2012 NBA Draft - Part III

[truwizfan4evr]

Chris Singleton was consider the best defensive player in last year draft. What do you think about his defense in the nba? Has it live up to the hype?

[doclinkin]

The Wiz with MKG might still be unable to score all that well except in transition, but man would they be hell on defense. You might not want to watch them but nor would you want to play against them. Long on the perimeter, burly up front deep with bruiser types, active hands, good positioning.

There are two key pieces needed for stout defense in the NBA: an intimidating presence who can deter interior attacks, and a perimeter hellion who can cover all three positions as needed to take out the opponent's best shooter. The rest can be covered with schemes, effort, and competent switch rules (etc). In Nene, Keveeene, Booker and Vesely (and pick a Singleton) we have decent depth in players who understand interior footwork, positioning etc. and enough strength/size to make life difficult for all but the most dominant inside forces. With MKG as an all-court berserker, with his wiry tenacles instead of arms and windmill defense, with his intangibles and personal motivation, next to John's length, speed, blocks, and improving footwork and positioning no possession would be safe from harrassment. Transition breakaways may instead result in a blocked shot that becomes a sprint back the other way.

We'd need to add say a Kim English at 2-guard, a long range gunner with decent defense. And we'd need to see continued improved rebounding from Seraphin and Ves, but finally good defense could translate to breakaways and open court finishing at the other end.

I'm warming up to the idea if we choose to go that route. Would be strange to be known as a team that relies on it's defense. Is that allowed in DC?

[Higga]

Chris Singleton was consider the best defensive player in last year draft. What do you think about his defense in the nba? Has it live up to the hype?

Doesn't matter how good he is defensively because he gives us nothing offensively. You can't win in this league playing 4 on 5 on offense unless you have 2-3 superstar caliber players to carry the load.

[GhostsOfGil]

Chris Singleton was consider the best defensive player in last year draft. What do you think about his defense in the nba? Has it live up to the hype?

Doesn't matter how good he is defensively because he gives us nothing offensively. You can't win in this league playing 4 on 5 on offense unless you have 2-3 superstar caliber players to carry the load.

And with that being said no, his defense has not lived up to the hype. The numbers suggest severe mediocrity and he's averaging 4.5 fp 36

[DCZards]

I'm warming up to the idea if we choose to go that route. Would be strange to be known as a team that relies on it's defense. Is that allowed in DC?

I think having a strong, well-armed defense fits in very nicely here in DC...given how much attention and money the feds give to DOD.

[nate33]

The Wiz with MKG might still be unable to score all that well except in transition, but man would they be hell on defense. You might not want to watch them but nor would you want to play against them. Long on the perimeter, burly up front deep with bruiser types, active hands, good positioning.

There are two key pieces needed for stout defense in the NBA: an intimidating presence who can deter interior attacks, and a perimeter hellion who can cover all three positions as needed to take out the opponent's best shooter. The rest can be covered with schemes, effort, and competent switch rules (etc). In Nene, Keveeene, Booker and Vesely (and pick a Singleton) we have decent depth in players who understand interior footwork, positioning etc. and enough strength/size to make life difficult for all but the most dominant inside forces. With MKG as an all-court berserker, with his wiry tenacles instead of arms and windmill defense, with his intangibles and personal motivation, next to John's length, speed, blocks, and improving footwork and positioning no possession would be safe from harrassment. Transition breakaways may instead result in a blocked shot that becomes a sprint back the other way.

We'd need to add say a Kim English at 2-guard, a long range gunner with decent defense. And we'd need to see continued improved rebounding from Seraphin and Ves, but finally good defense could translate to breakaways and open court finishing at the other end.

I'm warming up to the idea if we choose to go that route. Would be strange to be known as a team that relies on it's defense. Is that allowed in DC?

I don't think we need MKG to become a top notch defensive team. On paper, we should be pretty good already. Seraphin, Vesely, Booker and Singleton can cover a lot of ground inside and block shots. Nene and Seraphin can play post defense with the best of them. Wall has the best defensive tools of any PG in the league not named Rondo. All we need is an above-average SG on defense and some better rebounding and we should be a top 5 defense.

We showed signs of having a great defense this year in the few games when Nene and Booker were healthy. If we get some help on the wings this summer (Danny Green, Bradley Beal) and get a little more muscle packed onto Vesely, the defense should be very good.

[truwizfan4evr]

The Wiz with MKG might still be unable to score all that well except in transition, but man would they be hell on defense. You might not want to watch them but nor would you want to play against them. Long on the perimeter, burly up front deep with bruiser types, active hands, good positioning.

There are two key pieces needed for stout defense in the NBA: an intimidating presence who can deter interior attacks, and a perimeter hellion who can cover all three positions as needed to take out the opponent's best shooter. The rest can be covered with schemes, effort, and competent switch rules (etc). In Nene, Keveeene, Booker and Vesely (and pick a Singleton) we have decent depth in players who understand interior footwork, positioning etc. and enough strength/size to make life difficult for all but the most dominant inside forces. With MKG as an all-court berserker, with his wiry tenacles instead of arms and windmill defense, with his intangibles and personal motivation, next to John's length, speed, blocks, and improving footwork and positioning no possession would be safe from harrassment. Transition breakaways may instead result in a blocked shot that becomes a sprint back the other way.

We'd need to add say a Kim English at 2-guard, a long range gunner with decent defense. And we'd need to see continued improved rebounding from Seraphin and Ves, but finally good defense could translate to breakaways and open court finishing at the other end.

I'm warming up to the idea if we choose to go that route. Would be strange to be known as a team that relies on it's defense. Is that allowed in DC?

I don't think we need MKG to become a top notch defensive team. On paper, we should be pretty good already. Seraphin, Vesely, Booker and Singleton can cover a lot of ground inside and block shots. Nene and Seraphin can play post defense with the best of them. Wall has the best defensive tools of any PG in the league not named Rondo. All we need is an above-average SG on defense and some better rebounding and we should be a top 5 defense.

We showed signs of having a great defense this year in the few games when Nene and Booker were healthy. If we get some help on the wings this summer (Danny Green, Bradley Beal) and get a little more muscle packed onto Vesely, the defense should be very good.

Who do you want us to get? If we miss out on Anthony Davis. Getting GillChrist would help us alot but Ihear people call Thomas Robinson overrated for some reason.

[doclinkin]

I don't think we need MKG to become a top notch defensive team. On paper, we should be pretty good already. Seraphin, Vesely, Booker and Singleton can cover a lot of ground inside and block shots. Nene and Seraphin can play post defense with the best of them. Wall has the best defensive tools of any PG in the league not named Rondo. All we need is an above-average SG on defense and some better rebounding and we should be a top 5 defense.

We showed signs of having a great defense this year in the few games when Nene and Booker were healthy. If we get some help on the wings this summer (Danny Green, Bradley Beal) and get a little more muscle packed onto Vesely, the defense should be very good.

Yes, we could be pretty good without MKG at times. I think Kidd-Gilchrist adds an infectious energy and intensity on defense that should help drive other players to keep focus on that end all game long. Occasionally JWall has shown a tendency to drift in this regard, not strictly passive, nor distractible, but not always stuck in the 'on' position full throttle. I suspect with a running buddy who crackles with desire his game on this end would maintain a high charge.

MKG hasn't really been my top pick after Davis, I don't like his shot, there's too much to rebuild before he gets it right and he seems like too much of an instinctive player more than a craftsman willing to rebuild his swing as it were. But there's no question he eats breathes and lives the game. Making a virtue of necessity, if he lands on this squad I can see how and where he would fit. Can see what synergy he would add despite obvious offensive chemistry issues.

He's a nice outlet passer, making quick reads good passes one or two steps after the rebound, firing the ball to the right player or running the lane and dumping off to the correct trailer. He's a decent rebounder on activity alone (if not necessarily technique). And he's a frenetic defender who would surely improve our team in that regard. Yep, we have a chance to be a pretty nice defensive team regardless, it needn't be a weakness. But if MKG is the selection, then defense suddenly becomes our hallmark. Like Chicago and the Celts, both squads can harrass you into frustration and turn your missed shot into an upcourt rumble, only with this squad we have the youth energy to maybe keep that pedal pressed to the floor more often than not. We'd be a pain in the ass to play on many nights.

Essentially, I'm running through my head the 'plug-in' game. If we land this or that player, what would it look like. I wasn't feeling MKG --- he's not quite the explosive athlete he's touted as, is high energy sure, but has disappeared from a few games, especially following foul trouble after he's been too handsy on defense. You can get away with more physical Defense in the NCAA than this no-hand-check NBA, and he'll need more strength before his energy on the offensive glass graduates to production after the contact, which removes much of his offense his current level. That said, can I see where he fits? Yes. He'd be a bigger version of John Wall: up tempo, slashing attack, rebounding above average, defending well in transition, unselfish with the ball. I can see how a decent coach can develop plays to take full advantage of these two, without one neutralizing the other.

[hands11]

http://espn.go.com/nba/lottery2012/mockdraft

So this seem to have situational results already.

Here is what it has us doing given what pick we get.

Pick 1 Davis
Pick 2 MKG
Pick 3 Beal
Pick 4 Beal/Robinson
Pick 5 Drummond

We take Beal with the 3rd if Mil, Cats take MKG with the second
We take Robinson with the 4th if Beal and MKG are gone.
if NO or Nets take Robinson 3rd, in that scenario we could get Beal at 4

NO, Nets, King seem to be slotted for a big so they that Robinson and Drummond given the chance which helps us get Beal at 4 when they end up ahead of us and MKG is off the boards.

Is this thing right. NO, POR and the Jazz all have two slots in the lottery ?

If 3 teams are set up like this the question is, if we get the number 1, do we swop with one of them and trade down to get MKG, Beal or Robinson and their second number 1. If we don't like the player available there, we can always trade down again and pick what we want. Maybe one of thoe nice PG or SG available lower. And would they even do that?

The situation mostly comes up with NO. We would get Robinson and Tyler. What if we could get Eric Gordon out of the deal?

I would be interested in reading some well thought out responses to some of this.

[Dr Positivity]

NOH has their own pick and MIN's, so they are guaranteed 2 in the lotto
POR has their own pick and NJN's if they don't land in the top 3
UTA has their own pick if they don't make the playoffs, and Golden State's if they don't finish bottom 7.

Houston is looking good for something like a 14/16 combo, they get New York's and their own if they don't make the playoffs which I don't think they will (If Dallas finished 20+ HOU would get theirs, but that looks unlikely right now)

[SUPERBALLMAN]

After Davis this draft really is a tough call, and it's hard not to flip flop because there is alot to like about each player, as well as a lot to question.

I seem to find MKG as the most popular candidate for the #2 pick. Adding him could make the Wizards an elite defensive team potentially. MKG added to a group including Vesely, Booker, Seraphin, Nene, Singleton, Crawford, Wall could give the Wizards an identity and something to hang their hat on a nightly basis. A defensive 1st team that is going to press and harass you for 48 minutes.

I am a little leary of the MKG rise. He was effective offensively despite being a poor shooter, but played with alot of other good players at Kentucky to draw attention away from him on the offensive end. On the defensive end, he had Davis behind him to clean up any mistakes. But still he comes off as being the one with the most upside.

Robinson would at the least add a top tier rebounder to a team that lists rebounding as one of it's biggest weak spots (behind shooting). A high level rebounder, top flight character, leadership skill and work ethic.

Beal would also fill a glaring need as a top quality shooter. An ideal backcourt tandem with Wall, brings an all-around skillset to the SG spot similar to a Harden type. The backcourt is set for years and becomes the identity of the Wizards.

Those are the 3 I see as the top candidates for the #2 pick. I really like all 3 players, and would be happy to add any of them. Too bad we can't get all 3.

[truwizfan4evr]

New Orleans has a 3 game win lead on us. We need 1 more loss to make it official. But I don't expect us to beat the heat both time but I want at least one win over them.

[doclinkin]

After Davis this draft really is a tough call, and it's hard not to flip flop because there is alot to like about each player, as well as a lot to question.

I really like all 3 players, and would be happy to add any of them. Too bad we can't get all 3.

Well, making a virtue of necessity, odds are we don't get the 2nd pick anyway so the question is probably moot. As it stands there's an 87.2% chance we don't get the 2nd pick. If we like all three equally (I think I lean towards Beal, then Robinson, then MKG; but I do waffle on this myself) then we should be happy since we have an 87.7% chance of picking top 4.

The only issue lies in whether the front office likes Drummond more than the others. The emergence of Seraphin, the acquisition of Nené, Booker's utility at 4, and the investment in Vesely suggests that if the front office likes Drummond equally to the others then they'll pick players at a position of greater need (MKG and Beal, say). Though there too we may be in a position of strength. If we land at #2, and like all options equally, having need all across the roster, we can explore a trade down with a team in the 3-5 range and take whomever is left while picking up an asset later (this year or in the future) or facilitating a trade as well as the selection.

[DallasShalDune]

TRob or Beal would be better than MKG for us. We need reboundings. Nene, Book, and Sera are all good players, but none of them are good defensive rebounders. None of them. TRob's strength is crashing the boards.

Defensively, we have the right pieces to be elite, eventually, in the right system. Singleton, Ves, Sera, Nene, and Wall are good defenders, and the youngers of this group will hopefully improve.

Rebounding and shooting are our biggest weaknesses. MKG could be the best of the three, but Beal and TRob will both also probably be good and fill needs.

Saying that, we still need talent where we can get it. Beggars cannot be choosers.

But still, my big board is.

1. Davis.
2. Beal.
3. Robinson
4. Kidd-Gilchrist

[doclinkin]

I'm more like:
1. Davis
2. Trade up to get Davis.
-if not possible, then-
2. Select a player at another team request, trade back to which ever team selects Beal, while collecting another asset.
3. TRob. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
4. MKG. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
5. Beal. A 6' 3" 2-guard is more likely to be available here, and players of this sort (if somewhat lesser) may be drafted or recruited more easily, need not be drafted top 5. He's a better fit for the team though in many ways.

Davis aside, none of these players is a surefire championship keystone around which to build. Talent is equivalent, and there are sure to be great players available in future drafts. In any trade down scenario I'd prefer to land a lotto unprotected pick in a future draft. Or as close to that as I can get. This team looks to improve significantly soon, this may be one of the last free bites at the apple before we lack 'teh suck' to pick top 5. Might as well leverage a future pick from a team that may suck more resolutely for future tries at bobbing for franchise players.

[Earth2Ted]

I'm more like:
1. Davis
2. Trade up to get Davis.
-if not possible, then-
2. Select a player at another team request, trade back to which ever team selects Beal, while collecting another asset.
3. TRob. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
4. MKG. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
5. Beal. A 6' 3" 2-guard is more likely to be available here, and players of this sort (if somewhat lesser) may be drafted or recruited more easily, need not be drafted top 5. He's a better fit for the team though in many ways.

I pretty much agree. As I said before I think the only remote possibility of trading up for Davis if we don't get the #1 would be to package Wall with our pick, and then I'd still be surprised if we would have any takers.

Re who would be our 2nd choice, I think it has to be Robinson. Whatever his size issues, he carried that Kansas team, which really wasn't very good without him. All his scoring and rebounding numbers came with him double and triple teamed in every game I saw him. He isn't ideal in terms of size for us, but he's the kind of guy that will wear down his opponent with his intensity over the course of the game, and as good as Nene and Seraphin have looked at times, they don't bring that fire on the boards.

As far as MKG and Beal go, maybe I just haven't seen them play enough, but they just didn't look all that impressive in the games I saw- I don't feel like they've shown enough for us to pass up a Robinson and his rebounding and intensity.

[nate33]

I'm more like:
1. Davis
2. Trade up to get Davis.
-if not possible, then-
2. Select a player at another team request, trade back to which ever team selects Beal, while collecting another asset.
3. TRob. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
4. MKG. Or trade down for Beal plus, if the offer is good.
5. Beal. A 6' 3" 2-guard is more likely to be available here, and players of this sort (if somewhat lesser) may be drafted or recruited more easily, need not be drafted top 5. He's a better fit for the team though in many ways.

Davis aside, none of these players is a surefire championship keystone around which to build. Talent is equivalent, and there are sure to be great players available in future drafts. In any trade down scenario I'd prefer to land a lotto unprotected pick in a future draft. Or as close to that as I can get. This team looks to improve significantly soon, this may be one of the last free bites at the apple before we lack 'teh suck' to pick top 5. Might as well leverage a future pick from a team that may suck more resolutely for future tries at bobbing for franchise players.

I like this strategy.

I like Thomas Robinson but the presence of Vesely and James Singleton makes him less essential. Vesely is rebounding better and better these days, and Singleton has been a revelation. We could retain Singleton for another year as Vesely continues to fill out and improve his game, and then turn the PF position over to Vesely after that (which will be easier to manage with capable shooters like Nene and Seraphin manning the C position).

[Severn Hoos]

Warning: Rant to follow...

There are some NBA "truisms" that just won't die, and are impervious to any form of logic or analysis. One of these is the "SG is the easiest position to fill." Sure, it might have been true (depending on how you classify SG/SFs) in the heyday of MJ and Drexler, when even the Bullets had a solid/star caliber player like Jeff Malone. From there through Kobe, Vince, JRich, TMac, Redd, Rip, Ray Allen and others, it certainly appeared true. But now? Sure it's true, if by "fill" you mean having someone to wear the uniform, guys like Ronnie Brewer and Demar DeRozan. But are there even 5 players under 30 who would sniff an All-Star game 10 years ago? I've got Harden and maybe Eric Gordon. After that? And yet, the pundits keep dissuading us from drafting SGs high in the Lottery by repeating "SG is the easiest position to fill."

The other one that gets me is when pundits and posters wax philosophic about how Team X needs to "take the Best Player Available." First, it's an idiotic statement on its face, as if some team would consider taking Worst Player Available if not for this sage advice. But even giving the benefit of the doubt that it's more sophisticated than that, there's still the question of how do you define "Best"? Best player as of right now? Or do you project forward to what you think he could become? Do you consider his ceiling and define by "Upside" or who has the higher floor?It is obviously an inexact science, to say the least.

But where it gets really moronic is when the sages come out with statements like "Well, you know - drafting for Need leads to Bowie over Jordan." Umm, Drafting Bowie over Jordan wasn't stupid because it was drafting for "Need." Bowie over Jordan was colossally stupid because it was MICHAEL FREAKING JORDAN. But one data point, and a misinterpreted one at that, seems to answer all objections, and all the fellow pundits nod approvingly.

But, let's try a little thought experiment, using that same data set from the 1984 draft. To hear people tell it, you would think that Portland & Chicago had the #1 and #2 picks that year. But of course, they didn't. Houston had the #1 pick. Like they did the year before. When they took Ralph Sampson. Sampson, the 3-time NCAA Player of the Year, came to the Rockets, made the All-Star game as a Rookie, was named Rookie of the Year, and averaged 21 points and 11 rebounds.

Putting aside what we now know about his career, later injuries, etc., you would have to say that the Rockets had the Center position fairly well covered. And now they were staring at the #1 pick, the right to select any draft-eligible player in the world. And what did they do?

Well, it seems pretty clear to me that they drafted the "BPA." They already had a Center, but the consensus BPA was also a Center, so they took him and figured they'd "make it work." The Twin Towers were going to revolutionize the game. And for a while, it was a successful experiment, with a trip to the NBA Finals just 2 years later, before Sampson's body gave out.

But what would have happened if, instead of being enlightened BPA'ers, the Rockets had been the type of knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who draft for "Need"?

Well, first of all, they already had an All-Star Center, so drafting another Center wouldn't make much sense, meaning Olajuwon's out as the pick. Oh, and since Bowie was a Center too, he would be out. Which leaves....

MICHAEL FREAKING JORDAN!

Shall I put this in starker terms? Drafting for "BPA" over "Need" caused the Rockets to pass on the Greatest of All Time.

Now, we shed no tears for the Rockets. They did win 2 titles with Olajuwon, and given the trajectory of Sampson's career, it's a good thing (in a way) that they didn't reject taking a Center. Plus, they weren't stuck with Bowie and the psychological albatross of passing on the GOAT for a guy who could barely see the court.

But that doesn't change the fact that, had they drafted strictly for need, they would have made the right choice (in hindsight).

The point of all of this is that drafting is, in fact, an inexact science. One team's "BPA" may not be the same as another's. And while I don't like the term "Need", I do think teams should consider "Fit". It's a slightly different approach than pure "Need", taking into account the player's mindset, approach to the game, how he would balance with the current roster, and yes - what holes the team has (or strengths that would be redundant). The Wiz shying away from Drummond after their recent experiences would be an example here.

There are more thoughts on how it applies specifically to the Wiz in this year's Draft, but for now, I just wanted to rant. Carry on....

[Ruzious]

If we get the 2nd pick - forget the games - just pick the best player. I really doubt there's going to be a significant market with teams dying to get TRob. There's a veritable plethora of PF's in the NBA. Utah alone has 3 surplus outstanding PF's that all might be better than TRob.

[DCZards]

Severn hoos...I agree with what you say about drafting for need, especially this year when the Zards have a desperate need for rebounding and shooting. But I think you're a little hard on both Houston and Portland for not drafting M. Jordan. The Portland move blew up in their face because of Bowie's injuries...that they really should have seen coming since he was injured in college. But Portland did draft for need since they already had Drexler.

As for Houston, their decision to draft Hakeem was almost a no-brainer. Almost no one expected/predicted that Michael Jordan would be as good an NBA player as he turned out to be...and most of those who now say they knew MJ would be one of the greatest players of all-time are probably lying.