Making a case for Jeffery Taylor:

bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#1
#1
I realize right off the bat that Taylor is projected to go in the second half of the first round somewhere. Of course, thats all they are, projections. And, sometimes if a player just fits better, and fills an important need, then either reach, or trade down a little so you don't offend anyone. I happen to love Jeffery Taylor, and, as Uncia03 will attest, I never used to. We had plenty of arguments over him the last few years.

But this last season, he won me over. So rather than I expound on his virtues, I'll post this article along with its video. I think the article is fair, and very accurate.

http://www.hardwoodcanvas.com/2012/...-profile-jeffery-taylor/#.T8eAyJmBPX0.twitter
 
K

King in England

G-League
#2
#2
It may not be worth much but you've convinced me! He sounds like just the player we need 2 fill that black hole at the 3. How would you rate him against Harrison Barnes? For what its worth I get this bad feeling about Barnes that he'll be merely average and when we look back on the draft every1 will say he went too high.

If we were to go for Taylor I guess we would trade back? Now i've not had much experience in coming up with trades but i'll float some ideas.

Looking at teams around the late teens maybe something could be done with Dallas or Houston.

#5 + Salmons for Marion + #17 + future 1st?

or


#5 + Salmons + Jimmer for #16 + Lawry + Dalembert

I dont know if any of these work but there jsut thoughts:D
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#3
#3
King in England said:
It may not be worth much but you've convinced me! He sounds like just the player we need 2 fill that black hole at the 3. How would you rate him against Harrison Barnes? For what its worth I get this bad feeling about Barnes that he'll be merely average and when we look back on the draft every1 will say he went too high.

If we were to go for Taylor I guess we would trade back? Now i've not had much experience in coming up with trades but i'll float some ideas.

Looking at teams around the late teens maybe something could be done with Dallas or Houston.

#5 + Salmons for Marion + #17 + future 1st?

or


#5 + Salmons + Jimmer for #16 + Lawry + Dalembert

I dont know if any of these work but there jsut thoughts:D
Click to expand...
Well I love your second trade and would do it in a heartbeat. But I think you'd have to get Houston high on drugs to agree to it. First, Houston isn't enamored with Dalembert, so I think you could probably get them to throw him in. The problem is, he's the only center they have left on the team. Camby is an unrestricted freeagent. So if they trade Dalembert, they're left with Scola playing center. So I think you'd have to include Hayes in the deal.

Second problem, is that at present, Lowery is the only PG they have left on the team, and while Jimmer may have som long range potential, he's not in the same class with Lowery. Dragic is an unrestricted freeagent. Now once they resign Dragic (no guarantee) then you might get them to trade Lowery. However, I think it would take more than what you offered. But hey, if you can get them to agree, lets do it.
 
roasthawg

roasthawg

Starter
#4
#4
Definitely not one of those guys that falls in love with one prospect at the expense of all others but just can't see taking Taylor ahead of Barnes. Taylor was a sr this year and had a decent year... how good a college player would Barnes have been by his senior season? They're similar players as is but Barnes has far more upside imo.
 
Anthony1

Anthony1

Bench
#5
#5
If Petrie were to target Taylor, I would imagine that he would have discussions with Houston. Houston has 14 and 16 overall. Kings could take Taylor with the 14th pick, and still get a very nice player at 16.
 
Anthony1

Anthony1

Bench
#7
#7
We could easily trade the 5th overall to Houston for 14 and 16. Normally, such a trade would be considered ludicrous, to give up a top 5 talent for two picks that are so far down, but this is a pretty unusual draft. Once you get past the top 5 players, there are EASILY 9 more players that don't have a ton of separation between their talent level. Sure, some of those 9 players will turn out to be busts, but a guy taken at 14 or 16 could easily end up as good as a guy taken 7th or 8th. Still, the worry is, what if the 11 GM's drafting in front of you make all the right picks, and you actually end up with your 14th and 16th ranked players. If you make this trade, the thinking has to be that 3 or 4 picks in front of you are guys that you really aren't interested in, for a trade like this to really make sense.

It's a very risky gamble. If Robinson and Barnes are the guys we are choosing between, I might actually consider a deal. I don't really want either of those guys at 5 overall. (although I won't be devastated if we end up with either of those guys)
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#8
#8
Don't want to get younger. One rookie will be enough. Wasting a roster spot and more cap space on another rookie is the opposite direction from which I'd like to go. But if you all think Taylor will help with a playoff push next year, have at it. More power to you.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#9
#9
roasthawg said:
Definitely not one of those guys that falls in love with one prospect at the expense of all others but just can't see taking Taylor ahead of Barnes. Taylor was a sr this year and had a decent year... how good a college player would Barnes have been by his senior season? They're similar players as is but Barnes has far more upside imo.
Click to expand...
There is nothing similar about Barnes and Taylor. Taylor is a freak athlete and may have been the best defensive SF in all of college. And if I have to choose between what is, and what might be, I have a tendacy to go with whats already proven. I doubt that Barnes will ever be the defender that Taylor is. I'm always curious why someone thinks that one player has more upside. The only physical advantage that Barnes has over Taylor, is height, and age.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#10
#10
rainmaker said:
Don't want to get younger. One rookie will be enough. Wasting a roster spot and more cap space on another rookie is the opposite direction from which I'd like to go. But if you all think Taylor will help with a playoff push next year, have at it. More power to you.
Click to expand...
What I like about Taylor is that he is a four year player. He has very good BBIQ, and is one of those players that can play right away. The dude can defend. He's not just a good defender, he frustrates the players he defends. I agree that he doesn't make sense at 5. But if a player is the best fit, then find a way to aquire him thats to your advantage.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#11
#11
bajaden said:
What I like about Taylor is that he is a four year player. He has very good BBIQ, and is one of those players that can play right away. The dude can defend. He's not just a good defender, he frustrates the players he defends. I agree that he doesn't make sense at 5. But if a player is the best fit, then find a way to aquire him thats to your advantage.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
I just can't get excited about adding two more youths to this roster, until I know we're amnestying or buying out someone else and freeing up cap space. If it were to happen(drafting Taylor) of course I'll hope for the best.
 
OptimusRhyme

OptimusRhyme

Jive Turkey
#12
#12
I'm all for finding a way too get him (not with the 5th of course). If hes anything like Kawhi Leonard and Sefolosha then im 100 % down. As long as we improve defensively at SF or C/PF this draft, then I'm a happy fan.
 
Last edited:
A

Arby's Roast Beef

Starter
#13
#13
He's clearly a role player--he doesn't handle the ball well at all--in fact, his ball skills rated near PF levels for me--but he's decently built, chiseled frame, prototypical SF height, good athleticism--in other words, looks like an NBA player.

One thing that's always en vogue in the league is the threes-D wing player. Fortunately for players like Jeff, I don't recall Thabo Sefolosha or Kawhi Leonard--two guys who are of that mold still playing for teams in the playoffs--having much three point range at the time of the draft--Kawhi I believe didn't even have the range, and was a PF. But again, that's the Spurs and their organizational savviness for you. Jeff shot 42% this year from three, but his percentages from the line definitely give one pause when evaluating the overall shooting, and is this shooting the outlier--the first three years, we were all criticizing the dude for the jumper. There's a step up to NBA three point range, and whether he truly has it is a bit questionable.

But, NBA-body, NBA-caliber man-to-man defense, tough...I have him in the late first to early second. #28-37. I've had him at 28, 31 and 37 when accounting for different factors. I think he can go up to even the early 20s if a team really loves him though. Also like how he's from Sweden, joins Jonas Jerebko as another one in the league.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#14
#14
Arby's Roast Beef said:
He's clearly a role player--he doesn't handle the ball well at all--in fact, his ball skills rated near PF levels for me--but he's decently built, chiseled frame, prototypical SF height, good athleticism--in other words, looks like an NBA player.

One thing that's always en vogue in the league is the threes-D wing player. Fortunately for players like Jeff, I don't recall Thabo Sefolosha or Kawhi Leonard--two guys who are of that mold still playing for teams in the playoffs--having much three point range at the time of the draft--Kawhi I believe didn't even have the range, and was a PF. But again, that's the Spurs and their organizational savviness for you. Jeff shot 42% this year from three, but his percentages from the line definitely give one pause when evaluating the overall shooting, and is this shooting the outlier--the first three years, we were all criticizing the dude for the jumper. There's a step up to NBA three point range, and whether he truly has it is a bit questionable.

But, NBA-body, NBA-caliber man-to-man defense, tough...I have him in the late first to early second. #28-37. I've had him at 28, 31 and 37 when accounting for different factors. I think he can go up to even the early 20s if a team really loves him though. Also like how he's from Sweden, joins Jonas Jerebko as another one in the league.
Click to expand...
Since I've followed Tayor for that last three years, believe me, I know a lot about his shooting. It was the one area that I was very critical of. But this last offseason he really worked on his shot, and it showed. There still room for improvement, but in a pure spot up, he was money this year. Another area he's very good at is coming off screens. His ballhandling is better than you describe. But he's what I call a straight line dribbler. And if you give him a line to the basket, he's a very good finisher. Where he gets in trouble is when he tries to crossover, or change direction in traffic. However, he has a very nice pullup along the baseline, which is an area where he likes to attack.

To be honest, I don't think his overall game, in the way we would use him has many holes. I think his biggest problem is that he has a concience. When he misses two or three shots in a row, he tends to let it bother him. He was a lot better at that this year, so maybe he's growing out of it. But there's one thing he always does, and that play defense. And if you truely want to compare Barnes defense and Taylors defense, its a no contest. Taylor will flat out lock you down.
 
K

King in England

G-League
#15
#15
Looking around most mock drafts have him going mid to late 20's at the moment. Is it possible he slips all the way to the 2nd round?

If so would it be possible to move our #36 up 6 or 7 spots to get him there on draft night?

I would be well happy with Robinson or Drummond at 5 and then nabbing Taylor late in the first.

Am I overly optimistic/unrealistic here? :)
 
ParniValjak

ParniValjak

All-Star
#16
#16
King in England said:
Looking around most mock drafts have him going mid to late 20's at the moment. Is it possible he slips all the way to the 2nd round?

If so would it be possible to move our #36 up 6 or 7 spots to get him there on draft night?

I would be well happy with Robinson or Drummond at 5 and then nabbing Taylor late in the first.

Am I overly optimistic/unrealistic here? :)
Click to expand...
Having not seen this guy play but just going off what I have read about him, it seems to me that this is the classic, defensive ready made role player that gets picked up by a play off team in the 20-30 range so chances of him slipping to our 2nd pick are probably slim.

Someone like Pop would pick this kid up. I think Heat and Thunder would also look at him. A classic tough defensive perimeter defender than can knock down a spot up 3. Contenders value those sort of guys highly.
 
whozit

whozit

Starter
#18
#18
rainmaker said:
Fair enough.
I just can't get excited about adding two more youths to this roster, until I know we're amnestying or buying out someone else and freeing up cap space. If it were to happen(drafting Taylor) of course I'll hope for the best.
Click to expand...
That would assume current management would do something with freed up cap space and even if they would, would you trust them to do right. Petrie has said something along the lines that they most likely wouldn't amnesty because they aren't going to spend it.
 
A

Arby's Roast Beef

Starter
#19
#19
bajaden said:
To be honest, I don't think his overall game, in the way we would use him has many holes. I think his biggest problem is that he has a concience. When he misses two or three shots in a row, he tends to let it bother him. He was a lot better at that this year, so maybe he's growing out of it. But there's one thing he always does, and that play defense. And if you truely want to compare Barnes defense and Taylors defense, its a no contest. Taylor will flat out lock you down.
Click to expand...
I think Taylor's a sure thing to be a defensive guy in the league at least--in fact, all of the threes-D defensive guys in the league actually don't shoot the three that well at college. Thabo--at Europe, it was 9, 31, and 38%. Afflalo never hit 40 from deep in three years at UCLA, but has hit 40 from deep in his last four (!!!) seasons in the NBA. Kawhi shot 20-29% at SDSU, now 37% with the Spurs. Again, a good organization or devoted dedication from the player can make the player transform into this role. I think Taylor's a smart guy, four-year type as you said, he can do that. I think if the Spurs hadn't had a defensive-threes guy already, he's the sort of guy they would swipe.

As for us, totally agree--we need a defensive wingman out there to take the pressure off Reke so we don't always have to match him up with the top opposing wing when he's paired with Thornton. Garcia's an amnesty candidate and frankly, older and possibly injury-prone, so he's not the same. T-Will can play good D, but his obligations as a shot creator/slasher type may sometimes reduce his effectiveness on D. Taylor I'd imagine is a guy who won't waste too much energy--do stuff off the ball (another thing we have to note is he's a good finisher), spot up at the short corner three, run in transition, and most of all, play defense. He's the specialist guy every good team needs.
 
K

King in England

G-League
#20
#20
Ok rookie poster randomely floating trade scenario ideas take 2 :)

On draft night if we get to pick 24 (cavs) and Taylor is still on the board would it make sense 2 work a trade around removing the protection from the pick we owe them to get this pick?

Does that make sense?

Also ATL pick at 23 so..

#5 + #36 for J Smith and #23??

Dont know if Hawks would do that tho...?

Please feel free to call me a fool if i'm way off with these!
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#21
#21
Arby's Roast Beef said:
I think Taylor's a sure thing to be a defensive guy in the league at least--in fact, all of the threes-D defensive guys in the league actually don't shoot the three that well at college. Thabo--at Europe, it was 9, 31, and 38%. Afflalo never hit 40 from deep in three years at UCLA, but has hit 40 from deep in his last four (!!!) seasons in the NBA. Kawhi shot 20-29% at SDSU, now 37% with the Spurs. Again, a good organization or devoted dedication from the player can make the player transform into this role. I think Taylor's a smart guy, four-year type as you said, he can do that. I think if the Spurs hadn't had a defensive-threes guy already, he's the sort of guy they would swipe.

As for us, totally agree--we need a defensive wingman out there to take the pressure off Reke so we don't always have to match him up with the top opposing wing when he's paired with Thornton. Garcia's an amnesty candidate and frankly, older and possibly injury-prone, so he's not the same. T-Will can play good D, but his obligations as a shot creator/slasher type may sometimes reduce his effectiveness on D. Taylor I'd imagine is a guy who won't waste too much energy--do stuff off the ball (another thing we have to note is he's a good finisher), spot up at the short corner three, run in transition, and most of all, play defense. He's the specialist guy every good team needs.
Click to expand...
When listening on the fourm to people describe what kind of SF we need, Taylor was the first guy that sprang to mind in the draft after Gilchrist. Someone thats a very good defender, and a unselfish player that can hit the open shot. I actually think Taylor can be a better NBA player than a college player. At Vandy he was one of the guys asked to carry the offense along with Jenkins, and I think there were times when his shot was off where he put too much pressure in himself. That wouldn't be a problem with us. He'll be the defensive specialist and the outlet guy from doubles. Plus everyone says we need to get more athletic. Well Taylor would probably be the most athletic player on the team.

The other thing that can't be ignored, is that he improved his game every year, which shows he's a hard worker. So I would expect him to continue improving. The burning question, is how do we aquire him. I seriously doubt that Petrie would reach that far. So we'd have to make a trade. How about we trade our 5th pick and Hayes to Houston for Dalembert and their 14th pick. Maybe Dalembert is happier under Smart than he was under Westphal. We use the 14th pick to draft Taylor. Wa La, we solve our PF and SF problem with one swoop. Just an idea....
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#22
#22
Čarolija said:
Having not seen this guy play but just going off what I have read about him, it seems to me that this is the classic, defensive ready made role player that gets picked up by a play off team in the 20-30 range so chances of him slipping to our 2nd pick are probably slim.

Someone like Pop would pick this kid up. I think Heat and Thunder would also look at him. A classic tough defensive perimeter defender than can knock down a spot up 3. Contenders value those sort of guys highly.
Click to expand...
I think the odd's are better once the team workouts start, that Taylor will move up in the draft, not down.
 
twslam07

twslam07

All-Star
#23
#23
I would be perfectly fine with trading back to get Taylor. He's probably the only player in this draft that I would trade back for. I think dealing with Houston might be the most realistic scenario.

5th overall
Thomas
Hayes
Garcia

for

16th overall
Lowry
Dalembert

I think Houston would definitely consider this trade. With it looking like Dragic is the favorite there, it makes Lowry the odd man out. Thomas would be a good young PG who can give them great minutes off the bench. They lose Dalembert but they get Hayes back who Adelman has a knack for making him look like a solid player. Not to mention he is loved by Houston. Garcia is an expiring contract after the season so they will gain cap space next offseason. And on top of all that they get a top 5 draft pick.

This would benefit our team by allowing us to take Taylor to fill that void at SF as well as add that athletic, defensive minded shotblocker. We also pair Evans with a PG that can split the ball handling duties. Lowry is a good defender and can hit the 3 ball.

Our lineup would look like this if we went through with the trade:

PG - Lowry/Fredette
SG - Evans/Thornton/Salmons
SF - Taylor/Williams/Outlaw/Honeycutt
PF - Dalembert/Thompson
C - Cousins/Whiteside

That looks like a pretty solid and balanced team if you ask me. We have two players in the starting lineup who are completely dedicated to defense (Taylor and Dalembert). Plenty of ball handling, 3 point shooting, defense, athleticism, size, I could go on and on. The only thing this team doesn't have is experience.
 
Last edited:
G

Gilles

Starter
#24
#24
Perception would be thst he as a senior has to do things much better than underclassmen to refute the notion he's being not talented enough was the only reason he stayed in school for so long. And workouts are mostly athletic shows. He will have to adjust to NBA 3pt line along with everybody so his shooting may not be that impressive. Well, there's a chance his senior shooting numbers will drop dramatically with the line moving away from the basket anyway.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#26
#26
Capt. Factorial said:
Houston would do it instantaneously, then laugh at us behind our backs for years to come.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it's about fit. Those pieces would fit better with us than what we're giving up does. Hou may laugh, but I'm not sure why. I'd do that trade.

We give up two garbage contracts/players in Cisco/Hayes, give up what should be a backup PG in IT, and the 5th, for a legit starting PG who'd fit well, a starting PF in Daly next to Cuz, and the 16th pick where we might get Taylor, who'd be a 3rd starter for us?

That's possibly three starting players in return, and we possibly lose one, being whoever the 5th pick would be, while getting out from underneath two terrible contracts.
 
Last edited:
B

BMiller52

All-Star
#28
#28
rainmaker said:
Sometimes it's about fit. Those pieces would fit better with us than what we're giving up does. Hou may laugh, but I'm not sure why. I'd do that trade.

We give up two garbage contracts/players in Cisco/Hayes, give up what should be a backup PG in IT, and the 5th, for a legit starting PG who'd fit well, a starting PF in Daly next to Cuz, and the 16th pick where we might get Taylor, who'd be a 3rd starter for us?

That's possibly three starting players in return, and we possibly lose one, being whoever the 5th pick would be, while getting out from underneath two terrible contracts.
Click to expand...
We could get out of Garcia's contract with the amnesty, and if Hayes is actually healthy next season he can be helpful if we can add a shotblocker. Dalembert's not the only shotblocker out there. Lowry's a little overrated IMO, and and you don't give up the 5th pick which is a potential star to go back to 16 unless you're getting something really good. IT is a pretty good PG himself, and not too much smaller than Lowry, and we're basically giving him away for free when he has atleast a decent amount of value. That's a horrible deal.

btw I wouldn't really trade back for Taylor in the first place. IMO he'll be a Morris Peterson type player. He might be a decent shooting and defending role player but that's kind of it IMO. I'd rather atleast get Ross from Washington if we're trading back, who has better athleticism and more potential.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#29
#29
BMiller52 said:
We could get out of Garcia's contract with the amnesty, and if Hayes is actually healthy next season he can be helpful if we can add a shotblocker. Dalembert's not the only shotblocker out there. Lowry's a little overrated IMO, and and you don't give up the 5th pick which is a potential star to go back to 16 unless you're getting something really good. IT is a pretty good PG himself, and not too much smaller than Lowry, and we're basically giving him away for free when he has atleast a decent amount of value. That's a horrible deal.

btw I wouldn't really trade back for Taylor in the first place. IMO he'll be a Morris Peterson type player. He might be a decent shooting and defending role player but that's kind of it IMO. I'd rather atleast get Ross from Washington if we're trading back, who has better athleticism and more potential.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I completely disagree. First, I highly doubt the Maloofs allow Petrie to use the amnesty clause. Second, Chuck had one good year, and that was under Adelman. He hurt his shoulder which effected him, but that was after he got fat last summer and came into camp overweight and out of shape. I want nothing to do with Chuck on this team. Third, while yes Daly isn't the only shot blocker out there, name another proven shot blocker we can get. If it didn't work out, he's gone after next year, clearing cap space.

Fourth, I think there's a considerable gap between Lowry and IT. Lowry was in AS conversations before his injury, and is one of the top 5-8 defensive PG's in the league. Quite an upgrade over IT imo. Fifth, moving Chuck/Cisco, and then Daly if he didn't want to stay a year later or we didn't want him, moves about 14M off the books not counting Cisco who would have expired, heading into the 2013 off season. If it did work out with Daly and he wants to resign, that means he fit well next to Cuz and we have someone to pair with him for a few years. Not sure if you're exaggerating by saying it would horrible, but I really disagree with that stance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.