RealGM

As long as he leaves his guns at home....could be worse....like a Randy Foye deal...

Overall draft B/B+

FAH1223 wrote:Shooter

I don't really get the pick. He's a shorter Jordan Crawford. But he can play, and I guess that's what you shoot for in the 2nd round.

Gives us another shooter off the bench, but more importantly a guy who was a winner in College and will bring the right attitude to counter all the knuckleheads we already have.

I was really hoping for Honeycutt with this pick.

20MexicanosIn1Van wrote:I was really hoping for Honeycutt with this pick.

Yeah, me too. But assuming the Wiz are re-upping Young, where would he play? Mack is a guy who isn't a pure point, but can be a change of pace guy behind Wall. Wall has the quicks, whereas Mack is the bruising defender. At the very least, he's a hard worker who is going to help with the culture change. A guy like Nick Young will no free passes from Mack in practice.

High def vid ofESPNs coverage...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4FA59N5twA

I really like the pick. Seems like an ideal backup for JW.
He may not be a pure ie Stockton type point but he's a
more than capable player and should allow us to send
Shakur back to the D league. FWIW, I had hopes for
Shakur after his debut in Boston but I fell out of love
with him.

Mack's a winner, a great athlete and figures to be
culturally well suited to the direction mgmt is trying
to take the team.

I don't like the idea of taking the ball out of Jordan Crawford's hands and putting it Shelvin Mack's. Crawford is fine as Wall's backup IMO and Crawford seems so much more effective running the offense through him.

Nothing against Mack. I don't hate the pick. I don't love it. He's better than Shakur who shouldn't be in the team's plans anymore. He can be a 5th guard, just don't see him as a backup PG.

I would have liked a shooter. David Lighty is still available and might give Mack a good run for a roster spot.

I like Mack as a cheap 4th guard. I don't want to see him take minutes from Crawford either, though. He can fill in when we need a steady hand or when someone goes down to injury, and he's going to be a great practice guy.

I do wish he was a slightly better shooter. I wonder what his catch-and-shoot numbers are. Anyone know where we can get that data?

Agree with both ^

Mack will probably end up as a 4th G with Crawford getting most
of the bench minutes in the backcourt, especially for the next year.
There's nothing wrong with that for a 2nd rnd pick. If we have injuries,
hopefully Mack will be ready to step in and at least fill a role.

dobrojim wrote:Agree with both ^

Mack will probably end up as a 4th G with Crawford getting most
of the bench minutes in the backcourt, especially for the next year.
There's nothing wrong with that for a 2nd rnd pick. If we have injuries,
hopefully Mack will be ready to step in and at least fill a role.

That's it right there. Mack and fill in for either the #1 or the #2 position, which is really what you want out of your 4th guard. He'll probably only get spot minutes until someone gets hurt. If God forbid, Wall gets hurt for a month or so, we'll be in a situation where Mack works fine as a third guard - but he also works fine as a third guard if NY gets hurt.

Sebastian Pruiti likes Shelvin Mack and gives him high marks in areas that will aid his transition to "pure" point guard.



In this regard he likes him better than a few of the guys taken ahead of him.

On top of that, the his comparatively low usage rate should serve him well when adjusting to a new role:

In my opinion, Mack is right there with Nolan Smith when it comes to putting the basketball right in the shooting pocket. I think what separates Smith and Mack from guys like Walker, Cole, and Jenkins is that when they are forced to throw a jump pass or a skip pass, they can put that right on the money as well.

For the most part, when Shelvin Mack comes off of a ball screen, he makes the right plays, makes the right decisions, and his passes are on the money. However, if you throw a trap on him, you can bother him a little bit. He has a tendency to back dribble (or pick up his dribble all together) against the trap, allowing the defense to be the agressors rather than himself.

Bookmark nbaplaybook.com!

Dat2U wrote:I don't like the idea of taking the ball out of Jordan Crawford's hands and putting it Shelvin Mack's. Crawford is fine as Wall's backup IMO and Crawford seems so much more effective running the offense through him.

Nothing against Mack. I don't hate the pick. I don't love it. He's better than Shakur who shouldn't be in the team's plans anymore. He can be a 5th guard, just don't see him as a backup PG.

I would have liked a shooter. David Lighty is still available and might give Mack a good run for a roster spot.

I still believe Crawford will be backing up Wall. I see Mack getting some spot duty but I wouldnt pencil him in as the back up PG just yet. They can roll out Nick or Wall first and Crawford would step into either position. Then when the next one goes out, he would move over.

Wall/Nick
Craw/Nick
Wall/Craw or Mack/Craw
Wall/Nick

I think Mack is a good option as a 4th guard. I think having 3 potential PGs on the team is a good thing. I think any combination of Wall, Nick Young, Crawford and Mack can work at least as a stopgap backcourt. Mack/Crawford may be a little undersized, but it would be a stopgap and would let either player initiate the offense.

Assuming Mack is a legit NBA player, I think he can provide a steady hand off the bench on nights that Wall struggles. Crawford is a better option as the back-up when more scoring is needed from the back-court.

Possibly added for flexability in the event a trade arises that allows team to shore up weak spots (rebounding, 3-Pt shooting); if the right long-term piece is available in trade, a reliable backup PG makes it easier to part with Crawford in trade, either alone or in combination w/ Blatche, picks, etc.

Sh'Mack Attack

fishercob wrote:Sebastian Pruiti likes Shelvin Mack and gives him high marks in areas that will aid his transition to "pure" point guard.



In this regard he likes him better than a few of the guys taken ahead of him.

On top of that, the his comparatively low usage rate should serve him well when adjusting to a new role:

In my opinion, Mack is right there with Nolan Smith when it comes to putting the basketball right in the shooting pocket. I think what separates Smith and Mack from guys like Walker, Cole, and Jenkins is that when they are forced to throw a jump pass or a skip pass, they can put that right on the money as well.

For the most part, when Shelvin Mack comes off of a ball screen, he makes the right plays, makes the right decisions, and his passes are on the money. However, if you throw a trap on him, you can bother him a little bit. He has a tendency to back dribble (or pick up his dribble all together) against the trap, allowing the defense to be the agressors rather than himself.

Bookmark nbaplaybook.com!

I think Jenkins will surprise people for where he was picked. I'll be shocked if Jenkins doesn't stick and ends up in D-League.

fish, I think Pruiti is as sharp as they come. I think, however, that Mack had and advantage of having very strong, veteran post players in Howard and the C (can't recall his name). Mack can hit the deep ball and he'll be a decent distributor and a hard-nosed player. I think he's a winner. I just don't see where he takes minutes from established jacker Crawford or Young.

I could be wrong.

I'm personally not especially jazzed about the pick, though I realize Mack was commonly slotted at or around where he was selected and that people with more respected voices than my own think he was a smart pick and a pretty good bet to make the team.

Me I don't know that he won't but there are two players I would have far and away preferred with the pick, Honeycutt and Parsons (you might say the team has no minutes for either but I basically consider Lewis no impediment whatsoever and expect Vesely and Singleton to see about as much time at power forward as small forward between them so the team still needs a forward who can shoot) , and a number of others that I would have probably liked better but the difference is less extreme, Bertans, Malcolm Lee, Darius Morris, maybe Keith Benson and John Luer, I don't really even like Charles Jenkins but perhaps him as well, Goudelock I would have felt about the same about.

Mostly though I'm not especially excited about the fact that the most compelling thing most analysts can say about Mack is "he's a winner." To me that suggests not that he was such a good player that he was directly responsible for a large amount of winning, but rather that he must be some kind of wizard whose weirding ways were misused to win Horizon League basketball games. Well now he's another kind of Wizard and I don't think that stuff works in the big leagues. We'll see I guess.

Dat2U wrote:I don't like the idea of taking the ball out of Jordan Crawford's hands and putting it Shelvin Mack's. Crawford is fine as Wall's backup IMO and Crawford seems so much more effective running the offense through him.

Nothing against Mack. I don't hate the pick. I don't love it. He's better than Shakur who shouldn't be in the team's plans anymore. He can be a 5th guard, just don't see him as a backup PG.

I would have liked a shooter. David Lighty is still available and might give Mack a good run for a roster spot.

A key determining factor could be how each one plays alongside John Wall. Crawford may be a better fit alongside Wall because he is bigger although I suspect Mack may at times have better quickness in staying in front of quicker guards.

Shooting from the perimeter is also a key factor. While Crawford projected to be an at least adequate shooter from 3 point range in college, he has been pretty disappointing with a 25% 3 point percentage. Then again, Mack had a worse 3 point percentage than Crawford in college although he was often in the role of driving and kicking out to the open shooter.

Mck's assist to turnover ratio also hasn't been that impressive although I'm curious if that will improve with a different kind of play in the NBA.

But yeah, I think Crawford is the superior prospect. At the same time, I don't want to write off Mack just yet.

I think there were 3 guys who are clearly more talented than Mack that the Wizards passed on. I think Honeycut, Williams and Tyler all have much higher ceilings.

I think that Honeycutt has the potential to be an NBA starter, however I think he will need playing time to develop. The Wizards don't seem to have a lot of minutes available to develop yet another forward.

Jeremey Tyler has plenty of talent, but I think him on a roster with Blatche(and to a lesser degree McGee) has disaster written all over it. I don't know that Golden State will be any better for his development. If he ended up on a team with a strong veteran post presence, I think his chances would be a lot better.

Jordan Williams would be an easy pick(post scorer, rebounder and UMD connection). He probably would have been the pick if Pollin was the owner. I think Williams would need PT to develop into an NBA post player and maybe even will spend a significant amount of time in D-League in his first couple seasons. I think his lack of athleticism, may have made him a poor fit on the Wizards.

If he was available, I would have liked Harper because I think he can step into a 10/15 mpg role pretty quickly. I think Mack can do the same.