*Should we go after an Immediate need like Channing Frye, Fran Vasquez, and Chris Taft who are servicable centers or go for the Best Player Available or atleast one with the most upside like Wright, Granger, and Bynum, who have the ability to be allstars.


*I think Taft can be put under both categlories and playing in his hometown would definately help his attitude

are marbury, crawford, TT, & Ariza that good that all we need is a servicable center? I don't think so. Maybe if we want to just miss the playoffs every year. If we had Kobe, McGrady, Lebron, Wade, Pierce in place than it would make more sense.

We need the absolute best player available and there's a good chance that it will be Bynum or a potential allsta SG/SF. Say Bynum is gone and we take the best potential allstar. Then you can take a center in the future. You can find serviceable centers in the 2nd round

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

alot of Mock drafts have Bynum going at #30.

because its only been 1 month since he entered the draft. Don't be surprised when he's picked a lot higher based on excellent workouts.

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

alot of Mock drafts have Bynum going at #30.

because its only been 1 month since he entered the draft. Don't be surprised when he's picked a lot higher based on excellent workouts.

so you think Bynum is the Best player available at 8?

when you take skill, size and potential into consideration.. YES! no question about it!

sure Wright, Webster, graham can all be potential allstars but to have a center prospect who can easily become an allstar in a Center deprived league, where bigmen impact wins tremendously! Bynum is the only center other than Bogut I would draft as high as 8. The rest to me are servicable centers

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

alot of Mock drafts have Bynum going at #30.

because its only been 1 month since he entered the draft. Don't be surprised when he's picked a lot higher based on excellent workouts.

so you think Bynum is the Best player available at 8?

He is definitely not the best player available, there are obviously players who are better than him right now, but I could see why folx would want to take him here. He has the potential to be a much better player than Frye, Taft or whoever else.

Taft has the potential. What he doesn't have is the drive and size of Bynum

Posted by Solace:

There's more to the equation than that. For example, in a MLB fantasy draft, who do you take? Pujols, Abreu or Tejada?

If you said Pujols or Abreu, you just flunked. You have to take Tejada. Why? He puts up comparable stats, although you could argue that Pujols and Abreu are better, but he plays a position that it's almost impossible to get what he gives out of.

Same goes for the NBA draft. Take the best player available, you might wind up with a terrific shooting guard. However, if you weigh position into the mix versus talent, you may find that a center who is slightly less talented may be a better long run fit and have more overall value.

like bynum. Now Frye wouldn't be slightly less talented, he'd be a lot less talented

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by Solace:

There's more to the equation than that. For example, in a MLB fantasy draft, who do you take? Pujols, Abreu or Tejada?

If you said Pujols or Abreu, you just flunked. You have to take Tejada. Why? He puts up comparable stats, although you could argue that Pujols and Abreu are better, but he plays a position that it's almost impossible to get what he gives out of.

Same goes for the NBA draft. Take the best player available, you might wind up with a terrific shooting guard. However, if you weigh position into the mix versus talent, you may find that a center who is slightly less talented may be a better long run fit and have more overall value.

like bynum. Now Frye wouldn't be slightly less talented, he'd be a lot less talented

Hold on. As it stands right now, Bynum is way less talented! He hasn't done anything! Frye has stepped his game up in the tourney, stop talking about Bynum like he is Shaquille O'neal reincarnated. He has potential and size, but he hasn't done anything yet and he is definitely not better than Frye right now! This madness has got to stop!!!!

THANK YOU

Well we have a need at every postion except PG and possibly PF although we could obviously be better there.

Drafting need would mean to me drafting a 2,3, or 5 really.

Posted by technomaster:

Posted by Solace:

There's more to the equation than that. For example, in a MLB fantasy draft, who do you take? Pujols, Abreu or Tejada?

If you said Pujols or Abreu, you just flunked. You have to take Tejada. Why? He puts up comparable stats, although you could argue that Pujols and Abreu are better, but he plays a position that it's almost impossible to get what he gives out of.

Same goes for the NBA draft. Take the best player available, you might wind up with a terrific shooting guard. However, if you weigh position into the mix versus talent, you may find that a center who is slightly less talented may be a better long run fit and have more overall value.

It's that kind of thinking that got Michael Jordan picked #3. The lesson is that you always go with the better player if it's a clearcut decision. If you have too much duplication, you make some trades. It doesn't always have to end with the draft.

Rarely do you see teams constructed with the same blueprint nowadays (not like the Knicks/Heat/Rockets/Pacers/Spurs were in the mid 90s).

Teams w/o dominant centers have managed to win big. The center position can work with merely someone servicable.

Of course, but that Jordan argument is overblown. Up until that point there wasn't a player like him who just put a team on his back and willed them to win at the 2. The prevailing logic was that you build around a center.

Where exactly do you propose we get a serviceable center from? There are some iprospects in the draft, but very few in the league.

Well... we had a servicable center who we were very lucky to get him in the first place (Nazr Mohammed)... but then we gave him away for a 6'7" center/Anthony Mason-clone (Malik Rose) and the 30th pick (what are the odds you'll get the center of the future (or even a player of the future) w/ the #30 pick? It makes me sick.

Looks like Nazr might have the stuff to be the starting center of a championship team. (He's prolly thinking, "Thanks, Isiah!") He was part of one of Kentucky's NCAA title teams, right?

Let's look at a hypothetical situation. Check out the 1996 NBA draft.
Ya know, if anyone knew Ilgauskas (18th pick, 1996) would be the 3rd most productive center in the NBA (17ppg/9rpg/2.1bpg), using your logic... he should be taken over just about any guard or forward.

http://www.sportsstats.com/jazzyj/greats/96/

(I'm willing to discount the fact that big men like Camby, Lorenzen Wright, Dampier, Fuller, Potapenko, Jermaine O'Neal, and Walter McCarty were taken ahead of him-- perhaps only O'Neal is better at this point).

If you had to re-draft these players TODAY (knowing what we know), how would you rank them? Would Ilgauskas go #1-- and O'Neal (technically a PF) go #2? Or do you choose a PG in MVPs Nash and Iverson, or perhaps our very own Marbury? Do you shun the "dime a dozen" swingmen in Kobe and Allen? Do you pick Camby and Dampier with #3 and #4?

In any case, it's not so clear cut. Centers are important... but the Bulls managed to win 6 titles with various 3-headed monster centers, the Pistons picked up 2 with Edwards/Salley/Mahorn (and last year w/ a 6'8 Ben Wallace as their center). So that's roughly 9 out of the last 15 years where a title was not won by a team with a true dominant center.

Of course... Milicic was chosen by the Pistons for his potential to be a dominant center... when they could have had Carmelo or Wade... or even Bosh. Had they picked any of these 3, and you'd be talking about a Pistons dynasty (tho they seem to be doing quite fine in spite of Milicic!).