is Anthony Bennett the worst use of a #1 overall pick ever?

[senelcoolidge]

Say what?

The Cavs did not want that #1 pick. They couldn't get rid of it..no one wanted it. So they picked a guy that was obviously not a #1 pick to sort of give the league/someone the middle finger. It sounds cruel. That's why I hope Bennett does well. He's kind of been picked to fail.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Cleveland went for potential. I personally like the pick.

[RedBlackAttack]

The Cavs did not want that #1 pick. They couldn't get rid of it..no one wanted it. So they picked a guy that was obviously not a #1 pick to sort of give the league/someone the middle finger. It sounds cruel. That's why I hope Bennett does well. He's kind of been picked to fail.

That is maybe the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Why would it be the league's fault that the Cavs couldn't trade the pick, if they even really wanted to anyway? Word was the Cavs did have offers, but they were asking for way too much... Which tells me they think Bennett is going to be very good.

There were rumors that Charlotte tried like hell to move up to no. 1 so they could take Bennett.

People have to understand... Just because a draft order doesn't look like the consensus "mocks" made by journalists prior to the draft does not mean that it was necessarily a surprise to GMs around the league. Noel and McLemore were considered the Nos. 1 & 2 picks for a long time and neither guy went in the Top 5. The GMs picking at 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. were obviously not surprised and not interested that either guy "fell" to them.

The idea that the Cavs didn't take the guy they thought was best in the draft, but instead made a pick as a statement (to whom or for what, I'm not sure) is just crazy and I don't mean to sound harsh.

[JMT]

No.

LaRue Martin.

Learn something. The league started before 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaRue_Martin

[chips93]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaRue_Martin

Over his 4-year stint, Martin totaled over 1,400 points; number 2 overall pick McAdoo totaled over 1,400 points in his rookie year alone.

jeez

[CavaliersFTW]

is that true? never heard that before. he still looks undersized to me

Yeah I call publicity B.S. on that. The Orlando Magic said the same thing about Dwight Howard, and he's clearly still about the same height as the leagues other 6-9 w/o shoes players. Tristan is no different in that he still looks the same height relative to other players measured his height w/o shoes. For either player (Dwight or TT) I could see maybe a half inch of growth being plausible but beyond that it should be more visible. Definitely not 2 inches from what I see.

[Owl]

There is a lot of revisionist history going on here. That isn't out of the ordinary for drafts when you're looking at them years later, but the truth of what was being said at draft-time bears repeating.

It's disingenuous for people to act as though Drummond was the consensus pick and the Cavs shocked the world by taking Waiters. Drummond ended up going right around where he was projected by most. Maybe it was a little later than anticipated, but he was not being mocked in the Top 4 by the time the draft came by anyone I can remember.

There was also very little talk about Drummond and how the Cavs should take him. His stock fell as the guys went through the combine and individual workouts, which shocked me personally -- I thought the opposite would happen. But, it was pretty well accepted by draft day that Drummond likely wasn't going to be a high pick.

There was a guy who everyone said the Cavs blew it by not being able to draft and HE was actually considered the consensus best player available at No. 4... That was Thomas Robinson. I can't tell you how many times I listened to people rattle on about how, if the Cavs would have taken someone else other than Thompson in 2011, they would be able to take a much better PF prospect in TRob in 2012 and that would have solved all of the Cavs problems.

Where are all those people now? Suddenly, it has shifted to Drummond who was the consensus pick, even though there were literally like three people on here talking about him that high and I was one of them. I don't remember getting a lot of support with that opinion.


About Jonas, as DukeDelonte said... his agent was giving the Cavs the runaround. He told them it may be several years before he could come to the states. That was reported by Chad Ford among others. His agent (and maybe Jonas himself) wanted Toronto.

The Cavs, faced with a guy they really liked who didn't want to come here, turned around and "reached" for a guy who just averaged a double-double as a 21-year-old sophomore in the NBA and has certainly been one of the best players in that draft so far. He's also a great locker room guy, which is an underrated asset.

These "dubious" picks have been pretty damn good. Now, had the Cavs listened to the masses and taken TRob in 2012? That would have been a dubious pick. That's not normally the way we refer to guys who were second amongst rookies in scoring and made First Team All-Rookie. We generally reserve hyperbole like that for Top 5 picks who've played for three teams in one year.

Are the Cavs given credit for not going with conventional wisdom on Robinson and possibly trading Thompson (an idea floated by many people)? Of course not.

We'll see about Bennett, but if Grant's track record is any indication, he'll probably be good.

Literally nothing I said implied Drummond was the consensus pick only that he was within his reasonable drafting range. Note that the NBA consensus mock had Drummond above Waiters. Drummond was indeed only in one top 4 projection, but that's one more than Waiters. Drummond at four was less of a reach. That said the other member of the usual projected top 5 Robinson playing worse than Waiters and the next wing Barnes at around the same level "dubious" is perhaps a tad harsh. Then again with Lillard (overrated now but already a decent starting guard) and Drummond on the board there were players who look significantly better already who were plausible picks.

Its clear you like Waiters but "2nd in rookies in scoring"? Is that a real accolade? How about 19th in PER or 41st in WS/48. All that scoring reflects at the moment is that he got minutes, can jack up shots and be a bit below average at converting them.

I don't know about Cavs specific discussions or whether Valanciunas would have really risked his NBA career by refusing to sign with the Cavs. All I know is they went for someone consensus mocks had at 9. The pick could have been much worse (Jan Vesely anyone?) and Thompson looks like a decent energy big, a low end starter or a nice reserve. But again Leonard and Valanciunas were on the board, projected higher, are younger, have more upside.

Cavs have recently shown a tendency to reach for safe, okay players whom were projected to be available later (try to trade down?). It may well be that with Kyrie, Bynum and possibly LeBron solid rotation players is all they need. But Bennett looks like another guy who could have been had later and doesn't have superstar (or consistant all-star) potential.

Like I said they are in a great position because they have cap space at the right time finally made a strong, bold (risky, but worth it for a chance winning, getting LeBron, getting titles) move in getting Bynum and have a young core. If they can move Varejao for further young pieces they'll be in an even stronger position to contend in the future.

[DukeDelonte13]

Literally nothing I said implied Drummond was the consensus pick only that he was within his reasonable drafting range. Note that the NBA consensus mock had Drummond above Waiters. Drummond was indeed only in one top 4 projection, but that's one more than Waiters. Drummond at four was less of a reach. That said the other member of the usual projected top 5 Robinson playing worse than Waiters and the next wing Barnes at around the same level "dubious" is perhaps a tad harsh. Then again with Lillard (overrated now but already a decent starting guard) and Drummond on the board there were players who look significantly better already who were plausible picks.

Its clear you like Waiters but "2nd in rookies in scoring"? Is that a real accolade? How about 19th in PER or 41st in WS/48. All that scoring reflects at the moment is that he got minutes, can jack up shots and be a bit below average at converting them.

I don't know about Cavs specific discussions or whether Valanciunas would have really risked his NBA career by refusing to sign with the Cavs. All I know is they went for someone consensus mocks had at 9. The pick could have been much worse (Jan Vesely anyone?) and Thompson looks like a decent energy big, a low end starter or a nice reserve. But again Leonard and Valanciunas were on the board, projected higher, are younger, have more upside.

Cavs have recently shown a tendency to reach for safe, okay players whom were projected to be available later (try to trade down?). It may well be that with Kyrie, Bynum and possibly LeBron solid rotation players is all they need. But Bennett looks like another guy who could have been had later and doesn't have superstar (or consistant all-star) potential.

Like I said they are in a great position because they have cap space at the right time finally made a strong, bold (risky, but worth it for a chance winning, getting LeBron, getting titles) move in getting Bynum and have a young core. If they can move Varejao for further young pieces they'll be in an even stronger position to contend in the future.

I think Kyrie wasn't necessarily the "safe pick" as he only played 11 games.

TT was considered a huge reach at the time but only one player you can make an argument should have been picked ahead of him and that's J-Val. We all know J-Val didn't get steady minutes last year but i don't think J-Val is going to turn into some perennial super star that's gonna make the cavs regret TT. He's gonna be good no doubt, but TT is turning into a very decent player himself.


Waiters, again, considered a big time reach at the time, but in reality he was less of a reach than TT. Jerry West was huge on Dion Waiters and Warriors were talking about taking him with their draft pick. Most rookie guards don't come into the league like Kyrie Irving and have great efficiency. Beal was extremely inefficient the first half of the season like Dion was. Nobody seems to give a sh*t, because Beal was picked where he was mocked and Dion wasn't. People praise Beal's great play in the second half of the season, but Dion's second half of the season performance is only known by cavs fans. People that actually watch Dion play game in and game out know he's extremely talented, and has flashed the ability to take over games.

TT and Dion at the very least are going to be very decent startes in the league and can both potentially be all stars if they are on winning teams. That's excellent drafting considering the national media slammed the cavs for making those picks.

The success of Dion and TT lead me to believe the Chris Grant knows what he's doing with the draft. He's clearly not going to conform and take players the national media says he should take. Grant gets the guy he wants, and this go around it was Anthony Bennett.

I have little reason to believe that he's going to bust.

[secund2nun]

All the teams that passed on Drummond were stupid except NO and are gonna regret it, including Cleveland. It should have been obvious that Drummond was an elite talent coming out of college. He had just turned 17 years old at the start of his freshmen college season , was 6'10 265 pounds as a 17 year old, and had 54% fg 10-8-3 blocks in 28 mpg as a 17 year old freshmen in the best conference in college bball. That usually means extreme ceiling for a 17 year old freshmen to do that. Drummond's low draft stock was simply another example of the NBA underrating big men. Small way less impactful players like Irving (after rookie deal) and Rose getting max contracts is an example of these types of players being overrated.

There were several far inferior selections taken above Drummond. The only player that should have been taken over Drummond was Davis, and I am not just saying it now. It was obvious on draft night as well.

Look at the players taken over Drummond:

Bradley Beal- SG- not a bad selection as he had a good freshmen season but sure as heck not better than Drummond, and this is coming from a huge Gator fan. 15 ppg on 44% fg, 7 rpb, 2 apg in the SEC or anywhere is certainly not better than Drummond's statline, size, potential.

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist- SF- Another good selection, but no way was he a better pick than Drummond. 31 mpg vs 28 mpg. 11.9 on 49% fg vs 10 ppg on 54% fg. 7.4 rpg vs 8 rpg. 6'7 vs 6'11. SEC vs Big East.

Thomas Robinson- PF- 21 year old JR. Had a good season at 18-12-2 and he is a big man. You can argue his selection over Drummond but I'd rather take the 6'10 270 17 year old freshmen over the 6'10 237 21 year old junior. You could see the ceiling difference obviously.

Harrison Barnes- SF- This was an absolute joke. Barnes over Drummond? LOL. This shows how stupid NBA GMs are. A sophomore who scored 17 PPG on 44% fg 5 rpg.....and that's it. Wow amazing.

Dion Waiters- SG- This was another terrible selection over Drummond and really shows how overrated guards have become. He was a 6'4 sophomore that averaged 12.6-2.5-2.3 on 48% fg. How was he considered better than Drummond??? It wasn't even close.

Terrence Ross- SG- Another bad pick over Drummond. He was a sophomore that averaged 16.4, 6.4 on 45.7 % fg

Damian Lillard- PG- 22 year old senior that show in his 43% for his first 3 years then "broke out" as a senior shooting 46.7% 24.5 ppg, 5 rpg, 4 apg, but he played terrible midmajor competition and was a senior. No way was he a better selection especially since he is a 6'3 PG who spent much of his career shooting in the 43%s and 46.7% isn't that great for a top prospect senior in a midmajor conference.- PGs are so overrated.

4 guards, 2 SFs were taken over Drummond...Fail. Drummond was the 2nd best draft prospect after Davis and it was obvious. Big men are just underrated- that's what happened.

[DukeDelonte13]

All the teams that passed on Drummond were stupid except NO and are gonna regret it, including Cleveland. It should have been obvious that Drummond was an elite talent coming out of college. He had just turned 17 years old at the start of his freshmen college season , was 6'10 265 pounds as a 17 year old, and had 54% fg 10-8-3 blocks in 28 mpg as a 17 year old freshmen in the best conference in college bball. That usually means extreme ceiling for a 17 year old freshmen to do that. Drummond's low draft stock was simply another example of the NBA underrating big men. Small way less impactful players like Irving (after rookie deal) and Rose getting max contracts is an example of these types of players being overrated.

There were several far inferior selections taken above Drummond. The only player that should have been taken over Drummond was Davis, and I am not just saying it now. It was obvious on draft night as well.

Look at the players taken over Drummond:

Bradley Beal- SG- not a bad selection as he had a good freshmen season but sure as heck not better than Drummond, and this is coming from a huge Gator fan. 15 ppg on 44% fg, 7 rpb, 2 apg in the SEC or anywhere is certainly not better than Drummond's statline, size, potential.

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist- SF- Another good selection, but no way was he a better pick than Drummond. 31 mpg vs 28 mpg. 11.9 on 49% fg vs 10 ppg on 54% fg. 7.4 rpg vs 8 rpg. 6'7 vs 6'11. SEC vs Big East.

Thomas Robinson- PF- 21 year old JR. Had a good season at 18-12-2 and he is a big man. You can argue his selection over Drummond but I'd rather take the 6'10 270 17 year old freshmen over the 6'10 237 21 year old junior. You could see the ceiling difference obviously.

Harrison Barnes- SF- This was an absolute joke. Barnes over Drummond? LOL. This shows how stupid NBA GMs are. A sophomore who scored 17 PPG on 44% fg 5 rpg.....and that's it. Wow amazing.

Dion Waiters- SG- This was another terrible selection over Drummond and really shows how overrated guards have become. He was a 6'4 sophomore that averaged 12.6-2.5-2.3 on 48% fg. How was he considered better than Drummond??? It wasn't even close.

Terrence Ross- SG- Another bad pick over Drummond. He was a sophomore that averaged 16.4, 6.4 on 45.7 % fg

Damian Lillard- PG- 22 year old senior that show in his 43% for his first 3 years then "broke out" as a senior shooting 46.7% 24.5 ppg, 5 rpg, 4 apg, but he played terrible midmajor competition and was a senior. No way was he a better selection especially since he is a 6'3 PG who spent much of his career shooting in the 43%s and 46.7% isn't that great for a top prospect senior in a midmajor conference.- PGs are so overrated.

4 guards, 2 SFs were taken over Drummond...Fail. Drummond was the 2nd best draft prospect after Davis and it was obvious. Big men are just underrated- that's what happened.

it wasn't pure coincidence a lot of GMs passed on Drummond. There obviously were concerns with him that were strong enough to allow Detroit to snag him.

Hindsight is always 20/20 and its a lot easier to play GM one year after a draft happened.

[TonyMontana]

AVERAGES THUS FAR: 1.0 PPG 3.2 RPG 5% FG

Don't say I didn't tell you kiddies.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Honestly I got to give OP some props. He called it. (Yeah I know - only 5 games but still)

[TheWINdyCity]

Honestly I got to give OP some props. He called it. (Yeah I know - only 5 games but still)

I don't think anyone really thought he was going to live up to his "# 1 pick potential" but it basically comes down to its ONLY 5 GAMES! people need to chill out lol

[Dbrog]

All the teams that passed on Drummond were stupid except NO and are gonna regret it, including Cleveland. It should have been obvious that Drummond was an elite talent coming out of college.

Honestly, this statement is straight BS. I watched the tournament that year. Drummond looked lost out there with no moves and little presence. It was like he wasn't even trying or just plain sucked. I remember he had like 2 pts and 2 rebs in one of the tourney games. Many people questioned his work ethic and whether he could be anything in the NBA. It was a HUGE risk to take this guy...hence why he fell so far. No one knew he was going to become a COMPLETELY different player in the NBA. Saying otherwise is just false.

Edit: I love the complete revisionist history when it comes to where players were ranking during the drafts. Everyone had Oden over Durant. He was going to be the new Shaq and yet some people on this forum act like it was a no-brainer to take Durant over him. Same thing with Okafor over Dwight. Okafor was looked at as the guy who could come in and immediately make an impact on a team while Howard was seen as being very raw and a risky pick due to his upside being his potential.

[TonyMontana]

Current Averages: 1.4 PPG 2.7 RPG 14.3% shooting 11.7 MPG

Good progress by fatty in the past two weeks. He got his PPG above 1.

Honestly I got to give OP some props. He called it. (Yeah I know - only 5 games but still)