2012 Draft, Part VI (Draft Week is Here!)

[LyricalRico]

Maybe this belons in the trade thread but what would it take to land Kevin Martin? That would allow us to go MKG and fill our 2 guard need. Would Booker and our 2nd rounder get it done? Do we have the cap space?

Okafor for Martin was something discussed here almost immediately after the Lewis for Okafor/Ariza trade was announced. The numbers match up, but I think HOU would want more since they would be giving up both the best player and the shortest contract in the trade. Since we can't package Okafor with another player at the moment, the best we can do is Okafor+32. The only way to sweeten it further would be to deal guys like Booker or Crawford for picks and then include them in the Okafor/Martin trade.

[sfam]

everyone knows that cleveland wants Drummond because they have no center and they are banking on a european to come in and be the starter which is doubtful. Bobcats want Barnes but feel like they can milk Cleveland out of a pick if they can ensure that washington won't take him if they select Drummond for cleveland. Jordan wants barnes and cleveland wants Drummond. The problem is that we have Ted the Savior running operations and can see through bluffs unlike the previous regime. If bobcats take barnes, we take drummond, and cleveland has tier 4 role player in Beal or poor man's wallace to show for their year of suffering. It's a three man draft folks and cleveland is on the outside looking in. If they can somehow use the media to convince the wizards that Beal is worthy of a top three pick, they have a chance of lowering Bobcat's demands for trading up to the number 2 spot.
don't get fooled people, JOrdan absolutely loves Barnes and Jordan may not be able to see talent for bigmen but he definitely knows shooting guard talent which is why he isn't sold on Beal and neither should we.
It's ADavis, A Drummond or H Barnes. There is no one else that comes close to these three players and I have seen many drafts. After that, we have truck load of role players. Cleveland just so happens to be the odd man out and will have to pay a fortune to grab one of the three franchise players.

OK, I'll bite - how many drafts have you seen? And clearly nobody agrees with you on the player ratings...I don't even know what a tier 4 player is, but clearly Beal is not that.

[Nivek]

It's ADavis, A Drummond or H Barnes. There is no one else that comes close to these three players and I have seen many drafts. After that, we have truck load of role players. Cleveland just so happens to be the odd man out and will have to pay a fortune to grab one of the three franchise players.

You have seen many drafts and have had your predictions proven wrong on a consistent basis.

Not wrong -- just not correct...yet. The world will soon catch up with WizNasty's genius.

i usually don't respond "consistent basis"....but that's a pretty powerful statement coming from a guy who has been on this board over a decade. I would love to hear which of my predictions have been consistently wrong lol.

I don't have time to decipher/catalog your predictions and rank the accuracy of them. Someone posted a list of your draft time man-crushes over the past several years, and I don't think that list showed much ability to predict future NBA success.

I think most here know the real from the phoney.

Here's a prediction I think you have correct.

[payitforward]

Someone made a great suggestion to tell the Cats brass that if they trade down to get TRob, and that costs us Beal, we'll take TRob, who can be traded as easily as can the 3d pick on its own.

Sorry not to recall whose idea that was -- but it's an excellent one. It might get us MK-G and a little extra.

At worst, if they call our bluff, we should probably be able to trade TRob to them for MK-G straight up and pay the latter a little less too.

[truwizfan4evr]

Someone made a great suggestion to tell the Cats brass that if they trade down to get TRob, and that costs us Beal, we'll take TRob, who can be traded as easily as can the 3d pick on its own.

Sorry not to recall whose idea that was -- but it's an excellent one. It might get us MK-G and a little extra.

At worst, if they call our bluff, we should probably be able to trade TRob to them for MK-G straight up and pay the latter a little less too.

What if Thomas Robinson turns out better and we traded him? I think i would of just kept him and made more moves as in trading Booker for a Shooting guard or even Jan if it comes down to it.

[barelyawake]

WizD is right about two things (and they are highly important to NBA, championship success):

1) Size matters. It matters not a lick how undersized players do in the regular season. Once you are playing the best, undersized players often get exposed. Are there exceptions? Sure. A few.

2) This is a superstar league. While debating second round picks, please realize that most of it doesn't matter. What matters to success is obtaining and developing a few stars.

WizD has been selecting high risk/high reward picks, that have mostly busted because he disregards the mental aspects of the game (and you simply can't do that). But, IMO his approach is actually closer to how you build a champion than those wanting "slow progress." Trust me, I'd rather not have to agree with him on these points, but he is right. Obviously, he takes the argument to the extreme.

[TGW]

According to Wiznasty's calculations using measurements/build etc, Shaun Livingston is a better point guard than John Stockton.

[fishercob]

WizD is right about two things (and they are highly important to NBA, championship success):

1) Size matters. It matters not a lick how undersized players do in the regular season. Once you are playing the best, undersized players often get exposed. Are there exceptions? Sure. A few.

2) This is a superstar league. While debating second round picks, please realize that most of it doesn't matter. What matters to success is obtaining and developing a few stars.

WizD has been selecting high risk/high reward picks, that have mostly busted because he disregards the mental aspects of the game (and you simply can't do that). But, IMO his approach is actually closer to how you build a champion than those wanting "slow progress." Trust me, I'd rather not have to agree with him on these points, but he is right. Obviously, he takes the argument to the extreme.

Size matters less than skill -- certainly less than skilled size. The Heat won a title no center, and often played 2 or 3 SF's.

FOund this on ESPN from January:

We already know that the Dallas Mavericks are the oldest team in the NBA, boasting a mature average of 30.3 years and a starting lineup that averages 32.8 years (and Delonte West, 28, lowered that when he took over for 34-year-old Vince Carter).

But what about the tallest team in the NBA? Yes, it appears that Dallas, with its recent signing of 7-foot Chinese center Yi Jianlian, can also claim this distinction (if not in total feet and inches, which they might, than in total number of tall players). Seven -- virtually half of the Mavs' 15-man roster -- stand 6-10 or taller. Dallas is the rare team with three 7-footers (Yi, Dirk Nowitzki and Brendan Haywood), plus 6-11 center Ian Mahinmi and three 6-10 forwards and/or centers in Lamar Odom, Brandan Wright and Sean Williams.

Dallas has already shown a lineup that includes Odom, Nowitzki and Mahinmi, or darn near 21 feet of front-line players.

The league average for the number of players 6-10 or taller on a team is 4.2.

Four teams -- the New York Knicks, thanks to the addition of 7-1 center Tyson Chandler, the Orlando Magic (with five players at 6-10), the Washington Wizards and the Minnesota Timberwolves -- all have six.

Two teams -- the Chicago Bulls and Indiana Pacers -- have just two players at 6-10 or taller.

Six teams, including tonight's opponent, the Detroit Pistons, have five, six have three, 11 teams -- including the entire Pacific Division -- have four, but just one team stands the tallest with seven.

[MF23]

David Locke‏@Lockedonsports

On Average Draft will get you 1 All-Pro; 2 more all-stars; 7 additional starters and 11 other rotation players - 21 impact players

All-pro: Davis
All-stars: MKG and maybe Beal
Starters: Waiters, Drummond, Robinson, Lillard, T. Jones, Leonard, Henson
Rotation: Zeller, Barnes, J.Lamb, Rivers, T. Jones, Nicholson, Moultrie, Sullinger, T. Ross, Crowder, Barton, Q. Miller

That means a lot of guys were talking about won't be worth mentioning in 3 years.

We have our opinions but I have to respectively disagree with you on Barnes. He's a starter and will probably be one as soon as next season. 3 years from now MKG will begin to ascend to what you have on there as an all pro. I think you have Perry Jones as a starter but I have him being an all pro as well. He has too much skill and physical talent to fail. As long as he goes somewhere they tell him to cut his #### and be the player he's supposed to be he'll exceed a lot of peoples expectations. I see him play and I see a dominant basketball player who doesn't understand that he is. I don't sense laziness or ***hole behavior so I think he projects well long term. He's really skilled, athletic and long. If the Wizards don't get MKG I'd be estatic with Jones on their roster as I see him as the 1 scorer John Wall will need. Every dominant pg needed an elite scorer to win a title going back to Oscar Robertson. I honestly believe Perry Jones can be that.

[Terpman]

Wiz frontcourt of Booker, Nene, and Seraphin lead the league in solid nasty frontcourt muscle. Add Beal and Wall in backcourt, and you have a physical defensive team that will push around quite a few teams in the paint...including the beotches in Heat..

[Terpman]

I think we should try to trade for Steve Novak to play the 2/3, and be happy with Beal or Kidd-Gilchrist..

[barelyawake]

Calling James a SF is cheating. He's a once in a lifetime player. And Bosh is a legit center (whom they would not have won without). And they beat an undersized team. The Spurs would have beaten them.

[Rafael122]

Watching this ESPN First Take special on the draft, Kidd-Gilchrist could be one of those guys who five years now we're gonna look back and say "damn, they should have taken him." Leaning towards Kidd-Gilchrist again, should Beal be taken at 2.

[KevinFCheng]

Watching this ESPN First Take special on the draft, Kidd-Gilchrist could be one of those guys who five years now we're gonna look back and say "damn, they should have taken him." Leaning towards Kidd-Gilchrist again, should Beal be taken at 2.

+ 1. Take whoever's left between 1a) Beal and 1b) MKG.

[Dat2U]

David Locke‏@Lockedonsports

2nd round picks from 1997 to 2009 - 1% all-star; 6% starters; 18% rotation players (includes starters and all-star) - 84% non rotation

Food for thought on really how valuable the pick at #32 really is.

[Dat2U]

Watching this ESPN First Take special on the draft, Kidd-Gilchrist could be one of those guys who five years now we're gonna look back and say "damn, they should have taken him." Leaning towards Kidd-Gilchrist again, should Beal be taken at 2.

That's what my gut tells me about MKG. Anyone who passes on him outside of NO is going to be kicking themselves in a few years.

[7-Day Dray]

WizD is right about two things (and they are highly important to NBA, championship success):

1) Size matters. It matters not a lick how undersized players do in the regular season. Once you are playing the best, undersized players often get exposed. Are there exceptions? Sure. A few.

2) This is a superstar league. While debating second round picks, please realize that most of it doesn't matter. What matters to success is obtaining and developing a few stars.

WizD has been selecting high risk/high reward picks, that have mostly busted because he disregards the mental aspects of the game (and you simply can't do that). But, IMO his approach is actually closer to how you build a champion than those wanting "slow progress." Trust me, I'd rather not have to agree with him on these points, but he is right. Obviously, he takes the argument to the extreme.

Size matters less than skill -- certainly less than skilled size. The Heat won a title no center, and often played 2 or 3 SF's.

The Heat are the exception. They're two best wing players are future HOFs. Do you see anything of the wings in this draft getting to that level? I definitely don't.

[Rafael122]

Watching this ESPN First Take special on the draft, Kidd-Gilchrist could be one of those guys who five years now we're gonna look back and say "damn, they should have taken him." Leaning towards Kidd-Gilchrist again, should Beal be taken at 2.

That's what my gut tells me about MKG. Anyone who passes on him outside of NO is going to be kicking themselves in a few years.

My concern with him has always been his shooting, but Ford said his ceiling is Pippen, worse case scenario is Gerald Wallace or Ron Artest (minus the craziness). I'm sure Wittman will figure out where and when to play him. Kid is only 18, I wouldn't be surprised if he is Ariza's backup by midseason.

[Severn Hoos]

I have' nt been posting here lately but still read the threads occasionally. I have' nt heard one word about Gasol.

I' ve heard
3+blatch for 5+ Garcia

3+ blatche for 6+ Matthews

3+ blatche for 14,16+ Lowery who would be flipped.


.....


I was told our top 5 was
Davis
Trob
Mkg
Barnes
Beal

But we will take Beal unless a trade is worked out. We are drafting need over BPA.


My source has' nt mentioned anything at all about Gasol.

Sam, thanks for posting - and I sure hope your intel is good!

Glad to hear about Beal, still hope he's the pick at #3.

If Beal is gone, I definitely like the Sac trade for #5 (means we'd get MKG or Barnes). Would probably also do the Portland deal for #6, but worried that Drummond would be the guy who drops from the top 5. And if the team moving up to #3 takes TRob, all the better to stick it to the Cats.

REALLY glad to hear Gasol has not been mentioned. That would be disastrous, IMO.

A little concerned about the top 5 list, if only because I'd just about flip 2-5 upside down. But if it means we do get Beal or MKG, I'd be happy.

Not crazy about the HOU trade, depending on what Lowry would be flipped for. That's a long way to go to dump Blatche, even with both mid-1sts coming back.

Keep up the posting - would love to hear any info about the last minute thinking in the FO.

[sfam]

Watching this ESPN First Take special on the draft, Kidd-Gilchrist could be one of those guys who five years now we're gonna look back and say "damn, they should have taken him." Leaning towards Kidd-Gilchrist again, should Beal be taken at 2.

That's what my gut tells me about MKG. Anyone who passes on him outside of NO is going to be kicking themselves in a few years.

See this is what we should be doing with the #3 - taking our best guess at who might be an all-star level player. Even if MKG doesn't get there, he just doesn't have the bust potential of say, a Drummond. The risk-reward decision is in our favor if go this route. If not for need, I would want MKG over Beal. I'm quite fine if Cleveland gives away the rest of their picks for Beal, leaving us MKG.