2012 NBA Draft

[Ruzious]

I'm in the draft Davis (#1) or Sullinger (#3-4) and throw all my eggs in trying to get Eric Gordon camp. Who could be our #1 option, 20+ point scorer, who will suredly open things up for Wall.

Wall
Gordon
Singleton
Davis
Mcgee

If Davis has the offensive skills that everyone pre-college was raving about, adding that to his already great defense, paired with an improving Mcgee and Singleton. That's a team I would pay to see! Playoff team I believe, with potential to be a top team in the east relatively quickly as everyone but Singleton and Davis would have over 3 years experience by the 12-13 season.

Gordon would be a nice addition - I'm not a raving fan, but he'd sure be a huge upgrade for us.

But it would sure make for a strange-looking lineup if Sullinger is our pick: A team where the PG (Wall) is taller than the SG (Gordon), and the SF (Singleton) is taller than the PF (Sullinger).


Why, it so crazy that it just....might........WORK!!!!

I'm nitpicking, but Sullinger is taller than Singleton. Singleton measured in at 6'9 with shoes (6'7.5 without) in the pre-draft camp, and Sullinger measured in at 6'10 with shoes at the Lebron camp. In HS, he might have been 6'8. Remember, as mature as he looks, he's just 19 years old (3 years younger than Singleton), so he might have grown over the last year or so.

[Dat2U]

Faried probably makes less sense than Vesley as a SF. Your better off having Faried at C IMO.

But I agree with CCJ's notion that Booker's presence should not have played a role in whether we should have drafted Faried. I thought Faried was better player from day one.

Faried & Singleton would have been a real nice draft. So would have Walker & Singleton or Walker & Faried.

[kirubel94]

Im calling this now, Draft Thomas Robinson!!!!!!!!!, I see so much Amare in his game, he doesnt get to shoot alot of jumpers but when he does he makes them, very good rebounder, really aggresive on the offensive end, really athletic!. Im not saying we should draft him No.1(if we get that pick) but if we do, i wouldnt mind trading a couple of spots down to draft him.

[Ruzious]

Im calling this now, Draft Thomas Robinson!!!!!!!!!, I see so much Amare in his game, he doesnt get to shoot alot of jumpers but when he does he makes them, very good rebounder, really aggresive on the offensive end, really athletic!. Im not saying we should draft him No.1(if we get that pick) but if we do, i wouldnt mind trading a couple of spots down to draft him.

There does seem to be improvement in his offensive game - he's shot over 50% in each of the last 6 games - getting his FG% up to 54.5% - and he got the 1st 2 3's of his college career. I'm warming up to him.

[kirubel94]

Im calling this now, Draft Thomas Robinson!!!!!!!!!, I see so much Amare in his game, he doesnt get to shoot alot of jumpers but when he does he makes them, very good rebounder, really aggresive on the offensive end, really athletic!. Im not saying we should draft him No.1(if we get that pick) but if we do, i wouldnt mind trading a couple of spots down to draft him.

There does seem to be improvement in his offensive game - he's shot over 50% in each of the last 6 games - getting his FG% up to 54.5% - and he got the 1st 2 3's of his college career. I'm warming up to him.

Yeah, what's also encouraging about him is his shooting form, which is really clean.

[Severn Hoos]

I'm in the draft Davis (#1) or Sullinger (#3-4) and throw all my eggs in trying to get Eric Gordon camp. Who could be our #1 option, 20+ point scorer, who will suredly open things up for Wall.

Wall
Gordon
Singleton
Davis
Mcgee

If Davis has the offensive skills that everyone pre-college was raving about, adding that to his already great defense, paired with an improving Mcgee and Singleton. That's a team I would pay to see! Playoff team I believe, with potential to be a top team in the east relatively quickly as everyone but Singleton and Davis would have over 3 years experience by the 12-13 season.

Gordon would be a nice addition - I'm not a raving fan, but he'd sure be a huge upgrade for us.

But it would sure make for a strange-looking lineup if Sullinger is our pick: A team where the PG (Wall) is taller than the SG (Gordon), and the SF (Singleton) is taller than the PF (Sullinger).


Why, it so crazy that it just....might........WORK!!!!

I'm nitpicking, but Sullinger is taller than Singleton. Singleton measured in at 6'9 with shoes (6'7.5 without) in the pre-draft camp, and Sullinger measured in at 6'10 with shoes at the Lebron camp. In HS, he might have been 6'8. Remember, as mature as he looks, he's just 19 years old (3 years younger than Singleton), so he might have grown over the last year or so.

Um, yeah. You are nitpicking.

But in this case, it's helpful. Because if Sullinger really is 6'10, does anyone think he's too small to be effective in the post? Of course, that could cut both ways, because if NBA GMs think that he really is 6'10, there's no way he goes lower than top 3. But then, our odds of being in the top 3 look awfully good....

Oh, and if it makes you feel better, throw Vesely into the starting lineup, can we agree that he's taller than Sullinger?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

So over in the "season tracker" thread I just started looking at what it is the Wizards are really bad at. We all know about shooting efficiency. BUt they suck at defensive rebounding and getting to the line too. Booker isn't rebounding at that high a rate, and Vesely's rebounding has been terrible so far.

These things make Sullinger look even more attractive. He's efficient, gets to the line and rebounds. People had been wondering he would be a defensive liability. But with the rebounding upgrade he'd bring, I wonder if our overall defense would actually improve with him.

He remains very high on my non-existent draft board.

When people posted don't draft Faried because the Wizards already have Booker, this is what I thought about. Booker is hitting the boards far better than I imagined he could, but he's nowhere near the rebounder Faried is. If Booker grabs 8 boards in 30 minutes (pretty good, actually), Faried would grab 12 or 13 in that same time. I like Booker a lot and would have him AND Faried on the court. Faried is a straight beast who can play SF.

I haven't seen a ton of Faried, but from what I have seen and from the scouting reports - he's not going to play SF. You gotta have range on your jump shot to play SF in the NBA, and I'm not sure he's even got a jump shot - much less range. He's a PF who can probably guard SF's.

Exactly!

When your team is full of shot jacking guards, the SF really doesn't need a perimeter game. Also, for every opponent miss if Faried doesn't grab the rebound he's sprinting downcourt for a dunk. The guy is a pretty phenomenal finisher around the rim.

Faried is in Denver and IMO he's a Tebow-like NBA player. He's really bad at some facets of the game. Faried is a one-trick pony. He rebounds and is an intensity player. His ferocity is his whole game. Kenneth Faried is is exactly the type player the Wizards need in place of Andray Blatche.

[Severn Hoos]

Any chance Mike Scott has played himself into the draft? Man, he is a smart, hardworking, effective player. So what if he's a 5-year Senior and 23 years old? I just love the way he plays. Given the garbage players and idiots that stick around in the League, there really should be space for a Mike Scott in the NBA.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Im calling this now, Draft Thomas Robinson!!!!!!!!!, I see so much Amare in his game, he doesnt get to shoot alot of jumpers but when he does he makes them, very good rebounder, really aggresive on the offensive end, really athletic!. Im not saying we should draft him No.1(if we get that pick) but if we do, i wouldnt mind trading a couple of spots down to draft him.

kirubel94, you could be right.

Sullinger really shoots well, carves out space, and is super smart. He will be a good NBA player.

However, Robinson has that Amare bounce you speak of and he is also a quality defender. I am going back and forth on this one between which would be better for the Wizards. Robinson doesn't have a refined NBA game but he finishes with authority--something Sullinger won't do nearly as well in the NBA. I have some questions about which is better for the Wizards.

--My first impression weeks back was draft Robinson over Sullinger if both are on the board.

--However, Sullinger fits the profile on offense as a whole because he can pick-and-pop, set screens, and post up inside. He has a very high BBIQ. Sullinger might be a bigger Adrian Dantley. He's going to score a ton beneath the rim.

It's a question of the beast or the masterful technician. The tiebreaker for me right now is Sullinger is a year younger and apparently making physical improvements. He's stepping up for sure.

[REDardWIZskin]

CCJ I would love to have Robinson, but this team really need IQ and Skill. we've drafting athleticism for the last couple of drafts. We need Skill. If there's any thought that he could have the rebounding impact anywhere close to Love 9+ per game out of the gate. I'd opt for Sullinger. Tough Decision, Robinson has hit Jumpers put the ball on the floor and looks to finish with authority Every time. Both have great work ethic

[Ruzious]

Gordon would be a nice addition - I'm not a raving fan, but he'd sure be a huge upgrade for us.

But it would sure make for a strange-looking lineup if Sullinger is our pick: A team where the PG (Wall) is taller than the SG (Gordon), and the SF (Singleton) is taller than the PF (Sullinger).


Why, it so crazy that it just....might........WORK!!!!

I'm nitpicking, but Sullinger is taller than Singleton. Singleton measured in at 6'9 with shoes (6'7.5 without) in the pre-draft camp, and Sullinger measured in at 6'10 with shoes at the Lebron camp. In HS, he might have been 6'8. Remember, as mature as he looks, he's just 19 years old (3 years younger than Singleton), so he might have grown over the last year or so.

Um, yeah. You are nitpicking.

But in this case, it's helpful. Because if Sullinger really is 6'10, does anyone think he's too small to be effective in the post? Of course, that could cut both ways, because if NBA GMs think that he really is 6'10, there's no way he goes lower than top 3. But then, our odds of being in the top 3 look awfully good....

Oh, and if it makes you feel better, throw Vesely into the starting lineup, can we agree that he's taller than Sullinger?

Yes, we can agree Vesely is taller, but no - it doesn't make me feel better to put him in the starting lineup.

[Ruzious]

Im calling this now, Draft Thomas Robinson!!!!!!!!!, I see so much Amare in his game, he doesnt get to shoot alot of jumpers but when he does he makes them, very good rebounder, really aggresive on the offensive end, really athletic!. Im not saying we should draft him No.1(if we get that pick) but if we do, i wouldnt mind trading a couple of spots down to draft him.

kirubel94, you could be right.

Sullinger really shoots well, carves out space, and is super smart. He will be a good NBA player.

However, Robinson has that Amare bounce you speak of and he is also a quality defender. I am going back and forth on this one between which would be better for the Wizards. Robinson doesn't have a refined NBA game but he finishes with authority--something Sullinger won't do nearly as well in the NBA. I have some questions about which is better for the Wizards.

--My first impression weeks back was draft Robinson over Sullinger if both are on the board.

--However, Sullinger fits the profile on offense as a whole because he can pick-and-pop, set screens, and post up inside. He has a very high BBIQ. Sullinger might be a bigger Adrian Dantley. He's going to score a ton beneath the rim.

It's a question of the beast or the masterful technician. The tiebreaker for me right now is Sullinger is a year younger and apparently making physical improvements. He's stepping up for sure.

It's a GOOD problem to have - to have to choose between these 2.

[Ruzious]

Any chance Mike Scott has played himself into the draft? Man, he is a smart, hardworking, effective player. So what if he's a 5-year Senior and 23 years old? I just love the way he plays. Given the garbage players and idiots that stick around in the League, there really should be space for a Mike Scott in the NBA.

I'd guess mid second round. He's a heckuva college player - but an under-sized PF with nothing that really sticks out. Wes Johnson's failure (and other similarly older prospects) to make it with Minnesota has really made me downgrade older college players.

[nate33]

Back-to-the-basket low-post scoring isn't all that important in today's NBA. It's extremely hard to consistently feed the post against the help defense that is permitted under the current rules. If Robinson can continue to hone his jumper and develop a high-percentage pick-and-pop game, he will be almost as useful on offense as Sullinger. I also think a pick-and-pop floor-stretching big is a better fit alongside a penetrate-and-dish PG like Wall (and also better alongside McGee assuming he develops his hook some more). A post-up big like Sullinger works better alongside a PG with 3-point range.

I think Robinson is a better fit with our current personnel. I'm not smart enough to say if he's necessarily as good as an overall player as Sullinger, but if we determine that the disparity is small, I'd go with Robinson.

I'd really like to see some Synergy stats on their respective shooting percentages from various distances. If Robinson's shooting percentage from the perimeter is in the high 30's or low 40's, I'd be very encouraged.

[MF23]

I disagree with Nate33. Post play is very important in today's game as long as a team has perimeter scorers. The last 2 champions had dominant post scorers and without that they wouldn't have won. It's what's holding the Heat and Thunder back. Great post scorers always create 2 things. They either force a team to double or the occupy a defender attempting to keep that player out of position. When you rotate the ball in either situation you create a lot of openings in the defense. An effective penetrator or shooter ala Kobe or JT can score points off of that against the toughest defenses.

[nate33]

Who was Dallas' dominant post scorer? Who was Boston's?

And let's not forget your other caveat: "as long as a team has perimeter scorers". In my opinion, you need to surround the post scorer with three perimeter scorers. You can only hide one non-shooter on the weakside. We won't ever have enough perimeter scorers to space the floor as long as both Wall and McGee are in the game (unless McGee is the post scorer and our PF has range out to 18 feet - which is something Robinson can do).

Again, I want to reiterate that I'm not opposed to a Sullinger pick. If we think he is substantially better than Robinson, then I'm not worried as much about fit. We should take the best player available. All I'm saying is that if we think they're real close, I'd go with Robinson - particularly if we think Robinson will become a high-percentage midrange shooter.

[Nivek]

I agree with nate. Every advantage you get with a dominant post scorer, you get with a dynamic penetrating player. On dribble penetration, the defense still has to rotate, shooters still get open on the perimeter or in the paint. And not worrying about a dominating post scorer also expands opportunities for a team personnel-wise because the supply of highly-skilled bigs is pretty small.

[MF23]

Nate33, Dirk duh and for LA Gasol. For Boston which I didn't mention they had unconventional post play from KG and Pierce. Like I said you need that aspect in order to win against the tougher defenses. Until Durant and LJ-maybe Bosh- do that for their teams they won't win against the tougher defenses. The Wizards and Sullinger are exclusive to the point I was making about post play being necessary to win it all.

[tontoz]

Nate33, Dirk duh and for LA Gasol. For Boston which I didn't mention they had unconventional post play from KG and Pierce. Like I said you need that aspect in order to win against the tougher defenses. Until Durant and LJ-maybe Bosh- do that for their teams they won't win against the tougher defenses. The Wizards and Sullinger are exclusive to the point I was making about post play being necessary to win it all.

Maybe i am misreading this but it seems like you are saying that Dirk is a post player. If that is the case i have to wonder if you have watched him at all.

[Ruzious]

Nate33, Dirk duh and for LA Gasol. For Boston which I didn't mention they had unconventional post play from KG and Pierce. Like I said you need that aspect in order to win against the tougher defenses. Until Durant and LJ-maybe Bosh- do that for their teams they won't win against the tougher defenses. The Wizards and Sullinger are exclusive to the point I was making about post play being necessary to win it all.

Maybe i am misreading this but it seems like you are saying that Dirk is a post player. If that is the case i have to wonder if you have watched him at all.

Dirk can score pretty much any way there is. How he does it usually depends on the weaknesses of the guys defending him. That's one thing that Sullinger especially has going for him. Now that he's showing he's a legit outside shooting threat with 3 point shooting potential, it makes him that much more versatile in how he can score - depending on the opponent. For example, if he's playing against a 7 footer, take him outside. If he's going against a quicker player, take him inside and brutalize him.

As for the discussion, I don't think it matters how you score - as much as that you score efficiently and that you can do it in volume. It also helps a lot if your offensive skills mesh with your teammates. In that regard, the more ways you can score, the better.