2012 NBA Draft - Part V

[AWIZZINGBULLET]

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

See I thought the same thing because he pretty much seemed to burst onto the scene and into discussion late season, but after watching just one of his games in high school I' was pretty conivinced he wouldn't be a disappointment of a pickup.

I think his stock is deserving to be where it is because he's a complete player or at least comes very close to being one. His standout trait is his shooting but he can play some point, plays defense, didn't come across as a player who messes up the flow of offense by dominating the ball or forcing things, plays under control, can create his own shot, and gets to the basket---a trait the Wizards really need at SG. As far as effort and desire to win, he reminds me of Wall.

[Dat2U]

They mean nothing to you? ... You can certainly dismiss numbers you don't like or that don't fit your narrative but that doesn't make you right.

Standing reach specifically is an important tool....

Uh huh, and let me point out that he has to have two arms as well. No good bigs w/ only one arm -- what could more clearly prove the importance of these measurements, I ask you?

Do you have some real research to cite, my friend? Someone has done an actual study plotting standing reach of PFs vs. productivity of PFs? Please feel free to provide a URL.

Suppose we rank all NBA teams in order of added-up team TS% -- do you think there'd be a statistically significant correlation of that order w/ the order of teams by win-loss record? I do. How about if we listed all NBA teams by number of rebounds?

Now what if we listed all NBA teams by the total of their squads' standing reach. Do you think there'd be a statistically significant correlation of that order and the order of teams by win-loss record? If not, why not?

How about if we just listed all NBA Power Forwards in order of their standing reach. Do you think that list would have a statistically significant correlation w/ the same guys listed in order of rebounds per 40 minutes? If you do, please prove it. As soon as you prove it, I'll fall in right behind you to trumpet this oh so important stat. Until then, you are the one with the narrative and choosing numbers to fit it.

So do you refuse to acknowledge that length is important for a big man?

Do you think a midget could play PF in the NBA, lol?

As far as statistical correlation, maybe one exists, I don't know of one. However if you take a look at the draftexpress database and look at the Cs & PFs in order of standing reach you'll notice that outside of Jarron Collins and Josh Harrelson, there's no real record of of a big with a standing reach below 8'9" with any level of success.

So obviously if Zeller's standing reach is 8'8" (and I'm sure teams will do their own measurements during the workout process) then there's reason for concern in my opinion.

[Mizerooskie]

Trying to equate standing reach to player productivity using historical measurements one way or the other is a fool's errand. The record is not nearly complete enough to make conclusions either way.

[FAH1223]

Beal is only 18-19, right? He may grow a little bit more to a legit 6'5''

[jivelikenice]

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.

I don't see how improving on front court depth creates a bigger disadvantage at the 2. It restricts you from using that exact resource to improve the 2 guard spot, but you still have plenty of resources available to do that either via trade, free agency, or additional draft picks. What's harder to find, a quality big or a guard? The mindset that we're ok up front now so lets ignore it is not wise either. You have Nene and Seraphin and they're both ideally 5s. There are no other starting quality forwards on the roster.
Vesely- MIGHT develop into one but as of now looks like a high energy reseves
Booker- High energy reserive who's had injury troubles
Lewis- Will be bought out or traded.
Andray Blatche- Hopefully amnestied but nobody to count on regardless
Singleton- Very big question mark at this point

Look at the available two guards in FA:
Eric Gordon
Landy Fields
Carlos Delfino
OJ Mayo
Courtney Lee
Lou Williams
Gerald Green
Danny Green
Jodie Meeks
Alonzo Gee

If you want a 2 guard, you can find one this year.

[Dat2U]

Trying to equate standing reach to player productivity using historical measurements one way or the other is a fool's errand. The record is not nearly complete enough to make conclusions either way.

So does that mean we should throw it out because we don't have a historically complete picture?

This isn't a court of law. This isn't based on the preponderence of the evidence. I'm suggesting standing reach is a useful tool in determining whether or not whether someone has the requisite size to play the position.

If your a scout or GM, you damn well know their paying attention or looking closely at those measurements.

[jivelikenice]

If I knew that Beal could create off the dribble and be a Wade type (as he described himself) in terms of getting to the hoop, its an easy choice. But I haven't seen anything that shows he'll be able to break down a defense off the dribble and I just can't see the value in drafting a 2 guard who can't be equally effective shooting and driving. We keep talking about Eric Gordon, but I also see some Randy Foye.

[DCZards]

Look at the available two guards in FA:
Eric Gordon
Landy Fields
Carlos Delfino
OJ Mayo
Courtney Lee
Lou Williams
Gerald Green
Danny Green
Jodie Meeks
Alonzo Gee

If you want a 2 guard, you can find one this year.

Other than Gordon, who will probably resign with the Hornets, none of the two guards on this list impress me. They are all bench players at best, other than maybe Mayo and Lou Willams.

[thinker07]

Finally some new to talk about. On twitter:

Michael Lee ‏@MrMichaelLee

#wizards will have workout Tues. with Jason Clark, Matt Gatens, Bernard James, Scoop Jardine, Darius Miller & Miles Plumlee

[Upper Decker]

Look at the available two guards in FA:
Eric Gordon - RFA, it's a certainty any offer will be matched
Landy Fields - PER 12.0, is he any good?
Carlos Delfino - Seriously? Delfino?
OJ Mayo - Is he any better than Jordan Crawford?
Courtney Lee - RFA, any reasonable offer will be matched
Lou Williams - SG in PG's body, great bench player
Gerald Green - He's an interesting player, was his time in NJ a flash in the pan or is he N1^2?
Danny Green - I'm intrigued by Danny Green, but the Spurs are soooo savvy they'll play this perfectly. If the Wiz acquire him its because the Spurs know something Washington doesn't, or Washington massively overpaid
Jodie Meeks - PER 11.5, is he any good?
Alonzo Gee - Been there, done that

If you want a 2 guard, you can find one this year.

[payitforward]

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 ?

Ummm, Robinson's rebounding rate is up there w/ Faried if you add 20% to it. Brian Zoubek's rebounding rate was better than Robinson's, closer to Faried. I guess that makes him even more of a Faried type?

And Robinson is "more of an offensive player" you think? Faried's eFG% as an NBA rookie was .59; Robinson's as an NCAA junior was .51. Faried averaged north of 18 points per 40 minutes.

Robinson is a good player, as I said above. But it makes zero sense to compare him to Faried. They are not similar players one bit.

[DCZards]

If I knew that Beal could create off the dribble and be a Wade type (as he described himself) in terms of getting to the hoop, its an easy choice. But I haven't seen anything that shows he'll be able to break down a defense off the dribble and I just can't see the value in drafting a 2 guard who can't be equally effective shooting and driving. We keep talking about Eric Gordon, but I also see some Randy Foye.

Most of us have seen Beal play maybe 5-6 times. What we know is that he's a good shooter, in fact NBA scouts/gms who have seen far more of Beal than anyone on this board has rave about his shooting. We also know he has a hi ball IQ, a good work ethic, and is humble, mature and coachable. He also rebounds and blocks shots better than most forwards.

Can Beal break down the defense off the dribble? I personally haven't seen enough of him to know for sure. But with his strength and work ethic I'm betting he'll be able to do that as well...if not now very soon. Let's remember that Beal is only 18...so his best is yet to come.

Btw, Ray Allen isn't especially good at breaking down defenses off the dribble and he's had a pretty decent NBA career.

[DCZards]

A word of caution for those comparing TRob's college stats with those of Faried. Dont forgot that Robinson played in a MUCH better conference and against MUCH better players.

[payitforward]

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.

He averaged almost 6 reb a game… That’s good production for a SF plus everybody on that Gtown team was a good rebounder 1-5.. Heck Otto Porter led them in rebounding at 6.7 and he came off the bench for most of the season, and even their PG averaged 4 boards a game.

Hollis is a good rebounder for his position..

Actually, he averaged 7.1 boards every 40 minutes, and, no, that's not good rebounding for a SF; it's in the bottom 35% of the NCAA for SFs who played 20 or more minutes/game.

Porter averaged 9.2 per 40. The fact that someone came off the bench and had a 30% higher rebounding rate at HT's position isn't really evidence that HT is a good rebounder.

[Dat2U]

Faried struck me as an above the rim player in college. Faried is longer and more bouncy than Thomas Robinson. Robinson is more floor bound, but is quick and agile. Robinson has more signs of a developing face up game. Faried is lower usage and very efficient cleaning up around the glass and finishing at the rim. I personally question whether Robinson will have to transition into being a lower usage player in the NBA b/c of his struggles around the rim and inconsistencies with his face up game.

Even considering the level of competition, I think Faried is the better prospect. Robinson isn't a game changer defensively and Faried wrecked havoc defensively in college. I'm just not sold on Robinson as an elite prospect. s he worthy of a top 10 pick? Yes. A top 3 pick? IMO, no.

[cleek+wall]

Faried struck me as an above the rim player in college. Faried is longer and more bouncy than Thomas Robinson. Robinson is more floor bound, but is quick and agile. Robinson has more signs of a developing face up game. Faried is lower usage and very efficient cleaning up around the glass and finishing at the rim. I personally question whether Robinson will have to transition into being a lower usage player in the NBA b/c of his struggles around the rim and inconsistencies with his face up game.

Even considering the level of competition, I think Faried is the better prospect. Robinson isn't a game changer defensively and Faried wrecked havoc defensively in college. I'm just not sold on Robinson as an elite prospect. s he worthy of a top 10 pick? Yes. A top 3 pick? IMO, no.

trust me when i say this...robinson has swag and heart..he will be an all star many times over.

[Rafael122]

Darius Miller coming in for a workout tomorrow. Jason Clark too, but Miller is currently projected as a 2nd round pick by DX.

[truwizfan4evr]

Faried struck me as an above the rim player in college. Faried is longer and more bouncy than Thomas Robinson. Robinson is more floor bound, but is quick and agile. Robinson has more signs of a developing face up game. Faried is lower usage and very efficient cleaning up around the glass and finishing at the rim. I personally question whether Robinson will have to transition into being a lower usage player in the NBA b/c of his struggles around the rim and inconsistencies with his face up game.

Even considering the level of competition, I think Faried is the better prospect. Robinson isn't a game changer defensively and Faried wrecked havoc defensively in college. I'm just not sold on Robinson as an elite prospect. s he worthy of a top 10 pick? Yes. A top 3 pick? IMO, no.

trust me when i say this...robinson has swag and heart..he will be an all star many times over.

I agree! i Agree on mostly all your post you do. I see him as being a allstar in the nba.

[7-Day Dray]

Robinson just doesn't fit with Nene in the frontcourt, especially on defense. They're both bigs that like to operate from the perimeter the majority of the time an face-up. On defense, Robinson has the same problems as Nene. He's not a good shot-blocker and struggles with help defense. We need a frontcourt player that can block shots and protect the weakside. I know many people hate on Drummond, but I'd rather have him that T-Rob because of this reason alone.

[Dat2U]

trust me when i say this...robinson has swag and heart..he will be an all star many times over.

Until we find out his swag % and get his heart measurements, I have my doubts.