Official 2013 NBA Draft Thread

I'm optimistic for Orlando because they have some solid pieces and will hopefully be bad next year with a real shot of landing a franchise player. Or if they strike out next year, you have a couple tempting prospects and cap room to attract free agents.

Utah made the mistake of being too good to get top draft picks and still bad enough to not matter. They're in a decent position because they have young guys, but you either hope they make the leap or you land a franchise free agent in Utah... which will be easier said than done.
 
Last edited:
why can't it be? look at the teams now. chicago (without rose), indiana and memphis are perfect examples. if you play a certain way, you can be successful without star power.

will they win a championship? history says no, but theres no reason to say they wont be competitive.

That's the point isn't it?

I never said they wouldn't be competitive.

Chicago without Rose...is going home every year after the first or second round. With Rose they can at atleast contend for a championship. Indiana...has a so called budding superstar in PG but until he reaches that...they're going to lose to the team with the superstar everytime...which they are about to. And before anyone mentions it...no Carmelo is not a superstar. Memphis "scares" people every year and then ends up losing to the team with the type of alpha players im referring to.

you said they're not a good team.

all i meant in my post was that orlando will be fine. they didn't lose out as bad on the trade as everyone made it seem. there's no reason that they can't put their team in a similar spot as indiana. harkless/harris/vucevic all have shown flashes, and theres reason to be believe they can bud into good players a la paul george.
 
My point is...

Which of those guys is the alpha male? Where is THAT GUY that we've CLEARLY seen from every championship team in the past 10 years (except for Detroit) that you need to be a contender?

They get a legitimate PG...sure they'll be a playoff team but that's all they'll be. I like Favors/Kanter/Burks/Hayward but unless that point guard is a superstar or something...they're nothing more than 4-6 year in and year out. They aren't scaring anybody.

If you don't have a big time star...you're not going to win anything in the NBA more often than not.
Favors and Kanter are 21, and Hayward turned 23 two months ago (and Burks is 21, too, but I don't think he'll amount to much).

I personally think Hayward will be a near-star, but his personality will hold him back from being more than that. Regardless, there's still plenty of time to find that player. You can't really fault them for where they are right now. It's a pretty envious position.
Utah made the mistake of being too good to get top draft picks and still bad enough to not matter.
This is true, though. Not moving Jefferson and/or Millsap was absolutely a mistake. Luckily, they still have a chance to sign and trade.
he is no where near a starting caliber PG in this league.
He's 23, and he made huge strides in every aspect of basketball this season playing behind Chris. And as one of the best defenders and one of the most athletic players in the league, I am absolutely taking a chance on him as a starter. Today.
 
Last edited:
Favors and Kanter are all 21, and Hayward turned 23 two months ago (and Burks is 21, too, but I don't think he'll amount to much).

I personally think Hayward will be a near-star, but his personality will hold him back from being more than that. Regardless, there's still plenty of time to find that player. You can't fault them for where they are right now. It's a pretty envious position.
He's 23, and he made huge strides in every aspect of basketball this season playing behind Chris. And as one of the best defenders and one of the most athletic players in the league, I am absolutely taking a chance on him as a starter. Today.
I'm not faulting them. I'm just saying people are overblowing their potential as a team. 

There's no one in that group that projects to be a top 5 player one day...so unless they draft that guy exactly how "good" are they? If you're telling me they have the potential to be a 4-6 seed like I said...I'm fine with that...but people act like these dudes are the next OKC (which seems to be every rebuilding team's success model) and there's no one in that group that will EVER be as good as KD or hell even Russy for that matter.

Rebuilding with young good character guys with high upsides is great....but let's pump the breaks on exactly how great they will be unless one of those guys is star.

And we agree to disagree here but I see a really good player in Hayward...nothing that suggests near star tho. Whatever near star means.
 
Last edited:
What's wrong with George Hill's ball handling? The struggle he has handling the ball as a point guard is crazy.

Not much is wrong with it. He's not a GREAT ball handler but a pretty good one - Miami clamps down on PGs or players without elite handles. Chalmers/Wade/Lebron have long arms and are great on the perimeter and any screen in roll is trapped hard by a quick/great defender. That's more what you're seeing. Miami makes it tough for any ball handler, ask Derrick Rose.

-

Also, Dennis Shroeder doesn't really have any weaknesses and looks like an elite or near elite athlete at the PG position. He seems young and immature (didn't want to play in a blowout because he wasn't warmed up) but he looks really good. Hope he gets drafted in a good situation cause he has all the tools.
 
he is no where near a starting caliber PG in this league.
He's 23, and he made huge strides in every aspect of basketball this season playing behind Chris. And as one of the best defenders and one of the most athletic players in the league, I am absolutely taking a chance on him as a starter. Today.

In my opinion you want a good defender as a point guard but in my eyes you want a pg who can definitely run an offense more and i dont think bledsoe can do that

Also his bad jumper will expose him
 
I really like MCW , he can be an elite defender, has good passing skills, I know his shot is questionable but he has the athletic ability to get to rim, but if he doesn't develop he'll just be Shaun Livingston which is just a reserve
 
Last edited:



Utah Jazz radio voice David Lokce breaks down the Nike Hoop Summit and the play of Dennis Schroeder.
 
Last edited:
If MCW can tighten up his handle he'll be good. He has good form on his shot it'll start falling more, he is an elite athlete and has the perfect body for the PG position. He doesnt run the pick and roll or have great court vision unless on the break. I think his development all hinges on where he goes and who coaches him. He's someone that will be able to guard Westbrook, Wall and Rose with more athletic PG's on the horizon, that's valuable.
 
Some actually say the zone masked MCW's defensive strengths. He's a more than adequate on the ball defender with his length and hands.

Main criticism against MCW is his scoring ability. Can he take over a game? He very well could be a jack of all trades, master of nothing.
 
Really dislike MCW. He has Evan Turner-like explosiveness, and his offensive game is astoundingly bad--his cuts and his dribble penetration seem awkward. He plays like a kid who has played a lot of basketball but doesn't really ever watch basketball growing up, so doesn't have the same finesse with the ball that you can only get from watching a ton of basketball.

Weird analysis, I know. But a 6'6" PG is hard to come by these days, and with his length and defensive ability (despite the Cuse Zone), someone's going to take him early
 
I hear that. Anyone expecting to do what the Thunder did is going to end up real disappointed. It's not logical to get that lucky.
Gotta credit their evals too. KD was luck, but Russ, Harden and Ibaka were definitely greats evaluations.

Thought the MCW train was dead? Now I've seen Lo Brown and MCW hyped in here in the past 2 days :lol:.
 
Last edited:
I really like MCW , he can be an elite defender, has good passing skills, I know his shot is questionable but he has the athletic ability to get to rim, but if he doesn't develop he'll just be Shaun Livingston which is just a reserve

Didn't MCW play for that Syracuse zone?

Maybe I'm wrong but didn't that cover up players weakness and a lot of people say is overrated or something to that extent?

That zone is very overrated and all the recent players from there suck on defense in the nba
 
I really like MCW , he can be an elite defender, has good passing skills, I know his shot is questionable but he has the athletic ability to get to rim, but if he doesn't develop he'll just be Shaun Livingston which is just a reserve

Didn't MCW play for that Syracuse zone?

Maybe I'm wrong but didn't that cover up players weakness and a lot of people say is overrated or something to that extent?

That zone is very overrated and all the recent players from there suck on defense in the nba

They play good zone d, thing is it doesnt show players full capabilities in d

The known thought is that if you are running zone that offense yor players cant defend 5 on 5 meanig essentially your covering up one players weakness
 
roll.gif
@ Tony Mitchell's DX interview.

On what he could contribute right away - "10 points, 5 blocks, 7 rebounds. Something light"

laugh.gif
 
Fraschilla:
Top forward? It's Bennett over Porter

In today's NBA, the forward position has evolved to the point that it's difficult to typecast a player as "only" a power or small forward. Certainly, there are power forwards such as Zach Randolph, David West and David Lee who fit the traditional mold and pound you inside. Likewise, athletic, multidimensional players such as Carmelo Anthony or Paul George fit what we traditionally think of as the small forward position.

Then there are uniquely skilled players who don't fit the positional archetype, the guys a good NBA coach can fit into a range of offensive and defensive schemes with flexibility and what I call "coaching creativity."

For example, the New Orleans Pelicans' Ryan Anderson is a "stretch" power forward who creates great spacing for an offense with his shooting but won't do much damage to a defense in the paint. Similarly, there are those at the small forward position I call "one-trick ponies", such as the Atlanta Hawks' Kyle Korver, whose only elite NBA skill is shooting the ball. But that's been enough for him to carve out a long career because coaches can maximize those prized traits.

Undersized power forwards who play with supreme energy, like the Denver Nuggets' Kenneth Faried, are in vogue right now. George Karl isn't running many plays for him, but Faried has started his career averaging one rebound every three minutes.

This year's draft offers up some forwards who could be taken in a similar range in the first round but with very different skills. The two best forwards in this year's draft, Georgetown's Otto Porter and UNLV's Anthony Bennett, are 6-foot-8 but play very differently. Porter is the traditionally skilled small forward who is one of the draft's best shooters, and Bennett is an undersized power forward with terrific rebounding instincts, a good shooting touch and massive potential, as well.

Bennett and Porter are expected to go in the top five selections. Here is a breakdown of both players and how each could ultimately affect the teams that draft them.

Otto Porter | 6-8 | Georgetown

Porter might be the safest player to select among the first 14 picks. He has very good NBA positional size and skill level and is a high-character guy who has not been weaned on AAU basketball. He was extremely successful at the high-majors level and turns 20 just three weeks before the draft. But he's not perfect.

Porter's main offensive strength is that he is an excellent shooter, especially in the midrange. According to hoop-math.com, 79 percent of Porter's shots this season were jump shots, and he made an outstanding 42 percent of them. Mechanically, he has a high release and consistent follow-through. This accounts for his high accuracy.

Additionally, he played in an offense at Georgetown that accentuated ball movement. Although he's an outstanding shooter with his feet set, critical in creating floor spacing in the NBA, cutting and moving to open areas also will serve him well.

That said, the Porter I saw on tape and in person is, at best, an average NBA passer and driver. He is a very good straight-line driver, but he rarely beat athletic defenders off the dribble. And, although his turnover rate is a very good 11.7 percent, according to kenpom.com, that is a deceiving number because he is usually in a position to shoot before he passes.

Defensively, Porter gets kudos for stuffing the stat sheet with steals, rebounds and blocks, and he has the basketball intelligence to be an excellent team defender. That said, his lateral quickness is average and problematic at times when was guarding the ball off the dribble. He won't arrive in the league as an elite defender.

Two years ago, Porter was an unheralded high school player who honed his game on the playgrounds of Sikeston and Morley, Mo. Toughness and adherence to basketball fundamentals were part of his DNA even before he arrived at Georgetown. Without question, his two years playing in the Big East enhanced those strengths.

Ultimately, Porter should have a reasonably smooth transition to the NBA. He can make outside shots, will play with great energy and should find his role.

Anthony Bennett | 6-8 | UNLV

Bennett, who turned 20 in March, is one of the few players in this draft who has the potential to appear in multiple NBA All-Star Games, but he still has a lot to figure out. He also will be coming off recent shoulder surgery, which will sideline him for four months, precluding him from pre-draft team workouts.

But Bennett possesses some attributes that are precursors to NBA stardom. Although he is just 6-8, he is an explosive NBA-level athlete with a 7-1 wingspan. In addition, he is an excellent rebounder and a better-than-average outside shooter. The Mountain West Freshman of the Year, he shot 38 percent behind the arc this past season.

When he reaches the NBA, Bennett should immediately be proficient in screen-and-roll situations because of his ability to shoot the ball from the perimeter. He was heavily involved in drag screens in transition at UNLV. Few power forwards in this draft will stretch the floor like he does.

There are some issues with Bennett, some of which can be attributed to his inexperience. Although he had the potential to dominate games, I don't believe his motor ran full throttle all the time. Also, he has battled injuries and asthma throughout his high school and college careers. In addition, Bennett's low-post game is still a work in progress. He is more likely to score inside off offensive rebounds, dump-offs and quick face-up moves as opposed to back-to-the basket offense.

Overview

Ultimately, although Porter has solid credentials and is considered a safe draft pick, Bennett has the attributes to be a star in the NBA.

Taking Porter, who I think will be a starter in the NBA, is like hitting a double in the gap, but taking Bennett is swinging for the fences and trying to hit a grand slam. If Bennett connects, a team is getting a major building block for the next 10 years, and that, especially in the draft, will be hard to pass up.
 
If MCW can tighten up his handle he'll be good. He has good form on his shot it'll start falling more, he is an elite athlete and has the perfect body for the PG position. He doesnt run the pick and roll or have great court vision unless on the break. I think his development all hinges on where he goes and who coaches him. He's someone that will be able to guard Westbrook, Wall and Rose with more athletic PG's on the horizon, that's valuable.

All syracuse does is run high pick and rolls.
 
I just don't know what to make of Bennett....

Best case, a poor man's Melo? Someone help me....
 
Back
Top Bottom