Doug: If Knights not there then its Bismack

KRANG · Post #61 » by **KRANG** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:30 pm

No interest in BB whatsoever.

Knight or Kemba please.

I'd even rather trade the pick for Tony Parker if it meant not wasting it on Bismak.

Fairview4Life · Post #62 » by **Fairview4Life** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:30 pm

Relentless88 wrote:I'm disappointed Val isn't in the discussion. He is easily a better prospect than both.

Maybe he is in the discussion.

Mikeye · Post #63 » by **Mikeye** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:30 pm

Bismack is really 6'7 not even 6'9

Fairview4Life · Post #64 » by **Fairview4Life** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:31 pm

Mikeye wrote:Bismack is really 6'7 not even 6'9

He's 6'8.31'' in bare feet. I am betting that measurement was not just eyeballed and someone used a measuring tape. That was the recorded height from Eurocamp.

[SJJ] · Post #65 » by **[SJJ]** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:31 pm

Relentless88 wrote:I'm disappointed Val isn't in the discussion. He is easily a better prospect than both.

I definitely agree.
My draft board goes Val, BK, BB. I think all three will be solid pros.

barrist · Post #66 » by **barrist** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:31 pm

Mikeye wrote:Bismack is really 6'7 not even 6'9

6'8.31" without shoes. 1/2 an inch from 6'10" with shoes.

notic519 · Post #67 » by **notic519** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:32 pm

When I look at Knight I get a little scared. Can he really be a pure point guard? He has a great shot and good size for a pg but i'm not sure how well he can run an offense. If he is the pick I won't mind at all, I'm just worried Kemba will explode out of the gates and make the pick initially look bad.

The general consensus is if Knight is available at 5 you take him. If he is gone I like the idea that a poster above mentioned. Draft Val even if we have Bismack higher on our board since we do need a center. Monitor where Bismack is drafted then see if something can be worked out with that team to add another asset by switching picks. If nothing can be worked out we hold on to Val which isn't bad at all since many believe he may end up being the best prospect in the draft.

RocLaFamilia · Post #68 » by **RocLaFamilia** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:32 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
Mikeye wrote:Bismack is really 6'7 not even 6'9

He's 6'8.31'' in bare feet. I am betting that measurement was not just eyeballed and someone used a measuring tape.

I love when people say that, he looks 5'10... when in reality he is 6'3

Junkball · Post #69 » by **Junkball** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:33 pm

highness wrote:Wtf? Just a day ago most of the board was hoping for Knight to fall and now that there is a very likely chance that may happen.....people don't want him? People are weird.

Knight is a Bayless clone. Going back to Bayless' freshman year and pre-draft measurements, they're two peas in a pod.

Indeed · Post #70 » by **Indeed** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:36 pm

notic519 wrote:
Supercool Beas wrote:
RocLaFamilia wrote:
I don't know I like upside and all, but I also want a sure thing. What I am hearing about Val is both... If we get Knight I hope BC could get another pick for one of these two guys (BB/Val)

If there's any year to take a Valunciunas, this is it - we don't need him right away since we're in the midst of a rebuild, it's a terrible draft & there could very well be a lockout next year. It would suck to wait a year for him to come over though.

Yesterday I compiled a spreadsheet that measured Height, Reach and blocks/48 (player has to play at least 20 mins a game). The results were that Reach plays a bigger factor then height when it comes to blocked shots (correlation was higher with reach vs height). Bismack's reach is pretty darn huge and compares with centers around the league. The fact that he is shorter would likely make it easier to guard smaller players as well.

I also made the same comparison with rebounds/height/reach and noticed that there isn't much correlation with either reach/height when it comes to rebounding.

Hmm, of course, you don't use your head to block shots.
The standing reach and max vertical are there for block shots and rebounding.

Ducksplatt · Post #71 » by **Ducksplatt** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:36 pm

[SJJ] wrote:
Relentless88 wrote:I'm disappointed Val isn't in the discussion. He is easily a better prospect than both.

I definitely agree.
My draft board goes Val, BK, BB. I think all three will be solid pros.

Agree with you both. This guy could be a franchise C. Having to wait one year (when I don't expect we will do much next year) is a low price to pay to have him.

HSOB SIRHC · Post #72 » by **HSOB SIRHC** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:36 pm

Sooooo....can Ed Davis and Bismack co-exist?

Fairview4Life · Post #73 » by **Fairview4Life** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:37 pm

Junkball wrote:
highness wrote:Wtf? Just a day ago most of the board was hoping for Knight to fall and now that there is a very likely chance that may happen.....people don't want him? People are weird.

Knight is a Bayless clone. Going back to Bayless' freshman year and pre-draft measurements, they're two peas in a pod.

Wingspan.

K1NG · Post #74 » by **K1NG** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:38 pm

Thanks Doug, good to know we're not getting Bismack.

witnessraps · Post #75 » by **witnessraps** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:40 pm

HSOB SIRHC wrote:Sooooo....can Ed Davis and Bismack co-exist?

Offensively is a question mark. Defensively however, it will be one of the scariest frontcourts in the NBA.

Weems · Post #76 » by **Weems** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:42 pm

I like how the Walker fans suggest that Knight is redundant with Bayless and that they're clones. Is Walker not way more like Bayless than Knight?

tecumseh18 · Post #77 » by **tecumseh18** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:42 pm

HSOB SIRHC wrote:Sooooo....can Ed Davis and Bismack co-exist?

Thorpe's intervew on RR said that BB was a good match if Bargs is the 4, but Alabi (! - listen to the interview) would work better with Ed.

notic519 · Post #78 » by **notic519** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:42 pm

Supercool Beas wrote:
notic519 wrote:Yesterday I compiled a spreadsheet that measured Height, Reach and blocks/48 (player has to play at least 20 mins a game). The results were that Reach plays a bigger factor then height when it comes to blocked shots (correlation was higher with reach vs height). Bismack's reach is pretty darn huge and compares with centers around the league. The fact that he is shorter would likely make it easier to guard smaller players as well.

I also made the same comparison with rebounds/height/reach and noticed that there isn't much correlation with either reach/height when it comes to rebounding.

What about straight up man-to-man post defense though? We all know he can block shots & rebound, I think the bigger concern would be getting pushed around in the post due to his size.

If his age is no concern (actually 18) then is about the same weight as Dwight was going into the draft. If Dwight can hold his own the BB should be fine. Looking at BB it definitely appears he has the body capable with banging on the inside (he looks strong and should also be able to add more muscle to his frame).

Howard weight 240 reach 9' 3.5"
Bismack weight 245 reach 9' 3.42"

tecumseh18 · Post #79 » by **tecumseh18** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:43 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:
Relentless88 wrote:I'm disappointed Val isn't in the discussion. He is easily a better prospect than both.

Maybe he is in the discussion.

If he's not being discussed, it's because he's definitely in the discussion.

NashyMing · Post #80 » by **NashyMing** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:43 pm

If BC can somehow trade Bargnani for a pick to draft Biyombo a few spots later, then I am all for drafting Brandon Knight, but I would rather take Biyombo @ #5 and trade for a later pick to grab Kemba Walker.

I think Kemba Walker is much better than a lot of people think (as rumors suggested he's going to slide to late lottery).