thead wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Time to Mock the Mockers (2012 Edition)
Collapse
X
-
If recent history has created a blue print of what championship front courts look like:
Dirk/Chandler
Gasol/Bynum
Garnett/Perkins
B. Wallace/R. Wallace
Duncan/fill in the blank
O'neal/fill in the blank
I would say you need one scoring specialist and one defensive specialist (with the exception of Duncan and O'neal who did both for their team....ah they don't make bigs like they use to). With that in mind perhaps two bigs in the front court that are more in the mold of defensive specialists (Drummond/JV) is not a great idea. Not that they can't be really good together and not that one can't be a really good interior scorer, but from what see right now Bargnani might be the better option to pair up with either of JV or Drummond.
Comment
-
ceez wrote: View PostWhat
Comment
-
Mediumcore wrote: View PostIf recent history has created a blue print of what championship front courts look like:
Dirk/Chandler
Gasol/Bynum
Garnett/Perkins
B. Wallace/R. Wallace
Duncan/fill in the blank
O'neal/fill in the blank
I would say you need one scoring specialist and one defensive specialist (with the exception of Duncan and O'neal who did both for their team....ah they don't make bigs like they use to). With that in mind perhaps two bigs in the front court that are more in the mold of defensive specialists (Drummond/JV) is not a great idea. Not that they can't be really good together and not that one can't be a really good interior scorer, but from what see right now Bargnani might be the better option to pair up with either of JV or Drummond.
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostAs much of a Bargnani fan as I am, even I had to do a double-take on that statement! From all the players legitimately being considered the top prospect, I would agree that Bargnani would be top-3 from that draft right now, along with Aldridge and Gay. Obviously Aldridge wasn't a real thought for a Raptors team buliding around Bosh as their PF, which would make Bargnani top-2 from the Raptors' perspective. But to say that he's the easy #1... hmmmm ballsy, I'll give him that! lol
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostI agree that an ideal C/PF front court consists of a defensive anchor and a scoring threat. That's one of the reasons why I would seriously consider trading the #1 overall pick if the Raptors were to win the lottery, as I think Davis' strengths are going to mirror JV too much. I personally like the combination of JV and AB. Therefore, I'd rather trade the #1 pick for #2-5 pick (to get MKG or Beal) and either another lottery pick (ie: Portland, Utah and NO are all potential possibilities) or another solid young rotation player.
From Draft Express on Davis:
While Davis plays a simple role for Kentucky, he's arguably the most efficient offensive player in college basketball, converting an amazing 67% of his 2-point attempts (which ranks in the top 15 in our database in the past decade) and turning the ball over on just 9% of his possessions. He's one of the best finishers we've seen in recent years, making nearly 80% of his non-post-up attempts around the basket.
From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz1qcbMSq1e
http://www.draftexpress.comEh follow my TWITTER!
Comment
-
Apollo wrote: View PostYou can try to read between the lines all you want but I'm not going there with you. All I know is that Colangelo consistently comes out after a draft and states that he's selected the best player available. I also know that he has a better track record in the draft than a lot of the league.
Comment
-
Nilanka wrote: View PostDon't forget Rondo...
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostI agree that an ideal C/PF front court consists of a defensive anchor and a scoring threat. That's one of the reasons why I would seriously consider trading the #1 overall pick if the Raptors were to win the lottery, as I think Davis' strengths are going to mirror JV too much. I personally like the combination of JV and AB. Therefore, I'd rather trade the #1 pick for #2-5 pick (to get MKG or Beal) and either another lottery pick (ie: Portland, Utah and NO are all potential possibilities) or another solid young rotation player.
Rome wasn't built in one off season, nor should this team be. We want to put a contender together, not just make the playoffs. You have to ask yourself if the team we're building has the parts and talent to beat Chicago, Miami, OKC etc..
Comment
-
slaw wrote: View PostWhat core? Amir Johnson? Ed Davis? Bargnani? Derozan? James Johnson? Dear god. If that's the core then disrupting it is perfectly fine by me.
Comment
-
Mediumcore wrote: View PostThough maximizing the first over all pick would be good idea in last years draft I have to agree with Employee that you can't trade Anthony Davis for anything. I'd move JV before I move Anthony Davis, but if it were up to me I'd keep all three of AD, JV and AB. Play all three in rotation next season and lets see how JV and AD translate into the NBA next season. You keep whomever looks like the best option going forward stays on the team and the third either one of the three could be traded for another peice.
Rome wasn't built in one off season, nor should this team be. We want to put a contender together, not just make the playoffs. You have to ask yourself if the team we're building has the parts and talent to beat Chicago, Miami, OKC etc..
One guy played with college kids and the other guy played with European pro athletes, some in their primes.
I dont think it even warrants a comparison.
Comment
-
Anthony Davis would have gone first over all last year as well as the year before. He's as sure to be a star as one can say without knowing the future wheras JV projects to be a good player, not a great one. You can only make educated guesses on how players will turn out, but to pass up on what all the scouts are calling one of the best players to come out of college in years for JV (if it came to chosing between them) makes little sense.
Comment
-
Apollo wrote: View PostNeed should not matter in the draft. The draft is about the future, not the present. You take the best player available on your board and the future will make way for your decision.
For the most part, Needs are less subjective then Best Player Available. Aside from Anthony Davis & Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, things start to get less certain at the top (of this Draft).
Some mock drafts have Barnes high, others have Beal going #2 ... even Jeremy Lamb gets his name up there. The point is, after the consensus top pick (Davis), it could go any number of ways. Which to me is what I'd describe as subjective.
.
What I find so f*@ked up, is how many of these Mock Draft Boards have Raptors picking another Big .... wtf. Are we Minnesota deja vu - with Bigs - instead of Point Guards. How's that working out for the Timber Wolves? Try 57 wins in almost 3 seasons (when they started the PG slop-fest). I guess the real question is, with the Raptors already loaded with tall guys, why would we go after 2 more of them (which includes JV - a probable #2 or #3 if he was in this draft). Yes - Davis would be an easy sure-fire answer. But after him, the question has to be ...... WHY?
.
Raptors have needs from the 1 & 3 spots, with some even going so far as to include our SG spot. Never-the-less, Toronto has some serious needs in the Back Court - especially Starter quality. Shouldn't we start addressing that, or do we expect some Free Agent to make his way here because he's okay with the smell up here.
Some will counter that we'll have these extra Bigs to trade, forgetting that this draft is loaded with them. Economics 101 will tell you that when your supply is larger than the demand, price goes down. Hence, Raptors need to go after their Needs - when the BPA is not readily dominant.
.
Comment
-
RapthoseLeafs wrote: View PostNeeds vs Best Player
For the most part, Needs are less subjective then Best Player Available. Aside from Anthony Davis & Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, things start to get less certain at the top (of this Draft).
Some mock drafts have Barnes high, others have Beal going #2 ... even Jeremy Lamb gets his name up there. The point is, after the consensus top pick (Davis), it could go any number of ways. Which to me is what I'd describe as subjective.
.
What I find so f*@ked up, is how many of these Mock Draft Boards have Raptors picking another Big .... wtf. Are we Minnesota deja vu - with Bigs - instead of Point Guards. How's that working out for the Timber Wolves? Try 57 wins in almost 3 seasons (when they started the PG slop-fest). I guess the real question is, with the Raptors already loaded with tall guys, why would we go after 2 more of them (which includes JV - a probable #2 or #3 if he was in this draft). Yes - Davis would be an easy sure-fire answer. But after him, the question has to be ...... WHY?
.
Raptors have needs from the 1 & 3 spots, with some even going so far as to include our SG spot. Never-the-less, Toronto has some serious needs in the Back Court - especially Starter quality. Shouldn't we start addressing that, or do we expect some Free Agent to make his way here because he's okay with the smell up here.
Some will counter that we'll have these extra Bigs to trade, forgetting that this draft is loaded with them. Economics 101 will tell you that when your supply is larger than the demand, price goes down. Hence, Raptors need to go after their Needs - when the BPA is not readily dominant.
.
I don't think the conversation has been about when one player is not noticeably better than another - at least that is the way I've interpreted it. If there is no difference in evaluated talent and potential, then yes, go with needs.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostThat last sentence is a no brainer. I agree 100% with it.
I don't think the conversation has been about when one player is not noticeably better than another - at least that is the way I've interpreted it. If there is no difference in evaluated talent and potential, then yes, go with needs.
Outside of the 5 spot (and that is still an uncertainty) we need talent upgrades at every position. They are currently trying to develop young players that don't have "it" factor. There are a few decent pieces but I'm hoping this draft pick will turn out to be an undisputable 'core' piece of the team.
P.S. Beal in the top 3? I pride myself on keeping up with the college game and although he is a nice prospect, I can't say from what I saw of him this year that he would be taken that high. I think both Beal and MKG are sexy picks that might not give you the return expected from a top 3 selection. I might end up eating those words but just mho.
Comment
Comment