Luka Doncic (the 'LET'S RE-LITIGATE THE PICK UNTO PERPETUITY~!' thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
Thats true. I just think that these defensive responses doesnt need to exsist in this thread. If this thread is just about Luka, then ideally the conversation here should be objective and these "man why cant you just enjoy......" responses should not belong here. Same goes for "pro Luka" crowd of course. No one should get offended if someone simply points out that atm Luka is a below average perimeter defender, then yeah thats a valid point and hard to disagree or discuss about. If someone uses it as an argument on why its ridiculous that someone thinks Luka looks like that he will become a star, then thats a conversation.

Its a different case if someone opens a thread on Kings Rap about stuff like how Luka is so much better than Bagley. In that type of situation defensive reactions are both expected and imo allowed...
That's not an unreasonable point of view. And, in the interest of full disclosure, I don't spend as much time in #KingsRap as I used to, unless I'm on "official" mod business, since I stopped rooting for the team, so I don't have any real sense of how often it's happening over there; I really just see it when it happens in here. So here is where I would be more inclined to address it.
 
Thats true but I didnt say that every rookie should be criticized as harshly. I wouldnt criticise any of them like for example sactowndog is criticizing Doncic and that was my point. All of them are rookies and rookies usually dont contribute to winning basketball. Most of the time in order to evaluate them you need to look for other things than their direct effect on winning. Fox is a good example. Per advanced metrics (rpm, vorp ect) he was one of the worst players in the league and didnt contribute to winning at all. Thats often the case with rookie ball handling creators.
I guess it demonstrates how far some have gone when saying Doncic is deservedly the Rookie of the year and could be (but has some needed areas of growth which might or might not happen) a franchise player is considered harsh criticism.
 
... snip...
Him becoming a great player doesnt require him to become a great or a good defender. The most important thing for him is offense. He can be a Harden/Lillard ect type of liability on defense and still be an extremely valuable player. Wether he is even Harden/Lillars level player now, I dont know and dont really care since hes only 19 and a rookie. Like them or not but his advanced numbers tell that his team isnt getting killed by his defense when hes on the court.
I could bring a bunch of evidences about their defensive liabilities that make them look average/bench players ;).
 
You previously talked about facts, well wether you like it or not, the fact is that based on what we know and what we've seen, Luka was easily the best player on the draft and its not even close to being close. Thats a fact. That fact could possibly change in two or three years if something huge happens, but.. At this moment if we are making an educated guess on who is and will be the most valuable player in this draft class, its Luka. Its very difficult to argue otherwise and thats just how It is.
At this point it is simple to argue that the possibility of Luka not being the best player in this class is far from remote....

1) Luka came into this season far more prepared to play than other rookies. I’m not one who subscribes to the notion the Euro league is less demanding than the NCAA. It’s not even close. Luka has been coached by NBA caliber coaches while Bagley has been coached by his college football playing dad.

2) previous Euro players such as Bogdan and Brogdan with similiar Euro experience have come into the league and improved incrementally. Yes Luka is younger but his skills are easily as advanced as Bogdan and Brogdan.

3) even where players have entered with similiar experience it doesn’t mean the Rookie of the Year winner is the best player of his class. Would you rather have Micheal Carter Williams (ROY) or Giannis? Would you rather have Tyreke (ROY) or Steph Curry? Would you rather have Andrew Wiggins or Aaron Gordon? This trend has excellerated in the era of 1 and dones.

Does Luka have a good chance to be the best player if this class? Sure, I have never said he isn’t a very good player with potential to be a great player. But it’s far to early to say the die is cast like you and others have done.
 
No, you're really not. Do you not honestly understand that you're putting Luka up on a pedestal so high that you're begging people to find reasons to knock him down? You continually point out the good in Doncic (and there is a lot) but bristle any time anyone brings up his failings (and there are a few). Give the kid a break, dude. You'd have a lot fewer people arguing with you if you would at least acknowledge his areas for improvement without immediately going totally on the defensive. HE'S NOT PERFECT. He is going to be targeted more and more by the rest of the West and it will be very interesting to see how he adapts his game.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm more interested in his ability to adapt than I am in just pure statistics.
My thing is he’s going out of his way to bash his defense I never here anybody say harden scored 30 but he didn’t play defense. And he said SA went at him every play they went at DJ more and were successful. Trust me I know he won’t be a great defender but he’s shown time and again he won’t be a negative especially in crunch time. I just want him to hop veteran players I the same pedigree he does Luka with the defense.

Honestly I which we drafted at 3 si I couldn’t get attached to Luka I fell in love with his game.

Cat wait for the Sacramento vs Dallas playoffs series it will be like the 2000s
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
My thing is he’s going out of his way to bash his defense I never here anybody say harden scored 30 but he didn’t play defense. And he said SA went at him every play they went at DJ more and were successful. Trust me I know he won’t be a great defender but he’s shown time and again he won’t be a negative especially in crunch time. I just want him to hop veteran players I the same pedigree he does Luka with the defense.

Honestly I which we drafted at 3 si I couldn’t get attached to Luka I fell in love with his game.

Cat wait for the Sacramento vs Dallas playoffs series it will be like the 2000s
Then you're not paying attention. Harden draws a tremendous amount of criticism/derision around here.
 
I guess it demonstrates how far some have gone when saying Doncic is deservedly the Rookie of the year and could be (but has some needed areas of growth which might or might not happen) a franchise player is considered harsh criticism.
I would say this is pretty harsh:

Luka doing Luka things down the stretch
Would that be giving up multiple baskets on defense and being responsible for the Mavs defense being collapsed?
If anyone spammed garbage like that when Bagley was playing well and scoring some critical baskets, it would be a sh*tstorm. I'm pretty sure not many people in here (especially not a moderator) would end up defending the guy that started the conversation like that.

At this point it is simple to argue that the possibility of Luka not being the best player in this class is far from remote....

1) Luka came into this season far more prepared to play than other rookies. I’m not one who subscribes to the notion the Euro league is less demanding than the NCAA. It’s not even close. Luka has been coached by NBA caliber coaches while Bagley has been coached by his college football playing dad.

2) previous Euro players such as Bogdan and Brogdan with similiar Euro experience have come into the league and improved incrementally. Yes Luka is younger but his skills are easily as advanced as Bogdan and Brogdan.

3) even where players have entered with similiar experience it doesn’t mean the Rookie of the Year winner is the best player of his class. Would you rather have Micheal Carter Williams (ROY) or Giannis? Would you rather have Tyreke (ROY) or Steph Curry? Would you rather have Andrew Wiggins or Aaron Gordon? This trend has excellerated in the era of 1 and dones.

Does Luka have a good chance to be the best player if this class? Sure, I have never said he isn’t a very good player with potential to be a great player. But it’s far to early to say the die is cast like you and others have done.
Maybe you should read what I've written. I havent said that "the die is cast". This is what I've said:
You previously talked about facts, well wether you like it or not, the fact is that based on what we know and what we've seen, Luka was easily the best player on the draft and its not even close to being close. Thats a fact. That fact could possibly change in two or three years if something huge happens, but.. At this moment if we are making an educated guess on who is and will be the most valuable player in this draft class, its Luka. Its very difficult to argue otherwise and thats just how it is.
The fact that you are comparing this situation to other rookie of the year winners like Carter-Williams and Tyreeke doesnt say anything else but that you might not be so good at evaluating talent and future value of a player. Its not about who is going to win the award, its about based on what we know and have seen, who has the most probable path to being the most valuable and productive. The rookie of the year award itself doesnt mean anything to me and I do zero evaluations that base on it. Im not going to waste my time comparing this situation to other rookie classes because it has nothing to do with the overall point.

I can briefly again state the case that why based on what we know and have seen, Luka is most likely going to be the most valuable out of this group.

First of all his play on the court has been so much better than anyone elses that hes on a level of his own compared to these other guys, I'm pretty sure we agree on this so no reason to go on with it.

Luka plays the most valuable role, the most valuable position and has the most valuable skillset. He is a ball handling offensive creator, hes 6'8 and while being great at creating the offense, he shows very high basketball IQ. If you dont even think about his performance, his role/position and skillset are so much more valuable compared to Ayton or Bagley for example that it gives him a huge edge.

Then especially when we know and understand the value of different skillsets and roles AND we combine it to the on court performance, we can make a pretty good educated guess. Guys like Ayton or Bagley are already behind Luka so much based on performance that its very hard to see neither surpassing Lukas value considering their role and skillset is already far less valuable.

Tre Young and Luka have more similar skillsets but Luka seems to be better on almost every aspect of the game and has more size (making it easier to operate defensively).

JJJ is atm probably closest to Luka (also was #2 on my board). Him being great defensively and spacing the floor makes his floor very high, surely a productive player in the future but again, Lukas role and skillset is more valuable and he is already performing great in that role so again, hard to make the case that JJJ becomes more valuable player.

As I've said over and over again, its about making educated evaluations based on the data we have currently. Bu saying that Luka will most likely be the best of his class is a very reasonable take because majority of the data points to it at the moment.
 
I would say this is pretty harsh:




If anyone spammed garbage like that when Bagley was playing well and scoring some critical baskets, it would be a sh*tstorm. I'm pretty sure not many people in here (especially not a moderator) would end up defending the guy that started the conversation like that.



Maybe you should read what I've written. I havent said that "the die is cast". This is what I've said:


The fact that you are comparing this situation to other rookie of the year winners like Carter-Williams and Tyreeke doesnt say anything else but that you might not be so good at evaluating talent and future value of a player. Its not about who is going to win the award, its about based on what we know and have seen, who has the most probable path to being the most valuable and productive. The rookie of the year award itself doesnt mean anything to me and I do zero evaluations that base on it. Im not going to waste my time comparing this situation to other rookie classes because it has nothing to do with the overall point.

I can briefly again state the case that why based on what we know and have seen, Luka is most likely going to be the most valuable out of this group.

First of all his play on the court has been so much better than anyone elses that hes on a level of his own compared to these other guys, I'm pretty sure we agree on this so no reason to go on with it.

Luka plays the most valuable role, the most valuable position and has the most valuable skillset. He is a ball handling offensive creator, hes 6'8 and while being great at creating the offense, he shows very high basketball IQ. If you dont even think about his performance, his role/position and skillset are so much more valuable compared to Ayton or Bagley for example that it gives him a huge edge.

Then especially when we know and understand the value of different skillsets and roles AND we combine it to the on court performance, we can make a pretty good educated guess. Guys like Ayton or Bagley are already behind Luka so much based on performance that its very hard to see neither surpassing Lukas value considering their role and skillset is already far less valuable.

Tre Young and Luka have more similar skillsets but Luka seems to be better on almost every aspect of the game and has more size (making it easier to operate defensively).

JJJ is atm probably closest to Luka (also was #2 on my board). Him being great defensively and spacing the floor makes his floor very high, surely a productive player in the future but again, Lukas role and skillset is more valuable and he is already performing great in that role so again, hard to make the case that JJJ becomes more valuable player.

As I've said over and over again, its about making educated evaluations based on the data we have currently. Bu saying that Luka will most likely be the best of his class is a very reasonable take because majority of the data points to it at the moment.
If your point is Luka has the primary ball handler should be putting guys in position to succeed I would agree that’s an important role. Whether Luka is succeeding in that role is debatable. If he is using his skills to get teammates open/better shots then why are most of his teammates having worse years than last year?
 
If your point is Luka has the primary ball handler should be putting guys in position to succeed I would agree that’s an important role. Whether Luka is succeeding in that role is debatable. If he is using his skills to get teammates open/better shots then why are most of his teammates having worse years than last year?
His role is to create shots for himself and to others. As I've said constantly, rookies (let alone 19 year olds) usually doesnt contribute to winning basketball, especially if you are the primary ball handler, Fox last year was a good example. Even though for Luka and Trae Young advanced metrics arent that important in their first year, with Luka they suggest that the team is better when he is on the floor.

The whole point is to put Lukas performance and his skillset into a context of a 19 year old rookie playing the hardest role for a rookie. In that context, he is performing as well as anyone could expect for him. Luka isnt a superstar yet, hes 19 and 19 year olds are far from finished product. However, his performance in this context suggest that its easy to make a case that he will become all star level player. It already suggest very heavily that most likely he'll be the most valuable player of his draft class.
 
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
 
His role is to create shots for himself and to others. As I've said constantly, rookies (let alone 19 year olds) usually doesnt contribute to winning basketball, especially if you are the primary ball handler, Fox last year was a good example. Even though for Luka and Trae Young advanced metrics arent that important in their first year, with Luka they suggest that the team is better when he is on the floor.

The whole point is to put Lukas performance and his skillset into a context of a 19 year old rookie playing the hardest role for a rookie. In that context, he is performing as well as anyone could expect for him. Luka isnt a superstar yet, hes 19 and 19 year olds are far from finished product. However, his performance in this context suggest that its easy to make a case that he will become all star level player. It already suggest very heavily that most likely he'll be the most valuable player of his draft class.
I agree with all of this up to the very heavily adjective modified. It certainly suggests but when you are dealing with 19 year olds, many of whom have limited professional experience very heavily is an over statement.
 
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
Or even more interesting I suspect many of the same people saying Luka is a sure thing to be a generational 25-30 point scorer ridiculed the concept of Bogdan growing to be a 19-21 point a game scorer even though on a per 36 it’s roughly the same level of improvement.

Remember Bogdan and Luka came over with similiar high level experience in Europe.
 
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
Exactly people look at age and not previous coaching and skill levels.

Luka is incredibly skilled. The spacing he generates on his step back exceeds what many if not most NBA players can generate. His step back was (still is) much better than Bogi’s step back last year. But the skill cuts two ways. Most players refine and add spacing on their moves as a way to increase their scoring. Luka in many ways is already there.
 
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
Saying that hes only 19 simply implies that whatever you think his "growth chart" is, it would be intellectually dishonest to argue that he doesnt have room to improve.

Luka is playing the most valuable and difficult role/position. He still outperforming every other rookie by an absolutely huge margin. The situation right now is that a lot of these high drafted rookies would have to develope a very significant amount to even reach the level that Luka is playing atm. The value of his role and skillset already gives him an edge, his performance puts him on another level compared to anyone on his class. This is the starting point to any evaluation of future value and I would never bet against Luka becoming the most valuable player of that group based on what we know atm.
 
I agree with all of this up to the very heavily adjective modified. It certainly suggests but when you are dealing with 19 year olds, many of whom have limited professional experience very heavily is an over statement.
I dont know what exactly you are disagreing with. The value of Lukas role and skillset already puts him ahead of the group simply because that role and skill set is the most valuable in the Nba. His performance puts him even more ahead, a lot more. To me based on the things we know, predicting him to be pretty surely the most valuable player of this draft class isnt an over statement.

Or even more interesting I suspect many of the same people saying Luka is a sure thing to be a generational 25-30 point scorer ridiculed the concept of Bogdan growing to be a 19-21 point a game scorer even though on a per 36 it’s roughly the same level of improvement.

Remember Bogdan and Luka came over with similiar high level experience in Europe.
Bogdan is 7 years older than Luka so their potential and "room to grow" are not even comparable.

Exactly people look at age and not previous coaching and skill levels.

Luka is incredibly skilled. The spacing he generates on his step back exceeds what many if not most NBA players can generate. His step back was (still is) much better than Bogi’s step back last year. But the skill cuts two ways. Most players refine and add spacing on their moves as a way to increase their scoring. Luka in many ways is already there.
If a 19 year old is already very good, obviously you wont see a 10+ppg and 7+rpm improvements but usually when a 19 year old plays really well, that just means that its highly possible that he'll become even better, probably even a star player. a 19 year old is playing on a level that all of these other high drafted rookies are so far from. Thats not a negative, thats only a positive.

Again, its the context that matters. Without context, Bagleys performance suggest that he is a fringe Nba backup. With proper context you see that he is a young rookie performing fairly well with room to improve. Without context, Luka is a good offensive player that has limitations on defence. With proper context, his performance for a 19year old is amazing and it predicts him being a very valuable player
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
Okay, but just as it's fair to ask, "Why are you coming to a Kings message board expecting us to talk about the potential of Luka Doncic?", I feel like a fair counter to that would be, "Why are you clicking on a thread dedicated to Luka Doncic expecting us to talk about the potential of Marvin Bagley III?" It's not as if there's some kind of requirement for every thread on this message board to somehow come back to the Kings.

I agree with you about there being a disconnect, stemming from the "he's only 19" thing. But I'd also suggest that there's a second disconnect stemming from what I would classify as the "Why aren't you saying that about Bagley, tho?" take. Like, why do the people who have that take think that that is a reasonable thing to expect in this thread? What I am curious about (and, as a mostly inactive participant in #KingsRap these days, I haven't curated this), is whether or not any of the pro-Doncic posters praise Bagley and his potential outside of this thread? How do they talk about Bagley outside of the context of comparison with Doncic? Have they demonstrated that they can talk about Bagley, absent that comparison?
 
Okay, but just as it's fair to ask, "Why are you coming to a Kings message board expecting us to talk about the potential of Luka Doncic?", I feel like a fair counter to that would be, "Why are you clicking on a thread dedicated to Luka Doncic expecting us to talk about the potential of Marvin Bagley III?" It's not as if there's some kind of requirement for every thread on this message board to somehow come back to the Kings.
This thread is the re-litigate the draft thread, not the Doncic thread. And really I have done my best to stay out of it since I said my piece.

I like Luka, I wanted to draft Luka, I'm not surprised in the least that he's where he is right now. But I don't think anything is guaranteed for him. He is going to have to build an NBA body to take the next step. I am sure he can do it, the question is will he. Especially with all the early accolades he is receiving I am not sure he is given the incentive. If he's going to get an all-star nod in his rookie year (I have no issues with this) and he enjoys his lifestyle, he gets tons of hype, he may just conclude there's no reason to change his body. And I think that requires a bigger commitment than a naturally gifted athlete with NBA-worthy skills through high-school and college developing an NBA game.

In either event, this is not the Luka thread, that one just for him and no critique still exists (though not as popular). My take is great guy, but no need to fire Vlade and co. for going a different route. We have something quite nice to look forward to.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
In either event, this is not the Luka thread, that one just for him and no critique still exists (though not as popular). My take is great guy, but no need to fire Vlade and co. for going a different route. We have something quite nice to look forward to.
Touché. And, for the benefit of anyone else who may have also forgotten, this is the thread he was referring to.

And @pdxKingsFan has a point: we already have a "judgment/criticism-free" (well, maybe not completely criticism-free, but hopefully, you get the point) thread for Luka Doncic, and this one is for discussing Doncic in the context of re-litigating the pick. Just because people don't want to post in both of them, or don't feel like they should have to, doesn't mean that they get to claim this one for the purpose that the other one was created for. I'll take responsibility for being slack on allowing that to happen.
 
I think part of the disconnect between those who really really wanted Luka but have accepted the pick we made vs. those who haven't is the "he's only 19" part.

Yes he's only 19, but he's already a seasoned pro and his growth chart is different than the average NCAA entrant would be. Many of us wanted that accelerated growth chart due to team needs and no pick in 2019, but part of the bargain might be he's closer to a finished product than the average NCAA entrant.

"He's only 19" implies that he's going to get way way better in 3-4 seasons before he signs his next deal and yet some folks seem unwilling to give the same benefit of the doubt on the college guys in calling for Vlade's head on the pick.
Before the season all you heard was euroleague isn’t all that and as soon as Luka starts balling all of a sudden he’s had experience
 
This thread is the re-litigate the draft thread, not the Doncic thread. And really I have done my best to stay out of it since I said my piece.

I like Luka, I wanted to draft Luka, I'm not surprised in the least that he's where he is right now. But I don't think anything is guaranteed for him. He is going to have to build an NBA body to take the next step. I am sure he can do it, the question is will he. Especially with all the early accolades he is receiving I am not sure he is given the incentive. If he's going to get an all-star nod in his rookie year (I have no issues with this) and he enjoys his lifestyle, he gets tons of hype, he may just conclude there's no reason to change his body. And I think that requires a bigger commitment than a naturally gifted athlete with NBA-worthy skills through high-school and college developing an NBA game.

In either event, this is not the Luka thread, that one just for him and no critique still exists (though not as popular). My take is great guy, but no need to fire Vlade and co. for going a different route. We have something quite nice to look forward to.
If this thread is just to re-litigate the draft pick, there isnt that much to talk about. It was clear pretty quickly that passing on Luka was a mistake for any team that did that. The value of his skillset and role combined with his superior performance made it pretty clear that he will most likely be the most valuable player of this draft class. It might turn out that someone else surpasses him but based on everything we know atm, its quite unlikely. You can argue otherwise but then you are arguing a pretty weak case.

Also this thread is not about wether we should fire someone over this or not. There are different threads for that. This regime made a mistake on this, its pretty cleat but this regime has done a lot of good things too so its a whole another discussion.
 
If this thread is just to re-litigate the draft pick, there isnt that much to talk about. It was clear pretty quickly that passing on Luka was a mistake for any team that did that. The value of his skillset and role combined with his superior performance made it pretty clear that he will most likely be the most valuable player of this draft class. It might turn out that someone else surpasses him but based on everything we know atm, its quite unlikely. You can argue otherwise but then you are arguing a pretty weak case.

Also this thread is not about wether we should fire someone over this or not. There are different threads for that. This regime made a mistake on this, its pretty cleat but this regime has done a lot of good things too so its a whole another discussion.
That’s your opinion. I believe it is certainly possible he is the best player but it’s by no means a certainty. In fact, gambling isn’t allowed but even given what we know today, I would happily put $100 on Bagley being better than Luka in 4 years.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
If this thread is just to re-litigate the draft pick, there isnt that much to talk about. It was clear pretty quickly that passing on Luka was a mistake for any team that did that. The value of his skillset and role combined with his superior performance made it pretty clear that he will most likely be the most valuable player of this draft class.
Eh, I think that whether or not this argument holds up depends on whether you believe that, no matter how much anyone else from the 2018 draft class improves, they'll always be a step behind Doncic.


It might turn out that someone else surpasses him but based on everything we know atm, its quite unlikely.
Is it, though? I'm not convinced that Doncic is that far ahead of his peers. Ahead, sure, but he doesn't seem so far ahead as to be uncatchable. 2018 wasn't like the 1997 draft, where the talent differential between the best player in the draft and, say, the fourth-best player in the draft is completely insurmountable. And it doesn't even require a so-called drop-off, like what people talk about with Tyreke Evans: Victor Oladipo won ROY in 2014, and was considered at the time to be the best player in a bad draft class. If you re-did that draft, he'd probably be 2nd or 3rd, depending on how much you value a player like Gobert. But the thing is, Oladipo never actually fell off: if anything, he started out good, and has continued to get better. It's just that he was caught and surpassed by Antetokuonmpo. Just like John Wall never really fell off: Paul George just became better than him.

What makes the pick re-litigation a worthwhile discussion to have is whether you believe that a player like Ayton, Bagley or Jackson can ever develop the skills that Doncic already has? Because one side of the argument is rooted in the belief that they can't, and the other side is rooted in the belief that, if they can, you'd rather have a guy who can do all (or most) of what Doncic can do, but is also bigger, faster and stronger. What detracts from the discussion is the tendency of some to overemphasize weaknesses to the point of making it seem like they are trivializing strengths, and the tendency of others to be more focused on making people answer for their takes.
 
Eh, I think that whether or not this argument holds up depends on whether you believe that, no matter how much anyone else from the 2018 draft class improves, they'll always be a step behind Doncic.



Is it, though? I'm not convinced that Doncic is that far ahead of his peers. Ahead, sure, but he doesn't seem so far ahead as to be uncatchable. 2018 wasn't like the 1997 draft, where the talent differential between the best player in the draft and, say, the fourth-best player in the draft is completely insurmountable. And it doesn't even require a so-called drop-off, like what people talk about with Tyreke Evans: Victor Oladipo won ROY in 2014, and was considered at the time to be the best player in a bad draft class. If you re-did that draft, he'd probably be 2nd or 3rd, depending on how much you value a player like Gobert. But the thing is, Oladipo never actually fell off: if anything, he started out good, and has continued to get better. It's just that he was caught and surpassed by Antetokuonmpo. Just like John Wall never really fell off: Paul George just became better than him.

What makes the pick re-litigation a worthwhile discussion to have is whether you believe that a player like Ayton, Bagley or Jackson can ever develop the skills that Doncic already has? Because one side of the argument is rooted in the belief that they can't, and the other side is rooted in the belief that, if they can, you'd rather have a guy who can do all (or most) of what Doncic can do, but is also bigger, faster and stronger. What detracts from the discussion is the tendency of some to overemphasize weaknesses to the point of making it seem like they are trivializing strengths, and the tendency of others to be more focused on making people answer for their takes.
Nice post. Luka has exceeded my expectations, but the idea that the score is settled on the draft class is ridiculous. In 5 years, I could easily see a scenario where Marvin, Ayton, Jackson, Bamba or even Trae are thought of as the top player in the draft. A lot depends not only on who has the best individual numbers, but also who (if any) end up contributing to a championship. A lot can happen in a short amount of time to change the landscape of the league.
 
If this thread is just to re-litigate the draft pick, there isnt that much to talk about. It was clear pretty quickly that passing on Luka was a mistake for any team that did that. The value of his skillset and role combined with his superior performance made it pretty clear that he will most likely be the most valuable player of this draft class. It might turn out that someone else surpasses him but based on everything we know atm, its quite unlikely. You can argue otherwise but then you are arguing a pretty weak case.

Also this thread is not about wether we should fire someone over this or not. There are different threads for that. This regime made a mistake on this, its pretty cleat but this regime has done a lot of good things too so its a whole another discussion.
Weak case? I guess it depends on what perspective you're looking from.

This is a thread to re-litigate the draft. You seem focused looking strictly on how Luka is doing. That's great for Luka and the Mavericks. But does that make it a mistake for the TEAM called the Kings? We don't know what would've happened with Luka but we do know what happened with Bagley. The team is winning and maybe after all these years of futile to have turned a corner. IF they continue their current trajectory they will have the first winning season in over a decade. Even if and there's a good chance they won't make the playoffs I'm not sure that arguing that it wasn't a mistake is such a weak argument. At least not from what is actually happening with the Kings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.