Stephen Curry NBA Draft Pick: The Untold Story Behind His Selection Journey

I still remember sitting in my college dorm room, watching the 2009 NBA Draft unfold on a grainy stream. As a basketball analytics enthusiast even back then, I had my own theories about which players would succeed, but Stephen Curry’s journey to the Golden State Warriors remains one of the most fascinating draft stories in modern basketball history. Most fans know the basics – how he went seventh overall, how the Minnesota Timberwolves famously passed on him twice – but the real story behind Stephen Curry’s NBA draft pick involves a perfect storm of overlooked potential, organizational philosophy clashes, and ultimately, one franchise’s willingness to bet on skill over conventional wisdom.

When I look back at pre-draft assessments from that era, it’s almost comical how many experts focused on what Curry couldn’t do rather than what he could. The Davidson standout had just averaged 28.6 points per game while shooting 45% from the field during his final college season, yet scouts kept circling back to his “limited upside” and “NBA-unready frame.” I’ve always believed that the most revolutionary players are often misunderstood in their time, and Curry was no exception. Teams were so obsessed with finding the next prototype athletic guard that they overlooked perhaps the greatest shooter to ever enter the league. The New York Knicks were reportedly desperate to land him at number eight, but the Warriors’ last-minute decision to select him at seven changed the course of NBA history.

The context of Curry’s selection becomes even more intriguing when you consider the organizational dynamics at play. The Warriors had just come off a 29-53 season and were in the midst of transitioning from the Don Nelson era to something new. Their front office was divided between traditional evaluators and analytics-minded staffers, creating what one insider later described as “the toughest environment for making consensus picks.” This reminds me of that telling quote from the UAAP Season 88 reference material, where a longtime deputy acknowledged that “this might just be ‘the toughest season’ for the Lady Bulldogs.” Similarly, the 2009 draft represented one of the toughest decisions in Warriors history – stick with conventional wisdom or bet on a revolutionary talent that didn’t fit the physical mold.

What many people don’t realize is how close Curry came to being a New York Knick. The Knicks had been preparing to select him with the eighth pick, and Curry himself had limited workouts with other teams because he believed he was heading to Madison Square Garden. The Timberwolves, picking fifth and sixth, famously selected two other point guards instead – Ricky Rubio and Jonny Flynn. Minnesota’s then-president David Kahn later explained they wanted “two chances to get it right,” but history would prove this decision disastrous. As someone who’s studied draft analytics for over a decade, I’ve never understood this logic – when you have a chance at a transformational talent, you don’t split your bets.

The Warriors’ selection was particularly bold because they already had Monta Ellis, a ball-dominant guard who seemed incompatible with Curry defensively. Many critics questioned how the small backcourt would function, and I’ll admit even I had my doubts initially. But what the Warriors’ front office recognized – and what others missed – was that Curry’s shooting would transcend traditional positional concerns. His 44% three-point shooting in college wasn’t just good – it was historically great, though most teams hadn’t yet developed the analytical frameworks to properly value this skill. The evolution of basketball strategy has proven Golden State right, but at the time, it was a massive gamble.

Looking back with the benefit of hindsight, it’s clear that Curry’s draft position says more about NBA evaluation flaws than his actual talent. Teams were using outdated metrics that overvalued physical measurements like vertical leap and wingspan while undervaluing shooting efficiency and skill. The Warriors, to their credit, saw something special – not just a shooter, but a player who could fundamentally change how offense was played. I’ve always argued that the true greats don’t just play the game better, they change how it’s played, and Curry’s impact on basketball strategy is arguably greater than any player since Michael Jordan.

The Stephen Curry NBA draft pick story ultimately serves as a cautionary tale about groupthink in talent evaluation. When everyone is looking for the same prototype, truly unique talents can slip through the cracks. The Warriors’ willingness to go against conventional wisdom – to see the potential for revolution where others saw only limitations – didn’t just net them a franchise player, it changed the entire trajectory of their organization. Fifteen years later, as Curry continues to add to his legacy, that 2009 decision stands as one of the most impactful draft selections in sports history, a reminder that sometimes the best picks aren’t the obvious ones, but the ones that require vision and courage.