insider Warrior draft pick

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">Udonis Haslem is an effective starter-and he doesn't have Diogu's skills. The whole point with Diogu is that he has quickness and power,skills and size. In real life he can eat up some of those "high upside" marshmellows,who may be an inch or two taller but never play BIG. Diogu has the tools to matchup well with most forwards in the NBA. Ike probably would find Duncan or KG difficult-but we won't be finding anyone able to shut down an MVP-and we don't have anyone who plays defensive F better than Diogu now</div> Udonis Haslem is effective at one thing: rebounding. He's not a shotblocker and he's not a scorer. He's a starter because the Heat really don't have much choice. I'm sure if the Heat had the young Christian Laetner or even Alonzo Mourning, they'd rather use either one of them first.

But anyhoo, I see what you're saying, but I think unless this guy smokes people in workouts, he's not worth a #9. You want the guy who is a real hardcore NBA matchup and not one that falls in between being too slow for small forward, too small for power forward. There hasn't been a successful shorty power forward in a while and there's no guarantee he will play big consistently with that size. Finding the next Charles Barkley is like finding the next Larry Bird it's just too hard to find. Even with a guy like Elton Brand, he can't really carry a team even though he's a good player and there's just so many Elton Brand or Zach Randolph clones that don't do jack for a franchise and end up being huge busts. If we're going for bigs, I'd rather get the biggest guy with the biggest talent that plays big or one that has the body and attitude to do so in the near future if not ready now. In other words, a franchise guy.

I am just 50/50 on Ike Diogu. He's basically perfect except for his size. Athletically he's supposed to be average or a bit better than average and he's strong.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Run BJM:</div><div class="quote_post">Any suggestions on franchise guys at 9 in this draft? Most of the players in the 9 area of the draft are not going to be superstars; Granger, Vasquez, Jack, Wright etc. Its just a weak draft, we should hope that our pick turns out to be a top 3 player on our team.</div> I don't think the draft is that weak, maybe for bigs. There's hope that Gerald Green could fall into our laps. Lots of scouts raving about him. Then there's Martell Webster. Tiago Splitter has some promise if he ever bulks up. He looks aggressive and that's important. I thought Sheldon Williams could be some serious business but he pulled out. They don't call him the landlord for nothing. I think Chris Taft could be effective under the right system. If he's talented and nba built as they say, let's just draft him. We're not the Wizards of the old or a true lotto team, so might as well risk it while his stock is falling. We've got a pure point guard, he's got good hands, and if his workout goes well, then we may have somebody who can play both ends and be our "amare stoudamire".

But keep in mind I'm not really sold on Chris Taft. I think we should avoid him if there's somebody better with similar potential to tear it up inside.

 

Splitter may be the best of a batch of untested Euro-teens,I can only leave it up to those who can go overseas and do workouts,I see the stats,which are pretty bleak,and I see the year old "reviews on NBA.Draft Net,plus a tiny 10 sec clip....and none of that says he's better than a generic backup. I did see Diogu,Green,Granger,Frye,and Simien play full games and I have seen their stats in detail,so i have some mental image of how they play,and I would not freak out if the W's were to take one of them-I should have added H Warrick to that group. The Warriors have been somewhat lucky,and smart,when it comes to imports-but several teams blew high picks and got duds.

haslim and Reggie Evans went undrafted-they play-Darko and Shika WATCH. Darko and Shika were wasted high picks paid major money. Haslim and Evans were basically tough,dedicated rebounders,in college neither sported a 22 pt average,or any of the other statistical clues the seperates a guy like Diogu from the pack.
As significant,while I liked Evans and Haslim in college-I felt they were good Rd 2 picks. They didn't have the " Oh S--T" factor...when a guy does something that makes me say "Oh S--t,how the hell'd he do THAT?" Having watched B-Ball since the days of Cousy,the "Oh S--t" doesn't happen a lot. Over the years I came to expect that to be important when thinking about NBA draft prospects. Chris Taft did not ring the bell,instead I kind of felt sorry for the kid,he's a rather average player who looks like he ought to be better. He may get picked far higher than his talent deserves-and then he get's to be a bum for not matching "expectations" that were mistaken. Whether its a case of apathy,undeveloped skills,a low basketball IQ or whatever,he is not ready now and his future is a pure coinflip. For us he'd be behind Murphy,Foyle ,Zarko,and Biedrens for at least a year.
There are unanswered questions in my mind when it comes to Green,but I saw some real Star Quality in some areas, if he applies his very good basketball instincts toward being a complete player-look out. Webster is a good shooter,I didn't see as much speed and spring as Green has,and Green is a bit taller.. Green's very high upside/potential makes him worth a gamble. Webster,however would be in the same spots as J Rich and Pietrus also,and is less apt to snatch a share of minutes. Blatche could be considered,he's got some credentials-and size,but I didn't get to see him.

 

a statistical comparison of big-man skills,impact games, comparing Diogu and Taft
Diogu --- Taft
points-
20+ 20 ---- 4
30+ 4 ---- 0
rebounds
13+ 7 ---- 2
shotblocks
4+ 6 ---- 2

What is the purpose of a high pick frontcourt player? Score,rebound,block some shots. This shows how these guys compare,how often they make a major impact on a game with a skill. Add the numbers and Ike's score is 37. Chris's score is 8.
Granger would look good on such a chart-especially if steals and assists were also considered,or his 3 pt % Granger does get more boards and blocks than Taft. Warrick,a slim 6-8,averaged 8.6 boards,a bit less than Granger but better than Taft's 7.5. Dwayne Jones averaged 11.6 boards,was 5th in the NCAA in blocks...and might be a round 2. Mocks overrated Taft before the season started,assuming some real progress,but there was very little progress,and picking Taft above slot 20 looks like a reach.

 

Nbadraft.net emailed someone on the warriorsworld board saying Splitter's chances of staying in the draft are slim to none.

Those statistics are pointless. Didn't you read Kwan's post? Foyle, Fuller and Joe Smith averaged great numbers while Pietrus, Gasol, Kirilenko, Bosh averaged poor numbers. Your comparing apples to oranges. Granger gets more boards and blocks than Taft but that's a terrible comparison for 2 reasons.

1. Granger is a senior who's the heart and soul of the team. Taft is a sophmore who's been left out by his.
2. Granger is a one man show. Taft had Troutman there to get more boards & touches.

If we get a post presence, we don't need him to swat shots. We have Foyle. What we need is someone to control the paint and hold his own like Dampier used to. Granger's not going to do the dirty work downlow so why are you even comparing their stats? They play two complete different styles and positions. Bad comparison.

First you said Diogu should go top 5 now your saying Taft should fall to 20. I've never heard any writer, poster, analyst, rumor indicate that and with good reason because it's ridiculous.

 

Nothing wrong with backing the underrated player that has the potential to get the job done, but if you look at our roster, guys like Zarko and Pietrus were really stepping it up. Anyone could have said their stats weren't good, or they were too weak or that Zarko was the second coming of Tskitishvilli, but you have to kind of guess who is going to be an impact player in the NBA and who is going to create mismatch problems. If they're nothing special in terms of a mismatch, they'll just be good role players like Mike Dunleavy Jr. Everyone who has a lotto pick wants to try and draft a star because if you improve the talent on your team, your team usually gets better. They could hustle, they can have all the skill in the world, the guy who has a good mix of raw talent, determination, smarts, coordination, size, speed, strength is going to be the team's difference maker. I hope we go through this draft as if we didn't even have Baron Davis on this team and get the best guy available. I don't care if it's a point guard, if he's the best guy I want to hold on to him and try to use him in a trade or use him as insurance in case one of our guys go down.

 

I think we just need a guy who plays smart, hustles, and does the dirty work. The emphasis should be on the defensive and rebounding, and low post game. This team doesn't need a "numbers" guy. You'll see Foyle's numbers skyrocket if there's one more solid rebounder next to him. Also, team FG % will improve with a guy that can play the lowblock and seal off with screens. Finding a guy that "plays above the rim" or can take over the game is not my first choice. If we can package the pick to get that guy and a pick next year, or whatever.. Mullin has the creativity to figure that stuff out. Honestly, This Warriors team is not far away from being really good. A small piece can make everything else come together.

 

So Cohanhater, what you're saying is you'd want to trade the pick.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">So Cohanhater, what you're saying is you'd want to trade the pick.</div>

If we can get the right piece of the puzzle, yes.

 

I wonder if we need to really add anybody else. 9 man rotation seems like it's already set. Unless we can introduce some more depth at center, we may just trade away the #9 for cash or future picks or something. Or here's a possibility: I'll bet Mullin will do something like use the #9 on Jonathan Bender's two year contract. Think Indiana would go for it? I'm not a fan of Bender, but I know Mullin is.

 

at this point the # 9 would be overpaying for Bender,I just ranted on poor ol' Taft-yet Bender,who SHOULD have amounted to something by now....has not-while Taft,for me,lights up the warning lights as an underachiever,at least there is a chance his backers are right and he has a future.
Now I pointed out that Taft gets outrebounded by Granger and Warrick and it's irrelevent? What the hell does a "post Presense " do? We can take 7-9 Sun Ming Ming and have a big presence-we can,however,do that round 2 after getting a guy we have every reason to believe will get RESULTS. My point with those stats was exactly that a guy who parks near the basket is not as much a post presence as a guy who does all the stuff down in the paint that WINS GAMES which is the objective.
I am sorry if I am seeming too cynical,it's not like Mullin is waiting for us to reach a consensus,hell,he may pick a guy none of us like. This debate will be resolved next season when some player is looking good and another is not.
Incidently , HS 7 footer Reggie Bynum declared,interesting high risk-high upside player,real big but hustles and has some skills. I didn't see him enough to say he's our guy,but him,and Blatche are potentially as good as any of the Euros,or Taft. Personally,as for a "big" I'm still loopking at Dwayne Jones....but not at # 9. I am pretty certain about Diogu being a bargain at (,and Granger being the next best choice if we can't get Diogu. Green,I am sure will go top 6.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">Nbadraft.net emailed someone on the warriorsworld board saying Splitter's chances of staying in the draft are slim to none.

Those statistics are pointless. Didn't you read Kwan's post? Foyle, Fuller and Joe Smith averaged great numbers while Pietrus, Gasol, Kirilenko, Bosh averaged poor numbers. Your comparing apples to oranges. Granger gets more boards and blocks than Taft but that's a terrible comparison for 2 reasons.

1. Granger is a senior who's the heart and soul of the team. Taft is a sophmore who's been left out by his.
2. Granger is a one man show. Taft had Troutman there to get more boards & touches.

If we get a post presence, we don't need him to swat shots. We have Foyle. What we need is someone to control the paint and hold his own like Dampier used to. Granger's not going to do the dirty work downlow so why are you even comparing their stats? They play two complete different styles and positions. Bad comparison.

First you said Diogu should go top 5 now your saying Taft should fall to 20. I've never heard any writer, poster, analyst, rumor indicate that and with good reason because it's ridiculous.</div>
The idea that what a player in college accomplishes is meaningless is new to me,but I'm an old timer who recalls that Wilt,Elgin,Oscar,Magic,Bird,Malone,Barkley,West,Karim,Walton.Hakim Olajuwon,Jordan, were guys who had great productivity in college and the stats to prove it. Why is it "ridiculous" that the top scoring college player in this draft-who happens to have a well rounded game,hustles,is solid with no red flags or weak areas is top 5-yet a clear underachiever who is ,maybe a C who is undersize and not a scorer or defender,who has yet to show he will board like a quality PF,or score much-is supposed to be top half of round 1?
I saw Diogu play,he looked special. I saw Taft play,He did not look special. I have looked at their stats,in depth,game by game and if anything,that helps Diogu,and hurts Taft. I am no gypsy fortune teller with a crystal ball,but Niether is NBA Draft.Net,or any other online expert. History shows that a lot of NBA teams suck on draft day as often as not.
I am not hearing people say "I saw this guy,and that guy play". To me,having a mental picture of what the guy plays like is vastly more significant that the hazy info some anonymous expert puts in one paragraph..not updated all season,and yet I keep hearing that NBA Draft.net stuff repeated as if its the gospel according to Red Auerbach.

Diogu was among the top college players. Taft was not. Taft scores around 13 a game,Diogu scores around 23,and there were 100+ guys who came somewhere in between. What does Taft do better? Anything?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting CohanHater:</div><div class="quote_post">If we can get the right piece of the puzzle, yes.</div>
I'm totally with CohanHater on this one. I've been very open to the idea of trading this year's pick since the trade deadline. It isn't that there aren't quality guys in the draft, it's just that there are no visible holes in the Warriors roster where they don't already have young talent in place that is just as good or better than anyone in the draft.

Need an athletic, low post guy? Is there anyone in the draft you'd rather have then Biedrins? I wouldn't. He's extremely athletic (34 inch vertical coming into last year's draft), he's got the frame to continue adding weight so he can hold his posistion in the post. He's got a limited offensive game right now, but he's got great hands and feet. You don't need great post moves to be an effective scorer when you have a pg like Baron who can penetrate and dish.

Taft, Splitter, and Petro don't seem to be clearly better in any area of the game than Biedrins. I'm not a fan of trying to develop two guys with similar games when the pf/c position is already going to be overcrowded with Murphy, Foyle, and Zarko. If you still think they need more of a low post scoring presence, go out and get a vet free agent to tide the team over until Biedrins or Murphy develops an offensive low-post game.

As for Diogu, you guys can say anything you want about him, but I don't see him ever going as high as #9. I'd say I'm one of the biggest draftniks on this site (though I haven't followed it as closely this year as years past), and I'm in total agreement with Chad Ford on this one. He's got Diogu listed as going anywhere from 21-35. Unless he measures in above 6-8 or has a bigger wingspan than anyone thought, he's not going any higher. Like it or not, these things matter to GM's and no one is going to take an undersized pf in the lottery, no matter how productive he was in college.

The only reason not to trade the pick is if the team falls in love with a guy who they think has star potential, regardless of position.

 

<u>"Why is it "ridiculous" that the top scoring college player in this draft-who happens to have a well rounded game,hustles,is solid with no red flags or weak areas is top 5-yet a clear underachiever who is ,maybe a C who is undersize and not a scorer or defender,who has yet to show he will board like a quality PF,or score much-is supposed to be top half of round 1?"</u>

1. Taft isn't a center, he's a legit 4. 6'10 260 isn't undersized. 6'8 is undersized.
2. Diogu has red flags which is why everyone is speculating he'll pull out. Taft has red flags but he'll still go lottery.
3. Taft has the combination of size, strength and athleticism to play against the bigs of the west. Diogu does not. How will Diogu play against Duncan, Amare, Gasol? Defense is our biggest concern and Diogu will never have the size to battle against those guys.
4. Taft had a crappy season. After the glimpses he showed his first year he should have dominated. Even after a crappy year he still is a lottery pick and with reason. He has more upside than any other big in the draft not named Bogut.

The reason I argue with you is because of your logic. It's the same redundant argument. Stats. "Diogu stats are better so he's the better prospect!" Stats are a measuring stick. They are not a strong indicator of how someone's game will translate to the NBA. It's been proven year after year. College stats won't translate to the NBA and especially these days with everyone getting stronger/faster. Diogu has played against weaker competition, played amongst boys not NBA men and doesn't have size. He's not a #9 pick. Your arguments always leave me room to pick from because they're never consistent. ex: Taft is undersized while Diogu isn't? Inconsistent.

 

First, if I have a choice to draft similar player, I would rather not choose Taft, because all indicates that his mental my be bit suspect, and that's a good quality to be a bust. That has been said, if he has superb mental, he won't be available for us to begin with.

Back then, I explained why great stats in college doesn't equal a great player in NBA. When I saw Taft's stat (13.3/7.5), I wondered if any successful NBA players had underwhelming stats in college. And, these are results...

1. 15.1 pts / 9.5 reb / 63% FG / Auburn

2. 15.9 pts / 8.8 reb / 54% FG / Houston

3. 14.6 pts / 9.2 reb / 63% FG / Georgetown

4. 16.5 pts / 9.0 reb / 54% FG / Lousiana Tech

5. 17.0 pts / 6.0 ast / 43% FG / Santa Clara

6. 16.8 pts / 13.5 reb / 68% FG / Houston

7. 15.2 pts / 12.2 reb / 59% FG / Georgetown

8. 11.3 pts / 5.4 reb / 48% FG / Arizona

In glance, I was able to pick 5 HOF, 2 All-Stars, and one star, who didn't have better stat then Diogu.

The answers are...









1. Barkeley
2. Drexler
3. Ewing
4. Malone
5. Nash
6. Olajowon
7. Mutombo
8. Jefferson

OK, maybe putting guys like Olajowon or Ewing may not be too fair, because they were superstars in college as well. However, in terms of pure stats, their stats are also not nearly as good as Diogu, and it reflects that even NBA HOF players can have supbar stats and still be a great NBA players. I mean, guys like Jefferson had a pitiful stat, which shouldn't belong to any player hwo gets to play in NBA. To add more for Taft, there are plenty of great players whose stats in sophomore are worse than Taft. In contrst, Arizona State went nowhere in NCAA (6th in Pac 10 with 7/11). It can be translated that AS may not have many talented players, and Diogu may have a chance to do more scorings, reboundings and others than in good college teams.

I tried to find consistancy between college stats and success in NBA, but one too many college players with great stats failed to do anything in NBA. In contrast, even if you don't completely dominate in college, it's also not impossible for a college player with subpar stats to dominate in NBA. A lot of stats have to do with the system, talents around that player, and other various factors. That's why I will only regard college stats as a footnote.

NBA is the league where big body and sheer athlathism overweight fundamentals and basic skills, because if you don't have necessary body and athlathism, you are bounded to hit the wall sooner or later, especially among big men. Stoudmire still has tons of holes in his game, but with pure athlathism, he simply carves through PO. Heck, just look at our team. Players like Richardson, Jamison or Pietrus were as raw as sushi when they were drafted, but that didn't stop them from being successful stars in NBA. In contrast, Dunleavy probably had the best fundamental and was a refined player in Warriors last 10 years. However, he is as good as his athlathism allows, and it's most likely that he won't be a star in this league.

Again, we didn't hear enough of Diogu or Taft, so I am not going to start "Taft is better than Diogu" campaign. But, stats alone, which doesn't necessary prove anything, are not enough evidence to prove that Diogu is better than Taft or any euro PFs. So, until we get enough info (or at least some), I will hold my judgement on any PFs...

 

Wow, that was great Kwan!

Where do you get such an easy lookup of stats? Did you have to work to find it or was it easy?

 

http://www.basketball-reference.com/

After that, it's bit of clicking players to see their stats, because they don't have a program to sort stats or anything. But, finding euro players' stats are way too hard though, since I couldn't find any site that stores stats for euro players...