PDA

View Full Version : Where do you think Bird would go in the draft these days?



JasonJohnHorn
06-27-2014, 12:46 AM
When drafting players in recent years (Iíve noticed since the late 90ís), teams put a lot of weight into ATHLETICISM. There seems to be a belief that athleticism means more potential. It has paid off in cases like Tracy McGrady and Kobe Bryant, obviously, but there have also been a great many busts. Skill seems to be neglected in favour of athleticism in many instances. I was shocked to see Kyle Anderson drop all the way to 30th overall. I will be the first to admit that I donít know jack about college ball, and you canít rely on per-game averages on college to project NBA success, but I thought Anderson put up some CRAZY impressive numbers (great passer). A lot of mock drafts had him going in the mid-late teens. I had asked PSD for their input on Anderson, and some of you guys answered back that he had a weight issue and wasnít athletic (both legit red flags).

It got me thinking. Where would a guy like Bird end up getting drafted today? Bird was one of the least athletic greats of all time. In his own draft he only went 6th (behind Mychal Thompson, Phil Ford (?), Ricky Roby (?) Purvis Short and Michael Ray). Where would he go in a draft these days? Would he go top 5? Top 10? Or would he slip into the mid-late teens? And how about guys like Barkley, who were considered to have a weight problem in college? Would he have slid down the draft ladder?

I do feel somewhat vindicated in my tentative excitement about Anderson given that the Spurs drafted him, and nobody has done better than the Spurs in the last 17 years when it comes to drafting players (not that I expect him to be an All-Star, but I expect he could be a solid rotation player in the NBA). The Spurs though, have had some success with guys that have Ďweightí issues or are Ďunauthenticí (see Diaw and Mills and perhaps Bonner as well).

In this context, Iím not sure that some of the guys we know to be great players, Bird, Barkley, ect., would be drafted as high these days.

Where do you think Bird would be drafted these days? Or Barkely? And are there any other players you think would slip in the draft these days that were drafted high in the past?

dhopisthename
06-27-2014, 12:55 AM
#1 easily. he averaged 33/13/4.4 his first year in college.

JasonJohnHorn
06-27-2014, 01:02 AM
#1 easily. he averaged 33/13/4.4 his first year in college.

Those are impressive numbers, but they weren't even impressive enough to get hims first in his own draft.... and scouts would see those numbers as being inflated because there were no other good players on his college team, where as recently we've seen guys from the same program both get drafted top 3 twice in the last few seasons.

Also... I would assume that with today's slower paced games, those averages wouldn't be so high.

GREATNESS ONE
06-27-2014, 01:05 AM
Second pick in the draft.

dhopisthename
06-27-2014, 01:09 AM
Those are impressive numbers, but they weren't even impressive enough to get hims first in his own draft.... and scouts would see those numbers as being inflated because there were no other good players on his college team, where as recently we've seen guys from the same program both get drafted top 3 twice in the last few seasons.

Also... I would assume that with today's slower paced games, those averages wouldn't be so high.

he would still be putting up 20+ on killer efficiency with a great 3 point shot which is much more valued in today's game then it was then. he did that as a 20 year old rookie. assuming he came out after one year he would be the #1 pick for sure. we also never saw some actual combine numbers to see how unathletic he really was

B'sCeltsPatsSox
06-27-2014, 01:12 AM
Those are impressive numbers, but they weren't even impressive enough to get hims first in his own draft.... and scouts would see those numbers as being inflated because there were no other good players on his college team, where as recently we've seen guys from the same program both get drafted top 3 twice in the last few seasons.

Also... I would assume that with today's slower paced games, those averages wouldn't be so high.

Well ya, that was because he was drafted before he made it his intention to get drafted lol.

dhopisthename
06-27-2014, 01:14 AM
yeah bird would have gone #1 if it wasn't for a really weird rule back then

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NBA_draft

Shlumpledink
06-27-2014, 01:24 AM
Bird was a great equalizer with his massive threat to hit any shot, which demanded a close out where he would use one of the best fakes. If they're more athletic they are flying by and he can nail the 3 with a micrometer of daylight.

Larry Bird had a strong base and could play in the post very well, as well as rebound. I don't know many teams that would pass up on 3 point shooting/playmaking/rebounding. Even though wiggins is a sexy prospect at number 1, I think Bird was still the better prospect (but I am trying to forget Larry Bird's career to make that comparison, which is hard for me to do admittedly)

JasonJohnHorn
06-27-2014, 01:48 AM
yeah bird would have gone #1 if it wasn't for a really weird rule back then

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NBA_draft


Thanks! I did not know that. You learn something new every day!

Jeffy25
06-27-2014, 02:07 AM
yeah bird would have gone #1 if it wasn't for a really weird rule back then

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_NBA_draft

Yup


Before the draft, Larry Bird had just finished his junior year at Indiana State. However, he was eligible to be drafted without applying for "hardship" because his original college class at the Indiana University had graduated.[9][14] He initially enrolled at Indiana in 1974 but dropped out before the season began. After sitting out a year, he enrolled at Indiana State.[15] Despite being eligible for the draft, he stated that he would return to college for his senior season. His hometown team, the Indiana Pacers, initially held the first overall pick. However, when they failed to persuade him to leave college early, they traded the first pick to the Blazers, who also failed to convince him into signing.[16][17] Five teams, including the Pacers who held the third pick, passed on Bird until the Celtics used the sixth pick to draft him. They drafted him even though they knew that they might lose the exclusive rights to him if he didn't sign before the next draft. He could reenter the draft in 1979 and sign with the other team that drafted him. Nevertheless, on April 1979, he signed a five-year, US$3.25-million contract with the Celtics, which made him the highest-paid rookie in the history of team sport at that time.[18]

KnickNyKnick
06-27-2014, 10:03 AM
in a nest up in the rafters

IndyRealist
06-27-2014, 10:58 AM
Bird was drafted highly in part because he took an ISU team with no other NBA caliber players to the NCAA Championship game. Stephan Curry did not get that far and got drafted #6 (?) with similar questions about his athleticism.

NBA decision makers like obvious, eye test level evaluation that doesn't require any thinking. No. 1 right now is obvious athleticism. But carrying a team in the tourney is pretty obvious as well.

Kevj77
06-27-2014, 06:09 PM
He would have been the #1 pick yesterday for sure.

Jint.
06-27-2014, 06:24 PM
Bird >>>>> Wiggins

slashsnake
06-27-2014, 10:41 PM
Bird was drafted highly in part because he took an ISU team with no other NBA caliber players to the NCAA Championship game. Stephan Curry did not get that far and got drafted #6 (?) with similar questions about his athleticism.

NBA decision makers like obvious, eye test level evaluation that doesn't require any thinking. No. 1 right now is obvious athleticism. But carrying a team in the tourney is pretty obvious as well.

But Shelvin Mack did get that far too with less.

It is tough to base it on an eye test, especially today, as they are playing 30 games in a system not like what you run, against pretty weak competition overall with 5 or 6 real quality games.

No matter which way you go you can bust. Pick a guy with an injury history in college and you could get Oden, or you could get Kyle Lowry.

Pick a guy off of game tape and you can get good or bad. Pick a guy off of athleticism it goes both ways. Same with high character guys, could get you Duncan... or Jimmer.

Hawkeye15
06-27-2014, 10:47 PM
well, let see. He skipped a year of school after dropping out of Indiana, and then spent all his remaining eligible years at a small school dominating. In today's NBA drafts, youth and athleticism are highly rated, but his skillset and production wouldn't have let him slip past picks 3-6, even at age 23, which is an old man by draft standards today.

Back then, they drafted for need and college production. Things are so different now, its honestly tough to say.

Hawkeye15
06-27-2014, 10:47 PM
example: Magic would have easily gone #1 this year, but due to age, Bird may have slipped a handful of spots, despite being as good.

alexander_37
06-27-2014, 10:51 PM
He would be a lottery pick at first after all the top athletes went. He would probably grab comparisons to a shorter more skilled Kevin Love.

TDjacksonville
06-27-2014, 11:16 PM
I would have picked him at 4. He epitomizes what henny likes. Would space our offense out but would be real soft in the interior

THE MTL
06-27-2014, 11:30 PM
He would probi go at #4 in today's draft. Basically slightly higher than his own. His value would be inflated because of the values of the three point shot in today's game

jaydubb
06-28-2014, 12:20 AM
Larry bird AKA "that white boy can hoop!!"

I really think he goes #1.. The dude is one of the most versatile players ever, not to mention his stroke from outside.. He put up insane numbers in college, no way Wiggins gets picked over him.

Raps08-09 Champ
06-28-2014, 12:23 AM
Isn't he like in his 60's?

koreancabbage
06-28-2014, 12:45 AM
#1. but i'm sure Andrea Bargnani would have gone #1 instead because thats what the Cavs would have done.

Iron24th
06-28-2014, 01:21 AM
jordanbulls is that you?

goingfor28
06-28-2014, 01:51 AM
Isn't he like in his 60's?
Lol iswydt

PowerHouse
06-28-2014, 02:01 AM
When drafting players in recent years (Iíve noticed since the late 90ís), teams put a lot of weight into ATHLETICISM.

If its all about athleticism then how did fat *** Anthony Bennett get picked #1 overall last year?

slashsnake
06-28-2014, 02:23 AM
He would probi go at #4 in today's draft. Basically slightly higher than his own. His value would be inflated because of the values of the three point shot in today's game

Great point there. His rookie year was the first year of the three in the NBA, and many in the NBA thought of it as an ABA used gimmick at the time.

Another thought... His draft class was pretty weak. Had they had the talent of the year before or after, he may have been taken at the end of the lottery back then.

Of course look at guys like Dirk (9th), Bargnani (1st), Laettner (3rd)... Larry was a 30 pt 13 board, 5 assist guy in college who shot 53% and over 80% from the line. Back to back consensus all american, Naismith award winner, AP player of the year in college and about every single other regular season MVP award possible. Figure his career points and boards averages over three years are higher than any single season by any player in the past 15 years. Sure different time but he was killing it.

People have made the Steph Curry and Kevin Love comparisons. Take the best of each of their college careers and combine them and you have a lesser season than any of Larry Bird's.

He was small school and had a poor shooting game in the championship game (still 19 points and 13 boards)...

But he killed NBA talent and top schools on the way up. 35/16/9 against Mark Aguirre and #2 DePaul in the final four, 31-10 vs. Scott Hastings and Sidney Moncrief and #2 seeded Arkansas, 22/13/7 and 29/15/5 in his other two bracket games that year.

The scan of his senior year game logs is cut off after 21 games, but after the season opener it shows him as their leading scorer and rebounder for 20 straight games.

I really could see him as #1 seeing his college numbers (all before my time). Sure he wasn't a physical specimen, but I think he would have done fair enough there with a modern nutrition/training regimen where that wouldn't be a problem. Durant couldn't bench press a fly, but got taken #2 overall because you knew he could play.

aman
06-28-2014, 07:06 AM
A 50 year old Bird would have been the #1 pick in last year's NBA draft if he could have re-entered. I'm sure his shooting percentage would have been better than Anthony Bennett's 30% shooting.

The draft is different these days. These kids are being draft with just one or two years of college experience. So, athletism is a key factor since there's not much data to evaluate a player. It's becoming a crap shoot like in the MLB draft and NHL draft. These teams pick based on what they project the player will be in 3-4 years (when their rookie contract ends).

Back when Bird was drafted, NBA teams had 4 years to evaluate a player's skill level. Also, after 4 years of staying in college, other college teams had a chance to scout the players and devise game plans to stop the elite players. So, if a college player could improve each year in college, there's a good chance he'd improve in the NBA as well. There was less guessing back then.

Now, Bird only played 3 years in college... but that's still alot more than the freshmens who got drafted this year.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-28-2014, 11:58 AM
I never understand how often Bird gets under rated on this board. I have said it before and I will say it again. I absolutely hated the guy but he was incredible. He would have been drafted #1 this season. He would have been drafted #1 in his draft (if he would have agreed to enter the draft). The Hick from French Lick averaged 30ppg-13rpg-5apg-53%FG in his 3 college seasons. He carried a bunch of scrubs to the championship game.