Lather me with blather -- DRAFT thread 4

[TGW]

If he was a lock to be a star then we wouldn't have a chance to get him. There is risk in any draft pick. Stars are so hard to get that if you don't take a risk to get one you might not get another chance. But role players aren't hard to replace.

Meh. You're basically saying "Well if Derrick Williams doesn't pan out, I'm not wrong because there's risk involved in every trade." I'm pretty sure that any GM that uses that excuse after a trade would get fired immediately after.

A team that lacks stars isn't going anywhere no matter how many decent role players they have.

A team that lacks stars with a bunch of role players might win the championship this year. A team with three stars might lose.

Did you even look at those comparisons? Beasley still can't shoot and has had character issues from the beginning. West was a nobody when drafted and eventually developed a midrange shot. Those other guys weren't even comparable. Jamison was much weaker and struggled with his shot. Marvin is soft as tissue paper and has no moves at all, anywhere. Harrington is smaller and can't jump. Shareef was soft and unathletic.

Dude I didn't make the comparisons...highly reputable draft sites that do due diligence did. If you think their opinions don't matter, by all means start your own and show em who's boss.

The old adage in the NBA is that the team that gets the best player wins the trade. If you can think of examples to the contrary then by all means please share.

Did we not get the better player in the Rod Strickland/Rasheed Wallace trade? Or the Ike Austin/Ben Wallace trade? Or that Rip Hamilton/Jerry Stackhouse trade? Hell, I'm just using Bullets history.

[tontoz]

David West was NCAA player of the year.

If i remember right so was Jameer Nelson.

West did 8 fewer reps on the bench than DWill, had only a 31.5" vertical and was drafted 18th. To this day he is no threat from deep.

[Ruzious]

Checking NBADraft.net, they now have the Cavs taking Kanter #1 overall and Brandon Knight at #4. They have the Wiz taking Tristan Thompton and Tobias Harris (even with Biyombo still on the obard at 18). They don't even have Valanciunas on the board, so I guess you have to take that list with a grain of salt.

http://www.nbadraft.net/2011mock_draft

Uh oh, I hope they're not assuming Jonny Vally is taking his name out of the draft. I know there's a separate deadline for foreign players to take their names out - don't remember what that date is.

[fishercob]

David West was NCAA player of the year.

If i remember right so was Jameer Nelson.

West did 8 fewer reps on the bench than DWill, had only a 31.5" vertical and was drafted 18th. To this day he is no threat from deep.

Who cares. I was responding to direct comment that "West was a nobody when drafted." He wasn't.

[TGW]

Checking NBADraft.net, they now have the Cavs taking Kanter #1 overall and Brandon Knight at #4. They have the Wiz taking Tristan Thompton and Tobias Harris (even with Biyombo still on the obard at 18). They don't even have Valanciunas on the board, so I guess you have to take that list with a grain of salt.

http://www.nbadraft.net/2011mock_draft

Uh oh, I hope they're not assuming Jonny Vally is taking his name out of the draft. I know there's a separate deadline for foreign players to take their names out - don't remember what that date is.

June 13th.

[Wizardspride]

Contenders are built around stars not soft, low IQ role players that roll with different names in the offseason.

I think we all can agree that contenders are built around stars.

But where some of us differ with you is the notion that Derrick Williams is a bonafide "star".

[Ruzious]

Thanks, TGW. Our pick's value really dips if he opts out.

[tontoz]

Meh. You're basically saying "Well if Derrick Williams doesn't pan out, I'm not wrong because there's risk involved in every trade." I'm pretty sure that any GM that uses that excuse after a trade would get fired immediately after.

Uh... no. There is certainly a chance that DWill doesn't turn out to be a star. But even if that happens the only loss is 3 role players. That isn't a big deal since role players aren't hard to get.

A team that lacks stars with a bunch of role players might win the championship this year. A team with three stars might lose.

That team has the best player in the entire playoffs and ex-All-Stars.

Dude I didn't make the comparisons

You also didn't look at them very carefully. There are people comparing Vesely to Dunleavy and AK which is rather odd because those guys are completely different players.

Did we not get the better player in the Rod Strickland/Rasheed Wallace trade? Or the Ike Austin/Ben Wallace trade? Or that Rip Hamilton/Jerry Stackhouse trade? Hell, I'm just using Bullets history.

How many All-Star games did Austin play in ? Are you trying to say Stackhouse is better than Rip?

[tontoz]

David West was NCAA player of the year.

If i remember right so was Jameer Nelson.

West did 8 fewer reps on the bench than DWill, had only a 31.5" vertical and was drafted 18th. To this day he is no threat from deep.

Who cares. I was responding to direct comment that "West was a nobody when drafted." He wasn't.

You got me there. He was a big time player in college but not highly rated as an NBA prospect.

[hands11]

Contenders are built around stars not soft, low IQ role players that roll with different names in the offseason.

Name the stars on the Dallas team after dirk

Kidd may have been a star but he is 37 or something now. He was traded there.

Terry is a good player but not a star. You can find Terry players

Marion is good n he has stepped it up. If he keeps it up n they win
It all, he could star to get a PP label

Chandler is good but not a star. McGee can fill that roll.

DS is no star.

You luck into a dirk to a large degree.

I say we use our pick to add player to the young talent we already have.

Add a Morris. Add a Harper. Etc.

I would not sell out for Williams. Specially if it meant giving up McGee n no way
For McGee n picks.

[theboomking]

A team that lacks stars with a bunch of role players might win the championship this year. A team with three stars might lose.

Dallas doesn't lack stars. Novitsky is a top 6 player in this league, significantly better than Wall is at this point. Jason Kidd is a top 50 all time player, even if he is past his prime.

So how is Williams like Beasley? Beasley is a guy that shoots long contested 2's and creates shots off of the dribble. Their styles of play are almost entirely different. Williams excels banging in the post on offense, has a great 1st step and can attack the rim with proficiency off of one or two dribbles, and can knock down outside shots when left unattended or on the P&R. Williams gets to the line a ton, and takes very few poor shots. On defense, maybe Williams has some similarities. I don't love Williams as a defender, but I think with time, he can be good if not great.

[tontoz]

Contenders are built around stars not soft, low IQ role players that roll with different names in the offseason.

I think we all can agree that contenders are built around stars.

But where some of us differ with you is the notion that Derrick Williams is a bonafide "star".

I don't know for sure that he will be a star. But all signs point to me that he will be. And i think it is worth taking the risk because chances to add a star dont come around often. Wall fell into their laps. I doubt they will get that lucky again.

The downside of the trade is losing 3 role players and that is assuming the 6th and 18th picks become legit role players.

DWill is at the top of the NCAA in scoring efficiency in every area. Jumpers, post-ups, driving, getting to the line, he does it all extremely well. if his offensive games has any holes i don't see them.

Some people are assuming that he will be a bad defender but when i ask for the reasoning behind this it's...... *crickets*.

[dobrojim]

I swear half the board overrates our young prospects, yet the other half completely underrates our young talent as well.

If I was completely sold on Williams or Kanter as a star quality prospect then I'd be fine with consolidating our talent to get them. But I don't so I wouldn't be comfortable trading McGee to do so. I view Williams & Kanter as solid but flawed prospects and mortgaging the future to get either one doesn't seem like a recipe for success.

I'm not against trading McGee but we should move carefully. He clearly represents our best asset outside of Wall. An athletic freak with tons of upside yet even as steep as his learning curve is, he's still relatively productive and he's a legit C. If I deal him, I want a game changer back, not just a guy who I think will be solid.

+1 - the thing we appear to probably disagree on is how good DWill may or
may not be. I think he could be quite good and in a way that would be
useful to us - smart, 2 way player who can shoot with range, high motor,
gets to the FT line and hates to lose. The only real question in my mind
is whether his relative level of athleticism is sufficiently high to become
a game changer. The answer to that is unclear right now. Just as the answer
to whether the light will ever come completely on for JM in the future.
We should indeed move carefully.

[dobrojim]

By no means is Derrick Williams a lock to be a star in this league.

DX best case scenario: Michael Beasley W/perfect Intangibles
NBADraft.net comparisons: David West/Michael Beasley

A quick google search brought up other guys he's been compared to: Jamison, Abdur-Rahim, Marvin Williams, Al Harrington. Some mope on Bleaker Report actually compared him to Lebron James but I'm pretty sure he was smoking crack when he wrote that article.

Last time I checked, none of those guys other than LBJ are stars.

If he was a lock to be a star then we wouldn't have a chance to get him. There is risk in any draft pick. Stars are so hard to get that if you don't take a risk to get one you might not get another chance. But role players aren't hard to replace.

A team that lacks stars isn't going anywhere no matter how many decent role players they have.

Did you even look at those comparisons? Beasley still can't shoot and has had character issues from the beginning. West was a nobody when drafted and eventually developed a midrange shot. Those other guys weren't even comparable. Jamison was much weaker and struggled with his shot. Marvin is soft as tissue paper and has no moves at all, anywhere. Harrington is smaller and can't jump. Shareef was soft and unathletic.

The old adage in the NBA is that the team that gets the best player wins the trade. If you can think of examples to the contrary then by all means please share.

I agree with much of the above -

in the case of DWill, one thing I would say we know is that he can shoot
and he can also get to the stripe.

[Nivek]

The notion that he has a negative impact defensively due to his tendency to get out of position is simply false. The team was better defensively with McGee on the floor and McGee outplays his counterpart going by PER. I'm not saying that McGee doesn't make defensive mistakes. I'm saying that he's reasonably effective despite his mistakes (which also means that he should get better over time because mental mistakes are correctable).

Disagree that this is what on/off data is telling us. The Wizards weren't any worse defensively with McGee than they were without him, but that could be Webster's definition of "faint praise." On/off and +/- data is comparative (as you know). McGee's backups were for the most part (Armstrong, Seraphin, Blatche, Yi), and yet (according to 82games) the Wiz were only 1.1 points per 100 possessions better defensively with McGee on the floor.

Use the numbers at basketballvalue, and they say the Wiz were only 0.26 points per 100 possessions better defensively with McGee (don't know why there'd be a difference between 82games and bv, but that's what they have).

I don't put a ton of stock in these numbers, but even so, I don't agree with your interpretation. Wiz are awful defensively when McGee is on the floor. His on/off numbers don't show a team dropoff because his backups have a similar impact. In other words, all the team's centers are bad defenders, not just McGee.

I do agree that virtually all of his problems defensively are mental and that he should get better over time. But it's not like he did a solid job this season with some mistakes. He was a poor defender this season who made lots of mental mistakes and he needs to significantly improve on defense.

[dobrojim]

which is why he shouldn't be untouchable

we need to proceed judiciously

[Nivek]

Re: The roster construction conversation.

The star method is long-established. Get 2-3 great players and win. Countless examples through NBA history. It's often easier said than done, however.

The other method is to build a roster with a bunch of good players who fit well together. The Ben Wallace Pistons are a great example. This year's Mavericks are that kind of team. The Pistons were anchored by a defensive superstar; the Mavs by an offensive one.

Which philosophy a team chooses largely depends on who's available to them. The star method is preferable based on history because there are more examples of it succeeding. And, honestly -- the "bunch of good players" approach may just be a failed "star" approach. Teams were trying to get great players and they guys merely turned out to be really good.

Either way, I don't think the Wizards need to be overly worried about it at this point in their rebuild. They need to add talent. If a guy turns out to be a star, that'd be great. If not, they need to get a guy who will at least be a contributor.

[Zonkerbl]

Argh Kev you didn't answer the key question -- What do you think about trading McGee for Williams straight up? The world wants to know.

[sfam]

Re: The roster construction conversation.

The star method is long-established. Get 2-3 great players and win. Countless examples through NBA history. It's often easier said than done, however.

The other method is to build a roster with a bunch of good players who fit well together. The Ben Wallace Pistons are a great example. This year's Mavericks are that kind of team. The Pistons were anchored by a defensive superstar; the Mavs by an offensive one.

Which philosophy a team chooses largely depends on who's available to them. The star method is preferable based on history because there are more examples of it succeeding. And, honestly -- the "bunch of good players" approach may just be a failed "star" approach. Teams were trying to get great players and they guys merely turned out to be really good.

Either way, I don't think the Wizards need to be overly worried about it at this point in their rebuild. They need to add talent. If a guy turns out to be a star, that'd be great. If not, they need to get a guy who will at least be a contributor.

Agree with you but... opportunities for high draft picks are critical - if they come around to often it means you're blowing them. There its definitely pressure on EG for this selection. That sort of makes me think he'll play it safe, which might mean no big trades up, but more likely trades moving down with the idea that the more selections, the more likely one really rocks.

[TGW]

More good stuff about Marcus Morris. He was very good at the combine, killed Chris Singleton in Cleveland, and now Silas is propping him up. If we could trade down, he's the guy I'd target.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... Floor_Game

Charlotte Bobcats coach Paul Silas said there's an efficiency about the way Marcus Morris plays that suggests far more experience than that of a college junior.

"It's his help-side defense or his blocking out. They really don't do a whole lot of that in college," Silas said after the workout. "Or him posting up and then fading back on the jumper. He already knows if he just goes inside, there's a chance he's going to get it blocked.

"He knows to position himself to be successful with the basketball. That's most important in this league - knowing who you are and what you have to do. And he most certainly does.

"With most kids in this league, you have to wait two or three years for them because they don't understand what's going on," Silas said. "You have guys who are athletic, but don't know how to play. You have guys who know how to play but aren't very athletic. You have to have one of the two, and if you have both you can be outstanding.”

Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... z1OtbKr97i