RealGM

last year (if the Hawks kept the 18th pick) people were saying that the Hawks should draft any center no matter who else is available, so everybody was advocating drafting Jeremy Tyler and over looking a guy like MarShon Brooks or Kenneth Faried.

for this year's draft, should the Hawks draft Fab Melo (or Festus Ezeli) because he is a center and over look other guys at other positions?

Will we keep him in the roster once the RS starts?
Better ask firstly LD if he really wants a center, or another PF who plays inside.
We have Collins and Dampier, who are no great deal, sure, but who today played 3 and 1 minutes (is there another strangest coach out there, playing centers in such curious ways?).
We had Benson, who I believe is better than whoever we could select this year in the second round (or even the first one) and we got rid of him... so?

If we don't trade for a Center then yes definitely, I'm lovin Festus Ezeli right now after the great showing in the Vandy loss to Wisconson

Is the C in the same tier of prospect as the other guys available? If so, yes, and I'd say that would have to be a general basketball axiom and not anything specific to our situation. I think I'd jump at Patric Young if he's sitting there regardless of the rest of this post - just think he'll be a better pro than college player.

Otherwise, no. You have to grab the person who makes you the better team overall. As a team, we're looking for "now" contributors to push us deeper into the playoffs. C's, as a general rule, take longer to develop than any other position on the court. Finding one in the late-teens/early-20's who could fill an immediate role isn't something that I'd think even a draft guru could do on any consistent basis - so forth Sund. We've got other needs - a wing defender (Marvin just ain't cutting it), someone to fill Hinrich's role as a guy who can guard the opposing PG for limited stretches but also get some minutes @ SG, an assist getter - that we're more apt to find an immediate contributor, so I wouldn't mind hitting up one of those roles with the 1st then trolling the FA market for a C.

No, they should not. If that C prospect does not have good rebounding rates, does not protect the rim, does not finish well or shy's away from contact. Or if that C prospect does not have adequate weight or height to come in and contribute at the position right away they should not waste a first round pick on said player. Festus Ezeli is not a good enough rebounder to take in the 1st rd. If he is there when we pick early in the 2nd with Phoenix pick he would be a good project C because that is what he is even after 4 years of college which is not good. Patric Young is not a C but a PF. The guy is going to measure out shorter than Al Horford.He is 6"9 with shoes at best. None of these guys you people are speaking of fit the build. Fab Melo is also a project Center even at age 21-22 or whatever he is. He like Festus does not rebound well enough and is really more of a early 2nd rd type of guy.

When you look around the league and you see Pekovic, Gortat, you know there might be some decent available big men. They might not be ready to step in and contribute right away, but they have to have potential. It wasn't the case with K. Benson. Size doesn't matter in the NBA unless you know how to use it wisely. Now, our scouts suck. How do you justify picking a SG in Crawford when the Hawks had JJ and J. Crawford already making 30 M combined. That was a very stupid pick. I'd say if there's no talented big men available, draft a SF. Marvin's days with the Hawks are numbered. We just need to find a way to get rid of his contract somehow.

In my mind, getting a good big man is like getting a rebound: you understand how hard it is and you know there's a lot of competition for the ball but if the rebounder keeps failing to get the ball, you have to cut him.

It's not a matter of drafting a Center, no matter what, it's a matter of getting a Center somehow ... or else. Failure for a short time can be excused, but, eventually, the GM had better deliver.

I say Jeff Taylor and john Jenkins would both contribute to more w's than just wasting a first on a 2nd round project.

Ruhiel didn't provide a link, but this quote from Gearon is scary,

- When the topic of center was raised again, he answered he thinks getting a center will reduce Smoove’s value by moving him away from the basket. So he is not convinced anything other than Lion and Smoove is necessary.

Personally, I think it's just talk to cover up disappointment over not getting a Center, but if true, it dooms us. If he truly thinks we should avoid getting a Center, I worry about his thinking processes.

Skyhawk1 wrote:When you look around the league and you see Pekovic, Gortat, you know there might be some decent available big men. They might not be ready to step in and contribute right away, but they have to have potential. It wasn't the case with K. Benson. Size doesn't matter in the NBA unless you know how to use it wisely. Now, our scouts suck. How do you justify picking a SG in Crawford when the Hawks had JJ and J. Crawford already making 30 M combined. That was a very stupid pick. I'd say if there's no talented big men available, draft a SF. Marvin's days with the Hawks are numbered. We just need to find a way to get rid of his contract somehow.

Not sure I agree with any of that. 1st, our scouts actually did a pretty good job here. Look at everyone else drafted @ 24 or later in that draft. The only guy whose gotten significant minutes is Landry Fields - a guy many pundits had going undrafted and not worth even having a posted scouting report so give NYK credit for seeing what everyone else missed. JC2 hasn't been lighting it up with WASH, no, but I do think he's got as good a shot at being a legit impact NBA player as any of those guys drafted later. It's the scouts job to identify the best players - not to select or trade them - and JC2 may very well be the best player we could have drafted at that position.

2nd, I don't fault the positional selection at all. It's rare that you can select someone so late in the round and expect an immediate impact. We all knew that JC1 wasn't going to be with the team this year even at the point of the '10 draft. The plan was obvious: let JC2 sit the bench for a year and learn the NBA game, then open up the 6th man/scoring specialist role for him in year 2. That's a very sound plan for any prospect taken so late. Now, the plan didn't work out, but just because it didn't work out doesn't mean it was a bad one.

Skyhawk1 wrote:When you look around the league and you see Pekovic, Gortat, you know there might be some decent available big men. They might not be ready to step in and contribute right away, but they have to have potential. It wasn't the case with K. Benson. Size doesn't matter in the NBA unless you know how to use it wisely. Now, our scouts suck. How do you justify picking a SG in Crawford when the Hawks had JJ and J. Crawford already making 30 M combined. That was a very stupid pick. I'd say if there's no talented big men available, draft a SF. Marvin's days with the Hawks are numbered. We just need to find a way to get rid of his contract somehow.

i can't think of one player better than Jordan Crawford, besides Landry Fields, who was selected behind Jordan. everybody else selected behind Jordan and Fields have just been jumping in and out of D-League.

Skyhawk1 wrote:When you look around the league and you see Pekovic, Gortat, you know there might be some decent available big men. They might not be ready to step in and contribute right away, but they have to have potential. It wasn't the case with K. Benson. Size doesn't matter in the NBA unless you know how to use it wisely. Now, our scouts suck. How do you justify picking a SG in Crawford when the Hawks had JJ and J. Crawford already making 30 M combined. That was a very stupid pick. I'd say if there's no talented big men available, draft a SF. Marvin's days with the Hawks are numbered. We just need to find a way to get rid of his contract somehow.

At the time Jordan was drafted and traded for, only Jamal was under contract with just a year left on his deal so I would say his selection made perfect sense seeing as the draft precedes free agency. Joe was a free agent and there were rumblings that the Bulls, Knicks, and Clippers were all pretty much set to give him a max deal meaning that the team would have potentially been left with only declining Bibby, expiring Jamal and fresh as **** Teague on the roster.

As far as Marvin goes....when you look at guys like Wilson Chandler, Caron Butler, Jeff Green before his deal was voided due to his heart issue, Travis Outlaw before getting amnestied, Ariza, Artest, etc all got slightly less or in some cases more money than him yet have either not been much if at all better than him and in most cases disgustingly worse.....you just come to the realization that everything is relative and his deal isn't as bad as it's been made out to be. Of course when it comes to comparison of actual on the court performance those guys get pumped up with superlatives like "toughness" "versatile" "great defenders" to get you to believe that they are worth a damn while Marvin still get's judged by where he was picked 6 years ago. *shrug*

Anyway, considering where we are picking you always go BPA. Our last pick in this range was Teague and he was BPA that just so happened to fill a need. We don't have an actual international scouting department so I won't include Beaubois but Teague was hands down the guy on the board with the largest amount of upside. I expect no different from this draft, if it's a C worth a damn sure but I wouldn't reach if there's also another much better PF considering Josh's impeding free agency and the fact that both Al and Zaza can man the C position. I wouldn't necessarily go SF because of Joe most likely having to transition there due to age but definitely 2guard or the minimum a guy who can swing.

theatlfan wrote:Is the C in the same tier of prospect as the other guys available? If so, yes, and I'd say that would have to be a general basketball axiom and not anything specific to our situation. I think I'd jump at Patric Young if he's sitting there regardless of the rest of this post - just think he'll be a better pro than college player.

Otherwise, no. You have to grab the person who makes you the better team overall. As a team, we're looking for "now" contributors to push us deeper into the playoffs. C's, as a general rule, take longer to develop than any other position on the court. Finding one in the late-teens/early-20's who could fill an immediate role isn't something that I'd think even a draft guru could do on any consistent basis - so forth Sund. We've got other needs - a wing defender (Marvin just ain't cutting it), someone to fill Hinrich's role as a guy who can guard the opposing PG for limited stretches but also get some minutes @ SG, an assist getter - that we're more apt to find an immediate contributor, so I wouldn't mind hitting up one of those roles with the 1st then trolling the FA market for a C.

both Melo and Ezeli look like projects

With the 1st round pick I would take the best player available.

After that I would cheer for Ezeli or Melo to drop and get one of them in the 2nd round, if they aren't available I would strongly consider Robert Sacre. He has size, has decent post moves, he is an outstanding FT-shooter and he is dedicated on the defensive end.

playa_lev wrote:... I would strongly consider Robert Sacre. He has size, has decent post moves, he is an outstanding FT-shooter and he is dedicated on the defensive end.

His lack of explosiveness is the biggest question mark in projecting his post game to the next level, as he is neither overly quick out of his moves or explosive as a leaper, and he has his shot blocked more than you would hope for considering the size advantage he has on most nights. With the increased length and athleticism at the next level, and not having the kind of offensive diversity to date that would offset a drop in his productivity in the post, it brings into question how much of an offensive factor he could be at the next level.

In the post is where he is the most comfortable defensively, and where he shows the most promise at the next level, as he does a good job of denying deep post position and uses his length to effectively disrupt offensive players.

Sacre's poor defensive rebounding -- his 5.8 defensive rebounds per 40 minutes pace adjusted ranks amongst the worst numbers for centers in our database, albeit an improvement over his 2009-2010 year -- is the other area that makes projecting him to the next level difficult. With the expected drop in offensive usage at the next level it would be much easier to project him as a role player if he was more of a contributor in this regard. He simply doesn't appear to be all that instinctual of a rebounder on this end of the court and he doesn't have the athleticism or quickness to make up for that.

That's from DraftExpress. There's a lot more at the link: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Robert-Sacre-5814/

It would be nice to draft/sign/trade for a project with the physical gifts to have a chance to be a starter in the NBA. I don't think Sacre fits that description.

playa_lev wrote:With the 1st round pick I would take the best player available.

After that I would cheer for Ezeli or Melo to drop and get one of them in the 2nd round, if they aren't available I would strongly consider Robert Sacre. He has size, has decent post moves, he is an outstanding FT-shooter and he is dedicated on the defensive end.

if that is the case, then it looks like the Hawks won't be drafting a center in the first round, unless Zeller drops to the late first round.

it will be interesting to see what the Hawks do if Kendall Marshall happens to fall that far and is available to the Hawks.

Aside from the top prospects we probably won't get close to, are good prospects like Festus Ezeli, Fab Melo and minor prospects like Lucas Nogueira, Ognjen Kuzmic, Dusan Cantekin. Though they will probably flop, each has the physical gifts to be a starter in the NBA. Nogueira is too light now but he's only 19.

Why shouldn't we be looking for another DeAndre Jordan or Omer Asik? And why haven't we been?

monsterblock wrote:it will be interesting to see what the Hawks do if Kendall Marshall happens to fall that far and is available to the Hawks.

He looks like a shorter-armed Anthony Johnson to me. What interests you about him?

monsterblock wrote:

theatlfan wrote:Is the C in the same tier of prospect as the other guys available? If so, yes, and I'd say that would have to be a general basketball axiom and not anything specific to our situation. I think I'd jump at Patric Young if he's sitting there regardless of the rest of this post - just think he'll be a better pro than college player.

Otherwise, no. You have to grab the person who makes you the better team overall. As a team, we're looking for "now" contributors to push us deeper into the playoffs. C's, as a general rule, take longer to develop than any other position on the court. Finding one in the late-teens/early-20's who could fill an immediate role isn't something that I'd think even a draft guru could do on any consistent basis - so forth Sund. We've got other needs - a wing defender (Marvin just ain't cutting it), someone to fill Hinrich's role as a guy who can guard the opposing PG for limited stretches but also get some minutes @ SG, an assist getter - that we're more apt to find an immediate contributor, so I wouldn't mind hitting up one of those roles with the 1st then trolling the FA market for a C.

both Melo and Ezeli look like projects

So do a lot of other kids at other positions. When rating a prospect, there's a lot of subjectivity involved - one piece of this is that, in the position we look to be going in, we're prolly place a higher value on "immediate contributor" than on "highest upside". Typically, "immediate contributor" and "draft a C" don't go hand in hand. That was really the point of that 2nd paragraph...

parson wrote:Ruhiel didn't provide a link, but this quote from Gearon is scary,

- When the topic of center was raised again, he answered he thinks getting a center will reduce Smoove’s value by moving him away from the basket. So he is not convinced anything other than Lion and Smoove is necessary.

Personally, I think it's just talk to cover up disappointment over not getting a Center, but if true, it dooms us. If he truly thinks we should avoid getting a Center, I worry about his thinking processes.

Yeah he's got the crazy eyes. Waiting on Ezeli's measurements but The smart move seems obvious it would be adding Fab Melo to the platoon of Horford + Pachulia.

The frontcourt has been the weakness for years. ITs retrograde retardation to even ask this question.

Go ask the rest of the league this question. Answer: Hell yes its true center or bust for the Hawks for last 4 or 5 years, ever since the Celtics series.