Ford Mock 6.0 #2 Embiid

[Willie Colon]

Because his game doesn't project to improve as much as Wiggins' with age, and he has a much greater chance of being the same player he is now than an equal prospect with greater potential/physical tools.

This is definitely not an opinion; it's proven FACT.

[Flap Jackson]

So, if he's not particularly quick, why is everyone so confident that once he's in the NBA, he'll be quick enough to create space for himself, or beat his defender and drive to the rim?

You don't have to be super quick to score buckets, knowing spacing is more important. Look at Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce, Michael Redd, Glenn Robinson, Jamaal Mashburn, Michael Jordan (the last three championships), Kobe Bryant post 30 years old ... Its about spacing and rhythm with the defender. Its a young man's mentality that you have to blow by defenders or take dramatic step backs to be a scorer.

I am by know means comparing Parker to those players, just commenting on quickness being necessary for scoring. Those were just off the top of my head, I'm sure I could think of countless others.

[Newz]

I think Paul Pierce is probably a good comparison when it comes to Parker's upside. I think he's going to be more Glenn Robinson than Paul Pierce though.

[mattg]

Yeah, Hammond's MO is athleticism and upside. Harris is the only guy that really fit the "polished skill" category, and he went #19. I'll be pretty surprised if we take Parker at #2. I know nothing is in stone, but it will greatly surprise me if we go that route.

I wouldn't even call the Harris pick a polished skill one. Harris was ridiculously young and his skillset coming out was anything but polished, he was pretty raw. To me he was a pure potential pick. He worked hard and he developed his body and his handle, jumper, and post moves all improved a lot between year 1 and 2.

[Ron Swanson]

Because his game doesn't project to improve as much as Wiggins' with age, and he has a much greater chance of being the same player he is now than an equal prospect with greater potential/physical tools.

This is definitely not an opinion; it's proven FACT.

If you agree that Wiggins "potential" is significantly greater than Parker's (a pretty universally agreed upon assessment at this point), then I fail to understand how people keep stubbornly arguing the opposite. Wiggins at his peak would be a much better player than Parker at his, if you wanna call that an opinion then so be it. There's no guarantee that either reach their peak, but we sure as hell won't know that for at least several years.

Simply put, if you think that Parker is going to be the superior player in the NBA, say so because you think he is going to get significantly better on D and become an elite "Melo" type offensive player. Not because "I think Wiggins will bust". That's not a valid reason to pass up superior potential.

It's just amazing to me the kind of logic people are talking themselves into solely based on the fear that we draft a "bust" over some questionably labeled "sure thing" in Parker. My problem isn't that people put Parker over Wiggins, it's the completely subjective, often times nonsensical criteria in which he gets "credit" over him. Because when you put them on a stage and judge them strictly on their "NBA translatable skills", Wiggins has the potential to be better than anyone in this class besides Embiid.

Until someone gives me an argument in favor of Parker that doesn't involve the words "killer instinct", "alpha male", and "PPG", I will continue to regard said arguments as lazy analysis.

[SJSF]

Sixers fan. I am hoping that the Cavs get screwed some how. But I am just glad I am in the top 3. You guys have a preference between Wiggins or Parker? I am guessing we will land Parker.

[-Jragon-]

Sparky is all like.... Parker, Parker, Parker but if you need a superstar leader to be great on both sides of the ball. I hope we can get Embiid in and he passes that physical because he's the closest thing to KG that we've seen in a long time.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/5/20/5 ... ing-report

[Baddy Chuck]

I hope we can get Embiid in and he passes that physical because he's the closest thing to KG that we've seen in a long time.

No he's not .

[Zeezprah]

Sixers fan. I am hoping that the Cavs get screwed some how. But I am just glad I am in the top 3. You guys have a preference between Wiggins or Parker? I am guessing we will land Parker.

wiggins easily. he fits our team prolly better than anyone in the draft.

the way i see it, if the Cavs take Embiid, we'll run up to the podium with Wiggins as the pick

[skones]

Because his game doesn't project to improve as much as Wiggins' with age, and he has a much greater chance of being the same player he is now than an equal prospect with greater potential/physical tools.

This is definitely not an opinion; it's proven FACT.

If you agree that Wiggins "potential" is significantly greater than Parker's (a pretty universally agreed upon assessment at this point), then I fail to understand how people keep stubbornly arguing the opposite. Wiggins at his peak would be a much better player than Parker at his, if you wanna call that an opinion then so be it. There's no guarantee that either reach their peak, but we sure as hell won't know that for at least several years.

Simply put, if you think that Parker is going to be the superior player in the NBA, say so because you think he is going to get significantly better on D and become an elite "Melo" type offensive player. Not because "I think Wiggins will bust". That's not a valid reason to pass up superior potential.

It's just amazing to me the kind of logic people are talking themselves into solely based on the fear that we draft a "bust" over some questionably labeled "sure thing" in Parker. My problem isn't that people put Parker over Wiggins, it's the completely subjective, often times nonsensical criteria in which he gets "credit" over him. Because when you put them on a stage and judge them strictly on their "NBA translatable skills", Wiggins has the potential to be better than anyone in this class besides Embiid.

Until someone gives me an argument in favor of Parker that doesn't involve the words "killer instinct", "alpha male", and "PPG", I will continue to regard said arguments as lazy analysis.

You're making an incredible amount of assumptions in this post. It is absolutely NOT universally agreed that Wiggins "potential" is significantly greater. In fact, it's debatable whether it's greater at all. I believe an article was posted a week or two ago that examined developmental curves of players which took into account athletic abilities, skill level, and actual production. In the article, it actually showed the more skilled players at young ages growing more than players with less developed skill levels but superior athleticism.

It's reasonable to assume, at least at this point, that Parker's developmental curve on a skill to skill (ball handling, shooting, rebounding, etc) basis is actually superior to Wiggins at this point given his basketball skills are not only more defined, but he's younger as well. What remains to be seen is how much Wiggins athleticism helps him close or not close that gap over the course of their development.

In a perfect world, sure, Wiggins has a higher ceiling, just as any player with superior athleticism has a higher ceiling than a player who's on a tier below. Unfortunately, potential can't be pigeonholed like that. It goes back to the discussion we had last month about the "likelihood" of a player reaching a certain level.

[Miasma]

I've seen some bad mock drafts, but

http://www.insidehoops.com/nba-mock-draft.shtml

[SJSF]

I've seen some bad mock drafts, but

http://www.insidehoops.com/nba-mock-draft.shtml

Wow that's bad. Randle at 3. I like Randle but I would love for him to drop to 10.

[Ill-yasova]

I hope we can get Embiid in and he passes that physical because he's the closest thing to KG that we've seen in a long time.

No he's not .

He's closer to a Tim Duncan type IMO.

[JustinCredible]

I seem to change my mind every day on who is 2nd on my list, but I am really starting to want Wiggins or Parker. I think they are both very safe picks that will be All-Stars. We cannot afford to whiff on this pick and to me both Embiid and Exum have higher risks of being 'misses'. Also, both Embiid and Exum seem to have zero interest in Milwaukee.

1. Wiggins
2. Parker
3. Embiid
4. Exum

[AussieBuck]

His question mark, IMO, is his health... and I really could care less about that.

Famous last words.

[Newz]

I hope we can get Embiid in and he passes that physical because he's the closest thing to KG that we've seen in a long time.

That's just not true. Anthony Davis is in the NBA and he is super similar to KG.

I will also say Embiid doesn't remind me much of KG. Even if he hits his absolute upside, he's much more along the lines of guys like Hakeem or Robinson... where as he will operate out of the post far more often.

[Buckrageous]

I've said all along that Embiid and Parker are 1 and 2 on the Bucks board. I think Embiid and Parker will go 1 and 2 in the draft. At best, I see Wiggins going 3rd to Philly. I don't see the Bucks taking Wiggins over Parker. I really don't. Parker has the added allure of being able to tap into the Chicago market. He's the Grant Hill type face that every organization wants to stand behind. He makes the most sense for Milwaukee all things considered. This is a business and our new owners will likely consider marketability if all other things are equal.

I'll be watching to see if Wiggins slides past Philly (Exum) and down to Orlando. Perhaps Philly is in love with Wiggins and he is their #1 target. Hmmf. If Exum blows Philly away in a workout and Wiggins underperforms, who knows. I personally take Wiggins in that scenario because the defense will translate. Still uncertain about Exum.

I know that is what you're hoping for, but I'm wagering strongly that isn't what happens. If the Cavs go Embiid, get ready for Wiggins in a Bucks uniform.

Yep. Given Hammond's track record, I'd bet his top 3 are Wiggins, Embiid, Exum, and wouldn't be shocked if Exum is number two.

How do we know this is Hammond's track record? Ive asked this before on here and no one has really answered it. How do we know Hammond made all those picks? It seems like the consensus opinion here is Kohl and his minions interfere in everything but Hammond controls the draft, you know except for Alexander. What is the proof of that? How do we know Kohl hasnt been doing the drafting and Hammond he gave Hammond full say on trades?

[Buckrageous]

You have Parker ahead of Wiggins I assume.

Nope, and I've never argued that I'm ONLY drafting on per minute production. Unless you can find that quote somewhere. I don't really understand what you're getting at. My original point was attacking the "he's only an 11/8 center!!" claim. It's not that relevant when taken out of context. Especially when you compare it to past top 5 bigs.

What I was getting at is you change the parameters of the argument to fit your opinion and then act as though its proven. Whatever, carry on

[Swan Vox]

This looks terrifying after what we have gone through with Packer players getting vertebrate fused. Would not pick Joel without a clear picture of his medical...

Reports from Kansas during the Final Four pegged Embiid’s injury as a stress fracture which is called Spondylolysis, which is a small crack in the pars interarticularis portion of the lumbar spine. This injury usually heals normally with rest and rehab. The unknown in this equation is if the condition is really Spondylolisthesis, which is a recurring stress reaction, related to vertebra shifting forward and sitting on nerves. The surgical treatment for that is surgical fusion, which is a scary concept for NBA teams. It is believed this is the second time Embiid has had this injury, which is why there is so much debate and concern.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nba-a ... z5yOPhV.99

[TroyD92]

Parker has the added allure of being able to tap into the Chicago market.

I mentioned this a couple days ago also. I'm not sure how much Parker cares about being close to home, but if it matters to him at all it's a pretty big deal. Thinking long term, the Bucks probably aren't winning anything of note during any of these incoming rookie's first contracts. If you can get any of them to stick around for that second contract it makes a huge difference.

That's down the list a bit as far as why I prefer Parker, but it is worth considering.

Do you mean the 2nd contract as in the one they get after Restricted free agency?