2012 NBA Draft - Part V

[closg00]

You also have to consider who would be best to pair with Biyombo and Walker, Robinson would be the better fit there, agree?

[Wizardspride]

https://twitter.com/#!/DohertyMatt

Matt Doherty ‏@DohertyMatt


Experts questioning Hollis Thompson bc of Georgetown's style.."share the ball...Princeton offense...team ball..." worked for Hibbert/Green.[/

b]

Matt Doherty ‏@DohertyMatt


[b]Will Barton is "cheap to the curve". See him as big guard. Competes. Undervalued.

I don't understand the tweet about Hollis, what is their point?

Some scouts are questioning Thompson because of the type of system G'Town ran.

[nate33]

You also have to consider who would be best to pair with Biyombo and Walker, Robinson would be the better fit there, agree?

Yes. A Biyombo/Robinson frontcourt could pan out to be very good in the long run - particularly if Robinson hones his offensive game to be something like Chris Bosh's. Defensively, Biyombo would defend the rim and Robinson would clean the glass.

I really think it's a no-brainer for them. Take Robinson at #2.

[Wizardspride]

You also have to consider who would be best to pair with Biyombo and Walker, Robinson would be the better fit there, agree?

Yes. A Biyombo/Robinson frontcourt could pan out to be very good in the long run - particularly if Robinson hones his offensive game to be something like Chris Bosh's. Defensively, Biyombo would defend the rim and Robinson would clean the glass.

I really think it's a no-brainer for them. Take Robinson at #2.

Sounds like you're somewhat high on Robinson.


Fwiw, so am I....which is why I hope Charlotte passes on him.

[nate33]

You also have to consider who would be best to pair with Biyombo and Walker, Robinson would be the better fit there, agree?

Yes. A Biyombo/Robinson frontcourt could pan out to be very good in the long run - particularly if Robinson hones his offensive game to be something like Chris Bosh's. Defensively, Biyombo would defend the rim and Robinson would clean the glass.

I really think it's a no-brainer for them. Take Robinson at #2.

Sounds like you're somewhat high on Robinson.


Fwiw, so am I....which is why I hope Charlotte passes on him.

I am. Robinson's 7-3 wingspan clinched it for me. I'm not buying his standing reach measurement. I think he has legit PF size and won't really have a size mismatch against anyone.

Skillwise, I think he talents are ideal for today's pick-and-roll based game. Robinson may never be a big post threat, but you don't need much post scoring out of your PF. Your PF needs to be able to shoot 18-footers, and know how to pump-fake-and drive. Robinson can do all that. Robinson will also be able to receive the ball when rolling to the basket and finish in traffic. He might need a couple of years to refine his offensive game, but he has the skills.

My only concern with Robinson is his woeful shot blocking numbers. He might not be much of a rim protector on help defense. I think his man to man defense will be fine though.

[theboomking]

It's Robinson or Beal.

It will be great either way, a Guard who plays off the ball and shoots and rebounds. Or a strong leader at the 4 who is Guarenteed to be a strong defender in the paint.

No way we take MKG ahead of either those two, the shooting would be horrendous

I don't think Robinson will be a great defender in the paint. He lacks length, didn't post great block numbers in college, and wasn't regarded as a very good rim defender. That doesn't make him a horrible match though. You could leave those duties to Nene and KS, and let Robinson clean the boards.

[forbes20]

Here are my favorite draft scenarios:
1) trade blatche and #3 to Portland for resign Batum and #11. At 11 we take terrance Jones. Portland takes trob at 3 to pair with aldridge, and Barnes at 6.
Batum is better than mkg, bigger, and avgs close to 40% on 3's. He is friends w/ Kevin, age. 22, 6'8 and can also play guard.
I think jones is going to be a solid player and an be our lebron stopper. He was very consistant for 2 yrs at Kentucky. He is 6-8 1/4 w/o shoes (inch taller than lbj) 7-2 1/4 wing span... 2" longer than lbj, and at 25252 he is similar make up. Both yrs at ku he shot 33% 3fg, 7-8rbs, 1.4ast, and 1stl and almost 2blks per game.

2) if that doesn't work, then maybe we help lakers get dwilliams. Lakers need to shed salary. How about rashard and blatche to la, gasol to philly, artest (amnestied, save 8m vs amnesty blatche), iguadala and Lou Williams (expiring) to dc. Ai is 5rbs and 5ast per, shot 3ptr near 40%, and would be fine not being the #1 option. He only has 2yrs left. Wiiliams also shoots high 36% or so 3fg. We can then take beal at 3 or do trade #1 above

[The Consiglieri]

DraftExpress: Bradley Beal Video Scouting Report: http://t.co/PCYNoS8L

I like him. You want to like someone less, click on the Jeremy Lamb video scouting report near the bottom of the page. In fact, I'd say watch the Waiters report and the Lillard report as well, then say who looks best. (Lillard looks outstanding, btw -- then you see that it's a game vs. Montana or UT Arlington).

Beal looks way ahead of the rest of them in pretty much every skill -- esp. his shooting stroke -- and also way ahead developmentally. He just plays strong and smart in every aspect. Then you think "this kid is 18..." Looks to me like he's going to be a heck of a player.

As I watch him, he seems never to need to react; he's already seen the situation, and he's there. I can't put Waiters, Lillard or Lamb on his level at all.

Just a quick edit to suggest watching him out-rebound 6'7" Jeff Taylor several times, and some concerns about his size go away.

People have pounding away for months on his shooting, and for me, it's nonsense. The word on Beal out of high school was easily the best jump shooter in the recruiting class. Easily. Never heard anything different. So as a freshman he has an uneven year playing out of position with two chuckers and suddenly years of evidence pales in comparison to chunks of one uneven college season despite the fact that he started turning the corner late, and particularly in March.

There are many issues with Beal to question, his height (do we have standing reach yet, because I know dudes got no neck), his overall athleticism, his somewhat limited ceiling, but shooting is not one. Obsessing about his one uneven season, completely ignoring his entire history save that when the kids 18 is simply beyond me. I understand that its what we have in college #'s, but to me, when you've got such a small sample size, and an unreasonble control for the evidence (out of position, with two chuckers running the show) the college level, and a massive pile that contradicts it completely previous to that, you gotta go with the bigger sample size.

We really need to cut out the Beal is a mediocre shooter nonsense because it is nonsense. If passing on him because his athleticism isn't really likely to lift him to an elite level, i can see that, if passing on him because his lack of great size could make him only adequate on the defensive end, I could get that, if passing on him because he's never going to be better than either good or very good, i kinda get that. But there is no other argument than those 3, because he is a fantastic shooter, and will be at the next level, has an outstanding motor and BBIQ, always does the right thing, makes the right decision, and is apparently mega coachable.

I don't know exactly what his ceiling is because motor and BBIQ, and coachability are massive "skills" to have in a player who can already shoot the lights out, but I do honor the threat presented by his issues. Just give up the ghost on the shooting issue because if that's why you don't want him, you're making a HUGE mistake. Now MKG (who I'd actually take over Beal), now he actually does have a shooting issue, though a potentially solveable one, I get that, but with Beal it's a total nonissue.

[jivelikenice]

I've never been sold on MKG, and still don't get why he's so highly rated.

Yeah, he's very athletic and has some on-court intangibles, but where are the basketball skills and production to merit a top-5 pick? I see a lot more Gerald Wallace in him than Scottie Pippen.

Great glue guy, but potential Alpha scorer? I don't think so.

Who do you think is an alpha male out of this group? Wallace is a pretty good player but I see MKG as a better version of Wallace and that's not a bad thing. He's much further along than Gerald was at a similar age.

[Dat2U]

I don't think this is true anymore. This isn't Andray Blatche's Wizards. With Nene, Seraphin, Booker, Vesely, Wall and Crawford, this team is full of guys who work hard and love to play. MKG would certainly fit into the new mindset, but I don't think we are a team that needs his leadership.

Agreed. I think people are living in the past when they say the Zards need MKG to be a leader and show them how to play hard.

Wow. We don't need leadership? We don't need guys that can't stand losing. That push teammates to work harder. That lead by example?

I don't know how to even respond to that.

I would think every single team in competitive sports would need players like that. The more the better.

But I guess we've got our full allotment. We don't need anymore.

We were undefeated in the Morris Almond era.

[theboomking]

I am. Robinson's 7-3 wingspan clinched it for me. I'm not buying his standing reach measurement. I think he has legit PF size and won't really have a size mismatch against anyone.

Skillwise, I think he talents are ideal for today's pick-and-roll based game. Robinson may never be a big post threat, but you don't need much post scoring out of your PF. Your PF needs to be able to shoot 18-footers, and know how to pump-fake-and drive. Robinson can do all that. Robinson will also be able to receive the ball when rolling to the basket and finish in traffic. He might need a couple of years to refine his offensive game, but he has the skills.

I agree with your bolded assessment. I do think however that his standing reach measurements are accurate. Robinson had difficulty finishing in the post against shorter less athletic college defenders. The official measurements just reaffirm his relative lack of elite length.

I've never been sold on MKG, and still don't get why he's so highly rated.

Yeah, he's very athletic and has some on-court intangibles, but where are the basketball skills and production to merit a top-5 pick? I see a lot more Gerald Wallace in him than Scottie Pippen.

Great glue guy, but potential Alpha scorer? I don't think so.

MGK is a great slasher that can get to the rim off the dribble. He is a very good rebounder. He is an excellent defender. These are all important basketball skills.

[Mizerooskie]

I've never been sold on MKG, and still don't get why he's so highly rated.

Yeah, he's very athletic and has some on-court intangibles, but where are the basketball skills and production to merit a top-5 pick? I see a lot more Gerald Wallace in him than Scottie Pippen.

Great glue guy, but potential Alpha scorer? I don't think so.

Who do you think is an alpha male out of this group? Wallace is a pretty good player but I see MKG as a better version of Wallace and that's not a bad thing. He's much further along than Gerald was at a similar age.

Of the players we'd realistically take at 3, both Beal and Robinson are definitely closer to alphas than MKG. I'd argue Barnes is as well (though I wouldn't advocate taking him at 3). There's a few other that won't be in consideration for one reason or another (Sullinger, Lillard, Waiters) that are much more likely to lead the line than MKG.

On the Wallace comparison, I don't think MKG is any more than marginally ahead of Wallace their freshman years.

[VictorPage44]

I've never been sold on MKG, and still don't get why he's so highly rated.

Yeah, he's very athletic and has some on-court intangibles, but where are the basketball skills and production to merit a top-5 pick? I see a lot more Gerald Wallace in him than Scottie Pippen.

Great glue guy, but potential Alpha scorer? I don't think so.

Who do you think is an alpha male out of this group? Wallace is a pretty good player but I see MKG as a better version of Wallace and that's not a bad thing. He's much further along than Gerald was at a similar age.

Yea MKG's energy level is similar to Wallace's, butI think he is further along too. Whereas Wallace is a full-steam-ahead style player (hence the "crash" nickname), MKG I think plays at that speed and with that kind of motor, but he seperates himself with by having a better feel for the game and playing more under control IMO. MKG can make a lot of slick plays at full speed, which makes him pretty unguardable unless the defender is high athleticism/high iq as well.

But I think the Gerald Wallace comparison is pretty close. Wallace can kill your defensive rebounding and break down seams in your defense for 30 and 15 any given night and MKG will be able to do the same thing. If MKG were able to reach Gerald Wallace's level, I'd be satisfied. You dont usually hear about guys making hustle plays for bad teams, so Wallace got underrated in his prime. But going forward, I like the idea of having Wall and a 19 y.o., NBA ready Gerald Wallace type player as the core of the team.

[sfam]

I've never been sold on MKG, and still don't get why he's so highly rated.

Yeah, he's very athletic and has some on-court intangibles, but where are the basketball skills and production to merit a top-5 pick? I see a lot more Gerald Wallace in him than Scottie Pippen.

Great glue guy, but potential Alpha scorer? I don't think so.

Who do you think is an alpha male out of this group? Wallace is a pretty good player but I see MKG as a better version of Wallace and that's not a bad thing. He's much further along than Gerald was at a similar age.

Yea MKG's energy level is similar to Wallace's, butI think he is further along too. Whereas Wallace is a full-steam-ahead style player (hence the "crash" nickname), MKG I think plays at that speed and with that kind of motor, but he seperates himself with by having a better feel for the game and playing more under control IMO. MKG can make a lot of slick plays at full speed, which makes him pretty unguardable unless the defender is high athleticism/high iq as well.

But I think the Gerald Wallace comparison is pretty close. Wallace can kill your defensive rebounding and break down seams in your defense for 30 and 15 any given night and MKG will be able to do the same thing. If MKG were able to reach Gerald Wallace's level, I'd be satisfied. You dont usually hear about guys making hustle plays for bad teams, so Wallace got underrated in his prime. But going forward, I like the idea of having Wall and a 19 y.o., NBA ready Gerald Wallace type player as the core of the team.

I think MKG has more upside than Wallace. The only game Wallace flat out changed (and franchise for that matter) is when he karate kicked Gilbert's knee. I think MKG may have the capability to flat out take over games. If he gets his shot working well, he really could be an elite player. Whether he achieves that or not is certainly open to question.

[payitforward]

https://twitter.com/#!/DohertyMatt
Experts questioning Hollis Thompson bc of Georgetown's style.."share the ball...Princeton offense...team ball..." worked for Hibbert/Green.

Hollis Thompson averaged 1.9 assists per 40 minutes. As a 6'8" SF, he didn't rebound well or get to the line much. I don't think these are matters of "style." As to Green, he was a high draft choice, but he is not a very good player.

Will Barton is "cheap to the curve". See him as big guard. Competes. Undervalued.

Not any more apparently; he's projected in round 1 by DR.

[DCZards]

I don't think this is true anymore. This isn't Andray Blatche's Wizards. With Nene, Seraphin, Booker, Vesely, Wall and Crawford, this team is full of guys who work hard and love to play. MKG would certainly fit into the new mindset, but I don't think we are a team that needs his leadership.

Agreed. I think people are living in the past when they say the Zards need MKG to be a leader and show them how to play hard.

Wow. We don't need leadership? We don't need guys that can't stand losing. That push teammates to work harder. That lead by example?

I don't know how to even respond to that.

I would think every single team in competitive sports would need players like that. The more the better.

But I guess we've got our full allotment. We don't need anymore.

We were undefeated in the Morris Almond era.

You misunderstand--or misinterpret--me. I'm not saying that a team doesn't need leadership or that leadership is not an extremely valuable commodity. What I'm saying is that it would be a mistake to draft MKG, or anyone else for that matter, simply because of their leadership skills or because they play hard. With guys like Nene, Booker, and J. Singleton,if we resign him, I don't see there being a leadership void on Zards...as there was once was. Or a lack of guys who set an example by playing hard.

The biggest need the Zards have, IMO, is a wing player who can score. That's why I like Beal, who, like MKG, also plays hard and is very competitive.

And, for the record, as I've said before I wouldn't mind seeing MKG in a Zards uni...although I'm leaning toward TRob as my second choice after Beal.

[Wizardspride]

Hollis Thompson averaged 1.9 assists per 40 minutes. As a 6'8" SF, he didn't rebound well or get to the line much. I don't think these are matters of "style." A.

It's very hard for me to judge the lack of rebounding or getting to the line for the simple fact that Hollis was basically a spot up shooter in G'Town's offense.


In fact, I would argue that someone like Harrison Barnes' numbers would be greatly depressed in JT3's version of the Princeton as well.

[7-Day Dray]

I still think Drummond should be getting more recognition on this board. It seems that people forget that he was a Fr. and that he turns 18 y/o in August. He Freshman season was disappointing, but he still averaged double figures with two ball-hogging guards, had a solid rebounding rate, and was 2nd in the Big East in blocks. In comparison, a guy like T-Rob 2.5 ppg & 2.7 rpg as a freshman. T-Rob put in work to get to the point he is now (improved ball-handling and jumper), but what's not to say that Drummond can't improve the same way? Same thing applies for fellow Fr. MKG and Beal (but to a lesser extent because they only have solid/good physical tools).

And on T-Rob, he's a much worse fit than Drummond because a T-Rob/Nene frontcourt has no rim protection and would be a lay-up line for the other team. He would be a better fit for a team like Charlotte that has another rim protector beside him. Nene's touch would complement Drummond offensively, and Drummond's shot-blockling would complement Nene defensively.

My top 5 big board for the Wiz:

1. C Andre Drummond
2. SF/SG Harrison Barnes
3. SF Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
4. SG Brad Beal
5. PF Thomas Robinson

[Wizardspride]

I'd have no problem with Drummond but I'm in the minority,

[WizarDynasty]

Wizards need players that can take over games offensively in the fourth quarter even if the refs aren't calling fouls inside. Royce White baby! We need length and bulk that can transform into a scoring machine and is a nighmare matchup in the playoffs. royce white!