<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetsDaily)</div><div class='quotemain'>In an interview with his hometown newspaper, Ryan Anderson takes a reporter through his recent journeys, from underestimated high school player to underestimated college player to underestimated NBA draft choice. “All I can do is just go out and work hard, play basketball as well as I possibly can,” says the 6′-10″ Anderson “and … be able to impress the people of New Jersey.”</div> Local Boy Anderson Ready for Action This Winter with NJ Nets - Mike Jones - El Dorado Hills Village Life I keep forgetting we picked this guy. He was the most "random" of the 3 picks - as in, the guy I never really heard of. I wanna see him pan out to be a really good player. Although, being a 20 and 10 player and a great shooter, I am curious as to why he dropped to 21. I never really thought about it before. Oh, and question for all: Who do you think will produce the most out of our rookies?
Out of the 3 Lopez will clearly get the most PT. Looks like he is the only legit C on our roster now... Anderson will be behind Yi, Najera, Boone, Sean, and maybe even Stro on the depth chart... Hopefully we can make a trade dumping Stro + KVH and one of SW and Boone for a legit C or a better starting SF. We have way too many SFs though... Simmons, Hayes and Hassell are each "second string SF" level guys, so it would be nice to dump one of them also (probably Hassell is the most probable, since the other two are new guys) CDR will get his chance, but I don't expect him to turn out too much better than Wright did...
I never heard of him before we drafted him, but I can't say a negative thing about picking him right now. Good shooter, good potential, team player. He's not perfect, obviously, but #21 picks usually aren't. As for your question pegs, there's no doubt in my mind that Lopez will be our best rookie in year one. He'll get the most minutes, and I believe he's NBA ready so he'll produce.
He didn't 'drop' to 21, the Nets reached for him at 21...according to Draft Express, by about 10 slots. The reasons are two-fold. He 'dropped' because this draft was predicated on "POTENTIAL, POTENTIAL, BABY."(Dick Vitale) Dickie was clearly misinterpreted. The ESPN guys don't take him seriously because of his shtick and missed the point on his commentary, but he was mocking the draft prognosticators and NBA GM's. The 'reach' was all about need and fit. Nets needed shooter, height, and someone who hustles. Lil' Birdman fits...perfectly.
With the news of Steve Novak being traded, I now would compare him to Anderson or Anderson to him. I hope not but you never know.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Aug 6 2008, 10:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>With the news of Steve Novak being traded, I now would compare him to Anderson or Anderson to him. I hope not but you never know.</div> He'll be much better than Novak. Ryan is more versatile, tougher, a better rebounder, and more. I'm proud for Ryan, and I know he'll do well. He's always had that underdog label put on him and has shined.
Plus, Anderson is a damn good rebounder. I expect him to struggle shooting wise though, but if he works out well in his 3rd year he can be a very good player.
Personally, I could give a sh*t what Jonathan Givony says. He runs a blog. You could also take a look at NBADraft if you want an alternative view from another blog. In their final mock, Lopez was at #4, CDR at #25, Anderson at #26 and Jaycee Carroll at #57. So while Givony thought he was a 10-spot reach, Aran Smith of NBADraft.net thought he was a reach of five spots...not a big miss. Cleveland had also told Anderson he was on their short list at #19. (They took Hickson instead...and if Hickson had been available at #21, so would the Nets, I'd bet.) Everyone here seems enamored of CDR. I'm not. I believe players drop as precipitously as he did for a reason. He's a good risk at #40, but I don't think he is a world beater. Collectively, NBA GM's are not that dumb. Yes, Monta Ellis dropped to #40, but he was a high school baller who had had a knee injury. And Yes, Paul Milsap dropped to #45, but he played for a small school, was undersized and showed up at his workouts grossly out of shape. CDR is right-sized, healthy, in shape and played for one of the top two teams in the NCAA. Everyone had seen him play...yet passed.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Aug 7 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Personally, I could give a sh*t what Jonathan Givony says. He runs a blog. You could also take a look at NBADraft if you want an alternative view from another blog. In their final mock, Lopez was at #4, CDR at #25, Anderson at #26 and Jaycee Carroll at #57. So while Givony thought he was a 10-spot reach, Aran Smith of NBADraft.net thought he was a reach of five spots...not a big miss. Cleveland had also told Anderson he was on their short list at #19. (They took Hickson instead...and if Hickson had been available at #21, so would the Nets, I'd bet.) Everyone here seems enamored of CDR. I'm not. I believe players drop as precipitously as he did for a reason. He's a good risk at #40, but I don't think he is a world beater. Collectively, NBA GM's are not that dumb. Yes, Monta Ellis dropped to #40, but he was a high school baller who had had a knee injury. And Yes, Paul Milsap dropped to #45, but he played for a small school, was undersized and showed up at his workouts grossly out of shape. CDR is right-sized, healthy, in shape and played for one of the top two teams in the NCAA. Everyone had seen him play...yet passed.</div> Such as when Marcus Williams dropped?
I was under the impression that Marcus dropped because of conditioning concerns, not exactly defense and inability to contribute to the team in a positive manner. I am also under the impression that CDR dropped because he had really bad workouts with every team but the Nets, and many didn't see him as a very good shooter.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Aug 7 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Everyone here seems enamored of CDR. I'm not. I believe players drop as precipitously as he did for a reason. He's a good risk at #40, but I don't think he is a world beater. Collectively, NBA GM's are not that dumb. Yes, Monta Ellis dropped to #40, but he was a high school baller who had had a knee injury. And Yes, Paul Milsap dropped to #45, but he played for a small school, was undersized and showed up at his workouts grossly out of shape. CDR is right-sized, healthy, in shape and played for one of the top two teams in the NCAA. Everyone had seen him play...yet passed.</div> What about Boozer?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rory @ Aug 7 2008, 11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Aug 7 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Everyone here seems enamored of CDR. I'm not. I believe players drop as precipitously as he did for a reason. He's a good risk at #40, but I don't think he is a world beater. Collectively, NBA GM's are not that dumb. Yes, Monta Ellis dropped to #40, but he was a high school baller who had had a knee injury. And Yes, Paul Milsap dropped to #45, but he played for a small school, was undersized and showed up at his workouts grossly out of shape. CDR is right-sized, healthy, in shape and played for one of the top two teams in the NCAA. Everyone had seen him play...yet passed.</div> What about Boozer? </div> Boozer was in 280 lbs range pre-draft.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Aug 7 2008, 10:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was under the impression that Marcus dropped because of conditioning concerns, not exactly defense and inability to contribute to the team in a positive manner. I am also under the impression that CDR dropped because he had really bad workouts with every team but the Nets, and many didn't see him as a very good shooter.</div> I wouldn't go so far as to say that NBA GMs have collective wisdom--just that they have collective BIASES. I'd argue that the players that rise as the draft approaches tend to be bigs; points; so-called "athletes; and/or youngsters. The players that tend to drop, as a result, are swingmen; "non-elite athletes"; and/or college juniors and seniors. And, of course, one you get to the second round all bets are off.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Aug 7 2008, 11:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Aug 7 2008, 10:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was under the impression that Marcus dropped because of conditioning concerns, not exactly defense and inability to contribute to the team in a positive manner. I am also under the impression that CDR dropped because he had really bad workouts with every team but the Nets, and many didn't see him as a very good shooter.</div> I wouldn't go so far as to say that NBA GMs have collective wisdom--just that they have collective BIASES. I'd argue that the players that rise as the draft approaches tend to be bigs; points; so-called "athletes; and/or youngsters. The players that tend to drop, as a result, are swingmen; "non-elite athletes"; and/or college juniors and seniors. And, of course, one you get to the second round all bets are off. </div> Don't forget the international stash. That is another reason a number of players fall in the draft. Teams with multiple picks or limited number of roster spots can go that route. Assuming he wouldn't have gone higher than #23 the only teams that passed up CDR (those taking US swingmen) were: #30 - Boston (JR Giddens) #38 - Charlotte (Kyle Weaver) #39 - Chicago/Denver (Sonny Weems) <-Not sure which team actually made the selection. Out of the other 14 players chosen in front of him 2 were PGs, 1 was an international swingman, and the other 11 were bigs (3 of which were international players).
