This And this. Griffin is undersized, but has the wide frame and raw strength of a power forward so his chances are better ... having said that I'm not so sure Griffin is destined for all-NBA or all-star greatness; he could end up just being a very good starter.
Yes, and Love went 5th in a very good draft. I'm talking about Hansbrough at 24th in a week draft. BNM
Yes, and Griffin is projected as the No. 1 over all pick - not the 24th. Griffin will likely be a better player than Hansbrough, perhaps even a LOT better, but taking him at No. 1 is a much bigger risk than taking Hansbrough at 24. It's not like Hansbrough is Shawn Bradley. 234 lbs. at 6'8.25" (w/o shoes) isn't exactly skinny. LaMarcus Aldridge weighed exactly the same, but was almost 2" taller. He's manged to add about 15 lbs. of muscle working with Bobby Medina. As intense as Hansbrough is, I can easily see him adding a little bulk/strength with a good strength and conditioning coach working with him. And, again, he'd be a back-up, not a starter. He wouldn't be expected to go up against guys like Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitski, Kevin Garnett, Chris Bosch, Carlos Boozer, etc. BNM
You do realize that Lawal is half an inch shorter, 5 lbs, lighter and has the same standing reach as Hansbrough. So, if Hansbrough is undersized, what's that make Lawal? BNM
Let's just put it this way, I'm not a 'draft for need' guy, I'm more of a 'best player available' guy ... if Hansbrough just happens to be the best available at 24 then yeah, I guess you take him, but I think there are more intriguing prospects likely to be available when our pick comes around. For me there's a larger issue than just the draft. If you really want a backup banger wouldn't a veteran acquisition be a better idea for a team seriously considering getting into title contention anyway? Wouldn't you rather have a guy with a proven track record? I only say this because this year's free agent crop is going to be pretty thick with older, veteran power forwards who are likely to be more effective at 29+ years old than Hansbrough will ever be.
I like the tier system. Unless there is a player who is clearly better than all others, group the players by talent level/potential, and then pick the one out of the group who best fills a need. Who knows, Hansbrough may just be the BPA at 24 (or maybe not). His stock was down due to the who undersized/lack of upside knocks on him, but now that he's measured out bigger than expected and is looking good at the camps/workouts, it's seems to be rising. Who know where he'll go. Guys who stay in college 4 years tend to get underrated on draft boards because they are seen as having little upside. I've personally never been a "upside" guy. I look at the players in the draft and tend to prefer the ones that can help me right now, in some way, over the "projects" that may, or may not pan out 3 or 4 years down the road. If you're going to gamble on upside, I prefer to do it in the second round where the risk is lower and there are no guaranteed contracts. I think I've said it about 50 times in this thread, yes, I'd prefer a veteran PF - if we can get one cheap this summer. It does appear that it will be a buyer's market. So, that very well may be possible. However, if we exhaust our cap space and trade assets (2nd round draft picks, trade exception, players, Paul Allen's cash, etc.) to upgrade the STARTING PG and/or SF positions, THEN I would use the 24th pick on a back-up 4. BNM
How come the Draft Measurements don't include verticals or sprint times this year? Who's the Jordan Farmar WTF!? candidate?
usually those come out a day or two after the measurements yet it's been like 4-5 days since those were released. If this wasn't such a lackluster draft I'd be There are a few numbers I want to gawk at though... like the verts of Budinger and Blair STOMP
Yes, I already knew that. I'd rather have Lawal because his frame could easily pack on more pounds on. Plus he has 3rd most upside out of any PF in draft(not named Griffin or Hill), and he's got a lot of natural athleticism. With Hansbrough being undersized he needs the athleticism to overcome his size disadvantage. Hansbrough just isn't that athletic unfortunately. I never said I wouldn't take Hansbrough. I'd much rather have Lawal or Blair due to their upside and better athleticism.
I think the PF's we are looking to get go in this order. 1. Blair 2. Lawal 3. Hansbrough If Blair and Lawal are gone you take psycho T, but if Lawal or Blair are there you definitely take them and not think twice about it.
Yes, in my original post in this thread, I said I'd take Blair over Hansbrough. To do so would require trading up, perhaps way up, in the draft. I specifically mentioned Hansbrough at 24. I'm not interested in Lawal. Not even slightly. He's extremely raw - basically a project. I think this team is beyond the point where they need to be drafting projects. As I stated previously, I've never been a big "upside" guy. Tons of guys have it (Darius Miles), few realize it. I prefer "is" over "might be - someday". Now that the team is winning, I want to use any 1st round picks we have on guys who can contribute now, not maybe three years down the road. Guys who can contribute now and are available at 24, will of course, have some limitations. Mostly limited "upside". BNM
The guy averaged 15.1 ppg at a 55% clip and averaged 9.5 rpg, in the same conference as psycho T too. He's not at limited as you think. He has a decent turnaround jumper and(from DraftExpress) budding/basic back to the basket game. He's still raw but so is Blair and Hansbrough. Both their offensive games need polish along with Lawal's. I don't see how Lawal wouldn't be able to contribute as well or even better than Hansbrough. Like I stated, though he has a skinny frame he doesn't shy away from contact and can bang down low. He was actually a better rebounder than Hansbrough. Here are some other strengths of his that we could use. From Draftexpress - Ability to get to free throw line - Ability to establish position in post - Ability to contest shots - Activity level - Lateral quickness - Post defense - Competitiveness - Role-player potential - Athleticism - Solid frame - Wingspan - Offensive rebounding - Rebounding tools Those are all the things we're basically looking for in our backup 4.
I'd rather have a project at the end of our bench or over in Europe than a guy who has limited upside. If we are going to go with a guy who we KNOW isn't going to be particularly good, we might as well go with a veteran at the level of Mikki Moore... those guys aren't that tough to find. Ed O.
And here's Hansbrough's "strengths": - Ability to get to free throw line - Likes to mix it up inside - Back to basket scoring - Excellent Touch - Footwork/Post-moves - Jump-hook shot - Turnaround jumper - Commitment to playing defense - Aggressiveness - Competitiveness - Physical Toughness - Strong Intangibles - Winning mentality - Work ethic - High-level productivity - Strength - Free throw shooting My list is longer than yours, neaner, neaner. Seriously, that sounds pretty good to me. And some of Hansbrough's "weaknesses" have been proven inaccurate now that his measurements are in: - Stuck between 4 and 5 - he's clearly a 4 at the next level - Size for position - has decent, if not great size for an NBA 4 - Undersized - ditto - Wingspan - greater than Blake Griffin's BNM
But would you rather have a project at the end of the bench, or a guy who is actually part of the regular rotation and can give you a productive, if unspectacular 10 - 12 MPG? It all depends on how you define "particularly good". And, exactly how do "we" know he won't be "particularly good"? IMHO opinion, Hansbrough already has a much better offensive game than Mikki Moore. Limited upside is not the same as sucking. It means the player is already capable of playing at, or near, his peak. After all, "limited upside" was one of the knocks on Brandon Roy. Given the Blazers situation, I'd rather have a guy who can contribute something positive immediately than a guy who might, or might not, contribute a little more three years down the road - if he ever gets off the end of the bench. BNM
