2012 NBA Draft - Part V

[closg00]

ESPN is reporting NO rejected the Cavs offer of all 4 of their picks for #1. Hey! at-least they tried.

[nate33]

some mock drafts have beal going 2 to CHO

I just don't see it. Beal is a pretty safe pick with a reasonably high ceiling, but it's doubtful that he has superstar potential. MKG and Robinson both have higher upsides and a rebuilding team that lacking in talent needs to swing for the fences. Also, both MKG and Robinson seem more suited to be vocal team leaders.

Also, Charlotte has just 3 players who could conceivably be part of their foundation: Walker, Henderson and Biyombo. That makes SF and PF their biggest holes. With a SF (MKG) and a PF (Robinson) on the draft board, why draft Beal?

Finally, when everything else is equal, you generally take big over small. Good guards are obtainable in free agency. Good bigs are real hard to acquire.

I say there's a 60% chance that Charlotte takes Robinson, a 25% chance they take MKG, a 10% chance they take Drummond, and a 5% chance they take Beal.

[jivelikenice]

I have nothing against Beal and will admit that my lack of exposure to UF games on tv probably plays some part in my evaluation but I have a more general question. Shooting and SG are needs but why are we treating it as the only need of the franchise.

1. We don't have a legitimate starting 3 on the roster and that was by far our worst position as far as offensive production in 11.
2. We don't have a long-term starting PF. Seraphin is more of a 5.
3. We are not a great rebounding team.

Each of these 3 prospects can fill a hole on this roster. If I were evaluating them I'd make the decision on these factors:

A. Who grades out as the best player of the bunch- Forget need; they all fit needs
B. Who brings the most to the table- On & offcourt
C. Who will contribute most quickly-

To me if I look at it this way it shakes out like this:
1. Robinson
2. MKG
3. Beal

Robinson brings scoring, rebounding, physical and mental maturity, work ethic, and will get you 6-8 points just because he'll beat his counterparts don't court on hustle alone. Like Hands said, he's a Faried type of rebounding w/ better offense. What's not to like?

[fishercob]

I believe Beal is as talented as TRob, MKG or anyone else who might be available with the third pick. The fact that he also addresses the Zards need for a great shooting wing player is an added benefit.

What he said. If anything, he is *more* talented than either TRob or MK-G at his position. Not to ding MK-G at all, but Beal is so far along in development at 18; it really sticks out. As to TRob, I don't see how he'll be an impact player -- though of course I could be wrong. He played well in college; he's a good player. That's about as far as I can take it.

But Robinson's rebounding rate was right up there with Faried. What is not to like about a Faried type who is more of an offensive player ?

I don't think that's a fair characterization. Look at their Draft Express profiles side by side -- the pace adjusted per 40 stats. Faried was much, much better. Not just rebounding, but shooting, steals, and blocks. Plus, RObinson had one season of meaningful minutes. Faried had 3.

[jivelikenice]

Look at it from another angle. Drafting Robinson gives you great flexibility in dealing with Nene going forward. You have insurance for when Nene misses his 10-20 games per and It also gives you the flexibility to potentially deal Nene in a year or 2 to a contender at the deadline for additional assets based on how well Seraphin develops.

[TGW]

I don't think Robinson has the motor Faried does. Faried has the speed of a small forward so he beats most bigs down the court, and I also think he's more athletic than Robinson as well.

I just don't buy Robinson being that great of a player in the pros. You especially don't see him doing the kind of things Faried did in college (i.e. dunking on multiple players, catching high lobs, etc.)

[fishercob]

I have nothing against Beal and will admit that my lack of exposure to UF games on tv probably plays some part in my evaluation but I have a more general question. Shooting and SG are needs but why are we treating it as the only need of the franchise.

1. We don't have a legitimate starting 3 on the roster and that was by far our worst position as far as offensive production in 11.
2. We don't have a long-term starting PF. Seraphin is more of a 5.
3. We are not a great rebounding team.

Each of these 3 prospects can fill a hole on this roster. If I were evaluating them I'd make the decision on these factors:

A. Who grades out as the best player of the bunch- Forget need; they all fit needs
B. Who brings the most to the table- On & offcourt
C. Who will contribute most quickly-

To me if I look at it this way it shakes out like this:
1. Robinson
2. MKG
3. Beal

Robinson brings scoring, rebounding, physical and mental maturity, work ethic, and will get you 6-8 points just because he'll beat his counterparts don't court on hustle alone. Like Hands said, he's a Faried type of rebounding w/ better offense. What's not to like?

I agree with most of your premise. I think it was Sev last week who said that drafting for "need" is a bad idea, but drafting for "fit" is not. That is to say, if you have a few prospects graded out roughly equally, of course you take the one who fits your team the best. That said, you don't take a lower graded prospect because he fills a need.

That said, I am not sold on your conclusion. As I responded above, I don't at all buy that Robinson is "Faried with better offense." There are two red flags for me on Robinson. First, his low shooting percentage this year worries me. Second -- and something I havent seen discussed much -- is the fact that he couldn't get on the court until this year. Everyone just dismisses this away with "he was stuck behind the Morris twins." And these guys are special how, exactly? They were the 13th and 14th pick in what was considered a historically weak draft. Neither did anything of note as rookies (well, that's not entirely true: Marcus' PER of 3.8 was nothing if not noteworthy). They're just not that good. The fact that RObinson -- iron will, perpetual motor, and all -- couldn't supplant them until they left campus does not inspire any confidence in me.

There's a lot to like about Kidd-Gilchrist, but he did very little this year to set himself apart from Beal in my mind. MKG is supposed to be this defensive animal, but he averaged fewer steals+blocks per-40 than Beal did. Think about that. Perhaps he project to be a better man defender, but NBA defense is a team venture. No one is drafting MKG to "shut down" Lebron or Durant or whomever.

As to our need for rebounding, yes. All the more reason to like Beal. He led Florida in rebounding -- on a team with Patric Young. He led SEC freshmen in rebounding. I don't know how, given his supposed size limitations. But I don't care. The guy knows how to get the ball. He'll help address that need.

As to getting a guy who will help most quickly, I don't quite agree. I don't want to wait 5 years to develop a project, sure. But I wouldn't pass on an 18 year old Beal (or MKG) for Andrew Nicholson, even if the latter may help sooner.

[Wizardspride]

I just don't buy Robinson being that great of a player in the pros. You especially don't see him doing the kind of things Faried did in college (i.e. dunking on multiple players, catching high lobs, etc.)

The G'Town Hoyas would disagree with you.

[AWIZZINGBULLET]

http://www.beltwaysportsblog.com/2012/06/07/beal-has-to-be-the-choice/

good read

As a Bealite, I'm in full agreement with the writer of this blog.

Took me awhile to jump on board with Bradley Beal, but that was due to never having seen him play in a full game. Beal should be the top pick, not just because of his shooting ability, but because his style of play stabilizes the Wizards offense.

If the Wizards miss out on Beal, I think it should be Harrison Barnes. I'm surprised how much Barnes is an afterthought amongst most Wizards fans, especially when I consider the Cavs interest in him picking directly behind the Wizards. Barnes I believe could end up being that guy in this year's draft teams and fans look back at and ask themselves how they passed on him.

Draft either player and I'd be real happy.

[J-Ves]

http://www.beltwaysportsblog.com/2012/06/07/beal-has-to-be-the-choice/

good read

As a Bealite, I'm in full agreement with the writer of this blog.

Took me awhile to jump on board with Bradley Beal, but that was due to never having seen him play in a full game. Beal should be the top pick, not just because of his shooting ability, but because his style of play stabilizes the Wizards offense.

If the Wizards miss out on Beal, I think it should be Harrison Barnes. I'm surprised how much Barnes is an afterthought amongst most Wizards fans, especially when I consider the Cavs interest in him picking directly behind the Wizards. Barnes I believe could end up being that guy in this year's draft teams and fans look back at and ask themselves how they passed on him.

Draft either player and I'd be real happy.

If beal is picked at 2, and the wiz target barnes, I hope they try to trade down and obtain another 1st. Barnes at 3 is a reach.

[closg00]

I have nothing against Beal and will admit that my lack of exposure to UF games on tv probably plays some part in my evaluation but I have a more general question. Shooting and SG are needs but why are we treating it as the only need of the franchise.

1. We don't have a legitimate starting 3 on the roster and that was by far our worst position as far as offensive production in 11.
2. We don't have a long-term starting PF. Seraphin is more of a 5.
3. We are not a great rebounding team.

Each of these 3 prospects can fill a hole on this roster. If I were evaluating them I'd make the decision on these factors:

A. Who grades out as the best player of the bunch- Forget need; they all fit needs
B. Who brings the most to the table- On & offcourt
C. Who will contribute most quickly-

To me if I look at it this way it shakes out like this:
1. Robinson
2. MKG
3. Beal

Robinson brings scoring, rebounding, physical and mental maturity, work ethic, and will get you 6-8 points just because he'll beat his counterparts don't court on hustle alone. Like Hands said, he's a Faried type of rebounding w/ better offense. What's not to like?

You make a strong-case there counslor. It was an anonymous GM who said that TROb was better than Faried. Bring-on the workouts.

[7-Day Dray]

Too many people here drinking the Beal kool-aid. What's his standout trait? His 3pt % wasn't even that good in college.

[Mizerooskie]

Look at it from another angle. Drafting Robinson gives you great flexibility in dealing with Nene going forward. You have insurance for when Nene misses his 10-20 games per and It also gives you the flexibility to potentially deal Nene in a year or 2 to a contender at the deadline for additional assets based on how well Seraphin develops.

That also leaves you with a depth chart at SG of:

Jordan Crawford
Roger Mason

[Mizerooskie]

Too many people here drinking the Beal kool-aid. What's his standout trait? His 3pt % wasn't even that good in college.

If you have access to it, read Chad Ford's piece here: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/blog/_/name/nba_draft/id/8015869/nba-draft-slow-start-bradley-beal-living-ray-allen-comparisons

It details how Beal was thinking too much in the beginning of the season, causing him to fall out of rhythm. When Donovan finally got him to just play and be more aggressive, the shooting improved.

[fishercob]

Too many people here drinking the Beal kool-aid. What's his standout trait? His 3pt % wasn't even that good in college.

So I knew that I first learned of Beal last summer, but I did not remember who first brought him to my attention.

It was theboomking, who first posted about him last July. Big ups to Boom. The second post was from rockymac52, who liked Beal and was familiar with him from Missouri's recruitment of him. Perhaps you'll recognize this third post:

I'm a huge Beal fan! He reminds me of Eric Gordon in a number of ways. Undersized long stocky two-guard who can stroke and get up. They even look similar.

And I didn't know he had ups like this!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6quEQX7ufiI[/youtube]

7/13/11

[jivelikenice]

Look at it from another angle. Drafting Robinson gives you great flexibility in dealing with Nene going forward. You have insurance for when Nene misses his 10-20 games per and It also gives you the flexibility to potentially deal Nene in a year or 2 to a contender at the deadline for additional assets based on how well Seraphin develops.

That also leaves you with a depth chart at SG of:

Jordan Crawford
Roger Mason

If I were to use your argument I could say if we passed on Beal, our SF depth would be Chris Singleton

But I'm in no way saying that we should draft Robinson and ignore everything else so I don't see your argument there. You could get an effective 2 guard deeper in this draft, trade options, and you also have FA in a year where a lot of good shooters are available. I don't understand why drafting Robinson equates to not addressing the 1 guard need?

[Severn Hoos]

fish - you had me at "I think it was Sev last week who said...", how could I resist?

I agree with everything you have said, and it's why Beal is my first choice for the Wiz. Thanks for reminding me why I had that conclusion.

A couple comments in addition:

1. Yes, I spoke of Fit - and someone else recently pointed out how Wall as the one cornerstone going forward does affect other decisions. For example, I don't prefer Beal to Robinson (or MKG) because we're already set at the Forward positions (obviously, we are not). But I do prefer Beal in part because we need to surround Wall with shooters, and Beal looks to be the best in the entire Draft class (or at least has a reasonable potential to be so).

2. I and a few others did bring up Robinson's inability to push the Morris twins and get more minutes in his first two seasons. There were some explanations, but to me they were like the "he was always triple teamed" as an explanation for his poor FG%. Seems like a good amount of rationalizing and/or projection going on, if you ask me.

3. Good point on the greater steals+blocks per 40 numbers for Beal over MKG - didn't realize that. Somehow I think Beal's detractors will use the fact that he played primarily SF to explain away those numbers, but at the same time won't give him credit for playing up a position (remember, he's "undersized" for a SG. And I still don't get how the measurements for Beal are worrisome but Robinson's are OK? Both are a shade below ideal height for their position, very solidly built, low body fat, good wingspan, and low standing reach. I'd be far more concerned about the length measurements for a post player than for an SG, but maybe that's just me?

My preference is definitely Beal, though I probably have MKG a bit closer in 2nd than you do. Robinson scares me a bit - not that he'll be a bust, but that he won't live up to the expectations and hopes of a top 3 pick. Here's hoping we get our Harden with the 3rd pick....

[AWIZZINGBULLET]

Just responding to J-Ves, couldn't quote comment. Something about 3 post being embedded.

When you call Barnes a "reach" at 3, what do you mean? I believe Mchael Kidd-Gilchrist is a reach at 2 or 3 but media is hyping him so much. Not that he isn't deserving of some of it.

[7-Day Dray]

Too many people here drinking the Beal kool-aid. What's his standout trait? His 3pt % wasn't even that good in college.

So I knew that I first learned of Beal last summer, but I did not remember who first brought him to my attention.

It was theboomking, who first posted about him last July. Big ups to Boom. The second post was from rockymac52, who liked Beal and was familiar with him from Missouri's recruitment of him. Perhaps you'll recognize this third post:

I'm a huge Beal fan! He reminds me of Eric Gordon in a number of ways. Undersized long stocky two-guard who can stroke and get up. They even look similar.

And I didn't know he had ups like this!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6quEQX7ufiI[/youtube]

7/13/11

Okay you got me.

But that was before he had a lot of nationally televised games. I had only seen him in All-Star games, and not that I've seen and read a lot about him, I have my reservations. I do think he'll shoot better in the pros, but will he be an elite shooter like Ray Allen? Is his handle good enough to break guys down off the dribble? Does he have the 1st step and bulk to get to and finish at the rim? Most star SGs have this traits. I'm just questioning what he stands out at.

[Mizerooskie]

Look at it from another angle. Drafting Robinson gives you great flexibility in dealing with Nene going forward. You have insurance for when Nene misses his 10-20 games per and It also gives you the flexibility to potentially deal Nene in a year or 2 to a contender at the deadline for additional assets based on how well Seraphin develops.

That also leaves you with a depth chart at SG of:

Jordan Crawford
Roger Mason

If I were to use your argument I could say if we passed on Beal, our SF depth would be Chris Singleton

But I'm in no way saying that we should draft Robinson and ignore everything else so I don't see your argument there. You could get an effective 2 guard deeper in this draft, trade options, and you also have FA in a year where a lot of good shooters are available. I don't understand why drafting Robinson equates to not addressing the 1 guard need?

You're missing Vesely and Lewis from the SF depth chart.

You were intimating that the flexibility Robinson would provide would be an advantage of drafting him over Beal/MKG. I'm saying that it would create a bigger disadvantage. The front court rotation is in much better shape than the back court rotation.

I've said it before, but I'm not sure Robinson is anything more than a marginal upgrade over Booker.