2012 NBA Draft Lottery

[Ed Wood]

I'm also largely left cold by Austin Rivers. He isn't an awful prospect but most of the qualities ascribed to him to make him something other than an unremarkable prospect are very nebulous. I've seen his competitiveness and motivation praised, which is certainly a good thing, but I have no earthly idea how anyone can arrive at the impression that he is More motivated or More hard working than other prospects. A favorable report on his practice habits might lend some weight to the later, but is putting in work in practice really such an unusual quality among already very well regarded athletes?

I won't presume to dismiss things like motivation in accounting for a players success or failure but while that is a dimension of a player's game that can't be easily measured (and so is often cited as a reason to eschew very statistically based analyses) it's the very fact that those qualities cannot be easily measured that poses a problem. How much credit should Rivers be given for his strong intangibles? Enough to counteract his pedestrian play? How much better are his intangibles than those of other prospects? If I can find a fluff article talking about how much Marcus Denmon loves his mother and one that mentions he occasionally sleeps in the gym after long hours of practice can I continue consider each via the context that Denmon was a much better player? Intangibles matter, but short of reverting to dead reckoning when considering players I'm not sure how they are to be made to matter, unless their effects are made measurable (and therefore no longer intangible).

So that was very long and not really addressed specifically at you, All Hail, Rivers just seemed like the player in this draft to structure that point around. To actually reply to something you said, I'll say that I see Vesely receiving roughly every minute he ever plays in the NBA at either power forward or center barring either some very surprising developments on his end or unusual team circumstances. Vesely really doesn't have any wing skills to speak of that have manifested at the NBA level and playing him on the perimeter would entail a lot of compensation for his limitations offensively; most teams probably aren't equipped to do that and the result would be a less effective offense (think sticking a Luc Richard Mbah a Moute at small forward but without necessarily receiving the same caliber of perimeter defense).

Vesely moves well and handles perimeter players when switching very nicely but those are very specific situations for a very short period of time. Reports from Europe suggested teams were very willing to attack his perimeter defense when he defended the wing full time and I imagine the same would happen here. Coupled to his offense and the fact that it would stifle some of the gains that led to any optimism at all about his NBA future (his improved rebounding) and I just don't see a good reason to play him at wing, he'd be below replacement level (literally this past year, I'm sure he'd have been a less effective small forward than Cartier Martin). He's not at a disadvantage size-wise at any position so I don't see a reason to try to move him down to a position at which his size would be less significant and his low level of skill more problematic.

[Ruzious]

Fwiw (very little), I ran the RealGM lotto simulator http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/ ... _simulator 10 times and the Wiz went:
1st
1st
1st (I kid you not.)
4 (reality finally set in.)
2
4
1
4
5
4

[closg00]

4 seems fitting for the Wizards. I wouldn't be surprised by 5th, and would be happy with picks 3 and up.

[7-Day Dray]

Just ran the lotto simulator. Here were my results:

1st
1st
1st
4th
4th
2nd
4th
1st
1st
1st

These were the real results. Just keep your hopes up guys. We actually have a shot here!

[ALL HAIL]

All Hail, I agree with some of your points, but there's no way I'd pick Rivers or Lamb that high.

Yeah I know it's not a popular opinion, but I come from the same thread as Jerry West and Geoff Petrie, if I were GM, I'd draft the guy I like the most.

I remember when Petrie drafted Jason Williams at like 8 or 9 when he was polled at around 15.

I remember when West drafted guys like Frankie King and Derek Fisher out of literally nowhere because he just liked them a lot.

I like Lamb and Rivers for the Wiz.

I don't think Robinson is the second best prospect in this draft (maybe top 10).

I think Barnes is average and Beal is rally no better than Anthony Peeler.

Kidd-Gilchrist is special, the type of guy that if he played for the Bobcats and were completely turned loose , could score a ton of points, however, he isn't a prototypical SF. He can guard SFs, but he's not a shooter and I question his chemistry with Wall.

That leaves me with Rivers and Lamb (out of highly ranked guys that I've seen play).

And although I really like Rivers in an eerily similiar style of game as OJ Mayo (I like him too), I lean more heavily toward Lamb because of his length (he's as good as Rivers--just not as aggressive).

I'd have to go with Lamb because at the very worst he is a rock solid shooting guard who can do everything on offense (when engaged) and who has the potential to be lockdown defender and disrupter with those long arms.

Lamb reminds me of a more offensively refined Eddie Jones with less defensive swag (right now).

I think Lamb should be the guy. Trade down, take a flyer, do whatever.

I think he would be the most solid pick for this team.

Just my two cents.

[ALL HAIL]

I'd take a prime Josh Howard on this team, would be a great addition...

Yeah your right, but when I mentioned Josh Howard I was more referring to when Josh Howard was a role player (early in his career), not when he was arguably the esecond best player on the Mavs.

Prime Howard is much better than Barnes because Howard, throughout his career (and college), was an efficient player, Barnes is not (although I haven't looked at his numbers). He doesn't strike me as a gunner either (that's why I compared him to Marvin Williams and J. Howard), but he's not as unique as Howard becasue of Howard's long-ass, freakish looking arms.

[cleek+wall]

we are going to get the 2nd pic(my moms a psychic and i might carry this trait also) so welcome to dc , mkg

[ALL HAIL]

I'm also largely left cold by Austin Rivers. He isn't an awful prospect but most of the qualities ascribed to him to make him something other than an unremarkable prospect are very nebulous. I've seen his competitiveness and motivation praised, which is certainly a good thing, but I have no earthly idea how anyone can arrive at the impression that he is More motivated or More hard working than other prospects. A favorable report on his practice habits might lend some weight to the later, but is putting in work in practice really such an unusual quality among already very well regarded athletes?

I won't presume to dismiss things like motivation in accounting for a players success or failure but while that is a dimension of a player's game that can't be easily measured (and so is often cited as a reason to eschew very statistically based analyses) it's the very fact that those qualities cannot be easily measured that poses a problem. How much credit should Rivers be given for his strong intangibles? Enough to counteract his pedestrian play? How much better are his intangibles than those of other prospects? If I can find a fluff article talking about how much Marcus Denmon loves his mother and one that mentions he occasionally sleeps in the gym after long hours of practice can I continue consider each via the context that Denmon was a much better player? Intangibles matter, but short of reverting to dead reckoning when considering players I'm not sure how they are to be made to matter, unless their effects are made measurable (and therefore no longer intangible).

So that was very long and not really addressed specifically at you, All Hail, Rivers just seemed like the player in this draft to structure that point around. To actually reply to something you said, I'll say that I see Vesely receiving roughly every minute he ever plays in the NBA at either power forward or center barring either some very surprising developments on his end or unusual team circumstances. Vesely really doesn't have any wing skills to speak of that have manifested at the NBA level and playing him on the perimeter would entail a lot of compensation for his limitations offensively; most teams probably aren't equipped to do that and the result would be a less effective offense (think sticking a Luc Richard Mbah a Moute at small forward but without necessarily receiving the same caliber of perimeter defense).

Vesely moves well and handles perimeter players when switching very nicely but those are very specific situations for a very short period of time. Reports from Europe suggested teams were very willing to attack his perimeter defense when he defended the wing full time and I imagine the same would happen here. Coupled to his offense and the fact that it would stifle some of the gains that led to any optimism at all about his NBA future (his improved rebounding) and I just don't see a good reason to play him at wing, he'd be below replacement level (literally this past year, I'm sure he'd have been a less effective small forward than Cartier Martin). He's not at a disadvantage size-wise at any position so I don't see a reason to try to move him down to a position at which his size would be less significant and his low level of skill more problematic.

Long, but good post my man.

First things first, if Vesely is a PF becasue of his length and style, does he rebound like one as well? He doesn't appear to be much of a rebounder, although I've only really paid attention to his game about four or five games this year (he is uncanny in his ability ot be close to rim to get easy dunks by the way--really unusual skill).

Your post seems to be mostly about how intangibles are not a measurable skill ... they aren't.

That's why they're called INtangibles as opposed to tangibles.

Intangibles are the skills a player possesses that you only real see through using a but of intuition.

For all of his greatness, Magic Johnson was a high intangible player (he was tangible as well). Magic made guys play at a higher level through his unselfishness, encouragement, and leadership.

Austin Rivers ain't Magic Johnson, and he isn't even a high intangible player to me, I just think that he has what guys like Dejuan Wagner, OJ Mayo, Allen Iverson, and Kobe Bryant have ... a strong confidence and an unfettered desire to prove himself.

I'd still take Lamb over Riversfor the Wiz, but, in the right situation, Rivers could be really, really good (Ginobli good).

[Dat2U]

Reminder on our odds:

19.9% chance at #1 pick
18.8% chance at #2 pick (38.7% chance of picking 1 or 2)
17.1% chance at #3 pick (55.8% chance of picking top 3)
31.9% chance at #4 pick (87.7% chance of pick top 4)
12.3% chance at #5 pick (44.2% chance of picking 4th or 5th)

I'm liking those odds Fish. Nearly 40% shot of landing top 2 pick. Better than 50% shot at a top 3. There's only a 1 in 8 chance we get totally shafted in the lottery. I'm starting to feel confident!

[bawizards]

Come on guys lets have some optimism about getting Davis. We have the 2nd best shot to begin with plus here is why him coming to us makes a lot of sense for the NBA.


1) Yes I know the Nets moved to Brooklyn but lets be real here, that has and always will be a knicks city the Nets moving across the pond will not do anything. That city stuck with the Knicks during the Isaiah era that city isnt going to split just because the nets moved across the bay. So that takes the nets out as the best spot for Davis.

2)Cutting out the nets Washington is the 2nd biggest metro area out of all lottery teams except Houston. It is the 7th biggest metro area in the nation so Davis will come to a big metro area that has a lot of viewers.

3)We already have a elite PG in Wall so giving us Davis gives us 2 potential super stars to make the East a lot tougher. This will balance out the conferences if Washington becomes a contender.

4)

John Wall has a very marketable personality. Giving him another superstar will be very good to get his personality out there. The league wants to see personalities like that suceed.


5)

You guys may ask what the kiss has to do with all of this but it is another way to market overseas. Vesley has a exiciting american style that is rare for euro players. Well seeing him do some great dunks in the playoffs will help market the NBA and the NBA playing style overseas.



There are 5 reasons why we are best off with Davis. I hope David Stern sees this and listens.

[dobrojim]

the lotto ain't fixed and Brooklyn is across the East RIVER from Manhatten.

almost any scenario will have us with a good chance at Beal. It'll be interesting
to see how high MKG ends up going. Second seems to be one consensus.

[Severn Hoos]

the lotto ain't fixed and Brooklyn is across the East RIVER from Manhatten.

almost any scenario will have us with a good chance at Beal. It'll be interesting
to see how high MKG ends up going. Second seems to be one consensus.

Hopefully, this should be a pretty easy draft (at least at the top) for the Wiz. There's really only 2 possible "choices" they would have to make - MKG or Beal, if both are on the board? And do you take Robinson or trade down/out?

Everything else should be essentially predetermined:

At #1, take Davis.
At #2, you have to make a choice - MKG or Beal? Dat's just about got me convinced that MKG would be the better choice, though I really want some shooting on this team.
At #3, you take whichever from MKG or Beal does not go #2. If both are there, same choice as at #2.
At #4 - with MKG or Beal still on the board, take the one that's left.
At #4 or #5 with both MKG & Beal off the board, do you take Robinson or trade?

So my answers to my own questions are:

1. Beal, but reluctantly and could still definitely change before Draft Day. Can't wait for workouts.
2. Trade. If there was a way to turn TRob into, say, Waiters and Crowder, wouldn't you do that?

At least we won't have to consider all the myriad possibilities after Weds. night....

[Rafael122]

You guys do realize that if the Nets send Blue Ivy Carter (Jay Z's daughter) as their representative, that's pretty much a wrap right?

[7-Day Dray]

Ted Leonsis' son, Zachary, will be representing us in the draft lottery. http://www.nba.com/wizards/video/2012/0 ... index.html

[closg00]

Ted Leonsis' son, Zachary, will be representing us in the draft lottery. http://www.nba.com/wizards/video/2012/0 ... index.html

FAIL!!!!, sending his fricken son who now works for the org? Bad karma after renewing Ernie.
Woe is me

[fishercob]

Ted Leonsis' son, Zachary, will be representing us in the draft lottery. http://www.nba.com/wizards/video/2012/0 ... index.html

FAIL!!!!, sending his fricken son who now works for the org? Bad karma after renewing Ernie.
Woe is me

I've met Zach and talked with him at length. He is a GREAT kid. Very bright and mature for a kid his age (I think he just graduated from Penn). Next of kin worked for the Cavs last year anyhow. Have a little faith and try not being a negative nancy 24/7.

[penbeast0]

the lotto ain't fixed and Brooklyn is across the East RIVER from Manhatten.

almost any scenario will have us with a good chance at Beal. It'll be interesting
to see how high MKG ends up going. Second seems to be one consensus.

That's what people were saying just before Patrick Ewing went to the Knicks. . . .

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Ted Leonsis' son, Zachary, will be representing us in the draft lottery. http://www.nba.com/wizards/video/2012/0 ... index.html

FAIL!!!!, sending his fricken son who now works for the org? Bad karma after renewing Ernie.
Woe is me

I've met Zach and talked with him at length. He is a GREAT kid. Very bright and mature for a kid his age (I think he just graduated from Penn). Next of kin worked for the Cavs last year anyhow. Have a little faith and try not being a negative nancy 24/7.

Next of kin also worked with Irene Pollin the year before.

Dan Gilbert's son has a disease and is therefore a more sympathetic figure than Ted's intelligent, healthy son. Washington could have found someone less able-bodied.

[fishercob]

Gilbert Arenas?

[closg00]

Reading some great conspiracy theories on Mike Lees blog about the draft lottery
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wiz ... _blog.html
.