General (Non-Wiz) Draft Discussion

doclinkin · Post #481 » by **doclinkin** » Fri May 15, 2009 1:15 am

Griffin was pretty open about his biggest perceived weakness: his lack of defense at Oklahoma.

"I was on a team where I couldn't get in foul trouble," Griffin said. "Coach [Jeff] Capel was pretty clear that I needed to be on the floor. So I was always conscious, maybe too conscious, about picking up fouls.

"I definitely [think] that it's an area of my game that needs improvement. But I feel like I'm going to be a good defender in the NBA. I like to play defense."

From Chad Ford's peek into his workout.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #482 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Fri May 15, 2009 2:32 am

Ruzious wrote:CCJ, I'm not disagreeing but I think there has to be concern about Blair's height. Millsap measured in at 6'6.25 without shoes, so he's effectively 6'7.5 - very short but not crazy short. What if Blair measures an inch shorter - which I think might be the case. If he's under 6'7, does that change the equation? It does for me - even if he measures with a 7'2 wingspan (Millsap's was 7'1.5").

Ruz, the tape measure will factor in with Blair. I just don't think it should. As far as I'm concerned if Barkley can play PF at 6'5", and if Rodman can rebound like nobody else at 6'6", so can Blair.

The guy you mentioned, Millsap, certainly isn't disappointing at his height, Ruz.

As far as Blair goes, I think he's a little taller than Millsap but just appears shorter because he played at 25-30 lbs heavier Millsap. I expect Blair to be an NBA 6'8'. (But I say so what if he's an inch shorter.)

Post #483 » by **miller31time** » Fri May 15, 2009 2:39 am

doclinkin wrote:
Griffin was pretty open about his biggest perceived weakness: his lack of defense at Oklahoma.

"I was on a team where I couldn't get in foul trouble," Griffin said. "Coach [Jeff] Capel was pretty clear that I needed to be on the floor. So I was always conscious, maybe too conscious, about picking up fouls.

"I definitely [think] that it's an area of my game that needs improvement. But I feel like I'm going to be a good defender in the NBA. I like to play defense."

From Chad Ford's peek into his workout.

That's what we pretty much expected was the reason (and what Griffin was told when at Oklahoma), but it's still nice to see in print.

doclinkin · Post #484 » by **doclinkin** » Fri May 15, 2009 3:18 am

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:
Ruzious wrote:CCJ, I'm not disagreeing but I think there has to be concern about Blair's height. Millsap measured in at 6'6.25 without shoes, so he's effectively 6'7.5 - very short but not crazy short. What if Blair measures an inch shorter - which I think might be the case. If he's under 6'7, does that change the equation? It does for me - even if he measures with a 7'2 wingspan (Millsap's was 7'1.5").

Ruz, the tape measure will factor in with Blair. I just don't think it should. As far as I'm concerned if Barkley can play PF at 6'5", and if Rodman can rebound like nobody else at 6'6", so can Blair.

The guy you mentioned, Millsap, certainly isn't disappointing at his height, Ruz.

As far as Blair goes, I think he's a little taller than Millsap but just appears shorter because he played at 25-30 lbs heavier Millsap. I expect Blair to be an NBA 6'8'. (But I say so what if he's an inch shorter.)

How does Rodman keep shrinking in all these revisions? He definitely had a couple inches on (6'6") MJ.

Dat2U · Post #485 » by **Dat2U** » Fri May 15, 2009 3:39 am

I don't think the height matters too much either. For me it comes to two things with undersized PFs. Their standing reach and/or their vertical. What made Charles Barkley & Dennis Rodman so effective is that they were both explosive leapers. Rodman could sky for rebounds. Barkley was a freak of nature considering his power & girth combined his agility and explosiveness.

For Paul Millsap and to a lesser extent Jason Maxiell, its their incredibly long arms. Millsap may be 6-7 1/2 in shoes but he's got the standing reach of some starting centers. To me, I put more emphasis on a guy's standing reach than their wingspan b/c its more important that you have the length to challenge shots and grab rebounds as opposed to how far wide you can extend your arms.

I suspect Blair's standing reach will be quite impressive even if he measures in the 6-6 range with shoes. Blair is a mortal lock as a lottery pick as long as he's got decent length. IMO, he's worth a top 10 selection in this draft. I personally think he's the 2nd best big in the draft, after Griffin & before Thabeet or Hill.

mhd · Post #486 » by **mhd** » Fri May 15, 2009 4:42 am

Dat2U wrote:I don't think the height matters too much either. For me it comes to two things with undersized PFs. Their standing reach and/or their vertical. What made Charles Barkley & Dennis Rodman so effective is that they were both explosive leapers. Rodman could sky for rebounds. Barkley was a freak of nature considering his power & girth combined his agility and explosiveness.

For Paul Millsap and to a lesser extent Jason Maxiell, its their incredibly long arms. Millsap may be 6-7 1/2 in shoes but he's got the standing reach of some starting centers. To me, I put more emphasis on a guy's standing reach than their wingspan b/c its more important that you have the length to challenge shots and grab rebounds as opposed to how far wide you can extend your arms.

I suspect Blair's standing reach will be quite impressive even if he measures in the 6-6 range with shoes. Blair is a mortal lock as a lottery pick as long as he's got decent length. IMO, he's worth a top 10 selection in this draft. I personally think he's the 2nd best big in the draft, after Griffin & before Thabeet or Hill.

I just disagree. I said Hill was a more athletic Al Horford and I stick by that. Hill already has the mid range game. He is a very good rebounder. He scores with BOTH hands. He plays with passion.

Blair is so wide bodied and he played in a physical conference. Guess what, can he stay on the flour? I've seen too many Mike Sweetney's come in and eat themselves out of the league. Give me the chisled Jordan Hill who has worked his butt off to improve his body since coming into college. Give me the guy who couldn't score when he first got to campus, to the guy with left and right hooks. Give me the guy who came back on a severly sprained ankle against Wash U and almost willed that game for Zona.

Hill is being undervalued.

pancakes3 · Post #487 » by **pancakes3** » Fri May 15, 2009 5:09 am

doclinkin wrote:
Griffin was pretty open about his biggest perceived weakness: his lack of defense at Oklahoma.

"I was on a team where I couldn't get in foul trouble," Griffin said. "Coach [Jeff] Capel was pretty clear that I needed to be on the floor. So I was always conscious, maybe too conscious, about picking up fouls.

"I definitely [think] that it's an area of my game that needs improvement. But I feel like I'm going to be a good defender in the NBA. I like to play defense."

From Chad Ford's peek into his workout.

um... there's nothing foul-prone about staying in front of a guy and playing defense with your arms reaching for the ceiling. there are absolutely 0 NBA-quality PF in the big 12. in fact, there are few NBA-quality PF in college that Blake had to go against in college. I''m not doubting that blake embraces defense, but i mean... he doesn't know what defending top-flight PF really means. When he checks the David Wests and Rashard Lewises of the league, he'll find himself in one world of hurt. When he D's up the Tim Duncans and the Elton Brand's of the league he'll find himself in another.

also, the other reservation i have about blake is that i've seen little in the sense of a "finesse" post game in his arsenal. blair has an array of up and unders, and flip/hook shots. Griffin has a rudimentary hook and lots of dunks - some from up and unders. the fluidity of his moves though leaves lots to be desired. i guess you can't have it all. after all, D12 isn't exactly mchale in the paint but he gets it done more than adequately.

Dat2U · Post #488 » by **Dat2U** » Fri May 15, 2009 5:19 am

mhd wrote:I just disagree. I said Hill was a more athletic Al Horford and I stick by that. Hill already has the mid range game. He is a very good rebounder. He scores with BOTH hands. He plays with passion.

Blair is so wide bodied and he played in a physical conference. Guess what, can he stay on the flour? I've seen too many Mike Sweetney's come in and eat themselves out of the league. Give me the chisled Jordan Hill who has worked his butt off to improve his body since coming into college. Give me the guy who couldn't score when he first got to campus, to the guy with left and right hooks. Give me the guy who came back on a severly sprained ankle against Wash U and almost willed that game for Zona.

Hill is being undervalued.

We can agree to disagree but the biggest difference IMO b/w Hill and Horford is b-ball IQ. You may be dead on about Hill being more athletic than Horford but Horford is one of the smartest players around. Billy Donovan, UF's head coach, remarked that Horford was the smartest player he's ever coached. Hill, while being one that's worked hard on his game, cannot be confused with a basketball savant. That's why I think Hill's upside is limited, he can run & jump all over the place but too often in college he looked completely lost out there, including in the NCAA tourney.

I like him as the 2nd coming of Tyrone Hill who was an athletic rebounder & defender but honestly that's about as optimistic as I can get about him.

Post #489 » by **Ruzious** » Fri May 15, 2009 12:32 pm

Dat2U wrote:I don't think the height matters too much either. For me it comes to two things with undersized PFs. Their standing reach and/or their vertical. What made Charles Barkley & Dennis Rodman so effective is that they were both explosive leapers. Rodman could sky for rebounds. Barkley was a freak of nature considering his power & girth combined his agility and explosiveness.

For Paul Millsap and to a lesser extent Jason Maxiell, its their incredibly long arms. Millsap may be 6-7 1/2 in shoes but he's got the standing reach of some starting centers. To me, I put more emphasis on a guy's standing reach than their wingspan b/c its more important that you have the length to challenge shots and grab rebounds as opposed to how far wide you can extend your arms.

I suspect Blair's standing reach will be quite impressive even if he measures in the 6-6 range with shoes. Blair is a mortal lock as a lottery pick as long as he's got decent length. IMO, he's worth a top 10 selection in this draft. I personally think he's the 2nd best big in the draft, after Griffin & before Thabeet or Hill.

Height matters, but yeah - standing reach is more important for bigs than wingspan is. Some of the bulky guys have a long wingspan but then surprise you that they don't have a long standing reach - simply because they're so wide in the chest (that makes they're wingspan longer - but has no effect on their standing reach.). Maxiell and Brand both have freakishly long arms - to the extent that they have good standing reaches, but Millsap really doesn't have the high reach. He's got long arms with the 7'1.5 wingspan but his standing reach is mediocre for a PF - 8'9.5. For example, looking at the chart, most guys over 6'10 have a reach over 9'. One surprising exception is Noah. He's got only an 8'10.5 reach, but he makes up for it by having a great verticle leap for a big - 37.5".

eltacoman · Post #490 » by **eltacoman** » Fri May 15, 2009 7:06 pm

hey.... what if he measures in at 6'5 could he maybe fall to us with our 2nd pick :wink:

Could he adjust to playing SF in the NBA :-?

Post #491 » by **LyricalRico** » Fri May 15, 2009 8:31 pm

Dat2U wrote:I like him as the 2nd coming of Tyrone Hill who was an athletic rebounder & defender but honestly that's about as optimistic as I can get about him.

And that's not a bad thing. Basically a rich man's Udonis Haslem. Top 10 lottery pick? No. Mid-late first? Yes.

Post #492 » by **Ruzious** » Fri May 15, 2009 8:34 pm

eltacoman wrote:hey.... what if he measures in at 6'5 could he maybe fall to us with our 2nd pick

Could he adjust to playing SF in the NBA

Not unless the NBA legalizes body slams.

doclinkin · Post #493 » by **doclinkin** » Fri May 15, 2009 10:44 pm

Alright my trade-down scenario for a Stef Curry selection has a tiny thread of a hope.

Stef Curry will prep for the draft with DC based personal trainer Idan Ravin, who is Gil's personal trainer (rehabbed Gil this most recent time) and has done work with: Haywood, Jamison, DeSteve, etc.

He's Chris Paul's trainer as well (famously worked CP3 out against Gil when prepping for the draft. Gil said Paul would be a special player at the next level). Never know, if the DC cats work out with Stef and come back to HQ talking him up, maybe GMEG takes a second look on a trade-back scenario.

fishercob · Post #494 » by **fishercob** » Fri May 15, 2009 11:11 pm

I was several years behind Idan at the Jewish Day School in Rockville. He made the first high school 3-pointer I ever saw. You know you're old when you remember the days before the high school/college 3.

Benjammin · Post #495 » by **Benjammin** » Fri May 15, 2009 11:49 pm

Chad Ford was quite glowing about James Harden, but then again he's been that way about all the guys on his workout tour so far. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009 ... our-090515

Some specific points:
Harden is working out with Tim Grover
Harden appears to have lost ten to fifteen pounds and looks quicker and more explosive
Height is 6-5 1/2 in shoes, according to Glover
6-11 wingspan (that's impressive)
Increased 3 point range and better form on shot

Now I take whatever Chad Ford writes with a grain of salt, but if these things are true and Harden works out well and tests well (vertical, shuttle, etc.) he may well solidify himself as a reasonable top 5 pick.

fishercob · Post #496 » by **fishercob** » Sat May 16, 2009 12:08 am

If it not for Harden's stinker of a Pac-10 and NCAA tourney, I -- and I'm sure many others -- would be excited about him as our draft pick.

And if what you/Chad say is true -- that he's lost weight, refined his J, and is that big, the Wizards could do a lot worse than drafting him. He strikes me as bright enough to step in right away and fit in with the starters, in somewhat of a supporting role. But in a few years could be a primary option -- like a Manu, Rudy, etc.

He just looked worn out by the end of the season, and I'm sure that was in no small part to being the focal point of the opponents' energy every night. He's no potential HOF'er like Griff and Ricky Rube, but I could see him making a couple all-star games.

Keep workin, young fella.

pancakes3 · Post #497 » by **pancakes3** » Sat May 16, 2009 12:41 am

fishercob wrote:I was several years behind Idan at the Jewish Day School in Rockville. He made the first high school 3-pointer I ever saw. You know you're old when you remember the days before the high school/college 3.

seriously dating yourself there fish. carbon dating.

also, is the harden bandwagon making a phoenix-like revival? I'll take a flier. I'd take Harden over Tyreke evans as of right now.

bah. who're we kidding? #3 pick and onwards is going to be traded. no doubt.

Ji · Post #498 » by Ji » Sat May 16, 2009 2:37 am

I want James Harden. I hope we pick 5th. Harden is the guy ive coveted since he came out of high school. I really believe we will pick 5th and get Harden. Its going to be our lucky day

AgentOvechkin08 · Post #499 » by **AgentOvechkin08** » Sat May 16, 2009 4:19 am

I read that Chad Ford article on Harden and like I said way back, he reminds me of Brandon Roy. I know people down him for his stinker in the tourny but come on, he was doubled and tripled all the time.

He has that "sneaky athleticism" Ford says, which i agree with and has said to have lost 10 - 15 pounds and its evident in workouts.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009 ... our-090515

Post #500 » by **miller31time** » Sat May 16, 2009 4:25 am

I agree with the sentiments on Harden - he may not be an elite athlete but what he is is a sound player. He can space the floor, he can score from anywhere and, most importantly, he has a very high basketball IQ.

I don't know if he'll ever be a Brandon Roy-caliber player but I don't think he will be a bust. It wouldn't be a total loss if we got the 3rd-5th pick and took the guy.