When it comes to NBA Draft analysis, a constant presence for the last several years has been ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith. Unfortunately, many of his predictions surrounding the NBA’s annual talent auction are often wrong.
And not wrong like he predicted someone to win Rookie of the Year and they came in second or got hurt. Wrong like the complete opposite of his statements usually comes to fruition. Here’s a jewel from DailyBasketball.com.
At the 2007 NBA Draft, upon hearing that the New York Knicks traded for Zach Randolph, Stephen A. went on to proclaim that the Knicks would drastically improve and be a contender in the East. At the time I thought, “what planet is this guy living on?” Zach Randolph has never helped a team in the win column, is a poor defender and has had numerous off-the-court and on-the-court issues. Not to mention that they already had a guy on their roster who was eerily similar (Eddy Curry). Yet Stephen A. proclaimed him to be the savior of the Knicks, even though his price tag was $60 million over four years, further constricting them financially. In a long line of bad trades, this was another terrible trade for the Knicks. I don’t need to remind anyone how this situation turned out.
When you’re right, you’re right. And quite frankly, Stephen A. Smith can’t claim that superlative.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Right? Wrong?
I can’t ever get past the yelling to ever consider the validity of SAS’s points.