You would pass on a guy who may be able to come in and contribute during his rookie year (while the Spurs are in the running for another championship) to draft a project who is very raw and picked 13 spots later? Really?
He can't sign for "second round money". Each first round slot has a salary that is dictated by the collective bargaining agreement. You can vary between 80% and 120% of this figure. That will be his salary. He will also DEFINITELY be on the roster in October. All first round contracts are guaranteed for the first two years, plus any option years that are picked up.
The money makes no difference this summer anyway.
A.
A+ First. I thought Anderson was the best player on the board, so can't complain. He has some clear weaknesses, but UCLA hasn't done a great job getting guys in shape. A lot of excess fat on that team(Adams, Anderson both a bit Tubby). Not a huge fan of Dangubic, but that's with relatively limited search, and the second round isn't as important.
So Aaron will have a chance to prove you right in the summer league.
I'm still uncertain as to why you think that they could have done so much better than they did with such low first and second round picks. Simmons, and several other pro sportswriters think Anderson was the perfect pick for the Spurs at #30. McDaniels might have been interesting as a "Durant stopper" but there's a lot of questions about his game too.
Oh well, only time will tell if you'll be bumping this thread in the future.
typical chumpdumper thread
I'll cop to not doing my homework on this one. I'd heard the name around and seen one highlight tape and thought he was a project with high potential. Didn't know he went late in the second.
You do as much homework as the average NBA GM. Probably why Anderson dropped.
I dont want craft, my point was he has the character fit, which is a reason some people are hyping this pick. I agree wholeheartedly that there are wholes in McDaniels game. Which is harder to teach, how to be quick and explosive, or how to shoot? Which takes more work; getting better dribbling skills or being able to obtain a first step? Which takes more work, being able to prevent your man from driving to the lane or learning how to make an extra pass?
In my opinion, the skills of the game are easier to learn than training the body to do the skills at a high speed, or become explosive. Can McDaniels learn to shoot more than Anderson can learn to be athletic? I think so. My money would be on that. But I agree, IF Anderson can learn to be explosive he would be a far better pro than McDaniels. I dont think he can though.
Very interesting to see how Brown develops McDaniels. That team is loaded with athletes.
If you can teach McDaniels how to pass like Anderson you should be an NBA coach.
If this were true, then what's the excuse of guys like Anthony Randolph, Michael Beasely, Stromile Swift, JR Smith, Jan Vesely, Evan Turner, Joe Alexander, Nick Young, Mouhamed Sene, James White!!!...
Javale McGee!!!!
I'm all for taking flyers on athletes with no real skills.
That's what the second round and training camp are for.
Spurs went that route with RJ, White, Temple, Gee, Hairston, Pops, etc. and they barely had a 50 game season. High IQ with decent athleticism over high athleticism and avg to low iq any day of the week.
Last edited by Cowboys_Wear_Spurs; 06-28-2014 at 07:40 PM.
This.
That reminds me - whatever happened to Gist!!!?
B+ grade. Good draft, I've seen Anderson play several times and anytime you can get someone at 30 who was projected to go 19-20 or even higher, it can't be that bad. He definitely has ability on the offensive end, but ultimately in the NBA if you are a total liability on defense you won't get minutes.
I see what you're saying, but my point is, if you had JR Smith and Anderson at the same 30th pick, would you really select Anderson? I dont think I would, and I despise the player and the person JR smith has become, but there is a ceiling for all players. Look at Smith, he played for garbage teams, with garbage leaders... Could JR have come in, learned from manu and fit right in at that level, maybe. Will Anderson ever be able to be the game changer that Ginobili is, highly doubtful from my perspective. Additionally, what does he do for us on off nights? He may be worse than bonner...
You brought up evan turner. I think, from watching them both play in college, they are VERY SIMILAR on the offensive end. Turner was more crafty, and NEVER AN ATHLETE. He just awkwardly dribbled in missed a layup or a bunny then got his rebound... it was weird to watch him go through his career at OSU, much like Deshaun Thomas. Thomas was a totally different player in HS. At OSU he seemed to lose athleticism, he also reminds me of Anderson, with the speed of his game with the ball in his hands.
Again, I hope he proves me wrong. I hope he comes out and makes Boris look bad. I'll own up, I always do. I hate Tiago's pussy game but when he does well I cheer him on.
The point is the draft grade. He's a going to need a lot of work, what you may expect from a 30 pick. The Spurs picked a guy that fits what they want to work with. Just like what many other teams would do. C is average.
Russel Westbrook, Dwight Howard, Shaq, Barkley. Every person you name that you feel has floundered because he was an athlete there is another that has terrible basketball sense. I would argue that the NBA has minority players with good IQ over not.
It stands to reason that if you possess both physical potential and mental potential, you can improve both of those aspects of your game.
However, I'm not sure that I agree that the mental aspect is easier than the physical. Michael Jordan once famously said, “talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.”
There are lots of gifted athletes who have incredibly low basketball IQs, suffer as a result, and never learn the finer points of the game. J.R. Smith, IMHO, is a prime example of a gifted athlete with a horribly low BBIQ as are JaVale McGee, Rudy Gay, and Josh Smith, et. al.
I could argue that even Westbrook is an example of a player who survives on instinct and athleticism, but makes a lot of dumb decisions on the court, especially when the game is on the line. In Westbrook's case, his physical gifts outweigh his less than stellar BBIQ, but I think there's little doubt that if he was a more coachable player, he and the Thunder would be more successful.
Boris Diaw, OTOH, is a good example of a player who gets by more on guile, cleverness, and out thinking his opponent than athletic skill. , Duncan has been getting by on BB smarts for the last 5 years.
My point in all this is that Anderson has been described by the experts as having a very high BBIQ, even at his young age of 20. I'll take a smart but average athlete over a dumb gifted one every time.
Spurs got a draft pick that was valued in the late teens or early 20s in one of the deepest drafts in history. He's probably one of the most skilled players regardless of position in the entire draft. And, if there's a staff that can maximize his potential or minimize his weaknesses, it's the Spurs. As for the second rounder, you have to give the Spurs a pass based on history. They traded up to get him, so they have to believe he has the potential to grow and develop. Given the talent they drafted and their modest position, I don't see how people can be underwhelmed with the pick or overall draft.
I have no doubt the Spurs would've picked Anderson, because they made the choice over more athletic players in this draft...guys like Early and Robinson. The point is, they selected one of the most skilled all-around players regardless of position and you don't like that he's not athletic. They picked the best available option and a of a good prospect. You can't be so jaded that you give them a C for being the best team in the regular season and having such a complete squad that it made no sense to trade up. They drafted a player at #30 with a value 10-15 spots higher. That's not a C no matter how you slice it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
