ImageImageImageImageImage

Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III

Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart

User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#441 » by sfam » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:59 am

DCZards wrote:^^^^Unless Bennett's D and attitude really suck, I think the Zards take him with the 8th pick rather than Len. It would give us 3 potential young studs on the perimeter with Wall, Beal and Bennett and we'd still have Nene and Okafor to hold it down in the paint for the next 2-3 years. Hopefully, the Zards can get a young big in the second round, through free agency or in the 2014 draft.


Why doesn't Sac Bennett over Shabaaz? Jason Thompson isn't all th at. My fear is we're left with Shabaaz and Len, and EG chooses...poorly.
thricethefun
Junior
Posts: 340
And1: 46
Joined: Feb 15, 2013

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#442 » by thricethefun » Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:25 am

sfam wrote:
DCZards wrote:^^^^Unless Bennett's D and attitude really suck, I think the Zards take him with the 8th pick rather than Len. It would give us 3 potential young studs on the perimeter with Wall, Beal and Bennett and we'd still have Nene and Okafor to hold it down in the paint for the next 2-3 years. Hopefully, the Zards can get a young big in the second round, through free agency or in the 2014 draft.


Why doesn't Sac Bennett over Shabaaz? Jason Thompson isn't all th at. My fear is we're left with Shabaaz and Len, and EG chooses...poorly.


Who would you have them take in that scenario? I actually have Shabazz 2nd for who the Wizards should take and Len 4th.
My list is
1. Noel
2. Shabazz
3. Bennett
4. Len
5. Porter
6. Oladipo
7. Mccollum
8. Olynyk
9. Zeller
mhd
General Manager
Posts: 9,722
And1: 1,721
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#443 » by mhd » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:17 pm

Sac traded for Patrick Patterson (they wanted him b/c he's buddies with Cousins) and alreayd have Jason Thompson signed longterm. Another stretch big like Bennett does nothing for them. They desperatly need a SF, a SG (if Tyreke leaves), and even a PG as an upgrade over Thomas.
closg00
RealGM
Posts: 24,682
And1: 4,550
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#444 » by closg00 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:51 pm

So if we hold our 8th spot, we have a slim shot at getting the #1 pick. If we don't get pick #1, what is the most we could move-up, 6th?
User avatar
rockymac52
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,824
And1: 73
Joined: Dec 14, 2006

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#445 » by rockymac52 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:06 pm

closg00 wrote:So if we hold our 8th spot, we have a slim shot at getting the #1 pick. If we don't get pick #1, what is the most we could move-up, 6th?


If we get the 8th slot, then we either get the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 9th, 10th, or 11th pick.

We would only get the 9, 10 or 11 pick if a team in the 9-14 range miraculously got a top 3 pick. So basically we'd realistically be 9th at worst, and most likely 8th.
closg00
RealGM
Posts: 24,682
And1: 4,550
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#446 » by closg00 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:10 pm

rockymac52 wrote:
closg00 wrote:So if we hold our 8th spot, we have a slim shot at getting the #1 pick. If we don't get pick #1, what is the most we could move-up, 6th?


If we get the 8th slot, then we either get the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 8th, 9th, 10th, or 11th pick.

We would only get the 9, 10 or 11 pick if a team in the 9-14 range miraculously got a top 3 pick. So basically we'd realistically be 9th at worst, and most likely 8th.


Thanks, I knew it was something like that. Wizards luck = 8-11 pick :(
Upper Decker
Rookie
Posts: 1,223
And1: 166
Joined: Apr 05, 2012

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#447 » by Upper Decker » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:12 pm

6th - 1st 6.3%, top-3 22%
7th - 1st 4.3%, top-3 15%
8th - 1st 2.8%, top-3 10%
User avatar
rockymac52
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,824
And1: 73
Joined: Dec 14, 2006

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#448 » by rockymac52 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:45 pm

I just wanted throw out another potential sleeper: Myck Kabongo.

Slept on after being suspended for 20 some games for some misunderstanding where Tristan Thompson paid for him to fly to Cleveland to train with them or something along those lines. Seemed like an honest mistake, although I think he lied to Texas when they started investigating it, which is partially why he got in trouble, but personally I don't care, because if I were in his position, at his age, I'd probably lie about that too. I'm not sweating this one.

But yeah, he missed most of the season, but came back late, and he looked fantastic IMO. It's a little too small of a sample size this season to put too much weight into it, but he looked like he improved a ton from his freshman season (which wasn't that bad either, he just went into it thinking he might be a late lottery pick, and when he was told he'd be more likely to go in the 20-30 range, he decided to go back to Texas for another year to develop, and it appears it worked!). His offense improved, and he's capable of scoring in several ways, and is also a good distributor. His jump shot is definitely a weakness at the moment, but it's passable for now, and there's reason to believe he can fix it over time.

Defensively he gets after it, and was straight up phenomenal this season (again, sample size might be an issue, but even if he fell off over the course of a normal full season, he still would have been a very good defender based on how amazing he was in his 12 games). According to Synergy, in his 12 games, his defensive PPP was literally the best of any player in the entire NCAA. The man he was defending averaged only .39 PPP. That is an INSANELY good rate. It's so good that it kinda makes it obvious that the sample size was too small, because if he was able to keep that up for an entire season, he'd be the best defender of all time. It's not like he was doing this against scrubs either, this was all against Big 12 competition, including top PGs such as Marcus Smart, Korie Lucious, Elijah Johnson, Angel Rodriguez, and Pierre Jackson. He was elite against all play types defensively, but especially against spot up shooters, where he once again lead the entire NCAA, allowing his man to score only .143 PPP (!!!) spotting up. That's simply nuts. Chalk it up to the sample size if you will, I mean, maybe the guys he was guarding just happened to miss a lot of shots, it's certainly possible, but wow, still. Crazy impressive numbers. Point is, he's good on defense at the very least, regardless of the sample size. (Then again I just looked at the past few years to see the NCAA leaders in defensive PPP to see if I recognized anyone, and sure enough in 2010, a guy allowed only .53 PPP (11th best in the NCAA), and his name was Jordan Crawford... sooo yeah, don't know what happened there haha)

It'll be interesting to see where he ends up getting drafted. Going into his freshman season last year, he was projected as a late lottery pick in last year's draft. I think that might be what his current talent level is at, but I get the feeling he's going to go late 1st, and very possibly anywhere in the 2nd.

If we can get him with our 2nd round pick, I'd be thrilled. He seems like another quality PG prospect in this draft that I'd happily take over AJ Price, and he isn't too good that he'd demand more minutes leading to issues with Wall (at least not yet, and if he develops and deserves more minutes, we'll deal with that then, and it's a good problem to have).
User avatar
rockymac52
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,824
And1: 73
Joined: Dec 14, 2006

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#449 » by rockymac52 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:12 pm

Okay I have a question for everybody about Anthony Bennett...

It seems like the big debate around here recently has been what position he will play - PF or SF. It also seems like you guys are very split on this topic. But here's my question...

Why does it matter?

Let's say the group of you saying he is too big and slow to play SF is right. Okay, big deal. We'll figure that out real fast, and then we'll only play him at PF.

Let's say the group of you saying he is capable of playing SF is right. Okay, great. So he can play SF and/or PF now. Or even if he can't play PF, he can at least play SF, so he's got a position.

Last time I checked we were looking for a long-term answer at SF (see: everyone saying we should pick Otto Porter). Last time I checked we were also looking for a long-term answer at PF (see: everyone saying Nene isn't what he used to be, and/or everyone saying we should draft a big man). Furthermore, last time I checked we have been begging our front office to acquire a stretch 4 (see: Ryan Anderson/Ersan Ilyasova lovers).

So as long as Bennett can play either SF or PF, then there's not even the slightest problem for us.

The only potential problem, which I'm sure some of you will harp on, is if he is a classic tweener - not strong enough to play PF and not fast enough to play SF. That's it. That's the only excuse or issue I want to hear when we're talking about Anthony Bennett. Because other than that, he's a damn good basketball player, and I don't care if he ends up playing SF, PF, or both for us, as long as he can play at least one of them.
mhd
General Manager
Posts: 9,722
And1: 1,721
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#450 » by mhd » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:13 pm

I could see Dallas taking Kabongo at 12. He's local, fills a HUGE need, and they are a stats advanced organization. I think he's better than Michael Carter Williams.
User avatar
rockymac52
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,824
And1: 73
Joined: Dec 14, 2006

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#451 » by rockymac52 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:28 pm

Also, I don't understand why people have any concerns about Anthony Bennett's offensive game.

He was an absolute beast this season offensively. He was incredibly productive from all over the floor. He demonstrated an elite ability to score in basically every possible way. The only play type that he was below average in was the pick and roll, but I don't think that's what we'd be expecting to get out of him if we drafted him. Rather, we'd like to get a guy who is good at posting up, fantastic at spotting up, good at cutting to the hoop, great at grabbing offensive rebounds and converting put backs, great in transition, and very good in isolation (although he didn't do this very often, he was elite when he did).

He is the complete package offensively.

And for the tweener crowd, guess what, that's not going to be an issue on that side of the ball. It doesn't matter if Bennett is at SF or PF when we're on offense, because he's an elite scorer and he can score a ton of different ways. The potential tweener-related issue would surface when he's on defense, and he might be physically outmatched by a big PF while he'd also possibly be outmatched by a fast SF that can handle the ball. Theoretically...

He is such a perfect fit for us offensively, I really hope it works out.

Oh, and in case anyone wanted to try and say he was doing it against weak competition, or anything along those lines, I call bull.

The Mountain West is no joke these days. Seriously, take a look at that conference. It's pretty damn stacked as far as mid-majors go.

Take a look at 2 recent players to come out of the Mountain West for example...
2011: Kawhi Leonard
2010: Paul George

Obviously both turned out great. That doesn't mean Bennett automatically will though, obviously, but it's a good sign, especially considering Bennett outplayed both of them by a large margin in his only season in college!

Here are some basic synergy stats for a player's overall offensive efficiency (PPP) and defensive efficiency (opponent PPP), with their percentiles in parentheses.

Paul George:
PPP: .92 (71%)
Opp PPP: .98 (21%)
Net: -.06

Kawhi Leonard:
PPP: .89 (64%)
Opp PPP: .82 (60%)
Net: +.07

Anthony Bennett:
PPP: 1.07 (92%)
Opp PPP: .81 (55%)
Net: +.26


Anthony Bennett was considerably better on offense than both George and Leonard, and he was also considerably better than George on defense, and basically the same as Leonard defensively, but sliiightly worse.

Oh, and George and Leonard were both sophomores at this time, so they had that much more experience.

Bennett is going to be a stud.
User avatar
rockymac52
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,824
And1: 73
Joined: Dec 14, 2006

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#452 » by rockymac52 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:30 pm

mhd wrote:I could see Dallas taking Kabongo at 12. He's local, fills a HUGE need, and they are a stats advanced organization. I think he's better than Michael Carter Williams.


I think he's a lot better than Michael Carter-Williams too. Frankly I don't know what people see in Carter-Williams. There's easily 5 PGs I would take before him in this draft. Easily.

Still, unless Kabongo has some amazing workouts and his stock soars, I think taking him at 12 might be a bit of a reach.

Also, after reading Cuban's comments about this season and his plan for a quick rebuild, I get the impression he might be impatient to a fault, and he might trade their pick this year. Just a hunch. I'd love to get in on it.
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#453 » by Ruzious » Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:34 pm

mhd wrote:I could see Dallas taking Kabongo at 12. He's local, fills a HUGE need, and they are a stats advanced organization. I think he's better than Michael Carter Williams.

Kabongo's a wild card that certain teams could really like - comparing him to Rondo. There are 4 very different highly rated PG's in the draft - Kabongo, Smart, MCW, and Burke. Dallas, Utah, and LAL have huge needs for a PG.

One thing to consider on Bennett is his ability to stay healthy. His shoulder injury limited him at least in February, and I wonder if it continued to bother him in March - perhaps we didn't see him at his best. In both his junior and senior seasons of HS, his season was cut short due to injuries.

I'm breaking the smart rule of avoiding over-aged players, but I really like Cory Jefferson - the 22 year old junior PF at Baylor - and Whithey (23). Withey can step in and play immediately and really is a better offensive player than most give him credit for. And Jefferson's a stud. He averaged 20 PPG for the last 7 games making a ridiculous 56 of 77 FG attempts. He hadn't made a 3 all season and then made 3 of 3 against Kansas. The only thing he doesn't do well is pass, but that's never been his role - just like making 3's wasn't. Hands' boy Pierre Jackson makes a fine 2nd rounder. He's short but strong and stocky and got over 10 assists a game in the NIT. Get the presidents from Baylor - Jefferson and Jackson.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#454 » by hands11 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:34 pm

AFM wrote:I don't see how Bennet doesn't even pass the eye test. He looks way better offensively than DWill IMO. Big boy can stroke it from anywhere (that came out wrong).
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37ZzxlYuIWA[/youtube]


He looks lazy about everything except his offense.

Looks to be a great catch and shoot player. I see more SF/SG than PF. He scoring moves are quick and decisive which is good for a primary scorer.

Catch Shoot.
Catch, one or two dribble, shoot.
Length of the court dribbling like Sr Charles

I wonder how that works on a team that will expect him too also pass some. Looks like a big Crawford.
High volume scorer with no defense. Sounds like a great Microwave type off the bench.
The Consiglieri
Veteran
Posts: 2,881
And1: 1,055
Joined: May 09, 2007

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#455 » by The Consiglieri » Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:39 pm

rockymac52 wrote:Okay I have a question for everybody about Anthony Bennett...

It seems like the big debate around here recently has been what position he will play - PF or SF. It also seems like you guys are very split on this topic. But here's my question...

Why does it matter?

Let's say the group of you saying he is too big and slow to play SF is right. Okay, big deal. We'll figure that out real fast, and then we'll only play him at PF.

Let's say the group of you saying he is capable of playing SF is right. Okay, great. So he can play SF and/or PF now. Or even if he can't play PF, he can at least play SF, so he's got a position.

Last time I checked we were looking for a long-term answer at SF (see: everyone saying we should pick Otto Porter). Last time I checked we were also looking for a long-term answer at PF (see: everyone saying Nene isn't what he used to be, and/or everyone saying we should draft a big man). Furthermore, last time I checked we have been begging our front office to acquire a stretch 4 (see: Ryan Anderson/Ersan Ilyasova lovers).

So as long as Bennett can play either SF or PF, then there's not even the slightest problem for us.

The only potential problem, which I'm sure some of you will harp on, is if he is a classic tweener - not strong enough to play PF and not fast enough to play SF. That's it. That's the only excuse or issue I want to hear when we're talking about Anthony Bennett. Because other than that, he's a damn good basketball player, and I don't care if he ends up playing SF, PF, or both for us, as long as he can play at least one of them.
I don't think it matters either. As long as he's athletic enough to handle his responsibilities it should be fine. I think the attraction with the kid has always been that he is one of the few weapons in this draft that has the potential to be a star. I think that renders the particulars rather moot. That he plays a position, or could play positions of need for us and could become something truly special is what matters. He isn't there so far, and he's a little immature. Again, I'll feign surprise. Want to cruise around some high schools and talk to athletes this spring? I teach there, I can tell you the Bradley Beals of the world represent about .5% of these prospects at best. The vast majority are like Bennett, or worse for those that are bothered. They are 18 year old kids, sometimes 19. Not exactly mature. We now have built a culture that can actually help him develop, rather than hinder him like when Wall was drafted three years ago.To me, barring doing great in the lottery, the scenario in play seems to be, draft a 1 dimensional big man with a low floor (Zeller, Olynyk), draft a big man with potential but also a low floor (Len), draft the kid with great potential and great liabilities (Bennett), draft the faller (Burke, Porter, Oladipo), or trade down. I'll take the guy with the highest potential, and considering that he's already a very skilled scorer, he won't be a bust imho.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#456 » by hands11 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:57 pm

For me, I think there are better more fundamental paths to building the team. Makes more sense for them to draft Len or trade down and pick up.

C.J. McCollum, Gorgui Dieng to go with Mike Muscala and Pierre Jackson
If you can find another 2nd round pick. Erick Murphy/Ryan Kelly. Send him to the DL until Booker pulls up lame which he eventually will. There is also Cory Jefferson.

Wall/Pierre
Beal/CJM/Temple
Trevor A/Webster
Nene/Muscala/Booker?/(Erick Murphy/Ryan Kelly/Cory Jefferson)
Okafor/(Dieng/Withey) + Ves or Kevin ( whichever you couldn't trade )

Trade Kevin S/Ves, Singleton, even Booker to get pick(s) this year and next year.
Don't sign C Martin
Don't sign Price. With Pierre, CJM and Temple, there is no need for him.

Muscala is a Kevin McKale type. He does everything and more then Kevin S and he is smarter
CJM is going to light it up right away. We really need another guard to go with Wall and Beal. 3 ball
Pierre has amazing handles and is lightening fast. True PG and even at his size, he still can drive. 3 ball
Temple is the extra perimeter defender and he still has some upside. Solid kid. Keep him.

I would strongly consider this type of play over Len and clearly over Bennett. Everyone I added, I know they would work out. I have no questions about their motors or personalities mixing in. And I know all of their skills and how they fit.
User avatar
stevemcqueen1
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,588
And1: 1,137
Joined: Jan 25, 2013
     

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#457 » by stevemcqueen1 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:03 pm

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.s ... cgary.html

"Analyst compares Mitch McGary to Kevin Love, but small sample size is a 'huge concern'"

Interesting points from Chad Ford. He talks about how the class ended up being so weak.

McGary is interesting to me simply because he's the best and most physical rebounder in the class should he declare. I don't know if I like him in our range though. The passing and hands and floor awareness and rebounding is similar to Love. He looks more athletic than Love too. But the comparison to Kevin Love falls apart when you look at his production and his offensive skill level. He's simply a long ways away from the versatile scoring talent Love was. But McGary at his best is one of the most dominant players in the class.

Say the good guards are gone, as are Porter, Zeller, and Bennett. Then I'm much more open to drafting McGary. He and Len constitute "swing for the fences picks" to me. They've flashed star potential. McGary played the game with that kind of passion and motor in the tourney.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#458 » by hands11 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:43 pm

SUPERBALLMAN wrote:I understand the interest in Bennett. His physical gifts are impressive. I'm wrestling with his immaturity. He struggled to adjust to the increased physicality of conference play, in a weak conference. His DX interview he mentions he doesn't want to be a "regular player" and envisions himself as an eventual 2 or 2/3.

I just think he could be in for a rude awakening when he gets to the NBA, and I'm not sure how he'll take it or adjust to it. But he may have the physical gifts to rise above that.

I consider this while taking into account the major efforts the Wizards have gone through to change the makeup of this team. Exiting Arenas, McGee, Blatche, Young, Crawford, while bringing in Nene, Okafor, Ariza, Webster, Price, Beal, etc.

My preference is to add a player that will come in and fit in to this team. I'm just so tired of the knucklehead factor, and just don't want to bring in a player that doesn't get it. I like the progress we've made and want it to continue in the right direction, and don't want to derail it.

The players at the top of the draft that fit into that category would be Otto Porter and Trey Burke. Other possibilities include Noel, Oladipo, Zeller, Dieng, McDermott, among others. These players must be compared to physically superior but potential low BBIQ players like Len and Bennett.

IMO it is imperative to not rock the boat at this time. We need someone who will come in and fit in and add to the momentum. Someone who will play defense, and a team first mentality. For that reason at the first pick I am looking Noel, Porter, Burke. IMO all 3 are big time players who will impact the NBA, play the right way, and have the mental toughness to do what it takes to make the Wizards a better team.

I'd really like to add another later 1st to acquire Dieng or Withey to add to our center mix.

Our top 2nd rounder I'm looking McDermott or Erik Murphy for a shooter/stretch 4 off the bench.

I don't expect Ernie to keep the later 2nd rounder.


Unless we win out on a top 3, Noel and Potter will likely be gone by our pick.
Burke is a nice player, but why would we draft a starting PG with our top pick? Doesn't make sense.

As someone that pimped Withey early and often, I think I might lean toward Dieng. He is more mobile.

I think I did well this year. The players I locked into early Otto, VO and CJM seem to have landed in the lottery. Noel, Shabazz, McLemore, Zeller were always there. I didn't give much mind to Burke or Smart early one because I doubt we draft a PG. Same with Micheal Carter.

I said no to Zeller and that seems to have caught on except some still love him.
Withey was a late first target for me. But you'll turned me onto Dieng which may be a better choice.
Pierre was my 2nd round target and he seems to be gaining some love on the board.

Len. I said no at first then he started to win me over. I would have no problem with Len now.

The idea that this draft sucks has faded. I have thought for a while that this would be a great draft for the Wizards to reload their younger bench players with. There is plenty of talent and maturity in this draft. Better then what they have and skills that fit better.

You'll spotted Muscala who I now include in most my draft scenarios. Nice find.

Most people know about Ryan Kelly as a stretch 4 option but now we have Erik Murphy to consider as well.

I like the collaboration.. My final board is looking better because of players you'll introduced me to.

We can only hope the Wizards brass is reading as well. And I hope Ted/EG have the balls to consider the clean house trade down or trade scenarios. If not, get a new GM is who has no skin in the older moves that didn't work.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#459 » by hands11 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:10 pm

The Consiglieri wrote:I guess part of my point of view is predicated upon having grown up in the bay area, and been a college student during the Webber/Sprewell implosion at Golden State. I saw what a reflexive conservative approach after those twin disasters lead to. The repeated drafting of character first talentless hacks, and mediocrities that guaranteed failure. They spent the rest of the nineties and the early aughts repeatedly drafting low upside, low ceiling, non-knuckleheads, and as a result we're consistently even worse than we were in the 1994-2013 era which beggars the imagination, but is nonetheless true.

'95 1.1: Joe Smith (over McDyess, Wallace, and Garnett)
'96 1.11: Todd Fuller
'97 1.8 : Adonal Foyle
'98 1.5: V. Carter for Antawn Jamison swap
'99 1.21: J. Foster
'01 1.5: J. Richardson
'01: 1.14: T. Murphy
'02: 1.3: M. Dunleavy
'03: 1.11: M. Pietrus
'04: 1.11 : A. Biedrins
'05: 1.05: I. Diogu
'06: 1.09 P. O'Bryant
'07: 1.18: M. Belinelli

Now granted basketball drafting failure on this scale is Saw IX hitting a theatre near you worthy, but it's not difficult to imagine where character obsessed eschewing of talent, for fit and chemistry drafting can land you: In the lottery for nearly 20 consecutive years, that's where.

I'm just not a fan of basing any decision making on an emotional reaction to previous failures. Always draft w/brain at the controls, and emotion, and frustration at home, locked up in a kennel if necessary.

As someone with a first hand view of the failures of the Warriors, and Clippers (being a California/bay area kid/adult in the eighties/nineties), and a fan's view of the Wizards failures, I simply can't tolerate the idea of drafting decisions being based on past issues. Rate the guys now, based on what you've seen, and what you project period. I couldn't give 2 blanks about our experiences with Blatche, Young or McGee, we should be making our decisions based on the premise that we take the best possible asset available to help us now and tomorrow, and nothing else should motivate our thinking whatsoever. pred


Not sure the point you were trying to make but it sounds like drafting knuckheads can really affect a team well beyond the years they were actually on the team.

I don't think anyone is suggesting drafting solid character, smart but unskilled and non physically gifted players.

But for every R Wallace who makes it, you have 10 that don't lives up. And at worst, you can get a Sprewell or similar. Hell, I would even through Gil in with that group. Look how his action blow up a team and crush an organization that was on the come back.

Smarts and Character are very important traits. Owners are going to invest millions into these players. This is a serious competitive tough league to win in. You need a solid team of player that have their heads screwed on right. Or at least enough of that in the leadership side of the team to keep the others in check.

The problem with talented knuckheads is the tough decision to let them go so you end us locking into them for tons of money and they have you. You entire franchise is riding on their crazy. Eventually they become boat anchors.

And when this stuff matter the most is when you get deeper and deeper in the playoffs. That when the smarts and character stuff really starts to show. Players fold under the pressure. Teams can't get on the same page. Thats when SA, Boston, LA and Dallas getcha
The Consiglieri
Veteran
Posts: 2,881
And1: 1,055
Joined: May 09, 2007

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#460 » by The Consiglieri » Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:57 pm

hands11 wrote:
The Consiglieri wrote:I guess part of my point of view is predicated upon having grown up in the bay area, and been a college student during the Webber/Sprewell implosion at Golden State. I saw what a reflexive conservative approach after those twin disasters lead to. The repeated drafting of character first talentless hacks, and mediocrities that guaranteed failure. They spent the rest of the nineties and the early aughts repeatedly drafting low upside, low ceiling, non-knuckleheads, and as a result we're consistently even worse than we were in the 1994-2013 era which beggars the imagination, but is nonetheless true.

'95 1.1: Joe Smith (over McDyess, Wallace, and Garnett)
'96 1.11: Todd Fuller
'97 1.8 : Adonal Foyle
'98 1.5: V. Carter for Antawn Jamison swap
'99 1.21: J. Foster
'01 1.5: J. Richardson
'01: 1.14: T. Murphy
'02: 1.3: M. Dunleavy
'03: 1.11: M. Pietrus
'04: 1.11 : A. Biedrins
'05: 1.05: I. Diogu
'06: 1.09 P. O'Bryant
'07: 1.18: M. Belinelli

Now granted basketball drafting failure on this scale is Saw IX hitting a theatre near you worthy, but it's not difficult to imagine where character obsessed eschewing of talent, for fit and chemistry drafting can land you: In the lottery for nearly 20 consecutive years, that's where.

I'm just not a fan of basing any decision making on an emotional reaction to previous failures. Always draft w/brain at the controls, and emotion, and frustration at home, locked up in a kennel if necessary.

As someone with a first hand view of the failures of the Warriors, and Clippers (being a California/bay area kid/adult in the eighties/nineties), and a fan's view of the Wizards failures, I simply can't tolerate the idea of drafting decisions being based on past issues. Rate the guys now, based on what you've seen, and what you project period. I couldn't give 2 blanks about our experiences with Blatche, Young or McGee, we should be making our decisions based on the premise that we take the best possible asset available to help us now and tomorrow, and nothing else should motivate our thinking whatsoever. pred


Not sure the point you were trying to make but it sounds like drafting knuckheads can really affect a team well beyond the years they were actually on the team.

I don't think anyone is suggesting drafting solid character, smart but unskilled and non physically gifted players.

But for every R Wallace who makes it, you have 10 that don't lives up. And at worst, you can get a Sprewell or similar. Hell, I would even through Gil in with that group. Look how his action blow up a team and crush an organization that was on the come back.

Smarts and Character are very important traits. Owners are going to invest millions into these players. This is a serious competitive tough league to win in. You need a solid team of player that have their heads screwed on right. Or at least enough of that in the leadership side of the team to keep the others in check.

The problem with talented knuckheads is the tough decision to let them go so you end us locking into them for tons of money and they have you. You entire franchise is riding on their crazy. Eventually they become boat anchors.

And when this stuff matter the most is when you get deeper and deeper in the playoffs. That when the smarts and character stuff really starts to show. Players fold under the pressure. Teams can't get on the same page. Thats when SA, Boston, LA and Dallas getcha


My point was simple and noted in the opening paragraph. Reflexive conservative drafting, especially conservative decision making across the board, leads directly to a calcification of a roster, and abject failure in performance. The Warriors reacted to the twin disasters of Webber and Spreewell by getting really conservative, they repeatedly went for the team first, character guy, and eschewed risk, in favor of known commodities w/o any worries. They landed mediocre to terrible players with limited to know upside.

I would argue that going after Wallace's/Garnett's/Webber's/ etc land's you a much better team 9 times out of 10, maybe 19 times out of 20, than avoiding them.

And to elucidate, I'm not arguing about drafting a DeMarcus Cousins every year, that disaster was predictable and most of us called it. I called him a Derrick Coleman in waiting, a prototype elite player that no one ever signed to a second contract because he was a knucklehead and inevitably wore out his welcome. What I am arguing for is drafting the guy that could be a difference maker. Year in and year out, Basketball titles are won by the teams w/the franchise changing transcendent players. Sometimes they carry risk, sometimes they are primo character guys (Duncan). Regardless, you need to roll the dice on the players who can be special if you expect to ever win a title or contend for one. Historically if you don't, not only will you not win, you also won't even come close to winning. There are almost no exceptions. The Pistons team from nearly a decade ago is the only real noticeable one. Every other team is built on risk players with huge upside.

My entire point is simple, if you want to be a sometimes playoff team, and not have any risk of knuckleheads, you can probably accomplish that, but the methodology you use in drafting will sabotage any reasonable chance of competing. Again, doesn't mean automatically knuckleheads, does mean that you're taking risks when the value of the player suggests it may be worth it. History points persuasively to failure for teams unwilling to take the risk on a primo player. Again, though, there's a diference between drafting for upside, or building a youth movement like a blind man a la the wizards and the kings in recent years (though the wizards obviously jettisoned that group).

Return to Washington Wizards