and with the #1 pick in the 2009 NBA draft the Kings select...

[nbrans]

I'd like to clarify that I'm not that down on Monroe's athleticism, except that he's not Webber-like explosive or something; it just doesn't make him as much of a sure thing as I would like. I'd say he's got the physical ability to be more like post-peak prime but pre-knee injury Webber. I agree he has the ability to be a good rebounder, if that weren't the case I'd likely not be that high on him. However I'd like to see some hunger for rebounds by the time of the draft because even freshmen who eventually become plus rebounders show hunger for rebounds. We can't settle for a PF who only averages 7-8 rebounds, we need a consistent 10rpg guy, that may be too much to ask for him but I'm interested in building for a championship team, no less. We need to make something big out of this pick one way or another, we have to make up for missed opportunities in the past. That's why I'm for going for a homerun like Monroe or Hill rather than Thabeet.

But the thing about Webber that made him so deadly was precisely his athleticism, combined with those skills. Take Webber's athleticism away and his ability to drive to the hoop, and bigs would just force him out on the perimeter to shoot 20 footers, which is precisely what happened in Philly. He was not very valuable at all.

Guys who lack athleticism are never -- never -- home runs. Their cielings are so limited. Look at the recent All Star teams and find a non-center who isn't an elite athlete. Maybe Boozer? But that guy has incredible strength, which Monroe doesn't have. And he's still more athletic than Monroe. Monroe has some decent lateral quickness, but zero hops and no strength. I don't see how that's going to translate to rebounding ability in the NBA unless he seriously bulks up on that skinny frame.

Monroe is not capable of being a home run. Best case he's a skilled big who's good offensively and soft on the glass and on D. A better Troy Murphy? A smaller Spencer Hawes? How is that possibly a home run? And when you look at the bigs who have busted in recent draft history, they're almost always the marginal athletes.

If you want a home run in this draft, you look at Hill, Jennings, Thabeet... look at the athletes.

I'm not just touting Thabeet simply because he fills a need. I'm touting him because he's a freakish athlete for his size. He's probably not going to be a deadly scorer, but he could seriously change a team defensively. And who knows, maybe he'll learn some go-to moves and be a star.

 

[Kingster]

I actually haven't seen Mullens play much. So I can't really agree or disagree intellegently. Although, my list wasn't so much predictions of who would be successful NBA players as who would rise on the draft boards between now and the draft. Mocks have had Mullens dropping pretty late in the lottery. But I have to believe he puts up better second half stats and his combine measurements should be amazing. Heck, even in group work outs he will probably look better playing 1 on 1 than 5 on 5. I just have to believe that some GM will reach on a player with his size, body and athleticism.

As for CB and Thas. I definitley do not want either with our first pick (assuming we are 1-7 range). I wouldn't mind gambling on Thasbeet with our second pick. Worst case he gives us a shotblocker that we haven't had since Keon Clark left. CB, I would not want to spend a first round pick on period.

I would easily take a poing guard or a wing who could make a big shot over Thabeet. I don't think his hands are good, his instincts aren't good, and he's just not athletic enough. I like Samuels at Louisville much better than Thabeet (I have no idea whether he would be coming out this year though). As a freshman, he has a feel for the game, he has excellent hands, very good rebounder, and has a nice hook shot.

 

[nbrans]

I was sitting courtside at the Stanford/ASU game tonight and got a good look at Harden. There's a whole lot of good and bad with him.

The good -- he has insane court vision. He makes amazing passes, and I can see where the Roy comparisons come from. When he gets in the lane he just knows what to do with the ball. 10 assists. His jump shot also looked pretty solid.

The bad -- he was really bothered by Landry Fields of all people. Fields is 6'7" but only a so-so athlete, but he really bothered Harden with his length. Harden just isn't very explosive, and while he's able to muscle past shorter defenders I think he's going to really struggle as a 2 guard in the NBA. He also basically only goes left and seems awkward when he's forced right.

Ultimately, I think Harden has some serious question marks. He's not as quick as Roy, who I also saw plenty of when he was in college, and while I think he can be a solid rotation player, I just don't really see the hype.

Meanwhile, I'd love to see us pick up Jeff Pendergraph in the second round. The guy is seriously athletic, and he dominated tonight over a small Stanford front line. He's still somewhat raw offensively, but he could be a good dirty work guy.

 

[captain bill]

Ricky Rubio may skip 2009 NBA draft.

Sucks for the Kings.

you say that like you think we're not gonna have a shot at him next year

 

[=LarryLegend=]

I have a weird feeling Kings will draft Blake Griffin....

 

[wonjaeyou]

I have a weird feeling Kings will draft Blake Griffin....

Then draft Griffin and trade for westbrook yeah!!

 

[nbrans]

Georgetown/Pitt: More of the same with Monroe. Some deft passes and impressive ballhandling, mixed with some weak interior play. He was really pushed around by DeJuan Blair, who is a load to be sure, but is only 6'7". He got 8 rebounds, but a lot of those came when the tallest Pitt player on the floor was 6'6". Basically, Blair just absolutely positively worked him. His stats are deceptive because virtually none of his points or rebounds came when Blair was guarding him, and Blair is their only big.

All in all, I think Monroe is going to be the softest big in the NBA next to Channing Frye. No thank you!

Also, I can't believe DeJuan Summer is projected as a mid-first rounder. He can shoot or he can finish around the rim, but he's not good at putting the ball on the floor and getting to the rim. I can see the Rashard Lewis comparisons in that regard, but he's not as tall as Lewis, which is going to limit what he can do without more ballhandling. What a terrible draft year.

Pitt is an interesting team because no one player stands out but they just wear you down with their (basically indistinguishable) guards, who are all good, athletic, and can shoot. And Blair cleans up the missed shots.

 

[HighTopKicks]

Georgetown/Pitt: More of the same with Monroe. Some deft passes and impressive ballhandling, mixed with some weak interior play. He was really pushed around by DeJuan Blair, who is a load to be sure, but is only 6'7". He got 8 rebounds, but a lot of those came when the tallest Pitt player on the floor was 6'6". Basically, Blair just absolutely positively worked him. His stats are deceptive because virtually none of his points or rebounds came when Blair was guarding him, and Blair is their only big.

All in all, I think Monroe is going to be the softest big in the NBA next to Channing Frye. No thank you!

Also, I can't believe DeJuan Summer is projected as a mid-first rounder. He can shoot or he can finish around the rim, but he's not good at putting the ball on the floor and getting to the rim. I can see the Rashard Lewis comparisons in that regard, but he's not as tall as Lewis, which is going to limit what he can do without more ballhandling. What a terrible draft year.

Pitt is an interesting team because no one player stands out but they just wear you down with their (basically indistinguishable) guards, who are all good, athletic, and can shoot. And Blair cleans up the missed shots.

It's pretty early to be making that kind of evaluation, on a 18yr old 225 lb Freshman, don't you think. Not evey kid comes out of high school looking like Oden.

 

[Vlade4GM]

My stupid DVR didn't record it for some dumb reason, I missed it

 

[bajaden]

My stupid DVR didn't record it for some dumb reason, I missed it

Sometimes they repeat the games on espn 2. or the college network. I also believe that its way too early to write off Monre. The kids a freshman. I mean to watch him play a couple of game and say he's just another Channing Fye is ridiculous.

I've said this before, but it still applies. I sat and listened to Scotty Sterling, then a scout for the Warriors, say that Larry Bird was too unathletic. He could'nt jump and he had no foot speed. All he could do was shoot and he would have trouble getting his shot off in the NBA. Well he was right on the money with that assessment wasn't he.

To point out the weaknesses of a player is all well and good, but to put the finnished stamp on them when their that young doesn't make sense.

 

[FakeInjury]

The jury is still out on all these kids. The only surefire NBA level player is Blake Griffin, based on his "fire" for the game. Everyone else other than courtney fortson is a project or like Thabeet, in my opinion, a project and a half. I don't see Brandon Jennings being in the top ten, if he falls far enough i wouldn't mind him. The most interest i have is in Al-Farouq-Aminu behind Blake Griffin as my number 1 and number 2 followed by DeRozan as my 3rd in line based on his potential draw(to audiences). After that, I don't know who else will actually be eligible or even apply for the 2009 draft. But as a kings fan i would be disappointed if we didn't see one of those three.

 

[nbrans]

I'm sorry, the guy is soft! That statement comparing him to Frye might have been hyperbolic, but players don't tend to change their essential nature and become a radically different player down the line.

Monroe is soft. That tag dogged him in high school, and it's dogging him at Georgetown, and with good reason. He shies away from contact. He is not very athletic, and he's not very strong.

Sure, he can improve his strength, and with that his rebounding. But he is who he is. He just got positively worked by a not-particularly-athletic 6'7" power forward on both ends of the floor. He's soft. He might still be good despite being soft, but to somehow wish that he's going to transform himself into a different player is insane.

 

[Bricklayer]

I would easily take a poing guard or a wing who could make a big shot over Thabeet. I don't think his hands are good, his instincts aren't good, and he's just not athletic enough. I like Samuels at Louisville much better than Thabeet (I have no idea whether he would be coming out this year though). As a freshman, he has a feel for the game, he has excellent hands, very good rebounder, and has a nice hook shot.

We don't need hands. We don't need jumpshots. We don't need any fo that crap.

We are quite possibly, pace adjusted, the single worst defensive team in the NBA. If we can't nab a major star, we need to start bringing in major defensive personnel ASAP, and it doesn't have to score, pass or any of that other crap we have valued so highly on the way to our 8-25.

That is the argument for Thabeet. Not that he will be a star, but that he is a huge and unique package as a need pick -- in that we desperately need somebody to protect the rim for us. If he is Deke, he's a Top 3 pick, if he's Dalembert, he's still Top 10. And if he's no better than Pryzbilla he would still be a good first round pick for us given our makeup. Only if he's a complete flop is he a bad pick, and that can obviously be said about anybody.

 

[Kingster]

We don't need hands. We don't need jumpshots. We don't need any fo that crap.

We are quite possibly, pace adjusted, the single worst defensive team in the NBA. If we can't nab a major star, we need to start bringing in major defensive personnel ASAP, and it doesn't have to score, pass or any of that other crap we have valued so highly on the way to our 8-25.

That is the argument for Thabeet. Not that he will be a star, but that he is a huge and unique package as a need pick -- in that we desperately need somebody to protect the rim for us. If he is Deke, he's a Top 3 pick, if he's Dalembert, he's still Top 10. And if he's no better than Pryzbilla he would still be a good first round pick for us given our makeup. Only if he's a complete flop is he a bad pick, and that can obviously be said about anybody.

You're assuming that a shot blocker would cure our ills, that Thabeet would make us respectable on D. And while you're at it, you're totally ignoring the fact that a guy who just blocks shots, who'se not a very good rebounder, who can't play offense, is going to hurt your team in other areas. It's as if you're seeing the pluses without the minuses. As I'm sure you've noticed, the Spurs do not have a great shot blocker. Duncan is not great, yes good, not great. They do, however, have a stopper wing (or they used to) in Bowen, and they've got a team that PRIDES itself on its defense, as well as a great coach who knows something about it. So I think you can have a great defense without a great shot blocker. They've got to have some good lateral quickness, be coached right, they've got to be committed to D, and they they have to work on it, a lot. If you're looking for a shot blocker, look in your own back yard - Hawes has been pretty darn good in his second year. I really think Hawes and Thompson can be very good defensive players in the years to come. What we have to really think about is the point guard and the small forward position (I'm assuming Salmons is goner). We get killed repeatedly on pg penetration. That has to stop. Next, we don't know if Greene has the aptitude or the attitude to become a good defensive player, so if we did choose another long wing who could play D, I wouldn't be dissapointed. Greene and he could fight it out.

 

[Kingster]

But the thing about Webber that made him so deadly was precisely his athleticism, combined with those skills. Take Webber's athleticism away and his ability to drive to the hoop, and bigs would just force him out on the perimeter to shoot 20 footers, which is precisely what happened in Philly. He was not very valuable at all.

Guys who lack athleticism are never -- never -- home runs. Their cielings are so limited. Look at the recent All Star teams and find a non-center who isn't an elite athlete. Maybe Boozer? But that guy has incredible strength, which Monroe doesn't have. And he's still more athletic than Monroe. Monroe has some decent lateral quickness, but zero hops and no strength. I don't see how that's going to translate to rebounding ability in the NBA unless he seriously bulks up on that skinny frame.

Monroe is not capable of being a home run. Best case he's a skilled big who's good offensively and soft on the glass and on D. A better Troy Murphy? A smaller Spencer Hawes? How is that possibly a home run? And when you look at the bigs who have busted in recent draft history, they're almost always the marginal athletes.

If you want a home run in this draft, you look at Hill, Jennings, Thabeet... look at the athletes.

I'm not just touting Thabeet simply because he fills a need. I'm touting him because he's a freakish athlete for his size. He's probably not going to be a deadly scorer, but he could seriously change a team defensively. And who knows, maybe he'll learn some go-to moves and be a star.

Webber forced Webber away from the basket. I'm very amused about the Webber talk when you talk about soft. He was not a dominant college player. When I watched him college I wondered what all the hype was. And then when he was with Washington he spent his time 20 feet away from the basket, of his very own volition. I remember seeing them play Chicago in the playoffs and I was left wondering if the guy really knew that he was a power forward. He seemed like he thought he was a two guard. I think Monroe is less soft than Webber was when he was in college.

 

[Kingster]

Georgetown/Pitt: More of the same with Monroe. Some deft passes and impressive ballhandling, mixed with some weak interior play. He was really pushed around by DeJuan Blair, who is a load to be sure, but is only 6'7". He got 8 rebounds, but a lot of those came when the tallest Pitt player on the floor was 6'6". Basically, Blair just absolutely positively worked him. His stats are deceptive because virtually none of his points or rebounds came when Blair was guarding him, and Blair is their only big.

All in all, I think Monroe is going to be the softest big in the NBA next to Channing Frye. No thank you!

Also, I can't believe DeJuan Summer is projected as a mid-first rounder. He can shoot or he can finish around the rim, but he's not good at putting the ball on the floor and getting to the rim. I can see the Rashard Lewis comparisons in that regard, but he's not as tall as Lewis, which is going to limit what he can do without more ballhandling. What a terrible draft year.

Pitt is an interesting team because no one player stands out but they just wear you down with their (basically indistinguishable) guards, who are all good, athletic, and can shoot. And Blair cleans up the missed shots.

Blair had an excellent game. Pitt is the UCLA of the east as far as their physical play and defense. They have 4 seniors and Blair was the co-Big East Player of the Year last year (as a frosh) so he wasn't playing against mincemeat out there. They're going to kick the A$$ of many a freshman, especially at the beginning of the year.

 

[nbrans]

You're assuming that a shot blocker would cure our ills, that Thabeet would make us respectable on D. And while you're at it, you're totally ignoring the fact that a guy who just blocks shots, who'se not a very good rebounder, who can't play offense, is going to hurt your team in other areas. It's as if you're seeing the pluses without the minuses. As I'm sure you've noticed, the Spurs do not have a great shot blocker. Duncan is not great, yes good, not great. They do, however, have a stopper wing (or they used to) in Bowen, and they've got a team that PRIDES itself on its defense, as well as a great coach who knows something about it. So I think you can have a great defense without a great shot blocker. They've got to have some good lateral quickness, be coached right, they've got to be committed to D, and they they have to work on it, a lot. If you're looking for a shot blocker, look in your own back yard - Hawes has been pretty darn good in his second year. I really think Hawes and Thompson can be very good defensive players in the years to come. What we have to really think about is the point guard and the small forward position (I'm assuming Salmons is goner). We get killed repeatedly on pg penetration. That has to stop. Next, we don't know if Greene has the aptitude or the attitude to become a good defensive player, so if we did choose another long wing who could play D, I wouldn't be dissapointed. Greene and he could fight it out.

One player alone is not going to turn a terrible defensive team into a great defensive team, and Thabeet wouldn't all of a sudden turn the Kings into the Spurs. But first of all, you're seriously underrating Duncan. The Spurs' ENTIRE defense is based around funneling guys into the lane so Duncan can deal with them as needed. He's averaged 2.39 blocks over the course of his career, which is extremely good, but more importantly, guys know he's there, respect him, and he's the cornerstone of their defense.

Now, yes -- Hawes has shown some decent weakside shotblocking this year. But do you really think anyone in the entire league, or anyone in their right mind, fears Hawes? You think they're driving thinking, "Oh no! Spencer Hawes is waiting for me in the paint!!" He's got good anticipation, but he's not someone you base your defense around because he's not that big and not that athletic. Nevermind that he's an extremely limited man defender.

Thabeet is potentially a gamechanging defensive presence -- a Mutombo, a Rodman, a Wallace. No one has come into the league with his size and athleticism since Mutombo. He could be the type of shotblocker that gets into people's heads and who you can base your defense around. At worst he's a guy you throw in off the bench to make things happen.

I still think he's going to be even better in the NBA because he'll be going up against centers instead of small power forwards, the floor is more spread, and controlling the paint is so important. I seriously can't believe that after the last 8 years some people would rather have another softie big.

 

[Kingster]

One player alone is not going to turn a terrible defensive team into a great defensive team, and Thabeet wouldn't all of a sudden turn the Kings into the Spurs. But first of all, you're seriously underrating Duncan. The Spurs' ENTIRE defense is based around funneling guys into the lane so Duncan can deal with them as needed. He's averaged 2.39 blocks over the course of his career, which is extremely good, but more importantly, guys know he's there, respect him, and he's the cornerstone of their defense.

Now, yes -- Hawes has shown some decent weakside shotblocking this year. But do you really think anyone in the entire league, or anyone in their right mind, fears Hawes? You think they're driving thinking, "Oh no! Spencer Hawes is waiting for me in the paint!!" He's got good anticipation, but he's not someone you base your defense around because he's not that big and not that athletic. Nevermind that he's an extremely limited man defender.

Thabeet is potentially a gamechanging defensive presence -- a Mutombo, a Rodman, a Wallace. No one has come into the league with his size and athleticism since Mutombo. He could be the type of shotblocker that gets into people's heads and who you can base your defense around. At worst he's a guy you throw in off the bench to make things happen.

I still think he's going to be even better in the NBA because he'll be going up against centers instead of small power forwards, the floor is more spread, and controlling the paint is so important. I seriously can't believe that after the last 8 years some people would rather have another softie big.

If Thabeet is the new Mutombo, then yes, he's worth a top 10 pick, because he would literally be feared in the paint. And then he would be a difference maker on defense. (Even then, the team with the fragile psyche is more apt to be affected by such a player than the team that is mentally tough.) But you better darn be sure that he's as good as Mutombo in shot blocking, because if he isn't then all the other warts he has are going to make him like one gigantic wart. Look, if the guy can't play offense, then he's going to be like Miller. Miller can't play the low post, so a lot of teams guard him with quicker smaller guys, play small ball on offense, and make him a moot point. Same thing for Thabeet. And remember, Mutombo didn't win any NBA championship. How much of that had to do with the fact that whereas on defense, he made teamates better, on offense, he made teamates worse? Wallace is a lousy comparison. Wallace was a very, very strong player, and quick as well. He won an NBA championship for Detroit because of those abilities much more than because of his shot blocking. It's those abilities that allowed him to neutralize Shaq, not shot blocking. Same thing holds for Rodman. Exceptionally quick. Great rebounder because he was VERY quick to the ball, and had excellent anticipation.

As you alluded to above, it's the shot blocker who is sooo good that he is feared that can make a large difference. Duncan is not one of those. I'm not underestimating Duncan. The subject was shot blocking. Yes, Duncan is a good shot blocker. He's not a great shot blocker, not close to Mutombo's class. But he is an excellent defender, and certainly has much credit for the Spurs excellent defense. Hawes has shown excellent shot blocking for his young age. You underestimate his athleticism by the way. You don't get to be #6 in blocked shots in the NBA at age 20 without a decent amount of athleticism. Do teams fear Hawes's shot blocking. NO. Do teams fear Duncan's shot blocking? NO. Do you have to have a shot blocker on your team that teams fear in order to have a very good defense? NO. Heck, Detroit has a very good defense this year. They don't have a Hall of Fame shot blocker. They just make it very uncomfortable for the opposing team's players when they are on offense, with length, quickness, and strength. Jerry Reynolds is right about shot blocking - in general, it's overated. It's not that it's not important. It is. It's just that what's more important in defense is lateral quickness and strength. It's funny to me that nobody talks about a guy who is great at taking charges. Nobody. Yet the charge is a better play than the blocked shot because with the charge you positively will get the ball, and you positively will cause there to be another foul on the opposing team, unlike the blocked shot.

With the right coach (Natt?), I really think that Hawes and Thompson could be very good defensively. Both of them appear to be motivated to play defense, they both have good lateral quickness (I think Thompson has excellent lateral quickness), and they will both get even stronger in a couple of years. Hawes has excellent anticipation on the defensive side of the ball. They just need time to get extremely comfortable with their switches and to read offenses better and to get stronger. That will come in time. I'm much more concerned about the point of attack - the point guard position - than I am with center and pf.

 

[Hansel]

Is Houston 1round pick protected?

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Is Houston 1round pick protected?

Yes, I believe lottery protected this year and then it slowly less protected.

 

[NewMonkey]

Thabeet is potentially a gamechanging defensive presence -- a Mutombo, a Rodman, a Wallace. No one has come into the league with his size and athleticism since Mutombo. He could be the type of shotblocker that gets into people's heads and who you can base your defense around. At worst he's a guy you throw in off the bench to make things happen.

I still think he's going to be even better in the NBA because he'll be going up against centers instead of small power forwards, the floor is more spread, and controlling the paint is so important. I seriously can't believe that after the last 8 years some people would rather have another softie big.

Ix-nay on the efense-day... You know Geoff Petrie will NEVER draft a player without a 20 foot jump shot. Try talking up Thabeet's ability to hit the 20 foot jumper, based on that one he hit that one time. If Petrie thinks Thabeet can shoot, he might draft the guy by accident.

 

[nbrans]

If Thabeet is the new Mutombo, then yes, he's worth a top 10 pick, because he would literally be feared in the paint. And then he would be a difference maker on defense. (Even then, the team with the fragile psyche is more apt to be affected by such a player than the team that is mentally tough.) But you better darn be sure that he's as good as Mutombo in shot blocking, because if he isn't then all the other warts he has are going to make him like one gigantic wart. Look, if the guy can't play offense, then he's going to be like Miller. Miller can't play the low post, so a lot of teams guard him with quicker smaller guys, play small ball on offense, and make him a moot point. Same thing for Thabeet. And remember, Mutombo didn't win any NBA championship. How much of that had to do with the fact that whereas on defense, he made teamates better, on offense, he made teamates worse? Wallace is a lousy comparison. Wallace was a very, very strong player, and quick as well. He won an NBA championship for Detroit because of those abilities much more than because of his shot blocking. It's those abilities that allowed him to neutralize Shaq, not shot blocking. Same thing holds for Rodman. Exceptionally quick. Great rebounder because he was VERY quick to the ball, and had excellent anticipation.

Where did this rumor get started that Thabeet isn't a good rebounder? He's a really good rebounder for a center -- he's averaging 14.5 per 40 minutes this year, and 10.5 per 40 the last two years. By comparison, Robin Lopez, for instance, averaged 9.2 per 40. He may need to work on his positioning in the NBA, but in the entire league there's only one guy who's taller than he is.

He's also not worthless on offense. He simply does not get the ball. Period. But when he does get the ball he's got a decent jump hook, and he has very good hands catching tough passes on the inside and finishing around the rim. He's also improved at the line and makes 67%, which is roughly Duncan's level. He also happens to shoot 67% from the field, which is extremely good.

If Thabeet were just a shotblocker I'd be as nervous as you are. But combine his shotblocking with his ability to finish around the rim and his rebounding and you have someone who's not just going to be a black hole on offense.

 

[bajaden]

If Thabeet were just a shotblocker I'd be as nervous as you are. But combine his shotblocking with his ability to finish around the rim and his rebounding and you have someone who's not just going to be a black hole on offense.

In fact, that exactly what he is and thats why I'm nervous. Now you can say he has good hands till the cows come home, but I've watched this guy 5 times this year already and god knows how many times last year. He not only doesn't have good hands. He has bad hands. He is not a good rebounder and when he gets into the NBA he'll be exposed as such.

Lets look at the competition. Here's a list of the majority of the teams he's played against this year.

AIC
Western Carolina
La Salle
Bryant
Delaware St.
Buffalo
Stony Brook
Fairfield
Rutgers

All basketball powerhouses:

The two best teams he's faced are Gonzaga and Georgetown. He struggled in both those games with UConn barely beating Gonzaga and losing to Georgetown. This is why I called UConn a paper tiger. Are his stats better than Brook Lopez's? Yes, but look at the schedule Brook played. He was up against better competition night in and night out.

His shooting percentage is high because almost all of his shots are dunks. I call him a bad rebounder, and it has nothing to do with his stats. Fundamentally, he's terrible. He doesn't block out. He doesn't fight for position. He doesn't go to the ball. He has the advantage of being 7'3" tall with long arms and being guarded most of the time by centers that are 6'7" tall.

I would love nothing better than for this guy to prove me wrong. UConn's schedule is going to get tougher now, and he's going to have to go up against bigger, stronger, more athletic players. I suggest you start watching those games, which I see as a good test. I was looking forward to the Georgetown game because it was his first real test. And in my humble opinion, he failed. He still has time, but right now, at this point in time, he's not a top five pick.

 

[nbrans]

Even if you look at his stats over the course of the entire last two seasons, he's still a good rebounder. Fact is, he doesn't really need to box out. He's 7'3"! He can just go straight up and get the ball, which is what he does. Now, maybe he'll need to adjust in the NBA, but fact is he's 7'3", athletic and agile. He's got all the tools.

And I seriously don't know what you are talking about with his hands. He catches tough passes. He gets tough rebounds. He's a good free throw shooter. He doesn't turn the ball over much. And he's improved markedly every year.

Chad Ford: Good Rebounder with Good Hands.
NBADraft.net: Has soft hands

Only DraftExpress cites him as having poor hands, but in the text they also cite that he was improving as of 2/1/08.

I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder, but I think he's a special player and it's been 20 years since someone like him has been in the draft.

 

[nbrans]

Catching up with Kentucky/Louisville. I'm mystified that Earl Clark is listed as a top 10 prospect, except that this is possibly the worst draft class ever. You look at Clark and he looks like a really special SF prospect. He's 6'9", can handle the ball, athletic, and makes some pretty passes. Almost like a smaller Lamar Odom (also, he's pure SF, forget the SF/PF that DraftExpress lists).

But the guy just can't shoot. He threw up a slew of bricks against Kentucky, and a lot of them weren't even close -- airballs and hitting the very back of the rim. He might have just had a bad game, but looking at his stats, it doesn't particularly look like he's been a good shooter the whole year.

His decisionmaking wasn't always great -- he takes some really bad shots, but that's also a Louisville/Pitino tradition.

I guess someone will draft him and hope he improves his shot, but I have to think in another year he'd be a mid to late first rounder rather than top 10.

For Kentucky, Patrick Patterson is a big dude, very skilled around the hoop, and a very good athlete, but I just don't know that he's quite athletic or special enough to make up for the fact that he's 6'8". He's just not as big or explosive as Millsap or Maxiell.

Jodie Meeks is a pretty tough SG and is flying under the radar -- definitely not anoyne we'd need and a little undersized at 6'4", but he just does it all and is very strong pulling up off the dribble.

Also, Clark Kellogg needs to do more color commentary. He's terrific. He's wasted at teh halftime deks.

 

[bajaden]

Even if you look at his stats over the course of the entire last two seasons, he's still a good rebounder. Fact is, he doesn't really need to box out. He's 7'3"! He can just go straight up and get the ball, which is what he does. Now, maybe he'll need to adjust in the NBA, but fact is he's 7'3", athletic and agile. He's got all the tools.

And I seriously don't know what you are talking about with his hands. He catches tough passes. He gets tough rebounds. He's a good free throw shooter. He doesn't turn the ball over much.

Chad Ford: Good Rebounder with Good Hands.
NBADraft.net: Has soft hands

Only DraftExpress cites him as having poor hands, but in the text they also cite that he was improving as of 2/1/08.

I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder, but in my opinion he's a special player and it's been 20 years since someone like him has been in the draft.

I don't know about other peoples opinions. I only report what I see. He catches the easy passes, but I see him fumble bounce passes while on the move all the time. As far as his rebounding goes, you just validated my point.

 

[nbrans]

I don't know about other peoples opinions. I only report what I see. He catches the easy passes, but I see him fumble bounce passes while on the move all the time. As far as his rebounding goes, you just validated my point.

There's more to rebounding than boxing out. Being big and athletic is far more important. Otherwise Mark Madsen would be a rebounding champion.

 

[bajaden]

There's more to rebounding than boxing out. Being big and athletic is far more important. Otherwise Mark Madsen would be a rebounding champion.

We will agree to disagree, or at least I will. As for the Kentucky game, I agree with you on Clark. I seen him a couple of times this year and he doesn't blow my socks off. I actually like Samuels as a much better long range project. For every good thing Clark does, he seems to counter it with something bad.
I like Patterson. He's another of those 6'8" PF's, but he can play. I think he'll find his nitch in the NBA somewhere.

 

[Gary]

We don't need hands. We don't need jumpshots. We don't need any fo that crap.

We are quite possibly, pace adjusted, the single worst defensive team in the NBA. If we can't nab a major star, we need to start bringing in major defensive personnel ASAP, and it doesn't have to score, pass or any of that other crap we have valued so highly on the way to our 8-25.

That is the argument for Thabeet. Not that he will be a star, but that he is a huge and unique package as a need pick -- in that we desperately need somebody to protect the rim for us. If he is Deke, he's a Top 3 pick, if he's Dalembert, he's still Top 10. And if he's no better than Pryzbilla he would still be a good first round pick for us given our makeup. Only if he's a complete flop is he a bad pick, and that can obviously be said about anybody.

Which there is a 99.999999999% chance he will be.

Just kidding.. But I wouldn't touch him if the Kings get a top 3 and by the way it's looking the Kings might get that. The Kings have the 3rd worst record in the league right now. He's just not that good against good opponents. He cleans up on those small colleges though stat wise. It's hard to say that he has improved until the end of the year. Last year he started off pretty fast too and then leveled off once he hit conference play.

 

[Kingster]

Where did this rumor get started that Thabeet isn't a good rebounder? He's a really good rebounder for a center -- he's averaging 14.5 per 40 minutes this year, and 10.5 per 40 the last two years. By comparison, Robin Lopez, for instance, averaged 9.2 per 40. He may need to work on his positioning in the NBA, but in the entire league there's only one guy who's taller than he is.

He's also not worthless on offense. He simply does not get the ball. Period. But when he does get the ball he's got a decent jump hook, and he has very good hands catching tough passes on the inside and finishing around the rim. He's also improved at the line and makes 67%, which is roughly Duncan's level. He also happens to shoot 67% from the field, which is extremely good.

If Thabeet were just a shotblocker I'd be as nervous as you are. But combine his shotblocking with his ability to finish around the rim and his rebounding and you have someone who's not just going to be a black hole on offense.

Well, maybe the game I saw him (Georgetown) was an aberration. In that game his hands looked terrible and he looked like a fish out of water on offense. On defense, Monroe totally dismantled him with his quickness and ability to shoot outside. I definitely get your point though about his teamates not getting him the ball. Heck, the Kings point guards have a hard time getting our big men the ball, and certainly in college most guards aren't very good at it so the big men can work their butt off in the paint and not get rewarded. I really got the impression he's very below average when it comes to offensive rebounds. He just didn't go get it. I'd like to see a guy like Thabeet be able to get some garbage baskets rather than have the ball come directly to him for offensive production. I'd really like to see Thabeet against Hill (Arizona). That would be a very interesting matchup. From what I saw Hill is a grade above him when it comes to mobility and offense, though AZ has no problem in getting him the ball.