The Official Washington Basketball Thread: Wizards, Mystics etc

[StillUnknown]

Vescey is a highly unreliable source but this is not surprising. Ernie is coming back. If he wasn't, he would've been let go by now and his replacement already here.

Agreed

[CrypticVillain]

Let me ask this: I am not sure if they were mentioned, but let's say that Ernie does get told to kick rocks. Who are your potential candidates to replace the bum? One of the most interesting choices I heard were from Laron Profit when I think he suggested Danny Ferry and Alonzo Mourning because of their ties to the area.

[StillUnknown]

Let me ask this: I am not sure if they were mentioned, but let's say that Ernie does get told to kick rocks. Who are your potential candidates to replace the bum? One of the most interesting choices I heard were from Laron Profit when I think he suggested Danny Ferry and Alonzo Mourning because of their ties to the area.

Kevin Pritchard would be my first call.

He was building Portland nicely until the basketball gods took the knees away from their best players one by one.

[SuperBash]

Chad Ford tweeted last night that the Wiz would take Beal as high as two. Idk if he has a source or is just assuming they would. He's been my basketball crush for a while if we couldn't get Davis. He is a much better fit at SG than Craw.

[Going Commando]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7722656/john-wall-demarcus-cousins

Read that if you want to get pissed off. I had a long post typed up pointing out how stupid a lot of his assertions about Wall were before it was lost. It ****ing pisses me off to no end that if you click the left and right button of the touch pad on my laptop, it closes the window you are tying to select.

Anyway, clearly Kang has a terrible read on Wall because he hasn't been watching him consistently and is relying on numbers to make his case. Saying he'd take Cousins over Wall for the reasons he did is stupid and I guarantee no one else in the NBA would even consider for a moment taking Cousins over Wall. I'll try and remember my points that were lost.

Most basketball people would say that Wall has a bigger upside than Cousins, especially in an era that rewards point guards, but Cousins has been the better player to date.

Ummmm… what? Cousins has been the better player to date? By what measure pray tell? That’s news to me. I like Cousins and have defended him for a while, but I don’t think anyone can credibly came Cousins has been better to date. No one with credibility would claim it.

His jump shot, a minor area of concern coming out of Kentucky, has gotten significantly worse.

Wrong! Anyone who has been watching recently knows this is wrong. If anything, it’s gotten better. He’s coming off screens or using the space defenses give him and nailing sweet dribble pull-ups, fades, and step back j’s from the top of the key with regularity now. And he’s always been pretty good at shooting runners and momentum jumpers.

The John Wall project in Washington started when the Wizards won the lottery. Nearly two years in, the team has rebooted again.

Why do people keep saying this? We didn’t suddenly decide to start the rebuild over. We never finished the damn thing in the first place. We weren’t just going to add John Wall and suddenly say, “there, that should do it. Championship!” We had to completely revamp the entire roster from the Big 3 era, a process that still isn’t finished.

Cleveland, another point guard picked no. 1 in the draft has dragged a similarly terrible supporting cast to 17 victories. Kyrie Irving's success this year has provided evidence that a young, wildly talented point guard can be successful while playing with washed-up and/or untalented teammates. Nene is significantly better than anyone on the Cavaliers roster.

NENE HAS ONLY BEEN ON THE TEAM FOR TWO GAMES MORON!!!

Prior to his arrival, the Cavs featured a far better supporting cast of players for Irving—this season—than the Wizards have for two seasons with Wall. Varejao and Twan are far better than anyone on our team pre-Nene. Ramon Sessions probably was too. And Alonzo Gee and Boobie Gibson are better shooters than anyone we’ve got.

The Cavs had veterans, and more importantly, shooters that space the floor for Irving and allow him to shine. The core of that team won 60+ games with LeBron James two years ago.

John came to a team of rookies and first year full time starters that were expected to grow up with him. Booker, Seraphin, Crawford, Young, McGee, Blatche were all first time starters/rookies last year, plus Vesely and Singleton and Mack this year are significant contributors as rookies.

As those remaining guys grow up, they’re going to be much, much better than what Cleveland has. But so far this season, they’ve been much worse. It’s natural, it’s to be expected. Young players struggle in the NBA.

And really, is winning 17 games versus 11 supposed to be some sort of evidence that Kyrie Irving is special and Wall’s future is in doubt?

Although the Wizards can't really commit to rebuilding around Wall and Nene until Rashard Lewis's $20+ million annual salary comes off the books in 2014, the organization can finally start to get some very real answers about Wall's potential.

Come on Kang. Any cursory examination of the Wizard’s roster situation reveals Rashard’s buy out option for next season. His contract will be off our books by then, not 2014.

Wall doesn't quite have the vertical explosiveness of Russell Westbrook or Derrick Rose, and he might not be as flat-out fast as Ty Lawson

Wrong about Westbrook, right about Rose and Lawson but only minutely so, to the point that making a distinction between them is meaningless.

Westbrook, max verticle - 36.5". Wall, max vert - 39". Rose, max vert - 40".

Wall is also bigger and longer than all three of those other PGs.

Anyone whose seen Wall take off and get his shoulders even with the rim understands that he's an elite leaper. Wall is, unquestionably, the premier physical talent at PG in the NBA.

But then again, John Wall might not be a pure point guard, either. Considering that every other part of his offensive game rates out somewhere between mediocre and average, it's worth wondering whether John Wall's best future might be as a combo guard who scores 20+ points per game while playing off a solid, pass-first guy who can run the floor with him. Unfortunately, nobody on the Wizards roster even approaches that description. And that's not what the team signed up for when they picked him no. 1 overall.

This is stupid. Wall is clearly a pure PG who needs the ball in his hands to be effective. He has always been a pass first player and only goes on scoring binges when he has too because his team mates are sucking and can’t score. If you don’t see that Kang, I don’t know what to tell you other than you clearly aren’t watching him play every game like we Wizards fans are.

I like how Kang and other members of Grantland refer to Wall as an enigma. I’m sure he would seem enigmatic when you don’t watch him play.

Compounding the problem are Wall's well-documented shooting woes. Of players who have shot more than 200 jump shots this year, only Shannon Brown (30.7 percent) and Tyreke Evans (23.3 percent) have shot at a lower percentage than Wall (31.2 percent). From beyond the arc, Wall has shot an almost comical 8.7 percent this season. In recent history, the only All-Star-caliber point guards to significantly improve on their shooting numbers were Jason Kidd and Chauncey Billups. Kidd shot 38 percent from the floor during his first two seasons as a pro, mostly on account of taking way too many 3-pointers. Billups, on the other hand, just became a better shooter as his career went along.

Again, if you’re actually watching Wall, you’d know that he doesn’t take 3s. His percentage there is low because the only time he takes them is when he has to force late shot clock attempts. This part of his game isn’t really a concern.

Also, whaaaat about Kidd’s % being low from shooting too many 3’s? It was low because he was an ineffective shooter from mid ranges. His numbers from 3 pt range have always been solid.

And Derrick Rose and Chris Paul don’t count as All Star caliber PGs who improved their shooting? The jump Rose made during the summer of 2010 doesn’t qualify? He went from making 16 threes his previous two seasons on 22% shooting to making 138 the next year on 33% shooting. And what about Paul suddenly becoming an elite shooter in his third season?

Players routinely improve their shooting over time, why would it be different for All Star caliber point guards?

The numbers can only tell us so much — Wall is currently ninth in the league in assists per game and leads the league in turnovers, but those stats don't account for the volatility and fluctuation in the Wizards roster and coaching staff. That being said, court vision is one of those skills that's almost always immediately apparent — it doesn't take more than a couple quarters of watching Ricky Rubio, Steve Nash, Jason Kidd, or even the young T.J. Ford to see how the ball travels differently when they're in the game. Wall has not displayed the same playmaking ability.

LOL!! Now you don’t want to turn to the numbers when they don’t support your claim?

Hey Kang, I bet it is hard to see elite Wall’s elite playmaking ability on display WHEN YOU DON”T WATCH THE GAMES!

You would think some level of intensive film study would have been in order for him to write this article.

Ball-dominant point guards will get their assists — Marbury finished in the top 10 in assists per game a shocking nine times in his career — but that doesn't mean they can effectively run a team.

If this were true, then why is Grantland golden boy Kyrie Irving only averaging 5.7 assists per game? With excellent shooters to work with no less.

Wall’s assist totals are special and they are an accurate reflection of his outstanding passing ability, you simply can’t spin that away.

For now, Wall seems to be closer to Marbury than to Nash. This doesn't mean that he's a useless player who will never win a championship or whatever other terrible fates seem to always be attached to scoring point guards. It does not mean that John Wall can't make his teammates better.

All it means, really, is that John Wall is a scoring point guard. Unfortunately, the history of teams built around scoring point guards hasn't been all that great.

OK, I grant that Wall is more like Starbury than the greatest passing PG in NBA history. But then so is everyone else in the NBA right now except Rondo. And?

I don’t really buy the “you can’t contend with a scoring PG argument.” Zeke was a scoring PG at his heart whom the Pistons were built around and won back to back championships in the golden era. Iverson took his team to the finals and won a game against one of the greatest teams of all time. Derrick Rose is the best player on arguably the best team this year and his team won 60 games last year. Further, other teams with scoring PGs as part of an elite duumvirate or triumvirate have done well—Tony Parker’s Spurs, and Russell Westbrook’s Thunder for example. And if Wall counts as a scoring PG, shouldn’t CP3 and DWill fall into that category as well? Both have always been ball dominant scorers who’ve been the primary scoring option on their teams, and have led their teams in scoring almost every year of their careers. Wall has never consistently been our primary scoring option before. When NY was here, it was him, and now it’s Jordan Crawford.

Also this:

Wall is currently ninth in the league in assists per game and leads the league in turnovers

is B.S. Technically, Wall is second in turnovers to Deron Williams. And pointing to this stat as evidence he’s not a good offensive facilitator seems lame when the rest of the list of top ten TO/G players reads:

- Kobe Bryant

- Russell Westbrook

- Kevin Durant

- Rajon Rondo

- Steve Nash

- Jeremy Lin

- Lebron James

- Monta Ellis

The primary ball handlers in fast tempo offenses turn the ball over at high rates. That’s just a fact of basketball and not clear evidence of questionable passing/management skills. And then you have Kobe Bryant.

All in all I thought this article was pretty ****ing stupid. All he needed to say was he would (stupidly) take Cousins over Wall because he thinks a potentially dominant big is more valuable/rare than a potentially dominant point guard. I can understand that. I don’t fully agree, but it’s a conventionally sound basketball argument.

The writers at Grantland too often try to outsmart themselves.

Edited March 23, 2012 by stevemcqueen1

[Rocky21]

I read that too this morning McQueen. Good thing you didn't type a really long pissed off post.:pfft:

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

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7722656/john-wall-demarcus-cousins

Read that if you want to get pissed off. I had a long post typed up pointing out how stupid a lot of his assertions about Wall were before it was lost. It ****ing pisses me off to no end that if you click the left and right button of the touch pad on my laptop, it closes the window you are tying to select.

There's nothing worse than writing out a long post and then losing it for whatever reason. And the rewrite is never as good as the original. That's how it feels anyway.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 12:48 PM ----------

BTW, just tweeted Kang and let him know he's an idiot. Hopefully he tries to debate me on this.

[Going Commando]

If everything goes to according to plan, I don't see Wall as a 20-22 PPG scorer at all. His game screams future 17-18, 10, and 5 player with 2 steals and 1 block per game.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 01:01 PM ----------

I read that too this morning McQueen. Good thing you didn't type a really long pissed off post.:pfft:

LOL! What kills me about this article is that Wall actually does have several problems and flaws to his game. But not one of them is mentioned by this article.

- He needs to greatly improve his consistency and effort defending the ball on the perimeter and he needs to work harder getting off screens.

- He needs to develop his array of finishing moves at the rim like Chris Paul did. Work in different moves--more high cross overs, two steps, pass and pump fakes, etc. He needs to do a better job reading all his outlets on the way to the rim (and his outlets need to do a better job moving around and getting open when he attacks).

- He needs to keep his feet when he passes more. To often he goes up for a bad shot, realizes it's going to be bad, and forces a tough pass to a teammate that becomes the source of a lot of his turnovers in the half court.

- He needs to continue improving at the free throw line because he gets there so often.

- He needs to continue developing his feel for the state of the offense--learn when to take games over on his own and not be too content to pass like he was in the second and third quarters last night.

That's just stuff off the top of my head that weren't even mentioned.

All of that stuff will come in time. You can see John learning each game. He's going to be a marvelous player one day.

[Dukes and Skins]

The more I've watched of Beal the more I want him in DC. He just reminds me a lot of Eric Gordon when watching him.

[Going Commando]

I would hope that somehow the Wiz can bring in a legit shooting guard this offseason. I can't stand watching Crawford. All he does is jack up stupid shots. The offense can't flow with him out there.

Crawford has played well the past several games. The offense desperately needs his shotmaking now.

[SuperBash]

Any position should be looked to be upgraded in terms of depth and talent outside of PG and I guess center too, maybe not. BPA SG/SF/PF in the first round. If we grab a forward in the first, just grab some pure shooters in the 2nd.

[Going Commando]

The more I've watched of Beal the more I want him in DC. He just reminds me a lot of Eric Gordon when watching him.

Me too. Even kind of looks like him. He's been better in college than Gordon was though. And he's a better all around player and better at working off the ball. Gordon is a better ball handler though. Gator compared Beal to Ray Allen and I can see some of that as a sort of best case scenario.

Beal would be a really nice pick. But I think we need more help at forward, particularly power forward. Things got bad last night when Booker got into foul trouble and we just couldn't rebound.

We need Davis most of all, but I don't see it happening. Thomas Robinson's big body would make a difference day one for us. As would Sully most likely. He understands positioning well and boxes out and pulls down a lot of boards.

If we do go with a wing, Beal and MKG are both plus rebounders for their positions, but they're not really an intimidating glass cleaning presence that I'm looking for.

Barnes also makes sense for us, not so much as a rebounder, but because he can catch and shoot and work off the ball and fits within the scheme of our offense. Crawford and Wall will be dominating the ball among the starters. Barnes can shoot threes, offer a nice outlet, and get his points without needing to put the ball on the court. It's the same appeal Beal has, except Barnes can see the floor at the same time as Crawford whereas one of Beal or Crawford has to go to the bench.

And at this point, Crawford is a considerably more valuable starter than either Singleton or Vesely would be at the 3.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 01:43 PM ----------

Any position should be looked to be upgraded in terms of depth and talent outside of PG and I guess center too, maybe not. BPA SG/SF/PF in the first round. If we grab a forward in the first, just grab some pure shooters in the 2nd.

Yeah probably. We need quality over quantity at this point. If we go Beal, then we should probably trade Jordan to see if we can't recoup something at a different position. Crawford doesn't thrive as well coming off the bench because he needs to get into a rhythm early in the game like he did the past two nights. So try and deal Crawford to get another draft pick and look for a developmental forward.

I love Beal, and I'm going to toot my own horn and say I think either me or Gator was the first to really get behind him in this thread. But I think taking him doesn't utilize this draft class as well as we could by focusing on other positions.

I'd rather go PF or Barnes early and then try and trade back into the first to take a SG like Adonis Thomas. Keep Crawford in the starting role to see what he becomes, move either Booker or Singleton to the bench as a super sub (depending on if we took Sully, Robinson, or Barnes), and feature this quality group:

1 - Wall, Mack

2 - Crawford, Thomas, Mason

3 - Singleton, Vesely, Thomas

4 - Robinson, Booker, Vesely, Seraphin

5 - Nene, Seraphin

A three guard lineup with Wall, Crawford, Mack isn't good. A front court of Vesely and Seraphin isn't good either. I don't know who Ubiles is, but seems like he shouldn't be getting much burn. I'd rather see us scrap the three guard lineup altogether and put Thomas on the floor with Crawford and Wall if we want speed without giving up size and defensive ability.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 02:18 PM ----------

T-Rob just does'nt look that big to me looks like 3/4 tweener like Derrick Williamss and Beasley. Beasley was a dominant rebounder his freshman year. My other concern is why is he just now getting alot of burn as a 21 year old junior. The Morris twins are not special talents. Most of the other top prospects did it from day 1 Davis,Mkg,Sully,Barnes,Beal, Lamb etc. What will they be at 21 they are still kids.

You can't penalize T-Rob for not getting PT on Kansas. That's a power program that wins 30 games a year and seniority is emphasized. The Morris twins were great college players and were both lottery picks besides. It doesn't happen the same way for everyone. All of those freshmen came in and had an opportunity to play right away whereas I don't think T-Rob had that opportunity until this year. DX had a good point where Robinson was actually the second best per minute rebounder in their database as a sophomore, he just didn't get much burn to get national attention.

As far as the size goes, I don't see this being a huge problem for him. He measured 6'10 in shoes and has a 7'1 wingspan. He's built like a tank too with low body fat and has a build that is really reminiscent of Blake Griffin. When you've got guys like Paul Millsap and even our own Trevor Booker doing well measuring just over 6'6 without shoes, Robinson actually seems tall. My guess is he's somewhere between 6'8.5 and 6'9 without shoes on, which is actually the same height as Blake Griffin, only T-Rob has a longer wingspan.

[Destino]

Crawford has played well the past several games. The offense desperately needs his shotmaking now.

Right now we have no options but Crawford is a combo guard with a gunner play style. He is not an ideal starter at the SG spot and makes much more sense coming off the bench. I'd like a more ideal fit at SG as a starter, some length and ability to cut without the ball would be nice.

Harden is the only available option but I don't see the thunder letting him go anywhere.

Thomas Robinson will probably measure in at 6'8ish without shoes which is considered undersized these days by scouts for a PF.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Destino

[Going Commando]

Right now we have no options but Crawford is a combo guard with a gunner play style. He is not an ideal starter at the SG spot and makes much more sense coming off the bench. I'd like a more ideal fit at SG as a starter, some length and ability to cut without the ball would be nice.

Harden is the only available option but I don't see the thunder letting him go anywhere.

Thomas Robinson will probably measure in at 6'8ish without shoes which is considered undersized these days by scouts for a PF.

I like Crawford in the starting role with Wall. They have excellent chemistry with each other and Crawford greatly benefits from coming in and making some shots early in the game.

Crawford is also the only guy left on the team that can consistently get his own shots, even more so than Wall can.

Robinson measured 6'10 in shoes at the LBJ skills academy weigh in. I doubt he loses two inches without shoes. ~1" difference is to be expected and 1.5" is probably the most he'll lose.

6'8.5" w/o shoes is not undersized for a PF, it's prototypical. Blake Griffin measured 6'8.5" w/o shoes at the combine. Robinson has a nearly identical build, except that his arms are almost two inches longer.

Hardly matters a ton how tall Robinson is though because he has a 7'1 wingspan which is longer than average. He's also strapped together like an NFL player. He'll have top tier defensive potential in the NBA because of his length and strength and be able to muscle people around in his rookie season. To me, he's the physical prototype for the pick and roll PF.

Edited March 23, 2012 by stevemcqueen1

[Samuels]

Me too. Even kind of looks like him. He's been better in college than Gordon was though. And he's a better all around player and better at working off the ball. Gordon is a better ball handler though. Gator compared Beal to Ray Allen and I can see some of that as a sort of best case scenario.

Beal would be a really nice pick. But I think we need more help at forward, particularly power forward. Things got bad last night when Booker got into foul trouble and we just couldn't rebound.

We need Davis most of all, but I don't see it happening. Thomas Robinson's big body would make a difference day one for us. As would Sully most likely. He understands positioning well and boxes out and pulls down a lot of boards.

If we do go with a wing, Beal and MKG are both plus rebounders for their positions, but they're not really an intimidating glass cleaning presence that I'm looking for.

Barnes also makes sense for us, not so much as a rebounder, but because he can catch and shoot and work off the ball and fits within the scheme of our offense. Crawford and Wall will be dominating the ball among the starters. Barnes can shoot threes, offer a nice outlet, and get his points without needing to put the ball on the court. It's the same appeal Beal has, except Barnes can see the floor at the same time as Crawford whereas one of Beal or Crawford has to go to the bench.

And at this point, Crawford is a considerably more valuable starter than either Singleton or Vesely would be at the 3.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 01:43 PM ----------

Yeah probably. We need quality over quantity at this point. If we go Beal, then we should probably trade Jordan to see if we can't recoup something at a different position. Crawford doesn't thrive as well coming off the bench because he needs to get into a rhythm early in the game like he did the past two nights. So try and deal Crawford to get another draft pick and look for a developmental forward.

I love Beal, and I'm going to toot my own horn and say I think either me or Gator was the first to really get behind him in this thread. But I think taking him doesn't utilize this draft class as well as we could by focusing on other positions.

I'd rather go PF or Barnes early and then try and trade back into the first to take a SG like Adonis Thomas. Keep Crawford in the starting role to see what he becomes, move either Booker or Singleton to the bench as a super sub (depending on if we took Sully, Robinson, or Barnes), and feature this quality group:

1 - Wall, Mack

2 - Crawford, Thomas, Mason

3 - Singleton, Vesely, Thomas

4 - Robinson, Booker, Vesely, Seraphin

5 - Nene, Seraphin

A three guard lineup with Wall, Crawford, Mack isn't good. A front court of Vesely and Seraphin isn't good either. I don't know who Ubiles is, but seems like he shouldn't be getting much burn. I'd rather see us scrap the three guard lineup altogether and put Thomas on the floor with Crawford and Wall if we want speed without giving up size and defensive ability.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 02:18 PM ----------

You can't penalize T-Rob for not getting PT on Kansas. That's a power program that wins 30 games a year and seniority is emphasized. The Morris twins were great college players and were both lottery picks besides. It doesn't happen the same way for everyone. All of those freshmen came in and had an opportunity to play right away whereas I don't think T-Rob had that opportunity until this year. DX had a good point where Robinson was actually the second best per minute rebounder in their database as a sophomore, he just didn't get much burn to get national attention.

As far as the size goes, I don't see this being a huge problem for him. He measured 6'10 in shoes and has a 7'1 wingspan. He's built like a tank too with low body fat and has a build that is really reminiscent of Blake Griffin. When you've got guys like Paul Millsap and even our own Trevor Booker doing well measuring just over 6'6 without shoes, Robinson actually seems tall. My guess is he's somewhere between 6'8.5 and 6'9 without shoes on, which is actually the same height as Blake Griffin, only T-Rob has a longer wingspan.

All the freshman play at elite programs the Morris twins while solid are'nt anything special at the college or NBA level. Marcus was a good player but Markieff got drafted that high on size.

Sully would have started has a true freshman at Kansas and got major minutes or any other school same with Davis, MKG, Beal, Lamb etc. TROB was barely getting burn at all.

Listen I like him alot but i'd be suprised if he truly measures 6-8 and over 230lbs. I would'nt take over the younger guys who have been the man all throughout HS and from day 1 in college to me there upside is higher but again my opinion could be swayed.

Hopefully we get to see him againest Carolinas frontline this weekend.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 11:12 PM ----------

The more I've watched of Beal the more I want him in DC. He just reminds me a lot of Eric Gordon when watching him.

Hey Dukes I finally found your name on twitter and followed you. Mine was @RRose78

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 11:13 PM ----------

The more I've watched of Beal the more I want him in DC. He just reminds me a lot of Eric Gordon when watching him.

Hey Dukes I finally found your name on twitter and followed you. Mine was @RRose78

[Destino]

Jones III really couldn't be more unimpressive in the tourney. He doesn't appear to have any fire in him.

[Going Commando]

Yeah. PJIII is just meh. He somehow appears to play hard without really doing anything or making much of an impact.

[StillUnknown]

Jones III really couldn't be more unimpressive in the tourney. He doesn't appear to have any fire in him.

Lots of Lamar Odom in him, all the potential in the world, none of the desire to really seize it.

Not liking what I'm seeing from Barnes tonight at all.

Edited March 24, 2012 by StillUnknown

[Going Commando]

Barnes choked on that three. Stupid shot choice, terrible execution. Luckily Bullock dug them out.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 09:46 PM ----------

I keep talking myself into Barnes in my mind. Then every time I sit down to actually watch him play I'm disappointed. I'm about done trying to convince myself he's an ideal choice.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 09:49 PM ----------

Be interesting to see who gets this last shot. If it's not Barnes, then that says worlds about him.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 09:50 PM ----------

Barnes choked again.

[StillUnknown]

I'm not taking Barnes in the top 5

[Going Commando]

Good mid range pull up from Barnes there. That's his range and his shot.

Still, once again, I get the feeling Henson is UNC's best player and prospect.

---------- Post added March-23rd-2012 at 09:57 PM ----------

WTF Barnes?

[Destino]

Barnes is 3/16 and has only shot two free throws. Even Crawford would be ashamed of that stat line.

[Going Commando]

1.) Davis

2.) MKG

3.) Robinson

4.) Sullinger

5.) Beal

6.) Barnes

Good move from Barnes though, good job making the free throws.

[Destino]

Zeller has 23 rebounds? What?

[skinfan2k]

Barnes is not a ball handler. he can't create his own shot. Thats why putting him with Wall would be deadly.