2025 Draft Thread

[prime1time]

No GM in the league would trade away the #1 pick this year. No team owner would allow it. If Harper is your guy you have to hope we land the 2nd pick. Drafting Flagg is worth too much to any franchise that lands him. He’s been more hyped than Wemby. On the public radar for longer.

That's the reality of the situation but we'll see how the basketball plays out. To be honest, what we're really debating isn't Flagg or Harper but what should big time Freshman look for when they choose schools. Rutgers was dysfunctional. Duke was basketball heaven. But me being me, I have to block out the hype and try to analyze what I see based on what I've seen in the past. Case in point, Jayden Daniels. The Caleb Williams hype was insane before the draft but a season in, things are very different. Flagg is a lock to go #1 but that's different than saying I would stay at #1 and take him or that I believe he will be the best player in the class.

[nate33]

Imagine a Bilal-Flagg-Sarr front court in a couple years, with George-Champagnie coming off the bench. Flagg is a beast, offensively and defensively.
He will make the rest of the team much more competitive just by sheer will and talent.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=GWeuz7j_sc5cBYZzdD92Tw

14% probability…We are a franchise that suffered GM malpractice for years. So now that we finally have a competent front office, we are owed some luck, right?

Flagg is a beast but we should put his success in context. He is in an ideal situation. Not inlcuding Flagg Duke shot 66% from the field. I just feel like we're seeing Flagg in an ideal situation and I question how good his offense will be when he gets to the NBA and he finds himself #1 on an opposing teams scouting report. Like what is the ceiling on Flagg's offense? Look at how many easy/great looks Flagg got yesterday. In competitive NBA games, against skilled wings I have questions about Flagg's ability to create offense when easy looks are taken away. And not just doubts of 18 year old Cooper Flagg, but doubts concerning prime Cooper Flagg.

When you're playing Boston and they are locked in defensively so all the layups and wide-open 3's disappear and they have 4 great defenders that are going to make you earn every bucket that you get, I have questions about Flagg's offense. With KD the offensive upside was always clear. He gets to his spot and he can rise up. He's an elite 3-point shooter even at high volume. And his size and length make him very tough to cover. KD's rookie year he shot 43/28/87. But the elite offensive upside was always there. And the great thing about KD is that he had no problem creating offense out of nothing and doing it efficiently.

I don't think you are properly factoring his extreme youth. I agree that he currently lacks an unstoppable go-to move to serve as a foundation of his NBA offensive attack. But he is also really good at lots of things at a very young age. It's not hard at all to envision him developing a reliable step-back jumper like Tatum, or do the Deni Avdija shoulder-bump floater thing and live at the FT line, or tightening his handle enough to run a Luka-style pick and roll game where his height makes the lob pass virtually unstoppable.

Basically, he is already good enough to be a quality third-option or maybe even second-option offensive player on Day 1, while also being an elite defender. And in a couple of years, it's very possible that he'll be a first-option on offense while also being an elite defender. He may not be quite as unstoppable offensively as KD, Lebron or Jokic, but I can very much see him being a Tatum tier player - good enough to be a #1 option while also being an exceptional defender. And having a guy like that at the forward position gives you a ton of flexibility in roster building. If you can run your offense through your forward, you can get away with starting a Lu Dort tier 3&D guard, or a Coby White tier tunnel-vision scorer at guard. Those guys aren't effective starters on a lot of teams, but they're great if they have the right type of players around them.

[prime1time]

I've wrestled a lot about what the Wizards should do if we fall out of the top 3. I think my conclusion, and some may not like it, is you take Derik Queen. People are going to say it shouldn't factor in, but he's a hometown kid. He grew up in Baltimore and he played at Maryland. As a tiebreaker, that's something that gets you over the hump. But in terms of his actual basketball ability and potential, the kid is just an offensive savant. Time after time this season Maryland would just give him the ball and he'd create out of nothing.

I was texting my friend while watching the Terps play yesterday that it almost seemed like Florida's strategy was to foul as soon as he made his initial move. The offense is so good that I'm willing to live with the problematic defense that his presence would likely bring. Queen is so good that he changes the dynamic of the game. He gets players into foul trouble. He distorts the defense because he can attack bigs off the dribble for the 3-point line. While a bad 3-point shooter for most of the year his last 4 games (all post season tournaments) he shot 5/11 from 3.

He compromises the defense, but plenty of teams have players they have to hide defensively. The Cavs have Garland, the Nuggets have Jokic, the Knicks the Knicks have KAT, the Hawks of Trae. Queen's offensive potential is so high. I'm interested to hear about what people think about Sarr/Queen 4/5. I think you still would need a big 5 as part of the rotation but it's growing on me. If Maryland really gave him the ball instead of playing an equal opportunity offense, Queen could have averaged 30. I literally haven't seen him be stopped once all year long.

[nate33]

He compromises the defense, but plenty of teams have players they have to hide defensively. The Cavs have Garland, the Nuggets have Jokic, the Knicks the Knicks have KAT, the Hawks of Trae. Queen's offensive potential is so high. I'm interested to hear about what people think about Sarr/Queen 4/5. I think you still would need a big 5 as part of the rotation but it's growing on me. If Maryland really gave him the ball instead of playing an equal opportunity offense, Queen could have averaged 30. I literally haven't seen him be stopped once all year long.

I'm against Queen at the top of the draft. You can't afford to have a big man who is a defensive liability. Let's take a good look at the 4 examples you just cited.

Garland: Hiding a PG is easier than hiding a bad defensive big. And frankly, we haven't yet seen if Garland is playable late in the playoffs. The Knicks took out Cleveland two years ago in Round 1. Last year they barely squeaked by Orlando 4-3 in Round 1, before being obliterated by Boston 4-1 (without Porzingis).

Jokic: He is the best offensive player of all time. Not a fair comparison.

KAT: Minnesota never went anywhere with KAT at center. They only did well when KAT was moved to PF where he was no longer a defensive liability. We will see about KAT at center with NY this year. I'm not optimistic.

Trae: Trae is Exhibit A in why having a poor defender in the rotation is nearly an insurmountable liability. What have the Hawks ever done in the Trae era?

[prime1time]

He compromises the defense, but plenty of teams have players they have to hide defensively. The Cavs have Garland, the Nuggets have Jokic, the Knicks the Knicks have KAT, the Hawks of Trae. Queen's offensive potential is so high. I'm interested to hear about what people think about Sarr/Queen 4/5. I think you still would need a big 5 as part of the rotation but it's growing on me. If Maryland really gave him the ball instead of playing an equal opportunity offense, Queen could have averaged 30. I literally haven't seen him be stopped once all year long.

I'm against Queen at the top of the draft. You can't afford to have a big man who is a defensive liability. Let's take a good look at the 4 examples you just cited.

Garland: Hiding a PG lis easier than hiding a bad defensive big. And frankly, we haven't yet seen if Garland is playable late in the playoffs. The Knicks took out Cleveland two years ago in Round 1. Last year they barely squeaked by Orlando 4-3 in Round 1, before being obliterated by Boston 4-1 (without Porzingis).

Jokic: He is the best offensive player of all time. Not a fair comparison.

KAT: Minnesota never went anywhere with KAT at center. They only did well when KAT was moved to PF where he was no longer a defensive liability. We will see about KAT at center with NY this year. I'm not optimistic.

Trae: Trae is Exhibit A in why having a poor defender in the rotation is nearly an insurmountable liability. What have the Hawks ever done in the Trae era?

A lot to unpack. Are you against drafting Queen at 4 or are you against drafting Queen at all? Are you claiming that we'd be worse off with Queen than without Queen. Queen still gives you some rim protection at 1.1 blocks a game. For comparison Mo Wagner at Michigan never averaged over 1 block a game. Sengun, Vukcevic, Sabonis are all in the same category. And I think Queen can be better offensively than all of them. I'd have to take some time to look at Queen's defense though. I think Maryland just hid him in switches but he did provide some rim protection. And if that's the case, he's similar to many bigs that play in the NBA. And he would also let Sarr play more of a rover roll instead of simply guarding the big.

[doclinkin]

I've wrestled a lot about what the Wizards should do if we fall out of the top 3. I think my conclusion, and some may not like it, is you take Derik Queen. People are going to say it shouldn't factor in, but he's a hometown kid. He grew up in Baltimore and he played at Maryland. As a tiebreaker, that's something that gets you over the hump. But in terms of his actual basketball ability and potential, the kid is just an offensive savant. Time after time this season Maryland would just give him the ball and he'd create out of nothing.

If we are out of the top 3 I listen to offers from teams that want to move up. But that's my default position every year, since the guys I like best are always mocked lower down. I expect they'd take VJ or Maluach. Betting on the athleticism and competitiveness of a Westbrook type, or else a player who has unmatched length and upside at the hardest spot to fill.

For my money: trade back with the Spurs and give me both CMB and Rasheer Fleming/Thomas Sorber. I want the rebounding, hustle, defense, and BBIQ. I don't want to play the either/or game. I want complete players.

That said I think my way would jeopardize the tank for 2026. CMB + Fleming adds both the rebounding we lack, defensive fire, and a ranged option at 4/5 that doesn't actually blow it on defense. Fleming's purported 7'5" wingspan means he should be able to defend as a small ball center. CMB may be short stout and sturdy but next to a team of long armed versatile defenders, he can take the physical assignments that Sarr will shy away from. The two of them I think would have good synergy with Bub. CMB's situational smarts make him a plug and play defender. I'd bank on him adding range to his jumper as needed, but meanwhile Sarr's habitual chucking from outside will tend to open the paint for CMB to get loose on the interior. I think we'd see instant effect in the win/loss column, if not the best long term upside. So the WInger Dawkins way is probably smarter. Bet on the long game. Not the guy who knows how to play. Teach 'em up.

[nate33]

He compromises the defense, but plenty of teams have players they have to hide defensively. The Cavs have Garland, the Nuggets have Jokic, the Knicks the Knicks have KAT, the Hawks of Trae. Queen's offensive potential is so high. I'm interested to hear about what people think about Sarr/Queen 4/5. I think you still would need a big 5 as part of the rotation but it's growing on me. If Maryland really gave him the ball instead of playing an equal opportunity offense, Queen could have averaged 30. I literally haven't seen him be stopped once all year long.

I'm against Queen at the top of the draft. You can't afford to have a big man who is a defensive liability. Let's take a good look at the 4 examples you just cited.

Garland: Hiding a PG lis easier than hiding a bad defensive big. And frankly, we haven't yet seen if Garland is playable late in the playoffs. The Knicks took out Cleveland two years ago in Round 1. Last year they barely squeaked by Orlando 4-3 in Round 1, before being obliterated by Boston 4-1 (without Porzingis).

Jokic: He is the best offensive player of all time. Not a fair comparison.

KAT: Minnesota never went anywhere with KAT at center. They only did well when KAT was moved to PF where he was no longer a defensive liability. We will see about KAT at center with NY this year. I'm not optimistic.

Trae: Trae is Exhibit A in why having a poor defender in the rotation is nearly an insurmountable liability. What have the Hawks ever done in the Trae era?

A lot to unpack. Are you against drafting Queen at 4 or are you against drafting Queen at all? Are you claiming that we'd be worse off with Queen than without Queen. Queen still gives you some rim protection at 1.1 blocks a game. For comparison Mo Wagner at Michigan never averaged over 1 block a game. Sengun, Vukcevic, Sabonis are all in the same category. And I think Queen can be better offensively than all of them. I'd have to take some time to look at Queen's defense though. I think Maryland just hid him in switches but he did provide some rim protection. And if that's the case, he's similar to many bigs that play in the NBA. And he would also let Sarr play more of a rover roll instead of simply guarding the big.

I'm against drafting him at 4. With a pick that high, I need a guy I know can play in the second round of the playoffs.

Queen strikes me as a situational player. In the right matchup, he'll probably be awesome. But against the wrong team that can exploit a poor-defending big, he'll be close to unplayable. There's nothing wrong with having guys like that on your team, but I won't expend top tier draft capital to acquire one.

[prime1time]

I don't think it's fair to make blanket statements concerning anything in the NBA. Every case has to be evaluated on its own merits.

1) Sarr is a very unique player that gives us the ability to do things that other teams can't. A similar defensive player to Sarr is Giannis. The Bucks have had Brook Lopez next to Giannis for 7 straight years. The reasons why are obvious. Lopez can stretch the floor on offense to create room for Giannis' drives and on defense Lopez can offer rim protection 1.9 blocks a game. They hide him on screens and play drop coverage. But it doesn't hurt as much as it should since the NBA is going away from mid-range jumpers.

Another example to think about is Al Horford. Al Horford is 38 years old and still playing minutes for one of the best teams in the league For his career Horford has averaged 1.1 Blocks a game and .8 steals a game. What are we thinking about Queen's potential defense with respect to Horford? If Queen is committed to playing defense, how good can he be? I think he can be adequate. The end of the traditional big man wasn't just because he was a liability defensively, but it was combined with the fact that they were not good at rim running/catching lobs, they were limited to playing out of the post and they couldn't stretch the floor. So in essence they serve no purpose. Queen sidesteps (literally and figuratively) many of these issues.

Like Jokic he's able to attack the defense from many different starting places including the 3-point line. He projects as a 3 level scorer and he can draw fouls. He's not a good of a passer as Jokic but he's a good passer for a big man. And that let's you be way more creative offensively. Especially with Sarr's ability to stretch the defense.

Watch on YouTube

Passing starts at 10:55 and Defense starts at 15:02

Queen moves his feet very well for a big. He provides real rim protection. I think his defense can be adequate especially when viewed through the lens of him being a very good offensive player.

I like Queen at 4. The defense concerns are there but he won't be the defensive disaster that I feared. Offensively he is a walking mismatch. If you buy into the jumper it's an easy decision to take him at either 4 or 5. And he's a local kid. The defensive concerns aren't any worse than they would be with any other big. Now will he be all NBA defense? Definitely not. If you want that you should think about Malauch. But the benefit of Queen is that he can attack defenses in the ways that they aren't really built to stop.

I also like the culture we would be building because we would have two bigs that are both capable passers. (This is another reason that was the end of traditional of big. When this happens you really start to get ball movement.

[gesa2]

I know Queen is relatively young, though he's old for a freshman. But while he has a great handle for his size he doesn’t actually finish well over college bigs and doesn’t have a 3 in his bag yet. And as a playmaking big his A/TO is poor. He’s got really intriguing talent on offense but is a long way from looking like he’ll be effective in the NBA. I have a tough time buying him for us at 5 or 6

[lastemp3ror]

I've wrestled a lot about what the Wizards should do if we fall out of the top 3. I think my conclusion, and some may not like it, is you take Derik Queen. People are going to say it shouldn't factor in, but he's a hometown kid. He grew up in Baltimore and he played at Maryland.

As a Terrapin alumn who witnessed the Wizards draft both Dixon and Blake, I am going to have to say no. Thank you. Unless the Wizards are trading down because they fell out of the top 2 picks and are getting Queen that way.

[The Consiglieri]

I'm against Queen at the top of the draft. You can't afford to have a big man who is a defensive liability. Let's take a good look at the 4 examples you just cited.

Garland: Hiding a PG lis easier than hiding a bad defensive big. And frankly, we haven't yet seen if Garland is playable late in the playoffs. The Knicks took out Cleveland two years ago in Round 1. Last year they barely squeaked by Orlando 4-3 in Round 1, before being obliterated by Boston 4-1 (without Porzingis).

Jokic: He is the best offensive player of all time. Not a fair comparison.

KAT: Minnesota never went anywhere with KAT at center. They only did well when KAT was moved to PF where he was no longer a defensive liability. We will see about KAT at center with NY this year. I'm not optimistic.

Trae: Trae is Exhibit A in why having a poor defender in the rotation is nearly an insurmountable liability. What have the Hawks ever done in the Trae era?

A lot to unpack. Are you against drafting Queen at 4 or are you against drafting Queen at all? Are you claiming that we'd be worse off with Queen than without Queen. Queen still gives you some rim protection at 1.1 blocks a game. For comparison Mo Wagner at Michigan never averaged over 1 block a game. Sengun, Vukcevic, Sabonis are all in the same category. And I think Queen can be better offensively than all of them. I'd have to take some time to look at Queen's defense though. I think Maryland just hid him in switches but he did provide some rim protection. And if that's the case, he's similar to many bigs that play in the NBA. And he would also let Sarr play more of a rover roll instead of simply guarding the big.

I'm against drafting him at 4. With a pick that high, I need a guy I know can play in the second round of the playoffs.

Queen strikes me as a situational player. In the right matchup, he'll probably be awesome. But against the wrong team that can exploit a poor-defending big, he'll be close to unplayable. There's nothing wrong with having guys like that on your team, but I won't expend top tier draft capital to acquire one.

Lost my post. I was just gonna add, the Jazz now have a strong advantage to land the 1.01-1.05 odds. Fewer games to play, more losses, and a tougher schedule. That 7 win stretch at March just ruined our tank . To make matters worse, we are within striking distance of the current 3rd slot side, only 2 wins behind them. Only saving grace is that it was primarily built upon young players like Sarr lighting it up (including some throw ins like AJ playing well, Champaigne playing well after the new deal I wasn't expecting etc).

80% chance of top 5 pick, 20% chance of total screw job and the 6th pick. So I assume the screw job with our terrible lottery history.

1-2: Easy, Flagg and Harper.
3-5: Harder, but I think Edgecome, Bailey, Maluach
5-6: Bailey, Maluach, Tre Johnson? Cannot figure out how to order them.

below 6: Trade out for a '25 first and '26 first from a win now team like the Spurs or Pistons who are done tanking? I don't know, I'd be so miserable if we land the 6 or 7 I don't think I'd give a ----, I'd go into 1000% believing in the curse, and feeling hopeless, with just 1% of me keeping an eye on the May '26 lottery.

I don't really care about Queen, he's interesting to me if were 7 or below, but it's such a HUGE loss to fall to that kind of tier after a season where we won like 9 games the first 5 months that I'd view the tanking effort as largely a failure in the '23-'25 phase, and in desperate need of massive luck in '26 (which is possible, I tend to think the Suns are gonna blow up the roster this summer or winter deadline '25-'26, and I think we also get some value from that other swap we got in '28 or whatever). The massive luck in '26 is possible, but really, a team like ours desperately needs to land a top 4 pick in '25, and a top 2-4 pick in '26 to really be in position to actually build a 50+ game winner, instead of yet another iteration of the 40-49 win sides we've topped out at in the '80-'25 era of misery as Boulez fans.

[nate33]

I don't think it's fair to make blanket statements concerning anything in the NBA. Every case has to be evaluated on its own merits.

1) Sarr is a very unique player that gives us the ability to do things that other teams can't. A similar defensive player to Sarr is Giannis. The Bucks have had Brook Lopez next to Giannis for 7 straight years. The reasons why are obvious. Lopez can stretch the floor on offense to create room for Giannis' drives and on defense Lopez can offer rim protection 1.9 blocks a game. They hide him on screens and play drop coverage. But it doesn't hurt as much as it should since the NBA is going away from mid-range jumpers.

Another example to think about is Al Horford. Al Horford is 38 years old and still playing minutes for one of the best teams in the league For his career Horford has averaged 1.1 Blocks a game and .8 steals a game. What are we thinking about Queen's potential defense with respect to Horford? If Queen is committed to playing defense, how good can he be? I think he can be adequate. The end of the traditional big man wasn't just because he was a liability defensively, but it was combined with the fact that they were not good at rim running/catching lobs, they were limited to playing out of the post and they couldn't stretch the floor. So in essence they serve no purpose. Queen sidesteps (literally and figuratively) many of these issues.

Like Jokic he's able to attack the defense from many different starting places including the 3-point line. He projects as a 3 level scorer and he can draw fouls. He's not a good of a passer as Jokic but he's a good passer for a big man. And that let's you be way more creative offensively. Especially with Sarr's ability to stretch the defense.

Watch on YouTube

Passing starts at 10:55 and Defense starts at 15:02

Queen moves his feet very well for a big. He provides real rim protection. I think his defense can be adequate especially when viewed through the lens of him being a very good offensive player.

I like Queen at 4. The defense concerns are there but he won't be the defensive disaster that I feared. Offensively he is a walking mismatch. If you buy into the jumper it's an easy decision to take him at either 4 or 5. And he's a local kid. The defensive concerns aren't any worse than they would be with any other big. Now will he be all NBA defense? Definitely not. If you want that you should think about Malauch. But the benefit of Queen is that he can attack defenses in the ways that they aren't really built to stop.

I also like the culture we would be building because we would have two bigs that are both capable passers. (This is another reason that was the end of traditional of big. When this happens you really start to get ball movement.

Sarr is a unique player in that he can protect the rim at the PF position, but I don't really think that solves the problem in today's NBA. These days, offenses hunt mismatches. Teams are going to put Queen into the pick-and-roll until they force a switch where Queen is guarding the opposition's #1 scorer. If Queen plays drop coverage, he is just too small and floor-bound to simultaneously stop the ball handler and the lob threat. And there's not much Sarr can do about it since he will be guarding some other player who is a threat from the corner 3.

Bigs must either be able to guard in space, or they must be very long shot blockers who can play drop defense. Guys that can do neither will get run off the floor.

If you think Queen can develop the footspeed to actually stay with the PF's in this league, then that would be a different story. It would take a pretty significant body transformation though. Who would he guard on the Celtics? On OKC? Heck, on POR? Do you want Queen to have to run with Deni Avdija on the fast break?

Defensively, he reminds me of Thomas Bryant. And that's not a good thing.

[pcbothwel]

I know Queen is relatively young, though he's old for a freshman. But while he has a great handle for his size he doesn’t actually finish well over college bigs and doesn’t have a 3 in his bag yet. And as a playmaking big his A/TO is poor. He’s got really intriguing talent on offense but is a long way from looking like he’ll be effective in the NBA. I have a tough time buying him for us at 5 or 6

Yeah... I dont see it at all. He is the same size as Holmes, but without the pop.
Classic skilled big that you can look at in the 12-20 range, but top 7 would be a failure.
I honestly think I bet on Tre Johnson. He's got a lot of Booker in his game.

[doclinkin]

Sarr is a unique player in that he can protect the rim at the PF position, but I don't really think that solves the problem in today's NBA. These days, offenses hunt mismatches. Teams are going to put Queen into the pick-and-roll until they force a switch where Queen is guarding the opposition's #1 scorer. If Queen plays drop coverage, he is just too small and floor-bound to simultaneously stop the ball handler and the lob threat. And there's not much Sarr can do about it since he will be guarding some other player who is a threat from the corner 3.

Bigs must either be able to guard in space, or they must be very long shot blockers who can play drop defense. Guys that can do neither will get run off the floor.

This is why I'd bet on CMB over Queen. He's undersized for a frontcourt player, and lacks a J, but plays Defense with agility, fire, and smarts. Easier to develop a jumper than it is to add quickness and desire on the defensive end. CMB won't defend the rim, but he is strong enough to stand up a big to prevent them taking up space on the blocks. Low center of gravity types with long arms have had success in the league. Millsapp. Draymond. I can see CMB filling this role and becoming a captain on defense. Connective passing, opportunistic putbacks off rebounds, stymieing low post players long enough for the help defense to arrive, and directing the action on Defense. He can earn a role as a garbage man early on while he adds a ranged attack to his game.

If I'm at 4-5 and can't trade back I take VJ and Maluach and bank on upside. But I'd take CMB as high as 6. I know he is going to be a player in this game.

Watch on YouTube

[closg00]

Read on Twitter

The Cats remaining schedule:
3/28 - Toronto
3/30 - New Orleans
3/31 - Utah

[Dat2U]

I'm not drafting Queen in the top 5, defense from the C position simply matters too much to spend such draft capital on a guy who would have some struggles if he gave max effort on that end, which he doesn't. I think I like Sorber more as a C prospect.

My preference outside the top 2 are the young playmaking guards, VJ, Jase & Jeremiah interest me the most.

I'm fascinated by Jase ... He AND VJ have that 'it' factor, albeit for very different reasons.

[closg00]

Watch on YouTube

Tre Johnson
Kon Knueppel
Jase Richardson
Derik Queen
Jeremiah Fears

[9 and 20]

Watching VJ Edgecomb highlights. He reminds me a bit of Steve Francis.

[pcbothwel]

My preference outside the top 2 are the young playmaking guards, VJ, Jase & Jeremiah interest me the most.

I'm fascinated by Jase ... He AND VJ have that 'it' factor, albeit for very different reasons.

Man. I really don’t see the deal with Jase. I mean at all.
Small, unathletic, combo guard with mediocre handle.
Even last night. He made open catch and shoot 3s…
Hes not a 1st round pick to me. Fears and VJ are well above him.

[Kanyewest]

I've wrestled a lot about what the Wizards should do if we fall out of the top 3. I think my conclusion, and some may not like it, is you take Derik Queen. People are going to say it shouldn't factor in, but he's a hometown kid. He grew up in Baltimore and he played at Maryland.

As a Terrapin alumn who witnessed the Wizards draft both Dixon and Blake, I am going to have to say no. Thank you. Unless the Wizards are trading down because they fell out of the top 2 picks and are getting Queen that way.

That being said, I would say Steve Blake was a great pick.