Zombie 2012 NBA Draft (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Reep said:
Anyone starting to wonder if MKG could slip to us at 6? If people are really high on Barnes (who tested better athletically than MKG), and Beal looks good, AND someone take a flyer on Drummond, doesn't that leave us with MKG potentially? I think it is a long shot, but I'm not hearing the buzz about MKG after the combine that you are about the others.
Click to expand...

I think he's a perfect fit for Sacramento, and they would grab him at 5.
 
Reep said:
Anyone starting to wonder if MKG could slip to us at 6? If people are really high on Barnes (who tested better athletically than MKG), and Beal looks good, AND someone take a flyer on Drummond, doesn't that leave us with MKG potentially? I think it is a long shot, but I'm not hearing the buzz about MKG after the combine that you are about the others.
Click to expand...

I think he goes to Sacramento, and I would rather not grab a player who is slipping
 
RR7 said:
I think he's a perfect fit for Sacramento, and they would grab him at 5.
Click to expand...

Given their lack of desire to pull in another project big man, you are probably right. But, Barnes could also look good at 5 if he was available, as could Beal. It would probably have to look something like:

1: Davis
2: Robinson
3: Drummond
4: Barnes
5: Beal
 
Reep said:
Anyone starting to wonder if MKG could slip to us at 6? If people are really high on Barnes (who tested better athletically than MKG), and Beal looks good, AND someone take a flyer on Drummond, doesn't that leave us with MKG potentially? I think it is a long shot, but I'm not hearing the buzz about MKG after the combine that you are about the others.
Click to expand...

Possible. I think Davis at 1 (obviously), Robinson at 2, and Barnes at 4 are all pretty much locks. So that leaves Beal, Drummond and MKG for WAS and SAC. If WAS is as high on Beal as rumored, and SAC really does want to pair Drummond with Cousins, then it's very possible that MKG could fall to us. It would feel like an upset of epic proportions if it were to happen, but I wouldn't complain.

I think the better question is, if Davis-Robinson-Beal go 1-2-3, is MKG a big enough prize to justify the 6/11 for 4/24 trade with Cleveland that has been rumored?
 
Last edited:
Why does everyone like MKG so much!!!!!!! Undersized 3 that can't shoot and scored all his baskets in the open court.
 
handiman said:
To me, that feeds into another, slightly more important question: Have the scouting staffs for any teams figured out which combine numbers (or combinations of) are actually useful? So many of the numbers end up telling you little about how the guy will play, and when someone like Rose or Westbrook tests about the same as numerous run-of-the-mill guards, you know the combine tests are failing to capture which components of athleticism actually translate to game situations.
Click to expand...

A long time ago I took an entire quarter's class on multivariate regression. The visiting professor had a bunch of data on athletes who had competed for football scholarships at Clemson University IIRC.

We spent a bit of time proving that the single best physical indicator of future performance was vertical leap. It is evidence of fast-twitch muscle and speed -- both necessary to outperform other athletes. However this is a case of necessary but not sufficient. Jumping and running are way important in basketball, but as others have pointed out here, there is hand-eye coordination for shooting and the mental side of the game among other things.
 
Reep said:
Given their lack of desire to pull in another project big man, you are probably right. But, Barnes could also look good at 5 if he was available, as could Beal. It would probably have to look something like:

1: Davis
2: Robinson
3: Drummond
4: Barnes
5: Beal
Click to expand...

I think there is a pretty good chance that you are right with those 5. I would be happy with MKG.
I know we all want BAP and if we get Barnes or MKG at 6, A center, SG and PG are still in play at 11.

But I think if we somehow get Beal at 6 then that will take another SG at 11 off the table. (So PG or C) And if Drummond slips to us at 6, then I think they go SG at 11 for sure. We would need scoring help
 
Mediocre Man said:
Why does everyone like MKG so much!!!!!!! Undersized 3 that can't shoot and scored all his baskets in the open court.
Click to expand...

Is he undersized? 6'7.5" 233 lbs and 7' wingspan sounds pretty good size to me. (actually, almost identical in every dimension with Carmelo).

I don't disagree with your analysis of what he is now, but I think the question is what will he become. He was a very strong team leader on a national champion team. He appears very driven and athletic. Maybe has the kind of drive that Jordan, Wade, Bird had--just not fully developed yet? Can he develop a better outside shot? I don't know. People seem to believe that he will develop enough of these other skills given his very strong drive. Blazers could use a guy with strong drive getting on his teammates when they start to coast.

The good news is that the rise of Barnes makes the field of top players now 6-7 deep (depending on how you see Lillard). So, picking 6 now looks pretty sexy because you are going to get someone good.
 
Last edited:
maybeso said:
A long time ago I took an entire quarter's class on multivariate regression. The visiting professor had a bunch of data on athletes who had competed for football scholarships at Clemson University IIRC.

We spent a bit of time proving that the single best physical indicator of future performance was vertical leap. It is evidence of fast-twitch muscle and speed -- both necessary to outperform other athletes. However this is a case of necessary but not sufficient.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The combine results should really just be a yes/no checkbox. All of the guys have enough measurable athleticism to succeed on the next level, but the numbers themselves are unlikely to predict anything with much accuracy.
 
You are telling everyone on this board that management will be a failure if they take Lillard or Leonard. Bottomline is, you don't know more than the next guy on this board about predicting who will be a failure, or a success at the next level.
Click to expand...

It's my opinion, I am entitled to state it, and I have given numerous, specific & justifiable reasons as to why I came to that opinion, and I will again since they keep being glossed over.

Sorry to break the news to you, but Lillard was projected as a lottery player before the combine. You ramble on about Lillard not having explosion, or the body to withstand the NBA, but Chad Ford said he measured out almost the same size as Derrick Rose did a 6'8" wingspan and a 40-inch vertical.
Click to expand...

He was back end of the lottery and a lot of the slotting right now on mock drafts is based on percieved team needs and not whom teams ACTUALLY like...and the fact that he has some measureables that resemble Rose, CLEARLY is worthless isn't it? b\c history has certainly shown us that basketball at the NBA level is more than just athletic combine numbers...otherwise Rose wouldn't be one of the best players in the NBA now would he? The fact is there are always players that teams rave about or vice versa and a lot of it is smokescreeen...and sometimes guys just look better in a workout setting than they actually are on the floor in a 5v5 setting (Hello Martell Webster!),...and I do believe that the lack of PG in POR adversly affects many fans' perspective on a player...Lillard doesn't have as many question marks to me as Leonard does or as critical of a one, but he DOES have some serious concerns that I am baffled how people can just wave away like they are no big deal...

Lillard...He has not performed well in games vs better teams, that should be concerning when reviewing a player from a smaller conference....He shoots the ball low and in front of him, look at how a guy like Waiters shoots the ball for instance, high above his head, a little lean back, that shot would be hard as hell to block in the NBA....low and in front of you? That will get blocked or more likely what will happen is that he will be chased off the shot and have to pull back and take an off balance shot...much tougher shot, far less success rate...and watch how he drives to the basket, a lot of little lay in type shots, you are not going to get that in the NBA...He shows athleticism but he doesn't appear to have explosion to the basket, he can do it when the path is open before him, but when a defender is there it is a lean to the side and an attempt to lay it in across the backboard...against inferior competition that can work, against top nothc size\athleticism in the NBA that will be blocked...Again, look how Waiters finishes...look how he absorbs body hits and continues onto the basket and throws it down...that is very impressive and reminiscent of what he will face, defensively in the NBA...I think Lillard is fool's gold...looks good when playing against sub par competition and in a gym when no one is guarding him...but in an NBA game, 5 on 5, I am prediciting he will strugggle, he will essentially be a jump shooter (and he isn't lights out there) and I don't see him as a go-to player type scorer at the end of games either (which this team DESPERATELY needs)...Maybe I am wrong, maybe he overcomes those short comings, but I would be highly surprised if he does...

You ramble on about Teague in comparison to Lillard, but not much of what you rambled on about was true aside from the fact that Teague played on a better team. Mateen Cleaves won a championship, that didn't make him better than a guy like Eric Maynor who went to VCU.
Click to expand...

Not sure what Cleaves was ranked coming out of HS, Teague was a top 5 HS recruit (I do think that matters, I did a rough analysis and the percentages were pretty compelling to me)....and his ahtleticism, speed and size compared to Cleeves are certainly factors....I think Teague is a better athlete than Lillard, a better PG in terms of passing\running a team...He is accustomed to playing against better competition and he performed well for a freshman...and I thought his play in the NCAA tourney when the competition\pressure is at its's greatest was very good...Those to me are very positive signs...and what I said was correct, he had a better assist\to ratio as a freshman than Lillard did ANY year he at Weber State....Lillard is a SG that once again, POR is trying to make into a PG, that experiment has failed several times now already...and even if you think Lillard is better, is he that much better to take at #6 than getting a guy like Teague and other assets in the mid 1st? I don't think so, bad use of your assets IMO...and either way, whomever they pick (if they do pick a PG) POR is going to have to bring in a vet...

Lastly to Leonard, I have mentioned it several times now and you keep skipping over it but he has a well known history of problems with mental toughness and self confidence...He gets down on himself a lot....I just don't know how ANYONE can ignore that...to me that is a MAJOR red flag...Look at Luke Babbitt, talk about a guy who struggles with confidence, and it is likely why he will be nothing more than a bench scrub\specialist in the NBA, b\c the shooting tools are there...and for a big man to have those issues? I would argue that lack of confidence is even more concerning...he is going to get pushed around, banged on, fouls called on him...a lot...and other players yapping in his ear to get into his head....You add that to the fact that athleticism aside, he is raw offensively and raw defensively....Heck his best shot is a little jump hook that he starts low and can be blocked quite easily...that isn't going to work in the NBA...So you are drafting a project that is very raw that struggles with confidence issues and whose best case otucome if he overcomes all that is Spencer Hawes? I view that as a reach....

and you mention Hawes as a comparison, whose play has improved after FIVE years in the NBA and on his 2nd team....and he didn't have confidence issues and had a better offensive game out of college than Leonard does....You really want to wait 5 years for Leonard and hope that he developes into that type of player?

You take Leonard at #11 then you are reaching, you are hoping he becomes a serviceable...middle of the road starter...you are hoping that he developes some kind of go to post move...you are hoping that he improves enough on defense that he can actually stay out on the court and not collect fouls like a magnet...and MOST importantly you are hoping that by some miracle? he suddenly overcomes all of his self confidence issues...and again history I think shows that players who suffer from that don't usually overcome it...Not in the NBA...

I'll put trust in the various league executives and analysts that have attended the combine. Lillard's rise in pre-draft has reminded me a lot of another guy that rised to the top after workouts and wasn't exactly considered a pure PG coming out of college; Russell Westbrook.
Click to expand...

First of all, I don't think we really know where they rank with executives...saying a guy helped himself or he loked good at the combine is a LOT different from how you have him ranked on your draft board...and I don't think he has ANYWHERE near the athleticism or EXPLOSION of Russell Westbrook. Seriously? I don't know how anyone can see similarities from watching them play....It is that explosion that makes Westbrook so damm good...and his jumpshot has come along....I think that is reaching if you are comparing the 2...

Long enough? You want to debate those points fine, but I have given you MY reasons for why I don't particularly like either player...Not just a "They suck, STFU"...
 
Last edited:
Mediocre Man said:
I think he goes to Sacramento, and I would rather not grab a player who is slipping
Click to expand...

I would gladly scoop up MKG, even with the concerns about his outside shooting....Everything else about him is very good IMO...Defensively, hustle, leadership....Also, youngest player in the draft....

I think there is a chance he could slip....

I really think there is a good chance that there is going to be 2 of Robinson, Beal, Barnes, MKG, Drummond sitting there for POR to choose from....
 
Blaze01 said:
It's my opinion, I am entitled to state it, and I have given numerous, specific & justifiable reasons as to why I came to that opinion, and I will again since they keep being glossed over.



He was back end of the lottery and a lot of the slotting right now on mock drafts is based on percieved team needs and not whom teams ACTUALLY like...and the fact that he has some measureables that resemble Rose, CLEARLY is worthless isn't it? b\c history has certainly shown us that basketball at the NBA level is more than just athletic combine numbers...otherwise Rose wouldn't be one of the best players in the NBA now would he? The fact is there are always players that teams rave about or vice versa and a lot of it is smokescreeen...and sometimes guys just look better in a workout setting than they actually are on the floor in a 5v5 setting (Hello Martell Webster!),...and I do believe that the lack of PG in POR adversly affects many fans' perspective on a player...Lillard doesn't have as many question marks to me as Leonard does or as critical of a one, but he DOES have some serious concerns that I am baffled how people can just wave away like they are no big deal...

Lillard...He has not performed well in games vs better teams, that should be concerning when reviewing a player from a smaller conference....He shoots the ball low and in front of him, look at how a guy like Waiters shoots the ball for instance, high above his head, a little lean back, that shot would be hard as hell to block in the NBA....low and in front of you? That will get blocked or more likely what will happen is that he will be chased off the shot and have to pull back and take an off balance shot...much tougher shot, far less success rate...and watch how he drives to the basket, a lot of little lay in type shots, you are not going to get that in the NBA...He shows athleticism but he doesn't appear to have explosion to the basket, he can do it when the path is open before him, but when a defender is there it is a lean to the side and an attempt to lay it in across the backboard...against inferior competition that can work, against top nothc size\athleticism in the NBA that will be blocked...Again, look how Waiters finishes...look how he absorbs body hits and continues onto the basket and throws it down...that is very impressive and reminiscent of what he will face, defensively in the NBA...I think Lillard is fool's gold...looks good when playing against sub par competition and in a gym when no one is guarding him...but in an NBA game, 5 on 5, I am prediciting he will strugggle, he will essentially be a jump shooter (and he isn't lights out there) and I don't see him as a go-to player type scorer at the end of games either (which this team DESPERATELY needs)...Maybe I am wrong, maybe he overcomes those short comings, but I would be highly surprised if he does...



Not sure what Cleaves was ranked coming out of HS, Teague was a top 5 HS recruit (I do think that matters, I did a rough analysis and the percentages were pretty compelling to me)....and his ahtleticism, speed and size compared to Cleeves are certainly factors....I think Teague is a better athlete than Lillard, a better PG in terms of passing\running a team...He is accustomed to playing against better competition and he performed well for a freshman...and I thought his play in the NCAA tourney when the competition\pressure is at its's greatest was very good...Those to me are very positive signs...and what I said was correct, he had a better assist\to ratio as a freshman than Lillard did ANY year he at Weber State....Lillard is a SG that once again, POR is trying to make into a PG, that experiment has failed several times now already...and even if you think Lillard is better, is he that much better to take at #6 than getting a guy like Teague and other assets in the mid 1st? I don't think so, bad use of your assets IMO...and either way, whomever they pick (if they do pick a PG) POR is going to have to bring in a vet...

Lastly to Leonard, I have mentioned it several times now and you keep skipping over it but he has a well known history of problems with mental toughness and self confidence...He gets down on himself a lot....I just don't know how ANYONE can ignore that...to me that is a MAJOR red flag...Look at Luke Babbitt, talk about a guy who struggles with confidence, and it is likely why he will be nothing more than a bench scrub\specialist in the NBA, b\c the shooting tools are there...and for a big man to have those issues? I would argue that lack of confidence is even more concerning...he is going to get pushed around, banged on, fouls called on him...a lot...and other players yapping in his ear to get into his head....You add that to the fact that athleticism aside, he is raw offensively and raw defensively....Heck his best shot is a little jump hook that he starts low and can be blocked quite easily...that isn't going to work in the NBA...So you are drafting a project that is very raw that struggles with confidence issues and whose best case otucome if he overcomes all that is Spencer Hawes? I view that as a reach....

and you mention Hawes as a comparison, whose play has improved after FIVE years in the NBA and on his 2nd team....and he didn't have confidence issues and had a better offensive game out of college than Leonard does....You really want to wait 5 years for Leonard and hope that he developes into that type of player?

You take Leonard at #11 then you are reaching, you are hoping he becomes a serviceable...middle of the road starter...you are hoping that he developes some kind of go to post move...you are hoping that he improves enough on defense that he can actually stay out on the court and not collect fouls like a magnet...and MOST importantly you are hoping that by some miracle? he suddenly overcomes all of his self confidence issues...and again history I think shows that players who suffer from that don't usually overcome it...Not in the NBA...

Long enough? You want to debate those points fine, but I have given you MY reasons for why I don't particularly like either player...Not just a "They suck, STFU"...







I'll put trust in the various league executives and analysts that have attended the combine. Lillard's rise in pre-draft has reminded me a lot of another guy that rised to the top after workouts and wasn't exactly considered a pure PG coming out of college; Russell Westbrook.

As for Leonard, I think he can become like Spencer Hawes type player. Who taken at #11 in any draft is a solid pick.
Click to expand...

Blaze, IMO it's the "way" you state your "opinion" that bothers many here and I can see why that is the case - just my opinion
 
I didn't think there was anything offensive in that last post????
 
Blaze01 said:
I didn't think there was anything offensive in that last post????
Click to expand...

wasn't about the last post, just the tone of some of your others, I don't have any beef with you but at times you do come across as pretty arrogant
 
Boise Blazer said:
I sat there yesterday wondering, can you guys think of anyone from the last few years that really stood out in the combine and then turned out to be a bad pick? Im sure there are examples out there but I would like to compare them to Lillard. He seemed to do really well and just about everyone at the combined seemed to like him. What other players recently were like this but still turned out a bad pick?
Click to expand...

Besides Oden? Thats an interesting question.

Edit: Joe Alexander is a good answer. Good catch guys - I had completely forgotten him!
 
Last edited:
question, havent kept up with all the pages of this thread lol.

would you be happy with a draft of Drummond and Marshall, and then using capspace to sign Eric Gordon, and Re-sign Batum? would that even be plausible?
 
Wheels said:
question, havent kept up with all the pages of this thread lol.

would you be happy with a draft of Drummond and Marshall, and then using capspace to sign Eric Gordon, and Re-sign Batum? would that even be plausible?
Click to expand...

I'd be very happy with that outcome, personally.

Marshall/Gordon/Batum/Aldridge/Drummond
Vet PG/Wes/Babbitt/Hickson/Freeland
Nolan/Elliot Williams/Przybilla/Claver/40 or 41
 
RR7 said:
I'd be very happy with that outcome, personally.

Marshall/Gordon/Batum/Aldridge/Drummond
Vet PG/Wes/Babbitt/Hickson/Freeland
Nolan/Elliot Williams/Przybilla/Claver/40 or 41
Click to expand...

that lineup does intrigue me I admit. But is it even plausible? Not sure what the going rate on a RFA like Gordon is, and if NOLA would match... etc etc
 
crap nvm I forgot about the Olshey/Gordon fued
 
Wheels said:
question, havent kept up with all the pages of this thread lol.

would you be happy with a draft of Drummond and Marshall, and then using capspace to sign Eric Gordon, and Re-sign Batum? would that even be plausible?
Click to expand...

Probably not plausable because Gordon would take more than the 12.5 million in cap space we have
 
Wheels said:
crap nvm I forgot about the Olshey/Gordon fued
Click to expand...

Was trying to reaad up on that. I remembered it worse than it really seemed. He felt lied to, but he mentioned Olshey and VDN. And I'm sure that's tough for a player. But if the guy that lied to you about being traded comes up to you and says here's a near max offer.....are you going to say no for less money? I think it would smooth it over pretty easily.
Also read somewhere that initially, Olshey didn't want to include Gordon in a deal for Paul, because he was sure he'd become an All Star. Maybe that means he likes him a lot, and will target him in free agency.
I imagine N.O. would likely match any reasonable offers. Maybe some front loaded deal makes benson hesitate? I dunno what sort of NBA owner he will be. It's otherwise possible. I can see Drummond there for us at 6. Marshall should definitely be there at 11. Matching on Batum is easy. So you just look at a deal to gordon, and whether they want to commit big money to him, versus maybe their ability to get a SG at 10 in the draft(Waiters or Ribvers or Lamb)
 
Mediocre Man said:
Cap holds for Batum, Freeland, Claver, #6 and #11.

Storyteller came up with that figure on a Blazers Edge article....I think it was BE anyway?

http://www.blazersedge.com/2012/5/30/3053497/portlands-cap-position-in-2012-13
Click to expand...

I keep forgetting about Hickson's cap hold.

So he has us at 12.35. I would think there'd be a good chance of us stretch waiving Shawne, having his salary go down to 1 a year, but then a roster chaarge of close to 500,000, so that gives us an additional 1.6 roughly, up to14 in space. Let's say it is 13.5. That's a 4 year, 57.6 offer to him. Possible they match.
 
RR7 said:
I keep forgetting about Hickson's cap hold.

So he has us at 12.35. I would think there'd be a good chance of us stretch waiving Shawne, having his salary go down to 1 a year, but then a roster chaarge of close to 500,000, so that gives us an additional 1.6 roughly, up to14 in space. Let's say it is 13.5. That's a 4 year, 57.6 offer to him. Possible they match.
Click to expand...



We can get to 17 by renouncing all FA's (minus Batum), Freeland and Claver or renouncing all FA's (minus Batum) and getting stretching Williams
 
if we're at 12.35, and he has a 4.5 hold for Hickson, then just waiving him and williams gets us over 17.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top