Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part IV

[Ruzious]

Bennett is having rotator cuff surgery on his left shoulder. That should definitely cause him to fall.

Tontoz, i wish this were the case I have stated Bennett is going to be a Melo/Larry Johnson type player. But I actually think this will raise his stock. Why?... Look at how he performed before the Wyoming game and look at the games after that (before tourney). This show that the shoulder really affected him and he played through it. I think GM's see this. If his shoulder turned out to be okay, then questions about his toughness and conditioning could be much more legitimate.

Interesting point. If you're right, that'd raise my view of Bennett. Having had that injury before, it's the kind of thing you can sometimes play through, but it definitely curtails what you can do and can make it look like you're not going all out - even when you're doing the best you can.

[stevemcqueen1]

Just FYI, I'm not arguing that Len should be our pick. I'm really just asking questions and giving observations. I want the Wizards to take the best player no matter who it is, and don't have any sort of vested interest.

I agree. Len has too much upside to be completely dismissed yet doesn't have enough consistency to deduce success with any sort of certainty. Basically, people shouldn't have strong opinions one way or another on him - at least that's the lesson I learned from Drummond. If Len busts next season I'm sure I'll be singing a different tune for the next 7 footer d'jour.

I'm in the same place as you. I actually liked Drummond last year FWIW, just not at three. That's sort of where I'm at with Len, I like him, but not over a lot of different players likely to be available at 8. I do know that I like Noel, Zeller, Porter, and Bennett a lot better than I like Len and would not for a moment consider drafting him over any of those four. And in terms of just what I see on the court, I like Muhammad, Burke, McLemore, and Oladipo over Len too. Muhammad is sketchy for me unless the intangibles check out. If they do, then there is no way I would draft Len at 8 because there is no way he would be the BPA for me.

Worth mentioning that Len isn't nearly as good a prospect as Drummond IMO. Drummond is a much better athlete than Len and he is so much bigger and stronger. And Drummond had been universally talked about as a future #1 overall pick when he was a junior in H.S., Len has never had that kind of boom factor. Plus Drummond had the excuse for poor performance in how screwed up his college situation was. As much as people have put some of Len's struggles on his team, Maryland wasn't nearly the bad situation UConn was last year.

[Dark Faze]

Bennett has the potential to be a good offensive player. I think he's going to be like a more perimeter oriented Millsap. I think that still equates to a bench player though, and without Olynyks versatility as a PF/C but with added tweener concerns.

As for Drummond, his athletic tools are probably the best I've seen from a big. Lens in comparison are merely average, that's just how ridiculous Drummond was/is as an athlete.

And even then Drummonds sample size is terrible. There's still a decent chance that he never looks as good as he did briefly this year.

[tontoz]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

Why is that the only thing that seems to matter to you? Do you disagree that he can score in all the ways I listed?

He could probably score from half court too at times, but his efficiency wouldn't be very good.

Jordan Crawford could score in a lot of ways.

[DCZards]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

Why is that the only thing that seems to matter to you? Do you disagree that he can score in all the ways I listed?

He could probably score from half court too at times, but his efficiency wouldn't be very good.

Jordan Crawford could score in a lot of ways.

Why must Jordan Crawford be the response to every suggestion that a player can "score in a lot of ways"? Shouldn't we be judging these guys on their own strengths and weaknesses and not those of another player.

[Dark Faze]

Cob I'm actually leaning somewhat in your direction, despite my numerous posts taking a shot at Len.

One thing that is for sure, Hibbert isn't all that skilled at basketball.

Even so, his massive size and IQ allow him to be extremely effective defensively.

And I think you can argue that Len is probably more skilled than Hibbert. I see a lot of Valanciunas and Hibbert in him.

Under that case, you have to ask what makes him different from Hibbert?

Probably very little. Hibbert is an inch taller and is currently 30 pounds heavier, but Len can get close enough to be very similar.

To be honest with you fishercob, if he stays healthy I think there's a chance he could be Roy Hibbert 2.0, I really do.

Its a real project though. Hibbert played 4 full years in college and wasn't worth much in the NBA until his 4th season. That's the equivalent of 6 years of development for Len. Could it be faster? Sure.

I think it could very well pay off at some point, but the long term prospects of the situation just seem to be so daunting. One thing with Hibbert that we should note is that he was picked 17th in the draft. Its not hard to go with a project at that point, but 8 is a different story.

So in a lot of ways fishercob I agree with you that Len could eventually be very much worth the selection, but the investment is just..its really tough.

[tontoz]

Why must Jordan Crawford be the response to every suggestion that a player can "score in a lot of ways"? Shouldn't we be judging these guys on their own strengths and weaknesses and not those of another player.

Scoring in a lot of ways with weak efficiency isn't "remarkable", as steve was saying earlier. Every other area of Bazz's game is a weakness.

Jordan is an easy comparison because he played here. At least he showed some legit playmaking ability.

[pancakes3]

I was going to make some sort of snarky joke about JC's un-scoring abilities because of his career sub-.500 TS% but noticed a weird coincidence that his TS% in Boston and in DC was identical: 0.512.

[Dark Faze]

I don't mind a great scorer who can't do anything else. If Shabazz could be a healthier prime Kevin Martin with the ridiculous TS% and foul rate then I'd be all for it.

The scary thing about Shabazz is that he probably shot better than he should have when you consider he wasn't really known as a great shooter coming out of HS. That and his FT precentage was 71%. Can you imagine shabazz with a worse shooting percentage than he had this year? He wouldn't even be a 2nd round pick then.

[tontoz]

Len's weak motor is a major concern but the weakness of this draft does make him a viable option. He did seem to step up his effort level in big games. At other times he looked disinterested.

[nate33]

We drafted Beal 3rd overall despite posting worse numbers than Shabazz and he's been terrific, looks like a home run. If you were to look just at Beal's averages and percentages at Florida, you would think he couldn't shoot and that he was a bad shot chucker, both of which couldn't be farther from the truth.

I'm struggling to see why you characterize Beal's numbers as worse. Beal in college was better than Shabazz in every single advanced stat except offensive rebound percentage and turnover percentage. He blows Shabazz away TS%, DRB%, AST%, BLK%, ORtg and DRtg. And Beal did it as an 18-year-old. Muhammed was 20.

Code: Select all

Player Beal  Muhammed
PER    22.0    21.9
TS%    .575    .528
eFG%   .525    .487
ORB%    4.8     9.9
DRB%   18.1     8.5
TRB%   11.6     9.2
AST%   12.7     5.8
STL%    2.5     1.3
BLK%    2.6     0.4
TOV%   14.3     8.6
USG%   23.0    29.8
ORtg  115.4   110.1
DRtg   96.4   104.5
OWS     3.6     2.9
DWS     2.2     0.9
WS      5.8     3.8

[Nivek]

To piggyback on nate's post, here's Muhammad and Beal per 40 minutes.

Code: Select all

PER40   Shabazz Beal
Class   FR      FR
Min     30.8    34.2
efg     .487    .525
2p%     .463    .541
3p%     .377    .339
FT%     .711    .769
eOrtg   108     110
Usg     20.1    15.1
Reb     6.8     7.9
Ast     1.1     2.6
Stl     0.9     1.6
Blk     0.2     1.0
Tov     2.1     2.5
Pts     23.2    17.2


Muhammad shot the 3 a little better and he used more possessions, which means that even though he was less efficient he scored more. Beal was better at everything else.

[DCZards]

But if you isolate out just the scoring tools he [Beal] demonstrated without caring about the numbers, you'd have seen a picture perfect jump shot with awesome range, tremendous shot selection and IQ, a nice little floater game, smooth dribbles and athletic straight line drives with physical finishing ability--i.e. all of the tools to be a big time scorer in the NBA. Remember all of the incredulity about all of the Dwyane Wade and Ray Allen comparisons Beal drew? He was getting them from all over. There were people who saw the similarities in the tools and people who couldn't see it because what they were thinking about were the numbers.

Yup, an over emphasis on numbers at the expense of an eye test can be a mistake. Last year at this time when some on this board were doing back flips over Jae Crowder "numbers," I consistently argued that after watching Crowder numerous times at Marquette he didn't pass the eye test...at least as far as being a lottery pick was concerned. Thus far, I think that's turning out to be true.

People need to get over Bazz's frosh numbers and recognize that, given his impressive offensive versatility, he's likely to be a very good NBA player.

BTW, I also argued that Beal was a better shooter than his frosh numbers showed and that the Zards should draft him over any player not named Anthony Davis.

[tontoz]

We drafted Beal 3rd overall despite posting worse numbers than Shabazz and he's been terrific, looks like a home run. If you were to look just at Beal's averages and percentages at Florida, you would think he couldn't shoot and that he was a bad shot chucker, both of which couldn't be farther from the truth.

I'm struggling to see why you characterize Beal's numbers as worse. Beal in college was better than Shabazz in every single advanced stat except offensive rebound percentage and turnover percentage. He blows Shabazz away TS%, DRB%, AST%, BLK%, ORtg and DRtg. And Beal did it as an 18-year-old. Muhammed was 20.

Code: Select all

Player Beal  Muhammed
PER    22.0    21.9
TS%    .575    .528
eFG%   .525    .487
ORB%    4.8     9.9
DRB%   18.1     8.5
TRB%   11.6     9.2
AST%   12.7     5.8
STL%    2.5     1.3
BLK%    2.6     0.4
TOV%   14.3     8.6
USG%   23.0    29.8
ORtg  115.4   110.1
DRtg   96.4   104.5
OWS     3.6     2.9
DWS     2.2     0.9
WS      5.8     3.8

And Beal was playing out of position at the 3.

[Nivek]

But if you isolate out just the scoring tools he [Beal] demonstrated without caring about the numbers, you'd have seen a picture perfect jump shot with awesome range, tremendous shot selection and IQ, a nice little floater game, smooth dribbles and athletic straight line drives with physical finishing ability--i.e. all of the tools to be a big time scorer in the NBA. Remember all of the incredulity about all of the Dwyane Wade and Ray Allen comparisons Beal drew? He was getting them from all over. There were people who saw the similarities in the tools and people who couldn't see it because what they were thinking about were the numbers.

Yup, an over emphasis on numbers at the expense of an eye test can be a mistake. Last year at this time when some on this board were doing back flips over Jae Crowder "numbers," I consistently argued that after watching Crowder numerous times at Marquette he didn't pass the eye test...at least as far as being a lottery pick was concerned. Thus far, I think that's turning out to be true.

People need to get over Bazz's frosh numbers and recognize that, given his impressive offensive versatility, he's likely to be a very good NBA player.

BTW, I also argued that Beal was a better shooter than his frosh numbers showed and that the Zards should draft him over any player not named Anthony Davis.

Just as an over-emphasis on the "eye test" at the expense of the numbers can be a mistake. A good process would include both scouting (which is not the same as "watching") and good statistical analysis.

[daSwami]

I'd be curious to see a YODA comparison of Len (fr) vs. B. Haywood (sr), as I see them having comparable size/skill-set. Problem being: Haywood managed to put up consistently high +/- numbers despite not really being a guy who fills up the stat sheet (idk must've been some intangibles going on there). I think Haywood's 'thing' was that he seemed to be an excellent team defender (knew where he needed to be on the court), which isn't easy to measure statistically.

[Nivek]

I'd be curious to see a YODA comparison of Len (fr) vs. B. Haywood (sr), as I see them having comparable size/skill-set. Problem being: Haywood managed to put up consistently high +/- numbers despite not really being a guy who fills up the stat sheet (idk must've been some intangibles going on there). I think Haywood's 'thing' was that he seemed to be an excellent team defender (knew where he needed to be on the court), which isn't easy to measure statistically.

Comparing them as sophomores, Len posted higher per minute numbers in usage, scoring, rebounds and blocks. Haywood had a MUCH better 2pt% and overall efficiency. Assists, turnovers, steals -- all about the same. Haywood's competition was tougher according to my numbers, but their overall ratings as sophomores was about the same. Slight edge to Haywood.

Haywood as a senior -- he stayed all four years, of course -- Brendan pulled ahead in steals and blocks. Efficiency was about the same, although Haywood's 2pt% was still way better than Len's. Haywood's efficiency was dragged down by terrible FT shooting. Transplant Haywood to this year's draft, and he'd rate in the late lottery, pending the addition of physical measures, of course.

In my doppelganger machine, Haywood's junior year is the most similar to Len's sophomore season, but still ranks 22nd among "most similar."

Top similars for Len:

- Reggie Johnson, SO
- Anthony Tolliver, JR
- Glen Davis, FR
- Trevor Mbakwe, SO
- Jack Cooley, SR & JR
- Roy Hibbert, SO
- Larry Sanders, JR

[pcbothwel]

Bennett has the potential to be a good offensive player. I think he's going to be like a more perimeter oriented Millsap. I think that still equates to a bench player though, and without Olynyks versatility as a PF/C but with added tweener concerns.

As for Drummond, his athletic tools are probably the best I've seen from a big. Lens in comparison are merely average, that's just how ridiculous Drummond was/is as an athlete.

And even then Drummonds sample size is terrible. There's still a decent chance that he never looks as good as he did briefly this year.

Bench Player? You are seriously underestamating Bennett.

Per 40 Stats for Freshman year for AB and Melo

Bennett
PTS FG% 2PT% 3PT% REB BLKS PER TS
23.2 52.6 57.6 38.3 11.7 1.7 27.6 .60

Melo
PTS FG% 2PT% 3PT% REB BLKS PER TS
24.4 45.3 49.6 33.7 11.0 0.9 27.2 .54

Keep in mind that Bennett carried his team and was hur the last 5-7 games of the year which brought down his stats. Melo played with Hakim Warrick and Gerry McNamara.
You get the chance to get a talent like Bennett in this draft you take it and run.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Bennett has the potential to be a good offensive player. I think he's going to be like a more perimeter oriented Millsap. I think that still equates to a bench player though, and without Olynyks versatility as a PF/C but with added tweener concerns.

As for Drummond, his athletic tools are probably the best I've seen from a big. Lens in comparison are merely average, that's just how ridiculous Drummond was/is as an athlete.

And even then Drummonds sample size is terrible. There's still a decent chance that he never looks as good as he did briefly this year.

Bench Player? You are seriously underestamating Bennett.

Per 40 Stats for Freshman year for AB and Melo

Bennett
PTS FG% 2PT% 3PT% REB BLKS PER TS
23.2 52.6 57.6 38.3 11.7 1.7 27.6 .60

Melo
PTS FG% 2PT% 3PT% REB BLKS PER TS
24.4 45.3 49.6 33.7 11.0 0.9 27.2 .54

Keep in mind that Bennett carried his team and was hur the last 5-7 games of the year which brought down his stats. Melo played with Hakim Warrick and Gerry McNamara.
You get the chance to get a talent like Bennett in this draft you take it and run.

Yeah I got Bennett on my Wizards board #2 behind only Porter.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Bennett to me has the highest potential and upside, possibly 2nd only to Len. He immediately comes in and is better than either Singleton or Vesely. I like the idea of Nene at PF, with the ability to come off the bench with either Booker or Bennett. Unlike Len, I see Bennett able to come in and immediately contribute, despite his youth and inexperience, because he is so skilled off the bat. We wouldn't need to wait years for him to develop. Yet the potential upside is nearly as high, and with less uncertainty.

Plus I see Nene and Booker as ideal mentors, allowing Bennett to come along as slow as needed, and showing him how to play the right way. Bennett can become a physically imposing as well as incredibly skilled player. His combo of size and skill is unique. Barkley, Larry Johnson, Anthony Mason, Zach Randolph are players that immediately come to mind when I watch him play. And his perimeter skills are superior to all of the above.

But moving Vesely and Singleton would become necessary IMO, or the whole situation could become a muddled mess.