2012 NBA Draft - Part II

[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.

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.

Well you're obviously ignoring the point. Again, draft tiers. Similarly talented players are put into tiers (e.g., players like Robinson and MKG). Teams then pick from those tiers based on need.

You've got a starting PF with a per of 16+ (29th in the league at the position, with the second-lowest usage rate in the top 30) in his second year. Your hodge-podge of starting SFs have a PER of 8+. What's the smarter pick? A tier 2 PF, or a tier 2 SF?

And Oden wasn't in the right tier. He was Sam Bowie. Durant put up ~26 and 11 per game en route to winning the Naismith award. He was in a tier by himself.

[Mizerooskie]

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.

I'm not saying you pass Robinson to pick Jeff Taylor. I'm saying you pass Robinson to pick a similarly talented player in MKG/Beal/Barnes that's a better fit.

[nate33]

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).

I agree with this assessment. Robinson does not appear to be an All Star caliber talent. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if anyone in this draft is an all star caliber talent other than Davis. I think there are a lot of starters but very few stars.

I also think the college game tends to stifle big men because of the zone defenses and the lack of floor spacing. When Robinson gets to the NBA and faces single coverage, I think he'll do a lot better. Sullinger no doubt will too, but Sullinger is going to have problems on the defensive end.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

How about Green (MichST) in the 2nd rnd if he falls. That kid does
everything. I wonder if he isn't underrated on DX at 29th. Gotta
like guys who are the opposite of Nick, stat-fillers.

By all means, YES! I love his potential in the NBA, jim.



http://www.msuspartans.com/sports/m-bas ... ond00.html

The Word
Possesses strong leadership qualities, one of the best of Tom Izzo's coaching tenure • His best skills are his versatility and high basketball IQ • Ability to score inside or outside, having worked to extend his shooting range • Very skilled passer • Strong rebounder • Very tough player •

Noteworthy Acheivements
========================================================
-- Draymond Green is the best player on #1 seed, Michigan State
-- He achieved a triple double in NCAA play.
-- Green is the Big Ten Player of the Year
-- Green improved all four years at Michigan State.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... mond-green

-- Green has played on two Final Four Spartan teams.
-- Green won multiple HS state championships before Michigan State.

High School
Led Saginaw High School to Michigan Class A State Championship for second straight year as a senior • Averaged 20 points, 13 rebounds and two blocked shots in leading the Trojans to a 27-1 record and a No. 4 national ranking by USA Today •

jim, my scouting report on Green is that he fits the profile of several successful NBA players. His bio is very similar to that of DeJuan Blair. He reminds me also of Jared Dudley and also Trevor Booker in terms of his years of NCAA play and gradual improvement. I love this about Draymond Green: He played for Tom Izzo. Green will defend the heck out of pick and roll because his coach is one of the best defensive coaches. Draymond's fundamentals will be strong and I can see him playing any front court spot, despite his size. In small ball, he can play the post and be a wonderful passer. I also could have mentioned Chuck Hayes when comparing Green.

So, yes, projecting him at #29 is too low for this player IMO, jim. He's not a great athlete but he is going to be a good player.

[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.

I'm not saying you pass Robinson to pick Jeff Taylor. I'm saying you pass Robinson to pick a similarly talented player in MKG/Beal/Barnes that's a better fit.

It really all depends on where we draft, by the looks of it we can't pick worse than 5th.At least that's the direction we are heading, we may end up picking a guy like Barnes because he's the best player available at that point and he also fits a need.

BTW, this may be moot if we end up with the 3rd pick. MKG could be staying in school, so we will probably pick Barnes or Robinson.

[tontoz]

And Oden wasn't in the right tier. He was Sam Bowie. Durant put up ~26 and 11 per game en route to winning the Naismith award. He was in a tier by himself.

That is simply not true. Even with his shooting hand in a cast Oden had a big impact in college. He was the consensus top pick, especially after the combine where he showed out and Durant.... didn't.

[nate33]

You've got a starting PF with a per of 16+ (29th in the league at the position, with the second-lowest usage rate in the top 30) in his second year.

I ran a screen of players 6-7 to 6-11 who have played 1000 or more minutes (mostly starters or high minute 3rd bigs). If you weed out the centers and small forwards (and add the 7-foot Nowitzki), Booker ranks 22nd among starting PF's in PER. He has the second-lowest usage rate on the list. He is also a better defender than a bunch of the guys above him like Jamison, Lee, Gooden and Boozer. A fair argument could be made that Booker is roughly the 20th best PF in the game right now.

I don't know if it's good or bad that his usage rate is so low. Presumably, he could improve his PER a bit if he touched the ball more, but on the other hand, maybe he isn't capable of handling much more of an offensive load with his efficiency suffering.

[montestewart]

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.

I don't recall that, but I agree, there was a plethora if there was even one such comparison. Oden was better, more athletic, and more physically dominant in his one year in college than Bowie was at any point in his entire college career. Oden also was a much different, more massive body. Bowie had missed two years due to injury. Anybody making a pre-draft Bowie comparison was just throwing wild guesses at a sticky wall. Psychics get a few right also, but did they really get anything right?

I recall sites and analysis regarding Durant and Oden breaking both ways, sometimes depending on what a drafting team wanted/needed.

[Mizerooskie]

And Oden wasn't in the right tier. He was Sam Bowie. Durant put up ~26 and 11 per game en route to winning the Naismith award. He was in a tier by himself.

That is simply not true. Even with his shooting hand in a cast Oden had a big impact in college. He was the consensus top pick, especially after the combine where he showed out and Durant.... didn't.

Disagree. I think it was true. Oden was a physically mature leaper in college. Durant was massively more skilled and a significantly better player. Considering Durant is one of the top 2 or 3 players on the planet, and has never averaged fewer than 20 points per game, I don't think it's a reach at all to say he was in a tier by himself that draft. I thought it at the time and I think it now.

[Mizerooskie]

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.

I don't recall that, but I agree, there was a plethora if there was even one such comparison. Oden was better, more athletic, and more physically dominant in his one year in college than Bowie was at any point in his entire college career. Oden also was a much different, more massive body. Bowie had missed two years due to injury. Anybody making a pre-draft Bowie comparison was just throwing wild guesses at a sticky wall. Psychics get a few right also, but did they really get anything right?

I recall sites and analysis regarding Durant and Oden breaking both ways, sometimes depending on what a drafting team wanted/needed.

The Sam Bowie comparisons weren't comparisons of Oden's and Bowie's respective abilities, they were comparisons of their situations--taking the big man over the more dominant and dynamic perimeter player because big men are more rare.

[tontoz]

And Oden wasn't in the right tier. He was Sam Bowie. Durant put up ~26 and 11 per game en route to winning the Naismith award. He was in a tier by himself.

That is simply not true. Even with his shooting hand in a cast Oden had a big impact in college. He was the consensus top pick, especially after the combine where he showed out and Durant.... didn't.

Disagree. I think it was true. Oden was a physically mature leaper in college. Durant was massively more skilled and a significantly better player. Considering Durant is one of the top 2 or 3 players on the planet, and has never averaged fewer than 20 points per game, I don't think it's a reach at all to say he was in a tier by himself that draft. I thought it at the time and I think it now.

Just because it was your opinion doesn't mean it was the consensus. By all means please provide any articles or mock drafts at any time during that year that had Durant ranked over Oden. The "it's true because i say so" argument isn't going to convince many people.

Oden averaged 15/10 shooting 60% with his shooting hand in a cast. And his strong suit was defense.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

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.

While I agree with your principal of just get talent and BPA, I think there needs to be a consideration of fit and team chemistry.

With Nene on here earning $13M and slotted to play X amount of minutes, along with Booker having arrived as a rotation player, and with Seraphin emerging as a potential stopper and post scorer; any big the Wizards draft needs to have appreciably better talent or they need to possess a disparate skill set that improves this team. Otherwise, IMO the Wizard better go G or SF with their lotto/non-Davis pick.

Dat, I don't think Robinson makes as much sense for the Wizards now, because I think Seraphin will end up at C and Nene will finally get to play PF, as he prefers. I think Booker will be a sub. Or else the next coach will be largely unsuccessful. Robinson would have to be more of a stud than I think he is to put Booker and Seraphin on the bench.

What I would MUCH RATHER SEE is for the Wizards to select a guard like Beal with their top pick. I'm backing off MKG. I know the team needs talent but I think it needs to be disparate, or different in an area of need, talent at that same tier of Robinson or whomever.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just trying to say I think chemistry and fit and role is important. The Wizards need knock down shooters who have elite talent IMO.

[Ed Wood]

Sounds more like a heaping helping of creeping determinism than anything else. Oden and Durant had roughly equal PERs in college, Oden was seen as the best big man prospect since Tim Duncan, Durant faced real questions about his frame and position and how his game would translate to the NBA. Given how Oden has fared when actually playing in the NBA he might well have been the player people expected him to be if he had remained healthy.

[tontoz]

Mock drafts from 2007 from dates between the lottery results and actual draft. They all have Oden going number 1.

http://www.nba.com/features/draft2007_consensus.html

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1186 ... mock-draft

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/lottery2007/mockdraft


http://phil-partington.suite101.com/200 ... aft-a24020


http://thesportsflow.blogspot.com/2007/ ... draft.html

[tontoz]

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.

While I agree with your principal of just get talent and BPA, I think there needs to be a consideration of fit and team chemistry.

With Nene on here earning $13M and slotted to play X amount of minutes, along with Booker having arrived as a rotation player, and with Seraphin emerging as a potential stopper and post scorer; any big the Wizards draft needs to have appreciably better talent or they need to possess a disparate skill set that improves this team. Otherwise, IMO the Wizard better go G or SF with their lotto/non-Davis pick.

Dat, I don't think Robinson makes as much sense for the Wizards now, because I think Seraphin will end up at C and Nene will finally get to play PF, as he prefers. I think Booker will be a sub. Or else the next coach will be largely unsuccessful. Robinson would have to be more of a stud than I think he is to put Booker and Seraphin on the bench.

What I would MUCH RATHER SEE is for the Wizards to select a guard like Beal with their top pick. I'm backing off MKG. I know the team needs talent but I think it needs to be disparate, or different in an area of need, talent at that same tier of Robinson or whomever.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just trying to say I think chemistry and fit and role is important. The Wizards need knock down shooters who have elite talent IMO.

I agree with all of this. Other than Davis i don't see anyone as a sure All-Star. Unless there was a standout BPA i think the Wizards should go with a wing player.

[Mizerooskie]

Just because it was your opinion doesn't mean it was the consensus. By all means please provide any articles or mock drafts at any time during that year that had Durant ranked over Oden. The "it's true because i say so" argument isn't going to convince many people.

Oden averaged 15/10 shooting 60% with his shooting hand in a cast. And his strong suit was defense.

I never once said it was the consensus. Please point out where I did.

Here's a few snippets I've found condoning Durant over Oden:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=DN&s_site=philly&p_multi=PI|DN&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=117A3CE61C4332F0&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2007/06/27/nba_draft_07_lead_pipe_lock.php

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/scorecard/03/19/truth.rumors.nba/index.html

There's also a bunch of dead links to such articles that are irretrievable.

[Mizerooskie]

Mock drafts from 2007 from dates between the lottery results and actual draft. They all have Oden going number 1.

http://www.nba.com/features/draft2007_consensus.html

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1186 ... mock-draft

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/lottery2007/mockdraft


http://phil-partington.suite101.com/200 ... aft-a24020


http://thesportsflow.blogspot.com/2007/ ... draft.html

I'm sure that had nothing to do with Brandon Roy, did it?

[tontoz]

The title to your first link

THE 1-2 HUNCH, Must-see TV: One day Oden looks like top choice next day it's Durant

Doesn't sound like this guy is convinced Oden belongs on tier 2.

Michael Jordan seemed to be leaning toward the versatile Kevin Durant over Ohio State center Greg Oden -- assuming they enter the draft -- if the Bobcats get the top pick since they have Emeka Okafor inside.
-- Chicago Tribune

MJ is the same guy who picked Kwame at 1 and Morrison at 3. Not sure I would use him as a reference.

[Severn Hoos]

Well, this seems like a rather silly argument, but hey - that's what we're all about here at RealGM!

If the question is - who was the consensus #1 pick in the 2007 Draft, the only answer is Oden. Google "2007 NBA Mock Draft" and I doubt you can find one (reputable) site that didn't have the Blazers taking Oden. Here's the Chad Ford Lotto game:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/lottery07/mockdraft

You could do it 100 times, and no matter which team "wins" the Lottery, Oden is the #1 pick. To say that anyone of significance was predicting Durant would go #1 is simply not true.

Now, saying who would be the better pro is another story. Take the NFL Draft right now - Maybe you'll find one or two sites that have RGIII at the top of their mock, but 99%+ have Luck going #1. BUT - there is a discussion going on now among draft "experts" as to who will be a better pro. Very different discussion.

Draft sites are funny things. Their first priority is to predict what will happen, not what should happen. They guess what each team will do, and gain credibility if they are correct. So even if you think Durant will be the better pro, if you run a draft site, your mock will have Oden at the top - or else you lose credibility very quickly.

I'd be curious to see any contemporaneous "expert" opinion that said Durant is in a separate class from Oden. The best I could find was a snippet from DX (and that in early Feb, they had come around on Oden by the end of the NCAA tournament):

Does that mean that Oden is not going to end up becoming a phenomenal NBA player? Absolutely not. That just means that it’s not ridiculous to suggest that his overall upside might be less than that of Kevin Durant.

The most I could find anyone willing to go out on a limb was to say that the two were roughly equal, and either would be a good #1 overall pick. I just don't see anyone who said Durant was in another tier (or class or whatever) from Oden.



EDIT - see I was a bit slow to the party. I'll check out the links.

[tontoz]

Mock drafts from 2007 from dates between the lottery results and actual draft. They all have Oden going number 1.

http://www.nba.com/features/draft2007_consensus.html

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1186 ... mock-draft

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/lottery2007/mockdraft


http://phil-partington.suite101.com/200 ... aft-a24020


http://thesportsflow.blogspot.com/2007/ ... draft.html

I'm sure that had nothing to do with Brandon Roy, did it?

From the second link.

1. Portland Trailblazers: Greg Oden - Ohio State


While Kevin Durant would fill a more pressing need for the Blazers, Greg Oden is the anchor of all anchors. With Oden and LaMarcus Aldridge as staples in the frontcourt, Kevin Pritchard will probably try to move both Zach Randolph and Darius Miles in the offseason. If so, Randolph should generate interest across the league, with Chicago and Golden State as leading candidates.

From March 2007

http://60picks.wordpress.com/2007/03/16 ... ock-draft/

http://nbadraftguru.blogspot.com/2007/0 ... draft.html