Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part V

[tontoz]

Porter has an awesome mid range game. He's a better scorer than Dipo and he fills a position of need instead of creating a redundancy. You have to build a team, not blindly collect talent. He should be the pick over Dipo.

I would agree with drafting Porter over Dipo, but SF is just not our position of need. PF is. Backup combo guard is. It may be that Porter is still the best option, and we worry about a logjam at SF for this year. But we need to take a serious look at Bennett, as someone who may possibly be a force at PF. Burke also for the same reason. There is some merit to dropping down if we could pick up a good PF, and then draft a CJ McCollum with the second pick. But rarely do I think that's a good thing to do in Bball because of the potential impact of the players at the top of the draft.

Bottom line, if we see Porter as solely a role player who probably won't ever make an All-Star appearance, we really shouldn't be drafting him unless we see everyone else as role players as well. If Bennett has that potential, he should be the pick, assuming is work ethic seems solid.

This team needs everything except a starting 1 and 2.

Bennett is a risky pick but a case can certainly be made that the Wizards need to take a risk in order to become contenders. They have no capspace and have blown a bunch of draft picks.

Bennett's obvious talent and fit with Wall should definitely be given serious consideration. Wish he had been able to attend the combine. The results might have made the picture much clearer.

[stevemcqueen1]

I agree with fishercob. Porter is a better basketball player than Bennett. Bennett is just going off raw talent right now, he doesn't know how to play the game. He doesn't know how to play off the ball. He doesn't know how to post up. He doesn't know how to play defense. Porter does know how to do all of those things.

With our coach and history of player development, particularly raw bigs, you can't take Bennett over Porter. You need to pick the guy who already knows how to play. Same as we did with Beal.

Also, I think Porter is just better than Dipo. better scorer, better fit. Porter is used to being the guy for his team. He was the man in the Big East last season, that's so special. He can come in and be a legit source of scoring for us, more creative than even Beal, who is much more of a finisher by nature. When Wall goes out, Porter can facilitate. When Beal goes out, Porter can finish. When both are out, give Porter the ball and let him go to work from mid range.

Paul Pierce was not a good athlete. He wasn't nearly as long as Porter either, bit tweenerish. But he knew how to score and how to play and he was a lot better than some of the upside guys taken ahead of him in 1998. If you did that draft over again he'd go second behind Dirk.

Noel is first. But after him, there isn't a question in my mind that Porter should be the pick for us over Dipo, Burke, McLemore, Bennett, etc. The only guy who still makes me think is Zeller. I think the draftnik community has consistently been wrong about Zeller this entire season and I think he's a lot better than people realize. Right now I lean towards Porter over Zeller because I suspect he's a better overall player regardless of position. But I don't know yet.

[Ruzious]

Millsap has rebounders named Jefferson, Favors, and Kanter as teammates. Even Jeremy Evans had a higher rebound rate this season.

He's been just a so-so rebounding PF for the last 4 years. They've had Favors and Kanter for 2 years. You'll need to come up with a better rationalization.

I can explain now, after looking very carefully at his career advanced stats.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... bile=false

Ruz, Paul Millsap posted a career-best 21.2 defensive rebounding percentage in 2011-2012. His rebounds per-36 was 9.7 in 2011-2012. That was identical to his second year and above his career average of 9.2. Indeed you are right about Millsap's rebounding being less this past season, and three of the past four seasons

What changed was his offensive rebounding percentage. His first three seasons Paul Millsap was an ORB beast, with a percentage near 15. That number has decreased to around only 10 the past four seasons.. Millsap hits the defensive glass the same but he's not nearly the same on the offensive glass as he was early in his career. Why?

The past four years Millsap became a starter. Per-36 he has taken a lot more shots, generated a lot more assists, While his rebounding dipped, his assists have doubled and he is scoring about four more points per 36. His usage% has been much higher the past four seasons than his first three, when Millsap was a rebounding and defensive specialist off the bench.

My summation: He rebounds as well as ever. Millsap concentrates on scoring and being part of the offense now. He no longer cleans offensive boards only, a la Reggie Evans. Millsap's PER and WS/48 show he continues to be well above average.

That is definitely a different rationalization. Whether or not that's a valid reason for his offensive rebounding to substantially decrease (It may be a valid reason - I'll take your word for it .), it did decrease, so effectively - he's not as good at it.

[Ruzious]

Why is Millsap in the draft thread? I forget.

Elija's cousin Baal Millsap is a projected 3rd round pick in the draft.

[verbal8]

Posted this in his dedicated thread but is Satoransky coming over? We need to evaluate him before we invest heavily into the PG position.

I am not sure why he would be relevant for the long-term. I don't think he projects as anything more than a back-up combo guard.

[hands11]

Another thing about the new DX draft, they have Withey all the way at 22.

You gotta think we can move up to there somehow from 38. Which by the way is new, they previously have been showing the Wizards at 37.

At least get up to 34 for Muscala!


CCJ, kinda funny they have Wolters going the pick after at 39.

SUPER, I think having a scoring PG off the bench who can also distribute the ball expertly will really help the Wizards. I have a good feeling about Wolters. He seems destined to be a 10-yr pro and starter-worthy player

How do his numbers compare to Steve Blake ?

When Blake was with the Wizards, sitting on the bench mostly, I projected he would have a long career if someone gave him a chance. Not as a stud star mind you, but I could see he had enough legit handles and game to stick around. I wanted us to keep him because I thought he was a great back up PG and PG skills is something this team has been thin on for a long time.

Your evaluation of what that kind of player would add is exactly why I keep bringing up how CJM would help.

Who to pick is a tough call.
Depends on things we don't know. And mainly that's Trevor A and Webster. And Trevor A isn't an issue next year.

If Trevor A would stick around, you already have SF covered with him and Webby. Trevor A is a legit NBA SF with great D, 3 range, some driving skills and NBA playoff championship experience. If he leaves, you have a huge whole. So Otto would make sense there because he replicates a lot of those skills. But you can address that next year if needed. Nene is signed a few more years and most believe Okafor can be extended at a fair price while we find the center of the future. But where and for how much do you find that future center? They don't usually come cheap.

For next year and longer term needs at center, Len makes sense and this is the year to get a center. I don't say Noel because I project him as a PF. At least for a couple years which is when the Wizards want to make some playoff noise. They want to get Wall and Beal into the playoffs next year to start that stage of their development. Now if everyone stays healthy, they should be able to do that even without Noel. But Okafor go down, I don't know. Nene to center with Kevin S or Booker at PF?

But they also need to add ball handers and outside shooting at guard so CJM would be perfect. Right now if Beal goes down, they have nothing even close to his skills behind him. Same is true of Wall. If you want less ball handling and shooting but more defense and athleticism, you like VO. But VO is more a SG/SF. CJM is the SG/PG that covers more of what the Wizards need covered behind Wall/Beal. I see an experienced vet adding the extra layer for PG protection behind that more then them going with Wolter or even Pierre who was my choice.

Nene is a injury concern for many. And so is Booker. That's your PF scoring and rebounding. After that you only have Kevin S ( motor rebounding concerns but still in play for one more year), Ves ?, Singleton ? So people are interested in a PF. Specially one with range. But I don't see Bennett as the answer to those concerns. For at least this next year, I think they still have time to let this play out because they have Kevin S and while he has questions, he has shown skills to score in the post and he has the body and athleticism to rebound. The move would be to add a role playing S4 like Eric Murphy or Ryan Kelly a PF/C like Muscala.

My dream draft would be Len, CJM, Jackie Carmichael, Erik Murphy and Peirre

I like Muscala a lot but I would rather have the power of Carmichael who also has enough range to clear the post and open things up if needed.

Hell, if they could just get Len, CJM, Jackie Carmichael that would be an awesome draft in my book.

But that isn't very likely to happen. lol

They have more cap space and draft pick next year to figure out SF/PF longer term. Right now it isn't an issue and they have more options next year. So why fill a whole that is already filled ?

Defensive center, SG with shooting skills and PG handles, strong PF rebounder with mid range shoot that plays D, and an extra layer of depth a PG. I don't know how they fill it but that is what I see needing filled. A role playing S4 is less of a need. Trevor A can do that when needed. But a Eric Murphy/Kelly Ryan would be a cherry on the top add.

[hands11]

I'd actually be pleased with the scenario of Dipo being the BPA on the board at 3. Just take Dipo and run three guard sets.

How is Oladipo the BPA with McLemore and Burke available?

You could make a case for those guys, sure; Dipo gets the nod for me over McLemore based on his personality and assertiveness overcoming BM's shot. Burke, I don't know if he's going to shine or not; kind of hard to read a guard who doesn't have a defining characteristic, but I didn't scrutinize him in the games I watched as I figured there was no chance we'd take him in comparison to the other guys on the floor. His ceiling is just going to depend on his efficiency at the margins, but his floor's pretty high. I'm feeling "Next 10" point guard, which isn't bad given the depth of the position.

You have to take Office Dipo in context, though. Indiana was the 2nd most efficient offense in college basketball with 4 out of their top five 5 players had a TS% of 60% or more. Watford and Hulls were shooting a combined .46% from 3-land on more than eight attempts a game.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/sch ... /2013.html

I don't have time to get into it now, but they ran a spread offense and found the open man with about 55 total FGA taken per game, so Dipo did what he was supposed to with the second highest usage rate on the team by a hair. He would have easily put up more gaudy numbers in another system or with less efficient options around him.

I actually think Porter and VO are similar type players except one is more athletic and the other uses his length. Both give max effort, scrap, play defense and are team players. Neither has great form on their shot like a Beal but both can score.

I think of the two, Victor may have the better upside. He is clearly focused on getting better and will put in the work. I could also see him packing on the muscle needed to be a bull as time goes one. And the dude already has his won theme song.

Best thing for VO would be to constantly work on improving his handles.

Porter should have a nice career. Just a bread and butter kid. Smart. Focused. Says he molds his game after Prince and I can see that some. He will fit in on a winning team as a compliment player.

I actually think this is a pretty decent draft. There are going to be a lot of players out of this draft that have long productive NBA careers.

But Burke and CJM are the two most skilled players in the top ten. I think they are going to really impress in their first year.

Yes, there is a fair chance that we are dicing follicles here. A lot of the good things you'd say about Dipo you'd say about Porter as well. I prefer Dipo based on athleticism over length, but Porter is fine too, so it's not really that I'd make a strong case against Porter versus Dipo.

I have concern with both guys in that, despite all the glue-gooped oohs-n-ahs (or would that be "ooze-n-ahs"?), we don't end up being that much more effective than if we just rolled with a designated hitter of a squat-n-plop corner 3 man.

The corner 3 is the best shot in basketball with Webster giving an outright silly 1.8 PPS from the right corner. It's an easy, low risk release valve that sets the stage for "kind of a big deal around here" guys to create high percentage rimshots as you preemptively put paid to the slinking charlatans who'd otherwise clog the keyhole with double teams.

Beal is elite in the left pocket, but you'd be remiss to have him hanging a hammock there and taking a nap for 36 minutes. I can't help but think we can get by with a specialist at the other wing slot and commit our resources better up front. There's a reason the mid-range game is lamented as a lost art by the old timers.

Are Dipo or Porter going to generate better offensive looks and final outcomes than we could have gotten with a cheap specialist who plays at least respectable defense? Maybe, but I expect the drop off there is less than the difference between the bigs we're going to have and what we might be able to do up front if we used the third pick to bait the hook.

You said BM Thats funny.
Wow. Sucks to have that as your initials. I didn't realize that until you wrote that.

[Dark Faze]

How many red flags do you want before you move on from a prospect sfam?

I don't mean any disrespect, but this is a guy that has the McGee/Blatche/Young mentality. He's a guy who's not focused on defense. All of that might be okay if I thought for sure his offense might transfer over to the pros, but tweeners almost always see a huge decline from college production to the NBA.

And we weren't good at all because of offense last year. We were good because we were great on defense. Porter makes us even better there and we get deeper. An all-star? I don't know if Porter will be that, but what I do know is that he can give us 16, 5 and 3 on good efficiency with a great head on his shoulders and strong defense.

Why should I take the risk on Bennett being a 18 and 8 guy that gives up as much as he gets as a best case scenario?

[The Consiglieri]

Why is it that Consigilieri and stevemcqueen and myself agree on all prospects and Dat, CCJ, and nate agree on prospects? What do we look for differently?

Board vets vs. board rooks. Well, not the Consiglieri, but he came straight out of high school.

Two quibbles, Mcqueen loves Zeller, I loathe him as a prospect, and I'm 38 . I got a special 20 year Spicoli Dispensation in high school.

[MikeTheKid]

Michael Lee Trolling:

Cavaliers Considering Otto Porter With First Pick
May 23, 2013 11:44 PM EDT


Otto Porter Jr. is under consideration by the Cleveland Cavaliers with the first overall pick, according to a source with knowledge of the team's thinking.

Porter is a sophomore forward out of Georgetown.

Chris Grant selected Tristan Thompson and Dion Waiters higher than most had projected.

Via Michael Lee/Washington Post

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/22 ... First-Pick

We all know the Cavs are interested but I think the Cavs will take Noel and tank for Wiggins/Lebron next year. There not going on a PO run next year even though Im leaning towards Bennett/Porter or trading down.

[hands11]

I have concern with both guys in that, despite all the glue-gooped oohs-n-ahs (or would that be "ooze-n-ahs"?), we don't end up being that much more effective than if we just rolled with a designated hitter of a squat-n-plop corner 3 man.

The corner 3 is the best shot in basketball with Webster giving an outright silly 1.8 PPS from the right corner. It's an easy, low risk release valve that sets the stage for "kind of a big deal around here" guys to create high percentage rimshots as you preemptively put paid to the slinking charlatans who'd otherwise clog the keyhole with double teams.

Beal is elite in the left pocket, but you'd be remiss to have him hanging a hammock there and taking a nap for 36 minutes. I can't help but think we can get by with a specialist at the other wing slot and commit our resources better up front. There's a reason the mid-range game is lamented as a lost art by the old timers.

Are Dipo or Porter going to generate better offensive looks and final outcomes than we could have gotten with a cheap specialist who plays at least respectable defense? Maybe, but I expect the drop off there is less than the difference between the bigs we're going to have and what we might be able to do up front if we used the third pick to bait the hook.

Really great points, deeptu. I'm definitely going to have to research this further before I fully formulate my opinion on the matter, but at first glance, I think you're onto something here.

At first glance, we don't appear to have a long-term starter at SF at the moment. But if we bring back Webster at a reasonable rate, which it sounds like we probably can, then we clearly have 2 very capable, above average but not great by any means SFs in Webster and Ariza. Neither blows you away or has any real chance of developing into a great player at this point in their careers. But they both bring something to the table.

To oversimplify this, Ariza is a fantastic on-ball defender, and a capable offensive player with solid 3 point range and an ability to penetrate and drive. Webster is a phenomenal 3 point shooter, and while his defense leaves a lot to be desired, it's not quite awful either.

Before reading your post, I was inclined to think that we could use a long-term solution at SF, and that Porter and Oladipo both sounded like perfect fits. Guys who could do a little bit of everything on both sides of the ball, who were hard workers and maybe didn't project to ever be a star caliber player, but were virtually a lock to at least be "good" all-around role players.

But now I'm reconsidering that notion. First of all, Webster and Ariza both have their strengths and weaknesses, but their skill sets actually complement each other perfectly, in the sense that what one lacks, the other seems to have. I'd go so far as to say if you combined Webster and Ariza into 1 player, he might be an all-star. Their diverse skill sets allow us to have a great deal of flexibility with our rotations, and we can rotate the two of them in and out depending on the matchups and specific need for any given point in a game. Come the fourth quarter, they make it incredibly easy to make substitutions for offense/defense. So while we might not have one SF that is great on both sides of the ball, a real star, we at least have a SF for any given situation. Having such a complementary combo of SFs might arguably be better than having one very good SF who is good all-around, but not great at any one thing. That's what we'll have to explore further.

Then there's the point you raised about cheap alternatives at SF. Webster last season was a perfect example of what you're talking about. Hell, there's a good chance that Webster will still be a huge bargain value-wise after we re-sign him, as he'll only be making about $3-4 million a year I suspect. But I'm inclined to agree with you here, as I feel confident saying that in any given offseason, there's probably a solid handful of overlooked wings who are phenomenal 3 point shooters, especially from the corner, and who aren't absolutely awful on D, that can be had for less than $3 million a year. On the other hand, I can't say the same for backup big men, at least off the top of my head. Part of the problem is that I think it's harder for a big man to make an NBA roster if he's a "specialist." What can a big man realistically specialize in that is important enough to outweigh his lack of other skills. I guess there's a couple stretch 4s in the Novak mold (although many might consider him a SF anyways), but having a 3 point specialist at PF hurts your team a lot more than having one at SF, IMO. It's important that your big men can defend the opposing bigs, because as good as a guy like Novak is at shooting 3s from the corner, he has absolutely no shot at defending even an average PF, let's say Patrick Patterson. However, even if your 3 point specialist SF is awful on defense, he is still probably more capable of trying to stop the opposing team's SF, because the opposing SF is at least likely to take a few jumpers here and there, and no matter how good of a shooter are, you will always miss some shots. The same can't necessarily be said for a big man shooting within 5 feet of the rim. They could do that all day, IMO.

Again, you brought up a very intriguing point, and I'm going to have to research this further. It might just be enough to convince me that Porter and Oladipo are not the ideal picks for us at 3, and that we might be better off trying to draft a big man - whether it's Bennett, Len, Zeller (probably not at 3), or Noel.

Rock.

Where have you been brother? This view has been posted for a long time dating back at least to mid season once Trevor A, Webster and Okafor started to integrate onto their new team. Well at least the (need) part of it. But slotting players into those needs has also been posted here tons. Its the main basis for all the CJM/Burke/Len/Adams/Zeller/Noel/Muscala/ ( did I miss anyone ) talk

But welcome aboard anyway.

[verbal8]

Look at Paul Pierce's 19 year old sophmore season, it looks pretty close to Porter's. He doesn't match Pierce's insane 46% 3 point percentage(but it was 30 less attempts). Also Pierce gets the edge in scoring, since he had a similar point total in fewer minutes.

Otto's freshman season makes me optimistic that his "floor" is pretty high. In a situation where his long range shot wasn't falling and he was asked to do less, he was efficient and rebounded well.

[sfam]

...With our coach and history of player development, particularly raw bigs, you can't take Bennett over Porter. You need to pick the guy who already knows how to play. Same as we did with Beal...

This is the most persuasive argument for taking Porter over Bennett. Do we see Bennett developing with this coaching staff, who clearly has a poor history on developing bigs? This, like Bennett's ability and desire to play defense is an unknown.

But do you see Porter having real All-Star potential, or do you just see him as a high quality role player who fits what we do?

[tontoz]

How many red flags do you want before you move on from a prospect sfam?

I don't mean any disrespect, but this is a guy that has the McGee/Blatche/Young mentality.

And how exactly do you know that? Just because he didn't give good effort on defense as a college freshman doesn't mean he is a head case.

[Zonkerbl]

Posted this in his dedicated thread but is Satoransky coming over? We need to evaluate him before we invest heavily into the PG position.

I am not sure why he would be relevant for the long-term. I don't think he projects as anything more than a back-up combo guard.

Isn't a backup guard one of our biggest needs right now?

[Dark Faze]

...With our coach and history of player development, particularly raw bigs, you can't take Bennett over Porter. You need to pick the guy who already knows how to play. Same as we did with Beal...

This is the most persuasive argument for taking Porter over Bennett. Do we see Bennett developing with this coaching staff, who clearly has a poor history on developing bigs? This, like Bennett's ability and desire to play defense is an unknown.

But do you see Porter having real All-Star potential, or do you just see him as a high quality role player who fits what we do?

Being all-star is dependent on a lot of different factors.

Paul George was an all-star as a 17, 4, and 8 player.

I think Otto can be a 17, 3, and 6 player easily with comparable defense.

Would that make him an all-star? I don't know. Does the label really matter with similar production?

[sfam]

How many red flags do you want before you move on from a prospect sfam?

I don't mean any disrespect, but this is a guy that has the McGee/Blatche/Young mentality. He's a guy who's not focused on defense. All of that might be okay if I thought for sure his offense might transfer over to the pros, but tweeners almost always see a huge decline from college production to the NBA.

And we weren't good at all because of offense last year. We were good because we were great on defense. Porter makes us even better there and we get deeper. An all-star? I don't know if Porter will be that, but what I do know is that he can give us 16, 5 and 3 on good efficiency with a great head on his shoulders and strong defense.

Why should I take the risk on Bennett being a 18 and 8 guy that gives up as much as he gets as a best case scenario?

I see none of the Knucklehead vibe we get from McGee, Blatche or Young in Bennett. If I did, I would want nothing to do with the guy. As you know, I'm one of the few here who would never want us to bring in Cousins for exactly that reason. Bottom line, if Bennett has any of the character issues associated with those guys, I wouldn't want him. The Wizards should look into that strongly before drafting him.

But the fact the guy was not great on defense does not imply he's a knucklehead. In none of his interviews do you get that. Its fully possible the coach told him to conserve his energy for offense. Bottom line, this shouldn't be a reason to discount him, especially after looking at the guy's offensive potential. Porter doesn't have the ability to drive right now, which is a real weakness at the SF position - Bennett excels at this. Bennett seems to be a better athlete than Porter, and flat out manhandles his competition at times. This is the reason you take a chance at the guy, even with the risks. Again, I'm not opposed to Porter, but if our goal is to win a championship, I doubt we get there with two potential all-stars and a bunch of role players. We need a third star.

[sfam]

Posted this in his dedicated thread but is Satoransky coming over? We need to evaluate him before we invest heavily into the PG position.

I am not sure why he would be relevant for the long-term. I don't think he projects as anything more than a back-up combo guard.

Isn't a backup guard one of our biggest needs right now?

If Satoransky is close to Price in terms of quality, I think we bring him in as our Combo guard. That would be great if he becomes a serviceable backup this year or next. I didn't expect a thing out of this pick.

[closg00]

Patrick (Cleveland)


What kind of offers could the Cavs expect for the #1 pick?

Chad Ford (1:34 PM)


Dont' think Cavs fans will be happy. Just talked to half the GMs in the league, and they are all looking to sell their picks. No one really wants No. 1, nor are they willing to give up a valuable asset to get it. I think the Cavs will have a hard time moving it.

Josh (MD)


Who's a better fit for the Wizards at 3: Bennet or Porter?

Chad Ford (1:43 PM)


Such a tough call. Those are the two players they are high on. Both are fits. If they need more offense and potential star power Bennett is the guy. Porter gives them the high basketball IQ, the passing, the defense, all the little things. Personally, I think I like Porter a little bit more, but if I was Ernie Grunfeld, I'd be torn here.

FWIW, may be on a preceding page.

[likwitdesi]

Regarding backup PG options, I don't want a Wolters or Pierre Jackson. Rather than getting one of these marginal 2nd round guys, we have to find a way to get at least a Larkin-level player. We saw what happened with no Wall last season. We need a backup who is at least league average