Updating the Draft Board
OK, now that we know who is in and who is out of the 2009 NBA Draft, it's time to update the draft board. Right now we are assuming that the Wolves will draft 5th and that Blake Griffin and Ricky Rubio will be off the board. Everyone else is in play. Before we begin, here's the end-of-the-college-season draft board with Hoopus Scores and crossed-out names for the players that are staying in school:
Tier One:
- Blake Griffin: 45/18.196 (63.196-big).
Cole Aldrich: 35/14.863 (49.863-big)- Demar Derozan: 31.3/13.879 (45.179-wing)
Evan Turner: 36.5/10.359 (47.009-wing)- Tyreke Evans: 31.4/8.414 (39.814-guard)
- Stephen Curry: 42.6/13.203 (55.803-guard)
Al Farouq Aminu: 35.474/8.758 (44.233-wing)- James Harden: 38.4/10.393 (48.793-guard)
- Hasheem Thabeet: 42.7/14.703 (57.4-big)
- DeJuan Blair: 37.825/15.578 (53.403-big)
Tier Two:
- Ty Lawson: 35.275/10.616 (45.668-guard).
- Nick Calathes: 33.3/10.575 (43.875-guard).
- Terrence Williams: 26.775/11.06 (37.835-wing).
- Eric Maynor: 32.875/9.558 (42.433-guard).
- Jeff Teague: 35.525/7.813 (43.358-guard).
Tier Three:
Jerome Jordan: 38.55/10.652 (49.202-big)Greg Monroe: 37.475/9.822 (47.297-big)- Jordan Hill: 33.999/12.451 (46.45-big)
- Chase Budinger: 29.575/10.953 (40.528-wing)
- Damion James: 31.05/9.3 (40.35-wing)
- Gerald Henderson: 30.5/7.808 (38.308-guard)
Kyle Singler: 31.525/9.666 (41.191-wing)- Sam Young: 29.8/8.196 (37.996-wing)
- Lee Cummard: 30.6/11.359 (41.959-guard)
Willie Warren: 30.55/5.625 (36.175-guard)- Tyler Hansbrough: 39.375/13.766 (53.141-big)
- James Johnson: 29.375/10.77 (40.145-big)
- Marcus Thornton: 31.875/9.685 (41.156-guard)
- Toney Douglas: 31.25/8.842 (40.092-guard)
- Wayne Ellington: 27.3/8.828 (36.128-guard)
It wasn't a very deep draft to begin with, but those 7 players are really going to be problematic for the Wolves' second first round pick, especially when you consider that most of the players staying in are viewed as "potential" guys who would be worth a peak with the 18th pick. Here are the updated tiers with a few changes here and there that I will explain after each tier:
Tier One:
- Stephen Curry: 42.6/13.203 (55.803-guard)
- Demar Derozan: 31.3/13.879 (45.179-wing)
- James Harden: 38.4/10.393 (48.793-guard)
- Hasheem Thabeet: 42.7/14.703 (57.4-big)
- DeJuan Blair: 37.825/15.578 (53.403-big)
OK, first of all, I just want to remind people that I have removed Griffin and Rubio from this list. Griffin is the clear number one pick and Rubio is a Euro guard that none of us really know how to grade. Right now we are operating on the assumption that the Wolves are drafting with the 5th pick.
As you may have noticed, not only have I removed the players who are returning to college from tier one, but I have also struck out Tyreke Evans. I did this for a few reasons. First, I have to be consistent with the Hoopus Score and his low number is pretty hard to overlook. Even though he came on late in the season, his improved numbers were not nearly as good as were his peers'. I have gone back and forth on Evans several times. No other player in this draft has the potential to change the Wolves as much as the Memphis guard. If you believe he can start at the point in the NBA, then by all means he should be near or at the top of your draft board. 6'6" guards with massive wingspans don't exactly grow on trees and his pick-and-roll potential is off the charts. What is also off the charts is his ability to turn the ball over, miss jumpers, and dominate the ball. Let's take a look at the three players that are in direct competition for the best non-Rubio (and non-Lawson; more on that later) guard in the draft:
| PPR | A/TO | %TM POSS | TO/POSS | PTS/POSS | FTA/POSS | TO RATE | EFG | 2FG% | |
| Curry | -0.11 | 1.50 | 32.9 | 0.16 | 1.21 | 0.31 | 16.1 | 54.9 | .519 |
| Harden | -1.62 | 1.25 | 28.5 | 0.19 | 1.15 | 0.44 | 18.9 | 55.3 | .564 |
| Evans | -3.60 | 1.08 | 24.7 | 0.21 | 1.00 | 0.31 | 21.6 | 48.9 | .514 |
There are a few things that jump out right away with these numbers. First of all, how on earth does someone with a .514 2FG% have a sub-50% eFG? A: By shooging 34-124 (.274) from beyond the arc. While I have said in the past that Evans is a hard player to overlook in this draft, what is also hard to overlook is his amazingly awful outside shooting. The anti-Evans argument is that he's simply too bad of an outside shooter to make his positive attributes worthwhile. The pro-Evans argument is that he's a 6'6" guard with an amazing ability to get to the rim and he would be paired with a shorter guard (Randy Foye) who can shoot the spot up three.
Moving beyond the generic pro and con arguments, Evans simply isn't that efficient of a player; doing very little per possession that would place him above guys like Curry and Harden. The big problem here is that Evans takes a large chunk of jump shots (40% of his shots are jumpers according to this DX post) and he makes less than 30% of them. What this means is that he can't score when he's not in transition or penetrating the lane. This was abundantly clear in Memphis' year-ending loss to Missouri. Evans made only 2 jumpers in the game and his outside game was so non-existant that Missouri was able to survive with him going nuts in the paint. It's not just that he can't make threes. Tony Parker has been a terrible three point shooter while making a living in transition and the paint. He also has a mid-range game that, at the very least, has to be respected. Evans simply can't make jump shots. I can't think of a single successful NBA perimeter player who makes a living in the paint and at the line while not being able to shoot a jumper over 30%. That's sub-Bassy territory. If you throw in the fact that no one really knows if he can play the point in the NBA, he is far and away the most hit-or-miss prospect in this draft.
Even Evans' rebounding numbers are a bit of a fluff. While he has a oreb/dreb rate of 5.0/15.3--which massively outpaces Curry's 1.9/12.3 marks--this may simply be a product of the system, as he grabs a team percentage of 13.5/25.8 off/def rebounds compared to Curry's 13.1/25.7 marks. In other words, Curry rebounded for Davidson almost exactly as well as Evans did for Memphis.
Moving on to Curry, allow me to geek out for a moment. I know the thought of a 6'3" shooting guard being the third best player in an NBA Draft is something of a head-scratcher. I know that a small-ball team like the Wolves seems like a weird place for a player like this to end up. I get all of that. What I also get is that Curry transitioned to the point while losing very little of his effectiveness and he put up efficiency numbers that make him a back court equivalent of Kevin Love. Say what you will about the guy, but there is far more evidence that he will be a better NBA play maker and scorer than Tyreke Evans or James Harden. Let's take a look at how he has improved during his three seasons at Davidson:
| PPR | AST/TO | FTA/FG | %TM POSS | FGA/POSS | 3PA/FGA | |
| FROSH | -3.08 | 1.00 | 0.28 | 23.6 | 0.89 | 0.57 |
| SOPH | -2.04 | 1.12 | 0.23 | 28.5 | 0.93 | 0.56 |
| JR | -0.11 | 1.50 | 0.37 | 32.9 | 0.86 | 0.49 |
Here's the bottom line: During his three seasons at Davidson, Curry increased his share of the offense by nearly 10% while decreasing his turnovers, becoming a better play maker, taking fewer shots/possession, relying less on the three ball, and getting to the line more. The more responsibilities he was handed, the better he played. It's that simple.
What really intrigues me about Curry is the prospects of him playing pick-and-roll with Kevin Love. Curry has one of the most developed mid-range pull up jump shooting games in recent college history. While he may not be a fantastic finisher around the rim, he converts a higher percentage of mid range jumpers than does Bassy with layups. If a defender goes under the screen, there is no doubt in my mind that his quick release will make him an effective NBA three point shooter. I intentionally mentioned Tony Parker before as an example of a player who has a nice mid-range game combined with superior inside finishing ability. Curry is a player who has an advanced mid-range game combined with superior exterior ability. Whether or not that sort of inverse Parker-esque game works in the NBA remains to be seen, but there is enough to suggest that he'd be a good enough scorer where the team could get away playing Corey Brewer at the 2. He's also solid enough with the ball that they could live with him having a relatively high percentage of team possessions. In other words, he could be a high scoring point.
Wrapping up tier one, this draft is in many ways similar to last year's affair for the Wolves in that there appears to be two upper level talents (Griffin and Rubio vs. Beasley and Rose) and then some competition for the three spot. Kevin Love was the right pick at three and five in last year's draft. When in doubt go with efficiency and production over promise style and that is the lesson I am going to apply in this year's draft. Curry is the third best player in this draft and he should be the Wolves' first choice if he is available with the 5th pick.
Tier Two:
- Ty Lawson: 35.275/10.616 (45.668-guard).
- Nick Calathes: 33.3/10.575 (43.875-guard).
- Eric Maynor: 32.875/9.558 (42.433-guard).
- Terrence Williams: 26.775/11.06 (37.835-wing).
- Tyreke Evans: 31.4/8.414 (39.814-guard)
- Jeff Teague: 35.525/7.813 (43.358-guard).
There is simply no way on God's green earth my head can overlook Tyreke Evans' outside shooting. I can overlook the turnovers for a 19 year old point guard with 1 season of college; I can overlook questions about his selfish play; I can overlook a lot of things, but when a guy with that much talent has that poor looking of a jump shot, and when he shoots worse than the team's current diminutive point guard (much worse I might add), then no matter what positives he brings to the table (and there are quite a few), he's simply not a first option...even in a weak draft.
I've swapped out Maynor and Williams because both are seniors and Maynor has enough in his track record to suggest that he has put together a higher quality resume than the Louisville swingman. Teague gets booted to the bottom of tier two because of the last 1/2 of his season. He also is about as close of a player to Randy Foye as there is in college right now and the Wolves should only draft him as a last resort.
Tier Three:
- Jordan Hill: 33.999/12.451 (46.45-big)
- Chase Budinger: 29.575/10.953 (40.528-wing)
- Damion James: 31.05/9.3 (40.35-wing)
- Gerald Henderson: 30.5/7.808 (38.308-guard)
- Sam Young: 29.8/8.196 (37.996-wing)
- Lee Cummard: 30.6/11.359 (41.959-guard)
- Tyler Hansbrough: 39.375/13.766 (53.141-big)
- James Johnson: 29.375/10.77 (40.145-big)
- Marcus Thornton: 31.875/9.685 (41.156-guard)
- Toney Douglas: 31.25/8.842 (40.092-guard)
- Wayne Ellington: 27.3/8.828 (36.128-guard)
I'm not really sure what is the big deal about Jordan Hill. He played on a middle-of-the-road college team and his stats are nothing to write home about. His team mate (Budinger) could be a valuable back up at the next level but I just don't get the first thing about why he appears so high on so many draft boards.
The rest of this list is filled with players that probably won't make it very far in the NBA. If I had to bet on one of them, it would be Sam Young because I think he could become a nice defensive player off the bench. Damion James probably comes in at number 2 followed by Budinger. As for the rest of them, here's hoping the Wolves can move the 28th pick for something a bit more substantial.
Wrapping this thing up, I think this year's draft, while thin, offers a solid chance for the Wolves to walk away with two solid rotation players. Ideally, they would find a way to land in the top two and walk away with Griffin or Rubio. Short of that, I think the best they can hope for is to walk away with Curry and DeRozan. Curry is the best non-Rubio guard in the draft and DeRozan is the best small forward. This sort of situation would almost demand that either Miller or Foye (or both) be moved but it would go a long way towards giving the Wolves more efficiency in the back court and more athleticism on the wing.
Playing along in Fantasty GM Land, here is a peak at what a Curry/DeRozan enhanced lineup would look like:
- Curry/Bassy
- Brewer/(Miller/Foye)
- Gomes/DeRozan/(Miller/Brewer)
- Love/(bag-o-donuts)
- Jefferson/(bag-o-donuts)
Obviously there needs to be some work done in terms of front court depth, but with Cardinal, Smith, and Madsen still signed, the Wolves could get by for a year without having what they need at the backup 4/5. The bottom line here is that the Wolves would add a starting level player in Curry while drafting a player with more wing potential than anyone they've had on their roster in a long, long time.
Finally, there are a few different ways the Wolves could go to maximize value in this draft. If they believe Lawson, Calathes, or Maynor will be there at 18, then it wouldn't be all that bad to see them go with DeRozan at the top pick and then take the best point available with the Heat pick. Let's say Harden turns out to be a legit 6'5" with decent athleticism. Same sort of deal applies here: take the best point available with the Heat pick. Whatever the case, we'll update the list once again after the lotto.
Until later.
PS: I should mention that I still can't completely shake the idea of the Wolves taking Evans with the top pick. If there were any team in the league where a guy like Evans could walk into a starting point job, it is with the Wolves next to Foye and with Jefferson (a post player) and Love (future pick-and-roll/pop star). With Miller at the three Evans would be surrounded by two....well, we'll have more on this after the lotto. I'm sure I'll change my mind about the guy by then. Whatever the case, Evans presents the Wolves (and their fans) with a pretty interesting dilemma.
124 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good write-up
We disagree about Curry, but that’s what makes the world go around. I wouldn’t mind a Harden/Maynor result, or even a DeRozan/Maynor.
Evans is hugely hit or miss—you’re right about the shooting. On the other hand, I believe he can play point guard (I saw a lot of high quality passing from him), so I’m intrigued.
One guy I’m wondering about that isn’t on your list but that I like is Jonny Flynn from Syracuse. Do you have numbers for him?
by Eric in Madison on Apr 26, 2009 11:09 AM CDT reply actions
Flynn Numbers
This link might work, it might not. If it does, it’s a stat comparison of Collision, Maynor, Curry, Lawson, Calathes, Flynn and Evans. Sorted by class rank and then last name (I think). It’s not sortable, but it should give you a solid idea.
BTW:
Here is Bobby Knight on Curry’s passing.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
No link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JyTIQq5H-g
A bit over the top (best passer ever?) but great video.
Curry has gotten much better at the point, seems like he can project upwards as the primary ball handler/initiator of the offense.
Evans will always....
….be intriguing. I think he can play point too and there will always be something in the back of my head telling me that he’s the right pick for the Wolves. Evans, Foye, Miller, Love, and Jefferson for the starting 5.
We did run Flynn’s numbers and they weren’t good:
http://www.canishoopus.com/2009/3/22/807049/current-dogs-and-future-ho
Actually, that’s not completely true. He ended up right between Gerald Henderson and Tyreke Evans. He came on late and I wish I could break the numbers down by month. He’s pretty small so I’m not sure that’s a good fit with what the Wolves have…especially if Lawson is still around (he’s a better small guard).
Another interesting thing about Evans is his defensive potential. A 6’6" guard with a massive wingspan is something that the Wolves could use.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I think it's likely (not based on numbers)
SnP that Evans and Brandon Jennings are the 3rd and 4th best players in this draft. It might even be possible that Griffin or Rubio could drop from that top 2 spot (although I very much doubt it).
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Nope...
…you are correct. I’ll make the change above.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Thanks for something to occupy a crappy Sunday
A couple of follow-ups:
1. Chad Ford is echoing you on Calathes, and has now ranked him as the 23rd best prospect in the draft.
2. Any thoughts on the Wolves taking a flyer on B.J. Mullens if he’s still around with the Celtics pick?
3. How about Jrue Holiday? I’m not a fan with the first pick, but a good possibilty with the Miami choice. As I mentioned here the other day, the ESPN Lotto Sim-u-lator has the Wolves picking him if they end up with the 7th pick overall.
Good work—-
I think Mullens...
….will depend on his interviews with the team. It sounds like he came out for financial reasons and they would have to be willing to see that he’s coachable and not just there for a single contract.
I don’t know about Holiday. He didn’t put up good numbers…not even close to Westbrook’s. He could come on in workouts I suppose. I can’t believe he’d go as high as 7.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Indiana could take him at their spot (13th overall) assuming they don't jump in the top 3
Simply because he could be the best talent with the best overall upside.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
FINALLY some back-up on the Don’t Want Evans front! Do. Not. Want.
I’d like a Curry / DeRozan draft as well. Do think we’d have to move up to somewhere along the lines of the nr12 pick (Capt. Kirk + nr12 for Miller + nr18 and one of those leftover 2nd rounders .. how bout that).
Still not sure Harden isn’t better for that nr5 pick. Though it’s between those two. We’ll have to wait and see how the physicals turn out. It all depends on that.
If Mullens or Calathes are still available at the Boston pick … no brainer… If not; I am intrigued by Patrick Mills mentioned on the side.
If DeRozan; Curry; Thabeet; Harden are gone at 18 I’d even go with Calathes or Mullens there.. nobody else I’d like.
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
Forgot about Holiday
Don’t want in first round. Calathes over him for sure. Only with a 2nd rounder.
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 26, 2009 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Expect Holiday to be at UCLA...
unless he impresses teams enough to get a top 20 (at the lowest). Given the hype around Holiday and Mullens I’d guess they’ll suck someone in long before our 28.
Curry
Damn, I’m starting to warm up to this guy. He can shoot, shoot, shoot and one of the key Wolves weaknesses this season was….shooting. Two things have curbed by enthusiasm about the guy: 1) Defensive potential and 2) ability to orchestrate an offense. #1 concern actually applies to a lot of PG’s, but it carries extra weight with us sporting a Love-Jefferson frontline. We need a tight lid along the perimeter and I worry about guys like Curry, Lawson, and Calathes at the point. This is where Hinrich offers some intrigue. #2 matters as we saw how an orchestrating PG that can’t shoot (Telfair) can still be a net + for a team without many shot creators. But still, he has decent size for a PG and showed great b-ball instincts in college, whether it was finding the open man or getting into the passing lanes for some thefts. To me this has become a DeRozan-Harden-Curry draft (in terms of the lotto), with Curry replacing Evans. Thanks for the post.
Agree on Evans, but how 'bout Lawson?
First of all, DraftExpress allows you to create a list of ‘My Players’ and ‘My Stats’; you can customize which players you want to see and which stats you want to analyze them by. It’s very nice when you want to compare a short list of players.
Evans can rebound, and he’s a ball hawk, but he is not a starting point in the NBA. 4.8 turnovers (per 40/pace adjusted) is atrocious and 3rd worst in the NCAA (amongst players playing more than 25min/game). A slashing off guard, maybe. But not a point.
Ty Lawson, on the other hand, is easily the best point guard in the NCAA (at running the offense) and shot 47% from three last year (perhaps an aberration, but he shot 36% his other two years). Now, stats don’t tell us everything, and I’m willing to bet his are inflated a bit due to playing on the best team in the country. And we would probably have to trade up for him. Still, I think he’s intriguing as a two headed PG with Telfair. And if we really need a point guard (yes), I don’t see how we could do much worse than the best point guard in the NCAA.
I am saving the Lawson stuff for...
….the next draft post. He’s a solid, solid player and they could do a lot worse.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I was wondering, too...
You seem to throw out the possibility he’ll be there at 18 – that’s crazy talk – I’m guessing he’s a mid- to late-lottery pick. Maynor might be available at 18, Calathes probably will be available.
If there were any justice in the world...
…Lawson is a top 10 pick. I don’t know where he will end up. I could see him slipping because of his size.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Lawson was just sick
this season…..Absolutely sick from in terms of some of his ratios. 2 or 3 inches taller and he’d be a Top 3 pick.
by Rascal Flatts on Apr 26, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions
I think drafting CW has come along far enough
that taking Curry or Derozan at 5 and expecting either of them to be available at 18 is problematic. The only player I am consistently seeing who is top 10 who has no business to be is Hill.
To be honest, I think the best player likely to be available at pick 18 without a move is Calathes (whois going to fly up boards as people work him out). No, I woulnd’t mind drafting him there but I would much prefer the Wolves act aggressively with the 18 to move up and address needs – a move up to 11 or 10 will hopefully allow the Wolves to add a Lawson.
agreed....
…on the fact that they will have to move up to grab both DeRozan and Curry. They will both go in the top 10.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Curry
im a huge curry fan and would be thrilled if the wolves got him. i also dont think the conference he played in should have any effect on what people think of him. im sure if anyone has said this but he did score 44 against oklahoma and 29 against duke this year plus everyone knows what he did in the tourny last year against some pretty solid defensive teams. when your talking getting curry and derozan which one do you think is gonna be there at 18 or are you anticapating a move?
i also agree with what you’ve said about evans being able change this team more than anyone else even though is outside shot is terrible. whats the difference between his shot and derozans? derozan shot about 10% worse than evans and derozan only shot about 65% from the line so why is his poor shooting so easily overlooked?
DeRozan...
…actually had fantastic mid-range jump shot numbers for a freshman. He can hit the pull up and catch and shoot at over 40% from mid-range. With his elevation and form, he really has a world of potential for being a guy who can take a dribble or two into a mid-range jumper. His three point shooting wasn’t very good but he made up for it with his mid-range game. If Evans could hit the mid range jumper like DeRozan (and if he had his form) he would be a no-holds-barred top 5 pick. He also would have beat Missouri.
Another thing about Curry is this: he was the single focus of his opponents and he still led the nation in scoring.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
agreed
curry still put up great numbers while getting the best defense each team could throw at him
i really like derozans mid range game but im a little worried that with such poor outside shooting defenders would be able to play way off of him and because NBA players are usually taller/more athletic he wouldnt be able to get his shot off as effectively.
Another interesting thing about your ranking
is that the Wolves are likely to only get one of Curry, DeRozan, Hardin, or Evans, all of whom will be gone by the time the Miami pick comes up.
Preferably, the Wolves could trade back up into the draft to get another player in the above group. What’s more likely is that they keep the Miami pick, where Blair will still be available. If he is, do you still pick him? Or do you go with a guard to complement whomever was taken with the first pick?
they will have to make a trade
to get the ideal package. i should have made that clearer in the top. btw…if blair is still available and lawson, calathes, and maynor are all gone, they grab him up and give him craig smith’s role.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Blair/Hinrich
You would without a doubt want to take Blair at 18- then have him be your back up 4. His projects as an excellent rebounder with decent scoring capabilities. The one advantage he would have on Rhino is he actually has length. He’s clearly a solid role player at the next level- to get this at pick 18 is nice.
I must admit in watching the playoffs I’m warming to trading for Hinrich. He wouldn’t be my first choice to acquire but here’s a couple of things that have stood out.
1. His defense especially when he mans up Pierce.
2. His 40% Three- Point Shooting.
3. He has a terrific plus/minus ratio on the season.
4. His contract isn’t what I would call terrible as they would have him for 3 years after this at reasonable numbers for an average starting PG.
5. Looking at players who the Wolves could acquire it’s important to remember the guys teams are trying to unload are all going to have questionable contracts.
i really watched hinrich close today...
…and his defense is what really stuck out. i forgot how good of a defender the guy is. curry + hinrich in the backcourt would be a nice thing to see.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I'm with you on Hinrich's skills and abilities
but ay dios mio does he have a big contract. I could see going after him if the Bulls would include Thomas or Noah, and take back, like, Miller, Smith, and filler, but I’d prefer the Wolves blow that dough on Childress/Williams/Sessions/Ariza instead.
i would be more than beyond happy....
….with the following rotation on opening day:
1- Curry/Bassy
2- Hinrich/Brewer
3- Gomes/Brewer
4- Love/Noah
5- Jefferson/Noah
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Say what you want
about that line-up’s athleticism and ability to defend, but at the very least they would be the least-likely team to have any players show up on the arrest report.
And virtually tat-free, to boot.
I guess
only people that get tattoos get arrested.
I could see Love getting too into the glass cleaner routine and run around Mpls/St. Paul with a squeegee and some glass cleaner, cleaning windshields at traffic lights. Illegal in NYC at least, not sure about the TC.
I've got no problem with it
except my completely unreasonable and unsubstantiated bias is that the more tats an NBA players has, the bigger headache/a-hole/criminal he is.
I’d gladly entertain examples to the contrary, of which I am sure that there are many. But at the minimum, and all other variables being equal, I doubt that the Wolves will be able to re-inflate their tenuous fan base with a roster that screams, “THUG LIFE.”
Like the cliche goes, some of my favorite people in the world
happen to have some degree of ink (and no, Robert Swift is not one of them). But, to generalize all the hell all over the place, this team does not have the luxury of avoiding off-court/marketing/intangibles when deciding which players to pick up—which I think would tip the scales in Curry’s favor (again, all other things being equal).
Now, if a certain heavily-tatted Cleveland Cavalier decides that the quality of life of the Twin Cities offers him the best option in 2010 free agency, I’ll be first in line for season tickets (and no, I don’t mean Delonte West).
When it comes to reinvigorating the fan base...
… I don’t think tats are going to make as much of a difference. The people who really are going to care about the ‘thug life’ issues aren’t going to watch the Wolves even if they’re the antithesis of that. Most of those folks just don’t like pro basketball in general.
The Wolves will get fans in the stands as long as they’re winning. That brings in the rubes who coincidentally have disposable income.
Obviously that’s a huge simplification, but I think that’s the brush we’re painting with in this situation.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Apr 26, 2009 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions
trade window on Hinrich = closed
I think the Wolves missed their chance at picking him up – the Bulls were able to grab Salmons so Miller would be redundant. And I don’t think Chi will be trying to get under the cap – I imagine their strategy will be to build around Rose, Deng, Salmons, Thomas, and Noah – Hinrich is a nice piece to go with that group.
But hey, if the Wolves had another shot at the guy, I would hope they take a real long look at it. I can’t find Wyn’s team-by-team salary cap breakdown but maybe luxury tax would be a variable?
I think they have an interesting dilemma...
…they obviously have to keep Rose but Gordon has been just as good this series. Both of them can’t play defense for a lick and Hinrich has been their defensive saving grace. They can’t pay all of them but they can’t win right now without all of them. I think Hinrich and Rose is the way to go but who knows? BTW: Rose is killing them on defense right now. He completely blew that switch when Allen got his late game 3.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Deng
You could also argue that John Salmons has made Deng just as expendable. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them keep Gordon and try to ship off Deng to any takers…
It'll be tough to keep Gordon...
unless he’s over the bad blood from last season. He’s unrestricted now and would at least get a MLE from someone. If his signing didn’t create a Foye-dundancy like drafting Mayo would’ve, I’d be interested in the Wolves getting him.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 27, 2009 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions
Other FA's
1. The assets we currently have would be expiring contracts for the 2010 Off-Season (Cardinal, Madsen, Gomes(TO), Miller, and Rhino. To actually have Cap Space for this off-Season we need a team to assume a contract for Cap Space (OKC, Tor, Memp, Det). Considering I doubt any of this teams will take these players for free- the only way we get Cap Space is by giving up a First Round Pick. When SNP was advocating trading Miller for Wally this was the situation he had in mind.
2. I really can’t see the Bulls giving up their best front- court player Noah or another player Thomas as a throw-in to a Salary Dump to another quality player in Hinrich. Hinrich’s got enough value that they shouldn’t have to do a technique quite like this.
by Jose Cordoba on Apr 26, 2009 9:28 PM CDT up reply actions
especially..
….with his defense in this series. he can guard 3 positions.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
wouldn't the Pistons...
…make good trade partners. They have shown a willingness to deal and should be in prime re-building mode. I would target Rip or Tayshaun, but am not sure we have what it would take to get either of them. Maybe Miller/Brewer/Boston Pick or Gomes/Brewer/Boston Pick would do it…
by Minneapleseed on Apr 26, 2009 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions
it will be interesting to see....
…just how much they want to blow it up. I think you hit the nail on the head with Rip + Prince. Those two would be a huge catch. Draft Curry plus add those two with trades (involving pick 18, Foye, and expiring contracts) and you’re in business:
1- Curry/Bassy
2- Hamilton/Brewer
3- Prince/Gomes
4- Love/bag-o-donuts
5- Jefferson/bag-o-donuts
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
of course...
….that’s very pie in the sky. i think they keep prince.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
There was a little rumor
on the Detroit News site (via the good people at RealGM) that Prince and Chris Bosh could swap uniforms.
Prince, Rip, Hinrich—they’re all really nice players. But they’re exactly the type who will get the Wolves to 48 wins in the West, and maybe a first-round upset in the play-offs. Meanwhile, adding just one of their salaries to the roster pretty much handcuffs the team from adding any more significant well-paid talent, or signing whatever top-level free agent at whom the Wolves might have a crack. Especially with AlJeff’s current contract, Love’s next contract, and (hopefully) the next contract of a solid starter/star the team drafts in 2009.
Realistically, the Wolves are at least 2-3 years from rebuilding into a contender—if they’re lucky. I’d rather have the team form a core of 4-5 players who are currently in their early to mid 20s (or late teens, Ricky), and then add a player like Hinrich, Rip, or Prince when the team goes for broke and can benefit from some veteran leadership.
I see where you're going
but I just don’t think this is a “young” team any more, outside of Love. Despite what the organizations talking heads say, our “young” players are actually at an age where they should be competing NOW. Foye – 26 Gomes – 25 Smith – 25 Jefferson – 24 Brewer – 23 Bassy – 23. These are the ages the Pistons and Spurs players were when they started making runs in the Playoffs, not 28-30. All of the players I mentioned SHOULD be in their prime or about to hit it. Compare this to the Hawks, Blazers and Bulls playoff teams and all of a sudden we aren’t so young. I just don’t think adding a slew of rookies to this squad really helps and we also can’t wait for our “young” guys to develop. It just seems like now is prime time to make a serious move for playoff contention, not 2-3 years from now when our competition has 2-3 years of playoff experiences in them.
by Minneapleseed on Apr 27, 2009 8:27 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think...
….it’s possible to overstate the luck factor in all of this. They need to hit the jackpot by getting a player that turns into a monster. I’m not sure that player exists in this draft. They can get older players or younger players and it won’t matter one bit unless one of them turns out to be an upper-level player. The one thing that is constant with any successful NBA model is that winning teams have amazing players. I think the Wolves have one player with the potential to be an amazing player. They have some nice pieces but they need another upper level player if they are ever going to matter.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
True that
We need “A” list talent on this squad (not just on the floor either) and there probably isn’t a franchise changer available in the draft. Luck has never seemed to be on our side, so better player analysis and scouting techniques need to be implemented. I wrote up a piece based on your Build a Winner post focusing on what I believe the franchise needs to do to be a legitimate NBA franchise (though I stayed away from specific players to target, as you did an excellent job of this in the other post). Not sure where to post it, but I would really enjoy the people on this forum reading it and discussing…
by Minneapleseed on Apr 27, 2009 9:01 AM CDT up reply actions
put it in a fan post
and we’ll bump it up to the top
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
So what you're saying, Minneapleseed (shouldn't there be two "p's" in there?) is . . .
that the Wolves’ current roster isn’t remotely talented enough to make anything close to a run, or they would have begun to do so by now. Jefferson is the only one of that bunch who is a legitimate starter on a playoff team, and even he is flawed (and now, in recovery). Love is the beginning of a nice team, but has a long way to go as well.
Sorry, but even if the Wolves had the cap room to avoid the luxury tax, in the last few years Glen hasn’t demonstrated any willingness whatsoever to pay to add stars to this roster. Perhaps he will when the bad contracts expire, and although I hope I’m wrong, I doubt he will.
So, the next step is to keep trying to “get lucky” in the draft, and hope that 2-3 stars develop together, or one MegaStar drops down from above. In the meantime, adding guys in their late 20s or early 30s with eight-digit annual salaries will just doom the team to more mediocrity—at best.
Yup (and only one P, like Minneapolis, where I grew from a seed)
our current roster isn’t remotely talented enough. I won’t go so far as to say Glen hasn’t demonstrated any willingness, just that he was ill advised on who to spend the money on. THud, Madsen, Hassell, Jaric, Davis, Juwan Howard. All of these players were/are paid handsomely, they just were not the right players.
The reason I threw out Tay and Rip as ideas is because they understand what it takes to progress through the NBA and hopefully would be able to bring that knowledge to the team and help others apply it. You rarely see a team take the step into playoff contention without adding pieces that have already been there.
by Minneapleseed on Apr 27, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I’d even do that without Rip and go just for Prince..
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 27, 2009 4:00 AM CDT up reply actions
Also shouldn’t sleep on Jennings just because he’s playing in Europe…
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
Definitely
People will take Rubio just because he’s Rubio. But it will be interesting to see where Jennings goes because, on a lot of the mocks I’ve seen, Jennings is the next-highest-ranked true PG. Which NBA teams do you think have the strongest Euro scouting presence?
dunno...
…i’m sure a lot of teams had him scouted on the aau level.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
it’s conceivable that he’s learned something in all of the rigorous European style practices. Playing for a team that wouldn’t give him minutes if he didn’t play defense probably made him a better defensive player too. It’s too bad euro assists are so different from american assists making it very difficult to compare him to non euro guards. My intuition tells me that the two most important stats for scouting a point guard might be efg and some sort of assist to turnover ratio.
by oblivionspocket on Apr 27, 2009 9:30 PM CDT up reply actions
In defense of Evans.
http://www.ibiblio.org/craig/draft/2003_draft/Players/wade.shtml
Another guy who in college had a limited jump shot but was terribly effective. I don’t mean to say Evans will be as good as Dwayne because that is just a crazy thing to predict, but I also don’t think college shooting percentages (especially for a 19 year old) are the be all end all.
I like Evans with the #5 and I have no delusions about him being a good shooter. I have just as much faith in Evans’ becoming a much better shooter as I do Stephen Curry not getting beat up night in night out.
if evans..
….didn’t have such a goofy ass form, I’d be more on board. Not every shot needs to be a fade away jumper.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
yeah...
but Calipari is more of a recruiting mastermind than a coach. Think of how much LeBron’s form has improved since he was a rookie. If my memory serves me he had that same odd angular elbow form as Evans (not as pronounced).
And Joakim Noah… will you please stop trying to prove me wrong on this with every free throw you take.
jump shots...
….are like golf swings: as long as you can reproduce it over and over again, you can adjust for error. Evans seems to have the kind of shot that you can’t even reproduce. It’s all over the place. That being said, I have no idea how he’s been coached over the years and that would definitely be something the team would have to look into if they drafted him. They don’t need to change the shot; they just need to make it as reproducable as possible.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I...
would gladly take Evans or Harden at #5. Not sure where the Evans hatorade is coming from.
Also, if Harden was on a better team last year, he would have been a beast and an absolute STUD!
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Also...
Sometimes I think you guys put waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much stock into these advanced stats and whatnot, rather than what your eyes tell you from watching them play (that is, if you watch them play.)
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh...
and I’d take DeRozan at #5 too.
Depending on who is left, we should take one of Harden/Evans/DeRozan.
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Curry passes the eye test, too...
At least when it comes to offensive skills. Comparing him to Harden is actually a good gauge; neither is considered physically gifted. Both find a way to score when defenses are keying on them, both are questionable defensively (until Harden has to play man D nightly, it’s tough to tell how good he’ll be there). If Davidson played ASU, it’d be an even match, and Davidson’s nonconference schedule and tourney run last year should provide some inkling of his ability against the best. I don’t buy that Harden would’ve been a stud playing for UConn or someone like that; he’d have more exposure from a better team, but his numbers might’ve even gone down.
I don’t see why watching Harden is much different than watching Curry. In addition, it’s at least possible Curry could grow 1-2 more inches and/or play point guard in the NBA. I’m not going to speak for SnP, but I think his main point with Curry and DeRozan (and others) is that they pass the eye test and the numbers test.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 27, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Ok, fair enough.
I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
One HUGE thing that will at least partly determine how good of a pro they become will be which team drafts them. SNP could very well be right. Then again, Curry might not be anything special. Who knows.
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions
I go with the stats here...
…because there is no way we can see enough games to make a draft board in the traditional manner. That being said, I’ve seen all these guys play. Some more than others. Of all the guys I’ve seen play more than twice, Lawson and Curry are the ones who have stuck out the most. They’re fantastic guards.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Harden did show some things...
I watched a lot of his games, and I liked his sneaky productivity and at times dominance. For me, the guys who stuck out were Griffin, Harden, DeRozan (the Pac 10 tourney version), Lawson, and Curry (more for his tourney work last year and the crazy Ds thrown at him). But I’m concerned because he doesn’t play fast and played for a team that played a zone.
Plus, one overlooked thing the Lakers and Spurs have proven is that having the best athletes and the strongest players become huge advantages in the playoffs. Would Harden end up with the same injury issues as Ginobili? That’s not a reason in itself to skip him, but if it was a toss-up between he and DeRozan, then I’d rather have DeRozan.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 27, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Fair enough.
Lawson and Curry are both small though.
I like Lawson. I’d take him FOR SURE at 18 if he is there (and we don’t get Rubio.) But I have huuuuuge concerns about Curry defending NBA caliber players. What was Davidson’s schedule like? I honestly don’t have time to check right now, I have to leave. Was Curry’s competition anywhere near as difficult/talented as some of these other top guys and the competition they played against? My guess is that it wasn’t (again, I don’t have time to look right now.)
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 6:02 PM CDT up reply actions
P.S.
Harden is really underrated by everyone around here.
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Generally speaking, that is.
I see you do have him listed #3 in your tier one. I meant mostly from commenters.
by College Wolf on Apr 27, 2009 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Guilty as charged
I just don’t trust a guy in his teens that appears to move so slow. I noticed Calathes wore white shoes for part of the season—maybe the Devils should have done the same, and Harden wouldn’t have looked like he was shuffling through wet cement.
A while back I said that when it was all said and done it would be a 3 man draft … Griffin-Rubio-Harden. That might have been a bit over it but I remember it was because SnP mentioned him as such a good player that I started looking at him. At first glance he seemed like a terrible fit, that’s why I wasn’t interested in him.
I still think the fit isn’t great but the skill is there, don’t think anyone will deny that; it’s the physicals that make the bad fit.
Also on the stat thing: the stats are always the starting point in the post .. but the comment section is where the “eye testing” is done. As SnP said we can’t all watch all the game but I’ve got the feeling that with everyone watching some games there is a lot of “eye-testing” in the followup comments sections.
Tough I’m pretty sure your being “critical” is appreciated ;)
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 1:44 AM CDT up reply actions
I was thinking Harden...
if they couldn’t get Rubio or Griffin, but I moved on because this team needs athletes (DeRozan, Evans) or, at least, needs to stay away from guys who might be redundant. If the player the Wolves pick ends up not being good enough to be a top-3 option, they have to be able to fit him in somewhere else. In that scenario, Harden would be the most redundant. If I had to guess, that’s partially why others aren’t talking about him. My assumption is that the Wolves would have to be convinced that he’s a potential Ginobili-type player to take him, and based on what others are saying, that’s questionable.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 28, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Curry's schedule...
Should also be considered in light of the teams he played well against in the tourney last year — they beat Gonzaga (40 pts), Wisconsin (25), and Georgetown (30) before losing to Kansas (33). That year, they played UNC, Duke, UCLA, and N.C. State in their nonconference schedule, losing each game by fewer than 10. This year, they lost by 4 at Oklahoma (44 points), beat N.C. State by 5 at home (44), won at West Virginia by 3 (27 and 10 assists), lost to Purdue by 18 in Indianapolis (13 pts/8 rebounds), lost at Duke by 12 (29, 8 rebs, and 7 asts), and lost at home to Butler by 12 (20). In his freshman year, he had 30 in a tourney loss to Maryland, and the team also played at Michigan, at Missouri, at Duke, Charlotte (Atlantic 10), and at Arizona State. His teams have obviously played as tough a nonconference schedule as they could, and he has played very well. I’m concerned about his number of turnovers — there’s more than one instance where he had more of them than assists — but I trust what draftxpress is saying about him.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 27, 2009 9:30 PM CDT up reply actions
I imagine there’s a positive correlation between the number of double teams/odd zone defenses thrown at a player and his turnover rate. Granted, Curry never had Rajon Rondo covering him for the length of the floor in college, but it’s only going to be a problem twice a year.(how common are good defensive point guards in the nba anyway?)
by oblivionspocket on Apr 27, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Good,
I’d rather have Rajon Rondo having to pay attention to one guy as opposed to wreaking havoc on the rest of the team. With Telfair running the point, Rajon can leave him to attack other players. Curry may not get many shots off against guys like Rondo, but he’d sure as hell give everyone else more space to operate in.
by Rascal Flatts on Apr 28, 2009 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks for that.
appreciat the research. Guess I was wrong about an easy schedule.
Still, SNP (and others) are always advocating how small we are and that we need “length.” So please tell me again why we would draft one of the smallest players with the FIFTH overall pick, passing up guys like Evans and/or DeRozan? That makes no sense.
by College Wolf on Apr 28, 2009 9:12 AM CDT up reply actions
Good question...
I’d prefer DeRozan in that scenario. However, if Curry can play the point, he’s tall enough (listed at 6-3 but looks more like 6-1) and might grow another 1-2 inches (or even as tall as his dad, who was 6-5). If he can play the point, he’s obviously a better prospect than Brandon Jennings.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 28, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Talent > Length
Curry is an awesome, awesome player.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
you just spent...
all year talking about the length and defensive flailing of this team. How does Curry do anything but compound that?
(btw I do completely agree with the overarching idea that Talent>Length… when you draft for length you end up with a really long bench)
Did I really highlight those things?
I’m not sure I did those things. I’m pretty sure I’ve always been a win through offense kind of guy. Defense can come with effort, teamwork, and age.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Not to rip on you at all...
but I would tend to agree with Pants on this one. In all fairness, that’s also what I’ve thought from what you have said all season.
by College Wolf on Apr 28, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
really?
wow, i had no idea. really. i think the team needs a big athletic 4/5 and to upgrade the height at the 2 but Curry is bigger and shoots way better than Bassy.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
i will say this:
it is weird to have a site with this much back and forth and to see how other folks read your stuff. thanks for pointing that out for me. i really had no idea it was coming across like that.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Yeah, not a problem.
I never thought or said it was a bad thing, I was just pointing out what I perceived that you have been saying this season.
by College Wolf on Apr 28, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree with you that
SnP has preached “length” and “defense” and “athleticism” for as long as I’ve been around here. Not that you’re attacking him at all, but in his defense:
1. He puts up a ton of information here—sooner or later he’s bound to contradict himself in different contexts.
2. If you’re going to write about what’s wrong with the Wolves, there are plenty of areas to moan about.
3. All other things being equal, length should win out. But with so much unknown and uncertain about picks 3 and beyond, Curry’s demonstrated talent should trump his lack of athleticism.
OK...
…I get it now. I definitely would love nothing more than to have 3 guys on the perimeter who are 6’6" and above and athletic as hell. Foye is a midget. You can live with one small guard but not two. I guess where I see Curry fitting in is that they move Foye and go with Curry and Brewer as the starting back court (or Miller). Functional flexibility is key. The bad thing about the Wolves is that they have positional, not functional, tweeners. If Foye could actually function as a tweener between shooting and point guard in terms of his actual play (and not just size), it wouldn’t be a bad thing.
I do think that the league is going big and athletic and one of the most disappointing thing about the Wolves is that while this was happening, they were reacting to what the league looked like in 03-04…when they were last good. The next most frustrating thing is that they never went full in on small ball. They had Witt coaching them with a focus on few threes, slow tempo, and defense.
I think the confusion I had here is that I thought the Wolves could have done better with small ball. Ideally, they wouldn’t have gone down that road, but since they did, they had to make the best of it. If I were in charge in Fantasy GM land, I’d blow the damn thing up one more time and completely rid myself of Foye and Jefferson. Foye is a bench player and Jefferson is very good but not someone I’d ever trust playing two-way ball. Either go all in with an up tempo small ball lineup or re start. It’s too mismatched of a roster to try to split the difference.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
actually, I think they were trying this...
When Casey was hired, but they scrapped it after one season. They traded Cassell for Jaric because they thought he could play point at 6’6. They drafted McCants, who was a scorer and has a 6’10 wingspan. They re-signed Eddie Griffin. They traded a first-rounder for Marcus Banks with the assumption that he could be a tough on-the-ball defender. Then it all turned with trading Roy for Foye, drafting a 6’5 power forward in the second round, and signing Mike James. Dealing Olowokandi for Mark Blount also hurt their D, and Griffin’s inability to play for Casey like he could for Saunders/McHale forced them to turn to Smith/Mad Dog as the backup centers. They didn’t do a great job of choosing personnel, but they seemed to have a concept in mind.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 28, 2009 10:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Their concept flopped...
Because the team was horrible offensively at times. Olowokandi couldn’t make layups, they lacked the ball movement of Flip’s teams, and there was no one to penetrate the lane. And their defense wasn’t as good as it could’ve been because there was no physical presence at any position; it was length without strength.
I also think defense is easier to improve than offense. Great players step up that element of their game when necessary, and having 1-2 good or dominant players on that end make it easier for other players. The Wolves were decent defensive team during the 20-20 start three years ago because of a great defender (KG) and two above-average defenders (Hassell and Jaric) getting some average guys to step up every once in a while.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 28, 2009 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I look at it....
….like they rode a top 3 all time player at his position to a .500 record before the bottom fell out. They managed to be average because they had something no one else did: KG. It was patched together with no vision or purpose. They saw how close they came with Sam and Spree and they kept trying to make it work with diminishing returns.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Hear, hear!
“I also think defense is easier to improve than offense.”
Which is a factor that tilts the first pick in Curry’s favor (not to curry favor). Especially if the player has a willingness to actually play defense, and learn the trade.
To that end, TrueHoop has a post on Houston’s defense, crediting both Adleman as an underrated defensive coach, and the fact that Thibodeau was a Rockets assistant under Van Gundy.
On that topic, why isn’t Thibodeau an obvious choice to return to the Wolves as a head coach>
I'm not saying he's a bad choice...
But he’s not an obvious choice because the assistants who are specialists in one area don’t necessarily become good head coaches. Also, he didn’t get any of the jobs available last season, which might indicate something about his personality. Some assistants are better off staying that way, and he might be one of those.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Apr 29, 2009 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Good points
Since you were kind enough to bring them up, give me your three realistic and three unrealistic hopes for a new head coach.
“Functional flexibility is key. The bad thing about the Wolves is that they have positional, not functional, tweeners.”
EXACTLY
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 29, 2009 2:35 AM CDT up reply actions
I also agree Talent > Length… but is Curry THAT MUCH better than DeRozan or Evans? I would say no.
by College Wolf on Apr 28, 2009 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions
Don’t think anyone would really be disappointed with DeRozan at the 5th pick; some might be rooting for Curry but DeRozan would also be good.
Evans on the other hand … I get that you can’t overlook his potential because of his length and defense .. that still doesn’t justify overlooking that we’ve just gotten rid of our previous headcase and now we’re getting the same type of guy back? At least McCants could should in garbage time.
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Woops, that’s not right. It’s the selfishness and overdribbeling part that is equal between the two players, not the headcase thing. (bad day bad day)
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
talent
is definalt the most import thing but curry would still be adding height to the point guard position even though its not as much as evens. if we did draft derozan would he play the 3? because ive seen him listed at 6’6-6’7 and that wouldnt be an upgrade over a brewer/gomes and other 6’9 610’ players
Interesting interview
with Dan Patrick. Curry says he thinks he will go 6th to the Knicks???
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/62802/index.html?eref=fromSI
Sounds sort of like a cupcake interview, but the draft response and height questions were interesting.
if he lasts that long...
….i think he and DeRozan both end up being top 5 picks.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
6 feet 2.5 inches w/o shoes, if true,
is actually on the tall side of PGs. In the NBA he’d be listed at 6"4 since shoes add one inch and then they round up from there. I think part of the perception issue with him being weak is that if you just hone in on his face, he actually looks kind of sickly.
by Rascal Flatts on Apr 27, 2009 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions
+ the weight and arm length also seems not exceptionally long
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 1:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Draft plan...
There’s nothing we can do with # 28. It’s basically considered around the League to be a second round pick with guaranteed 1st round $$$. However, a guy just declared that would be perfect for us there: Taj Gibson. I love him in the Al/Love Center rotation.
We trade the # 18 pick, Mike MIller (expiring), and a 2nd to Golden State for # 7.
With # 7 we take DeMar Rozan. Great midrange shooter, perimeter defender, and offside rebounder.
With # 5 we take Stephen Curry. Run our point and a historically great shooter coming out of college.
We have enough assets to make this happen. This draft, with a healthy Al and Corey, gives us a lot of talent.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
like the GS trade; don't see 'm do it though
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 1:48 AM CDT up reply actions
I think GSW...
….and the Wizards are the best targets for a trade.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Who are we taking back?
To trade Mike Miller to GS we’d need to take back one of their terrible deals.
Crawford – 2 years ~20 million
Ellis – 5 years 55 million
Maggette – 4 years ~40 million
Jack Stacks – 3 years ~35 million
2 years of Crawford wouldn’t be the worst ever but Losses follow him at every turn. That seems a pretty steep price for them to get out of 1 year of Crawford’s deal.
Sure
why not? I’d take Crawford. He’s actually a really good player. One of only 3 or 4 in the history of the NBA to score 50 points while playing for 3 different teams.
by College Wolf on Apr 28, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Given how much Nelly hates the...
existence of rookies and guys named Jamal Crawford this isn’t actually that unrealistic.
I’d also wouldn’t have a problem with Ellis’ deal. He’s still young right? He’s overpayed but he’s worth something, right? Miller + 18 +2x 2nd rounder for Ellis + 7 + future 2nd? I’d ink that down faster than you can say “highwayrobberypart2”
Curry/Ellis/Bassy
Foye/Brewer/Derozan
DeRozan/Brewer
Love/Jefferson/Bag o’
Lay’s Sensations Sweet Chili & Sour Cream Kettle Cooked Potato Chips
Jefferson/Love/Bag o’
Lay’s Sensations Sweet Chili & Sour Cream Kettle Cooked Potato Chips
Depth at the front court -check
Ability to go both small and large -check (when adding a center trough FA or so)
Balance of known good players vs potential players -check
Age cohesion -check
What’s not to like?
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions
As PoorDick points out. If Mullens could stick around till #28 (or we somehow manage to give the 28th pick instead of the 18th one in the trade) you could put him instead of the bag Lay’s Sensations Sweet Chili & Sour Cream Kettle Cooked Potato Chips and that would complete the dream scenario for the draft. In my mind there is absolutely not better draft outcome then to end up with Ellis, Curry, DeRozan and Mullens with only giving up Miller and 2nd rounders.
(ssh; don’t tell me that’s not going to happen, keep me in my bubble for a little while)
Beater of the early Thabeet drum
by Wim (Belgium) on Apr 28, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions
hmmm
I’ll leave your Mullen bubble be but…
If you were picking an NBA player who is closest to Curry wouldn’t it be Monta Ellis. In a world where Curry turns out to be a good NBA player he is still slower than Ellis but a better shooter and passer. With those two are your starting back court they have to shoot lights out every night given the size mismatches.
I also wonder if Monta Ellis is in the OJ Mayo, Gilbert Arenas, Allen Iverson (off-peak) group of players that are scoring first semi-points who are fun as hell to watch and miserable to see lose in the 1st round of the playoffs.
You know who might pair really well with Monta Ellis if we go that route…. Tyreke Evans. :)
actually...
even Monta and Tyreke are a poor pairing because they are both slashers with suspect 3 pt range.
Any good Curry comparison needs to be a good shooter. That’s the most important part of the guy’s game. Comparing him to Tony Parker and Monta Ellis just doesn’t make sense. They’re different styles of play. Jason Terry seems like a closer fit, or maybe Ray Allen.
by oblivionspocket on Apr 28, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions
I would buy....
that Terry is a better comparison especially 21 year old version (of Terry).
I don’t think that’s his ceiling though. He could very likely have an even better career than Jason Terry’s.
by oblivionspocket on Apr 29, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions
I think #28 goes for
a kid who’s desperate to get a paycheck, but too young and inexperienced to go in the lotto this year (as opposed to next year, or the year after). We pay him some money, and plop him on the bench. Some candidates include:
1. B. J. Mullens
2. Austin Daye
3. Gani Lawal
4. Danny Green
5. Jarvis Vornado
6. Nick Calathes
7. Matt Bouldin (the poor man’s Nick Calathes)

by 
















