The 2012 Rookie Class

[Dat2U]

I still like Waiters. I still prefer him to Barnes or Rivers, always have. But IMO, Waiters needs a year or two of seasoning. Drummond has been a revelation but as said months ago, it's foolish to right off a 18/19 yr old big with his upside. Crowder is no real surprise, Kev gets the credit on that one, his arguments so convincing that nearly half of the board was completely sold by draft night.

I'll stick by my initial predictions that Anthony Davis will dominate this class from day one and MKG will be the 2nd best player and a multiple all-star.

[DCZards]

I said it before the draft and I'll say it again, Dion Waiters going number four was completely asinine, especially with Lamb still on the board.

I'm glad for the sanity of Cavs fans that they have Irving to follow for the next half-decade, because they're going to feel like they got a bill-of-goods with Waiters.

The Cavs will regret passing on Barnes. He's going to be a better NBA player than Waiters and he'd be a better fit with Irving.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

This draft class seems like a real powerhouse to me. There are a bunch of good players in this draft. I expected Beal would take a while but he won't. Terrance Jones, Andrew Nicholson, Jared Sullinger, Festus Ezeli, Arnett Moutrie have come in putting up very respectable numbers. Motiejunas, Valenciunas, and Drummond all look very good. Tyshawn Taylor looks impressive off the bench for Brooklyn. Malik Wayns is tiny but he looks great at PG for Philly. Marcus Lamb is going to be a 20 ppg scorer the second Martin leaves Houston. Liillard is another 20 ppg scorer. I would love to have John Henson on the Wizards, he is a terrific defender and I think will be a good starter in time.

Dat, all of that said, I agree that Davis will dominate and MKG is going to be 1st Team all rookie, I think on the strength of his defense and rebounding but with just adequate scoring.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I said it before the draft and I'll say it again, Dion Waiters going number four was completely asinine, especially with Lamb still on the board.

I'm glad for the sanity of Cavs fans that they have Irving to follow for the next half-decade, because they're going to feel like they got a bill-of-goods with Waiters.

The Cavs will regret passing on Barnes. He's going to be a better NBA player than Waiters and he'd be a better fit with Irving.

Barnes is looking MUCH better than I thought. So are Drummond and Perry Jones. (Add them to names in previous post -- What a rookie class!). Waiters is a big-time scorer. He was a curious selection for Cleveland because they already had Kyrie Irving. I give the Cavs the benefit of a doubt. People doubted them picking Tristan Thompson last yea but he looks like a beast in preseason. Waiters might work out for them.

GS really improved through the draft. Barnes is definitely going to help them, as will Festus Ezeli. The big guy can catch and finish inside and he is very mobile. i wouldn't rule out Draymond Green chipping in,either, for GS. All their rooks can play. They hit it out of the park with Klay Thompson last year.

[Dat2U]

I said it before the draft and I'll say it again, Dion Waiters going number four was completely asinine, especially with Lamb still on the board.

I'm glad for the sanity of Cavs fans that they have Irving to follow for the next half-decade, because they're going to feel like they got a bill-of-goods with Waiters.

The Cavs will regret passing on Barnes. He's going to be a better NBA player than Waiters and he'd be a better fit with Irving.

I'm not sure what makes you feel so confident in that. Waiters clearly had the better sophomore season of the two. It's going to take more than a few preseason games or training camp articles filled with fluff to change my opinion there.

I don't but the whole good fir/bad fit part. That's on the coaching staff. However Waiters seems very comfortable with the ball in his hands and Kyrie excelled last season playing off the ball and running off a screens because he's such a knockdown shooter. So I don't see why those two couldn't develop good synergy,

[willbcocks]

Although there was a thread created for in honor of CCJ about Crowder, he really has been Kevin's pick this year, since his system labeled him as top-5 worthy.

CCJ: Have you picked one main guy for success this year? I remember a number you've hyped, but none particularly stands out.

willbcocks, nice of you to contribute nothing but come in bringing hate. You say none that I have hyped stands out. There's your answer. I really don't feel like playing your game.

As Nate said, I was just curious if you had one guy you were focusing on this year, like Faried last year, because I usually pay extra attention to your top pick, assuming he'll do well. I couldn't remember if you did and got the impression that you liked a number of guys instead of really liking one guy.

Not an attack...this time.

I can't contribute much to these threads because I don't watch any college ball.

[DCZards]

Barnes is looking MUCH better than I thought. So are Drummond and Perry Jones. (Add them to names in previous post -- What a rookie class!). Waiters is a big-time scorer. He was a curious selection for Cleveland because they already had Kyrie Irving. I give the Cavs the benefit of a doubt. People doubted them picking Tristan Thompson last yea but he looks like a beast in preseason. Waiters might work out for them.

It's a little scary that an already talented team like OKC was able to get Perry Jones (or PJIII) with the 28th pick. He could end up being the real steal in this year's draft. I've been a fan of Tristan Thompson. He was impressive during his one year at Texas. I thought the Cavs made the right move when they drafted him with the 4th pick last year. Tristan played decently, especially on D and as a rebounder, when he got PT last season.

[DCZards]

dub post

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

willb, this draft is sick deep. I can't single out one good player because there are so many good players in this draft is pretty incredible.

I cannot get over how good this class is. These guys make Faried, Leonard, Brooks, Cole, Jenkins --players i liked last draft look run-of-the-mill and below par.

One guy will put up some real good numbers because he's on a bad team: Andrew Nicholson. Lillard, Drummond, Beal, Barnes, Sullinger, Perry Jones III, Donatas Motiejunas, Jae Crowder, Festus Ezeli and the top two picks Davis and Gilchrist are all going to be phenomenally effective pros. Jeremy Lamb and Terrence Jones play on a crowded roster but their talents will emerge.

I can't think enough and well enough to avoid leaving out a good player. This draft is awesome.

[closg00]

+1 on CCJ's post on GSW improving through the draft with Curry, Thompson, Barnes, and Featus. Festus is a revelation and big-time steal at 30. I will cry again and wish that we had packaged our picks to get Perry Jones, or even be happy just taking Crowder at 32

[DCZards]

Dat, Barnes also played very well in the summer league. But, as you say, none of that means anything. Nevertheless, I feel very good about my prediction that Barnes is going to be a better NBA player than Waiters--on both ends of the court. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Induveca]

Perry Jones has been shockingly good.

Luckily, so has Beal....

[Ruzious]

I can't believe nobody's picked Chris Copeland, the 28 year old supastar rookie on the Knicks - who scored 34 the other night - taking just 18 FG attempts. Of course, that might be a bluff - He is from the University of Colorado.

[payitforward]

there are so many good players in this draft... These guys make Faried, Leonard, Brooks, Cole, Jenkins... look run-of-the-mill....

I agree that so far this draft looks to have been incredibly good. But I don't agree that these guys make Faried and Leonard look like less good choices in comparison (let alone less good players). At 15 and 22 Moe Harkless and Fab Melo went this year. Who knows about the future, but I see no indication that they are likely to be as good as Leonard at 15 and Faried at 22.

One guy will put up some real good numbers because he's on a bad team: Andrew Nicholson. Lillard, Drummond, Beal, Barnes, Sullinger, Perry Jones III, Donatas Motiejunas, Jae Crowder, Festus Ezeli and the top two picks Davis and Gilchrist are all going to be phenomenally effective pros. Jeremy Lamb and Terrence Jones play on a crowded roster but their talents will emerge.

Motiejunas went #20 in '2011, tho he's a rookie this year. In 2012, #20 went to Evan Fournier. I like Fournier, but I thought Motiejunas was a great pick last year, I think he's going to be an outstanding player.

None of that really affects the truth of your core statement -- this looks like a heck of a draft. But what's particularly impressive, as you pointed out (and in fairness so did many of us) is the depth. What a year for Ernie to have checked us out of the second round!

Aside from the round 2 guys you mention, I still think Kim English can be very good. And I am putting myself on the line that we should keep an eye on Kyle O'Quinn, taken #49 !! I think he will be a very good pro, and he looks like it already.

Not to mention that pick #60, Robert Sacre, is starting at C for the Lakers in pre-season! (Ok... there's a guy in the wings who'll take that job away from him, but still....)

Only thing I really disagree w/ is: "One guy will put up some real good numbers because he's on a bad team: Andrew Nicholson." I do agree he might be terrific, but not because he's on a bad team. I read both this kind of thing and its exact opposite (e.g. Kawhi Leonard put up real good numbers because he's on a good team) all the time. Not true either way. If a guy is good and given minutes, he'll put up good numbers. If not, he won't.

Keep Kyle O'Quinn in the back of your mind, guys; lets see if I'm right....

[closg00]

I can't believe nobody's picked Chris Copeland, the 28 year old supastar rookie on the Knicks - who scored 34 the other night - taking just 18 FG attempts. Of course, that might be a bluff - He is from the University of Colorado.

You beat me, I was following him as-well. Copeland isn't a fresh-faced newbie, but he is new to the NBA. I wonder if the Knicks have a slot for him. There are guys like Copeland and Akognon that are out-there waiting for a opportunity.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I had not even heard of Copeland before he dropped 34 points. I get a lot of love here but had no clue about Copeland. I don't even remember him at Colorado ...

I have since read Copeland is a lock to make the Knicks roster as the last non-guaranteed player.

His timing could not have been better. Amare Stoudemire will miss the start of the regular season. Copeland might find him self starting next to Carmelo Anthony.

What I think is happening is international league play is getting on a par with NBA play. There are many players around the world better than all but the stars of the NBA. (James Singleton is a better-than-average NBA player now IMO--he got better overseas). It does not surprise me that much that Copeland has dominated. I believe Akognon will, too, given minutes.

[Ruzious]

One guy will put up some real good numbers because he's on a bad team: Andrew Nicholson. Lillard, Drummond, Beal, Barnes, Sullinger, Perry Jones III, Donatas Motiejunas, Jae Crowder, Festus Ezeli and the top two picks Davis and Gilchrist are all going to be phenomenally effective pros. Jeremy Lamb and Terrence Jones play on a crowded roster but their talents will emerge.

Motiejunas went #20 in '2011, tho he's a rookie this year. In 2012, #20 went to Evan Fournier. I like Fournier, but I thought Motiejunas was a great pick last year, I think he's going to be an outstanding player.

None of that really affects the truth of your core statement -- this looks like a heck of a draft. But what's particularly impressive, as you pointed out (and in fairness so did many of us) is the depth. What a year for Ernie to have checked us out of the second round!

Aside from the round 2 guys you mention, I still think Kim English can be very good. And I am putting myself on the line that we should keep an eye on Kyle O'Quinn, taken #49 !! I think he will be a very good pro, and he looks like it already.

Not to mention that pick #60, Robert Sacre, is starting at C for the Lakers in pre-season! (Ok... there's a guy in the wings who'll take that job away from him, but still....)

Only thing I really disagree w/ is: "One guy will put up some real good numbers because he's on a bad team: Andrew Nicholson." I do agree he might be terrific, but not because he's on a bad team. I read both this kind of thing and its exact opposite (e.g. Kawhi Leonard put up real good numbers because he's on a good team) all the time. Not true either way. If a guy is good and given minutes, he'll put up good numbers. If not, he won't.

Keep Kyle O'Quinn in the back of your mind, guys; lets see if I'm right....

True, but a player will be a much more effective or much worse player depending on the environment he's in - just like people in all professions. I think this poster put it wel on Nicholson on page 1 of this thread:

I'll be very surprised if Davis doesn't win ROY in a landslide.

After him, Andrew Nicholson is in a situation where he should get a lot of opportunity, and he can score - so he has a chance to be 2nd while playing on a very bad team. And Jared Sullinger could make significant contributions to a good Celtics team.

[payitforward]

...but a player will be a much more effective or much worse player depending on the environment he's in - just like people in all professions.

That point is so general as to be true in a meaningless sense -- "the environment he's in" can be construed to include absolutely anything. Hence it can be invoked to explain absolutely anything.

Any player has upper and lower limits based on his individual capabilities (across the board from athleticism, size, smarts, knowledge, character, etc. to anything else). You don't have to view them as hard borders, but as an increasing difficulty in improving that as it were hits a limit.

Compared to the influence of these factors, whether he's on a good team or a bad team (i.e. before he gets there) is of little significance. Not to mention that teams are good or bad on the basis of their players -- not vice versa. And FOs are bad based on their ability to assemble good players under the cap.

Almost all competitive team sports are decided based on the quality of the players in some sense -- tho the influence of a single player in baseball or football is limited by how the games work. Basketball is another story. It's almost entirely a players' game.

In short: e.g. Jae Crowder is looking good because he is good -- not because he was drafted by the Mavs. It's the opposite. What makes the Mavs a good franchise is that they're smart enough to grab a guy like that.

[Ruzious]

Pay, if I'm understanding you, you're saying environment makes no difference - which I think is an absurd view - especially with impressional players coming in as early as 19 years old. A player isn't going to be good no matter what environment they're in. Just because environment encompasses a lot - doesn't mean it's meaningless. Environment includes the system a player plays in. A player like Sullinger for example, wouldn't get off the bench on certain teams because of his perceived physical limits and won't show he's a "good player", but on the Celtics, he can make a significant impact and be a "good player". Your view seems to be everything is black and white. Maybe everything is - if you use several million variables, but most of us don't have access to all of them. Perhaps you're the exception.

[Nivek]

I think payitforward's point isn't that environment doesn't matter, but rather that good management, good coaching, good players, good people make for good environment. Good teams are the ones that make more good choices. Dynasties are teams that make more good choices over a long period of time.