Stop Sund before he picks again, please

by jrauch on Jun 23, 2009 10:30 AM EDT Comment 10 comments

As the Hawks prep, in at least some scenarios, to draft with the #19 and #49 picks in this year's draft, one question has me deeply worried about Thursday night: We all know Rick Sund is running the Hawks draft, right?

What's the cause for concern, you say? This is the same Rick Sund who built a spunky Mavericks team in the 1980's, and kept the Supersonics hanging around the playoffs back before they were named for the weather in a tiny Midwestern media market.

Yet his drafts of the past decade with the Sonics were the biggest collective dud we've seen this decade — and that's taking into account our dearly departed Billy Knight, Isiah Thomas and Billy King.

And his record indicates we might be in for a doozy come Thursday night.

Let's look at his picks, first and foremost (after the jump):

2001

— 12th pick Vladimir Radmanovic, 40th pick Earl Watson, 42nd pick Bobby Simmons (who became Pedrag Drobjnak)

2002

— 49th pick Peter Fehse

2003

—12th pick Nick Collison, 14th pick Luke Ridnour, 41st pick Willie Green

2004

— 12th pick Robert Swift, 35th pick Andre Emmett, 41st pick David Young

2005

— 25th pick Johan Petro, 48th pick Mickael Gelabale, 55th pick Lawrence Roberts

2006

— 10th pick Saer Sene, 40th pick Denham Brown, 53rd pick Yotam Halperin

Ye gods.

The results are pretty ugly, when you look at who's left in the NBA, much less still playing for the Sonics/Thunder.

Collison, Ridnour, Simmons, Radmanovic and Watson are the only consistent contributors in the league, though none of them would be considered stars by any stretch of the imagination.

Swift, while he'd be first team for the NBA's Awkward White Guys with Lots of Tats squad, isn't much else.

His 3.3 ppg and 13 minutes per game this year weren't even in Zaza Pachulia territory, though he did shoot a career best 52 percent from the field. That should at least make Solomon Jones and Randolph Morris envious.

Robert Swift, full of great tattoos and very bad basketball, via thesportsgeeks.com

Swift and Sene would have to be considered the biggests busts, given a relatively high draft placing with absolutely nothing to show for it in the NBA.

Looking over this draft record, you begin to see why that Sonics team built around Ray Allen (and admittedly a good trade on Sund's part, dumping Payton for Allen, but only because George Karl and Ray Allen couldn't stand each other in Milwaukee anymore) always seemed to be stuck in mediocrity hell.

A starting five of those picks alone would be Ridnour/Watson/Collison/Swift/Bobby Simmons. That team might win 12 games.

Sund could never really put the pieces around Allen through the draft to take the next step until his ouster with the new ownership group.

What's particularly troubling about his Seattle drafts is those teams had two gaping holes that needed to be filled: Bruising post players to suck up rebounds and defend, and legitimate wing/backcourt players to complement Allen.

Did Sund find any of those players in any draft?

Not even close.

After Collison, he failed to draft a serviceable big man, particularly the rebounding/shot blocking center the Sonics needed at the time. Watson is a decent back-up in the league (actually a really nice find at the 40th pick, same with Willie Green at 41, but nothing you would ever build a team around), while Ridnour fills the same role in Milwaukee.

Only he was picked at 14.

Its as if Sund has a giant blind spot for post players, and point guards, particularly those who need to fill large holes for the team, which just happens to be what the Hawks need. And he happens to have a knack for picking precisely the wrong foreign big man at just the wrong time. Vitaly Potapenko as a free agent re-signing after the Vin Baker trade ring any bells?

And its not as if those drafts were full of stiffs.

Rajon Rondo went at #21 in 2006.

David Lee at #30 in 2005.

Kevin Martin, Jameer Nelson, Josh Smith, J.R. Smith and Al Jefferson were all on on the board when Sund picked Robert Swift in 2004.

At least Billy Knight stumbled into Josh Smith in the mid-to-late first round, the proverbial broken clock being right twice a day, and found a solid player in Josh Childress. And the jury is still out on Marvin Williams, and he seems to have found a real player in Al Horford.

I can't believe I'm defending Billy Knight, but his draft record looks better than Sund.

Constrained by the cap, this team will largely need to build via the draft from a relatively difficult position in the mid to late first round, barring any trades.

In his defense, Sund has a pretty good track record making deals. The aforementioned Gary Payton for Ray Allen move has been widely lauded, and deservedly so.

But the Hawks look to be in a situation similar to those Sonics teams, with the draft being the primary vehicle for improvement. The team has relatively little room to maneuver in the trade market or sign outside free agents without disrupting what's widely considered the team's core, thanks to a miserly, or cash-strapped, ownership group.

Throw in the weakest draft class in a very long time, and it all seems to be lining up that Thursday night will be a disappointing one for Hawks fans, barring some boffo trade involving some Josh action (either Childress or Smith), picks and a pu-pu platter of other players.

If Sund does pick at #19 or #49, I'm just hoping its not Petro/Sene/Swift all over again.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i remember in 2006 he was being told to start to cut salary by the owner. many people thought that he was going to pick sene so that they could keep him in europe. what surprised me was that they brought him over so quickly. to me that was the mistake they made.

by Bryant on Jun 23, 2009 11:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

as bad as this draft is i’d be happy with robert swift, it’s not like we’re gonna get a great point guard at 19. personally i would like to see them draft hansborouh. he will be a decent upgrade at backup PF, and he almost has to be better than solomon jones

I think your being a little harsh on sund though, How many good players are there after the lottery every year? 1? 2?

by thirdfALCON on Jun 23, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

"Sure thing" big men don't come cheap

With picks outside of the top 3, you are rarely going to get a center that is anything but a long-shot. So, you either take a one-in-ten shot of getting a starter (maybe one-in-three that they develop into a quality back-up/weak starter), or you go for somewhat higher odds at other positions.

Seattle needed a center, so Sund kept taking those gambles. He’d probably have been better off going with the BPA, but it wasn’t the worst draft strategy.

At 19, if Mullens falls to you, it isn’t a bad pick to spend on a longshot with those kind of odds. At the same time, there are a lot of good PGs in this draft, so you have to think you could get some very good value at the 19.

Currently playing the role of the Atlanta Hawks GM in the Blazersedge.com 2009 NBA Mock Draft.

by hoopla-pdx on Jun 23, 2009 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

good value maybe

But a point guard that can start (especially right away)? very doubtfull in my opinion. Our biggest weakness last year was frontcourt depth. why not go with my man from NCU? I don’t think we’re gonna get a starter in hansbrough, but we don’t need one. We just need someone that can play competent backup minutes.

by thirdfALCON on Jun 23, 2009 12:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The most likely scenario is this pick replaces Acie Law or Solomon Jones as the 9th man in the rotation, so I can’t get too worked up about Sund’s past draft history. It’s just the 19th pick after all. If it doesn’t pan out, so what? I’ll be more interested to see which free agents he re-signs and what other deals he makes.

by redwards95 on Jun 23, 2009 1:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed that the lower levels of the first round aren’t where you can reliably expect home run picks, but the draft history of the past decade shows that there’s plenty of viable starters, and even stars, at that level. Tony Parker was an end of round selection.
What was surprising for me looking at this draft history is the fact so many successful rotation players/starters went after some of his selections.
They really are abysmal when you look at the larger context.
Something I didn’t make as clear as I like is that yes, I’m not expecting a home run at 19. But even a single or double seems a stretch, given Sund’s last few drafts.

by jrauch on Jun 23, 2009 2:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd like to see more.

My thesis is that the NBA draft is ALWAYS a crapshoot after the two to four can’t-miss guys. Stars have to be drafted, or traded for on draft day, or you don’t get them unless you give up another star in a trade. The rest of the draft—95% of it—is an attempt to find players who will contribute.

So, yeah, Sund’s record is bad. But my point is that everyone makes bad picks A LOT of the time. Consider: Kwame Brown at #1; Patrick O’Bryant at #9; Darko Milicic at #2; Rafael Araujo at #7 (Toronto); Andrea Bargnani #1 (Toronto); Martell Webster #6 (Pportland); Andrew Bogut #1; Mike Dunleavy #3 !!!!!; Adam Morrison #3; Tyrus Thomas #4; Yi Jianlian #6; Joe Alexander #8 (Milwaukee). And that’s only a few top 10 picks from recent drafts. It gets much, much worse below 10.

But recent draft patterns do suggest that you can will likely get a contributor between 1-10; that seems to drop by about 50% for picks 11-29.

by rbubp on Jun 23, 2009 3:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Generally agree Rbubp, but a few counterpoints:
Despite the belief its a crapshoot, some good GMs just seem to have a knack for finding those kinds of quality players further down in the draft. Tony Parker was picked in the late 20’s (28? 29?).
I can understand him having some misses, even a fair number of those misses, but it appears every pick he made in a 4-5 year span qualifies as a miss, for a team that is largely in the same situation as the Hawks are now: Shooting guard in his prime, a few pieces here or there for a halfway decent team, but needing another piece or two to make that next step.
Maybe it’ll happen Thursday night via trade (my ideal scenario personally), but his draft record, to me, is pretty concerning given he failed to deliver when in roughly the same situation just a few years ago.

Plus this draft appears to be laughably weak. Of course, that means we’ll have 10 All Stars come from the first round and be calling this the greatest point guard draft ever. Murphy’s Law.

by jrauch on Jun 23, 2009 3:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The thing about those teams with the Knack is that they are ahead of the curve on trends.

For example with the spurs they were more progressive in their international scouting, and it netted them Parker as well as Ginobli in the late first round. But now the league has caught up to them (bet they want that Scola trade back).

So yeah I don’t think that Rick Sund is a genius that has an advantage over the rest of the league like the Spurs did, I do think that we need to manage our expectations though. We most likely aren’t gonna get the second coming of Gilbert Arenas, But we might get a quality backup that can soak up 15 minutes or so and give us some badly needed depth

by thirdfALCON on Jun 23, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

after seeing what sund has dun for us this thread is sarting to look pointless.

by ca$hmere36 on Jul 13, 2009 7:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Peachtree Hoops: An SB Nation Community

Network Bar

Peachtree Hoops -

There is first love, and there's Zaza Pachulia love