Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part III

[hands11]

^ I agree I have no problem with him at 8 But I think it comes down to him or Olynyk is we keep the pick.

But, I would not hate taking a PG at 8, because we need depth. If smart enters the draft after all, Burke could fall right in to our laps. plus CJM would still be a respectable pick at 8. Or again I think we should at least consider moving back with Atlanta or the Jazz. then grabbing a big and a PG, that way the risk is a little bit lower and we fill two needs. Shane Larkin and Steven Adams would be a nice first round draft and we could still maybe get Daing mid round as well or go after Erick Green.

Obviously a trade back is a lot less likely to happen so I'm not giving it much serious consideration. Early in the draft process I wanted them to do that because I wanted a late first for Withey, Diegn, VO, Otto or CJM but I'm not as big a fan of the idea anymore. They can get a good player at 8th and the salary at that slot isn't that much that they need to worry. And a lot of those player have moved up now so there isn't as much in the 2nd half of the first I would go after.

They have plenty of options available at 8 so they will either use it or trade it. And at this point, I don't think they know what they will do. Its all about evaluating options right now. For cap reasons, I would think they want to use the pick. But since they don't want to be wet behind the ears young, I would guess they lean toward the none 19 or 20 year olds.

Lucky for them, this draft is good for that. CJM 21. Dieng 23. Kelly 22 Muscala 21 Erik Murphy 22

[Ruzious]

Ruzious—How does Zeller pass your eye test and not Olynyk? Zeller has t-rex arms and is physically underdeveloped from a strength perpective. Olynyk at least looks like a center. Not only that, I put less stock in athletic ability for bigs than I do with wing and point guard prospects...great bigs don't have to be athletic.

And skillwise, Olynyk (and Muscala) are the most skilled bigs in this draft...by far. Olynyk reminds me of Brad Miller, who was extremely effective in his prime. To me, he's a no brainer pick at the spot we're at.

He's a year and a half younger than Olynyk - and for all the talk that Zeller isn't big and strong enough - I'll bet you he measures both heavier and stronger than Olynyk at the combine. He also gets from point a to point b quicker. He's faster in transition, and he reacts much quicker on defense. Defensively, Zeller is very underrated in this thread and far superior to Olynyk, imo.

Brad Miller had deep shooting range and was an outstanding passer. Olynyk - with all his skill - hasn't shown those 2 qualities. Without them, how good a player would Brad Miller have been?

[Dark Faze]

Brad Miller was a career .33% shooter from deep. Olynyks last two years of college (not taking into account his freshmen year) he shot an average .37% from the college three, and taking his freshmen year into account .33%.

There's no reason to believe Olynyk can't develop a deep ball at the next level.

[fishercob]

Brad Miller was a career .33% shooter from deep. Olynyks last two years of college (not taking into account his freshmen year) he shot an average .37% from the college three, and taking his freshmen year into account .33%.

There's no reason to believe Olynyk can't develop a deep ball at the next level.

Yeah, I think the three ball is going to play a pretty sizable part of what Olynyk eventually becomes or doesn't. I re-watched his DX scouting video last night. He's very fluid and agile, but he's also heavy-footed and not a leaper. He was a great shot-maker in college, especially in close, but I question how he's going to carry that over to the pros.

I can see him being very effective operating out of the high post, where he could be a screener and popper (or roller), but also go by slow guys who crowded him to contest his jumper. The other thing in his repertoire that strikes me as pretty dangerous and unusual is that spin move. You don't see a lot of bigs with that kind of agility and body control. Dirk's spin is basically unstoppable.

I continue to not love his D and rebounding -- he doesn't have an unquenchable thirst for the ball on the glass and he seems to lose focus on D. From an "upside" perspective, his defensive upside would seem to be in team/scheme stuff because I don't see him getting more athletic.

We've all talked about how our primary need moving forward is a two-way big, but especially a big who can anchor our D. I have my doubts with respect to Olynyk. But at the same time, I think writing him off for the Wizards risks missing the forest for the trees. He has a chance to be a good player, and we need those even if he doesn't fit idealized picture at the moment.

Olynyk was a much better college player than Darius Songaila. If any of us had been offerred a 7-foot version of D-Song when he was in the league, we would have jumped at the chance. I think KO's far from a perfect prospect, but I'm more comfortable with the fact that he will be a good NBA player.

Edit: We operate under the assumption -- perhaps correctly -- that excellent team defense starts and is heavily weighted by centers and bigs. I'm curious as to how Chicago maintained a top-6 ranking in defensive efficiency, given that Noah missed 17 games and their second and third bigs were Boozer (who has a bad defensive reputation) and Taj Gibson (his rep is better, but he's 6'9'). Is there a way to see CHI's defensive ranking in games without Noah or when he was off the floor? Basically, I want to understand how much our defensive potential is blunted by the prospect of having Olynyk on the floor. Because I think he can help us offensively.

[Dark Faze]

One thing about Kelly O though is that I haven't seen a single mock with the Wiz taking them. It could be irrelevant, especially given the Wiz don't seem close to hinting who they like until workouts, but the most routine picks for the Wiz in mocks are Oladipo, Len, and occasionally Zeller.

For speculations sake in having to remove guys like Dieng and Olynyk from the conversation based on chalk, who do you guys like between those three guys? On the basis of keeping the current team together I think I like Oladipo, but on the basis of a rebuild I lean towards Zeller and Len.

[pcbothwel]

Can someone please tell me what makes KO attractive at 8 when we could just take Mike Muscala with our 2nd. I am dead serious. Besides a better 2%, what does Kelly O do better. Muscala is younger, longer, a better defender, a better rebounder, and seems to have the same type of offensive game. Even if you look at his DX video you'll see the only weakness he has his Competition (not his fault/cant help) and his strength. i submit the fact that he his only 21 and plays for Bucknell(not the strength and conditioning program as other big schools) shows me he will get bigger.

I think you take Bennett/Oladipo, Muscala, and Bullock and you light a (draft) victory cigar.

[Nivek]

Edit: We operate under the assumption -- perhaps correctly -- that excellent team defense starts and is heavily weighted by centers and bigs. I'm curious as to how Chicago maintained a top-6 ranking in defensive efficiency, given that Noah missed 17 games and their second and third bigs were Boozer (who has a bad defensive reputation) and Taj Gibson (his rep is better, but he's 6'9'). Is there a way to see CHI's defensive ranking in games without Noah or when he was off the floor? Basically, I want to understand how much our defensive potential is blunted by the prospect of having Olynyk on the floor. Because I think he can help us offensively.

This season, the Bulls were 5.1 points per 100 possessions worse defensively when Noah wasn't on the floor. Without Gibson: -3.6.

[Ruzious]

Brad Miller was a career .33% shooter from deep. Olynyks last two years of college (not taking into account his freshmen year) he shot an average .37% from the college three, and taking his freshmen year into account .33%.

There's no reason to believe Olynyk can't develop a deep ball at the next level.

An average of .37%? That'd be 1 out of 370. He shot 31% last season, and he's never shot enough 3's for his percentage to be close to statistically relevant. Miller was a shooting threat not just because of his 3's. He spaced the floor because he shot enough from outside and made enough from outside to force defenses to defend him outside. Olynyk may or may not develop that ability. He did not prove it in college.

[Ruzious]

I continue to not love his D and rebounding -- he doesn't have an unquenchable thirst for the ball on the glass and he seems to lose focus on D. From an "upside" perspective, his defensive upside would seem to be in team/scheme stuff because I don't see him getting more athletic.

We've all talked about how our primary need moving forward is a two-way big, but especially a big who can anchor our D. I have my doubts with respect to Olynyk. But at the same time, I think writing him off for the Wizards risks missing the forest for the trees. He has a chance to be a good player, and we need those even if he doesn't fit idealized picture at the moment.

What teams have won in recent years with below average defensive bigs?

[Nivek]

Can someone please tell me what makes KO attractive at 8 when we could just take Mike Muscala with our 2nd. I am dead serious. Besides a better 2%, what does Kelly O do better. Muscala is younger, longer, a better defender, a better rebounder, and seems to have the same type of offensive game. Even if you look at his DX video you'll see the only weakness he has his Competition (not his fault/cant help) and his strength. i submit the fact that he his only 21 and plays for Bucknell(not the strength and conditioning program as other big schools) shows me he will get bigger.

I think you take Bennett/Oladipo, Muscala, and Bullock and you light a (draft) victory cigar.

I like Muscala and wouldn't mind seeing the Wizards pick him. What did Olynyk do better? 2pt%, 3pt%, ft%. Muscala has better rebounding and block numbers, but against MUCH weaker competition. Olynyk committed more turnovers than I'd like, but was still extremely efficient and high usage.

I wouldn't be upset to see the Wizards come out of this draft with both Olynyk and Muscala. If I thought they could be good defenders in the team's defensive scheme.

[verbal8]

FT% is almost exactly even for the players. Muscala was in the 80s prior to this season, so maybe he gets a slight edge. I think they are 3 months apart in age, so that isn't a hugely significant difference.

I think Muscala is a great second round pick. The reason he is a second round pick is his level of competition. That could change if he has a strong showing against other NBA prospects in the pre-draft workouts. If he looks like he can hold his own, I can see a number of teams that might take him in the 20s.

I agree with Kevin that it is not an either/or and getting both in the draft would be a solid draft.

Can someone please tell me what makes KO attractive at 8 when we could just take Mike Muscala with our 2nd. I am dead serious. Besides a better 2%, what does Kelly O do better. Muscala is younger, longer, a better defender, a better rebounder, and seems to have the same type of offensive game. Even if you look at his DX video you'll see the only weakness he has his Competition (not his fault/cant help) and his strength. i submit the fact that he his only 21 and plays for Bucknell(not the strength and conditioning program as other big schools) shows me he will get bigger.

I think you take Bennett/Oladipo, Muscala, and Bullock and you light a (draft) victory cigar.

I like Muscala and wouldn't mind seeing the Wizards pick him. What did Olynyk do better? 2pt%, 3pt%, ft%. Muscala has better rebounding and block numbers, but against MUCH weaker competition. Olynyk committed more turnovers than I'd like, but was still extremely efficient and high usage.

I wouldn't be upset to see the Wizards come out of this draft with both Olynyk and Muscala. If I thought they could be good defenders in the team's defensive scheme.

[Nivek]

Yeah, FT%s this season were about equal -- Olynyk: .803; Muscala: .788.

[verbal8]

Yeah, FT%s this season were about equal -- Olynyk: .803; Muscala: .788.

Not significant, but it is a little strange Yahoo and DraftExpress have Olynyk at 77.6% or 78%.

It looks like his post-season shooting was 75%, so I don't think that would have knocked a couple points off his average.

[pancakes3]

With the depth of big men and 3 picks in this draft, I've resigned myself to the fact that McCollum wouldn't be the worst pick ever at 8. Coming away with McCollum, Muscala, and Murphy would be a solid B for the Wizards.

What's a bit depressing is that the Cavs are in position to potentially draft Noel, Bullock, Green - my dream trio in this draft.

[Nivek]

Yeah, FT%s this season were about equal -- Olynyk: .803; Muscala: .788.

Not significant, but it is a little strange Yahoo and DraftExpress have Olynyk at 77.6% or 78%.

It looks like his post-season shooting was 75%, so I don't think that would have knocked a couple points off his average.

Yeah. I can't remember when I updated his numbers in my stuff. I have to go through and make sure I have everyone up to date. Either way, they're "about the same" from the FT line.

[Deeptu McPullup]

Edit: We operate under the assumption -- perhaps correctly -- that excellent team defense starts and is heavily weighted by centers and bigs. I'm curious as to how Chicago maintained a top-6 ranking in defensive efficiency, given that Noah missed 17 games and their second and third bigs were Boozer (who has a bad defensive reputation) and Taj Gibson (his rep is better, but he's 6'9'). Is there a way to see CHI's defensive ranking in games without Noah or when he was off the floor? Basically, I want to understand how much our defensive potential is blunted by the prospect of having Olynyk on the floor. Because I think he can help us offensively.

I'm sure there was a certain fluke factor, but Gibson was actually statistically one of the best defenders in the NBA this last year:

(Avery) Bradley finished this, his third season, allowing 331 points on 475 plays. Of players with at least 450 defensive plays under their belt this season, Bradley’s average (0.679) is far and away the best. The next closest is Chicago’s Taj Gibson (0.744).

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball ... story.html

Consider that Gibson is guarding a higher percentage of plays closer to the hoop than Avery Bradley there too.

Bigger picture though, it's not much of a leap to say that bigs establish your defense. I believe it's been verified that at least centers (if not also power forwards) are involved in somewhere around 50% of defensive plays on average.

We saw the effects of what physical, smart bigs can do last year, going from bottom five to top five by flipping Dray and Javale for Emeka and Nene (not in one calendar year, but still).

Much of it was just getting people to take shots in low percentage locations: there were 23.8 opponent shot attempts per game at the rim (3rd least), 8 attempts from 3-9 feet (3rd least and at a poor percentage), 6.4 attempts from 10-15 feet (13th most and at the 3rd worst percentage), 21.6 deeptu's (4th most and at the leagues worst percentage!). The three pointers were about average all around. It certainly can be said that the perimeter defense deserves credit (the low percentage on the long-J's), but we don't get there without being physical and well positioned inside. Pretty tough in the handcheck era for perimeter defenders to do much more than funnel elite penetrators to suboptimal or predetermined spots.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd be at about an 9 on how important defense is in your bigs.

[sfam]

With the depth of big men and 3 picks in this draft, I've resigned myself to the fact that McCollum wouldn't be the worst pick ever at 8. Coming away with McCollum, Muscala, and Murphy would be a solid B for the Wizards.

What's a bit depressing is that the Cavs are in position to potentially draft Noel, Bullock, Green - my dream trio in this draft.

Honestly though, we know the Wizards aren't drafting 3 picks to come to the team. I doubt they even draft 2. Far more likely is we sell one pick and eurotrash, er, stash the other. Better would be for us to use the two #2s to move up a few sports to get Burke or Bennet.

[verbal8]

With the depth of big men and 3 picks in this draft, I've resigned myself to the fact that McCollum wouldn't be the worst pick ever at 8. Coming away with McCollum, Muscala, and Murphy would be a solid B for the Wizards.

What's a bit depressing is that the Cavs are in position to potentially draft Noel, Bullock, Green - my dream trio in this draft.

Honestly though, we know the Wizards aren't drafting 3 picks to come to the team. I doubt they even draft 2. Far more likely is we sell one pick and eurotrash, er, stash the other. Better would be for us to use the two #2s to move up a few sports to get Burke or Bennet.

That last pick isn't really worth considering to significantly in future plans. The guy DraftExpress has there - Brandon Paul - looks like Jordan Crawford(in terms of production) is his upside. It really doesn't matter if he is at the end of the bench or Barbosa or AJ Price(the 52nd pick the year he was selected). I would say the odds are likely against the pick playing the same year(either they get cut or are a draft and stash). Ginobili and Scola were the only recent stars to be picked after the 50th pick.

[Rafael122]

Anthony Bennett out 4 months with rotator cuff surgery.

McCollum and Olynyk are looking better and better every day.

[nate33]

Anthony Bennett out 4 months with rotator cuff surgery.

McCollum and Olynyk are looking better and better every day.

I don't worry too much about injuries as long as they're not to the knee, foot or lower back. Everything else heals pretty well given time and treatment. If anything, this Bennett injury might be good news because it could push him back to us at #8 rather than in the #3-6 area where he seemed to be settling.

I still say that Bennett is the best fit on our roster assuming we've first determined that he's actually a good player. Bennett is the only guy in the top 10 that could be characterized as a stretch four. He fills a short term need (stretch four) and a long term need (young PF or C for the future) at the same time.

Insert the appropriate caveats here about not reaching for fit. Obviously, if we like another player much more than Bennett, then take the other player. But if there are several players on the board at #8 that we assess to be relatively equal in talent, and one of them is Bennett, take Bennett.

If we take Bennett, we should probably look to trade Booker for a combo guard.