Mike Lowry wrote: Thu May 28, 2026 7:43 pm
Exactly how bad is this draft class?
How many prospects do you see that could eventually find themselves starting jobs?
How many will become All Stars?
Why are GMs so down on them?
I think we've had several really strong draft classes (the 80's were an amazing time) but more importantly, I think we have a perception problem. This class is a little weaker than recent classes, but not THAT much weaker. Because so many guys in the creation draft were young and fully formed, we've convinced ourselves that every player in the draft should come in fully formed. They did early in the 80's but don't any more.
Look at our "all rookie" teams the past three years.
Archives/NPBSL/1986/seasonawards.htm
Archives/NPBSL/1987/seasonawards.htm
Archives/NPBSL/1988/seasonawards.htm
Mitch Richmond averaged 24 ppg last season as a rookie and Rony Seikaly averaged 18 ppg on a bad Knicks squad without a lot of offensive weapons. In 1987, Reggie Miller averaged 18 ppg on a bad Kings squad without a lot of offensive weapons and Kevin Johnson put up 15.9 on a bad Sonics squad without a lot of offensive weapons. In 1986 Johnny Newman got 16 ppg on... a bad Kings squad where there weren't a lot of offensive weapons. So, we've seen exactly one rookie put up good numbers on a squad that actually isn't horrible with no other offensive options over the past three seasons.
Heck, look at this year's draft. Robinson is great and Timmy Hardaway is doing well, but this was a squad that had nobody last season and both guys were given the keys to the car. Kemp is... 14.6 ppg and 7 rpg on a squad that's using Wayman Tisdale as its chief offensive option. That's... not good.
Looking at this year's draft, I wonder if I'm a little higher on it than most. I don't see a lot of multi-time all-stars (I can see a couple of of them putting up big numbers in his prime on a tanking team and get rewarded with a one-time all-star berth for empty numbers). What I do see is a lot of players that don't have an eye-popping strength, but when they reach their potentials won't have a lot of weaknesses, either. And you know what we call those guys? Third, fourth, and fifth starters. The other thing a guy with no weaknesses has? A chance for stardom with a TC bump.
I think most GMs are down on them because GMs in this league seem hyper-fixated on stars - everyone is worried about their #1, #2 and maybe #3 players. Most aren't thinking about their 7th or 8th man - but those guys do get significant minutes and if you lose a starter to injury, these are your new starters. You don't have to love them as much as your starters... but you shouldn't fear to play them either... and guys with no weaknesses are guys you aren't excited about playing but you're also not afraid of playing them, and that's an important thing.