Tim wrote an article about 64 tournament "truths," which immediately tells me what he is going to say is not the truth at all. Kudos to Tim for predicting 64 things that would happen in the tournament, but unfortunately a few of them were WAY off.
There used to be a time when the griping was limited to the teams that were left out (we've had plenty of that) or teams that feel unjustly persecuted by poor seeding (some, not a lot), but now we've entered a different realm. We have coaches parsing the difference between a high No. 2 seed and a low No. 2 seed (West Virginia) or the meaning of a No. 1 seed with an unfairly difficult path to the Final Four (Kentucky).
Apparently every single team wants the road the Final Four for them to involve playing all teams with losing records. Obviously it shows how much confidence a team has in their ability when they want to play the weakest possible teams in the NCAA Tournament. Really, the seeding issue is a little bit overblown for me. While everyone is up in arms over the incredibly difficult road Kansas had to the Final Four, it ended up they couldn't get focused enough to beat a quality team in Northern Iowa. Maybe the road to the Final Four was so tough for them because they have trouble focusing on the task at hand. The #3 seed and #4 seed were gone from the region by the Sweet Sixteen, so it's not like Kansas would have an incredibly hard road had they mustered up enough energy to play Northern Iowa tough all game.
In the age of statistics, maybe it was inevitable.
I have no clue what this means.
2. The guy with the best chance to finish off a season that cements a well-earned reputation as the one coach who can do the least with the most: Rick Barnes, Texas.
As much fun as it would be to also bash Roy Williams for his "coaching" this year, Rick Barnes does take the cake for underachieving this year...barely. Roy Williams had a great recruiting class coming in and had other McDonald's All-Americans on the roster this year, yet he barely eeked out a .500 year. Now his team is playing like it should in the NIT. I know his team was young, but it's not like he doesn't have a team with talent. He recruited these guys to play for his team, yet we are supposed to feel bad for him?
I don't recall anyone feeling bad for Duke when they started 2 freshmen, 2 sophomores, and a junior during the 2006-2007 season, had a sophomore and 2 freshmen as the first guys off the bench, and lost in the 1st round to VCU. People shouldn't have felt bad for them because Coach K picked those guys to recruit, so it was his fault when they didn't play well. I just found the difference in how Duke was treated during the 2006-2007 season interesting compared to the sympathy (at least in North Carolina) towards Roy Williams. One got sympathy and the other did not. Of course 96% of North Carolina residents are UNC-Chapel Hill fans so that probably explains it.
Ok, back to Rick Barnes. I would like to go easier on him because his team did have injuries, but there was still talent on that team, they had quality seniors and he had a preseason Player of the Year candidate in Damion James. I think Barnes is a great recruiter, but I do have to admit he doesn't always seem to do everything I think he could do with the talent his team has.
6. The weekend's biggest winner: Seth Greenberg at Virginia Tech, who got a lot more play out of his snub than he would have if his team had sneaked into the tournament and lost quietly to BYU or Louisville.
As I showed last week, VT got snubbed a lot harder over the past 2 seasons than they did this season. They also got REALLY good officiating in the NIT game against UConn last night. There were some pretty borderline calls that all went VT's way towards the end.
7. If they'd just scheduled Iona instead of ITT Technical Institute on that one Wednesday in December, things might have turned out differently: Virginia Tech's nonconference strength of schedule -- 339.
In VT's defense, they scheduled a much harder schedule over the past couple of seasons and didn't get in because the committee wasn't impressed with how many wins they had. So they more wins this year and they ended up in the same spot.
11. Apparently someone in facilities planning was expecting a bigger season from Bruce Weber and the boys: Illinois has to travel to Stony Brook because Cirque du Soleil has the gym that night.
I am pretty sure Illinois was projected to be in the Top 25 all year. So I think everyone expected Illinois to be in the NCAA tournament this year as well.
15. Team that will go quietly and early, thereby making the trendy wink-wink know-it-all experts look bad: Cornell, whose "big wins" were against Princeton, Harvard and Vermont.
Cornell made the experts look exactly like experts when it came to picking them. This prediction by Gene couldn't have been more wrong. Of course I said I didn't see the Temple-Cornell being an upset either. I didn't mock the Big Red's "big wins" though, but I am just going to call myself a dumbass anyway. Still, I am going to call Gene out with more anger for trying to call the experts out...and failing...twice.
16. Say this about Cornell: Never before has a team gotten such mileage out of a close loss as the Big Red got out of almost not losing to Kansas.
He just couldn't stop could he? I wonder if he has a basketball-related reason for these thoughts or was just trying to be contrary to popular opinion?
21. How does he do it? Calipari, the unchallenged master of recruiting the one-and-done, has entered the tournament the past three years with Derrick Rose, Tyreke Evans and John Wall at point guard.
How does he do it? Apparently with Derrick Rose he did it by cheating (oh, that's right. Calipari didn't know what went on, which I totally believe) to help him get into Memphis and then he was able to convince the other two players listed here he doesn't care if they stick around for more than one year. Plus, he did a good job of coaching all these guys at the point guard position and runs the dribble-drive offense which is fun to play in. That's how he does it.
23. Least interesting first-round matchup: Clemson versus Missouri.
This was actually an interesting game. There were two teams that like to press going against each other, not a bad matchup actually.
24. There's a saying in sports, and it goes something like this -- win the damn game: Northern Iowa can't complain about its seeding with losses to DePaul and Evansville.
Can they complain about their seeding now that they have beaten the overall #1 team in the tournament and are in the Sweet Sixteen? I hate seeding complaints, but it feels like Northern Iowa has a valid one. They were in the Top 25 most of the year and then got a #8 seed? Of course I did predict them to lose to UNLV, so what do I know?
So Gene doesn't give Cornell credit for almost beating Kansas, like this doesn't make them a good team, but also thinks Northern Iowa shouldn't complain about their seeding because they got upset twice? So an almost-upset means nothing compared to an actual upset in Gene's world. I think I got it. Personally, an almost-upset still tells me something about a team.
25. Mr. Big Shot: Sherron Collins.
Collins was 11-29 with 28 points in the two games he played in during the tournament. This Mr. Big Shot crap has to end...and I mean with Chauncey Billups as well. Why do we give the "Mr. Big Shot" title to players who haven't hit any big shots lately?
26. He had Occidental and Pacific Lutheran in the BCS title game: CBS morning man Harry Smith revealed his Final Four: Northern Iowa, Butler, Cornell and Robert Morris.
3 of those 4 teams are still alive. So while mocking him seemed like fun at the time, it doesn't seem too much fun when Harry Smith ends up possibly being right.
52. Or, looking at it another way, maybe it's further proof that everybody's right: Given the world's penchant for believing Duke gets preferential treatment every year, wouldn't you think the committee would go out of its way to make sure it doesn't happen -- just once?
As I have said a few times, I don't know if they did get preferential treatment. Of course they did get put in a bracket with a weak #2 seed, but they also have Baylor, St. Mary's, Texas A&M and Purdue in their bracket. They would have had to play either Texas A&M (if they beat Purdue) or Baylor in Houston, Texas, to advance to the Final Four which pretty much makes it a road game for Duke. I don't know if I would consider that preferential treatment.
The rationale the committed used does make some sense, even if some people hate it. Kansas was #1 overall and needed to be in the Midwest bracket, Kentucky was #2 overall and got the regional bracket closer to them in Syracuse. West Virginia was the strongest #2 seed so it wouldn't be right to put them with Kansas nor would it make sense to put them in the same bracket as Syracuse since they both played in the Big East. That leaves either putting the strongest #2 seed in Syracuse or Houston. They chose to keep the weakest #2 seed the furthest away from home and put the strongest #2 seed as close to home as possible. Maybe Duke's bracket is fairly weak, but please remember that the regional final is played in Texas and 2 of the top 5 seeds are located in Texas.
I am sure there were other ways to do the bracket, but it would have probably made less geographic and competitive sense than where each team actually was placed.
53. By the way, in the interest of quenching our unquenchable thirst for logic: Is it too much to expect the winner of the play-in game to play the team you designate as the No. 1 seed in the whole tournament?
Agreed. That was ridiculous. It really doesn't make a difference in the long-run though.
55. When Kentucky will go down: In the Sweet 16, against Wisconsin, a team that will impose its will on the Wildcats and force the youngsters into foul trouble and general impatience.
That prediction was so very wrong. Kentucky looks like the National Champion at this point and I don't doubt they will be.
56. Coach Cal seems like a nice guy and all, but seriously: Outside of Bob Knight, is it against the rules for broadcast journalists to mention Calipari's record of erased Final Four appearances (two)?
Not unless you want some crazy-ass Kentucky fans to start calling you racial slurs and pretty much everything else in the book.
Check out the comments after this article.
64. Once again, it's time for the timeless piece of advice concerning that most valuable of all your possessions, your bracket: Nobody cares.
"Nobody cares about your bracket" says the guy who just wrote an entire article on his 64 truths, which were essentially his opinion, on what would happen in the NCAA tournament. I think Tim Keown should give himself this same advice.
-Chad Ford had a chat yesterday and had some interesting things to say about the draft prospects of some college basketball prospects.
Joe (Davis)
Is a team going to risk taking on the contract demands and ego of Kevin Pritchard? He is very good, but his reputation makes him sounds like the Terrell Owens of NBA GMs.
Chad Ford: I think people should be looking at the folks that want his job (both within the organization and from outside the organization). Those are the folks killing him right now. I love the NBA, but there are only 30 NBA GM jobs and some folks would sell their young to get one.
Right now, Bill is nodding his head thinking of actually selling one of his young for an NBA GM job...because openly campaigning for them just isn't working.
Greg (OKC)
Hard pressed to find a better evaluator of talent than Pritchard? Greg Oden meet Kevin Durant please.
CF: That's a hard one. Unless Pritchard (and the rest of the organization for that matter) ignored the advice of the Blazers medical staff (which I have a hard time believing) and took him knowing he had major medical issues -- I don't know how you can really fault him. I spoke with virtually every NBA decision maker in the league. All of them told me they'd take Oden.
That was one miss involving a pick that was almost unanimous in who should be taken. Oden was being compared to Bill Russell, while some where concerned Durant's body couldn't take the beating of an 82 game season. It is hard to knock Pritchard for taking Oden, even if it hasn't turned out well at all. It seemed like a smart decision at the time, at least to most people.
CF: By the way ... that John Salmons trade is looking really good in Milwaukee right now isn't it. Not only are they making a huge run for a good playoff seed ... but they get the Bulls lottery pick too. Wow. John Hammond has done a great job this year as GM of the Bucks.
Not to make a second comment about Bill Simmons, but remember when he wanted to be the Bucks GM? Does anyone reasonably think he could have done as good a job as John Hammond has done with that team? I don't think so personally. I admit anyone could have done a better job with the Timberwolves GM position...of course I still don't think he should have been hired for it.
Chris (Firenze)
Minnesota lands the top pick, they have to take Evan Turner right? That's what seems logical to me.
No sir. You take the best available player. Just because you have a 2009 Toyota Camry doesn't mean if you get the chance to get a free new BMW you turn down this chance. If you are Minnesota and your fans hate you, draft John Wall and then shop the rights to Ricky Rubio. Having Jonny Flynn on the roster is just gravy and Wall has shown he can play with another point guard on the court while playing with Eric Bledsode. It's that easy. John Wall as the first pick. We all love Evan Turner, but even with Jonny Flynn on the roster, Minnesota needs John Wall.
Fortunately Chad Ford agreed with me on this.
Gnemi (Montana)
Chad, how worried should GMs be about Evan Turner's ball-handling? Nearly 4 and a half turnovers a game, many more in the tournament so far...then again, John Wall tends to mishandle the ball, too.
I am going to be a college basketball snob for a moment. Doesn't Gnemi from Montana know that Ohio State doesn't have a point guard? It's fine to make criticisms like this, but you have to look at why Turner is handling the ball a lot. The fact Turner is not a natural point guard and he is committing 4.5 turnovers a game while playing completely out of his natural position should be no cause for concern among NBA scouts. This is a typical case of someone taking a small part of a player's game and overexaggerating it to make it a big weakness, when it isn't a weakness.
Also, John Wall mishandles the ball because he is 19 years. Holy shit, get some perspective. It's not like he is a 4 year college starter or anything. Tyreke Evans wasn't exactly the best ball-handler for Memphis last year and he has done well in the NBA.
Frank (Allentown)
Most Potential for All-Star type player in the NBA: Cousins or Favors?
Let's see, which one of these potential turd-like players is more prone to be an All-Star in the future? After watching these players all year, Favors has absolutely terrible body language on the court when things are going bad. He has disappeared during games this year and has gotten in foul trouble. Of course he hasn't had a real point guard throwing the ball to him all year, so it's been kind of a struggle to get the ball when/where he wants it. I think the gap between these two isn't that great, but I would probably take Cousins in this situation.
DeMarcus Cousins has had a real point guard giving the ball to him all year and he has had some behavior-ish and foul problems this year as well. I say the most potential for All-Star type player in the NBA is DeMarcus Cousins. Favors may end up being the better player, I won't rule that out, but Cousins definitely has more potential to be either a franchise player or very close to a franchise player. I don't know if I have seen that potential in Favors yet.
CF: Both have the potential. Cousins is more NBA ready. Favors has more athletic upside.
I don't see it that way personally. I may just be ignorant and not speak "NBA-ese" where athletic upside somehow translates to NBA basketball skills. I like Favors, but I could care less about his "athletic upside" because he hasn't quite shown that to me yet without having a point guard to get him the ball. Cousins is going to be able to play center/power forward in the NBA, and while he is a little bit of a character, he isn't going to need excessively great athleticism to play his position in the NBA...not that he doesn't have great athleticism. Cousins hasn't even been the focal point of his team's offense this year, while Favors has been more of the focus of the Tech offense. Not to mention, it scares me Favors couldn't co-exist with Gani Lawal this year. George Tech didn't play too well when both players were in the game. This Favors/Cousins argument seems to be a "great potential player" versus a "great actual player" argument right now. The NBA drafts on potential, so I can see Favors going over Cousins.
Favors really hasn't had a reliable point guard all year. Either way, a team should be satisfied with either of them on their team. If Favors can drop his attitude and terrible body language I think he may end up being a better player than Cousins. Right now, I would draft Cousins before Favors though.
Philip (Bloomington, IN)
I am confused here Chad, I have no clue how people rank Ed Davis so high in the draft. NOrth Carolina stunk this year, and Ed Davis should have carried them to a much better record. I know he hurt himself lat in the year, but come on is size that important to waste a draft pick on Davis in the lottery, he should go early second in my opinion!
This guy probably also thought Steve Alford should have been drafted by the Pacers over Reggie Miller.
Ed Davis was injured for much of this year and when he did play he averaged 13 points, 9 rebounds and 2.7 blocks on 57.8% shooting. Those type players don't fall to the 2nd round of the NBA draft. This is without a real point guard too, please remember. Ed Davis went from the 6th best player on a team to the best player in a span of 7 months. That's not always easy for a sophomore to do.
For a comparison, Favors averaged 12 points, 8 rebounds, 2.1 blocks on 61.1% shooting and DeMarcus Cousins averaged 15 points, 10 rebounds, 1.9 blocks on 55.1% shooting. So unless you are high or just stupid, Ed Davis shouldn't fall to the 2nd round.
CF: Big guys need to get the ball on offense to score. I'm not saying Davis isn't a work in progress. He's still not a confident offensive player. But he'd look much better if his guards could've ever gotten him the ball in a decent spot. He should've averaged 6 ppg alone on alley-oops.
Saying Davis should have gotten more opportunities on alley-oops doesn't do a whole hell of a lot to convince me he will be a good NBA player. Alley-oops are gimme shots that he won't be able to get quite as often in the NBA as in college.
Knox (Conroe)
Eric Bledsoe is shadowed by Wall, I personally like Eric Bledsoe better. He is not as careless with the ball. Do you picture him like Johnny Flynn?
I love Eric Bledsoe as well, but he is not a better NBA point guard than John Wall. It's just not true. Also the reason Bledsoe isn't as careless with the ball is because he isn't having to be the primary ball-carrier because that is Wall's position on the Kentucky team. That does have something to do with Bledsoe's ability to not turn the ball over, the fact he isn't the primary ball-carrier. I would like to think Bledsoe as a point guard may not go for the spectacular play as much as Wall does either.
seth (lexington)
What do the NBA GM's think of kentuckys daniel orton?
I think Daniel Orton needs to stay in school one more year. 13 minutes per game, 3 points, 3 rebounds and 1.4 blocks don't impress me that much at this point. He is averaging 2.4 fouls in those 13.3 minutes as well. That's as a backup center in college where he is probably bigger than most other centers. He plays out as a forward in the NBA, but 2.4 fouls in only 13 minutes of action has to worry some GM's.
Who am I kidding though? GM's won't pay attention to the fact he hasn't been able to show much this year and be fixated on his potential. I wouldn't be shocked if Orton gets drafted high this year and then gets buried on the bench by a team that is too busy to actually give him the time he needs to develop.
Orton is the rawest of the bunch, but he's big, physical, plays defense and isn't afraid to mix it up under the basket. I just had a GM in the lottery tell me they liked him more than Cole Aldrich.
I like pretty much any (tall) player better than Cole Aldrich, so I can't disagree with that. The problem is Orton's "mixing it up" involves fouling other players and he hasn't shown much of a post game. One more year in college would work well for him.
Francis (Boston)
How much (if at all) do you think the Kansas players hurt themselves with the early upset to UNI? Does it affect Collins, Henry, and Aldrich at all?
Nothing can affect how I feel about Aldrich, because I don't like him as a lottery pick anyway.
CF: It didn't help. Sherron Collins probably took the biggest hit as he shot Kansas out of the game.
Collins' performance against Northern Iowa made me look at him a little closer. His FG% has steadily declined as he has gotten a bigger role in the Kansas offense and he had a 1.89 A/T ratio, while the "careless" John Wall had an A/T ratio of 1.62. Collins shot 42.6% from the field this year and only averaged 4.5 assists per game on a incredibly loaded team. To me, Collins is a guy that should go in the 2nd round of the draft...and I mean the later part of the 2nd round. As his role has increased on the Kansas team, his percentages have dropped. That has to mean something.
Joe (Maryland)
What are your thoughts on Maryland's Greivis Vasquez? Any chance he gets in the first round with teh lack of PG's in this year's draft?
CF: Like him, but he's not a great athlete. Maybe a second rounder. Maybe.
What I dislike the most about the NBA Draft is that a productive player can be discounted from being a 1st round draft choice because he isn't athletic enough, and that's it. As if the fact Vasquez plays in the ACC and has played well against teams like Michigan State doesn't matter. Who cares if he is actually a good basketball player? He isn't athletic enough to be in the NBA. So obviously the fact this has never hurt him before has nothing to do with this evaluation. The kid can rebound, score, handle the ball, and his teammates really seem to like him. There has to be a place for him in the NBA.
I am not saying Vasquez should go in the 1st round, but at least give an honest evaluation of the kid. He can do everything fairly well on the court and you are telling me a team like the Lakers, Cavs, or Celtics wouldn't want him as a backup point guard in the late 1st round? So he may not be able to jump out of the gym, but he can rebound and score from the point guard position. Isn't that valuable for some teams? Whatever, I am not going on my soapbox right now.
Benjamin (Albany)
Greg Monroe?. would he be there for the bucks with the 10th 11th pick the bucks get from the bulls?
CF: I doubt the Jazz let him slide past No. 9. I like Monroe, but I understand the concerns. Like a lot of these guys I'm talking about they are missing a key element -- either size, athleticism, shooting ability, motor, something. But that's how the draft is every year.
You mean to tell me there aren't players coming out of college with complete games that have no weaknesses? What? This is a shock to me. I would think there would be at least 10-15 players that have no weakness in their game. Shouldn't all 19-22 year old players be complete players at this point in their career?
(Done with sarcasm)
The question is whether this key element is going to affect this player's ability to be an NBA player or not. Chad Ford doesn't exactly say what Greg Monroe is missing, but I am guessing he isn't athletic enough. Because if a 6-foot-11-inch center can pass the ball like a guard, shoot the jump shot well and rebound well also, he better be really fucking athletic or else those numbers mean nothing to some NBA scouts.
This is the same league that ignores any concerns about a player like Hasheem Thabeet and drafts him #2 overall...despite the fact the holes in his game were athleticism, defense on the actual man he is guarding, his entire offensive game, and motivation.
Mike (Ohio)
Evan Turner reminds me of Dwyane Wade when he was at Marquette. Am I off base here?
Yes, you are off base. Evan Turner is a 6-foot-7 small forward who is being forced to play point guard, when he is actually a scorer and rebounder (sort of a Durant-lite), while Dwayne Wade is a hybrid guard that can score at will. There is a difference, and a big one, in these two players.
Taylor (Utah)
Am I right here. Cole Aldrich = Greg Ostertag Part II. Stay far far away gms.
Agreed. 100%. He isn't a bad player, but he was nearly always the biggest player on the court and only averaged 11.3 points per game this year. This is when he was clearly the biggest player on the court. What happens when he goes up against players who are as big as he is? I can't emphasize this enough. I think Cole Aldrich is a 1st round pick, but he is not a lottery pick.
CF: That's not fair. He LOOKS like Ostertag. But he's a better athlete and more skilled offensively.
I don't know if being a better athlete and being more skilled offensively than Greg Ostertag should make any player a lottery pick, nor should this be considered an endorsement of any type this player will be good in the NBA. Comparing Ostertag to Aldrich and expecting Aldrich to be a better pro isn't a huge leap.
Ostertag's college numbers. He wasn't even that great of a college player, though he scored nearly as many points as Cole Aldrich when you compare their junior years. In fact they have very similar junior years. Ostertag played about 5 minutes less per game than Aldrich did this past year.
Aldrich's junior year numbers.
I think Aldrich will be a better NBA player than Ostertag, I just feel like I have to compare the two players and show there isn't a massive difference in them, at least in college.
But he isn't as big as Ostertag was and that's a problem.
I don't mean to compare the two players, but having watched Cole Aldrich I have just found that he is a skilled big man in college, but I just don't know how much it will translate to the pros. Like last year I had questions about Thabeet and DeAndre Jordan to a lesser extent the year before, Aldrich is the official "Bottom of the Barrel Big Guy In the NBA Draft That Is Overrated" for this upcoming draft.
Maybe Aldrich will make me look like an asshole...but maybe he won't.
25. Mr. Big Shot: Sherron Collins.
Collins was 11-29 with 28 points in the two games he played in during the tournament. This Mr. Big Shot crap has to end...and I mean with Chauncey Billups as well. Why do we give the "Mr. Big Shot" title to players who haven't hit any big shots lately?
26. He had Occidental and Pacific Lutheran in the BCS title game: CBS morning man Harry Smith revealed his Final Four: Northern Iowa, Butler, Cornell and Robert Morris.
3 of those 4 teams are still alive. So while mocking him seemed like fun at the time, it doesn't seem too much fun when Harry Smith ends up possibly being right.
52. Or, looking at it another way, maybe it's further proof that everybody's right: Given the world's penchant for believing Duke gets preferential treatment every year, wouldn't you think the committee would go out of its way to make sure it doesn't happen -- just once?
As I have said a few times, I don't know if they did get preferential treatment. Of course they did get put in a bracket with a weak #2 seed, but they also have Baylor, St. Mary's, Texas A&M and Purdue in their bracket. They would have had to play either Texas A&M (if they beat Purdue) or Baylor in Houston, Texas, to advance to the Final Four which pretty much makes it a road game for Duke. I don't know if I would consider that preferential treatment.
The rationale the committed used does make some sense, even if some people hate it. Kansas was #1 overall and needed to be in the Midwest bracket, Kentucky was #2 overall and got the regional bracket closer to them in Syracuse. West Virginia was the strongest #2 seed so it wouldn't be right to put them with Kansas nor would it make sense to put them in the same bracket as Syracuse since they both played in the Big East. That leaves either putting the strongest #2 seed in Syracuse or Houston. They chose to keep the weakest #2 seed the furthest away from home and put the strongest #2 seed as close to home as possible. Maybe Duke's bracket is fairly weak, but please remember that the regional final is played in Texas and 2 of the top 5 seeds are located in Texas.
I am sure there were other ways to do the bracket, but it would have probably made less geographic and competitive sense than where each team actually was placed.
53. By the way, in the interest of quenching our unquenchable thirst for logic: Is it too much to expect the winner of the play-in game to play the team you designate as the No. 1 seed in the whole tournament?
Agreed. That was ridiculous. It really doesn't make a difference in the long-run though.
55. When Kentucky will go down: In the Sweet 16, against Wisconsin, a team that will impose its will on the Wildcats and force the youngsters into foul trouble and general impatience.
That prediction was so very wrong. Kentucky looks like the National Champion at this point and I don't doubt they will be.
56. Coach Cal seems like a nice guy and all, but seriously: Outside of Bob Knight, is it against the rules for broadcast journalists to mention Calipari's record of erased Final Four appearances (two)?
Not unless you want some crazy-ass Kentucky fans to start calling you racial slurs and pretty much everything else in the book.
Check out the comments after this article.
64. Once again, it's time for the timeless piece of advice concerning that most valuable of all your possessions, your bracket: Nobody cares.
"Nobody cares about your bracket" says the guy who just wrote an entire article on his 64 truths, which were essentially his opinion, on what would happen in the NCAA tournament. I think Tim Keown should give himself this same advice.
-Chad Ford had a chat yesterday and had some interesting things to say about the draft prospects of some college basketball prospects.
Joe (Davis)
Is a team going to risk taking on the contract demands and ego of Kevin Pritchard? He is very good, but his reputation makes him sounds like the Terrell Owens of NBA GMs.
Chad Ford: I think people should be looking at the folks that want his job (both within the organization and from outside the organization). Those are the folks killing him right now. I love the NBA, but there are only 30 NBA GM jobs and some folks would sell their young to get one.
Right now, Bill is nodding his head thinking of actually selling one of his young for an NBA GM job...because openly campaigning for them just isn't working.
Greg (OKC)
Hard pressed to find a better evaluator of talent than Pritchard? Greg Oden meet Kevin Durant please.
CF: That's a hard one. Unless Pritchard (and the rest of the organization for that matter) ignored the advice of the Blazers medical staff (which I have a hard time believing) and took him knowing he had major medical issues -- I don't know how you can really fault him. I spoke with virtually every NBA decision maker in the league. All of them told me they'd take Oden.
That was one miss involving a pick that was almost unanimous in who should be taken. Oden was being compared to Bill Russell, while some where concerned Durant's body couldn't take the beating of an 82 game season. It is hard to knock Pritchard for taking Oden, even if it hasn't turned out well at all. It seemed like a smart decision at the time, at least to most people.
CF: By the way ... that John Salmons trade is looking really good in Milwaukee right now isn't it. Not only are they making a huge run for a good playoff seed ... but they get the Bulls lottery pick too. Wow. John Hammond has done a great job this year as GM of the Bucks.
Not to make a second comment about Bill Simmons, but remember when he wanted to be the Bucks GM? Does anyone reasonably think he could have done as good a job as John Hammond has done with that team? I don't think so personally. I admit anyone could have done a better job with the Timberwolves GM position...of course I still don't think he should have been hired for it.
Chris (Firenze)
Minnesota lands the top pick, they have to take Evan Turner right? That's what seems logical to me.
No sir. You take the best available player. Just because you have a 2009 Toyota Camry doesn't mean if you get the chance to get a free new BMW you turn down this chance. If you are Minnesota and your fans hate you, draft John Wall and then shop the rights to Ricky Rubio. Having Jonny Flynn on the roster is just gravy and Wall has shown he can play with another point guard on the court while playing with Eric Bledsode. It's that easy. John Wall as the first pick. We all love Evan Turner, but even with Jonny Flynn on the roster, Minnesota needs John Wall.
Fortunately Chad Ford agreed with me on this.
Gnemi (Montana)
Chad, how worried should GMs be about Evan Turner's ball-handling? Nearly 4 and a half turnovers a game, many more in the tournament so far...then again, John Wall tends to mishandle the ball, too.
I am going to be a college basketball snob for a moment. Doesn't Gnemi from Montana know that Ohio State doesn't have a point guard? It's fine to make criticisms like this, but you have to look at why Turner is handling the ball a lot. The fact Turner is not a natural point guard and he is committing 4.5 turnovers a game while playing completely out of his natural position should be no cause for concern among NBA scouts. This is a typical case of someone taking a small part of a player's game and overexaggerating it to make it a big weakness, when it isn't a weakness.
Also, John Wall mishandles the ball because he is 19 years. Holy shit, get some perspective. It's not like he is a 4 year college starter or anything. Tyreke Evans wasn't exactly the best ball-handler for Memphis last year and he has done well in the NBA.
Frank (Allentown)
Most Potential for All-Star type player in the NBA: Cousins or Favors?
Let's see, which one of these potential turd-like players is more prone to be an All-Star in the future? After watching these players all year, Favors has absolutely terrible body language on the court when things are going bad. He has disappeared during games this year and has gotten in foul trouble. Of course he hasn't had a real point guard throwing the ball to him all year, so it's been kind of a struggle to get the ball when/where he wants it. I think the gap between these two isn't that great, but I would probably take Cousins in this situation.
DeMarcus Cousins has had a real point guard giving the ball to him all year and he has had some behavior-ish and foul problems this year as well. I say the most potential for All-Star type player in the NBA is DeMarcus Cousins. Favors may end up being the better player, I won't rule that out, but Cousins definitely has more potential to be either a franchise player or very close to a franchise player. I don't know if I have seen that potential in Favors yet.
CF: Both have the potential. Cousins is more NBA ready. Favors has more athletic upside.
I don't see it that way personally. I may just be ignorant and not speak "NBA-ese" where athletic upside somehow translates to NBA basketball skills. I like Favors, but I could care less about his "athletic upside" because he hasn't quite shown that to me yet without having a point guard to get him the ball. Cousins is going to be able to play center/power forward in the NBA, and while he is a little bit of a character, he isn't going to need excessively great athleticism to play his position in the NBA...not that he doesn't have great athleticism. Cousins hasn't even been the focal point of his team's offense this year, while Favors has been more of the focus of the Tech offense. Not to mention, it scares me Favors couldn't co-exist with Gani Lawal this year. George Tech didn't play too well when both players were in the game. This Favors/Cousins argument seems to be a "great potential player" versus a "great actual player" argument right now. The NBA drafts on potential, so I can see Favors going over Cousins.
Favors really hasn't had a reliable point guard all year. Either way, a team should be satisfied with either of them on their team. If Favors can drop his attitude and terrible body language I think he may end up being a better player than Cousins. Right now, I would draft Cousins before Favors though.
Philip (Bloomington, IN)
I am confused here Chad, I have no clue how people rank Ed Davis so high in the draft. NOrth Carolina stunk this year, and Ed Davis should have carried them to a much better record. I know he hurt himself lat in the year, but come on is size that important to waste a draft pick on Davis in the lottery, he should go early second in my opinion!
This guy probably also thought Steve Alford should have been drafted by the Pacers over Reggie Miller.
Ed Davis was injured for much of this year and when he did play he averaged 13 points, 9 rebounds and 2.7 blocks on 57.8% shooting. Those type players don't fall to the 2nd round of the NBA draft. This is without a real point guard too, please remember. Ed Davis went from the 6th best player on a team to the best player in a span of 7 months. That's not always easy for a sophomore to do.
For a comparison, Favors averaged 12 points, 8 rebounds, 2.1 blocks on 61.1% shooting and DeMarcus Cousins averaged 15 points, 10 rebounds, 1.9 blocks on 55.1% shooting. So unless you are high or just stupid, Ed Davis shouldn't fall to the 2nd round.
CF: Big guys need to get the ball on offense to score. I'm not saying Davis isn't a work in progress. He's still not a confident offensive player. But he'd look much better if his guards could've ever gotten him the ball in a decent spot. He should've averaged 6 ppg alone on alley-oops.
Saying Davis should have gotten more opportunities on alley-oops doesn't do a whole hell of a lot to convince me he will be a good NBA player. Alley-oops are gimme shots that he won't be able to get quite as often in the NBA as in college.
Knox (Conroe)
Eric Bledsoe is shadowed by Wall, I personally like Eric Bledsoe better. He is not as careless with the ball. Do you picture him like Johnny Flynn?
I love Eric Bledsoe as well, but he is not a better NBA point guard than John Wall. It's just not true. Also the reason Bledsoe isn't as careless with the ball is because he isn't having to be the primary ball-carrier because that is Wall's position on the Kentucky team. That does have something to do with Bledsoe's ability to not turn the ball over, the fact he isn't the primary ball-carrier. I would like to think Bledsoe as a point guard may not go for the spectacular play as much as Wall does either.
seth (lexington)
What do the NBA GM's think of kentuckys daniel orton?
I think Daniel Orton needs to stay in school one more year. 13 minutes per game, 3 points, 3 rebounds and 1.4 blocks don't impress me that much at this point. He is averaging 2.4 fouls in those 13.3 minutes as well. That's as a backup center in college where he is probably bigger than most other centers. He plays out as a forward in the NBA, but 2.4 fouls in only 13 minutes of action has to worry some GM's.
Who am I kidding though? GM's won't pay attention to the fact he hasn't been able to show much this year and be fixated on his potential. I wouldn't be shocked if Orton gets drafted high this year and then gets buried on the bench by a team that is too busy to actually give him the time he needs to develop.
Orton is the rawest of the bunch, but he's big, physical, plays defense and isn't afraid to mix it up under the basket. I just had a GM in the lottery tell me they liked him more than Cole Aldrich.
I like pretty much any (tall) player better than Cole Aldrich, so I can't disagree with that. The problem is Orton's "mixing it up" involves fouling other players and he hasn't shown much of a post game. One more year in college would work well for him.
Francis (Boston)
How much (if at all) do you think the Kansas players hurt themselves with the early upset to UNI? Does it affect Collins, Henry, and Aldrich at all?
Nothing can affect how I feel about Aldrich, because I don't like him as a lottery pick anyway.
CF: It didn't help. Sherron Collins probably took the biggest hit as he shot Kansas out of the game.
Collins' performance against Northern Iowa made me look at him a little closer. His FG% has steadily declined as he has gotten a bigger role in the Kansas offense and he had a 1.89 A/T ratio, while the "careless" John Wall had an A/T ratio of 1.62. Collins shot 42.6% from the field this year and only averaged 4.5 assists per game on a incredibly loaded team. To me, Collins is a guy that should go in the 2nd round of the draft...and I mean the later part of the 2nd round. As his role has increased on the Kansas team, his percentages have dropped. That has to mean something.
Joe (Maryland)
What are your thoughts on Maryland's Greivis Vasquez? Any chance he gets in the first round with teh lack of PG's in this year's draft?
CF: Like him, but he's not a great athlete. Maybe a second rounder. Maybe.
What I dislike the most about the NBA Draft is that a productive player can be discounted from being a 1st round draft choice because he isn't athletic enough, and that's it. As if the fact Vasquez plays in the ACC and has played well against teams like Michigan State doesn't matter. Who cares if he is actually a good basketball player? He isn't athletic enough to be in the NBA. So obviously the fact this has never hurt him before has nothing to do with this evaluation. The kid can rebound, score, handle the ball, and his teammates really seem to like him. There has to be a place for him in the NBA.
I am not saying Vasquez should go in the 1st round, but at least give an honest evaluation of the kid. He can do everything fairly well on the court and you are telling me a team like the Lakers, Cavs, or Celtics wouldn't want him as a backup point guard in the late 1st round? So he may not be able to jump out of the gym, but he can rebound and score from the point guard position. Isn't that valuable for some teams? Whatever, I am not going on my soapbox right now.
Benjamin (Albany)
Greg Monroe?. would he be there for the bucks with the 10th 11th pick the bucks get from the bulls?
CF: I doubt the Jazz let him slide past No. 9. I like Monroe, but I understand the concerns. Like a lot of these guys I'm talking about they are missing a key element -- either size, athleticism, shooting ability, motor, something. But that's how the draft is every year.
You mean to tell me there aren't players coming out of college with complete games that have no weaknesses? What? This is a shock to me. I would think there would be at least 10-15 players that have no weakness in their game. Shouldn't all 19-22 year old players be complete players at this point in their career?
(Done with sarcasm)
The question is whether this key element is going to affect this player's ability to be an NBA player or not. Chad Ford doesn't exactly say what Greg Monroe is missing, but I am guessing he isn't athletic enough. Because if a 6-foot-11-inch center can pass the ball like a guard, shoot the jump shot well and rebound well also, he better be really fucking athletic or else those numbers mean nothing to some NBA scouts.
This is the same league that ignores any concerns about a player like Hasheem Thabeet and drafts him #2 overall...despite the fact the holes in his game were athleticism, defense on the actual man he is guarding, his entire offensive game, and motivation.
Mike (Ohio)
Evan Turner reminds me of Dwyane Wade when he was at Marquette. Am I off base here?
Yes, you are off base. Evan Turner is a 6-foot-7 small forward who is being forced to play point guard, when he is actually a scorer and rebounder (sort of a Durant-lite), while Dwayne Wade is a hybrid guard that can score at will. There is a difference, and a big one, in these two players.
Taylor (Utah)
Am I right here. Cole Aldrich = Greg Ostertag Part II. Stay far far away gms.
Agreed. 100%. He isn't a bad player, but he was nearly always the biggest player on the court and only averaged 11.3 points per game this year. This is when he was clearly the biggest player on the court. What happens when he goes up against players who are as big as he is? I can't emphasize this enough. I think Cole Aldrich is a 1st round pick, but he is not a lottery pick.
CF: That's not fair. He LOOKS like Ostertag. But he's a better athlete and more skilled offensively.
I don't know if being a better athlete and being more skilled offensively than Greg Ostertag should make any player a lottery pick, nor should this be considered an endorsement of any type this player will be good in the NBA. Comparing Ostertag to Aldrich and expecting Aldrich to be a better pro isn't a huge leap.
Ostertag's college numbers. He wasn't even that great of a college player, though he scored nearly as many points as Cole Aldrich when you compare their junior years. In fact they have very similar junior years. Ostertag played about 5 minutes less per game than Aldrich did this past year.
Aldrich's junior year numbers.
I think Aldrich will be a better NBA player than Ostertag, I just feel like I have to compare the two players and show there isn't a massive difference in them, at least in college.
But he isn't as big as Ostertag was and that's a problem.
I don't mean to compare the two players, but having watched Cole Aldrich I have just found that he is a skilled big man in college, but I just don't know how much it will translate to the pros. Like last year I had questions about Thabeet and DeAndre Jordan to a lesser extent the year before, Aldrich is the official "Bottom of the Barrel Big Guy In the NBA Draft That Is Overrated" for this upcoming draft.
Maybe Aldrich will make me look like an asshole...but maybe he won't.
5 comments:
Frankly I think Derrick Favors has way more NBA potential than DeMarcus Cousins and Ed Davis. Even though Davis was hurt and had no real point guard, they still fed him the ball when he was on the court. Meanwhile, Favors got no touches as you pointed out, but still put up similar numbers. Also Cousins only dominates now because of his mammoth size. That's not to say that he won't be a great player (which I think he will), but way more NBA players can match his size, and have way greater athleticism. Favors has that ahleticism, but as you said, a bad attitude when he's not getting touches. It's interesting to think how their potential would be evaluated had Favors played for Kentucky and Cousins for Georgia Tech.
Yeah, I'm going to agree with Dylan. Favors to me definitely has the most upside. As you mentioned, he didn't have a backcourt that could get him the ball, and the problem with him co-existing with Lawai stemmed from the fact that they both like to operates on the same spots on the floor. Cousins is a little too immature/unstable for my liking. I'm not saying that he's a sociopath, but I don't think he's worth the risk. Here would be my top 10:
1. Wall
2. Turner
3. Favors
4. Wes Johnson
5. Ed Davis
6. DeMarcus Cousins
7. Greg Monroe
8. Cole Aldrich
9. Al Farouq-Aminu
10. Eric Bledsoe
Dylan, obviously Cousins has the advantage in playing with John Wall, but for some reason I still would draft Cousins over Favors. Like I said in the post, I will admit Favors could end up being a great player, I just haven't seen the passion, caring or ability to take over the game. But, not having a point guard hurts.
I didn't mean to directly compare Davis to Favors and Cousins. Davis is below those two for sure, but I was just trying to say he wasn't a 2nd round pick, that he could make it in the lottery as well. I would take both Favors and Cousins over Davis.
Jeremy, as long as another team with a post player doesn't draft Favors I guess he will be fine. I know Favors will probably mature, but I haven't been impressed with him overall. I know Cousins is immature too, but it's a passionate immature that I can handle better in a player. It's like he cares, which I don't know if Favors does or not.
I hate Aldrich. How he can only score 11 ppg in the Big 12 is beyond me. Loved him as a freshman, hate him as a sophomore. I may be wrong, but I would put Aminu and Bledsoe above him.
I am glad you gave Greg Monroe some respect. He is going to make a team that drafts him happy, as will Vasquez. If I were Bledsoe, I would wait one more year though. He won't, but he should.
Also, I forgot to mention this yesterday; in regards to Duke having an "easy" path to the final four, this is the last year of the NCAA's TV deal for the tournament with CBS. In that sense, it's essentially like a contract year; they're going to do as much as possible to make sure they get good ratings. With Duke, a lot of people are going to watch those games, both because a lot of people like them, and a lot of people dislike them, and thus like watching them lose. The same with Kentucky, which has a strong national following and a slew of players that are NBA prospects. So, this year especially, it's in the best interest of pretty much everyone to keep Duke (and Kentucky) in the tournament for as long as possible. With a team like Syracuse, however, a team that doesn't really have a strong national fanbase, they got put in a bracket that was a little bit more wide-open, with teams like Butler and Kansas St. Obviously I don't think that the tournament committee sat down saying "we need to keep Duke in the tournament," but I also don't think that it can be completely ignored, either.
That sound you heard was me booing that idea, but not totally ruling it out. I don't think it matters anyway, ESPN is probably going to get the tournament and then I will be forced to watch Dick Vitale and Dan Shulman call the National Championship game and have to kill myself.
I see what you are saying and I am not in denial. It goes strong both ways on Duke (which still amazes me, why isn't UNC/Kansas/Syracuse so polarizing? Though Kentucky is), so it gets ratings.
It's a good point Jeremy and I don't think it was an overt attempt but you know what I think well enough to know I won't rule it out.
Post a Comment