Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1966 NBA Expansion Draft/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 08:02, 2 June 2010.

1966 NBA Expansion Draft

 * Nominator(s): — Chris! c / t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC) & User:Martin tamb

I am nominating this on behalf of User:Martin tamb because I think it is ready. It will hopefully be a part of a future Chicago Bulls GT.— Chris! c / t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, still no comment. My list is that boring that no one wants to read it. :)— Chris! c / t 18:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  01:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments from Zagalejo
 * I know that the Chicago Bulls Encylopedia has some additional info about this draft. I own a copy, so when I get a chance, I'll add some stuff. One thing I remember is that Dick Klein (the Bulls' GM) planned to use Kerr and Bianchi as coaches before the draft even took place. (So, basically, they were drafted to be coaches; they were still under playing contracts, so they couldn't be signed outright.) I also remember that Klein worked out some deal with Red Auerbach in which Klein promised not to select a certain Celtics player (I forget which one) if Auerbach shared his evaluations of other players throughout the league. Zagalejo^^^ 19:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for helping.— Chris! c / t 19:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I added a little bit. Zagalejo^^^ 22:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Do we really need to mention here that Sloan was inducted into the HOF as a coach? He was primarily inducted because of his work with the Jazz. Also, I don't think we should mention Thompson at all, since none of his accomplishments have anything to do with the Bulls. Zagalejo^^^ 19:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Those excessive detail can be cut down. But some should remain because readers probably would like to know what happen to the players after being drafted.— Chris! c / t 19:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if we're going to say that Sloan is in the HOF, then I think it would be better to restore something about the Jazz, for the sake of clarity. Zagalejo^^^ 20:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done— Chris! c / t 19:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support – After the fixes, the list meets the criteria.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 20:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: Good list, but there's one thing I'd like to see. For Sloan, I'd like to see a highlight/key either for being in the Hall of Fame as a coach, or for having his jersey retired by the Bulls (or both). Do that and I'll support it. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 20:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done— Chris! c / t 23:46, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 02:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really agree with the colorings because this isn't a normal draft articles. The colorings could have ambiguous meanings, for example: whether the players has been selected to the All-Star Game before he was drafted by the Bulls or after his whole playing career ended. Non-expansion draft articles wouldn't have this problem because the draftees were never been in the league before being drafted, while in an expansion draft, the draftees are usually already in the league. Also a coloring for Hall of Famer coaches is never being used in any draft articles because it's irrelevant for a list of players drafted. Hall of Famer coaches are usually mentioned in a short paragraph on the lead. Furthermore, the information about the Hall of Famers and the All-Stars was already included in the lead. It even mentions which player was already an All-Star when he was drafted and which player became an All-Star after their Bulls drafted them. I would like another opinion from the others on this issues. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That sounds reasonable to me. I didn't think about this when I added the color.— Chris! c / t 23:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not crazy about the colors. They're misleading; I think Boozer is the only one who actually earned his "color-worthy accomplishment" as a Bull. Zagalejo^^^ 05:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Color removed.— Chris! c / t 18:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * "The Bulls were the third NBA franchise to play in Chicago, after the Chicago Stags, which folded in 1950, and the Chicago Packers–Zephyrs, which moved to Baltimore and became the Baltimore Bullets in 1963." A)It would read better IMO if after was changed to following since it currently reads like the sentence would go into something where you're saying 'after the Chicago stags did something'. B)Unlink Baltimore.
 * "In an NBA expansion draft, new NBA teams can acquire players from the previously established teams in the league. " -- can or are allowed?
 * "Dick Klein had been planning to use Kerr and Bianchi as coaches before the draft even took place, but because they were still under playing contracts with other teams, Klein needed to draft them instead of hiring them outright." - no need to state his first name again.
 * "Guy Rodgers—whom the Bulls acquired in exchange for Jim King and Jeff Mullins—and Jerry Sloan were named to the 1967 All-Star Game, becoming the franchise's first All-Stars" - you should probably link the final All-Stars word of the sentence to like a main article, if there is one.
 * If you mean that the NBA All-Star Game should be linked, it's already linked in "..three-time All-Star Johnny Kerr..". — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "Boozer became the team's third All-Star when he was named to the 1968 All-Star Game.[10]" - is this necessary? This article is about 66-67, so why state 68? Unless he still holds that title of being the last All Star, which I doubt.
 * I put Boozer's achievement there to show that he is one of the most successful expansion draftees for the Bulls, compared to the others. I also didn't think the term "third" would imply the last All-Star. But if you insist, I can remove this sentence. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The only reason I brought it up is because I feel that the year 68 has nothing to do with this draft even if he came from the expansion team. Wouldn't the following season be like a whole new type of roster environment? -- T ru  c o   503 01:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable, never thought that, so the sentence removed. Thanks for the review! — Martin tamb (talk) 07:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Avoid repetition: "as has fellow draftee John Thompson. Thompson never worked for the Bulls in any capacity, but found success as a coach at Georgetown University"-- T ru  c o   503 20:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * All others fixed. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support -- All issues resolved; meets WP:WIAFL. Good work!-- T ru  c o   503 23:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.