Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part V

[stevemcqueen1]

Bennett is the ,most skilled offensive player in the draft. I'd be surprised if he didn't continue to develop offensively, including a post up game.

At this point, I still think Bennett is the right pick for us, but would be excited if its Zeller or Porter as well. Not so much Olapido, as I think we should be drafting starters at this point.

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

and maybe CJM is the most skilled G...

the other thing is (as was discussed earlier), Bennett appears to have a lot to
learn about 5 on 5 basketball. He can have all the skills in the world (see Javale McGee)
but if he doesn't know how/when/where to put them to use, he ultimately won't
be that successful. I'm not saying I know that this is/will be true, but it is a definite
risk. Combine that with tweener size and the risk grows.

I agree that CJM is the most skilled guard in terms of moves and shooting ability. He has a gorgeous pull up jumper and cross over.

I think Bennett's capacity to learn and develop new skills is really going to be key for him, perhaps more than other players because his potential is so high. With his combination of size and athleticism and individual tools, he really does have awesome potential if he can fill in all of the other gaps. There is a long way to go though.

My thought is that there is a set of things he does really well already though, and he can use those things to get minutes and have some early success and build his confidence in the fragile early part of his career. But who knows how capable he'll be of learning? That's something that has to be figured out by the scouts who have access to that kind of intangible info. I think that's why Randy was so adamant about guys showing improvement.

I don't think the tweener size is going to limit prospects like it perhaps used to. There are a lot of PFs running around the league at Bennett's size and most aren't as athletic as Bennett probably is. My take is if Carmelo can become so good at PF, then Bennett should be alright.

[Dat2U]

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

That's an interesting comp - Ryan Kelly to Olynyk. Kelly's actually got a significant standing reach advantage. And Kelly's a player who I think you can make the case that his other numbers would have been better if he hadn't been injured. He's recovering from offseason surgery now - and I'm not sure what the prognosis was - when he'll be healthy enough to play. Kelly at some point will play in the NBA.

I like Kelly, as a guy to take a 2nd round flyer on but his skillset seems far more limited than Olynyk. Kelly's only role in the NBA will be to stretch the D a la Steve Novak. I don't think he's mobile or athletic enough to do much else. He rebounds like a weak SF on college level. He isn't facing up and going by anyone. He isn't posting up anyone either.

I've haven't seen a guy like Olynyk get discredited as much as he does by so many draft gurus and I really don't understand why. All I hear is that he's slow and terribly unathletic. He's incredibly short for a C. He's weak. He's a terrible rebounder. His skill level doesn't stand out. He's a fluke. He's got no chance at the next level, etc, etc...

And I think every one of these statements are misleading and incorrect. I think his skill level is off the charts and his athleticsm & length acceptable for a NBA center. And I suspect many people will be eating these words in time.

[tontoz]

The obvious allure of Bennett is how well he would fit with Wall, assuming he pans out to be a good player. But without measurements and athletic testing it is hard to get a handle on his true value. I also find it odd that he is apparently unwilling to do interviews.

Unwilling to do interviews with teams? Or with the media?

With teams. I read recently that he doesn't have any interviews scheduled with anyone.

[sfam]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

Show me an example of Larry Bird or Joe Dumars or Chris Mullen doing it, and I'll believe in your TPF coinage.

Larry Bird did OK at that. Take a look at the third one:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y300SqnSxtw[/youtube]

[stevemcqueen1]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

Show me an example of Larry Bird or Joe Dumars or Chris Mullen doing it, and I'll believe in your TPF coinage.

That's true. There are many roads to get to the same result. Many different ways to get the ball to the rim.

[sfam]

The obvious allure of Bennett is how well he would fit with Wall, assuming he pans out to be a good player. But without measurements and athletic testing it is hard to get a handle on his true value. I also find it odd that he is apparently unwilling to do interviews.

Unwilling to do interviews with teams? Or with the media?

With teams. I read recently that he doesn't have any interviews scheduled with anyone.

Yeah, that doesn't make sense at all. Clearly he'll have to do interviews with all the top teams. If he doesn't he'll definitely be dropping. If the Wizards don't get to interview the guy, I doubt they would even consider him.

[Ruzious]

Dat, people wouldn't spend time discrediting Olynyk if people like you wouldn't keep touting him as one of the top handful of players in the draft - while saying all his obvious negatives don't matter.

Did you like Christian Laetner as a pro? Do you think he helped his teams win in the NBA? What does KO do that translates to the NBA that L8ner didn't?

[Dr Positivity]

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

That's an interesting comp - Ryan Kelly to Olynyk. Kelly's actually got a significant standing reach advantage. And Kelly's a player who I think you can make the case that his other numbers would have been better if he hadn't been injured. He's recovering from offseason surgery now - and I'm not sure what the prognosis was - when he'll be healthy enough to play. Kelly at some point will play in the NBA.

Well I think Olynyk is the clear cut better athlete. I actually see Olynyk as having above average mobility for a PF. He has strong agility, a surprising first step putting the ball on the floor, rolled to the rim hard and had an impressive top speed running up the court. I don't understand the weak athlete comments for KO really. A 7 footer who moves that well isn't a weak athlete. Kelly is the guy who's feet will look stuck in cement compared to NBA peers, but if he plays C who won't need to be as fast, mind you.

[Ruzious]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

Show me an example of Larry Bird or Joe Dumars or Chris Mullen doing it, and I'll believe in your TPF coinage.

Larry Bird did OK at that. Take a look at the third one:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y300SqnSxtw[/youtube]

Good basketball plays - but no visible posterization.

[Ruzious]

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

That's an interesting comp - Ryan Kelly to Olynyk. Kelly's actually got a significant standing reach advantage. And Kelly's a player who I think you can make the case that his other numbers would have been better if he hadn't been injured. He's recovering from offseason surgery now - and I'm not sure what the prognosis was - when he'll be healthy enough to play. Kelly at some point will play in the NBA.

Well I think Olynyk is the clear cut better athlete. I actually see Olynyk as having above average mobility for a PF. He has strong agility, a surprising first step putting the ball on the floor, rolled to the rim hard and had an impressive top speed running up the court. I don't understand the weak athlete comments for KO really. A 7 footer who moves that well isn't a weak athlete. Kelly is the guy who's feet will look stuck in cement compared to NBA peers, but if he plays C who won't need to be as fast, mind you.

If we were in the 1970's, Oly might have good mobility, speed, and athleticism for a PF. He doesn't pass the eye test, and he didn't pass the combine tests.

[The Consiglieri]

As was mentioned yesterday, there's a fundamental difference between being a player that logs serious minutes producing certain numbers, and a player that isn't logging heavy minutes producing certain numbers. Issues like fatigue and injury crop up more frequently with players that log the heavier minutes. Oladipo didnt have to deal with these issues hence it inherently distorts the numbers a bit, and I don't know any reliable way of adjusting for that, since you can't really create a "known quantity" out of what's missing.

I am completely baffled as to why you continually harp on the minutes issue with Oladipo. Oladipo averaged 28.4 minutes per game, second only to Zeller who averaged 29.5 minutes. That's easily enough minutes to make per-40 comparisons with other starting players. It's not like Oladipo came off the bench for 15 minutes a night and pounded on opposing bench players.

The only reason Oladipo didn't play more minutes is because Indiana benches their good players in blowouts. Over the first 11 games of the season (ignoring the 3 games against Georgetown, North Carolina and Butler), Oladipo averaged just 23 minutes a game. All but one of those 8 games were blowouts, usually by 30-40 points. He also played just 14 minutes in a blowout win over Perdue during February. Ignore those 9 games, and Oladipo averaged 31 minutes a game over 27 games, nearly all of those games against quality competition.

31 minutes a game is a completely normal amount for a starter and right on par with the other top players in this draft. Porter averaged 33 minutes a game; Bennett, 27; Olynyck, 26; Zeller, 29; Noel 32; Burke, 35; Len 26:, McLemore, 32.

I was just about to post similar. Oladipo and Zeller were clearly Indiana's two top players, yet both fell short of 30 mpg, maybe for some other reason than the failings or inabilities of the players or the incompetence of the coach. Even discounting nate33's observation about Oladipo's early season minutes, his 28.4 per game translates into 34 mpg in a 48 minute NBA game. That doesn't exactly sound like "extremely limited."

Oladipo showed pretty well prior to this year not only in YODA but in other systems and in the estimation of other observers. This year, he made a leap forward, something frequently only hoped for in players drafted after freshman year. Oladipo gives whatever team drafts him the benefit of having already seen him made great strides.

A player that logs heavier minutes may be doing so only because the team has no valid option to take some of those minutes, even against lesser competition. Many of those additional minutes may come against bench players or equally fatigued starters, mitigating the presumption of a greater ability to play through fatigue.

I'm not a fan of drafting Oladipo for the same reasons many have already mentioned: he plays the same position as Beal and he doesn't seem to be a valid option at PG or SF. For a team that needs a shooting guard, I would think he's a top option, and for one that already has an alpha scorer and needs defense and all around skills, I would think he's the top option.

It doesn't have to mean anything at all and I never implied it meant anything from the coach. My issue with it is purely based on projecting minutes based on the fact that he didnt play nearly 1/3 of the minutes available. The coach may prefer to keep everyones minutes relatively light so their fresh. I have no idea, and that aspect is not a reason I impugn Oladipo's ability and for the record he's fluctuating on my board right now between 2 and 4, he's not exactly being smashed by me for it, or even remotely indicted, my issue is that projecting where he's at in terms of projection per 40 is an inherently unreliable statistical journey. That's all. I think Oladipo's probably going to be on the best 3-5 players from this draft, maybe the 2nd best. That's why I'm harping on it, and in my opinion it's not harping, it's supporting another posters issue with stat based projections that he and I view as flawed, that doesn't mean i view him as flawed as a prospect because of it, however.

[stevemcqueen1]

+1 - great post.

This is why I want us to draft Bennett. Even given the risks Bennett poses, having that sort of player on our team can potentially raise us to the upper echelon of the East. I don't know that Porter does that.

Thanks sfam, Bennett was actually the player I enjoyed watching the most this season. Even more than Marcus Smart. I love the passion he plays with and the excitement he creates. I remember thinking to myself at one point, "this kid must be really fun to root for."

I can't get over some of his maturity and effort flags though. For a different team they wouldn't scare me as much. But we're the Wizards, and we have been chronically burned by guys with maturity/effort concerns and we never seem to have the success stories with these guys that other teams do. If he gives no effort on D and doesn't go to work off the ball, then I just can't see him getting on the floor for Wittman. At this point, I'll take steady and professional over spectacular if the upside isn't too terribly different. Blatche & McGee were so difficult and demoralizing that I want us to keep going after the super mature guys. For me Porter and Zeller fit that bill, which is why I have them at 2 & 3 over Bennett.

[truwizfan4evr]

Would anyone consider trading are third pick for Tobias Harris? I thinik he will be really good.

[Dark Faze]

Great post on bulletsforever on Bennett vs Porter and they basically bring up everything we've been arguing about over the last 30+ pages since we've gotten the third overall.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2013/5/29 ... ny-bennett

I personally wasn't swayed from my stance and I doubt Bennett supporters will be swayed from theirs as both viewpoints are argued quite well.

[sfam]

+1 - great post.

This is why I want us to draft Bennett. Even given the risks Bennett poses, having that sort of player on our team can potentially raise us to the upper echelon of the East. I don't know that Porter does that.

Thanks sfam, Bennett was actually the player I enjoyed watching the most this season. Even more than Marcus Smart. I love the passion he plays with and the excitement he creates. I remember thinking to myself at one point, "this kid must be really fun to root for."

I can't get over some of his maturity and effort flags though. For a different team they wouldn't scare me as much. But we're the Wizards, and we have been chronically burned by guys with maturity/effort concerns and we never seem to have the success stories with these guys that other teams do. If he gives no effort on D and doesn't go to work off the ball, then I just can't see him getting on the floor for Wittman. At this point, I'll take steady and professional over spectacular if the upside isn't too terribly different. Blatche & McGee were so difficult and demoralizing that I want us to keep going after the super mature guys. For me Porter and Zeller fit that bill, which is why I have them at 2 & 3 over Bennett.

I think that's a totally fine reason for choosing Porter or Zeller over Bennett. I really can't fault that at all. I would be happy if either Porter or Zeller were chosen. For me, I'm just a little bit less worried about Wittman than that, and am not sure he or EG are even here past this year. My driving rationale is I want to see another Wizards championship - more importantly, I want my son to see this. To get to that level, I think the Wizards need to take some risks, even if they are high ones.

Put it this way, if Porter doesn't get us to the upper echelon, we're stuck having to find the equivalent of Hibbert and Rondo level talents mid to late in the draft in order to raise our game. I have little confidence this will happen - far less confidence in fact than very justified concerns over Wittman's ability to get the most out of Bennett. If what we end up with is a 45-50 win team that never competes for a title (Atlanta?), I think we'll be pretty depressed like 10 years later. I'd rather take the chance now, rather than advance slowly over time.

[pancakes3]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

Show me an example of Larry Bird or Joe Dumars or Chris Mullen doing it, and I'll believe in your TPF coinage.

Or to use examples from guys who are still playing, successful nonposterizers also include Paul Pierce and Joe Johnson.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I agree with Ruzious on the notion of a mix.

--Sophisticated stats and analytics
--scouting/"eye test"
--background checks, interviews, personality tests

The art -- and the job of the ultimate decision-makers -- is knowing how to balance all of this data and make a decision. Do you take the guy who looks the part, comes from a great family, but the stats are lukewarm on, or the isn't as tall and long as you'd like, has had some attitude issues, but has been realy productive? There are tons of variables.

The art should also encompass the politics of the front office, coaching bias/preference, and most of all existing guaranteed contracts.

I think the numbers would be very much the story were it not for variables that often have little to do with how good a player is. It really should be as easy as looking at team rankings in vital statistics and selecting players who best supply those needs.

[Dark Faze]

Apparently Bennett didn't finish his junior or senior seasons?

There are just so many marks against this guy. Tweener, bad defensive reputation, injury prone, asthma.

It's a really hard pill to swallow.

[Ruzious]

When Clint Eastwood was scouting for the Braves and signed Dale Murphy, Tom Glavine, and Chipper Jones - did he rely on stats, or did he go to their games and scout them?

[AFM]

Larry Bird was a bust anyway.