PDA

View Full Version : SI.com Draft Sleepers etc.



ESutt7
06-17-2009, 01:37 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/scott_howard-cooper/06/17/draft.notes/index.html?eref=sihpT1

Some highlights:

One general manager said of Holiday: "[UCLA's] Ben Howland is an excellent college coach, but he had his thumb down so hard on that kid that he was afraid to take a shot at 15 feet. ... I think the coach had him scared to take most shots." The counter, of course, is that Howland's primary job is to win at UCLA, not run a farm club for the pros.
James Johnson of Wake Forest has the athleticism and ball-handling ability to play small forward and the strength to play power forward at 6-7, but he also has conditioning issues. "He needs to lose some weight," a GM said. "His body fat needs to come down. But he knows how to play." Johnson is still projected to go somewhere around the end of the lottery.
Brandon Jennings' criticism of fellow point guard Rubio last week -- "I think the dude is just all hype" -- was more than a surprising moment of trash talk at a predraft workout. It was an affirmation of Jennings' personality. Friends say he embraces attention and prefers to create his own path rather than blend in, and welcome to not blending in. There are a lot worse things to say about a point guard than he is over-reaching for competition. Remember the words of an NBA executive: "If he gets it from the neck up, he will be as special as a lot of players in this league."

Hoop
06-17-2009, 03:04 PM
One NBA executive: "I'll just tell you this is the worst draft in decades. People are going to get excited about guys. But this is a terrible draft. Guys are going to screw up big time." He meant his peers. "A number of my colleagues are warming up to it," Mr. Sunshine continued. "I think they're making a big mistake."

Only thing that stuck out in this article, for me, was that quote.

Is this draft really that bad?

ESutt7
06-17-2009, 03:13 PM
Quality of draft is based on number of superstars to a lot of GMs. There is only one that is a consensus "star." There are 2-3 others that have the potential to be, but not everyone agrees.

After that there are a lot of solid rotation/starter type players. But not a lot of steals in terms of finding a stud at #20 or something. But I think it is deep on contributing, solid guys, which is fine for a team like us that already has a solid young core. If you were looking for the face of the franchise, or the future to build around, you'd be out of luck unless you got Griffin. I think that's what he means perhaps.

d_c
06-17-2009, 03:52 PM
Is this draft really that bad?

In a word, yes.

A guy like Jordan Hill is being considered at #5 when he's probably a worse prospect than someone like Mareese Speights, who was taken at #16 last year. I suppose this draft has some depth at PG, but that's about it.

count55
06-17-2009, 04:12 PM
In a word, yes.

A guy like Jordan Hill is being considered at #5 when he's probably a worse prospect than someone like Mareese Speights, who was taken at #16 last year. I suppose this draft has some depth at PG, but that's about it.

Yeah, I think that's why everybody's iffy...I think Griffin and maaaaaaybe Rubio are the only guys from this draft that go top ten last year.

Jonathan
06-17-2009, 04:22 PM
This draft is not terrible. Last year's might have been even better than 2003 when it is all said and done. 2003 was Lebron, D Wade, Melo, Bosh. I feel this draft is on par with 2006 Oden/Durant.

rexnom
06-17-2009, 04:30 PM
This draft is not terrible. Last year's might have been even better than 2003 when it is all said and done. 2003 was Lebron, D Wade, Melo, Bosh. I feel this draft is on par with 2006 Oden/Durant.
This draft does remind a bit of the 2006 draft - terrible overall, some decent PG prospects.

The Oden/Durant draft (2007) wasn't that bad.
Outside of them you had Horford, Green, Noah, Stanko, Young, Thornton, Stuckey, Landry, Big Baby, the great Javaris Crittenton, Rudy among others. All guys that have already shown that they can be decent starters in the NBA.

count55
06-17-2009, 04:31 PM
This draft does remind a bit of the 2006 draft - terrible overall, some decent PG prospects.

The Oden/Durant draft (2007) wasn't that bad.
Outside of them you had Horford, Green, Noah, Stanko, Young, Thornton, Stuckey, Landry, Big Baby, the great Javaris Crittenton, Rudy among others. All guys that have already shown that they can be decent starters in the NBA.

Right...

Stop that.

Hicks
06-17-2009, 05:30 PM
This draft is not terrible. Last year's might have been even better than 2003 when it is all said and done. 2003 was Lebron, D Wade, Melo, Bosh. I feel this draft is on par with 2006 Oden/Durant.

2006 was Andrew Bogut. I think you're thinking of 2007.

Young
06-17-2009, 05:43 PM
It is really unfair to judge the 07 class right now.

The 2000 draft class is by far the worst draft class of this decade. I think this 2009 draft should be much better. Outside of Blake Griffin I think there are no more than 5 (at the most) guys in this 2009 draft who have a good chance at being all star level players. There should be a nice group of quality role players in this draft and you can't discount the value of those guys on teams.

DGPR
06-17-2009, 06:02 PM
2006 was Andrew Bogut. I think you're thinking of 2007.

Bogut was 2005, same year as Mr. Granger.

Hicks
06-17-2009, 06:16 PM
Bogut was 2005, same year as Mr. Granger.

:doh:

Whoops. Yeah, 2006 must have been Bargnani, right?

Coop
06-17-2009, 07:43 PM
I don't even think Griffin will be that great. He's an athletic rebounder. His defense isn't that great, and most of his offense was generated from put-backs and being stronger and more athletic than his competition. I think he'll probably turn out being a 15 and 10 guy at the top of his game. Not bad by any means, but not a consistent all-star either.

Having said that, yes, I think this draft is that bad. A lot of the prospects I've seen mentioned at #13 have me cringing. Outside of an average PG crop, there's not a whole lot to get excited about.

danman
06-17-2009, 08:09 PM
Dunno how it will turn out, but there's no handful of dynamic players at the top, and there's a huge group of guys who could get picked at #6 or #25 and everyone would shrug.

Between the lines, a lot of GM's with relatively high picks are muttering about the salary hit/value level.

But ya never know. Cross your fingers and hope the Pacers get lucky.