<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">? Mitch Richmond, who scouted the Pacific-10 Conference for the Warriors, is a big Frye fan because Frye was very consistent last season and raised his level of play -- and toughness -- from January into the tournament. ? I've called Frye a sort of Duncan-lite, and I won't back off until proved embarrassingly otherwise. Frye isn't a pure center, but no Piston or Spur is, either. ? With a few weeks to go, Andrew Bogut, Marvin Williams, Chris Paul and Deron Williams are set at the top of the draft. High school star Gerald Green and two international players make up the next tier. That leaves the New York Knicks at No. 8 and the Warriors at 9 possibly choosing from among Frye, Raymond Felton, Sean May, a couple of tall internationals and several intriguing wing players. ? Picture Frye teaming with last year's No. 1 pick -- tall, active big man Andris Biedrins -- and there's a frontcourt to fear. I doubt Mullin has given Frye a ``guarantee'' that the Warriors will take him if he's there at No. 9, as has been rumored. But I won't start bracing for a big Warriors trade (for, guess what, an athletic big man) unless it's obvious that Frye will be gone before Mullin has a shot at him.</div> Source
Here's my analysis of Frye ... The Pac-10 has had a history of producing UNproductive big men. Channing Frye reminds me too, much of former Arizona center, Loren Woods. Loren Woods was once labeled 'Duncan Lite' when he signed on with Wake Forest. He put up similar numbers to Frye in college ... Woods - PPG 13.2 RPG 6.5 APG 2.1 BPG 2.9 FT% 83% FG% 50.4% MPG 30.3 Frye - PPG 15.8 RPG 7.6 APG 1.9 BPG 2.3 FT% 83% FG% 55.4% MPG 31 Woods had an impressive NCAA Tournament, averaging 16.0 points, 7.7 rebounds and 4.0 blocks to earn All-Midwest Regional Team. Woods 7'1 / 250 Frye 7'0 / 248 Here was a quote from a GM when Woods was dominating his draft workouts ... "He was a projected top 5 pick last year, he played well in the tournament this year, he's 7'1" and is now showing the ability to bulk up," the GM told Insider. "When the smoke clears, he might sneak right back up into the top 10. I don't think he'll slip past Boston. If things keep going well the next two weeks, he may go as high as 6." Source
I think both Woods and Frye have different motors... anyway this sounds like a bunch of smoke. No way would Mitch Richmond hype up Frye this much unless it's to confuse the hell out of the other GM's. Calling someone Tim Duncan-lite is just another term for "quiet, fundamentally sound". I sure hope we don't draft Frye at #9, but it's not the end of the world if we do. Who would be the ideal power forward that can defend, play in the post, and shoot a little from midrange or 18-20 feet out? Well let's see, there's Blatche who could be that kind of player in a few years and has way more upside. I just don't like the fact Ike Diogu can outplay him.
I can't decide which my favorite part is: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">That leaves the New York Knicks at No. 8 and the Warriors at 9 possibly choosing from among Frye, Raymond Felton, Sean May, a couple of tall internationals and several intriguing wing players.</div> or <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">? Picture Frye teaming with last year's No. 1 pick -- tall, active big man Andris Biedrins -- and there's a frontcourt to fear. I doubt Mullin has given Frye a ``guarantee'' that the Warriors will take him if he's there at No. 9, as has been rumored. But I won't start bracing for a big Warriors trade (for, guess what, an athletic big man) unless it's obvious that Frye will be gone before Mullin has a shot at him. </div> This is a great example of the naturally-occurring phenomenon I like to call the Kawakami/Bayless para-dimensional rift. Apparently, and I'm basing this on research I've read from both Stanfurd and Cal astrophysics departments, there is a small dimensional rift located around the San Jose Mercury's sports department and editor's office. It seems a small gateway has opened to another dimension where newspaper editors think it's a good idea to give jobs in the sports department to complete idiots masquerading as competent journalists. It's hard to spot if you aren't looking for it, but once you know it's there, it's pretty easy to see. All you have to do is read an article by Tim Kawakami or Skip Bayless and you'll realize that this person should have never been given a job. Take this article for example, Kawakami believes that 1) Sean May will be one of the best guys left on the draft board when the Warriors pick and 2) there's already a fair chance that Frye may be off the board by the time the Warriors pick, and in a couple of weeks it may be obvious that he'll be picked before the Warriors have a chance to take him. I used to get really mad at Kawakami a few years ago, I couldn't believe someone so dumb had been given a job. But once I realized he and his editor were simply idiots from another dimension, everything was fine again.
A dimensional rift works in many ways. Once you realize Fran Vasquez does not even exist in this dimension,which rules him out prior to pick 20,and Martynas is totally mythical,even Lithuanians can't confirm his existance,then everyone else moves up a bit,making Tim K closer to right than he usually is. He once wanted us to trade pretty much our top 3 players and every round 1 pick for my life expectancy for Kobe. I would say Cheaney and a future round 2,so something is askew.
Wow. Accordint to him, Frye is a Duncan-lite. By using the same term, we must have Bill Russel-lite, also known as Foyle, and Jordan-lite, also known as... Cheaney. If he resembles anywhere near Duncan-lite, he would have been top 3 pick. I was about to torch Mullin's house, if we draft Frye, but I guess I should add Mitch's house as well...
Okay,how about ultra-lite? Frye ain't bad. He also will continue to evolve his game at the slow but steady pace he's shown. With 3 or 4 imports,a couple of HS guys,and an apathy poster child as the other 6-10-plus,options I expect a couple of those to ultimately be better,a couple about equal to Frye,and a couple to really suck....and it's hard to say which. Clint Eastwood would say,Do you feel Lucky,punk? Do you? if not...draft Frye. ...and don't leave any matchbooks where Kwan can reach them on draft day,okay?
That's pretty funny fellas (especially Walker). Frye isn't the worst we could do, but drafting him would essentially be drafting a role player. Plus as Jzblaze pointed out he's kind of a softie sometimes and he plays passive. He's got some athleticism to be like a fast center, but ideally we want the big guy to hold his own down low in the block or play power forward, which he may not be quick enough for. Frye shoots a high percentage ball, he can hit free throws, he can rebound okay, he can block shots, and he's arguably the most polished/fundamentally sound player after Andrew Bogut or Ike Diogu. That's not saying much, especially because most big men are going to be raw in this draft and Bogut and Diogu were stars on their team while Frye was a role player on his and played like it too. Drafting Frye at #9 would be upsetting, but it wouldn't be a total loss because you know what to expect... a role player. Despite being passive at times, he's got a good character, he's athletic, he's got good shot touch, and he possibly can continue to develop a low post game if he shrugs off his habit of shying away from contact or sleep walking during games. I think with Dunleavy for the past 2.5 years, I'm used to watching that sort of thing.
I wish Frye was doing some workouts so that we could tell whether he is as good as he played in the NCAA tourney. So far, Diogu > Taft > May, this is according to reports from spectators at workouts though. I dont know where Frye would rank on that list but as of now, i would take Taft over Frye and Frye over May, Diogu over all (the Euros are pretty unknown). IMO, Frye would be a pretty bad pick for any team picking from 13 or above in the draft.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kwan1031:</div><div class="quote_post">Wow. Accordint to him, Frye is a Duncan-lite. By using the same term, we must have Bill Russel-lite, also known as Foyle, and Jordan-lite, also known as... Cheaney. If he resembles anywhere near Duncan-lite, he would have been top 3 pick. I was about to torch Mullin's house, if we draft Frye, but I guess I should add Mitch's house as well...</div> I think it was Tim Kawakami who originally wrote "Channing Frye: Think Tim Duncan without the greatness." or something like that. I'm already thinking like that when I think chocolate chip ice cream without the chips... or the chocolate. Makes me appreciate the original all that better. I'm a Tim Duncan fan and I don't see any real Tim Duncan's in this draft. You might say Bogut, but I disagree that he's nearly like him.
I'd rather draft the 7'3 Marty Vicious than Frye. Vicious is ridiculously weak but I like the fact that he doesn't avoid contact. He'll get in there and work but get outmuscled every time. Both have a smooth shooting stroke but Marty also is very athletic. Combine the athleticism, shooting stroke, ball handling, size, wingspan, interior passing and was taught by Sabonis and you have a very intriguing prospect. He can play the 4 and at 7'3, that kid would be a nightmare. If your going to go with a perimeter oriented big man, might as well pick up this kid instead of Frye. He has the quickness and upside that Frye doesn't. Duncan-Lite....what a joke.
First of all, wouldn't drafting Frye be almost the exact same thing as when they took Foyle? Nice conservative pick, will be a good role-playing big man, good defender... ...don't most Warrior fans consider that pick a total disappointment? Secondly, if the Warriors were going to go that route...and I'm really not saying they should...but if they do...I'd much rather they take Diogu. At least he fills a role (interior scoring) that the Warriors lack. But, I'd only want him if his official measurements are at least as good as what's been reported (6'9" with a 7'4" wingspan).
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">First of all, wouldn't drafting Frye be almost the exact same thing as when they took Foyle? Nice conservative pick, will be a good role-playing big man, good defender... ...don't most Warrior fans consider that pick a total disappointment? </div> I don't think anyone likes Frye at #9 after our series of drafts where we kept passing over future superstars or stars who had the most upside on draft day. Frye at #9 would certainly be grounds for warrior fans to whip out the pitchforks and Mullin effigies if it wasn't for the new found direction the W's have in Baron Davis and an emerging Jrich + energy laden bench. And to not shortchange Foyle here, Foyle's not a horrible player, but he's been made horrible because he never really improved much in his 8 years in the league, still plays raw, has the bball IQ of a gnat, and because we passed up better players that probably could have changed this franchise for the better a lot sooner. Foyle's also getting overpaid so that adds to why fans are turning on him after he was considered more valuable to the team than Dampier. Give me the young Foyle for 4 years at 2 mil or less and now we're talking. Frye is one of those guys where he's not as bad as he's made out to be and not as good as Kawakami makes it out to be. I don't think anyone wants Frye period unless it's a late late pick. Despite his height advantage, a guy like Ike Diogu can eat him alive in the paint and outboard him too. If Ike Diogu was at least as tall as Frye even having the same wingspan as his regular 6'8 self (7'3-7'5), somehow I'd think Diogu would be surefire lottery.
I personally like Loren Woods all things considered. He put up some good numbers with the Raptors early last year and if he could just do it more consistently he'd be a servicable starting big man for them. I still dont know why he went from starting to DNP 9 out of 10 games. Anyone want to fill me in? 9 is to high for Frye IMO. Though i kinda hope the Raps take him with their 16th
Kicksdaddy had a good post on the main draft thread,he's at the pre-draft camp in Chicago. He's saying Frye has moved up some,is measuring 6-11 3/4.and teams like his charachter,work ethic. Simien and Diogu measured up each a bit taller than expected,and are also looking lottery. Martynas has slid a lot and is assumed to be pulling out. Marko Tomas,the Euro who actually DOES score a lot,has a big contract with no buy-out for 2 yr,yet a few teams are considering him as a late 1. Taft's stock is way down,no top 15 interest. Granger and Wright remain popular and Green is hot. A big difference between Frye and Woods is that Frye is focused,Woods is an off an on guy who can look good for a while,then look clueless. I expected more,that he'd make the adjustments,but it's pretty much the same,though he's a bit more experianced. Frye doesn't do a lot of flash stuff but has a solid game. Frye isn't quite my ideal pick but he is on my short list. The W's probably like his mobility,that he plays well in transition. Diogu,Granger,and Blatche are also good transition players,and it figures the W's have taken notice
I don't know, of all the comparisons, Duncan is hard to see in Frye. When I look at him, I see something more between Clifford Rozier or Carlos Rogers, both "soft" big men who worked well for a while on a bad W's team. Frye does have a much better mindset, though, at least from the reports. I suppose that's where the Foyle comparison comes in. I never paid much attention to Frye when he was on the court, though, even though I like guys with fundamentals. Hm, I'm just not a fan of GS drafting him personally.
Okay, so now Ford says that he's going to put Frye at #8 in his second mock draft due out Monday. Apparently Isiah Thomas has fallen in love with him... So...Kawakami's idiotic prophesy may actually come true...and I'll look stupid...oh well. I don't mind looking stupid if it means the Warriors don't take Frye. It's not that I really have anything against him, I don't. I just see him as the big man version of Shane Battier. Good player, safe choice, but no upside. If the Warriors took him, they'd be getting a fringe starter and that's just not what they need. I'd much better swing big and take the chance at missing big than bunt and hope I leg it out to first. (sorry for the mixed sports anology...)
