Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part VI

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

EG doesn't want 3 rookies on the roster but he is apparently OK with having two garbage cans (Ves,CS).

I wish Ted, EG, and Wittman were sharper and not self-protective, closed-minded, people. They are flat stupid to say they don't want three rookies.

Wall would have his hands full guarding Siva or Pierre Jackson, and one of them might slip all the way to 55. EG wouldn't trade down for Dieng, Muscala and Siva, Jackson, or Wolters because that would be three rookies and he is not a good GM. Wittman's job is on the line and he and Ernie will throw all their hope into mediocre thirty year old players with big contracts. They don't like youth or the draft.

CCJ

I think you get to upset about this stuff and in doing so, you some how feel the need to character assassinate over it. I have read your posts for a long time. I know you don't really want to be that person.

There are valid reasons to not want to many young players on a team. People set different goals and depending on what they are, they make decisions. There are opportunity costs that are projected regardless of which decision you make. Example, while I don't think Ves, Singleton, Mack was a good draft at all, they clearly needed scoring and didn't draft for that at all. Only thing that makes sense to me is they drafted a longer term project that won't help on the court now and a defensive player that would help in the future. Its was draft done with tanking in mind. Now I think it was poorly done. They could have done a tank draft and got better value with Nikola, but you can at least in part see that their plan was from what they did.

So we can all make individual projection on what we want, but if you aren't read into their more detailed goals and plans/strategy ( none of us know for sure) .. or are unwilling to except them... then being over critical of their moves ( before they actually do them and out of context afterward ) is to be over critical for the sake of being that way.

They have a lots of young players already. They want to start getting into the playoffs. So while they are not in an win now at all cost mode, they also are trying to expand the collective talent they have on the team while also keeping and expanding on the experienced legit NBA talent they have. Adding 3 rookies probably doesn't match with their goals and time line.

All things being equal, any rookie draft pick they add from this draft is going to be less NBA tested then experienced NBA players and probably more risk. Known knowns and known unknowns. I now this is over simplifying things but I'm sure you get what I am saying.

Hey, I love finding those low cost high return players as much as you do. Pierre was one of I got on board with this year. I could even see how he would really help the team. But if they have identified other needs as more important. i.e. Center and back up SG, then having the back up PG being a player that has NBA experience actually makes sense.

So could they use all three picks this year and still meet their goals. It could be done. Probably would take them getting ride of at least two of the young players they already have though. Winning team rarely consist of tons of rookies added to a team that already has 3 young projects. Not including Beal in the list as a project but even their two stud stars are way young. See what I'm saying ?

Evaluating individual upside for players like Wolters and Pierre is a lot of fun. But just because the Wizards don't add them doesn't mean they are idiots.

Them only using two of the picks isn't a failure. Nor is putting it out there that you only want to use two. I'm not going to assume I know all the reasons a GM would want to publicly communicate something like this. It would seems to me if the goal was to let other GMs know, he could do that directly. But if this is part of how they send that message so teams know they are willing to deal one or more 2nd round pick to trade up or trade, so be it. No harm. It doesn't mean they won't use it. We will only know that on draft day.

I am frustrated and do not trust EG and I mean every word I say about him. He has done a bad job overall since EJ was fired. EG is lucky to have a job. Ted backs him. Thus, I am not thrilled.

To say young people are rarely on good teams is one thing. To say they can't win I ask what happened to Andre Miller and Andre Igoudala in the playoffs? Their veteran coach and they got beat by a team that started Harrison Barnes and most of the season Festus Ezeli. Two rookies. Also, rookie Draymond Green was their sixth man. Second-year player Klay Thompson, a guy Ernie passed on for Vesely, dropped 29 in a half on the Spurs. Rookie, Brazilian, PG who shares Nene's agent, Scott Machado, was on their bench in the playoffs. Steph Curry, who they could have drafted, but opted instead for Miller and Foye--who helped win 23 games and get a coach fired--Curry is 24.

hands, I should not assassinate characters or name call but I have been a fan of this franchise 40-something years and I care. I think they are STUPID. Age is not why they fail. Poor talent evaluation and organizational failure is MUCH MORE responsible. If they drafted the young guys we have suggested for years and years and years they would not be seeking overpriced veterans while they disparage young players.

You think I am calling them idiots for not picking Wolters or Pierre? They are DAMN FOOLS for not extending a fair competition because they think no one drafted that late can help. When EG was selling second round picks, the 2009 draft produced several players in the rotations of playoff teams. EG sold the 37, and DeJuan Blair went on to start for the Spurs. Danny Green was the 46th pick. (AJ Price was a 52nd pick that year).

What I am saying is this draft is just like 2009. If ever you want to keep the 54th or 55th pick this is the year!

I don't have to be liked by Ted but I will put him and EG on front street for not listening year after year. What they need to do is draft three very talented players. A player picked to meet a need at 54 could be just as game-ready as the #3 pick.

These guys can help right away: Pierre Jackson, Peyton Siva, Zeke Marshall, Ray McCallum, DJ Stephens, Jackie Carmichael, Colton Iverson, Lorenzo Brown, Carrick Felix. Brandon Davies, Michael Snaer, Brandon Paul

The Wizards need to draft three, and if the round two guys are better fits; move any of Seraphin, Singleton, Vesely, and Booker.

Seraphin and Booker are entering their fourth seasons. Like Wall, their contracts are up. Singleton is a very ordinary talent. Those guys--NOT Vesely--would be the guys I trade first. Booker is a good player who is a little too injured and slightly undersized.

[montestewart]

Consiglieri and sf

We may disagree on the evaluations of those two players, their fit for the Wizards and the opportunity cost of not adding other players or using the pick on other way. No big deal. But lets keep is above board. No need to take personal shoots. We are just seeing things differently.

I'm honestly confused. Where's the personal shots? Nothing in either post had anything like a personal shot.

You can agree to disagree, as long as you are agreeing. Just don't disagree. That's personal. And don't be confused or baffled by anything, because that's hitting below the belt.

[nate33]

The Zeller love is also a little weird. The athleticism grades are all well and good and may suggest something, but how come it was never evident on the court?

I wouldn't say that. He was considered all season long to be one of the top 3 players in college basketball. His only failing was that he and the rest of his team couldn't figure out Syracuse's zone defense.

[TGW]

Agree with the Consigleiri...Zeller's atheltic measurements didn't translate on the court. I didn't see the explosive leaping ability in games. Saw for Dipo, but definitely not from Zeller.

[hands11]

Consiglieri and sf

We may disagree on the evaluations of those two players, their fit for the Wizards and the opportunity cost of not adding other players or using the pick on other way. No big deal. But lets keep is above board. No need to take personal shoots. We are just seeing things differently.

I'm honestly confused. Where's the personal shots? Nothing in either post had anything like a personal shot.

"To say that neither would fit with what the Wizards are trying to do almost stretches the imagination."

I guess you are just a whole lot smarter and have much better evaluation and reasoning skills.

Clearly this was a shot at intelligence. Not sure what other category it fits in.

You know... something like me replying to you with, that's insane. Who in their right mind would come up with something that foolish. lol

Sure I might think that when reading some posts but I try hard not to write it in my replies. I'm sure I haven't always succeeded.

Not a huge deal or anything to draw out. Its was just a comment I had about your post. You seem to be pretty patient about your views which is cool, just a small reminder/request to be aware of comments that reflect your basically calling someones views stupid. Counter viewer can be accomplished by posting facts, asking that poster a question to clarify, or just posting your counter view.

You really think Bennett is the right pick. I respect that. I just disagree. I think I laid out why and I think the logic is sound.

[montestewart]

The Zeller love is also a little weird. The athleticism grades are all well and good and may suggest something, but how come it was never evident on the court?

I wouldn't say that. He was considered all season long to be one of the top 3 players in college basketball. His only failing was that he and the rest of his team couldn't figure out Syracuse's zone defense.

Calling Wiz-D! nate33 and The Consiglieri are deeply entrenched in groupthink.

[nate33]

You think I am calling them idiots for not picking Wolters or Pierre? They are DAMN FOOLS for not extending a fair completion because they think no one drafted that late can help. When EG was selling second round picks, the 2009 draft produced several players in the rotations of playoff teams. EG sold the 37, and DeJuan Blair went to start for the Spurs. Danny Green was the 46th pick. (AJ Price was a 52nd pick that year).

What I am saying is this draft is just like 2009. If ever you want to keep the 55th pick this is the year!

I can understand EG's concern about having too much youth in the lineup. Too much youth and inexperience is a bad thing because the young guys need some veterans to teach them how to be a professional. But where EG fails is in his methods to restrict the amount of youth on the roster. He does so by trading away 2nd round picks all the time. What he should be doing is what Houston does. Draft 2nd rounders, sign them to short contracts full of team options, and then try them out. If they don't figure things out quickly, get rid of them and try next year with a new crop.

EG falls in love with his picks and sticks with them for too long.

There are two types of young players that should stick around. The first type are the ones who are already productive relative to their salary. Booker falls into this category. There's no reason to cut him because there's no reason to expect that we can find better player at the same cost. The other type of young player you should keep are the ones that are likely to develop into a player good enough to be worth more than the MLE because it's difficult to add players that good in free agency. There is no advantage in developing a guy who is only going to pan out to be a $3M a year free agent. When his contract is up, he is going to be just as obtainable as any other sub-MLE guy. Those guys are basically interchangeable so there's no real value. Why do we care if we have Bird Rights on Chris Singleton when we could just as easily sign a guy like Chase Buddinger for the same money?

With that in mind, I can see sticking with Seraphin. If he pans out, he could conceivably be a two-way starting big man - that's valuable. Bird Rights and RFA rights on a player like that are also valuable. But there is no reason whatsoever to grow attached to Vesely or Singleton. There is clearly no significant upside with those two. Even in a best case scenario, they get good enough to be NBA role players. Big whoop. Cut them now, let them develop on someone else's dime, and if we want them in two years once they're ready, sign them as free agents then.

In a nutshell, I am pretty certain CCJ is wrong about some of his favorite 2nd rounders, but I'm pretty certain that he is right on some of them too. If we had the roster space, we could try them out. If CCJ is right just 50% of the time, we'd still be adding a good player with every other 2nd round pick.

[AFM]

Athleticism scores at the combine mean absolutely nothing to me. I don't need to wait for a vertical jump test to see whether or not a player is a superb athlete. It should be clear from watching them actually play basketball (which is what they are drafted to do, NOT partake in "agility drills" or whatever Zeller excelled at).
Nick Young had an amazing vertical, I think over 40 inches. Would you know that from watching him play? Did he attack the rim and try to fly over players for a rebound? Never. Athleticism on the court, which should be evident, is all that matters.

[sfam]

Consiglieri and sf

We may disagree on the evaluations of those two players, their fit for the Wizards and the opportunity cost of not adding other players or using the pick on other way. No big deal. But lets keep is above board. No need to take personal shoots. We are just seeing things differently.

I'm honestly confused. Where's the personal shots? Nothing in either post had anything like a personal shot.

"To say that neither would fit with what the Wizards are trying to do almost stretches the imagination."

I guess you are just a whole lot smarter and have much better evaluation and reasoning skills.

Clearly this was a shot at intelligence. Not sure what other category it fits in.

You know... something like me replying to you with, that's insane. Who in their right mind would come up with something that foolish. lol

Sure I might think that when reading some posts but I try hard not to write it in my replies. I'm sure I haven't always succeeded.

Not a huge deal or anything to draw out. Its was just a comment I had about your post. You seem to be pretty patient about your views which is cool, just a small reminder/request to be aware of comments that reflect your basically calling someones views stupid. Counter viewer can be accomplished by posting facts, asking that poster a question to clarify, or just posting your counter view.

You really think Bennett is the right pick. I respect that. I just disagree. I think I laid out why and I think the logic is sound.

Wow, yeah, we really have a different idea of what a personal comment is. There is nothing in what I said that was a shot at your intelligence. I could link to some posts on the internet of personal comments if you'd like to see what I would consider a personal comment to look like. But complete disagreement on a topic doesn't equate a shot to intelligence. I think I'll take montestewart's advice if I ever decide respond to a post of yours I really disagree with again.

[TheKingOfVa360]

Here is an article from ESPN Draft blog about Zeller. I thought it would interest some Wizards fans since we are talking about drafting him. Personally I want Porter with our pick, then Bennett, then Zeller.

How Zeller compares to Bosh, Aldridge

Cody Zeller, Indiana Hoosiers

Zeller began the season in the mix for the No. 1 pick in the draft. After an incredibly efficient freshman season, teams had high expectations for him as a sophomore. Zeller actually improved in points per game (from 15.6 to 16.5) and rebounds per game (6.6 to 8.1) and he was eighth in the NCAA in PER, but his improvements weren't big enough for scouts who began to pick apart his game.
As skilled as Zeller was in the post and as fast as he was in the open court, he struggled with long, physical bigs on the front line. He got his shot blocked way too much for a future NBA center and teams began to worry that his terrific college game wouldn't translate at the next level.

After a crushing final game versus Syracuse (Zeller had 10 points on 3-for-11 shooting), his stock slid out of the top 10 and scouts began to openly pine for him to go back to school and develop a face-the-basket game.

Zeller, however, decided to enter the draft and he has spent the past month in Santa Monica doing what scouts have asked -- he's honing his jump shot and ballhandling skills to make the leap from center to forward.

Zeller, for his part, claims that he has always had these skills. As a high school player, he regularly played on the perimeter and took 3s. He said he made three 3-pointers during one game his senior season. However, at Indiana, head coach Tom Crean wanted Zeller in the post and that's where he stayed. As a freshman he took just 27 percent of his shots outside the basket area. As a sophomore he upped it slightly to 34 percent.

What makes him think he can do it differently now?

Zeller told us at the NBA draft combine we'd be surprised by his shooting and he backed up that claim Thursday. I tracked his NBA 3-point shots and he shot 72 percent for the workout. That's terrific, especially for a 7-footer. His midrange jumper was even better. Zeller showed the ability to shoot off the bounce and with his feet set. He was especially effective in the corners, where he shot 80 percent from the field for the day.

Combine that small sample with other known qualities of Zeller -- he's the fastest big man in the draft (both laterally and in sprints), has the highest standing vertical (35.5 inches) of any player 6-foot-9 or taller in our database, great hands and a high basketball IQ -- and the question is: Did Zeller go from being overrated to underrated?

Some scouts think so. Several scouts compare him to a young Chris Bosh. A few others to LaMarcus Aldridge. They are both interesting comparisons -- rail-thin college centers who made the transition to power forward in the pros.

Zeller actually has some advantages on Bosh and Aldridge. He's taller than both. His standing and max verticals (35.5 and 37.5 inches) are both considerably higher (Bosh 30 and 33 -- Aldridge 26.5 and 34). He was much faster in his lane agility (10.82 seconds) and sprint testing (3.15 seconds) at the combine (Bosh 11.8 and 3.3 seconds -- Aldridge 12.02 and 3.43 seconds). In short, he's taller and a quicker, a more explosive athlete than either player.

Where Bosh and Aldridge beat Zeller is on wingspan (Bosh 7-foot-3.5, Aldridge 7-4.75, Zeller 6-10.75) and standing reach (Bosh 9-1, Aldridge 9-2, Zeller 8-10). But those numbers aren't nearly as important if Zeller is playing the 4. He is big enough for that position.

As far as style of play goes, both Bosh and Aldridge were allowed to play on the perimeter more in college. In fact, Bosh took 47 3-pointers during his one season at Georgia Tech.

But all three players are fluid athletes who are more comfortable on the perimeter. We didn't see that much from Zeller in college, but from what I saw at the workout, it was more than just a gimmick. He looked truly comfortable on the perimeter -- more so than he ever looked in the post in college. And he certainly has the foot speed to guard quick 4s.

If Bosh and Aldridge are legit comparisons, we have Zeller too low on our Big Board. Where he goes in the mock is another matter. He'd be a good fit in Charlotte, but sources say the Bobcats aren't one of the teams that high on him. The Kings are another possibility. But his real sweet spot looks like the Sixers at 11, the Thunder at 12 and the Mavs at 13. All three teams are great fits. I'm not sure he should last that long, but in a draft with so much parity, I expect teams to be drafting primarily for need.

[hands11]

CCJ

I'm sure you don't have everything I write memorized but I do agree with you regarding this draft. I think it is a lot like that year and I have felt that way for a while.

My early take was that I not only wanted them to use all three picks, but I thought it was viable for them to add another in the late first so that would have been 4 new picks. They could stay young but be more skilled and mature. But there were lots of Seniors on my list.

My early wish list idea was I thought this would be a great draft to totally reload the young players they have with new ones. Clean house. Well all except keeping Booker who I see as a solid vet at this point. Martin and Price would also be gone. Booker you keep. He does what he does well. He rebounds. And he is tough. He just isn't healthy. That where I came up with drafts that included players you just just listed. My list looked like this though. Take into account, this was a while ago.

CJM, VO, Otto, Dieng, Withey, Muscala, Erik Murphy, Ryan Kelly, Cory Jefferson, pick up Pierre off the street for other at one point. Well that list even looks pretty good today.

I hated Zeller and Len at the time so they were not on the list but they are now.

Jackie Carmichael is may latest addition.

Its a shorter list then you have but lots of similar names.

So I get were you are going from. Not one player I wanted was drafted in that 2011 draft. I left that draft pissed. I wasn't one of the ones who liked that we got Singleton. I wanted players like Nikola, Marshon Brooks, and Justin Harper ( that was a 3 draft combo I posted a lot) . I wanted a center and scoring. Looks like I hit on at least one from that group and it was a really good hit. Still waiting on Marshon to show better but I knew he was a 3-4 year project. He was my Nick replacement. And Harper was just a 3 pts role player pick. I also had T Harris in there. M Morris was on the list as well. Even wanted to take a stab at Jeremy Tyler in the 2nd as a project.

So I get where you are coming from. And we are all confused about what will happen this draft. Hell, the league is. I guess I just don't get that upset about things before they happen. Its not worth it. If they screw up, I'll get pissed then like I was in 2011 and I will surely call for EGs head and be pissed at Ted. Hell, I don't even know if EG stays regardless of what he does this year. Depends on who else is out there. Again, we will see.

But for now, I really like the Wall and Beal core young stars they have. I can see that having legit legs. I can see both those players on the floor playing high level playoff basketball. Thats a whole lot more then I could say two years ago about the team. And thats a ton of progress. So is the general make up of the team with Nene, Okafor, Webster and Trevor A vs Nick Young and McGee. I like the chemistry that have. And I have waited over 10 years for them to focus on building more around defense. And offense with a true PG as I was one who hated the idea of a shoot first PG that didn't play defense well.

I think this is the best team and total front office they have had since the Nash days and teams like this....

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/WSB/1996.html

That was 18 years ago. That was a team I felt they could grow from but they screwed it up.

So count me in the glass half full camp considering the no vote of confidence I had with Abe, Wes front offices and moves like dumping Nash over the Howard F up. And years of La Suz with circus marketing.

They have a lot better of a team and options right now. And I like Randy for the coach next year. And I can see a viable future. So lets see if they can keep moving it in the right direction. And just remember. Wall and Beal. That gives me a lot of hope for the future.

[AFM]

Bosh and Aldridge? LOL. These comparisons are always ridiculous. "He's like a young vince carter with a better handle". "He's like a more explosive Rondo". "He's like Hakeem with range to the 3pt line".
Why is everyone always compared to all star players? I would poop my pants if Zeller every becomes a 22/9 player like Aldridge or a 24/12 player like Bosh was in Toronto.

[sfam]

Athleticism scores at the combine mean absolutely nothing to me. I don't need to wait for a vertical jump test to see whether or not a player is a superb athlete. It should be clear from watching them actually play basketball (which is what they are drafted to do, NOT partake in "agility drills" or whatever Zeller excelled at).
Nick Young had an amazing vertical, I think over 40 inches. Would you know that from watching him play? Did he attack the rim and try to fly over players for a rebound? Never. Athleticism on the court, which should be evident, is all that matters.

While there's some merit to that, here's the issue with Zeller - people are envisioning a different role for him in the pros than he played in college. In college, he was asked to stay in the paint and do center-like things. Now he's envisioned to be a stretch 4. There's just not a lot to go on, so things like the agility drills give some credence to Zeller's possibilities at the 4. For this reason, I think they have merit more than they would if the player is going to be playing the same role in the pros than he did in college.

[hands11]

You think I am calling them idiots for not picking Wolters or Pierre? They are DAMN FOOLS for not extending a fair completion because they think no one drafted that late can help. When EG was selling second round picks, the 2009 draft produced several players in the rotations of playoff teams. EG sold the 37, and DeJuan Blair went to start for the Spurs. Danny Green was the 46th pick. (AJ Price was a 52nd pick that year).

What I am saying is this draft is just like 2009. If ever you want to keep the 55th pick this is the year!

I can understand EG's concern about having too much youth in the lineup. Too much youth and inexperience is a bad thing because the young guys need some veterans to teach them how to be a professional. But where EG fails is in his methods to restrict the amount of youth on the roster. He does so by trading away 2nd round picks all the time. What he should be doing is what Houston does. Draft 2nd rounders, sign them to short contracts full of team options, and then try them out. If they don't figure things out quickly, get rid of them and try next year with a new crop.

EG falls in love with his picks and sticks with them for too long.

There are two types of young players that should stick around. The first type are the ones who are already productive relative to their salary. Booker falls into this category. There's no reason to cut him because there's no reason to expect that we can find better player at the same cost. The other type of young player you should keep are the ones that are likely to develop into a player good enough to be worth more than the MLE because it's difficult to add players that good in free agency. There is no advantage in developing a guy who is only going to pan out to be a $3M a year free agent. When his contract is up, he is going to be just as obtainable as any other sub-MLE guy. Those guys are basically interchangeable so there's no real value. Why do we care if we have Bird Rights on Chris Singleton when we could just as easily sign a guy like Chase Buddinger for the same money?

With that in mind, I can see sticking with Seraphin. If he pans out, he could conceivably be a two-way starting big man - that's valuable. Bird Rights and RFA rights on a player like that are also valuable. But there is no reason whatsoever to grow attached to Vesely or Singleton. There is clearly no significant upside with those two. Even in a best case scenario, they get good enough to be NBA role players. Big whoop. Cut them now, let them develop on someone else's dime, and if we want them in two years once they're ready, sign them as free agents then.

In a nutshell, I am pretty certain CCJ is wrong about some of his favorite 2nd rounders, but I'm pretty certain that he is right on some of them too. If we had the roster space, we could try them out. If CCJ is right just 50% of the time, we'd still be adding a good player with every other 2nd round pick.

I group think this post.

Except I give a small amount more hope that Ves could be worth something more. I know it is long shot and I don't have a ton to back it up that he will project to do it, but if Ves can add a mid range, I believe that changes his projection from bust, to a legit development player who "if" he keep developing, could turn things around pretty quickly. By quickly I mean starting next season.

I wouldn't be pissed if they moved him, but I won't be pissed if they keep him either. But it is time to put up or shut up with him. He has to show he got his head together and has improved his skills. Mainly shooting and FTs.

So while I group think on 90% of this post, I group think the other 10% of it with CCJ regarding Ves.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I want Olynyk to be the pick. I am virtually certain he won't, but I like him more than Zeller or Len, and slightly more than Muscala.

Zeller at three is probably not a bad pick because Cody will thrive in open court playing alongside Wall. LaMarcus Aldridge blocks shots better and is stronger. Pau Gasol in his prime was a far better passer and tougher scoring in traffic . That said, Cody seems capable of becoming like them. He'll at least be a good NBA scoring PF.

Len was wildly inconsistent. Alex had 4 or 5 beast mode games. His games against Duke, Kentucky, and the last couple NIT games were spectacular. Otherwise, Len only got his hands on the ball to take 5 or 6 shots. His rebounding and shot blocking are not great except for when he has an occasional tremendous game. Len is still just 19. He had terrible teammates to overcome. I am concerned most about his feet and his temperament. By far he has the most upside. By far he has the most bust potential.

Muscala is pretty solid player who I like a lot, especially the way he rebounds. He is a gym rat. He's not the athlete Zeller is but he is an old school grinder. He's not able to score in the paint against physical players. He is a safe later pick. Muscala absolutely destroyed competition (even Missouri and Oriakhi) until a miserable NCAA final game against Andrew Stevens and Butler. Muscala is ready to play and might be the best big man in the draft if he goes to the right team.

http://basketball.realgm.com/player/Cod ... Logs/24152

http://basketball.realgm.com/player/Ale ... Logs/26866

http://basketball.realgm.com/player/Mik ... Logs/17065

Right now, I like Olynyk's efficiency in the paint. He is truly an inside out threat. He can be a good high post center and is mobile enough to play PF. His best games were in the NCAAs. He is a ready -now player and the type of young guy who is more confident and poised than Vesely or Seraphin. The Wizards need offense from a big and by far he is the most ready to provide that IMO. He can score in transition or in half court. I value his performance a bit more than Zeller's athleticism. Olynyk thinks the game better IMO.

http://basketball.realgm.com/player/Kel ... mmary/8330


I know he won't be the pick but I like Olynyk.

[hands11]

Athleticism scores at the combine mean absolutely nothing to me. I don't need to wait for a vertical jump test to see whether or not a player is a superb athlete. It should be clear from watching them actually play basketball (which is what they are drafted to do, NOT partake in "agility drills" or whatever Zeller excelled at).
Nick Young had an amazing vertical, I think over 40 inches. Would you know that from watching him play? Did he attack the rim and try to fly over players for a rebound? Never. Athleticism on the court, which should be evident, is all that matters.

I wouldnt go that far. It does matter sometimes. Specially when a player is changing positions.

Zeller moving from center to PF makes me take him numbers into account more then I would if he stayed at center.

And these players are changing leagues. The pro game is a lot different. Nick having those leaps was good to know. "If" they where able to get him to drive more and if the offense was set up for him to do that, then its helps to know a player can actually do it. Not standing jumps but moving and jumping. But you don't need combine number to see that. There are usually vidoes of them doing that in practice or at least in college games on break away dunks.

Nick had all the physical tools. And he could shoot so there was some skills that fit a need. He was poorly evaluated because they didn't take enough into account that he was Nick coming to a team with to many immature players. That was a bad fit.

Put Beals brain into Nicks body and you would have a really good player.

[popper]

It's going to be real interesting to see where Noel ends up. My take is that he obviously has outstanding defensive talent and reflexes but until he gets to 235 plus pounds I don't see how he's going to maintain position. Assuming he gets some minutes next year, I think opposing coached are just going to instruct their players to ride him out of the key at every opportunity. He doesn't have much value unless he's positioned in front of the basket.

I wonder how long it will take a person with his build and metabolism to gain 30 pounds?

[payitforward]

There are valid reasons to not want to many young players on a team. ...

I can only think of one valid reason: your team is reaching its peak and you validly expect some years of that going forward. Otherwise you need to add talent to your team. Trades don't do that usually; they are parity exchanges. The only things that do are a) signing a superstar (because superstars are underpaid due to the cap) and/or b) adding rookie-scale players via the draft (because rookie contracts underpay quality players and are pretty easy for a team to dump).

People set different goals and depending on what they are, they make decisions.

Sure. If your goal is an average competitive team -- a 40-game winner at the bottom of the lottery or just out -- you make the decisions the Wizards have made. That's what we seem to want, and I don't doubt that we can get there. I just find it depressing.

So we can all make individual projection on what we want, but if you aren't read into their more detailed goals and plans/strategy ( none of us know for sure) .. or are unwilling to except them... then being over critical of their moves ( before they actually do them and out of context afterward ) is to be over critical for the sake of being that way.

Uh huh. Only we've watched Ernie Grunfield seek his "goals" and execute his "plans/strategy" for a decade now. He's averaged 28-29 wins a season -- how is it possible to be "over critical of" that?

[sfam]

It's going to be real interesting to see where Noel ends up. My take is that he obviously has outstanding defensive talent and reflexes but until he gets to 235 plus pounds I don't see how he's going to maintain position. Assuming he gets some minutes next year, I think opposing coached are just going to instruct their players to ride him out of the key at every opportunity. He doesn't have much value unless he's positioned in front of the basket.

I wonder how long it will take a person with his build and metabolism to gain 30 pounds?

According to Noel, he was in the 228 went injured - Calipari said he was 222. I sort of believe that, considering Dr. Andrews wanted Noel to get his weight down for the ACL to recover. If so, Noel probably lost more water weight than anything, and should be able to build it back almost as quickly. If you believe them, the weight issue kind of disapears.

Now if they were lying, whoever drafts Noel will figure it out by February or so.

[doclinkin]

Agree with the Consigleiri...Zeller's atheltic measurements didn't translate on the court. I didn't see the explosive leaping ability in games. Saw for Dipo, but definitely not from Zeller.

True, he's not explosive, he's quick. Which can be better, depending on the system and players. With this roster that's a good fit. It allows for more open spacing in half court sets, and allows him to keep pace running the floor with our breakout uptempo concept. We tire out opposing bigmen and force them to foul to catch a rest.

Granted explosive and long would make him a better defender, rebounder, and allows him to get putbacks in heavy traffic. But on this squad he's the replacement for Nene not for Okafor. He stretches the floor as P&R man, and pick and pop if it turns out he is an above average shooter when left open. That P&R ability though will prove a nice weapon, he actually sets a solid pick and then leaves it surprisingly quickly, not anticipating the roll but following through both ways.

Where I like him is his quick feet, great footwork and good body control. He picked up FT attempts because he does seek contact, using the defender as a pivot point for spin moves etc. I can see him adding some strength, but he's unlikely to power over opponents. Still he's less likely to pick up fouls because of that. His footwork is excellent in the low-post. On defense, no I don't like him as a paint defender, except inasmuch as he can close the lanes by stepping in the way. If he can develop his flop repertoire that will help. What I do like is his ability to make things sticky on P&R defense. It's my read that his skill set is a large part of what helped his teammates in Indiana post the remarkable efficiency they did. That high FT total suggests that opponents were loading up on him. And I was comfortable with his results in the big time games that Indy played (vs Anthony Davis among other NBAers). They had a monster schedule if you look at some of the teams they faced. He had decent results, if not eye-popping ones.

Is he my favorite player here? Nope, but I'm happy to get him on a trade-back, he's savvy, hardworking, agile, and looks to be a good fit with our core in many respects.

Actually I have few overwhelming favorites, am happy to take many of the guys in the lotto. Various good fits and consolation prizes. I'll post a pre-view of my happy upside post-draft recap, soon. Call it a PRE-cap. Just so we can be happy no matter who we end up with.