2015 Draft Thread - Part 1

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Look into your heart. You already know who the Wizards are going to draft.

Who's the most boring pick likely to be available?

Who's the least immediately controversial selection?

Who has virtually no upside?

Who has, in some way, some prior tie to the franchise or the DC metro area?

The pick is Jerian Grant.

Yep.

Boring is the route they generally choose. Dorian, one thing I know is NEVER expect to be thrilled on draft night when Ernie Grunfeld is in charge. Round one is generally known in advance. Grant is very likely the pick.

Tyus Jones will probably be available and passed over, as will Looney. Both will end up having far better NBA careers than Grant. So will Delon Wright. The upside pick that EG won't make are Richaun Holmes, Clifford Alexander, and Dakari Johnson. Justin Anderson is also a better prospect than Grant.

Also, I expect to be distressed by a wasted second round. Jordan Clarkson was just the latest squandered opportunity. Don't look for ANYTHING at 49.

Grant won't be a bad player but he definitely has less upside than many others.

Justin Anderson isn't an upside pick.. he is ready now.

Wood is an upside pick.. not Justin.

By saying that Anderson is a better prospect than Grant I didn't say a word about upside, nor did I say that Anderson isn't ready now.

Those three that I mentioned were upside picks.

I think Anderson has legit three point range that will translate to the next level. He seems like a surer contributor than Grant, but Jerian should be a pretty solid player in his own right.

[Rafael122]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JakeLFischer/status/613712887635427328[/tweet]

It's too bad we don't have a late round pick. I'd make that move for a lotto protected 1st.

[nate33]

I saw this on Reddit:

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

This year I would try to trade down to get a player like Olynyk or Mason Plumlee plus a later first. In effect, use the 19 and Blair for a pick 25-33 plus any of Olynyk, Sullinger, T Zeller, or Mason Plumlee.

Another idea: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=q34mn6a

Trade the pick if you can get Dieng with Bennett. (See that link)

Take a shot at using Bennett as a stretch four, in a buy low scenario in which you for sure get a very good player in Dieng. Fishercob came up with a double down on rookie contracts that inspired me to think of that deal.

[hands11]

Yep.

Boring is the route they generally choose.

Was Jan Vesely the "boring" pick?
Was Javale McGee?
Was Nick Young?
Wouldn't Turner have been the safe, boring pick over Wall?
Wouldn't Barnes have been the safe, boring pick over Beal?

I just don't understand why everyone is convinced that EG will pick Grant. There is virtually nothing in EG's history to suggest he'd take a guy like Grant over the "upside" prospects like Looney.

The only time in recent history where it could be argued that EG took the "boring" option was when he took Porter over Noel.

There has been a change. They draft differently.

EG used to pick athletic, long, "potential", and Euro. He never used to consider character, intelligence.

He went smarter starting with the Leonsis ownership and purging of all the guys who he used to draft. (BLATCHE, Young, McGee, Vesely). Beal was the safe pick as was Porter. They are the only EG picks besides Wall who are still with the Wizards.

I think Glen Rice Jr was selected because of Rice Sr.

Sounds like my mantra CCJ.

Yes. Once Ted got here, he set the mandate. Glen was a EG relapse. Hopefully the last of its kind.

I would add, drafting players and changing their positions was also common.

Ves from SF to PF to PF/C
Booker SF to PF
Singleton SF to PF
Mack.. SG they wanted to be a PG
Glen.. a chucker that they wanted to not be a chucker. Not a change of position but similar..

Instead of drafting something that looks like what you need already. You can expand players games easy their changing them outright.

Also.. smarter, mature, hard working, emotional development, accountability, focus, etc.. they are all important skills that get over looked over...how high you can jump, length, height, upside, etc.

[hands11]

Was Jan Vesely the "boring" pick?
Was Javale McGee?
Was Nick Young?
Wouldn't Turner have been the safe, boring pick over Wall?
Wouldn't Barnes have been the safe, boring pick over Beal?

I just don't understand why everyone is convinced that EG will pick Grant. There is virtually nothing in EG's history to suggest he'd take a guy like Grant over the "upside" prospects like Looney.

The only time in recent history where it could be argued that EG took the "boring" option was when he took Porter over Noel.

There has been a change. Young guys don't make it playing for Wittman. They draft differently.

EG used to pick athletic, long, "potential", and Euro. He never used to consider character, intelligence, actual ability to play.

He went safe starting with the Leonsis ownership and purging of all the guys who he used to draft. (BLATCHE, Young, McGee, Vesely). Nate, Beal was the safe pick as was Porter. They are the only EG picks besides Wall who are still with the Wizards.

I think Glen Rice Jr was selected because of Rice Sr. I expect Jerian Grant will be picked primarily because his father, uncle, and brother have all contributed to NBA rosters. Grant is also a safe, local pick as was Porter. Jerian by far is the most likely selection IMO.

You may be right. We shall see.

There did seem to be a concerted effort to get away from the youth movement and to acquire vets to make sure that our top young players had an infrastructure around them to succeed. In general, I think I agree with the philosophy that young players develop best when they have a support system of good-character veterans, but I think we're at the point where we no longer have to worry about supporting Wall and Beal. They're now veterans too. I sincerely hope that EG can move on to a new crop of youngsters. If a high upside guy like Looney is available, let's get him. I think the team can handle two developing young players in Porter and Looney.

It true a lot of times.

Magic landed to a team with great vets to help him.
MJ, many don't realize but I did several write ups on this, landed to a team that had and added those vet mentors.
Duncan landed to a team where D Robinson mentored him and set the tone making room for Duncan to start
Iggy has done tones for GS.. underated vet presence.
Kobe .. he had Phil and others. Fisher was huge for that team at one point.
Bird got Robert Pasish and others

Contrast.. Houston needs this.. OKC has needed this.. Perkins wasn't enough. Look at LeBrons early years. Needed to go where Wade was. How much farther along with Cousins be if he made the team to get into the playoffs by now ?

A great coach is often in this formula at some point.

Young talent needs proper mentoring.. Getting The Truth was/is still huge. We need him one more year to finish his mentoring.

This follows what I have been pointing out about the Wizards path. They locked in on the most important pieces to save.. Wall and Beal and now Otto.. The other pieces were expendable. Getting Wall to the playoff could wait. Everyone wasn't going to make it if they were to lock in on those three making it into and out of the first round. Which was vital for their development.

NO now has this challenge with A Davis.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I saw this on Reddit:

Nate, I like that three of six have us picking Looney. Born in 1996 vs Jerian Grant, who was born in 1992 and is 3 & 1/2 years older. I also like Gottlieb predicting Tyus Jones (also born in 1996).

Three said Looney. Two Grant. One Jones and also, one Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. Not sure what to think about RHJ.

[hands11]

Yep.

Boring is the route they generally choose. Dorian, one thing I know is NEVER expect to be thrilled on draft night when Ernie Grunfeld is in charge. Round one is generally known in advance. Grant is very likely the pick.

Tyus Jones will probably be available and passed over, as will Looney. Both will end up having far better NBA careers than Grant. So will Delon Wright. The upside pick that EG won't make are Richaun Holmes, Clifford Alexander, and Dakari Johnson. Justin Anderson is also a better prospect than Grant.

Also, I expect to be distressed by a wasted second round. Jordan Clarkson was just the latest squandered opportunity. Don't look for ANYTHING at 49.

Grant won't be a bad player but he definitely has less upside than many others.

Justin Anderson isn't an upside pick.. he is ready now.

Wood is an upside pick.. not Justin.

By saying that Anderson is a better prospect than Grant I didn't say a word about upside, nor did I say that Anderson isn't ready now.

Those three that I mentioned were upside picks.

I think Anderson has legit three point range that will translate to the next level. He seems like a surer contributor than Grant, but Jerian should be a pretty solid player in his own right.

"The upside pick that EG won't make are Richaun Holmes, Clifford Alexander, and Dakari Johnson. Justin Anderson is also a better prospect than Grant."

Ahh.. small font.. that was a period, not a comma... I read it all back to back like one thought.

[FAH1223]

Richaun Holmes will be available in Round 2 but doubt he lasts to #49

Should we really reach for him????

[deneem4]

Andrew Harrison
Aaron Harrison
Richaun Holmes Or Robert upshaw
Christan wood

Trade down get these 4 guys call it a night

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

I'd love for Hunter or Portis to fall to us...

If not, I guess I could get enthused about Grant or perhaps Dekker.

Like Anderson a lot, not sure if his game translates.

Ernie will pick none of them.

[payitforward]

The Bucks want to move *up* from their #17; if they're willing to deal Henson, they must want to move *way* up!

[FAH1223]

I'd love for Hunter or Portis to fall to us...

If not, I guess I could get enthused about Grant or perhaps Dekker.

Like Anderson a lot, not sure if his game translates.

Ernie will pick none of them.

Jerrell Martin

[nate33]

The Bucks want to move *up* from their #17; if they're willing to deal Henson, they must want to move *way* up!

Henson's trade value isn't that high. He's going to be a free agent next year, a year when nearly everyone is going to have cap room. Having Bird Rights when you already have cap room isn't helpful, so effectively, he's a one-year rental, after which he's going to go to the highest bidder.

[payitforward]

The question is - Can you pull that type of statistic on many other players?

I prefer Jones over Grant, but Grant has a lot going for him. And I don't think he's a boring player, because he's consistently shown the ability to play like a pure point guard - setting up his teammates beautifully - making the game look like poetry. I think he had problems when he tried to carry his team and become their prime scorer.

To be fair, I really don't have anything against Grant. He seems like he might pan out to be a useful rotation player. I just have a problem with drafting a backup PG with our top pick when we have greater needs at literally every other position on the roster. Sessions is a solid backup. We've got the position covered.

Pick the best player available. If that's Grant, then pick him. Sessions isn't a fixture on the roster, and backup PG is always a need. The Wizards "need" players at every position, realistically speaking.

That said, I'd be surprised if Grant was the BPA when the Wizards pick.

Yup. And how this is not utterly obvious to absolutely everyone amazes me.

A better player is also (and always) a more valuable asset than a less good player. All you do is help your opponents when you pick a sub-optimal player. The guys picking after you have a shot at a better player than they would have had you taken him off the board.

If (somehow?) you "need" a guy who's less good (though this makes no sense to me) -- pick the best player anyway! Then trade him for the less good guy plus something else to even the deal. Again... why is this not simple and obvious?

[queridiculo]

Whatever happened to Richaun Holmes?

Haven't really paid much attention but I'm really intrigued by his combination of size and athleticism. Would love to see him end up on the Wizards somehow.

[nate33]

To be fair, I really don't have anything against Grant. He seems like he might pan out to be a useful rotation player. I just have a problem with drafting a backup PG with our top pick when we have greater needs at literally every other position on the roster. Sessions is a solid backup. We've got the position covered.

Pick the best player available. If that's Grant, then pick him. Sessions isn't a fixture on the roster, and backup PG is always a need. The Wizards "need" players at every position, realistically speaking.

That said, I'd be surprised if Grant was the BPA when the Wizards pick.

Yup. And how this is not utterly obvious to absolutely everyone amazes me.

A better player is also (and always) a more valuable asset than a less good player. All you do is help your opponents when you pick a sub-optimal player. The guys picking after you have a shot at a better player than they would have had you taken him off the board.

If (somehow?) you "need" a guy who's less good (though this makes no sense to me) -- pick the best player anyway! Then trade him for the less good guy plus something else to even the deal. Again... why is this not simple and obvious?

I'm all in favor of picking the best player available, but as we've discussed before, you rank those players in tiers. There will be other players who rank higher than Grant, or will at least be in the same tier as Grant but fill a position of need. I can't envision a scenario where Grant will actually be the clear best player available at #19.

[payitforward]

This year I would try to trade down to get a player like Olynyk or Mason Plumlee plus a later first. In effect, use the 19 and Blair for a pick 25-33 plus any of Olynyk, Sullinger, T Zeller, or Mason Plumlee.

For Plumlee or Sullinger, sure! -- and especially if Looney is off the board.

Another idea: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=q34mn6a

Trade the pick if you can get Dieng with Bennett. (See that link)

Take a shot at using Bennett as a stretch four, in a buy low scenario in which you for sure get a very good player in Dieng. Fishercob came up with a double down on rookie contracts that inspired me to think of that deal.

It would be great to add 2 rookie contracts, one of them in place of Blair, but I can't see Minny going for that trade. Dieng is too much of a bargain (offsets the non-bargain Bennett is!).

[Ruzious]

Whatever happened to Richaun Holmes?

Haven't really paid much attention but I'm really intrigued by his combination of size and athleticism. Would love to see him end up on the Wizards somehow.

I wouldn't trust the mocks that still have him as a mid to late 1st rounder. He caught all the internet mocks by surprise - measuring it at 6'9.5 and 243 lbs. I see he's still listed by Yahoo a 6'8 214 lbs. Bowling Green's schedule looked weak, and I'm sure that's a major reason he's not ranked higher. Just saw that his coach was fired for getting caught on video inappropriately touching 2 women.

[payitforward]

I'd love for Hunter or Portis to fall to us...

If not, I guess I could get enthused about Grant or perhaps Dekker.

Like Anderson a lot, not sure if his game translates.

Ernie will pick none of them.

Jerrell Martin

You are forgetting Montrezl Harrell !!

My depressing projections are Grant or Harrell -- though in fairness, Grant is likely to be a much better player than Harrell!

My optimistic projections are Looney or (dream dream dream) he's gone but Oubre falls to us -- that kid is a phenomenal talent.

My ultra optimistic projection is that somehow we trade down and Dekker drops to us, we pick up a high R2 guy like Cliff Alexander, then at 49 we get say Joseph Young (? anyone like him at all?). Michael Qualls has somehow fallen off of DR's mock along w/ my guy Alan Williams. So we pick up those two guys as FAs.

W/ Blair, Seraphin, Bynum & Butler off the team, we stock the back of the bench w/ guys who are cheap and have the potential to build the team's core down the road.

Now... I know I've grabbed 5 and only dropped 4 in the above scenario -- it's a motivation thing: we tell them as follows -- "we're going to keep the 4 best of you, and the other one we're going to (fill in the blank)!"