Official Raptors 2012 NBA Draft Thread, Part 4

[fredericklove]

On Tuesday:

Barnes shoots 4-12 in a game where he was worst starter on the court

Reaction:

Half the Raps act like it didn't happen


On Wednesday:

Perry goes 7-13 for 15 points against a defense schemed to take out the offense

Reaction:

Raps fans pound their chest in validation that Perry is soft and not worthy of a top 5 pick

On Tuesday:

Barnes was jacking bricks in first half, then came back strong in late 2nd half to redeem himself, drawing fouls, going to the line and grabbing rebounds when he had the chance.

On Wednesday:

Perry was aggressive in first half, then came non-existent in 2nd half, didn't even do jack when his team was down 5-6 points.

So what's your excuse for PJ3 tonight? He tripped, landed, and fell on his d*ck? That's why he lost his mojo in 2nd half?

[Undefeated]

Can you describe what you're seeing in Miller in relation to his pro prospects? I'm not seeing it quite frankly. To me, he looks like Charlie Villanueva (who'd be pretty good if he played with the same activity level as Miller). Who would you compare him to?

There's going to be a bit of bias with my view of Quincy Miller, but I see him as the best offensive wing in terms of being able to do everything offensively next to Jeremy Lamb. He seems to have been recovering from that torn ACL injury quite nicely seeing how he's looking more agile, but I never thought Quincy as much of an explosive athlete who was able to rocket off the floor even back in high school. More than anything, I'd describe him as a smooth, crafty, and fluid athlete who has good body control for his 6'9" frame.

But I can see why you think Quincy at times has looked a bit underwhelming. He's a player that excels when he has the ball in his hands creating for himself in the high-post and not popping spot-up jumpers which he did for the most part of this season. That's why; it's kinda hard to judge Quincy at this point. Although if you were to compare Quincy Miller against his peers from this draft class based on their highlights from high school, you'll see how much he stands beyond and above them. Some of the **** he does is straight up dirty.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKu8-ZZAsyQ[/youtube]

I think with full reign of the offense, Quincy is easily the most complete SF in this draft hands down. A player that is able to shoot from anywhere on the floor, can create his own shot off the bounce with decent elevation on the jumper or get to the hole with that burst of speed, good court vision and passing in the open court, crafty post moves in the mid and high-post with the up-and-under, excellent touch for the backboard with the ability to finish either hand and ankle breaking ball skills. He still needs to tighten up his handles, learning to use his arm and body to protect the ball better like Harrison Barnes since he can sometimes get called for the carry or gets his pocket picked because he dribbles the ball far away from his body. I don't know why fredericklove is picking on Quincy's crossover, it's low and quick which is what a crossover is lol. I mean, ignoring Quincy's flaw for a second, which other prospect can bring what he brings offensively to the table? That's practically the package the Raptors are looking for from a SF imo.

I don't know about Charlie Villanueva since he doesn't have the ball handling skills which is what Quincy Miller is known for. The comparisons to Kevin Durant are off based too, but I can see some similarities. Personally, I'd compare him to Lamar Odom or Hedo Turkoglu during their prime.

[tdotrep2]

barnes is with a bigger motor and less skill. Hes got better but don't expect his ceiling to be as high as a pj3 qm mkg ad ad lamb beal. He is the most complete player right now in the draft but he doesnt have the tools to become elite like the names I have mentioned.

[fredericklove]

On Tuesday:

Barnes scores 13 points on 4-12 shooting in a game where he was worst Tar Heel starter on the court

Reaction:

Half the Raps fans act like it didn't happen

He wasn't the worst starter that night, don't make up useless stuff, Steely. I watched that game. Reggie Bullock was the worst starter (he did defend really well but was terrible on the offensive end), Bullock had 2 of 11 FG So why you claimed Barnes being the worst starter? This is one of your many irrational claims again so I'm not surprised.

Why don't you go back to last night's page and see what Raps fan said about Barnes. Don't be a small-minded ignorant and make accusation when you didn't even have good evidence to back it up.

Nice drive by Barnes there. Looks more comfortable handling the ball. Good 'D also on the defensive end.

It wasn't an efficient night, he had an off game but did a good job on the glass too.

Quoted from the link below
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1153462&start=1140


Hey Steely, really again. What's your excuse on PJ3's 2nd half performance tonight?

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Can you describe what you're seeing in Miller in relation to his pro prospects? I'm not seeing it quite frankly. To me, he looks like Charlie Villanueva (who'd be pretty good if he played with the same activity level as Miller). Who would you compare him to?

There's going to be a bit of bias with my view of Quincy Miller, but I see him as the best offensive wing in terms of being able to do everything offensively next to Jeremy Lamb. He seems to have been recovering from that torn ACL injury quite nicely seeing how he's looking more agile, but I never thought Quincy as much of an explosive athlete who was able to rocket off the floor even back in high school. More than anything, I'd describe him as a smooth, crafty, and fluid athlete who has good body control for his 6'9" frame.

But I can see why you think Quincy at times has looked a bit underwhelming. He's a player that excels when he has the ball in his hands creating for himself in the high-post and not popping spot-up jumpers which he did for the most part of this season. That's why; it's kinda hard to judge Quincy at this point. Although if you were to compare Quincy Miller against his peers from this draft class based on their highlights from high school, you'll see how much he stands beyond and above them. Some of the **** he does is straight up dirty.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKu8-ZZAsyQ[/youtube]

I think with full reign of the offense, Quincy is easily the most complete SF in this draft hands down. A player that is able to shoot from anywhere on the floor, can create his own shot off the bounce with decent elevation on the jumper or get to the hole with that burst of speed, good court vision and passing in the open court, crafty post moves in the mid and high-post with the up-and-under, excellent touch for the backboard with the ability to finish either hand and ankle breaking ball skills. He still needs to tighten up his handles, learning to use his arm and body to protect the ball better like Harrison Barnes since he can sometimes get called for the carry or gets his pocket picked because he dribbles the ball far away from his body. I don't know why fredericklove is picking on Quincy's crossover, it's low and quick which is what a crossover is lol. I mean, ignoring Quincy's flaw for a second, which other prospect can bring what he brings offensively to the table? That's practically the package the Raptors are looking for from a SF imo.

I don't know about Charlie Villanueva since he doesn't have the ball handling skills which is what Quincy Miller is known for. The comparisons to Kevin Durant are off based too, but I can see some similarities. Personally, I'd compare him to Lamar Odom or Hedo Turkoglu during their prime.

Thanks for the well-thought out description of his game. I'll keep watching him closely, but some of my concerns with Miller might be extenuated due to the fact Perry Jones consumes a lot of the offence (in addition to Pierre Jackson), leaving little room for Miller to demonstrate his skills. I have to say, though, despite him shooting solid %s, I don't like the look of his jumpshot

[fredericklove]

barnes is with a bigger motor and less skill. Hes got better but don't expect his ceiling to be as high as a pj3 qm mkg ad ad lamb beal . He is the most complete player right now in the draft but he doesnt have the tools to become elite like the names I have mentioned.

I disagree with the bold part. Barnes' motor is not bigger...are you saying bigger than...? If so, his motor is not bigger than Davis and MKG, even Beal too. His motor compared to Lamb are sort of similar, and his motor is definitely better than PJ3.

I disagree with the "less skill" part, you need to elaborate on that. What skill you're talking about? Barnes has higher perimeter skills than MKG, Qmiller and Beal, and is up to par with Lamb in that department (but I won't be surprised if Lamb surpasses Barnes in terms of skills).

If you're talking about all around skills, then of course, MKG, Lamb and Qmiller are better in that department. But if you compare barnes' skill to PJ3 and ADs, how? Perimeter skills or big men skills..? Cos 3 of the others play a 4 or 5, so its difference and is a complicated comparison. PJ3's perimeter isn't that great, he's mostly a spot-up shooter, scores on baby hooks and on post moves, his handle is better though. But still, his perimeter game is still not as advanced as Barnes (shooting touch, jab-step, shotfake & triple-threat).

Also, I don't think Beal and MKG will be elite players. Otherwise, I personally would say Barnes has more tools to become elite than both MKG and Beal. I only agree with you on Lamb/ADs/PJ3/Qmiller having better tools to become elite. That's all.

[careful]

I'm usually pretty good at predicting guys who are going to climb up draft boards as March Madness, workouts, etc take place and the most likely candidate right now that I'm going to call is Austin Rivers.

His game is just more suited to NBA ball than the NCAA, especially if he measures out at 6'5 in shoes and is seen as more of a SG prospect. He literally has all the tools, except height, that you'd look for in a young SG prospect. He can get to the net at will. His first step is above average. He's quick going either way. He has an assortment of hesitations he uses to create space. He can finish with either hand. He can make quick decisions on the move. He has excellent form and release on his jumper and seems to have NBA range. I know his numbers so far has underwhelmed everybody but people will try to see sort of a Eric Gordon/Steph Curry/Monta type of player in him and if he's 6'5 I'd be interested in rolling with a guy with those kind of skills at SG. it's all going to come down to his height unfortunately. 6'5 with 6'7 or above wingspan will give GMs assurance that he won't need to be converted. Anything less than those measurements though and he probably slides since he's not putting up enough assist numbers or points to compensate. Fundamentally though... it's almost all there. He's fun to watch and assuming he can defend a position reasonably well I think his game is better suited to the pro style.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbkj3eSYAb8[/youtube]

I like his scoring ability, but I fear that he's not a crazy enough athlete to become an upper echelon player in the NBA. For his build and athleticism, I'd say his ceiling is probably Monta level, while something more realistic might be OJ Mayo. Also not loving that he seems to be a one way player. Having said all that, I'd still take him over Derozan. lol

[Aristotle]

On Tuesday:

Barnes scores 13 points on 4-12 shooting in a game where he was worst Tar Heel starter on the court

Reaction:

Half the Raps fans act like it didn't happen


On Wednesday:

Perry goes 7-13 for 15 points against a defense schemed to take him out the offense

Reaction:


Raps fans pound their chest in validation that Perry is soft and not worthy of a top 5 pick

Ok so I'm not alone. I don't understand the fascination with Branes at all. His ceiling is Deng IMO, which is really good, but def not a game changer. I'm not too high on Perry but his ceiling is thru the roof. If he can put it all together he has star quality.

[Kevin Willis]

MKG might be a Kawhi Leonard type impact player. Of course a better version but still someone who's good with a solid motor and can give you many things but not outstanding. He's not PJ 3 in skill level or Lamb or Beal or even Miller but he's more likely to reach his potential just like Leonard's motor would allow him to reach his potential more than Blatche let's say.

[fredericklove]

Ok so I'm not alone. I don't understand the fascination with Branes at all. His ceiling is Deng IMO, which is really good, but def not a game changer. I'm not too high on Perry but his ceiling is thru the roof. If he can put it all together he has star quality.

Have you seen the games where he single-handedly brought the game back, and closed the game out, I guess not. Or else you wouldn't make that bold statement.

[fredericklove]

I don't know why fredericklove is picking on Quincy's crossover, it's low and quick which is what a crossover is lol.

Not always low, sometimes his hands can go too high, you supposed to keep your hands low to the ground so that when you cross, it makes u cross faster. But Qmillers' hands stay up too high at times that when he shifts from left hand to the right (or right to left), he would force to palm and "carry" the ball cos when you leave your hand too high you're afraid the ball will slip off your hand, so you had to sort of palm and grab it to make sure its stays to your palm thus, that's why Qmiller usually ends up getting called for carrying. I know a thing or two about crossover though, I used to study Iverson and Tim Hardaway's crossovers clips like crazy! And model my crossover after them and used it to cross over guys on the court (that's all I know to do on the court, crossover but suck at the hesitation/in & out move), but at times I forget to stay low I end up going too high and forced to carry it ...the haters on the court accused me of carrying the ball too much

Otherwise, Quincy should adjust his game though, since his handle isn't as good as advertised, I do feel he has a versatile game, his handle is capable enough to help him secure the ball on transition. I feel that he is at his best when he's playing near high post area and short corner I see that as an adv for him since he's 6''9 with long frame so the closer he is to the rim the better for him (he can draw for contact easily if he's more built and stronger). That's why he really should bulk the f*ck up. Cos I see his game being poor man's Melo, minus the quickness and strength but similarly, takes one or two steps then power his way str8 to the hoop from short corner. He's got the basic dribbling skills, there's no need to be flashy, like you said, should protect the ball using his body.

In terms of his court vision and long range, I see Odom comparison like you said too. He's slowly has built up more aggressiveness now, more quicker. The things he needs to work on are controlling his handles, use body to shield from the ball, bulk the f*ck up, work on his inside and out game.

[ty123]

I'm looking at the highlights and I'm not entirely sold on Lamb's first step.

[Steely Reserve]

The same critical eye you scout one prospect, you must do the same for the next. Anything less and you're only doing yourself a disservice and damaging your credibility.

For instance:

If you criticize Perry Jones for not being a dominant rebounder given his 6'11 frame, how could you give Harrison Barnes a pass for being a poor passer, turnover prone (averages more TOs a game than Ast), and pedestrian rebounder for his size?

I mean, really, if Barnes projects to be a small forward worthy of a top 5 selection, he'll have to do more than he's shown so far in college. And when I say 'shown' I mean in a skills projected sort of way. I can see Perry play and forecast with his athletic ability and timing, that he could translate into a solid rebounder if you chose to play him fulltime at the PF position.

Now with Barnes, I cant say the same thing. All his metrics outside shooting are below average for a star wing. There's really been nothing demonstrated by the guy at the collegiate level (outside shooting) that could confidently get me to say he'll be able to expand his game to an all-star level in the NBA.

I'm sorry, that's not top 5 talent. You can speak on his clutch ability all you want but if he cant create space off the dribble or be viable passing threat with his court vision, I contend the clutch crutch shouldn't be a factor when scouting the guy.

[fredericklove]

The same critical eye you scout one prospect, you must do the same for the next. Anything less and you're only doing yourself a disservice and damaging your credibility.

For instance:

If you criticize Perry Jones for not being a dominant rebounder given his 6'11 frame, how could you give Harrison Barnes a pass for being a poor passer, turnover prone (averages more TOs a game than Ast), and pedestrian rebounder for his size?

I mean, really, if Barnes projects to be a small forward worthy of a top 5 selection, he'll have to do more than he's shown so far in college. And when I say 'shown' I mean in a skills projected sort of way. I can see Perry play and forecast with his athletic ability and timing, that he could translate into a solid rebounder if you chose to play him fulltime at the PF position.

Now with Barnes, I cant say the same thing. All his metrics outside shooting are below average for a star wing. There's really been nothing demonstrated by the guy at the collegiate level (outside shooting) that could confidently get me to say he'll be able to expand his game to an all-star level in the NBA.

I'm sorry, that's not top 5 talent. You can speak on his clutch ability all you want but if he cant create space off the dribble or be viable passing threat with his court vision, I contend the clutch crutch shouldn't be a factor when scouting the guy.

Sometimes I wonder if you're either really super ignorant or epic troll. But I think you are super ignorant as if its part of your personality so that's why you're always so clueless. Cos you come in here reading a specific page and then attack on people at it without following or tracking people's past record of their posts. I don't blame you if you don't go back to a long 30-40 pages prior to this page, but whether its being ignorant or so, try to look back at 10-15 pages prior to this one, there's obvious comments written about Barnes' lack of court vision, and it was posted by ME too. So your argument of "critical eye for one scout but not doing for others makes u lose your credibility" is a bunch of bull, I'm a fan of Barnes and I have criticized about his court vision and his lack of handles. But you, what about you? You so ignorant in a whole new level that you praise so insanely crazily about your PJ3 and claim no flaws in his game, no flaws, absolutely none. You're talking a bunch of bull right now, because when it comes to credibility, you are one of the top guns out there who don't have it. If you have credibility, I'll let you take my lunch money then.

Barnes' not the best rebounder in his position but he's a SF. The key rebounders have to come from C and PF, because they spend most of their time in the paint, covering the paint on both ends, they SHOULD be rebounding at a high rate in order to be qualified as good rebounder. Small forward usually stays in the perimeter, there's less chance to engage in the paint to fight for rebound when compared to the 5 and 4 but with that said, Barnes' rebounding rate declines, last year he avg so much more, that's also the flaw from him that Nahom have said too and I didn't argue about it cos it's the fact, but you? What you say about Perry? Nothing, still the same praising again and again, now about his athletic ability and timing on the board? But what happens to the most basic fundamental of rebounding, BOXING OUT and positioning? He does very poorly on those two areas, thus he never able to get in position to get rebounds on both ends consistently, you really think with his athletic ability alone can help him to become a SOLID rebounder? That's just laughable.

So you wrote Barnes' outside shooting is below average for a star wing, why you being ignorant again? How? Do you know how to read numbers?

FG% at .484, 3P% at .431, they are a jump from .423 FG% and .344% from last season, these are substantial improvement, and you call them below average?

Trouble creating space off the dribble? Really? ...no wonder why the other day another poster used your irrelevant resource to debate me on this, which I find laughable. Why are you using last season's evidence, why not this season's evidence as most scouts, even posters here that weren't fan of Barnes have agreed that he has improved on creating space off the dribble. I know that you don't watch all of UNC games, cos if you do, you wouldn't blindly just use limited source to argue this area with me. And how can you not conclude the clutch as factor when you're scouting? It's part of intangibles, its where a prospect's ability to take over the game (clutch is an integral part of it).

So tell me, you still haven't answered my question, why did PJ3 go nonexistent in the second half of this game? Heck, it's not the only game, it happened in so many games this season, you can ask all the posters here who watch baylor games. You chose to ignore clutch as a scouting analysis because its where PJ3 lacks the most, his clutch and his consistency. He simply has NONE. But again, why did PJ3 go nonexistent again?

[WhatsaTDot]

Fred Love handing out smackdowns in the draft thread.

[CunningLinguist]

For all of you who are high on Drummond, have you entertained the thought of trading for Anthony Randolph over wasting a draft pick on Drummond? They're essentially the same player from what I can see, and Randolphs proven to be a productive player in his limited starts at the NBA level.

Those two players could not be more different.

[CunningLinguist]

The same critical eye you scout one prospect, you must do the same for the next. Anything less and you're only doing yourself a disservice and damaging your credibility.

For instance:

If you criticize Perry Jones for not being a dominant rebounder given his 6'11 frame, how could you give Harrison Barnes a pass for being a poor passer, turnover prone (averages more TOs a game than Ast), and pedestrian rebounder for his size?

I mean, really, if Barnes projects to be a small forward worthy of a top 5 selection, he'll have to do more than he's shown so far in college. And when I say 'shown' I mean in a skills projected sort of way. I can see Perry play and forecast with his athletic ability and timing, that he could translate into a solid rebounder if you chose to play him fulltime at the PF position.

Now with Barnes, I cant say the same thing. All his metrics outside shooting are below average for a star wing. There's really been nothing demonstrated by the guy at the collegiate level (outside shooting) that could confidently get me to say he'll be able to expand his game to an all-star level in the NBA.

I'm sorry, that's not top 5 talent. You can speak on his clutch ability all you want but if he cant create space off the dribble or be viable passing threat with his court vision, I contend the clutch crutch shouldn't be a factor when scouting the guy.

Sometimes I wonder if you're either really super ignorant or epic troll. But I think you are super ignorant as if its part of your personality so that's why you're always so clueless. Cos you come in here reading a specific page and then attack on people at it without following or tracking people's past record of their posts. I don't blame you if you don't go back to a long 30-40 pages prior to this page, but whether its being ignorant or so, try to look back at 10-15 pages prior to this one, there's obvious comments written about Barnes' lack of court vision, and it was posted by ME too. So your argument of "critical eye for one scout but not doing for others makes u lose your credibility" is a bunch of bull, I'm a fan of Barnes and I have criticized about his court vision and his lack of handles. But you, what about you? You so ignorant in a whole new level that you praise so insanely crazily about your PJ3 and claim no flaws in his game, no flaws, absolutely none. You're talking a bunch of bull right now, because when it comes to credibility, you are one of the top guns out there who don't have it. If you have credibility, I'll let you take my lunch money then.

Barnes' not the best rebounder in his position but he's a SF. The key rebounders have to come from C and PF, because they spend most of their time in the paint, covering the paint on both ends, they SHOULD be rebounding at a high rate in order to be qualified as good rebounder. Small forward usually stays in the perimeter, there's less chance to engage in the paint to fight for rebound when compared to the 5 and 4 but with that said, Barnes' rebounding rate declines, last year he avg so much more, that's also the flaw from him that Nahom have said too and I didn't argue about it cos it's the fact, but you? What you say about Perry? Nothing, still the same praising again and again, now about his athletic ability and timing on the board? But what happens to the most basic fundamental of rebounding, BOXING OUT and positioning? He does very poorly on those two areas, thus he never able to get in position to get rebounds on both ends consistently, you really think with his athletic ability alone can help him to become a SOLID rebounder? That's just laughable.

So you wrote Barnes' outside shooting is below average for a star wing, why you being ignorant again? How? Do you know how to read numbers?

FG% at .484, 3P% at .431, they are a jump from .423 FG% and .344% from last season, these are substantial improvement, and you call them below average?

Trouble creating space off the dribble? Really? ...no wonder why the other day another poster used your irrelevant resource to debate me on this, which I find laughable. Why are you using last season's evidence, why not this season's evidence as most scouts, even posters here that weren't fan of Barnes have agreed that he has improved on creating space off the dribble. I know that you don't watch all of UNC games, cos if you do, you wouldn't blindly just use limited source to argue this area with me. And how can you not conclude the clutch as factor when you're scouting? It's part of intangibles, its where a prospect's ability to take over the game (clutch is an integral part of it).

So tell me, you still haven't answered my question, why did PJ3 go nonexistent in the second half of this game? Heck, it's not the only game, it happened in so many games this season, you can ask all the posters here who watch baylor games. You chose to ignore clutch as a scouting analysis because its where PJ3 lacks the most, his clutch and his consistency. He simply has NONE. But again, why did PJ3 go nonexistent again?

Steely's very good at not responding to direct questions. I've repeatedly asked him how he can justify stating that Giilchrist is FAR AND AWAY the best player in the draft after previously declaring that PJ3 is a once in a decade player and all I here is crickets in response.

In regard to Barnes' 4 for 12 performance the other night, if Steely had actually watched the game he would have seen a great post up move from him that demonstrated his great footwork. I think anybody who states that Barnes is just a jumpshooter hasn't been watching him since midway through his frosh season.

That being said, I would still consider Drummond, Davis and PJ3 as being the top 3 picks in the draft and Barnes should go shortly thereafter.

[Marvin!]

Lamb stunk out the joint last night. I just cannot see what has so many of you excited about him.

[CunningLinguist]

The same critical eye you scout one prospect, you must do the same for the next. Anything less and you're only doing yourself a disservice and damaging your credibility.

For instance:

If you criticize Perry Jones for not being a dominant rebounder given his 6'11 frame, how could you give Harrison Barnes a pass for being a poor passer, turnover prone (averages more TOs a game than Ast), and pedestrian rebounder for his size?

I mean, really, if Barnes projects to be a small forward worthy of a top 5 selection, he'll have to do more than he's shown so far in college. And when I say 'shown' I mean in a skills projected sort of way. I can see Perry play and forecast with his athletic ability and timing, that he could translate into a solid rebounder if you chose to play him fulltime at the PF position.

Now with Barnes, I cant say the same thing. All his metrics outside shooting are below average for a star wing. There's really been nothing demonstrated by the guy at the collegiate level (outside shooting) that could confidently get me to say he'll be able to expand his game to an all-star level in the NBA.

I'm sorry, that's not top 5 talent. You can speak on his clutch ability all you want but if he cant create space off the dribble or be viable passing threat with his court vision, I contend the clutch crutch shouldn't be a factor when scouting the guy.

Physician, heal thyself

[sunny]

guys, I don't actually enjoy college basketball. I force myself to watch it just so I can be involved with Steely's contributions to realgm.

A+