really agree. he was raw, yes, but his work ethic has been - and still is - off the charts. that's why he's had success, not because he's a system guy. he'd still be as good as he is now on the majority of nba teams. and he'd still end up very, very good on the remaining teams too.

fwiw i am saying that as someone who was vehemently against drafting him at #4. i way, way, way underestimated him. definitely did not want thompson either, but dismissing kawhi was likely my most off-base basketball opinion in the past 5yrs.
 
Last edited:
kawhi is #1 in a redraft

don't really agree. he was raw, yes, but his work ethic has been - and still is - off the charts. that's why he's had success, not because he's a system guy. he'd still be as good as he is now on the majority of nba teams. and he'd still end up very, very good on the remaining teams too.

fwiw i am saying that as someone who was vehemently against drafting him at #4. i way, way, way underestimated him. definitely did not want thompson either, but dismissing kawhi was likely my most off-base basketball opinion in the past 5yrs.

Kawhi does not go #1 in a redraft. Irving is and always will be the best player from the draft class. He would always go #1. Not Cavs homer, but the historical feats that Kyrie have achieved put him #1.
 
Kawhi does not go #1 in a redraft. Irving is and always will be the best player from the draft class. He would always go #1. Not Cavs homer, but the historical feats that Kyrie have achieved put him #1.
if this was the and1 league you would be correct.

since defense actually matters - and more than offense, actually - you are not.

also not sure what "historical feats" you can even be referring to; playing on a dogshit team for 3 years and racking up fan-voted ASG's and trophies over all-star weekend don't carry a whole lot of weight as far as "historical feats" go. though, their trophy cases sure are an interesting contrast!
 
if this was the and1 league you would be correct.

since defense actually matters - and more than offense, actually - you are not.

also not sure what "historical feats" you can even be referring to; playing on a dogshit team for 3 years and racking up fan-voted ASG's and trophies over all-star weekend don't carry a whole lot of weight as far as "historical feats" go. though, their trophy cases sure are an interesting contrast!

Try FIBA MVP amongst other things.

Kawhi benefited from developing in a well established system. Kyrie is still the superior talent. No amount of superior athleticism from Kawhi makes up for Kyrie's domination in the skills department.

You're a fool to think otherwise.
 
Try FIBA MVP amongst other things.

Kawhi benefited from developing in a well established system. Kyrie is still the superior talent. No amount of superior athleticism from Kawhi makes up for Kyrie's domination in the skills department.

You're a fool to think otherwise.
lol, he was fiba mvp after half the damn nba declined invitations, backed out, or got hurt. usa didn't exactly have their a-list team out there.

the "system" stuff is such a cop out. the spurs aren't the only team that knows how to develop players and kawhi's insane work ethic is well established. he would've been just as good on the majority of other teams in the league. by "skills" i'm guessing you mean "fancy crap that shows up on sportscenter and gives casual fans hardons" as opposed to stuff that actually matters and wins games. like, as i said earlier, a little thing called defense.

kawhi is an elite two way player while kyrie is only an elite one way player. the contrast in positional scarcity vs. positional abundance makes the decision even easier.
 
if this was the and1 league you would be correct.

since defense actually matters - and more than offense, actually - you are not.

also not sure what "historical feats" you can even be referring to; playing on a dogshit team for 3 years and racking up fan-voted ASG's and trophies over all-star weekend don't carry a whole lot of weight as far as "historical feats" go. though, their trophy cases sure are an interesting contrast!

Are you seriously trying to compare the hall of fame players, hall of fame coach, and system of championship winning Kawhi was drafted into, compared to Kyrie and the situation he was in the last three years? Hysterical.

Yeah, because everyone should win with Mike Brown, Dion Waiters, Alonzo Gee, and Earl Clark at the helm.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top