Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part VIII

[FreeBalling]

It's been a long time sense I could say this, "the future looks bright to be a Bullets fan."

We have a # 1 and # 3 pick that are a solid core and now with another # 3. If Porter is anything like Wall or Beal we are going to have a very competitive basketball team. I'm looking forward to the season.

Everyone should be happy today... Porter dominated in the big east.

[The Consiglieri]

My favorite write up on Rice alongside the one at NBA.com is the write up at the dreamshake, linked via bullets forever, highlights:

link:
http://www.thedreamshake.com/2013/6/1/4 ... on-rockets

"...It’s no surprise that Rice was among standouts at the NBA combine; he had a year of NBA level training regimen on most of the prospects. Google a picture of Glen Rice, Jr. at Georgia Tech, then compare it to a picture of him at the combine, you’ll see a much thicker, stronger athlete. He played against stronger men and had a more demanding schedule in the D-League and came away a better physical specimen.

When it comes to the court, Junior shoots the ball just like his daddy Glen Rice used to do. He shoots with a lot of arm, has a fluid wrist motion, and good elevation and quick release, high arcing shot with decent rotation. He did not shoot very well at Georgia Tech, but he found his outside stroke with a wide open, trigger happy offense at RGV. A dangerous shooter from range, Glen Rice had no reservation about taking a 3 from NBA range, even getting in the habit of taking shots a foot behind the 3 point line.

He has so much arms strength and elevation, that he makes it from 25-26 feet with regularity....he’s not the caliber of shooter G Money was. Rice doesn't always finish his follow through, he's not as automatic as one would hope in catch and shoot situations, and occasionally hesitates for no reason. His free throw shooting may also be a point of concern; he had a sub-70% free throw percentage at Georgia Tech, and only shot 74% as a Viper. Rice does not show consistent form from the line, as he sometimes bends his knee low as his father used to, and other times not at all. His overall shot selection is questionable as well....

Junior may not shoot as well as daddy, but he sure as hell can out-jump him. His 40.5 inch max vertical and 33 inch standing vertical ranks or ties him among top 5 in the combine. He plays above the rim, attacks it every chance he gets. He's not the most fluid ball handler, and thus Rice cannot consistently get to the rim off the dribble, but he is pretty damn physical for a 210lb guy. If he can't get all the way to the rim, he will muscle his way to the paint and use his elevation for a score. He also actively asks for possessions in the post if he matches up with smaller guards, where he again just bullies and elevates.

In transition, Glen Rice, Jr. is a highlight waiting to happen. Alley oops, 2 hand slams, tomahawk jams, you name it, Rice can deliver it. That raw leaping ability also makes him a huge factor in rebounding and shot blocking. He is an outstanding shot blocker for his size, with good timing and awareness at the rim. I have also seen him block jump shots on multiple occasions just because he explodes off the ground so quickly and powerfully. In rebounding, he may not always have the best fundamentals, but his sheer length and leaping ability negates a lot of errors. He is also quite good at tracking the ball off the rim, allowing him to track down long rebounds that RGV’s offense often creates.

... I would not rank his basketball IQ as high. Passing and running pick and rolls are all still work in progress, but they all have been trending upwards in recent years. Rice shows some good instincts in making highlight passes on the move, but struggles on some of the more basic passes....

...but Rice has overall poor fundamentals [on defense], often caught standing upright and flat footed off the ball, he takes bad angles on defense, and picks up cheapies on bumps and reaches. He gets steals and blocks playing weakside defense, but sometimes at the expense of completely ignoring his assignment. He can finish at the rim with the best of them, but bump him 2 feet out, then it’s often a wild shot. Rice makes a lot of highlight plays out of pure athleticism and hot shooting, but he is a lesser player than his highlight would suggest. I’d tread very carefully with Rice if I were a team in the early to mid first round...."

[truwizfan4evr]

Rice was a first round talent.

[popper]

Kudos to EG for a good draft although I would have traded down for an asset and Adams. GRJ was a great choice. Just watched the OP introduction press conference. I would like to see some sports reporter with a set of b*lls ask Ernie two simple questions.

1. What, if any, lessons have you learned as a result of the Vesely and Pecherov selections?

2. Was the 5th pick for the one year rental of Miller and Foye your choice or Abe's?

[tontoz]

I want the best player over the next ten years. That's what I want every time. .

It isn't that I'm not aware of the failure rate of these guys, it's just that after viewing the draft in all sports for the past 25 years or so, the one consistent feature I've seen is that to err on the side of athleticism and super talent, even if a bit dinged, over going conservative, will be right, more often than its wrong, and its upside, when right, is infinitely bigger too boot, than the conservative side.

Wrong. NBA GM's are notorious for taking project bigs way too high. The results have sucked.

The reality is that the best player now will probably be the best player over the next 10 years. The majority of these "upside" guys don't come close to reaching their perceived potential. "Upside" was the reason Marvin Williams was taken at 2 over Paul and Deron. Darko anyone? Sene? Swift? Tyrus? and so on and on.

Give me a guy who can actually play basketball. I think it was Dat awhile ago that said IQ, skills and work ethic are generally underrated when evaluating prospects and i agree.

[truwizfan4evr]

I have no idea why people on this board got mad at Ernie for picking Glen rice jr, He has first round talent i think wizards got a steal in him.

[fishercob]

This will make some -- not all -- feel better about our selection of Porter with Noel on the board.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1sqoxXAr7Y[/youtube]

[dobrojim]

Olynyk is who I had going at 13, with the Mavs moving him. I'd love him in Washington, but he'll go to Boston.

The Cs know what they're doing and they are going to like who they will be getting.

A white boy named Kelly goes to Beantown. Who'd a thunk it?

(I liked Olynyk)

[fishercob]

Olynyk is who I had going at 13, with the Mavs moving him. I'd love him in Washington, but he'll go to Boston.

The Cs know what they're doing and they are going to like who they will be getting.

A white boy named Kelly goes to Beantown. Who'd a thunk it?

O'lynyk.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Good morning, my little chickadees. Now THAT was a draft night -- blockbuster deals, complete unpredictability, picks changing hands multiple times. Thoughts are scattered; hoping coffee kicks in soon.

The Telecast: The worst I can ever remember. I am usually a big fan of Bill Simmons' work form TBoB to the 30 for 30's to even some of his pregame/halftime stuff. But he was completely out of his depth covering a draft, and the problem was exacerbated by having no coach or color analyst on the panel to balance him out (where art thou Jeff Van Gundy??). Perhaps Simmons could have worked if they had him at a separate desk and cut to him regularly -- so he could monitor twitter, digest what was happening, have some time to gather his thoughts and come up with a quick take. But he talked waaaay too much, interrupted people, got stuff wrong because it was happening too fast, etc. The Doc exchange was good. Other than that, pure crap.

Ted is Right: His "no one knows nothing" axiom couldn't be more true. It doesn't matter how loudly you bang on the keyboard, you just don't know. The mock drafts put out by the guys supposedly "in the know" couldn;t have been more wrong. No one predicted Bennett first and Noel sliding out of the top 5. NBA FO's did an excellent job revealing nothing of substance prior to the draft. It should (but won't) make all of us re-think some of our own evaluative measures, but whatever....

The Wiz were fortunate: If the Wiz had stayed at 8 they would have been looking at a board without Bennett, Oladipo, Porter, Zeller, Len, Noel and McLemore. We won't know for some time, but I think the Wiz gained a lot by moving up to #3 to grab Porter.

I like the Porter pick. He's been my main target since we moved up to 3. I think in a few years he will -- depending on matchups -- be able to share the court with two other wings/shooter; it's a combination of the direction/evolution of the NBA game and the fact that he's likely to grow and/or fill out. As long as he doesn;t have to guard a beefcake who can score efficiently in the post, he'll be fine.

I've never seen Glen Rice Jr play. But the arguments I'm seeing against the pick have to do with (a) that he isn't someone else or (b) his position. Everyone crushes our brass for not playing the value game -- buying low, selling high, etc. Well, isn't that exactly what we're going for here? Rice is a supposed first-round talent who had some issues. So we scoop him up deep in the draft and see what he's made of. He purportedly has owned up to his missteps and was very productive in the D-league. Maybe he establishes some value and is part of a trade package down the road or ends up filling a need here. Certainly seems like a reasonable risk.

As to position, relax a little bit. The Wizards need talent, position be damned -- especially in round two. At this point last year lots of us here were pretty sure that the Wizards were going to be the worst perimeter shooting team in NBA history. Ariza shot much better than anyone expected. Webster came out of nowhere. Beal exceeded expectations. Free agency and trading is still ahead of us, so there will be plenty of opportunity to add backup guards and bigs. Not to get all handsy, but we just have to sit back and watch things unfold a bit.

On Noel: Never fully understood why he was so hyped as a prospect and felt like going to Kentucky inflated his public stock. I don't buy the Noah comparisons, as Joakim had a much more refined offensive game (particularly as a passer) when he came into the league. Tyson Chandler? Well he's well shorter and TC took a long time before he was an impact player. Is he Ben Wallace? Maybe if he adds 30 pounds of muscle. He may turn out to be a very complete player, but he has a long road to get there. The knee injuries were scary, as is his frame, and there were some character/company whispers. I think New Orleans made a really good deal because Holiday is a hell of a young lead guard and they should be good enough to stay out of the high lottery. One has to wonder whether Phoenix considered the same deal but couldn't make it because they were going to suck too bad this year and had Goran Dragic (ew).

Okay, after getting no Wolters yes Rice out of my system ....

The good news is the Wizards moved up to third to get Porter, a player I like a lot.

I think I'm going to take a break from bringing the board down over the second round pick. The first round pick is as solid as solid gets. I think he's going to be a very good pro.

[truwizfan4evr]

When is are press conference?

[The Consiglieri]

I want the best player over the next ten years. That's what I want every time. .

It isn't that I'm not aware of the failure rate of these guys, it's just that after viewing the draft in all sports for the past 25 years or so, the one consistent feature I've seen is that to err on the side of athleticism and super talent, even if a bit dinged, over going conservative, will be right, more often than its wrong, and its upside, when right, is infinitely bigger too boot, than the conservative side.

Wrong. NBA GM's are notorious for taking project bigs way too high. The results have sucked.

The reality is that the best player now will probably be the best player over the next 10 years. The majority of these "upside" guys don't come close to reaching their perceived potential. "Upside" was the reason Marvin Williams was taken at 2 over Paul and Deron. Darko anyone? Sene? Swift? Tyrus? and so on and on.

Give me a guy who can actually play basketball. I think it was Dat awhile ago that said IQ, skills and work ethic are generally underrated when evaluating prospects and i agree.

Wrong.

I never made an argument based on project bigs, that's straw men territory. I made an argument about high upside players with tremendous potential get my choice every time over conservative, lower upside, higher floor players.

I don't disagree w/Dat, they are underrated, I just view play w/higher upside, and lower floors as better bets than players with lower upside and higher floors in their grand totality over time, and I'm right, when it comes to building great teams. If you just want to be a 42-45 game winner, and be guaranteed that, if you want to be a 4th-7th seed that never wins a conference championship, let alone contend for a title, than going high floor makes more sense. I don't, I want to win it all, and build a team capable of doing so, and my strategy is the one that actually accomplishes that goal 9 times out 10. The conservative strategy does so 1 time out of ten, and its usually the pistons, an aberration, not a trend.

[fishercob]

Good morning, my little chickadees. Now THAT was a draft night -- blockbuster deals, complete unpredictability, picks changing hands multiple times. Thoughts are scattered; hoping coffee kicks in soon.

The Telecast: The worst I can ever remember. I am usually a big fan of Bill Simmons' work form TBoB to the 30 for 30's to even some of his pregame/halftime stuff. But he was completely out of his depth covering a draft, and the problem was exacerbated by having no coach or color analyst on the panel to balance him out (where art thou Jeff Van Gundy??). Perhaps Simmons could have worked if they had him at a separate desk and cut to him regularly -- so he could monitor twitter, digest what was happening, have some time to gather his thoughts and come up with a quick take. But he talked waaaay too much, interrupted people, got stuff wrong because it was happening too fast, etc. The Doc exchange was good. Other than that, pure crap.

Ted is Right: His "no one knows nothing" axiom couldn't be more true. It doesn't matter how loudly you bang on the keyboard, you just don't know. The mock drafts put out by the guys supposedly "in the know" couldn;t have been more wrong. No one predicted Bennett first and Noel sliding out of the top 5. NBA FO's did an excellent job revealing nothing of substance prior to the draft. It should (but won't) make all of us re-think some of our own evaluative measures, but whatever....

The Wiz were fortunate: If the Wiz had stayed at 8 they would have been looking at a board without Bennett, Oladipo, Porter, Zeller, Len, Noel and McLemore. We won't know for some time, but I think the Wiz gained a lot by moving up to #3 to grab Porter.

I like the Porter pick. He's been my main target since we moved up to 3. I think in a few years he will -- depending on matchups -- be able to share the court with two other wings/shooter; it's a combination of the direction/evolution of the NBA game and the fact that he's likely to grow and/or fill out. As long as he doesn;t have to guard a beefcake who can score efficiently in the post, he'll be fine.

I've never seen Glen Rice Jr play. But the arguments I'm seeing against the pick have to do with (a) that he isn't someone else or (b) his position. Everyone crushes our brass for not playing the value game -- buying low, selling high, etc. Well, isn't that exactly what we're going for here? Rice is a supposed first-round talent who had some issues. So we scoop him up deep in the draft and see what he's made of. He purportedly has owned up to his missteps and was very productive in the D-league. Maybe he establishes some value and is part of a trade package down the road or ends up filling a need here. Certainly seems like a reasonable risk.

As to position, relax a little bit. The Wizards need talent, position be damned -- especially in round two. At this point last year lots of us here were pretty sure that the Wizards were going to be the worst perimeter shooting team in NBA history. Ariza shot much better than anyone expected. Webster came out of nowhere. Beal exceeded expectations. Free agency and trading is still ahead of us, so there will be plenty of opportunity to add backup guards and bigs. Not to get all handsy, but we just have to sit back and watch things unfold a bit.

On Noel: Never fully understood why he was so hyped as a prospect and felt like going to Kentucky inflated his public stock. I don't buy the Noah comparisons, as Joakim had a much more refined offensive game (particularly as a passer) when he came into the league. Tyson Chandler? Well he's well shorter and TC took a long time before he was an impact player. Is he Ben Wallace? Maybe if he adds 30 pounds of muscle. He may turn out to be a very complete player, but he has a long road to get there. The knee injuries were scary, as is his frame, and there were some character/company whispers. I think New Orleans made a really good deal because Holiday is a hell of a young lead guard and they should be good enough to stay out of the high lottery. One has to wonder whether Phoenix considered the same deal but couldn't make it because they were going to suck too bad this year and had Goran Dragic (ew).

Okay, after getting no Wolters yes Rice out of my system ....

The good news is the Wizards moved up to third to get Porter, a player I like a lot.

I think I'm going to take a break from bringing the board down over the second round pick. The first round pick is as solid as solid gets. I think he's going to be a very good pro.

Thanks for responding to my missive CCJ!

As I told a friend earlier today, time may bear out that Ernie screwed up the second round. But if we had to get one pick right and one wrong, I'd much rather be right about the high first rounder.

[tontoz]

Wrong.

I never made an argument based on project bigs, that's straw men territory. I made an argument about high upside players with tremendous potential get my choice every time over conservative, lower upside, higher floor players.

I don't disagree w/Dat, they are underrated, I just view play w/higher upside, and lower floors as better bets than players with lower upside and higher floors in their grand totality over time, and I'm right, when it comes to building great teams. If you just want to be a 42-45 game winner, and be guaranteed that, if you want to be a 4th-7th seed that never wins a conference championship, let alone contend for a title, than going high floor makes more sense. I don't, I want to win it all, and build a team capable of doing so, and my strategy is the one that actually accomplishes that goal 9 times out 10. The conservative strategy does so 1 time out of ten, and its usually the pistons, an aberration, not a trend.

Knighthonor, is that you?

High upside guys are consistently worse than the guys who can already play. It isn't even arguable. It is basketball, not run and jump.

Feel free to list these "high upside" picks you are talking about. Let's see some names from past drafts. I won't hold my breath. I can name plenty of them who wound up being busts, or mediocre.

[Dark Faze]

This will make some -- not all -- feel better about our selection of Porter with Noel on the board.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1sqoxXAr7Y[/youtube]

lol

[FreeBalling]

I have no idea why people on this board got mad at Ernie for picking Glen rice jr, He has first round talent i think wizards got a steal in him.

I agree with you trubulletsfan4ever. Rice is a pure shooter, I like his catch and shoot skills. For a second round pick I think EG did a nice job getting a good player.

[GoWizGo]

Not a fan of the Otto pick for many reasons. Too many for me to list

I would call the Cavaliers right now and ask them if they would be willing to trade Tristan Thompson for Otto Porter. They did just drafted a power forward, maybe they don't think that highly of Thompson anymore.

Thompson would be a perfect compliment to Wall and Beal.

[The Consiglieri]

Nice piece on Rice Jr from draftexpress:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Glen-Rice-19807/

[payitforward]

... if I'm Webster, I'm asking my agent to find me a place where I have a chance at starting. I don't see if with Porter and Ariza, and then no backup minutes at the 2 guard, assuming Rice gets some play.

Martell Webster is an exceptionally smart individual. This is his *one time* to get the best $$ he'll get in the NBA, and unless he's nuts that is what he'll be looking at in making his decision. Especially with his injury history. Best money and surest money (i.e. longest possible term).

I don't know whether we'll be able to keep him or not. But where he plays won't depend on whether he's going to start. He may even prefer not to start; he'll extend his career playing 20+ minutes a game -- given his back problems I'm sure of that.

[payitforward]

Grunfeld takes talent but I suspect is devoid of depth of character himself. Rice if good is perhaps an Aaron Hernandez waiting to happen. I don't think Glen Rice is a great role model.

That's a cheap shot, ccj. (Actually toward both EG and GRII). Comparing the kid to a a suspected murderer is flat-out wrong. I know you are frustrated because the Zards didn't keep Wolters but you don't need to go there. You know as well as I do that there are 18 and 19 year olds who do wild and stupid stuff (I know I did) who turn out to be solid characters by the time they're 22-23.

I agree. This is a person we're talking about here -- not a name, not a number, not a choice, and not just some phenomenon passing through your mind. Give this guy a chance.

You like Wolters better, fine. Me too. But lets save our negativity for the proven-over-a-decade mediocrity who makes the picks. Lets not demonize Glen Rice.