2012 NBA Draft - Part II

[dobrojim]

follow up to Sev and a general question as well...

doesn't MKG have a compelling personal story perhaps similar
to TRob for that matter? Either one would be reasonably marketable.

[nate33]

Via Chad Ford:

Once you form an early opinion of a player, it's hard to let go of that. Everyone (including me) loved Barnes so much in high school that we are always looking for the greatness and hanging on the glimpses of it. While I've personally started to come to grips with the fact that it's more likely he's a solid scoring wing, others still see greatness there. I've had some GMs tell me they'd still take him No. 2. Others have him much lower. I could say that about a lot of guys in this draft however.

Didnt Ernie fall in love with this guy last year?

My guess is that any GM who is telling Ford that they want Barnes at #2 is merely engaging in a misinformation campaign. Nobody wants Barnes that high.

[Severn Hoos]

follow up to Sev and a general question as well...

doesn't MKG have a compelling personal story perhaps similar
to TRob for that matter? Either one would be reasonably marketable.

jim - don't know MKG's story, but do think it could still be marketable in a different kind of way (far removed from the LeBron-style slobbering, so I'd be happy with it). That's what I was getting at in my parenthetical comments before veering down the green-fonted snark about McGee.

And in case it wasn't clear in my post - I'm not saying that I think GMs should act that way. I wish that it was competition first and all else secondary. Just reflecting the reality of the world we live in.

[dobrojim]

I understand and agree. Talent should trump marketing. That said,
I recall how UT and BOS used to get hammered for taking white
players with what many perceived to be marginal talent... this
going back 10-25 years. Guys like Greg Kite.

[DCZards]

Plus, I hate to say it, but basketball, like all sports, is a business first, entertainment second, and competition only third. Why did the Jets trade for Tebow? Have anything to do with selling tickets and jerseys, perhaps?

Isn't winning what matters most? Isn't that the core of a successful sports franchise/business. It's a mistake to put competition (if that's the same as winning) behind business and entertainment. Denver had no problem trading Tebow because they knew that, despite his likeability and marketing/entertainment appeal, what mattered most was his ability to win games on a consistent basis, which most NFL folks still have doubts about.

And shouldn't the Wizards care far more about what MKG can do on the court as opposed to how he comes off in front of the camera? I think I like MKG even more given that he sounds like he might be a lot like some of the young black men I know...deserving a chance to show that you can't judge a book by its cover.

[doclinkin]

And shouldn't the Wizards care far more about what MKG can do on the court as opposed to how he comes off in front of the camera?

True, and ultimately I think every franchise would prefer to have a player with heart on the court as compared to players like Dray or the KFB who each in their own way are fairly lucid and cogent, but who can't make their bodies obey their words on court.

Having read a little more -- knowing he has a speech impediment more than a learning disability may well make all the difference in interviews. It may make it tough to actually evaluate whether he is quick or slow to understand instruction. But front offices will probably do due diligence.

I still think he won't be taken at #2.

[Nivek]

Nivek, I agree with you on Tony Wroten, Jr. I fear some might be calling him Tony Rotten one day.

What do you think about Damian Lillard, and also Reggie Hamilton?

Lillard is a guy I like a lot. I'd have to double-check my sheet, but I'm fairly certain he's my top-rated PG, and one of the 10 best players in the draft this year.

[Nivek]

If Cousins can become a dominant center....no reason why Drummond cant. I still think Drummond ends up going #2. MKG 3 and Robinson 4

Cousins was extremely productive as a freshman -- Drummond was not. Cousins in my system had the rating of a top 5 pick; I'd have to double check on Drummond, but I think he rates no better than a late first in my stuff. I think lower than that even. I don't have my spreadsheet with me today so I'm going by memory.

I'm not saying Drummond can't be a dominant center -- just that there are red flags on him.

[Nivek]

++If we land Davis and SAC offers up Cousins + their #1, for Davis and Vesely (to make salaries work) do we bite or pass? As much as I love Davis, he still has alot of work to do on offensive end to be an effective low post threat. Cousins has shown that he can really dominate on the offensive side of the ball and he IMO has eclipsed Bynum as arguably the 2nd best cener NBA behind Howard. If he keeps his head straight, there is no reason he can't be #1 center for years to come. I'd lean toward making the trade if we could add Beal.

Our realistic lineup could look like this:

C-Cousins, Seraphin
PF-Nene, Booker, Blatche
SF- FA (Gerald/Danny Green)/Singleton
SG-Beal, Crawford
PG-Wall, Mack

No. I think Davis will be better than Cousins and the Wizards could a) use a later pick to get Crowder, or b) use their cap space to sign or trade for someone to fill the SF or SG slot.

[Nivek]

Picking a player for marketing purposes is beyond foolish. Fans don't come to home games to see the individual players, they come to see winning teams. Stars sell tickets on the road, and the road team gets nothing in the NBA. Players should be selected solely for their ability to help the team win, even if the decision is being made for "business" reasons. Because wins is what actually drives fan interest in the home market.

[Mizerooskie]

If Cousins can become a dominant center....no reason why Drummond cant. I still think Drummond ends up going #2. MKG 3 and Robinson 4

Cousins was extremely productive as a freshman -- Drummond was not. Cousins in my system had the rating of a top 5 pick; I'd have to double check on Drummond, but I think he rates no better than a late first in my stuff. I think lower than that even. I don't have my spreadsheet with me today so I'm going by memory.

I'm not saying Drummond can't be a dominant center -- just that there are red flags on him.

Just curious, what is this database you refer to? What kinds of metrics does it track?

[SUPERBALLMAN]

That Sac trade is interesting to consider. If you make it something more like Davis & Blatche for Beal, Cousins, Garcia. Cousins & Nene up front with a Beal-Wall backcourt. Bench of Seraphin, Booker, Vesely, Martin, Garcia, Mason, Crawford, Mack. Maybe add a SF in 2nd round like Crowder or Miller to rotate with Singleton, also what we can do in free agency.

It would never happen though. Davis is seen as very coachable, Cousins complete opposite. Wiz management will definately choose the Davis route if given the opportunity.

[truwizfan4evr]

I like cousin he's been very productive. As good as he's been playing I think its risky taking on a head case like cousins for long term. Its almost like the Ron Artest situation for the pacers a very good talent but has a lot of baggage that comes with him.

[sashae]

This is not helpful, but...

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

++If we land Davis and SAC offers up Cousins + their #1, for Davis and Vesely (to make salaries work) do we bite or pass? As much as I love Davis, he still has alot of work to do on offensive end to be an effective low post threat. Cousins has shown that he can really dominate on the offensive side of the ball and he IMO has eclipsed Bynum as arguably the 2nd best cener NBA behind Howard. If he keeps his head straight, there is no reason he can't be #1 center for years to come. I'd lean toward making the trade if we could add Beal.

Our realistic lineup could look like this:

C-Cousins, Seraphin
PF-Nene, Booker, Blatche
SF- FA (Gerald/Danny Green)/Singleton
SG-Beal, Crawford
PG-Wall, Mack

That sure does make me think about it, llcc25. Davis is far better than even Cousins and I'm not too worried about his scoring. He was dominating the NCAA championship game without even scoring a point! I would be afraid of this deal.

However, tweak the deal to where they take Blatche for Francisco Garcia. They add an additional unprotected 1st round pick as well--and now you're talking. They might do that, too, if you convince them Blatche has already started NBA games and Davis needs time.

A deal I THINK I would do is the Wizards give the Kings the rights to Anthony Davis plus Andray Blatche; and the Kings swap their 2012 first round pick (MKG/Beal), and they also send Francisco Garcia, Demarcus Cousins, AND their 2014 pick UNPROTECTED. Cousins/MKG/1st for Anthony Davis still might be a bad deal for the Wizards. Life is a risk.

[Nivek]

If Cousins can become a dominant center....no reason why Drummond cant. I still think Drummond ends up going #2. MKG 3 and Robinson 4

Cousins was extremely productive as a freshman -- Drummond was not. Cousins in my system had the rating of a top 5 pick; I'd have to double check on Drummond, but I think he rates no better than a late first in my stuff. I think lower than that even. I don't have my spreadsheet with me today so I'm going by memory.

I'm not saying Drummond can't be a dominant center -- just that there are red flags on him.

Just curious, what is this database you refer to? What kinds of metrics does it track?

It's a homemade spreadsheet with 220 players in it (so far) -- about 150 from this season, the remainder are from previous draft years. I run their numbers through my own PER-like stat (mine's better (of course) because (among other things) it puts more emphasis on offensive efficiency -- not in the kinda crazy way Berri does in Wins Produced (where anything less than 50% efg registers as a negative), but in a way that's actually realistic). I include an adjustment for strength of schedule, and then accounting for other stuff ranging from physical attributes and athleticism to off-court issues to "intangibles" like defensive prowess, motor, coachability -- nearly anything you could think of that might be relevant.

I have lots of ways of looking at players from a single number to different stats to comparisons with others at the same position. I expect the rankings to shuffle a bit as we get information from the draft camps. It'll be interesting to see how guys "measure up".

Before the draft, I'm going to start researching some of the international prospects as well.

[FAH1223]

http://www.csnwashington.com/basketball ... eedID=6356

James Harden in a Wizards uniform? The idea is not as far fetched, as it may seem. With Oklahoma City having locked up both Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook to long-term deals, will there be any money left for Harden? Thanks to the new collective bargaining agreement he is now only eligible for a four-year extension, the same deal he can get from any other team in the league. Throw in the fact that Serge Ibaka will also be eligible for free agency in 2013 and its clear the Thunder can’t afford all four players.

The Wizards will likely have a top five pick in this June’s NBA draft. If the Wizards offered that pick for Harden would OKC bite? The Thunder have a great history of drafting players that other teams didn’t rate as highly. Florida’s Bradley Beal should be available in the 2-6 range. At just 18-years-old he’s the top rated shooting guard in the draft. Playing behind Durant and Westbrook the Thunder could bring Beal along slowly.

If the Wizards were to amnesty Andray Blatche and buyout Rashard Lewis this summer they’d have more than enough cap space to offer Harden a sizeable extension. Pairing John Wall (20) with Harden (22) would give the Wizards the best young backcourt in the league. Harden currently averages 17 points a game on only 10 shots. The bearded one is clearly the best sixth man in the league, but how would he adjust going from the third option in OKC to a leading role in Washington? Harden would be given more freedom and could easily up that average to 22 points per outing.

It remains to be seen what OKC will do with Harden but this deal would be a no brainer for the Wizards. Harden is already better than any player in this years draft not named Anthony Davis. Washington would have a core of Wall, Harden and Nene to build around. If Trevor Booker, Chris Singleton and Jordan Crawford all continue to improve they would at least be in playoff contention.

I'd still like to get back into the mid 1st with James Harden

[Mizerooskie]

It's a homemade spreadsheet with 220 players in it (so far) -- about 150 from this season, the remainder are from previous draft years. I run their numbers through my own PER-like stat (mine's better (of course) because (among other things) it puts more emphasis on offensive efficiency -- not in the kinda crazy way Berri does in Wins Produced (where anything less than 50% efg registers as a negative), but in a way that's actually realistic). I include an adjustment for strength of schedule, and then accounting for other stuff ranging from physical attributes and athleticism to off-court issues to "intangibles" like defensive prowess, motor, coachability -- nearly anything you could think of that might be relevant.

I have lots of ways of looking at players from a single number to different stats to comparisons with others at the same position. I expect the rankings to shuffle a bit as we get information from the draft camps. It'll be interesting to see how guys "measure up".

Before the draft, I'm going to start researching some of the international prospects as well.

Very cool, thanks.

What are your thoughts on CJ McCollum and Will Barton? Both intrigue me as possible second round picks (though I'm fully expecting Hollis Thompson to be the guy).

[Rafael122]

Depending on where we pick, I wouldn't be opposed to trading the pick for Harden. I mean at 5, you're talking about Harrison Barnes or someone of that ilk vs. James Harden and it's not even close.

[Mizerooskie]

Depending on where we pick, I wouldn't be opposed to trading the pick for Harden. I mean at 5, you're talking about Harrison Barnes or someone of that ilk vs. James Harden and it's not even close.

It seems awfully wishful thinking on the part of the author of that article.

OKC will find a way to make it work, rather than trade Harden for a pick.