Sam Bowie Is Not A Bust...

[Dro]

This is not a new documentary but for anybody who hasn't seen it, its a great watch. I'm in my 30's so I've already known that Bowie was more than just "the guy picked ahead of MJ", but obviously many don't since he's still the target of "bust" jokes. He had knee injuries, unfortunately, some of it due to his thin frame but the guy was a very skilled player and still went on to have a decent NBA career. Reading ish and other forums and listening to idiots in the media, you'd think the guy never accomplished anything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1uTIZ_pPKk

[JimmyMcAdocious]

He had knee injuries that nagged him throughout his career and was an inefficient 10.9 ppg scorer.

He's not a bust if he was taken in the the late first round. Forget the Jordan (or Barkley, or Stockton, etc) factor. A #2 pick who couldn't stay healthy and played only modestly whenever he could get on the floor. That's a bust. I don't give Oden a pass because I think he could have been good if he stayed healthy.

[TheReal Kendall]

People seem to forget that the Blazers drafted a talented Shooting Gaurd in 83 by the name of Clyde Drexle.No reason to draft Jordan in 84 Sam Bowie was the better option for them at that time !

Don't know much about Bowie but this is the top comment on youtube.

So if I was GM I would have went big also.

Plus I just checked Wiki(I know it's not reliable) it says the Blazers needed a Big and wanted Hakeem but the Rockets picked him so they went with the next best thing.

[ralph_i_el]

He's still a bust, because that draft was amazing, but you can't really blame Seattle for the pick.

[Marchesk]

Don't know much about Bowie but this is the top comment on youtube.

So if I was GM I would have went big also.

Plus I just checked Wiki(I know it's not reliable) it says the Blazers needed a Big and wanted Hakeem but the Rockets picked him so they went with the next best thing.

Yeah, but Jordan was a sure thing. People knew he was going to be real good at the next level. He had a pro game in college.

Hakeem is justifiable, even if in retrospect it was the wrong pick, but Bowie isn't. He wasn't an elite big in college, and he already had injury issues.

It would be like picking Noel over Lebron because you drafted Melo the year before.

[Owl]

Depends on what your definition of a bust is.

It was certainly a very bad pick with the benefit of hindsight.

There's a fair degree to which it was a poor pick straight away. Bill Simmons' version of the draft coverage is a tad harsh but there was more of a sense of Jordan being a sure thing (even if that just meant an all-star rather than being GOAT) and other coverage (SI, Hollander handbooks) noted Bowie red flags and seemed to prefer Jordan.

The key thing for me that informs/confirms my views that
a) Drafting Bowie over Jordan was a mistake straight away
and
b) a fully healthy Bowie could have been special player (note: by draft night '84 a fully healthy Bowie was no longer a possibility)
is that Bowie was never the same after the injury at Kentucky. Looking at his numbers before the injury he was a really good player. In his final year at Kentucky he was already damaged goods. Not iredeemable, not bad, but, I believe, not at all likely to reach what his potential had been.

The documentary and the numbers fit with this.

[TheReal Kendall]

Yeah, but Jordan was a sure thing. People knew he was going to be real good at the next level. He had a pro game in college.

Hakeem is justifiable, even if in retrospect it was the wrong pick, but Bowie isn't. He wasn't an elite big in college, and he already had injury issues.

It would be like picking Noel over Lebron because you drafted Melo the year before.

I forgot to mention that they drafted Drexler the year before.

So no need for another SG that's pretty much similar to the one you drafted the previous year.

I don't think no player is a bust cause you can never predict how things will turn out.

[Dro]

Depends on what your definition of a bust is.

It was certainly a very bad pick with the benefit of hindsight.

There's a fair degree to which it was a poor pick straight away. Bill Simmons' version of the draft coverage is a tad harsh but there was more of a sense of Jordan being a sure thing (even if that just meant an all-star rather than being GOAT) and other coverage (SI, Hollander handbooks) noted Bowie red flags and seemed to prefer Jordan.

The key thing for me that informs/confirms my views that
a) Drafting Bowie over Jordan was a mistake straight away
and
b) a fully healthy Bowie could have been special player (note: by draft night '84 a fully healthy Bowie was no longer a possibility)
is that Bowie was never the same after the injury at Kentucky. Looking at his numbers before the injury he was a really good player. In his final year at Kentucky he was already damaged goods. Not iredeemable, not bad, but, I believe, not at all likely to reach what his potential had been.

The documentary and the numbers fit with this.

Thats the keyword "hindsight". The Blazers had JUST drafted Drexler who had an outstanding college career himself with just as many jaw dropping highlights as MJ had at NC. It can be argued that individually, not including tournament success, that Drexler had just as good a college career as Jordan. They weren't nicknamed phi slamma jamma for nothing. Jordan was as close to a sure thing but there was no way to know he would turn out to be most people's GOAT. How could possibly see that in advance? Even with all the hype that Lebron had, which is arguably the most hype than anyone has ever had coming into the NBA, you still didn't have anybody saying he would be the GOAT and even after 4 MVP's, you still have people say he isn't the best

Lets say hypothetically that Durant and Lebron were in back to back drafts and OKC drafted Durant first. If they had the chance to draft Lebron the next year at the same position, would they do it? Or they they draft hypothetically, a Greg Oden since they really need a center? Of course, we see how good Lebron is now and people will say yes but on draft day? Probably not. Unless you think one of them could play a different position. We KNOW Durant is SF. We also know that Lebron's best position is SF. Just like Drexler and Jordan, it wasn't like Portland was gonna draft Jordan and play one of them at SF. I think they made a reasonable pick. If anything, Bowie should be blamed for not being upfront with Portland about his injuries. He led them to believe that he was completely healthy when he knew he wasn't but he said he did it for the money and he had a family to raise which I understand. If you knew a team might take you in the top 3, would you tell them the truth about your injuries? I''m not sure if I would either. Id probably win the lottery first and then deal with the rest later.

[Dro]

He had knee injuries that nagged him throughout his career and was an inefficient 10.9 ppg scorer.

He's not a bust if he was taken in the the late first round. Forget the Jordan (or Barkley, or Stockton, etc) factor. A #2 pick who couldn't stay healthy and played only modestly whenever he could get on the floor. That's a bust. I don't give Oden a pass because I think he could have been good if he stayed healthy.

The fact that he came back to average even 11 ppg and be a solid role player is WAY more than anyone expected after he was tabbed a "bust". To me, a player who deals with injuries is not a bust. A bust to me is someone like Eddy Curry. A guy who showed all the promise and domination before entering the draft but because of a bad work ethic and other reasons, did not pan out. Oden is not a bust to me, he just had bad knees. Michael Beasley is a bust to me and not even a complete bust because he's put up some decent numbers statwise but for what people thought he could be and he dominated in college, he's a bust and it wasn't because of injuries but because of other factors that he can control. You can't control getting injured. You can condition your body the best you can, but even that doesn't guarantee you won't tear an ACL or something. Things you can control like your work ethic, working on your game, focus, your mental approach to the game, getting better every year, I think those are what determine your bust status.

[Dro]

Don't know much about Bowie but this is the top comment on youtube.

So if I was GM I would have went big also.

Plus I just checked Wiki(I know it's not reliable) it says the Blazers needed a Big and wanted Hakeem but the Rockets picked him so they went with the next best thing.

You should really watch the documentary if you get a chance. It really clears up a lot of things and clarifies a lot of facts instead of what the media has been feeding us for years.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

There's a difference between being a bust and being a bad pick at the time. To be considered a bust you have to use hindsight, otherwise how can you know what they achieved in their career? Oden is a bust because he didn't produce like a #1 pick, injuries or not. With hindsight (again, you have to use hindsight to determine their careers) he probably ended up as a net negative for the Blazers.

Ralph Sampson and Bill Walton are great examples of players who had their careers shortened due to injuries, but still justified being #1 picks.

Anyway, there's that famous quote from Bob Knight, who was coaching Jordan and USA team for the Olympics at the time. Paraphrasing the story, Blazers GM tells Knight they need a center before the draft and Knight tells him "Draft Michael Jordan and play him at center". There were well respected basketball people who had an idea how good Jordan could be. Probably not the GOAT, but enough of a talent difference to be picked as the best available? I think so.

[Dro]

There's a difference between being a bust and being a bad pick at the time. To be considered a bust you have to use hindsight, otherwise how can you know what they achieved in their career? Oden is a bust because he didn't produce like a #1 pick, injuries or not. With hindsight (again, you have to use hindsight to determine their careers) he probably ended up as a net negative for the Blazers.

Ralph Sampson and Bill Walton are great examples of players who had their careers shortened due to injuries, but still justified being #1 picks.

Anyway, there's that famous quote from Bob Knight, who was coaching Jordan and USA team for the Olympics at the time. Paraphrasing the story, Blazers GM tells Knight they need a center before the draft and Knight tells him "Draft Michael Jordan and play him at center". There were well respected basketball people who had an idea how good Jordan could be. Probably not the GOAT, but enough of a talent difference to be picked as the best available? I think so.

I agree but still, I probably would not have drafted him. The Blazers were very impressed with Drexler and they had already made up their mind that they needed a C. They really took Bowie by default since Hakeem was gone. I don't know, I probably wouldn't have drafted Jordan either if I were Portland and had just drafted Drexler. I don't really think people really take that into consideration like they say they are, especially when there's another position that you REALLY need help at. Are you more likely to draft a guy at the same position, even if he was a sure bet, when at that time you had CLOSE to a sure bet in Clyde Drexler already on the team? Especially when you desperately need help at center which most people agree is one of the most important positions? This was the mid 80's when the NBA was used to watching guys like Kareem, Wilt, Moses Malone, and even Bill Walton be such difference makers previously. A team with second pick is probably going to use that pick to get something they really need instead of using on a player who at the time was similar to what they already had.

[The JKidd Kid]

I forgot to mention that they drafted Drexler the year before.

So no need for another SG that's pretty much similar to the one you drafted the previous year.

I don't think no player is a bust cause you can never predict how things will turn out.

Exactly, it wasn't a bad pick, I can't understand why people ignore the fact that the Blazers already had a HOF SG on the roster.

[Haymaker]

They could've drafted and traded MJ at least.

[iamgine]

In addition to already having a "nice" SG in Drexler, they had Kiki Vandeweghe, an all star small forward and Jim Paxson, an all star shooting guard. So really, they had no reason picking MJ at all.

It's tough luck that they didn't end up with Hakeem. That could've been a dynasty.