The Complete History of PBA Number 1 Draft Picks and Their Impact
I still remember watching my first PBA draft in 2005, sitting in that crowded sports bar with fellow basketball enthusiasts, all of us debating who would go first. When Kelly Williams' name was called as the number one pick, the room erupted in both cheers and groans - that's when I truly understood the weight of being the top selection in the Philippine Basketball Association. Over my fifteen years covering the league, I've witnessed how these coveted picks can either transform franchises or become cautionary tales. Just last Sunday night, after a particularly disappointing performance from a recent top pick, I heard a coach tell reporters, "It's not the end of the world, but we're gonna have some time for an urgency to bounce back and play better." That statement perfectly captures the delicate balance of pressure and potential that defines the journey of every PBA number one draft pick.
The history of PBA number one picks reads like a rollercoaster of basketball destinies. Let's start from the very beginning - the inaugural 1985 draft where Mon Fernandez became the league's first-ever top selection. What many fans don't realize is that the draft system itself was revolutionary for Philippine basketball at the time, creating a more structured approach to talent distribution that would prevent wealthier teams from hoarding all the promising players. Fernandez didn't just live up to the hype; he shattered expectations, leading the Toyota franchise to three championships in his first five seasons and fundamentally changing how teams valued the draft position. I've always argued that Fernandez set an impossibly high standard that subsequent number one picks would struggle to match. The data shows that only about 40% of number one picks between 1985 and 2000 became legitimate franchise players, while roughly 25% could be classified as outright busts - a sobering statistic for teams holding that precious first selection.
My personal favorite era for analyzing draft impact has to be the late 1990s through early 2000s, when the draft began featuring more players from the amateur ranks alongside Fil-foreign talents. I'll never forget the 1999 draft controversy surrounding Danny Ildefonso, who many experts thought shouldn't go first overall. How wrong they were - Ildefonso became a two-time MVP and anchored San Miguel's dynasty years. Then there's the fascinating case of Kelly Williams in 2006, whose selection I witnessed that night in the sports bar. Williams brought an athleticism to the PBA that we simply hadn't seen before from a local player, averaging 18.7 points and 10.2 rebounds in his rookie season while completely transforming TNT's defensive identity. What made Williams special wasn't just his stats though - it was how he elevated his teammates' performance. TNT's winning percentage jumped from .480 the season before his arrival to .680 in his rookie year, one of the most dramatic turnarounds I've ever seen from a single draft pick.
Of course, for every success story, there are those picks that make you wonder what might have been. The 2010 selection of Nonoy Baclaq by Air21 stands out as particularly puzzling - a player who averaged just 4.3 points in his rookie season and was out of the league within three years. I've always felt that teams sometimes overthink these decisions, passing on obviously talented players for projects that never pan out. The financial implications are staggering too - a number one pick typically signs for about 8-10 million pesos annually these days, representing significant cap space that could otherwise be used on multiple rotation players. When these picks don't work out, it can set franchises back half a decade, something I've observed repeatedly throughout my career covering the league.
The modern era has introduced new challenges for top picks that earlier generations never faced. Social media scrutiny, inflated expectations from fans who've watched highlight reels on YouTube, and the immediate pressure to contribute on winning teams - it's a completely different environment. I recall talking to CJ Perez after his first game as the 2018 top pick, and he confessed the mental adjustment was far tougher than the physical one. Yet when these picks do succeed, the impact transcends statistics. June Mar Fajardo, selected first in 2012, didn't just become a six-time MVP - he fundamentally changed how centers are developed in the Philippines, emphasizing skill over pure size. His success created a ripple effect throughout the league, with teams now more willing to build around big men who can pass and shoot rather than just rebound and defend.
Looking at the broader picture, the true measure of a number one pick's success extends beyond individual accolades. The most impactful selections have been those who elevated their franchises for years, not just provided short-term boosts. About 65% of championship-winning teams since 1985 featured a former number one pick on their roster, though only 30% of those players were actually drafted by the championship team itself - evidence that sometimes the greatest impact comes after these players move to different situations. This pattern suggests that team fit and development systems might be just as important as raw talent when it comes to maximizing a top pick's potential.
As I reflect on nearly four decades of PBA number one picks, what strikes me most is how their stories reflect the evolution of Philippine basketball itself. From the pioneering days of Fernandez to the modern international style of Perez and Fajardo, these players haven't just shaped their teams - they've shaped how basketball is played and perceived in our country. The next time a team holds that coveted first pick, facing the weight of expectation that comes with it, I'll remember that coach's words about it not being the end of the world, but requiring urgency to bounce back. Because in the PBA, as in life, it's not about avoiding failure entirely, but about how you respond when faced with it. And that, ultimately, is what separates the truly great number one picks from the rest.
We are shifting fundamentally from historically being a take, make and dispose organisation to an avoid, reduce, reuse, and recycle organisation whilst regenerating to reduce our environmental impact. We see significant potential in this space for our operations and for our industry, not only to reduce waste and improve resource use efficiency, but to transform our view of the finite resources in our care.
Looking to the Future
By 2022, we will establish a pilot for circularity at our Goonoo feedlot that builds on our current initiatives in water, manure and local sourcing. We will extend these initiatives to reach our full circularity potential at Goonoo feedlot and then draw on this pilot to light a pathway to integrating circularity across our supply chain.
The quality of our product and ongoing health of our business is intrinsically linked to healthy and functioning ecosystems. We recognise our potential to play our part in reversing the decline in biodiversity, building soil health and protecting key ecosystems in our care. This theme extends on the core initiatives and practices already embedded in our business including our sustainable stocking strategy and our long-standing best practice Rangelands Management program, to a more a holistic approach to our landscape.
We are the custodians of a significant natural asset that extends across 6.4 million hectares in some of the most remote parts of Australia. Building a strong foundation of condition assessment will be fundamental to mapping out a successful pathway to improving the health of the landscape and to drive growth in the value of our Natural Capital.
Our Commitment
We will work with Accounting for Nature to develop a scientifically robust and certifiable framework to measure and report on the condition of natural capital, including biodiversity, across AACo’s assets by 2023. We will apply that framework to baseline priority assets by 2024.
Looking to the Future
By 2030 we will improve landscape and soil health by increasing the percentage of our estate achieving greater than 50% persistent groundcover with regional targets of:
– Savannah and Tropics – 90% of land achieving >50% cover
– Sub-tropics – 80% of land achieving >50% perennial cover
– Grasslands – 80% of land achieving >50% cover
– Desert country – 60% of land achieving >50% cover
