'14 Draft Thread pt 2: vote again? VOTE AGAIN.

[Ayt]

Carson having serious issues this game. Definitely highlights the red flags with hime (read: lack of height).

Also, no way Kyle Anderson is an NBA player. Why this team doesn't start Lavine and not make him the focal point of the offense is beyond me.

Well, because Kyle Anderson and Jordan Adams are FAR better offensive players for one.......

Now I know why you failed out of Madison, you're clearly an idiot.

[skones]

Now I know why you failed out of Madison, you're clearly an idiot.

wut?

[PANDEMONEUM]

Last two I can think of is the Aldridge to Portland and D-Will to Utah trades. Neither of them worked out very good.

Edit - That wasn't the #1 spot but rather top 5, I should read.

worked god for portland

If we got the #1 pick, we could turn that into a great deal
but I dont think wd trust anyone to accomplish that

[Baddy Chuck]

Last two I can think of is the Aldridge to Portland and D-Will to Utah trades. Neither of them worked out very good.

Edit - That wasn't the #1 spot but rather top 5, I should read.

worked god for portland

If we got the #1 pick, we could turn that into a great deal
but I dont think wd trust anyone to accomplish that

Portland and Utah were the ones who traded up. We'd be the team getting Tyrus Thomas or Martell Webster in those scenarios.

[PANDEMONEUM]

Yea that would b bad.
Im not sure which of the 3 will boom or bust
But I would swap out of 1 to get another pick or something,
only to the #2 or #3
That way we r assured a top prospect and the #1 pressure if off that player and the Bucks

[Ruzious]

LOL.

Indeed. Joke of a comment, really. It would be like saying Caron Butler is far superior to Giannis. Or James White is far superior to Melvin Gordon. Sure, they have more experience, but Lavine is miles beyond every other player on this UCLA team in terms of talent.

Nobody is questioning the talent. Talent isn't in question when you're talking about making Lavine the focal point of the offense when he's playing with two guys who are significantly better than him on that end of the floor at the college level. UCLA isn't there to groom Lavine as a pro prospect, they exist to win college basketball games. Lavine, stylistically, is very similar to Terrence Ross. Despite all of these athletic gifts, he rarely uses them to his advantage when it comes to penetrating, which is obviously a necessary skill for a ball dominant player.

Conversely, Anderson may have the highest basketball IQ in all of college basketball, and I think that shows given his all around game despite being athletically over matched even at the college level which is often times the case. Adams has shown an extremely varied offensive game, and one that he's pretty damn efficient with going on one and a half seasons right now.

I'd say that's a plethora of reasons right there. Nevermind the fact, that with tonight excluded, Lavine has shot 42.3% from the floor and 29.5% from the three point line over his last 6 games. His percentages were completely unsustainable and now you're left with the "which version is the real Zach Lavin" question.

I think you're missing the big picture. Anderson's putting up numbers and nobody's questioning his skills, but it's questionable whether or not that's helping the team. Running the offense through him slows the pace of the team wayyyy down - which takes away what could otherwise be easy baskets for his faster teammates. They're maximizing Anderson's skills at the expense of LaVine's talent and - to a lesser extent - Adams'. Btw, LaVine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding. His production isn't great only because he hasn't gotten the opportunities that his talent warrants.

[Diggr14]

I still like Exum #1. His length, athleticism, and natural feel for the game remind me of a Giannis type player in a point/shooting guard body.

Keep going with these long and skilled players. You can always get length, but if you can find those special players with length... that's where we will make our hay.

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

Finish with the worst record and you are guaranteed one of these guys.. Exum is still by far my favorite. If Sanders starts to turn the corner, I could see us going Jabari instead of Embiid. I'd love to add a pick around 12-14 as well.. especially if Sam Dekker is in this draft. Sure im a bit of a Wisconsin homer, but he is long/skilled and modestly athletic. The free throw shooting is a bit of a concern, but long-term I don't see it as an issue with his skillset. Heck, if Dekker does declare and if the Badgers keep having this kind of a year, I could see him rising up into the middle to end of the lottery.

[skones]

Indeed. Joke of a comment, really. It would be like saying Caron Butler is far superior to Giannis. Or James White is far superior to Melvin Gordon. Sure, they have more experience, but Lavine is miles beyond every other player on this UCLA team in terms of talent.

Nobody is questioning the talent. Talent isn't in question when you're talking about making Lavine the focal point of the offense when he's playing with two guys who are significantly better than him on that end of the floor at the college level. UCLA isn't there to groom Lavine as a pro prospect, they exist to win college basketball games. Lavine, stylistically, is very similar to Terrence Ross. Despite all of these athletic gifts, he rarely uses them to his advantage when it comes to penetrating, which is obviously a necessary skill for a ball dominant player.

Conversely, Anderson may have the highest basketball IQ in all of college basketball, and I think that shows given his all around game despite being athletically over matched even at the college level which is often times the case. Adams has shown an extremely varied offensive game, and one that he's pretty damn efficient with going on one and a half seasons right now.

I'd say that's a plethora of reasons right there. Nevermind the fact, that with tonight excluded, Lavine has shot 42.3% from the floor and 29.5% from the three point line over his last 6 games. His percentages were completely unsustainable and now you're left with the "which version is the real Zach Lavine" question.

I think you're missing the big picture. Anderson's putting up numbers and nobody's questioning his skills, but it's questionable whether or not that's helping the team. Running the offense through him slows the pace of the team wayyyy down - which takes away what could otherwise be easy baskets for his faster teammates. They're maximizing Anderson's skills at the expense of LaVine's talent and - to a lesser extent - Adams'. Btw, LaVine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding. His production isn't great only because he hasn't gotten the opportunities that his talent warrants.

If Lavine is made the focal point of an offense, you've got a ball dominant player, with a score first mindset and the reluctance to attack the rim. If you put Lavine at the helm with, by all accounts, his questionable point guard skills, the team opens itself up to quite a bit of dysfunction on the offensive end. This absolutely neutralizes Anderson, and in all likelihood also ends up neutralizing parts of Adams game as well. I'd also say it's absolutely ridiculous to say it's questionable whether or not Anderson helps the team in this role. They're 13-3 and just put up one hell of a fight against the best team in the country a few days ago. I'd say the proof is in the pudding with him running the show.

I'm aware that Lavine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding, but I question whether they're the real deal. His percentages through the first month were completely unsustainable and he's in line for a regression to the mean. If he's made the focal point of the offense, I think you see an even higher degree of severity in that regression. The last 6 games prior to this evening were meant to illustrate that point, and the specific reason they're regressing? Lavine has a tendency to settle for too many jump shots when he has the ability to do so much more.

Zach Lavine is a very talented freshman with significant upside, but I have my reservations about him being as good RIGHT NOW as some seem to believe. He's not a complete offensive player.

[TroyD92]

Yea that would b bad.
Im not sure which of the 3 will boom or bust
But I would swap out of 1 to get another pick or something,
only to the #2 or #3
That way we r assured a top prospect and the #1 pressure if off that player and the Bucks

IMO. Don't tempt fate.

[Lippo]

at this point, i trade OUT of the #1 spot, but only to #2 or #3
and get another 1st round pick

who has 2 picks in the 1st round ?

how many times has this happened ? (even trading out of top 3 spots)

and who / what were those deals ?

Phili has the best shot of this, I mentioned the 1 for 3 and 12 , would you do it?, and most said no. I have no clue why unless they wanted Embiid, we would still likely have our choice of Parker/Exum.

[Nebula1]

CJ Wilcox was good again

[Scoops]

Does Exum play again before the draft or no?

[bizarro]

Hot off the HoopsHype presser:

This just in: Wiggins is slipping out of contention for No. 1-2. The NBA guys I talk to say that will be Parker and Kansas seven-footer Joel Embiid. At No. 3, Wiggins has yet to separate himself from Kentucky power forward Julius Randle, Australian point guard Dante Exum and, depending on whom you talk to, Arizona forward Aaron Gordon. So Wiggins, whose fame in high school far exceeded Kevin Durant’s at Montrose Christian (it’s in Rockville, Md., if you haven’t heard of it) could miss the top two… or three… or more? “There’s zero chance of any team taking anybody before Jabari Parker,” says an Eastern Conference personnel guy. “And there’s zero chance of any team taking Wiggins before Joel Embiid.”

Interesting...very interesting.

[Whiteman]

While the league has moved away from emphasizing the center position, is that due to changes in the league or the lack of great centers?

I'm old school on this and look back to this lineage starting from the 1984 draft.....

Hakeem #1 overall
Ewing #1 overall
Robinson #1 overall
Daugherty #1 overall
Shaq #1 overall
Alonzo Mourning #2 overall (behind Shaq)
Duncan #1 overall

Good question. Could it be a bit of both?
The no-zone rule made it easier to spread the court on offense, leaving centers more room to post up and go one-on-one; that may have played a role. (the end of the no-zone rule didn't diminish Shaq's effectiveness though) Have teams changed their offense to adjust to the new rules with more face-up play? Would Amare have been put in the low post in the 90's?

Or maybe they just don't make 'em like they used to. Who should have been the great 21th century centers? Howard maybe, Yao Ming, Oden had the potential, Pau Gasol in his best years?
And there are some super talented (near-)seven-footers now - they just have different skills (Dirk, Durant, KG).


As far as Embiid is concerned, I've only seen some highlights and the DraftExpress scouting video. Lots of talent both physically and skill-wise, but the "soft/doesn't handle contact well" part is very concerning. I think only one player on your list was called soft in college, and he's the one you wouldn't spend a top 3 pick on.

[Ruzious]

Nobody is questioning the talent. Talent isn't in question when you're talking about making Lavine the focal point of the offense when he's playing with two guys who are significantly better than him on that end of the floor at the college level. UCLA isn't there to groom Lavine as a pro prospect, they exist to win college basketball games. Lavine, stylistically, is very similar to Terrence Ross. Despite all of these athletic gifts, he rarely uses them to his advantage when it comes to penetrating, which is obviously a necessary skill for a ball dominant player.

Conversely, Anderson may have the highest basketball IQ in all of college basketball, and I think that shows given his all around game despite being athletically over matched even at the college level which is often times the case. Adams has shown an extremely varied offensive game, and one that he's pretty damn efficient with going on one and a half seasons right now.

I'd say that's a plethora of reasons right there. Nevermind the fact, that with tonight excluded, Lavine has shot 42.3% from the floor and 29.5% from the three point line over his last 6 games. His percentages were completely unsustainable and now you're left with the "which version is the real Zach Lavine" question.

I think you're missing the big picture. Anderson's putting up numbers and nobody's questioning his skills, but it's questionable whether or not that's helping the team. Running the offense through him slows the pace of the team wayyyy down - which takes away what could otherwise be easy baskets for his faster teammates. They're maximizing Anderson's skills at the expense of LaVine's talent and - to a lesser extent - Adams'. Btw, LaVine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding. His production isn't great only because he hasn't gotten the opportunities that his talent warrants.

If Lavine is made the focal point of an offense, you've got a ball dominant player, with a score first mindset and the reluctance to attack the rim. If you put Lavine at the helm with, by all accounts, his questionable point guard skills, the team opens itself up to quite a bit of dysfunction on the offensive end. This absolutely neutralizes Anderson, and in all likelihood also ends up neutralizing parts of Adams game as well. I'd also say it's absolutely ridiculous to say it's questionable whether or not Anderson helps the team in this role. They're 13-3 and just put up one hell of a fight against the best team in the country a few days ago. I'd say the proof is in the pudding with him running the show.

I'm aware that Lavine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding, but I question whether they're the real deal. His percentages through the first month were completely unsustainable and he's in line for a regression to the mean. If he's made the focal point of the offense, I think you see an even higher degree of severity in that regression. The last 6 games prior to this evening were meant to illustrate that point, and the specific reason they're regressing? Lavine has a tendency to settle for too many jump shots when he has the ability to do so much more.

Zach Lavine is a very talented freshman with significant upside, but I have my reservations about him being as good RIGHT NOW as some seem to believe. He's not a complete offensive player.

The proof in the unsweetened vanilla pudding is that UCLA isn't even a ranked team - with at least 3 first round picks in the lineup.

[ConoverBucks]

I think you're missing the big picture. Anderson's putting up numbers and nobody's questioning his skills, but it's questionable whether or not that's helping the team. Running the offense through him slows the pace of the team wayyyy down - which takes away what could otherwise be easy baskets for his faster teammates. They're maximizing Anderson's skills at the expense of LaVine's talent and - to a lesser extent - Adams'. Btw, LaVine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding. His production isn't great only because he hasn't gotten the opportunities that his talent warrants.

If Lavine is made the focal point of an offense, you've got a ball dominant player, with a score first mindset and the reluctance to attack the rim. If you put Lavine at the helm with, by all accounts, his questionable point guard skills, the team opens itself up to quite a bit of dysfunction on the offensive end. This absolutely neutralizes Anderson, and in all likelihood also ends up neutralizing parts of Adams game as well. I'd also say it's absolutely ridiculous to say it's questionable whether or not Anderson helps the team in this role. They're 13-3 and just put up one hell of a fight against the best team in the country a few days ago. I'd say the proof is in the pudding with him running the show.

I'm aware that Lavine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding, but I question whether they're the real deal. His percentages through the first month were completely unsustainable and he's in line for a regression to the mean. If he's made the focal point of the offense, I think you see an even higher degree of severity in that regression. The last 6 games prior to this evening were meant to illustrate that point, and the specific reason they're regressing? Lavine has a tendency to settle for too many jump shots when he has the ability to do so much more.

Zach Lavine is a very talented freshman with significant upside, but I have my reservations about him being as good RIGHT NOW as some seem to believe. He's not a complete offensive player.

The proof in the unsweetened vanilla pudding is that UCLA isn't even a ranked team - with at least 3 first round picks in the lineup.

Just because a team has NBA talent on it doesn't necessarily mean they should be a good team or else Kansas and Kentucky would be the best teams in the nation.

If a player is going to be a first round pick it's most likely based off of potential and physical abilities and not necessarily production. That's why we usually don't see a freshmen dominated team win the championship. Take a look at the top 5 picks over the last 10 years or so and see how many of them were freshmen on a championship level team in college. There aren't many.

LaVine has a lot of potential and is a better pro prospect but Anderson is the better player right now for UCLA.

[No-Man]

Jabari barring injury is CLEARLY the favourite for nº1.
And it's simple, only 2-3 teams will choose Embiid ahead of him, and that's because mostly everyteam in the lottery has a Center but none of them has a franchise wing player.

Exum should go 2nd in my mind, I still like Embiid, but Exum ceiling is Kobe Bryant, that's too much to pass, even if Embiid reach that stupid Olawujon comparison I will always select Kobe before Hakeem, specillay in this era of bball.

Then after those two, probably the Kansas duo in some order, and Smart and Randle at the end.
LaVine will be the 7th, and the drop after the top7 is HUGE.

[VooDoo7]

FYI...Wiggins and Parker both play on ESPN tonight.

[ReasonablySober]

I think you're missing the big picture. Anderson's putting up numbers and nobody's questioning his skills, but it's questionable whether or not that's helping the team. Running the offense through him slows the pace of the team wayyyy down - which takes away what could otherwise be easy baskets for his faster teammates. They're maximizing Anderson's skills at the expense of LaVine's talent and - to a lesser extent - Adams'. Btw, LaVine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding. His production isn't great only because he hasn't gotten the opportunities that his talent warrants.

If Lavine is made the focal point of an offense, you've got a ball dominant player, with a score first mindset and the reluctance to attack the rim. If you put Lavine at the helm with, by all accounts, his questionable point guard skills, the team opens itself up to quite a bit of dysfunction on the offensive end. This absolutely neutralizes Anderson, and in all likelihood also ends up neutralizing parts of Adams game as well. I'd also say it's absolutely ridiculous to say it's questionable whether or not Anderson helps the team in this role. They're 13-3 and just put up one hell of a fight against the best team in the country a few days ago. I'd say the proof is in the pudding with him running the show.

I'm aware that Lavine's efficiency numbers on the season are outstanding, but I question whether they're the real deal. His percentages through the first month were completely unsustainable and he's in line for a regression to the mean. If he's made the focal point of the offense, I think you see an even higher degree of severity in that regression. The last 6 games prior to this evening were meant to illustrate that point, and the specific reason they're regressing? Lavine has a tendency to settle for too many jump shots when he has the ability to do so much more.

Zach Lavine is a very talented freshman with significant upside, but I have my reservations about him being as good RIGHT NOW as some seem to believe. He's not a complete offensive player.

The proof in the unsweetened vanilla pudding is that UCLA isn't even a ranked team - with at least 3 first round picks in the lineup.

UCLA is 25th in the AP...two spots below Duke and all that talent.

[ConoverBucks]

Jabari barring injury is CLEARLY the favourite for nº1.
And it's simple, only 2-3 teams will choose Embiid ahead of him, and that's because mostly everyteam in the lottery has a Center but none of them has a franchise wing player.

Exum should go 2nd in my mind, I still like Embiid, but Exum ceiling is Kobe Bryant, that's too much to pass, even if Embiid reach that stupid Olawujon comparison I will always select Kobe before Hakeem, specillay in this era of bball.

Then after those two, probably the Kansas duo in some order, and Smart and Randle at the end.
LaVine will be the 7th, and the drop after the top7 is HUGE.

Can't say I really agree with any of that.

Don't really think Jabari is the clear number 1 right now especially seeing as he hasn't played well in the last few games.

Mostly every team in the lottery has a center? Orlando has Vucevic but he could easily slide over to PF with Embiid at center, Philly would benefit from having Embiid and Noel is more of a PF anyways, Boston could use a center, Cleveland could use a center, Sacramento could play Embiid next to Cousins, and the Lakers could use a center.

I could be wrong here but I haven't heard anybody say Exum's ceiling is Kobe. From everything I've heard Exum isn't a very good shooter and Kobe is a great shooter. I'd also have a hard time putting Exum at number 2 right now.

I wouldn't put LaVine at 7 right now and I think the drop off is after the top 6 but don't think it is a huge drop off. There could be some pretty good players after 6 in Gordon, LaVine, Harris, Vonleh, Saric, and Hood among others.

Just my opinion on all of that.