The Official Washington Basketball Thread: Wizards, Mystics etc

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Marcus Camby is a former DPOY. 2x All-Defensive First Team, 2x All-Defensive Second Team, 4x blocks leader, College Player of the Year. I don't think anyone would confuse him as transcendent. Davis will have to do more than just defend.

[Going Commando]

Marcus Camby is a former DPOY. 2x All-Defensive First Team, 2x All-Defensive Second Team, 4x blocks leader, College Player of the Year. I don't think anyone would confuse him as transcendent. Davis will have to do more than just defend.

Sure. Mutumbo is another one. Davis does more than defend. Davis affects the game in a wholistic way--defending, passing, rebounding, and scoring. All of the things it takes to win games, he does. Defense is just what he does at a transcendent level.

I also think Davis is a significantly better prospect than Camby with better defensive potential.

To me he's more Bill Russell/Tim Duncan than he is Camby. To do the things he did as a freshmen is unprecedented in the modern era.

[pjfootballer]

IDo I want the easy 20+ PPG scorer who can't defend a lick but can take over the offense in crunch time? Or do I want the well rounded player who is only going to score off assisted buckets mostly and won't be able to give me much in the way of crunch time offense? Tough call between two incomplete players.

And that's why I'd love to trade down. Reading through all these posts, it looks like there is no true concensus as to who we should take. This draft reminds me of the Kwame Brown draft. I'm not saying Davis is Kwame, because he's surely better, but the rest of the draft after #1 has too many question marks. I'd rather trade down with Portland at 6 and pick up their 11, then we have 2 solid players with lower expectations. If MKG, TRob, Beal or Drummond were "can't miss" at 3, then I'd say stay put. I think the Bobcats take MKG (that's the talk on the local sports radio) at 2, which leaves us with 3 questions marks to choose from (Beal, Drum or Rob). Trade down and you can pick up Rivers at 6 and Jones at 11.

I found this mock draft dated 05/31/12.

http://nbadraft.net/2012mock_draft

Edited June 1, 2012 by pjfootballer

[MattFancy]

I guess that's why I'm so sour on Barnes.

Are there any UNC fans upset that Barnes is leaving school? Did anyone actually enjoy his two years there?

He just seems like a skinny' date=' surprisingly unathletic really good shooter who played with absolutely no passion.[/quote']

I wish he would've come back for 1 more year just to see that group win a title and maybe because he could use the extra year.

Don't get me wrong, he has a ton of potential and can take over games when he wants. But there were games were his shot would be off and he would just disappear.

[No Excuses]

No to more rookies. This team really doesn't need more young talent. Pick the #3 guy and call it a day. We really don't have the minutes to dispense to rookies anymore. There are two positions on this roster that have to be filled with starters: SG and SF. At least one of these has to be a veteran.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

I'm not sure any of us can compare Davis, or anyone today, to Russell. We didn't see him play and reading, watching youtube vids or even seeing old footage of an entire game can't give us the ability to do so.

That's one of my pet peeves. Young people like myself comparing a current player/prospect to someone who last played 20+ years before we were even born. This is especially true for football and basketball. Baseball is baseball so you can actually get something out of the numbers (the Steroid Era doesn't exist in my world) but other sports, things change so much.

I mean ****, they didn't even keep blocks as a statistic in Russell's time. Kinda like they didn't keep track of sacks, so we have no idea how many Deacon Jones had.

Edited June 1, 2012 by G.A.C.O.L.B.

[RonArtest15]

And that's why I'd love to trade down. Reading through all these posts, it looks like there is no true concensus as to who we should take. This draft reminds me of the Kwame Brown draft. I'm not saying Davis is Kwame, because he's surely better, but the rest of the draft after #1 has too many question marks. I'd rather trade down with Portland at 6 and pick up their 11, then we have 2 solid players with lower expectations. If MKG, TRob, Beal or Drummond were "can't miss" at 3, then I'd say stay put. I think the Bobcats take MKG (that's the talk on the local sports radio) at 2, which leaves us with 3 questions marks to choose from (Beal, Drum or Rob). Trade down and you can pick up Rivers at 6 and Jones at 11.

I found this mock draft dated 05/31/12.

http://nbadraft.net/2012mock_draft

COMPLETELY disagree.

The 2001 NBA draft had a bunch of HS'ers and solid, but unspectacular players in their top-10.

The pedigree of all the prospects rumored to go in the top-10 this year is far better than 2001. FWIW, the 2000 and 2001 NBA drafts are widely considered to be two of the worst in the history of the league.

*NBADraft.net is awful. I can't take a site seriously after comparing DeShawn Stevenson to Michael Jordan.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Yeah, the 2001 draft is the worst in history my opinion. And of course it's the year we win the lottery. I mean when people criticize you for not taking a Jason Richardson or Shane Battier #1 (god bless them), yeah that's pretty suck.

And as I said a couple of pages ago, nbadraft.net is a huge steaming pile of ****.

Use www.draftexpress.com

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Random Draft thought. This is a good year not to get the number one. Davis can't really shoot. Seems to me he's a rich man's Jan Veesely. Great defensive, hustling player... but a liability away from the basket.

Are you high?

I'm not entirely sure Veesely will be in the league in three years. In the absolute worst case scenario, I see Davis being like Marcus Camby - a defensive force with a limited offensive game.

But I think he is ultimately going to be better offensively than that. He has really good hands. He's shown the ability to score with either hand around the basket. His jumper is already okay - if he has a problem with it, it's that he doesn't seem to have completely grown into his body yet. He always seems surprised by the actual release point of his jumper.

Davis would be a top three pick in nearly any draft over the last 30 years, and a number one pick in most of them.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Are you high?

I'm not entirely sure Veesely will be in the league in three years. In the absolute worst case scenario' date='[/quote']

I agree that comparing Davis to Vesely is pretty absurd, but I really think you're selling Vesely short here.

Edited June 1, 2012 by G.A.C.O.L.B.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yeah, the 2001 draft is the worst in history my opinion. And of course it's the year we win the lottery. I mean when people criticize you for not taking a Jason Richardson or Shane Battier #1 (god bless them), yeah that's pretty suck.

What's really sad is that people even knew then how bad it was. Generally, it takes a few years perspective. That year, the thought was - "well, if you take Battier #1, you can be confident that you are drafting a starter. The rest of these guys....eeeshhhhh."

[Going Commando]

Drummond is our lottery ticket.

Draft him at three and teach him the game and he would make us a playoff team. His raw tools are amazing.

Can we teach him to play? He doesn't know what he's doing right now. He doesn't know much about positioning. He doesn't know how to face up and shoot. He doesn't know how to move in the post and doesn't know how to finish if the dunk isn't there. He doesn't know how to consistently box out and throw his weight around. He looks like a 17 year old trying to tread water against much older kids. He's incredibly raw.

But so was Dwight Howard and so was Andrew Bynum. If he develops a post repertoire, becomes a passable shooter, learns to move around on the floor and the block, and learns to consistently use his size as an advantage on the defensive glass, the kid will be dominant.

He's a gamble. You have to understand where he's at mentally before you risk it--make sure he actually can learn to play the game. But the payoff could be so big. In four seasons or so I could see him starting to put it together. By year six I could see him being the best center in the league.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Drummond is our lottery ticket.

Draft him at three and teach him the game and he would make us a playoff team. His raw tools are amazing.

By the time he develops, John Wall will be playing in a state without income taxes. Do the Wizards have the luxury of waiting three or four years?

---------- Post added June-1st-2012 at 08:07 AM ----------

By year six I could see him being the best center in the league.

In other words, he is Tyson Chandler and will be on this third team at that point.

Bynum is the only big I can think of that stuck with his original team through years and years of development. And the Lakers had the luxury of patience with him.

I think Drummond will one day be good. I also think that the team that drafts him will be developing him for someone else. That's just the nature of young bigs and the lottery.

[Going Commando]

With Drummond, it seems like the core deficiencies to his game are skill deficiencies and a lack of simple game experience. You can teach the post up skills and finishing skills and in time, with playing experience against tough competition, he'll gain some working experience. That's what makes him so tantalizing. How good he becomes depends on his capacity for learning. If he's a good learner and gets a good teacher, he can be dominant.

This is a really good year for lottery big men. Davis, TRob, Sully, and Drummond all look like high potential starters. Old stalwarts like Zeller are there too, you know you're getting a good player from him. Henson has nice potential if he ever fills out and physically matures. And you've got high potential projects like Meyers Leonard out there too.

The depth of this year's class is incredible. People will be getting great players in the late teens.

One guy that hasn't gotten a lot of burn that I've always been interested in is Quincy Miller. He didn't do a lot at Baylor this year, but this kid has some really nice tools to work with. He's a super long shooting guard essentially. A poor man's Durant athletically. He's raw as hell, but the kid can put the ball on the court and get to the rack, and with his length and speed, he makes for a very interesting long term developmental project in the mid to late first round.

[RonArtest15]

I agree with LKB. As good as Drummond might turn out to be, we don't have the luxury of developing him with the hopes he turns into a quality big in 3 years or so. Another thing, I don't necessairly trust our current coaching staff to develop a raw talent like Drummond. Yes, we've had a breakthrough w. Seraphin to some extent, but if there is another area where the Wizards could improve, it's with player development.

I would pass on him because there are NBA ready prospects who we can take at the #3 spot. Guys who can step in and IMMEDIATELY contribute for us. Drummond isn't going to help us win any games in the next year or two. You can make an argument that guys like MKG, Robinson, and Beal would.

[Going Commando]

By the time he develops' date=' John Wall will be playing in a state without income taxes. Do the Wizards have the luxury of waiting three or four years?[/quote'] I actually think it will be a while before Wall leaves, if he ever does.

Nobody turns down the max rookie deal extension. Wall will probably get it. He won't turn it down.

In other words, he is Tyson Chandler and will be on this third team at that point.

Bynum is the only big I can think of that stuck with his original team through years and years of development. And the Lakers had the luxury of patience with him.

I think Drummond will one day be good. I also think that the team that drafts him will be developing him for someone else. That's just the nature of young bigs and the lottery.

It'll depend on his expectations from his FO going in. Get a patient FO working with him like Orlando did with Dwight and L.A. did with Bynum and they'll suffer through the growing pains and reap the fruits of their labor in playoff runs.

But potential like Drummond's is a super valuable commodity. Get an FO that's only looking to flip him as part of a package to another team looking to get something back for a star and he could bounce around the league just like Chandler did, like Emeka Okafor did, and like Derrick Favors very well could.

The Wizards are in good position moving forward IMO, much better than their record last season indicated. The team was bad because it was young, had no chemistry or identity going into the season, and they didn't know what the hell they were doing. The chemistry changed, the young guys are starting to figure out how to play, and the potential of the group is sky high compared to the other lottery teams. Out of all the other high lotto teams aside from Portland, they're the team with the groundwork starting to take shape to make a huge leap forward.

I don't think the Wizards are as desperate as most would think. I do think they've got the luxury of going BPA and being patient with the guy for a long time because they've got good enough players at most positions to eventually become competitive with the roster as is. Drummond wouldn't have to start early, he could avoid that abuse. Nene and Seraphin can easily hold us down at C and Booker and Vesely make us pretty solid at PF. We've got four good enough PF/C types and they're all young or under long term contract. We could wait on Drummond.

BUT, if you take on a project like Drummond with such a valuable team building resource in that high draft pick, you need to find other ways to fill roster holes. With Vesely showing he's really a PF and not a SF, SF is flat out weak, short term and long term. Chris Singleton is the only body we've really got and he's a project himself. I'm fine keeping guys like James Singleton, Cartier Martin, and Roger Mason around for a while, but it's just a rotating cast of stop gaps and role players for the most part. It'd be nice to find someone who can claim a starting role for himself long term. Going to be hard to find that for next season in FA when the team is still losing so much.

---------- Post added June-1st-2012 at 09:44 AM ----------

I agree with LKB. As good as Drummond might turn out to be, we don't have the luxury of developing him with the hopes he turns into a quality big in 3 years or so. Another thing, I don't necessairly trust our current coaching staff to develop a raw talent like Drummond. Yes, we've had a breakthrough w. Seraphin to some extent, but if there is another area where the Wizards could improve, it's with player development.

I would pass on him because there are NBA ready prospects who we can take at the #3 spot. Guys who can step in and IMMEDIATELY contribute for us. Drummond isn't going to help us win any games in the next year or two. You can make an argument that guys like MKG, Robinson, and Beal would.

I don't know. I'm not totally convinced that the draft is our only, or even our best avenue for immediate improvement. If you're patient, and take a very big picture approach, it can make a lot of sense to take on a project with enormous potential payoff because you'll have set the table for yourself so well once it does.

If we're looking for someone who can help us win next season as the primary concern, then I think the target has to either be Barnes or Sullinger or possibly Austin Rivers. These are the day one starters with immediately translatable NBA skills. Each would be an immediate upgrade over the starter we've already got in place.

I think MKG, Beal, and TRob are projects too. Beal didn't shoot as well this year as he should have. He was expected to show NBA three shooting ability immediate and shooting just .339 from three this season feels like a major disappointment. He's got a longer ways to go on the offensive end than people expected. I don't expect him to be a major contributor next year, and see him being more of a long term project you take on because of how good his combination of IQ, hustle, and athleticism is.

I get the exact same feeling from TRob too. He's a relentless hustler and terrific athlete, which overshadows the fact that he doesn't have a ton of skills. I could see him making more of an immediate impact than Beal though. TRob is big and that elite rebounding ability should translate right away. Also, it's important to remember that we need rebounding. Seraphin isn't a consistently good defensive rebounder and Nene never has been a great rebounder. The only guys who I'd say have plus rebounding skill in the front court are Vesely and Booker. TRob could probably come in as a rookie and be the best rebounder on the team. Dude is a hoss.

MKG is a lot more raw than I originally credited. His offensive game is lacking. It'll be a while before he becomes a quality offensive contributor, he's going to have to thrive on transition offense and hustle buckets for now. I could see him leading to a bump in wins from sheer effort and positive chemistry, but he's definitely a project.

I don't think Beal should really be in consideration for us at three. You've got two superior prospects to him in TRob and MKG, plus you've got the huge potential project in Drummond in play. Two of those guys will be available, and I think each would be a better pick than Beal.

[Samuels]

I still think Drummond goes #2 but if he don't thats our meal ticket to trade back with a team like Portland.

This draft after Davis the players are so closely rated a team like Portland is in the perfect spots #6+ #11 to get extreme value. I can very easily see the guys getting picked after #5 being better then the top 5 picks in fact I rate some of them higher already.

[Going Commando]

I still think Drummond goes #2 but if he don't thats our meal ticket to trade back with a team like Portland.

This draft after Davis the players are so closely rated a team like Portland is in the perfect spots #6+ #11 to get extreme value. I can very easily see the guys getting picked after #5 being better then the top 5 picks in fact I rate some of them higher already.

I'm not opposed to that kind of trade down. Kill two birds with one stone. I definitely think the value of this class extends to 11 and beyond.

Who would you target with those two picks though?

[SuperBash]

If we did trade down to the 6 and 11, I'd take two of Rivers/Waiters/Sully/Barnes/Zeller/PJ3 and call it a day. Then 2 of Jenkins/Nicholson/Lamb/Crowder/Demon/Buford in the 2nd, who ever is available. I've got a feeling we grab a Euro player in the 2nd to stash them and then we never hear of the player again.

[Samuels]

I'm not opposed to that kind of trade down. Kill two birds with one stone. I definitely think the value of this class extends to 11 and beyond.

Who would you target with those two picks though?

It don't even really have to be both picks but i'd jump all over that. It could be the exclusive rights to Batum+ #6 they don't want to pay him anyway and can draft a replacement at #11. I'd love to pry Klay Thompson from Golden st I wish we drafted him last year.

I think the first 4 picks in some order will be

Davis

Drummond

TRob

MKG

I think Barnes goes #5 they need a Sf and seem fine in the backcourt

If it was both picks we got i'd look at

#6- Beal/Lamb

#11-Sullinger/Henson/Zeller

#32- Hollis Thompson legit SF size,great shot,good defense very underrated

#46- Scott Machado Very good pass first with good ast/TO ratio and improved 3pt shot over 40% a great backup PG

I sure remember getting ragged on last year over Kawhi Leonard but look how that has turned out. If we took him or Thompson last year this team would be in whole lot better shape right now.

[Mr Awesome]

I've got a feeling we grab a Euro player in the 2nd to stash them and then we never hear of the player again.

Speaking of that, whatever happened to Vladimir Veremeenko? I remember hearing good things about him and then we traded him to Chicago for Hinrich.

I dont think our international drafting record is that bad considering we are drafting the unknown/unproven. Juan Carlos Navarro would have been awesome had he played for us

[StillUnknown]

If we did trade down to the 6 and 11, I'd take two of Rivers/Waiters/Sully/Barnes/Zeller/PJ3 and call it a day. Then 2 of Jenkins/Nicholson/Lamb/Crowder/Demon/Buford in the 2nd, who ever is available. I've got a feeling we grab a Euro player in the 2nd to stash them and then we never hear of the player again.

That would put our roster at 10 or 11 players on rookie contracts, with no real signs that the players going into their 3rd year are ready to assume a "vet/leadership" role. Assuming we can hopefully bring in a decent vet or 2 in free agency, where are the minutes going to come from for all these rookies?

[SuperBash]

That would put our roster at 10 or 11 players on rookie contracts, with no real signs that the players going into their 3rd year are ready to assume a "vet/leadership" role. Assuming we can hopefully bring in a decent vet or 2 in free agency, where are the minutes going to come from for all these rookies?

I doubt it happens but the question was who would we target there.

I'm still in the camp where you stand pat at 3 and target Danny Green, Brandon Rush, or if we are really, really lucky, Portland does a sign and trade with Batum and 6 or 11 for our 3. Ideally, I'd like to see 3 plus Blatche for 11 plus a resigned Batum. We still get a solid player at 11, get a really good wing for the future AND get rid of Blatche. Something so perfect would never happen but I can dream!

[Samuels]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wizards-insider/post/thomas-johnson-would-have-an-interest-in-playing-for-the-wizards/2012/05/31/gJQAPXfX5U_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wizards-insider/post/ted-leonsis-i-dont-want-to-be-in-the-lottery-anymore/2012/05/31/gJQAUHHT4U_blog.html?wprss=rss_wizards-insider

two very interesting articules.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Two points:

1. Dwight Howard started every game as a rookie, shot 52 percent and averaged 10 rebounds. By his third year, he was a superstar. Orlando has done a wonderful job with him, but the first day he walked onto the court, he was already one of the best centers in the league.

2. This is a question more than a point: How many goddamn under 22 year olds do you people want? Are you trying to beat Kentucky or make the playoffs? The only thing I would trade the #3 for is an established player of the Cousins ilk. You add two more lottery picks to this team, and it's going to be Romper Room next year.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Lombardi's_kid_brother