2012 NBA Draft

[theAlaskanBear]

With the Charlotte trade of Maggette, it looks to me like CHA is clearly setting up to take Barnes. By trading Corey they create a need at SF, and Gordon will prevent SG from being a top priority so that locks out Beal (who is looking like the #2 player on most GMs charts). They have also been shopping the #2...looking to move down a few spots. Ideally they would trade Portland for the #6 and #11 and try to take Barnes at 6.

The Rockets have the 14, 16, and 18 picks, and are clearly looking to make a bigger deal...

While Charlotte has a need at PF, I am unsure about Robinson's ceiling in the NBA, I think that Beal and MKG will likely be better players, I think if Sullinger stays healthy he would clearly be a better PF as well.

[CDu]

With the Charlotte trade of Maggette, it looks to me like CHA is clearly setting up to take Barnes. By trading Corey they create a need at SF, and Gordon will prevent SG from being a top priority so that locks out Beal (who is looking like the #2 player on most GMs charts). They have also been shopping the #2...looking to move down a few spots. Ideally they would trade Portland for the #6 and #11 and try to take Barnes at 6.

The Rockets have the 14, 16, and 18 picks, and are clearly looking to make a bigger deal...

While Charlotte has a need at PF, I am unsure about Robinson's ceiling in the NBA, I think that Beal and MKG will likely be better players, I think if Sullinger stays healthy he would clearly be a better PF as well.

Either that or they could just take MKG at #2. In fact, MKG makes more sense given his defense and the fact that Gordon, Walker, and Henderson are more scorers.

[Billy Dat]

Maybe Chad Ford does give his own opinions sometimes:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...re-nba-more-do

FORD: Look, Lillard was a late bloomer. He wasn't lightly recruited until his senior season. You may be right that Rivers would've put up better numbers as a freshman. However, here's my knock on Rivers. He thinks he's Kobe. He's not. He doesn't have the length, the height, nor the athletic ability. Take those things away from Kobe, and he's Ricky Davis — an irritating ball hog no one wants to play with and who isn't good enough to warrant the diva act.

SIMMONS: Wow, you just waved two middle fingers at Doc Rivers — you compared his son to his least favorite player to have ever coached. Why didn't you just throw a Dominique Wilkins barb in there while you were at it?

FORD: Lillard is a willing passer. Rivers isn't and will never be. Lillard made dramatic improvements from year to year. I thought Rivers was the exact player in college that he was in high school. Lillard is a team player. He was the second most efficient player in college basketball DESPITE being the only decent player on his entire roster; teams game planned to stop him and him alone every night. I just don't see Rivers ever being anywhere near as unselfish or efficient. I think Rivers will be shocked at the athleticism and length at his position. He'll try to do the same things at which he excelled in high school, spend a lot of time on the bench, get into it with his coach and teammates, get traded in a year or two to a desperate team, put up huge numbers for a cellar-dweller for a year or two, make some money, and eventually, teams will realize he can't be the alpha dog on a winning team.

SIMMONS: Other than that, you're a huge Austin Rivers fan.

FORD: I honestly think Rivers is the one guy I wouldn't touch in the lottery. Too toxic for team chemistry, doesn't have the same physical tools to make it worth it.

[CDu]

Maybe Chad Ford does give his own opinions sometimes:

FORD: I honestly think Rivers is the one guy I wouldn't touch in the lottery. Too toxic for team chemistry, doesn't have the same physical tools to make it worth it.

I don't know if I'd go so far as toxic for team chemistry, but it will be interesting to see how Rivers handles not being the best player on his team. Because that's the situation he's about to enter for the first time in his life. In every other setting, he's been the unquestioned star. Next year, he's going to likely be a role player. I don't know if anyone is sure how he'll handle that role.

[FerryFor50]

Maybe Chad Ford does give his own opinions sometimes:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...re-nba-more-do

FORD: Look, Lillard was a late bloomer. He wasn't lightly recruited until his senior season. You may be right that Rivers would've put up better numbers as a freshman. However, here's my knock on Rivers. He thinks he's Kobe. He's not. He doesn't have the length, the height, nor the athletic ability. Take those things away from Kobe, and he's Ricky Davis — an irritating ball hog no one wants to play with and who isn't good enough to warrant the diva act.

SIMMONS: Wow, you just waved two middle fingers at Doc Rivers — you compared his son to his least favorite player to have ever coached. Why didn't you just throw a Dominique Wilkins barb in there while you were at it?

FORD: Lillard is a willing passer. Rivers isn't and will never be. Lillard made dramatic improvements from year to year. I thought Rivers was the exact player in college that he was in high school. Lillard is a team player. He was the second most efficient player in college basketball DESPITE being the only decent player on his entire roster; teams game planned to stop him and him alone every night. I just don't see Rivers ever being anywhere near as unselfish or efficient. I think Rivers will be shocked at the athleticism and length at his position. He'll try to do the same things at which he excelled in high school, spend a lot of time on the bench, get into it with his coach and teammates, get traded in a year or two to a desperate team, put up huge numbers for a cellar-dweller for a year or two, make some money, and eventually, teams will realize he can't be the alpha dog on a winning team.

SIMMONS: Other than that, you're a huge Austin Rivers fan.

FORD: I honestly think Rivers is the one guy I wouldn't touch in the lottery. Too toxic for team chemistry, doesn't have the same physical tools to make it worth it.

All that proves is that Chad Ford is kind of an idiot.

Is Rivers a bit of a black hole on offense? Sure.

Are there plenty of NBA players like that? Yep.

Are they all named "Rickey Davis"? Nope.

Rivers is the son of a coach and will be coachable. He does need the reality check that he can't do what he did in college and HS though.

[sporthenry]

I don't know if I'd go so far as toxic for team chemistry, but it will be interesting to see how Rivers handles not being the best player on his team. Because that's the situation he's about to enter for the first time in his life. In every other setting, he's been the unquestioned star. Next year, he's going to likely be a role player. I don't know if anyone is sure how he'll handle that role.

I would agree with you that this is the first time he is entering a situation where he won't be the best player on the court and he will have a lot of growing up to do. And normally I would have similar reservations to Ford (albeit not nearly as harsh) but the one thing that I really think will help AR is that he has been around the game his whole life. He has seen the NBA lifestyle. His father wasn't the best player in his day and has coached some of the best today so I'm sure he doesn't give unrealistic confidence to AR. I'm sure it will be humbling but the guy seems too much of a competitor to be Ricky Davis and I don't think he warrants the criticism when players like JR Smith are still kicking around in the league.

[BD80]

I found this amusing stat from the article on Henson linked on the front page:

"Many questioned the 6-10 Henson's slim stature heading into college, but Henson gained 37 pounds in three years and enters the draft at 216 pounds and growing."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baske...ard/55819564/1

By my calculation, that means he walked onto campus at 6'10' and 179 lbs!

Wow that's skinny.

[NSDukeFan]

I don't know if I'd go so far as toxic for team chemistry, but it will be interesting to see how Rivers handles not being the best player on his team. Because that's the situation he's about to enter for the first time in his life. In every other setting, he's been the unquestioned star. Next year, he's going to likely be a role player. I don't know if anyone is sure how he'll handle that role.

I think Rivers isn't getting enough credit here. So what if he isn't the best player on his team? I don't think there is any more evidence that he won't thrive in that situation than that he would be toxic for team chemistry. I think Austin is a competitor with some of the best, if not the best, one-on-one offensive skills in the draft. He seemed to be a team player who was willing to work and to learn at Duke. He seems to come from a good family and seems to be quite bright. He has lots to work on, but so does every 20 year old. I believe that he will have one of the 5-8 best careers of anyone in this draft.

[CDu]

I think Rivers isn't getting enough credit here. So what if he isn't the best player on his team? I don't think there is any more evidence that he won't thrive in that situation than that he would be toxic for team chemistry. I think Austin is a competitor with some of the best, if not the best, one-on-one offensive skills in the draft. He seemed to be a team player who was willing to work and to learn at Duke. He seems to come from a good family and seems to be quite bright. He has lots to work on, but so does every 20 year old. I believe that he will have one of the 5-8 best careers of anyone in this draft.

The issue is that he's only shown the ability to do one thing as a basketball player: score. And he's only shown that ability as a guy who creates his own shot. He's never made his teammates better, and he's never played off the ball. That's worked to this point because he's always been the best player on his team, and most importantly the best scorer on his team. But in the NBA, it's unlikely that this will be the case. There is almost certainly going to be a better shot creator on the team.

As such, he's going to have to learn another role. There are questions about whether he has the skillset and/or willingness to do it. On top of that, he's always had the alpha dog mentality. How will that play out as potentially the third or fourth best player on a team?

Again, I don't know that he won't adapt just fine. If he can make the adjustments in his game or if he can find a role as a 6th man scorer things can work out great for him. But I think it is a legitimate question.

[NSDukeFan]

The issue is that he's only shown the ability to do one thing as a basketball player: score. And he's only shown that ability as a guy who creates his own shot. He's never made his teammates better, and he's never played off the ball. That's worked to this point because he's always been the best player on his team, and most importantly the best scorer on his team. But in the NBA, it's unlikely that this will be the case. There is almost certainly going to be a better shot creator on the team.

As such, he's going to have to learn another role. There are questions about whether he has the skillset and/or willingness to do it. On top of that, he's always had the alpha dog mentality. How will that play out as potentially the third or fourth best player on a team?

Again, I don't know that he won't adapt just fine. If he can make the adjustments in his game or if he can find a role as a 6th man scorer things can work out great for him. But I think it is a legitimate question.

I very much agree that it is a legitimate question. I just strongly disagree that it is a given that he will not be able to adapt his game in the NBA. I also think it is a bit harsh to say that he's only shown the ability to do one thing as a basketball player. That has always been his primary role, but I thought he improved his one-on-one defense and help side defense this year. Though he was certainly not great at making his teammates better, he was one of the team leaders in assists and improved greatly (at least in my opinion) in his decision making ability for when to penetrate and how far to drive as the season progressed. He also rebounded ok for a shooting guard. I doubt that Austin will be unwilling to learn in the NBA. He has some great role models and I expect he will continue to improve.

[theAlaskanBear]

The Houston Rockets have made another move.

Rockets trade Dalembert (C) and the 14th pick for Brockman, Leuer, and Shaun Livingston and the 12th pick from the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Now the Rockets sit with the 12, 16, 18 pick and a gaggle of role players.

[CDu]

I very much agree that it is a legitimate question. I just strongly disagree that it is a given that he will not be able to adapt his game in the NBA. I also think it is a bit harsh to say that he's only shown the ability to do one thing as a basketball player. That has always been his primary role, but I thought he improved his one-on-one defense and help side defense this year. Though he was certainly not great at making his teammates better, he was one of the team leaders in assists and improved greatly (at least in my opinion) in his decision making ability for when to penetrate and how far to drive as the season progressed. He also rebounded ok for a shooting guard. I doubt that Austin will be unwilling to learn in the NBA. He has some great role models and I expect he will continue to improve.

Let me clarify: he's shown the ability to do only one thing of NBA quality as a basketball player. And I don't think it's a given that he'll fail to adapt. It's just that we've seen little evidence of it so far. And compared to other players who were great college scorers that will be asked to adapt, he does so little else really well that the questions are more legitimate.

For a simple and proximate example: a guy like Barnes has shown the ability to find shots off the ball. So you can clearly see his role as a complementary player in a starting lineup, even if he doesn't cut it as a superstar talent.

[COYS]

Let me clarify: he's shown the ability to do only one thing of NBA quality as a basketball player. And I don't think it's a given that he'll fail to adapt. It's just that we've seen little evidence of it so far. And compared to other players who were great college scorers that will be asked to adapt, he does so little else really well that the questions are more legitimate.

For a simple and proximate example: a guy like Barnes has shown the ability to find shots off the ball. So you can clearly see his role as a complementary player in a starting lineup, even if he doesn't cut it as a superstar talent.

CDu, I think you're right on and I think NBA GM's are right to notice that, besides scoring, Austin doesn't project to do anything THAT well in the NBA without some serious work. That being said, the issues of coach-ability seems to me to be baseless, at this point. Everyone talks about how he's a bad teammate, but no one seems to remember that Coach K put him on the bench in the Maui final against a good Kansas team in favor of Tyler Thornton . . . we're talking about benching the number 1 or 2 recruit in the nation for a player that didn't even crack the top 100 on anybody's list. Why did Coach K put him on the bench? Because he was forcing the issue, not playing within the offense, and was likely to commit a few bad turnovers. Did Austin give up and threaten to transfer? Did he blow up on the sidelines, pout, and throw a tantrum? No. I'm sure that hurt, but he sat back, watched his team put the game away without him, celebrated with his teammates, and then he learned from it and improved his game management. What happened when he lost his starting spot mid season for a game? Nothing. He entered that game and played much better and went on to play much better for the rest of the season. Quite honestly, I feel like those were two obvious situations where someone with REAL coachability issues would have thrown a fit or caused problems. But in both of those cases, Austin kept his head high, put in the work, and earned back his place on the court.

He will obviously need to learn to play off the ball better and attack quickly when he receives a pass in a good position, two areas in which he was really poor this year. He will also need to improve his court vision. And yes, I think there will be an adjustment period as he adapts to the fact that he won't necessarily be "The Man" in the NBA. That being said, he's a gym rat, extremely driven, and handled the tough love that K used on him very well. OK, so he doesn't project to be Kobe. So what if he's not the second best shooting guard of all time? He still can be a pretty good one.

[A-Tex Devil]

The Houston Rockets have made another move.

Rockets trade Dalembert (C) and the 14th pick for Brockman, Leuer, and Shaun Livingston and the 12th pick from the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Now the Rockets sit with the 12, 16, 18 pick and a gaggle of role players.

The Rockets almost made the playoffs in a ridiculously deep western conference with no all-star caliber players last year. Daryl Morey is a stat geek, and unlike baseball, guys like him and Cuban's team of stat geeks have a TON of proprietary statistics they are using to mold as good a team as possible. Morey almost did it in 2009 before Yao got hurt in the middle of the Lakers series they would have won had he stayed healthy.

If Morey can get the star that he wants down there, I'll be interested to see if he can build the team around that star with the undervalued players he's been so good at acquiring since he landed Shane Battier. McHale was much better than expected, other than his run ins with Lowrey. I am on pins and needles waiting to see what they can do. If they can swing a Howard deal and keep one pick, plus land another solid free agent, they will make some noise next year. If they can convince Howard to stay and pick up another star free agent (easier said than done), they'll be back on top.

Morey has been setting up this draft and free agent offseason for 2 years now, though, so he had better get it right. If he doesn't, stat genius or no, he's gone.

[Duvall]

The Rockets almost made the playoffs in a ridiculously deep western conference with no all-star caliber players last year. Daryl Morey is a stat geek, and unlike baseball, guys like him and Cuban's team of stat geeks have a TON of proprietary statistics they are using to mold as good a team as possible. Morey almost did it in 2009 before Yao got hurt in the middle of the Lakers series they would have won had he stayed healthy.

If Morey can get the star that he wants down there, I'll be interested to see if he can build the team around that star with the undervalued players he's been so good at acquiring since he landed Shane Battier. McHale was much better than expected, other than his run ins with Lowrey. I am on pins and needles waiting to see what they can do. If they can swing a Howard deal and keep one pick, plus land another solid free agent, they will make some noise next year. If they can convince Howard to stay and pick up another star free agent (easier said than done), they'll be back on top.

Morey has been setting up this draft and free agent offseason for 2 years now, though, so he had better get it right. If he doesn't, stat genius or no, he's gone.

I wonder what happens to these super-secret statistical systems when the people behind them get fired. The systems probably belong to the teams, but will the next guy want to use them?

[FerryFor50]

This is a pretty cool analysis of players over the years at each specific draft spot:

http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2012...is-picks-1-10/

Interesting how horrible the #8 pick has been, considering how good #9 has been.

[moonpie23]

drinks on me if Austin Rivers goes before HWNSNBM...the carolina fans would melt like the wicked witch...

[Starter]

CDu, I think you're right on and I think NBA GM's are right to notice that, besides scoring, Austin doesn't project to do anything THAT well in the NBA without some serious work. That being said, the issues of coach-ability seems to me to be baseless, at this point. Everyone talks about how he's a bad teammate, but no one seems to remember that Coach K put him on the bench in the Maui final against a good Kansas team in favor of Tyler Thornton . . . we're talking about benching the number 1 or 2 recruit in the nation for a player that didn't even crack the top 100 on anybody's list. Why did Coach K put him on the bench? Because he was forcing the issue, not playing within the offense, and was likely to commit a few bad turnovers. Did Austin give up and threaten to transfer? Did he blow up on the sidelines, pout, and throw a tantrum? No. I'm sure that hurt, but he sat back, watched his team put the game away without him, celebrated with his teammates, and then he learned from it and improved his game management. What happened when he lost his starting spot mid season for a game? Nothing. He entered that game and played much better and went on to play much better for the rest of the season. Quite honestly, I feel like those were two obvious situations where someone with REAL coachability issues would have thrown a fit or caused problems. But in both of those cases, Austin kept his head high, put in the work, and earned back his place on the court.

He will obviously need to learn to play off the ball better and attack quickly when he receives a pass in a good position, two areas in which he was really poor this year. He will also need to improve his court vision. And yes, I think there will be an adjustment period as he adapts to the fact that he won't necessarily be "The Man" in the NBA. That being said, he's a gym rat, extremely driven, and handled the tough love that K used on him very well. OK, so he doesn't project to be Kobe. So what if he's not the second best shooting guard of all time? He still can be a pretty good one.

This is the best assessment I've seen in the thread, IMO. I was asked to evaluate Rivers' pro potential for Dime recently and compared him to J.J. Redick -- NOT that he plays anything like Redick. I meant more that he'd be going from a situation where he was a singular star to one where he'd have to rein it in a bit in order to steadily become a better player. I see certain skills that Rivers is probably accustomed to exploiting that he won't be able to nearly as well on the next level, but on the whole, I see no indication that Rivers won't be able to acclimate himself. He has a terrific learning curve, loves basketball and desperately wants to succeed. I like his chances.

[UrinalCake]

Yeah, the assertion by Ford that Rivers was the exact same player in college as in high school is completely wrong. Maybe in China he was the same player, but he improved tremendously over the course of the season. His ability to beat his man off the dribble was always there but he developed better decision making, was able to see the floor better, and his defense got better. Maybe those things still aren't great, but he is coachable and he is willing to work on other parts of his game.

I do think his play may have regressed a little towards the end of the season, but that was also true for the team as a whole.

[Starter]

Interesting comments here from Coach K on Rivers. He defends him, but his praise isn't exactly effusive. http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...-rivers-future

“I hope he gets a demanding coach at the next level who pushes him to keep adding to his game. That’s how he’ll become great. If he reverts back to just doing the thing he does well, his chances lessen that he’s a good player in the NBA.”

He also noted that despite rumors to the contrary, he liked working with Rivers.

“He was very coachable and he’s a very good young man,” Krzyzewski said. “I like him. He was never a problem. He fit in well. He likes the game. He was a good kid to coach.”