2012 NBA Draft - Part II

[MBash721]

Just figured I'd dig this up since I remember thinking much along the line of Simmons at the time. Oden was the safe pick, Durant, to me at least the right one.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... aft/070627

alot of people felt that way...

but its just like the NFL draft this year

Luck is the safe, surefire, protypical "franchise QB," who wins Super Bowls

RG3 arguably has a higher upside

but no one in their right mind would take RG3 over Luck..... if u did, u better damn well be 100% correct

Oden/Durant was the same.... Oden was the type of prospect that championships have been built around for the previous 25 years.... Durant was a 6'10 wing player who's upside was through the roof....

its easy for fans to sit here and say "oh I'd take this guy"..... but no GM in their right mind would have taken Durant over Oden

[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.

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.

Beal is a little short to be a sure all star. MKG's shoot woes make him a long way from stardom. One player I think will be a star is Cody Zeller. I feel reasonably good that Cody will be a multiple all star. Anthony Roberson's extreme physical talent but an underdeveloped shot make me think he's got a shot at being a star--but he's no sure thing. Damian Lillard sure can shoot the ball. I think he's got a shot at being a star. Arnett Moutrie is going to be better as a pro than projected.

I could keep doing this but outside of Davis, I can only count Cody Zeller and maybe the youngest talents like Tony Mitchell, Moe Harkless, Anthony Roberson, etc. have a shot a being stars. The NCAAs have shown Royce White, C.J. McCollum, and Andrew Nicholson have star potential. I like Will Barton, too.

tontoz, I like the wings. I wouldn't mind seeing the Wizards trade down to select among: Barton, Mitchell, White, and Nicholson. All those guys interest me more than Barnes.

[fishercob]

CCJ, i don't think Beal is short to be an all-star. He may be 6'4, but look at his rebounding numbers -- particularly given he was playing alongside two smaller guards. I think he'll measure out to be every bit as big in the important metrics as Ray Allen, Ginobili, Harden, etc.

[The Consiglieri]

Agreed, the issue for me is that I don't think Robinson is an elite player at the next level. I think he's probably an above average player, I have a hard time seeing him become an all star. To me, this draft is about either getting Davis, getting MKG or Beal, or trading down for multiple picks. I dont think we should stay at slot if we're around #4 or #5, if a team w/two picks likes our slot enough for us to pick up 2 picks in the top 12-15, I'd deal down in that scenario. I don't think there's a big enough difference between the 2nd and 4th or 5th best bigs, and the 3rd or 5th best 2's and 3's to really justify staying at slot if we get screwed in the lottery. Hopefully the team thinks the same way. New Orleans and Utah are in that potential multipick scenario, anyone know the other teams?

Big's I'd consider:

1. Davis
2. Drummond
3. Robinson
4. PJ3 (Trade that pick)
5. Jared Sullinger
6. John Henson
7. Cody Zeller
8. Tyler Zeller
9. Meyers Leonard

2's/3's:
1. MKG
2. Bradley Beal
3. Q. Miller
4. H. Barnes
5. J. Lamb
6. D. Lamb
7. T. Ross
8. T. Jones
9. D. Waiters

I'm seriously aggravated we didnt find a way to get a 2nd top 12-15 pick this draft because its loaded, I can find about 18 players I'd be absolutely fine w/drafting and have quality expectations for if they all declared. The depth is amazing. I really, really, really hope we package picks. Looks like we'll have the 32nd or 33rd, and the 51st to 53rd, maybe we'll be able to package them both for a pick in that 15-20 zone.

I like your multi pick scenario if we do end up lower than we 'should'.
I think that would be wise IF we found a willing trade partner. I do wonder
whether that is wishful thinking and if other potential trade partners wouldn't
view this exactly the same way as we are here.

re lists

I can't see taking Drummond at all. Assuming you meant the list as ordered
by rank, I have Ty Zeller a lot higher than you do. I just like what I hear
about him and I think he's ready to contribute more quickly than others
as well as still having upside within reach just due to his work ethic.

Also, did you mean to leave Jenkins off your list of 2/3s. Jeff Taylor too
for that matter. Just askin'

I haven't looked into either of them yet so it's yes and no. For instance Doron Lamb wasn't in my batch until recently, nor Cody Zeller because I figured both would go back to school, but Im including them now, other guys like Austin Rivers have dropped off my thought process because I can't imagine him declaring, and MKG may be leaving my list too as I do tend to believe him.

I think there are several guys that may go back, Sully (injury and declining stock, going back could help, and it couldnt get worse), Beal (disappointing year, could go top 3 if he performed as expected) Q. Miller (why not?), M. Leonard (I keep hearing GM's/Scouts saying he needs to go back) and Henson (won't sniff top 5, in a draft w/o Davis, Drummond and Sully, he could go up much higher).

I understand the Drummond hate, and have had him in the parenthesis "trade him" category, but Im not totally sold on the refuse to draft him scenario because he could truly become the best player in this draft. He has the body, and the athleticism to be the one guy not named Davis that develops into an absolute stud. There are major major alarms, practically Air Raid warnings going on to worry us on why the hell he didnt dominate a weak Big East this year, and why we shouldn't draft him (and it does appear that we wouldn't take him top 3), BUT and this is a big bust, after Davis he is the player with the best chance at reaching greatness. Passing on him is a major risk. Drafting him is a major risk.

I wouldn't take him unless he fell out of the top 4 (for me: 1. Davis 2. MKG 3. Beal 4. Robinson), I would consider him after that because I dont think any player after that other than mutual boom bust prospect PJ3 has any chance at greatness, i think the rest of the guys are a hodge podge of "good" nba players, and when we could find help at the 2 or 3 in free agency w/o expending a top 5 pick rather easily that could likely produce similar #'s to the expectations of Barnes, I think Drummond comes into play there. Would I take him? No. And I suspect he could grab the back to school bandwagon if he stays on the outside looking in at the top 3. But there is definitely a case to take Drummond after your favorite 4 or 5 are off the board.

[The Consiglieri]

Here's the thing I like about Barnes. While perimeter shooting might be the basis of his offensive game, unlike NIck Young he appears to understand what constitutes a good shot. He may not have Nick Young's "handles," but he also doesn't use his dribble to create terrible shots for himself and waste possessions. He seems to have the makings of a post game, too.

So no, I don't see him as a multiple all-star. But he does remind me a little bit of Luol Deng. Similar frame, soft spoken. Barnes probably a little more polished coming out of school. Deng is a critical piece on a legit title contender. Keep that in mind. We could do a lot worse than a player like that.

That is a good point, the one thing he has on Young is he isnt an idiot. He has a great BBIQ, and can smoothly fit into the lineup as a player Wall could rely upon to make the right decisions and the right play, and with Nene, that makes 3-4 starters that would be doing that for us, and some decent bench help (if not shooting). My problem is that when you have a miserable season that will likely project to a typical 16-66 to 18-64 record, and all you get out of it is a player that might be a Luol Deng, your draft in my view was a failure, particularly if there are better options available. Picking top 4 or 5, there are much better options to me, picking 5-7, that's when guys like Barnes and Sully would be in a pinch your nose shut and pull the trigger mode, where "well, at least we're getting someone that we know can fill a role and do it well". I just don't think we should be thinking that way at 1-2-3-4-5 when there are guys like Davis, MKG, Beal, and Robinson, or a Drummond who you could trade out with (or in my view, consider taking and probably pass, trading down instead).

[Dat2U]

I've grown to like Beal a bit more than before but the shooting numbers give me pause. He seems like a smart and heady player. Not an elite athlete though, seems like he relies more on a solidly built frame. He's definitely got a smoothness about his game.

In other words, he looks a good prospect but not necessarily an elite one. I might be skeptical about taking him too high. At #5 or later he may well be a very good option though.

[fishercob]

I've grown to like Beal a bit more than before but the shooting numbers give me pause. He seems like a smart and heady player. Not an elite athlete though, seems like he relies more on a solidly built frame. He's definitely got a smoothness about his game.

In other words, he looks a good prospect but not necessarily an elite one. I might be skeptical about taking him too high. At #5 or later he may well be a very good option though.

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

Remember, what gave you most pause about Harden was questionable athleticism.

[The Consiglieri]

Barnes was pretty invisible before Marshall came around though, last year. In face Kendall's insertion into the starting lineup appeared to play a key role in Barnes developing from a disappointing freshmen through December into a good player in the second half of last year.

The keyword here is freshman. The expecations were so high for Barnes coming out of high school that when he struggled the first few weeks at UNC people were quick to label him a disappointment. He had changed most of those people's minds by midseason.

I just dont see it at all and I don't understand why so many are enamoured with him. Maybe because what he does well is essentially a low floor, virtually guaranteed quantifiable talent? He's definitely a fantastic shooter.

Barnes doesn't get enough credit for his rebounding--or his D. He's averaged more than five boards a game both years at UNC. And, while MKG is a better rebounder than Barnes (7.6 per game), MKG is nowhere near the shooter that Barnes is...and probably never will be. I expect Kidd-Gilchrist to end up being more of a PF than SF in the NBA.

He's a third or fourth option at UNC, why would he be better at the next level? There have been guys that were utilized more effectively at the next level and became better pros's than stars, but w/our understanding of Barnes limitations I have a hard time seeing that happening with him, I think he'll be a very nice scorer at the next level, but I dont see him doing much beyond that and with all of our issues, we need a 2/3 that does a lot more and they are available.

Yes, Barnes is sometimes the second or third option for UNC. But that has more to do with the fact that he’s on the court with two other likely lottery picks. If you’ve watched as many UNC games as I have over the past couple of years, you also know that Harrison is often the #1 option when the game is on the line…and he usually delivers.

On point 1: MKG is not getting the same love, nor is Beal from Barnes supporters. From all reports MKG has been outstanding at Kentucky, and yes he needs work on his jumper, but he is also, only a freshmen. Beal needs help with nothing, the big problem at Florida appears to have been integrating him into the system. It doesnt appear to be a big problem anymore, and Beal outproduces Barnes on seemingly every measurable other than point production and he's closing in on him there. If you like Barnes, you should love Beal because he basically combines all the assets of MKG (Mental Makeup, BBIQ and associated intangibles, all around game markers (rebounding, assists, defense), and all the assets of Barnes (spot up shooting, range, and while not the efficiency of Barnes, he's already getting there, and it was considered one of his assets coming out of High School). If Barnes gets the benefit of the doubt for being invisible for his first two months as a freshmen and for not really dominating or imposing his will on anything in 2 years in a weak ACC, what about Beal and MKG who've been for all intents and purposes far more productive and imposing as freshmen?

2. I agree, and you make a good point, Barnes adds a little bit of spice outside of his shooting. He isn't Nick Young, and I was being unfair to him in comparing him to Young, but we can also clearly see that Barnes is a better rebounder, and a better defender despite being shorter and playing on an inferior team.

3. You also have a point here, but that wasn't supposed to happen. At the end of the day, when UNC recruited him they expected more than a quiet, passive player who could quietly score 15-17 for you, and add a few boards and assists. They thought they were getting one of the best recruits in the nation, not the third banana to Zeller and Henson. I have a problem with him the same way I have a problem with PJ3, and if nobody gives PJ3 the benefit of the doubt despite superior athletic ability and physical prowess, why should Barnes get the benefit of the doubt? It isn't his fault he's surrounded by players expected to be lottery bound or nearly so (Kendall pre-injury), but he also is throwing up similar flags to guys like PJ3, Drummond and even Sully this year who simply haven't lived up to the hype.

At the end of the day I'd much rather have Beal, or bet on MKG developing an adequate jump shot, than jump on a guy who probably will never be better than something you could find in free agency for well below the max, and a little above the traditional MLE of last years. Again, he's better than a bust, better than nearly anything available last year 5-10, but he's not good enough to warrant the pick if we're in the top 5 period.

[The Consiglieri]

I've grown to like Beal a bit more than before but the shooting numbers give me pause. He seems like a smart and heady player. Not an elite athlete though, seems like he relies more on a solidly built frame. He's definitely got a smoothness about his game.

In other words, he looks a good prospect but not necessarily an elite one. I might be skeptical about taking him too high. At #5 or later he may well be a very good option though.

I love Beal. I may go down in flames in the future for loving the guys game, but after Davis and MKG, I think he's the best value on the board other than possibly Drummond who rightfully scares the hell out of everyone. After getting nothing out of the '09 miserable season draft, and what may be only bench help out of the miserable '11 season, to completely blow the '12 draft on Drummond would cause apocalyptic grief and gnashing of teeth and I'd understand that.

Anyway Beal has been getting better and better all season, and I love his game, for me, he's slowly but surely been turning into an MKG at the 2, who can shoot and shoot exceptionally well. It's taken him a long time to get his game in gear but I love a kid his size who rebounds like he does, plays defense like he does, isn't a ball stopper, and has a great BBIQ and mental make up.

I think it's imperative to come out of this draft with Davis, MKG or Beal, if not those 3 guys, maybe Robinson, or the hell with it, trade down, and try to get multiple picks in the 5-15 range where we can take multiple shots at shooters and bigs. There's about 18 guys (barring returning to school) who are of interest to me, maybe 20, if we can't get one of those 3-4 we might as well trade down, I dont think guys like Barnes add enough to warrant utilizing the top 3-5 pick on them over a trade down (or over the players I mentioned). I'll be beyond disappointed if we blow a third draft in four years. You can't rebuild if you keep screwing yourselves on draft day with blue chip picks.

[WizarDynasty]

I am starting to get the idea that Barnes actually might be able to play shooting guard for the wizards. I think he can definitely hold it down on the defensive end.
He doesn't have a quick first step or the ability to create his shot but he definitely has a reggie miller run off screen and catch and shoot.
Does anyone here think that he can handle the ball well enough or drive the lane well enough to be an upgrade at the shooting guard over crawford. I definitely think Barnes would be a better defensive at shooting guard spot than Crawford but I don't think he can get into the lane and draw fouls or break down the defense when shot clock drops below 5 second. I think he would could work well next to singleton.
It's just a floating idea right now.
What can singleton do better than Barnes is the next question.

[tontoz]

In other words, he looks a good prospect but not necessarily an elite one.

That could be said about all of the top projected picks other than Davis.

[80sballboy]

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Bradley-Beal-5759/

[Rafael122]

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Bradley-Beal-5759/

Key sentence: mid to late lottery pick. Not top 5.

I would guess if the Wizards pick 4 or 5, they should consider trading down in the lottery, maybe getting rid of Blatche's contract in the process.

[Hoop Prospect]

What exactly are your guys' concerns about Barnes?

[Halcyon]

Found a nice youtube channel with a ton of vids on prospects. Didn't know about it so thought I'd share
http://www.youtube.com/user/swishscout?feature

[theboomking]

What exactly are your guys' concerns about Barnes?

I am no more concerned about Barnes than about any prospect not named Anthony Davis.

MKG can't shoot, and has fallen off a bit in his production.
Beal lacks elite length and athleticism, and isn't a great shooter at this point
Drummond lacks production, maturity, and any apparent sense of the game
T Robinson looks about 6'7" and isn't a great help defender
Lamb lacks an alpha personality, doesn't penetrate or draw FT's often enough
Barnes doesn't appear assertive enough and is too much of a jump shooter

Everybody in this draft has flaws.

I like Barnes better than many on this board, and think he has a good chance to be a better pro than collegiate player. Barnes has ideal size for his position, is a good defender and a good but not great jumpshooter. Somewhat like Carmelo, one of Barnes' biggest strengths is the ability to create contested jumpshots. Obviously not ideal. On the other hand, I think Barnes has a pretty good post game. I do think that given Barnes' size, shooting ability, body control, and work ethic, he could wind up a poor man's paul pierce.

Barnes isn't what I would be hoping for, but the Wizards could probably do worse than adding a player at SF that can defend, and won't be a self check.

I am okay with Beal, Barnes, MKG, or Thomas Robindon. Honestly though, I won't be pissed if we take Drummond. Nothing wrong with swinging for the fences and missing. Better than not swinging at all sometimes. How many people thought the Thunder reached with the Russell Westbrook pick?

Speaking of the Thunder, I second the notion of Harden, even on a near max deal. I might be alone, but I think Harden has a solid chance to wind up having a better career than Westbrook.

[tontoz]

What exactly are your guys' concerns about Barnes?

He doesn't look good at all taking it to the basket. He frequently looks a bit clumsy. Sometimes he reminds me of Marvin Williams in that regard. He doesn't score much inside at all and doesn't have great ball handling skills.

On the plus side we already have several guys who do score inside.

Like CCJ i think trading down could be a viable option. I don't think the gap is that big from 2-5 to 10-12. If i could get 2 picks in that range, or one pick and a rotation player, it might be worth it to trade down.

[theboomking]

What exactly are your guys' concerns about Barnes?

He doesn't look good at all taking it to the basket. He frequently looks a bit clumsy. Sometimes he reminds me of Marvin Williams in that regard. He doesn't score much inside at all and doesn't have great ball handling skills.

On the plus side we already have several guys who do score inside.

Like CCJ i think trading down could be a viable option. I don't think the gap is that big from 2-5 to 10-12. If i could get 2 picks in that range, or one pick and a rotation player, it might be worth it to trade down.

I feel like you are watching a different guy if you think Barnes looks clumsy. Barnes has great body control. It is one of his best traits. I agree about his lack of ability in driving and ball handling.

I would much rather a trade up than a trade down. If we trade down, we will have wasted a 5th overall pick from the EG trade of infamy, a 6th overall pick on Vesely, and likely this year's pick as well. I think we could throw in next year's pick and any player other than Wall and try to move up in the draft, or aquire a player.

How do you guys feel about Royce White and Patric Young? Young will probably be available later and could be another bully inside. I think he has Kendrick Perkins potential. What is Royce White's NBA position?

[FAH1223]

Barnes, Sullinger, Drummond = all will be disappointments in the NBA

I got no problem with taking anyone else.

[Hoop Prospect]

Most need to realize that the only sure thing in this draft is Davis. Some of you already do.

With that being said, you have to start looking for traits in these guys that suggest something might be there.

Barnes' jumper is well advertised but what stands out to me is his footwork for a 19-year old. No other wing in this draft comes close. Contrary to popular belief, he's improved his ability to get to the rim big time compared to last season. His FT rate spike supports that.

Not saying he's going to lead the league in scoring, but there's a ton of offensive potential with him. Unrealistic expectations is hurting his stock. I'm not ready to write him off and I definitely don't consider him "bust" material. There are many worse routes the Wizards could take.