Learning About Lazar
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 27, 2010 10:39 PM CDT
Email
PrintI took part in a brief Q&A with the good folks at SB Nation's Marquette blog, Anonymous Eagle. You can read my end of the proceedings by clicking here. It was a Jesuit meeting of the minds as a Creghton Bluejay went back and forth with a Marquette Golden Eagle.
Below the fold you can read Rubie Q's response to my questions about Mr. Hayward.
He was billed as a 3 (and possibly a big 2) when he came to Marquette as a freshman, but, out of necessity, he played the 4 and, at times, the 5 during his four years. Lazar never once complained about it. He put his head down and went to work.
In his first three years, he often played third or fourth fiddle to Dom James, Jerel McNeal, and Wes Matthews (three career 1500 point scorers). Lazar never once complained about it. He developed into an effective post player, knocked down open looks, and deferred to his teammates without a peep.
This year, after James, McNeal, and Matthews graduated, the yoke fell on 'Zar's shoulders. He was our best scorer, our best defender, and our best rebounder. More importantly, the team gelled around Lazar and adopted his "bust your hump and let your play do the talking" style. The end result? In a year when not much was expected of Marquette, the team clawed and scratched its way into the NCAA tournament.
For these reasons, his coaches love him. His teammates love him. The media loves him. And, obviously, the fans love him.
In terms of his game, Lazar is a good shooter. He showed NBA three-point range at times last year, he makes his throws, and he's got a decent mid-range game. He struggles to create his own shot, but he's got a quick release if you can find him on the wing. He can guard a number of positions, and he's not afraid to mix it up in the paint.
As for best performances, it's hard to single out individual games, because he's been such a steady, dependable player for so long. He scored in double figures in all but 2 games last year, and all but 5 games two years ago. That said, 'Zar was huge against Providence on the road two years ago -- 25 and 7 in a game that the team rallied to win after being down by double digits in the second half -- and repeated the trick this year, scoring 28 and grabbing a critical offensive rebound and hitting two free throws when the team was melting down at the end of the game. But a better example of the type of player 'Zar is was seen in this year's game at Cincinnati. His shot was broke all game -- 1 for 10 coming into the last two minutes of the game -- but he grabbed 11 rebounds and then hit a crucial three-pointer with about 30 seconds left, and then made a couple more big shots in overtime.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm excited
to bring this guy on board. He seems like a stand up guy that can contribute a lot to the team, even if he doesn’t see a whole lot of minutes. We need a guy like this on a team that is developing. Good grab for the Wolves.
I like him
his measurements were great. productive player at a good school. he looks like a possible steal.
agreed
This was a reach pick only in that Chad Ford and the rest of the media genius’ didn’t have him highly rated. No shocker because playing with heart seldom is shown in a mock draft projection. I think Hayward is all heart, and guys like him always make the ball club. Any time you can add a player at 30 like this guy consider yourself lucky. Can’t wait to see how his summer league goes.
One more thought
Kudos to Khan for making the trade from 23 as I feel reasonably certain they would have drafted Lazar there if they couldn’t deal.
And adding in Bjelica is the big bonus.
"I was trying to focus on breathing," Milicic said. "I was just focusing on breathing so I didn’t die."
NBAdraft.Net said this
NBA Comparison: Jarvis Hayes/Ryan Gomes
Strengths: Hayward is not your prototypical 6’6 wing. Played predominantly the 4 spot for Marquette, occasionally forced to play the 5. Held his own against the beasts of the BE, not afraid to mix it up … An effective interior player despite his frequent size disadvantage, thanks to a 7 3/4 wingspan … Has a knack for getting quality shots off in the paint, excellent use of the ‘flip shot’ … Showed his core strength performing 15 reps of 185 at the NBA Draft Combine … Excellent stationary shooter … Form and follow through are textbook with no excess moving parts- simple mechanics and a quick, effortless release … Uses his lower body extremely well on his shot- like an anchor, generating lift from his base. Possesses tremendous range well beyond the NBA 3, which he put on display at the Reese’s All-Star Game at the Final Four (5 threes). Shot 35% from distance as a senior in 5.5 attempts per game … Found some of his best looks in the pick and pop game, where he was very effective stepping out … Hit 17 of 25 college threes and 15 of 25 NBA threes at the combine shooting drill. Utilizes the pump fake well knowing opponents must respect his jumper … When he sees an open lane, he attacks the hole with reckless abandon- wills his way to the basket … Outstanding FT shooter, shooting 82% as a junior and 84% as a senior. Won 96 games in his 4 years at Marquette … Clutch player, not afraid to take and make big shots. Made drastic improvements in all facets of the game during his collegiate career … Increased his scoring average from 6.8 as a freshman to 18.1 as a senior, and rebounding from 3.6 to 7.5 (8.6 rpg as a junior). Opened eyes at combine athleticism tests with a 36 inch max vert and 3.31 3/4 court sprint … Finished 2nd, only behind John Wall, in the lane agility drill at 10.87.
Weaknesses: Despite solid showings in the athletic testing, concerns over general athletic ability, explosiveness and quickness still remain … Does he possess the lateral quickness to defend opposing two-guards or wings? Despite his toughness and lower body strength, he’s not defending 4’s at the next level … He will need to prove he can defend on the perimeter … Appeared lead footed at times when forced to cover quicker opposition at the college level. While he’s an efficient spot up shooter, does not shoot well on the move or off the dribble. Needs time to get his legs underneath the shot. Additional cultivation of the mid-range game will be critical to his success. Did not spend time coming off screens in college, usually acting as the screener … Can he use screens effectively and make shots? His ball handling skills are extremely limited for an NBA SG/SF … Has minimal creativity as a result, and unable to get shots for himself … Dribbles with his head fixated on the ground … Had turnover problems (2 per game) despite limited ballhandling responsibilities … Was the beneficiary of open 3 pt looks floating around the three point stripe when defended by bigs … Open spaces will be few and far between when guarded by players of comparable size … Became heavily reliant on the three rather than using his brute strength inside. Almost 40% of his FG attempts came from beyond the arc … Did not spend enough time on the FT line (3.7 FTA), failing to attempt more than 8 in a game. With his accuracy, he should be seeking out contact whenever possible.
Matthews vs Hayward
Both were seniors at Marquette…
Matthews: 18.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 2.5 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.5 BPG in 34 MPG
Hayward: 18.1 PPG, 7.5 RPG, 1.5 APG, 1.9 SPG, 0.5 BPG in 32 MPG
Hayward looks superior compared to Wesley Matthews, and Matthews averaged close to 10 points…
I think Hayward could be a really good, A status role player..
Did not spend enough time on the FT line (3.7 FTA)
That’s better than Gomes, who rarely made it to the line. We don’t need another Ryan Gomes. We improved the minute he was traded.
Gomes attempted just 1.66 times FT’s per game last year, and 2.45 per game in his career. He was invisible on both offense and defense.
He should have made it to the line more often by accident.
Another McFail remnant bites the dust. Who’s next? Big Al? KLove? Brewer?
Did you call yourself Jesuit? I love it…
“bust your hump” is a phrase I use coaching. Interesting…
Hard worker with quick release and a beasty wingspan. Looks good to me.
taught by jesuits
is probably a better way to put it these days.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Thanks for this post. I'll admit I was WAY against drafting Hayward.
This article is helping me to think more positively. Here’s to hoping that I’m wrong.
The Timberwolves were really in no position to take a guy like Hayward at the end of the 1st with higher potential players
I liked Hayward more than most heading into the draft, but his upside is only “solid”… and the Timberwolves don’t need solid – especially when they made a trade earlier in the night for Webster. Kahn left 3-4 players on the table who would’ve made more sense for the Timberwolves. Maybe they wouldn’t have been character guys like Lazar, but honestly, who cares?
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
Keep in mind
a guy like Whiteside might be great, but could also be an epic failure. The Wolves can’t afford epic failure. I’ll take solid all day long at pick 30.
How can they not afford epic failure?
They picked up two “safe” wings with the #4 and then via trading #16 and Gomes. They absolutely could afford “epic failure” at #30. Whiteside should have been the pick there unless he disrespected the Wolves at his workout – if not him, then one of the handful of other prospects who offer…. more clay to mold.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
Agree 100%
Hope the best for Hayward and all that, but on a night devoid of upside, it made perfect sense to go for some at that spot.
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
I think teams are starting to realize that developing raw 19 year old prospects can be a huge burden on team resources.
In the past, when all draftees were seniors, prospects would come into the league somewhat polished. Now that most guys leave after one or two years, you’re asking teams to invest a lot of valuable playing time and energy and sacrifice a lot of wins as well to teach the fundamentals of bball to a player who hasn’t really proven himself. More often than not this ends badly when the player loses confidence and rots away on the bench (Ndudi). I think that’s why several highly touted but very raw prospects fell so far this year.
I also think that’s why the wolves might have been wise to trade the 16th pick. Even if Babbit could someday be as good as or better than Webster, its far from guaranteed and it would take a lot of time and effort and patience. Our team won 15 games last year!!! Did you enjoy it? Many of you preferred that we drafted Whiteside as well, but how much better do you think we would be if committed ourselves to developing those two extremely raw prospects (in addition to the already pretty raw rest of the team)? How many more 15 win seasons can you or the franchise take?
I don’t know how it will play out in the end, Lazar may never be much of a contributor on the court, although it won’t be for lack of effort, but at least he won’t hurt the team by wasting precious minutes learning how to do things he should have learned in college. And judging from the few interviews I’ve seen with him he seems to have his head firmly screwed on, has great work ethic, is mature well beyond his age, and is humble to the point of inspiration. In a locker room full of millionaire ‘kids’ with big egos this type of personality could be invaluable. So, I don’t care what Chad Ford or many of you naysayers say, I think it was a great pick.
I didn't really want 2 extremely raw prospects
I said nothing about Babbit. I didn’t particularly like that deal as I much preferred Anderson, but if you’re hedging your draft by taking two mature players in Johnson and Webster, then you can afford a high upside pick like Whiteside.
And I wouldn’t call sending him to the D league and/or letting him learn in practice a “huge burden on team resources.” Nor would I call minutes poached from Ryan Hollins “precious.”
As I said above, I’m all for hoping Hayward works out, but we were in the perfect position to take a swing on an upside player at that point in the draft and I’m disappointed we didn’t.
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
Player Development
Plus Kahn has done nothing but state that the Wolves are going to be the #1 team in the NBA at player development. A guy like Whitside or Alabi would have been the perfect proof of this.
Plus how much do you think Hayward is actually going to play with Brewer, Johnson, and Webster ahead of him on the SF depth chart? He’s going to spend just as much time on the bench/D-League as Whiteside with about a third of the potential.
No way
why go for the guys who have the tools to develop into monsters when you can take the guys who don’t have the tools and make them into allstars anyways? Then you can hold your head up and look at all the national sports writers and go, “SEE!”
Buckeyes are red, Wildcats are blue,
I wanted Evan Turner, But DeMarcus Cousins will do.
Whiteside
When exactly would this guy play for us? We couldn’t tolerate Hollins last year, where would Whiteside get any minutes between Love, Darko, and Pekovic (and that’s assuming we trade Al)? That’s the problem with raw big guys — there’s usually only one place they can play and they usually get their a$$ kicked by anyone with experience. DeAndre Jordon was the same way two years ago.
Character doesn’t mean much to me when last year’s team won 15 games and is lacking po-po-potential.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
I'd rather win 15 games with good character guys
than win 70 games and a championship with the Jail Blazers. Just my personal opinion.
Actively looking for red flags since my 5th grade traveling team
What I'm saying
is that the team needs to get better. The risk/reward thing is dicey. It means it can go either way. If our draft was all upside we would would be a worse team for the ones that don’t pan out than if we take a few solid players who will make the club. When they make the club, we get better. Simple as that. We still need our superstar and maybe Wes will be it, but the chances of it being Whiteside were too slim. Plus he’s an asshole.
You must love the Lakers
with Colorado Kobe and Artest…
by Breaking Ankles on Jun 28, 2010 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Really?
I disagree completely. This business is about winning and entertainment. You could put 5 saints out there and if you don’t win nobody is going to the games.
If it's the very last pick of the first round....
…..it should be drafting safe. It’s the LAST PICK OF THE FIRST ROUND. It’s not the place to be taking projects, especially for a team like ours. Guaranteed money is a big deal, even at that amount….we can’t afford to lock up money in a kid that 29 other teams didn’t think was worth it, and who might very well end up wasting that money if he doesn’t pan out.
By far the best players taken late in the first round have been players who are NBA ready. Wayne Ellington, Taj Gibson and Omri Casspi. Courtney Lee and George Hill. Rajon Rondo. Aaron Afflalo. Jason Maxiell. David Lee. Josh Howard. Tony Parker. Tayshaun Prince.
The “projects” drafted late? Guys like BJ Mullens, DJ White, Mardy Collins, Johan Petro, David Harrison, Brian Cook, Qyntel Woods….how much do we hear about any of them these days?
We’re not the only team that passed on Whiteside. EVERY SINGLE TEAM PASSED ON WHITESIDE. That says something. Haywood was a fine pick at 30, and I’m quite frankly baffled why anyone would complain about that. Players who aren’t NBA ready who are taken late in the first round have not worked out very well as a whole in this league.
If the pick has that little value why would you want to trade for it? This hasn’t been brought up much but I think you could easily argue that the #30 pick is the worst pick in the entire draft and David Kahn traded for it. How does that make any sense?
Just to give you one example that you are wrong. David Lee was selected with the #30 pick in the 2005 Draft after only 2 years of college and he seems to be doing ok. I could keep going with guys like Batum or Kendrick Perkins but who’d want to do that. Plus if you think some of those guys you listed were NBA ready when they were drafted you’re crazy. Nobody thought Rondo was ready when he came into the league. You just don’t know until you draft them.
Well, technically you don't know with anyone
Michael Jordan could have busted, even though he was a college junior averaging 20ppg when he was drafted. No one knew for sure.
Although I disagree that we traded for #30 to get Lazar. We traded for #35 for Bjelica, and got #30 in the process
The reason I am ok with taking Whiteside that low
and would have preferred it even. Despite your point (and a good one), I still think he is a guy who will have trade value next year even if he sucks this year. It’s like Thabeet this year. He was pretty bad but as long as he has a nice play or two once a month teams will still want a guy like him. It’s the Anthony Randolph and JaVale McGee effect. Both of them are valued a lot higher than their production. We could easily trade Whiteside as long as he didn’t decide that soccer was his true career path.
Buckeyes are red, Wildcats are blue,
I wanted Evan Turner, But DeMarcus Cousins will do.
Prime example of someone cherry picking names to make their argument
Yeah, let’s not look at the truth of the situation Oceanary, let’s just pick the names you did and hope no one looks at the rest of history.
Oh wait… I’m not one of those people.
Late 1st round picks get a guaranteed contract of two years for a little less than double the minimum. ~900k in the grand scheme of things is absolutely nothing if the guy doesn’t work out. Lazar Hayward is a bench guy, likely one who will not see big minutes considering the 2/3 rotation the Timberwolves currently have. He’s not even guaranteed to become anything in the NBA, yet here you are advocating taking him as a safe selection.
Want some names of the other late 1sts (last 7 picks) that are “projects”? I’ll name them since you decided to leave them out and pick out names as “projects” who weren’t:
2009: Mullens
2008: Ibaka, Batum, Greene
2007: Koponen
2006: Farmar, Rodriguez, Freeland
2005: Petro, Mahinmi
2004: Monia, Harrison
2003: Outlaw, Ebi, Perkins
2002: None
2001: Wallace, Dalembert, Parker
Drafting safe? I rather not list all the other guys (you can go through them yourself and hopefully you don’t misrepresent the truth to yourself like you attempted to do to the CH readers) but know that the rate is basically equal, and the turnout of them (i.e. star quality) is not as good as the “projects”. Please tell me you didn’t expect readers to just take your word for it when you tried to spout the bull that you just wrote. Parker was “safe” and “NBA ready”? Are you kidding? Rondo? Are you kidding? You have no idea, absolutely none, about what you are talking about.
Yes, every single team who owned a first round pick passed on Whiteside. What’s your point? Seriously, what.. is.. your.. point? Every team passed on Rashard Lewis as well… are you saying if people are fans of a 15-win team, they have no right to be annoyed that they passed up on that type of guy for a “safe” pick when clearly they are not needing “safe”? Hassan Whiteside could easily bust, and yes, teams in the 1st passed – however, not every team at the end of the 1st are in the Timberwolves situation where they are dying for potential. Not every team at the end of the 1st has a need for a player like him in the frontcourt. Not every team had no use for another safe pick at wing when they just picked two safe wings prior.
Seriously dude. Just seriously.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
C'mon guys
Why are we having these petty arguments, when the very real threat of Manbearpig exists? I’m being serial. In fact, I’m super serial.
Ok, for an actual serious answer
First, I’ll repeat the mountains and molehills comment I made to S-n-P. This is a big deal to make over the 30th pick.
Second, you’re accusing me of trying to pass of opinions as facts, when you’re doing the exact same thing. So cool it, Mr. Gingrich
Third, the names you listed all fall into the category of the names I listed. You, in fact, repeated several of them. Then you try to tell me you’re “filling in the blanks” on my behalf? You’re just overwritting what I’ve written.
This isn’t taking Darko over Carmelo here. And it’s not the top of the draft. If you’re the kind of guy that wants to gamble at the end of the first round, then that’s your choice, but that’s not how things are typically done. The 30th pick is where teams look for something servicable, usually someone who can start right away, and doesn’t have much bust potential. Hayward is a fine pick…..actually, he’s a typical pick, even a steal….for where he was taken.
To be fair
the teams at the bottom of the first are contenders who are usually looking to add someone who can contribute immediately and not a project that will help them after their run is over.
Buckeyes are red, Wildcats are blue,
I wanted Evan Turner, But DeMarcus Cousins will do.
Yeah… you just happened to conveniently leave out the project picks which panned out or mislabel them as “safe” picks when they were anything but. I’m not accusing you of passing off opinions as facts, I’m accusing you of only giving “facts” (even though some of them are things which history clearly disagrees with, i.e. White, Rondo, Cook) to the things which support your case and leaving out all the things which don’t.
Reading posts similar to the one you made above… God… just so annoying. It’s like you don’t see anything wrong with that type of argumentation either. For someone who gets their posts front-paged at times, you’d think relaying the truth would be most important. Not purporting it to suit your purposes.
PS, I love how you accuse me of cherrypicking names…
….then solo name drop Rashard Lewis. Brilliant
Want me to go through and list all of those names as well? Rashard Lewis was the first name that came to mind when it’s a risk-reward player with high potential. It’s not even remotely the same as blatantly picking out names of busts – some of whom were safe picks that you’re trying to mislabel as projects – and ignoring the people who succeeded.
If you want me to debate with you as if you were a ten year old and keep bringing up every name which fits the criteria since you obviously like to neglect the cases which don’t help your argument… I’ll do that. I will list every “safe” and “project” pick that panned out or didn’t in the late-1st and early-2nd, and then show you how the %s are virtually equal and that taking Lazar Hayward when they already took Johnson and traded for Webster makes very, very little sense over taking a project big like Whiteside when the need is overwhelmingly in Whiteside’s favor.
Check out my NBA Draft blog:
http://casperkid23.blogspot.com/
by Casperkid23 on Jun 29, 2010 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions
PS, I love how you accuse me of cherrypicking names...
….then solo name drop Rashard Lewis. Brilliant
Point is IMO
If you are losing you can not have the complainers and whiners – much less a team of jail blazers. Showing passion is one thing, putting up your own numbers and costing the team’s front office to NOT be able to evaluate the current talent is the much bigger issue.
Hayward can play his role in the O and will buckle down on D…..Whiteside maybe a NBDL player by the end of the year
Let's look at this another way.
Let’s just imply that upperclassmen are “safe” picks and underclassmen/internationals are “upside” picks. In the last 5 drafts, here are the guys taken in picks 21-30, which is mainly the area that’s being discussed.
2009
“Safe”: Darren Collison, Taj Gibson, Demarre Carroll, Wayne Ellington, Toney Douglas
“Upside”: Byron Mullens, Victor Claver, Roddy Beaubois, Omri Casspi, Christian Eyenga
Crack Analysis: The internationals who came over seemed to show some of that upside, but most of the safe picks contributed right away.
2008
“Safe”: Courtney Lee, George Hill, D.J. White, J.R. Giddens
“Upside”: Ryan Anderson, Kosta Koufos, Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, Darrell Arthur, Donte Greene
Crack Analysis: Again, the internationals are the best picks, then the upperclassmen, then the underclassmen.
2007
“Safe”: Jared Dudley, Morris Almond, Aaron Brooks, Arron Afflalo, Alando Tucker
“Upside”: Wilson Chandler, Daequan Cook, Rudy Fernandez, Tiago Splitter, Petteri Kopponen
Crack Analysis: Internationals are tough to say but Splitter is reportedly the best of all, which would make it internationals, then underclassmen (mainly because there are only two and both are at least rotation-level), then upperclassmen.
2006
“Safe”: Josh Boone, Shannon Brown, Maurice Ager, Mardy Collins
“Upside”: Rajon Rondo, Marcus Williams, Kyle Lowry, Jordan Farmar, Sergio Rodriguez, Joel Freeland
Crack Analysis: This is really the only draft in the bunch where it’s clear that “safe” didn’t work out for the teams drafting, particularly since Brown didn’t become a rotation player until his 3rd team.
2005
“Safe”: Nate Robinson, Jarrett Jack, Francisco Garcia, Luther Head, Jason Maxiell, Wayne Simien, David Lee
“Upside”: Johan Petro, Linas Kleiza, Ian Mahinmi
Crack Analysis: Simien is the only clear bust in the “safe” picks as the others have been in NBA rotations, while Mahinmi and Petro have struggled to develop.
To me, it seems like the best players to take, either way, are perimeter players, particularly guards. Not only that, but there are examples of “reaches” according to projection (like Hill and Brooks) that worked out well for their teams. To me, this list indicates that it’s internationals, then upperclassmen, then underclassmen at this stage of the draft. Whether Hayward is more like Hill and Brooks than he is Giddens and Tucker remains to be seen, but there is plenty of history behind taking a guy like Hayward at this point.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 29, 2010 11:59 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
This is awesome stuff, PSR
If you are willing to dedicate a bit more time, I think you should figure out where mocks had these guys going compared to where they were taken and then make a fanpost out of it.
Easy to figure out where they were taken, a little more work to figure out where they were mocked…
Anyways, rec’d
Buckeyes are red, Wildcats are blue,
I wanted Evan Turner, But DeMarcus Cousins will do.
I already did
Here. It was just bumped from the main page because of the flurry of other posts.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 29, 2010 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes that I knew about (hence my comments :) )
But I mean one that sets people up by class rather than year. It’s one thing to look at players draft higher or lower than expected and another to look at that combined with age at time of draft… I suppose a combination of the post and the reply here :)
Buckeyes are red, Wildcats are blue,
I wanted Evan Turner, But DeMarcus Cousins will do.
I see.
I’ll just do a quick one here because most posters would prefer to chase rumors and waste their energy in coming up with new ways to complain than think about something in a different way.
From the people on the list:
’09: Collison, Beaubois, Ellington, Claver, and Eyenga went higher than projected; everyone else went about where they were supposed to go
’08: Anderson, Hill, Giddens, and Ibaka went higher; White, Koufos, Arthur, and Greene went lower; everyone else went about where projected
’07: Dudley, Brooks, Afflalo, and Tucker went higher; Splitter went lower; everyone else went about where projected.
I could only do 3 years because there aren’t any free draft sites as good at projecting as DraftExpress. That is a pretty impressive list of upperclassmen going higher than projected, though.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 30, 2010 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
To add to that:
Underclassmen who went higher than projected, 07-09: Ryan Anderson, Thaddeus Young, Marreese Speights, J.J. Hickson, Brandon Jennings, Austin Daye, Jodie Meeks
Underclassmen who went lower, 07-09: Josh McRoberts, Kosta Koufos, Donte Greene, Darrell Arthur, DeAndre Jordan, Bill Walker, Richard Hendrix, Jrue Holiday, Byron Mullens
Upperclassmen who went higher, 07-09: Tyler Hansbrough, Collison, Ellington, Jermaine Taylor, Jon Brockman, Jeff Pendergraph, Joey Dorsey, George Hill, J.R. Giddens, Sonny Weems, Dudley, Brooks, Tucker, Afflalo
Upperclassmen who went lower, 07-09: Paul Harris, Ahmad Nivins, Josh Heytvelt, Patty Mills, Marcus Thornton, Chase Budinger, Jack McClinton, Ty Lawson, DeJuan Blair, Sam Young, D.J. White, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Mario Chalmers, DeVon Hardin, JaMont Gordon, Pat Calathes, Gary Forbes, Nick Fazekas, Derrick Byars, Taurean Green, Ramon Sessions, Demetris Nichols, Dominic McGuire, Zabian Dowdell
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 30, 2010 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
And on another track...
Instead of focusing so heavily on whether or not the team fucked up this pick, why not focus on what Hayward will have to be able to do to survive in this league? For me, it’s 1) make open 3s and Js; 2) show productive effort (effort that leads to positive things) at all times; 3) guard all 3s and bigger 2s effectively; 4) guard stretch 4s effectively by contesting outside shots, forcing tough shots on post-ups, and outrebounding his opponent; 5) be able to get up and down the floor to finish in transition; and 6) handle the ball on the perimeter without turnovers and make all of the passes an average SF should make. This guy has to mainly show and develop a skillset that fits in this system and be able to play tough, smart basketball every minute he’s on the court. I think he’s more a 3 who plays small-ball 4 than a 2/3, but that means he has to show the capability to play there.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 29, 2010 12:09 PM CDT reply actions
First off, Tim Allen your not alone.
Character is pretty high on my list as well. What also makes for interest in a team is improvement or development . One thing I don’t like about the NBA is they have decided to make it all about a handful of egotistical stars. Yet some were appealing (Magic Johnson is my all time favorite) . It would be nice to see more whole team experience. The Boston Celtics in 08 were about individual Egos but at least all the focus wasn’t just on one player and that made it more interesting. But back to my point of development, i find that the thunder are the most appealing team for me right now because of the real improvement they are making and they don’t seem to be spoiled yet. Even if the Timberwolves develop slower, so long as they develop I’m into them.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
