Article: Kawhi would be the #1 pick if the 2011 draft were redone today...

http://basketball-players.pointafter...-Kawhi-Leonard

It could be argued the Spurs were lucky getting two #1 picks in Robinson and Duncan, but this one was earned by great scouting and a smart trade.

Who was the #1 pick that year... Anthony Bennett, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNT Eagles 2016

Who was the #1 pick that year... Anthony Bennett, right?

---

Clicking through to the article will usually answer dumb questions like this. Redrafts always go selection by selection, and give both the original pick, and their new pick.

Water is wet

Should've been Jimmer imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNT Eagles 2016

Who was the #1 pick that year... Anthony Bennett, right?

---

Kyrie Irving

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

http://basketball-players.pointafter...-Kawhi-Leonard

It could be argued the Spurs were lucky getting two #1 picks in Robinson and Duncan, but this one was earned by great scouting and a smart trade.

---

Yeah, amazing. Leonard would easily go #1 in 2011. Ginobili would most likely go #1 in 1999. Parker probably goes #2 in 2001 (with Gasol #1).

Pretty good draft year.

Give Kyle Anderson a few more years, gents, and watch him shine.

No shit. JJ Watt would too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNT Eagles 2016

Who was the #1 pick that year... Anthony Bennett, right?

---

Kyrie, Bennett was in 2013. 2011 was supposed to be a weak draft but it has turned out to be pretty good. At least Kyrie was projected to go #1, Bennett was a reach (I could be wrong but I think most mocks had him in the 5-10 range).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Yeah, amazing. Leonard would easily go #1 in 2011. Ginobili would most likely go #1 in 1999. Parker probably goes #2 in 2001 (with Gasol #1).

---

Leon Smith in '99, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

Give Kyle Anderson a few more years, gents, and watch him shine.

---

Biggest move belongs to Isaiah Thomas. Dude was the last pick of the draft and now a top 5 pick.

Surprisingly a lot of solid players out of the 2011 draft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rasuo214

Kyrie, Bennett was in 2013. 2011 was supposed to be a weak draft but it has turned out to be pretty good. At least Kyrie was projected to go #1, Bennett was a reach (I could be wrong but I think most mocks had him in the 5-10 range).

---

That's right. Cavs reasoning was he was the most "ready to play now" choice, and of course they were contenders and all... (Sarcasm).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Yeah, amazing. Leonard would easily go #1 in 2011. Ginobili would most likely go #1 in 1999. Parker probably goes #2 in 2001 (with Gasol #1).

---

Spurs :worthy:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

Give Kyle Anderson a few more years, gents, and watch him shine.

---

hey, according to the article, Corey Joseph was a good pick and people thought he was a bust.

POTFO should still sign Vesley to replace Bonner, he can be an energy guy like Derrick Williams/Brandon Wright:wakeup

Imagine, Kawhi at 15th (Spurs) and Jimmy at 29th (Spurs).

Wouldn't Boban and CoJo go higher than what this article says?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm

POTFO should still sign Vesley to replace Bonner, he can be an energy guy like Derrick Williams/Brandon Wright:wakeup

---

They can get a fridge to replace Bonner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ParadoxEN

Leon Smith in '99, IMO.

---

That draft was historically bad. Only a few All-Stars (and I'm talking about 1x or 2x All-Stars) and Manu the only future HoFer (and not based on his NBA credentials).

Derick Williams was in that draft? I have the feeling he already is around for 10 years the way Sean always speaks about that untapped potential he has/had

Leonard would be top ten but not number one. No other team has player development like San Antonio. No other team can afford to wait through a rebuild of a players shot. Not every coach can connect to a shell shocked shy guy. Everyone, including the spurs thought leonard would be a defensive junk man and only that.

If you redraft with perfect information you still have to account for that issue. Leonard is very self motivated but not in a traditional way. It's taken him five or six years to be the star. As a number one pick that's a day one experience. People would call Leonard a bust for not developing fast enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K...

Leonard would be top ten but not number one.

---

I'm not sure you fully understand the concept of a redraft.

:lol so lucky to be born into being a Spurs fan tbh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

Give Kyle Anderson a few more years, gents, and watch him shine.

---

He should be pissed that Simmons is moving up the ladder before him.. he needs to stop being passive now and lay it on the line, or else he won't be around in two years, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I'm not sure you fully understand the concept of a redraft.

---

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K...

Leonard would be top ten but not number one. No other team has player development like San Antonio. No other team can afford to wait through a rebuild of a players shot. Not every coach can connect to a shell shocked shy guy. Everyone, including the spurs thought leonard would be a defensive junk man and only that.

If you redraft with perfect information you still have to account for that issue. Leonard is very self motivated but not in a traditional way. It's taken him five or six years to be the star. As a number one pick that's a day one experience. People would call Leonard a bust for not developing fast enough.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I'm not sure you fully understand the concept of a redraft.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheDoctor

:lmao

---

:lol yep, someone missed the boat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DJR210

:lol so lucky to be born into being a Spurs fan tbh



He should be pissed that Simmons is moving up the ladder before him.. he needs to stop being passive now and lay it on the line, or else he won't be around in two years, IMO.

---

Anderson will shine more when he is able to run a unit. Simmons is better at getting to the rim, but Anderson is pretty much unstoppable one-on-one when he sets his mind to it. And he's court vision and anticipation is better. I haven't seen Simmons run the team well yet, so I wouldn't put him above Anderson yet in terms of replacing Manu.

So what's the difference between a redraft or a list of best players from said draft?

I think I get it, but it's not a redraft. It's a list of good players. My point stands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K...

So what's the difference between a redraft or a list of best players from said draft?

I think I get it, but it's not a redraft. It's a list of good players. My point stands.

---

The point is, if that draft were held today, 100% of GMs would pick Kawhi Leonard first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aztecfan03

hey, according to the article, Corey Joseph was a good pick and people thought he was a bust.

---

Spurstalk shit on him regularly for years until right before someone paid him a lot of money to go to their team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

The point is, if that draft were held today, 100% of GMs would pick Kawhi Leonard first.

---

I think that's true, but I kind of understand K's point. Sometimes what makes a player flourish is the situation he ends up in. If it were possible to mix and match teams with draft picks randomly and see the outcomes, I think we'd be surprised at how much environment plays a part. Some guys become great players because they dropped in the draft, and they use that as motivation. Some guys feel entitled. Some guys don't match up well with coaches, etc.

I'm not positive that Leonard would be the player he is today in any other situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

I think that's true, but I kind of understand K's point. Sometimes what makes a player flourish is the situation he ends up in. If it were possible to mix and match teams with draft picks randomly and see the outcomes, I think we'd be surprised at how much environment plays a part. Some guys become great players because they dropped in the draft, and they use that as motivation. Some guys feel entitled. Some guys don't match up well with coaches, etc.

I'm not positive that Leonard would be the player he is today in any other situation.

---

I also understand his point, but the whole point of a redraft is to eliminate all the "what ifs" that were present during the actual draft. It's a 20/20 hindsight kind of exercise.

The odds of success are actually stacked against most top draft picks because they are by definition drafted by crappy, dysfunctional, toxic teams. That's why so many of them only start being good after getting traded at the end of their rookie contract. The smart ones bolt as soon as they can.

GMs in 2016 would still draft Kawhi #1 because they'd know he's not going to be a difference maker out of the gate and that they'll need to invest some time and effort to develop him. They know that because that's exactly what SA did and they can see the result.

Doing a redraft any other way is just opening the door to endless "but what if that bust pick had been drafted by the Spurs, he'd be a HoFer by now!" arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I also understand his point, but the whole point of a redraft is to eliminate all the "what ifs" that were present during the actual draft. It's a 20/20 hindsight kind of exercise.

The odds of success are actually stacked against most top draft picks because they are by definition drafted by crappy, dysfunctional, toxic teams. That's why so many of them only start being good after getting traded at the end of their rookie contract. The smart ones bolt as soon as they can.

GMs in 2016 would still draft Kawhi #1 because they'd know he's not going to be a difference maker out of the gate and that they'll need to invest some time and effort to develop him. They know that because that's exactly what SA did and they can see the result.

Doing a redraft any other way is just opening the door to endless "but what if that bust pick had been drafted by the Spurs, he'd be a HoFer by now!" arguments.

---

Correct. The purpose of having this discussion is ranking the players as they are today.

Really strange thinking of Manu going from the very end to the very beginning of the '99 draft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Really strange thinking of Manu going from the very end to the very beginning of the '99 draft.

---

Actually I don't think that it's quite as clear cut as for Kawhi: Manu would have a strong case for being picked #1, but depending on each team's situation I could see some going for Shawn Marion or Metta World Peace instead, or even AK47.

Not every team could afford waiting 3 years for their #1 pick to arrive and then play him below 30mpg.

Ok so redraft is the same as best players(from a coaches/fo) standpoint.


I could go on..But the main distinction, it's called a redraft b/c of fantasy sports where people do draft established players. In the real world draft only occurs with new players (outside of weird exspansion draft cases).

So if you say redraft your stipulating a return to 2011 with more information about player development. That is unless your redraft is fantasy redraft, in which case your asking about best players.


The sight difference with saying "kawhi is the best player from 2011 class) is that in your redraft you acknowledge teams needs..So like Cleveland wouldn't take kawhi because LeBron. You'd have to stipulate that the redraft is best player available not best fit for team. Or you invent some trade fiction and say Cavs take kawhi and trade out.


Anyway, this thread clearly should be titled best player 2011 draft class and not redraft redo. Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K...

Ok so redraft is the same as best players(from a coaches/fo) standpoint.

---

Yup.

Quote:

---

The sight difference with saying "kawhi is the best player from 2011 class) is that in your redraft you acknowledge teams needs..So like Cleveland wouldn't take kawhi because LeBron. You'd have to stipulate that the redraft is best player available not best fit for team. Or you invent some trade fiction and say Cavs take kawhi and trade out.

---

That's a valid point but nobody does that as it's way too complicated, especially taking into account that we don't even know what is going on in most of the GMs' head when they draft (or rather, what is NOT going on in their head, like that knucklehead drafting Rubio and Flynn with 2 lottery picks).

So essentially a redraft is just listing the players from that draft from best to worst according to how things panned out for them in the meanwhile. It's just another way to say "that team was so right/wrong" or "that player so over/underperformed compared to the rank where he was drafted".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongtimeSpursFan

Biggest move belongs to Isaiah Thomas. Dude was the last pick of the draft and now a top 5 pick.

---

debatable. He is still a hard player to use if you're trying to win games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K...

Ok so redraft is the same as best players(from a coaches/fo) standpoint.


I could go on..But the main distinction, it's called a redraft b/c of fantasy sports where people do draft established players. In the real world draft only occurs with new players (outside of weird exspansion draft cases).

So if you say redraft your stipulating a return to 2011 with more information about player development. That is unless your redraft is fantasy redraft, in which case your asking about best players.


The sight difference with saying "kawhi is the best player from 2011 class) is that in your redraft you acknowledge teams needs..So like Cleveland wouldn't take kawhi because LeBron. You'd have to stipulate that the redraft is best player available not best fit for team. Or you invent some trade fiction and say Cavs take kawhi and trade out.


Anyway, this thread clearly should be titled best player 2011 draft class and not redraft redo. Lol.

---

The idea isn't to pick those players now. It's to pick those players then, knowing what you know now about how to players turned out. The Cavs would have every incentive to pick up Kawhi, because they didn't have James (and it's not like they can't play together). The only reason I could see deciding against it is that the Cavs could pick Irving at one and still get one of Leonard/Butler/Thompson at four. That would be a better foundation than just picking two wings.

If you invested $10K in Microsoft at it's IPO, it would be worth something like $17M today. Everyone would have stayed out of the World Trade Center on 9/11, and the Titanic would have sailed to the Caribbean.

Strangely, Portland might still select Greg Oden with their #1 pick from 2007, if they could do it over. :D

Why am I not surprised that that specific faggot is the one who doesnt get the point...







yet again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 100%duncan

Why am I not surprised that that specific faggot is the one who doesnt get the point...

yet again

---

The point that Kawhi was a lot better than the #15 position, where he got drafted? Yes, that point totally escaped me. Glad someone wrote an article about it.


Why am I not surprised that you don't get that it's a stupid, unnecessary fluff-piece written by a guy who normally writes articles like, "What to do with an English degree" and "The 25 Best Women's Colleges"?
https://author-profiles.graphiq.com/l/8/Nick-Selbe
I knew, without looking, that the person who wrote that article is some dumbshit who recently graduated college, and knows jack shit about basketball. I wonder why you didn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5

Give Kyle Anderson a few more years, gents, and watch him shine.

---

The league is full of ex-Spur players who couldn't crack the rotation here. We face them all the time. Anderson could easily be one of those.

Parker and ginobili would be near the top of their drafts in retrospect as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

That draft was historically bad. Only a few All-Stars (and I'm talking about 1x or 2x All-Stars) and Manu the only future HoFer (and not based on his NBA credentials).

---

Dude, Manu is a hall of famer with his NBA credentials alone too. If only for being part of the winningest trio in the history of the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Actually I don't think that it's quite as clear cut as for Kawhi: Manu would have a strong case for being picked #1, but depending on each team's situation I could see some going for Shawn Marion or Metta World Peace instead, or even AK47.

Not every team could afford waiting 3 years for their #1 pick to arrive and then play him below 30mpg.

---

If he would have been the number 1 pick he wouldn't have waited 3 years to get to the league and would have played above 30 minutes per game. And no, nobody would pick Ron Artest nor shawn fucking Marion over Manu knowing what they know now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

Dude, Manu is a hall of famer with his NBA credentials alone too. If only for being part of the winningest trio in the history of the league.

---

His european and international resume will help, though. Many people won't have seen him play and will only look at the stats sheet and personal accolades, will forget he's been snubbed for several ASG and that he could easily have had a FMVP. Based on current NBA resume I'm afraid he'd be borderline, some people would put forward his rings and being part of the Big 3, others would target his low mpg and rather mundane stats. Intangibles don't translate well into stats.

Anyway Manu is a HoFer, and deservedly so, and I forgot that Shawn Marion has a decent chance to get in as well, in the same draft. Everybody else is 2nd tier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

The point is, if that draft were held today, 100% of GMs would pick Kawhi Leonard first.

---

I think there's a good 60% who would pick Irving still :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DAF86

If he would have been the number 1 pick he wouldn't have waited 3 years to get to the league and would have played above 30 minutes per game. And no, nobody would pick Ron Artest nor shawn fucking Marion over Manu knowing what they know now.

---

I'd say you overestimate Manu's capacity to play > 30mpg (and I don't remember what was his contract situation in Europe), and that you underestimate Shawn Marion, who was a 20 & 10 player in his prime. Marion played 50% more minutes than Manu over the course of his career...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

Clicking through to the article will usually answer dumb questions like this.

---

https://media.giphy.com/media/xKy2w6LehxxHa/giphy.gif

I wonder who the first person (a scout, I presume) in the Spurs' organization was to say to RC that Kawhi was someone to keep an eye on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 100%duncan

Why am I not surprised that that specific faggot is the one who doesnt get the point...







yet again

---

One interesting take, comparing the Suns & Spurs: http://www.azcentral.com/story/sport...-nba/26476681/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 100%duncan

Why am I not surprised that that specific faggot is the one who doesnt get the point...







yet again

---

:lol

K... genuinely thinks that Morris, Jimmer, Vesely, Biyombo...are way better players than Kawhi. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

One interesting take, comparing the Suns & Spurs: http://www.azcentral.com/story/sport...-nba/26476681/

---

"They had the culture ready to groom Leonard into a star with Duncan, Parker and Ginobili putting a ring, or rings, to selfless play"
This is nice coming from AZCentral.

"Not pick Leonard because of an overabundance of rotation small forwards on the roster — Grant Hill, Jared Dudley and Josh Childress"
19-years-old Kawhi was a better defender than Dudley/Childress in their whole careers...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Actually I don't think that it's quite as clear cut as for Kawhi: Manu would have a strong case for being picked #1, but depending on each team's situation I could see some going for Shawn Marion or Metta World Peace instead, or even AK47.

Not every team could afford waiting 3 years for their #1 pick to arrive and then play him below 30mpg.

---

If this is just a mental exercise, all things being equal, then the delay isn't a factor. I'd imagine that Manu's no worse than second on virtually every GM's list.

Although we got a huge steal on Kawhi it does make me a bit sad that we could of had Jimmy Buckets instead of Cojo. Could of had the two best players in the draft :wow

idk tbh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

If this is just a mental exercise, all things being equal, then the delay isn't a factor. I'd imagine that Manu's no worse than second on virtually every GM's list.

---

Well, one player's career in the NBA is potentially 3y shorter than the other, and Manu already wasn't that young when he was drafted. I'd definitely draft Manu first, don't get me wrong, but I could see some GMs pick Marion first because it would work better for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Well, one player's career in the NBA is potentially 3y shorter than the other, and Manu already wasn't that young when he was drafted. I'd definitely draft Manu first, don't get me wrong, but I could see some GMs pick Marion first because it would work better for them.

---

Manu didn't sign with Kinder Bologna until after the draft. His age might be a factor, but the Spurs could have had him for the 1999/2000 season.

Holy shit, that deserves its own thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

The league is full of ex-Spur players who couldn't crack the rotation here. We face them all the time. Anderson could easily be one of those.

---

Anderson wont be. I think he'll be a bonafide star and place top 10 on all time Spurs list when its all said and done. hes just taking a while to get to his max potential, naturally LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

I'd say you overestimate Manu's capacity to play > 30mpg (and I don't remember what was his contract situation in Europe), and that you underestimate Shawn Marion, who was a 20 & 10 player in his prime. Marion played 50% more minutes than Manu over the course of his career...

---

I've seen him play over 30 minutes per game in all kinds of formats. So no, I don't think I overestimate his capacity to play over 30 mpg. I think you underestimate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

The point that Kawhi was a lot better than the #15 position, where he got drafted? Yes, that point totally escaped me. Glad someone wrote an article about it.


Why am I not surprised that you don't get that it's a stupid, unnecessary fluff-piece written by a guy who normally writes articles like, "What to do with an English degree" and "The 25 Best Women's Colleges"?
https://author-profiles.graphiq.com/l/8/Nick-Selbe
I knew, without looking, that the person who wrote that article is some dumbshit who recently graduated college, and knows jack shit about basketball. I wonder why you didn't?

---

What? I wasnt talking bout the article bruh :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robz4000

Kyrie Irving

---

Would pick Irving over Leonard, but Leonard definitely top 5 for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Manu didn't sign with Kinder Bologna until after the draft. His age might be a factor, but the Spurs could have had him for the 1999/2000 season.

Holy shit, that deserves its own thread.

---

Biggest "what if" in the history of the Spurs if PATFO had indeed full control over when he could come...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Biggest "what if" in the history of the Spurs if PATFO had indeed full control over when he could come...

---

Yeah, 2000 was a lost season, but Manu instead of Derek Anderson to take over for Mario Elie and Jaren Jackson. Holy shit.

Seems like years ago folks on this site used to take a lot of shots at the FO and Pop for their draft choices. "Sure," they said, "they got lucky with Timmy, Ginobilli, and Parker, but luck isn't good drafting skills." You don't hear a lot of that these days.

Are Spurs Talk fans maturing? Nah, probably not. Just bandwagoneers.