I know he's got a lot of filling out to do, and I know he's probably not a guy you'd consider at 5, but what about John Henson? He's probably the 2nd best shot blocker in this draft after Anthony Davis, he averaged a double double, and he plays really hard. If he puts on 20 lbs of muscle he could seriously be Kevin Garnett like on the defensive end of the floor. He's a good athlete who has ridiculously long arms and plays hard. I think that he could turn out really well next to Cousins. Hypothetically you could trade down 4 or 5 spots and get him or whatever.
John Henson the best fit next to Cousins?
- Thread starter BMiller52
- Start date
Not sure who to answer. I'd pick Henson with a 10-14th pick as I doubt he will put on meaningful weight. He's a skinny guy without a frame that would fill out. The best you could hope for is that he would be like Daly and that is just add non-muscle weight. Off the bench he would be very useful playing against another team's 2nd string but we need someone better or bigger as a starter. I sure wouldn't use the 5th pick on him and I wouldn't trade down to get what I suspect would be a bench player.
I want a shot blocker just like everyone else but the reality of the situation is unless Petrie is sold on Drummond AND he's available at #5 we're not gonna get one in the draft. So that leaves Whiteside, free agency, or a trade. The #5 pick is just too valuable a commodity to mess around with... we can get a Beal or a Barnes there, either of whom could develop into 20ppg scorers in the NBA. Can't trade down just to take a stab at filling a hole while passing on real talent.
Davis right now weighs 225 pounds, and he was a freshman. In three years at North Carolina, Henson went from around 185 pounds to 220 pounds, and I think that posted weight is being generous. Henson has narrow shoulders and appears to be small boned, whereas Davis has wide shoulders and appears to be large boned. My gut tells me that Henson would have a hard time being a regular starter in the NBA. I'd rather put my eggs in the Whiteside basket than gamble on Henson.
Look, I'd love to have a shotblocker, but I'm not about to pass over better talent on the chance that a guy with that skill will find a way to add 25 pounds of muscle. We need to draft a player thats ready to play in the NBA right now. The more skills the better. If you going to take a gamble, then take one on Meyer's Leonard.
Henson: Junior, 6'11", 220 Lb's, 29.1 MPG, 13.7 PPG, 50.0% FGP, 9.9 RPG, 2.9 BPG.
Leonard: Sophmore, 7'1", 245 Lb's, 31.8 MPG, 13.6 PPG, 58.4% FGP, 8.2 RPG, 1.9 BPG.
The biggest difference between Leonard and Henson is their developed skills. Leonard is more raw. But I think Leonard is the better overall athlete, and he certainly looks like an NBA center, body wise. He has a great frame, and could easily add 15 to 20 pounds of muscle. And lets remember, Henson was asked to patrol the paint while Zeller did most of the physical man defense under the basket. Leonard had to do both.
Now I could be dead wrong about this, and to be honest, I'd hate to bet my immediate future on either of them. But long range, I'd rather gamble on Leonard. However, if I'm picking down in the 12 to 14 range, I'm taking Moultrie. He may not be the shotblocker you want, but he can play right now, and he is a good defender.
Look, I'd love to have a shotblocker, but I'm not about to pass over better talent on the chance that a guy with that skill will find a way to add 25 pounds of muscle. We need to draft a player thats ready to play in the NBA right now. The more skills the better. If you going to take a gamble, then take one on Meyer's Leonard.
Henson: Junior, 6'11", 220 Lb's, 29.1 MPG, 13.7 PPG, 50.0% FGP, 9.9 RPG, 2.9 BPG.
Leonard: Sophmore, 7'1", 245 Lb's, 31.8 MPG, 13.6 PPG, 58.4% FGP, 8.2 RPG, 1.9 BPG.
The biggest difference between Leonard and Henson is their developed skills. Leonard is more raw. But I think Leonard is the better overall athlete, and he certainly looks like an NBA center, body wise. He has a great frame, and could easily add 15 to 20 pounds of muscle. And lets remember, Henson was asked to patrol the paint while Zeller did most of the physical man defense under the basket. Leonard had to do both.
Now I could be dead wrong about this, and to be honest, I'd hate to bet my immediate future on either of them. But long range, I'd rather gamble on Leonard. However, if I'm picking down in the 12 to 14 range, I'm taking Moultrie. He may not be the shotblocker you want, but he can play right now, and he is a good defender.
He's the third of three guys (Davis, Drummond and Henson) who could fill the bill across the top of the draft -- we aren't looking for a guy who can just block an occasioanl shot, but rather an actual intimidator -- but as others have said there is a major physical issue there. And its not just that he is listed at 220 now, its his build and the fact that he already had to put on 40lbs just to GET to 220. How much more can he reasonably gain before it starts to slow him? Rem this is a guy who would have to guard Blake Griffin in the NBA, let alone be able to make the very common switch onto NBA centers.
So yeah, I take a look if Drummond is off the board, but not at #5 -- I trade down if I really want him. But its hard to call a guy an ideal PF to put next to Cousins when Reke outweighs him.
So yeah, I take a look if Drummond is off the board, but not at #5 -- I trade down if I really want him. But its hard to call a guy an ideal PF to put next to Cousins when Reke outweighs him.
For those that don't know much about Meyer's Leonard, here's a little video of his abilities. He's certainly a player that can be an intimidater in the paint, as well as having some offense to go along. But mostly, he's just a terrific athlete with great upside, and a legit 7 footer. He's an explosive leaper, and has great end to end speed. And when you look at him at 245 pounds, you can see that he can easily carrry another 15 to 20 pounds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0LWNpaPEw6o#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0LWNpaPEw6o#!
Last edited:
I'm not saying he's the right fit for the Kings, but I'd like to raise the possibility of Henson being able to play the SF position in the NBA. As a diehard Tarheel fan, I've seen Henson play a lot over the past 3 seasons. He really improved his perimter skills this past year, which I believe gives him a chance to be able to play the 3. If he isn't able to put on any more mass, I can see him developing into a Tayshaun Prince type 3. He's got a similar build, even more length and has adequate quickness for the position. He doesn't have the same shooting range as Prince, but neither did Tayshaun upon entering the league. I think he'd struggle defensively at first, as all rookies do, but would eventually be able to hold his own. He'd provide weakside shot blocking right away as he can cover a TON of ground in a short amount of time.
Just something to ponder.
Just something to ponder.
Last edited:
This thought also occurred to me. I wondered the same thing about Thomas Robinson. Im inclined to say yes to Robinson, and no to Henson. Main reason is ballhandling. While neither is a good enough ballhandler right now to play the SF position, I think Robinson is much closer. Robinson also has a better looking jumpshot, and is a better athlete with better lateral quickness. I think Henson's athleticism is overrated somewhat. What he does have, is natural instincts and timing when it comes to blocking shot. But when I watched Henson and Davis next to one another, it was obvious that Davis was much quicker than Henson. Although he made Davis work for his points and rebounds, it helped having Zeller along side him.
I could be wrong, but I'm also a believer in not playing someone out of his natural position. I get what you trying to do, and maybe with the right matchup, he could be used that way, but I don't see that as his permanant position. One of the reasons I'm willing to cut Perry Jones some slack, is that Baylor played him at center and PF for the last two years. I think his natural position is SF and out on the perimeter, where his ballhandling and shooting skills are better used.
I could be wrong, but I'm also a believer in not playing someone out of his natural position. I get what you trying to do, and maybe with the right matchup, he could be used that way, but I don't see that as his permanant position. One of the reasons I'm willing to cut Perry Jones some slack, is that Baylor played him at center and PF for the last two years. I think his natural position is SF and out on the perimeter, where his ballhandling and shooting skills are better used.
bajaden, don't forget that when Henson matched up with Robinson, he had just come back from his wrist injury and wasn't exactly back to the level he had been at previously. Something to consider anyway.
Furthermore, I disagree with you about Henson's athletic ability. He's a fantastic athlete. I've even seen a few scouting reports that believe Henson's potential as a defender could lead him to one day defending wings such as Kevin Durant. So I'm not alone in my assessment.
Does Robinson really have better lateral quickness? Possibly. But it's seems negligible to me. If you are correct, Henson's length surely makes up the difference. He's got somewhere around a 7'4" wingspan, which helps him compensate if he gets beat.
You are correct about their jump shots, but I think you're underestimating Henson's ball handling skills which showed a lot of improvement last season. Are his handles good enough now? No. But the potential seems to be there.
In the end, I really feel Henson will have to become a 3 in order to transition to the league ... especially if he is unable to add to his skinny frame. Is it a lock? Of course not. But all of these players are a gamble in some respect. Some team may have a solid 3 a couple seasons from now, though.
Furthermore, I disagree with you about Henson's athletic ability. He's a fantastic athlete. I've even seen a few scouting reports that believe Henson's potential as a defender could lead him to one day defending wings such as Kevin Durant. So I'm not alone in my assessment.
Does Robinson really have better lateral quickness? Possibly. But it's seems negligible to me. If you are correct, Henson's length surely makes up the difference. He's got somewhere around a 7'4" wingspan, which helps him compensate if he gets beat.
You are correct about their jump shots, but I think you're underestimating Henson's ball handling skills which showed a lot of improvement last season. Are his handles good enough now? No. But the potential seems to be there.
In the end, I really feel Henson will have to become a 3 in order to transition to the league ... especially if he is unable to add to his skinny frame. Is it a lock? Of course not. But all of these players are a gamble in some respect. Some team may have a solid 3 a couple seasons from now, though.
I like this guy, but then again, I'm a fan of the Brandan Wright/Anthony Randolph long athletic types. Wright, it must be noted, had a very good year for Dallas this year, proving that rover shotblocking is a good asset. And Wright was a poor rebounder this year. I think Henson can block shots AND rebound, and while that latter thing might suffer due to his lack of strength, he still has the instincts, which can't be said for many other players. Randolph has also been productive whenever he plays (nice fantasy pickup for me when K-Love got injured at the end of the year), and shenanigans and weepiness aside, is good. I think Henson can definitely be productive at this level. And I like how he doesn't need plays to be run for him, can be a weakside patrol, and complements Cousins fairly well.
I guess were going to have to respectfully disagree on some points. First, I'm not trying to belittle what Henson can do. He's a great shotblocker and has proved to be a good rebounder despite his slight frame. But athleticly, I don't think he's in the same class with Robinison or Davis. Or even Moultrie for that matter. Its easy to be fooled though. He's so long that it appears he has tremendous leaping ability. Don't get me wrong, he can definitely play above the rim, but he's not explosive around the rim. Remember as well, I'm using other very explosive players as a yardstick. But he's certainly athletic enough to play the PF position in the NBA.
But we wern't talking about the PF position, we were talking about the SF position. Again, with ballhandling. As a PF, I think his ballhandling is adequate to good. As a SF, I seriously doubt it'll hold up. I doubt that Robinson's would either. At least right now. I've seen Robinson take the ball end to end many times. Sometimes ending up in a mess, but none the less, as a straight line dribbler, he's not bad. But as a SF on the perimeter, trying to create his own shot, its not going to happen right now. I think that problem is only exaggerated with Henson. If I'm going to be critical of Barnes and Taylors ballhandling, and both are far better ballhandlers than Henson and Robinson, I can't give a free pass to Henson.
Defensively on the perimeter, your putting Henson in a bad situation. He doesn't have the lateral quickness to stay in front of the top SF's in the NBA, and you pulling him away from the basket where he can use his shotblocking talent. I believe Robinson's lateral quickness is superior, and I'm not sure he can stay in front of his man in the NBA.
When we get to shooting, I won't bore you with Synergy's stats on Henson's shooting ability. Lets just say, that beyond 15 feet, he's a terrible shooter. From 15 feet, he's improved, but he's not going to blow your socks off. Around the basket, Henson shoots well over 50%. The minute he moves away from the basket, his percentage drops dramaticly. He shot almost as many airballs from 15 feet as he did made baskets. He did not attempt one 3pt shot all season, and for good reason, he can't shoot from out there. On the other hand, Robinson attempted 14 shots from 3pt range, and made 7 for a 50% average. To some degree, I could argue that Robinson is a better jumpshooter than he is a post player right now.
You see, thats where Henson has the advantage over Robinson. He's a better post player at the moment. Henson has better use of dropsteps and can shoot hookshots with either hand. Robinson is a more effective jumpshooter, but relies too much on his athletic ability in the post. And thats the only reason I gave Robinson the edge at being able to play SF in the NBA. Both players have upside, but Robinson has more overall upside, which is why he's projected to go higher. I just think that if you take Henson out of the post, your feeding him to the croc's. Thats where his strength is. Hmmm! There's a little irony in that last statement.
But we wern't talking about the PF position, we were talking about the SF position. Again, with ballhandling. As a PF, I think his ballhandling is adequate to good. As a SF, I seriously doubt it'll hold up. I doubt that Robinson's would either. At least right now. I've seen Robinson take the ball end to end many times. Sometimes ending up in a mess, but none the less, as a straight line dribbler, he's not bad. But as a SF on the perimeter, trying to create his own shot, its not going to happen right now. I think that problem is only exaggerated with Henson. If I'm going to be critical of Barnes and Taylors ballhandling, and both are far better ballhandlers than Henson and Robinson, I can't give a free pass to Henson.
Defensively on the perimeter, your putting Henson in a bad situation. He doesn't have the lateral quickness to stay in front of the top SF's in the NBA, and you pulling him away from the basket where he can use his shotblocking talent. I believe Robinson's lateral quickness is superior, and I'm not sure he can stay in front of his man in the NBA.
When we get to shooting, I won't bore you with Synergy's stats on Henson's shooting ability. Lets just say, that beyond 15 feet, he's a terrible shooter. From 15 feet, he's improved, but he's not going to blow your socks off. Around the basket, Henson shoots well over 50%. The minute he moves away from the basket, his percentage drops dramaticly. He shot almost as many airballs from 15 feet as he did made baskets. He did not attempt one 3pt shot all season, and for good reason, he can't shoot from out there. On the other hand, Robinson attempted 14 shots from 3pt range, and made 7 for a 50% average. To some degree, I could argue that Robinson is a better jumpshooter than he is a post player right now.
You see, thats where Henson has the advantage over Robinson. He's a better post player at the moment. Henson has better use of dropsteps and can shoot hookshots with either hand. Robinson is a more effective jumpshooter, but relies too much on his athletic ability in the post. And thats the only reason I gave Robinson the edge at being able to play SF in the NBA. Both players have upside, but Robinson has more overall upside, which is why he's projected to go higher. I just think that if you take Henson out of the post, your feeding him to the croc's. Thats where his strength is. Hmmm! There's a little irony in that last statement.
Last edited:
I know what lines your thinking on and T. Jones fits the bill there much better than Henson and Robinson there, Yes he would need time to develope but the same goes for every single player in this draft including Davis. 6'8" 240lbs with a freakish 7'3" reach he could pan out to give us a dimension that give teams fits on the glass and in the open court.
I also wouldn't count out Perry Jones from Baylor. While he underwhelmed mostly playing the 4, he definitely has the build and skills to play the 3. In fact, there are a few articles out there that indicate he has been impressive in recent workouts and how he struggled at Baylor due to a variety of reasons. He's one to watch to next couple of weeks.
bajaden, thanks for the reply. Great discussion. I respect and always look forward to reading your opinion. While we don't fully agree, you bring up some interesting things to consider.
bajaden, thanks for the reply. Great discussion. I respect and always look forward to reading your opinion. While we don't fully agree, you bring up some interesting things to consider.
I would be more inclined to gamble on Perry Jones than I would Drummond. Both being considered the two riskiest picks in the lottery. Jones was played out of position, and Drummond wasn't. But my main reason, is that Jones knows how to play. He has the skills. He simply didn't apply them very well. I'd be very curious to see how he fares out on the perimeter where he can use his ballhandling, passing, and shooting skills to a greater advantage.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
I would be more inclined to gamble on Perry Jones than I would Drummond. Both being considered the two riskiest picks in the lottery. Jones was played out of position, and Drummond wasn't. But my main reason, is that Jones knows how to play. He has the skills. He simply didn't apply them very well. I'd be very curious to see how he fares out on the perimeter where he can use his ballhandling, passing, and shooting skills to a greater advantage.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Not to completely hijack this thread from the original topic, but since we're now talking about Perry Jones ... here's a recent piece from Sam Amick that highlights the following;
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...otebook.santa.barbara/index.html?eref=writers
- Perry Jones III has put his immense potential on display in NBA draft workouts
- Kentucky's Michael Kidd-Gilchrist tops the long list of small forward prospects
- Duke center Mile Plumlee impressed scouts with his leaping ability at workouts
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...otebook.santa.barbara/index.html?eref=writers
I would be more inclined to gamble on Perry Jones than I would Drummond. Both being considered the two riskiest picks in the lottery. Jones was played out of position, and Drummond wasn't. But my main reason, is that Jones knows how to play. He has the skills. He simply didn't apply them very well. I'd be very curious to see how he fares out on the perimeter where he can use his ballhandling, passing, and shooting skills to a greater advantage.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
I'd like to try it and find out. Most scouts feel that he's a very good athlete. He certainly looked quick in highschool, and he was excellent in the open floor. He never had a chance to display any of that at Baylor. For a 6'11" player, he has excellent handles. He might have trouble guarding some of the smaller quicker SF's in the league, but they would have an equally hard time guarding him because of his height and length. Maybe we'll get a chance to see down the road.
I would be more inclined to gamble on Perry Jones than I would Drummond. Both being considered the two riskiest picks in the lottery. Jones was played out of position, and Drummond wasn't. But my main reason, is that Jones knows how to play. He has the skills. He simply didn't apply them very well. I'd be very curious to see how he fares out on the perimeter where he can use his ballhandling, passing, and shooting skills to a greater advantage.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Agree on the discussion. If everybody agreed, it would be a boring world, and I'd be right all the time.
Perry Jones could be the best player out of this draft in 5 years.
The issue is that 'worst case' for him is 12th/D-League in 5 years.
He's got the perfect basketball body, with fluid athleticism and phenominal basketball skills for someone his size/length. The problem is that he doesn't apply any of that on the basketball court. He's so frustrating to watch because he could have just dominated his competition in every game, and instead you just got glimpses.
Scouts/GMs probably were willing to over-look it after his freshman year, but after a sophomore year of just more of the same, it's truly one of the biggest risk/reward picks out there.
Oh, and since this is a Henson thread.
No on Henson. He's not going to be able to play with the physicality needed to be a major minute contributor at the PF level and I'd gamble on T. Jones or P. Jones if I wanted to convert someone to the SF position.
The issue is that 'worst case' for him is 12th/D-League in 5 years.
He's got the perfect basketball body, with fluid athleticism and phenominal basketball skills for someone his size/length. The problem is that he doesn't apply any of that on the basketball court. He's so frustrating to watch because he could have just dominated his competition in every game, and instead you just got glimpses.
Scouts/GMs probably were willing to over-look it after his freshman year, but after a sophomore year of just more of the same, it's truly one of the biggest risk/reward picks out there.
Oh, and since this is a Henson thread.
No on Henson. He's not going to be able to play with the physicality needed to be a major minute contributor at the PF level and I'd gamble on T. Jones or P. Jones if I wanted to convert someone to the SF position.
