BRIGGS wrote:Can anyone and I mean anyone--anybody out there--find me ONE player who averaged less than 9 points a gmae as a junior in college basketball who went on to be a start in the last 25 years? Just 1. Good luck!

DeAndre Jordan..Matter of fact, exactly the same numbers as Stein in college..

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Would rather have Kaminsky, never hear about him lacking energy. Needs a midrange floater in his arsenal, but he isnt offensively challenged like WCS. His defense in the tournament was better than I was expecting from what Ive read about his D. A big man who brings that kind of energy and enthusiasm can be infectious. Galloway is also a high energy player, I could see them playing well together.

Kaminsky was good in the tourney. I wouldn't get too carried away with his defense in terms of how it will translate to the NBA tho. This comes down to a set of priorities. Kaminsky is a better all around player, but how does he actually impact the team when he doesn't have the ball? I know for a fact that WCS has an impact without the ball. This gets overlooked but it's very important. WCS also brings energy. You don't get the kind of defensive numbers he has without playing with energy.

WCS totally changes the way a team can defend and even on the offensive end he has a presence that can't be ignored. WCS scores at 72.5% at the rim and is always a threat to get an offensive rebound or dunk. His 120 Offensive Rating and 80 Defensive Rating show how he can be an efficient part of team even tho he doesn't demand the ball.

Moreover WCS actually makes everyone better on defense. He makes things easier for his teammates by turning away penetration and challenging on the perimeter as well. He plays the passing lanes with his length and quickness, getting steals and tips. His defense can help create more easy baskets.

Saw enough of his defense to see that Kaminsky can cover ground pretty well for a big. I prefer to take the better all around player than the defensive specialist with the 4 pick. If we could trade down and pick up what would turn out to be a diamond in the rough PG as well, that would be more palatable.

nixluva wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Would rather have Kaminsky, never hear about him lacking energy. Needs a midrange floater in his arsenal, but he isnt offensively challenged like WCS. His defense in the tournament was better than I was expecting from what Ive read about his D. A big man who brings that kind of energy and enthusiasm can be infectious. Galloway is also a high energy player, I could see them playing well together.

Kaminsky was good in the tourney. I wouldn't get too carried away with his defense in terms of how it will translate to the NBA tho. This comes down to a set of priorities. Kaminsky is a better all around player, but how does he actually impact the team when he doesn't have the ball? I know for a fact that WCS has an impact without the ball. This gets overlooked but it's very important. WCS also brings energy. You don't get the kind of defensive numbers he has without playing with energy.

WCS totally changes the way a team can defend and even on the offensive end he has a presence that can't be ignored. WCS scores at 72.5% at the rim and is always a threat to get an offensive rebound or dunk. His 120 Offensive Rating and 80 Defensive Rating show how he can be an efficient part of team even tho he doesn't demand the ball.

Moreover WCS actually makes everyone better on defense. He makes things easier for his teammates by turning away penetration and challenging on the perimeter as well. He plays the passing lanes with his length and quickness, getting steals and tips. His defense can help create more easy baskets.

How does Frank Kaminsky effect the game without the ball. Well he sits 27 feet from the basket and pulls out the shot blocker from the rim.

Willie moves well without the ball but the problem is its the other teams guys who are moving him.

Kaminsky showed us he doesnt have to bang in the post.... Was cookin OK4 in the title game.

I like him

nixluva wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:It's generally easier for an offensive player to develop good defensive skills than a defensive player developing good offensive skills.

You just don't draft in the top 5 for defense. If the player comes with a defensive skill set, then you consider that as an added incentive.

The draft is one of the few areas where defense takes a lesser priority. Offensive polish, physical attributes, potential and NBA readiness trump a prospect's defensive skills.

This is why you do not draft WCS at 4.

That is a complete disaster.

Patrick Ewing, Dwight Howard, Tyson Chandler were drafted for defense 1st.

I didn't say a player was never drafted in the top 5 for their defense. Just not something I would do, unless that player was easily a #1 pick.

Dwight Howard wasn't drafted strictly for his defense. He clearly had the biggest upside in one of the weakest drafts ever. Emeka Okafor, Ben Gordon, Shaun Livingston and Devin Harris went after he did. Howard could've been the weakest defensively from that group and he still would've gone first. Because why? He's still the best offensive player from that draft.

But to view it at from my original angle: Michael, Lebron, Iverson, Duncan, Webber, Shaq (and so many more) easily counters the list you gave.

They were drafted more for the characteristics I mentioned rather than just defense.

They all had franchise player capabilities.

holfresh wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:It's generally easier for an offensive player to develop good defensive skills than a defensive player developing good offensive skills.

You just don't draft in the top 5 for defense. If the player comes with a defensive skill set, then you consider that as an added incentive.

The draft is one of the few areas where defense takes a lesser priority. Offensive polish, physical attributes, potential and NBA readiness trump a prospect's defensive skills.

This is why you do not draft WCS at 4.

That is a complete disaster.

Not true..At least when I think of all the players that I know came up..The defensive player was usually the one that improved on the offensive end..Ewing, Dream, Butler, Mase, Oak, Alvin Robertson, Mourning, Dumars, can continue to run a list of guys u may not have heard...But thinking of the other way around, I having trouble thinking of one..

Ewing, Olajuwon, and Mourning were offensive players too. Hakeem is in the top 10 in all time points, Patrick in the top 25. Mourning was the offensive cornerstone of those Hornets teams. How are they only defensive players?

You think Ben Wallace had a better chance of becoming a good mid range shooter than James Harden has by becoming a good pick and roll defender, or improving his steals/blocks per game? I certainly don't see that.

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

holfresh wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:It's generally easier for an offensive player to develop good defensive skills than a defensive player developing good offensive skills.

You just don't draft in the top 5 for defense. If the player comes with a defensive skill set, then you consider that as an added incentive.

The draft is one of the few areas where defense takes a lesser priority. Offensive polish, physical attributes, potential and NBA readiness trump a prospect's defensive skills.

This is why you do not draft WCS at 4.

That is a complete disaster.

Not true..At least when I think of all the players that I know came up..The defensive player was usually the one that improved on the offensive end..Ewing, Dream, Butler, Mase, Oak, Alvin Robertson, Mourning, Dumars, can continue to run a list of guys u may not have heard...But thinking of the other way around, I having trouble thinking of one..

Ewing, Olajuwon, and Mourning were offensive players too. Hakeem is in the top 10 in all time points, Patrick in the top 25. How are they only defensive players?

You think Ben Wallace had a better change of becoming a good mid range shooter than James Harden has by becoming a good pick and roll defender, or improving his steals per game? I certainly don't see that.

Ewing, Mouring, and Olajuwon were all defense first players who did have an offensive game as well..Their offensive skills vastly improved in the NBA..I don't think u can deny that..