2012 NBA Draft - Part II

[Mizerooskie]

I don't get the defense of Drummond. Selfish guard play had very little to do with his terrible production. It was his lack of motor. His 'effort' against Louisville was easily the most pathetic I've ever seen from a supposed top draft prospect. His performance against Iowa State wasn't much better.

The guy makes Andre Blatche look spry.

Stay away, far away.

[The Consiglieri]

In 34 games, Andre Drummond shot 26-88 from the FT line. I did a double take, but that .295 FT shooting is correct. The young man made only 30% of his FTs. Worse or better, depending on how you look at it, Drummond only went to the line about 2 1/2 times per game.

Stuff like that is just horrifying to me. How can coaches not get on that, and fix it? That's bsically, at worst, 20-30 points given away across the season because they didnt work with him on his technique and mechanics. I refuse to believe a # like that can exist with consistent training unless the guy has a huge mental block.

[Dr Positivity]

I don't think UConn passing the ball to Drummond more would've helped, with his bad hands, horrible touch and "please foul me" FT numbers. I thought the biggest problem with UConn's offense was that Drummond and Oriakhi could both get a mini Joel Anthony/Kendrick Perkins treatment by defenses, allowing them to help off and clog off lanes against perimeter players and keep J Lamb to the outside

I think bad hands is quite possibly the worst weakness a prospect can have and the biggest reason I'm way out on Drummond's innate talent. His defensive upside is still sky high but offensively I'd be shocked by anything more than some 10ppg Deandre Jordan type of stuff

[Ruzious]

Oh gawd, he may very well be a bust, but he doesn't have bad hands or a terrible touch. He had guards who couldn't/wouldn't pass, and when guards don't pass to a center, there's no way for him to get the ball without rebounding it. He had far and away the best FG% on the team and didn't turn the ball over more than a typcial frosh center - 1.5 a game in 28 minutes a game. Does he have a ton to learn? Absolutely. Would I pick him with a top 4 pick for the Wiz? No. But I don't need to make things up to knock him down.

[Dr Positivity]

I didn't see it, though perhaps terrible is too strong a word, he does have some catch and dunk ability

[doclinkin]

If it were me I'd rather trade down off Drummond and take Royce White. Or Tony Mitchell (North Texas not 'Bama). I have the feeling Royce will prove to be the 2nd best Big taken in the draft...on some nights... On home games...

I'd love to see him face off against Blake Griffin on defense. Royce has a touch of nasty in his game, very competitive. Takes it personally. Will occasionally meet force with bulk. I'd anticipate a tractor trailer wreck on the interstate between those two. Good match of styles. Though he needs conditioning to maximize his potential power.

To my mind he's definitely the biggest boom/bust candidate in the draft. But he clearly likes to compete, even do too much, which is not the read you get from Drummond. Seems like that's what you look for in a player. Does he love the game?

[closg00]

If it were me I'd rather trade down off Drummond and take Royce White. Or Tony Mitchell (North Texas not 'Bama). I have the feeling Royce will prove to be the 2nd best Big taken in the draft...on some nights... On home games...

I'd love to see him face off against Blake Griffin on defense. Royce has a touch of nasty in his game, very competitive. Takes it personally. Will occasionally meet force with bulk. I'd anticipate a tractor trailer wreck on the interstate between those two. Good match of styles. Though he needs conditioning to maximize his potential power.

Definitely the biggest boom/bust candidate in the draft. But he clearly likes to compete, even do too much, which is not the read you get from Drummond.

Care to take a wild guess as to where Royce will be taken in the draft? He's such a wild-card with all of his "issues" that it's hard to tell. The fear of planes could be the deal-breaker. That was quite the introduction I got watching him battle Davis. BEAST!!

[Nivek]

No offense, but that's kind of nuts Nivek. Like your stuff and all the work you put in, but there's a reason he was rated #1 for the '12 draft last summer. He's not suddenly no better than 25th-30th because he had a poor year (like all of UConn) as a freshman. What the hell did Robinson due as a freshman? Nada. He wasn't near anywhere good enough to start as a freshmen.

Drummond was hugely disappointing, hugely, and the stories about him having a 90's personality (entitlement and crappy work ethic and motor) this summer are deeply alarming. There is plenty reason to be terrified of making him the pick, especially for us. However, he is the second most talented player in the draft, perhaps THE most talented, and that alone locks him in top 5, and reasonably so, and I dont disagree that he probably should go #2 considering the talent in this draft. The problem is that teams like ours and New Orleans and Charlotte cannot afford to swing and miss if we're at 2, and Drummond could be a complete whiff in a way that Robinson, MKG, and Beal are HIGHLY unlikely to be.

All that being said, again, he's probably the most physically talented player with the highest upside in the draft. It's absurd to suggest he shouldn't be going till the back end of round 1 to me. That's taking one of the key aspects of being successfull in the NBA (having the physical talent and athleticism to measure up and dominate as well) and completely ignoring it as an evaluative tool. Nobody in this pool has better tools for success in the NBA than Drummond. Nobody. The problem, unfortunately is mental make up, and motor, which is huge as well, but there are 1 million kids a year with great mental make up, motors, and skills that play the game that wont ever sniff the old CBA or Will Ferrell's Semi-Pro, let alone the NBA. How many kids are there like Drummond? This year? Two.

"Nuts"? I've been called worse.

By "talent" I'm guessing you mean physical ability. And yep, he has terrific physical ability. I'd rather have the guy who actually produces. I didn't "suddenly" drop him because of a bad season, I'm evaluating him now and the information I have is the season he just completed and information about his physical tools.

In my stuff, the guy doesn't look good. For all his amazing physical talent, he shot 54% from 2pt range. Meyers Leonard shot 60%. Fab Melo shot nearly 57%. 6-6 Jae Crowder shot 60%. Davis shot 65%. Doug McDermott shot 63% from 2pt range. A guy with Drummond's athleticism ought to be over 60%. It's a red flag that he's not.

Drummond shot 29.5% from the free throw line. I could probably do that blindfolded. 35% of his score in my stuff is based on his physical tools -- tied for the biggest percentage of anyone in this draft class.

My guess is that the scouts and GMs will probably see things more like you do. I think they (and you) will be wrong. We'll see of course. I wouldn't pick him in the top 5, though. Especially not for the Wizards. If I was running an established veteran team that had lucked into a top 5 pick (like San Antonio when they got Duncan, or the Celtics when they traded and got back Parish and the pick that became McHale, or the Lakers when they traded Gail Goodrich for the pick that turned out to be Magic), then MAYBE. But even then I'd rather take someone who's less of a project. There are far less risky players to draft that high in the draft.

[theboomking]

I don't love Drummond, and I think every criticism on the board has been justified. However, I don't really love any prospect at 2. At least with Drummond you have a player that has the potential to justify his slot. A few posts back, someone said that the Wizards can't afford to swing and miss. For a rebuilding team, it is even worse not to swing at all. I'm not saying I'm sure I would draft Drummond that high. This year is a tough call.

Nivek, how does your evaluation system rate Russell Westbrook as a prospect. He was largely taken as an athlete rather than because he was productive, and that has turned out okay. What about Paul George?

Whoever used Robinson as an example of a prospect that wasn't any good as a freshman either, was a little off base IMHO. Robinson has made only incremental progress in his per minute production. He just got more minutes this year.

[jangles86]

The only doubt that We're going to take Drummond is that we already have a couple of project bigs in vesely and Serephin. Our gm may decide we need a "produce now" type of guy like Robinson.

It would be disappointing if we use our number 1 2 or 3 pick on Robinson. Anything after 3 I wouldn't really mind.

As of now I think our board should be around this (if we finish with the second worst record we can't pick after 5)
1 Davis
2 Drummond
3 Kidd-Gilchrist
4 Robinson
5 Lamb - over beal cause this kid is rangy with huge defensive potential. And he's clutch as hell

Beal doesn't excite me much. If we want a solid shooter there a dime a dozen and there's no way you'd be taking him in the top 3 unless the kid is lights out ala Reggie or ray Allen

Austin rivers reminds me of Gilbert arenas. I like his game a lot. He is lightning off the dribble and is clutch. Defensively will be questioned night in night out at the nba level though. He may win a 6th man award one day.

[Mizerooskie]

That's far from the "only doubt" we'd take Drummond.

He's not even remotely close to being the consensus #2 in the draft.

[DallasShalDune]

I mean MKG, Beal, and Robinson have to be above Drummond on our big board, right? Even his teammate, Lamb seems like a better prospect.

God I sure hope so.

Barnes, Jones, and Drummond scare the hell out of me and I want to avoid them.

[nate33]

This one is for Severn Hoos.

This year’s draft class is the most loaded one since 2008 (Derrick Rose, Russell Westbrook, Kevin Love, Eric Gordon) if not 2003. Making the wrong pick in 2012 while other lottery teams take All-NBA caliber players could set a franchise back three or four seasons.

With that in mind, the one player I would stay far away from is Ohio State’s Jared Sullinger. There’s no arguing with his collegiate production, but like Fredette, he’s not going to be valuable to a team if he isn’t dominating the ball. The Buckeyes’ offense is built around his low-post game, as Thad Matta surrounds him with shooters (DeShaun Thomas, William Buford, Aaron Craft, Lenzelle Smith Jr.) who make a concerted effort to pound him the ball inside.

But will an NBA coach really want to feature Sullinger offensively? He doesn’t have great athleticism and he’s never shown the ability to dominate from the high post; he primarily scores in the paint in college. Unless he’s paired with a great center, teams can slide their best low-post defender on him. Players like Tyson Chandler and Marcus Camby, who are not only bigger but much better athletes, should easily limit his efficiency.

Indeed, there are several college power forwards who will have an easier transition to becoming an NBA role player. At 6’9, 260, Sullinger is a classic “4.5”: not big enough to defend centers, not quick enough to defend power forwards. He’s improved his perimeter jumper this year, but he’s not yet close to being a stretch-4, someone who can consistently bury NBA three-pointers at a 35% clip.

In contrast, Arnett Moultrie (Mississippi State) is a long and athletic 6’11, 220 forward capable of defending both interior positions who shoots a higher percentage from the free-throw line. Kevin Jones (West Virginia) is a dominant offensive rebounder at 6’8, 230 whose poor three-point shooting percentage (28.3%) is mainly a function of having to take so many contested shots for a Mountaineers team with far less talent than Ohio State.

Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/article/21 ... z1rSteEr4M

[Jazzfan12]

Moultrie was the anchor of one of the worst defenses in college basketball whereas OSU was the top defensive team in the nation. Sullinger probably won't be good defensively at all, but Moultire will probably be worse on D, pretty misleading article.

[nate33]

I don't have any particular opinion on the potential of Arnett Moultrie. I posted the article mainly because of his opinion of Sullinger - that he's a "4.5".

[pancakes3]

on the richter scale.

[Dat2U]

Obviously, Sullinger won't be posting up with the consistency he did on the college level but I think he showed enough touch and range on his jumper to make me believe he can successfully transition to playing a high post game.

I wouldn't draft Sully as a high lottery pick but if your talking late lottery at that point he presents a good value. I do have concerns about his ability to challenge shots at the next level but he was a solid positional defender in college using his smarts and size to maximize his effectiveness. His defense won't hurt a team as much someone like Moultrie who demonstrated no ability to grasp defensive concepts despite being a year older than Sullinger.

I never been a huge fan of Sullinger and under the microscope of a top 5 pick, his warts do stand out, but he's not going to be the complete NBA bust some people are making him out to be. Some team is going to be happy to get a solid, if unspectacular player as long the expectations for him are kept in check and he's not drafted too high.

[Dat2U]

I mean MKG, Beal, and Robinson have to be above Drummond on our big board, right? Even his teammate, Lamb seems like a better prospect.

God I sure hope so.

Barnes, Jones, and Drummond scare the hell out of me and I want to avoid them.

I'd like to know why Lamb "seems" like a better prospect.

If Drummond gets blamed for UConn's failures, isn't Lamb culpable in their failure too?

Personally, I don't think Lamb rises to the level of Kemba Walker as a prospect. Lamb looks like a mid-first rounder at best.

With Drummond, the intrigue is certainly based more off his physical tools. Specifically, his potential projection as a difference maker on the defensive end. However, the higher in the lottery we are, the more I'd be wary of taking a risk. If he's available at 5 or 6, it would be very hard to pass up his talent. At #2 or #3, I think there are safer and smarter bets to make.

[The Consiglieri]

The only doubt that We're going to take Drummond is that we already have a couple of project bigs in vesely and Serephin. Our gm may decide we need a "produce now" type of guy like Robinson.

It would be disappointing if we use our number 1 2 or 3 pick on Robinson. Anything after 3 I wouldn't really mind.

As of now I think our board should be around this (if we finish with the second worst record we can't pick after 5)
1 Davis
2 Drummond
3 Kidd-Gilchrist
4 Robinson
5 Lamb - over beal cause this kid is rangy with huge defensive potential. And he's clutch as hell

Beal doesn't excite me much. If we want a solid shooter there a dime a dozen and there's no way you'd be taking him in the top 3 unless the kid is lights out ala Reggie or ray Allen

Austin rivers reminds me of Gilbert arenas. I like his game a lot. He is lightning off the dribble and is clutch. Defensively will be questioned night in night out at the nba level though. He may win a 6th man award one day.

Beal was one of the most highly sought after recruits of the '11 class, exceptionally high BBIQ, great motor, highly coachable, lights out shooter (though disappointing year on that front until Feb), rock solid body, athletic (though not jump out the gym variety). I think he's a fantastic prospect, easily one of the best five in the draft and could be justified as high as #2 overall. I don't like Lamb anywhere nearly as much as Beal, doesnt have Beals mentality, motor, dedication or intelligence, has never come close to maximizing his tools. With Beal's mental make up and approach, Lamb would probably go top 2, but he doesnt have any of that, and so he's much less valuable to me.

Rivers should have stayed in school, down the road he had nice potential, but going out early really, really concerns me, he will be a great value if he goes as expected in that 10-20 range, but he doesnt represent value much higher than that to me.

[The Consiglieri]

I don't love Drummond, and I think every criticism on the board has been justified. However, I don't really love any prospect at 2. At least with Drummond you have a player that has the potential to justify his slot. A few posts back, someone said that the Wizards can't afford to swing and miss. For a rebuilding team, it is even worse not to swing at all. I'm not saying I'm sure I would draft Drummond that high. This year is a tough call.

Nivek, how does your evaluation system rate Russell Westbrook as a prospect. He was largely taken as an athlete rather than because he was productive, and that has turned out okay. What about Paul George?

Whoever used Robinson as an example of a prospect that wasn't any good as a freshman either, was a little off base IMHO. Robinson has made only incremental progress in his per minute production. He just got more minutes this year.

I think you're referencing me twice, as I was the one who went after Nivek's Drummond take. I also said we couldn't afford to swing and miss, and I still feel that way, though I'd also be someone who could (and has) repeatedly said that you can't afford to go it safe on draft day (part of the reason i attacked the hell out of the Marcus Morris and associated low ceiling targets), but Drummond is a huge risk for a team that probably wont pick this high again for a while unless it loses Wall to free agency. I definitely agree that you can't be gunshy with the draft, that you have to take risks, but when you measure the risk and upside of Drummond with MKG/Beal and even Robinson, I don't believe you can say yes to Drummond when you have a team like ours. If we had much better leadership, FO support, and a quality locker room I might not be so steadfast against it, but with our issues, what we need most of all is a great mix of raw ability, BBIQ, motor and leadrship. The best combination of those qualities, and clearly Drummond only has one of the four in spades, while the others have 3 or all 4 of the 4 qualities. As such, and considering the ceilings of the second tier guys are all in the "Above average to potential all star" area, I don't believe its worth passing on them for the higher ceiling of Drummond, until 5.

As for the Drummond, Robinson deal. I also said that. Robinson didnt produce because he had better players ahead of him and didnt have anywhere near the same demands placed upon him, his metrics are meaningless from that year because the sampling data is far far far too small to be illustrative of anything. All one can take away from it to me is that Robinson wasn't good enough to start ahead of admittedly better options than him and what Drummond had to contend with at UConn.

Drummond lacks qualities Robinson has now, but Drummond is also a kid, and a kid who it wasnt even clear would go to college, let alone UConn until the very last minute. Im inclined to give the kid some room and understanding because of all the variables at work in his poor season. Lack of leadership, terrible overall performance by the vets, radical instability at the coaching staff level (and with his health), and in his own choices it was never clear till the last second what he was actually going to do, go to school or not, where, etc. It was ANYTHING but ideal, and definitely not like going to Kentucky to play with team first, high BBIQ, character guys like Davis, and MKG, or play with Donovan and a vet Florida team like Beal did (though Beal also disappointed for the first half, but not the second, of the season), or play at UNC with a great collection of talent and BBIQ like McAdoo got, and great coaching. Drummond picked a ghastly scenario, and it played out as bad as it could have.

As it plays out it will be a hugely interesting debate going forward and thru the next year or two:

1. Davis

2. MKG/Beal/Robinson-a justification can be made for any of them at 2,3 and 4.

5. Drummond-Rated #1 overall slightly ahead of Davis last June, and now having fallen quite a bit.

The rest (great options last at least till 20).

After slot 1, we will be debating the choice for potentially a really long time, but for now, Im just savoring the 3 game lead with 10 to play over New Orleans, and the hopes that at worst, we lock in 2 overall pre-lottery.