I think I got three picks in my mock draft correctly. As usual, I failed to achieve the goal I set for myself in terms of getting the picks correct. Sorry this is a little late, but I went on vacation and blah, blah, blah...I'm just getting around to writing this. I enjoy doing the NBA Draft grades because I know most of the players, except for most of the foreign-born players who I don't pay attention to because (adopts deep Southern accent) I'm an American and that ain't real basketball they play overseas.
As I usually do, I'll grade the teams on a scale of 1-10 with "10" being the best and "1" being the worst, or as I may call it from now on "The Ainge." Here we go and I'm going to ignore what the teams have done in free agency because I still can't wrap my head around the money being thrown around. I recognize it's market value for these players, plus THE CAP IS GOING UP SO IT'S OKAY TO SPEND MONEY IN FREE AGENCY, but I still struggle a bit with some of the money that was handed out in free agency. The cap is going up, but I still think a lot of these teams are going to be looking to unload the contracts they recently handed out over the next two or three years.
Atlanta Hawks
Of course the first team is hard to judge because they took two European guys that I've never heard of and traded Kelly Oubre for Tim Hardaway Jr. I thought Oubre should have stayed in school for another year and the Hawks needed another scorer. So the trade sounds good on paper. Yet, Hardaway Jr. is a chucker who didn't manage to shoot 40% from the field last year. Short term it might be a good move, especially if Hardaway Jr. is able to find a role with the Hawks. The role being "don't shoot 11 times per game and stand in the corner to wait for your chance to shoot." It was sort of a punt-type of draft for the Hawks.
Grade: 3
Boston Celtics
To say I hated this draft would probably not fully describe how much I hated this draft. Terry Rozier is a volume-scorer who isn't a point guard and is much too small to be a shooting guard. I don't see what he adds to the team. He's not as good as Marcus Smart, he isn't a good scorer like Isaiah Thomas, and he can't play defense like Avery Bradley. I despise R.J. Hunter as a first round pick. The fact he was taken more towards the second round mitigates the choice a bit, but wow, he is a shooter who isn't a good shooter. I wouldn't have drafted him even close to the beginning of the second round. Jordan Mickey is the only pick I think that can save this draft for the Celtics and only because I think he'll give the Celtics a guy who actually has the ability to block shots. Overall, I didn't like the Celtics going with two guards in the first round and I didn't like the guards they picked.
Grade: 1
Brooklyn Nets
The Nets basically got Michael Kidd-Gilchrist with the #23 pick. They had to give up Mason Plumlee to do it, but in terms of value, I like Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. At worst, he will be a good defender and that will keep him on the floor. He won't be a starter, but can be a Tony Allen-type off the bench. I mocked Cliff Alexander to the Nets because I thought they needed a young power forward on the roster and there would be one available at the end of the first round. I chose the wrong one. I hope the Nets are patient with Chris McCullough, because I think he has the chance to be a contributor in the NBA. He's like 155 pounds soaking wet though and he's coming off major surgery. The Nets weren't in a position to get a great talent who will help immediately, but I think they showed themselves fairly well.
Grade: 7
Charlotte Hornets
Where to start?
1. I thought with Justise Winslow being available here, they Hornets should have taken him instead of Frank Kaminsky.
2. Fine, choose Kaminsky. If the Celtics offer of four 1st round picks (and change) to the Hornets is true (which I believe it was) then why not make the trade and offer two first round picks to the Heat just to move up to #10 and select Frank Kaminsky? Winslow will be gone at that point, so the Heat could be open to the trade.
3. Fine, the Heat aren't open to the trade. Some team between spot #11 and #16 will be open to this trade, because the value of two first round picks to move back just a few spots has to be tempting. Some team, somewhere would take this trade. They would have to.
4. Fine, no teams wanted to make a trade and the Hornets wanted Kaminsky that badly. Tell the Heat you are making a trade with the Celtics who want Winslow, do the Heat want Winslow? If so, make the Hornets an offer to move up one spot. Then the Heat get Winslow and the Hornets get SOMETHING and still get Kaminsky at #10. Everyone can then laugh at Danny Ainge about how he got played by Michael Jordan and the Hornets.
5. Fine, the Heat think this is absurd and the Celtics are angry the Hornets are going behind their back to cut another deal and refusing four 1st round picks. Everyone hates the Hornets now and no one wants to do a deal with them ever again. Draft Kaminsky and know you tried to get more value out of a pick you were making anyway. My point, is the Hornets had so many options to get Frank Kaminsky, along with something else in a trade, and they didn't seem to want to do it.
I think Frank Kaminsky wasn't a terrible pick. In terms of execution, the Hornets get a big fat "1" from me in terms of a draft grade. The pick isn't going to be terrible, but it could have been so much better. Kaminsky can shoot well, which the Hornets need, but the Hornets also dangled their last two first round picks in trades prior to the draft, so I do have to wonder if they know what the hell they are doing overall. A team that tries to trade their last two lottery picks isn't suddenly going to start making savvy moves. I like Kaminsky as a role player, but I hated how this all went down for the Hornets.
Grade: 4
Chicago Bulls
I like Bobby Portis. I don't know if he will be a star, but he really works hard to improve his game (as seen by his improvement from freshman to sophomore year at Arkansas) and he will fit in well with the Bulls. He's not going to be asked to start and he'll learn from Pau Gasol while trying to out-effort Taj Gibson and Joakim Noah in practice. This is a great spot for Portis, which of course means he will fail miserably with the Bulls. The Bulls just sat there and let Portis fall to them though. That's always a winning strategy when it works.
Grade: 9
Cleveland Cavaliers
I hate Syracuse centers. It's just a thing for me. Syracuse centers play in the zone defense and aren't always ready for the NBA game if you ask me. Maybe I'm just thinking of Fab Melo. It's hard to fault the Cavs for drafting Rakeem Christmas in the second round though. He did improve at Syracuse and really did block shots. It's not like the Cavs don't have a need for a shot blocker or anything. I know very little about Cedi Osman, but hey, he's a foreign-born player so I'm sure Chad Ford loved him. Indeed, he did:
Osman is a terrific point guard with great size for his position putting
up solid numbers for his age. He needs to get stronger and his shot is
pretty ugly, but there's a lot of talent there. He's No. 43 in our Top
100 and could easily sneak into the late first round as international
players tend to do.
Ford loves Osman so much that he can't even decide if Osman is a point guard or a small forward:
Osman has the most upside of anyone left. He's a playmaking three who,
while he can't really shoot, does just about everything else well. He's a
likely draft-and-stash for the Lakers though his play for Efes this
season suggests he may be more ready than some.
Osman can play multiple positions well, and even though he can't shoot (why would he need to shoot to play basketball anyway?), he's a terrific point guard/small forward/he can do it all.
The best thing about Sir'Dominic Pointer is his name. Mockery of Syracuse centers and international players aside, not a horrible draft for the Cavs. Besides, they aren't exactly looking for guys to come in and play big minutes this year anyway.
Grade: 6
Dallas Mavericks
I like Justin Anderson a lot. He's an excellent defender whose offensive skills got lost on a Virginia team where offense means not scoring too many points in order to finally play a game where they win despite scoring less than 30 points. His value to the team could be seen in how they struggled once he got injured. Anderson isn't the type of scorer like Monta Ellis was, but I'm not sure he will need to be when coming off the bench. This was one of the very few picks I got correct and I think it was a nice choice. The Mavericks then selected a guy from India in the second round who is tall. This has never been done before. So Mark Cuban is looking to sell t-shirts in India.
Grade: 7
Denver Nuggets
I'm probably going to shade this grade lower than I should because (a) I'm not a huge Mudiay fan and (b) I can't figure out why the Nuggets are running one point guard of town just to draft another one. Money, I guess. Happiness, I guess. Rebuilding, most likely. It's horrible analysis, but there is something about Mudiay I just don't like. I feel like he's not a great shooter, but of course he's still young. I don't find him to be the dynamic point guard that I feel like he's being touted as. Maybe that's it. So the Nuggets did a good job to fill the point guard position that seems like it will be open soon. I'm not a fan of the pick, even if I understand the need.
Grade: 4
Detroit Pistons
I'm very "blah" on Stanley Johnson. For me, he's another one of those small forwards coming out of college that has all of the physical skills necessary to succeed, but I feel like he over-relies on those skills at times. An over-reliance on being more athletic and natural ability can only take him so far. Not that Johnson didn't work at Arizona, but he was inconsistent in his effort. Most of what could make Johnson succeed in the NBA isn't entirely what he showed at Arizona, but what his body and ability makes it seem like he could do. That causes me to be nervous. I would have drafted Justise Winslow here, but the Pistons clearly felt differently. They needed a small forward, so not a bad pick, and he's probably worth the risk. Darrun Hilliard is a pick I didn't understand. I know it's the second round where anything goes, but there were better options at #38 than Hilliard. At least I thought so.
Grade: 5
Golden State Warriors
I generally hate drafting guys on potential in the first round. It seems to me how busts often happen. It's easier to draft a guy on potential when it's the last pick of the first round though. I had Looney going to Boston in the middle of the first round and he almost lasted until the second round. The Warriors ran an interesting defense this year with Draymond Green at center and they could do that because they had athletic, tall guys who can guard multiple positions at the other spots. Well, Kevin Looney is an athletic, tall guy as well. He's not going to contribute much this year and possibly not the year after that, but I think he's going to eventually crack the Warriors rotation. He doesn't really have a position (he's a forward, but not really a power or small forward), which is normally a bad thing, but for the Warriors I think it works. I like this pick even if Looney busts, only because his talent has him going in the late lottery if he stayed in school one more year.
Grade: 9
Houston Rockets
I love making snide comments about Daryl Morey, the smartest GM in the history of the NBA. See? I did it again. I think he did a good job in this draft. Sam Dekker can be a more athletic Kyle Korver and I love Montrezl Harrell, even if he went to Louisville. I don't think either of these players are going to help the Rockets win the NBA title this year, but Harrell is a tough rebounder and isn't ever going to short the Rockets on effort. Dekker can be one of the guys off the bench (like Ariza) who can benefit from James Harden driving to the basket and kicking it out for a three-point shot. I know the Rockets had a point guard mocked to them in a lot of mock drafts since it was an area of need, but I think this draft is going to help the Rockets' bench this upcoming season.
Grade: 8
Indiana Pacers
Myles Turner runs so funny though. Plus, he voluntarily played for Rick Barnes, without a gun to his head forcing him to make this decision. Of course, so did Kevin Durant. I wasn't a fan of Myles Turner for most of the college basketball season. He too often wanted to shoot three-point shots and couldn't take minutes away from the ever-ballooning Cameron Ridley. He was the #2 center in the class behind Jahlil Okafor and only played 22 minutes per game. He shot 2 three-pointers a game, despite the fact he's almost seven feet tall and only made 27% of those three-point shots. He can block shots though. He's a taller, more awkward Josh Smith. That's how I saw him and I'm not sure my opinion has changed much. It's softened, probably beaten down by nearly every draft reviewer who thinks Turner has a high ceiling and not much of a floor. I didn't like Andre Drummond either, so keep that in mind. I idiotically killed Drummond. BUT, I did say this:
7. Golden State- Andre Drummond, C
As
a rule, I tend to dislike the Warriors draft picks. I hated the Klay
Thompson pick last year and I didn't like Anthony Randolph or Epke Udoh
that much either when they were drafted. So I know I will hate this
pick. The Warriors need a big man, even if they have Andrew Bogut on the
roster, you can't have too much size. Mark Jackson wants to turn the
Warriors into a defensive team and I think they try to start this
progression by drafting Andre Drummond. He could be special
He COULD be special, so I wasn't wrong...right? Actually, very wrong. Here's the best part:
or he could also be the reason Mark Jackson is back in the booth with Jeff Van Gundy in two years.
Two years later, Mark Jackson was back in the booth with Jeff Van Gundy. Why? Not because of Andre Drummond. So perhaps Myles Turner is the guy I am going to be very wrong about in this draft, but I think he has some bad habits he picked up at Texas and I don't know if he even wants to break them. He seems like a stretch-four in a center's body. Not sure that works for him in the NBA.
Grade: 2 (For Pacers fans, this is good news)
Los Angeles Lakers
I would have taken Okafor if I were the Lakers. They liked D'Angelo Russell more so that's good for them. I think they made a mistake, but I don't hate Russell. My concern with Russell is that he came from an Ohio State team where his deficiencies were masked by the fact the team didn't have a ton of other options. He's not a great defender, though he was a freshman so I can excuse that, but the fact he was one of the few scorers on the OSU team covered up for the fact his decision-making can be a bit questionable at times and his shot selection isn't always great. So it's hard for me to judge how he'll transition to the NBA, because the issues that are going to plague him in the NBA weren't issues at OSU, simply out of necessity. I'll say that Russell could be fun to watch and his upside is that he could be the best player in the draft. If he matures as he is capable then that's a definite possibility. He wouldn't have been my choice in this spot. Larry Nance Jr. wasn't a bad pick, but he was a bad first round pick. His game is limited and I thought there were better options available to the Lakers at the #27 spot. He's not worth a first round pick, though I could just pretend he and Anthony Brown (the Lakers second round pick) are flipped. Brown has a skill, three-point shooting, that could keep him in the NBA and I think he may end up being one of those guys who is better in the NBA than he was in college.
Grade: 4
Los Angeles Clippers
The Clippers originally had no pick. So having a pick is better than not having a pick, right? Especially when their bench needed a major infusion of talent. So they bought Branden Dawson from the Pelicans. I've heard lazy analysts say he could be this year's Draymond Green, which is lazy because they both went to Michigan State and both stayed four years and both don't have a definite pro position. I'm not sure how to grade this pick since I don't see Dawson as an NBA player, but the Clippers needed a pick to at least have some infusion of young talent. What Dawson does well is that the fills up a stat sheet, which is going to be his ticket to receiving playing time. It's not easy finding a player who has a diverse skill set like Dawson has late in the second round. Dawson will at least be a competitive practice player. I'll give them credit for that.
Grade: 5 for effort, though I doubt Dawson sticks.
Memphis Grizzlies
I don't know who promises Jarell Martin a first round spot, but I guess that's what the Grizzlies did. He's just not a good enough offensive player for me to take in the first round. I wouldn't have made this pick if I were the Grizzlies. He's not a great shot blocker either. So for me, he's a long, athletic player who isn't an offensive threat and isn't that interested in playing defense. I don't see him in the league in three years. Andrew Harrison wasn't a bad pick, given his size and the fact he has played a lot of big time college basketball games, but I can't see him making an impact in the NBA. Of course, he was a second round pick, so perhaps I'm being hard on him.
Grade: 2
Miami Heat
The Heat did great by doing nothing and landing Justise Winslow. I don't think Winslow is going to be a top-five player at his position or anything, but he's a talented player who is capable of doing a lot of things well on offense, is super-competitive and willing to play defense. I think he was a better choice for the Pistons, but he has that knock of his ceiling being lower than other players taken before him. Josh Richardson could stick in the NBA based on his defensive ability and the development of his shooting. If he doesn't get better at both, he won't make it. I didn't hate the pick for the Heat though.
Grade: 8
Milwaukee Bucks
Man, I'm going negative a lot here. Rashad Vaughn. I like how he shoots the basketball and he is so young (not that he is the only one in the draft who is young of course), that he can grow out of some of the deficiencies he has. How do I put this politely...he would have benefited from some better coaching in college and if Jason Kidd and his staff can coach Vaughn up then he can be a scorer coming off the bench. The Bucks also traded for Greivis Vasquez, as there is a mandate from the NBA that the Bucks trade for, or trade to another team, at least one point guard every six months.
Grade: 5
Minnesota Timberwolves
I would have chosen Okafor personally, but again, Towns wasn't the wrong choice. I'm excited to watch him play beside Andrew Wiggins. He's only touched his potential and he's definitely going to be a much better defender than Okafor. For Towns, my biggest question is whether he is ready to be "the guy" for an NBA team. Though I guess that may not be answered since Wiggins will be "the guy" for the foreseeable future. Still, how's he going to handle the nightly grind of the NBA? He only played 20 minutes per game in college. Otherwise, I can't argue with his selection. I also liked the Tyus Jones selection, only in that the T-Wolves need to get Zach LaVine closer and closer to his inevitable career on the And-1 circuit. Jones will only be a backup in the NBA, but he's smart with the basketball and doesn't need to shoot in order to make an impact on the game.
Grade: 9
New Orleans Pelicans
They traded Branden Dawson. I can not grade them in this draft, unless the Clippers sent counterfeit bills in return for Dawson. In which case, the Pelicans need to be more careful when accepting money from strangers.
New York Knicks
I don't have as much of an issue with the Knicks' draft because they aren't in a position to win-now. They want to now and the fans want them to win-now, but that's not reality. I know little about either Porzingis or Hernangomez, other than the name "Hernangomez" sounds like a glitch on a video game where a player's first name and last name are melded together. I do know Jerian Grant and he was Notre Dame's best player last year. I think he's going to be a starter in the NBA very soon. The Knicks weren't trying to win now, and if the international scouts can be believed, the Knicks may have gotten the best player at #4.
Grade: 7
Oklahoma City Thunder
I think Cameron Payne is going to be the the next mid-major player to star in the NBA. Of course, as soon as I say that, he'll never turn into anything. Regardless, Payne was an absolute stud at Murray State last year and pretty much does everything well. He's not athletic and he's skinny. He also tends to make mistakes, but he's going to a good NBA team because he's not going to be running the show. Russell Westbrook will be. I think Payne will end up being a nice replacement for Reggie Jackson. Dakari Johnson looks slightly cross-eyed and like he just came off playing a caveman in the Geico commercials, but I think he'll be a good NBA backup. He's limited, but he's a big guy who doesn't trip over himself. That alone has given many NBA players a 5-7 year career and at least one irresponsible free agent contract offer.
Grade: 8
Orlando Magic
Every report on Mario Hezonja says that he is very confident. So I guess that's good as long as it is used appropriately. The Magic seem to have a pretty good core with Payton, Oladipo, Hezonja, though I can't help but wonder if they will regret not going with Willie Cauley-Stein for his defensive abilities. It was early to take Cauley-Stein, so I guess not drafting him makes sense. Still, I'd like to see what he could do with Payton and Oladipo. Poor Tyler Harvey. He led the nation in scoring, but he seems to small to score like that in the NBA. I could be wrong, because he can shoot. I wish I knew more about Hezonja, but I can't knock the Magic too much since they didn't turn down four 1st round picks for the honor of choosing Hezonja.
Grade: 6
Philadelphia 76ers
So the Lakers choosing Russell over Okafor probably won't work out for either team. The 76ers don't really need another center and they wanted Russell, because the 76ers backcourt is awful on paper. I like the pick of Jahlil Okafor. His ceiling isn't seen as being high, but he can score points, rebound and I think he will improve his defense towards being respectable. The 76ers have to be trading either Joel Embiid or Okafor. It's got to be happening. Otherwise, the 76ers chose a couple of European big men, a college player I had not heard of (Richaun Holmes), and J.P. Tokoto. Ask UNC fans about J.P. Tokoto. He can jump and is super-athletic. His game needs so much work to catch up with his athleticism. Is Philly the right place for that? I'm in a weird position of liking the 76ers pick, but not liking this draft, as they really didn't fix any of the true holes they have on the roster.
Grade: 3 (based on bad luck and four other picks that were underwhelming...I like Okafor)
Phoenix Suns
I don't know why I didn't mock Devin Booker to the Suns. It made so much sense. I'm kicking myself. Booker is a great shooter and the Suns needed another shooter on the roster. They also traded for Jon Leuer, which is good news because maybe he will somehow cut into Alex Len's minutes and everyone can admit that Len was never really that good in the first place. I could have (and did) tell the Suns that a few years ago. I don't know if I buy Booker as an NBA starter, but in a league where outside shooting is becoming more and more important, Booker is NBA-ready as a shooter. He can stroke the three-point shot and he's really, really young so other facets of his game can develop too. It's hard to find guys with elite skills, but the Suns found one.
Grade: 8
Portland Trailblazers
The Trailblazers traded the #23 pick for Mason Plumlee. It seems like a decent move considering the Trailblazers are going to need some forwards. Plumlee is much better off the bench than as a starter, but it's not like they gave up a ton with the #23 pick. Pat Connaughton is a mystery to me. Watching him, I can never figure out exactly what he does best, but he seems to have an impact on games. So Connaughton is a workout warrior, but he's also managed to contribute in college. Therefore, he vexes me.
Grade: 5
Sacramento Kings
This seems a bit high for Willie Cauley-Stein. I like him a lot, but he has very, very little offensive game and most of his value is tied up into his versatility and ability to be a great defender of multiple positions. I mean, he's a freak in terms of being able to defend multiple positions. He reminds me of a taller Dennis Rodman at times. He has absolutely no offensive game at this point, though I guess that won't matter much since DeMarcus Cousins will be doing most of the post scoring. I love Cauley-Stein, but I still have no idea how an NBA team properly utilizes him. He's an NBA player I would love to watch, but I don't know if I would want him on my team. I'm not a fan of the selection so high, despite my infatuation with Cauley-Stein's skill set. I think there were better picks out there, even if it meant selecting a guy I didn't like (Emmanuel Mudiay), but better fit a need in George Karl's offense.
Grade: 3
San Antonio Spurs
My thoughts on the Spurs first round pick: Who?
My thoughts on the Spurs second round pick: Heard of him, didn't think he would get drafted.
Grade 1.0: 10 (didn't ruin the chance to land quality free agents), which was more important than choosing a contributing player.
Grade 2.0: 2 If the Spurs are going to choose a player who may not contribute then why not take a more talented underachieving player in the second round, who the organization can perform their magic on and transform him into a contributing player?
Toronto Raptors
Delon Wright was a difficult player for me to analyze. He's not a great shooter and was used to controlling the ball at Utah. Still, he was one of the best players in the country and should prove to be a pretty good NBA backup point guard. The Raptors needed to draft another point guard (though Wright is more of a combo guard) after trading Vasquez and Wright is an experienced option who will fit in. I liked the Norman Powell selection as well. I don't know if he will make it, but he gives good effort on defense and showed steady improvement over four years at UCLA. Solid, not great draft.
Grade: 6
Utah Jazz
I really liked this draft for the Jazz. I'm a big fan of Olivier Hanlan and can see a situation where he will get big minutes for the Jazz. His talent was covered up by Boston College teams that lacked talent and a direction. As long as Hanlan realizes he doesn't have to carry the load in the NBA, I think he has a skill set to be a 10-year pro. I also like Trey Lyles. Part of the reason he didn't go higher in the draft is he played out of position at the small forward spot all year for Kentucky. He would have been much better served coming off the bench as opposed to being thrust into the small forward spot after Alex Poythress' season-ending injury. I'm sure Poythress would agree. He's a good shooter for his age and size, plus he's also a strong rebounder. I think the Jazz got a steal in both picks. Hanlan will give the Jazz more experience (granted, college experience) at point guard and Lyles can come off the bench and give teams a different look from Favors.
Grade: 10
Washington Wizards
I like that the Wizards drafted Kelly Oubre, even if I'm not a huge fan of Oubre. The Wizards needed to be aggressive in taking a shot to make the team better, and while I do think Oubre should have stayed in school, he does have that special potential to be a great player. He also has potential to never be any good too. He's the ideal for teams that love potential, at least he's the ideal in this year's draft. While I do have hesitations about Oubre transitioning to the NBA, he responded when Bill Self benched his ass at the beginning of the year and took it as a challenge to improve. That's a good sign. Aaron White won't ever play much in the NBA and I'm not sure why he was drafted. He's a decent shooter, but unless he turns into Matt Bonner I can't see him making an impact in the NBA. Maybe the Wizards felt White was pro-ready, but I would have taken a bigger gamble in the second round to improve their big man rotation.
Grade: 5
So feel free to grade my grades harshly.
Showing posts with label NBA draft busts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NBA draft busts. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Thursday, June 2, 2011
2 comments A List of Players With "Major Red Flags" From Bleacher Report
Kyle Vassalo, who writes for Bleacher Report, has a list of the Top 10 prospects with red flags, not just red flags but MAJOR ref flags, in the 2011 NBA Draft. Kyle is one of the estimated 35 writers for Bleacher Report who currently have articles up about the NBA Draft and which players will bust. Apparently the Bleacher Report editors call a meeting and immediately demand 40 or 50 writers to write a variation of the exact same article.
Naturally, like any good Bleacher Report article it is a list of the Top 10 players with MAJOR red flags and you have to click on a separate page for each entry on the list. Because pageviews, not great content, is what Bleacher Report seems to aim for.
Let's find out first what a major red flag really is...
Every NBA draft produces a number of players who fizzle. In hindsight, most of them had glaring red flags prior to being drafted.
What kind of glaring red flags did these players have I wonder? Too bad, we get no examples of past player's red flags, which would be helpful to understand the context with which this article is being written.
What constitutes a red flag? It could be a nagging injury, potential holes in his game
"Potential holes in his game?" So basically, if a player doesn't come into the NBA Draft with an all-around game that has no potential holes, that's a huge major red flag. So essentially, every prospect that has ever come to the NBA has a major red flag. You want examples? Let me show you...
Check out this scouting report on Derrick Rose. His weaknesses are described as (and therefore potential holes in his game) are his mid-range game, his lack of interest in defense, his overall perimeter shooting and the fact he could play out of control at times. I guess retrospect says these weren't huge red flags, but a point guard with questionable decision-making, lack of ability to shoot from outside, and a liability on defense doesn't seem to be that enticing to a team. Despite the odds against him ever succeeding, Rose was taken #1 overall and won the MVP award this year.
Let's check out Dwyane Wade's major red flags before he came to the NBA:
Cons: The big dig on Wade is that he is perceived to be too small to play shooting guard and might not have the ball-handling skills to run an NBA offence. Still needs to work on his jump shot and must improve behind the NBA three-point arc.
So Wade is a tweener who doesn't shoot a jump shot well enough nor is he tall enough to be a shooting guard, while he doesn't run the point well enough to be a point guard? Sounds like this guy has some MAJOR red flags! We all know now this was bullshit and Wade is one of the NBA's best players. An NBA prospect tweener with a questionable jump shot is a guy who may have major red flags in the mind of Kyle Vassalo, as we will see in a minute.
My point is you can pick nearly any NBA prospect, find one thing wrong with that prospect and then call that a major red flag. Kevin Durant is too skinny and may not be able to handle the NBA grind. Dwight Howard has very few post moves and doesn't shoot foul shots well. You can do it for any player. A red flag isn't just a weakness in a player's game, because every player has weaknesses coming out of college.
or character concerns, among other issues.
That's my issue, what are "other issues?" Any small issue can be blown up into a huge issue when discussing an NBA prospect. A red flag should be an issue a player has, whether it be personal or on-the-court, that player has shown that could impact his ability in the NBA. Every player has red flags, but a MAJOR red flag should be something a team should look at has having a high probability of affecting the player's NBA career. They are generally something that is out of the NBA team's control.
I feel like Kyle went to Bleacher Report with a list of 5 players with red flags, but they wanted more pageviews in their slideshow, so they made him increase it to 10 players.
Let's take a look at 10 players in the draft who could be throwing up some major red flags prior to draft day.
I also like how the article is not only given no context, but there are no suggestions given. So Kyrie Irving has an injury red flag. Does that mean Kyle Vassalo thinks he shouldn't go #1 overall? He should fall to the middle of the 1st round? Saying a player has no red flags, giving us no other players in the past who had red flags for context, and then not saying how the red flag should impact that player's draft position doesn't bode well for a well-written article.
Let's begin the slideshow!
Kyrie Irving:
We could be looking at the second coming of Chris Paul. We might be looking at another number one pick with Greg Oden injury issues.
His injuries aren't expected to follow him to the next level, but how many guys have injury concerns in college and remain healthy at the next level?
How many players have one major (arguably) injury in college and remain healthy at the next level? How about how many players have zero injuries in college and don't remain healthy at the next level? I can't decide if this is a rhetorical question or Vassalo is actually asking the reader to provide him this information...because he sure as hell doesn't take time off from doing a slideshow to provide us with a single example.
Injuries for a player can be a major red flag. If only we had a way of seeing how Irving performed after he came back from the injury to see if he could perform well and stay healthy...wait, we do because he came back and played three games in the NCAA Tournament.
Against Hampton: 20 minutes, 14 points, 4 rebounds, 1 assist, 2 turnovers and 2 steals.
Against Michigan: 21 minutes, 11 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 turnovers, and 1 steal.
Against Arizona: 31 minutes, 28 points, 0 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 turnover, and 1 steal.
So coming back from his injury in the exact same season he experienced the injury, Irving seemed to have no problem scoring or playing at a high level. So should his toe injury really be a major red flag? Probably not.
His disappearance from the Duke lineup and sudden return in the tournament threw off the schematics of the team.
Which was obviously entirely his fault that he worked hard enough to rehab his toe and try to come back, rather than sit out the entire season. Irving's work ethic to make it back is probably considered a major red flag by Vassalo as well because Duke didn't win the National Championship, with the sole reason for this not occurring is the addition of Kyrie Irving back into the lineup.
Bismack Biyombo:
Bismack Biyombo might be the most athletic player in the draft.
He's raw, though, and nobody has seen a whole lot of him.
So Biyombo's red flag is that nobody has seen a whole lot of him. Apparently our ignorance about Biyombo and his skill set means his level of play may not be high enough to make it in the NBA. I can buy that he is raw and that's a red flag, but I can't buy a red flag is that we haven't seen him play much. So go watch him play. The red flag is now fixed.
Some mocks have him going as high as sixth, but teams should proceed with caution.
(closes eyes and refuses to watch Biyombo play) Because no one knows anything about him and it is his fault! Teams can't just scout players. Do you think there are just magical boxes that show Biyombo's games or highlights?
Jonas Valanciunas:
Jonas Valanciunas may have problems getting out of his contract with Lietuvos Rytas. Whoever decides to go after Valanciunas is going to have to do their research and figure out exactly what the stipulations are.
This isn't a really a red flag because it has nothing to do with his skills or how they would translate to the NBA. Teams can do research (as suggested) and figure it out.
Wasting a draft pick on a Euro player who doesn't come to the NBA, regardless of how talented, can set a team back years. Ask the TWolves.
Right, because the fact Ricky Rubio hasn't come to the United States to play is the single event that has set the Timberwolves back years. What a simplistic and convenient way of trying to prove your point. Everything would be coming up roses for the Timberwolves if they only had gotten that Euro player to play for them. Rubio's refusal to come to the United States to play for the Timberwolves is a single wave in the tide of problems for them.
Alec Burks:
Alec Burks is a shooting guard whose biggest flaw is that he has problems shooting the ball.
He shot 46.9% from the field this past year. He shot 53.8% from the field the year before that.
He shot 29.2% from three-point range this year. He shot 35.2% from the field the year before that. So it seems like Burks' three-point shooting needs help, but he either (a) gets to the basket effectively or (b) has a good mid-range game. Both skills could translate well to the NBA.
Yes, Burks isn't a great outside shooter. Dwyane Wade shot 50.1% from the field and 31.8% from three-point range his last year at Marquette. I'm not comparing Burks to Wade, just simply saying picking out one problem in a player's game doesn't constitute a major red flag.
Having a two guard with a limited range is dangerous. Penetrating guards like Dwyane Wade are lethal, but without a consistent mid-range jumper, he could tank at the next level.
This is exactly the type of player Dwyane Wade was coming out of college, a guy with an inconsistent three-point shot who could get to the basket. Sure, he is now a penetrating guard that is lethal, but coming out of college there were questions about his outside shot. This is why calling Burks' outside shot a major red flag may be an exaggeration, because Vassalo is using another guard who had an inconsistent outside shot coming out of college as a comparison to Burks. The same major red flag could have applied to the now "lethal" Dwyane Wade.
Jimmer Fredette:
There is a lot to like about Jimmer Fredette.
He's also a useless defender and if his shots don't hit, he has no off switch.
A lot of these major red flags depend on your expectations for a player. If a team drafts Jimmer Fredette as the 6th/7th guy off the bench who can score then this "major" red flag doesn't matter at all. Jason Terry can also be a fairly useless defender at times and he has found a place in the NBA, as have many other players who can shoot, but are liabilities on defense.
Fredette has more skills than the average pure shooter, but he still carries the same red flags that Adam Morrison did when he came out.
If by "same red flags" you mean "they are comparable in very few ways," then this is a true statement. Adam Morrison was a small forward who could score and played questionable defense. Jimmer Fredette is a point guard who can score and plays questionable defense. Other than that, they are completely different players. Fredette is a much better athlete than Adam Morrison is, has fewer health issues, and because he plays a different position his defensive and offensive responsibilities are different from what Morrison's were in the NBA. I guess if the same red flags means there are questions about both player's defense then that would be accurate, but the comparison should probably stop there.
Josh Selby:
If there is a player in the draft who can do to much, he's it. Solid defender, unlimited tools, but he doesn't have Kobe Bryant's stroke and he tries to emulate the way he takes over the game.
The major red flag on Josh Selby is that he isn't as good as Kobe Bryant.
He can be selfish, which obviously doesn't bode well for his position.
He's a shooting guard by the way. Not a point guard. Any team that drafts him should play him at shooting guard. So being selfish isn't an overly terrible trait in a shooting guard.
He's not necessarily a "look at me" sort of O.J. Mayo guy; he's just a competitor.
I have no idea what this means, but it apparently is a major red flag of sorts.
This leads me to another question. Kyle Vassalo is now starting to list guys with major red flags that are looked at being drafted somewhere near the end of the first round or close to the second round. These perceived red flags or issues teams may have with a player in many cases are the reason why the player is going to be taken at this point. I guess what I am saying is it becomes a bit obvious to list players taken close to the second round as having red flags, since these players would go higher if they didn't have these red flags. They aren't even really red flags, but perceived flaws in their game.
Also, I think the biggest red flag with Josh Selby is not that he is selfish or the way he tries to take over the game, but how he did not fit in well in Bill Self's structured system at Kansas. Selby seems to need a more free-flowing flexible system and he adjusted poorly to the improved defense at the college level. So the red flag about Selby is that he seems to struggle to fit into a structured offense within the team, so if he gets drafted by a team that wants him to run the point guard in a structured offense he could possibly fail.
Tobias Harris:
Tobias Harris is a tweener. Is he a 3? Is he a 4? He's got the ball skills to be a 3, but he rebounds like a 4. It's good to be able to play multiple positions. The more versatile a player is, the harder he can be to guard.
Versatility is a major red flag. I hate it when players rebound like a power forward and have the ball skills to be a small forward. These type guys are always making things more difficult by giving the head coach more options in a game.
The problem is that Harris could get caught up in the middle.
That's it. That is the entire reasoning given for why Tobias Harris has a major red flag due to being a tweener. The least Vassalo could have done is copy and paste part of a scouting report that says this exact same thing.
He's got a ton of upside and could pose matchup problems, but he could get lost in the mix.
The mix of what? I'm not saying Harris isn't a tweener, but depending on where many of these players are drafted, many of them could get caught up in the mix. I guess if a person calls being a tweener a major red flag, I look for more information than vague indications a player could "get lost in the mix."
Darrius Morris is a huge point guard. He's got the size, he can stroke the basketball and he is a solid defender. He has everything you would ever want in a point guard, most of the time at least.
Darrius Morris is a borderline first round pick. So his red flag is that he isn't a complete point guard, which if he were, would make him a lottery pick of course.
He goes missing at other times. He's one-dimensional and fails to make an impact at times. Morris could make a huge splash as a sleeper pick in this year's point guard–laden draft, but his inconsistency issues might make him struggle.
Still a little vague, but overall not a bad analysis of Morris. I still don't know if the fact Morris is inconsistent is a major red flag. He is only 20 years old.
Jordan Williams:
At 6'10", he doesn't have the length to camp out in the paint. He's got to be able to run the floor and quite frankly, he can't.
Williams is 250 pounds. He excelled in college at camping out in the paint and rebounding. I guess if you are only look at length as how a post player succeeds in the NBA then this would be a problem. Fortunately, most rational people know there is more to playing in the paint and rebounding than just having length. If that were true, Charles Barkley wouldn't have been a good NBA player and Hasheem Thabeet would be a 2-time All-Star.
Williams is one of those guys who won't be on the floor for extended periods of time. He's great at hauling in rebounds, but he's far more likely to be a bench role player on a good team than the next star center.
Again, Williams is a projected late first round or early second round pick. He's not being drafted to be the next All-Star center, he would be drafted for a bench role. So the fact he isn't an All-Star is not a red flag. Apparently to Kyle Vassalo any prospect that doesn't project to being an All-Star has a major red flag.
Jon Leuer:
Jon Leuer is a huge forward. He can pass very well for a big man. He has great ball skills for his size and knows how to operate on the perimeter. He has a lot of the traits you look for in a shooting guard, he was simply born in the wrong body.
So he has shooting guard skills in a power forward's body? What NBA team would be interested in a player like this? This could create matchup problems for the opposing team when he is on the court. Who would want that?
There isn't a line out the door for big men who can shoot and can't rebound.
But as a bench guy he is valuable, correct, because he has the skills of a shooting guard? Or is that a red flag?
I am also not sure where the idea that he can't rebound comes from. Leuer isn't as aggressive on the glass as he should be, but he did average 7.2 rebounds per game this year and nearly a block a game. He averaged 1.67 offensive rebounds per game as well. Some of that may be attributable to his height, but he can rebound. It's not his overwhelming strength, but he doesn't do poorly on the glass considering he is more of a finesse-type player.
There comes a time when your front court has to step up and own the paint.
As a starter late in a game this is true. Leuer doesn't necessarily project as a starter in the NBA, so he probably won't be on the court when the front court needs to step up and own the paint.
Again, we can't work under the assumption all of these NBA prospects are going to be starters. So knowing this, these "major red flags" turn out to just be weaknesses in a player's game and not really a red flag that could cause the player to completely bust.
There were 12 pages to this slideshow and when you go to Page 12 of the slideshow it takes you immediately to the next article. Oh Bleacher Report...you thrill me in your weak and transparent attempts at increasing pageviews. If an slideshow says it is 12 slides long, then that 12th slide should be a part of that slideshow and not the first slide of the next slideshow. That's just cheap. Of course, what else should I expect from Bleacher Report?
Naturally, like any good Bleacher Report article it is a list of the Top 10 players with MAJOR red flags and you have to click on a separate page for each entry on the list. Because pageviews, not great content, is what Bleacher Report seems to aim for.
Let's find out first what a major red flag really is...
Every NBA draft produces a number of players who fizzle. In hindsight, most of them had glaring red flags prior to being drafted.
What kind of glaring red flags did these players have I wonder? Too bad, we get no examples of past player's red flags, which would be helpful to understand the context with which this article is being written.
What constitutes a red flag? It could be a nagging injury, potential holes in his game
"Potential holes in his game?" So basically, if a player doesn't come into the NBA Draft with an all-around game that has no potential holes, that's a huge major red flag. So essentially, every prospect that has ever come to the NBA has a major red flag. You want examples? Let me show you...
Check out this scouting report on Derrick Rose. His weaknesses are described as (and therefore potential holes in his game) are his mid-range game, his lack of interest in defense, his overall perimeter shooting and the fact he could play out of control at times. I guess retrospect says these weren't huge red flags, but a point guard with questionable decision-making, lack of ability to shoot from outside, and a liability on defense doesn't seem to be that enticing to a team. Despite the odds against him ever succeeding, Rose was taken #1 overall and won the MVP award this year.
Let's check out Dwyane Wade's major red flags before he came to the NBA:
Cons: The big dig on Wade is that he is perceived to be too small to play shooting guard and might not have the ball-handling skills to run an NBA offence. Still needs to work on his jump shot and must improve behind the NBA three-point arc.
So Wade is a tweener who doesn't shoot a jump shot well enough nor is he tall enough to be a shooting guard, while he doesn't run the point well enough to be a point guard? Sounds like this guy has some MAJOR red flags! We all know now this was bullshit and Wade is one of the NBA's best players. An NBA prospect tweener with a questionable jump shot is a guy who may have major red flags in the mind of Kyle Vassalo, as we will see in a minute.
My point is you can pick nearly any NBA prospect, find one thing wrong with that prospect and then call that a major red flag. Kevin Durant is too skinny and may not be able to handle the NBA grind. Dwight Howard has very few post moves and doesn't shoot foul shots well. You can do it for any player. A red flag isn't just a weakness in a player's game, because every player has weaknesses coming out of college.
or character concerns, among other issues.
That's my issue, what are "other issues?" Any small issue can be blown up into a huge issue when discussing an NBA prospect. A red flag should be an issue a player has, whether it be personal or on-the-court, that player has shown that could impact his ability in the NBA. Every player has red flags, but a MAJOR red flag should be something a team should look at has having a high probability of affecting the player's NBA career. They are generally something that is out of the NBA team's control.
I feel like Kyle went to Bleacher Report with a list of 5 players with red flags, but they wanted more pageviews in their slideshow, so they made him increase it to 10 players.
Let's take a look at 10 players in the draft who could be throwing up some major red flags prior to draft day.
I also like how the article is not only given no context, but there are no suggestions given. So Kyrie Irving has an injury red flag. Does that mean Kyle Vassalo thinks he shouldn't go #1 overall? He should fall to the middle of the 1st round? Saying a player has no red flags, giving us no other players in the past who had red flags for context, and then not saying how the red flag should impact that player's draft position doesn't bode well for a well-written article.
Let's begin the slideshow!
Kyrie Irving:
We could be looking at the second coming of Chris Paul. We might be looking at another number one pick with Greg Oden injury issues.
His injuries aren't expected to follow him to the next level, but how many guys have injury concerns in college and remain healthy at the next level?
How many players have one major (arguably) injury in college and remain healthy at the next level? How about how many players have zero injuries in college and don't remain healthy at the next level? I can't decide if this is a rhetorical question or Vassalo is actually asking the reader to provide him this information...because he sure as hell doesn't take time off from doing a slideshow to provide us with a single example.
Injuries for a player can be a major red flag. If only we had a way of seeing how Irving performed after he came back from the injury to see if he could perform well and stay healthy...wait, we do because he came back and played three games in the NCAA Tournament.
Against Hampton: 20 minutes, 14 points, 4 rebounds, 1 assist, 2 turnovers and 2 steals.
Against Michigan: 21 minutes, 11 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 turnovers, and 1 steal.
Against Arizona: 31 minutes, 28 points, 0 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 turnover, and 1 steal.
So coming back from his injury in the exact same season he experienced the injury, Irving seemed to have no problem scoring or playing at a high level. So should his toe injury really be a major red flag? Probably not.
His disappearance from the Duke lineup and sudden return in the tournament threw off the schematics of the team.
Which was obviously entirely his fault that he worked hard enough to rehab his toe and try to come back, rather than sit out the entire season. Irving's work ethic to make it back is probably considered a major red flag by Vassalo as well because Duke didn't win the National Championship, with the sole reason for this not occurring is the addition of Kyrie Irving back into the lineup.
Bismack Biyombo:
Bismack Biyombo might be the most athletic player in the draft.
He's raw, though, and nobody has seen a whole lot of him.
So Biyombo's red flag is that nobody has seen a whole lot of him. Apparently our ignorance about Biyombo and his skill set means his level of play may not be high enough to make it in the NBA. I can buy that he is raw and that's a red flag, but I can't buy a red flag is that we haven't seen him play much. So go watch him play. The red flag is now fixed.
Some mocks have him going as high as sixth, but teams should proceed with caution.
(closes eyes and refuses to watch Biyombo play) Because no one knows anything about him and it is his fault! Teams can't just scout players. Do you think there are just magical boxes that show Biyombo's games or highlights?
Jonas Valanciunas:
Jonas Valanciunas may have problems getting out of his contract with Lietuvos Rytas. Whoever decides to go after Valanciunas is going to have to do their research and figure out exactly what the stipulations are.
This isn't a really a red flag because it has nothing to do with his skills or how they would translate to the NBA. Teams can do research (as suggested) and figure it out.
Wasting a draft pick on a Euro player who doesn't come to the NBA, regardless of how talented, can set a team back years. Ask the TWolves.
Right, because the fact Ricky Rubio hasn't come to the United States to play is the single event that has set the Timberwolves back years. What a simplistic and convenient way of trying to prove your point. Everything would be coming up roses for the Timberwolves if they only had gotten that Euro player to play for them. Rubio's refusal to come to the United States to play for the Timberwolves is a single wave in the tide of problems for them.
Alec Burks:
Alec Burks is a shooting guard whose biggest flaw is that he has problems shooting the ball.
He shot 46.9% from the field this past year. He shot 53.8% from the field the year before that.
He shot 29.2% from three-point range this year. He shot 35.2% from the field the year before that. So it seems like Burks' three-point shooting needs help, but he either (a) gets to the basket effectively or (b) has a good mid-range game. Both skills could translate well to the NBA.
Yes, Burks isn't a great outside shooter. Dwyane Wade shot 50.1% from the field and 31.8% from three-point range his last year at Marquette. I'm not comparing Burks to Wade, just simply saying picking out one problem in a player's game doesn't constitute a major red flag.
Having a two guard with a limited range is dangerous. Penetrating guards like Dwyane Wade are lethal, but without a consistent mid-range jumper, he could tank at the next level.
This is exactly the type of player Dwyane Wade was coming out of college, a guy with an inconsistent three-point shot who could get to the basket. Sure, he is now a penetrating guard that is lethal, but coming out of college there were questions about his outside shot. This is why calling Burks' outside shot a major red flag may be an exaggeration, because Vassalo is using another guard who had an inconsistent outside shot coming out of college as a comparison to Burks. The same major red flag could have applied to the now "lethal" Dwyane Wade.
Jimmer Fredette:
There is a lot to like about Jimmer Fredette.
He's also a useless defender and if his shots don't hit, he has no off switch.
A lot of these major red flags depend on your expectations for a player. If a team drafts Jimmer Fredette as the 6th/7th guy off the bench who can score then this "major" red flag doesn't matter at all. Jason Terry can also be a fairly useless defender at times and he has found a place in the NBA, as have many other players who can shoot, but are liabilities on defense.
Fredette has more skills than the average pure shooter, but he still carries the same red flags that Adam Morrison did when he came out.
If by "same red flags" you mean "they are comparable in very few ways," then this is a true statement. Adam Morrison was a small forward who could score and played questionable defense. Jimmer Fredette is a point guard who can score and plays questionable defense. Other than that, they are completely different players. Fredette is a much better athlete than Adam Morrison is, has fewer health issues, and because he plays a different position his defensive and offensive responsibilities are different from what Morrison's were in the NBA. I guess if the same red flags means there are questions about both player's defense then that would be accurate, but the comparison should probably stop there.
Josh Selby:
If there is a player in the draft who can do to much, he's it. Solid defender, unlimited tools, but he doesn't have Kobe Bryant's stroke and he tries to emulate the way he takes over the game.
The major red flag on Josh Selby is that he isn't as good as Kobe Bryant.
He can be selfish, which obviously doesn't bode well for his position.
He's a shooting guard by the way. Not a point guard. Any team that drafts him should play him at shooting guard. So being selfish isn't an overly terrible trait in a shooting guard.
He's not necessarily a "look at me" sort of O.J. Mayo guy; he's just a competitor.
I have no idea what this means, but it apparently is a major red flag of sorts.
This leads me to another question. Kyle Vassalo is now starting to list guys with major red flags that are looked at being drafted somewhere near the end of the first round or close to the second round. These perceived red flags or issues teams may have with a player in many cases are the reason why the player is going to be taken at this point. I guess what I am saying is it becomes a bit obvious to list players taken close to the second round as having red flags, since these players would go higher if they didn't have these red flags. They aren't even really red flags, but perceived flaws in their game.
Also, I think the biggest red flag with Josh Selby is not that he is selfish or the way he tries to take over the game, but how he did not fit in well in Bill Self's structured system at Kansas. Selby seems to need a more free-flowing flexible system and he adjusted poorly to the improved defense at the college level. So the red flag about Selby is that he seems to struggle to fit into a structured offense within the team, so if he gets drafted by a team that wants him to run the point guard in a structured offense he could possibly fail.
Tobias Harris:
Tobias Harris is a tweener. Is he a 3? Is he a 4? He's got the ball skills to be a 3, but he rebounds like a 4. It's good to be able to play multiple positions. The more versatile a player is, the harder he can be to guard.
Versatility is a major red flag. I hate it when players rebound like a power forward and have the ball skills to be a small forward. These type guys are always making things more difficult by giving the head coach more options in a game.
The problem is that Harris could get caught up in the middle.
That's it. That is the entire reasoning given for why Tobias Harris has a major red flag due to being a tweener. The least Vassalo could have done is copy and paste part of a scouting report that says this exact same thing.
He's got a ton of upside and could pose matchup problems, but he could get lost in the mix.
The mix of what? I'm not saying Harris isn't a tweener, but depending on where many of these players are drafted, many of them could get caught up in the mix. I guess if a person calls being a tweener a major red flag, I look for more information than vague indications a player could "get lost in the mix."
Darrius Morris is a huge point guard. He's got the size, he can stroke the basketball and he is a solid defender. He has everything you would ever want in a point guard, most of the time at least.
Darrius Morris is a borderline first round pick. So his red flag is that he isn't a complete point guard, which if he were, would make him a lottery pick of course.
He goes missing at other times. He's one-dimensional and fails to make an impact at times. Morris could make a huge splash as a sleeper pick in this year's point guard–laden draft, but his inconsistency issues might make him struggle.
Still a little vague, but overall not a bad analysis of Morris. I still don't know if the fact Morris is inconsistent is a major red flag. He is only 20 years old.
Jordan Williams:
At 6'10", he doesn't have the length to camp out in the paint. He's got to be able to run the floor and quite frankly, he can't.
Williams is 250 pounds. He excelled in college at camping out in the paint and rebounding. I guess if you are only look at length as how a post player succeeds in the NBA then this would be a problem. Fortunately, most rational people know there is more to playing in the paint and rebounding than just having length. If that were true, Charles Barkley wouldn't have been a good NBA player and Hasheem Thabeet would be a 2-time All-Star.
Williams is one of those guys who won't be on the floor for extended periods of time. He's great at hauling in rebounds, but he's far more likely to be a bench role player on a good team than the next star center.
Again, Williams is a projected late first round or early second round pick. He's not being drafted to be the next All-Star center, he would be drafted for a bench role. So the fact he isn't an All-Star is not a red flag. Apparently to Kyle Vassalo any prospect that doesn't project to being an All-Star has a major red flag.
Jon Leuer:
Jon Leuer is a huge forward. He can pass very well for a big man. He has great ball skills for his size and knows how to operate on the perimeter. He has a lot of the traits you look for in a shooting guard, he was simply born in the wrong body.
So he has shooting guard skills in a power forward's body? What NBA team would be interested in a player like this? This could create matchup problems for the opposing team when he is on the court. Who would want that?
There isn't a line out the door for big men who can shoot and can't rebound.
But as a bench guy he is valuable, correct, because he has the skills of a shooting guard? Or is that a red flag?
I am also not sure where the idea that he can't rebound comes from. Leuer isn't as aggressive on the glass as he should be, but he did average 7.2 rebounds per game this year and nearly a block a game. He averaged 1.67 offensive rebounds per game as well. Some of that may be attributable to his height, but he can rebound. It's not his overwhelming strength, but he doesn't do poorly on the glass considering he is more of a finesse-type player.
There comes a time when your front court has to step up and own the paint.
As a starter late in a game this is true. Leuer doesn't necessarily project as a starter in the NBA, so he probably won't be on the court when the front court needs to step up and own the paint.
Again, we can't work under the assumption all of these NBA prospects are going to be starters. So knowing this, these "major red flags" turn out to just be weaknesses in a player's game and not really a red flag that could cause the player to completely bust.
There were 12 pages to this slideshow and when you go to Page 12 of the slideshow it takes you immediately to the next article. Oh Bleacher Report...you thrill me in your weak and transparent attempts at increasing pageviews. If an slideshow says it is 12 slides long, then that 12th slide should be a part of that slideshow and not the first slide of the next slideshow. That's just cheap. Of course, what else should I expect from Bleacher Report?
Sunday, April 24, 2011
3 comments Marcus Hayes Has Not Enjoyed Chatting With You About the 76ers
We may all remember Marcus Hayes' epic chat last October concerning the Phillies where he revealed the entire city of Philadelphia is racist and Jimmy Rollins will have 30 home runs in 2011. It was a great chat, I would suggest those who haven't read it go through the chat. Marcus Hayes tends to antagonize those who ask questions. Today is no different, he has decided he will do a chat with readers (i.e. idiots in his mind) who ask him questions he clearly doesn't want to answer. It is his job, so Marcus answers the questions, but he doesn't have to like it.
Comment From Amir: Hey Marcus, the need for a go to guy is looking more obvious than ever do u think the sixers shud let Evan grow into it or make a deal
I have to admit, if I read a questions where I had to read misspelled words and text-like language instead of actual words I may be a little irritated as well.
Marcus: I cannot see Evan growing into it.
Because giving a 22 year old rookie one year to become the #1 scoring option on a playoff team is PLENTY of time. Maybe Turner won't grow into it, but give him more than one year please.
Comment From Huh: So you've written off Turner already?
Marcus: I never would have used the No. 2 pick on him.
Oh yes, hindsight is 20/20. Need to know what a team should do with their 2010 draft pick? Wait, three years and then make a decision on what that team should have done. I would love to know who Marcus Hayes would have drafted instead, only knowing what he did at the time, which is Turner was the only other "franchise" guy available that didn't have question marks about him (Cousins). It may have been a bad year to have the #2 overall pick and it isn't like there were a ton of other great options that would fit the Sixers at #2.
Granted, the Sixers did not need another small forward, but there wasn't a better option at that point in the draft. The Sixers didn't want to "reach" for a player in that spot. Five guys were seen as being the Top 5 in the draft: John Wall, Evan Turner, DeMarcus Cousins, Wesley Johnson, and Derrick Favors. Wall was gone when the 76ers drafted and the only guy outside of Turner who was seen as a "franchise" player was DeMarcus Cousins. So it is fine to say the Sixers shouldn't have drafted Turner, but he was their best option at the time, and no other player (outside of Cousins) would have made sense at the #2 spot when you combine perceived talent at the #2 spot and the Sixers needs.
He can be a nice, complimentary player, but for now, and for the foreseeable future, he cannot defend and he cannot shoot.
Again, he was a rookie. Perhaps this was true, but there wasn't a ton of non-complimentary players in the draft. The Sixers were in a tough position in that the best player on the board was at a position they didn't need greatly and even in retrospect any player they would chosen at that point would have been seen as a reach.
Comment From Rich M: #9 is stealing $$$$$!!! 4 points then follows with a solid 5 pts in game 2. Is there any hope they move him next season? He is a wonderful defender but will never ever be a #1 option on this team.
Now Rich M. has gone and done it. Marcus Hayes likes Andre Iguodala. He is the Jimmy Rollins of the 76ers for Marcus.
Marcus: ... and he should not be asked to be a No. 1 option.
And yet, he is paid like a #1 option. Therein lies the problem in many people's eyes. It's fine for Iguodala to not be a #1 option, but he gets paid like one.
I find it interesting Hayes jumps on Turner (who gets paid $4.6 million) for not being a franchise player after one year and says he is a complementary player, while he is perfectly fine with Iguodala (who gets paid $12.3 million) not being a No. 1 option because that's not who he is or what he should be asked to do.
You cannot replace Iguodala. You can only enhance him.
Apparently Marcus Hayes believes Iguodala is a robot. Perhaps he believes the Sixers should fine a way to trade Elton Brand so they can free up some money to buy Andre Iguodala the upper-tier offensive player hard drive upgrade. THEY PAID FOR EVAN TURNER'S HARD DRIVE TO BE UPDATED TO THE UPPER-TIER OFFENSIVE UPGRADE, WHY NOT IGUODALA?
Comment From botcho: Is this what we are going to see for yrs to come? One round and done? Any chance they can make moves once the new CBA is in place? Center is a huge hole - they need a body down low and Hawes will never provide that.
Marcus: You would have to have a tradable commodity, which they lack, Teams win without a classic center ... if they defend, rebound and run.
Teams win, but they don't win the NBA Title, which I am assuming is the goal for the Philadelphia 76ers. Over the past five years, these are the starting centers for each team represented in the NBA Finals:
2006: Shaquille O'Neal and Erick Dampier/DeSagnia Diop
2007: Tim Duncan and Zydrunas Illgauskas
2008: Pau Gasol and Kendrick Perkins
2009: Andrew Bynum (though Gasol played most of the minutes) and Dwight Howard
2010: Andrew Bynum and Kendrick Perkins
I would say nearly all of these players are "classic" centers, though some of their talent can be debated. Guys like Dampier, Diop and Illgauskas are still classic centers in height and weight. So, if the 76ers want to win a title or make the NBA Finals I question if they can do it without a classic center.
Comment From Peter: Commenting on Rich M post and your reply. Iguodala is paid as a #1 option!!!!!!!! How is four and 5 points accepted in playoff game? How anyone can defend anything about him is crazy.
Marcus: His paycheck is not his fault.
Well, yes and no it is his fault. Andre Iguodala took the money that was offered by the 76ers when they offered him the contract extension. So it is not his fault concerning the amount they offered him, but the fact he isn't living up to the paycheck, in some people's eyes, is his fault. So merely saying, "his paycheck is not his fault," is blindly defending Iguodala in some ways by ignoring a player who makes that much money will be perceived to close to a franchise guy. Iguodala signed the contract knowing he would have to perform at key points like the playoffs.
Using this same logic, it isn't Evan Turner's fault where the 76ers drafted him either, so the criticism from Marcus Hayes about his performance and how he isn't going to be more than a complementary player shouldn't be held against him. It's not like he could have refused to be picked at the #2 spot in the 2010 NBA Draft.
You forget: He's playing hurt. Really hurt. Come off it.
Granted, Iguodala is playing hurt. That much is true and him playing hurt is admirable. I'm not criticizing Iguodala, but players have played hurt in the playoffs before and scored more than 4 and 5 points in a game.
Comment From bob: I recall Charles Barkley suggesting early in the year that the Sixers should not try so hard to make the playoffs. And, we are now seeing why. That said, if the Sixers are going to draft the likes of Turner second, you have to wonder what difference it would make if they were in the lottery.
Now this is a comment Marcus Hayes has every reason to attack. The Sixers drafted Iguodala 9th in the 2004 draft, Thaddeus Young 12th in the 2007 draft, Jrue Holiday 17th in the 2009 draft, and Lou Williams in the 2nd round of the 2005 draft. So, the Sixers haven't done a terrible job of drafting players and many of the best players on the current team were drafted by the 76ers. This would be a great time for Marcus to point that out.
Marcus: Good point
Or maybe in his boredom with chatting he will just ignore it.
Comment From Ted: Who would you have taken at #2? Favors hasn't been impressive. Maybe Cousins and his risk?
Oh yes, the big question that Marcus Hayes didn't answer earlier while he was critiquing Evan Turner's performance during his rookie year.
Marcus: Maybe Cousins, but I'd have traded it.
Absolutely the 76ers failed by not trading the #2 overall pick in the 2010 NBA Draft, because we all know for a fact there were other attractive options available to them. I couldn't find any evidence one way or another what Marcus Hayes thought the 76ers should have done, but if this article is an example, trading the pick and not taking Turner wasn't a well-received idea. It is fine to say the 76ers should have traded the pick, but there has to be a team that wants the pick (and apparently take Elton Brand), otherwise the 76ers would just be giving away the #2 pick for little in return.
Comment From Brian: marcus, if the sixers play just as good withhout iggy, why not trade him. I'll take someone with half his defense, that can score atleast 20 points a night
Marcus: The Sixers win 20 games this season without Iguodala.
Wow! Really? Maybe Marcus is getting a bit carried away here? Iguodala was worth 21 games worth of wins this year? Perhaps someone has been overdosing on the crazy pills lately? I don't think the fall-off from Iguodala to the next guy on the depth chart is that drastic. Sure, the Sixers may not have made the playoffs, but to think they would only have 20 wins? No way.
Iguodala played in 67 games this year. The 76ers were 5-11 without Iguodala this year. I know that doesn't add up to 82 games, but I am just going with the stats I have available. That comes up to 25.5 wins over the full season without Iguodala. Of course, as we discussed a few weeks ago here, you can't just simply say Team X would have won X amount of games without a player because there are other variables that go into it, like injuries to and the performance of other players. So Iguodala is important to the 76ers, but I think 20 wins is quite low, the Sixers would win a few more games than that I believe.
Comment From filly: Where do you see the Sixers organization in 5 years?
Marcus: A two seed, with the best pure point guard/defender in the league.
So I guess Marcus anticipates the 76ers landing Chris Paul or Derrick Rose in free agency? Because I know he didn't just say Jrue Holiday would be the best pure point guard/defender in the league in five years. Marcus has such a bizarre pessimistic, while optimistic view of the 76ers. He thinks they have made some bad moves in the draft and won't be able to make too many substantial moves, yet he sees them as a the 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years.
Comment From filly: With Doug Collins and the pieces the sixers have...is the perception that free agents wont come here overblown?
Marcus: No.
Thanks for elaborating on this thought. Actually, Hayes does this a lot. He gets asked a question and then gives a one word or a very short response.
Comment From Bonzo: 5 years, a TWO seed? AI and Barkley are the only two top tier players the Sixers have had in 20 years. The drafting ability is atrocious, and constantly picking up mediocre past prime talent (DC, Webber, Robinson, now Brand)....what gives you ANY sense of hope? Until they get lucky with another star draft like AI, we're looking at the same old 5-8 seeds, 1 and done, pick another Rodney Carney clone.
Okay, this may be a bit of a panic on the part of Bonzo...John Bonham is that you asking questions from the grave? After this absolute mess of a question, what does Hayes say in response?
Marcus: ok.
That's it. If he doesn't want to chat, he could just come out and say it. Chatting with Marcus Hayes is like holding a conversation with a teenager.
Comment From filly: its fair to say iggy is never gonna get his batman unless he comes from in house
Marcus: Yes ... Unless a Brand/Young/Iguodala frontline gets it done.
I don't understand the answer to this question. Hayes is pulling a "Joe Morgan" here and answering a question that wasn't asked. What's even more interesting is that Marcus Hayes just said in five years the Sixers will have the best pure point guard/defender in the league on their team. That puts Iguodala at 32 at this time. So I am guessing either the best point guard/defender in the NBA won't be better than Iguodala at any point over the next five years or the best point guard/defender in the NBA isn't a better player than Andre Iguodala in the opinion of Marcus Hayes.
I think it is incredibly interesting that Marcus Hayes doesn't think the Sixers will get a Batman to Iguodala's Robin, and yet he has them as a 2-seed in the NBA playoffs in five years. So is Iguodala going to improve that much or is he wrong about Young or Holiday not being a better player than Iguodala? A team where Iguodala is the best player is not a 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years. The Sixers very well could have a bright future, but Hayes poops on their chances of improving over the next five years, except concerning in-house players.
Comment From tony: Marcus, if Thad starts next year where does Iggy play?
Marcus: I'd put them all on the court at the same time in the frontcourt. Play small all the time,.
Let me guess...and then run, rebound, and defend their way into being a 2-seed in five years?
I am not sure I have ever witnessed this bizarre combination of short-term pessimism and long-term optimism from a writer, when that writer acknowledges the team won't get much help from players not currently on the roster in that span because free agents don't want to come to Philadelphia, throw in with the writer's perception the team doesn't draft well. I think Marcus Hayes believes Andre Iguodala may be worth 30+ wins in a season to his team.
Comment From Evo: I'll take the over on the over/under of the Sixers winning 50 games or more next year. You?
Well it depends on if Andre Iguodala plays or not. The 76ers will win 102 games next year with him playing and 19 games without him playing.
Marcus: I'll take the under, until 2013.
The 76ers won 41 games this year without their best player in 16 of those games. For a team that is supposed to be getting good enough to compete for the 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years and can't get free agents (for some reason Hayes never explained exactly), they are not going to be able to win 9 more games over the next two years? I find that hard to believe.
Marcus: OK. Gotta catch a flight. Thanks, everybody.
What he means by "Thanks, everybody," is "I hate your fucking questions. Leave me and my Chase Utley-hating soul alone."
So...before I stop writing, I want to focus on something Marcus Hayes said in a February 9th chat about the Phillies. You may remember the other chat I linked earlier in this post from last October and how Hayes took anger out on Chase Utley and said the following things in that chat:
About Jimmy Rollins:
Marcus:Big rebound. 30 hit him in the gut this year.
So in October, a big rebound from Jimmy Rollins was expected by Marcus Hayes. He thought Rollins could hit 30 home runs in the 5th spot in the lineup. Of course, Hayes was spending most of his time in this chat race-baiting and making outlandish claims, so maybe he was just having a bad day. Let's see what Marcus thinks of Rollins now...
Comment From Duke Fame: J-Roll: Bounce back year or will this be his last season in red and white pinstripes?
Marcus: Not sure how much he CAN bounce back.
So in October a big rebound was expected from Jimmy Rollins and in February he CAN'T rebound any more than he has already. This is interesting since Rollins has seemingly been regressing over the past couple of years.
A .280/20HR/80RBI/110 runs year for Jimmy is what he is, at this point.
Rollins has hit these four levels in a season exactly once in his career and that was the year he won the MVP in 2007. So at this point, Jimmy Rollins is not at this level and he has been at this level exactly once in his 10 full seasons in the majors, yet this is what Marcus Hayes believes Rollins "is" right now. It's fun to think this is true though isn't it?
Which should make him an abvious extension candidate.
Well, obviously. Why not extend a 33 year old shortstop that is showing declining statistics and may start having injury problems...as seen in his response to the next question.
Comment From Amir: Hey Marcus, the need for a go to guy is looking more obvious than ever do u think the sixers shud let Evan grow into it or make a deal
I have to admit, if I read a questions where I had to read misspelled words and text-like language instead of actual words I may be a little irritated as well.
Marcus: I cannot see Evan growing into it.
Because giving a 22 year old rookie one year to become the #1 scoring option on a playoff team is PLENTY of time. Maybe Turner won't grow into it, but give him more than one year please.
Comment From Huh: So you've written off Turner already?
Marcus: I never would have used the No. 2 pick on him.
Oh yes, hindsight is 20/20. Need to know what a team should do with their 2010 draft pick? Wait, three years and then make a decision on what that team should have done. I would love to know who Marcus Hayes would have drafted instead, only knowing what he did at the time, which is Turner was the only other "franchise" guy available that didn't have question marks about him (Cousins). It may have been a bad year to have the #2 overall pick and it isn't like there were a ton of other great options that would fit the Sixers at #2.
Granted, the Sixers did not need another small forward, but there wasn't a better option at that point in the draft. The Sixers didn't want to "reach" for a player in that spot. Five guys were seen as being the Top 5 in the draft: John Wall, Evan Turner, DeMarcus Cousins, Wesley Johnson, and Derrick Favors. Wall was gone when the 76ers drafted and the only guy outside of Turner who was seen as a "franchise" player was DeMarcus Cousins. So it is fine to say the Sixers shouldn't have drafted Turner, but he was their best option at the time, and no other player (outside of Cousins) would have made sense at the #2 spot when you combine perceived talent at the #2 spot and the Sixers needs.
He can be a nice, complimentary player, but for now, and for the foreseeable future, he cannot defend and he cannot shoot.
Again, he was a rookie. Perhaps this was true, but there wasn't a ton of non-complimentary players in the draft. The Sixers were in a tough position in that the best player on the board was at a position they didn't need greatly and even in retrospect any player they would chosen at that point would have been seen as a reach.
Comment From Rich M: #9 is stealing $$$$$!!! 4 points then follows with a solid 5 pts in game 2. Is there any hope they move him next season? He is a wonderful defender but will never ever be a #1 option on this team.
Now Rich M. has gone and done it. Marcus Hayes likes Andre Iguodala. He is the Jimmy Rollins of the 76ers for Marcus.
Marcus: ... and he should not be asked to be a No. 1 option.
And yet, he is paid like a #1 option. Therein lies the problem in many people's eyes. It's fine for Iguodala to not be a #1 option, but he gets paid like one.
I find it interesting Hayes jumps on Turner (who gets paid $4.6 million) for not being a franchise player after one year and says he is a complementary player, while he is perfectly fine with Iguodala (who gets paid $12.3 million) not being a No. 1 option because that's not who he is or what he should be asked to do.
You cannot replace Iguodala. You can only enhance him.
Apparently Marcus Hayes believes Iguodala is a robot. Perhaps he believes the Sixers should fine a way to trade Elton Brand so they can free up some money to buy Andre Iguodala the upper-tier offensive player hard drive upgrade. THEY PAID FOR EVAN TURNER'S HARD DRIVE TO BE UPDATED TO THE UPPER-TIER OFFENSIVE UPGRADE, WHY NOT IGUODALA?
Comment From botcho: Is this what we are going to see for yrs to come? One round and done? Any chance they can make moves once the new CBA is in place? Center is a huge hole - they need a body down low and Hawes will never provide that.
Marcus: You would have to have a tradable commodity, which they lack, Teams win without a classic center ... if they defend, rebound and run.
Teams win, but they don't win the NBA Title, which I am assuming is the goal for the Philadelphia 76ers. Over the past five years, these are the starting centers for each team represented in the NBA Finals:
2006: Shaquille O'Neal and Erick Dampier/DeSagnia Diop
2007: Tim Duncan and Zydrunas Illgauskas
2008: Pau Gasol and Kendrick Perkins
2009: Andrew Bynum (though Gasol played most of the minutes) and Dwight Howard
2010: Andrew Bynum and Kendrick Perkins
I would say nearly all of these players are "classic" centers, though some of their talent can be debated. Guys like Dampier, Diop and Illgauskas are still classic centers in height and weight. So, if the 76ers want to win a title or make the NBA Finals I question if they can do it without a classic center.
Comment From Peter: Commenting on Rich M post and your reply. Iguodala is paid as a #1 option!!!!!!!! How is four and 5 points accepted in playoff game? How anyone can defend anything about him is crazy.
Marcus: His paycheck is not his fault.
Well, yes and no it is his fault. Andre Iguodala took the money that was offered by the 76ers when they offered him the contract extension. So it is not his fault concerning the amount they offered him, but the fact he isn't living up to the paycheck, in some people's eyes, is his fault. So merely saying, "his paycheck is not his fault," is blindly defending Iguodala in some ways by ignoring a player who makes that much money will be perceived to close to a franchise guy. Iguodala signed the contract knowing he would have to perform at key points like the playoffs.
Using this same logic, it isn't Evan Turner's fault where the 76ers drafted him either, so the criticism from Marcus Hayes about his performance and how he isn't going to be more than a complementary player shouldn't be held against him. It's not like he could have refused to be picked at the #2 spot in the 2010 NBA Draft.
You forget: He's playing hurt. Really hurt. Come off it.
Granted, Iguodala is playing hurt. That much is true and him playing hurt is admirable. I'm not criticizing Iguodala, but players have played hurt in the playoffs before and scored more than 4 and 5 points in a game.
Comment From bob: I recall Charles Barkley suggesting early in the year that the Sixers should not try so hard to make the playoffs. And, we are now seeing why. That said, if the Sixers are going to draft the likes of Turner second, you have to wonder what difference it would make if they were in the lottery.
Now this is a comment Marcus Hayes has every reason to attack. The Sixers drafted Iguodala 9th in the 2004 draft, Thaddeus Young 12th in the 2007 draft, Jrue Holiday 17th in the 2009 draft, and Lou Williams in the 2nd round of the 2005 draft. So, the Sixers haven't done a terrible job of drafting players and many of the best players on the current team were drafted by the 76ers. This would be a great time for Marcus to point that out.
Marcus: Good point
Or maybe in his boredom with chatting he will just ignore it.
Comment From Ted: Who would you have taken at #2? Favors hasn't been impressive. Maybe Cousins and his risk?
Oh yes, the big question that Marcus Hayes didn't answer earlier while he was critiquing Evan Turner's performance during his rookie year.
Marcus: Maybe Cousins, but I'd have traded it.
Absolutely the 76ers failed by not trading the #2 overall pick in the 2010 NBA Draft, because we all know for a fact there were other attractive options available to them. I couldn't find any evidence one way or another what Marcus Hayes thought the 76ers should have done, but if this article is an example, trading the pick and not taking Turner wasn't a well-received idea. It is fine to say the 76ers should have traded the pick, but there has to be a team that wants the pick (and apparently take Elton Brand), otherwise the 76ers would just be giving away the #2 pick for little in return.
Comment From Brian: marcus, if the sixers play just as good withhout iggy, why not trade him. I'll take someone with half his defense, that can score atleast 20 points a night
Marcus: The Sixers win 20 games this season without Iguodala.
Wow! Really? Maybe Marcus is getting a bit carried away here? Iguodala was worth 21 games worth of wins this year? Perhaps someone has been overdosing on the crazy pills lately? I don't think the fall-off from Iguodala to the next guy on the depth chart is that drastic. Sure, the Sixers may not have made the playoffs, but to think they would only have 20 wins? No way.
Iguodala played in 67 games this year. The 76ers were 5-11 without Iguodala this year. I know that doesn't add up to 82 games, but I am just going with the stats I have available. That comes up to 25.5 wins over the full season without Iguodala. Of course, as we discussed a few weeks ago here, you can't just simply say Team X would have won X amount of games without a player because there are other variables that go into it, like injuries to and the performance of other players. So Iguodala is important to the 76ers, but I think 20 wins is quite low, the Sixers would win a few more games than that I believe.
Comment From filly: Where do you see the Sixers organization in 5 years?
Marcus: A two seed, with the best pure point guard/defender in the league.
So I guess Marcus anticipates the 76ers landing Chris Paul or Derrick Rose in free agency? Because I know he didn't just say Jrue Holiday would be the best pure point guard/defender in the league in five years. Marcus has such a bizarre pessimistic, while optimistic view of the 76ers. He thinks they have made some bad moves in the draft and won't be able to make too many substantial moves, yet he sees them as a the 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years.
Comment From filly: With Doug Collins and the pieces the sixers have...is the perception that free agents wont come here overblown?
Marcus: No.
Thanks for elaborating on this thought. Actually, Hayes does this a lot. He gets asked a question and then gives a one word or a very short response.
Comment From Bonzo: 5 years, a TWO seed? AI and Barkley are the only two top tier players the Sixers have had in 20 years. The drafting ability is atrocious, and constantly picking up mediocre past prime talent (DC, Webber, Robinson, now Brand)....what gives you ANY sense of hope? Until they get lucky with another star draft like AI, we're looking at the same old 5-8 seeds, 1 and done, pick another Rodney Carney clone.
Okay, this may be a bit of a panic on the part of Bonzo...John Bonham is that you asking questions from the grave? After this absolute mess of a question, what does Hayes say in response?
Marcus: ok.
That's it. If he doesn't want to chat, he could just come out and say it. Chatting with Marcus Hayes is like holding a conversation with a teenager.
Comment From filly: its fair to say iggy is never gonna get his batman unless he comes from in house
Marcus: Yes ... Unless a Brand/Young/Iguodala frontline gets it done.
I don't understand the answer to this question. Hayes is pulling a "Joe Morgan" here and answering a question that wasn't asked. What's even more interesting is that Marcus Hayes just said in five years the Sixers will have the best pure point guard/defender in the league on their team. That puts Iguodala at 32 at this time. So I am guessing either the best point guard/defender in the NBA won't be better than Iguodala at any point over the next five years or the best point guard/defender in the NBA isn't a better player than Andre Iguodala in the opinion of Marcus Hayes.
I think it is incredibly interesting that Marcus Hayes doesn't think the Sixers will get a Batman to Iguodala's Robin, and yet he has them as a 2-seed in the NBA playoffs in five years. So is Iguodala going to improve that much or is he wrong about Young or Holiday not being a better player than Iguodala? A team where Iguodala is the best player is not a 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years. The Sixers very well could have a bright future, but Hayes poops on their chances of improving over the next five years, except concerning in-house players.
Comment From tony: Marcus, if Thad starts next year where does Iggy play?
Marcus: I'd put them all on the court at the same time in the frontcourt. Play small all the time,.
Let me guess...and then run, rebound, and defend their way into being a 2-seed in five years?
I am not sure I have ever witnessed this bizarre combination of short-term pessimism and long-term optimism from a writer, when that writer acknowledges the team won't get much help from players not currently on the roster in that span because free agents don't want to come to Philadelphia, throw in with the writer's perception the team doesn't draft well. I think Marcus Hayes believes Andre Iguodala may be worth 30+ wins in a season to his team.
Comment From Evo: I'll take the over on the over/under of the Sixers winning 50 games or more next year. You?
Well it depends on if Andre Iguodala plays or not. The 76ers will win 102 games next year with him playing and 19 games without him playing.
Marcus: I'll take the under, until 2013.
The 76ers won 41 games this year without their best player in 16 of those games. For a team that is supposed to be getting good enough to compete for the 2-seed in the Eastern Conference in five years and can't get free agents (for some reason Hayes never explained exactly), they are not going to be able to win 9 more games over the next two years? I find that hard to believe.
Marcus: OK. Gotta catch a flight. Thanks, everybody.
What he means by "Thanks, everybody," is "I hate your fucking questions. Leave me and my Chase Utley-hating soul alone."
So...before I stop writing, I want to focus on something Marcus Hayes said in a February 9th chat about the Phillies. You may remember the other chat I linked earlier in this post from last October and how Hayes took anger out on Chase Utley and said the following things in that chat:
About Jimmy Rollins:
[Comment From Doc: ]
Do you expect a rebound kind of year from J-Roll in 2011, or a continued decline? It's a contract year, but he's another year older. Marcus:
[Comment From Erik L.: ]
Can Jimmy Rollins ever hit 25+ home runs again? Or is that portion of his career over? Marcus:
I think he's got 30 in him hitting 5th. So in October, a big rebound from Jimmy Rollins was expected by Marcus Hayes. He thought Rollins could hit 30 home runs in the 5th spot in the lineup. Of course, Hayes was spending most of his time in this chat race-baiting and making outlandish claims, so maybe he was just having a bad day. Let's see what Marcus thinks of Rollins now...
Comment From Duke Fame: J-Roll: Bounce back year or will this be his last season in red and white pinstripes?
Marcus: Not sure how much he CAN bounce back.
So in October a big rebound was expected from Jimmy Rollins and in February he CAN'T rebound any more than he has already. This is interesting since Rollins has seemingly been regressing over the past couple of years.
A .280/20HR/80RBI/110 runs year for Jimmy is what he is, at this point.
Rollins has hit these four levels in a season exactly once in his career and that was the year he won the MVP in 2007. So at this point, Jimmy Rollins is not at this level and he has been at this level exactly once in his 10 full seasons in the majors, yet this is what Marcus Hayes believes Rollins "is" right now. It's fun to think this is true though isn't it?
Which should make him an abvious extension candidate.
Well, obviously. Why not extend a 33 year old shortstop that is showing declining statistics and may start having injury problems...as seen in his response to the next question.
Comment From scott: What are the chances it was just injuries/off years for Rollins and Utley and not a trend downward?
Marcus: Hmmm. Is there a difference? Maybe this is the beginning of a slew of injuries ...
I am not sure we can ever really know what Marcus Hayes thinks about Jimmy Rollins. In October he said Rollins is worth more hitting .250 than Utley is worth hitting .300 with 30 home runs. Then in this chat from February he said Utley could make an MVP run with 30 home runs and a .300 average. Undoubtedly, Hayes would still think Rollins is a more valuable player for the Phillies if Utley did win the MVP with a .300 average and 30 home runs.
In October, Marcus said Jimmy Rollins is going to have a big rebound from his 2010 year. Then in February said Rollins wouldn't rebound, he would just stay at the same level he has been at exactly once in his career, in 2007 when he won the MVP.
The one thing we do know for sure is that Marcus Hayes does not like chatting with you.
Marcus: Hmmm. Is there a difference? Maybe this is the beginning of a slew of injuries ...
I am not sure we can ever really know what Marcus Hayes thinks about Jimmy Rollins. In October he said Rollins is worth more hitting .250 than Utley is worth hitting .300 with 30 home runs. Then in this chat from February he said Utley could make an MVP run with 30 home runs and a .300 average. Undoubtedly, Hayes would still think Rollins is a more valuable player for the Phillies if Utley did win the MVP with a .300 average and 30 home runs.
In October, Marcus said Jimmy Rollins is going to have a big rebound from his 2010 year. Then in February said Rollins wouldn't rebound, he would just stay at the same level he has been at exactly once in his career, in 2007 when he won the MVP.
The one thing we do know for sure is that Marcus Hayes does not like chatting with you.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
10 comments I Don't Think This Year's Draft Is Going To Be That Bad
It's that time of the year again. The time when we get to hear about how this year's NBA Draft isn't going to be so great. I don't believe this year's draft is full of guys who are going to be Hall of Fame players, but I also don't believe this year's draft is as bad some are saying. We all are entitled to our opinion of course, but I thought I would run down the list of some players who are projected to be taken in the first round of 2011 NBA mock drafts and explain why I think this draft won't be so bad. It may not be the best ever, but I don't know if I would call it terrible. There may not be franchise guys in here, but there are guys who I would consider to be contributors on a good team.
The key point is nobody knows much about the NBA Draft, myself included, and how good these players drafted will end up being. Mostly, I would encourage you to never listen to Bill Simmons about college players. In two months he goes from this statement about Cole Aldrich to saying the following in one of his columns:
In the words of Denny Green, Cole Aldrich was who we thought he was: a complementary center who challenges shots, rebounds and scores if he gets good position. He's Joel Przybilla 2.0. And you wouldn't want Joel Przybilla trying to save you from the biggest upset in 16 years … right?
In two months Bill has gone from having Cole Aldrich in the Top 5 of the draft to calling him a backup center. Of course Bill would never bring this back up in any of his comments on Aldrich, he would prefer to scrub them from your memory. My point is that opinions change, and I think opinions are going to change about the 2011 NBA Draft. I think the opinion of this draft will get better.
It is early, so most mock drafts are not in agreement or even close to each other because we don't know who has declared and who has not declared. Plus, NCAA Tournament performance affects a player's draft stock as well. Not to mention, everyone's opinion will change based on these player's actual performance. So I am going to go with Walter Football's mock draft and give my opinion on what these players will be in the NBA. I will probably be wrong about many of these, but it is my dedicated job to defend the quality of the NBA Draft every year, so here I go.
I rank players in 7 categories that determines where they fit best in the NBA (some players will start on bad teams, but are better fits as a bench player. I will predict that player as a bench player because that is what I think he is. I don't want this to get too convoluted so I won't explain further):
1. Bust (out of the league in 3 years)
2. Role player (will be 9th/10th man off bench)
3. Bench player (6th/7th guy off bench)
4. Mediocre starter (will start on an average/bad team)
5. Starter (will start on good team)
6. Quality starter (will start on an excellent team)
7. All-Star (one of the best players at his position)
1. Cleveland Cavaliers: Kyrie Irving, PG, Duke, 6-2, Fr.
I have heard the rumors that Irving's draft stock may fall due to his injured toe. I can understand these, but as long as the toe injury doesn't appear to be chronic, this isn't a Greg Oden situation. Irving is easily the best point guard in this class and he is also a natural leader. I am admittedly biased, but I firmly believe he is ready (toe-permitting) to go to the NBA and be an All-Star. It doesn't matter to me that he hasn't played much in college. He will be an All-Star in the NBA and I see no, other than chronic toe problems, he shouldn't be the #1 overall pick. He can shoot, pass and lead a team in the NBA.
Future: All-Star
2. Minnesota Timberwolves: Jared Sullinger, PF, Ohio State, 6-9, Fr.
I don't think Minnesota should take Sullinger, but that's a different story. Sullinger has a basketball IQ that other players in this draft can't match. He's not like DeJuan Blair physically, but his basketball IQ reminds me of Blair's. He just knows where he needs to be on the court and knows when the double team is coming to pass out of it. Sullinger knows how to use his body to get position and keep position in the low blocks. I don't think Sullinger will be a perennial All-Star but he can be the third best player on a championship team.
Future: Starter
3. Sacramento Kings: Derrick Williams, PF, Arizona, 6-9, So.
I am torn on Williams. Athletically, he can put it all together and be a good player. Any power forward that has a scouting report (like Williams has) that says he needs to learn to guard bigger guys in the paint and should become stronger makes me wary. Every year there is a guy that comes out of the draft who looks like a great player, but if you take the time to look you can see it just won't happen (Jordan Hill, Hasheem Thabeet). Williams will be serviceable in spurts and I think Sacramento is a bad place for him to be drafted. His ceiling is incredibly high, but I don't know if he will ever reach that ceiling.
Future: Role-player/Bust
4. Toronto Raptors: Enes Kanter, PF, Kentucky, 6-10, Fr.
I haven't seen Kanter play except on YouTube videos. I know he rebounds well and has a good feel for the game. What I don't know if how he matches up against better talent, outside of the 34 points and 13 rebound performance he put up against the USA team at the Nike Hoops Summit. Is that one game or an indicator of his future prospects in the NBA? My question lies in whether he will be a power forward or a center at the NBA level. I think he will be a power forward, but play some center. If he is a power forward will he be able to guard NBA power forwards? I am not sure, but I do know a center with a skill set like Kanter will fit somewhere in the NBA.
Future: Starter---though this is a guess since I haven't seen him play other than on YouTube.
5. Washington Wizards: Harrison Barnes, G/F, North Carolina, 6-6, Fr.
Harrison Barnes hasn't shot the ball well this year, so he is being labeled a disappointment...which is a disappointment because I think people are being hard on him. He came into UNC with the perception he would be "the man" immediately. He has a knack for hitting big shots and has improved once the dreadful Larry Drew II left the UNC program. He won't declare for the draft this year, so this is a moot point, but the comparisons to Sean Elliott are apt. Is this a bad thing though? Elliott had a really good career until health issues forced him to retire. Barnes will be an NBA starter when he declares after his sophomore year. If he improves his game even more, then he could be an All-Star.
Future: Mediocre starter (I hate caveats, but at this point this is what I see for him. If he plays in college one more year, this will probably change)
6. New Jersey Nets: Terrence Jones, F, Kentucky, 6-9, Fr.
I like Terrence Jones' game a lot. When John Calipari is on your ass about your attitude at times though that can't be a good thing. I think Jones has all the talent in the world but I don't think he is going to be able to harness that talent. I think he shoots from the outside too much and though he is a good passer he doesn't do enough of it. Still, I think he has a good NBA game if he can get some good coaching in the NBA so he doesn't end up launching 200 three-points shots at a 27% clip in the NBA.
Future: Starter/All-Star
7. Detroit Pistons: Perry Jones, PF, Baylor, 6-9, Fr.
I don't expect Jones to go this low in the draft. I keep watching Perry Jones play and I keep wanting him to give me a feel that he will be good in the NBA. It's all I want for Christmas. It just didn't happen. He seems to have a ton of talent and his statistics as a freshman look really good, but when he goes against "true" power forwards like Jared Sullinger he has been beaten in the past. He is a really tall wing man in the body of a power forward. He could be an All-Star or he could be a complete bust. I vote bust.
Future: Bust
8. Los Angeles Clippers: Jonas Valanciunas, PF/C, Lithuania, 6-10, 1992
I know less about him than I do any other prospect in the 1st round. I can't predict his future because it would be a huge guess until I see him play more.
9. Milwaukee Bucks: Jordan Hamilton, SF, Texas, 6-7, So.
I don't care about the problems some have with where he will play in the NBA, at SG or SF, it doesn't matter because he can score and he has improved between his freshman and sophomore year. He may never win a defensive competition, but whoever drafts him is going to get a guy who can score, but maybe not do too much else. What I like about him is he could have gone to the NBA last year and he chose to stay and has come back to Texas as a much better player. Not sure he will ever be a star, but he will be a good pick for some team who needs scoring from a wing player and player who shows the will to get better.
Future: Mediocre starter
10. Charlotte Bobcats: Jan Vesely, F, Czech Republic, 6-11, 1989
Again, given my extreme hatred for foreigners I have only seen some YouTube video of Vesely so I don't know if I would consider myself too knowledgeable about him. From what I have seen he is an athletic guy who is going to have trouble guarding his position at the NBA level. He hasn't seemed to increase his production from last year like I think he should have. I am not sure he can be anything more than a high-energy guy off the bench.
Future: Role player
11. Golden State Warriors: Kawhi Leonard, SF, San Diego State, 6-6, So.
This may be the right spot for him. He seems to have the physical skills to compete at the NBA level and he is a great rebounder for his size. Still, I am not sure a wing player who shoots 27% from three point range is a player who translates well to the NBA. He shoots 43% overall. I think his ability to rebound is going to get him drafted in the early-to-middle first round, but I don't know how well his game translates to the NBA. He uses his athletic skill to rebound in college and that just won't fly as well at the next level.
Future: Role player
12. Houston Rockets: Donatas Motiejunas, F, Lithuania, 7-0, 1990
He is so damn skinny. That's the first thing I notice. I don't know if Motiejunas declares for the NBA this year or not. When I think of a stereotypical European player, this is who I think of. He isn't going to be able to guard his position at the NBA level. He has potential, which to a jaded asshole like me means he is 22 years old and we don't know what kind of player he will be and that is not a good thing.
Future: Bust
13. Phoenix Suns: Kemba Walker, PG, UConn, 6-1, Jr.
Kemba Walker is going to be an NBA player who can score, but he is too "short" to play at the NBA level. Whatever that means. I have a feeling he will be drafted by the Pacers...not sure why. I like Walker, but right now he is going to be a score-first point guard. It will be good for a while until his NBA team realizes he doesn't make his teammates better at this point. I would feel a lot better if Walker could grown a couple of inches or was taken later in the first round. Of course, the way he takes late game shots and seems to come through, it doesn't matter how tall he is, it looks like he could be a player in the NBA.
Future: Mediocre starter
14. Memphis Grizzlies: Jimmer Fredette, G, BYU, 6-2, Sr.
Somewhere 100 college basketball analysts started drooling at the mere mention of Fredette's name. If you have paid attention to college basketball, then you know what many people think about him. Yes, he is a great shooter, but the one thing that has been learned this year is if you put an athletic guy on him who can deny him the ball he will struggle. I think he will have a place in the NBA and I am afraid he will be the equivalent of David Eckstein and be seen as a try-hard player, which means he will be the subject of many a fluff piece. He's got talent and he is strong, but he can't start in the NBA on a good team.
Future: Role player
15. Indiana Pacers: Alec Burks, SG, Colorado, 6-6, So.
It makes me nervous his FG% has taken a dive in his sophomore year and he isn't much of a three-point shooter. I would like my shooting guard to be a good three-point shooter and to not go from 45% to 53% from his freshman to sophomore year. To succeed in the NBA he will have to work on his jump shot, but I think if he ends with the right team he could be an NBA starter.
Future: Bench player
16. Philadelphia 76ers: Chris Singleton, SF, Florida State, 6-9, Jr.
Singleton is the type of player that thrives on a championship team. He can be the 5th best player on a championship team because he is a defensive stopper, but he isn't going to be the 5th starter on a team that doesn't have 2-3 high quality players around him. In other words, I think he would fit in well with the Heat this year. He is the kind of guy a contender will like to put on the other team's best player in order to shut them down. That being said, even the best defensive player has to have some offensive ability to get on the court. I am not sure he will ever have a great jump shot, but if he does then he be a quality NBA player.
Future: Role player/Bust
17. New York Knicks: Brandon Knight, PG, Kentucky, 6-3, Fr.
I like Brandon Knight. There was a time he was considered in the same breath as Kyrie Irving. For me, he is the Eric Bledsoe/Ty Lawson point guard in this draft. A guy who will be taken too late and will be better than other players drafted before him. He is not a finished product by any means, but Calipari has already recruited over him with Marquis Teague so I see Knight going to the NBA. Some team is going to get a quality point/shooting guard later in the first round of this draft. Knight isn't a great passer yet, but I think that is an area where he can and will improve. He may never be an All-Star, but he could very well end up being close.
Future: Quality starter
18. Utah Jazz: Marcus Morris, PF, Kansas, 6-9, Jr.
Here is another guy I like. Morris is a bit of a tweener though. He looks like a power forward, but he may not have the arm length to be one and he can play outside the paint. The comparisons to Al Harrington are fairly accurate. He is an excellent offensive rebounder and really was part of the Kansas big man that helped make Cole Aldrich look good last year. I think there will be a place for a guy like Morris on an NBA roster. I can see him bouncing around the league a little bit though.
Future: Mediocre starter
19. Denver Nuggets: Kyle Singler, SF, Duke, 6-9, Sr.
I want to like Singler's prospects in the NBA, but I just don't. He is productive in college because he is bigger than most small forwards he faces and he is a smart player. Put an athletic guy on him though and he starts to drift out to the three-point line which takes away a lot of the matchup advantages he can provide at the small forward position. He will defend well enough to play at the NBA level, but I doubt he is going to be able to score inside by overpowering defenders like he can at the college level. I am also afraid he has reached his ceiling in terms of potential. There isn't one thing he does really, really well so that also concerns me.
Future: Role player
20. Portland Blazers: Trey Thompkins, F, Georgia, 6-9, Jr.
This is a guy I may be overrating. I like him more than a lot of other people could. I see him on a team like Orlando coming off the bench and making a difference in two years. If he can get an NBA coach who will electro-shock him every time he wants to shoot a three-point shot then he will be successful. He is a good post player who is going to come off the bench for a contender and be successful. I have put him as a role player, but I could see him being a guy who comes off the bench, but is in the game at crunch time.
Future: Role player
21. Portland Blazers: Josh Selby, G, Kansas, 6-3, Fr.
Selby won't come out this year. He hasn't had the freshman year he was anticipated to have. So Selby should not come out. If he does, he shouldn't go this high. I hear criticism of Brandon Knight about not having a position at the NBA level, well that really describes Josh Selby. He isn't a good enough passer at this point to play point guard and he is an inch shorter than Knight so he would struggle a bit to play shooting guard. He is a great shooter but will need a staff that can help him learn the point guard position better.
Future: Bust (if he comes out this year)
22. Phoenix Suns: William Buford, SG, Ohio State, 6-5, Jr.
I think Buford is a second round pick. He won't go in the first round unless he has a great NCAA Tournament. Even then, I don't think I like his potential in the NBA. He can shoot, but other than three-point percentage he hasn't improved too much between his sophomore and junior year. I believe at this point Buford would be better off not taken in the first round.
Future: Bust
23. Atlanta Hawks: Markieff Morris, PF, Kansas, 6-10, Jr.
I think I like Markieff Morris better than his brother. I rank Marcus higher, but Markieff is going to have lower expectations for himself and he is a great rebounder. Whether he is actually improving or has learned to play better off of the other Kansas players on the roster, I don't know. His ceiling is limited, but he is a great rebounder with athleticism and there is a place in the NBA for a guy like that.
Future: Role player
24. Oklahoma City Thunder: Kris Joseph, SF, Syracuse, 6-7, Jr.
Joseph really developed an outside shot over the last year or so. He is athletic and has the skills to make in the NBA. So why don't I like him at all? I think it is because before any scouting report I have read on him starts going into his actual ability to play they talk about his athleticism. That makes me nervous he is a guy who gets by on being athletic. I have noticed this a bit in the Syracuse games as well. I feel like Joseph could be better while on the court and I don't know if he wants to be better.
Future: Bust
25. New Jersey Nets: Thomas Robinson, PF, Kansas, 6-9, So.
Robinson needs to go back to college. I know it is tempting to come out to help support his family, but he took strides between his freshman and sophomore year. If he makes similar strides to his junior year then he could be close to a lottery pick. As it stands now, I see no reason he should be a first round pick. He's too inconsistent at this point.
Future: Bust (if he comes out this year)
26. Chicago Bulls: Kenneth Faried, PF, Morehead State, 6-8, Sr.
There is an adage that if a player can do one thing well then he can make it in the NBA. Well, Ken Faried is an incredible rebounder. He can play in the NBA. Faried played at a small school but he put up 18 rebounds against Florida and 15 against Ohio State this year. 40% of his rebounds are offensive rebounds. The comparison to Ben Wallace is interesting, but I do think he can be a better scorer than Wallace. He'll never be a star, but he knows how to rebound and that will give him a place in the NBA. He's a guy who will be greatly served to be on a team that allows him to play his role. He can straight rebound though.
Future: Mediocre starter
27. Dallas Mavericks: Nolan Smith, G, Duke, 6-3, Sr.
Smith is the definition of a tweener. He isn't that great of a passer to be a point guard and he is sort of small (in terms of frame) to be a shooting guard. That being said, there isn't a shot he can't hit on the floor. He has a mid-range game, a long-range game and he can get to the basket. The question remains whether he will be able to get to the basket at the NBA level or not. Smith is a willing and able defender, often being stuck on the opposing team's best player. He doesn't have a high ceiling, but I believe with his leadership and the fact he has improved dramatically every year in college he could be an NBA player. I can see Smith falling to the second round.
Future: Role player
28. Toronto Raptors: JaJuan Johnson, PF, Purdue, 6-10, Sr.
I really like JuJuan Johnson. He can play inside and outside, though I somewhat doubt his ability to score inside at the NBA level. I don't know if he has a wide enough base and is strong enough to score. The comparisons to Channing Frye are accurate, though I think Johnson is a little better rebounder and not as good of a three point shooter as Frye. I don't know if Johnson will be out of the league in a few years, but I also don't know if he can ever be a starter either.
Future: Role player
29. Boston Celtics: Jeffery Taylor, SF, Vanderbilt, 6-7, Jr.
Taylor won't come out this year, or at least he shouldn't. He's a great athlete but I don't know if he does anything really well. He also hasn't seemed to improve as much as I would have liked to see him improve between his sophomore and junior year. If he comes to the draft, we won't hear much of him after that.
Future: Bust
30. San Antonio Spurs: Marshon Brooks, SG, Providence, 6-5, Sr.
He is the most improved player in the country. He hoists up tons of shots and teams focus hard on him, yet he is shooting nearly 50% from the field and grabbing 7 rebounds as a shooting guard. Brooks is a guy who could have his draft stock skyrocket after the NCAA Tournament when it gets to the workouts. He can score, that's for sure. Can he score when he offensive doesn't revolve around him though?
Future: Bust
I will probably end up doing a full mock draft closer to the NBA Draft once the picks are set and I know who is picking where. Clearly, the little exercise I did today isn't scientific since it is all based on my opinion and many of these players are going to show something that will make them regress/improve in my mind. Still, I don't think this is going to be a terrible NBA Draft like others may. It will be short on All-Stars, but a team with two Top-10 picks could have a shot at players like Kyrie Irving and Terrence Jones.
I personally am more of a quality over quantity person when determining how good a draft is. I only have two guys projected as All-Stars at this point, but for teams drafting in the first round there are guys who can contribute in there. So it is not a great draft, but I think terrible is overstating it a little bit.
The key point is nobody knows much about the NBA Draft, myself included, and how good these players drafted will end up being. Mostly, I would encourage you to never listen to Bill Simmons about college players. In two months he goes from this statement about Cole Aldrich to saying the following in one of his columns:
In the words of Denny Green, Cole Aldrich was who we thought he was: a complementary center who challenges shots, rebounds and scores if he gets good position. He's Joel Przybilla 2.0. And you wouldn't want Joel Przybilla trying to save you from the biggest upset in 16 years … right?
In two months Bill has gone from having Cole Aldrich in the Top 5 of the draft to calling him a backup center. Of course Bill would never bring this back up in any of his comments on Aldrich, he would prefer to scrub them from your memory. My point is that opinions change, and I think opinions are going to change about the 2011 NBA Draft. I think the opinion of this draft will get better.
It is early, so most mock drafts are not in agreement or even close to each other because we don't know who has declared and who has not declared. Plus, NCAA Tournament performance affects a player's draft stock as well. Not to mention, everyone's opinion will change based on these player's actual performance. So I am going to go with Walter Football's mock draft and give my opinion on what these players will be in the NBA. I will probably be wrong about many of these, but it is my dedicated job to defend the quality of the NBA Draft every year, so here I go.
I rank players in 7 categories that determines where they fit best in the NBA (some players will start on bad teams, but are better fits as a bench player. I will predict that player as a bench player because that is what I think he is. I don't want this to get too convoluted so I won't explain further):
1. Bust (out of the league in 3 years)
2. Role player (will be 9th/10th man off bench)
3. Bench player (6th/7th guy off bench)
4. Mediocre starter (will start on an average/bad team)
5. Starter (will start on good team)
6. Quality starter (will start on an excellent team)
7. All-Star (one of the best players at his position)
1. Cleveland Cavaliers: Kyrie Irving, PG, Duke, 6-2, Fr.
I have heard the rumors that Irving's draft stock may fall due to his injured toe. I can understand these, but as long as the toe injury doesn't appear to be chronic, this isn't a Greg Oden situation. Irving is easily the best point guard in this class and he is also a natural leader. I am admittedly biased, but I firmly believe he is ready (toe-permitting) to go to the NBA and be an All-Star. It doesn't matter to me that he hasn't played much in college. He will be an All-Star in the NBA and I see no, other than chronic toe problems, he shouldn't be the #1 overall pick. He can shoot, pass and lead a team in the NBA.
Future: All-Star
2. Minnesota Timberwolves: Jared Sullinger, PF, Ohio State, 6-9, Fr.
I don't think Minnesota should take Sullinger, but that's a different story. Sullinger has a basketball IQ that other players in this draft can't match. He's not like DeJuan Blair physically, but his basketball IQ reminds me of Blair's. He just knows where he needs to be on the court and knows when the double team is coming to pass out of it. Sullinger knows how to use his body to get position and keep position in the low blocks. I don't think Sullinger will be a perennial All-Star but he can be the third best player on a championship team.
Future: Starter
3. Sacramento Kings: Derrick Williams, PF, Arizona, 6-9, So.
I am torn on Williams. Athletically, he can put it all together and be a good player. Any power forward that has a scouting report (like Williams has) that says he needs to learn to guard bigger guys in the paint and should become stronger makes me wary. Every year there is a guy that comes out of the draft who looks like a great player, but if you take the time to look you can see it just won't happen (Jordan Hill, Hasheem Thabeet). Williams will be serviceable in spurts and I think Sacramento is a bad place for him to be drafted. His ceiling is incredibly high, but I don't know if he will ever reach that ceiling.
Future: Role-player/Bust
4. Toronto Raptors: Enes Kanter, PF, Kentucky, 6-10, Fr.
I haven't seen Kanter play except on YouTube videos. I know he rebounds well and has a good feel for the game. What I don't know if how he matches up against better talent, outside of the 34 points and 13 rebound performance he put up against the USA team at the Nike Hoops Summit. Is that one game or an indicator of his future prospects in the NBA? My question lies in whether he will be a power forward or a center at the NBA level. I think he will be a power forward, but play some center. If he is a power forward will he be able to guard NBA power forwards? I am not sure, but I do know a center with a skill set like Kanter will fit somewhere in the NBA.
Future: Starter---though this is a guess since I haven't seen him play other than on YouTube.
5. Washington Wizards: Harrison Barnes, G/F, North Carolina, 6-6, Fr.
Harrison Barnes hasn't shot the ball well this year, so he is being labeled a disappointment...which is a disappointment because I think people are being hard on him. He came into UNC with the perception he would be "the man" immediately. He has a knack for hitting big shots and has improved once the dreadful Larry Drew II left the UNC program. He won't declare for the draft this year, so this is a moot point, but the comparisons to Sean Elliott are apt. Is this a bad thing though? Elliott had a really good career until health issues forced him to retire. Barnes will be an NBA starter when he declares after his sophomore year. If he improves his game even more, then he could be an All-Star.
Future: Mediocre starter (I hate caveats, but at this point this is what I see for him. If he plays in college one more year, this will probably change)
6. New Jersey Nets: Terrence Jones, F, Kentucky, 6-9, Fr.
I like Terrence Jones' game a lot. When John Calipari is on your ass about your attitude at times though that can't be a good thing. I think Jones has all the talent in the world but I don't think he is going to be able to harness that talent. I think he shoots from the outside too much and though he is a good passer he doesn't do enough of it. Still, I think he has a good NBA game if he can get some good coaching in the NBA so he doesn't end up launching 200 three-points shots at a 27% clip in the NBA.
Future: Starter/All-Star
7. Detroit Pistons: Perry Jones, PF, Baylor, 6-9, Fr.
I don't expect Jones to go this low in the draft. I keep watching Perry Jones play and I keep wanting him to give me a feel that he will be good in the NBA. It's all I want for Christmas. It just didn't happen. He seems to have a ton of talent and his statistics as a freshman look really good, but when he goes against "true" power forwards like Jared Sullinger he has been beaten in the past. He is a really tall wing man in the body of a power forward. He could be an All-Star or he could be a complete bust. I vote bust.
Future: Bust
8. Los Angeles Clippers: Jonas Valanciunas, PF/C, Lithuania, 6-10, 1992
I know less about him than I do any other prospect in the 1st round. I can't predict his future because it would be a huge guess until I see him play more.
9. Milwaukee Bucks: Jordan Hamilton, SF, Texas, 6-7, So.
I don't care about the problems some have with where he will play in the NBA, at SG or SF, it doesn't matter because he can score and he has improved between his freshman and sophomore year. He may never win a defensive competition, but whoever drafts him is going to get a guy who can score, but maybe not do too much else. What I like about him is he could have gone to the NBA last year and he chose to stay and has come back to Texas as a much better player. Not sure he will ever be a star, but he will be a good pick for some team who needs scoring from a wing player and player who shows the will to get better.
Future: Mediocre starter
10. Charlotte Bobcats: Jan Vesely, F, Czech Republic, 6-11, 1989
Again, given my extreme hatred for foreigners I have only seen some YouTube video of Vesely so I don't know if I would consider myself too knowledgeable about him. From what I have seen he is an athletic guy who is going to have trouble guarding his position at the NBA level. He hasn't seemed to increase his production from last year like I think he should have. I am not sure he can be anything more than a high-energy guy off the bench.
Future: Role player
11. Golden State Warriors: Kawhi Leonard, SF, San Diego State, 6-6, So.
This may be the right spot for him. He seems to have the physical skills to compete at the NBA level and he is a great rebounder for his size. Still, I am not sure a wing player who shoots 27% from three point range is a player who translates well to the NBA. He shoots 43% overall. I think his ability to rebound is going to get him drafted in the early-to-middle first round, but I don't know how well his game translates to the NBA. He uses his athletic skill to rebound in college and that just won't fly as well at the next level.
Future: Role player
12. Houston Rockets: Donatas Motiejunas, F, Lithuania, 7-0, 1990
He is so damn skinny. That's the first thing I notice. I don't know if Motiejunas declares for the NBA this year or not. When I think of a stereotypical European player, this is who I think of. He isn't going to be able to guard his position at the NBA level. He has potential, which to a jaded asshole like me means he is 22 years old and we don't know what kind of player he will be and that is not a good thing.
Future: Bust
13. Phoenix Suns: Kemba Walker, PG, UConn, 6-1, Jr.
Kemba Walker is going to be an NBA player who can score, but he is too "short" to play at the NBA level. Whatever that means. I have a feeling he will be drafted by the Pacers...not sure why. I like Walker, but right now he is going to be a score-first point guard. It will be good for a while until his NBA team realizes he doesn't make his teammates better at this point. I would feel a lot better if Walker could grown a couple of inches or was taken later in the first round. Of course, the way he takes late game shots and seems to come through, it doesn't matter how tall he is, it looks like he could be a player in the NBA.
Future: Mediocre starter
14. Memphis Grizzlies: Jimmer Fredette, G, BYU, 6-2, Sr.
Somewhere 100 college basketball analysts started drooling at the mere mention of Fredette's name. If you have paid attention to college basketball, then you know what many people think about him. Yes, he is a great shooter, but the one thing that has been learned this year is if you put an athletic guy on him who can deny him the ball he will struggle. I think he will have a place in the NBA and I am afraid he will be the equivalent of David Eckstein and be seen as a try-hard player, which means he will be the subject of many a fluff piece. He's got talent and he is strong, but he can't start in the NBA on a good team.
Future: Role player
15. Indiana Pacers: Alec Burks, SG, Colorado, 6-6, So.
It makes me nervous his FG% has taken a dive in his sophomore year and he isn't much of a three-point shooter. I would like my shooting guard to be a good three-point shooter and to not go from 45% to 53% from his freshman to sophomore year. To succeed in the NBA he will have to work on his jump shot, but I think if he ends with the right team he could be an NBA starter.
Future: Bench player
16. Philadelphia 76ers: Chris Singleton, SF, Florida State, 6-9, Jr.
Singleton is the type of player that thrives on a championship team. He can be the 5th best player on a championship team because he is a defensive stopper, but he isn't going to be the 5th starter on a team that doesn't have 2-3 high quality players around him. In other words, I think he would fit in well with the Heat this year. He is the kind of guy a contender will like to put on the other team's best player in order to shut them down. That being said, even the best defensive player has to have some offensive ability to get on the court. I am not sure he will ever have a great jump shot, but if he does then he be a quality NBA player.
Future: Role player/Bust
17. New York Knicks: Brandon Knight, PG, Kentucky, 6-3, Fr.
I like Brandon Knight. There was a time he was considered in the same breath as Kyrie Irving. For me, he is the Eric Bledsoe/Ty Lawson point guard in this draft. A guy who will be taken too late and will be better than other players drafted before him. He is not a finished product by any means, but Calipari has already recruited over him with Marquis Teague so I see Knight going to the NBA. Some team is going to get a quality point/shooting guard later in the first round of this draft. Knight isn't a great passer yet, but I think that is an area where he can and will improve. He may never be an All-Star, but he could very well end up being close.
Future: Quality starter
18. Utah Jazz: Marcus Morris, PF, Kansas, 6-9, Jr.
Here is another guy I like. Morris is a bit of a tweener though. He looks like a power forward, but he may not have the arm length to be one and he can play outside the paint. The comparisons to Al Harrington are fairly accurate. He is an excellent offensive rebounder and really was part of the Kansas big man that helped make Cole Aldrich look good last year. I think there will be a place for a guy like Morris on an NBA roster. I can see him bouncing around the league a little bit though.
Future: Mediocre starter
19. Denver Nuggets: Kyle Singler, SF, Duke, 6-9, Sr.
I want to like Singler's prospects in the NBA, but I just don't. He is productive in college because he is bigger than most small forwards he faces and he is a smart player. Put an athletic guy on him though and he starts to drift out to the three-point line which takes away a lot of the matchup advantages he can provide at the small forward position. He will defend well enough to play at the NBA level, but I doubt he is going to be able to score inside by overpowering defenders like he can at the college level. I am also afraid he has reached his ceiling in terms of potential. There isn't one thing he does really, really well so that also concerns me.
Future: Role player
20. Portland Blazers: Trey Thompkins, F, Georgia, 6-9, Jr.
This is a guy I may be overrating. I like him more than a lot of other people could. I see him on a team like Orlando coming off the bench and making a difference in two years. If he can get an NBA coach who will electro-shock him every time he wants to shoot a three-point shot then he will be successful. He is a good post player who is going to come off the bench for a contender and be successful. I have put him as a role player, but I could see him being a guy who comes off the bench, but is in the game at crunch time.
Future: Role player
21. Portland Blazers: Josh Selby, G, Kansas, 6-3, Fr.
Selby won't come out this year. He hasn't had the freshman year he was anticipated to have. So Selby should not come out. If he does, he shouldn't go this high. I hear criticism of Brandon Knight about not having a position at the NBA level, well that really describes Josh Selby. He isn't a good enough passer at this point to play point guard and he is an inch shorter than Knight so he would struggle a bit to play shooting guard. He is a great shooter but will need a staff that can help him learn the point guard position better.
Future: Bust (if he comes out this year)
22. Phoenix Suns: William Buford, SG, Ohio State, 6-5, Jr.
I think Buford is a second round pick. He won't go in the first round unless he has a great NCAA Tournament. Even then, I don't think I like his potential in the NBA. He can shoot, but other than three-point percentage he hasn't improved too much between his sophomore and junior year. I believe at this point Buford would be better off not taken in the first round.
Future: Bust
23. Atlanta Hawks: Markieff Morris, PF, Kansas, 6-10, Jr.
I think I like Markieff Morris better than his brother. I rank Marcus higher, but Markieff is going to have lower expectations for himself and he is a great rebounder. Whether he is actually improving or has learned to play better off of the other Kansas players on the roster, I don't know. His ceiling is limited, but he is a great rebounder with athleticism and there is a place in the NBA for a guy like that.
Future: Role player
24. Oklahoma City Thunder: Kris Joseph, SF, Syracuse, 6-7, Jr.
Joseph really developed an outside shot over the last year or so. He is athletic and has the skills to make in the NBA. So why don't I like him at all? I think it is because before any scouting report I have read on him starts going into his actual ability to play they talk about his athleticism. That makes me nervous he is a guy who gets by on being athletic. I have noticed this a bit in the Syracuse games as well. I feel like Joseph could be better while on the court and I don't know if he wants to be better.
Future: Bust
25. New Jersey Nets: Thomas Robinson, PF, Kansas, 6-9, So.
Robinson needs to go back to college. I know it is tempting to come out to help support his family, but he took strides between his freshman and sophomore year. If he makes similar strides to his junior year then he could be close to a lottery pick. As it stands now, I see no reason he should be a first round pick. He's too inconsistent at this point.
Future: Bust (if he comes out this year)
26. Chicago Bulls: Kenneth Faried, PF, Morehead State, 6-8, Sr.
There is an adage that if a player can do one thing well then he can make it in the NBA. Well, Ken Faried is an incredible rebounder. He can play in the NBA. Faried played at a small school but he put up 18 rebounds against Florida and 15 against Ohio State this year. 40% of his rebounds are offensive rebounds. The comparison to Ben Wallace is interesting, but I do think he can be a better scorer than Wallace. He'll never be a star, but he knows how to rebound and that will give him a place in the NBA. He's a guy who will be greatly served to be on a team that allows him to play his role. He can straight rebound though.
Future: Mediocre starter
27. Dallas Mavericks: Nolan Smith, G, Duke, 6-3, Sr.
Smith is the definition of a tweener. He isn't that great of a passer to be a point guard and he is sort of small (in terms of frame) to be a shooting guard. That being said, there isn't a shot he can't hit on the floor. He has a mid-range game, a long-range game and he can get to the basket. The question remains whether he will be able to get to the basket at the NBA level or not. Smith is a willing and able defender, often being stuck on the opposing team's best player. He doesn't have a high ceiling, but I believe with his leadership and the fact he has improved dramatically every year in college he could be an NBA player. I can see Smith falling to the second round.
Future: Role player
28. Toronto Raptors: JaJuan Johnson, PF, Purdue, 6-10, Sr.
I really like JuJuan Johnson. He can play inside and outside, though I somewhat doubt his ability to score inside at the NBA level. I don't know if he has a wide enough base and is strong enough to score. The comparisons to Channing Frye are accurate, though I think Johnson is a little better rebounder and not as good of a three point shooter as Frye. I don't know if Johnson will be out of the league in a few years, but I also don't know if he can ever be a starter either.
Future: Role player
29. Boston Celtics: Jeffery Taylor, SF, Vanderbilt, 6-7, Jr.
Taylor won't come out this year, or at least he shouldn't. He's a great athlete but I don't know if he does anything really well. He also hasn't seemed to improve as much as I would have liked to see him improve between his sophomore and junior year. If he comes to the draft, we won't hear much of him after that.
Future: Bust
30. San Antonio Spurs: Marshon Brooks, SG, Providence, 6-5, Sr.
He is the most improved player in the country. He hoists up tons of shots and teams focus hard on him, yet he is shooting nearly 50% from the field and grabbing 7 rebounds as a shooting guard. Brooks is a guy who could have his draft stock skyrocket after the NCAA Tournament when it gets to the workouts. He can score, that's for sure. Can he score when he offensive doesn't revolve around him though?
Future: Bust
I will probably end up doing a full mock draft closer to the NBA Draft once the picks are set and I know who is picking where. Clearly, the little exercise I did today isn't scientific since it is all based on my opinion and many of these players are going to show something that will make them regress/improve in my mind. Still, I don't think this is going to be a terrible NBA Draft like others may. It will be short on All-Stars, but a team with two Top-10 picks could have a shot at players like Kyrie Irving and Terrence Jones.
I personally am more of a quality over quantity person when determining how good a draft is. I only have two guys projected as All-Stars at this point, but for teams drafting in the first round there are guys who can contribute in there. So it is not a great draft, but I think terrible is overstating it a little bit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)