I'm tired of waiting for rookies to develop. We already have enough developing talent (Pietrus and Biedrins). I say we draft the player that is most NBA ready and can contribute right away. Being that I have seen nothing from Biedrins, I have to say that our biggest need is a post playing big man. Most of the centers available are very raw Euro's (Andriuskevicius, Petro) but I think that Bogut may be an exception. He is dominating in college, but I'm not sure how that will translate to the NBA. If Chris Taft can show that he can play Center in the NBA, he is worth taking a look at b/c his size can make him a very dominant post player.
Either him or a franchise point guard that's more durable than Speedy. The guy is constantly injured. 20 bucks says he goes down for a couple of weeks sometime after allstar break.
Think about it this way, when you draft a project player, what you are essentially doing is foregoing getting a rookie that year and instead getting two rookies the next year. The project pick from the year before and the current pick. Looking at it this way, the Warriors have two picks this year, one will be a pick that will probably be in the 3-7 range and Biedrins. Do you think the Warriors are better off spending both picks on big men? Before you answer it, consider this: assuming the team picks up Speedy's option, and they want to sign him to a long term deal, you can guarantee Speedy is going to want more money than Fisher since, in all liklihood, Speedy will be the starter. So in the '06/'07 season, Fisher makes 5.8 mil, if the Warriors want to resign Speedy (unless there are major changes to the CBA) Speedy is going to want a contract starting at a minimum of 7 mil. That's 13 to 18 mil over the next few years on one posisition for an injury prone starter and an over the hill back up. So if this is the scenario the Warriors will face in 18 months and you have a chace at doing something about it ths summer, would you rather draft a pg who can come in and be on his rookie contract for nearly the entire life of Fisher's contract or would you want to draft a big man who may or may not turn out to be any better than Biedrins and Murphy and know you're going to face major problems at the pg position.
It's sad but true. Wtwalker has touched on something the W's have not done in a long time, which was draft a point guard high in the first round. I think our last guy was a guy by the name of Tim Hardaway. There's definitely a connection about missing the playoffs and not having that important franchise piece to run the offense in a variety of ways to set the tempo.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Think about it this way, when you draft a project player, what you are essentially doing is foregoing getting a rookie that year and instead getting two rookies the next year. The project pick from the year before and the current pick. Looking at it this way, the Warriors have two picks this year, one will be a pick that will probably be in the 3-7 range and Biedrins. Do you think the Warriors are better off spending both picks on big men? Before you answer it, consider this: assuming the team picks up Speedy's option, and they want to sign him to a long term deal, you can guarantee Speedy is going to want more money than Fisher since, in all liklihood, Speedy will be the starter. So in the '06/'07 season, Fisher makes 5.8 mil, if the Warriors want to resign Speedy (unless there are major changes to the CBA) Speedy is going to want a contract starting at a minimum of 7 mil. That's 13 to 18 mil over the next few years on one posisition for an injury prone starter and an over the hill back up. So if this is the scenario the Warriors will face in 18 months and you have a chace at doing something about it ths summer, would you rather draft a pg who can come in and be on his rookie contract for nearly the entire life of Fisher's contract or would you want to draft a big man who may or may not turn out to be any better than Biedrins and Murphy and know you're going to face major problems at the pg position.</div> So what your basically saying is that Fisher screwed everything up. I believe that Speedy can be our solution at PG...the only knock on Speedy really has nothing to do with his game, its just that he is injury prone. I agree that SPeedy will most likely demand more money than Fisher is getting...Heck, he deserves to make more than Fisher. But it is a bit risky b/c of the aforementioned injury concern. I say, if he stays healthy the rest of this season, as well as next year...I think we should consider locking him up with a Fisher-esque contract. Also, don't we have 2 draft picks this year, ours and the one we got in the Damp trade? If we do, than we can address both concerns. We get a big early that replaces Dale Davis and hopefully contributes right away and we get a point with the 2nd first rounder. There are tons of quality PG's that will be available mid to late first round Felton if he slips, Gilchrist, Gibson, and high school phenom Louis Williams. They can backup Speedy for a year, and after that we'll see what happens.
This brings up tons of trade ideas come draft time. Remember how Washington traded Jerry Stackhouse + 5th overall pick (Devin Harris) + Christian Laetner for Antwan Jamison? I thought the Wizards were crazy for picking another guard, but it smelled like a trade. So when the Warriors start drafting and it doesn't make sense. I bet we're doing it for somebody else to get a star player. I'm hoping Baron Davis or Jamal Magloire or maybe them both if our pick is high enough. Our defense will improve so much and Baron Davis won't necessarily feel compelled to shoot so much because he'll have more options on offense.
Typically a player who racks up high rbd stats in college will be doing the same as a pro,and Bogut is a guy doing just that. A lot of big men look like rebounders in terms of size and muscle but whether in college or pros are 6.5 rbd guys. Bogut has shown he can and DOES score,score with a high fg%,rebound and pass. He shows instincts and work ethic. He's 7ft,with decent bulk and strength plus mobility. Biedrens for now is a wrapped box under the Christmas tree-we can only guess there is something inside. My take on Chris Paul and Raymond Felton is they don't appear to have more game than several point G's usually expected to be round 2,like Aaron Myles or Diener. I don't get the knocks on Murphy,sure,he ain't Tim Duncan BUT he is the guy we HAVE who is among the NBA leading rebounders and one of just a few guys on this team that should be allowed to fire a 3. Folks call Foyle awful because he is not what Murph is,and call Murph awful because he's not Foyle. A deal that give #1 picks and any trade bait we do have for Baron Davis would be a gamble. If Baron is healthy,he's been good,but we'd be unable to do much more to improve. If he keeps getting injuries-we'd be screwed. My hope is the Warriors get a shot at Bogut or Shelden williams with a lower pick for Danny Granger. Whatever winds up being the W's late #1,and #2 picks there should be a point G bargain,or maybe a very good defensive role type who doesn't score enough to get piced higher. I really am leaning to guys who are producing results more than who have "upside"but really are not consistantly getting it done
Rerem, I'm still hyped about Bogut, but I don't know about Shelden Williams unless he's Elton Brand part II. I found a good article about Steve Nash that relates to the type of point guard we should be getting if we decide to draft a guard. Too many shoot first point guards, but I wouldn't Baron Davis since he has playmaking skills, stellar defense, and a great shot when he's not trying to force it all the time. I just can't stand the Juan Dixon's and the Dajuan Wagners. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> Nash's style is a throwback to earlier times when point guards passed first, shot later, and dazzled fans with their brilliant ball skills and unselfish play. "In some ways, the NBA has really been dominated by scoring point guards the last five, six, seven years," Nash said on Saturday, before his West team practised in front of fans at the Denver Convention Center. "For me, I really enjoy passing the ball, I'm a lot like (New Jersey's) Jason Kidd , I think we're both in our own right throwbacks and play the game the way guys played it when we were growing up." </div> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=cp-n...ov=cp&type=lgns
Sheldon W is about the same as Brand in size and power and appears even in mobility. Williams is a better rebounder and defender,Brand is a more consistant scoring threat,though both are high % in the paint,Brand seems to have more range.Bogut,at 7-0 is a true C,the only guy I see in this draft who I'd expect could start right away as a C-and therefore odds are getting real strong he goes #1. Once Bogut's gone who else has proven big man skills? Look at the current Ncaa stats leaders for the guy in the top 5 in rebounds and blocks...hint..he's doing it in the ACC too
I'm still pulling for Bogut. Fisher and Foyle should never have been signed. And Murphy was questionable with injuries last year. Too many guys we have with no true positions. Albeit unproven, I like the idea of a true center with Andris Biedrens playing power forward in a couple of years.
We are having a good draft discussion in the Knicks forum and we found some pretty decent draft selections. I thought since we are in the same boat, why not share some with you guys? Fran Vazquez [imgl]http://www.draftcity.com/headshots/franvazquez.jpeg[/imgl] From: Spain Height: 6'10 Weight: 229 lbs Positions: PF/C Age: 21 He is from Spain. From what I read from him, he is a very athletic player with great quickness and great dunker. He also has a nice Kurt Thomas range from 12-14 feet, and works well without the ball. He has a good wingspan which might intimidate some players trying to take it inside. He is also a solid rebounder. Probably his best asset is his work ethic and attitude. He is just like Ariza and Sweetney in his work ethic, and he is a good leader. I think he looks good and might be a decent player in the league. Perhaps a solid for you guys.I don't think he is one of the more talented players though. It will be interesting to see what he can do. Either way he is a lottery pick. I heard the optimistic point of view from him is a poor man?s Marcus Camby, while the pessimistic side was a Francisco Elson. <div align="right">Hakim Warrick [imgr]http://www.draftcity.com/headshots/hakimwarrick.gif[/imgr] From: Syracuse Height: 6'8 Weight: 210 Positions: SF/PF Age: 22</div> I have heard a lot of good things about him. I have watched him occasionally but, I really do not follow college basketball too much. From what I read, he is extremely quick and runs the floor very well. He is extremely athletic and has serious leaping abilities. He throws down stuffs. He seems to be very mature to stay through college all 4 years. Rarely you see players taking the time to stay all 4 years. The only thing I am concerned about is his weight. He can play college 4 but in the NBA at 210, you can easily get out muscled. Sure he can use his quickness but what happens on the other end of the floor. Once he puts on some more muscle, I can see him playing the power forward. The optimistic view was an Antawn Jamison, while the pessimistic one was a Lee Nailon. Martynas Andriuskevicius. Lithuania 7-3 240 Age: 17 Strengths This guy looks decent right here, Martynas Andriuskevicius. I don't know how to pronounce his name either. He appears to have a nice touch he can shoot Kurt Thomas range and a little 3 too. He has long arms and blocks shots too. Very athletic and posses quickness to out match the opposition. He also has some good court vision and his extra height helps him too. Weaknesses He really needs to bulk up though. He is very skinny and he obviously has some weaknesses against stronger centers. He needs to also increase his post moves. Most of his scoring is mostly from shooting.
Hakim warrick compared to lee nailon? no way buddy Hakim is definatly a stromile swift type minus the shotblocking (although he can block shots) he WILL be a star in the nba.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting GoldenstWarrior:</div><div class="quote_post">Hakim warrick compared to lee nailon? no way buddy Hakim is definatly a stromile swift type minus the shotblocking (although he can block shots) he WILL be a star in the nba.</div> I'd rather draft Warrick then that 7'2 Andriuskevicius kid. Warrick is a tweener so that's why his stock his low but he will contribute in his 1st year. In his 1st year, that 7'2 kid will make Darko seem like Kareem Abdul Jabaar.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Rerem, I'm still hyped about Bogut, but I don't know about Shelden Williams unless he's Elton Brand part II. I found a good article about Steve Nash that relates to the type of point guard we should be getting if we decide to draft a guard. Too many shoot first point guards, but I wouldn't Baron Davis since he has playmaking skills, stellar defense, and a great shot when he's not trying to force it all the time. I just can't stand the Juan Dixon's and the Dajuan Wagners. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=cp-n...ov=cp&type=lgns</div> I agree with you CustodianRules2. My favorite player when I started liking basketball was John Stockton. Thats the type of player I wanted to play like. Its kind of sad that all these PGs these days have to feel like if they score 20ppg they will be a superstar. The sad thing is that some of them are allstars. Even if they avg 7 assists doesnt mean that they are good pgs either. Its easy to get taht many assists if they hog the ball every pocession. The warriors definitly need that type of Pg.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Gohn:</div><div class="quote_post">I agree with you CustodianRules2. My favorite player when I started liking basketball was John Stockton. Thats the type of player I wanted to play like. Its kind of sad that all these PGs these days have to feel like if they score 20ppg they will be a superstar. The sad thing is that some of them are allstars. Even if they avg 7 assists doesnt mean that they are good pgs either. Its easy to get taht many assists if they hog the ball every pocession. The warriors definitly need that type of Pg.</div> Yeah, Speedy is a start, but not excactly what we need. Speedy is a great passer and is great at penetrating, but we need an excellent passer, followed up with a good penetration move or three. Pasing needs to be the first priority with the PGs, Fisher is a great example of what not to do, he takes 4 steps past halfcourt, and BAM, he shoots a three
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Gohn:</div><div class="quote_post">I agree with you CustodianRules2. My favorite player when I started liking basketball was John Stockton. Thats the type of player I wanted to play like. Its kind of sad that all these PGs these days have to feel like if they score 20ppg they will be a superstar. The sad thing is that some of them are allstars. Even if they avg 7 assists doesnt mean that they are good pgs either. Its easy to get taht many assists if they hog the ball every pocession. The warriors definitly need that type of Pg.</div> Yeah I hear ya, Gohn. Stockton was a great player because he did a lot of things well and he was unselfish. A lot of these guards today are mostly popular because of their scoring and one-on-one skills and ability to break someone's ankles like Michael Jordan. I mean those techniques are great if you plan to move the rock, but some of these guys just hold on to it and either turn the ball over or pass up an opportunity to hit an open teammate. The thing is that kind of play doesn't necessarily make their team better even if they're getting to the foul line and forcing defenses to collapse on them. What good is it if you're leaving people wide open, especially if people are working hard on both ends to get the ball back and then get open. Some of these guards just force it or they weren't great passers to begin with. Take Stephon Marbury or Gilbert Arenas in those passing obstacle courses during allstar weekend. Some of these guys just lack pure fundamentals or don't have a great feel for basic passes like the chest or bounce pass, but since they are like top 5 in assists, nobody really points that out. I'm just saying these guys post great stats, but watching them and their team lay kind of reveals something different about the NBA quarterback. I'm sure that's why there's been complaints in the lockeroom at times in the past about Arenas and Marbury's shoot first, pass second game. Who knows when that will pop up again. I would, however, put shoot first, pass second Baron Davis in a separate class since he happens to be a very good playmaker and he's pretty accurate with the bounce or chest passes. Nick Van Exel's probably the same way.
