Slather me, Lather me, Blather me - 2011 Draft Thread 5

[hands11]

Speaking of the draft:

Washington Post sportswriter Tracee Hamilton suggests to David Sterm (aka DAT2U) that he invite a celebrity(ies) to host the draft. As I was reading the article, I thought...."that actually would be so cool."

Imagine:

-- Jack Nicholson announcing the Lakers' pick.
-- Billy Crystal announcing the Clippers'.
-- The President announcing the Wizards' pick.
-- Rudy Giuliani or Donald Trump announcing the Knicks' pick.
-- Eminem announcing the Pistons'.
-- Aaron Neville for the Hornets.
-- etc.

Actually, that could be fun.


etc.

Now that would be interesting. I think what she was suggesting was just one though. I like your idea better. And I think she was saying get more stars in the audience. Just Spike isn't enough.

[hands11]

BTW, if I were the Wiz mgmt, I would hire an outside consultant shooting specialist to work with Vesely and Singleton starting now. Pay him in full upfront so when the lockout occurs, he can still work with them.

add to that list: Booker, Seraphin, Wall, Crawford....

And McGee

[The Consiglieri]

Terpman, I've thought about it a couple days and I agree with you, 100%.

Faried will be a much better player than Singleton or Vesely.

I think you're dead wrong, CCJ. I can't speak on Vesely, because all I've really seen is highlights, but I've seen enough of Singleton to know that he has the potential to be a game changer on the defensive end. His length, motor and athleticism are off the charts. I also believe Singleton will work hard on his offensive game and turn out to be decent on that end of the court as well. Yes, Faried will likely be pretty good but EG made the absolute right choice in drafting Singleton.

Ernie got length and maturity and toughness, but he filled positions where he's already got starters that will not be displaced this season.

Length, maturity and toughness on a Wizard team that desperately needs all three traits. I LIKE IT!

Mack won't be an exceptional NBA player. He might be a solid backup. Singleton will be a good player but never great.

Is anyone really expecting Mack (a second round pick) to be an "exceptional NBA player?" I don't think so. I would be very, very happy to see him turn out to be "a solid backup" PG to the Zards exceptional starting PG.

Singleton will be good but not great? So what. How many "great" players are there in the NBA anyway?

I think the draft night optimism and solid B grade and even a few A grades just don't take into consideration what other teams did.

At this point, I'm only concerned about what one team--the Zards--did. And from all indications they had an excellent draft. Even in the opinion of those paid to report on such things.

Let's worry about Boston, Miami, Cleveland, etc. when the time comes. Just like the Zards, these teams, as well as their draft picks, also have their flaws and weaknesses.

I disagree as well on the Faried Vesely take, but it's also been clear for a long time that CCJ absolutely loves Faried, as well as some other pundits, and most of us in general. I think in part, Faried fits a template CCJ loves, hard working, high energy player that plays every possession like he's the highlander, and it's time to collect some heads. I love his game as well, i think there's a place in the league for guys with his measurments, and heart, desire, and determination. However, it is kind of weird to rave about him, without acknowledging the issues with his offensive game. I don't really understand that. I love the guy too, and was really torn before the pick on whom we should take, I really liked both options at 18. I think this is why the Singleton, and Vesely pick irked. Am I right CCJ? Because in the end, CCJ sees Faried as a guy like Kemp, who years from now, we're gonna wonder, how in the hell did nobody take him in that draft for that long? It irks because he sees greatness in Faried, not just a shot.

To me, 18, and 34 are slots reserved for a coin flip's chance of a player actually contributing in one case, and more of a dime out of a $1.00 chance of making it in the latter. That, I agree with. I'm not sure how or why one can rip the Mack pick. I get if you think Faried will be solid offensively and a fiend on the boards and on defense, that not picking him is a move against greatness and for maybe "adequacy," but in the case of Mack, any pick in that zone has about 8 chances in 10 of being totally irrelevant, and 1 chance in 10 of being relevant, and 1 chance in 10 in being something more. I'm not going to indulge in sturm and drang over a pick that has an 80-85% of busting, and there (in my view) are only 3-5 guys that I could id who have a chance of being that kind of guy, and only about 2 or 3 that seemed to fit our needs and match our program (a guy like tyler, as much as i like him as a value, doesnt make sense on a team that already has its handful with a front court that consistently was called the stupidest and most immature in the NBA). So Mack, a guy who could have a clear role, and would fit it, and has a lot of the essential tools necessary, in my view, was one of only 2 or 3 guys that made sense, he isnt the guy i would have taken, i would have gone with Honeycutt, draft and stash bertans, probably malcolm lee, then taken Mack in that order.

[hands11]

Terpman, I've thought about it a couple days and I agree with you, 100%.

Faried will be a much better player than Singleton or Vesely.

Ernie got length and maturity and toughness, but he filled positions where he's already got starters that will not be displaced this season. Mack won't be an exceptional NBA player. He might be a solid backup. Singleton will be a good player but never great. I think the Washington will be lucky if he turns into a stronger Tayshaun Prince--but that will take a couple years. Vesely, IMO has the look of a guy who's going to find out that dunking on Euros and dunking on negroes (yeah, I went there because it rhymed) is two different things--they'll come back at you. I know Vesely will be a high-flier and a crowd pleaser, but the guy's not a shutdown cover guy and he's not a stud rebounder. I think he's going to be a give-and-take player. He'll give a highlight but he'll also be a lot like McGee--guys will come at him.

I think the draft night optimism and solid B grade and even a few A grades just don't take into consideration what other teams did. Miami added Cole--and I think he's leaps and bounds ahead of Mack. Their teams met three times. Cole scored 65 points (21.7), grabbed 19 rebounds(6.3), had 5 steals (1.7), and had 7 assists (2.3) and 7 turnovers (2.3). Mack's totals(avgs): 32 pts(10.7), 12 rebs(4.0), 1 stl(0.2), 11 asts(3.6), 9 tos(3.0).

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=310072086
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=310360325
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=310642086

Mack is a guy who will defend and nail a three, but Cole is going to be a big-time stud on a Miami team that now has a complete PG. He plays well at both ends.

Boston added teammates JuJuan Johnson and E'Twuan Moore. Johnson will be a very good NBA scorer and he's just the type player the Cs need in their frontcourt. He is a complimentary scorer who will come in and get lots of open looks. Moore isn't a complete player but he's got deep range. Both of these guys can shoot. I predict Moore sticks in the NBA, too.

New Jersey added Brooks, who I personally think will be a stud scorer right away.

Folks are down on Cleveland for picking Tristan, but I think Tristan is an absolute stud defensively and will be a much better player than Vesely in time. Irving was the top pick and it wouldn't surprise me if despite not having Wall's athleticism that Irving doesn't run a team better and have altogether more effectiveness in immediately turning Cleveland around once Baron and Sessions are moved/benched.

My thoughts about the Wizards draft is they didn't get interior scoring and they didn't get better rebounding or better shooting (unless Mack displaces Crawford, Young, or Wall--and I don't see it). They got good, tough, wing defenders. Guys who can make life tougher for players like Melo, but they can't make them work hard defensively and they're a ways off being ready.

Sacramento added a bomber in Fredette to go along with a great slasher (Evans) and an emerging banger (Cousins). Shooting and rebounding are going to improve for that team.

Overall, this great draft will still result in a 30-35 win (max) team. Bye bye to Ernie and Flip is what I predict. Athleticism without skill, rebounding, or scoring efficiency will not translate to significantly more wins.

I get where you are coming from with this CCJ because I was thinking a totally different direction then they went. I wanted to trade down and get players like Morris, Tabias, Brooks, Harper and Nikola Vucevic but I also understand the route they took because it is something I wanted them to do years ago.

They are going straight up D first. That is actually a good idea. If you can stop teams, you get them out of their rhythm and they start forcing bad passes and get frustrated. Look at Chicago. They get teams out of their game, force turnovers and then break. I don't think anyone is guessing this team wont be able to break. And tough D is what wins playoff games in the long run. This approach gives them one more year to build the foundation while also giving Dray and McGee a final evaluation to see what how they fit in. I think Nick is already over the hump as a keeper but even Nick can still improve his game. But look at Chicago. They had one primary scorer.

As for shooting from the outside. Well, it doesn't get much better than Nick and Nick can actually break and drive when he puts his mind to it. Wall actually has a decent stroke, he just needed another off-season to work on it. Wall is going to score and get fouled. Lewis has a decent long ball and can post players like he showed last year before injured knee slowed him down. Dray can hit from outside and inside and get fouled. And if Dray isn't forcing it, he has a passing game as well. Again, he was injured but near the end of the year he got it going again. Crawford is a slasher that needs to work on his J but he should be able to improve it. Craw will get his. Mack shot 46.2 %. Singleton shot. 46.6%

Word on Singleton is he is not good off the dribble but in catch and shoot he is more effective, making 43% of his attempts at 1.28 points per shot, the 4th best in this group. Yeah he has work to do but if he just does what he does better, he will be more efficient.

So there is some shooting skills but this team is build more like Chicago. They are going to be cranking up the D. Between Wall, Nick, Dray, you have people that can score. Nick may be going for 25 pts a game and I don't think given the attempts, anyone doubts he could do that.

Now that isn't even mentioning all opps to McGee and Booker doing his scrappy thing and getting put backs. Now if Book added a 12 footer over the offseason, that is going to help a ton. And if McGee brings a baby hook, all the better. And remember, Seraphin showed some post game with baby hooks. I expect to see him healthy and improved this year. But in general, the non shooter all need to add a basic 10 footer. They dont have to be like Jimmer.

That is how this is going to work if it does. Defense with enough scoring to get it done and fast breaks. Game will be won in the low 90s. But this next year isn't about winning. It is about building a defensive and a tough mature culture and evaluating what to do with Dray, McGee, Seraphin and Hamady so they can move forward knowing what they need.

Other teams may have added players also but remember this team had a lot of injured players last year. They will have them all healthy to start the year together this year. They hardly got anything out of Lewis before his couldnt keep it up. Then Nick went out. Booker went out.

Lets see them all together. Oh, and did I mention we got Vesely ?

They should be ok.

[hands11]

The talk about how bad we'll be offensively...

We can roll out an offensive unit of Blatche, Lewis, Young, Crawford, Wall which isn't too shabby. I actually wouldn't be shocked to see that as a starting 5.

If Vesely is viewed as a PF, that will probably push Blatche up to the 5 more often. In similar fashion Crawfors could push Young to more time at the 3.

Bring McGee and Vesely in as a momentum changer with highlight dunks, Booker and Singleton for toughness and D. Mack can be a solid G off the bench. I'd definitely bring back Evans. I wouldn't rule out Josh Howard for a min deal either if fully recovered.

And before I get crushed... I prefer a starting 5 along the lines McGee, Blatche, Singleton, Young, Wall. Vesely, Book, Lewis, Crawford off the bench. I'm just sayin I wouldn't be surprised to see Flip go smallball on us with Blatche, Lewis, Young, Crawford, Wall.

I think you will see that line up and it may start here and there but I think they will have a few starting line ups. Well, if they play enough games to do it. I don't see the rookies starting until they get some game under their belts.

I'm pretty sure if Nick is here, he is starting at SG. To start season it will likely be

McGee, Blatche, Lewis, Young, Wall or
McGee, Blatche, Booker, Young, Wall

Or if Mo or Howard are here, they may start.

[DCZards]

I just think the Wizards didn't get much better--and I'm not one who thinks experts are all that important because they get paid, DCZards. They got paid to be wrong about Shelden Williams, Oleksiv Pecherov, Paul Millsap and Kwame Brown. I knew something they didn't. Same with Blair, Curry, Boozer, Korver, Marquis Daniels, Steve Novak, Steve Blake, Aaron Brooks and a ton of other guys they either said couldn't play or wouldn't be in the league.

Nobody's perfect (I've got my Morris Almonds/Mike Sweetney's/undervaluing Tyreke Evans, etc) but I think if this weren't just a hobby that I spend very little time on and I had INFLUENCE I would do better than most of the so-called experts. Considerably better.

Ok, ccj, maybe I shouldn't have bought up the "expert" opinions. I agree that most of them can be wrong as much as they are right...just like you and I.

Why is it that you can't admit that Singleton may turn out to be better than Faried, or that Vesely's size, athleticism, competitiveness and decent showing in a good European league may indeed make him a risk worth taking---even with the 6th pick. It isn't like the Zards and other teams haven't scouted JV (which is more than you and I have), and most of these NBA personnel folks had him at least as a top ten pick.

And what's wrong with having a solid, proven, defensive-oriented Mack as a backup at PG?

Why does it seem like every year you spend pretty much all your time looking at the downside of the Zards draft picks, ccj? Cheer up, bro, it was actually a pretty good draft for our Zards.

[popper]

I agree with Hand's analysis. Wiz are starting to build a defensive foundation which is essential in our rebuild. We can augment perimeter scoring beyond NY, Shard, (an improving) Wall. etc. as we move forward this year and next.

Defensively, we need to cause pain and discomfort. We need to overwelm the competition with warriors possessed of high energy, courage, and a never-back-down attitude. I predict we will be a very good team after the next draft. Lock it in.

[TGW]

I just think the Wizards didn't get much better--and I'm not one who thinks experts are all that important because they get paid, DCZards. They got paid to be wrong about Shelden Williams, Oleksiv Pecherov, Paul Millsap and Kwame Brown. I knew something they didn't. Same with Blair, Curry, Boozer, Korver, Marquis Daniels, Steve Novak, Steve Blake, Aaron Brooks and a ton of other guys they either said couldn't play or wouldn't be in the league.

Nobody's perfect (I've got my Morris Almonds/Mike Sweetney's/undervaluing Tyreke Evans, etc) but I think if this weren't just a hobby that I spend very little time on and I had INFLUENCE I would do better than most of the so-called experts. Considerably better.

Ok, ccj, maybe I shouldn't have bought up the "expert" opinions. I agree that most of them can be wrong as much as they are right...just like you and I.

Why is it that you can't admit that Singleton may turn out to be better than Faried, or that Vesely's size, athleticism, competitiveness and decent showing in a good European league may indeed make him a risk worth taking---even with the 6th pick. It isn't like the Zards and other teams haven't scouted JV (which is more than you and I have), and most of these NBA personnel folks had him at least as a top ten pick.

And what's wrong with having a solid, proven, defensive-oriented Mack as a backup at PG?

Why does it seem like every year you spend pretty much all your time looking at the downside of the Zards draft picks, ccj? Cheer up, bro, it was actually a pretty good draft for our Zards.

Yea, I agree. Too much hyperbole for my taste.

Farried is ok, but we have our Farried in Book. We didn't have a wing stopper, and Singleton is that guy.

Maybe CCJ would feel better if we got Hendrix from the Euro league. He is, after all, better than McGee.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

TGW, you just said the very thing I think the Wizards believe--they have their Faried in Booker. I'm glad you said that because it really gets to the heart of what I disagree with.

I love Booker's attack mentality and I actually prefer him to Blatche at PF. Not that he's better, but he's no-nonsense and runs and doesn't get you beat throwing up finesse shots and playing selfishly. But IMO Booker is NOWHERE NEAR THE REBOUNDER Faried is. Booker will be a good backup for years.

Faried is going to be a great rebounder and a starter for years. He's way better than Booker or Singleton.

Not just a little better. Way better.

[Ed Wood]

Hey look, I don't always agree with CCJ, or usually agree with him (maybe I do, I'm not keeping track) but there's nothing wrong with being less than completely satisfied with the team's decision making during the draft process. CCJ does have a number of qualities that make him good at appreciating particular players and qualities in players that others undervalue (a statistical focus, a preference for decidedly unromantic production, the ability to limit prejudgements based upon physical appearance or perceived athleticism, being a chubby chaser) but even if you don't buy the hype (and I think you're good at this CCJ but also that you're pretty good at self promotion) it's hardly hubris to offer a divergent opinion.

We're all here to waste time talking about a game and CCJ is (in this my endorsement is unqualified, this doesn't count shut up) in that preeminent capacity, good at what he does, and he's pretty good about providing a solid sales pitch for whatever tonic he's peddling.

Now that I'm done with the contentless portion of this post I'd like to say that Richard Hendrix could probably make a roster and provide some utility in a league where Reggie Evans is a precious commodity based entirely on rebounding ability and which counts Hilton Armstrong as a continued member.

edit: Booker and Faried are also players with a different set of somewhat overlapping virtues. Booker may be more mobile and a better defender at the four, and might even be a better scorer ultimately (I don't expect either to be anything more than efficient but limited) but there isn't any one thing Booker does or that I anticipate that he will do, that accomplishes an NBA necessity in the same way Faried's rebounding will. Plus I see Faried as a a player who could fill minutes at and might even ideally be a center whereas Booker is purely a power forward (not a small forward, nope). Faried has an outside chance at becoming a Chuck Hayes quality player, which to me is a legitimate starter in the NBA and an above average starter at that, at probably the hardest position to find such a player. I'd prefer to have Faried, though I am not at all upset to have Booker.

[Illuminaire]

I think it's worth pointing out that historically speaking, guys who can ONLY rebound tend to never be more than bench players. They have to have one more exceptional skill to be starters - be it defense, scoring, passing, something.

Singleton has an elite skill (defense) and appears closer to contributing in other areas (OK at rebounding, OK at set shots, etc...) Faried projects to be a super-bench guy, while Singleton could possibly be a starting quality player.

I'm a bit tired and not quite connecting my line of reasoning the way I want to, but what I'm trying to get at is this: a Reggie Evans is more easily available via free agency or trades than a Nicolas Batum. Whether you think Faried is better than Singleton or not, now or a few years from now, the *value* of Singleton is very likely going to be higher.

So, from a team building perspective, you take Singleton. You add more pieces. And if you need a Evans/Collison/Faried down the line, you can usually make a move to get one without breaking the bank.

[Jay81]

i would love to know who EG would of drafted at 18 had the Knicks taken Singleton

[closg00]

Best Investments Of The 2011 NBA Draft

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=20269

[Rafael122]

Does anyone else think Cleveland screwed the pooch with their draft picks? Irving might not even be the best point guard in this class and he got taken with the top pick, 11% body fat and all. They would have stood to have gotten Williams at #1, then JV or Knight at #4. They talked about how there was no guarantee Knight will be there at 4, but that point was made moot when it was rumored that Utah was going to take Kanter.

Oh well, I think Williams with any other combo and you would have said Cleveland might make the playoffs in the next year or two.

[Hoopalotta]

Best line from the Hoopsworld artivle:

Harris is versatile and should be able to help the Bucks at both forward positions when called on. Those calls may not come very often early on in his career due to the gluttony of forwards Milwaukee currently has.

Maybe Yannis isn't a native English speaker, but that's a pretty Sweetney malapropism there.

[Wizardspride]

TGW, you just said the very thing I think the Wizards believe--they have their Faried in Booker. I'm glad you said that because it really gets to the heart of what I disagree with.

I love Booker's attack mentality and I actually prefer him to Blatche at PF. Not that he's better, but he's no-nonsense and runs and doesn't get you beat throwing up finesse shots and playing selfishly. But IMO Booker is NOWHERE NEAR THE REBOUNDER Faried is. Booker will be a good backup for years.

Faried is going to be a great rebounder and a starter for years. He's way better than Booker or Singleton.

Not just a little better. Way better.

CCJ, you're my guy but I think the crux of the issue is what you value in a player.

You tend to like scrappy hard working, somewhat undersized guys who'll battle.

And don't get me wrong, every team needs a few of those guys.

But what I fear is that you'd build a whole team of those type guys and in doing so you'd sacrifice too much athletic ability/size.'

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that its fine to have your DeJuan Blairs of the world.

You just won't win many games with a team full of those type players.

[7-Day Dray]

TGW, you just said the very thing I think the Wizards believe--they have their Faried in Booker. I'm glad you said that because it really gets to the heart of what I disagree with.

I love Booker's attack mentality and I actually prefer him to Blatche at PF. Not that he's better, but he's no-nonsense and runs and doesn't get you beat throwing up finesse shots and playing selfishly. But IMO Booker is NOWHERE NEAR THE REBOUNDER Faried is. Booker will be a good backup for years.

Faried is going to be a great rebounder and a starter for years. He's way better than Booker or Singleton.

Not just a little better. Way better.

CCJ, you're my guy but I think the crux of the issue is what you value in a player.

You tend to like scrappy hard working, somewhat undersized guys who'll battle.

And don't get me wrong, every team needs a few of those guys.

But what I fear is that you'd build a whole team of those type guys and in doing so you'd sacrifice too much athletic ability/size.'

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that its fine to have your DeJuan Blairs of the world.

You just won't win many games with a team full of those type players.

+1

[DCZards]

Faried is going to be a great rebounder and a starter for years. He's way better than Booker or Singleton.

Not just a little better. Way better.

ccj, I admire your conviction and the way in which you stand by your opinions. But it's time for a little reality check. For the past two years, you've been telling us how great DeJuan Blair was going to be and how you were the only person smart enough to recognize that. You said that those teams that passed on Blair in the draft would live to regret it. And most of us have been drinking that Blair kool-aid.

Well, the truth is that DeJuan has just been alright as an NBA player, nothing special. He's averaging 8 pts., 7 rebs. for his 2 yr. career...on a team that's looking for him to step up so that Duncan can get more rest.

And Blair's pretty much been a nonfactor for the Spurs in the playoffs--averaging 4 pts and 3 rebs in 12 mins. Meanwhile, here are some players drafted just before or AFTER Blair (drafted 37th) who are already having more of an impact---Taj Gibson (26); Sam Young (36); Jodie Meeks (41); Marcus Thornton (43); Chase Budinger (44).

So, truth is, despite all of your hubris, DeJuan has simply not lived up to your hype.

BTW, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Booker will turn out to be way better than Blair. Not just a little better. Way better.

[nate33]

Hey look, I don't always agree with CCJ, or usually agree with him (maybe I do, I'm not keeping track) but there's nothing wrong with being less than completely satisfied with the team's decision making during the draft process. CCJ does have a number of qualities that make him good at appreciating particular players and qualities in players that others undervalue (a statistical focus, a preference for decidedly unromantic production, the ability to limit prejudgements based upon physical appearance or perceived athleticism, being a chubby chaser) but even if you don't buy the hype (and I think you're good at this CCJ but also that you're pretty good at self promotion) it's hardly hubris to offer a divergent opinion

This post from Ed Wood appears to be an effort to cool rising tempers before a fight breaks out. After seeing it, I reread my post and realized Ed Wood might have had my post in mind when he felt the need to settle things down.

I want to make sure that CCJ understands that I'm not trying to personally attack him. All I'm saying is that there are benefits and consequences to CCJ's drafting style. CCJ does a very good job of completely ignoring conventional wisdom and thinking independently. This tendency has served him well and has helped him find some diamonds in the rough, particularly in the second round. But that type of thinking isn't always so successful in the first round. Sometimes conventional wisdom is right and by ignoring it, he can make HUGE mistakes that could cripple a franchise. John Wall is the perfect example. It doesn't matter if CCJ finds all the Dejuan Blairs and Paul Millsaps in the world, if he misses out on John Wall, he completely undermine any chance of your team winning a championship. For that reason alone, conventional wisdom > CCJ.

As I've said before, If I were running a franchise, I'd love to have CCJ in my scouting department, but I wouldn't let him be GM.

[montestewart]

In my mock draft, I had the Wizards trading for the 9th and 19th picks (and I never bothered to update it), and taking Singleton and Faried 18th and 19th. I don't know enough about Faried to know whether he's one of those players whose rebounding is so awesome that he overcomes his height disadvantage and even develops beyond one-dimensionality (defense, a bruising dump off scorer, etc.), or whether he'd go more the Jerome Lane/Reggie Evans route. From what I've seen over the years, rebounding at the college level usually translates to rebounding at the pro level, and it seemed worth the risk. I wouldn't have been upset if he was chosen instead of Singleton, but I'm perfectly happy seeing what Singleton has, because if he's as good as advertised, he brings needed and diverse position defense, and he too may develop beyond one-dimensionality.