2012 NBA Draft - Part II

[thinker07]

Whoever the Wiz draft - they HAVE to add a couple of serious shooters. I think it was a big mistake not drafting a single shooter last year, and now we've discarded our best shooter. I wish that the Nuggets could have been convinced to throw Jordan Hamilton into the Nene trade. It is probably more detrimental to the team and to John Wall's morale that guys can't finish on his passes than any other single factor.

I was steadfast last year in arguing for drafting one of the shooters and we drafted none. NOW, we've even further behind the curve because honestly I think a team needs to have 3-4 good shooters to win and we have only free agent to be Roger Mason. Crawford is more of a scorer/very streaky shooter.

I just don't think we can continue drafting guys like MKG who can't shoot -- no matter how incredible their intangibles are, and there is every indication that MKG is going to stay in school for another year anyway (obviously to be seen).

We have to accept that if the Wiz finish with the second worst record, there is a a 44% chance that they'll pick 4th or 5th. If they finish with the 3rd worst record, there is a almost a 50% chance that they'll pick 4th, 5th or 6th.

According to NBADraft.net, these are the best shooters in the draft (not in order):

Barnes, J Lamb, Rivers, Beal, Lillard, Ross, D Lamb, Jenkins, Bufford, and Orlando Johnson -- I think the Wiz have to try and get 2 of these guys.

From all the obvious tea-leaves, I think EG would jump on Barnes if we don't win the Davis lottery. I think Beal looks like he has a higher upside than Barnes. But I have to think that we'll probably end up with Barnes, Beal, or Lamb. And I think that we have to draft a shooter with the early 2nd round pick as well. AND I think we have to go after a FA shooter this summer as well with our cap room.

[DCZards]

One massive difference b/w Roy & Barnes which makes the comparison questionable. Roy was a very skilled ballhandler. You could run the offense through him and he could set others up. He was a defacto PG at times. Barnes ball skills pale in comparison, nor does he have the court vision.

And of course the Wizards need shooting & scoring from the SG/SF position. That goes without saying, but they also need a lot of other things that Barnes doesn't necessarily provide. I wouldn't be focused on finding the perfect fit, instead I'd be focused on finding the perfect player. Or the guy that's closest to perfection that we can get. Barnes might be a very good fit skill wise, but he's far away from being a perfect player for us.

Totally agree that Barnes does not appear to have anywhere near the ball handling skills that Roy had.

A couple of things though:

--- Roy played four years of coll. before entering the NBA, Barnes is in his second year of college. So there is still a good chance that Barnes can become a better ball handler.

--- Barnes is playing with probably the best passer and playmaker in college bball, and the ball is always in Marshall's hands as it should be. (The same may have been true in high school where Barnes played with a talented PG in McDermott.) So we rarely get a chance to see exactly how good (or bad) a ball handler Barnes really is.

Barnes may not be the perfect player but he may very well be the best fit for the Zards.

I've seen a decent number of Kentucky games and, while MKG may have potential, it's not always obvious. And I have real doubts about his ability to be anything but a so-so shooter. I like Robinson a lot. But with Nene, Seraphin and Booker on the roster, I just don't think the Zards need another inside banger, especially when there's such a dire need for a quality SF.

I don't disagree with the Best Player Available philosophy, but, after Davis, Barnes may arguably be the BPA.

P.S. If Marshall can't play because of his wrist, which appears likely, Barnes may be called upon to step up and do more, which should give us a better idea of how good Barnes is...or isn't.

[Mizerooskie]

The idea of making draft decisions based on Trevor Booker's presence is laughable. We had this same argument this past draft involving Faried & Booker. Everyone said Booker is too similar to Faried. Nonsense. For all of Booker's benefits he's still most likely a backup PF. We need talent, regardless of position. Draft the best player available. Stop worrying about fit. If Robinson is the BPA then draft him and worry about fit later. If MKG is the BPA, who cares if effort guys like Singleton & Vesely were drafted a year? Just get the BPA and let everything figure itself out afterwards.

Of course it's not laughable. If there are doubts that a player will be any better than Booker, you don't take that player in the top 5 if you've got better fits in the same draft tier. Simple.

There's a reason the tier system is so popular for NBA draft boards. It's the nexus of BPA and need-based drafting. With limited rosters, you can't merely draft the BPA all the time.

Draft disasters happen when players are taken a tier early (or wrongly put in a tier), like Greg Oden.

[MBash721]

For all of the Sullinger supporters this upcoming game vs Gates will be the most telling. Gates is an NBA level pf and I'll be very interested in looking at this game. Personally I wouldn't touch Sullinger in the lottery. There's just noway I would do it as a GM.

not really because Sullinger is playing with a painful foot injury and isnt close to 100%

[MBash721]

The idea of making draft decisions based on Trevor Booker's presence is laughable. We had this same argument this past draft involving Faried & Booker. Everyone said Booker is too similar to Faried. Nonsense. For all of Booker's benefits he's still most likely a backup PF. We need talent, regardless of position. Draft the best player available. Stop worrying about fit. If Robinson is the BPA then draft him and worry about fit later. If MKG is the BPA, who cares if effort guys like Singleton & Vesely were drafted a year? Just get the BPA and let everything figure itself out afterwards.

Of course it's not laughable. If there are doubts that a player will be any better than Booker, you don't take that player in the top 5 if you've got better fits in the same draft tier. Simple.

There's a reason the tier system is so popular for NBA draft boards. It's the nexus of BPA and need-based drafting. With limited rosters, you can't merely draft the BPA all the time.

Draft disasters happen when players are taken a tier early (or wrongly put in a tier), like Greg Oden.

Oden was an elite, once in a decade type center prospect.... his career was just ruined by injuries

[Mizerooskie]

The idea of making draft decisions based on Trevor Booker's presence is laughable. We had this same argument this past draft involving Faried & Booker. Everyone said Booker is too similar to Faried. Nonsense. For all of Booker's benefits he's still most likely a backup PF. We need talent, regardless of position. Draft the best player available. Stop worrying about fit. If Robinson is the BPA then draft him and worry about fit later. If MKG is the BPA, who cares if effort guys like Singleton & Vesely were drafted a year? Just get the BPA and let everything figure itself out afterwards.

Of course it's not laughable. If there are doubts that a player will be any better than Booker, you don't take that player in the top 5 if you've got better fits in the same draft tier. Simple.

There's a reason the tier system is so popular for NBA draft boards. It's the nexus of BPA and need-based drafting. With limited rosters, you can't merely draft the BPA all the time.

Draft disasters happen when players are taken a tier early (or wrongly put in a tier), like Greg Oden.

Oden was an elite, once in a decade type center prospect.... his career was just ruined by injuries

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

[Dat2U]

The idea of making draft decisions based on Trevor Booker's presence is laughable. We had this same argument this past draft involving Faried & Booker. Everyone said Booker is too similar to Faried. Nonsense. For all of Booker's benefits he's still most likely a backup PF. We need talent, regardless of position. Draft the best player available. Stop worrying about fit. If Robinson is the BPA then draft him and worry about fit later. If MKG is the BPA, who cares if effort guys like Singleton & Vesely were drafted a year? Just get the BPA and let everything figure itself out afterwards.

Of course it's not laughable. If there are doubts that a player will be any better than Booker, you don't take that player in the top 5 if you've got better fits in the same draft tier. Simple.

There's a reason the tier system is so popular for NBA draft boards. It's the nexus of BPA and need-based drafting. With limited rosters, you can't merely draft the BPA all the time.

Draft disasters happen when players are taken a tier early (or wrongly put in a tier), like Greg Oden.

1. Were comparing Booker to top 5 picks. What?!?

3. Why are we so focused on one particular skill when we plainly need elite talent?

5. We don't have the pieces in place (elite talent) to worry about fit yet.

4. The only thing limited about our roster is talent.

5. Sorry if I'm being repetitive but basically what I'm saying is we need elite talent.

And Oden was in the right tier, he just could never stay healthy.

[Dat2U]

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

I actually preferred Durant myself but Oden was pretty much regarded as the #1 pick all along. Durant played his way into consideration but Oden was the rare elite center prospect. He played like one after a shaky start. If he stayed healthy he'd be right up there with Howard & Bynum.

[queridiculo]

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

Are you serious? Sounds like selective recall to me.

Oden was the consensus, can't miss, franchise building center prospect before he had even played a minute of college basketball. If not for the minimum age he would have been the 2nd player drafted first overall straight out of highschool.

As the 06/07 college season wore on Durant gained momentum, but Oden was still the consensus no. 1 pick by the time of the 07 NBA draft.

I personally preferred Durant, but Oden was without a doubt the player that most people expected to go 1st.

[MBash721]

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

Are you serious? Sounds like selective recall to me.

Oden was the consensus, can't miss, franchise building center prospect before he had even played a minute of college basketball. If not for the minimum age he would have been the 2nd player drafted first overall straight out of highschool.

As the 06/07 college season wore on Durant gained momentum, but Oden was still the consensus no. 1 pick by the time of the 07 NBA draft.

I personally preferred Durant, but Oden was without a doubt the player that most people expected to go 1st.

hindsight is 20/20

people can say they knew Oden would have injury problems in the NBA, but reality is, his only big injury before the NBA was his wrist injury, which he returned about a month early from

Oden healthy was a freak.... go watch highlights of him in high school or college.... he ran the floor like a small forward... at Ohio State, he was a 1 man zone in the paint.... teams didnt even try to attack the basket when Oden was in the game.... he was unbelievable on the defensive end

it sucks because we never knew how good he would have been.... I think he could have been Howard-esque, but Oden could also shoot FTs in the 70 to 80% range so he wouldnt have been a liability there

u think it was a coincidence that every level Oden played at his teams dominated and won championships?

his AAU team is considered the greatest ever....

his high school team lost like 3 homes games in 4 years and dominated Indiana

he led Ohio State to the national championship game his 1 year at Ohio State....he lost 3 games while at OSU, 2 against Florida, which is arguably one of the best college bball teams in the past 30-40 years

Oden was just an unbelievable defensive player and presence in the paint

he was the kind of prospect that would anchor a championship team

Durant was a really really really great prospect that woulda been #1 in almost every other draft.... but passing up a big man with the caliber talent that Oden had was impossible to do

[MBash721]

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

I actually preferred Durant myself but Oden was pretty much regarded as the #1 pick all along. Durant played his way into consideration but Oden was the rare elite center prospect. He played like one after a shaky start. If he stayed healthy he'd be right up there with Howard & Bynum.

there were a good amount of people who preferred Durant over Oden....

its like the NFL draft this year...... some people like RG3 as a better prospect than Andrew Luck.... but no one would dare take RG3 over Luck #1 overall.... too big of a risk..... Luck is the prototypical franchise QB that wins super bowls.... if ur not gonna take the consensus #1 pick, u damn well better be 100% sure or you are going to lose ur job

would anyone be shocked if RG3 turns out better than Luck? I wont....

but when nearly every scout and GM has agreed for over a year that Luck was the sure-fire #1 "once in a decade" Franchise QB, you can bet ur ass no one would have the guts to take RG3 #1 over him....

it was the same with Oden/Durant.... some people may have thought Durant was going to be better.... but Oden was known to be the "next great big man" and was known to be the #1 pick whenever he entered the draft since he was in 10th grade.... no one in their right mind was not going to take him #1 overall

[queridiculo]

Oden running the floor like a SF? That's not what I recall. I came away largely unimpressed (considering the hype) watching him play in college. He dominated players with his sheer length and size, but looked mechanic on offense and lacked finesse. He was no Duncan, Ewing or Mourning,and wasn't physically dominant on the level of a O'Neal.

Oden got a lot of hype because there had been such a derth of quality big men over the years, and people got excited about his NBA ready frame and legit height.

As a prospect Durant was on a completely different level to me with. His ability run the floor like a guard, finish above the rim like a PF combined with his incredible range and array of shots was simply unheard of from a player standing 6'10" tall.

Oden was the safe pick, and unfortunately for the Blazers they didn't learn their lesson from the Bowie debacle.

[MBash721]

Oden running the floor like a SF? That's not what I recall. I came away largely unimpressed (considering the hype) watching him play in college. He dominated players with his sheer length and size, but looked mechanic on offense and lacked finesse. He was no Duncan, Ewing or Mourning,and wasn't physically dominant on the level of a O'Neal.

Oden got a lot of hype because there had been such a derth of quality big men over the years, and people got excited about his NBA ready frame and legit height.

As a prospect Durant was on a completely different level to me with. His ability run the floor like a guard, finish above the rim like a PF combined with his incredible range and array of shots was simply unheard of from a player standing 6'10" tall.

Oden was the safe pick, and unfortunately for the Blazers they didn't learn their lesson from the Bowie debacle.

Oden's #1 asset was his defense.... go back and watch those Ohio State games.... he was a 1 man zone... no one tried to challenge him.... and if they did, he swatted it or altered it.... go watch the national championship game.... Corey Brewer and Chris Richard, 2 future NBA player tried to go and dunk on Oden and got stuffed.... u couldnt score in the paint when Oden was in the game

as far as his offense... dont forget... for most of the year, he was basically playing with 1 hand (and it was his left)..... he taught himself to shoot free throws left handed when he was hurt and shot them left handed in games for half the season.... and shot it between 65 to 70%... thats ridiculous....

when he did get healthy come tournament time, he ABUSED 4 future NBA players in the national championship in Noah/Horford/Richard/Speights and made them look like little boys... they couldnt handle him

go look up Oden's freshman stats compared to Ewing/Shaq/Mourning..... theyre right up there

as far as questioning Oden as an athlete...

Oden was a FREAK athlete coming out...

just look at the NBA draft combine testing..... compare Oden to some of the other guys taken in the top 10..... legit 7 footers/centers arent supposed to be that athletic..... Noah is considered maybe the most athletic center in the NBA.... and he couldnt touch Oden's ability

Oden:
No step vertical - 32 inches
max vertical - 34 inches
agility - 11.67 sec
sprint - 3.27

Durant:
No step vertical - 26 inches
max vertical - 33.5 inches
agility - 12.33 sec
sprint - 3.45

Horford:
No step vertical - 31 inches
max vertical - 35.5 inches
agility - 12.15 sec
sprint - 3.37

Noah:
No step vertical - 32.5 inches
max vertical - 37.5 inches
agility - 11.79 sec
sprint - 3.47

Conley:
No step vertical - 35.5 inches
max vertical - 40.5 inches
agility - 11.63 sec
sprint - 3.09

Brewer:
No step vertical - 30.5 inches
max vertical - 36.5 inches
agility - 11.69 sec
sprint - 3.22

[fishercob]

Welcome MBash721. Haven't seen you around much, but hope to see more from you.

I agree with pretty much every word of your recollection of Oden. The left handed free throw thing was instructive of someone truly unique and special. He was valiantly dominant in that title game agains t two NBA stars (Horford and Noah) plus Brewer, Speghts, Richard, etc.

It's a shame for all hoops fans that he got so unlucky with injuries.

[Ruzious]

The fact that Oden was taken ahead of Durant - a legitimately phenominal prospect - and Oden was the correct choice (without using hindsight) according to most people - pretty much tells you - Oden was a great great GREAT prospect. If people want to choose not to remember, that's up to them.

[fishercob]

The idea of making draft decisions based on Trevor Booker's presence is laughable. We had this same argument this past draft involving Faried & Booker. Everyone said Booker is too similar to Faried. Nonsense. For all of Booker's benefits he's still most likely a backup PF. We need talent, regardless of position. Draft the best player available. Stop worrying about fit. If Robinson is the BPA then draft him and worry about fit later. If MKG is the BPA, who cares if effort guys like Singleton & Vesely were drafted a year? Just get the BPA and let everything figure itself out afterwards.

Of course it's not laughable. If there are doubts that a player will be any better than Booker, you don't take that player in the top 5 if you've got better fits in the same draft tier. Simple.

There's a reason the tier system is so popular for NBA draft boards. It's the nexus of BPA and need-based drafting. With limited rosters, you can't merely draft the BPA all the time.

Draft disasters happen when players are taken a tier early (or wrongly put in a tier), like Greg Oden.

1. Were comparing Booker to top 5 picks. What?!?

3. Why are we so focused on one particular skill when we plainly need elite talent?

5. We don't have the pieces in place (elite talent) to worry about fit yet.

4. The only thing limited about our roster is talent.

5. Sorry if I'm being repetitive but basically what I'm saying is we need elite talent.

And Oden was in the right tier, he just could never stay healthy.

Dat, firstly I love the new numbering system you've come up with. Kidding aside, I don't think you and Miz are actually disagreeing. I think what he is saying is that if you are going to take a PF in this draft, you better be damn well sure that he's a clear upgrade over what we've got. Because what we've got isn't all that special and we have no one on this team that can shoot the ball. So if you want me to ignore the wings, you need be be certain that you're upgrading the frontcourt. That's all.

[DCZards]

I think what he is saying is that if you are going to take a PF in this draft, you better be damn well sure that he's a clear upgrade over what we've got. Because what we've got isn't all that special and we have no one on this team that can shoot the ball. So if you want me to ignore the wings, you need be be certain that you're upgrading the frontcourt. That's all.

This is pretty much where I am. If MKG and/or T. Robinson are elite talents then I'm all for drafting one of them in spite of the fact that the Zards desperately need a wing player (like Barnes) who can shoot. I'm just not convinced that there's a special player in this draft other than Davis.

[Rafael122]

This is what free agency is for. Dat is right, pick the talent, whether it's Robinson or MKG and figure out where to play him later and then get a shooting guard or small forward in free agency, someone who won't cost a lot (people here have thrown the name Brandon Rush around). Rush is shooting 45% from 3, you don't think we need that?

Any good coach will figure out how rotations and all that stuff. This team is bereft of talent.

[Mizerooskie]

I can't recall anyone outside of Portland believing he was in the same tier as Durant.

Are you serious? Sounds like selective recall to me.

Oden was the consensus, can't miss, franchise building center prospect before he had even played a minute of college basketball. If not for the minimum age he would have been the 2nd player drafted first overall straight out of highschool.

As the 06/07 college season wore on Durant gained momentum, but Oden was still the consensus no. 1 pick by the time of the 07 NBA draft.

I personally preferred Durant, but Oden was without a doubt the player that most people expected to go 1st.

Not selective recall at all You don't recall the plethora of Sam Bowie comparisons? Maybe we read different sites at the time, but I honestly cannot remember a single place that rated Oden more highly than Durant.

[Severn Hoos]

I think what he is saying is that if you are going to take a PF in this draft, you better be damn well sure that he's a clear upgrade over what we've got. Because what we've got isn't all that special and we have no one on this team that can shoot the ball. So if you want me to ignore the wings, you need be be certain that you're upgrading the frontcourt. That's all.

This is pretty much where I am. If MKG and/or T. Robinson are elite talents then I'm all for drafting one of them in spite of the fact that the Zards desperately need a wing player (like Barnes) who can shoot. I'm just not convinced that there's a special player in this draft other than Davis.

I with you, Zards. I really want to believe in TRob & MKG, but every time I do, I come up with more doubts. The good news is that they're both still alive in the tournament, so they have a chance to "come up big" on a big stage and show what they can do.

On Robinson, I still have trouble with the idea that he just hasn't faced many good big men. The Big 12 (ten) is embarrassingly weak at PF/C. KSt plays 3 guards and 2 Fs, as does Mizzou. Royce White outplayed him both times KU faced Iowa St. Some other prominent games:

Against Kentucky, 5-12, 11 points
Against Duke, 6-15, 16 points
Against Purdue, 2-12, 11 points

He killed OSU, but that was one of the games Sullinger didn't play.

And, in every one of those games, he was still a monster on the boards - and I expect that will carry over to the NBA.

My concern is more about his ability to provide offense in the NBA. I have some of the same concern with Sullinger, but have already seen him develop that mid-range shot (out to college 3-point line), and trust that he has more craftiness in the post. Robinson looks like a rebounding machine, and will score on offensive rebounds and fast breaks. But is that enough? That's where I have my doubts.

Again - not saying he isn't a very good prospect. I just don't see him as "special" - more like a Tier 3 guy, IMO (top half at his position in the NBA, but not All-Star).