Reply With Quote
Good breakdown. The Hornets and Celts seem like the only locks outside the top 10 to draft a SF, and with more than 2 legitimate mid-first talents at the position the Spurs look to be in good shape.
I hope (and think) that if the teams needs are factored in, it will make it an even more promising picture for the Spurs.
aside the Celtics, who definitely have similar needs, none of the 10 teams to pick ahead of the Spurs look as if SF was their priority need. some might still pick in that pool, when they think a SF is the BPA, but most will go for either a big or a guard.
#19 - Celtics: definitely need an athletic defensive long SF
#18 - Heat: don't have a big under contract and can play Beasley at SF
#17 - Bulls: have Deng and Johnson
#16 - Wolves: might take a SF, but still have Brewer and Gomes
#15 - Bucks: have Ilyasova, Delfino, Mbah
#14 - Rockets: Ariza and Battier
#13 - Raptors: Hedo and DeRozan
#12 - Grizzlies: Gay(re signed?), Young, Brewer
#11 - Hornets: their SFs are all washed up, should pick a SF
#10 - Pacers: Granger, Dunleavy, Rush, Jones
Good breakdown. The Hornets and Celts seem like the only locks outside the top 10 to draft a SF, and with more than 2 legitimate mid-first talents at the position the Spurs look to be in good shape.
Also, in a similar way, Teams are unlikely to go the TWolves route and draft 3 players at the same position. E.g, say the TWolves get Turner at their 1st pick. With Brewer playing well, SF would seem to be solved, so they could reach on a Centre(Orton, Alabi) who would be valuable to them in filling a need, but aren't the SF we're looking at. Also, teams will probably be drafting with an eye on free agency, e.g, Bulls pick will be effected by who they think they can get. If they think they'll get Boozer, a SG (Henry) makes a lot of sense, If they think they'll get Joe Johnson, A PF makes sense(Sanders?). Not the only factor, but I'd assume it's factored in.
Wolves are always unpredictable. they have 3 1st rounders. may spend all on SFs and then trow their whole cap space at Rudy Gay.
good chance that they waive Gomes to gain more cap space. (Gomes would be a nice pick up for the BAE, but he will likely get more from other teams).
what they for sure need is shooting. Ellington is good, but not enough (especially if Gomes leaves) whoever they pick on #1-#5, it won't be a shooter. Henry likely won't be on the board at #16 (if he falls that far, they should pick him there). maybe James Anderson makes the most sens for them at this point.
Celtics could very well draft a SF but they aren't lock to do so. Drafting a SG or a combo guard also makes a lot of sense for them.
Is rubio allowed to enter the draft again?
will depend on the 2 Allens. they are limited with their options, so I think they will re sign both. Ray Allen turns 35, but he still is a great player. they can't find a better SG in free agency. 2012 is their rebuilding deadline, so I guess Ray will be re signed for two more years. and Tony Allen still is their best perimeter defender.
however, if they like a guard at #19 (Anderson? Bledsoe? Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_ Williams ?), of course it also makes sense. they also need to look for the time beyond 2012 and they likely won't re sign Robinson and Daniels. (they are not even part of the PO rotation)
I also think that Anderson makes sense for the Wolves. I think a Turner-Anderson-Alabi draft would be about as good as they could hope for, though I think anything is possible, including a 16/23/2011 2nd package to move up to get another lottery prospect. (Also, when does Pekovic's contract expire? 2010?, 2011?).
Pekovic contract expires 2011. he makes big money in Greece. (reportedly about 5 million $ net.). won't be cheap for the Wolves to bring him in.
Perhaps "lock" was too strong a word. Nothing is really a lock when it comes to the draft.
Anderson, Lawal and (a bit surprising) Babbitt have hired an agent, so they are in for good.
Babbitt compensates a bit for Singler, so the SF and combo forward pool for mid to end 1st round stays deep.
Arn Tellem is criticizing the new deadline for college early entrants:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arn-te..._b_545509.html
It's a nice read and it's hard not to agree with him.
Well Vesely not being in is a bit of a shock, and the DX report of Montejunas possibly pulling out also takes out someone who could possibly be picked ahead of us(he should be picked before 20). I think it limits our options a bit, But we'll still have someone fairly similar in ability to who's projected(If we're thinking Robinson, Hayward, George, Pondexter), It's probably likely that 1 more will be gone(With a big likely also moving up if Montejunas also comes out). We'll probably have a choice of 3 or 4 solid SF/Combo Forward prospects, rather than 4/5 guys.
I also think that in thinking of who the Spurs will draft, We should think of looking at the General thinking of the Spurs Organisation. Blair was somewhat of a no-brainer pick, but he looked excellent statistically in advanced statistics. George Hill was a shock to us, But played on a top defensive team in advanced statistics and was high in other advanced stats(http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/George-Hill-5067/). Brent Barry was picked up after being at the top of the league in TS%. Also, the obvious general team focus on defence for the last few decades.
With all that, I think we can probably guess that we'll get a player that is highly efficient offensively(TS%, Turnovers etc), Will be able to fit in the team defensive concepts, and will probably fill a need. There's not a huge difference between James, Pondexter, Babbitt, Robinson and George in terms of efficiency, Though I'd guess the Spurs will do some stats work to seperate them all.
I saw some discussion in the Paul George thread about him and another SF prospect, Quincy Pondexter. The two seem to be the favorites by this board right now to get selected by the Spurs in the first round.
Here's my thoughts...the George v. Pondexter debate is an interesting one, but I really see two different players.
Pondexter is a slasher that uses his quick first step to get to the rim and his big physical profile to finish. He has shown development in his perimeter shot, but he attempted less than 1 1/2 college 3s per game. Given his reported work ethic, it's reasonable to assume he'll work on it, but it's still "projection" at this point.
George, conversely, is a spot-up shooter. He does use his nice speed/athleticism to get out on the break and finish in transition, but unlike Pondexter he's doesn't utilize it much in the half-court. His half-court offense (coming off screens, pick and roll, iso, etc.) is what remains "projection" for him.
As to whether Pondexter or George is "more ready", I'd say it's a function of what the Spurs would ask of them. George is more ready to sit in the corner and wait for the ball rotation to hit the spot up 3, while Pondexter is more ready to drive to the bucket and put pressure on the D.
Personally, I'd go with Pondexter for a few reasons...
1. I'd rather "project" shooting the ball than half-court execution. Take the player with the aggressive streak and teach them how to shoot, they become versatile while still defaulting to that killer instinct.
2. The system seems to be able to integrate another slasher. Now, a couple years ago I'd have gone George all the way because he seems to more seamlessly fit the current system. But as Richard Jefferson has proven, the Spurs are able to find plays and situations to include aggressive offensive players. I think when RJ leaves, if the Spurs went with Pondexter there would be a seamless transition.
3. Defense and motor are already there. Based on the scouting reports, most agree that while George has the physical tools to succeed as a defender, he just hasn't been consistent in doing so. There have also been questions about whether he gives consistent effort on the court. In Pondexter you don't have those questions and you know you can count on his effort and intensity to be there night in an night out.
I do think that George would still be a good fit and have hope that if the Spurs select him they believe he can reach his potential.
great post and well written. congratulations. agree on all points.
I would also pick Pondexter over George in the current situation, exactly because of this points.
it try to add some more arguments for Pondexter.
-he can get to the line at will (on college level), that's something that usually translates well to the NBA. Spurs will need this in the next seasons as Tim, Manu and Jefferson are regressing significantly in this area and Hill isn't above average as well. pondexter could develop an offensive game similar to Maggette. (who the Spurs wanted last year)
-he shots pretty well and high percentage of the dribble, that's a good sign that he has fundamentals to build on. he will become a better shooter.
-his defensive skills are not only based on his quickness and athleticism. he knows very well how to move and rotate, which will be the crucial point to become a contributor for the Spurs right away.
back to George. if the Spurs don't think the pick is relevant for the next 2 years, because they think about bring in a more seasoned wing player, they should go with George, who has the higher ceiling.
Great posts AFBlue and mountainballer. I like Pondexter a lot, but I'm biased being a Washington fan. While I'd be perfectly happy with a Pondexter pick, I won't be too upset if they pass on him. I've come to trust the Spurs scouting department, so if they decide to go with another SF or big man, I'll be very fine with it. On the other hand, if they go for a guard (unless someone REALLY drops), I'll be very perplexed.
i think Quincy Pondexter has Richard Jefferson style of play and that not the best for our system like we see RJ this year, i think Paul George better fit for our system and he also has more potential.
I think RJs style of play gets a bad rap because he makes $15M and disappears for long stretches...but to me that's on the person not the skill-set.
When RJ is slashing off picks, iso-ing from the post and driving or cutting to the basket off the ball he's actually a very effective player. It's just that he isn't consistently aggressive in doing those things and that translates to fewer touches and less efficiency.
Everything you read about Pondexter is that he relentlessly attacks the rim and that he does so in a half-court offense using several different sets. If Pondexter develops the reliable 18-20ft jumper then he becomes RJ-like...only a more aggressive version that's paid 1/15th the price.
My last point about why it would work...this is not the "4-down" offense of the late 90s/early 2000s where the ball would be tossed into Duncan, he'd wait for the double-team, and then pass out to open shooters. While there's still a role on this team for shooters (b/c of drive-and-kick), there will always be a place for player that can put the ball on the floor and get to the bucket when the shots aren't falling.
I do think Pondexter would have to develop a reliable corner 3pt shot to be most effective, but in my opinion the notion that his style of play doesn't fit the Spurs' offense doesn't bear out.
yes. there was a reason why the Spurs tried to get Maggette 2008 and why they traded for RJ last summer. Pop saw the need for another slasher. the point that RJ turned out to be a bad fit doesn't prove that this type of player is a bad fit in general.
and IMO the major criteria won't be the offensive style anyhow. it will be the stopper potential and Pondexter does have this potential. looking at the players, who likely will play a role in the Spurs future after Tim, we have Hill, maybe Tony, Splitter, Blair. maybe De Colo. so there is room and need for a defensive specialist, who can defend multiple positions.
some of the NBA comparisons for Pondexter are pretty interesting in this regard. Pietrus for example. Posey, Mbah, Bobby Simmons, some others.
Last edited by mountainballer; 04-29-2010 at 04:16 AM.
Early entry list:
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/04/29/d...s=iref:nbahpt2
Thanks!
Players who entered can still withdraw though...right?
They can withdraw up until June 14th.
DX comment about Beaubois and that he is a good example how important that type of quick combo guards is in todays NBA. (yes. see also Hill)
makes me wonder if this players will also be picked a bit higher than expected.
thinking about Eric Bledsoe, Dominique Jones, Armon Johnson, Avery Bradley. all currently projected bottom 1st to high 2nd round.
I'm fine with that. It just means more players will slide our direction.
Yes, they can (up until June 14th as said before).Thanks!
Players who entered can still withdraw though...right?
NCAA players must now withdraw before May 8th to keep their college eligibility. Given that there is only one meaningful international early entrant (Motiejunas), we will have an almost full picture of the landscape for Spurs first round pick in one week.
Speculations on who will be in the mix for #20 will start damn early this year.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
