The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
655047474C7547474C4B47220 wrote: The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
497C6B6B60596B6B60676B0E0 wrote: The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
______
My vote goes for "The Process". So far Cherington hasn't given any indication that he knows what the heck he is doing.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
______
My vote goes for "The Process". So far Cherington hasn't given any indication that he knows what the heck he is doing.
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
the big thing about building a great major league team is that it can't just be done through the draft.
The Bucs could have the best farm system in baseball for 4 or 5 years in a row and that wouldn't mean the major league team is a power house.
Being successful in the draft is vitally important to the Pirates but they have to get players other ways too.
The Bucs could have the best farm system in baseball for 4 or 5 years in a row and that wouldn't mean the major league team is a power house.
Being successful in the draft is vitally important to the Pirates but they have to get players other ways too.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
1E333E2F28392E6E6D5C0 wrote: The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
-
Bobster21
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
6B5E4949427B49494245492C0 wrote: The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
Those 2 franchises were not baseball franchises. They are in other sports where the effect of the draft is much different than in baseball. So I don't know what your point is. I think we all agree that the draft can only be a part of successfully building a team. But the draft plays a much greater part in building NFL and NBA teams than in baseball. So comparing them is not very useful.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
Those 2 franchises were not baseball franchises. They are in other sports where the effect of the draft is much different than in baseball. So I don't know what your point is. I think we all agree that the draft can only be a part of successfully building a team. But the draft plays a much greater part in building NFL and NBA teams than in baseball. So comparing them is not very useful.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
There are obvious difrerences among sports, but that doesn't change the point, which is- if anyone here is able to tell me which 18-to 22- year-old "sure things" will turn out to become "sure things," and which of them won't, then my hat's off to that person.
Some successes are dicated by the player. Some sucesses are dicatedf by their team. Some successes are within contril. Some aren't. Some injuries can be forseen, for example. Often, they're unpredictable.
But, if anyone is relying solely on draftng suspects and expecting their team- REGARDLESS of sport, REHARDLESS of team, to achieve ultimate competitiveness, they might be in for a less than dirsired outcome.
Some successes are dicated by the player. Some sucesses are dicatedf by their team. Some successes are within contril. Some aren't. Some injuries can be forseen, for example. Often, they're unpredictable.
But, if anyone is relying solely on draftng suspects and expecting their team- REGARDLESS of sport, REHARDLESS of team, to achieve ultimate competitiveness, they might be in for a less than dirsired outcome.
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
The sports are apples to oranges regarding the draft.
In the NBA and NFL, there are no sure things either. What is known, are sure NOTS. There is a level of athleticism and/or size that one must have to make the NBA and NFL. There was a Muggsy Bogues and a Spud Webb in the NBA, but they never were part of a championship team. They were exceptional outliers. Rarely in the NBA, and I mean RARELY, has anyone succeeded in the NBA who was under 6 foot tall in the past half century at the very least. Sure you can find mighty mites playing college ball, their quickness, smarts, ball skills, etc. may be phenomenal.....but there are also hundreds of guys just like them, and TALLER.
In football, you don't find slow wide receivers. If a WR is considered "slow" that's in comparison to his peer group at the position. Same with RB's. Jerome Bettis could still run a 40 in the 4.5-4.9 range. You have 300 pound people that can. Part of Chuck Noll's down fall was he kept recruiting guys who size translated great to the 50'-70's, but not the 80's and 90's. At some point, size DOES matter.
So at least those two sports, you can weed out a lot of people just from their athleticism or lack of it. Even slow footed pocket passers have to be able to throw the ball accurately, decisively, and far.
You can't do that in baseball. A guy's athletic attributes certainly help, and certainly bring attention. Being the fastest, the strongest, the hardest thrower, etc. will get you a contract, but it may never get you out of rookie ball if you can't play an aspect of the game with some level of competence.
In the NBA and NFL, there are no sure things either. What is known, are sure NOTS. There is a level of athleticism and/or size that one must have to make the NBA and NFL. There was a Muggsy Bogues and a Spud Webb in the NBA, but they never were part of a championship team. They were exceptional outliers. Rarely in the NBA, and I mean RARELY, has anyone succeeded in the NBA who was under 6 foot tall in the past half century at the very least. Sure you can find mighty mites playing college ball, their quickness, smarts, ball skills, etc. may be phenomenal.....but there are also hundreds of guys just like them, and TALLER.
In football, you don't find slow wide receivers. If a WR is considered "slow" that's in comparison to his peer group at the position. Same with RB's. Jerome Bettis could still run a 40 in the 4.5-4.9 range. You have 300 pound people that can. Part of Chuck Noll's down fall was he kept recruiting guys who size translated great to the 50'-70's, but not the 80's and 90's. At some point, size DOES matter.
So at least those two sports, you can weed out a lot of people just from their athleticism or lack of it. Even slow footed pocket passers have to be able to throw the ball accurately, decisively, and far.
You can't do that in baseball. A guy's athletic attributes certainly help, and certainly bring attention. Being the fastest, the strongest, the hardest thrower, etc. will get you a contract, but it may never get you out of rookie ball if you can't play an aspect of the game with some level of competence.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
The sport has nothing to do with it. Take the sport out of it if you want.
Pick baseball alone if you want. You'll easily find similar examples if you look.
Choose whatever timeframe you want.
The conclusion doesn't change.
If you have the ability to predict with confidence the young guys who will succeed and those who won't, then you can probably name your price.
The point is, no one gets it right every time.....or, much more than half the time.
If there is a struggle to get this right in Round 1, you can bet that it's no easier in the later rounds.
Or, in other years.
Regardless of sport. Regardless of team.
Pick baseball alone if you want. You'll easily find similar examples if you look.
Choose whatever timeframe you want.
The conclusion doesn't change.
If you have the ability to predict with confidence the young guys who will succeed and those who won't, then you can probably name your price.
The point is, no one gets it right every time.....or, much more than half the time.
If there is a struggle to get this right in Round 1, you can bet that it's no easier in the later rounds.
Or, in other years.
Regardless of sport. Regardless of team.
-
bucs607179
- Posts: 1582
- Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 1:08 pm
Half-Full or Half-Empty?
436E63727564733330010 wrote: The "Half-Fullers" might point to the 1974 Pittsburgh Steelers draft, when they took four eventual Hall-of-Famers en route to building a historical record of achievement 47 years ago.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
Those 2 franchises were not baseball franchises. They are in other sports where the effect of the draft is much different than in baseball. So I don't know what your point is. I think we all agree that the draft can only be a part of successfully building a team. But the draft plays a much greater part in building NFL and NBA teams than in baseball. So comparing them is not very useful.
Winner winner chicken dinner! In the NFL they don't spend time in the minors when first drafted. Najee Harris is not going to get time to develop. The Steelers are hoping like hell he pounds the ball from day 1. The Pirates could get the #1 pick for the next 10 years and still suck. Once that picks contract is up he will move on and Bob will never add quality players to compliment what we have.
The "Half-Emptiers" might point to "The Process" Philadelphia 76ers, who openly admitted to tanking so that they could accumulate top draft position from 2014 tbrough 2017.
One turned out historically well. The other- so far- is widely considered disappointing.
2014- Joel Embiid, taken third. One of the best players in the league, with some injury history.
2015- Jahil Okafor- Also taken third. Good pick. Most teams would have taken him higb. Bust of busts. Gone from the team long ago.
2016- Ben Simmons- Taken first. Good pick. Good, though faulty player. One of the faults? Didn't get it done in crunch time.
2017-Markelle Fultz- Taken first. Good pick in the sense that several teams would have taken him high, but Bust of all Busts' Busts. Gone from the team long ago.
And, those were only the Sixers' first picks in the first rounds. They had some picks later in first rounds, and none are worth writing home about.
Here's an article that gives more details/explantions. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/it ... ar-AALJ5nf
"Sure Things" aren't as sure things that fans think they are.
The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?
Tune in to find out.
The MLB draft can't compare to other sports where the college level of competition is good enough to prepare amateurs to become impact players in a a major league sport as rookies or by year 2 or 3. There is not enough depth of talent in college baseball to prepare draft picks to immediately contribute at the MLB level. Even the top picks will go through at least 3 minor league levels before reaching the majors and usually only the top picks are expected to become better than average players.
That's why free agency is so important in MLB. It's not reasonable to think a team will become a powerhouse simply by having a strong draft. It requires too many years to develop prospects who too often don't live up to the best case scenario expectations. So teams develop what they can via the draft, look at prospects in other organizations for possible trades and supplement what they come up with by obtaining veterans via free agency or trades for players with large contracts. But not the Pirates because that costs money.
Even in other sports, it's not exactly common to draft 4 HOFers in one draft. Has that ever happened before or since the Steelers in 1974? I don't think anything can be learned by comparing the MLB draft to the NFL or NBA draft. The Pirates don't draft well but no MLB team puts together a great roster just from the draft like an NFL or NBA team can.
There are differences, sure. But, the bottom line is- some focuses on drafting to improve a team work. Some haven't.
Drafting is only one piece of talent acquisition. These two franchises focused mainly on one, the drsft.
Those 2 franchises were not baseball franchises. They are in other sports where the effect of the draft is much different than in baseball. So I don't know what your point is. I think we all agree that the draft can only be a part of successfully building a team. But the draft plays a much greater part in building NFL and NBA teams than in baseball. So comparing them is not very useful.
Winner winner chicken dinner! In the NFL they don't spend time in the minors when first drafted. Najee Harris is not going to get time to develop. The Steelers are hoping like hell he pounds the ball from day 1. The Pirates could get the #1 pick for the next 10 years and still suck. Once that picks contract is up he will move on and Bob will never add quality players to compliment what we have.