2012 NBA Draft

[Severn Hoos]

My issue with Sullinger is that I think it's more important to have a mobile help defender and rebounder as a big man than it is to have a low post scorer (particularly if McGee continues to improve his post game). If I was choosing between a big man who was a "9" on offense and a "4" on defense; and a big man who was a "4" on offense and a "9" on defense, I'd take the defensive guy. You play defense on every play and you can't hide lousy big men on defense.

If we end up picking 5th, we might be looking at a choice between Sullinger and Thomas Robinson. Both are good character guys and hard workers who play the game "the right way". One is a beast defensively and modestly competent on offense (Robinson looks like he'll develop a reliable jumper). The other is a beast offensively and modestly competent on defense (Sullinger won't challenge shots, but he does get defensive boards). I'd lean toward Robinson.

(All that said, I'm not the draft guru that some are on this board. It may well be the case that Sullinger's superiority on offense is greater than Robinson's superiority on defense, making Sullinger the better overall player. My point is that if we consider them roughly equal in overall talent, I'll take the defensive guy.)

Interesting thought exercise. My impression is actually that it's easier to incorporate players with limited individual defensive skill into an effective (if not elite) defensive squad, but you can't just create offense from a scheme (as we are so painfully finding out).

Put another way, defense is about strategy and effort, offense is about skill.

Right now, Chicago has the #2 ranked defense (per Hollinger) with Boozer starting at PF. Not to mention Hamilton - long thought to be a defensive liability until he got into good systems.

Milwaukee ranks 4th, with big minutes from Bogut, Delfino, Dunleavy...

Philadelphia was top 10 last year with a nearly washed-up Brand at PF.


I do happen to think that Sullinger's offensive advantage outweighs Robinson's defensive advantage, and that's not even accounting for being able to incorporate Sullinger into a true team concept. Add in the fact that this is Sullinger's 2nd year performing at a very high level, while Robinson was in the shadows last year - thus has less of a proven track record, even though he's a year older - and I wouldn't hesitate to take Sullinger.


Side note - here's a good look at a college-level defensive scheme that's near and dear to my heart:

Bennett's Pack Line Defense

I know it's always dangerous to compare NCAA & NBA, but I still think the principle is there - good schemes make good defenses, not individual defenders. And if the undersized Hoos can do it, surely the pros in DC can too? Hopefully Dave Joerger can teach a few things to these kids - or maybe we should be looking to Charlottesville for the next Wiz coach?

[Ruzious]

My issue with Sullinger is that I think it's more important to have a mobile help defender and rebounder as a big man than it is to have a low post scorer (particularly if McGee continues to improve his post game). If I was choosing between a big man who was a "9" on offense and a "4" on defense; and a big man who was a "4" on offense and a "9" on defense, I'd take the defensive guy. You play defense on every play and you can't hide lousy big men on defense.

If we end up picking 5th, we might be looking at a choice between Sullinger and Thomas Robinson. Both are good character guys and hard workers who play the game "the right way". One is a beast defensively and modestly competent on offense (Robinson looks like he'll develop a reliable jumper). The other is a beast offensively and modestly competent on defense (Sullinger won't challenge shots, but he does get defensive boards). I'd lean toward Robinson.

(All that said, I'm not the draft guru that some are on this board. It may well be the case that Sullinger's superiority on offense is greater than Robinson's superiority on defense, making Sullinger the better overall player. My point is that if we consider them roughly equal in overall talent, I'll take the defensive guy.)

Is Robinson really a great defender? I'm asking because I hadn't heard that he was - and I really didn't focus on his D when I watched him. His blocks and steals numbers per 40 minutes this season are exactly the same as Sullinger's - 1.4 and 1.8. Usually athletic defensive-minded bigs get a lot of blocks in college. As far as rebounding, Robinson is a stud. I'm just questioning the defensive rep. Again, with Sullinger, it's the BBIQ and intangibles that make him even better than his stats show. And because he has those going for him - and he did supposedly measure at 6'10 with a 7'1 wingspan - I think he's going to find a way to be a useful - if not flashy - defender in the NBA.

[Mizerooskie]

Where on Earth do these Sullinger-Battier comparisons come from? They're not even remotely close to accurate.

As an underclassmen, Battier was a supporting player, and nothing more. He averaged under 10 points and 25 minutes a game. He didn't emerge into a great college player until he had matured as an uperclassman.

Sulilnger was a one of the 3-4 best players in the country as a true freshman. He's got a ton more natural talent than Battier.

[Ruzious]

Very good post, Sev. And don't forget Ilyosova (sp?) and Leuer - 4th and 5th of the unathletic white stiffs Milwaukee uses.

[montestewart]

Very good post, Sev. And don't forget Ilyosova (sp?) and Leuer - 4th and 5th of the unathletic white stiffs Milwaukee uses.

We were just talking today at work about Bowen and Battier, in some ways unremarkable players (though Battier was clearly talented) that forged great defensive reputations. "defense is about strategy and effort" I'll buy that. It's hard to see if the Wizards strategy is at fault without better and more focused dedication from players (and I'm thinking of a few in particular).

In that sense, offensive skill along with willingness to play hard and be coached wins out. The most efficient and productive high scoring offensive players were usually well known on entering the league. That doesn't seem to be the case with many of the top defenders.

[The Consiglieri]

Where on Earth do these Sullinger-Battier comparisons come from? They're not even remotely close to accurate.

As an underclassmen, Battier was a supporting player, and nothing more. He averaged under 10 points and 25 minutes a game. He didn't emerge into a great college player until he had matured as an uperclassman.

Sulilnger was a one of the 3-4 best players in the country as a true freshman. He's got a ton more natural talent than Battier.

The comparison isn't player for player, the comparison is upside to upside, both players were seen as having fundamentally limited upside/ceilings, while having very high floors compared to say guys like PJ3 and the late Eddie Griffin (granted his upside was sketchy compared to Kwame's, but his numbers suggested the potential for becoming an elite player, maybe, but he had a very, very low floor, and nobody seemed to investigate his mental stability either, and I say that with a lot of sorrow btw, it might have helped him and his family if they had).

[Ruzious]

Where on Earth do these Sullinger-Battier comparisons come from? They're not even remotely close to accurate.

As an underclassmen, Battier was a supporting player, and nothing more. He averaged under 10 points and 25 minutes a game. He didn't emerge into a great college player until he had matured as an uperclassman.

Sulilnger was a one of the 3-4 best players in the country as a true freshman. He's got a ton more natural talent than Battier.

The comparison isn't player for player, the comparison is upside to upside, both players were seen as having fundamentally limited upside/ceilings, while having very high floors compared to say guys like PJ3 and the late Eddie Griffin (granted his upside was sketchy compared to Kwame's, but his numbers suggested the potential for becoming an elite player, maybe, but he had a very, very low floor, and nobody seemed to investigate his mental stability either, and I say that with a lot of sorrow btw, it might have helped him and his family if they had).

Hey Consig, just read your posts - interesting thought processes. I just have one general comment. I think you can win with lots of different strategies, but the key is in the execution. It's not just about being safe or aggressive; it's about properly evaluating the players. If you fail at that, it doesn't matter what your strategy - you fail. When you're safe, be safe on the right players. When you're aggressive, be aggressive on the right players. See whutameanVern? It doesn't matter what your strategery is if you Kwame up on the execution.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

My issue with Sullinger is that I think it's more important to have a mobile help defender and rebounder as a big man than it is to have a low post scorer (particularly if McGee continues to improve his post game). If I was choosing between a big man who was a "9" on offense and a "4" on defense; and a big man who was a "4" on offense and a "9" on defense, I'd take the defensive guy. You play defense on every play and you can't hide lousy big men on defense.

If we end up picking 5th, we might be looking at a choice between Sullinger and Thomas Robinson. Both are good character guys and hard workers who play the game "the right way". One is a beast defensively and modestly competent on offense (Robinson looks like he'll develop a reliable jumper). The other is a beast offensively and modestly competent on defense (Sullinger won't challenge shots, but he does get defensive boards). I'd lean toward Robinson.

(All that said, I'm not the draft guru that some are on this board. It may well be the case that Sullinger's superiority on offense is greater than Robinson's superiority on defense, making Sullinger the better overall player. My point is that if we consider them roughly equal in overall talent, I'll take the defensive guy.)

Robinson has a beastly bounce to his game. I like that he will compete at both ends. Because of his mobility and range on defense I would rate him slightly higher than Sullinger. However, Jared is one year younger and the more effective post player. Both are monstrously tough rebounders, but Robinson appears to be slightly better. Sullinger has the same post dominance than Carlos Boozer had at Duke, maybe even better.

Either guy could help the Wizards a lot. I think Robinson is the better athlete and better defender, but Sullinger is the better scorer. Sullinger is also off-the-charts intelligent IMO. I would love him as the Wizard pick after about #5.

I don't think I would be unhappy even if the Wizards picked Sullinger over Robinson, because Sullinger's offense on this team would be huge.

[theboomking]

The tank is getting stronger. After the NJN won last night, we have a two game lead for 1st place in the draft lotto.

[sfam]

My issue with Sullinger is that I think it's more important to have a mobile help defender and rebounder as a big man than it is to have a low post scorer (particularly if McGee continues to improve his post game). If I was choosing between a big man who was a "9" on offense and a "4" on defense; and a big man who was a "4" on offense and a "9" on defense, I'd take the defensive guy. You play defense on every play and you can't hide lousy big men on defense.

If we end up picking 5th, we might be looking at a choice between Sullinger and Thomas Robinson. Both are good character guys and hard workers who play the game "the right way". One is a beast defensively and modestly competent on offense (Robinson looks like he'll develop a reliable jumper). The other is a beast offensively and modestly competent on defense (Sullinger won't challenge shots, but he does get defensive boards). I'd lean toward Robinson.

(All that said, I'm not the draft guru that some are on this board. It may well be the case that Sullinger's superiority on offense is greater than Robinson's superiority on defense, making Sullinger the better overall player. My point is that if we consider them roughly equal in overall talent, I'll take the defensive guy.)

When getting one of the top draft picks, best case is of course you get an all around stud. But if we're picking 5th, I think we want someone who is absolutely stellar at some part of their game (I hope we see this with Vesely whenever Flip deems it safe enough for Vesely to take off his warmups). The reason being, if someone has worked on some part of their game to make it stellar, chances are they have the character and work habits to improve the rest of their game over time to at least become decent. In comparing Robinson and Sullinger, Robinson does not look as stellar on defense to me as Sullinger looks on offense. Sullinger is a flat out beast inside. He will relieve our scoring problems in the post, and moreso, has a totally different game than McGee. The two may end up complementing each other wonderfully.

[FAH1223]

Anthony Davis or bust!

[jivelikenice]

Previously I was all for a 4 in the draft. I've kind of swung in the other direction though because this team doesn't need another low post guy who needs to be developed. I think we can be effectively fill that spot via trade or in FA. The biggest need to me might be a wing player who can create in the halfcourt and knock down an open jumper. I had hoped Nick could fill that role but his lack of foot speed hurts him when he plays with the ball in a halfcourt set. Barnes to me is the guy. He may not be an elite athlete but he has good handles, can shoot, and can immediately fit into a team concept.

[pancakes3]

if nick's lack of footspeed worries you, then harrison barnes is going to physically agitate you.

with the onset of the deepest big man draft class in recent memory, we cannot afford to draft based on need over talent. other than the obvious anthony davis, i think UNC's Jon Henson is a great consolation prize. people are down on henson in that he didn't live up to freshman hype and that he's now a junior but that doesn't change the fact that he's dominating right now. you just don't doubt a back-to-back ACC double double guy who can put up over 3 blocks a game. i tihnk both davis and henson are giong to be great pros and with either of those two and mcgee, wall could sleepwalk his way to 10+apg.

[tontoz]

On a more positive note the Nets won last night. The tank is strong with this team.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Add this guy to the draft watch. West Virginia's Kevin Jones

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kevin-Jones-5256/



I ignored his stats before, because he's a senior. Today, he had 22 points and 16 rebounds in WVUs win over Georgetown.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball ... 1201070636

After Sullinger and Robinson, Jones should figure in the mix of guys with NBA games suited to meet the Wizards' needs at PF. If drafting for need in round 2, this guy better not be a guy the Wizards pass over.

[fishercob]

Yep, he killed Perry Jones a couple of weeks ago.

[Severn Hoos]

So at the risk of turning this into the "how to improve the Wizards' Defense" thread....

Seems to me the issue/question with Sullinger is around physical limitations (size and/or athleticism), which translates into two potential problems:

Will he be able to get his shot off in the NBA?
Will he be able to guard PFs (plus Help defense) in the NBA?

On the first issue, I think he will be just fine. Plenty of undersized PFs have been written off, only to turn around and show that positioning, strength, and technique can in fact overcome Ridiculous Upside and provide reliable post scoring.

On the second issue, it got me to thinking. Suppose you handed the following starting lineup to a guy like Thibodeau or Carlisle or Skiles:

PG: 6'4, quickest PG in the league, leads the league in blocks among all Guards
SG: 6'7, solid man-to-man defender. Not the strongest guy, but you won't find a longer SG.
SF: 6'9, strong body, but with the quickness to guard pretty much any position 2-4.
PF: 6'9 (or so ), strong as an ox, eager student of the game with BBIQ off the charts
C: 7'1 Condor with elite athleticism, can erase shots from all over and make opponents think before driving the lane

Obviously, this is a "best-case" scenario for the Wiz, with Sullinger at PF and a re-signed Young + McGee. Those two guys get plenty of knocks for low BBIQ, but as Flip has shown with Young, if you break it down for him and give him specific tasks, with a clear read + react decision process, he'll get it. I'd love to see what they could do with a real Defensive scheme.

The reason I post it here is simply that I don't think Sullinger's lack of athleticism should be held against him as a draft prospect. To me, he projects to at least a 15 & 10 player with high efficiency, plus would be a great teammate to help with the culture change that is so desperately needed in DC. There is no reason that the lineup above - with Sullinger as the starting PF (and not even accounting for other potential assets like Booker, Vesely, Seraphin, other FAs) - can't be a top10 or even top 5 defense. All they would need is coaching/scheme and seasoning (as Singleton showed last night).

Granted, the same lineup with Davis at PF is downright scary.....

So call it the "safe" pick if you like - I just feel that it's possible/likely that when the Wiz pick (if not #1), he may end up being the best chance for the Wiz to get better, and that's the name of the game right now.

[Dat2U]

I've got to watch Kevin Jones but for the most part I'm real skeptical of players that don't break out until their senior season (i.e. pulling a "Hilton Armstrong"). An older, more physically mature prospect ought to be able to dominate younger competition.

[Severn Hoos]

I've got to watch Kevin Jones but for the most part I'm real skeptical of players that don't break out until their senior season (i.e. pulling a "Hilton Armstrong"). An older, more physically mature prospect ought to be able to dominate younger competition.

*cough* Robinson *cough*




To be fair, Truck was behind the Morris twins for the past two years - but then Hilton was behind a bunch of NBA players himself.

On the whole, though, I agree completely. I got burned by some of these guys (remember Herbert Hill? ), so I'm very skeptical as well.

[Dat2U]

Put another way, defense is about strategy and effort, offense is about skill.

Right now, Chicago has the #2 ranked defense (per Hollinger) with Boozer starting at PF. Not to mention Hamilton - long thought to be a defensive liability until he got into good systems.

Milwaukee ranks 4th, with big minutes from Bogut, Delfino, Dunleavy...

Philadelphia was top 10 last year with a nearly washed-up Brand at PF.

With Chicago, You often see Thibs substitute Taj Gibson or Omer Asik in situations where they need a stop. On the perimeter, it's easier to hide a weak defender and if you coach up effort most can even be passable. That's why you see a lot of teams run lineups with two PGs. It's good risk vs. reward. Get your best players on the floor vs. giving up size on the perimeter.

With Milwaukee, Bogut is actually regarded as a pretty solid post defender. Delfino & Dunleavy play on the perimeter and both have good length.

With Philly, Brand isn't as washed up as you think. He's not quite the player he once was but he's still pretty effective on both ends of the court even without the lift anymore. His long arms help.

I don't think there's a big difference on where most are at on Sullinger. As of right now I can only clearly put Davis, MKG, Drummond & Henson above him on my board. So maybe he is worth the 5th pick in this draft.

I've got Sullinger (Boozer) in the mix with Robinson (not sure about his height or defense), & PJIII (I still don't know what to make of him). Lamb, Q. Miller & T. Ross are also guys I like. I need to see Meyers Leonard. Vandy's Festus Ezeli looks intriguing. Barnes is really slipping in my eyes. Beal needs to stay in school.