Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part I

[nate33]

The best single statistical indicator of NBA success is steals per game. College players that get a lot of steals are much more likely to prosper at the NBA level. I don't know why. It could be that getting steals requires a combination of basketball IQ, awareness, length, athleticism, aggressiveness, and good reflexes. But whatever the case, Shabazz is posting a distressingly low steals per game average (0.9 per 40 minutes), and Porter does very well in this category (2.3 per 40 minutes). Porter ranks 5th in steals per minute among all SF's in college basketball.

[stevemcqueen1]

Steve, no matter what team a player's on, he's gotta show he can help his team win - especially a player who's supposed to be a star. Muhammad hasn't done that by any stretch, and Porter has. Porter is more an above the rim player than Bazz. Bazz is shorter and not any more athletic than Porter. And if a player has these "4 elite scoring tools" compared to 1, prove it by scoring more efficiently. Bazz has scored LESS efficiently. You use the word passion for Bazz, but he hasn't shown even the slightest bit of passion for anything other than shooting. Unfortunately for you and other fans of his, basketball isn't just about shooting, and it's not a platoon sport, so he can't sit out on defense. It's ridiculous to say that Porter isn't a better defender than Bazz. There's no comparison - Porter is far better and actually shows passion on that side of the ball. Porter's also a better passer and understands how to use his length to create passing lanes. Bazz doesn't do passing. I don't know if I've seen a shot-creator who creates so little for his teammates. Even selfish players like Allan Iverson and Jerry Stackhouse would occasionally set up their teammates. And Bazz has shooters around him to pass to. I have no doubt that he score in the NBA, but guess what - scoring and doing nothing else won't cut it. You and I agree that BPA is the way to go, right? The P doesn't stand for Shooter or Scorer or even Platoon player; it stands for Player. And P stands for a long Paragraph. Sorry about that.

UCLA is 18-7 and Shabazz has actually been playing well. He's probably played the best of anyone on his team. I don't have concerns about his ability to contribute to a winning team. Otto Porter's team has been playing well too, the "team" concern only comes into play for me if the guy is on a losing team where his poor play contributes to the losing. Otherwise there are all kinds of variables in play that are irrelevant to the prospect's NBA potential to be judging a guy on team success/achievement.

I don't know how you can say Bazz isn't a better athlete than Porter. He's a really good athlete and Porter is a little below average. Porter may be taller than Bazz but he really can't jump. Bazz is a posterizer whereas Porter's entire game is below the rim. Bazz runs the court well and is a weapon in transition and he is a threat to take his man off the dribble and go all the way to the basket for the big finish. Porter is not.

Porter's efficiency comes from his shot selection and what he gets to work with in his role. He doesn't take many shots, and he only really takes open 3s and good looks beneath the basket. So he makes most of them. That's great he can finish his open looks. But how does that differentiate him from a journeyman role player in the NBA like Martell?

The onus of creation is on Shabazz and he takes a much greater variety of shots--ISO post up hooks and turnaround fadeaways, mid range jumpers curling off screens or dribble pull-ups, momentum jumpers, difficult finishes around the basket off of drives into the lane, etc. They are lower percentage shots because they are hard. But they are a big part of the NBA game. You have to be able to beat your defender. He's got a whole mid range and face up game that Porter does not have. Shot creation is probably the single most valuable attribute in the NBA. No other perimeter player in the class can do it like Shabazz. Porter does not even come close.

Also defensively, Shabazz isn't that great a defender, but he's an opportunist with a high IQ. His conditioning has been lousy this year, I think once it improves, he'll improve. What can you really say about Porter's defense though? He plays in a strict zone system that's absolutely nothing like what he'll do in the NBA? It seems odd to weigh that as a significant advantage for him over Shabazz.

And as far as passing goes, Shabazz earns some of the criticism, but the criticism does go too far in general. He passes out of bad situations. He's got a very good Bball IQ. And in general, UCLA is a terrible passing team where inexperience hampers the ball movement. There are so many plays where Bazz works himself into great position and the team makes the wrong pass--often leading to a turnover or an awful shot like a big man hoisting a 3 to beat the clock. UCLA is not a cohesive team. They never came together and have been trying to figure it out all year. But that's irrelevant because that situation isn't coming with Shabazz when you draft him.

Porter is having a great year. A better year than Shabazz no doubt. But he's also a sophomore playing on a pretty good team where he is completely aware of and comfortable in his role. Bottom line, he's not a bigger talent than Shabazz.

[stevemcqueen1]

I don't think Bazz is that athletic. He looks undersized for the 3 and doesn't do much other than score. I will be curious to see his combine numbers but right now i am definitely not sold on him.

He's definitely undersized for the 3 in terms of height. But he does have good arm length supposedly. And he's got good weight and strength for the 3 in the NBA. His body is already NBA ready in terms of bulk. He's got an almost identical build to James Harden and he plays a similar game offensively--using his strength to get to his spots and shows a real knack for getting to the FT line. In general, I think he might be about the same caliber athlete as Harden, although I think he's slightly stronger and shows more of a tendency to post up and try and do some work in the lane with his strength. He's less of a jump shooter than Harden.

He's a pretty good athlete. I don't see where the concerns are coming from here. He's probably one of the best in game dunkers in CBB. He can really get up and throw down a vicious dunk. He's got a lot of confidence in his ability to finish and it shows.

[nate33]

I get the idea that a shot creator has more value than a role player, but even good shot creators have limited usefulness if they lack a complete game. Corey Maggette never won anything and he was a highly efficient scorer. If you project his efficiency to be a bit lower, you may be looking at the next Nick Young.

Meanwhile, high quality role players can really help teams win. If Porter turns out to be the next Shawn Marion, Tayshaun Prince, I'll take him over the next Corey Maggette any day.

[nate33]

He's got an almost identical build to James Harden and he plays a similar game offensively--using his strength to get to his spots and shows a real knack for getting to the FT line.

James Harden with more strength, less passing skills, and less basketball IQ sounds a lot like Corey Maggette.

[AFM]

I don't see the Shabazz as a more efficient Nick Young comparison. Shabazz already has a more developed game. Quick floaters, hook shots in the lane, as well as being able to pop the 3. He's a much better shot creator. Nick essentially just shoots contested fadeaways.
Although they both are only good for putting up points if that's what you mean.

[nate33]

I don't see the Shabazz as a more efficient Nick Young comparison. Shabazz already has a more developed game. Quick floaters, hook shots in the lane, as well as being able to pop the 3. He's a much better shot creator. Nick essentially just shoots contested fadeaways.
Although they both are only good for putting up points if that's what you mean.

Yes. That's what I mean. Being a very good individual scorer can only get you so far if you lack the passing skills and court awareness to take advantage when the defense keys on you.

[DCsOwn]

Steve, no matter what team a player's on, he's gotta show he can help his team win - especially a player who's supposed to be a star. Muhammad hasn't done that by any stretch, and Porter has. Porter is more an above the rim player than Bazz. Bazz is shorter and not any more athletic than Porter. And if a player has these "4 elite scoring tools" compared to 1, prove it by scoring more efficiently. Bazz has scored LESS efficiently. You use the word passion for Bazz, but he hasn't shown even the slightest bit of passion for anything other than shooting. Unfortunately for you and other fans of his, basketball isn't just about shooting, and it's not a platoon sport, so he can't sit out on defense. It's ridiculous to say that Porter isn't a better defender than Bazz. There's no comparison - Porter is far better and actually shows passion on that side of the ball. Porter's also a better passer and understands how to use his length to create passing lanes. Bazz doesn't do passing. I don't know if I've seen a shot-creator who creates so little for his teammates. Even selfish players like Allan Iverson and Jerry Stackhouse would occasionally set up their teammates. And Bazz has shooters around him to pass to. I have no doubt that he score in the NBA, but guess what - scoring and doing nothing else won't cut it. You and I agree that BPA is the way to go, right? The P doesn't stand for Shooter or Scorer or even Platoon player; it stands for Player. And P stands for a long Paragraph. Sorry about that.

UCLA is 18-7 and Shabazz has actually been playing well. He's probably played the best of anyone on his team. I don't have concerns about his ability to contribute to a winning team. Otto Porter's team has been playing well too, the "team" concern only comes into play for me if the guy is on a losing team where his poor play contributes to the losing. Otherwise there are all kinds of variables in play that are irrelevant to the prospect's NBA potential to be judging a guy on team success/achievement.

I don't know how you can say Bazz isn't a better athlete than Porter. He's a really good athlete and Porter is a little below average. Porter may be taller than Bazz but he really can't jump. Bazz is a posterizer whereas Porter's entire game is below the rim. Bazz runs the court well and is a weapon in transition and he is a threat to take his man off the dribble and go all the way to the basket for the big finish. Porter is not.

Porter's efficiency comes from his shot selection and what he gets to work with in his role. He doesn't take many shots, and he only really takes open 3s and good looks beneath the basket. So he makes most of them. That's great he can finish his open looks. But how does that differentiate him from a journeyman role player in the NBA like Martell?

The onus of creation is on Shabazz and he takes a much greater variety of shots--ISO post up hooks and turnaround fadeaways, mid range jumpers curling off screens or dribble pull-ups, momentum jumpers, difficult finishes around the basket off of drives into the lane, etc. They are lower percentage shots because they are hard. But they are a big part of the NBA game. You have to be able to beat your defender. He's got a whole mid range and face up game that Porter does not have. Shot creation is probably the single most valuable attribute in the NBA. No other perimeter player in the class can do it like Shabazz. Porter does not even come close.

Also defensively, Shabazz isn't that great a defender, but he's an opportunist with a high IQ. His conditioning has been lousy this year, I think once it improves, he'll improve. What can you really say about Porter's defense though? He plays in a strict zone system that's absolutely nothing like what he'll do in the NBA? It seems odd to weigh that as a significant advantage for him over Shabazz.

And as far as passing goes, Shabazz earns some of the criticism, but the criticism does go too far in general. He passes out of bad situations. He's got a very good Bball IQ. And in general, UCLA is a terrible passing team where inexperience hampers the ball movement. There are so many plays where Bazz works himself into great position and the team makes the wrong pass--often leading to a turnover or an awful shot like a big man hoisting a 3 to beat the clock. UCLA is not a cohesive team. They never came together and have been trying to figure it out all year. But that's irrelevant because that situation isn't coming with Shabazz when you draft him.

Porter is having a great year. A better year than Shabazz no doubt. But he's also a sophomore playing on a pretty good team where he is completely aware of and comfortable in his role. Bottom line, he's not a bigger talent than Shabazz.

The conversation about the two's athletic merits is necessarily problematic because we have nothing objective to weigh. The Combine was created to give us a series of objective metrics to utilize when formulating a comparative analysis between players, and until then we're arguing the empirical and subjective, so I won't delve into that further until more concrete information has been compiled since we're at loggerheads on the matter. But, I can say with complete confidence that you are SEVERELY mischaracterizing Porter's offensive prowess. He has a tremendous mid-range game (in fact, his value as a recruit according to pretty much every scouting service around was predicated on his length and relatively highly developed mid-range game for such a young player), and he stepped on campus knocking mid-range jumpers down at a high rate and really only added consistent three point range over this past summer. Presently, he shoots the mid-range J with accuracy, he shoots floaters and leaners well, he's made fadeaway shots this year, he has a face up and post game (although he doesnt break people down off the dribble with any real consistency, he can face up, go around people and finish in the lane with the aforementioned floaters and he can drive a close out well and make the appropriate play), he runs the court MUCH, MUCH better than you are giving him credit for (he had a coast to coast layup against the Golden Eagles last game for example), he scores off putbacks, he passes extremely well from all over the court, in transition and in the halfcourt, and he doesn't stop the ball.

There is real value with Porter and it's why you're seeing a steady uptick in his overall stock by most draft services/analysts.

[Ruzious]

Steve, no matter what team a player's on, he's gotta show he can help his team win - especially a player who's supposed to be a star. Muhammad hasn't done that by any stretch, and Porter has. Porter is more an above the rim player than Bazz. Bazz is shorter and not any more athletic than Porter. And if a player has these "4 elite scoring tools" compared to 1, prove it by scoring more efficiently. Bazz has scored LESS efficiently. You use the word passion for Bazz, but he hasn't shown even the slightest bit of passion for anything other than shooting. Unfortunately for you and other fans of his, basketball isn't just about shooting, and it's not a platoon sport, so he can't sit out on defense. It's ridiculous to say that Porter isn't a better defender than Bazz. There's no comparison - Porter is far better and actually shows passion on that side of the ball. Porter's also a better passer and understands how to use his length to create passing lanes. Bazz doesn't do passing. I don't know if I've seen a shot-creator who creates so little for his teammates. Even selfish players like Allan Iverson and Jerry Stackhouse would occasionally set up their teammates. And Bazz has shooters around him to pass to. I have no doubt that he score in the NBA, but guess what - scoring and doing nothing else won't cut it. You and I agree that BPA is the way to go, right? The P doesn't stand for Shooter or Scorer or even Platoon player; it stands for Player. And P stands for a long Paragraph. Sorry about that.

UCLA is 18-7 and Shabazz has actually been playing well. He's probably played the best of anyone on his team. I don't have concerns about his ability to contribute to a winning team. Otto Porter's team has been playing well too, the "team" concern only comes into play for me if the guy is on a losing team where his poor play contributes to the losing. Otherwise there are all kinds of variables in play that are irrelevant to the prospect's NBA potential to be judging a guy on team success/achievement.

I don't know how you can say Bazz isn't a better athlete than Porter. He's a really good athlete and Porter is a little below average. Porter may be taller than Bazz but he really can't jump. Bazz is a posterizer whereas Porter's entire game is below the rim. Bazz runs the court well and is a weapon in transition and he is a threat to take his man off the dribble and go all the way to the basket for the big finish. Porter is not.

Porter's efficiency comes from his shot selection and what he gets to work with in his role. He doesn't take many shots, and he only really takes open 3s and good looks beneath the basket. So he makes most of them. That's great he can finish his open looks. But how does that differentiate him from a journeyman role player in the NBA like Martell?

The onus of creation is on Shabazz and he takes a much greater variety of shots--ISO post up hooks and turnaround fadeaways, mid range jumpers curling off screens or dribble pull-ups, momentum jumpers, difficult finishes around the basket off of drives into the lane, etc. They are lower percentage shots because they are hard. But they are a big part of the NBA game. You have to be able to beat your defender. He's got a whole mid range and face up game that Porter does not have. Shot creation is probably the single most valuable attribute in the NBA. No other perimeter player in the class can do it like Shabazz. Porter does not even come close.

Also defensively, Shabazz isn't that great a defender, but he's an opportunist with a high IQ. His conditioning has been lousy this year, I think once it improves, he'll improve. What can you really say about Porter's defense though? He plays in a strict zone system that's absolutely nothing like what he'll do in the NBA? It seems odd to weigh that as a significant advantage for him over Shabazz.

And as far as passing goes, Shabazz earns some of the criticism, but the criticism does go too far in general. He passes out of bad situations. He's got a very good Bball IQ. And in general, UCLA is a terrible passing team where inexperience hampers the ball movement. There are so many plays where Bazz works himself into great position and the team makes the wrong pass--often leading to a turnover or an awful shot like a big man hoisting a 3 to beat the clock. UCLA is not a cohesive team. They never came together and have been trying to figure it out all year. But that's irrelevant because that situation isn't coming with Shabazz when you draft him.

Porter is having a great year. A better year than Shabazz no doubt. But he's also a sophomore playing on a pretty good team where he is completely aware of and comfortable in his role. Bottom line, he's not a bigger talent than Shabazz.

Travis Wear (sp?) even had better stats last season than Bazz has this season (higher PER and more efficient scorer).

I don't know who the bigger talent is, but I'm confident about who the better player is - meaning the player who will do more to make his team better. We'll just have to agree to disagree here.

[stevemcqueen1]

I get the idea that a shot creator has more value than a role player, but even good shot creators have limited usefulness if they lack a complete game. Corey Maggette never won anything and he was a highly efficient scorer. If you project his efficiency to be a bit lower, you may be looking at the next Nick Young.

Meanwhile, high quality role players can really help teams win. If Porter turns out to be the next Shawn Marion, Tayshaun Prince, I'll take him over the next Corey Maggette any day.

Sure, I agree with all of that, except the comparison to Maggette and the assertion that Shabazz can only be a scorer. Maggette never had the talent level Shabazz does IMO. Shabazz came into the year as the top ranked prospect and the top HS player.

You're right though that Maggette has always been a great scorer.

Shabazz is the best all around package of tools for the perimeter players in the class IMO. And that's how he was universally regarded prior to the season. The fact that he's dropping despite having a solid freshman year says to me that the draftnik community is overreacting to the events of the college season. It's an error of recency. Overvaluing small sample sizes of numbers over the actual skill sets the prospects possess. Errors like this are how Andre Drummond falls to 9th in the draft.

EDIT: I also wanted to point out that comparing Porter to Marion and Prince is making a best case scenario comparison for him and Maggette is something of a worst case scenario for Shabazz.

[DCsOwn]

Shabazz is the best all around package of tools for the perimeter players in the class IMO. And that's how he was universally regarded prior to the season. The fact that he's dropping despite having a solid freshman year says to me that the draftnik community is overreacting to the events of the college season. It's an error of recency. Overvaluing small sample sizes of numbers over the actual skill sets the prospects possess. Errors like this are how Andre Drummond falls to 9th in the draft.

Or it could be saying that Porter has improved beyond what most observers thought he would, or it could be that some other undervalued player has demonstrated a skill-set that elevates him above Muhammad in the minds of analysts, or it could mean that a previously unnoticed flaw in Muhammad's game manifested itself when presented against higher level competition etc. It really could me a number of different things actually.

You're talking about pre-season projections (pre-career projections in Muhammad's case) and acting like they should be immutable. Evaluators have more information now, they've seen him play against better competition, they've seen him play in a more structured offense and with better teammates etc., of course that's going to factor into an evaluation of the kid going forward. It shouldn't and I presume won't be the final word on his prospect status (myriad variables have to be weighed before a final analysis is made), but simply because someone is viewed a particular way at a particular juncture in his development doesn't and shouldn't preclude revaluations. You point to a case where a devaluation appears to have been a mistake, I can give 50 examples where an alteration was the right call, like in the case of Harrison Barnes, or OJ Mayo etc.

[Ruzious]

I get the idea that a shot creator has more value than a role player, but even good shot creators have limited usefulness if they lack a complete game. Corey Maggette never won anything and he was a highly efficient scorer. If you project his efficiency to be a bit lower, you may be looking at the next Nick Young.

Meanwhile, high quality role players can really help teams win. If Porter turns out to be the next Shawn Marion, Tayshaun Prince, I'll take him over the next Corey Maggette any day.

Sure, I agree with all of that, except the comparison to Maggette and the assertion that Shabazz can only be a scorer. Maggette never had the talent level Shabazz does IMO. Shabazz came into the year as the top ranked prospect and the top HS player.

You're right though that Maggette has always been a great scorer.

Shabazz is the best all around package of tools for the perimeter players in the class IMO. And that's how he was universally regarded prior to the season. The fact that he's dropping despite having a solid freshman year says to me that the draftnik community is overreacting to the events of the college season. It's an error of recency. Overvaluing small sample sizes of numbers over the actual skill sets the prospects possess. Errors like this are how Andre Drummond falls to 9th in the draft.

EDIT: I also wanted to point out that comparing Porter to Marion and Prince is making a best case scenario comparison for him and Maggette is something of a worst case scenario for Shabazz.

If I had a nickel for every overrated HS player, I'd have... a lot of nickels.

Maggette was regarded as a great athlete at Duke, and most observers do not think that Bazz is particularly athletic. Maggette is definitely not a worst case scenario for Bazz.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Watching Porter now on ESPN...

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Someone sell me on Anthony Bennett. I don't get it. Chad Ford has him #2 on his board, which he says is not his opinion, but the collective voices of scouts, GM's, and pro talent evaluators. What am I missing? I want nothing to do with him...

He plays the game with a passion and ferocity of a star player. He has that kind of motor.

Plus it doesn't hurt he's so skilled. I don't agree with putting him at #2 though. I think he's a tweener, and not in the good way. He's slightly limited because of his height.

Now if you think he can be Larry Johnson... yeah #2 ain't too high for him. But I'd caution Larry Johnson was a pretty complete scorer and he also had a better build than Bennett. LJ was a hoss and built like a super hero--broad, muscular shoulders, wasp waist. Bennett is a lot softer looking IMO.

I haven't seen him play much at all, but from all the stats and scouting that I've read on him, he seems like the real deal.

Synergy stats love him. They make him out to be a dominant force offensively, a guy who can run, shoot, attack the rim, and score from the post. Really sounds like he has it all offensively. Seriously, the only area where he's not awesome offensively is as the pick and roll man, which seems strange considering he's great at literally everything else. I would suspect it won't really hold him back, or he could easily learn and improve there. And then defensively, he's pretty damn good too. Not as dominant as he is on offense, but he gets it done, especially defending spot up shooters. I feel like I don't even need to read a scouting report on this guy to make the blind assumption that he's an athletic freak with a lot of natural gifts. Sounds to me like a guy who is oozing with potential, and the best part is, he already is playing at an elite level, remaining potential be damned.

Maybe he's the stretch 4 we've all been dreaming of But honestly, I think him being a capable but not deadly stretch 4 threat is his floor. The kid seems like he can play inside and out, and on both sides of the court. Alright, I'm sold.

He measures a 7-1 wingspan, but can't find any standing reach measurement. He looks to have really wide shoulders, which probably means low standing reach.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Hey got a draft topic for everyone...

In honor of MJ's 50th, what was his draft history with the Wizards?

I know he took Kwame. But I also remember some guard he took from some small school like South Alabama. I remember thinking he was gonna be some hidden gem cause Jordan liked him and he just disappeared.

He must of had some other picks too, but I can't remember. Did he take Jarvis Hayes, Juan Dixon, Jared Jeffries?

[stevemcqueen1]

Shabazz is the best all around package of tools for the perimeter players in the class IMO. And that's how he was universally regarded prior to the season. The fact that he's dropping despite having a solid freshman year says to me that the draftnik community is overreacting to the events of the college season. It's an error of recency. Overvaluing small sample sizes of numbers over the actual skill sets the prospects possess. Errors like this are how Andre Drummond falls to 9th in the draft.

Or it could be saying that Porter has improved beyond what most observers thought he would, or it could be that some other undervalued player has demonstrated a skill-set that elevates him above Muhammad in the minds of analysts, or it could mean that a previously unnoticed flaw in Muhammad's game manifested itself when presented against higher level competition etc. It really could me a number of different things actually.

You're talking about pre-season projections (pre-career projections in Muhammad's case) and acting like they should be immutable. Evaluators have more information now, they've seen him play against better competition, they've seen him play in a more structured offense and with better teammates etc., of course that's going to factor into an evaluation of the kid going forward. It shouldn't and I presume won't be the final word on his prospect status (myriad variables have to be weighed before a final analysis is made), but simply because someone is viewed a particular way at a particular juncture in his development doesn't and shouldn't preclude revaluations. You point to a case where a devaluation appears to have been a mistake, I can give 50 examples where an alteration was the right call, like in the case of Harrison Barnes, or OJ Mayo etc.

You're actually creating a straw man argument here. I never argued that preseason projections are immutable. I said that Shabazz has an entirely different pedigree and talent level than Maggette. Maggette was never good enough to be considered the top HS player and top player in his class at any point. Shabazz would never have been considered a top lottery pick if all he could do was score in volume. Even today, DX still has him ranked third overall and they have Otto Porter ranked in the teens.

More information about Porter has undoubtedly been revealed and as a result, he's climbed into the lottery discussion after being a no name going into the season. Clearly preseason projections aren't set in stone. Shabazz is still one of the top ranked players though because his talent level is so good and translatable and he's having a quality season for a freshman.

There is more reason to think Shabazz's case is like Drummond's than like Harrison Barnes's. Shabazz had a lot of stuff happen off the court that's contributed to his somewhat underwhelming season against his expectations, similar to Drummond. First he got hurt and got out of shape and didn't get to spend the summer with the team, pretty crucial as a freshman on a freshmen heavy team. Then he had to sit out for an NCAA witch hunt until he was cleared to play. Then he got sick and lost 15 pounds in a short span. All told, his weight has fluctuated a ton this season and he gained 10 pounds than lost over 20 pounds in a very short period of time. He is not totally himself right now, and he's never been able to fully settle into his team and get his footing.

And it's worth noting that Barnes probably still would have been a top 3 pick if he'd come out after his freshman season. He still ended up going seventh in one of the deepest classes in a long time.

I still think there isn't a lot you can learn to drastically change your mind on a player in 30 games. Especially someone like Shabazz who has been in the spotlight for years. He's so heavily scrutinized that the details of his diet are public knowledge, and that his body language after a teammate hitting a game winner becomes national news. A month ago, pretty much nobody would have attempted to argue Porter was a better prospect than Shabazz. How much have people really learned in a month? How much could either player have changed? And the arguments for Porter seem to be based mostly on their statistics, less so on his tangible skill set versus Shabazz's.

[hands11]

UNLV at 9PM - Anthony Bennett PF UNLV wins by 2
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/conversat ... =330472439
Bennett - quiet first half for Bennett but warming up in the second. Looks like he turned it on
21 pts 12 rebounds.

Duke and Maryland at 6PM - MD WINS Len vs Plumlee, plus Seth Curry
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/preview?gameId=330470120
- MD takes down #2 Duke. Nice - Lot of props to Len. He really is active and seeks contract and boxes out. He still look a little thin but he added a lot of weight since last year. Plumlee didnt have a good game at all. Seth Curry isn't even listed in the mock draft on Draftx ? 11-17 25 pts wow. MD - Jake Layman is someone to watch moving forward.

Indiana game in the bag. Zeller with another good game. Victor not so much so. I missed this game.
Ouch, just heard Victor rolled his ankle and left the game. Will Sheehey had a monster game.
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330470084

Oklahoma State vs Oklahoma - OT - Marcus Smart played really well and closed down the final shot with great D. He just stuffed the shooter. LeBryan Nash 7 pts in OT.
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330470197

Kansas at 9PM Ben McLemore and Jeff Withey
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/preview?gameId=330472305
Withey is just a solid player. I haven't notice McLemore much this game but it is a blow out. McLemore got a little something going late in the game. Did a 360 dunk off his own breakaway steal then left the game. Comments about what a nice kid he is and how he doesn't force his game. Sounds like Beal was. Saw Ben post game interview. He doesn't seem to have Beals smarts though.

UCLA. Shabazz . Good numbers by Shabazz but he looks like he needs to get in better shape to me. He is good at catch and shoots off screens. Needs to be more active though. Kyle Anderson is going to be someone to watch.
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330470024

Florida State vs Boston Michael Snaer, G 8-10 21 pts - that for you CCJ
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330470052

Gonzaga Bulldogs Kelly Olynyk, 7-0 sick game 13-17 9 rebounds 26 pts
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330472539

Isaiah Austin at 7PM Baylor vs Kansas St. Not a great game by Austin. Baylor lost
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/preview?gameId=330472306
Interesting player but just can't get a good read on him. They were talking Kareem during the game. Wears glasses and some weird swirl cut in his hair. I tend to stay away from players that look high maintenance. There is some talent there. I saw a flash of McGee for what it is worth. He shot 2 3 pointers. Like I said. There is something interesting there. Just not sure what.

B.J. Young SG on now Arkansas vs Missouri
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=330470008
Nice numbers from BJ but I didn't see it.

Ahh Sweet. Games for Free on Reply.
http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index?game ... pe/replay/

[nate33]

You're actually creating a straw man argument here. I never argued that preseason projections are immutable. I said that Shabazz has an entirely different pedigree and talent level than Maggette. Maggette was never good enough to be considered the top HS player and top player in his class at any point. Shabazz would never have been considered a top lottery pick if all he could do was score in volume. Even today, DX still has him ranked third overall and they have Otto Porter ranked in the teens.

I could be wrong, but I recall Maggette as being an extremely hyped player. He was a McDonald's All American and the top recruit for the premier program in college basketball: Duke.

[thricethefun]

I really hope Ernie only drafts Porter if Noel, Shabazz, Ben Mclemore, Zeller, Len, Bennett, and Smart are off the board.

[montestewart]

You're actually creating a straw man argument here. I never argued that preseason projections are immutable. I said that Shabazz has an entirely different pedigree and talent level than Maggette. Maggette was never good enough to be considered the top HS player and top player in his class at any point. Shabazz would never have been considered a top lottery pick if all he could do was score in volume. Even today, DX still has him ranked third overall and they have Otto Porter ranked in the teens.

I could be wrong, but I recall Maggette as being an extremely hyped player. He was a McDonald's All American and the top recruit for the premier program in college basketball: Duke.

DX shows Maggette ranked anywhere from 12 to 24 coming out of high school. Very telling that Al Harrington was ranked first in most polls. Others ranked at the top through the years include: Donnell Harvey, Eddy Curry, Gerald Green, O.J. Mayo, Brandon Jennings, Derrick Favors, and Harrison Barnes. Austin Rivers was 1st above Anthony Davis in two rankings, and 2nd in most others. Being ranked #1 probably guarantees an NBA career (although it didn't for Harvey) but beyond that...