Chad Ford's Mock 2.0

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Nikolokolus

There's always next year
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
30,704
Likes
6,198
Points
113
Well that went up quick. Some interesting guesses on his part

(Insider only : http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draf...ory?columnist=ford_chad&page=MockDraft-100518 )

He's currently got the Blazers taking Patrick Patterson at 22 ... which seems insanely low for a guy projected as a lottery pick all year long).

Analysis:Patterson would be a steal for the Blazers if he slips this low. While he does little to wow you, he's the type of unselfish, productive big man who will fit well in the Blazers' system.

And you've gotta love his pick for Memphis: Luke Babbitt at 12

Analysis: This pick may seem like a bit of a reach, but sources say the Grizzlies have locked in early on Babbitt; they're concerned he won't be there when they pick again at No. 25. While I have no idea who he'll guard at the next level, the guy can really score. The question: Is he the next Adam Morrison or the next Chris Mullin? The Grizzlies are banking on the latter.

My money is on "The next Ammo."
 
What does Ford say about Minnesota?

The consensus #4 pick, IMO, is DeMarcus Cousins.
 
Sweet, Pat Patterson?

20.jpg
 
What does Ford say about Minnesota?

The consensus #4 pick, IMO, is DeMarcus Cousins.

Ford has Minny taking Wes Johnson ... as an aside Jonathan Givony was at the lottery talking with David Kahn and he was "pissed" when he found out where they were picking -- apparently not real enthusiastic about the thought of Cousins.

Analysis: The Timberwolves have a need at small forward, and if they couldn't get Evan Turner, Johnson is the next best thing. He's an athletic swingman who can shoot, run the floor and rebound. He may not have star potential, but I think Johnson can come in and immediately contribute to the Wolves.

And as I mentioned in another thread I just started. A-Woj just tweeted this about 20 minutes ago:

WojYahooNBA

Houston and Portland are two teams that will be working No. 3 Nets and No. 4 Wolves hard to move up in the draft, league sources say.
 
Bradley to Raptors is fuckin fantastic. I love it.
 
http://www.portlandroundballsociety.com/home/2010/5/19/pick-and-scroll.html

Now, let’s look at just who Portland might be targeting. The players most likely to represent a value in this range are Derrick Favors, DeMarcus Cousins, Al-Farouq Aminu, and Wesley Johnson. I can’t imagine Cole Aldrich or Greg Monroe going that high at this point in the draft. However, if Portland can consolidate talent with a trade up to the third or fourth pick and then trade back down to say… eighth, and get the player they want plus some value to make up for trading to third, then maybe those players factor in. Ockham’s Razor would suggest that the Blazers want someone at three or four, however, Ockham was not consulted when the Collective Bargaining Agreement was drafted.

• Today we’ll look at what seems to me to be the most obvious candidate, Wesley Johnson. Here is his DraftExpress profile and his NBAdraft.net profile . Chad Ford says that Johnson is an athletic swingman who can shoot, run the floor and rebound. He may not have star potential, but Ford thinks Johnson can come in and immediately contribute.

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/wesley-johnson

My take: A long, athletic shooter with a quick release and good separation? I’ll take him and give him all of Martell Webster and Rudy Fernandez’s minutes. Both Johnson and Nicolas Batum can play and defend multiple positions, run the floor, and stroke it from deep. While there is significant overlap, I think both players can play at the same time. Especially with a playmaker like Andre Miller or Brandon Roy on the floor or a player like Jerryd Bayless who can create penetration. The only question is, at what cost? The first transaction I could think of off the top of my head was Andre Miller, Jerryd Bayless, Rudy Fernandez, and the 22nd pick for Devin Harris and the 3rd pick. Then, presumably Portland would target a backup point guard with the Mid Level Exception. That’s a high price, but Portland is left with a starting lineup of Harris, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, and Oden with Camby, Johnson, and the MLE point guard on the bench. Would that trade be worth it? Do you have a better idea? Let us know.
 
If the Blazers really think Wes Johnson can do all of those things then why would the Wolves -- who are starved for a talented wing -- trade us that pick? It makes you wonder if some package of Rudy, Martell, Bayless, draft picks (current and future first?) and/or maybe the draft rights to Claver could get them to nibble. That would leave the Wolves with the rights to three spaniards which might make Rubio a little more amenable to the idea of coming over ... I guess :dunno:
 

So they think that a swing man is the "most obvious" reason to trade up?

Let's see. Starting SG = Roy. Starting SF = Batum. Backup swing men = Webster, Rudy, Bayless.

Even if Johnson is an upgrade over Webster and Rudy (and I'm not sure that's the case; the guy is only 7 months younger than Webster... I think Martell would have been pretty darn good at Syracuse this year, don't you?)... we'd move all the way up to #3 or 4 for a guy who's never going to start for us? I find that very hard to believe. If we ARE going to trade that high up, I would think we'd need more depth up front, rather than replacing pieces we already have.

Ed O.
 
If there is any truth to the rumor I do think it is Wesley Johnson we are after. They must think he is going to be a star and be our 2nd or 3rd option. I guess if you really think Johnson is the star we need then you go for him. I'm not sure if this isn't just some smoke screen from the Blazers though. It seems every year a rumor about who we are going to draft comes out before the draft and it never ends up being true.
 
So they think that a swing man is the "most obvious" reason to trade up?

Let's see. Starting SG = Roy. Starting SF = Batum. Backup swing men = Webster, Rudy, Bayless.

Even if Johnson is an upgrade over Webster and Rudy (and I'm not sure that's the case; the guy is only 7 months younger than Webster... I think Martell would have been pretty darn good at Syracuse this year, don't you?)... we'd move all the way up to #3 or 4 for a guy who's never going to start for us? I find that very hard to believe. If we ARE going to trade that high up, I would think we'd need more depth up front, rather than replacing pieces we already have.

Ed O.

I don't see any reason to trade an Aldridge or an Oden for anybody not named John Wall. I really like Evan Turner, but I like Roy even more, so I'd pass on a deal to bring Turner. The rest of the bigs are all projects with limited games. The Wes Johnson scenario also makes no sense to me. I agree with you. Why trade starters for a back-up?
 
Last edited:
If the Blazers really think Wes Johnson can do all of those things then why would the Wolves -- who are starved for a talented wing -- trade us that pick? It makes you wonder if some package of Rudy, Martell, Bayless, draft picks (current and future first?) and/or maybe the draft rights to Claver could get them to nibble. That would leave the Wolves with the rights to three spaniards which might make Rubio a little more amenable to the idea of coming over ... I guess :dunno:
That actually makes some sense -- trade them Rudy & Claver in the hopes of luring over Rubio. I just don't know what a package like that can get us. I liked Flynn in College, but I haven't seen enough flashes in the NBA to show me he can be a starting PG. I don't know if the #3 pick has a lot of value either, but I would be willing to give up Bayless/Rudy/Claver/Martell (that's a decent amount of salary though -- don't know if Minny would want us to take some salary back). We would still have the MLE to address backup PG/SG/SF if all of those players went out. Maybe we bring back Trout or Blake. If a trade like that doesn't happen, I would be stoked if the Blazers just traded out of the first round of the draft. We have enough young players looking for playing time as it is. So basically, I have no idea what the Blazers should do this offseason, which means I will probably be happy with whatever happens. :lol:
 
That actually makes some sense -- trade them Rudy & Claver in the hopes of luring over Rubio.

OTOH, include Joel (instead of Rudy) for Rubio's rights, then maybe WE could lure Rubio?
 
If POR traded up to #3, I have to believe it is for a big guy...either Favors or Cousins...

Right now, POR is pretty loaded with big men, Camby, Oden, Przybilla & Aldridge (not forgetting Pendergraph). So, in theory, you COULD deal from a position of strength here as both Camby and Przybilla give you an approximate 2-year window before they head off into the sunset and suddenly you are void of big men and have only a injury prone Oden & Pendergraph as your only quality bigs....

That is why I have a tough time seeing POR trading Aldridge to go after a guy like Johnson or Aminu....and they are really high on Batum, and Roy is entrenched at SG, so Johnso is a back-up? or Batum is? Doesn't make sense....UNLESS they view one of those guys as just a can't miss star....and I haven't seen anyone label either of these players in that category.....

Now dealing Aldridge for Favors or Cousins would be aheck of a ballsy\risky move...Aldridge is a solid 18\8, and he may improve, or IMO, more likely what we see is generally what we can expect from him, which isn't bad at all....

The key here is what do Favors and Cousins project out to as NBA players using POR scouts metrics? If one of them (or both) project out to All Star caliber players, then maybe it makes sense for POR to take a hard look....There is no question that KP is on the hot seat, and maybe he feels the need to make a big move? You get out from under Aldridge's contract for one, you have other veteran bigs in Camby, Przybilla & Oden (perhaps Pendergraph) to help ease Favors\Cousins along...if that is even necessary, and 2 years from now when Camby is done and Przybilla may be as well, you have Oden (hopefully healthy) and another young big in Favors\Cousins, still under thier rookie contract and hopefully coming into thier own. I think both players have immediate impact ability, but the key is if POR scouts believe thier upside is greater than Aldridge's...

I think NJ certainly would look at a deal, thier new owner wants to get better and get better quickly. They have the cap room to not only acqire Aldridge via trade, but still have enough for a top tier FA.
 
Last edited:
This shit is nuts! I HATE THE SUMMER!
 
So they think that a swing man is the "most obvious" reason to trade up?

Let's see. Starting SG = Roy. Starting SF = Batum. Backup swing men = Webster, Rudy, Bayless.

Even if Johnson is an upgrade over Webster and Rudy (and I'm not sure that's the case; the guy is only 7 months younger than Webster... I think Martell would have been pretty darn good at Syracuse this year, don't you?)... we'd move all the way up to #3 or 4 for a guy who's never going to start for us? I find that very hard to believe. If we ARE going to trade that high up, I would think we'd need more depth up front, rather than replacing pieces we already have.
Like you profess to be, I'm a fan of adding the talent over addressing needs. But there are guys in this draft that would represent a talent upgrade over the guys already on the roster right? The real question is, what is the cost of adding these superior talents and does it exceed the value achieved in the upgrade? There is nothing wrong with being active and enquiring what it would take to get a guy you think will thrive.

I like the upside of Aminu and think the frontcourt could use another long athletic defender.

STOMP
 
Last edited:
Trading that high up in the draft for a wing would be a stupid move, especially what it would take to get New Jersey or Minnesota to bite on a deal.

Favors or Cousins are the only logical choices.
 
Ed, I think the thing people may be overlooking in all of this is the potential the Blazers see (or don't see) in Nic becoming the "PG". If so, there's definitely room for Evan Turner.

More and more, I like the LMA+Rudy+22 for Love and #4 pick. Works out pretty decently for everyone.
 
With Nate at the helm, Rubio would be a horrible fit on this team.

Look at how Rudy did in his first two years in the league. Imagine Rubio who is smaller/less athletic and younger. No thank you. I've said it from day 1. Rubio will not be productive in the NBA. I'll gladly eat my words if he turns out to be a great player but IMO....he's going to get eaten up.
 
Ed, I think the thing people may be overlooking in all of this is the potential the Blazers see (or don't see) in Nic becoming the "PG". If so, there's definitely room for Evan Turner.

More and more, I like the LMA+Rudy+22 for Love and #4 pick. Works out pretty decently for everyone.

IF that could happen....That would be incredible. I think a lot of people would laugh at that at first...but KLove >>> LMA IMO...you absolutely know what you're going to get out of Kevin night in and night out...LMA..not so much.
 
IF that could happen....That would be incredible. I think a lot of people would laugh at that at first...but KLove >>> LMA IMO...you absolutely know what you're going to get out of Kevin night in and night out...LMA..not so much.

You want a PF that shoots 45% and averages almost 2 3PT attempts a game? Ha.
 
You want a PF that shoots 45% and averages almost 2 3PT attempts a game? Ha.
and of course overmatched vs most everyone on D and earned a bench role for the lowly Wolves. A SF's height/length combined with a Centers weight and quickness.... I'm thinking if he wasn't from Portland, no one here would give a crap about him

STOMP
 
Media day for rookies, Orton threw Cousins under the bus:

Daniel Orton apparently threw DeMarcus Cousins underneath the bus. Called him "a big child," said he needed to pull him away from a fight.
DX's Twitter
 
Cousins could be the new Rasheed, and I'm told Rasheed >>>>>>> Aldridge so bring Cousins on in!

:devilwink:
 
LOL Wow RoyToy. Nice choice of stat.

You tell me which is which, hombre...
Power Forward A: PER of 20.7, TS% of 55%, eFG% of 48%. 33% 3pt, 81%FT, 13.6 reb/36
Power Forward B: PER of 18.2, TS% of 53%, eFG of 50%, 31% 3pt, 75% FT, 7.7 reb/36.

Yes, I want PF A. For 7M less a year.
 
More and more, I like the LMA+Rudy+22 for Love and #4 pick. Works out pretty decently for everyone.

I'd love that trade, but I don't think Minnesota even considers it. Even if we call Aldridge for Love an even swap (which is generous to Aldridge, considering Love is paid much less for at least comparable, even slightly higher, production and is several years younger), there's no way Fernandez makes up the difference between picks 22 and 4. Even counting in the dubious (IMO) "Rubio bait" angle.
 
LOL Wow RoyToy. Nice choice of stat.

You tell me which is which, hombre...
Power Forward A: PER of 20.7, TS% of 55%, eFG% of 48%. 33% 3pt, 81%FT, 13.6 reb/36
Power Forward B: PER of 18.2, TS% of 53%, eFG of 50%, 31% 3pt, 75% FT, 7.7 reb/36.

Yes, I want PF A. For 7M less a year.

Power Forward A: Bench player for a 15-win team
Power Forward B: Starter for 50-win team who was missing starting center for much of season.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top