Ruzious wrote:I_Like_Dirt wrote:The Wizards don't have a need for a player to step into the rotation right away. Assuming Gafford is the backup C and they use the MLE on a guy worth a rotation spot, the top 8 is largely covered. They're looking to fill spots 9 through 15. And honestly, even if they weren't, fishing for an immediate impact guy in the draft is a fool's errand. Sometimes guys will play right away and sometimes they won't. It's a mistake to have that be a major factor in the decision. It's all about the quality and total of minutes they'll give teams over their careers. Most rookies aren't actually particularly good contributors in their rookie season anyway and that production could be replaced my minimum signings. It's all about development.
Sent from my SM-G970W using
RealGM mobile app
Otoh, getting a guy like Duarte - who will be 24 as a rookie - might be smart, because he's likely going to be more developed as a rookie. The 19 year olds in this draft might have more long-range potential but probably won't be useful as rookies. I don't really want a Zaire Williams till his 2nd contract, tbh.
Right. Absent a guy falling who is too talented to pass, I have no problem selecting Chris Duarte. Especially if I can get him on a trade back.
An "Immediate impact guy" simply means you are recruiting a player who will give you a quick return on your 'dollar-for-minutes-played' ratio. It seems half stupid to me to sneer at a guy who already knows how to play the game of basketball in favor of a player who might someday be good. As if the player who has shown a proven track record of improvement will somehow stop developing and remain frozen at their current (high) level.
Chris Duarte has had some zigzags in his pre-Div I career, and learned from them. He met his challenges and exceeded expectations, to the extent where he was among the tops in the NCAA in true shooting% on high output. This while being notably disruptive on defense. Guards who post high %'s in efficiency tend to translate, and if they play defense then they tend to get minutes. They continue to develop because they have a role waiting for them and get live-fire reps in meaningful moments.
Successful franchises find ways of maximizing their opportunities. Some part of that includes finding guys who outperform their draft slot. Drafting outside the lottery means you are finding guys who are not sure-fire locks to become all-NBA. Teams that build a foundation with hardworking smart players who already have a role in the NBA are teams that won't struggle to find an identity. Or burn out too many developmental guys who don't yet know how to play at all, much less play together. The primary knock on Duarte is that he is older than the guys who will be drafted ahead of him. He gets knocked down a peg because he had to take a hard route to national notice. But he wasn't scoring at that rate due to his age. He scores because he plays the game the right way. He works hard. He reads the defense. To me there is nothing wrong with picking a player who actually has a position open for them. Yes we don't have the luxury of simply drafting for need. Need still goes into the equation, since otherwise you are devaluing the asset by recruiting a guy who will fight for minutes behind players you already have at the position.
But that's not the reason you pick him. You pick him because he is a damn good player. If you could, wouldn't you draft the 24 year old Bradley Beal if he was available in the 2018 draft? Because (at the D1 level) Duarte is the closest equivalent I have seen to Brad Beal in the package of shots he has in his bag. Stylistically he is very very similar to the age 24 Brad. Slightly worse handle and passing, significantly better defense. But the shots he takes and makes are Beal-esque.
I get the sense there will be a majority of players selected before Chris Duarte who will not have half his career longevity & success, nor minutes played. He's got a floater, hesitation dribble, teardrop, outside shot with quickness confidence and range; he anticipates plays and makes smart sharp timely cuts. He has the old man's game that (similarly high% scorer) Harden came into the league with, able to outsmart his opponents and make the right read. 2nd most efficient shooter off the dribble in the NCAA this year. AND he also plays defense, with high effort and intelligent play. He anticipates well for steals, but he also helps well in team defense. He looks like a bargain Klay Thompson, but distinct from Klay he also can create for himself off the dribble. It's more than just 3&D, he makes smart cuts.
This team, ANY team, can use a finisher and that 'go get a bucket' guy who can score efficiently. Referees are less likely to blow whistles on smooth scorers. He has room to get stronger, finish through contact instead of avoiding it, but having those shots already in his bag is going to help him against bigger faster competition.
Longterm I don't think fans of the team that selects him will be disappointed in the output of Chris Duarte for their team. We are still waiting on hypertalent Rui to learn the game. Deni struggled to finish, or find a role on the team. Duarte already learned his hard lessons, getting the ball in the basket is what he does. Selecting a guy who already knows how to play the game is not really the wrong way to improve. The fact that it looks like there IS synergy with the guys we already have on the team should be a positive, not a mark against drafting him. The man can play:
Moot point though, he doesn't fit the Tommy profile so we surely won't draft him.
