The Forgotten Man, pt. iii: Better value than DeRozan?
For those of you who haven't read the first two parts of our Wayne Ellington series, you can catch up on the action by clicking here and here. In the first post we talked about what Ellington brings to the table. In the second post we talked about his size and stats in relation to shooting guards and wings taken in the 1st round and early 2nd. We also discussed his relative value at 28 compared to Stephen Curry at 6. Our conclusion was that once the Wolves decided to go down Rubio Road, Curry at 6 wasn't as good of a value pick as Ellington at 28. Considering size, expected role, defensive potential, and situational stats, Ellington is a pretty good fit for what the Wolves are looking for at shooting guard compared to Curry. At the end of the day, Curry as a point guard is an intriguing prospect while Curry as a mini-Rip Hamilton is less so.
In this post we will take a look at the one player who went in the top 10 who could may have given the Wolves a greater value than both Flynn at 6 and Ellington at 28: Demar DeRozan.
Let's first take a look at some stats.| 2p% | 3p% | pts/poss | fta/fga | 3pa/fga | a/to | ppr | to/poss | %tm poss | asb/40 | orsb/40 | |
| Ellington | 53.9 | 41.7 | 1.25 | 0.25 | 0.46 | 1.63 | 0.40 | 0.13 | 16.6 | 4.9 | 3.4 |
| DeRozan | 56.2 | 16.7 | 1.09 | 0.40 | 0.10 | 0.70 | -3.37 | 0.16 | 19.4 | 3.3 | 4.4 |
There are a couple of things that really stand out here. First, DeRozan's 3 ball was non-existent. I've seen him play several times and his jumper looks normal but for some reason he wasn't able to convert at a reasonable level. Second, neither player does anything especially well off the ball. DeRozan has a nice OReb% but all-in-all he didn't really show a lot of activity that resulted in blocks, defensive rebounds and steals. Of course, neither did Ellington. Third, both players are fairly solid with the rock. They aren't going to kill you with turnovers and risky play. This means they're not especially aggressive and it shows in their free throw and steal numbers, but there could be worse things to see in young perimeter players.
Picking out some things to focus on, DeRozan has a soid 2p% while not turning it over a ton with good size and decent rebounding numbers. Looking deeper into his situational stats we see this:
Unlike every other player in our analysis, DeRozan doesn’t make a living in any one situation, though he is one of the most efficient players on our list. In our last piece we discussed the new %Score stat which indicates how frequently a player scored a point based on their logged possessions. DeRozan ranks first amongst the nineteen players on our list at 54.4%. However, he ranks only 16th in overall PPP. This disparity stems from the fact that he shoots nearly three less three-pointers per game than the average player on our list (4.3 vs. 1.3) and ranks last in terms of three-point percentage at just 16.7%. He doesn’t get to the free throw line at a great rate to compensate and only converts on a mediocre 65% of his attempts once there. He makes up for that by shooting 49% from the field on his isolation opportunities (4th), knocking down his catch and shoot jumpers at a 43% clip (6th), and hitting 41% of his pull ups as well (4th). Clearly DeRozan has a solid knack for operating in the mid-range area, which should serve him well in the more spacing-friendly NBA. He’s also a good offensive rebounder—a testament to his excellent physical tools.
We also know that he improved a great deal over the course of the season:
|
Demar Derozan |
Adj. FG pct |
3 pt pct |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
ASB40 |
|
Nov-Dec |
.487 |
.000 |
16.6 |
6.9 |
0.5 |
3.3 |
|
January |
.563 |
.167 |
16.0 |
7.0 |
0.1 |
2.7 |
|
February |
.486 |
.250 |
12.6 |
6.4 |
0.3 |
2.6 |
|
March |
.599 |
.300 |
23.5 |
8.4 |
1.3 |
4.4 |
On the other hand, Ellington is an effective shooter who doesn't turn the ball over, get to the line or rack up any substantial amount of off-the-ball numbers. He is clearly the better outside shooter and not only does he not turn the ball over, he appears to be able to facilitate at a modest level as well. Size-wise, he's 2-3 inches smaller than DeRozan in everything from standing reach to wingspan to max vert height. He also improved throughout the season:
|
Wayne Ellington |
2 pt pct |
3 pt pct |
P40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
|
Nov-Dec |
.507 |
.356 |
17.7 |
2.4 |
7.9 |
|
January |
.511 |
.391 |
19.5 |
1.3 |
6.9 |
|
February |
.563 |
.395 |
19.6 |
1.3 |
8.8 |
|
March-April |
.575 |
.518 |
20.2 |
1.7 |
5.9 |
He even had some nice situational stats of his own:
Amongst the top-10 college shooting guards we looked at, only Terrence Williams had fewer possessions to work with. The difference was as much as 50% compared to some prospects, who obviously had to shoulder much bigger offensive loads on far less talented teams. With that in mind, Ellington indeed ended up being one of the most efficient shooting guards in this draft, ranking first in field goal percentage (48%) and third in points per possession (1.04).
Because of how well Ellington was able to pick and choose his spots, he ends up looking excellent in a host of different categories. He for example ranks 3rd in his ability to finish around the basket, behind James Harden and Jermaine Taylor, 3rd in catch and shoot jumpers, behind K.C. Rivers and Jack McClinton, third in pull-up jumpers, behind Jack McClinton and Jodie Meeks and first in points per possession in transition opportunities.
Ellington's short-comings lie in his inability to create offense for himself, as he ranks third worst in isolation possessions generated behind two very poor ball-handlers in Paul Harris and K.C. Rivers, and his very related inability to draw fouls--which he did on just 9% of his used possessions. Ellington is obviously a finesse player who needs plays run for him in the half-court in order to be most effective, which means he'll definitely need to find the right situation in the NBA. Teams should not discount the skill-level he brings to the table as a pure scorer, though, as its clear that he wasn't such a highly regarded player coming out of high school for nothing.
I think the Wolves got a value pick at 28 with Ellington. Of all the players available on the board at that point, he is the one guy that really fits in terms of seeing a continuity of his college role in the NBA. He's never going to be a great 1-on-1 player or a dominant 2 guard, but what he can do is hit the open shot and give you a few high-scoring nights when his jumper is really going. The real comparison here is whether or not DeRozan could have provided value at 6 in comparison to Flynn.
I have often referred to DeRozan's upside as being something of an uber-Gomes; a player that will never live up to the spectacular athleticism his game seems to fit. Instead, he has the potential to be a guy that excels doing things off the ball, in transition and from mid-range. The one thing DeRozan doesn't have going for him in specific regard to the Wolves, is that he doesn't provide a hedge against if and when Ricky Rubio comes over to the NBA. This is not something that is easily quantifiable, especially now that the team has traded away Bassy. Positions aside, I think a solid case could be made that DeRozan should have been the pick at #6.
First, he was able to produce with a usage rate that will be similar to what he sees in the pros. Within this context he excelled in the mid-range game, hitting a solid percentage of spot-up jumpers and assisted jumpers. When given the chance to perform in isolation opportunities, he was no slouch either. Second, while not showing incredible off the ball numbers, DeRozan did have an ability to hit the offensive glass, a skill that could further be developed on what will likely be a poor shooting team with two other solid rebounders on the court (Jefferson and Love).
Had the Wolves taken DeRozan, they would be even more hard-pressed to have Rubio on the team, as they would now have zero point guards on the roster. This is the kicker with DeRozan. Despite what the stat sheets may say, having Flynn at 6 is now looking like an appropriate hedge with picking Rubio at 5. If the team had a guarantee from Rubio to come over, DeRozan at 6 and Ellington at 28 would have been a remarkable draft, providing the team with upgrades at the 3 positions they needed the most help at: the 1, 2 and 3. Without a Rubio guarantee, while DeRozan would have been a solid pick nonetheless, the risk involved with his selection would have shot through the roof, especially when considering the Bassy trade.
At the end of the day, any talk about DeRozan at 6 cannot be taken out of the context of selecting Rubio at 5. One way or another, the Wolves absolutely needed to walk away from this draft with a top-flight point guard. Had they not, the 4 picks would have been wasted. Of course, there is an argument that they could have held on to 18 and taken Lawson but now we're talking about a scenario several steps removed from what actually happened...i.e. pure speculation. In a perfect world, a Rubio, DeRozan, Lawson, Ellington draft might have made the most sense but it is becoming increasingly hard to fault the team for taking Flynn at 6 to cover their point guard bases. Who knows whether or not Denver would have found another trading partner to get Lawson before the 18th pick? There is also the question of whether or not DeRozan will end up being a better player than Flynn straight-up.
My gut tells me that DeRozan would have been a solid value pick at 6 but this would involve the Wolves making a large bet on the idea that Rubio will indeed come over this season. Had this been the case, the Wolves could have ran out a far more balanced roster than what they are looking at right now. I firmly believe that DeRozan will end up being one of the better players in this draft; a guy who will be able to blend into a system while still putting up solid production. He definitely would have provided value at 6. However, the question surrounding his selection wasn't whether or not he could have provided value, it is whether or not the Wolves would have walked away from picks 5 and 6 with a starting point guard. That is the ultimate test of this draft and it is probably a good thing that they erred on the side of caution with their selection of Flynn.
What say you?
0 recs |
46 comments
|
Comments
Well made points
But I would still have been concerned with his ability to hit from outside. We need someone who is able to hit the 3 to complement our post players. Sure, either way the discussion goes we got Ellington at 28, but it is yet to be seen if he is starting quality 2, and I’d be more concerned if we thought we had the 2 spot covered in DeRozan but had to deal with his 3pt. % weakness going forward.
by Cedarpenguin on Jul 27, 2009 7:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Derozan
has not enough holes in his game where I can’t say I’m devasted with not picking him. He’s still got a ways to go in regards to ball-handling, three-point shooting, and defensive awareness. I tend to doubt that he develops fully in all these areas. If he doesn’t he’s just a guy that the NBA level whose production can be duplicated by a variety of players.
I’m more upset about Curry. As far as the mini Rip Hamilton comparsion- this would be a good thing in many ways. Since you’d want to pair players who move well without the ball with Rubio. Especially if they’re terrific shooters from deep. While I don’t see Curry as a lockdown defender of 1’s or 2’s- I think his instincts are good enough to at least make him adequate. We also need to consider you can win games with Offense. If you’re Top 5 in Offensive Rating and 20th in Defensive rating- you should be a fairly good team. Look at the breakdown of the Suns of a few years back.
I’m not in the camp that says “Flynn can’t play off the ball”. Part of my concern lies in having too many players who need to attack the basket- when they’re is generally not going to be a lot of room in the lane with Big Al down there.
by Jose Cordoba on Jul 27, 2009 7:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Duncan's presence
doesn’t seem to deter Parker from getting to the hoop. And Wade didn’t seem to have a problem doing it with Shaq on that Miami team. Clogging the lane is more a function of spacing the floor appropriately and running the right sets. I’m less worried about Al clogging the lane than I am about having the shooters to punish defenses for clogging the lane.
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 27, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Al’s just gonna need to learn how to move off the ball. He hasn’t really demonstrated this skill yet, but then again he didn’t really have anyone on his team breaking down defenses and getting him easy buckets. You have to think that he’ll put some effort in on this front after the first few easy dunks/layups Flynn spoon feeds him.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Jul 27, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And
after the first few times the dish is there but Al messes it up by being in the wrong position. Big men love easy throw down buckets.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jul 27, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup
It will be interesting to see if Al’s FG% and FTAs go up after staying remarkably consistent these two past years. I think he’s pretty much taken his one-on-one post offense as far as he can at this point and the only way he moves the needle on efficiency is through maximizing his effectiveness playing off of Flynn/Rubio. I really hope they can get Al some easy buckets and help raise his overall PPP and TS% numbers. Right now he’s one of the least efficient 20+ PPG scorers in the NBA.
by Rascal Flatts on Jul 27, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
Big Al should watch some old Dean Garrett tape of Marbury spoon feeding Garrett into respectability.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jul 27, 2009 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup, and that’s pretty much because he has to do everything himself with a crafty 1 on 1 post game that doesn’t yield much in the way of FT’s. Were I coach, I’d run a bunch of drills exclusively meant to teach Al how to position himself for easy dump offs, if he even needs it. I mean, honestly, it’s not that hard so hopefully we’ll see Al flourish this way. The good thing about Al is that his touch near the hoop is so remarkable that catching it 6 feet away from the hoop might as well be a layup, so he even if he doesn’t get a dunk he’s probably still converting it.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Jul 27, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would Terrence Williams, Austin Daye or Earl Clark
have been better options?
WIth Rubio in your pocket at 5, pick 6 would have been ripe for a reach into that group of players (including DeRozan) who are available at 6 but off the board at 18.
Flynn provides all sorts of assistance for the Rubio bargaining this off season and is vital if Rubio doesn’t come this season (and that is still my gut feeling), but one of those three gives you a shot to fill three positions in one draft (if you think WIlliams can play SF).
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Jul 27, 2009 7:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But that’s just it – it would have been a reach to take any of those guys at #6. I can’t say whether or not Flynn was the slam dunk best pick at 6, but he seems to be equally, if not more, talented than DeRozan and provides the obvious hedge against the Rubio bet.. It’s not the way we wanted it to happen in the short-term, but we have to wait and see what happens down the line..
The Flynn pick is making more and more sense to me as times goes on. I’m quite certain they had him ranked above DeRozan on their board, and Kahn must have anticipated the Rubio drama. Think of it this way: Flynn will get minutes regardless, and, whether he plays on or off the ball, will be able to show his talents and build trade value. If Rubio’s not here, then he’ll truly get a chance to shine. Either way, we set ourselves up to win. Assets can always be shuffled around down the line – the important part is landing talent.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Jul 27, 2009 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Incomplete draft
Itās not the way we wanted it to happen in the short-term, but we have to wait and see what happens down the line..
I don’t think we can fully analyze this draft until next year’s draft is complete. This draft, more and more, looks to me to have been about only one thing—talent acquisition, and specifically talent that (in the words of Kahn) you believe has a legitimate chance to be above average NBA players.
I’m sure Derozen was up there for the Wolves, but after we’ve seen what Kahn has done to this roster, (it’s like he’s a rancher in the Amazon!), you gotta look at this draft as one in which we’re just trying to upgrade talent across the board anywhere. Fortunately for us this draft was heavy in PGs, but trading away other assets for future picks next year also seems like part of the plan as far as spreading out risk and strategically positioning ourselves better next year (via increased flexibility to do stuff on draft day).
To me it’s not Derozen vs. Flynn as far as who’s a better player or a better fit next to Rubio, but rather it’s going 4 for 4 on our first rounders this year, and going 3 for 3 (or however many we have) with our first rounders next year. This year’s team will be maddeningly incomplete, with brilliance in some facets of the game and complete incompetence in other parts. I’m willing to live with that and wait until after the next draft, because I think trying to solve all the problems on this team through one draft leads you to invariably to seeing what you want to see in players to fit what you need (aka overvaluing guys).
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jul 27, 2009 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Overvaluing?!?
that would NEVER happen around here!!
ok maybe a little
You are right though, there is no way we could have fixed everything wrong with the wolves in this draft. That is why I’m hoping Wolves fans will be patient, even if this year sucks (15 wins). IMO, I don’t think it will be that bad.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jul 27, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not at 6...
…xand1 puts it correctly: it would have been a reach and they would have lost value.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 27, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tim Floyd
Last year Fred Hoiberg was adament of picking OJ Mayo at the #3 pick in a deeper draft and pushed very hard to do so. This seemed to be due to all of the positive things about Mayo that Floyd (coach of USC) told Hoiberg given that Hoiberg has had a good relationship with Floyd that goes way back.
Assuming this and given that Hoiberg was the main talent evaluator for the Wolves in this last draft, why didn’t there seem to be a greater push for Derozan in a weaker draft at 6? I know there is obviously the Kahn affect, but I can’t believe that Hoiberg made any type of convincing case for Derozan as he was pushing for with Mayo.
This leads me to believe that Tim Floyd wasn’t as high on Derozan as he obviously was on Mayo. If this is true, then at least Derozan was considered. The only thing I would be bothered by is that if we find out that behind closed doors in the T-wolves draft room Hoiberg was just as adament about Derozan however Khan just ignored him.
by fan44 on Jul 27, 2009 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Do we know...
…that he didn’t push for DeRozan? I don’t know if we can make those assumptions. Flynn seemed like Kahn’s guy.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 27, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember the tiers?
There’s no doubt that Flynn was in the Wolves top tier. I seriously doubt that Derozan, Williams, Clark, and Daye were in that group. I think that the Kahn made the right decision in the limited amount of time they had and simply took the proverbial “Best Player Available” in Flynn.
by levi_mn on Jul 27, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For what it's worth
I think Daye will be a good player in the league. Too bad he wasn’t around at 18.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jul 27, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mebbe so...especially that he can learn from Tayshaun
but imagine Daye and Brewer playing together — the Stick Figures of Hennepin County
But I’m not sure when the deal with the Nuggets was done for the 18th pick. And I guess we’ll never know where Daye was rated vs Ellington.
I’m not looking for Ellington to become an All-Star, but his play in the Summer League has assured me that he will be a solid role player for the Wolves.
by levi_mn on Jul 27, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rumor...
Was that the Wolves were going to trade the pick if James Johnson wasn’t available and that they had multiple offers for that pick.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 27, 2009 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who is more valuable at the 6 spot?
On the floor for a balanced roster this season? Overall to the organization? Overall player vs player? You know these questions are getting more and more difficult to answer. Obviously DeRozan would have provided a player in a position of need. He definitely has upside, and I think he’ll have a good, not great, NBA career.
Right now, Flynn is looking like a pretty good draft decision, being the starting PG on the roster. He seems like he has the right mentality and personality to make an impact in the locker room, and enough talent to make one on the floor. Straight up, not considering need or position, Flynn might just be the better pick.
Strangely, I think the Wolves as an organization will end up turning the pick of Flynn into the best value. Looking at all the moves they’ve made since just before the draft, the Wolves have managed to create roster space, picking up draft picks for this year and next, maintaining assets like cap space and expirings. These have been good moves. I have a suspicion that the Flynn draft helped unlock Kahn’s plan, both for cover and flexibility.
Does Flynn and Rubio play together? How does that look? How does it work? How does the team play in general? These are all questions that can’t be answered now. What does the team look like a year from now? Who knows?
DeRozan might have been better value on the floor for play this year, assuming that Rubio comes over. Flynn might be better value to the rebuilding plan for the Wolves.
by Krotz the Wall on Jul 27, 2009 9:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m not too broken up over not landing DeRozan.. nothing about him screamed star to me. Solid jumper and nice hops, but not amazingly quick and he doesn’t seem to have the handle or mentality to be a go-to scorer. Things can change, of course, so he may yet prove me wrong, but it seems more likely that he becomes a #3 type of guy who has some nice skills and a good all-around game, but nothing amazing.
If this is the case, then I see no reason that that type of production, or better, can’t be found via trades or future drafts. It’s the same reason I wasn’t too mad about the Mayo trade last year (once the emotions died down, of course). Quite simply, those types of guys are always available. For example, Evan Turner will be available next year, probably around where we pick, and I like him quite a bit more than DeRozan.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Jul 27, 2009 9:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hindsight.....
Flynn/Rubio at 5, DeRozan at 6, Ellington at 18 (I know it would have been a reach but the FO says they considered it), and DuJuan Summers at 28. I can honestly say I would have taken Rubio, then DeRozan, at 18 I probably would have Mullens (which probably would have been a mistake, but the players who went 18-28 just don’t thrill me much and Mullens at least has the potential to be a player, plus the size you can’t ignore). Then I was saying Summers at 28. Looks like Budinger or Blair would have been good picks at 18 in hindsight but I personally probably wouldn’t have picked either at that point. Actually I would have had to think pretty hard in choosing between Summers, Budinger, and Sam Young at 28. But back to your point, yes, I would probably prefer DeRozan and could live with either Flynn or Rubio.
by wolfen on Jul 27, 2009 9:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Going even further back in hindsight...
Not trading the pick the Pistons used on Summers for Ronald Dupree.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jul 27, 2009 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On draft night
I was disappointed that they didn’t pick Curry, but taking Flynn looks better & better everyday. I would like to see Flynn & Rubio play together as I think that could be dynamic and make problems for other teams matching up. So far, I will go so far as giving Kahn a B in all he’s done.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jul 27, 2009 9:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I was shocked and dismayed at the Flynn pick – I thought Curry was a much better value at 6. If the Wolves really had Flynn as their man at 6, I felt they could have traded down 1-4 spots and taken Flynn (talent) or DeRozan (team need), which would have maximized their value-at-selection. However, all in all, it appears we can’t complain too much.
by Boss10 on Jul 27, 2009 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Listen to the GMs around the League
Flynn would not have lasted long at all. Milwaukee is on record saying that if Johnny was there Brandon would have fell farther than just 10. This is why he was not at the draft and made a great “hey-I want my TV time” handshake <granted this is before Joe B got him to Public Enemy #5 in NY for his comments>
by majinman on Jul 27, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I totally don’t agree this time around. I absolutely don’t get what value there was with DeRozan at #6 with a PG selected at #5. I think this would have been a terrible reach for need over BPA.
I also don’t really see how he would fit into our system. The biggest problem is off course his outside range. A two guard without range only works if you have sufficient other bombers out there. I fear he’s actually more of a tweener 2-3 instead of combo.
I do get that his situation in college resembles what he would have gotten with our Wolves but his skillset really doensn’t seem like a #6 pick…
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Jul 27, 2009 9:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they ultimately...
…play him at the 3. Also, he did show improvement over the course of the year with his shot and there’s no reason to think it’s broken. I think from defensive potential to rebounding to mid-range game, he’s every bit of a fit as Gomes, but with better athleticism for the 3.
Another way to look at all of this is this: The Wolves have 2 drafts + free agency to fill out the roster. In each draft they should get 1 or 2 players that they absolutely want and in free agency they fill out the roster. If they used this draft to get their point guard (and let’s face it, the odds of this happening with Rubio and Flynn are fairly good) and next year they get a swing man or a big (Turner or Aldrich come to mind) this thing works out like gangbusters in the long run. I just think that DeRozan is one of those players you could have plugged in for a long time at the 3 and not had to worry one bit about whether or not he will be able to hold it down.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 27, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t like Gomes’ fit either ;).
I do get that having somebody who gets his points from all over the court. But the problem is that his bad 3point shooting brings down the total. If he did have that outside shot, his ppp would have been much higher and then it would have been ok to talk about him at #6.
Yes there was improvement but it isn’t really that hard to improve from 0% now is it :p. If Brewer improved from awful-can’t-look-anymore to something a bit better than you can definitly say the same about DeRozan.
But, I do get it, the potential is there. Just don’t thing you reach for fit/potential when you’ve got Jonny Flynn right there.
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Jul 27, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotchya
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 27, 2009 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wim hits it on the head
This team needed mulitple shooters. Shooting not defense was the major issue with this team last season. The reason for the horrid start had to do with Shaddy falling apart along with other shooting issues. So if you get someone who moves well without the ball in a Rip Hamilton, Reggie Miller fashion as Curry then you have something. I still believe Curry could play the 1 in the NBA as he’s clearly smart enough and a good-enough passer.
As far as Flynn- he looked better than Curry in Summer League. Although much of Curry’s value is going to be derived from shots falling. I do think their is potential for a Flynn/Rubio pairing long-term. Shooting though going forward barring massive improvements is going to still be a major issue.
by Jose Cordoba on Jul 27, 2009 10:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What we shoulda done is...
said, forget about Rubio, and traded the 6th pick to the Knicks for Wilson Chandler, Nate Robinson and their pick. Then we take J-Fly with the 5th pick, Derozen with the Knicks pick, and Ellington with the 28th pick. That would have given us Flynn and Robinson at the point, and Ellington, Derozen, Chandler, Gomes, and Brewer at the wing positions. IMO, that would have been the best draft possible!
by Bartzy on Jul 27, 2009 10:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sorry - NO!
There is no way you pass up on a talent like Rubio that falls into your lap @ #5. Would the kniicks have given up that much? I don’t think so. But we’ll never know for sure. . .
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jul 27, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Derozan was not the right guy
With Al’s and Love’s limitations defensively, I think we need a solid defender at the 3. Someone like Austin Daye is the right idea, but Daye is SOOO skinny that he raises as many questions as he answers. I think trading out of this draft for a first-rounder next year was a smart move. Let’s fill this hole next year.
by Dave T on Jul 27, 2009 11:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If Sid doesn't like it, then it must be the right move
I am more and more impressed by Kahn. He seems to be making all the right moves, especially since the fading and confused Sid Hartman took a cheap shot at him and Rubio in Sunday’s column. The one thing that Sid is good at is not letting the facts get in way of holding a grudge. He can’t stand it that Kahn fired his close personal friend Kevin McHale.
by jgale on Jul 27, 2009 11:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I love Sid's latest two columns
They basically break down like this:
1- Bill Duffy loves his own clients and thinks they are better than guys who didn’t sign with him.
2- Bill Smith may suchk at MLB Gm-ing but at least he tries hard.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 27, 2009 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Punch Bowl
I can’t wait to hear about he Gophers Football team making the Rose Bowl this year or falling down trying! I’m so pumped, Sid. So pumped!
by littleboxes on Jul 27, 2009 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the odds of a correct prognostication by Sid
are laughably minute.
by levi_mn on Jul 27, 2009 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps Sid and Dave Berri together on a Podcast
I have a feeling they’re would be some Drama.
by Jose Cordoba on Jul 27, 2009 12:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
two points
I still would have picked Curry at #6 and tried to trade down and get value with another player. NY really didn’t have much to offer, but how much did GS really want Curry?
FWIW, with Derozan, he is in a great spot with the Raptors. That team has quietly gotten scary this off-season. He will get some good situational minutes for change-of-pace.
by Rasho Revolution on Jul 27, 2009 12:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
DeRozan wouldn't work
DeRozan at 2 next to Rubio would have been disastrous because we wouldn’t have anyone that could spread out the defense with an outside shooting threat. Flynn and Ellington can both do that better than DeRozan, who will never be more than a barely adequate 3 point shooter.
by Cobra312004 on Jul 27, 2009 3:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Bias?
SnP, I’ll preface this by saying that you’re normally very fair and unbiased, using statistics first and your own opinions second. However, I feel you’re being rather unfair to Derozan here.
I have a few problems with the Ellington comparison: firstly, it’s a lot easier to get maximum value out of a 28th pick than it is a 6th pick. Teams are more likely to let mid-round talent drop to 28 than a top 2 talent drop to 6, if that makes sense. Secondly, there are some factors working in Derozan’s favor here that weren’t fully emphasized. Ellington was a junior, Derozan a freshman. Derozan had to carry a larger offensive load than Ellington, who was the third option on a team full of scorers. And defensively, Ellington was average and projects to be no more than average, whereas Derozan shows potential as a top-flight perimeter stopper. I suppose a lot of this is implicit, since there are obviously reasons that Derozan went 9 and Ellington went 28, but they’re worth at least mentioning in Derozan’s favor nonetheless.
Later, you seem to be implying that point guard was a greater position of need than SG/SF, using the LAC trade that took place a month later as justification. Might it be more accurate to presume that that trade wouldn’t have happened if Derozan had been the pick? After all, while roster consolidation and losing Bassy’s 2010-11 guaranteed contract were nice fringe benefits, the crux of that deal was our need for someone to take up some minutes at SG this next year.
As you can see,
Telfair/Lawson or Maynor
Derozan/Ellington
Gomes/Brewer
would have left us with 2 point guards (Bobby Brown in a pinch) and 4 guys capable of playing the 2 and the 3, even without Rubio coming over.
Ultimately, I don’t think you came to any rash conclusions, but it just seemed as though this write-up may have been slanted toward justifying the Flynn pick. As the Cult of Kahn rapidly develops, I think it’s important that we still fully evaluate his decisions. If they’re truly the right ones, we shouldn’t need to pull punches.
by John Doe on Jul 28, 2009 4:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's fair
I’ll put it in much simpler and clearer terms: I would have drafted DeRozan. That being said, with the way the Rubio business went down, I get the Flynn pick because they absolutely, 100% couldn’t have walked away from this draft without a starting point guard….Rubio or no Rubio; Bassy trade or no Bassy trade…they needed a starting PG. I think that point trumps a lot of things. If they drafted Rubio and DeRozan and they never see Rubio in a Wolves uniform, they have problems. If he does play, I think they hit the jackpot. That’s a big bet to make and there is a lot riding on it. Perhaps my feelings towards Kahn on this one are more sympathetic in nature. That’s a tough call to make when you don’t know if you’ll ever see the 5th pick in uniform and you know you have to take him. All of that aside, I think DeRozan should have been the pick and in fantasy GM land, I would have made the bet that Rubio would come over (along with taking Lawson at 18 and keeping him if Denver didn’t find anyone else to move up with).
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 28, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
DeRozan can wait
There will be four more DeRozan type players in the next two drafts. The Wolves should be able to package the Utah and Charlotte picks and get a better version of DeRozan, while still using their own top 5 pick to fill either the 5 or another perimeter player to go with DeRozan.
by Rumblebee on Jul 28, 2009 8:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"We had to come away with a starting PG"
Because of lack of depth there, because of the importance of the position, or being the draft was stocked with point guards?
Our post-Washington depth chart at the 2/3 would seem to refute the first reason. Having seen you claim that 2/3 are highly important to a team’s success in your pining for Rudy Gay elsewhere makes me think you wouldn’t agree with the second reason. And the third one is generally pretty weak.
I’m glad you could take my questions/criticisms in stride. Truth be told, I’m pretty biased in the other direction. Derozan, while he’s not a truly elite SG prospect, has a weird combination of sure thing/upside and would’ve had great synergy with Rubio. If we had to have point guard insurance, I would’ve preferred Curry (more upside as a PG prospect, more size/ability to play off the ball alongside Rubio) or even Jennings, who is higher risk but higher reward.
by John Doe on Jul 29, 2009 1:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They had to have a PG...
…because that and the 3 were their two biggest weaknesses and it was a point guard heavy draft and they had 2 of the top 6 picks and 3 of the top 18. I completely agree with the weirdness of DeRozan’s sure-thing/upside combo but for this team to not walk away with a starting point with 3 picks in a draft filled with points would have been unacceptable. The 1 and the 3 kill this team…..followed by the 2. Taking DeRozan would have been a big bet and I can sympathize with Kahn not wanting to take it. I suppose they could have waited for someone like Eric Maynor or Ty Lawson but that assumes that there is a large gap between Flynn and DeRozan for BPA and while I may have pegged that difference, I know for sure the front office did not. They went with Flynn because he was their BPA and a hedge against Rubio not coming over.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jul 29, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















