RealGM

The Nets seem to have better luck in the 1st round when they go in (or come out) double-fisted. Richard Jefferson and Jason Collins have served us well as starters on NBA Finals teams, and Marcus Williams and Josh Boone certainly have proven to be quality youngsters. Heck, even though Tim Thomas and Anthony Parker didn't work out for us while they were here, they have both ended up fairly productive pro players.

We are in an uniquely envious position of power with both of our 1st-round picks in this draft. #10 and #21 are seen as backstop to the 2nd and 3rd tiers of talent, so we can sit back and let a nice player fall to us. And with a value-relative, "eye of the beholder" draft such as this, where one man's #3 pick is another man's mid-1st-rounder, we could end up wit hsome very valuable assets to certain interested teams.

Of course, we also have some holes that the right players in this draft could fill. We honestly have more than enough young talent at PF already (Josh and Sean), but neither is a true low-post scorer. Marcus is a fine young PG, but doesn't fit well behind Devin. Krstic will probably get a good extension this summer, but with Nenad's health concerns and Diop looking for PT elsewhere, the pivot position isn't as secure as it may seem. As for the swingman spots, yes, we all know that VC and RJ are good for a combined 78mpg. But the lack of ANY semblance of quality production behind them has hurt us in close games, where both of our star wings have had to take shorter than usual breaks and overwork themselves (hence, minor, lingering injuries). Grooming heirs to those starting spots could be important as well, since we may be a rough '08-'09 start away from moving Vince and Richard, and growing our youth core. SO, it's safe to say that no position is off-limits in the draft, and the best talent should be pursued.

Assuming that Rose, Beasley, Mayo, Bayless, Love and Gordon are off the board by our #10 pick...

Which of these pairs would you like to choose in this year's draft?

One good big, one good small...that's all I'm asking for. If we end up with something like Gallinari and CDR or Speights and Lopez, I'm going to choke someone.

Rich Rane wrote:One good big, one good small...that's all I'm asking for. If we end up with something like Gallinari and CDR or Speights and Lopez, I'm going to choke someone.

Man that'd be a sweet draft lol

That's fair. So, none of these packages entices you?

BTW, I'm surprised by the number of Nets fans who support drafting Speights at #10. I think he could be an inside scorer, but he's not the Brand v. 2.0 that some make him out to be. He doesn't have an NBA-ready repertoire [once defenders know his move(s?), they can shut him down], and he shies away from contact, despite his long, 6'10, 250lb frame. He also has issues with longer periods on the court, both because of stamina and foul trouble. So, we're talking about more of a blend of, say, Maurice Taylor with less moves, plus a dash of Wilcox's finishing ability. He's also been known to "take plays off", and rarely gives you that 100% effort that you would hope for in a low-post scorer. I'm not trying to say I hate him; I';d love to have him at #21. At that point in the draft, you can afford to gamble on a scorer who may not be able to score for 2-3 years.

Preludepunk27 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Man that'd be a sweet draft lol

Thrown Bill Walker in at 40 an we've got a party.

Rich Rane wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Thrown Bill Walker in at 40 an we've got a party.

Do you like Bill Walker or are you being sarcastic. I'm not gonna make my comment about him until I know how you intended for this to be interpreted.

the only pair that could reasonably happen is the first one.. and i would kill myself if we draft jordan

fasca wrote:the only pair that could reasonably happen is the first one.. and i would kill myself if we draft jordan

^^^^ what he said but in regards to both players in the first pair.

I really don't like your pairs ....

Gallinari + best available big at 21 + BPA at 40 is the best i can think of.

Imagine if Gordon/Gallinari fell to 10 and Speights to 21.

Preludepunk27 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Do you like Bill Walker or are you being sarcastic. I'm not gonna make my comment about him until I know how you intended for this to be interpreted.

hahaha. just say what you think man.

EFF wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




hahaha. just say what you think man.

Haha I was gonna say that I'm not a big fan of Walker. I just think he's a highlight real and not a whole lot more. I thought Rich was being sarcastic because he knows I love Speights and hate Jordan so his comment was pure sarcasm.

I basically was hoping it was sarcasm to bring Rich and I closer together because we could finally agree on a player in that we don't want Bill Walker lol.

Picking up Jordan is not stretch. He will be a Bynum project I wouldnt expect him to play the first season "watch and learn".

According to the workout notes Buddinger did not do well on his defense.

My pair is Speights and Greene.

Rich Rane wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Thrown Bill Walker in at 40 an we've got a party.

100% Agree, if not available JR Giddens would be a nice plan b.

Ideally, we would trade up for Love IMO but given those choices, I would go with Randolph and CDR.

mack69 wrote:Picking up Jordan is not stretch. He will be a Bynum project I wouldnt expect him to play the first season "watch and learn".

According to the workout notes Buddinger did not do well on his defense.

My pair is Speights and Greene.

I hate Jordan. He reminds me too much of Patrick O'Bryant.

speights and a good gaurd.

Right now my guess is Gallinari + J.J Hickson he seemed to really great the workout with the Nets and is the only player invited to a 2nd workout right now.

JJ is a solid player. He's still pretty raw from what I saw of him at NC State, but he definitely could be a bruiser. He's a year or two away from being a solid contributor. If Thorn was ok with waiting on him, I think he'd pay some decent dividends...of course, I think #21 is too high for him. If we could trade down a few spots and acquire another pick, I'd be ok with this.

Preludepunk27 wrote:I basically was hoping it was sarcasm to bring Rich and I closer together because we could finally agree on a player in that we don't want Bill Walker lol.

I gave up on this possibility a very long time ago.