Hoopus Mock Draft
by Stop-n-Pop on May 21, 2009 7:53 AM CDT
Email
PrintOK folks, I'm putting this one up here because I need to link to it in a future post. We'll run a community mock draft and draft board in the future. This is just for linking purposes although I'd be more than happy to hear your thoughts on any of the selections.
- LA Clippers: Blake Griffin
- Memphis Grizzlies: Ricky Rubio
- OKC Thunder: Brandon Jennings
- Sacramento Kings: Hasheem Thabeet
- Washington Wizards: Jordan Hill
- Minnesota Timberwolves: James Harden
- GSW: Demar DeRozan
- NY Knicks: Jeff Teague
- Toronto Raptors: Tyreke Evans
- Milwaukee Bucks: Stephen Curry
- New Jersey Nets: DeJuan Blair
- Charlotte Bobcats: Gerald Henderson
- Indiana Pacers: Ty Lawson
- Phoenix Suns: Jonny Flynn
- Detroit Pistons: Earl Clark
- Chicago Bulls: James Johnson
- Philly 76ers: Eric Maynor
- Minnesota Timberwolves: Jrue Holiday
- Atlanta Hawks: Chase Budinger
- Utah Jazz: Ty Hansbrough
- NOLA Hornets: Terence Williams
- Dallas Mavs: Sam Young
- Sacramento Kings: Patrick Mills
- Portland TrailBlazers: Austin Daye
- OKC Thunder: BJ Mullens
- Chicago Bulls: Omar Casspi
- Memphis Grizzlies: Gani Lawal
- Minnesota Timberwolves: Nick Calathes
- Los Angeles Lakers: Darren Collison
- Cleveland Cavs: Danny Green
That does it.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Only thing I would change
is Jennings over Thabeet. I don’t understand Chad Ford when he talks about how easily Westbrook could be moved off the ball (implied if they draft Rubio or Jennings). To me, that would be like moving Rondo or Rose off the ball. Non-shooting, dribble-penetrating point guards aren’t exactly two guard material, in my opinion. I don’t think OKC will take a point guard with their top pick. If Thabeet falls to them, I think they feel really good about nixing the Chandler trade and move forward with a really good young core.
With any other team...
…I would agree but I think the Thunder are a BPA operation and I’m going to go out on a limb and say that they’ve scouted the hell out of this kid and they like him. Thabeet isn’t the BPA at 3. Neither is Hill. I think they go Jennings or Harden. Chandler was interesting because he can play on both sides of the court. Thabeet can’t. I just can’t see them taking him at 3.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Harden would make more sense.
He’d look pretty good between Westbrook and Durant.
Thabeet and Curry are the two most polarizing players in this draft. People that like Thabeet usually don’t like Curry and vice versa.
For OKC’s purposes, I think Thabeet is too good to pass up. If they can have Westbrook harrassing the ball, with the luxury of Thabeet waiting behind him at the rim, I think their defense becomes a bigtime strength.
good point about the curry and thabeet crowds...
….it’s a rorschach test for the 2009 draft.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I agree on the polarizing aspect
To me, watching a guy like Thabeet get pushed around by Blair, and then by MSU’s possee of 6’8" rebounders that the thing that sticks out to me is Thabeet’s legs are too long. Maybe I notice this because I have long legs, but it’s going to be hard for him to devleop strength and when a shorter player pushes him around, his body tends to get pushed out of the way faster and loses balance quicker. To me, I just don’t think he’s going to be able to Rebound efficiently at the Pro level and that further limits his skill shot to Blocked Shots and defending Yao Ming.
Curry gets hammered for Defense and whether he’s a true point. His assist and t/o over ratios of 6.1 – 4.9 suggest he can make the transition. Evans, Harden, and Foye his last year in college were all negative a/to ratios, suggesting two guard spots. With the way the PG rules are currently, in regards to stopping dribble drive penetration, I don’t think we lose much defensively with him on the floor. Tony Parker, Rondo, CP3, Devin, those guys drive by everyone. It might be nice to have a bigger PG so that guys like billups couldn’t post him up, but all PG’s can’t be Mr. Big Shot and Derrick Rose.
Thabeet dominated almost every game he played. He struggled and got in foul trouble against Blair. I can’t say I know for sure, but I’d guess Curry even had a couple off-nights, and his conference was a couple steps behind the Big East, in terms of nightly competition.
I don’t worry about Curry’s defense as much as I just don’t think he’ll ever be any kind of impact player. If we truly think that everybody available to us is going to be a bust, then maybe he’s a good pick. Thabeet will already be gone when we pick, because of the defense he’s going to bring in the pros. There just aren’t many guys over 7’ tall with his athleticism, in the entire world. Add to that his great (and much-improved) shotblocking instincts, and he’s a pretty safe bet to be a long-term solution at center, for somebody.
Curry’s shooting will help him get on the floor in the NBA, but he’ll need a lot more than that, given his physical deficiencies, to ever be a quality starting player. When athletes like Mikael Pietrus (pretty much considered a role player on Orlando) can shoot treys every bit as well as Curry can, it highlights the problem with taking him too high in the lottery.
Dominated almost every game...
Against Georgetown and Greg Monroe:
34 Min. 4 Pts. 7 Reb.
Against Gonzaga and Heifeldt
19 Min. 9 Pts. 2 Reb.
Against Wisconsin
34 Min. 9 pts. 7 Reb.
Against Pitt and Blair
23 Min., 5 Pts, 4 Reb
Against MSU
36 Min. 17 Pts., 6 Reb.
Against Texas A&M
20 Min, 6 Pts, 4 Reb
What do all these games have in common? They were against GOOD Competition.
I think Curry's...
…mid-range game is the intriguing thing. He’s more than just a three point shooter. He has one of the most developed mid-range jumper games in recent memory. There simply aren’t too many players like that anymore who can still be efficient. The pick and roll potential is through the roof.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Mickeal Pietrus/ Curry
Pietrus is a 35% percent career 3 point shooter- with many of his looks coming on open threes.
The Thing that impressed me so much about Curry from his Synergy Sports numbers was his ability to make contested shots. You also have the added skill of being much more capable of creating shots for others thus making him more of a threat. It’s these skills that make him much more than a situational player.
by Jose Cordoba on May 21, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions
You guys might be right..
Only time will tell. Ebomb’s stats there couldn’t mean any less to me, given that Thabeet’s obvious impact is defensive, and not scoring and rebounding. And whatever stats Curry put up also couldn’t mean any less to me, since anybody that watched him play knows that he was his entire team and played 20+ games against crap competition. SnP’s points about Curry’s pure shooting (something that I admit could be a factor in the pro game) are important, but I still don’t think it warrants a mid-lotto pick. I think his value is more like #10-15, and we’d be lucky to get him at #18.
Thabeet
I agree, Stat’s shouldn’t tell the whole story. What I don’t agree with is taking a one-dimensional defensive player in the Top 5. People compare Thabeet to Mutombo, Mutombo was never the anchor of a Championship team and his offensive skill set was far more developed.
If you knew you were getting Mutumbo,
you’d take him near the top of this draft. He was an 8-time All-Star and 4-time DPOY. Just some perspective there…just became Dikembe’s best years were spent on average teams doesn’t diminish his impact. He made a great pair with Iverson in 2000.
Thabeet has made huge progress in three years at UConn. Why people seem to think that will stop when he makes basketball his full-time job, I have no idea.
I'll say this
If any team that high should consider Thabeet it’s OKC. Especially when you want to roll with Durant and Green- Long term at the 3 and the 4.
by Jose Cordoba on May 21, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm no Huge Westbrook Fan
but that would seem an awfully odd backcourt pairing. They’d be awesome on the defensive end but the shooting would leave a lot to be desired.
by Jose Cordoba on May 21, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think you take Westbrook at #4 last year
if you don’t think he’s going to learn to shoot. He was so turnover prone last year, it’s hard to imagine him continuing to play point and dominating the Ball. Granted, Durant is their and he can handle the ball, but I was just not impressed with Westbrook’s rookie season. I think it’s a mistake to say, I drafted a Combo Guard last year so even if PG is BPA I can’t draft one this year.
The only categories Westbrook was above average as a rookie was Minutes and Rebounds. Just looking at his stat lines, 39.8% FG percentage, .271 from three, 3.3 Turnovers per game. How did this guy make the rookie first team?
Further why are we so scared of OKC becoming our main compeittion. The only piece I like on that squad is Durant. Green plays the same SF position. Westbrook is a good athlete and a good defender but has poor skills. Krstic is a backup. Seflosha is a role player. They have horrible depth. I just don’t see anything but bringing in a top flight Free Agent for them to take the next step. Speculating who that might be and why we should be afraid of them is near impossible.
Harden, Holliday and Calathes
That sure is a lot of american guards. Do you take the Wolves seriously in that they won’t have 3 rookies on the roster next year? If so, have you checked out guys like Cassipi, Claver, Beaubois for the 28th pick?
I second E-Bomb
Wouldn’t a Euro like Claver make sense at 28? Since we seem pretty sure that their is no way this team keeps 3 firsts.
Claver please
His stock is low right now because of an injury but he was being talked about in the late lotto last year. He’s a really fascinating prospect.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
I would want the Wolves to draft Curry, not Harden.
The Wolves, I hope I’m saying this for the last time, do NOT need a SG this draft. They have plenty of good SG’s and no SG in this whole draft will start most games. Stephen Curry would start at point guard over Sebastian Telfair. They would get a great shooter to go along with another one (Mike Miller), and Big Al. Then, if they can trade 2 of their picks for a center, then Al Jefferson can play his true position at PF.
I would ask to define Good SG
Foye is a medicore at best NBA starter. He’s a average outside shooter and doesn’t finish at the rim. Brewer is probably projecting as a Defensive stopper who’s going to need to be surronded by scorers. Although I would rather Brewer start next than Foye. Miller’s OK- and will have more valued surronded by a shooter like Stephen Curry. I don’t think any serious NBA observer would think Foye/Miller/or Brewer is one of the top 3 players on a really good NBA team. This is why most posters here see a need as existing. I do agree with you heading into next year- Derozan wouldn’t start as for Harden it’s hard to say.
I am a bit confused by this desire to bench Kevin Love- who’s probably our best player within 2 years.
If Love's our best player in 2 years...
then we traded Jefferson and drafted Steph Curry:)
I agree about SG being another need. Sadly, I don’t think Foye’s a starting 2 on a good team. Brewer may or not be a starter, but he’s probably a 3 more than a 2. Pretty much everything is a position of need, except power forward. We have two good ones in our starting lineup and an adequate backup in Rhino. If Kahn drafts Jordan Hill, I’m done.
they need everything but...
…power forward….which, funny, was the position the former guy happened to play in the league. god this team is dysfunctional. i can’t believe they did this.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Few Issues
1. Do the Wolves need a Center? If they think they’re going to win with Great Defense- then yes. If they think they can win by outscoring and outrebounding people- then no. This is clearly what they had in mind for the long-term success of this team. I can’t say if this is right or wrong- I do think Love and Jefferson possibly have matching skill-sets to the point that it could work. At the same time- the Wolves will have to be a Top 10 team in OR for this to work.
2. I think Love’s the Wolves best player in two years because I think he’ll improve his jumper and ability to finish around the rim. If he shoots around 50 percent with his rebound and free-throw rates this is an ALL-STAR.
by Jose Cordoba on May 24, 2009 11:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Why Love won't be an All-Star
He’s never going to be a guy that can get his own shot, and be relied upon for consistent scoring. That doesn’t mean he’s not going to be a very valuable player, but he won’t beat out the likes of Duncan, Boozer, etc. when they can command double teams and put up 20+ almost every night on the offensive end, and still get their fair share of rebounds.
Love could, realistically, end up on an All-Star team, if there’s a down year in talent or injuries to key players open up a spot. Wally, Laettener, and even Jamal Magloire have made an All-Star team. It would be foolish to say that Love, under no circumstance, can join that company. But, it’s a stretch to think he’ll ever reach the level of all around dominance that the typical All-Star forward plays with. He’s just not big or athletic enough to score consistently at the power forward position.
I don't know
While I think your assessment could turn out to be accurate, I also don’t think it’s fair to take Love’s first season as a 20 year old rookie where he shot under 40% through December, but near 50% the reast of the year and then use his aggregate statistics as proof that he isn’t athletic enough to score consistently. Working with both Al and McHale, two dominant inside scorers who also weren’t very ahtletic, is only going to improve his finishing.
Further, look at Love’s frame, yes he’s pudgy, but I also see a frame capable of becoming much more muscular. It’s not like a young KG or KD where we have a thin frame that with running and playing basketball year round you know muscle is never going to be added. Boozer was older, stronger, and more advance when he entered the league and he still needed time to adjust to the pro grame and finishing due to his size and the comparable tsize of those guarding him.
To me a guy that is Ahtletic enough to rebound like he does, secure psoition, be in the right spot, on both the offensive and defensive sides of the ball, it’s ludicrous to suggest that he can’t establish that same position on offense and use it to put the ball in the basket. He is going to improve, most likely this next year.
I didn’t point to any stats from his rookie year—maybe that was pointed at somebody else.
Re: athleticism, I think Love is probably like most athletes in that he’s pretty much at his peak, right now. There haven’t been many guys that have seen their athleticism improve, past the age of 20 or 21. You’re right that he could get stronger (and he will get stronger) but I don’t see his game benefitting from added bulk.
I’m just trying to put this idea that Love will be an All-Star into perspective. Western Conference Forward has probably been the most competitive race for All-Star spots in the past decade. Names like Garnett, Duncan and Webber battled for spots through the 90s and early 2000s. If you watched Kevin Love, last year, and think he’s ever going to approach that company, we view the game very differently.
The hyperbole tends to fly around when K-Love gets mentioned on this site, and I try not to be overly contrarian, but it sometimes needs to get reigned in with a dose of reality. K-Love is a very solid basketball player. But he doesn’t show signs of a player that’s going to develop into a 22+ ppg guy, let alone the all-around force that Western Forward All-Stars have been and continue to be. Blake Griffin will probably be a Western Conference forward—and I think he will be more likely to make the future teams, along with others.
If Love were a standout defender, like Shawn Marion, or had noticeable intangibles that extend beyond rebounding and outlet passing—then again, maybe he’d get a spot if his team were winning the conference, or something. But even his intangibles are drastically overrated, at this point. He’s an ok defender that will always have a size disadvantage down low and quickness disadvtange on the perimeter. He passes the ball, which initiates ball-movement, but he’s hardly a Larry Bird-like passer, where he’s always one mental step ahead of everybody else. He’s just a very fundamentally sound player who works his ass off on the boards. I don’t see it translating into All-Star appearances, even if it leads to team success.
Few Points
1. If Love shots 50 percent while getting to the line once for every 2 shot attempts- this is a very efficent Offensive Basketball Player.
2. His Rebounding Rates for his age and experience level were unprecedented in NBA history. Part of this depends on the value one places on Rebounding. I think it’s a possibility he could be the best in the league within a couple years.
3. As far as his defense- it should be noted that Brian Cardinal is a reasonably effective defender minus great food speed due to instincts and positioning.
by Jose Cordoba on May 27, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions
OK...
How many rebounds per game do you envision K-Love pulling down in a few years? 15? 16? My guess is that his career-high will be around 12 or maybe 13. If he gets near Rodman territory, I’ll reconsider.
Cardinal’s legs look nothing like Love’s, aside from the skin tone. BC’s are lean, and athletic— and Love’s are thick. That’s reflected in their quickness, where Cardinal moves laterally better than Love. A better comparison would be Jason Collins, who, although isn’t white, has a body compisition closer to Love’s.
I’m not trying to downplay Love’s qualities—he’s clearly a very good rebounder. But I can’t envision a scenario where we’re beating a good Western Conference team in a playoff series because they just can’t seem to pull down a rebound over Kevin Love. He’ll fight for his share, and his numbers will add up, but it’s not going to be a thing where teams can’t contend with him. Talent and athleticism prevail in the NBA. Dwight Howard can dominate a playoff game with rebounding—I don’t think Love can, or ever will be able to.
Response
1. No NBA Scout would ever refer to Brian Cardinal as laterally quick. Love clearly has issues in this area. I’m just making the point that instincts can make him adequate in this area like Cardinal.
2. I think comparing Love to Howard is a bit simplistic. Rebounding is so dependent on positioning and reaction that Love can be elite in this area in a Playoff Series. This is how Dennis Rodman even later in his career kept being an elite rebounder.
3. We shall see who’s right in a couple years.
by Jose Cordoba on May 27, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions
And I really hope that you're right...
because if Love is an All-Star, and Jefferson comes back healthy, we’ll be quite a team, regardless of the backcourt changes.
Cardinal is not laterally quick like Corey Brewer—but he’s noticeably quicker side-to-side than Love or Jefferson. I would attribute that to his natural athleticism and body type more than his craftiness or something. The guy love has often been compared to, Brad Miller, looked like the slowest man in the universe vs Boston, in Round 1. I hate to say this, but I think it’s going to be a problem for KL as the years go by. He’s just not a natural athlete and to compare him to other white players that are actually decent athletes, like Cardinal, is inaccurate.
Your third point is definitely correct. My guess for Love’s 3rd or 4th season stats would be something like 14 pts 11 rebs 4 ass per game. He could easily be a starter on a contender, but he won’t be the guy that produces enough to make his team a contender. That’s all I mean when I seem like I’m bashing him. He’s probably our second-best player already, so clearly I like him on this team. I just take major issue with comments (I think SnP made it, but I could be wrong) like the one that said he’s the second-most talented player in Wolves history. Accomplished guys like KG, Marbury, Gugliotta, Sprewell, Cassell and Jefferson would probably have something to say about that. Love is not, and may not ever be, in more than one of those guys’ categories, even if some of them had issues unrelated to talent that detracted from their success.
Love...
I agree with Andy G.: Love is a nice player but lacks the talent to be an all-star. The main reasons stem from his athleticism, but he’s also limited in a few other areas. On offense, Love looked very awkward last year when he tried to create his own shot. Many of his baskets came off of putbacks of his own misses or shots he had blocked, and many others came off of offensive rebounds. The three point shot people said he would have never materialized, and I think most people would agree that they expected him to have a more fluent post game than he exhibited. Both could be improved in subsequent years, but I don’t see anything in his offensive game that leads me to believe he’ll ever average more than 15-16ppg—good numbers, but not all-star caliber. Second, his passing ability is widely overrated. As Andy G. pointed out, he isn’t a bad passer but the pre-draft comparisons of his passing ability to Larry Bird’s and Wes Unseld’s are laughable. If anything, Love looked very lost for about 1/3 of the season, making bad passes and bad decisions. Again, he’ll improve, but his BBIQ doesn’t scream all-star—it screams “very solid player.”
Finally, and most importantly for the Love/All-Star debate, consider the forwards Love would have to be better than in order to consistently make all-star teams:
Stoudamire
Nowitzki
Jefferson
West
Gasol
Aldridge
Griffin
Durant
Boozer (unless he ends up in the East)
Artest (same condition)
J. Howard
S-Jack
Gay
I don’t see Love ending up in the upper echelon of that group. I just don’t.
Huh
My observations, DX’s and Hollinger’s have Cardinal lacking lateral quickness. The basic point is that Cardinal gets by more on fundamentals than speed.
2. I see Love in 2 to 3 years as more of an 18/12- 20/12 guy. I think he’ll improve finishing around the basket along with his outside shot. If he does this while getting to the line at the rate he does- this is a tremendously effective offensive player. Thier is little mention made of his ability to get to the line- which is of tremendous importance in this discussion. It was this ability that had him lead Rookies in Win Shares as opposed to Brook Lopez.
3. If Love ever puts up his January numbers in 36 minutes this is an awesome player. 18.9 PPG, 15.0 RPG, and 5.4 OFF RPG. This is an All-Star. This isn’t realistic. But 19-12- and 4 would at the same time be an All Star.
4. As far as the list of players a few stand out
1. Rudy Gay is a one-dimensional Jump Shooter
2. Amare can’t rebound or defend.
3. Stephen Jackson has terrible shot selection
4. David West- Let’s see how good Love would look with Chris Paul.
5. Boozer- is not by any stretch considered a strong defender.
6. Aldridge- is one of the softest players in the NBA. I’m not exactly quivering looking at his free-throw rate nor Rebound rate.
7. Al- Doesn’t get to the line like Kevlar nor does he possess the ball movement.
8. Griffin- Not exacly known for defensive prowess. No guaranatee he develops into a Love-Type Rebounder.
by Jose Cordoba on May 27, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Maybe you, DX, and Hollinger are all overly influenced by Cardinal being a bald, white guy. They aren’t typically known for their athletic prowess, and it’s understandable that a relatively unknown player would be pitted into a common basketball stereotype. In these playoffs, Kenny Smith made similar remarks about JJ Redick, despite Redick playing the best D on Ray Allen of any other Boston opponent.
If salary and age were made equal, then every NBA GM would take Amare, West, Boozer, Aldridge, Jefferson and Griffin over Love. Gay and S-Jack are closer calls, for the reasons you cite. But Gay’s skill (point production) is more likely to lead to an All-Star birth than Love’s skill (rebounding).
Calculators might make Love look like a future All-Star, but visual observation and some thought put into how exactly is he going to evolve into an elite forward make it less likely. If he develops his offensive game, it’s likely to be as a jumpshooter, pick & pop type of guy. This will take away his ability to crash the boards. If he continues to be a glass-eater, he’ll never develop into an elite scorer. If we keep Love-Jefferson as the centerpiece, I think we should try to find a healthy balance, which would be something like 14/11/4, with an added backcourt scorer to play off of Jefferson.
I agree
on Redick. But no one would argue he’s a freakish athlete.
As far as who I would rather have from the list. I would take Love long-term over Amare, West, Boozer, Gay, and Stephen Jackson without thinking. Al’s got plenty of holes in his game. Lamarcus is better now- but isn’t what I would call a complete player nor a dominant post presence. Love’s proven more than Griffin in the NBA.
I think this argument comes down to whether Love is going to improve as a finisher at the basket- I think he will. Rhino is an example of a player without great hops for him to emulate. If this area doesn’t improve- you’re right and I’m wrong. I just tend to believe that it will.
by Jose Cordoba on May 27, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Fair enough
and I didn’t mean to sound like a dick with that first paragraph—I just think Cardinal is a bit more athletic than you (and probably most people) give him credit for. Not exactly an important argument for Wolves improvement purposes, though.
The only thing about Love’s improvement as an “around the basket finisher” that I’d add is that he won’t get a whole lot of attempts when Jefferson is on the team. If Love does improve in that area, and develops an effective low-block game, then we should think hard about trading one of those players or making Love a 6th man who comes in and provides bench scoring and probably crunchtime minutes.
I don't even know where to begin
I think every NBA GM currently would take Amare, Jefferson and Griffin over Love. I think less than 5 GM’s in the league would take Boozer, Aldridge or West over Love.
(1) Boozer: Love is already a better rebounder, equally putrid defenders; however, at this point we know boozer won’t improve. Boozer shot 49% from the field while averaging 16 points this season. Similar to Keving Love’s number after 1/1/09. During that time Boozer plays next to Kirilenko, Okur and Milsap, our boy Kevin Love gets Cardinal, Smith and a little taste of Jefferson. Considering age and salary, very few GM’s would take Boozer.
(2) Aldridge: Doesn’t play inside, can’t rebound, superb at taking the 18 foot jumper. Not known for defense. So Aldridge has a better outside shot while Love gets much more rebounds, gets to the line more frequently, and has shown more ability in the league at a younger age.
(3) West: Maybe the most overrated PF in the west. Horrible comparison, go read the Hornets board and read what fans who watch him every game think. No Defense, no rebounding, 15 foot jump shot.
The point of calculators is that they are their to assist you in making judgments. You may see a player who doesn’t look athletic, puts back his own misses and own block shots, and an underutilized outside shot. The calculator comes back at you and says after the 1st of the year he shot better, he draws fouls at an extremely high rate, rebounds at a historical level for a first year player, and shoots free throws at an above average clip for a post player.
He shot the ball effectively from deep in college. He makes his free throws in the NBA. It is a near certainty that the outside shot is going to make it into his repertoire.
I’m not putting him down for the first ballot Hall of Fame, but your thinking that he can’t be a pick and pop player and rebound and that his game will never appreciate more than the player he was after January 1, because he did average 15/12 after that point, is not a logical argument.
I hope you're right
because if Love is better than those guys, and Jefferson is even better than that, we’re a pretty stacked team. Or, as Charles Barkley would say, we’re a pretty stacked damn team.
I’m just a little hesitant to get that excited about K-Love. He seems more like a quality role player than a future star. If you’re right, the Wolves are going to improve very quickly and should be a playoff team for many years to come.
E-Bomb's right to a point
1. Amare is overrated. Amare’s an awesome Offensive player but a lousy rebounder and defender. This is why when their were discussions around the Trade Deadline the key figures coming back were Rudy Gay/ Tyrus Thomas. They couldn’t even get Gay.
2. Al perhaps. He’s clearly better than Amare. He’s got plenty of limitations in his game that have been discussed already at nauseam. I’m sure their’s a mix as to posters on this site over who to keep long-term. My thought is that Kevin Love will improve areas of his game currently lacking to be better than Al in 2 years. So I wouldn’t trade Love for Al.
3. Griffin is the most complex. Love was rated higher coming out of HS- 2 years ago. Love was probably slightly better as a College Freshman (Due to 3 Point Shot). This year you’re comparing Apples to Oranges. I think Love could have been National Player of the Year had he stayed at UCLA. I tend to agree most GM’s would trade Love for Griffin on the basis of potential. Long-term it’s hard to say who’s going to be better. I think it’ll come down to how good a 3 Point Shooter Kevin Love becomes.
by Jose Cordoba on May 28, 2009 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Fair points. The thing with those guys is that they’ve already proven that they can play at an All-Star level. Amare is an interesting case, because he’s been a monster at different points in his career, and at other times, he’s a jumpshooter who can’t defend to save his life. While his trade value dipped post-7SOL, recall that Phoenix (reportedly, and I think this was the case) refused to part ways with him in what would have brought KG to town.
Also, I think you’re right that Love would have been the NPOY, or right with Griffin, had he stayed at UCLA. That just doesn’t change the hangups that I (and others, I think) have with his long-term potential. Kind of like Hansbrough, another incredibly accomplished college player, Love’s a little too small and a little too athletically deficient to dominate the pro game. (He’s clearly going to have a better pro career than TH, but their physical problems are similar).
I wish Love would drop as much weight as possible and become a viable option at the 3. His perimeter passing skills and improving jumper would make a great offensive option at that spot and maybe not as big of a defensive liability as we’d think. I doubt that will happen, but there are some heavier small forwards in the league (Paul Pierce) and I bet Love could play it effectively, with the right training.
One thing to keep in mind with All-Star selections...
In the decade that probably had the most big-name stars in the league, Bill Laimbeer made the All-Star team 4 times. And this was before his team was going to the finals. So it’s not like Love would have to be playing on a title contender or always playing in the weaker conference to make an All-Star team or two.
by pagingstanleyroberts on May 30, 2009 9:13 PM CDT up reply actions
consider the forwards Love would have to be better than in order to consistently make all-star teams:
Stoudamire – I see that, unless he maybe goes East
Nowitzki – not after next year – getting old. . .
Jefferson – AL? If so, he’ll be listed as a C
West – maybe maybe not
Gasol – Pau – for a couple more years
Aldridge – yup
Griffin – If he pans out as good as we are expecting
Durant – yup
Boozer (unless he ends up in the East) – IDK I think he falls off
Artest (same condition) – yup
J. Howard – probably, unless he’s smoking some more trees
S-Jack – Stephen Jackson?? nah. . .
Gay – If the Grizz improve and he has a hand in it.
I really like Love and think he will be a regular all-star, but not a force his will on you kind of player. You know, one of those guys who always play in the ASG but never makes an impression on the casual fan. Just my opinion though.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on May 29, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
That is why you pick up Harden...
If Foye can’t beat him out to start then POINT PROVEN. beat case scenerio is Foye learns how to bring the ball up and at least start our O. Foye is a decent player but when he would try to be the Offense the PG that was “guarding” Bassy would shade towards either the post to block the pass to Al or in his lap when he tried to break people down. I don’t know about Foye yet but he doesn’t have too much time left as a “building block” on this team. Right now it is Big “I look 45” Al and Love ….Al will not be traded just because Love is good. They have to find players to go around those two…like a C to play 25 min of boards and D and a player outside like a shooting Mike Miller that is younger and a couple inches shorter in Mr. Harden.
But like I said, I can see Curry being a nice fit as well….I just not ready to turn a blind eye to look past Harden.
Draft Curry and start resurrecting this line-up
Sota has SG’s but none of them very good so I can see why people are saying draft Harden, its the same reason we went for Mayo (and traded him) last year. So what do we need heading into this draft? A point guard, a scorer, a defender, a big man and some athleticism. Point guard and scorer we can get in one pick – Curry. A big man we have coming over next year in Pekovic, if he is as good as you all say he is there is no way im trading him. So the next thing we need to address is athleticism and defense. For this, I’m signing Josh Childress and drafting Sam Young. I’m also putting Foye and Miller on the trading block, along with one of the picks. A combination of these two players, a pick and Cardinal’s expiring contract can get us a quality SF, Caron Butler, Marion, Josh Howard, Michael Redd (in this case Childress would move to SF). I would personally go for Caron because of his ball handling ability.
Curry/Bassy
Childress/Brewer
Butler/Young
Love/Gomes
Jefferson/Smith
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
