The Official Washington Basketball Thread: Wizards, Mystics etc

[Going Commando]

I don't want us to be in the business of trading picks for veterans. I want us to be in the business of drafting and developing our own players that fit within our own organization, where we get to enjoy their rookie contract contribution ourselves.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 06:27 PM ----------

Oh come on he doesn't play over 30 min per game and not play against starters. He did perfectly fine last night (actually extremely well) and he played 35 min against Miami's starters most of the time

BUT, having Harden come off the bench means he plays against the second line more often than a regular starter. It means his matchups are more favorable than a regular starter.

[Destino]

Well than Ted would be an idiot not to do so if the oppurtunity presented itself.

Harden averaged almost 17 points a game on 10 FGAs per game. He isn't the "6th man" because he can't start they just do it for the matchups I guess, but to think he cannot start is absurd. Plus ok he is a veteran.... but he is 22 that is not mortgaging the future at all..... that would just be enhancing it.

Rookies are cheaper.

[Going Commando]

Rookies are cheaper.

They are. I know there is a bit of exasperation in that statement, but it is important to get good contribution from rookie contracts. Good organizations do this. I don't want to get behind the curve here, paying for guys that other teams develop but never quite live up to the expectations we have when we pay them. I don't want an organization like the Thunder to use us to continuously reload while winning and stay on top of the league.

I want us to build something sustainable like the Thunder have for ourselves. I don't think we become a first rate organization by making moves like packaging the third overall pick in a good class for an expensive James Harden. I think we max ourselves out with a couple years of middle seeds that way.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Andre Drummond working out for the Wiz on Monday.

Barnes on Tuesday.

---------- Post added June-16th-2012 at 12:20 AM ----------

VIDEO: Austin Rivers Struggles In '7 Drill' At Wizards' Workout

http://www.bulletsforever.com/

[Going Commando]

Took a look at those links you sent me Brave. The more I see about Hollis Thompson, the more I want us to draft him. Local guy who fills a huge need at a potentially great value in the draft. What more can you ask? For him to be available when we pick I suppose.

[Destino]

They are. I know there is a bit of exasperation in that statement, but it is important to get good contribution from rookie contracts. Good organizations do this. I don't want to get behind the curve here, paying for guys that other teams develop but never quite live up to the expectations we have when we pay them. I don't want an organization like the Thunder to use us to continuously reload while winning and stay on top of the league.

I want us to build something sustainable like the Thunder have for ourselves. I don't think we become a first rate organization by making moves like packaging the third overall pick in a good class for an expensive James Harden. I think we max ourselves out with a couple years of middle seeds that way.

First step needed to attempt a wizards version of the Thunders draft success is firing Ernie. We didn't do that. He doesn't have what it takes to be a top GM.

[Skins199021]

I don't want us to be in the business of trading picks for veterans. I want us to be in the business of drafting and developing our own players that fit within our own organization, where we get to enjoy their rookie contract contribution ourselves.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 06:27 PM ----------

So your saying it never works trading picks for veterans...... I suggest looking at what the Celtics did in 07 because that brought them a lot of success, and they still look like they are going to be successful going forward. Just because the Wizards are stupid doesn't mean it doesn't work it means the Wizards are ****ing stupid. The Foye/Miller trade you made example of was pure stupidity. At some point we are going to have to trade for a star or we will never put ourselves on the map ever and no one will want to stay or sign with us.

Im not saying I would be mad if we don't do it. But if we got offered, Harden or Derozan, or someone proven, good and young I would do it.

Although I much rather trade 3 and something to the Blazers for 6 and 11 and get Barnes and PJ3/Lamb/Rivers as it would actually fill out our team

Edited June 16, 2012 by Skins199021

[Going Commando]

I feel like we should really attempt to get two of Robinson, Beal, or Gilchrist.

I've been reading that Cleveland has tried to move up. I could see them potentially moving up to #2 for MKG maybe.

If Cleveland trades up to 2 for MKG, I could see the draft settling like this:

1.) Davis

2.) MKG

3.) TRob

4.) Drummond - Charlotte

5.) Barnes - doubt the Kings add yet another combo guard, although I thought the same thing Utah taking Kanter last year.

Beal could be the odd man out. If he slides, I'd really try and get back into the draft to get him.

It makes sense for us to get a second lotto pick out of Shard's deal ahead of the draft so we can get some draft maneuverability. Take that pick and a future pick and a player, that seems like a strong offer to get to five or six.

There's New Orleans needing to get out of Okafor and Ariza's contract and they're sitting on the tenth pick. That's one potential option.

Toronto has Amir Johnson and Andrea Bargnani with undesirable contracts. Bargnani has three years left with ~11 million per year. Amir Johnson is 3 years at ~6.5 million per. I don't really want either of those deals though. Longer and I don't think Toronto would really want to deal Bargnani anyway.

Portland really has no bad deals other than Wesley Matthews, and his isn't that long nor expensive.

Golden State has David Lee's terrible contract. I'd have real trepidation about taking that thing on just to add a rookie though. It's got four freaking years left at like 14 million per year. You can't pay both him and Nene for that long and I don't want to amnesty Nene. They've also got Bogut's deal, but they probably want to keep him since they traded Monta for him. The whole point was for them to grab a Center.

I don't know, maybe you could work out a deal where we deal Shard and Nene to them for Bogut and Lee and they toss in the seventh pick. They'd probably get the center they've been looking for and they'd get out of Lee's deal. We'd amnesty Blatche and then Lee's contract is the only bad long term contract we'd have left plus we get the seventh pick and we're really only out Shard's expiring deal and Nene (whose contract isn't that favorable for us anyway).

Nah, that probably doesn't work for them. They'll have cap flexibility regardless of getting rid of Lee or not so long as neither Andris Biedrins or Richard Jefferson exercise their player options. The draft pick is probably more valuable than 23 million in cap room to them.

Still, with four potentially huge contracts on their books for 2013/2014 and the seventh overall pick, Golden State could be an amenable trade partner.

Sacramento really has no bad contracts aside from Salmons's deal, and it's not big enough to matter much to them. I don't see them being a player for Shard's deal at all.

Detroit has a lot of bad contracts and a lot of expiring deals that could make the math work:

- Tayshaun Prince: 3 years at ~ 7 per

- Ben Gordon: 2 years (one a player option that I have a hard time seeing him pass up) at ~13 million per

- Charlie Villanueava: 2 years (second a player option too) at ~8 million per

- Rodney Stuckey: 2 years at 8.5 million per

- Jonas Jerebko: 3 years at 4.5 million per (final year a player option)

Detroit is swamped for the next two seasons and they're hopeless. They need to reboot and rebuild around Greg Monroe and Brandon Knight and they need to shed contracts to do so. They need to clean out that locker room bad. If we were willing to take a bad contract or two, I bet we could get them to throw in the 9th pick just for Shard. Maybe they even sweeten the pot depending on the contracts.

Regardless, there should be a market among lottery teams for Shard's contract. Get a deal done before the draft, see if someone like Beal starts to fall on draft day, and then use that pick plus a player and some sort of future pick to move into range and draft him.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 09:47 PM ----------

So your saying it never works trading picks for veterans...... I suggest looking at what the Celtics did in 07 because that brought them a lot of success, and they still look like they are going to be successful going forward.

The Celtics had Paul Pierce though. And Pierce's window was closing, they had to make a move to achieve something with him. John isn't the same caliber player as Pierce to build a big three of aging stars around. Our situations aren't similar enough to be following their model.

Although I much rather trade 3 and something to the Blazers for 6 and 11 and get Barnes and PJ3/Lamb/Rivers as it would actually fill out our team

Barnes at six could be nice, but I don't want us to draft Rivers, Lamb, or PJIII at any point. Lamb wouldn't be the end of the world, but really, I don't think any of them are a good fit on our team. Rivers has no place in our offense or our locker room really and Lamb isn't much better. I doubt PJIII is really a good fit for any team.

[Samuels]

I already showed you a statistical breakdown of how Beal was a better played in his freshman year than Barnes has been in his 2 seasons. You haven't given one coherent argument other than explaining why Barnes is a better prospect. Do I have to give you the break down again?

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 03:16 PM ----------

He is also a FA after 2013, depending on who we draft will let us know if we're going to make a big run at him. As it stands now, I would see OKC paying up to keep him, even if that is near max money.

Stats mean nothing to me honestly,I'm just not a huge stats guy with prospects there was'nt a huge difference anyway and alot of stuff goes into that teammates, system etc. I form my opinions based off years of being around the game and knowing what i'm looking at. Even in the small video scouting breakdowns draft express has done on both, the difference is night and day between a guy like Barnes and Beal offensively.

Watch the draft express breakdown on both players there breakdown of Beal and its what you'll see if you have access to games. Lots of jumpers and very little creating jumpers or NBA type ISO plays. He also played Sf on a team with shotjackers in the backcourt and no frontcourt help that allowed his rebound numbers to be inflated, he did'nt even average that in high school. He also played 34mpg which is alot in college.

Barnes video you will see lots of NBA type ISO's that translate to the pro game. Shooting off the dribble, pump fakes drawing fouls and getting his own shot off of them. He averaged 7 FTA a game those are great signs to being a pro scorer. Barnes also had a stacked team and was still the #1 option for his club both years. He was the defensive focus unlike Beal. He put up 17ppg in under 30mpg both years.

I still think Barnes goes before Beal NBA GM's have access to some of the same games i've watched of these guys. Beal is a good pick in the 5-8 area but is'nt a elite offensive talent the comparisons to Ray Allen are laughable. Even has a freshman Ray Allen was a lights out shooter that would dunk all over you.

[Going Commando]

First step needed to attempt a wizards version of the Thunders draft success is firing Ernie. We didn't do that. He doesn't have what it takes to be a top GM.

Sure. I agree with you. Ernie is absolutely not the manager nor team builder that Presti is. But that doesn't mean we should give up our expectations for creating and utilizing a model of sustainable contention.

The Thunder have created a very visible road map for success for bad organizations that lucked into drafting their own franchise caliber player. We should try our best to copy it.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 10:07 PM ----------

Watch the draft express breakdown on both players there breakdown of Beal and its what you'll see if you have access to games. Lots of jumpers and very little creating jumpers or NBA type ISO plays. He also played Sf on a team with shotjackers in the backcourt and no frontcourt help that allowed his rebound numbers to be inflated, he did'nt even average that in high school. He also played 34mpg which is alot in college.

Let's also not pretend like Beal didn't show off plenty of NBA scoring tools either. I think he's an even better shooter than Barnes mechanically. Beal is rapid whereas Barnes has a very slow release. And he's terrific off the ball and that will definitely translate into scoring in the NBA, great off screens, good finishing in transition, great spotting up behind the 3 point line on the break, and he's definitely quicker and better than Barnes at attacking the rim from the perimeter.

Barnes is a comically bad ball handler after two dribbles.

Beal getting 34 minutes a game as a freshman in a Florida backcourt with lots of upperclassmen is incredibly special, not a knock on him at all. He was the best player on his team from day one.

Beal's rebounding is simply a plus at his position no matter the surrounding situation and I think he's definitely a better rebounder than Barnes. He's grittier, has a higher motor, and has a better BBall IQ than Barnes. He constantly works and boxes out whereas Barnes isn't nearly as cognizant and doesn't hustle like that. Beal looks like he has better hands than Barnes too.

And Beal is a much, much better and more active defender than Barnes. That video shows Beal absolutely battling through those screens and hounding the perimeter. Barnes will never be able to defend like that.

Barnes video you will see lots of NBA type ISO's that translate to the pro game. Shooting off the dribble, pump fakes drawing fouls and getting his own shot off of them. He averaged 7 FTA a game those are great signs to being a pro scorer. Barnes also had a stacked team and was still the #1 option for his club both years. He was the defensive focus unlike Beal. He put up 17ppg in under 30mpg both years.

This is where I feel like you're losing sight of the forest through the trees. Barnes has a lot of skills. He had a stacked team surrounding him. So why did he underachieve? I feel like you're ignoring all of the bad you get with Barnes by focusing only on his tangible skills like his array of shots, particularly in comparison to Beal.

Some of those shooting skills are things that Beal himself can learn to do in the NBA. But Barnes isn't suddenly going to have Beal's speed or heart or bball IQ. Barnes is certainly a better scorer with a much better mid range game than Beal (today). But that's just about the only things he has over Beal aside from his length. Beal is a better basketball player overall.

Edited June 16, 2012 by stevemcqueen1

[Samuels]

Sure. I agree with you. Ernie is absolutely not the manager nor team builder that Presti is. But that doesn't mean we should give up our expectations for creating and utilizing a model of sustainable contention.

The Thunder have created a very visible road map for success for bad organizations that lucked into drafting their own franchise caliber player. We should try our best to copy it.

---------- Post added June-15th-2012 at 10:07 PM ----------

Let's also not pretend like Beal didn't show off plenty of NBA scoring tools either. I think he's an even better shooter than Barnes mechanically. Beal is rapid whereas Barnes has a very slow release. And he's terrific off the ball and that will definitely translate into scoring in the NBA, great off screens, good finishing in transition, great spotting up behind the 3 point line on the break, and he's definitely quicker and better than Barnes at attacking the rim from the perimeter.

Barnes is a comically bad ball handler after two dribbles.

Beal getting 34 minutes a game as a freshman in a Florida backcourt with lots of upperclassmen is incredibly special, not a knock on him at all. He was the best player on his team from day one.

Beal's rebounding is simply a plus at his position no matter the surrounding situation and I think he's definitely a better rebounder than Barnes. He's grittier, has a higher motor, and has a better BBall IQ than Barnes. He constantly works and boxes out whereas Barnes isn't nearly as cognizant and doesn't hustle like that. Beal looks like he has better hands than Barnes too.

And Beal is a much, much better and more active defender than Barnes. That video shows Beal absolutely battling through those screens and hounding the perimeter. Barnes will never be able to defend like that.

This is where I feel like you're losing sight of the forest through the trees. Barnes has a lot of skills. He had a stacked team surrounding him. So why did he underachieve? I feel like you're ignoring all of the bad you get with Barnes by focusing only on his tangible skills like his array of shots, particularly in comparison to Beal.

Some of those shooting skills are things that Beal himself can learn to do in the NBA. But Barnes isn't suddenly going to have Beal's speed or heart or bball IQ. Barnes is certainly a better scorer with a much better mid range game than Beal (today). But that's just about the only things he has over Beal aside from his length. Beal is a better basketball player overall.

I disagree but we will have to wait and see who gets drafted first and who plays the best. Time will tell.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2012/6/15/3089448/nba-draft-2012-austin-rivers-wizards#storyjump

I wish I could tell you more about Michael Kidd-Gilchrist's individual workout prior to the group one later in the day, but we literally saw none of it. The whole situation was very strange, with the Wizards announcing 45 minutes before the workout ended that he would work out alone instead of with Rivers and Terrence Ross. He had finished up by the time media was given access, and all we got was three minutes to talk to him. I think this was agent-driven more than anything, but I'm not going to speculate about the reasons why. Either way, it was a very sharp contrast to the approach Bradley Beal took on Thursday.

Kidd-Gilchrist didn't say much when he talked to us. He has a stutter that causes him to struggle to speak in front of crowds, which was documented by CBS Sports' Gary Parrish during the tournament. During his brief session, he said John Wall has been a "mentor" to him.

Kidd-Gilchrist also said he's been focusing on improving his jump shot. "Just reps will improve it," he said. "It's every [shot] in general; also, off-the-dribble stuff." He also said he's a better passer than he showed in college.

For what it's worth, I did hear that Kidd-Gilchrist's workout went well, but that's about all I know. I really wish I could tell you more, but we just didn't see anything.

Terrence Ross was much more impressive than Rivers during the shooting drill we saw, flashing a nice, fluid stroke. But he also seemed to tire at the end, admitting that fact to reporters following the workout. "It was intense. You really have to push yourself in these workouts," Ross said. "It was really hard to do." He also admitted this was the sixth one he's attended, so you could sense some weariness.

[Skins199021]

Richard Jefferson basically has 2 years left on his contract because there is no way he gets more than his 11 million that is his player option

You could try and pry that pick from Golden State by sending them our high 2nd round pick and say Chris Singleton, for Jefferson (his contract) and the 7th pick.

Then on draft day with some luck we could get Beal and Barnes and amnesty either Blatche or Jefferson

I would dig a lineup of

Wall

Beal

Barnes

Booker

Nene

With Mack, Crawford, Seraphin, Lewis (if he isn't bought out), Jefferson/Blatche on the bench..... or you could go big and put Seraphin and Nene in at the same time

[Going Commando]

I disagree but we will have to wait and see who gets drafted first and who plays the best. Time will tell.

Well probably one or the other is going to Cleveland at 4. Unless they move up for MKG, they'll choose between Beal or Barnes most likely. I don't see them drafting TRob if we pass on him because of Tristan Thompson. I'd actually prefer Cleveland to take Barnes ahead of Beal if the choice is between them at four. Then maybe he'd slide and we could trade up to get him.

Earlier I didn't mean to say that Beal is a great ball handler. He loses his handle a lot too, and is below average by NBA combo guard standards. I just meant that he's better than Barnes in this area. Barnes is is pretty good with the ball in transition but he is not good at all trying to break a defender down in the half court. Beal is better here, keeps his head up, and finds his open teammates a lot better.

Barnes has legit NBA size and strength, lots of shooting skills, I understand why you like him. He'll be a good scorer in the NBA. He definitely has better scoring skills than Beal right now because he's got that huge mid range game. That in and of itself is a novelty that makes him an exciting player because nobody has that any more. Not as a high school player. That's probably why Barnes was so highly ranked as a recruit. Plus he's already starting to develop a nice post game and once he does, he'll be a surefire 20 PPG NBA scorer.

But to me, Beal will be a better player because I think he sees the game better than Barnes does and he plays a lot faster and more intense than Barnes. Barnes is a smooth, graceful athlete but he can plod and look disinterested on the court. Beal is just so explosive and tenacious. He brings the explosiveness and intensity of a football player to the game. He played quarterback and safety growing up and that kind of athletic smarts it takes to do that carried over to BBall IMO. He's a student of the game and he just gets "it." He knows how to do the things that lead to wins. There is no concern with his brand or his numbers or that self absorbed AAU ball mentality you see with so many top H.S. recruits. It's just about finding a way to fit himself into the structure of the team and play good ball to win.

Guys like Beal and MKG make their teams greater than the sum of their parts. I don't think Barnes does nearly to the same extent. That's part of why UNC could be so loaded but never quite live up to expectations with Barnes.

I don't mean to say that Barnes is selfish. I don't get that sense from him. I just think he doesn't see the game as well. He tunnels into his own scoring ability and gets on a one track leading him to take a lot of bad shots/settle for jumpers/try to do too much. I think his intensity and focus waver. I know you saw him doing this in the tourney. He showed off his flaws in that run. He just doesn't process the game as well or as quickly as Beal IMO.

Beal fits a big need. He can be a lockdown perimeter defender, which we need almost as bad as a legit long range shooter and productive off ball scorer. I think you get all of that out of Beal, plus he's a big glue guy that improves our chemistry. No a 6'4 shooting guard that doesn't have a half court ISO game is not typically top 3 value. But Beal is such a good fit for our needs, plus he has good upside, that you have to strongly consider him at three anyway. This is probably an instance where it's better to get the guy who fits exactly what we're looking for even if we have to reach than to take a guy ahead of him that might not fit as well just to get the best value from the pick. The guy who fits will end up being a better player for you than the guy who is a little more talented, but doesn't fit quite as well.

That's me going back to OKC taking James Harden over Tyreke Evans and Stephen Curry. Evans and Curry were bigger talents than Harden, but those guys are too ball dominant and had too much of an alpha scorer mentality to fit with Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook. OKC needed a guy who could thrive with limited touches and wouldn't mind coming off the bench and bringing energy and intensity off the bench. It's probably worked out better for OKC in the end that they took Harden over Evans or Curry.

EDIT: I meant Kevin Durant, not Kevin Love. Easy to see how I'd get them confused as they are so similar :silly:

Edited June 16, 2012 by stevemcqueen1

[Samuels]

Well probably one or the other is going to Cleveland at 4. Unless they move up for MKG, they'll choose between Beal or Barnes most likely. I don't see them drafting TRob if we pass on him because of Tristan Thompson. I'd actually prefer Cleveland to take Barnes ahead of Beal if the choice is between them at four. Then maybe he'd slide and we could trade up to get him.

Earlier I didn't mean to say that Beal is a great ball handler. He loses his handle a lot too, and is below average by NBA combo guard standards. I just meant that he's better than Barnes in this area. Barnes is is pretty good with the ball in transition but he is not good at all trying to break a defender down in the half court. Beal is better here, keeps his head up, and finds his open teammates a lot better.

Barnes has legit NBA size and strength, lots of shooting skills, I understand why you like him. He'll be a good scorer in the NBA. He definitely has better scoring skills than Beal right now because he's got that huge mid range game. That in and of itself is a novelty that makes him an exciting player because nobody has that any more. Not as a high school player. That's probably why Barnes was so highly ranked as a recruit. Plus he's already starting to develop a nice post game and once he does, he'll be a surefire 20 PPG NBA scorer.

But to me, Beal will be a better player because I think he sees the game better than Barnes does and he plays a lot faster and more intense than Barnes. Barnes is a smooth, graceful athlete but he can plod and look disinterested on the court. Beal is just so explosive and tenacious. He brings the explosiveness and intensity of a football player to the game. He played quarterback and safety growing up and that kind of athletic smarts it takes to do that carried over to BBall IMO. He's a student of the game and he just gets "it." He knows how to do the things that lead to wins. There is no concern with his brand or his numbers or that self absorbed AAU ball mentality you see with so many top H.S. recruits. It's just about finding a way to fit himself into the structure of the team and play good ball to win.

Guys like Beal and MKG make their teams greater than the sum of their parts. I don't think Barnes does nearly to the same extent. That's part of why UNC could be so loaded but never quite live up to expectations with Barnes.

I don't mean to say that Barnes is selfish. I don't get that sense from him. I just think he doesn't see the game as well. He tunnels into his own scoring ability and gets on a one track leading him to take a lot of bad shots/settle for jumpers/try to do too much. I think his intensity and focus waver. I know you saw him doing this in the tourney. He showed off his flaws in that run. He just doesn't process the game as well or as quickly as Beal IMO.

Beal fits a big need. He can be a lockdown perimeter defender, which we need almost as bad as a legit long range shooter and productive off ball scorer. I think you get all of that out of Beal, plus he's a big glue guy that improves our chemistry. No a 6'4 shooting guard that doesn't have a half court ISO game is not typically top 3 value. But Beal is such a good fit for our needs, plus he has good upside, that you have to strongly consider him at three anyway. This is probably an instance where it's better to get the guy who fits exactly what we're looking for even if we have to reach than to take a guy ahead of him that might not fit as well just to get the best value from the pick. The guy who fits will end up being a better player for you than the guy who is a little more talented, but doesn't fit quite as well.

That's me going back to OKC taking James Harden over Tyreke Evans and Stephen Curry. Evans and Curry were bigger talents than Harden, but those guys are too ball dominant and had too much of an alpha scorer mentality to fit with Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook. OKC needed a guy who could thrive with limited touches and wouldn't mind coming off the bench and bringing energy and intensity off the bench. It's probably worked out better for OKC in the end that they took Harden over Evans or Curry.

EDIT: I meant Kevin Durant, not Kevin Love. Easy to see how I'd get them confused as they are so similar :silly:

I'm not gonna keep going back and forth on Beal vs Barnes time will tell.

But I will say this Harden was one of the very best 2 guards i've watched the last 10 years in college basketball. He was better then Tyreke and still is in my opinion. He came in as a freshman and played damn well. As a sophmore he was over 20ppg if my memory serves me correctly and he shot damn near 50%fg both seasons. He was a complete basketball player and played in college just like he does now.

Matter of fact just found his college stats disgusting compared to someone like Beal. That was a legit top 3 talent at 2 guard.

Season GP MPG PPG FG% 3FG% FT% APG RPG BPG SPG

2008-09 35 35.8 20.1 48.9 35.6 75.6 4.2 5.6 0.3 1.7

2007-08 34 34.1 17.8 52.7 40.7 75.4 3.2 5.3 0.6 2.1

He shot 52%fg and 40%3fg with over 3ast, 5+reb and 2+spg as a true freshman.

Edited June 16, 2012 by Samuels

[Skins199021]

We also don't have to look at the top 10 to trade into

15-20 is going to offer a lot of value.

I mean Terrence Jones, Mo Harkless, Ross, PJ3, Moultrie, Nicholson....

That is some major talent

I mean a Beal and Harkless/Jones/Moultrie draft would be pretty damn exciting too, and easier to accomplish.

Say we traded in that range without giving up that 1st 2nd round pick (we trade the other 2nd, maybe a future 2nd and take on a really bad contract that isn't too long).

go Beal number 3, Terrence Jones, and Quincy Miller with that 2nd if you are lucky haha

Probably have to target 14 from Houston to get Jones

[Going Commando]

Harden was the right pick for OKC. But most people had Rubio and Tyreke ranked ahead of him and some had Steph Curry too.

[SuperBash]

I would stay up late to watch Harden at ASU. He was so fun to watch. That was a very disappointing lottery for us.

[nuposse87]

Stats mean nothing to me honestly,I'm just not a huge stats guy with prospects there was'nt a huge difference anyway and alot of stuff goes into that teammates, system etc. I form my opinions based off years of being around the game and knowing what i'm looking at. Even in the small video scouting breakdowns draft express has done on both, the difference is night and day between a guy like Barnes and Beal offensively.

Watch the draft express breakdown on both players there breakdown of Beal and its what you'll see if you have access to games. Lots of jumpers and very little creating jumpers or NBA type ISO plays. He also played Sf on a team with shotjackers in the backcourt and no frontcourt help that allowed his rebound numbers to be inflated, he did'nt even average that in high school. He also played 34mpg which is alot in college.

Barnes video you will see lots of NBA type ISO's that translate to the pro game. Shooting off the dribble, pump fakes drawing fouls and getting his own shot off of them. He averaged 7 FTA a game those are great signs to being a pro scorer. Barnes also had a stacked team and was still the #1 option for his club both years. He was the defensive focus unlike Beal. He put up 17ppg in under 30mpg both years.

I still think Barnes goes before Beal NBA GM's have access to some of the same games i've watched of these guys. Beal is a good pick in the 5-8 area but is'nt a elite offensive talent the comparisons to Ray Allen are laughable. Even has a freshman Ray Allen was a lights out shooter that would dunk all over you.

not a big stats guy and then you try to make an argument with how much superior Harden is over Beal with stats, LOL (for the record, I'd take Harden over Beal, but I don't see Harden like potential in Beal anyways)

Here is my biggest problem with Barnes, he may be a 20 ppg scorer in the NBA if given the opportunity, but the same can be said of Nick Young. Barnes doesn't do anything outside of scoring (and not even efficiently) to help his team. He is a stand-out athlete as demonstrated by his combine scores, but I have never seen him use his superior athleticism to dominate the college game, and he should have had no problem.

You claim he had problems with accruing stats because he played at UNC, if anything, having superior talent around you should make you a more efficient player, this was clearly not the case. He was a the number 1 option and still managed to have a worse TS. While Kenny B. was the high scorer for UF this year, but it isn't like Beal was a scrub on the team, he was a close 2nd, just like Zellar was a close 2nd to Barnes. Look at the stats, even though you seem to disregard them when they destroy your argument. If you are suppose to be a star player in the draft, get use to lock down defensive assignments on you, that is how it works in the pro. Barnes proved he can't handle it efficiently, so the whole "oh he was the defensive focal point" thing doesn't really work well IMO. It's also comical you say he put of 17 ppg, he did that at worse efficiency than Beal (btw it was15.6 ppg his first year, I'm nit-picking now, but don't flat out lie). He didn't even improve significantly in his sophomore year. How is that not a red flag?

Ray Allen is one of the greatest players to ever play SG, I'm not expecting that from him. His athletic scores are enough to say he could be like Eric Gordon. Harrison Barnes has shown enough offensive aptitude to make me think he could be a Granger like scorer but I doubt he will ever be as good defensively. I'll take the guy that has Eric Gordon like potential..especially considering how rare good SGs are these days.

[SuperBash]

6/13

Interesting, never knew most teams do that. He also said we like Trob but he thinks we are going MKG or Beal with us leaning to MKG right now.

Tye (Forshee)

As a GM do you draft for need or best player available?

Chad Ford (1:13 PM)

Both. You always draft best player ... but most teams draft in tiers. I'll write an article about this next week ... but for example. Anthony Davis is in Tier 1. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bradley Beal, Thomas Robinson, Andre Drummond and Harrison Barnes all in Tier 2. Within your tier, you draft for need. But you'd never reach outside your tier to get, for example, a Tier 3 point guard or center.

Edited June 16, 2012 by SuperBash

[Going Commando]

Teams do the same thing in the NFL draft I'm pretty sure.

---------- Post added June-16th-2012 at 04:05 PM ----------

If TRob, Drummond, Barnes, Beal, and MKG are all in the same tier and we're drafting for need, then I think the pick should be Beal or MKG. Beal probably fills a bigger need since he can already shoot.

I don't think Barnes is in that tier though. I'd put him in a third tier with Jared Sullinger.

[Destino]

Need = primary scorer and rebounding big would be needs. MKG wouldn't be a need at all. Other than PG there is nothing we need less than a SF that needs to work on his shooting but plays great defense.

[Going Commando]

Need = primary scorer and rebounding big would be needs. MKG wouldn't be a need at all. Other than PG there is nothing we need less than a SF that needs to work on his shooting but plays great defense.

We're one of the worst defensive teams in the league. Our perimeter defense is horrible. It's a need.

MKG is also much more than just a defender.

[Going Commando]

Interesting read:

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2012/06/blazers_insider_gm_neil_olshey_says_he_has_not_mad.html

Blazers Insider: GM Neil Olshey says he has not made any promises

As the June 28 NBA draft nears, rumors and speculation run rampant, and the latest involving the Trail Blazers is that Syracuse shooting guard Dion Waiters has been given a promise by the Blazers that they will select him with the 11th pick...

...Olshey said he hasn't given Waiters a promise, or any player, for that matter. But that's not to say Olshey is against the practice. He said he has done it before as an executive with the Clippers, and when he worked in a sports agency under Arn Tellem, he said it was not uncommon for one of their clients to get a promise from a team...

...But promises do exist -- Olshey said when he was working for Tellem, they received promises for Shelden Williams, Marcus Banks, Kendrick Perkins, Kedrick Brown and Robert Swift. Sometimes, the promises don't work out -- Swift in 2004 got a promise from Boston at No. 14, but he was chosen by Seattle at No. 12.

"And like last year, Reggie Jackson had a promise," Olshey said of the Oklahoma City guard. "I don't know if it was Oklahoma City, but I know he had a promise. Because he had a few medical issues, he didn't finish his season at Boston College, and nobody got to review that medical information, nobody got to interview him ... the rest of the league was flying blind."

That's the whole point of giving promises -- to shut down the information gathering process of other teams. But Chad Buchanan, who directed the Blazers' draft last year, said it was his policy to never give a promise to a player. He felt it handcuffed the team in case something unexpected came up, be it a trade opportunity or a player slipping.

Although Olshey said he is not against the practice of giving promises, he realizes the pitfalls. When he was an assistant general manager with the Clippers, his boss, Mike Dunleavy promised Russian forward Yaroslav Korolev the Clippers would take him at No.12. The problem was, a kid from New Mexico named Danny Granger was unexpectedly slipping out of the top 10. When it came time for the Clippers to pick at 12, Dunleavy honored his promise to Korolev, even though Olshey said they knew Granger was the better player. Granger was taken 17th by Indiana and became an All-Star. Korolev played 34 NBA games.

"I will say this: Very rarely does the promise work out in the best interests of the team," Olshey said. "What it does in my opinion is you are chasing the draft instead of letting the draft come to you. And it takes you out of that the world-comes-to-an-end scenario where a guy you didn't expect plummets. Like Brook Lopez slipping to 10. If New Jersey had promised somebody, what in the world do you do? Because in our business, your word is everything."

Olshey said promises happen more often with international players who will go in the second round, because teams want that prospect to remain hidden.

"But when you are picking 6 and 11 like us, you are looking at guys so over scouted that you are not hiding them," Olshey said.

More about Drummond at the link. He's only working out for the top six teams. Seems like Portland is his floor. I still think #2 is his landing spot.

---------- Post added June-17th-2012 at 08:29 AM ----------

Need = primary scorer and rebounding big would be needs. MKG wouldn't be a need at all. Other than PG there is nothing we need less than a SF that needs to work on his shooting but plays great defense.

I looked at some teams stats to see where are needs were. Boy was it depressing. Basically, we need everything.

- 21st in the league in FG%

- 28th in 3PT %

- 27th in FT %

- 26th in eFG%

- 22nd in PTs

- 27th in Assists

- 19th in TOV%

- 26th in DRB%

- 20th in OPP PTS/G

- 18th in OPP FG%

- 21st in OPP eFG%

- 25th in ORTG

- 21st in DRTG

We're sixth in attempts. Second in blocks, but oddly, our opponent ranking in blocks is seventh so we're also getting stuffed a lot. Symptom of running at a faster pace than we're capable of IMO. Shot selection is terrible team wide.

We ranked 9th in pace. We're up tempo but our FG% is extremely low. Looks like we need people who can convert on the break better.

Blocks and steals (13th) were the only categories we did well in. We've got a bunch of athletes than can protect the rim and defensive gamblers.

Our assist statistics are terrible, especially for having John Wall. He's basically the only one getting them. Part of the problem is our guys don't make their shots so that low FG% keeps the numbers down. A bigger part is we don't pass the ball well and have little offensive flow.

I think MKG fits multiple needs. He rebounds (check), finishes in transition better than anyone else in the class (check), passes very well (check), and he can defend four positions at what projects to be an elite level (check).

MKG can defend the pick and roll like a fiend and looks like he can lock down shooters on the perimeter by himself.

He doesn't help our 3P%, but he should help us almost everywhere else.

Rookies rarely defend well, especially on bad defensive teams. Singleton was a terrific defender in college but a very poor defender last year. Maybe he was a whiff or maybe he needs time. But he was so bad offensively that you can't let his defensive potential stop you from taking a special player like MKG because of the similarity of their roles. Draft MKG and deal Singleton if need be.

[SuperBash]

Would anyone give up a top 3 protected 2013 1st and Ves/Booker for the 5th or 6th pick this year? You could do a 2/3 combo of MKG/Beal Beal/Barnes MKG/Trob Trob/Beal or if you wanna swing for the fences MKG/Drummond or Beal/Drummond.