Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part VII

[fishercob]

fishercob, what did he say about Adams?

Also, does his system factor physical attributes (beyond those captured in statistical numbers)? Does the fact that Player X has a superior standing reach to Player Y make any difference?

Adams:

Of the project college big men, Adams rates as the best prospect. After developing over the course of his lone season at Pitt, Adams figures to be able to contribute as a rebounder and shot-blocker off the bench right away.

He projects a WARP of 1.9 for Adams and a "Win Percentage" of .429. He says that a WARP of 2.0 or better usually translates in to an NBA starter. He doesn't flesh out his methodology much, so I don't know how he comes to his WARP (wins above replacement player) number or what his Win% means. He doesn't mention anything about physical attributes, but I don't know if that factors in or not.

I believe Nivek knows Pelton and can comment on his work more extensively.

EDIT:

For more details on the process, as well as past draft ratings, check out the companion piece on Tuesday. I

[LyricalRico]

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him.

Agree on Porter. I don't think CLE will take him #1, but what do we know about Orlando's intentions? I've always assumed they'd take McLemore or Oladipo, but they do have longterm money tied up in Afflalo at SG. Seems like Porter could step in immediately for them at SF. They are also rumored to be interested in adding a young PG, and in this draft I don't think taking Burke #2 can really be considered a reach.

What would really worry me is talk of Orlando trading down, especially with teams like NOLA/DET/MIN that already have bigs so they wouldn't be trading up for somebody like Len or Zeller.

[rockymac52]

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him.

Agree on Porter. I don't think CLE will take him #1, but what do we know about Orlando's intentions? I've always assumed they'd take McLemore or Oladipo, but they do have longterm money tied up in Afflalo at SG. Seems like Porter could step in immediately for them at SF. They are also rumored to be interested in adding a young PG, and in this draft I don't think taking Burke #2 can really be considered a reach.

What would really worry me is talk of Orlando trading down, especially with teams like NOLA/DET/MIN that already have bigs so they wouldn't be trading up for somebody like Len or Zeller.

I don't think there's much to worry about with Orlando potentially taking Porter. Even if they avoid drafting McLemore or Oladipo because they're committed to Afflalo going forward, they still have plenty of other needs, but they also already have Tobias Harris and Mo Harkless who both are very young and play SF. It wouldn't really make sense to draft Porter, unless they were convinced he was by far the best player available, which I doubt is the case. Furthermore, reports are out there now that the Magic will almost definitely trade Afflalo to the Clippers on draft night for Eric Bledsoe and Caron Butler.

[Severn Hoos]

I have a lot of respect for the work that Kevin Pelton does over at ESPN Insider.

Here is his latest piece and draft rankings.

Here are the rankings.

1. Noel
2. Porter
3. Caldwell-Pope
4. Zeller
5. McCollum
6. Lucas Nogueira
7. Burke
8. Bennett
9. Carter-Williams
10. Karasev
11. Adams
12. Rice
13. Larkin
14. Mitchell
15. Crabbe
16. Olynyk
17. Oladipo
18. Mclemore
19. Bullock
20. Canaan
21. Franklin
22. Hardaway
23. Len
24. Dieng
25. Snell
26. Plumlee
27. Muhammaed

No rankings b/c of lack sufficient data for Schroeder, Antetokounmpo and Ledo.

His second round steals feature names we have discussed here -- Wolters, Muscala, doc's guy Kazemi

Here are his snippets on a few of the guys who are ranked significantly above or below where the typical mocks and rankings have them or are otherwise noteworthy:

Noel (about whom I have expressed doubts):

Noel's WARP projection is a little on the low side for a No. 1 pick, but would have put him second behind Kentucky predecessor Anthony Davis in last year's draft. Noel's defensive potential is immense. In addition to the second-best translated block rate of anyone in the draft (only Jeff Withey rates better), Noel also generates a high number of steals for a post player. He joins three post players in my database with translated steal percentages of 2.0 or better: DeJuan Blair, Kenneth Faried and Greg Monroe. That's important because steal rate tends to be an indicator of quickness that translates at the NBA level.

Porter:

Given Noel's injury, Porter might be the surest thing in this year's draft. The Big East Player of the Year rates well across the board; his only statistical weakness (a category in which he's in the bottom 25 percent of past players at his position entering the NBA) is usage rate. Note that Porter, despite playing two years at Georgetown, is younger than freshmen Anthony Bennett and Shabazz Muhammad.

Noguieria:

For European players who played in the Spanish ACB, the best domestic league, or the continental Euroleague and EuroCup competitions, the translation process is the same except it involves players going both to and from the NBA. "Bebe" put up solid stats playing against grown-ups in the ACB. He blocked shots more frequently than Serge Ibaka did in the same league and projects to make nearly 55 percent of his 2-point shots.

Oladipo:

More than any other prospect, Oladipo is hurt by the emphasis on previous years. Based just on his junior year, Oladipo's WARP projection would crack the top 10. He was much less effective on offense his first two seasons, which has historically proven more indicative of NBA potential. Oladipo will be an impact defender either way, but he needs to contribute offensively to justify a top-five pick.

Mclemore:

McLemore's statistical profile reflects the conventional wisdom that he was too passive at Kansas. His translated usage rate (17.4 percent) is low for a top-10 pick, especially a shooting guard. Of greater concern is how rarely McLemore got to the foul line. And, for a player who rarely created his own shot, he was surprisingly prone to turnovers. As a result, McLemore's upside appears overstated.

Len:

If Len indeed goes No. 1 -- or anywhere in the top 10 -- it will be on the strength of scouting and not his performance. Len was ineffective in two years at Maryland, and while that's partially attributable to the system in which he played, Len has no such excuses for his poor rebounding. His low translated steal rate is also an enormous red flag -- no player in my database has ever come up with steals so infrequently. DeAndre Jordan and Ryan Anderson have been able to overcome similarly low steal rates, but Hasheem Thabeet has not.

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him. Also, I really want to one of Len, Adams or Noguiera. I hope we can trade back up for someone who slips (likely one of the latter two). Nogueira's ranking/upside is clearly the best potential value compared to his purportedly likely draft position. Perhaps there's even more value there for the Wizards in having the young Brazillian tutored by Nene.

Thanks, fish - that's just a little slice of awesome to end my day!

I can't believe how closely that list tracks to my unscientific and as yet amorphous list that keeps banging around inside my head. Noel & Porter 1-2 have been pretty locked down for some time, with only Noel's potential injury issues clouding any question of flipping the two of them.

KCP is a bit of a surprise, and that comes from someone who lives in Georgia and has been to a few UGA games in person over the past 2 years. Certainly wouldn't pick him that high, but understand why he's a climber.

Glad to see Zeller next, I think I'd prefer to come away with him somehow if Noel & Porter are gone before the Wiz pick. Preferably in a trade down, of course - but wouldn't cry if he was the pick outright at #3.

McCollum's a bit of a surprise as a Senior, but he meets my "Impact Before 20*" rule, so I'd be OK with that. Although we really do need more than a backup combo G, no matter how good he might be.

Surprised to see Oladipo so low, but understand the age issue. Same with Olynyk.

Bennett seems about right at #8. Given the questions, he'd be worth the risk there, but not at 3.

I haven't been all that excited about McLemore, but wouldn't rate thim that low. Still, interesting to remember that he's older than Beal.

Kinda harsh toward Len, but I have to say I agree with that a whole lot more than seeing Len as a top 5 (potential #1?!?!) pick. I know it's a small sample size, but the only game I saw start to finish was the last game of the year against UVA, where Len was dominated by Mike Tobey. And if you're asking yourself, "Who's Mike Tobey?" you should also be asking yourself, "How could a potential #1 overall pick get dominated in his final Regular season game by a guy named Mike Tobey?"



* As the college game has become more and more watered down over the years by early defections, one pattern has emerged. If a guy does not dominate - or at least have a significant impact, however loosely defined - before his 20th birthday, he probably won't be a major star in the NBA. Or, put another way, watch out for those "late bloomers" with "breakout seasons" that mostly amount to being stronger and craftier than the collection of 18- and 19-year olds they're playing against.

From Hilton Armstrong to Herbert Hill (I Know CCJ remembers him) to Wesley Johnson to Jordan Hill to Derrick Williams to Thomas Robinson, there is a long line of guys - particularly Bigs - who have disappointed in the pros after looking like absolute studs in college. And I don't want to hear about efficiency stats, or how they were stuck behind this guy or that guy. Robinson was supposedly just as good as a Freshman and Sophomore, but couldn't get PT because of the Morris twins. I'm sorry, but if you can't force your way onto the court over the Morris twins, then I'm really going to question how you'll fare against Griffin, Duncan, Bosh, and Gasol.

So if I stick to that approach, it really rules out Olynyk, maybe Oladipo, plus causes caution for guys like Adams and Len who didn't even have the "breakout season" - just the first mediocre one or two.

It seems to me that Pelton has found a way to quantify what I have so inartfully described here. Noel showed he could impact the game at 18, and Porter did the same at 19. Zeller too, with his 2 solid years at IU. Those 3 are at the top of my board, I'm just happy to see it somewhat validated by an outside source.

[AFM]

EFTC explained:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhwqkxzX5hI[/youtube]

[DCZards]

The things I like most about Porter are unteachable.

1.) Height & length
2.) Tremendous feel for the game in general. Within that,
- Tremendous offensive IQ and scoring instincts. Knows how to get to the FT line, knows how to move off the ball, knows how to facilitate teammates, unselfish.
- Good defensive IQ, good anticipation to force turnovers, good communicator and team defender, good at bothering shooters with his length
- Excellent rebounder for his position, has a nose for the ball.
3.) Outstanding motor and competitiveness, plays very hard but stays under control.
4.) Showed the ability to be "the guy" for GTown and elevated that team.
5.) Showed a definite ability to improve. Mature. "Gets it."

Good summary of Porter's strengths. Point #2 is what I've loved about Otto from the first time I saw him play as a freshman at G'Town. It's really what makes him special despite his limited athleticism and thin body. If he does nothing else his rookie season, Porter's unselfishness and bball IQ is the reason he will almost certainly be a major factor in helping to facilitate the offense and create open looks for teammates.

I've got Noel and Porter #1 and 2 on my board. After that, I honestly don't know if the best choice for the Zards is Bennett, Zeller, Olapido, McLemore or Len. I think you can make an argument for (or against) any of them as a possible third pick in the 2013 NBA draft.

[gambitx777]

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him.

Agree on Porter. I don't think CLE will take him #1, but what do we know about Orlando's intentions? I've always assumed they'd take McLemore or Oladipo, but they do have longterm money tied up in Afflalo at SG. Seems like Porter could step in immediately for them at SF. They are also rumored to be interested in adding a young PG, and in this draft I don't think taking Burke #2 can really be considered a reach.

What would really worry me is talk of Orlando trading down, especially with teams like NOLA/DET/MIN that already have big's so they wouldn't be trading up for somebody like Len or Zeller.

A lot of teams will consider moving up for Oladipo or MaClemore.

If porter is gone and Len goes 1, I say we just take oladipo and field offers for him or just keep him. But i want Porter, and len if porter is gone.
Porter
Len
Oladipo, MaClemore, or Trade.

[stevemcqueen1]

The things I like most about Porter are unteachable.

1.) Height & length
2.) Tremendous feel for the game in general. Within that,
- Tremendous offensive IQ and scoring instincts. Knows how to get to the FT line, knows how to move off the ball, knows how to facilitate teammates, unselfish.
- Good defensive IQ, good anticipation to force turnovers, good communicator and team defender, good at bothering shooters with his length
- Excellent rebounder for his position, has a nose for the ball.
3.) Outstanding motor and competitiveness, plays very hard but stays under control.
4.) Showed the ability to be "the guy" for GTown and elevated that team.
5.) Showed a definite ability to improve. Mature. "Gets it."

I totally agree. He's poised, smart, and plays the "right" way. I think his ability to play off-ball is immeasurable especially with Wall/Beal in tow. A guy who can play in between and knows where to go to maintain spacing is one of those "intangible" type things. Commentators said it about Ray Allen a bit during the finals. He doesn't just spot up at 3 and wait for things to happen. He reacts to the situation and moves about to a) still be in position to shoot and b) not crowd the ball handler yet still be open. He also has great awareness of where the lines are and is always in position. I think things like that though technically can be taught - isn't being taught and it's fantastic to see us targeting a player like Porter who plays so... fundamentally.

I don't know, I think that kind of situational and spacial awareness is something that you either have or don't. Understanding angles, trajectories, timing, etc. Even in something as basic as setting a pick, it has to be done at the right angle and time to get the most from it.

You could probably improve that kind of awareness a little over time. But some players just anticipate the game well from the get go, have superior BBall IQs. The game is so dynamic, you're frequently going to find yourself problem situations where you have to go off script and react. Unfamiliar spots on the floor with the ball in your hands. Turn a negative into a positive.

I think, in the cauldron of the playoffs and in the clutch, where the importance of single possessions gets hugely magnified, BBall IQ becomes one of the most important things about a player. Someone pointed out to me the vast importance of it by using the sequence at the end of game six for Miami where LeBron and Mike Miller ran that little two man game on the long rebound. Hardly any time left, Mike Miller didn't panic by running to the 3 pt line and hoisting up a shot like most players would have. Instead, he spaced the defense for LeBron then made a slick pass to get him a better shot. Same on the next three where Bosh gets the long rebound, with time running out, he holds onto it just long enough for Ray Allen to get into position to get off a good shot. And Allen naturally found where he needed to be on the floor. Good BBall IQs lead to winning basketball in totally dynamic and unscripted situations.

I think Porter and Noel have excellent BBall IQs. I think Wall and Beal have totally superior BBall IQs and they are two of the smartest young players I've ever seen. I like the idea of pairing another smart young player with them as a three man core.

[stevemcqueen1]

RockyMac...Do you really think Martell re-signs with Otto and Ariza on the roster? I doubt it unless we offer way more than anyone else. Why would he come hear to split the SF position with three guys? I think we trade Ariza and still re-sign Martell but I think its unrealistic to assume we keep all three considering our holes at stretch 4 and 3rd guard who can score....Plus this FO has already agreed to trade Ariza once before.

I think Webster definitely re-signs, even with Porter and Ariza still on the roster. For this coming season, Webster can slide over to SG, where he's actually been better in his career. In the future, it's unlikely Ariza is brought back past this season, so there would be even more minutes opening up for Webster. Webster has stated he has no problem coming off the bench, and we should be able to get him a good 20-26 MPG either as a starter or off the bench. He's a team player, and he's smart enough to realize that even if he isn't starting, and the wings appear to be crowded with Porter and Ariza, that he'll still get his 20+ MPG that he's looking for. Webster will be back. No doubt in my mind. I think we keep Ariza as well, at least until the deadline, but I still think there's a decent chance we trade him this summer.

Depends on his other offers. If Webster has a chance to start somewhere else, why would he return to DC. Draft Porter probably has an opportunity cost associated with losing Webster.

Honestly, I kind of doubt some other team would offer him the full MLE. So it might be a moot point if no one beats out our offer money-wise.

I think Webster would be fine coming off the bench and I think he would force us to play him 6th man minutes.

The way I see it, through their positional versatility, Porter could get minutes at PF and Webster could get them at SG so they could play together quite a bit.

Ariza would seem to be the odd man out for us with a Porter pick. I personally like Webster better than Ariza for our team. Maybe we could trade him by the deadline. Or worst case scenario, we keep him and let him expire and enjoy the savings for ourselves. Not bad at all. Then by year 2, Otto can step into a much bigger role as the starter at SF.

Another thing to think about is Webster has never been durable, Porter would probably get a ton of time by default if he stays healthy.

[sfam]

I think Webster definitely re-signs, even with Porter and Ariza still on the roster. For this coming season, Webster can slide over to SG, where he's actually been better in his career. In the future, it's unlikely Ariza is brought back past this season, so there would be even more minutes opening up for Webster. Webster has stated he has no problem coming off the bench, and we should be able to get him a good 20-26 MPG either as a starter or off the bench. He's a team player, and he's smart enough to realize that even if he isn't starting, and the wings appear to be crowded with Porter and Ariza, that he'll still get his 20+ MPG that he's looking for. Webster will be back. No doubt in my mind. I think we keep Ariza as well, at least until the deadline, but I still think there's a decent chance we trade him this summer.

Depends on his other offers. If Webster has a chance to start somewhere else, why would he return to DC. Draft Porter probably has an opportunity cost associated with losing Webster.

Honestly, I kind of doubt some other team would offer him the full MLE. So it might be a moot point if no one beats out our offer money-wise.

I think Webster would be fine coming off the bench and I think he would force us to play him 6th man minutes.

The way I see it, through their positional versatility, Porter could get minutes at PF and Webster could get them at SG so they could play together quite a bit.

Ariza would seem to be the odd man out for us with a Porter pick. I personally like Webster better than Ariza for our team. Maybe we could trade him by the deadline. Or worst case scenario, we keep him and let him expire and enjoy the savings for ourselves. Not bad at all. Then by year 2, Otto can step into a much bigger role as the starter at SF.

Another thing to think about is Webster has never been durable, Porter would probably get a ton of time by default if he stays healthy.

Oh don't get me wrong. I love Webster and definitely hope he stays regardless who we draft. By drafting Porter, we'll probably be suffering a year of working out minutes for the three unless Ariza can be moved. But again, there are probably worse things than having too much depth at a position for a year, such as having no depth at the PF position.

*Cues the Bennett love*

From purely a positional standpoint, drafting Bennett means we are better positioned across the board. Grab a Wolters in round 2 and we'll have a pretty nice rotation. Personally, I'd be more than OK having Ariza and Webster at the 3 long term. I don't know that it will happen, but it would hardly be the worst outcome.

[sfam]

The things I like most about Porter are unteachable.

1.) Height & length
2.) Tremendous feel for the game in general. Within that,
- Tremendous offensive IQ and scoring instincts. Knows how to get to the FT line, knows how to move off the ball, knows how to facilitate teammates, unselfish.
- Good defensive IQ, good anticipation to force turnovers, good communicator and team defender, good at bothering shooters with his length
- Excellent rebounder for his position, has a nose for the ball.
3.) Outstanding motor and competitiveness, plays very hard but stays under control.
4.) Showed the ability to be "the guy" for GTown and elevated that team.
5.) Showed a definite ability to improve. Mature. "Gets it."

I totally agree. He's poised, smart, and plays the "right" way. I think his ability to play off-ball is immeasurable especially with Wall/Beal in tow. A guy who can play in between and knows where to go to maintain spacing is one of those "intangible" type things. Commentators said it about Ray Allen a bit during the finals. He doesn't just spot up at 3 and wait for things to happen. He reacts to the situation and moves about to a) still be in position to shoot and b) not crowd the ball handler yet still be open. He also has great awareness of where the lines are and is always in position. I think things like that though technically can be taught - isn't being taught and it's fantastic to see us targeting a player like Porter who plays so... fundamentally.

I don't know, I think that kind of situational and spacial awareness is something that you either have or don't. Understanding angles, trajectories, timing, etc. Even in something as basic as setting a pick, it has to be done at the right angle and time to get the most from it.

You could probably improve that kind of awareness a little over time. But some players just anticipate the game well from the get go, have superior BBall IQs. The game is so dynamic, you're frequently going to find yourself problem situations where you have to go off script and react. Unfamiliar spots on the floor with the ball in your hands. Turn a negative into a positive.

I think, in the cauldron of the playoffs and in the clutch, where the importance of single possessions gets hugely magnified, BBall IQ becomes one of the most important things about a player. Someone pointed out to me the vast importance of it by using the sequence at the end of game six for Miami where LeBron and Mike Miller ran that little two man game on the long rebound. Hardly any time left, Mike Miller didn't panic by running to the 3 pt line and hoisting up a shot like most players would have. Instead, he spaced the defense for LeBron then made a slick pass to get him a better shot. Same on the next three where Bosh gets the long rebound, with time running out, he holds onto it just long enough for Ray Allen to get into position to get off a good shot. And Allen naturally found where he needed to be on the floor. Good BBall IQs lead to winning basketball in totally dynamic and unscripted situations.

I think Porter and Noel have excellent BBall IQs. I think Wall and Beal have totally superior BBall IQs and they are two of the smartest young players I've ever seen. I like the idea of pairing another smart young player with them as a three man core.

Great posts - Porter may not be an elite athlete but he appears to have an elite BBall brain. That plus maturity definitely makes him a solid pick.

[sfam]

EFTC explained:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhwqkxzX5hI[/youtube]

Sweet!!! Whomever drafts Bennett, I can't wait to see a highlight of him doing that to LeBron!

[AFM]

Agreed. Porter may end up being the better/smarter player but he has no EFTC.

Bennett's eerily similar play:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol-kDStJ3gk[/youtube]

[doclinkin]

Revisiting this:

To me at this point in order to not overthink things and select a player one criteria of evaluation is to ask myself: "Could they play for the Spurs?"

Not 'could Popovich et al make a player out of them?' -- though Wittman is in the Popovich mold and will sit a player who does not defend, we lack the will to use the DLeague as a resource and lack the infrastructure to train new players.

But: could they step on court and play for Pop TODAY.

Here's the list:
1. Noel.
3. Porter.
5. Oladipo.
8. McCollum.
11. Zeller Gives good effort at both ends, high IQ, passes well.
12. KCP. If you rebound, defend and hit the 3 you can play for Pop.
13. MCW. Maybe. Passes, defends, rebounds well. He needs to shoot to play for the Spurs so probably no.
17. Olynyk. Smart, hard working, demonstrated ability to fix his shortcomings.
18. Mason Plumlee. Absolutely. Plumlee is a typical Spurs pick. Overlooked solid role player, unexciting but plays a needed role. Longtime starter from a great NCAA program that teaches fundamentally sound smart ball. Yes.
20. Gorgui Dieng. Yes. Passes well too. Though his positional defense is not as good as it could be, he occasionally allows players to blow by so that he can shadow them for a block from behind, he's smart enough to grasp the Spurs system quickly and captain the defense whenever Tim can't go.
24. Bullock. Same reasoning as Mason Plumlee but in that Bruce Bowen 3&D role. This year's Danny Green.
28. Isaiah Canaan.
29. Jeff Withey.

International players were all cut from the above list since they may well simply play overseas if selected by San Antonio.

In round 2 there are: Erick Green, Mike Muscala, Nate Wolters, maybe Solomon Hill. And DEFINITELY Arsalan Kazemi who adds the benefit of being an overseas prospect while he develops a ranged jumper.

I look at Andre Roberson as a Kawhi Leonard type project, playing well at both ends and rebounding remarkably, but needing his jumper fixed. Because of that he's a developmental-type project that Pop would develop well but I lack confidence in our ability to do so.

So yes, no matter the upside and potential, as a circuit breaker to enthusiasm I commonly fall back on the binary metric: Yes/No, Would the Spurs play them today? If No. I have to take a 2nd look at how much I like them and why.

Which I guess puts my selections at

1. Noel.

2. Porter.

3. Trade Back for a Big + ballast: Select Dieng, Olynyk, or Zeller along with a prospect/picks. And yes even Withey or Plumlee who may look un-spiffy, but will each prove a solid player who fits his role. A solid back-ups for Okafor even as a rookie.

Here the later the trade down the better the other incentive so for me Dieng+something or Olynyk+something look to have better value than Zeller+stuff. Get me either of those two with something else of quality, and I'm happy.

4. Oladipo I suppose, if no trade available. Agree with Nate he's a decent draft and dangle prospect (select him then listen to offers) and a fine compensation pick if nothing coming back looks good.

I do want Canaan, Bullock, Roberson, Kazemi, Wolters but have no confidence we'd select them.
Canaan and Bullock I know will find a role.
Roberson is an upside pick with high value late, good gamble.
Wolters, eh, combo guard is a need, worth a risk to see if small school talent translates.
Kazemi will play on a championship team somewhere. Europe probably.

And I also like some of the Euros but so far we have mismanaged these prospects. Still pissed that La Bomba never played as back-up for Hughes, Arenas. And we could have selected Marc Gasol to play with him. Though I was also happy with Dom McGuire, I wanted the world champ Spaniard.

There are Talents I like in this draft, even late bargains (I still like CJ Leslie's athletics; Len seems to have the right combo of size, agility, youth, and work ethic to maybe realize 75% or more of his talent) .

But the above is the list of WWSASD candidates and I'm resolved to be mostly happy with any of them. Except when we inevitably bypass a couple with our late picks, traded for cash or whatever. Sigh. Maybe I'll post a few breakdowns in the optimism thread.

[rockymac52]

Going off of what's been said in the last few posts here, I want to add that I agree on Porter and the importance of Basketball IQ. Obviously BB IQ is basically impossible to quantify. But, it's still evident that some players possess great IQ, and others do not. Porter absolutely has a great basketball IQ. That's huge, IMO.

Let's say Porter never takes his game to the next level (all-star caliber). Oh well, that would have been nice, but it's not the end of the world. The good news, is that Porter will still be able to contribute, even as a rookie. Even if he ends up being a very average player, there's no denying that he's going to be a smart player who is a capable defender and passer. Basically this comes back to the low floor vs. high floor debate, but I think this might illustrate it more effectively.

Porter will be a good team defender, even if his lateral quickness doesn't turn out to be that great. On offense, he's capable of hitting long jumpers, even if he's not a lights out 3 point specialist. He's the type of guy who knows his role, and can excel in it as a result. Meanwhile, a guy like Bennett has the potential to be much worse. If Bennett doesn't turn into a stud, there's a good chance that he's a terrible team defender, and he doesn't know his role offensively. That means the ball stops when it gets to Bennett frequently. Our entire defense would be worse as well.

With Porter, you're getting a guy that will undoubtedly become a positive contributor, even in his first season. Right now we have Wall, Beal, Ariza, Nene, Okafor, and most likely a re-signed Webster. That's 6 players, and I consider all of them positive contributors. Don't consider whether any of them are elite stars or anything like that, just ask yourself if they are a positive contributor or not. I say it's pretty clear that they all are. Now, that falls in line perfectly with what the lineup stats showed this past season. Any combination of those 6 players was very good, more so with Webster in than Ariza.

Our issues came when we had our other bench players in the game (Singleton, Vesely, Seraphin, Booker, Price, Temple, Martin). Even when one of those guys was in the game, our entire team production took a HUGE hit. While it'd be nice to acquire another legit star player, it's not necessary, at least for the moment. What we need is more bench production. It doesn't have to come from the bench, literally, as we could add a guy who becomes a starter, which in turn shifts one of our current starters to the bench, having the same basic effect. So for the time being, we simply need to add more positive contributors to our roster in order to become legit playoff contenders.

AJ Price was/is arguably a net average contributor as our backup PG as well, so if we brought him back, we would then have 6-7 positive contributors.

The third pick is likely to become our 7th or 8th positive contributor. We need him to be. Again, if he develops into a star, that's awesome, but not necessary. We need him to be a positive contributor, even if it's only by a small margin, at the very least. Porter will be that positive contributor, even as a rookie, there's no doubt in my mind. He'll always be a willing team defender and a capable floor spacer and passer. Bennett? If Bennett doesn't work out, we could be stuck with a worse version of Derrick Williams. YUCK! That player is NOT a positive contributor. Then we're losing out on a valuable asset, and setting our team's progress back even further.

Porter is a smart and safe pick. Bennett has the potential to be disastrous. I don't think it's even a question between the two of them for the Wizards, and I genuinely believe the front office feels the same way.

[TGW]

I love the WWSASD scenarios by doc. But what about Len? I figure they would have some interest in adding a mobile 7 footer with athleticism to the team.

[doclinkin]

I love the WWSASD scenarios by doc. But what about Len? I figure they would have some interest in adding a mobile 7 footer with athleticism to the team.

Could he play for them today?

I know the SPURS could develop him. And I'm on record as saying I think he has the best upside as the most complete two-way big in the draft. I agree with his assessment that we may look back in 10 years and say he was the best player in the draft. But we're not the Spurs when it comes to player development.

To be clear: _I_ want him. Will be happy or at least hopeful if we take him with Noel and Porter off the board. And at times have liked him better than Porter.

But I have concerns that he will live up to his full potential on this team. Me, I would take him ahead of Bennett. But then I would have taken Dave Joerger as coach when we ended up with Flip instead. I have concerns that this brain trust will not get #3 value from him. The WWSASD model is: how do you have a bulletproof draft without the foundation and support of the Spurs organization behind you.

But that said, I like him, especially next to John Wall, and like how he has put in work to develop his body if not yet his total game. I'd want a year round Big Man Camp for him.

[thinker07]

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him.

Agree on Porter. I don't think CLE will take him #1, but what do we know about Orlando's intentions? I've always assumed they'd take McLemore or Oladipo, but they do have longterm money tied up in Afflalo at SG. Seems like Porter could step in immediately for them at SF. They are also rumored to be interested in adding a young PG, and in this draft I don't think taking Burke #2 can really be considered a reach.

What would really worry me is talk of Orlando trading down, especially with teams like NOLA/DET/MIN that already have bigs so they wouldn't be trading up for somebody like Len or Zeller.

There seems to have been a lot of discussion between Orlando and the Clippers for some variation of a Afflalo for Bledsoe deal, so that would make it a lot easier to pick Oladipo or McLemore. Orlando also seems to be still in a deep "acquiring assets" phase, so I could see them picking Noel is Cleveland takes Len or Porter.

[mhd]

My main takeaway is this is yet another source I trust extolling Porter's virtues. This will be a good draft if he slips to three and we nab him.

Agree on Porter. I don't think CLE will take him #1, but what do we know about Orlando's intentions? I've always assumed they'd take McLemore or Oladipo, but they do have longterm money tied up in Afflalo at SG. Seems like Porter could step in immediately for them at SF. They are also rumored to be interested in adding a young PG, and in this draft I don't think taking Burke #2 can really be considered a reach.

What would really worry me is talk of Orlando trading down, especially with teams like NOLA/DET/MIN that already have bigs so they wouldn't be trading up for somebody like Len or Zeller.

There seems to have been a lot of discussion between Orlando and the Clippers for some variation of a Afflalo for Bledsoe deal, so that would make it a lot easier to pick Oladipo or McLemore. Orlando also seems to be still in a deep "acquiring assets" phase, so I could see them picking Noel is Cleveland takes Len or Porter.

Orlando already has Harkless and Tobias Harris. I doubt they take Porter.

[Jay81]

the new NBAdraft.net mock draft went bonkers today lol. Wth? Porter drops to 7. We take Ben over Noel....

http://www.nbadraft.net/