2014 DBR Mock Draft

[brevity]

As there is no more low hanging fruit, OKC needs to think strategically about what they need rather than get the best player on the board.

And what they need is a real, steady PG who can a) distribute, b) create, and c) defend. Ennis should to be a smart, heady player at his sole year at Syracuse. He doesn't have the highest potential, but he is reliable.

The "Westbrook at PG" experiment is now over. We need to shift him to the 2, start Ennis at the 1, and have the talented Reggie Jackson come on as the sixth man. Derek Fisher retired, and now we need a player who can not only fill his shoes, but also move this team to the Finals.

Solid reasoning. Too bad Tyler Ennis was already drafted at #17.

OKC is still on the clock.

ETA: I sent a PM to flyingdutchdevil.

[theAlaskanBear]

Solid reasoning. Too bad Tyler Ennis was already drafted at #17.

OKC is still on the clock.

ETA: I sent a PM to flyingdutchdevil.

I think you ''misunderstand''...flyingdutchdevil was drafting a clone of Tyler Ennis. If the Dutch can clone muscles to make hamburgers, who is to say they cant clone muscles to make athletes? Besides, flyingdutchdevil is also a flying devil, maybe there is magic involved.

[pfrduke]

First page is updated through yesterday's results. For convenience, here's the current state of the first round:

First Round

1. Cleveland Cavaliers – BlueDevilBrowns - Andrew Wiggins, Kansas
2. Milwaukee Bucks - Turk - Joel Embiid, Kansas
3. Philadelphia 76ers - pfrduke - Jabari Parker, Duke
4. Orlando Magic - Duvall - Dante Exum, Australia
5. Utah Jazz - tommy - Noah Vonleh, Indiana
6. Boston Celtics - Henderson - Aaron Gordon, Arizona
7. Los Angeles Lakers - TheSchwartz - Marcus Smart, Okie State
8. Sacramento Kings – Ichabod Drain - Doug McDermott, Creighton
9. Charlotte Hornets - mattman91 - Julius Randle, Kentucky
10. Philadelphia 76ers - pfrduke - Zach LaVine, UCLA

11. Denver Nuggets - The Alaskan Bear - Jusuf Nurkic, Bosnia
12. Orlando Magic - Duvall - Dario Saric, Croatia
13. Minnesota Timberwolves – FerryFor50 - Rodney Hood, Duke
14. Phoenix Suns - LI Duke - Gary Harris, Michigan State
15. Atlanta Hawks - JasonEvans - Kyle Anderson, UCLA
16. Chicago Bulls - CDu - Nick Stauskas, Michigan
17. Boston Celtics - Henderson - Tyler Ennis, Syracuse
18. Phoenix Suns - LI Duke - Elfrid Payton, Louisiana Lafayette
19. Chicago Bulls - CDu - James Young, Kentucky
20. Toronto Raptors - NovaScotian - Adreian Payne, Michigan State
21. Oklahoma City Thunder - FlyingDutchDevil
22. Memphis Grizzlies - Roywhite
23. Utah Jazz - tommy
24. Charlotte Hornets - mattman91
25. Houston Rockets - nsdukefan
26. Miami Heat - Duke3517
27. Phoenix Suns - LI Duke
28. Los Angeles Clippers- Newton_14
29. Oklahoma City Thunder - FlyingDutchDevil
30. San Antonio Spurs - Brevity

[flyingdutchdevil]

The OKC front office has been fired on the spot for failing to understand how the draft works. Also, solid pick by the Celtics.

With that, OKC takes Glenn Robinson III. The Swiss Miss, Thabo Sefolosha, is not the answer at the 3. He's a good defender, but his offense is awful. We're rolling the dice on a high risk, high reward candidate who is crazy athletic and comes from great genes. He can defend, get to the rim, and is getting better at shooting. On top of that, he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective, which is perfect.

[brevity]

The OKC front office has been fired on the spot for failing to understand how the draft works. Also, solid pick by the Celtics.

With that, OKC takes Glenn Robinson III. The Swiss Miss, Thabo Sefolosha, is not the answer at the 3. He's a good defender, but his offense is awful. We're rolling the dice on a high risk, high reward candidate who is crazy athletic and comes from great genes. He can defend, get to the rim, and is getting better at shooting. On top of that, he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective, which is perfect.

Solid reasoning. Too bad Glenn Robinson was already drafted #1 in the 1994 NBA Draft.

Kidding. The draft continues with Memphis on the clock...

[roywhite]

Memphis Grizzlies 2013-14 Season: 50-32; lost in 7 games in 1st round to OKC

Strong Points: Strong inside game with Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph; PG Mike Conley has improved and provides 17 pts/ 6 assists

Areas for improvement: Young talent and scoring needed on the perimeter and wings; Tayshaun Prince and Mike Miller are both 34 yrs old at SF; could use a good back PG

The pick: Warren has shown good scoring ability; is a legitimate 6'8" or better in shoes and at 230# has enough strength to get some rebounds and score mid-range or going to the basket; 3-point shooting needs some work; seems to have decent defensive ability; demonstrated hard work by making big jump in conditioning from freshman year to soph year at NCSU; good basketball IQ and finds ways to score

[Li_Duke]

Memphis Grizzlies 2013-14 Season: 50-32; lost in 7 games in 1st round to OKC

Strong Points: Strong inside game with Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph; PG Mike Conley has improved and provides 17 pts/ 6 assists

Areas for improvement: Young talent and scoring needed on the perimeter and wings; Tayshaun Prince and Mike Miller are both 34 yrs old at SF; could use a good back PG

The pick: Warren has shown good scoring ability; is a legitimate 6'8" or better in shoes and at 230# has enough strength to get some rebounds and score mid-range or going to the basket; 3-point shooting needs some work; seems to have decent defensive ability; demonstrated hard work by making big jump in conditioning from freshman year to soph year at NCSU; good basketball IQ and finds ways to score

Darn, was really hoping he'd last all the way to 27.

[tommy]

We definitely need a guard, as after having selected Noah Vonleh in the lottery, we're still sitting here with just Trey Burke and Alec Burks in the backcourt. Our decision came down to Jordan Adams and PJ Hairston, though we thought a little about CJ Fair too, but lacked confidence in his shooting at the NBA level. Hairston has a lot of positives. He's an outstanding shooter who will have no trouble adjusting to the longer-distance NBA three-point line, and he has an NBA body that he knows how to use to get to the hoop. He has ability defensively when he puts his mind to it. Very good athlete, very physical -- just like we like em in the NBA.

Of course, there are issues with Hairston as well, well-documented ones that do cause us concern in terms of his personal discipline and other off court issues.

We really like Jordan Adams. He's 6'5", so we wish he were an inch or two taller, but he's got really long arms and a solid body. He's got very good skills too. He can shoot it, drive it, he moves very well without the ball. We definitely can see him coming off screens set by Enes Kanter and Derrick Favors, receiving crisp, well-timed passes from Trey Burke, and burying jumpshots. Adams has a really good motor, which helps make up for athleticism which is good but not elite. He is an excellent offensive rebounder for his position -- which we need -- and he likes taking the challenge at the defensive end. He is also only 19 years old, one of the youngest players in this draft, really, so there's plenty of time and opportunity for growth. Adams is a solid citizen, he'll be really good in the community, which is important to us, and overall we just feel like he's a better fit with what we're trying to build here than is PJ Hairston. UCLA's Jordan Adams it is.

[CDu]

In the spirit of awhom111, it's Nik Stauskas, not Nick Stauskas.

[JasonEvans]

With the 16th pick in the draft, the Bulls select Nik Stauskas, SG, Michigan. It is no secret what the Bulls lack. It is offense. Stauskas is one of the best shooters in the draft. But we are gambling that he is more than just the next Kyle Korver. He dramatically improved his game over the past year, adding the ability to score off the dribble. That devotion to improve along with surprisingly solid athletic measurements at the combine give us hope that he can do more than just catch and shoot.

The concerns with Stauskas are defense. But defense is one thing the Bulls know best, so Thibs will just have to figure a way to make it work.

Basically, we are thrilled that Stauskas fell here as we were actually trying to trade up to get him. Now we get a bonus pick at #19.

I want to address the decision by the Hawks to pass on Stauskas, because I sorta can't believe he fell to the Bulls either.

My draft philosophy is always to look to see who inexplicably slipped down the draft and then pounce on that guy. If you can get a top 10 player with a top 15 pick, you are doing well. There's always a GM or two who think they are smarter than everyone else who takes a player 5 picks too early (or, in the case of Isaiah Thomas, 15 picks too early). I try to pounce when that happens and the guy who should have gone earlier falls into my lap.

This happened to the Hawks a few years ago when Luol Deng, who everyone knew was a top 3 pick in the draft, somehow fell into the team's lap with the #6 pick in the 2004 draft (thanks to the Bulls overvaluing Ben Gordon). Somehow, Atlanta took Josh Childress instead. I almost lost my mind watching this happen. It was such an inexplicable decision that the team tried to justify it in the newspaper by saying that Childress had that valuable commodity "length" even though Luol Deng's arms are the very definition of length!

Anyway, I digress. As the Hawks GM, when the time came for my pick I was sure that Stauskas was the guy who had slipped (I've seen him as high as #8 or #9 in some mock drafts) and I was all set to take him, but I just could not shake the feeling that I might be getting something very similar to Korver. I may regret the decision, but I went with Anderson instead... even though I suspect I could have gotten Anderson 3-5 picks later in the draft. Can anyone drafting after me tell me if you would have taken Kyle Anderson instead of who you eventually picked? I really do love what Anderson brings to the table and think I may have a future all-star on my hands.

So, that's the end of the story. I knew the Bulls would jump all over Stauskas the moment I passed on him. I the real world, I probably would have traded back a few picks (perhaps to the Bulls #19 spot) and picked up some kind of additional asset (the #49 pick) to let them get Stauskas.

-Jason "seriously, is anyone as high on Kyle Anderson as I am?" Evans

[roywhite]

I want to address the decision by the Hawks to pass on Stauskas, because I sorta can't believe he fell to the Bulls either.

. Can anyone drafting after me tell me if you would have taken Kyle Anderson instead of who you eventually picked? I really do love what Anderson brings to the table and think I may have a future all-star on my hands.

So, that's the end of the story. I knew the Bulls would jump all over Stauskas the moment I passed on him. I the real world, I probably would have traded back a few picks (perhaps to the Bulls #19 spot) and picked up some kind of additional asset (the #49 pick) to let them get Stauskas.

-Jason "seriously, is anyone as high on Kyle Anderson as I am?" Evans

Yeah, sitting at #22, I would have taken Kyle Anderson, and was not surprised to see him go earlier. Of the 3 UCLA prospects that have gone already, I liked Anderson the best. LaVine is interesting and jumps out of the gym, but Anderson has such versatility and basketball smarts.

[Duke3517]

Love the Kyle Anderson pick, UCLA will miss him this year.

[Henderson]

I think the Kyle Anderson pick was solid. Offensively, he's so multi-dimensional it's scary. Primary question for both him and Stauskas is: Can you guard anyone in the NBA? We'll find out.

The Celts weren't going to take Anderson at #17 had he been available because of the possible defense problem. Brad Stevens has made defense a bit of a religion, and I as GM don't want to tick the guy off. We also thought Stauskas would be easier to make into a good defender, because he has underrated athleticism. Anderson just seems slow on defense. Maybe he can overcome that problem with positioning and long arms. We'll find that out too. The Celtics ended up taking Ennis at #17 but would have been happy if the Bulls had passed on Stauskas rather than taking him at #16.

[Li_Duke]

They have much of the same skill-set and weaknesses, and I think we'll see that his success will largely depend on how a team uses him.

[tbyers11]

Yeah, sitting at #22, I would have taken Kyle Anderson, and was not surprised to see him go earlier. Of the 3 UCLA prospects that have gone already, I liked Anderson the best. LaVine is interesting and jumps out of the gym, but Anderson has such versatility and basketball smarts.

I also like Anderson the best of the 3 UCLA prospects. I am totally not sold on Lavine. Sure he has great athleticism for a SG but so do a lot of other players who accomplished a lot more in college and never sniff the 1st round of the draft. He says he wants to play PG in the pros and that is a great selling point for him. However, in the 5-6 games I saw him play this year I didn't see him display a remotely good enough handle.

I freely admit that I haven't seen him enough to be totally sure in my evaluation of him. He could develop consistency and a handle in the pros and become a really good pro. However, the list of athletic prospects who underachieve in college that crash and burn in the pros is a lot longer than the ones that excel. I think he is getting a big bump because Russell Westbrook and Jrue Holiday didn't set the world on fire at UCLA but have developed into a superstar and a great player, respectively.

I know this has been debated a bit on the boards before, but since he went #10 in this mock and is pretty much in the top 20 in all mock drafts I was wondering the opinion of others. Am I missing something in him besides the obvious "potential".

[CDu]

I want to address the decision by the Hawks to pass on Stauskas, because I sorta can't believe he fell to the Bulls either.

My draft philosophy is always to look to see who inexplicably slipped down the draft and then pounce on that guy. If you can get a top 10 player with a top 15 pick, you are doing well. There's always a GM or two who think they are smarter than everyone else who takes a player 5 picks too early (or, in the case of Isaiah Thomas, 15 picks too early). I try to pounce when that happens and the guy who should have gone earlier falls into my lap.

This happened to the Hawks a few years ago when Luol Deng, who everyone knew was a top 3 pick in the draft, somehow fell into the team's lap with the #6 pick in the 2004 draft (thanks to the Bulls overvaluing Ben Gordon). Somehow, Atlanta took Josh Childress instead. I almost lost my mind watching this happen. It was such an inexplicable decision that the team tried to justify it in the newspaper by saying that Childress had that valuable commodity "length" even though Luol Deng's arms are the very definition of length!

Anyway, I digress. As the Hawks GM, when the time came for my pick I was sure that Stauskas was the guy who had slipped (I've seen him as high as #8 or #9 in some mock drafts) and I was all set to take him, but I just could not shake the feeling that I might be getting something very similar to Korver. I may regret the decision, but I went with Anderson instead... even though I suspect I could have gotten Anderson 3-5 picks later in the draft. Can anyone drafting after me tell me if you would have taken Kyle Anderson instead of who you eventually picked? I really do love what Anderson brings to the table and think I may have a future all-star on my hands.

So, that's the end of the story. I knew the Bulls would jump all over Stauskas the moment I passed on him. I the real world, I probably would have traded back a few picks (perhaps to the Bulls #19 spot) and picked up some kind of additional asset (the #49 pick) to let them get Stauskas.

-Jason "seriously, is anyone as high on Kyle Anderson as I am?" Evans

Don't second-guess yourself. Anderson was a very solid pick. Had you taken Stauskas, I would have taken either Anderson or Young.

[mattman91]

This was a tough pick, even tougher than the number 9 selection. We have decided to continue with the same strategy by selecting who we feel is the best available prospect, regardless of position. Since Kemba Walker is the only guaranteed PG on our roster at the start of the season, this pick makes perfect sense. Napier is a big game player, a proven winner, and has a great relationship already with Kemba, so we feel that he would be a valuable backup PG. We looked very hard at C.J Wilcox from Washington for his NBA 3 point range, but felt like he was too one dimensional the 24th pick. Jordan Clarkson was another candidate as a combo guard, but we felt like his sub-par shooting ability was a big knock, and the fact that he probably won't be a great NBA PG scared us away.

Julius Randle and Shabazz Napier should definitely generate a lot of BUZZ for Charlotte.

With a mid second round pick, we can possibly fix our three point shooting woes. We have been pretty lucky so far with top prospects falling in our lap. After all, whatever immediate needs we don't fill in the draft, there is always free agency.

[flyingdutchdevil]

This was a tough pick, even tougher than the number 9 selection. We have decided to continue with the same strategy by selecting who we feel is the best available prospect, regardless of position. Since Kemba Walker is the only guaranteed PG on our roster at the start of the season, this pick makes perfect sense. Napier is a big game player, a proven winner, and has a great relationship already with Kemba, so we feel that he would be a valuable backup PG. We looked very hard at C.J Wilcox from Washington for his NBA 3 point range, but felt like he was too one dimensional the 24th pick. Jordan Clarkson was another candidate as a combo guard, but we felt like his sub-par shooting ability was a big knock, and the fact that he probably won't be a great NBA PG scared us away.

Julius Randle and Shabazz Napier should definitely generate a lot of BUZZ for Charlotte.

With a mid second round pick, we can possibly fix our three point shooting woes. We have been pretty lucky so far with top prospects falling in our lap. After all, whatever immediate needs we don't fill in the draft, there is always free agency.

I'm sure that you can also get AJ Price from the Wolves at a cheap price and sign Marcus Williams to the veteran's minimum. Charlotte might as well have a monopoly on UCONN PGs.

[Turk]

I also like Anderson the best of the 3 UCLA prospects. I am totally not sold on Lavine. Sure he has great athleticism for a SG but so do a lot of other players who accomplished a lot more in college and never sniff the 1st round of the draft. He says he wants to play PG in the pros and that is a great selling point for him. However, in the 5-6 games I saw him play this year I didn't see him display a remotely good enough handle.

I freely admit that I haven't seen him enough to be totally sure in my evaluation of him. He could develop consistency and a handle in the pros and become a really good pro. However, the list of athletic prospects who underachieve in college that crash and burn in the pros is a lot longer than the ones that excel. I think he is getting a big bump because Russell Westbrook and Jrue Holiday didn't set the world on fire at UCLA but have developed into a superstar and a great player, respectively.

I know this has been debated a bit on the boards before, but since he went #10 in this mock and is pretty much in the top 20 in all mock drafts I was wondering the opinion of others. Am I missing something in him besides the obvious "potential".

With all due respect to our friend pfrduke, I didn't like Lavine at the #10 to the Sixers in the mock. I think that's way too high for him, and pairing him with MCW will result in a pair of guards that will produce turnover-fests with dreadful percentages despite their athleticism. I think Stauskas or maybe Gary Harris are better matches for what the Sixers need if they do get Jabari at #3.

Perhaps Westbrook and Holiday didn't set the world on fire at UCLA because of Ben Howland's coaching style threw a wet blanket on them. (huh? someone call the Metaphor Police - violations in progress!)

My opinion is that you can draft "potential" for the front line; offensively limited athletic big men can still fill a role blocking shots, rebounding, and dunking putbacks / fast break alley oops. That list is pretty long. Guards and wing players need to have actual basketball skills and/or IQ to be established starters or even all-stars.

[Duke3517]

This was a tough pick, even tougher than the number 9 selection. We have decided to continue with the same strategy by selecting who we feel is the best available prospect, regardless of position. Since Kemba Walker is the only guaranteed PG on our roster at the start of the season, this pick makes perfect sense. Napier is a big game player, a proven winner, and has a great relationship already with Kemba, so we feel that he would be a valuable backup PG. We looked very hard at C.J Wilcox from Washington for his NBA 3 point range, but felt like he was too one dimensional the 24th pick. Jordan Clarkson was another candidate as a combo guard, but we felt like his sub-par shooting ability was a big knock, and the fact that he probably won't be a great NBA PG scared us away.

Julius Randle and Shabazz Napier should definitely generate a lot of BUZZ for Charlotte.

With a mid second round pick, we can possibly fix our three point shooting woes. We have been pretty lucky so far with top prospects falling in our lap. After all, whatever immediate needs we don't fill in the draft, there is always free agency.

Andre Dawkins?