The Consiglieri wrote:Dark Faze wrote:
So basically it all comes down to athleticism, despite the fact that some of the best man defenders of the last 10 years have been average to simply above average athletically--Bruce Bowen, Raja Bell, Tayshaun Prince, Shane Battier, older Ron Artest, Aaron Afflalo, etc.
The sort of system that Porter played in really can't be understated. Defensive focused, almost primarily in the half court (very very low percentage of his points scored were in transition), slow paced, and yet he still had high foul rates.
That bodes well for his offensive potential in a faster paced system that will get out in transition.
I have serious questions about a few aspects of Porter, and these questions are much bigger red flags to me, than Bennett gaining weight while injured, or even Len's highly uneven production, or Noel's injury. My first concern is the lack of athleticism, particularly on the offensive end, suggests he'll never be a difference maker on that side of the court. Now perhaps his work rate and habits (improved 3 point shot is in my view, both an outlier that isn't predictive of future production, but also an outlier that is predictive of how Otto will address issues in his game, w/WORK) can limit the issues he has in athleticism, but I tend to doubt it. I think he tops off as an average offensive weapon w/a slight chance of being above average. I worry that his ability to defend so well at Georgetown may not translate at an equal rate to the NBA. I worry that his limits athletically could leave him as no better than a solid defender at the next level, and if that happens, the pick could be a disaster.
My chief concern, as its been all along, is that he simply isn't an elite player in any phase or skill save for length. The rebounding rate is nice, and close to elite but not there, and the lack of athletic ability scares me there too, though his effort and work habits suggests he will max out whatever ability he has. Studying the draft for 25 years (in this sport in particular but also in others), the three trends that are most consistent harbingers of a dark future involve: having a lot of "good" skills, but no great ones, lacking athleticism to compete at the next level, and work habits and IQ. For me, Otto ticks off 2 of the 3 biggest red flag boxes there are. The one asset he does have, that is huge is that he does have ideal length, and his combo of work habits/work rate/BBIQ are off the charts. That could negate a great deal of the negative. The problem I have, is that I see far more "try hard, work hard" guys fail because they don't have the next level athleticism and elite skill(s), than I see guys fail that lack ideal work habits and BBIQ. You can't teach athleticism, and many of the skills. In most cases by the time you're 19-24, the development that happens is finishing touches, the key development already happened or did not happened in the players childhood or teenage hood. That's why the Spurs have eschewed using assets on so many young American players these days, the bad habits, and built in flaws that Pop hates, are already ingrained. The deal maker and deal breaker for me is to what degree a player is compromised by his lack of athleticism, or considerations on his work rate, work habits, BBIQ, athleticism, skill level etc.
For me, Otto is more compromised than Bennett, because we have far more evidence of what Otto is, than we have with Bennett. Earlier a poster suggested this was another reason to pass on Bennett, but for me it's actually a reason to focus more on Bennett. Bennett showed tremendous athleticism, and skill despite being injured for nearly a quarter of the season. What might we have? I do not know. Porter provides a bit more certainty for sure, but I simply don't think he's worth the 3 slot because of the ceiling issue. The criticism's of Bennett's issues are often more than fair, though some stray into inaccuracy, and outright fiction. Still, he definitely has more red flags in terms of concerns.
My issue is that Porter has more red flags in terms of ability to make a difference at the next level. You should not be taking a player 3rd, who you consider the 4th best option on your squad going forward. That simply makes no sense to me. If that's what you see when you evaluate him, a jack of all trades, contributor, who'll be the 4th best guy on your squad, then he has no business going 3rd, period, you should either trade down, trade the pick entirely, or pick an upside guy like a Len, or a Bennett, or a Noel if he fell, or Oladipo. I can see the justification for Porter, if you believe Pelton's analysis of him, particularly the age/length/work habits angel. Otherwise, the pick makes zero sense to me. It's aiming low and being satisfied with mediocrity for the forseeable future, and that's not good enough.
Here's that truth about it spurs article from last week:
http://www.truthaboutit.net/2013/06/the ... model.html 
