Draft Watch 2009 (5/2)
by Jamaicanpi on Mar 21, 2009 2:11 PM CDT
Email
Print*We lost our 2nd round pick to acquire the rights to Omer Asik last year.
**DraftExpress thinks we acquired Denver's pick, SI says we received San Antonio's pick (the difference is pick 26 vs 25).
Pick 16: 30% chance the player is above average.
Pick 26: 85% chance they suck.
Who's available:
Who's in, who's out according to Chad Ford
Links to mock draft sites:
DraftExpress (last update: Apr. 27)
nbadraft.net (last update: Apr. 28)
RealGM (last update: May 3)
Ignore height (more or less):
Better measurements than height
- talks about how to value standing reach, wingspan, height
- shows large residuals when correlating standing reach or wingspan to height
Quality of player vs pick:
How does each pick stack up to the 1st overall
NBA draft success and lessons --- part 2
- Big men bust. Late picks are good for guards and wings
Thinking about college stats:
College stats (per 40 pace adjusted default)
How do NCAA statistics translate to the NBA ---
- Good: block, assist, rebound, 3 P%, and FT%; Bad: FTA, PPG, FG%, and FGA
FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.
190 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like Blair . . .
. . . @ pick 25-27. Any higher than that would be a reach. I’m not sure he’s the worker that Milsap is. . .
He's a better rebounder than Milsap was and might be one of the best college rebounders ever
he would be perfect with the 15th pick. He’ll probably end up being the best player from this draft save for Blake Griffin.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 21, 2009 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions
the comment you responded to . . .
. . . was a perfect example of someone speaking before doing their homework. I checked the numbers. I’m officially on the Blair Bandwagon. . .
by ChiCity85 on Mar 21, 2009 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
At the time probably,
but he’s not the record holder.
Base rebounding stats
Millsap- 34.1 minutes, 6.0 OReb, 13.3 Reb
Blair -— 26.4 minutes, 5.5 OReb, 12.2 Reb
Per 40 minutes-pace adjusted
Millsap- 7.0 OReb, 15.6 Reb
Blair -— 8.4 OReb, 18.4 Reb
At the moment Blair is ranked 4th in rebounds per game.
I dunno,
watching him, he seems … slow.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
ghostly voice:
evan, stop… a college degree is worthless… you almost had a triple double yesterday… come to the nba, evan… come to the nbaaaaaaa…
BJ Mullens I'd guess will be around for our pick
after Ohio State’s round 1 crapout. The guy reminds me so much of Kwame Brown – limitless talent, zero basketball iq, zero tenacity. At the #1 pick it’s a stretch, obviously, at #15 I think it’s a smart pick. Thad Motta has no clue about developing big men.
Um... the Bulls... um...
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 21, 2009 7:13 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Thad Matta??
Yea, he did a poor job developing David West…
That's a good point
1) Because I didn’t know he coached David West, and 2) because I didn’t know how to spell Matta :)
Shows how much I know I guess. But I’ve seen Oden come and go without developing any skill (maybe free throw shooting?), Kosta Koufus come and go where he’s now buried on the bench, and Mullens come and (soon) go without learning how to box out. David West was an NBA non-factor until he was 25 years old.
Matta does not have much of a track record with big men
But David West was his only true big man worth much at either Butler or Xavier. Obviously he has had much more heralded recruits at OSU, but failed to keep them around for any substantial amount of time. DWest was national player of the year his senior year at Xavier and he was surrounded by solid talent that went deep in the tournament. West would be close to a non-factor without Paul and Chandler IMO. I only know this much because I am a Xavier alum and Matta is on my shitlist.
My choice, right now, is:
James Harden
Gerald Henderson
Dejuan Blair
Earl Clark
Evan Turner
BJ Mullens
Chase Budinger
Jerome Jordan.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I'm telling you, Marcus Thornton is GREAT. He was dominant in his first game and has been fantastic all season. He's even got a post up game for a guard.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 21, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions
We'll see. He doesn't seem to have the length or the athleticism (like Ben Gordon)...
…that indicates to me that an undersized 2-guard will still be able to get his shot off at the NBA level. Certainly, the measurements at camp will do a lot for him. If they take him w/ the 25th pick over Budinger, I won’t cry about it, but I don’t think he’s a potential average or above starter in the NBA. Not that I think Budinger would be, but if he busts, I think his floor is at least as a 3-pt specialist. If Thornton busts… I don’t know.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I got interested in something after I did my SPM post.
I decided to look at the numbers of some college players and plug them into the SPM formula.
There are a couple of very big caveats that need to be made with this: (1) there’s no guarantee that the coefficients for college ball are the same as the coefficients for pro ball. (2) because of point (1), it would be more helpful for this sort of calculation if I had a method of projecting these players college stats to pro-stats, (3) because of the two foregoing points, I just decided to plug in the numbers to see what they might tell me (4) finally, these numbers are the raw SPM numbers because I didn’t make the team adjustment to fit the individual minutes weighted SPMs summed to the actual team efficiency differentials.
Anyway, so I plugged in Marcus Thornton’s numbers from his junior year (last year) and his senior year (this year) – I used DX’s pace adjusted per 40 minute numbers.
OSPM DSPM TSPM
Thornton (Junior) 3.58 -1.33 2.24
Thornton (Senior) 5.23 -0.64 4.60
Then I did the same thing for Ben Gordon’s junior year to see where he came out.
OSPM DSPM TSPM
Gordon (Junior) 3.23 -0.89 2.33
Looking at the numbers, I’ll add a couple of observations. Gordon was on a much better team his junior year than Thornton was last year and this year, so it’s very likely that with a team adjustment to credit him for that, he’d look even better relative to his junior year and Thornton’s junior year. However, it is interesting to see how close their numbers came out in raw terms for their respective junior years. Anyway, maybe I’m reading it too much into the numbers and reaching too far for a justification for taking Thornton. I just really like the guy and think he does a lot of the same things that Ben Gordon does, so if we’re losing Ben, maybe Thornton’s a low-salary, slightly lesser version of Ben.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 7:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Earl Clark would be a great addition as would Turner.
I think Turner is returning though. BJ Mullens does not look appealing to me, his game is lazy and he seems so disinterested in putting in a solid effort every night of the college game let alone an 82 game season.
he seems to me like the public's perception of Tyrus Thomas.
Only opposite.
He hustles back on offense, doesn’t play defense. That’s the opposite-but-the-same of what most think of Tyrus Thomas.
Mullens, that is.
Turner is intriguing, but he probably returns to see if he can be a Top-10 pick next year.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Oh, and that list basically inclues both draft picks.
I wouldn’t take Mullens at 15 but certainly at 26.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I pretty much only want Blair for sure and the rest of the guys I'm less sure about
I like Thornton but could see him busting.
DeJuan Blair is a sure thing to me.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 21, 2009 10:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Clark can't shoot
He’s got a .515 TS% this year. If he is that inefficient in college, he’ll likely be even worse in the NBA.
agreed. I was going to make a similar point.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 3:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh.
Forgot to mention, don’t forget to rec this. I know Matt will keep it up once he gets back, but please rec, so it doesn’t disappear until then.
by Jamaicanpi on Mar 21, 2009 7:33 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
With the 2nd first rd pick
I think Dionte Christmas is being over looked. In case BG doesn’t stick around, this kid could be a solid pick.
Christmas is a great shooter
My only question is how he would perform when he is not the focal point. He is truly the only person on that Temple team that other teams would gameplan for but he would still but up big games. Great shooter and great athlete.
Hasheem Thabeet and Cole Aldrich are my guys.
We still need so much front court help, it’s ridiculous.
If we can trade Thomas/Noah, our two draft picks, + $3 million cash to move up to get one of these guys, I think that would be an investment well made.
I think I like Thabeet a bit more just from the perspective that he’s a giant. Guy reminds me a bit of Mutumbo.
But I still don’t know if you take Thabeet over Aldrich. Aldrich is just so good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOy-j5eoJ20
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Is Aldrich even declaring for the draft?
He isn’t a 1st round pick, much less in the lottery, in a single mock draft so far. Somehow, trading a former lottery pick, 2 1st round picks, and cash for a guy getting no name recognition from the popular draft sites seems a bit ridiculous.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 22, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions
No name recognition?
He’s ranked #5 on draft express’s sophomore list. He’s #8 on draftexpress’ 2010 mock draft.
He’s #6 on NBAdraft.net’s 2010 mock draft.
He’ll be a dumbass not to declare for this draft after Kansas goes to the Final Four.
He already is so skilled, I don’t think there is much more he can learn from playing in college. He already plays fierce. All he will do in college for another year or two is 1. Lead Kansas to a national championship probably and 2. Dominate completely inferior competition.
There is no reason for him not to come out. He’s ready.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
I'm just going on what the 2009 mock drafts are showing
He’s nowhere to be found on DX or NBADraft.net’s drafts.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 22, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions
The reason being...
"The word among NBA scouts is that Aldrich will stay in school for another year."
Good thing NBA scouts can read a youngman's mind!
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Yeah, but I don't see him realisticaly staying.
I think Kansas is probably going to make the Final Four. With a Final Four run, Aldrich will be in the mix for the #1 pick with Griffin/Thabeet.
He’s really having a great tournament so far.
Against North Dakota St: 23 pts 13 rebs 2 blks
Dayton: 13 points 20 rebounds 10 blocks.
He’s going really high. I just don’t see how he can bust without getting injured. he has a good frame, good athleticism, plays fierce, has great shotblocking instincts, boxes out, and has good offensive skill.
He just doesn’t seem like a likely bust candidate.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
I like Aldrich, but he's not in the same league as Griffin/Thabeet
First, you don’t pick white guys #1, not because they’re white, but because they have no wingspan. The best 6’11" white defender in the nba is Nick Collison.
Second, he’s a black hole on offense. 0.9 assists in 29.5 minutes. So his entire offensive game is what he provides with scoring (and he’s not Blake Griffin at scoring) and rebounding, which limits his effectiveness. If he’s around at #15, why not, but the odds are stacked against him that he’ll be anything more than a good, solid role player.
is griffin not white?
I guess I gotta adjust my tv set…and my computer monitor.
oh and andrei kirilenko has the longest arms Ive ever seen on a human being. but you go ahead and make your race generalizations. theyre very useful.
Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."
Griffin's mixed. His dad gave him his long arms, though. Not his mom.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Griffin has long arms? Looking at him I thought he had a bit
of the Jerryd Bayless raptor arms thing going (to a lesser extent, obviously).
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't know. They're not Tyrus Thomas long, that's for sure.
But if they’re not, then his hops are even that much more amazing because his arms are rarely extended on his dunks.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
maybe that's why they don't look as long to me
because he never fully extends on his dunks in the way that so many dunkers do (i.e. Tyrus).
It could also be his muscularity which tends to make guys arms visually appear to be less long because they are bulkier. I know my arms are really thin and as a result I look lankier than I did when I had a little bit of muscle tone.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions
I love Jerryd Bayless's arms
its like they are arms for a guy who is 5’7. its very rare to see someone with abnormally short arms.
by Basketball Smurf on Mar 23, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
who gave kirilenko his long arms???
stop generalizing. please.
Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."
While I don't disagree w/ your conclusion...
…I’d suggest that A) Chris Andersen has a great wingspan and is a better defender than Nick Collison (and neither is 6’11") and B) KU has two real scoring options: Aldrich and Collins and Collins creates a lot of his own offense. Aldrich should have more assists, but most of their offense is either Collins making his own shot or Aldrich making his own shot. I wouldn’t be surprised if 2 or 3 of Collins’ five assists per game are to Aldrich.
But ultimately, as I said, I agree with your final conclusion.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
wouldn't it be easier to simply say Cole Aldrich has short arms
than to make a race generalization?
I dunno, maybe I’m being overly sensitive too it, but it just seems like its not that hard to make it player specific, especially when you’re discussing a particular player. Also from what I’ve seen of Aldrich, his arms don’t look all that short.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
to it*
stupid misspelling. argh.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions
I actually think Aldrich has long arms.
He reminds me of a beefier Pau Gasol in body-type (minus the weight): wide shoulders, long arms—they help offset the lack of great hops.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
agreed. he doesn't seem to have great hops, but he blocked
10 shots in his most recent game. You don’t block that many shots without having your hands above the rim and since he doesn’t jump extraordinarily high (like Tyrus) I tend to conclude that he’s got pretty long arms. Plus, they look long.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
so youre saying
he’s black. right?
Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."
haha, well according to YaoPau's backwards logic about race
and wingspan, then yes.
But according to regular people logic, I’m going to say no, he’s not black. He’s just long-armed.
We whiteboys can be long-armed. My arms are actually long for my height, with no apparent explanation ( I don’t come from particularly lanky stock). It’s nice too because it makes me a sneaky shot blocker in pickup games. I’m only 5’11" but guys don’t expect me to be able to reach their shots at certain angles, but because of the arms I’m able to get there.
Anyway, probably too much information. Don’t want to delve into alec-land and have Matt make fun of me. :-P
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Stop with the pc bullshit
I didn’t say white people can’t be elite basketball players, I said they have short arms. That’s no different than saying asian people have high cheekbones; different races have different builds. Have a look at the pre-draft measurements, of the hundreds of white people on the list, the only exceptions I could find were Coby Karl and the aforementioned Collison.
Can Aldrich be great in spite of his (highly likely) short arms? Of course, but the odds are against him, just like they’re against an undersized post player or a wingman who can’t shoot.
it just seems like its not that hard to make it player specific, especially when you’re discussing a particular player
When his official measurements come out in May, I’ll refer to that, but for now I’d rather everyone use supported generalizations than “i think he has long arms, I saw a game once and he blocked a lot of shots”.
I'm not being politically correct. I'm being factually correct.
Go watch a video of Cole Aldrich. It’s okay, I’ll wait.
Okay, you back now? His arms are long. You can see that they are long. So why make a race generalization when you can just look at the guy and see his length?
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 24, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Hey, maybe you've got an ability I don't have
I can’t look at a video of him where he’s 100 feet from the camera and determine if his wingspan is 7’2" (short) or 7’5" (long).
If May comes along and next to Cole Aldrich on the draftexpress measurements board is a 7’5", then awesome, I’m wrong, and Aldrich is an anomaly.
But saying my logic is backwards is shortsighted. Read what I said again. It’s okay, I’ll wait :)
First, you don’t pick white guys #1, not because they’re white, but because they have no wingspan.
1) Aldridge is white, white guys don’t have long wingspans. Of course there’s a couple exceptions (Coby Karl, Nick Collison), but it’s substantiated.
2) Guys with short wingspans aren’t worth the #1 pick. Of course there’s a couple exceptions (Brandon Roy, Joe Johnson), but it’s substantiated.
Everything about the NBA Draft is generalizations. Did he play in the Final Four? Then he’s a winner! Does he have a 40" vertical? Then he’ll be great around the basket! You’re right that it would be better if I was player-specific, but that’s not always possible, especially when we’re dealing with limited information.
But instead of making generalization, just look at the player.
The Pioneer Press, a newspaper, who should be doing some kind of verification of facts (and not making up wing span numbers) says he’s 7’5" in wingspan.
http://phogblog.com/categories/cole-aldrich/
And he definitely doesn’t have short arms. He’s going to have a nice wing span. Eyes can deceive, but when you compare him to the other players on the court, he clearly has long arms. His long arms is probably the reason he can get so many blocks without really jumping too much.
Oh, and Cole Aldrich has some big game experience already. 8 points, 7 rebounds, and 4 blocks in 16 minutes in the Final Four last year. Pretty good.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
A newspaper reporter is measuring a player's wingspan?
Somehow I doubt that. Credible sources listed Michael Beasley at 6’10" last season, and he measured out to 6’7". The same goes with Blake Griffin’s 6’10" this year.
Anyway, this is stupid, and we aren’t going to get anywhere until the pre-draft camp data is released. The point holds though – year after year white athletes are overrated, get picked in the lottery, and then flop, and there’s got to be a reason why.
Maybe it's just because they don't have athleticism usually,
and not because they have short arms when they obviously have long arms.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
It's because so few are taken.
How many black players have become stars over the past 5 years? How many have been drafted? How many white players? It’s a numbers game. Do a study (a real statistical counting)(or maybe find one) and while there might be a difference, I guess you’ll see the percentage of busts, starters, stars, superstars aren’t all that different between black and white players.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 25, 2009 8:19 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I like that point
I actually did do a study on that, oddly enough, but it wasn’t for that purpose. Just a brief look through here at the last 10 lotteries…
Semi-stars: Mike Miller, Szczerbiak, Hinrich, Murphy
Role-players: Dunleavy, Love, Kaman, Collison, Ridnour, Hawes
Busts: Morrison, Mihm, Przybilla, Jackson, Redick
As I noted in the post, you might not agree with all the categorization (I tried to do it quickly and objectively with stats instead of saying “Hawes? Hmm… he sucks”). But according to those numbers, 15 white americans have been drafted in the lottery the past 10 years. And not a single one qualified for star status (a pretty low bar too, just points + assists + rebounds > 25). 4/15 rated as semi stars (p+a+r>20), 6/15 rated as role players (30+mpg or 75%+ of team games played), and 5/15 were busts.
I guess what that means is 1) white americans tend to bust at about the same rate as other prospects, so it’s not like if you take a white guy there’s a good chance you end up with Joe Alexander, which surprises me. But also 2) white americans almost never fulfill the expectations of their draft slot. You can argue that Hinrich was worth the #7 pick… was Wally worth the #6? If you had the #5 pick – with the 5th worst record in the NBA the previous season – would you be satisfied going forward knowing you now have Mike Miller?
As far as Aldrich goes, I think he’s got enough talent to reach the semi-star qualification. But if you’re thinking Top-5 pick with Aldrich, you’re expecting him to be a star, and that hasn’t happened in the past decade with any white american athlete.
I like that.
W/o commenting too much, I think it just reiterates how many players DO actually bust.
We might not think of Kevin Love as a superstar, ever, but if he doesn’t satisfy your star criteria shortly, I’ll be surprised.
And then that makes one white American to be there, which of course, doesn’t seem like a lot. But compared to how many white Americans are chosen, it’s not crazy.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
82games.com has a similar
series of articles going on, looking at expected performance by draft pick # – same sort of idea, but without grouping picks by top 5, rest of lottery, etc. I’m not sure it would change anything wrt the point here, but it’s an interesting comparison. Expectations from pick 6 to 14 are pretty different.
Also, I think Redick is pretty quickly climbing off the bust list – give him a couple of seasons at the current rate to bring the career averages up.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
What's he doing now?
I haven’t been following Redick or anything, but it doesn’t look so great.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Well, it's certainly not superstart stuff
But he’s getting minutes and contributing this year, which is a big jump over last year. I guess per minute he’s not really improved at all, but this formula uses per game averages so he looks much better just for getting time.
I definitely stated it too strongly – he is climbing off the bust list, but only to somewhere between deep bench/role player. (Hey, it’s a step up from Jackson and Morrison!)
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
It's a different list if you take out the "American" part of the qualification...
Since this was originally about white guy’s wingspans, would be interesting to see the list with Bogut, Dirk, Gasol, Bargnani, Kaman, Biedrins… etc.
I think that's a good point, except
The Dirks, Gasols, Bargnanis, and Stojakovics are successful because they’re huge and amazingly skilled. Dirk’s a 7’ PF who can penetrate and won the 3-PT contest. Gasol’s a 7’ PF who gets 4 assists a game with a 60% TS%. Bargnani’s a 7’ SF/PF who has a similar skillset to Dirk. Peja’s a 6’9" SF who might be the best shooter in the world.
If Dirk was 6’9", or if Peja was 6’6", would they be stars? Because despite their being 2-3" taller than league average for their position, they’re still not known for their defense. The only real foreign freaks are Ginobili and Kirilenko.
So it's just Americans...
…that breed short-armed white guys? That’s an interesting theory you have there.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
You forgot Bogut...
He’s decent no doubt.
"Playoffs? Are we talking about playoffs? Really, I mean... Playoffs?"
by Khalid El-Amin on Mar 27, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh wait, these guys are all American...
I see what you did there now.
"Playoffs? Are we talking about playoffs? Really, I mean... Playoffs?"
by Khalid El-Amin on Mar 27, 2009 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
10 blocks is 10 blocks
But Dayton is a pretty short team, and a bunch of those blocks were without Cole even leaving the floor. So does that make him the next Shaq-daddy or the next Beanpole Bradley?
But as to the original point – definitely not in Blake’s league, and I can’t see him getting there no matter what KU does the rest of the tourney. Of course, I haven’t heard anything that makes me think Griffin and Thabeet are in a Rose/Beasley race for #1 either. What I keep hearing is Blake as consensus #1, and nothing he’s done so far would make me question that.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
Beasley was the consensus #1 going into the tournament too.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
But Derrick was a possible first, at worst strong second
Maybe we just aren’t looking at the same draft forecasts, but I haven’t heard that about Thabeet. Instead I here rumblings of bust, but people just can’t resist the height.
And we’re a weekend in to the tournament – with Griffin dominating in his games and Thabeet being a disappointment.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
There are three phases to this draft process.
You have the NCAA season. Griffin emerged as the #1 during this, by no means a lock.
Then you have the NCAA tournament. I think this is where Cole Aldrich will enter the discussion towards the top of the draft. Uconn should do pretty well, which should help Thabeet out.
Then there will be measurement day. This is where Beasley lost it as the #1 pick last year. This should be a favorable day for Thabeet and Aldrich.
If I was to predict the draft, I would say Griffin goes #1, Thabeet goes #2, and Aldrich goes #3.
What I think is clear from this draft is that there are some good big men in here. Not necessarily stars, but they all should figure to be starters. They’re not locks to be stars, but that also doesn’t preclude them from being stars.
I think the one year college rule really helps big men the most. If you look at high school big men, you have Moses Malone and Dwight Howard as the only really good success stories. Then you have other high school bigs that are pretty good players, but it wasn’t an easy ride. It took Tyson Chandler awhile to figure things out. Took Jermaine O’neal 6 years to figure things out. Eddy Curry, Kwame Brown, Desagna Diop, James Lang, Robert Swift, and many more I can’t remember are massive busts at this point.
I think the one year college rule has been good for the big men. I disagree with the rule, but i think it’s helping make more skilled big men that are usable in the NBA.
If I’m wrong, and Aldrich isn’t a top 5 pick, I would be happy to trade up to get him in the late lottery. But if that’s the case, it makes me wonder why some of these guys have jobs as GM’s in the NBA.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Kevin Garnett would like a word with you, sir.
Amare Stoudemire and Andrew Bynum, too. Did you even think before you wrote that?
Moses Malone and Dwight Howard as the only really good success stories.
I’d say KG as one of the top 3 PFs of all time is probably a really good success story, call me crazy.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 24, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
When you start thinking about guys like James Lang
Your mind goes to a bad place thinking wise.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
good excuse, haha.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 24, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Lebron James could easily play PF too...
If he wasn’t so damn skilled in other areas.
"Playoffs? Are we talking about playoffs? Really, I mean... Playoffs?"
by Khalid El-Amin on Mar 27, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, I know all that
I just disagree with you that Thabeet or Cole are currently anywhere close to the number 1 pick. Obviously things can change between now and the draft – we don’t even know for sure who will be in, for one thing, or what order teams will draft in. Anything is possible at this point. Any one of them could have a Brandon Rush injury, or blow up or fall apart in the remainder of the tournament.
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
The racial stereotype is better.
Because Aldrich has pretty long arms. 7’5" wingspan. That ain’t bad.
Go through draftexpresses measurement database, and only including players of note, here are the longer wing spans than that.
Michael Olowakandi – 7’8"
Shaquille O’neal – 7’7"
Alonzo Mourning – 7’6.5"
Eddy Curry – 7’6.5"
Desagna Diop
Brendan Haywood
Brook Lopez – 7’5.5"
Elton brand
He has the same wingspan as Shawn freaking Bradley.
Like just watch this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOy-j5eoJ20
The long arms should be one of the first things that stick out to you.
Aldrich’s arm length was one of his positives imo. But since he’s white, I guess his arms will shrink before he gets to the nBA.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
It's smart to wait until Aldrich goes to the combine
before citing numbers. Players routinely have very different numbers at the combine then claimed.
What about...
Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, and maybe even Yao Ming? Surely they have greater than 7.5 too.
"Playoffs? Are we talking about playoffs? Really, I mean... Playoffs?"
by Khalid El-Amin on Mar 27, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Also, his tournament play is in elite company.
Only the 6th player to have a triple double in the tournament.
Third player to have a 10 block game in the tournament. (Shaquille O’neal and Shawn Bradley are the other two).
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
focusing on tournament play is extremely dangerous because of
the well documented issues with small sample size. It cuts both ways because obviously there’s more pressure in the tournament and presumably more competition, but there’s a real danger of a guy getting hot for a stretch and becoming wildly overrated as a result.
If you think Tyrus is a bust (which you seem to have indicated you do), he’s a guy that benefitted greatly from this because he went bananas in the tournament. There are also players who didn’t do much in the tournament, but were still amazing players. For instance, Kevin Durant and Michael Beasley.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Tournament play shouldn't be emphasized too much.
But it helps.
Before the 2006 draft I thought Tyrus was going to be a bust, simply because he didn’t really have too many well developed skills. He could block shots. That’s translated into the NBA ,but so has his lack of a well developed skill set, which is holding him back from fulfilling his selection as the #2 or #4 pick in the draft.
Cole Aldrich, I liked him before the tournament obviously. His great tournament play is just confirming my earlier beliefs.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
I'm not crazy about dealing Tyrus for someone unproven in
the NBA because I value his contributions significantly more than you do, but of the two players you suggested dealing for him, I’d say that I have to view Tyrus as the more expendable of the two.
Noah has proven himself to be a very good player on both sides of the ball. He’s a low-usage, uber-high efficiency player on offense and a quite good defender on the other end (this all in the absence of a coherent defensive philosophy for the last year and a half or so since Skiles was fired.) Put Noah in a real system and he should be even better.
Tyrus is more of a wildcard because his ceiling is still higher than Noah’s, his defensive impact is greater, but his offense is much more wildly variant. Some games he’s great on offense, other games he’s awful. Noah is pretty consistent on both ends, but I don’t see him changing a whole lot as a player outside of maybe getting stronger and benefitting from a real defensive system to become an elite level defender in the league.
Tyrus on the other hand could be an All-Star level player (in terms of impact because of his defense; he’ll likely never actually make the team because he won’t score enough), or he could be the same inconsistent player he’s been for a while. He’s still pretty productive, despite his inconsistencies, and that’s a pretty good commodity to have.
I don’t think this draft is particularly strong, and I don’t share your faith in Aldrich’s ability to translate to the NBA. So I’m wary about giving up proven productive NBA players for a guy I view as a question mark, especially when you add in your willingness to throw in 2 first round picks and $3 million in cash. That’s just lunacy. Especially when you consider we can probably use just one of those first round picks to land DeJuan Blair who is just as likely, if not more likely, to succeed over your two favorites (he’s a better rebounder than both and rebounding translates better than any other ability in the league).
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The only reason why I think I would trade Noah over Thomas
Is because Thomas is a power forward, while Noah has the skills of a center (despite a power forward body right now).
I think Noah is clearly the better player.
But if you get a good defender like Aldrich/Thabeet in there, and then are able to swing a trade for a good scoring big with our expirings, then we would be in pretty good shape.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
That's ridiculous. Noah is already one of the better young C's in the league
and you’re going to trade him and two draft picks for two potential bust big men in one of the weakest drafts in recent memory? That’s just dumb, man.
If you want frontcourt help, DeJuan Blair is the way to go. He’s going to be Millsap 2.0.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Sorry, but if I am able to get some good young big men.
I’m trading Thomas/Noah without thinking too much about it. They simply haven’t produce dwell. I think Noah has actually done pretty well, but nowhere near “best young big men”. They’ve both shown flashes.
Just take a look at this http://www.82games.com/0809/BYPOSIT.HTM
Guys who lead you to that crap aren’t guys you hold back in trades for top 5 draft picks.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
depends on what you define as production. Noah has been fantastic. If you don't want to
recognize that, that’s fine. It wouldn’t be the first time you’ve been wrong. Thomas is a little more suspect because he’s been so poor on the offensive side. The other problem with using the information you used is that a lot of those frontcourt minutes were not logged by Thomas or Noah. They were logged by an out of place Nocioni at the 4 or Gooden or Deng at the 4 while we ran a 3 guard lineup. Your just not making any god damned sense.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I think Noah has been good scoring and rebounding wise.
But his interior defense is suspect. And I’m not a big fan of weak interior defenders (thus why I like Aldrich and Thabeet for the Bulls).
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Noah is a good one on one defender on the inside. Where he struggles is help-side D.
A lot of that, I think, is not having a team that talks enough on the defensive side. Our defensive struggles come a lot more from allowing too much penetration which falls on guys like Gordon and Rose. It’s tough to be a good interior defender when your guards are leaving you out to dry all the time.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
He also struggles against centers.
Against legitimately big and strong big men he’s weak and gets abused.
I do agree that his help defense would probably be improved with a guy like Skiles/Thibodeau/Popovich etc. as our coach. Anyone else notice that we’e only drawn like 5 charges since Skiles was fired? Setting for charges was a big part of our help defense under Skiles, and that’s just completely disappeared.
So basically getting stronger is the only thing Noah really has to do, so he can bang with the biig centers.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Noah. He’s been pretty good ever since he got in shape. I would just think about trading him over Thomas in a trade for a guy like Aldrich/Thabeet, since those guys are low post players, and Thomas has some more perimeter skills than Noah.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Yeah, Aldrich is someone I want running up and down the court with Rose.
Yep.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I am going to remind you that
most people think if Noah had declared a year earlier, he would have been a top 5 pick. You can trust your gut, or your can trust the information. I like Aldrich a lot, just not enough to give up Noah + 2 draft picks + money, like you proposed earlier.
Tyrus Thomas was also essentially the #2 pick in that awful draft.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
This draft is even worse.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
And he's better than you think.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 22, 2009 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Awful draft?
That awful draft produced a top 10 NBA player (Brandon Roy), and a host of solid rotation guys (Tyrus, Aldridge, Rondo, Brewer, Gay, Farmar).
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 22, 2009 7:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I agreed with you on Gordon,
but you have to be kidding me here.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Holy crap, way off
Noah has been our best player this year.
No, noah has been our 3rd or 4th best player most of the year
and is right now our 5th best player behind Gordon, Rose, Salmons and Miller.
by Basketball Smurf on Mar 23, 2009 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions
He's been better than Rose at doing his role and being a complete basketball player.
Offense isn’t everything and Noah, despite his ugly game, is still a more effective offensive player than Rose because he sticks to what he is good at and eschews everything else. He takes 94% of his shots from inside! He knows his role and plays it well. He’s been our best player, and since the trade only Brad Miller has been nearly as effective.
Gordon is a liability on defense, Rose is worse, and Salmons despite his relatively good on ball defense is a liability to team defense because he doesn’t talk on the defensive end.
Scoring isn’t everything.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Noah is not a more effective offensive player than Rose and he is not a better player
this is the problem with stat gazing. Noah isn’t asked to do anything in the offense, therefore he is very efficient. If Noah was asked to perform at the level of an even mediocre offensive center – i.e a player you pass the ball and ask them to create to score points – than his efficiency would plummet. If you asked Noah to play the same role that Ilgalskus or Bynum or Rasheed Wallace, he would fail miserably. The fact that you would never ask to him to do this HAS TO LOWER HIS VALUE some. You have to take that in to consideration.
You note that Noah shoots 94% of his shots from inside. That is because he can’t make an outside shot. If NBA defenses wanted to stop Jo Noah, he would probably go scoreless for a week.
We ask Rose to do more, therefore his efficiency drops. What you are telling me, is because someone like Shane Battier is a really efficient player and very good on D, he is better than Yao Ming. That is just wrong. One guy you ask to make plays, the other guy you ask to support the player who makes plays. Rose may not be a very good lead player yet, but he is a lead player, as is BG. Noah is a role player. A potentially very good role player, but still just a role player.
Scoring isn’t everything. But the team with the most points wins. And Noah doesn’t generate points. You take your team of Battier’s and Noah’s. I’ll stick with the Yao Ming and D Rose’s and lets see who wins the most games.
by Basketball Smurf on Mar 23, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions
You mistook my point, and that is probably because I wasn't clear enough.
I agree that Rose is probably more important to overall offensive impact, but he is less efficient than Noah. My larger point was that Rose is so miserable on defense that he negates most if not all of his offensive contributions. Noah is good on both ends. I’m very familiar with the usage vs. efficiency tradeoff, and I probably did myself and my argument a disserve by arguing strictly on efficiency grounds at the outset. I overreached in my argument re: Noah’s offensive ability relative to Rose and the others, but the point remains that in terms of overall impact (adding defense to the mix) that Noah is playing better than Rose and has been all year, because Rose stinks somethin’ awful on defense.
This eliminates your Yao v. Battier argument because Yao can use a lot of possessions efficiently on offense and still dominate the game on defense in the same way that Battier can. That’s why he’s better.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions
disservice*
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions
i agree with everything you said but your conclusion
I could be just arguing semantics – but better to me means that I would rather have had this guy (Noah) over this guy (Rose). For the Bulls, Noah’s impact is amplified because he for a long time was the only decent interior player on the Bulls. Rose, on the other hand, is part of a perimeter group that has played well in the past and we expected to play well going forward (Hughes, Gordon, Hinrich, Deng, Salmons). So when
And on a different point – have people completely forgot the first 2 months of the season when Noah was efficiently playing 10 minutes a game because he was completely out of shape. If VDN had used Rose in the same way, maybe his numbers would be better – e.g. taking Rose out everytime he wasn’t effective. But as you probably can tell, I think playing Rose big minutes was the right way to go. When one guys role is so small in comparison to the other guy’s role, I don’t know how you can say player A is better than player B. More efficient? Noah. Better defensively? Noah by a mile? Who do you to have the ball at crucial moments? Rose.
Since many games come down to guys making plays in the 4th, its hard for me to say that Noah is better than Rose.
by Basketball Smurf on Mar 23, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions
I guess our argument is coming down to interpretations of the meaning of
the word “better”. I view better through the lens of who has the biggest impact on the court in the time that they are out there.
You seem to view better in terms of who has the most basketball skills and talent. Rose is clearly more skilled and talented than Noah, but Noah by virtue of his defensive ability and small role on offense that fits him perfectly tends to impact the Bulls more positively than Rose in total at this point in their relative careers.
I agree that if I had to choose between the two I’d clearly take Rose, because he’s younger, more skilled, and has a lot more potential, but in terms of on the court impact, until his defense gets better, he’s got some catching up to do to reach where Noah is at in terms of impact.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions
You seem to be looking only at offense
what if we were to look only at defense? Of our players who’ve been on our roster all year, who’s been our best defender? I’d say either Noah, Tyrus, or Kirk.
I agree with you that Rose and Gordon are significantly better than Noah offensively, but Noah is decent. My Statistical APM has Rose rated at a +1.69, Gordon at +1.90, and Noah at -1.04. Does that sound about right?
Defensively, fundamentallysound’s system rated Noah at +2.3 and +3.12 the last two years. Gordon has been -2.34 and -2.2. Rose is -2.49 this year.
So while you’re right that Rose and Gordon are much better offensively (nearly 3 points better), they’re much worse defensively (nearly 5 points worse). That doesn’t necessarily make Joakim more valuable (there are more players like him than there are efficient 20ppg scorers), but it does make him better.
I agree he hasn't been the best player
But he’s been the most efficient player on offense and defense. Rose is not very efficient on offense, and is just ridiculously poor defensively.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 23, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions
I like Aldrich, but...
Trading Noah for a pick is dumb. Big men bust all the time, see links above. Noah is not a bust and could be a quality center one day. I don’t like Noah on our team, but he will be valuable because so many teams have problems finding good centers. Don’t trade a good center for one with potential. No matter how confident you are that Aldrich or Thabeet will be good, you are probably not as confident as the guy that drafted Kwame Brown at number 1.
Learn from mistakes. I like Aldrich and if he fell to us, I would take him over Blair, but “rumors” are that he isn’t going to declare and even if he did, he is not that valuable.
Noah is a quality center today. He's fantastic at rebounding, finishing inside, and passing
out of the high post. The only things he needs to get better at is handling bigger centers on the defensive room (he needs to hit the weights), and if possible develop a reliable 8 to 10 foot jumpshot. The first should be decidedly easier for Noah than the second because his shooting form stinks so much.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Noah is fantastic at finishing inside?
Really?
http://thegettinplace.blogspot.com/
He wouldn't have a TS% of 56.2 if he couldn't finish inside
Not everyone has to shatter souls like Howard or Stoudemire to be a good finisher inside.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 22, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions
he does a great job of catching the ball and quickly flushing it home after he gets it.
so yes, he is fantastic at finishing inside. He could be a bit better, but on the whole, he’s very good in there and he’s getting even better since he added that little baby hook to his repertoire.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 22, 2009 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions
he scores on over 55% of his inside shots
which account for 94% of his attempts. There’s a reason he’s so efficient offensively. Another stat that shows his ability to finish, he converts on 93% of his dunk attempts, which account for 24% of his total shot attempts. That’s finishing inside. In fact, no player attempts more of his shot attempts from inside than Joakim Noah. ( data here) He could increase his “inside” scoring rate if he developed a 5 to 10 foot jump shot, but as it is when he dunks nearly a quarter of the time at a conversion rate of 94% it really helps.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 1:15 AM CDT up reply actions
How well do college stats translate to the pro game?
http://basketball-statistics.com/howdoncaastatisticstranslatetothenba.html
Specifically, we can predict with pretty good certainty an NBA player’s blocks, assists, rebounds, three-point percentage, and free throw percentage based on their equivalent college statistics. Free throw attempts, points per game, field goal percentage, and field goal attempts are the weakest.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
but
This all comes with one big caveat. The sample only includes guys that have made it in the NBA. The college stars that fizzled out at the pro level or the guys who NBA teams knew had no chance at the highest level before the draft were not included in this study. In other words, just because a guy is great in college doesn’t mean he will be great in the NBA. However, if he does make the NBA, we can somewhat predict how he’ll end up doing based on his college stats.
by Basketball Smurf on Mar 23, 2009 12:45 AM CDT up reply actions
Doesn't include college stars that fizzled out at the pro level?!?
But … but …. sigh.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
I thought that article sucked
No way can you just take one coefficient and apply it to everybody.
he's got a whole method he's developing for going about it that includes height, etc.
but it seems he’s not going to be forthcoming with exactly how he goes about it, likely due to propietary concerns or something similar.
It’s too bad, it would be nice to see the methodology to fairly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of it, but it looks like we won’t be getting that.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Thabeet
Thabeet is gonna be a bust. People see a Mutombo but Dikembe isn’t as stiff as Thabeet and Dikembe played hard every game and had a mean streak. Thabeet has neither. Strong, low center of gravity type post players like DeJuan Blair exposed Thabeet’s weaknesses.
I don’t see him being very good. At best, his ceiling is similar to Dalembert. Which is ok, but not lottery worthy.
Aldrich to me can be like a Brook Lopez type, again….solid center but nothing special.
No one in this draft stands out to me as future All-stars. I like a few players(Blair, Monroe, Harden) but overall not too impressed.
I really hope we don’t pick Budinger or Earl Clark as I see in a lot of mock drafts.
Brook Lopez, that guy that is in the running for ROY?
Not to restart the “should he win” argument – just to start the “really? solid center, nothing special?” argument
Man-slave, bring me my PB&J!
If he's available in the Bulls range, then take him by all means
Trading for him is a ridiculous proposition, though.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 23, 2009 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions
no Demar Derozan love?
I guess its pretty unrealistic he’d fall to us, but maybe with two picks we could trade up to get him. Draft Express has him at #12 and NBADraft.net has him at #10 I’d expect he moves higher as the draft nears based on his potential.
I’ve been saying since the minute we drafted Rose I’d like to pair him with an athletic scorer on the wing and Derozan I think is a guy who will flourish in the NBA even though he hasn’t been spectacular in college.
I know we have needs inside but at least we have Noah and Thomas and the 2010 free agents I think we have the best chances at are. Plus I don’t have much hope for retaining Gordon.
Question: Do you really trust this organization to develop an extremely raw, athletic wing?
The best players for this organization have been those that haven’t had to learn much, that have come in with a lot of polish. Low(er)-ceiling but high-floor guys. The first raw player the Bulls develop into his full potential will be the first in more than a decade.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
when your best nba comparison is gerald green
somehow I dont see “scorer” in his future.
Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."
He'd be a nice replacement for Gordon
I wouldn’t want Vinny to go anywhere near him, he’d be a bust on the Bulls.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 23, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
He has been spectacular the last few weeks...
In two NCAA tournament games he averaged 18-7-2.5 on 50% shooting.
In three PAC 10 tournament games he went for 21-9-2.3 on 57.5% shooting.
"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."
I've been disappointed in his reluctance to step up, ala Mayo
He’s physically gifted, but I dread putting a shrinking violet next to Rose; what happens when neither one thinks they should take over? I’m more incline towards Tyreke at this point; looks like Joe Johnson potential, and without being a hog, he KNOWS who he is.
by California Al on Mar 26, 2009 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions
What do we need?
We don’t need a pg, Hinrich does a good job at backup AND if we trade Hinrich, another team will probably want to unload a pg on us.
We might want a sg because Ben may leave.
We might want a sf, if the organization is doubting Deng.
We need a PF unless we make Noah one, then we need a C.
That said, I think it makes the most sense to use our first pick on a big man, since it fills a need and use our second pick on a wing, since it might fill a need. Additionally, if you read the “NBA draft success and lessons” link, supposedly a lot of the successes that come out of the late 1st round picks are wings. Remember we have a 60% chance that that second pick will completely bust. There are a lot of wings at the bottom of the draft and I think with careful scouting we could get lucky.
via DX: Budinger, Ellington, Thornton, Young, Smith, Summers are all late 1st round/early 2nd.
To be fair...
the big men available with the 2nd pick are Brackins, Hansborough, Jordan, Patterson (although supposedly he’s not coming out yet)…Even ignoring history, I’d still rather use that 2nd pick on a wing because those big men would just duplicate our scrawny front court.
Now I look like an idiot debating with myself
I probably shouldn’t even be hoping to get something good out of that 2nd pick and should just be hoping we get a star from our 1st pick. I just don’t see that many around in this draft. That’s why I think I lean towards making 2 good choices rather than one “shoot for the stars” choice. DeRozan and Evans both have a ton of potential, but the same reason they are not going higher is the same reason I am not wanting to gamble on them, their skill level is not quite there yet. Evans turns the ball over too much and isn’t a good enough shooter, DeRozan’s handle isn’t good enough and can’t hit the 3. That’s my 2 cents x3.
Flip Saunder Says.....
Former NBA coach Flip Saunders is impressed with the play of Kansas big man Cole Aldrich, who he feels could be a top ten pick in June’s NBA Draft.
Aldrich has put up performances of 23 points and 13 rebounds (against North Dakota State) and 13 points, 20 rebounds and 10 blocks (against Dayton) through the first two rounds of the NCAA Tournament.
“He’s going to help somebody,” Saunders said. “He’s a more than adequate offensive player right now. Defensively, he can really rebound, as you saw in the (Dome) games, and he blocks shots.”
Saunders believes that Aldrich, a sophomore, would be off the board rather quickly should be declare for the draft, but success certainly isn’t guaranteed.
“It depends where he goes,” Flip said. "All kids are going to struggle somewhat, because it’s a change. (Sunday against Dayton), he played against guys who are 6-9, 6-10. (In the NBA), you’re going to play against guys who are 6-11, 7-feet every night who are skilled, strong and quick.
"He’ll be able to play, but it will depend on how much adjustment he makes early, being able to deal with things. He’s a guy who would get some playing time.
“But he’s got a chance to be a pretty good player in the league because he’s long, strong; offensively, he can score a little bit; he’s got really good, soft hands; and he’s got great reach.”
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
regarding DeRozan
He is a terrible shooter. If you can’t shoot in college with the shorter line, then he’s gonna be screwed in the pros. He can get to the line and slash but you gotta be able to shoot to be an above average SG in the NBA.
18% from deep. Yikes.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 23, 2009 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions
The Bulls should draft
Tyreke Evans from Memphis, let Ben go, play Deng and Salmons together, let Tyreke come off the bench for the year, and have him ready to contribute in 2010.
Tyreke has the size and potential to be one of the top scorers in the NBA.
You all may not agree, but players no one would have thought the following players would be top scorers like Kobe 1st round 10th pick, Danny Grainger 1st round 17th pick, Joe Johnson 1st round 10th pick, etc…
Ben can score, but because of his height that’s all he’ll be able to do.
I am confused
First, Evans is not that big nor that athletic. He’s 6’5" and 195 lbs. He’s quick, but not a great leaper; probably the two aspects people consider when you talk about athleticism. Derozan is significantly more athletic and much larger than Evans, so based on your statement praising “size and potential,” Evans would not be your first choice.
Second, your examples don’t agree with your statement. Granger is not a sg, so that makes him an odd player to point out (there is a list longer than you’d like to imagine of athletic small forwards that didn’t make it in the NBA). Joe Johnson is skilled and big, but not particularly fast (he can jump however). What makes Johnson special is the skill set he brings as off guard (ability to dribble, pass, post-up, and hit the 3). So your examples are not really good arguments for drafting Evans; in case you don’t know Evans has an A:TO ratio of about 1.1, 28% from 3, and as pointed out above, is scrawny compared to Johnson.
Finally, Evans played really bad when he was Memphis’s off guard and Memphis was a really bad team, Memphis only played well when Evans was the primary ball handler. Which at least points to concerns about his immediate and potentially long term prospects as a sg. I am not saying Evans is a bad draft choice, but just that the reasoning doesn’t point to Evans as being a good choice.
I am also confused because you said that you thought because Evans is big, he’d be a top scorer in the NBA, but then said Ben will only ever be a scorer because of his small size. So clarification would be cool because I don’t like Evans as our sg, but maybe he could be really good.
by Jamaicanpi on Mar 24, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
agreed on your first point
Evans really struggled as the 2 for Memphis and obviously they have not lost since moving him to the 1. But that also shows that he is not performing to his ability when he is not always handling the ball and I would rather not try to mix him in with our roster. It seems to me that he has several spectacular plays but never plays a full solid game. I see that he can light up the stat sheet, but he is a poor 3pt shooter and does not show a consistently solid game, especially not as a 1.
I see the JJ analogy
He plays very deliberately, and looks slow, but then, he’s by his man and at the basket with pretty good finish. His range is a little shy right now. Maybe if the Bulls employ Calipari’s offense, we could have a double pg penetration offense.
by California Al on Mar 26, 2009 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm hopping back onto the Terrence Williams train
On the previous Draft Thread I said he was a senior who was terrible as a sophomore, which means he won’t be a good pro. But 5.1apg, 2.4spg, and .8bpg for a SF is ridiculous, regardless of age. If he can just be a defensive stopper who can get 5.1apg in the NBA from the SF position, he’ll start for someone.
Considering where he's likely to be available (late first round)
I’d have to say he’s probably a more than capable Thabo replacement, and he’ll be cheaper and we won’t have to extend him for a while like we would have with Thabo, so that’s a win for the Bulls front office if they can pull it off.
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 25, 2009 1:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Thabeet is playing right now for anyone who cares to watch.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
I'd rather watch the Bulls.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Mar 26, 2009 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Gotta have the Bulls on the TV, then NCAA games on the laptop.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
We don't need anymore young players
We should both first round picks and Hinrich for a big man if we can. We’re lucky we got the #1 pick last year because Griffin is going to struggle in the pros he didn’t even look taller than hansbrough whose 6"7.
You know who else struggles?
Paul Millsap. Charles Barkley. Yeah. Those guys suck[ed].
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
So, with the Final Four set, who the heck is Paxson watching?
Guys out that may have made good picks (or not) had they reached the Final Four:
Gerald Henderson
DeJuan Blair
Evan Turner
BJ Mullens
Chase Budinger (I know, I know)
Tyreke Evans
DeMar DeRozoan
Terrance Williams
Earl Clark
So maybe it will be between Ty Lawson, Tyler Hansbrough (!!!), Wayne Ellington and Danny Green.
Based on this information, w/ Ty Lawson being the only Final Four player worthy of a lottery pick (according to draftexpress.com and nbadraft.net), that, unless Gerald Henderson falls to the Bulls, they will trade their 1st pick and draft Hansbrough, Green or Ellington w/ the second (or trade it, too).
The Final Four precedent has clearly been set w/ Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Thomas, Noah and Rose. I can’t see this happening any other way.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
It's probably going to be Hansbrough. It just feels like destiny. I doubt we'll get Lawson, unless
we’re shifting Rose to the 2 guard and going super-ultra-tiny ball. Lawson is going to be pretty good though.
I wouldn’t mind Green, he can defend and hit the three ball. I’m not as crazy about Ellington because he doesn’t play a lick of defense, but he’s a smoother scorer than Green. Green has much better size though. I still think Terrence Williams would be a perfect Thabo replacement, but who knows.
The other thing is all of those players you mentioned were lotto picks, so maybe Pax goes away from the Final 4 draft strategy since the Bulls will be picking later in the draft. They grabbed Aaron Gray in the early second round and he never went to the Final 4 (correct me if I’m wrong).
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 1, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bank on it
“I talked it over with Jerry and Vinny and the rest of the staff, and we felt like with the departure of Noc, our roster was lacking the fist-pumping white guy. Too much of the NBA is athleticism and talent and skill, we feel we’ve got a really good team-first, character guy in Tyler who fits in perfectly with the culture we’re trying to build.”
Then they will proceed to play him 35 minutes a game and completely cut Tyrus out of the rotation.
F my life.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 1, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't worry!
Gray and Miller can take over the C spot, too.
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
Well, if Aaron Gray were better than a 50th overall (or whatever)...
…he would have taken his team to the Final Four! Or something.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I've talked about Mullens to death
But I’ve seen him slipping down the draft boards lately, and I’m shocked by that. Here’s the nation’s top recruit just 12 months ago, a 7 footer who can throw down between-his-legs dunks, and scouts are talking about him slipping out of the top 20?
There’s not much offensive skill to his game, and he’s the worst player I’ve ever seen at boxing out (he doesn’t), but 7 footers this athletic don’t come around very often – framewise he’s in another stratosphere compared to DaJuan Blair and Patrick Patterson and Tyler Hansbrough. You can’t expect much out of the 15th pick. At worst Mullens is a Kwame Brown type role player. And there’s a chance he’s much better.
Mullens has size, but he's just not that interested on the court, and he doesn't really have any skills
besides being big and crazy athletic. I’d rather grab DeJuan Blair who’s a historically good rebounder, which also happens to be the thing that best translates from the college game to the NBA, and also happens to be probably the most important thing you ask your big men to do (besides protect the paint on defense). So yeah, I’d much rather have Blair than Mullens, because Mullens is lousy at basketball.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 1, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed, given the track record of coaches we have
The Bulls’ most pressing need is someone who can come in and contribute immediately on a roster that will be thin somewhere next year. Mullens requires coaching and patience from what I’ve seen of him. On the right team, he could become a pretty good player, but it definitely won’t be Chicago.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Apr 1, 2009 8:28 PM CDT up reply actions
You've got your statistical APM
how does a Paul Millsap rate out? Rebounding is great, but at 6’6" or whatever Blair is I doubt he’ll be a positive offensive APM guy. My guess is Boozer is the only undersized big man consistently above zero offensively. And defensively it seems the best post defenders are the ones who are strong and quick on their feet – Chuck Hayes, Kenyon Martin, etc. Is DaJuan Blair quick enough to stay in front of a pivot-spinning Boozer? I don’t know, to be honest. But just saying “he’ll be a good rebounder” doesn’t mean he’s worth the 15th pick.
Well, using your own Stat +/- (because it's easier to calculate and I don't have time to
crunch the numbers for Millsap with Neil and Dan’s method at the moment). Millsap comes out as a +1.46. That’s pretty good, especially if you’re landing a player like that in the mid to late first round.
I’ve no idea how good Blair will be defensively, but the fact that he pulls down 27.8% of Defensive Rebounds in college suggests that he’s got pretty good footwork. Blair is a beast, he’s statistically a Millsap clone. Now, Millsap is taller and leaner than Blair, and you certainly have to factor that in, but this is a weak ass draft. Mullens is rubbish, and there’s no great history of guys that have been horrible college big men all of a sudden being great once they go pro, especially if they can’t rebound, and Mullens is a horrible rebounder for a 7 footer.
And I disagree with this:
But just saying "he’ll be a good rebounder" doesn’t mean he’s worth the 15th pick.
At the 15th pick, you’re lucky to get any kind of contributor. Most of those picks bust, so if you can go low-risk with someone you know has at least one NBA ready skill, then I don’t see how you pass that up for a 7 foot kid who hasn’t a clue how to play basketball.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree with your last point.
There are very, very, very few guarantees in the mid-teens in the draft, if any.* If a team can get any kind of guarantee at a need they have, even if in a backup role, they should jump on it at that point in the draft. If a guy has really good potential, there are good reasons they’ve dropped that low. While the past two drafts look mildly promising in this range (13-18), the three before that produced only 1 or 2 good players per draft.
OTOH, if the Bulls really do “believe” in Asik, and he is more defensively-orientated instead of offensively-orientated, it might make more sense to go for someone with offense instead of having Blair, Asik, Thomas and Noah as their front-court rotation. But then, having a defensively-dominant frontcourt for four or five years, could never really be a problem, and would allow them to look at guys at the SG and SF spots that might be offensive standouts but defensively-suspect (Ellington, Budinger, e.g.) instead of going for someone known more for defense w/ a suspect offensive game translation to the NBA (Terrance Williams, Danny Green).
I think my current list of those who might be available, for both picks, goes like this:
—-
Gerald Henderson (who knows where he’ll be, probably not there for the Bulls any more)
—-
DeJuan Blair
Cole Aldrich
Chase Budinger
—-
Wayne Ellington
Terrance Williams
Danny Green
Jerome Jordan
I’d group them that way where Henderson is definitely picked ahead of anyone else, any of those other three I don’t care about and any of the bottom four, meh?
*Obviously, there are no guarantees anywhere in the draft, but I’m speaking relatively.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Actually, if Aldrich comes out, I put him atop that 2nd tier.
I think he’d be able to defend the less-athletic, more traditional PF’s like Aldridge and Scola, and his ability to shoot (79% FT) he could spot up some, giving the Bulls flexibility. Maybe a year under Brad Miller makes him the 2nd-coming of. But maybe he’s not coming out.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Aldrich has good athleticism and longer arms than Brad Miller too!
It’d be fun seeing Cole Aldrich as an understudy of Brad Miller.
I would fly in a legit big man coach if we drafted Aldrich though. A guy like Mutumbo or Olujawon who could lock down the paint, and let him learn from them.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
We've had chances to do that before.
See: results!
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
Go look at Tyson Chandler game logs, and stats for the end of the season his 2nd year
under Bill Cartwright. A good big man’s coach can do wonders for big men. Chandler was a beast under Cartwright.
Bulls should try to steal Cartwright away from the Suns this summer.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
I wasn't saying that hiring a big man coach is a bad idea,
it’s a great idea.
I was saying that the chances of that happening are slim-to-none.
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
The thing I think is funny about Blair is that NBA GMs never learn from their mistakes
we’ve seen guys like Blair that dominated the boards in the NCAA in a major, major conference (probably one of the most dominant conferences ever, 3 #1’s in the tournament? crazy) consistently be successful in the league, even if they didn’t have size. Millsap, Powe, Craig Smith etc. are examples of this.
Blair, to me, is as close to a sure thing in this draft as there is, outside of Blake Griffin. Sure, his weight is a little bit of a red flag, but he’s going to be a player in the league and he’ll be able to score against bigger, more athletic players (see: his domination of Hasheem Thabeet). He’s just a bull down low.
I like Cole Aldrich if he’s available where we select – if he even comes out – but, (1) I suspect he won’t be available, and (2) I don’t love him like Andrew does where he would trade Noah or Tyrus plus our picks for him – which is, frankly, nuts. At the 15th pick though? Sign me up.
I still think Budinger is going to be a better player than he’s getting credit for. He hasn’t improved much throughout his college career, but he’s got great size, a great shooting stroke, and incredible athleticism, and his numbers are solid. There’s not much not to like, outside of questions about his heart and his lack of improvement. He certainly looks like he’ll be able to play in the league though, and again, that’s all you can really ask for where we’re picking in the draft.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Exactly.
I wouldn’t trade up for Aldrich because if I’m the Bulls I’m counting on Thomas and Noah to be starters for awhile, so I know I’m drafting a backup. Even if you think Aldrich might be better than Thomas or Noah or fit the needs of the Bulls better, I don’t think you trade a “sure” starter (as in someone who has produced as a starter in the NBA) for someone who has his own question-marks. You’re increasing one spot only based on potential, while keeping holes at other spots. The Bulls are a good young team. Their focus should be on filling in the holes that will be created by the losses of Miller, Salmons, Hinrich and Gordon/Deng or significantly upgrading any of Rose, Thomas or Noah.
Obviously, I agree on Budinger. He’s a low-ceiling but also high-floor player. He lacks above-average defensive ability and the ability to consistently create his own shot (although he can do it from time to time, and in spurts), but also has the athletic ability and consistent stroke that will allow him to consistently get his shot off. And while I think his athletic ability his slightly overrated (I think he and Thabo get more credit for being athletic when it’s their length that helps them a little more), I think it’s good enough that there is just the slightest, ever-so-slightest chance that he could turn into a really good player. I’d put it as a very rare, slight possibility and definitely “Best Case”, but I still think he could be someone like Brent Barry or Danny Granger. Of course, I wouldn’t be drafting him thinking he’s going to reach that, just that it’s possible.
If the Bulls ended up with Aldrich/Blair and Budinger/Ellington, I’d be pleased enough w/ the draft considering where they are.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Aldrich & Budinger could be the best draft in the league.
They’d get two guys with real starter potential to be (possibly) backups that would also fill real needs of the Bulls.
Rose – 5.5
Hinrich – 9
Deng – 11.5
Thomas – 9 (first year of a $10 mil/year extension, so it could be lower)
Noah – 3
Budinger – 0.9
Aldrich – 1.3
Asik – 0 (I’m assuming they could wait to sign him until after they signed a FA. He didn’t have a cap hold this past year nor this upcoming year, so I can’t see why it’d be different next year.)
Equals $40.3 million. I know it’s “pie in the sky” and extremely unlikely, but if they could sign a Dwyane Wade, it’s hard for me to imagine a deeper, more-rounded, younger team. Of course, if they wanted to off-load Hinrich for expirings sometime in the next year, and Thomas didn’t show enough potential or wouldn’t agree to a reasonable extension this summer or next and they let him go for nothing, they could try to add Wade and Bosh, which would be ridiculous.
Rose
Wade/Budinger
Deng/Budinger/Mid-level exception player
Bosh/Asik
Noah/Aldrich
Of course, both of these scenarios assume, probably wrongly, that Deng will become an above-average player again.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Big men in college
there’s no great history of guys that have been horrible college big men all of a sudden being great once they go pro
Most of the best big men in the game today either came from outside the US or directly from high school, so it’s hard to say either way what the recent history is. Some names though:
Sam Dalembert: drafted after sophomore season at Seton Hall, averaged 8.3 points and 5.7 boards in 21.4 minutes
Brendan Haywood: averaged 2.9ppg in 8.1 minutes as a freshman at UNC
Hakeem Olajuwon: averaged 8.3 points and 6.3 boards in 18.2 minutes as a freshman at Houston
Patrick Ewing: averaged 12.7poitns and 7.5 boards in 28.8 minutes as a freshman at Georgetown
Emeka Okafor: averaged 7.9 poitns and 9.0 boards in 30.0 minutes as a freshman at UConn
Marcus Camby: averaged 10.2 points and 6.4 boards in 21.9 minutes as a freshman at UMass
Hasheem Thabeet: averaged 6.2 points and 6.4 boards in 24.6 minutes as a freshman at UConn
Jordan Hill: averaged 4.7 points and 4.1 boards in 14.1 minutes as a freshman at Arizona
In comparison, Mullens’ 8.8 points and 4.7 boards in 20.3 minutes look par for the course. It takes a little while for 7 footers to learn how to take advantage of their size. And we’re talking about an elite talent here – the #1 prospect in his class eight months ago – not some Jerome Jordan-esque stiff that happens to be 7 feet tall. To me it’s silly to plan to draft a role player at #15. We haven’t had an all-star in 11 years, there’s no guarantee we get Bosh or Wade, and this could be our last top-15 pick in a while. I’d rather draft a guy with upside and see what happens.
citing Ewing and Olajuwon is sort of silly, because they were dominant defensive forces
even as freshman. Mullens is decidely not. Same thing goes for Okafor, Camby, and Thabeet. Jordan Hill also sucks and is going to be a gigantic bust, he’s in this draft class, so we have no idea how well he will do. I don’t see how citing him is useful at all. Dalembert and Haywood have both always been pretty good defensive players.
So, basically everyone you cited was at least a defensive presence in the paint in spite of being limited in terms of rebounding ability. Mullens is absolutely terrible on defense and also doesn’t rebound. What’s the incentive to take a flyer on the white version of Kwame Brown? Weren’t you the guy railing against selecting white big men because of their “short arms”?
Mullens stinks and will continue to stink, I’ve seen nothing out of him to suggest otherwise. It’s great that he can dunk between his legs at 7 feet, but that doesn’t make him good at basketball. He stinks at the game, and I’d prefer not to watch the Bulls futilely try to develop a big man. They’ve shown no ability to do so, and given how hard it is for terrible young big men to improve and adjust to the league, let’s just say I have significant doubts about Mullens’s ability to stick in the league if he comes to Chicago.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Mullens is 7 feet tall, short arms don't matter if you've got a height advantage
see Dirk, Peja, Bargnani, who are all tall for their position.
And I don’t get the “Mullens stinks and will continue to stink” talk. As a freshman, he was the 6th man for a quality Ohio State team that made the Big Ten championship game, and he was on the floor in crunch time and overtime in their NCAA Tourney game.
As for his stats, keep in mind he only played 20.3 minutes in the abysmally slow-paced Big Ten. Per 40 minutes adjusted, his stats work out to 18.4 points, 9.4 boards, 2.3 blocks, 1.0 steals, good for a 23.3 PER on 63 TS% .
Cole Aldrich is 6'11" (tall for his position) and you were shitting on drafting him
because of “short arms” talk. Also, Mullens is a 7 footer who has failed to dominate in college in a pretty lousy Big Ten conference. I fail to see how he’s going to dominate on the pro-level. 9.4 boards isn’t really that impressive pace adjusted for 40 minutes in college, especially for a legitimate 7 footer with his athleticism. Go look at DeJuan Blair’s pace adjusted 40 minute rebounding numbers – he put up 14.2 per pace adjusted 40 as a freshman and 18.0 (!!) per pace adjusted 40 this year. He also plays in a better conference than Mullens and doesn’t have the advantage of being 7 feet tall. So he’s double the rebounder Mullens is despite being somewhere around 6 inches shorter. Mullens is a big disappointment.
Another thing, there’s a reason Mullens didn’t get minutes this year. It’s because he’s lousy on defense and he doesn’t try hard a lot of the time. I’ll pass.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 7:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Whoa whoa
I was shitting on drafting Cole Aldrich Top-5 because of his short arms. We’re talking about the 15th pick here, which is relevant to my quote about Aldrich:
If he’s around at #15, why not, but the odds are stacked against him that he’ll be anything more than a good, solid role player.
And lousy Big Ten? The Big Ten was better than the Big 12 this year. Mullens’ Ohio State team beat Michigan State in the Big Ten tourney, and Michigan State beat Kansas in the NCAA Tournament a week later.
But on top of all that is that Aldrich played 8.3mpg as a freshman compared to Mullens’ 20+. If you’re going to say
there’s a reason Mullens didn’t get minutes this year.
Then the same goes for Aldrich. And I know National Champions, but 8 minutes is 8 minutes.
I’m not saying Mullens is the next Olajuwon. I’m not even saying he’ll definitely be better than Aldrich, or even DeJuan Blair. But the Bulls aren’t in a position to draft safely. For some odd reason everyone seems to think we’re a lock to get Wade or Bosh when that couldn’t be further from the truth. We’re a 38 win team that won 33 games last year, we haven’t landed a big name free agent in my lifetime, and we’re about to let our #1 scorer walk. I’d draft a player with some upside.
We're an organization of ineptitude. We don't develop bigs well.
We don’t coach anyone up. It’s safer from our perspective as fans to get a ready made contributor. You know it would be fantastic if the Bulls could get someone with upside and coach them up and develop them properly, but until we get new leadership, hell, even new ownership maybe, I just don’t see it happening. Rooting for this team really does seem like an exercise in masochism sometimes.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions
I disagreed with your Blair choice
chalking it up to “undersized big men can only do so much”. But I didn’t give him a fair shake, nor did I check how other undersized bigs fared in the NBA. And so I dug in.
I really like him.
My job is done here.
:)
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 3, 2009 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions
It's funny that that has happened multiple times.
Blair has a very specialized skill set and if you don’t watch for what he does well it’s easy to miss how much of an impact he has.
I love, love, love, LOVE his game.
I think he’s going to be a beast, and a steal for whatever team grabs him. I hope it’s the Bulls, especially because it would make me feel less bad about dealing Tyrus for someone like Bosh or Amare, because I’d have a new young PF to obsess over, and I’d have Bosh or Amare to watch dominate, and that would be sweet.
Fire Vinny.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 3, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions
I think if we keep the picks.
It will be Omri Casspi with the first pick, as our Salmons replacement. (You would hope that Casspi would grow into the starting small forward spot as Salmons declines).
and then Hansborough with the second pick.
But I think Paxson would take Stephen Curry if he was still on the board with our first pick.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
Casspi is a second round pick, I highly doubt we select him at #15.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Maybe we'll trade Roberson for a second-rounder,
anyone need to get rid of picks for cap room? Hornets?
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
That might not be a bad idea. Especially since Roberson is useless.
Stats with contextual observations, good. Stats with no context, bad. Anecdotal observations unsupported by data, the worst.
by fundamentallysound on Apr 2, 2009 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd trade Roberson for Toney Douglas for sure.
Don’t see how that happens, though.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Please tell me you've seen Casspi play at least one whole game
and you’re not just talking out of your ass.
You know what would be nice ...
having CDR play some SF right now. If we’d, you know, drafted him, instead of some random Euroleague big man who blew out his knee.
Blah, I want CDR on this team, especially if BG is leaving. :/
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
[And no, there's really no way to fix this, just me whining.]
Joakim Noah: Better than you.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Jeremy Lin’s teammate snaps of picture of his famous couch
- Dwight Howard picks a strange time to ask for more fourth quarter shots
- Spike Lee texts to thank the coach that cut Jeremy Lin before seeing him play
- LeBron threatened to beat up a heckler. You gotta problem with that, tough guy?
- Jason Whitlock apologizes for his unfunny Jeremy Lin comment on Twitter
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.
