Official Raptors 2012 NBA Draft Thread, Part 6

[S.W.A.N]

I don't know why people are discussing Q Miller anymore... Unless you all think that we are going on a big winning streak and not drafting in the top 10, in which case sure with a mid first round pick he is an option.

Barnes
MKG
Perry Jones
Lamb
Beal

Then Miller.


I will give Miller supporters some slack though, the injury factor leaves a lot of wiggle room for how much more potential he has if he only playing at 70% this year.

[5DOM]

Joe Forte was definitely not a "can't miss" prospect - at least not even close to being the one Jordan was.

Don't twist my words. I said they were both "can't miss" prospects (which if you actually remember correctly was true about Forte as well), but I never said Forte was at the same level as Jordan. The comparison is just to show the similarity in the stat lines, except one goes onto be the GOAT while the other falls into NBA obscurity.

Forte was an undersized SG who couldn't dribble the ball. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but players hyped up as "can't miss" prospects don't usually fall out of lottery either.

[ash_k]

Derrick Williams at Arizona looked like a PF to me.

For Example at K-State, Beasley was more of a SF that Derrick Williams even though Beasley looked like a tweener closer to a PF (if it makes sense).

If you look at PJII athleticism, length, how flexible/fluid he is as an athlete, with his shooting mechanics ...He is a SF ala Marvin Williams if you will.

To be an effective and consistent performer at the next level(at their respective position), shooting mechanics have a lot to do with it (of course among other things)

This is one of the reason I would have been shocked if Jimmer was performing at a high level right now.

[sunny]

im trying to establish a list of all the players drafted in the past decade from top 10 ranked teams to see how the players developed in the nba. Anyone want to help me out?

I have a big hunch that the unc/duke syndrome probably is a bit more universal than that and is a factor that can easily mislead fans/gm's come draft day.

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... University

http://basketballreference.com/players/ ... h+Carolina

I meant to focus on players who played on great teams where they weren't the leading factors in that teams success. Finding the difference between players who played on great teams because they made those teams great vs players who look good because they play on great teams.

I think it could help evaluate players like Barnes of MKG in isolation because their situations disguise their abilities.

Fredericklove - care to join in?

[5DOM]

I meant to focus on players who played on great teams where they weren't the leading factors in that teams success. Finding the difference between players who played on great teams because they made those teams great vs players who look good because they play on great teams.

I think it could help evaluate players like Barnes of MKG in isolation because their situations disguise their abilities.

Fredericklove - care to join in?

I think classifying the current UNC players this way is going to be rather difficult. It's kinda hard to say who the most important player is out of Marshall, Barnes, Henson and Zeller.

[fredericklove]

But I was saying how Barnes might be the best wing player from this draft who has a shot of slowing and steering LeBron James defensively. Of course no one can stop LeBron, but I want a guy who I know can contain and slow him down, and that's Barnes for a number of reasons. I really like how Barnes pops out his chest to slow down his opponent displaying superb upper body strength to absorb contact rather than using his hands to steer his opponent, the lateral quickness, the wingspan, and just his overall frame that's NBA-ready. As great as MKG is, he doesn't have the frame nor the height like Barnes to contain LeBron barreling down the middle.

I guess he does know how to use his body well, I wonder why he doesn't learn to flop if he pops his chest out so often, cos that stance can sell it to the refs..., poor Harry, he doesn't know how to play cheap, too classy my friend, ...he does have the total package on defense, I love the way he uses his long arm to shield the passing lane using his long arm and he actually gives a sh*t on every single defensive play.

I think if we have to use a similar defender as comparison to Barnes I say someone like a Luol Deng type defensively (solid footwork, long frame and strong). Yet he still couldn't slow Lebron down (dude scored 30+ points in game 4 against Deng)..., but for Deng, he's able to lock down d on Joe Johnson, and did solid defensive jobs against Rudy Gay and Paul Pierce.

Evidence (retrieved from Deng's stat)

This season Deng forced Paul Pierce to have a 3 of 12 shooting (13pts)@1st game, 4 of 10 (9)@2nd game, 6 of 16 (14)@3rd game.

Against Rudy gay (not this year but last year Rudy had a 1 of 10 (9) game) and Deng notoriously lockdown D on Joe Johnson.

So I can see if Barnes can really give effort on D in NBA level, I think he'll be able to contain these guys if we were to use Deng's comparison (tho I know Deng's a better defender than Barnes) But I can't find anyone else that has similar defensive game than Deng. I also got a question too, for a player who relies his game on jabstep and triple-threat, will he be equally good at guarding guys who have similar type of games?

Against all star players such as JJ, Granger, Gay and Pierce, Barnes has the potential (long frame, solid footwork and strength) to slowing their inside and outside game, but for someone like lebron or Melo, there's absolutely no chance at stopping them. I can't see Barnes able to catch up to these two's elite strength & elite quickness.

As for MKG, he might struggle from guarding elites who post up well, but he'll be very legit in terms of on ball defense, he's just so quick and always stay ahead of his man no matter what.

[Marlo Stanfield]

Joe Forte was definitely not a "can't miss" prospect - at least not even close to being the one Jordan was.

Don't twist my words. I said they were both "can't miss" prospects (which if you actually remember correctly was true about Forte as well), but I never said Forte was at the same level as Jordan. The comparison is just to show the similarity in the stat lines, except one goes onto be the GOAT while the other falls into NBA obscurity.

Forte was an undersized SG who couldn't dribble the ball. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but players hyped up as "can't miss" prospects don't usually fall out of lottery either.

You can say whatever you want, but anyone who remembers back to '01 draft remember the name Joseph Forte. But either way, you trying to distract from the main point won't work. Whether or not Forte was a can't miss prospect or not doesn't change the fact that his collegiate stat line was eerily similar to MJ because he was a feature player. It also doesn't change the fact that MJ was not option 1-5 in the UNC offense. And it especially doesn't change the fact that Scott Drew's misuse of Quincy Miller has all of you doubting his abilities.

[Marlo Stanfield]

Just for the draft thread: Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook combine for 91 points tonight (Durant 51, Westbrook 40). Ahh to have a good drafting GM in a strong draft...

[ash_k]

Marlo Stanfield,

Again stats dont tell all the story especially in the NCAA.

Scouts said Joe Forte was good! Scouts said the same about Olowokandi.

Watching him at UNC; Joe Forte did not look that good there (from an NBA game perspective)
A player like Rashad McCants looked much better from a skills set/NBA ready-game perspective.

All this coming from a big UNC fan!

Quincy doesnt have the presence to command shots and that weak knee at such a young age with suspect shooting mechanics. ( Slow release and no elevation..dribbles too high from what I have seen)


P.S. I still dont understand why Rashad McCants didnt make it, he had all the tools and the confidence...never given the opportunity (and maybe a lil headcase..a lil)

[Kevin Willis]

Wing prospects are Beal, MKG, Lamb, Barnes and Ross.

Tiered like this Barnes, MKG. Then Lamb, Beal and Ross. No matter where we end up we're going to have a shot of drafting one of them.

Highest ceiling - Barnes, Beal, Lamb. Highest chance of hitting their ceiling MKG and Ross (Hard worker on a team with a ball hog like Wroten.)

Barnes is a great wing prospect for the Raptors and I'm liking more and more the way he's playing consistently now. Lamb is falling out of favour more for his team than because of him. Still a quality player. MKG is going up because Kentucky is a beast team and he's a key contributor. Ross and Beal are quality players on good team. So either we get a pure shooter. Or a scorer. Or a utility guy that does everything. In the end, under Casey, we'll be alright.

[Marlo Stanfield]

Marlo Stanfield,

Again stats dont tell all the story especially in the NCAA.

Scouts said Joe Forte was good! Scouts said the same about Olowokandi.

Watching him at UNC; Joe Forte did not look that good there (from an NBA game perspective)
A player like Rashad McCants looked much better from a skills set/NBA ready-game perspective.

All this coming from a big UNC fan!

Quincy doesnt have the presence to command shots and that weak knee at such a young age with suspect shooting mechanics. ( Slow release and no elevation..dribbles too high from what I have seen)

P.S. I still dont understand why Rashad McCants didnt make it, he had all the tools and the confidence...never given the opportunity (and maybe a lil headcase..a lil)

You just agreed with everything I'm saying, outside of your opinion on Quincy which is opinion versus opinion anyways.

[fredericklove]

I meant to focus on players who played on great teams where they weren't the leading factors in that teams success. Finding the difference between players who played on great teams because they made those teams great vs players who look good because they play on great teams.

I think it could help evaluate players like Barnes of MKG in isolation because their situations disguise their abilities.

Fredericklove - care to join in?

well the thing is duke and UNC aren't teams that build their system revolving around one guy, its 5 guys that initiate team offense play (PG, big man, lots of p&r/screens), so its really hard to analyze on the players on this, sunny.

[fredericklove]

Just for the draft thread: Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook combine for 91 points tonight (Durant 51, Westbrook 40). Ahh to have a good drafting GM in a strong draft...

Are you talking about the GM who drafted these two? Well, there's no need for a good drafting Gm for durant lol, he's pretty much a consensus #2. But Westbrook was a good pick, I give their gm credit for that.

[ash_k]

Marlo,

You need to actually watch the player play instead of relying on the Stats or scouting reports.

Watch the tools, their presence on the court, how they move, their will, .. : Then you would not be bringing stats of MJ (GOAT) vs Forte to make a point.

Watching Jimmer for example, you could tell he wasnt built for the NBA .

Now Watch the tools of Quincy again during the games and reevaluate.

Dont put Durant and Quincy in the same breath again even to make a point

[fredericklove]

Wing prospects are Beal, MKG, Lamb, Barnes and Ross.

Tiered like this Barnes, MKG. Then Lamb, Beal and Ross. No matter where we end up we're going to have a shot of drafting one of them.

Highest ceiling - Barnes, Beal, Lamb. Highest chance of hitting their ceiling MKG and Ross (Hard worker on a team with a ball hog like Wroten.)

Barnes is a great wing prospect for the Raptors and I'm liking more and more the way he's playing consistently now. Lamb is falling out of favour more for his team than because of him. Still a quality player. MKG is going up because Kentucky is a beast team and he's a key contributor. Ross and Beal are quality players on good team. So either we get a pure shooter. Or a scorer. Or a utility guy that does everything. In the end, under Casey, we'll be alright.

I know Ross is hype now but I'm not impressed by his game and I wouldn't take him over Beal, or even River. Out of these 3, Beal is one I'd have most. But yes, thank god for this draft we don't have to be stuck with PJ3 if we are drafting 4th to 6th.

[Marlo Stanfield]

Just for the draft thread: Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook combine for 91 points tonight (Durant 51, Westbrook 40). Ahh to have a good drafting GM in a strong draft...

Are you talking about the GM who drafted these two? Well, there's no need for a good drafting Gm for durant lol, he's pretty much a consensus #2. But Westbrook was a good pick, I give their gm credit for that.

BTW, Ibaka and his triple double were drafted by that same guy.

Marlo,

You need to actually watch the player play instead of relying on the Stats or scouting reports.

Watch the tools, their presence on the court, how they move, their will, .. : Then you would not be bringing stats of MJ (GOAT) vs Forte to make a point.

Watching Jimmer for example, you could tell he wasnt built for the NBA .

Now Watch the tools of Quincy again during the games and reevaluate.

Dont put Durant and Quincy in the same breath again even to make a point

Are you serious? How many times have you even watched Quincy? I'd be willing to bet you haven't seen 90% of Baylor games this season like I have though. The MJ/Forte comparison was stat sheet only to prove to you that the stat sheet means nothing. And no one is saying Quincy is the next KD, just that their games are similar. Smh at people trying to twist my words....

[sunny]

I meant to focus on players who played on great teams where they weren't the leading factors in that teams success. Finding the difference between players who played on great teams because they made those teams great vs players who look good because they play on great teams.

I think it could help evaluate players like Barnes of MKG in isolation because their situations disguise their abilities.

Fredericklove - care to join in?

well the thing is duke and UNC aren't teams that build their system revolving around one guy, its 5 guys that initiate team offense play (PG, big man, lots of p&r/screens), so its really hard to analyze on the players on this, sunny.

I don't think it really matters with the amount of elite highschool players Roy Williams has gotten at UNC who played integral roles in their teams success only to become mediocre players or busts in the nba.

I'm not saying there is a direct causal factor taking place, but I think there is a definite trend of overrating players who happen to play on great teams with several other stars.

[fredericklove]

I meant to focus on players who played on great teams where they weren't the leading factors in that teams success. Finding the difference between players who played on great teams because they made those teams great vs players who look good because they play on great teams.

I think it could help evaluate players like Barnes of MKG in isolation because their situations disguise their abilities.

Fredericklove - care to join in?

well the thing is duke and UNC aren't teams that build their system revolving around one guy, its 5 guys that initiate team offense play (PG, big man, lots of p&r/screens), so its really hard to analyze on the players on this, sunny.

I don't think it really matters with the amount of elite highschool players Roy Williams has gotten at UNC who played integral roles in their teams success only to become mediocre players or busts in the nba.

I'm not saying there is a direct causal factor taking place, but I think there is a definite trend of overrating players who happen to play on great teams with several other stars.

You cant expect every single player that UNC or Duke produced to turn out to be star, some pan out to be stars, some pan out to be a solid rotational players, ....u would expect at least one or two under those two teams would pan out as stars - Irving, Pierce.

[fredericklove]

I don't think it really matters with the amount of elite highschool players Roy Williams has gotten at UNC who played integral roles in their teams success only to become mediocre players or busts in the nba.

I'm not saying there is a direct causal factor taking place, but I think there is a definite trend of overrating players who happen to play on great teams with several other stars.

You emphasize way too much on UNC and Duke's inability to create star players cos this is the only argument you pretty much used to argue with me cos you argued with me on this long time ago too I remembered. But in a draft, you analyze and dissect from the player's game, to analyze whether their skillset are of nba level. A team system does have indirect causal factor but it should be a partial of the scouting analysis rather than to use it as the only sole factor to a player's game, that's just my opinion whether you like it or not.

[sunny]

its not an argument, its just something I'm curious about.
and its something that influences people on this board. Take for example when Uconn starts playing poorly and people instantly think Jeremy Lamb's stock drops.