Skip navigation
Favorites
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Everyone is re-writing draft history with Oden/Durant, except Doc Rivers

NBA Finals Game 6:  Boston Celtics v Los Angeles Lakers

LOS ANGELES, CA - JUNE 15: Head coach Doc Rivers of the Boston Celtics answers questions after losing to the Los Angeles Lakers 89-67 in Game Six of the 2010 NBA Finals at Staples Center on June 15, 2010 in Los Angeles, California. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and/or using this Photograph, user is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)

Getty Images

You hear this all the time around the NBA now, especially the last couple days, “I wanted to pick Kevin Durant over Greg Oden if we had the chance.”

It’s crap. At the time almost everybody in the league was going to take Oden. It wasn’t close. True, there was a debate, and sports talk radio guys and online columnists were saying Durant because it is their job to stir up debates. But in the NBA circles it was Oden. You take the big, defensive-minded center that can anchor a team over the skinny shooter. Nearly everyone was sticking with the conventional wisdom.

Doc Rivers has my back. Remember the Celtics had the second worst record in the league the season before and expected a top pick that they could build a franchise around. Then the lottery gods slapped them across the face, Boston fell to No. 5 — which Danny Ainge flipped into Ray Allen, which was key to getting Kevin Garnett to sign in Boston, and away they go.

But Rivers told the Boston Globe he and the Celtics were firmly in the Oden camp.

“Even though everybody changes now, we were all for Oden, and I think 98 percent of the league,’’ Rivers said. “But now I hear it all over our staff, I hear it everywhere, ‘Oh, no, we were Durant guys.’ I don’t believe that. I think we would have drafted Oden.’’

The Celtics were Oden guys, nearly everyone was Oden guys. If you hear otherwise it’s almost certainly revisionist history.