Hornets picking 21st in draft

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HORNETSFAN

I understand the "reasononing." However, the logic failed us last year and is not a roadmap for long term success IMO. David West was #18, Ricky Davis #21, etc. I know that there are more failures than hits late in the first round, but how are we going to build youth for the future at lower salaries if we keep selling the picks to spend the cash on aging veterans at higher guaranteed salaries? Are we saying we are going to forget about building for the future until we are bad enough to pick in the top 10?

---

I agree. This whole situations smells like another ******* cop out by this franchise... "Oh there's no one worth taking so we might as well sell the pick." It's really just code for; we have an incompetent front office, and a cheap *** owner who couldn't be bothered to pay for some half decent scouts to figure out who actually IS worth taking in this year's draft."

They tried to fleece us with this same ******* b.s. last summer, "Oh we don't need young talent we are trying to win now, and we can use the money we save to sign a quality veteran"... Now how the **** did that work out?? :hot:

Personally I'd rather have had a player like Mario Chalmers making $2 million dollars over two years, than James Posey making $25 million over the course of 4 seasons. And I actually like Posey, I think he is a solid contributor off the bench as long as he isn't playing too many minutes. But even taking that into consideration his signing seems, at the very least, a bit foolish and short sighted at this time... Considering what it translated to this past year on the basketball court, and what his acquisition will likely translate to over the course of the next 3 seasons, especially considering his age.

I'm not falling for that same line again this year, and really what the **** is selling a draft pick who is slated to make not much more than $2-2.5 million dollars over the next two seasons going to do to really improve our salary cap situation?

Did our front office not noticed what happened to the Phoenix Suns in the past few seasons after they decided to go on a spree of dealing their draft picks for a few years, because they felt they didn't really need them and wanted to save some money? :confused:

We should not have to pay for Shinn and Bower's mistakes over paying underachieving, past-their-prime veterans! By selling draft picks this organization is essentially shutting off the pipe line of young talent, and it will only hurt this team more and more as the years go by. And then in turn this club will be forced to continue to over pay free agents in order to pry them away from their teams, or from other suitors who may offer more exposure(and potential endorsements) to the players because the teams are situated in larger markets. And all that just to fit roles that could have been, and should have been filled by young players hand selected(carefully) by this franchise through the draft process.

And it's always the same bull****, "Well, there's no one going to be around when we pick who we feel is going to be able to contribute to this team any time soon." It was the same last year, when we picked 27th, in one of the deepest NBA drafts in history! There is no way they can convince me that a player like Mario Chalmers who started for a playoff team in the Eastern Conference couldn't of helped the Hornets this past season. He would have given Chris Paul added rest in the regular season, so he could have had fresher legs for the playoffs, and not to mention quality contributions from Chalmers, a rookie, throughout the course of the season...

But on 2nd thought why would we really have needed that anyway right? We had Mike ****ing James on the roster for ***** sakes! :banghead:

Now this year we are drafting 6 spots earlier in the first round, a spot that I feel a quality player is likely to be available to us(especially in terms point guards-which is most definitely a need). And not even much more than a week after Jeff Bower was quoted, from a recent article on Nola.com about the team's blueprint for becoming championship contenders, as saying, "We are planning and preparing for this draft. We feel we like the positioning, to be quite honest, and we're eager to get the draft process rolling." When he was asked whether the Hornets will make a pick this year as opposed to selling the choice like last year...

http://blog.nola.com/hornetsbeat/200..._jeff_b_1.html

Does anyone else see how counter productive this is? Especially for this franchise in particular, because of their problem attracting top quality free agents at fair market value... When you draft a player, and you work with that player to teach and mold the player into the best player he can be in this league, you can expect a certain amount of loyalty from that player. To be supportive of the franchise, and to probably re-sign when their rookie deal has expired for a fairly reasonable amount of money, and to potentially stick around with the team for most, if not all of their NBA career.

I've followed this team closely and exclusively since 1991, and there is not a single player that was drafted by this club that stuck with this team for most of their career, let alone all of their NBA career... Take a look for yourself if you want:

http://www.nba.com/hornets/news/draf...ry_030604.html

I encourage anyone who reads this to ask yourself:

"What the **** is this franchise really trying to accomplish by selling 1st round draft picks?" :huh:

I know I don't like how ineffective we've been of late in drafting players and though I've never thought of it that way but, yeah, it is a fat cop out to keep trading the pick away...

I think the pitiful workout schedule is a good indicator of what the Hornet may do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NIH

I think the pitiful workout schedule is a good indicator of what the Hornet may do.

---

yeah just marcus thornton and will be attending the new jersey workout.

i read somewhere on hoopsworld last week that the hornets were interested in nick calathes, especially since he announced he was going to europe and would consider him knowing they wouldn't have a guaranteed contract on the books while he can get better in europe depending on if he keeps his name in the draft. i guess they decided to go in a different direction.

Bower must not want to keep his job.

This is probably an order from the top.( if these rumors are true)

[QUOTE=Al_Blaze]
Personally I'd rather have had a player like Mario Chalmers making $2 million dollars over two years, than James Posey making $25 million over the course of 4 seasons.


The one defense I have of the organization is that they did last year and DO this year want to get back in the second round if a guy like Thornton falls and it is a non guaranteed, cheper, shorter term contract. Chalmers was a second rounder. Their ideal draft day would be to sell their pick for $3 million or to unload a contract with it (Mo Pete) and then trade a future second to get back into the second round and grab Thornton or someone like that.

If Terrence Williams, Jrue Holiday or Jeff Teague are there at #21 and we sell the pick, I am going to mail the front office a box of ****

Just to play Devil's advocate, lets say we didnt sell the pick last year- even with a year's worth of hindsight- who should we have taken and would they have really made ANY difference either this past year or next year?

Maybe you could make very weak arguments for Chalmers or D. Jordan as a possible center of the future. But really was trading it last year so much of a mistake? And the class is much weaker this year.

In retrospect, what would have been ideal last year would have been to sell the pick and trade back into the 2nd for Chalmers, Jordan, or Weaver and hopefully that will be the plan this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

Just to play Devil's advocate, lets say we didnt sell the pick last year- even with a year's worth of hindsight- who should we have taken and would they have really made ANY difference either this past year or next year?

Maybe you could make very weak arguments for Chalmers or D. Jordan as a possible center of the future. But really was trading it last year so much of a mistake? And the class is much weaker this year.

In retrospect, what would have been ideal last year would have been to sell the pick and trade back into the 2nd for Chalmers, Jordan, or Weaver and hopefully that will be the plan this year.

---

That is an almost irrelevant question. Should we judge a draft on what a rookie can do in one year? Can the player help the team period? Think about adding a talented bench player at a minimal contract (rather than an overpriced aging veteran). Would it be helpful to have Arthur, Chalmers, Greene, etc. on the bench at a minimal salary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

Just to play Devil's advocate, lets say we didnt sell the pick last year- even with a year's worth of hindsight- who should we have taken and would they have really made ANY difference either this past year or next year?

Maybe you could make very weak arguments for Chalmers or D. Jordan as a possible center of the future. But really was trading it last year so much of a mistake? And the class is much weaker this year.

In retrospect, what would have been ideal last year would have been to sell the pick and trade back into the 2nd for Chalmers, Jordan, or Weaver and hopefully that will be the plan this year.

---

we didn't need the ROY. we struggled down the stretch from a severe lack of depth. any young player could have helped, we needed bodies.

so if the plan is hinging on Thornton dropping to the 2nd, what happens if he doesn't? are we going to make zero roster moves to get younger and deeper? that can't be a good plan.

You guys seem to discount the possibility of our draft pick being the equivalent of JR Giddens. Eating up 1.5 million (3 million because of the luxury tax) and contributing practically nothing long term or short term.

It is almost like there is an assumption that we will pull a jewel out of nowhere. Julian Wright is more talented than anyone we could have picked last year and more talented than anyone who will be available this year and he can barely get PT on this team. And as far as the "minimum salary" arguement- it is not a minimum salary. It is a guaranteed 3 yr contract at what will be around 5 million for this pick. So average of 1.6 mil a year. Devin, Bowen, Ely- those are guys on minimum salaries and are only given it a year at a time. All of those guys contributed more to the team than a rookie would have last year and all made less and all come off the books this year.

Granted, we COULD get a decent player at 21 (even though we have in the past failed to get major contributors at 12- Hilton, 13- Wright, and 15- Simmons) but the likelihood is we will be giving a 3 year contract to a guy who will likely never contribute more than a Devin Brown. So why not just keep signing minimum guys who are cheaper and you are only on the hook for one year over more expensive guys who you are on the hook for 3 years if they contribute EQUALLY?

Of course there is the potential they can become Spreewell or T. Parker or Horry, etc. but the percentages say they are more likely to be JR Giddens or Kirk haston. If we keep the pick rather then sell it we are essentially giving out a 3 year 13 million dollar contract to a guy who has a very high liklihood of being nothing. How did I get at 3 yr, 13 million? Check the math.

Contract: 3 yr/ 5million
Luxury tax (which we will be over) doubles that 5 million to 10
We dont get the 3 million we would sell the pick for.

5 +5+3= 13

3 years 13 million for a guy who has a likelihood of being a 10th man at best.

Bottom line, it is a business and I know it is so easy to look forward and see all these guys who have limitless potential. "Oh Jrue Holliday is gonna be so good. Oh I want Terrance Williams, etc." The HIGH majority of guys picked 11-30 this year are gonna be NOTHING. Again, look at last years picks between 20 and 30 and tell me how many you would want to give 3 yr./13 million to. I say 1- C. Lee. Batum is arguable but he will prove to be an average backup at best.

your math is wrong. how does not selling the pick turn into $13 million? if we don't get the $3 million, then we don't get it and have to fork out the $10 mil for the draft pick.

you're entire logic is built on not finding anything in the draft. where'd we pick Hilton? how's that working out? Julian's not really that special and he got picked higher than 21. the Hornets would sell the pick because they haven't done their HW to figure out who they should pick. so instead of just telling us "we haven't done our research correctly so we're going to sell the pick" they're going to feed us the same BS they did last year that we don't have time to grow a player.

we need players, we don't need to find a superstar at 21, we need to find a bench player. are you really prepared to go after guys like Ely and Brown to fill out the bench over a young rookie with something to prove?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

You guys seem to discount the possibility of our draft pick being the equivalent of JR Giddens. Eating up 1.5 million (3 million because of the luxury tax) and contributing practically nothing long term or short term.

It is almost like there is an assumption that we will pull a jewel out of nowhere. Julian Wright is more talented than anyone we could have picked last year and more talented than anyone who will be available this year and he can barely get PT on this team. And as far as the "minimum salary" arguement- it is not a minimum salary. It is a guaranteed 3 yr contract at what will be around 5 million for this pick. So average of 1.6 mil a year. Devin, Bowen, Ely- those are guys on minimum salaries and are only given it a year at a time. All of those guys contributed more to the team than a rookie would have last year and all made less and all come off the books this year.

Granted, we COULD get a decent player at 21 (even though we have in the past failed to get major contributors at 12- Hilton, 13- Wright, and 15- Simmons) but the likelihood is we will be giving a 3 year contract to a guy who will likely never contribute more than a Devin Brown. So why not just keep signing minimum guys who are cheaper and you are only on the hook for one year over more expensive guys who you are on the hook for 3 years if they contribute EQUALLY?

Of course there is the potential they can become Spreewell or T. Parker or Horry, etc. but the percentages say they are more likely to be JR Giddens or Kirk haston. If we keep the pick rather then sell it we are essentially giving out a 3 year 13 million dollar contract to a guy who has a very high liklihood of being nothing. How did I get at 3 yr, 13 million? Check the math.

Contract: 3 yr/ 5million
Luxury tax (which we will be over) doubles that 5 million to 10
We dont get the 3 million we would sell the pick for.

5 +5+3= 13

3 years 13 million for a guy who has a likelihood of being a 10th man at best.

Bottom line, it is a business and I know it is so easy to look forward and see all these guys who have limitless potential. "Oh Jrue Holliday is gonna be so good. Oh I want Terrance Williams, etc." The HIGH majority of guys picked 11-30 this year are gonna be NOTHING. Again, look at last years picks between 20 and 30 and tell me how many you would want to give 3 yr./13 million to. I say 1- C. Lee. Batum is arguable but he will prove to be an average backup at best.

---

So if we aren't picking in like the top 5, then there is no sense in drafting? That's how a team gets really old really fast. And by the time you are in a position to actually draft somebody, it means you stink because you're in the high lottery. And I don't think we want to seek out anyone like Devin Brown or Melvin Ely in free angency (sadly, we will have to if we keep dealing draft picks).

The fact is that last year we could have had either D. Arthur or Chalmers, and both would have helped out last year, more than Ely and Brown too. The draft allows you to get younger, and hopefully better based on the potential of the young player you get. Yes, guys like Devin Brown and Ely are cheap and proven. But they are proven to be sub-par basketball players and are way past their primes.

If I have to pick between the cheap vet that I know won't help the team (Ely) and the young, cheap draft pick that might not help the team much, then give me the young guy. If we actually take time and put effort into scouting, then a good player will be there. I don't care how "weak" a draft is, a player who can contribute is ALWAYS there. We just have to find him. Heck, maybe there is even a future all-star flying under the radar. I know the odds are against it, but does that mean we shouldn't even try? It doesn't cost us a lot of money either way.

But I do see the point of your argument, and I get the merit of it once in awhile. But I don't think anyone can argue that it makes sense to do this year after year. Especially when a team is in our current situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

You guys seem to discount the possibility of our draft pick being the equivalent of JR Giddens. Eating up 1.5 million (3 million because of the luxury tax) and contributing practically nothing long term or short term.

It is almost like there is an assumption that we will pull a jewel out of nowhere. Julian Wright is more talented than anyone we could have picked last year and more talented than anyone who will be available this year and he can barely get PT on this team. And as far as the "minimum salary" arguement- it is not a minimum salary. It is a guaranteed 3 yr contract at what will be around 5 million for this pick. So average of 1.6 mil a year. Devin, Bowen, Ely- those are guys on minimum salaries and are only given it a year at a time. All of those guys contributed more to the team than a rookie would have last year and all made less and all come off the books this year.

Granted, we COULD get a decent player at 21 (even though we have in the past failed to get major contributors at 12- Hilton, 13- Wright, and 15- Simmons) but the likelihood is we will be giving a 3 year contract to a guy who will likely never contribute more than a Devin Brown. So why not just keep signing minimum guys who are cheaper and you are only on the hook for one year over more expensive guys who you are on the hook for 3 years if they contribute EQUALLY?

Of course there is the potential they can become Spreewell or T. Parker or Horry, etc. but the percentages say they are more likely to be JR Giddens or Kirk haston. If we keep the pick rather then sell it we are essentially giving out a 3 year 13 million dollar contract to a guy who has a very high liklihood of being nothing. How did I get at 3 yr, 13 million? Check the math.

Contract: 3 yr/ 5million
Luxury tax (which we will be over) doubles that 5 million to 10
We dont get the 3 million we would sell the pick for.

5 +5+3= 13

3 years 13 million for a guy who has a likelihood of being a 10th man at best.

Bottom line, it is a business and I know it is so easy to look forward and see all these guys who have limitless potential. "Oh Jrue Holliday is gonna be so good. Oh I want Terrance Williams, etc." The HIGH majority of guys picked 11-30 this year are gonna be NOTHING. Again, look at last years picks between 20 and 30 and tell me how many you would want to give 3 yr./13 million to. I say 1- C. Lee. Batum is arguable but he will prove to be an average backup at best.

---

So, instead of taking a chance on adding young talent to the bench, we spend that money on Bowen or Ely (as we still have to fill a roster). Would you trade Bowen for a young player with potential at the end of the bench? I would rather have had Arthur than Bowen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

You guys seem to discount the possibility of our draft pick being the equivalent of JR Giddens. Eating up 1.5 million (3 million because of the luxury tax) and contributing practically nothing long term or short term.

It is almost like there is an assumption that we will pull a jewel out of nowhere. Julian Wright is more talented than anyone we could have picked last year and more talented than anyone who will be available this year and he can barely get PT on this team. And as far as the "minimum salary" arguement- it is not a minimum salary. It is a guaranteed 3 yr contract at what will be around 5 million for this pick. So average of 1.6 mil a year. Devin, Bowen, Ely- those are guys on minimum salaries and are only given it a year at a time. All of those guys contributed more to the team than a rookie would have last year and all made less and all come off the books this year.

Granted, we COULD get a decent player at 21 (even though we have in the past failed to get major contributors at 12- Hilton, 13- Wright, and 15- Simmons) but the likelihood is we will be giving a 3 year contract to a guy who will likely never contribute more than a Devin Brown. So why not just keep signing minimum guys who are cheaper and you are only on the hook for one year over more expensive guys who you are on the hook for 3 years if they contribute EQUALLY?

Of course there is the potential they can become Spreewell or T. Parker or Horry, etc. but the percentages say they are more likely to be JR Giddens or Kirk haston. If we keep the pick rather then sell it we are essentially giving out a 3 year 13 million dollar contract to a guy who has a very high liklihood of being nothing. How did I get at 3 yr, 13 million? Check the math.

Contract: 3 yr/ 5million
Luxury tax (which we will be over) doubles that 5 million to 10
We dont get the 3 million we would sell the pick for.

5 +5+3= 13

3 years 13 million for a guy who has a likelihood of being a 10th man at best.

Bottom line, it is a business and I know it is so easy to look forward and see all these guys who have limitless potential. "Oh Jrue Holliday is gonna be so good. Oh I want Terrance Williams, etc." The HIGH majority of guys picked 11-30 this year are gonna be NOTHING. Again, look at last years picks between 20 and 30 and tell me how many you would want to give 3 yr./13 million to. I say 1- C. Lee. Batum is arguable but he will prove to be an average backup at best.

---

i agree with what you say. but i think of it like this who would you rather on your team. a guy like terrance williams/marcus thornton or devin brown. i think that both of those players would definelty be an upgrade over devin brown. And also you were addressing in your other post on other threads that if we do clear up some cap space we will only be at the luxury this upcoming year.

a younger more athletic guard would be a huge upgrade over devin brown

I agree with all of you guys but again you are supposing that we are the 1 out of the 10 that hit on our draft pick in the 20's. Yes, Mario Chalmers would have been a little better than Devin this year (lets not go overboard on a guy with attitude, drug problems, and cant hit a jumper in the NBA) but would Giddens or Ibaka or greene, or DJ White or Koufus or Ryan Anderson- all other guys picked in the 20's? No, and we would still be on the hook for at least 2 more years, where Brown, Bowen, etc we can resign again for the minimum OR let go.

After pick 10, the odds are heavily stacked against you as far as getting a quality player which would be okay except for the fact that you HAVE to pay these guys for 3 years. In retrospect, wouldnt we sell Hilton or Simmons for $3 million plus not have their cap figure, as small as it is, on our books? And those were picks 12 and 15 in a BETTER draft.

Not saying that we should never get young guys, but if I have two choices:

#1 Draft a guy at 21

#2 Sell my first rounder and get back into the second round

I will choose #2 every time. Look at the second rounders from last year versus the late 1st rounders:

Late 1st (20 or later- since that is where we pick) : Top 5

C. Lee, D. Arthur, N. Batum, G. Hill, D. Greene

Early 2nd rounders: Top 5

M. Chalmers, L. Bhah a Moute, K. Weaver, D. Jordan, CDW

Other than C. Lee, is there a big difference? The true difference is in the contracts. Lets compare george Hill with Kyle Weaver, two solid backup PG's.

Late 1st round PG gets a 1st round guarantee for 3 years AND Hornets dont get $3 million.
Second round PG gets shorter, non guaranteed contract AND Hornets get $3 million.

Try to take fan passion out of the equation and think of it like a businessman. If I can produce two similar products and one saves you 5 million over three years (I will do the math if you want) which would you choose?

The odds of them developing a starter at 21 arent much better than developing one at 40, but the money difference is big. And even if they cant get back into the early second, selling the pick isnt a horrible move although it does nullify the opportunity to find a gem at a small price. There are pros and cons to each scenario, I am just advocating the Hornets brass line of thinking because you would swear that it is insane what they are doing, but it does make sense.

Personally I would love Teague or Thornton at 21, but I know getting them or not getting them will have nothing to do with winning a title. So again, just prepare for us selling the pick and try to see their point of view whether you agree or not because it is gonna be that way anyway.

if a guy like thornton is available in 2nd round then i would have no problem trading back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chubbs91

if a guy like thornton is available in 2nd round then i would have no problem trading back.

---

if thornton is not there, i wonder who else are they high on.

hopefully williams

If the Hornets can dump salary then I am all for trading the pick, so long as they can sneak back into the second and take someone they feel might make the team there. I also hate the idea of trading away first round picks for money. It does make the team old quick and it sends the wrong message to the fans. However, this club needs to shed some dead weight in terms of unproductive players making too much money. If selling our pick does helps to meet that goal, you have to look into it.

Glad we are all on relatively the same page guys. Gotta say it is really enjoyable talking to other passionate Hornets fans. i have lived in Florida all my life and have rarely come across that many. I had two friends who worked for the Hornets and one who currently does but they dont see a lot of things from our outside perspective.

At the end of the day, we have one of the top 5 players in the NBA and other than the 04 Pistons, that was a requirement for every team that won a title over the last 25 years, so for the first time in franchise history, because of CP3, I think we can honestly believe there is a chance for us to win a title if we make the right moves.

Chad ford posted a new mock draft. Does anyone have espn insider?

He has us taking Budinger:

Budinger would give the Hornets another player who can spread the floor. With Peja Stojakovic on the decline, Budinger's combination of athleticism and shooting would be welcome.


Has Terrance Williams going 22, teague 19, and Thornton out of the first round.

i still think i like williams better

I agree, but Budinger intrigues me. When he signed with Arizona, Olsen said it was the best recruit he ever landed. Some good, not great, players have come out of Arizona and Olsen said he was the best coming out of high school. Great athletic skills and a knockdown J but he cant get his own shot and he lacks some bball IQ. Could be great for us if we actually ran. Him and JuJu on the wings with CP3 would be nasty.

but we need someone who can create his own shot. that is what we are lacking

thornton seems to be up and down depending on who some like ford or givony and company talk to. i found this:

Quote:

---

The Hawks and Marcus Thornton?: Don't overlook LSU's Marcus Thornton. Marcus has had some stellar workout recently going 20-for-25 from NBA three in Dallas and knocked the socks off the Atlanta Hawks before heading to Chicago for the NBA Pre-Draft Combine. Marcus continues to climb as teams get an up-close look at him and are raving his ability to score the ball. Marcus is a "play right away" player and seems to be making things interesting especially in the 13 to 20 range. Hawks sources agreed that Marcus was exceptional in their workout and consider him a Joe Johnson type scorer. With Johnson expected to explore his free agent options next summer the Hawks may have found their man at #19.

---

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=12832

more draft news on trade rumors and other draft rumblings:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...June-2nd-3241/

I really hope they draft Patrick Mills or Jeff Teague

And its laughable that people actually want Budinger and Mullens. They have bust written all over them. I'm still waiting for someone to say we should draft Hansbrough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Napoleon Solo

I really hope they draft Patrick Mills or Jeff Teague

And its laughable that people actually want Budinger and Mullens. They have bust written all over them. I'm still waiting for someone to say we should draft Hansbrough.

---

Depending on who is available, I would not completely write off any of the three. All 3 could play a role on the bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geaux hornets

thornton seems to be up and down depending on who some like ford or givony and company talk to. i found this:



http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=12832

more draft news on trade rumors and other draft rumblings:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...June-2nd-3241/

---

I was afraid of this happening. I was hoping he'd be considered a 2nd rounder by most, but this makes it look less likely for us.

Joe Johnson type, eh? I wasn't ready to go that far but I definitely see the similarities.

Two guys that seem to be sliding are Earl Clark (maybe not all the way to 21) and Ty Lawson. I would not mind either of those two if they slid.

So I am assuming that we are living in an alternative reality here and we are keeping our pick. Under that scenario, what are you guys hoping to add?

Best player available for next year regardless of position
Best long term prospect regardless of position
Best guard available either long or short term
Best big available
Future Starter
Future key role player

Obviously we want to hit it big, but realistically and in regards of this franchise, what do you most want out of this draft if you cant get it all at #21? A project who can be a possible future starter or a guy who can be a solid role player but not much more next year and for the future?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

You guys seem to discount the possibility of our draft pick being the equivalent of JR Giddens. Eating up 1.5 million (3 million because of the luxury tax) and contributing practically nothing long term or short term.

It is almost like there is an assumption that we will pull a jewel out of nowhere. Julian Wright is more talented than anyone we could have picked last year and more talented than anyone who will be available this year and he can barely get PT on this team. And as far as the "minimum salary" arguement- it is not a minimum salary. It is a guaranteed 3 yr contract at what will be around 5 million for this pick. So average of 1.6 mil a year. Devin, Bowen, Ely- those are guys on minimum salaries and are only given it a year at a time. All of those guys contributed more to the team than a rookie would have last year and all made less and all come off the books this year.

Granted, we COULD get a decent player at 21 (even though we have in the past failed to get major contributors at 12- Hilton, 13- Wright, and 15- Simmons) but the likelihood is we will be giving a 3 year contract to a guy who will likely never contribute more than a Devin Brown. So why not just keep signing minimum guys who are cheaper and you are only on the hook for one year over more expensive guys who you are on the hook for 3 years if they contribute EQUALLY?

Of course there is the potential they can become Spreewell or T. Parker or Horry, etc. but the percentages say they are more likely to be JR Giddens or Kirk haston. If we keep the pick rather then sell it we are essentially giving out a 3 year 13 million dollar contract to a guy who has a very high liklihood of being nothing. How did I get at 3 yr, 13 million? Check the math.

Contract: 3 yr/ 5million
Luxury tax (which we will be over) doubles that 5 million to 10
We dont get the 3 million we would sell the pick for.

5 +5+3= 13

3 years 13 million for a guy who has a likelihood of being a 10th man at best.

Bottom line, it is a business and I know it is so easy to look forward and see all these guys who have limitless potential. "Oh Jrue Holliday is gonna be so good. Oh I want Terrance Williams, etc." The HIGH majority of guys picked 11-30 this year are gonna be NOTHING. Again, look at last years picks between 20 and 30 and tell me how many you would want to give 3 yr./13 million to. I say 1- C. Lee. Batum is arguable but he will prove to be an average backup at best.

---

1st round draft pick's contracts are only guaranteed for 2 years not 3 years. The team has an option for the 3rd and 4th year. Therefore in actuality the total dollar amount for signing the 21st pick in this draft to the mandatory two year deal is a mere $2,189,300... Just $1,055,100 in the first year... http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=9301

Which is almost the exact same amount of money that players are paid who are earning the veteran's minimum salary. As you can see here, with guys like Sean Marks, Ryan Bower, Devin Brown, and Melvin Ely: http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_orleans.htm

Shedding a million dollars off the cap will not get us under the luxury tax line. And basically any player, rookie or otherwise, who is signed this summer will add to our total player salary figure, and will therefore increase the luxury tax that will have to be paid out by Shinn... So unless the pick is being packaged with one of our bad contracts in order to free up cap space, I don't see how it will save us any money. We will just have to sign and plug in a veteran who will be making virtually the same exact amount of money as our draft pick would have been making next season.

If the team uses the pick to move a bad contract, or sells the pick but is actually able to secure a solid prospect in the early portion of the 2nd round, then I could live with the decision... But if neither of these things are accomplished when dealing the pick, then it's just a flat out bad move. Bad from a business standpoint, because in trading a pick for money you don't maximize your asset, and you don't really save money. Bad from basketball perspective, and a fan's perspective, because it will not improve the team what-so-ever, when that is exactly what the draft is there to provide to teams; cheap, young, talent... It's just up to them to put in the time, money, and effort to scout the prospects thoroughly and determine who is the best player suited for this team when our pick rolls around.

At least if they sell the pick again this year we won't be told by people on here that it has nothing to do with finances. It will have everything to do with finances.

I have no problem with that, as long as they make the right moves afterwards. But based on their track record, I have no confidence that they can do such a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Al_Blaze

1st round draft pick's contracts are only guaranteed for 2 years not 3 years. The team has an option for the 3rd and 4th year. Therefore in actuality the total dollar amount for signing the 21st pick in this draft to the mandatory two year deal is a mere $2,189,300... Just $1,055,100 in the first year... http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=9301

Which is almost the exact same amount of money that players are paid who are earning the veteran's minimum salary. As you can see here, with guys like Sean Marks, Ryan Bower, Devin Brown, and Melvin Ely: http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_orleans.htm

Shedding a million dollars off the cap will not get us under the luxury tax line. And basically any player, rookie or otherwise, who is signed this summer will add to our total player salary figure, and will therefore increase the luxury tax that will have to be paid out by Shinn... So unless the pick is being packaged with one of our bad contracts in order to free up cap space, I don't see how it will save us any money. We will just have to sign and plug in a veteran who will be making virtually the same exact amount of money as our draft pick would have been making next season.

If the team uses the pick to move a bad contract, or sells the pick but is actually able to secure a solid prospect in the early portion of the 2nd round, then I could live with the decision... But if neither of these things are accomplished when dealing the pick, then it's just a flat out bad move. Bad from a business standpoint, because in trading a pick for money you don't maximize your asset, and you don't really save money. Bad from basketball perspective, and a fan's perspective, because it will not improve the team what-so-ever, when that is exactly what the draft is there to provide to teams; cheap, young, talent... It's just up to them to put in the time, money, and effort to scout the prospects thoroughly and determine who is the best player suited for this team when our pick rolls around.

---

I agree with the majority of your points with the exception that trading the pick is bad from a business standpoint because you dont maximize your asset. I think in a situation where that asset has a 90 percent chance of being worthless, getting 3 million for it is good business. The point you make about it being a two year deal close to the league minimum is valid, but at that point it is foolish to not exercise the option even if the player has done nothing to prove he earned it (Hilton comes to mind). So, in actuality it can be a 2 year contract but in reality it will be a 3 or 4.

Plain and simple the cost differnce next year between signing a Devin Brown type or drafting a Marcus Thornton (who I want bad) is 3.4 million from our owner's perspective (assuming we sell the pick for 3 million). As an employee you have to tell this to your boss and he will ask you, well is Thornton 3.4 million better next year than Devin? And believe me, i hate Devin, but take fandom and emotion out of this, think business only. Does Thornton make you 3.4 million more than Brown next year? Does he sell that many more tickets or get us that many more playoff games? If analyzing just straight business, what is the liklihood he earns you that 3.4 million back at any point in his career?

I bleed Hornets and I want us to get every player possible, take chances, spend big, try anything, but I have also owned my own businesses and we have to understand that as much as we love them, that is what they are to some guys in the front office.

Quote:

---

I think in a situation where that asset has a 90 percent chance of being worthless

---

Link?

Quote:

---

Plain and simple the cost differnce next year between signing a Devin Brown type or drafting a Marcus Thornton (who I want bad) is 3.4 million from our owner's perspective (assuming we sell the pick for 3 million). As an employee you have to tell this to your boss and he will ask you, well is Thornton 3.4 million better next year than Devin? And believe me, i hate Devin, but take fandom and emotion out of this, think business only. Does Thornton make you 3.4 million more than Brown next year? Does he sell that many more tickets or get us that many more playoff games? If analyzing just straight business, what is the liklihood he earns you that 3.4 million back at any point in his career?

---

This is just plain retarded, Thornton's impact would be much bigger on the court than Brown's which leads to better team-more wins-more fans buying tickets-more money. Now that's good business, trading picks turns off the fan base which leads to less money.

Also, where are you getting the 3.4 figure?

Quote:

---

I bleed Hornets and I want us to get every player possible, take chances, spend big, try anything, but I have also owned my own businesses and we have to understand that as much as we love them, that is what they are to some guys in the front office.

---

A small business that you may have owned isn't comparable to a NBA franchise, sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NIH

A small business that you may have owned isn't comparable to a NBA franchise, sorry.

---

i have to disagree and know exactly what CP3 & 11 others were referring to by having been in the same situation. the only concept that matters is :money:! its not whether what they're doing is right as we all have something negative to say to what has transpired in some of the decision making with the front office. decisions are not always made about how it translate to the basketball court. it has to do with the business side. the same phrase we hear from the players to the owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NIH

A small business that you may have owned isn't comparable to a NBA franchise, sorry.

---

Except the Thunder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geaux hornets

i have to disagree and know exactly what CP3 & 11 others were referring to by having been in the same situation. the only concept that matters is :money:! its not whether what they're doing is right as we all have something negative to say to what has transpired in some of the decision making with the front office. decisions are not always made about how it translate to the basketball court. it has to do with the business side. the same phrase we hear from the players to the owners.

---

I know that! What I'm calling dumb is looking at every draft pick as a bad investment or something because of percentages. Let's go with Devin Brown over Thornton, he's more cost effective! If you build a **** team because it's more cost effective you'll lose paying fans, sponsorships, etc. and then you'll be losing money.

OTOH, if you draft well and build a good team the business side of your franchise will boom with tickets, suites, sponsorships, etc. sold. not hard to comprehend.

this is some bull****

but im not disappointed. ive come to accept this with our management. what a joke.

How could trading the pick even be a reality this team this off season when we don't have much depth surrounding CP and David West, we're in cap hell, and we were completely demolished in the playoffs by the Nuggets with our so called "veteran" experience? Overpaying OR signing another washed up veteran to the minimum will not improve this team in any shape or form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thefuture

If Terrence Williams, Jrue Holiday or Jeff Teague are there at #21 and we sell the pick, I am going to mail the front office a box of ****

---

I like your thinking.

Teague undoubetdly gives us the one thing we lack the most, a shot creator.
Every other player on our roster relies on Paul. West is isolated at times,
but can't get it rolling against the taller and more athletic
PF's and C's of the game. The championship teams will always have
these! Wright can get it done, but not nearly ready to be relied upon.

Terrance Williams' only knocks will be ironed out when playing with Paul. He comes out and plays defense better than our players already (except Paul)
and can best described as a feirce competitor. (paul and him would do well). He isn't a pick we would want on our second team. He's not a combo, nor points off the bench. But he can fill the lane, create turn-overs, drive, and be the one person to get out in front of paul on the break. Automatically, we'd be hellish on defense. I think he needs a player like Paul to mentor him, or he could go to the dark side.

Holliday- like Catheles and others, is the combo guard that we dream could fix our two holes (back-up PG, and SG). He's just the most athletic one we can get possibly.



If we sign Pargo,

my list is Terrance Williams or BJ Mullens. Yes, yes I said Mullens, but they are all gambles; and he is a year removed from being a top three pick. Just take a look at the clip at the bottom of this page

mullens


Let us not ask about the personality that we dont know. Our management should get to know him. Many a successful big sucked as freshman. AND
Don't worry he won't be around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NIH

I know that! What I'm calling dumb is looking at every draft pick as a bad investment or something because of percentages. Let's go with Devin Brown over Thornton, he's more cost effective! If you build a **** team because it's more cost effective you'll lose paying fans, sponsorships, etc. and then you'll be losing money.

OTOH, if you draft well and build a good team the business side of your franchise will boom with tickets, suites, sponsorships, etc. sold. not hard to comprehend.

---

Its not that I or the Hornets are arguing that Thornton is not betterr than Devin but if the entire roster is the same and on one roster you have Thornton and on another you have Devin Brown- what is the difference?

Financially the differnce is 3.4 million (Thornton's contract plus luxury tax plus the 3 million we wouldnt get from trading the pick minus Devin Browns contract plus the luxury tax)

Now, how does Thornton earn you back that 3.4 million dollar difference? Stop thinking of this as a fan for 1 second. You argue more wins equal more tickets sold. OK, I might agree with that but are we really gonna sell 170,000 more tix this year because of Thornton? Are we a 50 win team and a first round exit without Thornton and a 60 win team and a championship contender with him?

I think we can all agree the difference might be two wins at most, maybe three. So where do we make our money back?

Again, I am just a big of a fan as any of you but we really have to understand to them it is mostly a business if we are to understand their thinking. Otherwise we can just come on here and bash them all day because the Hornets will never spend like the Yankees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

Its not that I or the Hornets are arguing that Thornton is not betterr than Devin but if the entire roster is the same and on one roster you have Thornton and on another you have Devin Brown- what is the difference?

Financially the differnce is 3.4 million (Thornton's contract plus luxury tax plus the 3 million we wouldnt get from trading the pick minus Devin Browns contract plus the luxury tax)

Now, how does Thornton earn you back that 3.4 million dollar difference? Stop thinking of this as a fan for 1 second. You argue more wins equal more tickets sold. OK, I might agree with that but are we really gonna sell 170,000 more tix this year because of Thornton? Are we a 50 win team and a first round exit without Thornton and a 60 win team and a championship contender with him?

I think we can all agree the difference might be two wins at most, maybe three. So where do we make our money back?

Again, I am just a big of a fan as any of you but we really have to understand to them it is mostly a business if we are to understand their thinking. Otherwise we can just come on here and bash them all day because the Hornets will never spend like the Yankees.

---

By this logic- hell, the Hornets coulda had me for 60,ooo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

Its not that I or the Hornets are arguing that Thornton is not betterr than Devin but if the entire roster is the same and on one roster you have Thornton and on another you have Devin Brown- what is the difference?

---

A lot, Devin Brown does not belong in the NBA. Thornton could turn out to be a contributor or even an all-star.

Quote:

---

Financially the differnce is 3.4 million (Thornton's contract plus luxury tax plus the 3 million we wouldnt get from trading the pick minus Devin Browns contract plus the luxury tax)

---

wtf.

Quote:

---

Now, how does Thornton earn you back that 3.4 million dollar difference? Stop thinking of this as a fan for 1 second. You argue more wins equal more tickets sold. OK, I might agree with that but are we really gonna sell 170,000 more tix this year because of Thornton? Are we a 50 win team and a first round exit without Thornton and a 60 win team and a championship contender with him?

---

Thornton's impact in temrs of wins might not be huge this year, but down the road it could equal 5-10 wins and that would be a huge difference in terms of perspective from fans.

Quote:

---

I think we can all agree the difference might be two wins at most, maybe three. So where do we make our money back?

---

So every draft pick has to bring in a return in the 1st yeat? I cannot believe I am even debating this with you.

Quote:

---

Again, I am just a big of a fan as any of you but we really have to understand to them it is mostly a business if we are to understand their thinking. Otherwise we can just come on here and bash them all day because the Hornets will never spend like the Yankees.

---

There's a happy medium between being the Yankees and being the cheap *******s they would be for selling the pick.

do not expect much out of Bower or Scott, those two guys need "Viagra for coaches", because they are both limp noodles, when it comes to talent evaluation.

there is a thing called prospects and development obviously not every single rookie comes in right away and makes immediate impact. some do not make any impact until their third year. but that doesn't matter. teams use the draft to build for the future.

now, i'd understand if we had the 27th pick of the draft, which is near the end of the 1st round, but you can definitely find a good prospect with the 21st pick of the draft. no doubt about it. i thought selling the pick last year was idiotic, i mean, is there anybody who wouldn't want darrell arthur on the team? arguing against that is laughable. selling our pick last year, and then selling our pick this year, near the middle of the 1st round is unacceptable. we need to get some young bodies on the team, who may or may not contribute this year. but in the future? we'll need them. you don't have to look any further than the phoenix suns as a perfect example. they were steamrolling through the league, and decided that draft picks were not necessary to invest in. where are they now? you don't think they would have preferred to use a couple now?

the 21st pick can very well land us a decent role player in the future, much better than going out signing people like posey to huge deals, or signing scrubs like brown and ely.

i hear all this talk about moving up in the 2nd or something to get thornton? i guess that is the plan, yet what happens when his contract runs out? a talent like him most likely won't even last that far to begin with. a 2nd round pick who succeeds will probably command 1.5 mill or more when their contract expires regardless, so we'll have to shell out the dough regardless. i'd rather stay at 21 and get a good prospect rather than just throwing picks every single year. if that were the case, teams like the lakers and spurs would've just thrown away all their picks, but obviously that's not the case. championship teams value draft picks, i guess we don't since we obviously are not a championship team and won't be anytime soon if we keep throwing away our picks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CP3 & 11 others

Financially the differnce is 3.4 million (Thornton's contract plus luxury tax plus the 3 million we wouldnt get from trading the pick minus Devin Browns contract plus the luxury tax)

---

You keep trying to justify this through financial calculations that are not rational. There are still spots on the roster that must be filled. A rookie with a minimal contract counts just as much to the cap and luxury tax as a minimum salary veteran like a Bowen. The cost is roughly the same. The difference is the $3 million from selling the pick (which is the maximum, not a given). If a team really needs to make $3 million a year by selling its draft picks, it is time to get a new owner in place as that is not how teams are built and it is extremely short-sighted.

The calculations are exact actually. The difference between the league minimum and the 21st pick is 200,000- doubled because of the luxury tax- 400,000. Plus the Hornets will sell their pick for 3 million = 3.4 million.

All I am saying is please think of this as you going up to your boss who runs the company. You tell him you can use medium end corn flakes in your cereal instead of low end. He says to you, "Well what is the cost difference for us, and what do we expect to yield in profit?"

You say, it will be an extra 3.4 million and we will most definately not make that back this year and according to past studies there is a very high liklihood the medium end corn flakes never yield better than the low end corn flakes but there is a 10-15 percent chance that they do.

What would he say in all liklihood? Or use any other business if you cant think about corn flakes cereal. Yes we can make minor points like Thornton or Darrell Arthur or whomever COULD be a difference on this team even though history shows a pick in the twenties is likely to be a role player at best. The fact is, if this were any other business you would see the logic but since this is sports and we all get invested emotionally, we want our team to take the chances and foolishly assume we will be the 1 out of 8 who hit on our pick in the 20's.