Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part V

[sfam]

As an aside, its pretty cool that a crappy defender like Bennett averages 1.4 blocks a game.

[stevemcqueen1]

...With our coach and history of player development, particularly raw bigs, you can't take Bennett over Porter. You need to pick the guy who already knows how to play. Same as we did with Beal...

This is the most persuasive argument for taking Porter over Bennett. Do we see Bennett developing with this coaching staff, who clearly has a poor history on developing bigs? This, like Bennett's ability and desire to play defense is an unknown.

But do you see Porter having real All-Star potential, or do you just see him as a high quality role player who fits what we do?

I actually really like Bennett even though I've been arguing against him. That's the irony. I glommed onto him during the season when you could just see the flashes of LJ in him. He was just blowing by big guys and overpowering little guys and dunking hard on everyone, reverses, clutches, two handers that looked like he was about to tear the whole back board down. But he was getting all of his stuff on improvised plays that he made off of raw talent--ISOs and perimeter drives where he just got by multiple defenders and finished, transition threes, running the floor and dunking over guys on the break, begging for the ball inside and then just going through or over top defenders. He wasn't really executing an offense, wasn't really executing complex NBA style scoring plays. He's a raw player that hasn't figured it out yet and that makes me terrified to try and take him and develop him ourselves. I can see him getting buried on the bench early in his career, during the really fragile period in a young player's career. I can see him struggling to command minutes and then getting replaced by a mediocre vet who is ready to go and then we just forget about Bennett and view him as a sunk cost and a bust and we can't ship him off fast enough.

With Porter, I think you're thinking about it the wrong way if you are trying to figure out if he'll become an AS or not. Did anyone ever see Roy Hibbert or Luol Deng becoming All Stars? That kind of stuff is out of a player's control mostly, and it's a product of very complex on court results we can't really foresee. Who knows if he can score 16 and rebound 7 and piles up 3 assists per game? All the situations that need to happen for that aren't really predictable.

What you can start to envision instead is how Porter's specific skills can be utilized by the Wiz, how they'll look in the NBA. I see great off the ball skills, that'll be super useful for our team. I see reliable shooting with range out to three, again very useful. I see a creative mid range game that can be a legit source of offense for our half court sets, useful. I see excellent passing ability, the vision to move the ball across the court and set up scorers. I see extremely good efficiency finishing in transition. I see tenaciousness on the glass and good offensive rebounding ability, the ability to create and score off of second chances. I see an excellent ability to draw contact and get to the line. I see a great team defender who communicates really well and knows how to help out plus he makes a lot of opportunistic steals and has the length to close out on perimeter shooters and get into the paint and make it harder to score at the rim--extremely useful.

So in short, I see so many excellent tools in his box, most of which could be a big help to us as we strive to start playing consistent, winning basketball. That's what you'll measure his success by. He's going to command big minutes immediately because he's so good at basketball. We've got a situation where we need all of those things that he can do. He's an ideal fit that's probably going to fall into our laps, just like Beal did.

It's complete speculation, but my guess is that, if Deng and Granger can go to All Star games, if Jrue Holiday can, so can Porter.

[pancakes3]

if we don't pick drummond, and of course everyone is going act like they were in agreement when adams makes the allstar team and-nba defensive team in a few years, everyone on this board is going to try to revise history and pull a "drummond". My word for what most old posters here like to pull after they are horribly wrong on their predictions, if we don't pick drummond... getting an explosive 3/4 like bennet is definitely a no brainer. Unlike derrick williams, this mini lebron has an explosive first step and is super star. Why...because he can draw fouls during crunch time and has blow by ability off the triple threat. Lateral speed is a little below average but skilled is an understatement for this player. unlike the knuckleheads mcgee, young, and blatche...this guy spends his offseason playing for his country on the national team. For me its adams and bennet or trade back and get an extra late lottery pick if a team is able to acquire two from dallas.

And are you ready to accept ridicule for touting Aminu as the next big can't-miss prospect?

Snark aside, I do think that Steven Adams is severely underrated and deserves to be a lotto pick, and is being rectified as he shoots up the draft board.

The Mavs have to know there's no way they can land the free agents they're targeting, or at best it's a long shot. Maybe offering them OkaRiza and draft picks to fill their roster in exchange for Marion and the 13th will give us a shot at Adams.

This quote from Adams is especially heartening: "Steven Adams I'm not gonna go in straight away & dominate but I will dominate certain tasks they put me up to"

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Regarding backup PG options, I don't want a Wolters or Pierre Jackson. Rather than getting one of these marginal 2nd round guys, we have to find a way to get at least a Larkin-level player. We saw what happened with no Wall last season. We need a backup who is at least league average

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/pla ... ers-1.html

Look at the bottom of Wolters stats for the words "Career NCAA". Leaders since 1997-1998:

Wolters is
#1 all-time in Points Produced.
#2 all-time Offensive Win Share
#9 in Offensive Rating
#19 in PER (28.1 career)
Top 25 in Points, Free Throws, Free Throw Attempts, Minutes

What's more impressive is the bold number ones. His assist percentage in the Summit has been four straight no. 1 finishes. He is going to easily transition to NBA PG. Nate Wolters has at least 15 firsts. In conference he had great shooting, good steals, even a good defensive rating to go with the best offensive rating. Wolters is a great player!

This player has already lit up lottery picks (over the past four years) and helped shut down Trey Burke this NCAAs. I went on and on about how good Millsap would be. Same with Faried. I feel just as passionately about how good Wolters projects to be. He belongs in round one.

Nate Wolters could become just as good as Burke. Steve Nash never leaped 44". Is Shane Larkin better because he can? I saw Larkin play live this season. Quickest player I have ever seen. Yet, he's not a great floor general. Wolters can score and pass and should be better than Lin. He will end up starting and will be the surprise of this draft if he goes in round two.

[tontoz]

Right now the lack of spacing really hurts the offense. Nene/Okafor couldnt make jumpers at all so the opposing defenses just packed it in.

Getting a 4 who can shoot would greatly improve the spacing for Wall's drives. In a Wall/Bennett pick and roll Bennett would be a threat to hit the jumper or roll to the basket and finish with authority. Some of his drives to the basket remind me of Amare.

[fishercob]

You have the weigh the risk vs. reward. What's the reward for Bennett? What is really his upside? Is it the next Larry Johnson? Or is it more like the next Rodney Rogers?

I think folks see a guy that's built like a tank and shoots 3 pts and they get excited. But some of things he says and the way he plays at times really bothers me. He's not just a bad defender, he plays like he gives zero f*ck about playing D. He freely admits he's a perimeter player although he's probably at least 260 ibs. There have been questions about how good a shape he's in. He's just not serious yet. I don't see how drafting him 3rd, giving him $5 mil a year and calling him part of the next big 3 is going to help him mature into a complete basketball player.

Agree.

Watch that scouting video AFM just posted. His weaknesses are those of red flags -- effort, shot selection, defensive awareness. We just cleared our roster of "high upside" guys with these same warts. Can I get some examples of guys that had thease types of knocks against them coming into the league and overcame them.? I'm not trying to impugn the kid's character; he may be a lovely guy. But you can't teach motor. You can't rely on coaching to get a guy to play hard and care about both ends of the floor.

I need my bigs to be.....big. I'm not at all convinced he can be a key cog in a high-functioning defensive unit like Porter or Oladipo.

The other thing I'm not crazy about is that that one of his key strengths is offensive rebounding. Zach Lowe (I think) had a piece earlier this year on how the offensive boards are being de-emphasized by NBA teams. Denver, Brooklyn and the Clippers would good offensive teams in terms of efficiency who did well on the offensive glass. But Miami was 26th on the O-boards. Spurs 29th. ROckets, Knicks, Warriors, Lakers were all around or below average. It's not that offensive rebounding is bad -- it's not. But shooting efficiency is far more important. Given Bennett's shot selection and skill set, I'm not loving him as a fit on either end of the floor.

[GhostsOfGil]

Kev, how does Bennett compare to Blake Griffin as a prospect?

[The Consiglieri]

Why is it that Consigilieri and stevemcqueen and myself agree on all prospects and Dat, CCJ, and nate agree on prospects? What do we look for differently?

I would also add that I actually pay far more atttention to the draft and the related impact of draftable players before and after drafts than i do basketball as a whole because since I began paying serious attention in '86-'87, the wizards/boulez have largely stunk, and I always preferred other sports to retain my focus during the basketball season ( Pro and College football, Hockey, Baseball, Soccer, and College Hoops). As a result, i've spent probably 10x more attention on draft related issues, then seasons (this same occurence happened during the redskins decline from '96-'09). As a result, while I would not compare my basketball acumen here with any of the typical posters, or the draftniks, I do think i have a great eye for "signs of bust", and "signs of value", whether it's screaming for the Boulez to find a way to trade up for Pierce nearly 15 years ago, celebrating the Rip Hamilton selection, than excoriating the trade, screaming again to trade up for Caron Butler, screaming and pounding my head against the wall when we ended up with Jared Jeffries, being relatively okay with Young and McGee, who I felt were good value at slot, particularly considering the lack of very many quality options left or noting the odd similarities of guys like Cal Cheaney, Joe Smith, and the words people are using when they talk about Porter.

I can sniff a mediocrity at the next level like nobodies business. I sometimes miss on busts, and I definitely miss on guys I love, but generally if i say somebody's either going to bust, or subpar value at slot, or that somebody falling is well worth it, I'm right. I can't mine for 2nd round gold like CCJ (though as another poster said earlier this week, if you positively rep 2/3's of draftable players, you aren't in a position to really pump up your later round genius, got to thin that herd a bit and focus in on the guys you really are willing to proclaim values).


My worries about Porter are directly related to what I see, read, and hear about him. It all sounds like guys like Joe Smith and Cal Cheaney. Perfectly good pro's, but nowhere near worth their slot selection for what they brought to the table at the next level. Porter has that same, great guy, smart guy, does everything just about the right way, good motor, but not great at anything, and nothing to speak of elite. After watching drafts going back to Mugsy, and Tom Hammonds (when I was just out of 8th grade and on a trip through the northwest with my parents), I can smell that "mediocre at the next level," scent, and I can sniffing it about Porter. The only things throwing me off the trail right now are the length, which is terrific, the rebounding which is very good, and the love of Boeheim, a cranky guy that doesnt prop people too much, which is intriguing.

This draft when i sniff around the future, I feel that Noel is either going to be a franchise guy, or an injury nightmare like Oden, and there's just no way of knowing. If he's healthy, he's a massively valuable asset, particularly in this draft. I feel McLemore should be a very good player, probably the third best player out of this draft. I think Bennet is the second best player, and teams that pass on him will regret it (which is what I felt last year about Drummond after MKG and Davis were off the board (but i understood Beal over him because we just couldn't risk adding a potential knucklehead after expending so much energy getting rid of three), I think Porter reminds me of guys like Pierce and Butler back in the day, who became value when they dropped to the bottom of the top 10, but weren't necessairly value at the top of the draft.

And the one similarity perhaps myself and a few others that prefer Bennett have is that we may just value guys who have an NBA elite skill or talent, that should translate, and that when a player has that, it trumps all other players unless they also have that, and Porter almost certainly does not. With the lack of athleticism, and elite skill, the only unusual quality he has is the length of a PF or shorter center, which is probably reflected in the rebounding, and could make him more intriguing for me. However when I watch Bennett and McLemore, and Noel, i see guys that have something that all great NBA players have, some quality that will allow them to thrive, whether it's Bennett's advanced game as a scorer with elite skill so young, Noel's elite defensive tools, or McLemore going from a non-entity after a lost season, to exploding his soph year, and showing in many a game, the ability to outright take over,for instance when he put the sword to Michigan in the elite 8, and did everything save drag Kansas kicking and screaming to the final four (too bad Withey didn't show up).

I don't see that in Porter, he had a coming out game or two, the Syracuse game was massive, and hinted at possibilities, but otherwise he's hidden, perhaps in that O, or perhaps simply because in the end he doesnt have the tools to be great.

And to me, if you don't have the tools to be great, and there's a player who does, available, then you ALWAYS take the player who does, because just about always you'll regret it if you don't.. In '95 we needed a PG, but took Wallace and could have taken KG, despite having Howard or Webber. The right move. The wrong move was trading young and big, for old and small twice in the next three years (Sheed for Strick and Duckworth, and later Webber for a bucket of insurance bills from Mitch Richmonds doctor, and thank you notes from the people of greater Sacremento, Placerville and Vacaville). You go for greatness, you don't settle. The only way you become great, is by being great, and the only way to do that in this league is by drafting players that can become great (not porter), or by signing or trading for them, and at this point, the only way we can probably become great if we draft Porter, is if we pull off what the Warriors did this past season, and make ourselves look mighty attractive to free agents, or everybody is out for the year next year and we land another high lottery pick.

Id rather take Bennett, or Noel, or trade the rights to mclemore for a lower pick and a '14 pick, for whatever falls later in round 1 (thus helping us get one more shot at a star next year).

[Severn Hoos]

Posted this in his dedicated thread but is Satoransky coming over? We need to evaluate him before we invest heavily into the PG position.

Don't know if he's coming over, and don't really expect much of anything out of him, but this question did get me thinking about the PG position as it relates to our draft & FA decisions this summer. What I mean is - I'd like to see Porter as the pick, Webster signed, and Ariza dealt for a frontcourt player. That leaves a big hole at PG - and since we're envisioning Webster as a backup to both SF & SG (eventually, in the event Porter doesn't start right away), I had been thinking of the backup PG as more of a pure PG than a combo guard.

But then I realized that Porter & Beal both have some decent ballhandling & playmaking skills - and of course Nene is a very good passer for a PF/C. So maybe a guy like Satoransky - who is not a traditional PG in any sense of the term - might work with that lineup. Normally I'd look at a team with a PG such as Wall the way we look at a football team with a QB like Griffin - it's really tough to change everything when you go from the starter to the backup if their styles are so different. Meaning I'd want a ball-dominant setup man to back up Wall because the team would be used to / dependent on that type of player.

But Porter has some of those skills, especially if he's on one side and Nene's on the other. Maybe for those stretches where Wall is out, it's a PG-by-committee, and they could use a deadeye shooter (like a Seth Curry?) at PG to be the nominal PG? Biggest problem there is if/when Wall is out for an entire game, because I think you need a more traditional style PG for the bulk of the 48 minutes, and besides, Porter & Nene certainly can't play all 48 themselves.

It will be interesting to see if Tomas comes over - I hope he's at least here for Summer League.

[sfam]

You have the weigh the risk vs. reward. What's the reward for Bennett? What is really his upside? Is it the next Larry Johnson? Or is it more like the next Rodney Rogers?

I think folks see a guy that's built like a tank and shoots 3 pts and they get excited. But some of things he says and the way he plays at times really bothers me. He's not just a bad defender, he plays like he gives zero f*ck about playing D. He freely admits he's a perimeter player although he's probably at least 260 ibs. There have been questions about how good a shape he's in. He's just not serious yet. I don't see how drafting him 3rd, giving him $5 mil a year and calling him part of the next big 3 is going to help him mature into a complete basketball player.

For me there's only 3 players to consider, Noel, Porter or Oladipo. Outside of that, a trade for a youngish big.

Trading down would be an option, but only if were really getting back someone good. Trading down for the likes of Jared Dudley is a no go for me, because IMO that would likely take us out of the running for one of the top 3 propsects.

I'm with you. I like Bennett's upside but guys like that always come here and bust.

Well again, the last 6'7" PF coming highly rated out of UNLV did pretty well. As the game has evolved, smaller, faster players up front seem to be the direction things are moving towards. Chris Bosh as a center looks more valuable than Roy Hibbert, for example. A few years back, Bosh would never have played center - now this is becoming the norm. If he has the right work ethic, a guy with Bennett's skillset could really make an impact in today's NBA.

[nate33]

Here's an interesting interview of Taylor Burn of the Las Vegas Sun on Anthony Bennett. He voices some of the same concerns that we have about his defense and the inevitable culture shock he's going to experience once he has to deal with coaches and teammates who demand that he defend, but at the same time, he feels Bennett's poor D isn't necessarily an intrinsic weakness. He can play much better if properly coached and motivated.

Q: Anthony Bennett has often been scrutinized for his lack of commitment on the defensive side of the floor. Why did he struggle so much on that side of the floor? The Washington Wizards were ranked amongst the top defensive teams in the NBA (8th in defensive efficiency) and have ultimately gotten rid of a handful of players which weren’t willing to buy into the system. Is Bennett’s lack of defensive productivity a legitimate concern or does he seem like the type of athlete who will eventually develop into an acceptable defender?

A: I think with the right coaching he could buy into the defensive side of the ball. A lot of it certainly falls on him, but I think that at Findlay Prep and UNLV he was never really asked and forced to put the same type of effort into defense as offense, so he just didn’t. If that is made a priority by a coach, essentially by someone telling him, and then proving to him, that the only way they’ll put him on the court is if he plays better defense then I think he could make some big strides there. Because he’s athletic enough to move around better at that end and big enough to stand his ground.

http://wizofawes.com/2013/05/17/nba-dra ... r-bern-qa/

[Dark Faze]

Kev, how does Bennett compare to Blake Griffin as a prospect?

i lol'd

[Zonkerbl]

Here's an interesting interview of Taylor Burn of the Las Vegas Sun on Anthony Bennett. He voices some of the same concerns that we have about his defense and the inevitable culture shock he's going to experience once he has to deal with coaches and teammates who demand that he defend, but at the same time, he feels Bennett's poor D isn't necessarily an intrinsic weakness. He can play much better if properly coached and motivated.

Q: Anthony Bennett has often been scrutinized for his lack of commitment on the defensive side of the floor. Why did he struggle so much on that side of the floor? The Washington Wizards were ranked amongst the top defensive teams in the NBA (8th in defensive efficiency) and have ultimately gotten rid of a handful of players which weren’t willing to buy into the system. Is Bennett’s lack of defensive productivity a legitimate concern or does he seem like the type of athlete who will eventually develop into an acceptable defender?

A: I think with the right coaching he could buy into the defensive side of the ball. A lot of it certainly falls on him, but I think that at Findlay Prep and UNLV he was never really asked and forced to put the same type of effort into defense as offense, so he just didn’t. If that is made a priority by a coach, essentially by someone telling him, and then proving to him, that the only way they’ll put him on the court is if he plays better defense then I think he could make some big strides there. Because he’s athletic enough to move around better at that end and big enough to stand his ground.

http://wizofawes.com/2013/05/17/nba-dra ... r-bern-qa/

Again, the only way to get the guy to play defense is to penalize him? You can't just expect him to be self-motivated? Ugh.

[GhostsOfGil]

Kev, how does Bennett compare to Blake Griffin as a prospect?

i lol'd

Clearly one is not like the other, but I'm curious to see how big the gap is considering Griffin also had similar size concerns. You have such an adamant stance against Bennett, it makes it hard to buy into your posts. Your so entrenched in your arguments that I can't tell if your just massively opinionated or you actually believe in what your posting.

[fishercob]

Here's an interesting interview of Taylor Burn of the Las Vegas Sun on Anthony Bennett. He voices some of the same concerns that we have about his defense and the inevitable culture shock he's going to experience once he has to deal with coaches and teammates who demand that he defend, but at the same time, he feels Bennett's poor D isn't necessarily an intrinsic weakness. He can play much better if properly coached and motivated.

Q: Anthony Bennett has often been scrutinized for his lack of commitment on the defensive side of the floor. Why did he struggle so much on that side of the floor? The Washington Wizards were ranked amongst the top defensive teams in the NBA (8th in defensive efficiency) and have ultimately gotten rid of a handful of players which weren’t willing to buy into the system. Is Bennett’s lack of defensive productivity a legitimate concern or does he seem like the type of athlete who will eventually develop into an acceptable defender?

A: I think with the right coaching he could buy into the defensive side of the ball. A lot of it certainly falls on him, but I think that at Findlay Prep and UNLV he was never really asked and forced to put the same type of effort into defense as offense, so he just didn’t. If that is made a priority by a coach, essentially by someone telling him, and then proving to him, that the only way they’ll put him on the court is if he plays better defense then I think he could make some big strides there. Because he’s athletic enough to move around better at that end and big enough to stand his ground.

http://wizofawes.com/2013/05/17/nba-dra ... r-bern-qa/

I don't know how expecting significant improvement in defensive effort and execution from Bennett could be termed anything other than a huge gamble.

[sfam]

I would love to find an interview with Bennett or his coach that address his work habits and lapses on defense. Hopefully someone gets this in the next few weeks.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Note: Before someone else notes this on those Wolters stats, some only go back to 2009-2010. I looked at many of the names ahead and it's a mixed bag. You find names like Steph Curry and JJ Redick behind Wolters, but Jaycee Carroll is at the top of one list. Jimmer Fredette is not far behind. Tyler Hansbrough is a career leader on the list.

Still, I like Wolters a lot.

[fishercob]

Chad Ford tweets:

Muscala had one of the best workouts I've EVER seen for a big man. Literally missed just 2 shots entire workout. Crazy skills for big.

Muscala, by the way, had the highest shooting percentage of anyone at NBA Draft Combine.

I don't think he ends up lasting until 37. I think we'd have to do a Trevor Booker type deal up to the late first to get him.

[nate33]

With our coach and history of player development, particularly raw bigs, you can't take Bennett over Porter. You need to pick the guy who already knows how to play. Same as we did with Beal.

I've seen this argument floated a few times in this thread and I disagree with it completely. This isn't two years ago. We have expunged all the knuckleheads and lazy players from the roster already. This team now has a great attitude and support system in place. Guys come here, work hard, and buy into the team.

What good is it to add veterans with work ethic if you don't use them to teach young players how to be pros? This is exactly the reason why we added Nene, Okafor and Ariza in the first place. This is why San Antonio can take retreads like Stephen Jackson and Boris Diaw and get them to buy in.

I think we are the perfect team to help mold a guy like Anthony Bennett.

[nate33]

I don't know how expecting significant improvement in defensive effort and execution from Bennett could be termed anything other than a huge gamble.

Yes, it's a gamble. No question about it. Bennett's floor is lower than Porter's. But the gamble has upside too. Bennett's ceiling is also higher than Porter's. Consiglieri makes a powerful argument that Porter really lacks the "it" factor to be anything more than an ordinary role player. You can always find guys like that with the MLE. Why use the #3 overall pick on one?

I readily cede that the work ethic issue might be an insurmountable hurdle for Bennett. It's why I say more research needs to be done. But if Bennett gets ruled out, I still don't love Porter at #3. I'd take Oladipo. (Or, preferably, trade the pick.)