2012 NBA Draft

[The Consiglieri]

Glichrist >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Barnes

It's not even close IMO. Barnes may be a better perimeter shooter, but Gilchrist does EVERYTHING else at a higher level.

My thoughts too, so what is Ford trying to say in this response from three weeks ago?

"...Matt (DC)



Nobody needs intangibles as a team more than the Wizards, Chad. Why would they take BARNES over MKG?

Chad Ford
(1:49 PM)



Have you watched the past few offseasons for the Wizards?..."



Is he saying we've added nothing but non-shooters? Is he saying he agrees? Is he saying that we don't prioritize intangibles? I wish he'd answered it simply since it's exactly the question I'd want answered for us more than anything. He also said something I didnt mention about Sully a few weeks ago that applies to the Sully contingent even if it's a little obvious (it does seem instructive about the main concern teams have with him):

"...mark (cleveland )



Is Sullinger athletic enough to play the 4 in the NBA?

Chad Ford
(1:45 PM)



That's the question. I've got my concerns. Love his game, but it worries me..."

Link:

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/ ... -chad-ford

[Mizerooskie]

I think Beal, PJ3, and Drummond over Barnes is crazy.

I don't know where all the Barnes hate came from, and why it has sustained on this board. He can create his own shot, he can get to the rim, and he's the best shooter in the class. There seems to be a myth perpetuated that he's just a spot-up shooter. That's far from the truth.

[Jay81]

there is no question in my mind that if we dont get the #1 overall pick, we will get Harrison Barnes. Ted reads the blogs and what he seees is

1) We get no production from our small forwards
2) We have no shooters

barnes looks like a perfect fit based on that.

Cal Cheany2.0

[Mizerooskie]

there is no question in my mind that if we dont get the #1 overall pick, we will get Harrison Barnes. Ted reads the blogs and what he seees is

1) We get no production from our small forwards
2) We have no shooters

barnes looks like a perfect fit based on that.

Cal Cheany2.0

Cal Cheaney 2.0 based on what?

MKG = Wesley Johnson 2.0
Thomas Robinson = Drew Gooden 2.0
Bradley Beal = Rashad McCants 2.0

See how I can do that too?

[Severn Hoos]

Nah, you need at least a half dozen other posters to say the same thing, then it becomes conventional wisdom.

[Mizerooskie]

Nah, you need at least a half dozen other posters to say the same thing, then it becomes conventional wisdom.

Damn, I knew I was doing something wrong.

I like MKG, I just don't see the appeal of a perimeter player that can't shoot and isn't a great passer, especially in the top 5. How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

[Ruzious]

If we can secure a mid-late 1st round pick from another team via trade, I think we should take a serious look at Tony Mitchell from North Texas (not the one from Alabama). I've mentioned him before because I go to Mizzou and he originally committed here but couldn't play last season because of academic issues with the NCAA. Now he's finally playing games with North Texas, and while they don't play elite competition in their conference by any means, he's tearing it up, and you can see how quickly he's improving from game to game.

It remains to be seen if he'll declare for this year's draft, or if he'd prefer to dominate the midmajors for another year to help boost his draft stock, but if he's in this year's draft, I highly recommend giving him a good look if we can get another 1st round pick.

DX has him going 24th overall in this year's draft at the moment. Check him out. http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Ton ... s%29-6229/

He was an elite 5 star prospect, and has incredible size and athleticism. I can't say for sure how intelligent he is or how high his basketball IQ is, but in case anyone is concerned with character problems because of his issues with the NCAA last year, I assure you this wasn't the result of off the court buffoonery, it was purely an academic issue that he got involved in because he was given some incredibly terrible advice from Kansas State's head coach Frank Martin, and unfortunately Tony trusted him.

Thoughts?

Agreed. He could end up the second best player in this draft - in the long run. This is what I said about him earlier:

Sleeper time - that's the most fun part of the draft - finding a player who hasn't been talked about a lot but will someday be a star. Has anyone mentioned Tony Mitchell from North Texas in the Sun Belt (not the Tony Mitchell on Alabama)? My apologies if someone has. He's like a poor man's Anthony Davis. He missed last season due to academic reasons, but he's still a 19 year old freshman. See his stats http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/players/110025 great rebounding/blocks/steals/shooting % numbers. He was also the top per minute rebounder in the entire Nike international Under 18 Tournament 2 years ago - which included Jonas V. Listed at 6'8 220 - the question is - How big is he going to be, and how long is he. Also notice - he's hit some 3's - at a good percentage. So, if he grows just an inch or so and fills out - this kid could shoot way up.

[pancakes3]

How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

not many but they do exist. gerald wallace, iguodala, wilson chandler, shawn marion...

[Ruzious]

Nah, you need at least a half dozen other posters to say the same thing, then it becomes conventional wisdom.

Damn, I knew I was doing something wrong.

I like MKG, I just don't see the appeal of a perimeter player that can't shoot and isn't a great passer, especially in the top 5. How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

Good point about his passing. I've heard him compared to da Pip, but Pippen was a GREAT playmaker. Playing on a team with scorers like Kentucky and with his driving ability, MKG should be averaging 4 or 5 assists a game. Instead, he gets about 2. His offense in general needs a lot of improvement. The question remains - how much will it improve? I don't have a good feel as to what the answer is. I'd feel better if I saw some improvement - I think he's got to show it in the NCAA Tournament to go ahead of his UNC counterpart.

[The Consiglieri]

How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

not many but they do exist. gerald wallace, iguodala, wilson chandler, shawn marion...

If MKG were a junior I'd be a hellvalot more concerned. He's 25 games into his freshmen year. We'll see how he develops, considering his mental make up, work habits, and motor, I don't think it's beyond him to improve where's he's weak. With MKG, I think he's already great, and could get better, with Barnes, it just feels like what you see is what you get, which is too limited in my view, and something you can get more cheaply via trade or a FA signing. A top 2 pick should get more than that in my view.

I imagine NBA scouts and GM's see more than we do in his upside though, no way would be projected #2 overall if all they saw is what we saw.

[Ruzious]

Count the years. Could Rashard have met that kid's mom ... ? (Uncanny resemblance).

Moultrie is enigmatic, lsbf. My bottom line is he's got height, athleticism and jumper. Red flags are his years at UTEP and perhaps a lack of physicality.

Right now, as I type this the Bulldogs of Mississippi State had their 13-point halftime lead over Kentucky trimmed to 3 ...now 6. I am not watching this one, but i think Moultrie can really help his draft status with some heroics and a win tonight, lsbf.

MSU needs to win to get in the NCAAs, and to give Moultrie a shot at improving his draft stock.

Even the chin hair is the same. I hope he didn't get that from Rashard's mom.

I've watched 3 of his games in the last month. The thing I gotta wonder is - can he do ANYTHING offensively other than dunk. He's a great dunker, but in order to be a scorer in the NBA, ya gotta show something more. He's another guy who's gotta show he's got more game in the NCAA Tournament - if he's going to move up at all.

[Mizerooskie]

How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

not many but they do exist. gerald wallace, iguodala, wilson chandler, shawn marion...

Iguodola is a much better passer, and all but Wallace are significantly better outside shooters than MKG.

I think he's got far more holes in his game than Barnes does.

He's basically a slasher that can rebound and doesn't score all that much.

Do we really want two of our starting three perimeter players to provide nothing from long range?

[Mizerooskie]

How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

not many but they do exist. gerald wallace, iguodala, wilson chandler, shawn marion...

If MKG were a junior I'd be a hellvalot more concerned. He's 25 games into his freshmen year. We'll see how he develops, considering his mental make up, work habits, and motor, I don't think it's beyond him to improve where's he's weak. With MKG, I think he's already great, and could get better, with Barnes, it just feels like what you see is what you get, which is too limited in my view, and something you can get more cheaply via trade or a FA signing. A top 2 pick should get more than that in my view.

I imagine NBA scouts and GM's see more than we do in his upside though, no way would be projected #2 overall if all they saw is what we saw.

So MKG might improve because he's only a freshman, but Barnes can't improve because he's a sophomore. Don't you see the duplicity in that line of thinking?

Barnes has already shown significant improvement from last year. He's improved his shot, he's getting to the line more, and he's playing better defense.

[miller31time]

For the record (as I've been a big supporter of his since last NBA Draft when it was a possibility he was going to come out), I'm firmly planted on the Barnes bandwagon. He may not be perfect but the things he does well, he does really well. He's a high character guy with a great work ethic. He wouldn't be the #1 guy in D.C but fortunately we don't need that with Wall in town.

What I wanted from last draft (and now this draft) is not a franchise player, though that would be awesome. It's a running mate for Wall. Barnes is that guy, IMO.

[Earth2Ted]

For the Ohio guys on this board- what's the story with Sullinger? His last few games, especially since that 10 TO performance against MSU, have been a little alarming for a guy that is supposed to be a model of consistency. I know he had some back issues at the start of the season- is he still hurt?

[Dat2U]

How many 6-7 SFs that can't shoot or pass well are successful in the NBA today? Gerald Wallace is the only one that comes to mind.

not many but they do exist. gerald wallace, iguodala, wilson chandler, shawn marion...

Iguodola is a much better passer, and all but Wallace are significantly better outside shooters than MKG.

I think he's got far more holes in his game than Barnes does.

He's basically a slasher that can rebound and doesn't score all that much.

Do we really want two of our starting three perimeter players to provide nothing from long range?

Well, I'd expect MKG to have more holes in his game. Barnes does have a year on him. And I remember how bad Barnes looked for stretches last year before Kendall Marshall was inserted in the starting lineup. I view Barnes as a PG dependent player, which is fine with Wall but he's got seriously flaws of his own.

MKG is a better ballhandler IMO out of anyone of the guys mentioned too. Better than Iggy, better than Wallace. And MKG may not have elite court vision but I've seen him make the correct pass time and time again.

Again, I'm not tearing down Barnes as a prospect. I believe he's worthy of lottery pick, but the stiff hips, lack of explosion and inability to be effective off more than one bounce gives me pause when considering him a top 5 player. I think Barnes will be solid volume scorer at the next level but MKG is just a better all around player and does more to help his team win games other than scoring.

And while scoring may be our biggest need at this point, considering our incredibly low talent level, drafting for need would be a huge mistake. We need the best available player period, regardless of a specific skill set.

[The Consiglieri]

So MKG might improve because he's only a freshman, but Barnes can't improve because he's a sophomore. Don't you see the duplicity in that line of thinking?

Barnes has already shown significant improvement from last year. He's improved his shot, he's getting to the line more, and he's playing better defense.

No, I don't, the concerns most have with Barnes have to do with issues that can't be improved with practice and repetition, they're issues with athleticism and they're character and personality traits (much like, though not the same as PJ3's beta issues, in neither case do I consider these traits motor issue red flags btw, they aren't "he's a bad guy or a knucklehead" issues like the ones we have on our squad) that impact how Barnes and yes PJ3 express their talent on the court. MKG's issues are entirely related to things that could be corrected and/or improved with practice, and repetition, his personality and mental make up are top notch, he is an emphatic force on the game, hyper-involved, always present, always exhibiting absolute dedication and influence across the board. I don't think ANYONE says the same thing about Barnes or PJ3, and I'd be the first to say that while I have a lot of issues with another guy expected to go high, Sully, I dont have any concerns in this area with him. I do have plenty with Barnes, and this area of concern doesn't tend to be dramatically improved with practice. We are who we are, we are who we are comfortable with in ourselves, we can evolve, and some do, dramatically, but more often than not, a player doesn't evolve in terms of mental make up and personality and character that often in sports during their career.

I can't help but think that Barnes will always be a complementary player that doesn't influence things beyond his bread and butter (which is, admittedly, likely to be fantastic at the next level), MKG influences EVERYTHING and only needs to improve in a single major area, granted its a huge area, but it is an area that is much easier to affect change in, than mental make up and personality/character.

[Mizerooskie]

The thing is, MKG doesn't influence everything. He doesn't create opportunities for his teammates through his passing, he doesn't create any space with his outside shooting. Again, he's a slasher that rebounds, but he doesn't score all that much, and gets to the line less than Barnes.

And frankly, I have no idea where anything negative about Harrison Barnes' mental makeup would come from, at all. He's an incredibly consistent scorer who's come up big in big games. He's not even in the same stratosphere as PJ3 in the mental aspect. The fact that you group the two together indicates to me that you don't know much about Barnes.

I'd also like to point out that despite looking 'horrible' for stretches last year, Barnes still scored more, and shot (significantly) better than MKG has this year.

[Dat2U]

Basically only thing you've said Mizerooskie in 10 different ways is that Barnes is a better shooter and scorer. We know that. He's the #1 offensive option for UNC. His role is to be a volume scorer for them. MKG does not have that same role for Kentucky.

I don't question Barnes' makeup but there's no doubt who's the more intense and physically aggressive player. I love MKG's intensity & focus. Especially on the defensive end. And on the boards. You guys are making him sound like Al Thornton when he's much more than that.

I expect MKG to be the type of player who raises his skill level as he continues to mature and work on his game. Outside of that, he's an incredibly versatile defender and a natural leader. I don't know how to quantify it exactly, but he's got "it". I think he's a future star, not exactly a duplicate of Pippen, but on defense, he can potentially influence a game like Pip did in his prime.

[DCZards]

And frankly, I have no idea where anything negative about Harrison Barnes' mental makeup would come from, at all. He's an incredibly consistent scorer who's come up big in big games. He's not even in the same stratosphere as PJ3 in the mental aspect. The fact that you group the two together indicates to me that you don't know much about Barnes.

Agree wholeheartedly here. The thing that has impressed me most about Barnes is that he seems to be at his best when the game is on the line. Can't help but believe that's goig to carry over into his pro career. I also believe Barnes is a more intense competitor than people give him credit for because he has such a calm, laid back demeanor. I also think people underestimate Barnes' athleticism because he's so smooth and plays under control most of the time.

There's a lot to like about MKG--his toughness, his rebounding, but given how badly the Zards need scoring and Wall needs a running mate who can knock down the open jumper when he kicks it out, I'd probably take Barnes. But I'd be happy with MKG.