The Golden State Warriors, a franchise deeply woven into the modern NBA’s story of dynasties and dominance, have long been scrutinized for how they’ve handled the NBA Draft. Their choices in the draft have alternately set the team up for championship success and raised questions about whether they’ve squandered potential opportunities. Recently, a statement attributed to ESPN sparked interest among fans and media alike, claiming the Warriors had “announced four successful drafts.” This statement seemed to follow an equally peculiar assertion that the Warriors had “formally severed ties with their franchise,” a phrase that doesn’t make literal sense in the context of NBA governance. A team cannot sever ties with itself—it is the franchise. There may be a misinterpretation or a metaphor lost in translation, but taking these words at face value leads to confusion. However, what can be analyzed and explored with substance is the Warriors’ recent draft history and how the idea of “four successful drafts” may have come to be associated with them.
Since the Warriors’ rise to power in the early 2010s, largely off the strength of players they drafted and developed in-house, their draft performance has been closely followed. Stephen Curry was drafted in 2009, Klay Thompson in 2011, and Draymond Green in 2012. These three players formed the core of the dynasty that won four NBA titles in eight seasons. But if we’re to consider the “four successful drafts” notion from a different angle—perhaps ESPN or another outlet evaluated the team’s drafting from the 2010s through the early 2020s and selected four years that yielded substantial returns—then the claim starts to make more conceptual sense.
Draymond Green is often cited as the most successful pick relative to draft position in recent NBA history. Selected 35th overall in 2012, he blossomed into a multi-time All-Star, a Defensive Player of the Year, and the emotional leader of a title-winning team. That same year, the Warriors also selected Harrison Barnes with the 7th overall pick. Barnes went on to become a solid starter who contributed significantly during their 2015 championship run. Kevon Looney, selected 30th overall in 2015, was initially seen as a low-upside big man with injury concerns, but over time, he grew into a vital part of the team’s rotation, especially during playoff stretches where his rebounding and defensive versatility were on full display. Eric Paschall, a 2019 second-round pick, showed early promise during a season when injuries ravaged the roster and the Warriors were forced to rely on younger talent. He averaged over 14 points per game as a rookie and gave hope that he could be a long-term rotation player, though his role diminished with time and he was eventually traded.
Those four players—Barnes, Green, Looney, and Paschall—could very well be the core of what ESPN or another outlet might refer to as the Warriors’ “four successful drafts.” It’s not that they had only four drafts overall that worked, but that in a retrospective assessment, those four yielded players who either outperformed expectations, became essential to winning, or both. However, not all of the Warriors’ draft history is as bright. Their 2020 selection of James Wiseman with the second overall pick was initially lauded for its potential, as he was a highly athletic and skilled big man. Yet his development was hampered by injuries and a lack of consistent playing time, particularly on a veteran team with championship aspirations. He struggled to find a rhythm, and eventually, he was traded to Detroit in a deal that emphasized short-term returns over long-term development.
Following Wiseman, the Warriors drafted Jonathan Kuminga and Moses Moody in 2021, using the 7th and 14th overall picks respectively. Kuminga, with his raw athleticism and flashes of shot-making, has shown real promise but has yet to carve out a fully consistent role. Moody has had a more conservative development path, contributing in bursts, particularly in the playoffs, but hasn’t cemented himself as a key rotation piece either. Neither has emerged as a star, but their trajectory is still undecided, and in time they could be re-evaluated more favorably. When considering these recent drafts, it’s clear the Warriors’ front office tried to execute a dual-timeline strategy—building for the future while still trying to compete at the highest level. This ambitious plan, though noble, has drawn criticism as it appeared to disrupt the cohesion and focus required for a championship window. Some believe that holding onto so many young players during Stephen Curry’s remaining prime years was a strategic misstep.
Despite the criticisms, it’s important to note that most teams across the NBA struggle to hit on more than a handful of draft picks over a decade. Success in the draft is not just about identifying talent, but also about development, organizational culture, opportunity, and fit. For the Warriors, the bar is particularly high because of their championship pedigree. When they select players, fans and analysts alike expect impact, not just potential. The standard is no longer just “can this player make a roster?” but “can this player help win a title?” This pressure has made every draft decision feel more consequential.
Looking at the broader picture, Golden State’s drafting success has been a mix of brilliance and misfortune. The brilliance is evident in their early 2010s picks, where they built a dynasty largely from within. The misfortune, or perhaps miscalculation, can be seen in their more recent lottery picks. Yet the franchise has remained competitive, even winning another title in 2022, a feat many didn’t expect after the injuries and departures that followed the 2019 Finals loss to Toronto. This resilience underscores that the Warriors’ identity is more than the sum of their recent drafts; it is rooted in a culture built by Curry, Thompson, Green, coach Steve Kerr, and former GM Bob Myers, who led the team through its most successful era.
As for the idea that the Warriors “severed ties with their franchise,” there is no factual basis for such a statement. A franchise cannot disassociate from itself; it can change management, ownership, or strategic direction, but it remains a continuous entity. If the original phrase was metaphorical—perhaps alluding to a significant cultural or strategic break from past practices—then it might point to recent transitions, such as Bob Myers stepping down, Mike Dunleavy Jr. taking over as GM, or ownership reconsidering how it balances youth development with championship contention. But those changes are part of the natural evolution of any long-standing franchise and don’t imply a severance in the literal or structural sense.
So what remains is the lingering intrigue around what constitutes a “successful” draft. Is it producing a Hall of Famer like Draymond Green? A reliable role player like Kevon Looney? Or someone like Paschall, who contributed for a time but didn’t have staying power? For a team like the Warriors, which has operated at the championship level for so long, even a single draft pick who cracks the rotation can be considered a win. By that metric, four successful drafts out of the past decade may not be a damning figure—it might actually be slightly above average.
Thus, while the idea of four successful drafts may have come from a misquote or paraphrase of a larger analysis, the underlying notion isn’t far-fetched. The Warriors’ draft record shows that in four specific years, they added players who meaningfully contributed to their roster—either in helping win titles or in offering valuable minutes. In that sense, those drafts were indeed “successful,” especially by the tough standards set for elite teams. The Warriors’ story is ultimately one of balancing legacy with reinvention, and while their recent drafts may not all be home runs, their ability to remain relevant through waves of change speaks volumes about the foundation they’ve built.
