ImageImageImageImageImage

Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

DMVleGeND
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,833
And1: 194
Joined: Sep 06, 2010
Location: PG County, MD
   

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#81 » by DMVleGeND » Sun Apr 7, 2013 1:48 pm

Ruzious wrote:
closg00 wrote:Is there an overlooked/dismissed player in this draft like Drummund was last-year?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/ne ... t=uk_wr_a1

Btw, am I the only one who thinks people have gotten ahead of themselves on Drummond. I spent a lot of posts defending Drummond last year, but now people are ready to call him a superstar in the making. He's still a very limited offensive player who may never be more than version 2 of DeAndre Jordan. Meanwhile, Monroe's play has declined with Drummond's presence. Let's see what happens when Drummond plays 30 plus minutes a game rather than 18.


Well it's because you had people last yr calling him the next Michael Olowokandi, when he's already exceeded expectations and has been a top 5 rookie.

And why are people acting like his offense can't improve? Many of the top big men now weren't nearly as skilled when they were drafted. How good his work ethic is will determine it.
Formerly known as 7-day Dray
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#82 » by Ruzious » Sun Apr 7, 2013 1:50 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:nate, I see McDermott being a great complementary player to stars Wall and Beal. Seraphin inside and Booker do the things McDermott can't do. All Doug McDermott needs to do is what he's already great at, move to get open and score. What's going to surprise most NBA scouts is how well McDermott rebounds and how many garbage baskets McDermott gets. He's also got NBA three point range. His three point shot is INCREDIBLE in the NCAAs and won't be shut down in the NBA.

I don't see any reason NOT to draft McDermott, even with the #9 or 10 pick. I understand Porter, Len, and Olynyk will be higher on their list and each player has his merits, but the things I use to predict say McDermott can be the best player out of even them.

Can he defend anyone? If he's going to be a complementary offensive player, it's important that he be a good defender. Guys you just compared him to - like Bird and Mullen and Nash - weren't complementary players and were all GREAT passers. And they could pick pockets on D - even if they weren't good individual defenders. I haven't seen enough of him to make any judgment, so I'm asking you.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#83 » by Ruzious » Sun Apr 7, 2013 2:00 pm

DMVleGeND wrote:
Ruzious wrote:
closg00 wrote:Is there an overlooked/dismissed player in this draft like Drummund was last-year?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/ne ... t=uk_wr_a1

Btw, am I the only one who thinks people have gotten ahead of themselves on Drummond. I spent a lot of posts defending Drummond last year, but now people are ready to call him a superstar in the making. He's still a very limited offensive player who may never be more than version 2 of DeAndre Jordan. Meanwhile, Monroe's play has declined with Drummond's presence. Let's see what happens when Drummond plays 30 plus minutes a game rather than 18.


Well it's because you had people last yr calling him the next Michael Olowokandi, when he's already exceeded expectations and has been a top 5 rookie.

And why are people acting like his offense can't improve? Many of the top big men now weren't nearly as skilled when they were drafted. How good his work ethic is will determine it.

And those people who compared him to Kandi are probably the same ones falling over their feet talking about how good he is and overrating his potential now.

And of course, I never said he can't improve. I said "He's still a very limited offensive player who may never be more than version 2 of DeAndre Jordan." If all it takes is work ethic, are you saying that Jordan's offensive limitations are caused because he lacks work ethic?
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
mhd
General Manager
Posts: 9,691
And1: 1,708
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#84 » by mhd » Sun Apr 7, 2013 2:20 pm

What about this deal:

Wiz trade #10+Vesely for #19+John Jenkins?

Jenkins will be a good cheap spot up shooter for the rest of his contract. He'll be deadly as a bench shooter with Wall penetrating. ATL moves up in the draft to get a better player.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 70,455
And1: 22,874
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#85 » by nate33 » Sun Apr 7, 2013 2:54 pm

mhd wrote:What about this deal:

Wiz trade #10+Vesely for #19+John Jenkins?

Jenkins will be a good cheap spot up shooter for the rest of his contract. He'll be deadly as a bench shooter with Wall penetrating. ATL moves up in the draft to get a better player.

John Jenkins types are a dime a dozen. I'm not trading down in the draft to get him.
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 54,806
And1: 10,435
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#86 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Sun Apr 7, 2013 3:25 pm

Ruzious wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:nate, I see McDermott being a great complementary player to stars Wall and Beal. Seraphin inside and Booker do the things McDermott can't do. All Doug McDermott needs to do is what he's already great at, move to get open and score. What's going to surprise most NBA scouts is how well McDermott rebounds and how many garbage baskets McDermott gets. He's also got NBA three point range. His three point shot is INCREDIBLE in the NCAAs and won't be shut down in the NBA.

I don't see any reason NOT to draft McDermott, even with the #9 or 10 pick. I understand Porter, Len, and Olynyk will be higher on their list and each player has his merits, but the things I use to predict say McDermott can be the best player out of even them.

Can he defend anyone? If he's going to be a complementary offensive player, it's important that he be a good defender. Guys you just compared him to - like Bird and Mullen and Nash - weren't complementary players and were all GREAT passers. And they could pick pockets on D - even if they weren't good individual defenders. I haven't seen enough of him to make any judgment, so I'm asking you.


Who did Pete Maravich defend? Who did Big Dog Robinson defend? Who did Down Town Freddy Brown defend? Who did Nate Tiny Archibald defend? Who did Rick Barry defend? Who did Steve Nash defend? Who does Steve Novak defend? Who can Mike Miller defend? Antawn Jamison, Rashard Lewis, DeJuan Blair …. they all say hello.

Washington already has a ton of dudes who defend. They are looking for complements and disparate skills. McDermott if he were black would be a lottery player. Because he's white he's "non-athletic" and questions of "who can he defend" come up. Because he's "short" and (supposedly) can only play PF, people look at his lack of height and say that equals lack of potential. They'll blow a draft pick on Vesely and totally ignore production.

I said this same thing about Carlos Boozer about 12 years ago. He was supposedly 280 and could bench 185 but three times are something really unbelievably bad at the time. i said he's better than Kwame. Doug McDermott's numbers say this guy CAN PLAY!

I don't care if he's 4 ft tall and can't defend one of the Olson twins, Ruz. Doug McDermott can do something. :)

Do you remember the knock on Rip Hamilton of the Wizards. "He can't defend". I think McDermott can do the very same thing Bird did. Become an efficient team defender. Also, he can learn to hold and grab and fight for position like NBA players do. I don't care if McDermott is merely a specialist, bench guy and that he's a poor defender….

Ruz, I remember reading one of Bill Russell's books years back that was featured on one of the very first Realgm wiretaps or features. What he wrote about the Celtics is how each player had a skill. His was obviously defending the paint and rebounding. Cousy, Heinsohn, the Joneses all had different things they were great at. Each player stayed in his own realm. They were all great specialists.

Did Dennis Rodman provide offense? How many rings does he have? Why can't Doug McDermott be the next Robert Horry? (Ernie Grunfeld, Scott Wedman, Wally Szczerbiak, Jared Dudley, In their primes all could give offense off the bench to this Wizard team. So can McDermott).
Tre Johnson is the future of the Wizards.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 70,455
And1: 22,874
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#87 » by nate33 » Sun Apr 7, 2013 3:54 pm

CCJ, I think Ruzious has a point. If McDermott is to be a complementary role player, then he's going to have to be able to defend. The only guys in this league that earn minutes without defending are the guys who are big time offensive threats. Larry Bird and Chris Mullen scored 25 points a game to go with 5+ boards and 4+ assists. Steve Nash posted ORtgs in the 125 range and shot close to 50, 40, 90 every year.

Basically, for McDermott to be worthy of a top 10 pick, he needs to be at least as capable on offense as Antawn Jamison. I don't know whether he can be or not; but Ruzious is right that if he isn't going to be a #1 or at least a #2 option on offense, then he needs to defend or else he is merely a situational sub off the bench. You don't draft the next Steve Novak with the #10 pick.

I like your Wally Szczerbiak comparison. That might be a good analogy. Szczerbiak could help a team, but it was a reach to take him #6 overall. It also helped that Szczerbiak had one of the greatest defensive players of all time alongside him to make up for his lack of D. I wouldn't take the next Szczerbiak with the #10 pick, but I wouldn't mind him in the 15-20 range and I'd definitely take him with a 2nd rounder.

I wonder how YODA would rank Szczerbiak versus McDermott? I don't think Nivek's database goes back that far.
mhd
General Manager
Posts: 9,691
And1: 1,708
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#88 » by mhd » Sun Apr 7, 2013 4:30 pm

nate33 wrote:CCJ, I think Ruzious has a point. If McDermott is to be a complementary role player, then he's going to have to be able to defend. The only guys in this league that earn minutes without defending are the guys who are big time offensive threats. Larry Bird and Chris Mullen scored 25 points a game to go with 5+ boards and 4+ assists. Steve Nash posted ORtgs in the 125 range and shot close to 50, 40, 90 every year.

Basically, for McDermott to be worthy of a top 10 pick, he needs to be at least as capable on offense as Antawn Jamison. I don't know whether he can be or not; but Ruzious is right that if he isn't going to be a #1 or at least a #2 option on offense, then he needs to defend or else he is merely a situational sub off the bench. You don't draft the next Steve Novak with the #10 pick.

I like your Wally Szczerbiak comparison. That might be a good analogy. Szczerbiak could help a team, but it was a reach to take him #6 overall. It also helped that Szczerbiak had one of the greatest defensive players of all time alongside him to make up for his lack of D. I wouldn't take the next Szczerbiak with the #10 pick, but I wouldn't mind him in the 15-20 range and I'd definitely take him with a 2nd rounder.

I wonder how YODA would rank Szczerbiak versus McDermott? I don't think Nivek's database goes back that far.


I'd agree with you in a normal type draft. However, this draft isn't like 1999 or 1996. This draft stinks. You might as well get McDermott who will be a great bench scorer, is underaged (compared to his fellow prospects), and fills a need as a good role player.

Anthony Bennett, for all his physical gifts, is a much worse defender than McDermott is. Also remember that McDermott had to expend all his energy on offense in college. In the pros, he'll have a different role.
The Consiglieri
Veteran
Posts: 2,865
And1: 1,047
Joined: May 09, 2007

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#89 » by The Consiglieri » Sun Apr 7, 2013 5:17 pm

stevemcqueen1 wrote:Amazing that Michigan could win this game with Trey Burke playing like total crap.

Burke is poised and skilled but he's physically limited. MCW bothered him with his size and had absolutely no problems whatsoever staying in front of him. MCW isn't a burner either.

I like watching Burke the CBB player. And I really want to like Burke as an NBA prospect but I'm having trouble getting past the fact he is short and doesn't have a good first step. A star NBA PG needs to be able to attack multiple defenders with his dribble and score against set defenses and punish defenses for pressuring him. I don't think Burke has that ability. He looked pretty dang bad against Syracuse pressure. I think he's going to be a role player in the NBA. Sort of an upper-middle class man's Jameer Nelson.


I don't think we should get too up or too down based on one game. He stunk it up last night as a scorer, but did his job otherwise based on reports of what the game plan actually was (essentially focusing on pass first work, and breaking down the 2-3 zone which had massacred four consecutive opponents, and he was successful in doing that, providing Michigan with an 11 point cushion, and directing the offense to nearly as many first half points as Marquette scored in their entire elite 8 grudge match last weekend). He definitely has his limitations, but if we're going to take him to task about his iffy shooting performance last night, what about his quality performance against Kansas the weekend before. Lets look at the entire product, rather than just a one game snap shot. I have the same issue with the Mitch McGary love, which is a bit much, he's excellent, but needs a ton more seasoning and is overage.
mhd
General Manager
Posts: 9,691
And1: 1,708
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#90 » by mhd » Sun Apr 7, 2013 5:43 pm

Why don't we shoot for the home run and take Giannis, the greek kid? In terms of physical tools, only Noel is on par with him (along with maybe Gorbert).
jivelikenice
Analyst
Posts: 3,074
And1: 145
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#91 » by jivelikenice » Sun Apr 7, 2013 5:52 pm

The Vesely draft doesn't allow us to do that. They need to make sure they get someone who projects to a starter of a rotational player. They can't afford to get zero production from this pick long-term.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 15,107
And1: 6,840
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#92 » by doclinkin » Sun Apr 7, 2013 6:15 pm

nate33 wrote:CCJ, I think Ruzious has a point. If McDermott is to be a complementary role player, then he's going to have to be able to defend. The only guys in this league that earn minutes without defending are the guys who are big time offensive threats. Larry Bird and Chris Mullen scored 25 points a game to go with 5+ boards and 4+ assists. Steve Nash posted ORtgs in the 125 range and shot close to 50, 40, 90 every year.

Basically, for McDermott to be worthy of a top 10 pick, he needs to be at least as capable on offense as Antawn Jamison. I don't know whether he can be or not; but Ruzious is right that if he isn't going to be a #1 or at least a #2 option on offense, then he needs to defend or else he is merely a situational sub off the bench. You don't draft the next Steve Novak with the #10 pick.

I like your Wally Szczerbiak comparison. That might be a good analogy. Szczerbiak could help a team, but it was a reach to take him #6 overall. It also helped that Szczerbiak had one of the greatest defensive players of all time alongside him to make up for his lack of D. I wouldn't take the next Szczerbiak with the #10 pick, but I wouldn't mind him in the 15-20 range and I'd definitely take him with a 2nd rounder.
.


Wally likes the Wally Szczerbiak comparison. Quoted him earlier in this thread, on radio, saying that people forget that in college he was a low-post player and that many of his points in the pros came from low-post point off screens etc. He says he's watched Creighton closely and feels McDermott can have the same kind of impact/effect/career he had.

I suspect this sort of thing could have an influence on Wittman given the MInnesota connection, he surely knows Wally's game, and initially tried to work Singleton into that mold on offense, looking for a role for a tweener who could shoot from the wing and get garbage points if left alone underneath. Problem being CSing wasn't really proficient at either.
theboomking
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,597
And1: 20
Joined: Jan 10, 2011

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#93 » by theboomking » Sun Apr 7, 2013 6:58 pm

I would be fine with McDermott. He is very efficient and is an elite shooter.

I am not so sure about Otto Porter. He isn't an other worldly athlete and doesn't appear to have any real elite skills. He isn't an elite rebounder, shooter, scorer, defender, passer, etc. I just don't see him standing out vs any number of the very good SF's in the NBA right now.
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#94 » by Ruzious » Sun Apr 7, 2013 7:09 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:
Ruzious wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:nate, I see McDermott being a great complementary player to stars Wall and Beal. Seraphin inside and Booker do the things McDermott can't do. All Doug McDermott needs to do is what he's already great at, move to get open and score. What's going to surprise most NBA scouts is how well McDermott rebounds and how many garbage baskets McDermott gets. He's also got NBA three point range. His three point shot is INCREDIBLE in the NCAAs and won't be shut down in the NBA.

I don't see any reason NOT to draft McDermott, even with the #9 or 10 pick. I understand Porter, Len, and Olynyk will be higher on their list and each player has his merits, but the things I use to predict say McDermott can be the best player out of even them.

Can he defend anyone? If he's going to be a complementary offensive player, it's important that he be a good defender. Guys you just compared him to - like Bird and Mullen and Nash - weren't complementary players and were all GREAT passers. And they could pick pockets on D - even if they weren't good individual defenders. I haven't seen enough of him to make any judgment, so I'm asking you.


Who did Pete Maravich defend? Who did Big Dog Robinson defend? Who did Down Town Freddy Brown defend? Who did Nate Tiny Archibald defend? Who did Rick Barry defend? Who did Steve Nash defend? Who does Steve Novak defend? Who can Mike Miller defend? Antawn Jamison, Rashard Lewis, DeJuan Blair …. they all say hello.

Washington already has a ton of dudes who defend. They are looking for complements and disparate skills. McDermott if he were black would be a lottery player. Because he's white he's "non-athletic" and questions of "who can he defend" come up. Because he's "short" and (supposedly) can only play PF, people look at his lack of height and say that equals lack of potential. They'll blow a draft pick on Vesely and totally ignore production.

I said this same thing about Carlos Boozer about 12 years ago. He was supposedly 280 and could bench 185 but three times are something really unbelievably bad at the time. i said he's better than Kwame. Doug McDermott's numbers say this guy CAN PLAY!

I don't care if he's 4 ft tall and can't defend one of the Olson twins, Ruz. Doug McDermott can do something. :)

Do you remember the knock on Rip Hamilton of the Wizards. "He can't defend". I think McDermott can do the very same thing Bird did. Become an efficient team defender. Also, he can learn to hold and grab and fight for position like NBA players do. I don't care if McDermott is merely a specialist, bench guy and that he's a poor defender….

Ruz, I remember reading one of Bill Russell's books years back that was featured on one of the very first Realgm wiretaps or features. What he wrote about the Celtics is how each player had a skill. His was obviously defending the paint and rebounding. Cousy, Heinsohn, the Joneses all had different things they were great at. Each player stayed in his own realm. They were all great specialists.

Did Dennis Rodman provide offense? How many rings does he have? Why can't Doug McDermott be the next Robert Horry? (Ernie Grunfeld, Scott Wedman, Wally Szczerbiak, Jared Dudley, In their primes all could give offense off the bench to this Wizard team. So can McDermott).

I'll take that as a no. But when you compare a player to Bird, Mullen, Nate Archibald, Pete Maravich, Rick Barry, and other all-time greats and then say Oh, I just expect him to be a role player, I get confused as to what you're trying to say. Expecting a Scott Wedman or Wally Z is a lot different. And I don't want to use a lotto pick on a bunch of those players that you said say Hello to me. If you talk to them again, tell them I'm not interested. And it's possible we're not in a position that Bill Russell's teams were in, because we don't have a Bill Russell. But if we do get Bill Russell, I'd be happier about spending a lotto pick on McDermott. :wink:
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
The Consiglieri
Veteran
Posts: 2,865
And1: 1,047
Joined: May 09, 2007

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#95 » by The Consiglieri » Sun Apr 7, 2013 8:01 pm

I'd agree w/going for a home run with this pick for a couple of reasons, namely that this is probably our last chance unless something goes really wrong in '13-'14 which honestly I hope happens because the only way this team is getting great is if we land one of the super prospects from that draft. But barring that, or a trade of our '13 pick for assets in '14, I'd target the guys with upside and the highest floor. To me the guys that best fit that label are probably:

Noel
Mclemore
Bennett
Len
GRIII
McCollum
Adams
Mitchell
Austin

Many of these guys would require trade downs, but these guys strike me as the best upside targets, some of which have high floors, some not so much. Don't know squat about the two euros you mention above me (Gobert, Giannis).
The Consiglieri
Veteran
Posts: 2,865
And1: 1,047
Joined: May 09, 2007

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#96 » by The Consiglieri » Sun Apr 7, 2013 8:07 pm

jivelikenice wrote:The Vesely draft doesn't allow us to do that. They need to make sure they get someone who projects to a starter of a rotational player. They can't afford to get zero production from this pick long-term.
The Vesely Draft should be irrelevant. You don't get gunshy, and you don't get obsessed with getting some piece for the puzzle, any piece so long as it works. The low upside low risk players in this draft are no better than anything you could find in free agency at virtually no cost. There's no reason to waste valuable draft picks, which are the only way to cheaply acquire potential elite talent, on players like that. Vesely or no Vesely, I could care less.The only lesson from Vesely should be that you should actually examine what a player can d oand is likely to do, and not simply what you hope some day they might be able to do. Seems like nobody in our scouting department ever noticed that Vesely couldn't shoot a lick. Bizarre.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 15,107
And1: 6,840
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#97 » by doclinkin » Sun Apr 7, 2013 8:39 pm

Dat2U wrote:I live & breath the NBA draft, yet I'll be the first too admit, I really, really do not like this draft. It'a hard for me to figure out who's not going to completely disappoint, so it's probably going to be impossible for Ernie to make the right pick.

I'm all for trading the pick.

Sure, they're might be a young Hedo Turkoglu or Quentin Richardson in the late lottery/mid 1st area... or the next Sam Dalembert available late in the first but even then your not getting a game changer.



I like a trade down not a trade out.

There are decent players deep into the draft. Overlooked players like John Wall's buddy CJ Leslie are projected to be available high in the 2nd round. Though I suspect in one-on-one's he will destroy his workout partners and climb the ladder into round one.

Okay granted he has no jumper and all, but otherwise fits our squad's profile of long rangy fast quick athletic active frenetic high-upside fast break high energy defenders. He's like Jan Vesely with a handle. Blazing first step for his size.

I like Reggie Bullock as a 2nd rounder with all the intangibles of a back up 3 and D type bench worker. Efficient, knows his role (post up shooter and defender) and though he has no real dribble for his SG type size, he won't need it on a squad where John Wall does most of the ballcarrying duties. Stand right there and knock 'em down. Now use the screen and hit the shot. Plus he rebounds and defends bigger than he is. Efficient. A no frills Spurs-type player.

As of right now CCJ's guy Doug (can't spell Doug without G-O-D) McDermott projects to be available with our own (not NY's) round 2 pick. Selecting him would spare us having to hear another year or five of our man in Hawai'i :clown: I like him pretty well, knowing he will have to adjust his game somewhat in the pros, still he's a coaches kid I can see him finding a role, even slimming down a little to add footspeed now that he won't have to bang in the post and can exploit his ranged skillset.

(Something I also see a guy like Anthony Bennett doing as well, who will probably transform a ton when he is in pre-combine workouts, trying to show himself as an SF-capable player. I actually like the high bodyfat % types who display real athleticism under the babyfat. They tend to get faster and stronger when they have real trainers to work with. Hidden upside).

There is somebody in every draft. There are guys who people will be kicking themselves about, no point tapping out without looking to exploit other teams' lack of insight and foresight. Every year there are a couple guys who look far better in retrospect, the signs were always there.
User avatar
BigA
Analyst
Posts: 3,091
And1: 999
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Location: Arlington, VA
 

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#98 » by BigA » Sun Apr 7, 2013 8:50 pm

What do people think about where McGary should go and where he will go?

I don't watch much college hoops but have watched Michigan in the tournament and would be interested in your opinions.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#99 » by hands11 » Sun Apr 7, 2013 9:06 pm

Always draft smart, tough, hard working, energetic players with good character.

To me, McLemore seems soft. Bennett worries me as well. The way Bennett just floats slowly without purpose is concerning. He would need to gain some serious fire in his belly to become the player he could be. To much Kevin S in him and as we have seen, teaching to player to be more aggressive isn't so easy.

You want some fire like VO has. Pierre has it. And McDermott and Wolter have it as well. That's one of the things to gets CCJs attention. Its gets mine as well.

Potter is border line in that regards but I think he is the type that will get there. He is Bealish. I think he has it, it just hasn't all come out yet.

I liked McCollum early. But he may end up being a Foye. That is your downside risk there.

As for Len. People said he didn't have the fire. Well I watched him last game and he had plenty of it.

Given what this team needs more and where they are likely to pick,

I think they take Len.

If they can find another late first, there are plenty of interesting players in that range.
McDermott would be one of them.

2nd rounders.
Muscala and Pierre

Extend Okafor over 2 or 3 years and get his cost average down a little so you have a little more coin to find a back up SG FA. They if they don't find one, I'm find with Beal, Temple and something like a Mason.

Now if Pierre goes undrafted and Cory Jefferson comes out, grab him and have Pierre walk on.
User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III 

Post#100 » by sfam » Sun Apr 7, 2013 9:20 pm

stevemcqueen1 wrote:I also don't like Burke as a draft pick for us. I want John handling the ball for 36 minutes a game, and I think the third guard is probably the easiest position of all to fill in FA. His positional value would be negligible compared to the other positions. And ideally, we'd find a well seasoned vet to be the backup PG anyway. IMO he's only really useful to us as a lotto pick if he's a trade asset.

If guys like Burke are a dime a dozen, why haven't we spent 5 cents on someone who is NBA quality? Instead we have players like Price, who on occaision looks NBA quality, but often looks like he wouldn't make it overseas. If we're looking at either drafting a guard or getting someone for veterans minimum, we aren't getting Mo Williams. We're getting another Price clone. Price clones may be a dime a dozen, but Burke is clearly gonna be worth a few more bucks than that.

Again, I'm all for a really talented Big if available. If Len is there, I'd be happy to draft him. But I'd rather get someone who can help immediately - a 3rd guard is definitely one of our top two areas of need. If we think some of the Sr. PGs in round two can honestly fit the bill, than it does make sense to try to get a 3rd Big. But I'm not sold on their quality yet.

Return to Washington Wizards