RealGM

http://www.realgm.com/src_feature/1205/ ... nt_edition)/

I'm surprised there isn't a topic on this already, given how much people love to post there own mock drafts, I would have thought there might be some comment on this one. Of course, this mock, like all others, is subject to tweaking as the draft approaches, but I think for right now the mock is pretty solid and especially in-depth.

What do you think of the mock from your own team's perspective?

In the context of the Raptors' team needs, I think Batum is a good pick. I must say, though, that I haven't seen the kid play, but judging him on the basis of his exteriors and supposed skill set, he seems to address some of our needs.

The Raptors need two things ( from a draft perspective). A tough minded C who is willing to rebound and defend the basket, and an athletic, offensively creative wing player who can score on isolation plays. I can't say conclusively to what extent Batum addresses our wing needs, but if his upside/athletic ability is similar to that of Rudy Gay, then I think he fits the bill. The only downside I see with Batum is that the weaknesses in his game seem to be ( from what I've read) mostly mental, and they are related to passivness and "softness". Now, if there is any team in the entire NBA could use a player who is anything BUT soft and/or passive, it is the Toronto Raptors. Because Toronto fans seem to have given up on Andrea Bargnani for reasons related to his lack of fire/passion and his "softness" relative to most players of his size, even from the standpoint of PR, Batum would be a risky pick if his mental make-up is similar to Bargnani's. I have no problem with the Raps drafting Batum if he is a talented player, but I fear what may happen if he doesn't pan out, or shows early indications that his development may happen slowly.

Love the Sonics picks
Rose and Ibaka

but if THabeet was in the draft I would pick Him!

I was expecting to see a topic about the mock, but for a different reason....the "odds of future success" seem ridiculously generous in some cases.

Beasley and Rose are damn fine players, but do you really think Beasley has a 75% chance of making the HOF? Or Rose 80%? I don't think you could honestly say that about any prospect, just because so many things can happen to derail a career.

75-80% chance means you're surprised if it doesn't happen. That's some serious overhype imo.

I agree McBain, those probabilities were ridiculous. No way anyone could put Beasley or Rose over 25%, and even that would be a pretty crazy contention to make.

The draft itself seemed pretty reasonable. Randolph would be a very good pick for the Bobcats, I think.

mcbain wrote:I was expecting to see a topic about the mock, but for a different reason....the "odds of future success" seem ridiculously generous in some cases.

Beasley and Rose are damn fine players, but do you really think Beasley has a 75% chance of making the HOF? Or Rose 80%? I don't think you could honestly say that about any prospect, just because so many things can happen to derail a career.

75-80% chance means you're surprised if it doesn't happen. That's some serious overhype imo.

I completely agree with you. They are great prospects but you can't give a guy whos never played a NBA game an 80% chance of making the HOF.

If the Wolves take Bayless over OJ in the 3 spot I will throw up!

whether OJ is the right pick or not aside, I agree that Bayless would be a mistake given you already have an undersized shoot first guard in Foye

They should get rid of the probabilities, they are too subjective to add anything of value to the analysis.

Their HOF probabilities are absolutely ridiculous, and make me question everything else they say. Most drafts are gonna have 0-2 HOFers, but Beasley has a 75% chance, and even Anthony Randolph has a 15% chance?

I'd love to bet money against these probabilities. I'd make a fortune.

ponder276 wrote:Their HOF probabilities are absolutely ridiculous, and make me question everything else they say. Most drafts are gonna have 0-2 HOFers, but Beasley has a 75% chance, and even Anthony Randolph has a 15% chance?

I agree that the estimations are over generous, but they're still only saying that they expect 2 players from this class to enter the HOF. That's not unreasonable.

PaintPatrol wrote:If the Wolves take Bayless over OJ in the 3 spot I will throw up!

There is no indiciation the wolves are remotely interested in Bayless.

revprodeji wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



There is no indiciation the wolves are remotely interested in Bayless.

Has there been any kind of indication regarding who they're interested in?

Goodness knows what is going on in BC's head, so its hard to guess what he will do,

But I just don't see the Raptor's passing on Roy Hibbert at their pick, unless someone free falls out of the top ten.

The odds of dealing Bargnani with his value as low as it is, in the best case is unlikely. The Raps will start the season with Bargnani on their roster, what makes matters more interesting is their best asset on the trade market is Rasho and that huge expiring contract who happens to be the best center on the team.

Rasho's expiring coupled with the other expiring the Raps have I would imagine will be used to net the small forward that we need, which would leave us very thin at center.

I hate the term "NBA Ready" but Hibbert seems like the type of player who would be ready to contribute fairly early into his career, and while he may not be an all star, but even if he can offer up Joel Przybilla number with a better FT% it would allow the Raps to have a decent big/small rotation at the five with Bargs and Hibbert for years to come.

The_Pope wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Has there been any kind of indication regarding who they're interested in?

As far as I've seen, Rose is the only name that has "officially" come up.

Eric Gordon to the Bulls? Hard to argue with the value but the last thing we need is another small shooting guard.

Cliff Levingston thinks Danilo Galinari might be the better pick there, but who knows.

The_Pope wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Has there been any kind of indication regarding who they're interested in?

Other than Rose at 1, none that I've heard. But Bayless doesn't fit, that much should be obvious

Cliff Levingston wrote:Eric Gordon to the Bulls? Hard to argue with the value but the last thing we need is another small shooting guard.

Cliff Levingston thinks Danilo Galinari might be the better pick there, but who knows.

I tend to agree with Cliff Levingston,

If Danilo Galinari is still available when the Bull draft, having a guy who can step in and functionally play the 2/3 will be very handy if one of Gordon or Deng get S&T-ed to add a PG.

yea i would think that the bulls go for a big instead of a guard

The_Pope wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Has there been any kind of indication regarding who they're interested in?

Supposedly their draft board looks something like:

1A: Rose
1B: Beasley
3: Mayo
4: Lopez
5: Love

With Lopez/Love possibly flip-flopped. Nothing all that out of the ordinary, and it's probably mostly speculation.