Draft Grades 2008

In the spirit of NBA Draft coverage everywhere, I am pleased to unveil our first-ever set of draft grades for the 2008 NBA Draft. Some might say that it is pointless to dole out marks when there is a great deal of uncertainty as to how good each prospect will be. To that, I respond that our business here is projection, and I at least (although not wanting to speak for Hugh) have a big enough ego to think that I am right. Furthermore, we can already evaluate to some extent how well each team drafted for their present and future needs.

Atlanta Hawks:
Grade: N/A
Picks: none

Boston Celtics:
Grade: B
Picks: J.R. Giddens, Bill Walker, Semih Erden

No home runs for the Celtics with the last pick in Round 1, but they picked up some nice athletic talent in Giddens and Walker. I'm not high on Giddens with a first-round pick, but the Celtics made up for it by grabbing Walker in the second-round, who has the potential to be very good if he can stay healthy. Walker is a mid to late first-round pick on talent, and thus is a steal at 47.

Charlotte Bobcats:
Grade: D
Picks: D.J. Augustin, Alexis Ajinca, Kyle Weaver

Yeah a harsh grade but I'm not a fan of the way they spent their picks. After all, when Hugh originally selected Augustin for the Bobcats in our mock draft, it was because he forgot that they already have a 23 year old talented point guard. Apparently, so did Michael Jordan. Will Augustin be better than Felton? Certainly not right away, and Felton is still young enough to get better himself (although it should be noted he has not really improved since his rookie year). Looking at their college numbers, Augustin scored more, but Felton was the better passer, the better rebounder, and also got more steals. The Bobcats have to worry that they just drafted a backup PG with the #9 pick, considering that they don't really need a replacement point. The Ajinca pick is a flyer, but it should be noted that he failed to dominate an inferior European league, so I am not optimistic about his future.

Chicago Bulls:
Grade: A-
Picks: Derrick Rose, Omer Asik

I'd give an A, but I continue to hold onto the idea that Beasley is the superior prospect to Rose. I like Rose very much, but we've heard ad nauseam about his superior athleticism without questioning what skills that will translate into. Indications are that he is a good but not great passer meaning he will top off at about 8 assists per game. To be a true franchise superstar, he will have to develop a jump shot and turn into a 25+ points per game scorer. It is not out of the question, but not a lock either as his scoring abilities are still somewhat unproven. I have said it before, but he seems most likely to develop into a 20 ppg, 8 apg player which would make him an All-Star but not a superstar.
As for the Asik pick, I love it. According to John Hollinger, Asik projects to average 12.2 points and 13.5 rebounds per 40, with a PER of 15.23. Although he won't come over for a few years, he ought to be a useful role player when he does.

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Grade: B
Picks: J.J. Hickson, Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun

Overall, a solid draft for the Cavs. J.J. Hickson is a player with upside at #19, and it's never a bad idea to mine the roster of a dominant NCAA team like Kansas. In particular, Darnell Jackson is a potential 2nd-round steal with a very nice Hollinger projection.

Dallas Mavericks:
Grade: C
Picks: Shan Foster

I'm not a big fan of Foster, but honestly, with only the #51 pick in the draft, you can't expect to get much. Historically, only players drafted in the first half of the second round have made an impact, apart from a few foreign unknowns like Manu Ginobili.

Denver Nuggets:
Grade: D
Picks: Sonny Weems

Perhaps a D is harsh when they only made one pick, yet there's nothing in Weems' college numbers to indicate that he'll be useful, and in my opinion, a much more intriguing shooting guard in Chris Douglas-Roberts was still on the board.

Detroit Pistons:
Grade: B-
Picks: Walter Sharpe, Trent Plaisted, Deron Washington

I can't fault the Pistons too much for rolling the dice with Sharpe, considering it was a 2nd-round pick, but in a fairly deep draft, there were still some players left on the board who I think will ultimately make more of an impact. Plaisted seems like a stiff big man, and Washington will probably never make the team.

Golden State Warriors:
Grade: A-
Picks: Anthony Randolph, Richard Hendrix

If I had to guess, I'd say that Randolph won't live up to his potential, but despite his inefficiency, it was still impressive that he played a prominent role in scoring and rebounding as a freshman. At #14, the Warriors were rightfully willing to take the risk. They get an A- from me for managing to get Hendrix late in the second round - honestly, he could be as good as Marreese Speights or Darrell Arthur, either of whom the Warriors could have taken instead of Randolph, and is thus a tremendous value pick at #49.

Houston Rockets:
Grade: A-
Picks: Donte Greene, Joey Dorsey, Maarty Leunen

I definitely like the picks they got late. Greene, as a young, jump-shooting forward, has the potential to be quite good, and carries almost no risk with a late first-round pick. Dorsey's contributions in the NBA will be limited due to his lack of offense, but I am high on him as a second-rounder, in part because of GM Daryl Morey's quite convincing rationale. Leunen is a solid late second-round prospect who was incredibly efficient at Oregon. All in all, the Rockets did a nice job of bolstering their already impressive depth.

Indiana Pacers:
Grade: C+
Picks: Brandon Rush, Roy Hibbert

Unlike Chad Ford, I am not a big fan of the Pacers' draft-day moves. The TJ Ford trade is a very good one, yet they then proceeded to trade away a potential All-Star in Jerryd Bayless for two role players (Rush and Jarrett Jack). Yes, a Ford-Bayless backcourt might have been too small on defense, but the Pacers will nonetheless regret this trade if Bayless develops into a 20 ppg scorer in 3-4 years, which he is certainly capable of doing. Rush is a more valuable piece on a better team, where he could spread the floor coming off the bench. Hibbert is a developed player, and has a nice Hollinger projection, but his lack of speed and conditioning will likely consign him to a career off the bench.

Los Angeles Clippers:
Grade: C+
Picks: Eric Gordon, DeAndre Jordan, Mike Taylor

Honestly, it'd be a lower grade if they hadn't stolen DeAndre Jordan in Round 2. Eric Gordon is so one-dimensional that I wonder if he'll be much more than a spot-up shooter at the NBA level. Not to focus too much on Jerryd Bayless, but he seems to me the more intriguing talent, and although not a true point, could certainly play the position. If the Clippers put Gordon at point (and they currently have no one else), their offense will truly struggle.
It is quite amazing that NBA teams have wised up on talented, yet raw center prospects. It is becoming more and more of a guard's league and it is worth reminding that many of the glut of centers who fell into the late first and early second rounds would have been lottery picks five years ago. Nonetheless, it seems to me that teams got too scared of Jordan, who is still very young and showed some talent as a freshman. I had compared him to Sam Dalembert in our mock draft and the comparison holds even better now since Dalembert fell to the end of the first round yet wound up being a useful player.
As for Mike Taylor, he makes a nice story, but he was hardly dominant in the NBDL (PER of 16.3) and his college numbers the year before were pretty awful.

Los Angeles Lakers:
Grade: C
Picks: Joe Crawford

This draft was a non-factor for the Lakers, similar to the Mavericks.

Memphis Grizzlies:
Grade: B-
Picks: O.J. Mayo, Darrell Arthur

Time will tell, but although I think the Grizzlies wound up with two good players in Mayo and Arthur, I'm not sure that it was worth giving up Kevin Love to get Mayo. Mayo might have more upside, but I think Love will at the least be better right away (and quite possibly better in the long-term). Moreover, they gave up Mike Miller, who already may be as good an offensive player as Mayo will be. The Grizzlies get some points for stealing Arthur late in the first, but the Mayo-Love trade looks questionable at the moment.

Miami Heat:
Grade: A
Picks: Michael Beasley, Mario Chalmers

The Heat not only picked up the most talented player in the draft in Beasley, but landed a mid-first round talent in Chalmers in the second. It's hard to imagine that a team that was as athletically dominant in the NCAA as Kansas won't produce any good pros, and I would say that Chalmers and Arthur are the best bets in this regard.

Milwaukee Bucks:
Grade: C
Picks: Joe Alexander, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute

I like Alexander, but the Bucks have run into the same problem as the Bobcats. They just picked up a player who is going to be their backup SF. I like this a little better for the Bucks, since first, I think Alexander is more promising than Augustin, and although Jefferson is better than Felton, he is also a lot older, so perhaps as Jefferson starts to decline, Alexander will be hitting his prime, ready to claim the starting spot. Mbah a Moute will have to be a damn good defender, because he never improved offensively at UCLA, and looked nothing short of useless when I saw him in the NCAA Tournament.

Minnesota Timberwolves:
Grade: A
Picks: Kevin Love, Nikola Pekovic

They may have given away Garnett, but you have to love the Wolves' haul in this draft, although their frontcourt rotation may be a bit overloaded now with Love, Jefferson, and Pekovic (if Pekovic comes over any time soon). The team will be much improved in the short term if Love and Miller can make an immediate impact, and according to Hollinger, Pekovic may be an even better prospect than Love, projecting to average 18.3 points and 12.0 rebounds per 40, with a PER of 17.09 if he played next year. I suspect that Pekovic is not actually that good, as he had very low steal and block totals, and also improved vastly from the year before, but by the time he gets out of his European contract, he ought to make a big splash in the NBA.

New Jersey Nets:
Grade: A-
Picks: Brook Lopez, Ryan Anderson, Chris Douglas-Roberts

I don't think the Nets have any future stars here, but they got strong value at each pick, getting the best big man on the board at #10, a highly productive scoring forward at #21, and a first-team All-American in the second round. A great draft that will bolster their depth and make their roster more enticing for LeBron 2010.

New Orleans Hornets:
Grade: A+
Picks: none

They didn't have any picks, but they did sign Illini alum Shaun Pruitt to a summer league contract!

New York Knicks:
Grade: A-
Picks: Danilo Gallinari

A common misunderstanding in ESPN's draft coverage, and of course one used as evidence in Dick Vitale's annual anti-foreigner rant, was that Gallinari is not ready to play in the NBA and was being drafted on potential only. This is so completely wrong that I was forced to yell helplessly at my TV, even knowing that no one could hear me. As John Hollinger has pointed out, translating stats from the Euroleague is actually more accurate than translating NCAA statistics. Gallinari is not an Alexis Ajinca, who played in a lower-level European league and didn't get much playing time. Despite being just 19, he played 31.6 minutes per game in the second-best league in the world, averaging 14.9 points per game. He posted a quite respectable PER of 19.6. If anything, he is more ready to contribute right away than the more touted NCAA freshmen, who did not spend last year playing against professionals, as Gallinari did. Hollinger projects that his rookie PER will be 13.21, which would be quite promising for a 20 year old player. He likely is not a future star, but despite the mislabeling by ESPN commentators who know nothing about the Euroleague, is a player who ought to be able to make an immediate impact and should be an above-average NBA starter in 3 years. Amen to Chad Ford, who I just noticed said pretty much exactly the same things as I just did in his draft grading.

Orlando Magic:
Grade: C
Picks: Courtney Lee

An OK pick, but I don't see a lot of evidence that Lee is anything more than a solid scoring guard who will come off the bench.

Philadelphia 76ers:
Grade: B
Picks: Marreese Speights

I have some qualms about Speights, but his statistics are overwhelming. My concerns are why he only played 24 minutes a game at Florida, and from what I've heard, it is related to his lack of conditioning and poor work ethic, neither of which are good signs. I fear that he will turn into a Mike Sweetney or Ike Diogu in the NBA, players who are very productive, but get little playing time due to other flaws in their games.

Phoenix Suns:
Grade: D
Picks: Robin Lopez, Goran Dragic

It seems to me that a collapse from the Suns is imminent. Maybe not this year, but it could be the year after. Their title window has passed and Nash's productivity will soon begin to decline. Picking #15, they're not going to solve all their problems, but they should at least have gone for a guy who has the upside to be a starter. Robin Lopez's upside is as an energy guy off the bench. I covered my dislike of selecting Robin with a mid-first round pick in our mock draft, so I won't go into it too much more except to say that the Suns really whiffed on this pick.

Portland Trail Blazers:
Grade: A
Picks: Jerryd Bayless, Nicolas Batum

I give the Blazers an A because although I am far from a fan of Batum, I am amazed that the Blazers managed to walk out of the draft with a potential 20+ ppg scorer in Bayless despite holding the #13 pick. Perhaps there is a non-arbitrary reason that Bayless slipped, in which case this may not be as much of a steal as I think. But I have not heard any newfound negatives against him, and I continue to think that he was one of the top 5 players in this draft. More importantly, the Blazers are absolutely stacked with Rudy Fernandez coming over from Europe and Greg Oden coming back from injury to join Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. Their bench is loaded with young talent like Bayless, Batum, Travis Outlaw, Martell Webster, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye, and Ike Diogu. Best of all with Raef LaFrentz and Steve Francis soon to come off the books, the Blazers may have the cap room to pursue a Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, or dare I say, a LeBron, in 2 years. This team may very well be the dynasty of the 2010s if they play their cards right (and if Oden and Fernandez are as good as expected).

Sacramento Kings
Grade: D
Picks: Jason Thompson, Sean Singletary, Patrick Ewing Jr.

I don't want to beat up on Jason Thompson too much but although his numbers are very good, the history of big men from small conferences isn't (unless they were totally dominant, a la David Robinson). Maybe he'll be a solid bench player, but if the Kings wanted him so badly, they should have traded down where they still could have gotten him and some other pieces of value. Their second-round picks also are not the most inspiring, especially Ewing Jr., whose selection makes a nice story, but this is a guy who played four years and never started in college. A prospect who already was an energy guy off the bench likely won't even be able to be that at the pro level.

San Antonio Spurs
Grade: B
Picks: George Hill, Malik Hairston, James Gist

You can criticize the Spurs for taking Hill with Mario Chalmers still on the board, but I still love them for rolling the dice with this pick. I want to see what George Hill can do in the NBA if he gets the chance, and now I'm going to get it.

Seattle Supersonics
Grade: C+
Picks: Russell Westbrook, Serge Ibaka, DJ White, DeVon Hardin

I think the Sonics have had the right idea with their organization - letting Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis go while stockpiling young talent for the Kevin Durant era. Yet apart from the obvious pick of Durant, I haven't been that big a fan of Sam Presti's draft choices. He's now used top 5 picks the last two years on Jeff Green and Westbrook, both of whom, in my mind, are most likely to be role players in the NBA. Green still has time to improve, but his rookie performance was not all that encouraging (single-digit PER). They've added more young, solid parts to their team, so I can't fault them entirely, but I don't see the #2 to Durant's #1 on their roster.

Toronto Raptors:
Grade: C
Picks: Nathan Jawai

It's hard to say, but I'm guessing that Jawai won't really pan out. He averaged about 18 points and 9 rebounds a game in the NBL, an Australian basketball league. From my brief visit to the NBL website, it does look like a legitimate league with some former NCAA stars, but it being a lower level you would hope that he would be more dominant. For comparison, Julius Hodge, a former first-round pick who never made it in the NBA averaged 24 points, 9 rebounds, and 6 assists per game in the NBL this year. Jawai was one of the better players in the league (8th in efficiency per 40), but this may not be enough.

Utah Jazz:
Grade: B
Picks: Kosta Koufos, Ante Tomic, Tadija Dragicevic

A solid, if unspectacular draft for the Jazz. Koufos is another example of a player who would have gone 15 spots higher five years ago and been a disappointment - at #23, he is a nice addition to the team. From what I've read about Tomic, he is a good second-round prospect, and Dragicevic, as the Adriatic League MVP, may have some potential, although his statistics were good, but not dominating.

Washington Wizards:
Grade: C-
Picks: JaVale McGee

I can't believe that I'm in this position, but I think DeAndre Jordan would have been a better pick here. A month ago, I was ready to write incendiary posts about how Jordan was an obvious bust. Yet if anything, McGee seems to be a more obvious bust. I think Jordan, if given the chance, will be a solid bench center. McGee is not only a year older than Jordan but has failed to make an impact at a lesser level of play. He is a decent shot-blocker, but historically, you would like a shot-blocker who averages 1 or more blocks per personal foul, and McGee is not at that level. At least the Wizards get some upside with this pick, although I doubt McGee reaches it.

NBA MOCK DRAFT 2008

Welcome to our 2008 NBA Mock Draft.

A couple comments should be made before we get started. Our selections are based on what Jeremiah and I believe teams should do, not what they will do. This mock draft is about evaluating talent and deciding how each team should approach improving their roster based on what's available. Jeremiah and I alternate picks, with myself assigned to the odd ones and Jeremiah the even. It's not a competition, merely a way to make it interactive for both of us and allow multiple approaches to drafting (though our methods are rather similar in most circumstances). We also conducted this draft before the debauchery of ESPN's own duo mock draft with Bill Simmons and Chad Ford, but because we are lazy it just took us several days to type up our comments and post it. Finally, constructive criticism and questions are greatly appreciated.

Without further ado... I am on the clock...
1.) Chicago Bulls: Michael Beasley
H: I know the media has been hyping Rose for several weeks now but Beasley's numbers are simply unreal. He can score (30.9 pts/40), get to the line (10 FTA/40), and rebound (14.6 r/40) better than any player in this draft while maintaining efficient percentages (53.2/77.4/37.9). He also fills the Bulls' long need for an interior scorer and with T.J. Ford soon to be on the trading market there are other ways to address Kirk Hinrich's sudden inability to play basketball.
J: Worst case, he puts up stats but isn't a championship-type player. Sure, that would be disappointing, but Rose is no lock to be a franchise player either.

2.) Miami Heat: Derrick Rose
J: Easy pick here. The Heat want Rose, and they get him in our mock draft. I will say that I see him more as a star than a superstar. It's hard for me to see him averaging 10+ assists per game, a la Deron Williams or Chris Paul, nor do I see him averaging 25+ points, like I believe Beasley is capable of doing. That's still a lot of room for him to be very good, and I believe he will develop into a more consistent version of Baron Davis.

3.) Minnesota Timberwolves: Jerryd Bayless
H: I know the Timberwolves are big fans of O.J. Mayo and while I certainly wouldn't scoff at picking him here, I'm a bigger fan of Bayless. I have much more faith in his ability to play PG than Mayo and I like the idea of a dual PG system with him and Foye on the floor at the same time. Bayless also has better penetrating ability than Mayo, getting to the line 3.4 more times per 40 while Mayo settled for 3's a larger percentage of the time.

4.) Seattle Supersonics: Kevin Love
J: If you look closely at the Kevin Love bandwagon, you can see me in the driver's seat, whip outstretched (think horses). He gets a decent number of blocks, some steals, and a whole lot of rebounds, suggesting that he is a better athlete than we are led to believe or he is crafty enough to make up for it. He is a very well-rounded player, who lest we forget, is not necessarily a finished product. He has plenty of time to drop 25 pounds and work on his explosiveness. Don't rule out All-Star berths in his future.
H: I like this pick a lot given that Bayless is off the board and that having two alpha-dog scorers like Durant and Mayo on the floor at the same time might not gel.

5.) Memphis Grizzlies: O.J. Mayo
H: The Grizzlies need a big man but Jeremiah kindly reminded me that I shouldn't reach for a team need when it comes at the cost of crossing a tier. Mayo, Bayless, and Love consist of what I would consider my second tier of players available and reaching for Lopez would be foolish with Mayo still available. Mayo is a dynamic scorer who plays great defense and will hopefully be a part of a strong backcourt with whomever the Grizzlies eventually choose to be their PG of the future.

6.) New York Knicks: Danilo Gallinari
J: Gallinari is fairly young and posted a 19.3 PER in the Euroleague this season. Historically, this is a high enough mark to suggest that he will be able to play in the NBA right away with a PER in the 11-13 range. At worst, a solid contributor, and at best, a great piece in Mike D'Antoni's offense who is young enough to get a lot better.
H: I agree with Jeremiah that Gallinari isn't necessarily the next best player available, but he brings a different atmosphere with him to the Knicks and this pick is by no means a reach. I think this pick would mark a strong effort to start rebuilding a franchise that has gotten so off-course and begin moving in a new direction.

7.) Los Angeles Clippers: Russell Westbrook
H: I'm not a big fan of Westbrook, but the Clippers are losing seven players this off-season and they'll still have a viable starter at each position except at PG. Westbrook will probably take a few years to develop as he settles into his new role (his PG/SG role was consistently morphing while at UCLA) but the franchise appears to be in no hurry to make a playoff run.
J: It's scary to draft Westbrook this high, since he won't be able to contribute much offensively as a rookie, but he does have the frame and athleticism to get better. A gamble, but worst-case is a defensive guard off the bench.

8.) Milwaukee Bucks: Joe Alexander
J: I'm bolstered by Hollinger's strong projection behind this pick. Then again, his system liked Tyrus Thomas too, who as Chad Ford points out, is another athletic, high-energy player who looks lost on the basketball court. Nonetheless I like Alexander. He is an 'upside pick', but, anecdotally, he has the work ethic to make the most of it.
H: I oscillate everyday between really liking this guy and not understanding his appeal. Either way I think this spot accurately represents his skill level relative to what's available.

9.) Charlotte Bobcats: Eric Gordon
H: I honestly don't know what I was doing with this pick. I don't like Felton but drafting Augustin just cause he apparently won't fit Larry Brown's system, as suggested by some, just seems wasteful. This team has gone nowhere in its four years and seem bent on establishing themselves as the Tampa Bay Devil Rays (they're still the Devil Rays in my mind no matter what management says) of the NBA. Gordon was falling and I just swooped in and grabbed in.
J: I still don't know what to think about Gordon. His rebound and assist totals are scarily low, and you can't trust his shooting numbers because of his late-season, injury-related slump. He could be a very good, if one-dimensional, scorer but also a flat out bust.

10.) New Jersey Nets: Brook Lopez
J: I see Lopez as a nice big man off the bench. He has a solid Hollinger projection, and is big and skilled. He shoots a low percentage but will be able to get his jump shots off with impunity thanks to his height. Not a lot of upside, but seems like a pretty safe bet to make a contribution.

11.) Indiana Pacers: Anthony Randolph
H: The third pick I don't enjoy making. I'm not a big fan of Randolph but the Pacers are set for the next four years at PG with Tinsley, ruling out Augustin. The main justification for taking Randolph is the Pacers' lack of a defined need and the fact they are just starting to rebuild and Randolph is a long-term project. At 18 he's the youngest player in the draft and though Hollinger has made special note of Randolph's potential shortcomings the Pacers might as well take the gamble given that they don't really have anything to lose.
J: Randolph was quite inefficient this season but is at least 18 and athletic. Gerald Wallace is an example of a similar player who after his freshman season was if anything, even rawer than Randolph at the same age, yet has gone on to be a pretty good player in the NBA.

12.) Sacramento Kings: D.J. Augustin
J: Augustin's pure point rating is more solid than spectacular (in truth, I prefer Ty Lawson, but he withdrew), and thus I see him more as a very good backup point who will score and distribute. For the Kings, that's enough to take the starting job.
H: This ordering worked out perfect for the Kings who just dealt Mike Bibby and immediately get a chance to begin finding his replacement.

13.) Portland Trailblazers: Mario Chalmers
H: I have been salivating over Chalmers' numbers for sometime now and John Hollinger corroborated my admiration of Chalmers with his PER regression study. Chalmers is undersized at 6'1" but a tremendous defender for his stature and a PG whose distributing ability continues to improve as his turnovers/40 numbers have plummeted each year (4.1/3.1/2.5). He plays off the ball well too, nailing over 45% of his 3pt FG attempts last year and this'll allow Brandon Roy to remain as a primary ball-handler on the offensive end. This pick would also allow the Trailblazers to move Steve Blake to the bench where he rightfully belongs.

14.) Golden State Warriors: Marreese Speights
J: Speights is an underrated scorer and rebounder. I perhaps should have taken Darrell Arthur here as Speights will need to improve his conditioning to fit in with Golden State (he only played about 25 minutes a game at Florida) but what can I say, I've been enamored with Speights ever since he posted a PER of 41 in limited minutes as a freshman. A classic 20-10 college power forward.
H: A reach in some people's minds but I really think people are underrating his numbers. I like Speights's potential and only qualm with him is the horrific spelling of his first name.

15.) Phoenix Suns: Brandon Rush
H: At 22 Rush may have limited upside but the Suns are in a win now mentality and Rush fits their system perfectly as a big wing who can shoot from range and also is a top-notch defender. He'll be there Raja Bell 2.0 presuming they don't sell this pick, which is always a possibility.

16.) Philadelphia 76ers: Darrell Arthur
J: I have to admit, I was not big on Arthur but his strong Hollinger projection has gone a long way to soothe some of my fears. Additionally, he was one of the key players on an absolutely loaded Kansas team, and it seems a good bet that on a team that was so dominant, there are bound to be some solid pros. The concern is his motor, but he would solidify Philadelphia's frontcourt rotation.
H: What I said for Speights goes for Arthur too. I think he'll fit nicely alongside Dalembert or as a role player off the bench.

17.) Toronto Raptors: Kosta Koufos
H: Koufos suits the Raptors' deficiency at the 5 spot and makes Radoslav Nesterovic and his $8 million expiring contract more expendable. I prefer Koufos over some of the other mid-late 1st round centers like DeAndre Jordan, Robin Lopez, and JaVale McGee because of his ability to get a decent number of blocks per 40 (2.8) without drawing too many fouls (3.3) and more importantly turned the ball over only 2.3 times per 40 while handling the rock far more often than all of the players mentioned above.

18.) Washington Wizards: DeAndre Jordan
J: I've never been a fan of Jordan, as he fits the stereotype of the classic bust center (then again, so did Andrew Bynum). Yet with his stock falling, it's worth mentioning that a similarly raw and young center, Sam Dalembert, turned out to be a useful player for Philadelphia after a few years. I don't see Jordan as a future star but at #18, he is good value.

19.) Cleveland Cavaliers: Chris Douglas-Roberts
H: The Cavs are really in need of better players at any position and ones who don't mimic the skill sets of others (ie: Pavlovic and Szczerbiak, Varajao and Wallace). CDR provides a scoring threat off the bench that isn't based around sitting and waiting for a teammate to draw a double-team and then dish them the ball. CDR will hopefully providing a slashing and driving attack that'll diversify the Cavs' offensive threat and ease the load on Lebron.
J: Don't forget that Chris Douglas-Roberts has apparently never lost a game of one-on-one. His numbers compare to a litany of bench shooting guards, but watching him play, he's anything but generic. Don't rule out the possibility that his unorthodox scoring abilities will serve him very well with the right team.

20.) Denver Nuggets: Alexis Ajinca
J: Okay I admit that I drafted Ajinca because I didn't really see any pressing needs for the Nuggets. Consider it my 'what the hell' pick. From what I've read about Ajinca, and after seeing Chad Ford's surprising condemnation of him, he probably isn't worth drafting this high.
H: I just started laughing when I saw this pick because I immediately knew Jeremiah's motives and concurred with them.

21.) New Jersey Nets: Richard Hendrix
H: This pick along with the 10th selection give the Nets two shots at strengthening their frontline. I reached for Hendrix over the other big men projected to go in the latter half of the first round but I feel it's justified. He mounted a grueling scoring record at 22.3 pts/40 while shooting 60% from the field. He rebounds at a strong rate (12.7), gets a decent number of blocks relative to fouls (2.5/3.7), doesn't turn the ball over (2.2), and grabs a surprising number of steals given his position (2.5). Overall, he's much more well-rounded than the any of the alternatives. Also props to Jeremiah for finding this sleeper, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to pick him though I'm sure Jeremiah would've preferred to, hehe.
J: Richard Hendrix is my boy! Unfortunately, he had a surprisingly low projected PER or I might have recommended that he go higher. It does seem odd to me that scouts are not higher on a player who is both athletic and productive, so this may be a sign that they know something I don't.

22.) Orlando Magic: Robin Lopez
J: Neither of the Lopez twins really get me excited, but Robin even less so. Supposedly he'll be an energy guy, but I feel that GMs are forgetting that players who were stars in college become energy guys in the pros and players who were energy guys in college head overseas in three years. The comparison to Joakim Noah is thus misguided, because Noah was a dominant and far more productive college player. Nonetheless, he's one of the best big men remaining at the board at this point. Also, I forgot about Roy Hibbert.
H: If you're noticing a big men trend, you're not the only one. This pick marks the 6th frontcourt player in the last seven picks, and the trend's not gonna stop yet.

23.) Utah Jazz. Roy Hibbert
H: I was initially looking in other directions (a better backup for Deron Williams would be nice) but reconsidered when I realized that Jarron Collins is the first man off the bench backing up Mehmet Okur. Hibbert hasn't always been the most aggressive player and he's pretty much already reached his peak, but the Jazz won't be demanding a whole lot from this selection. Hibbert should easily provide the defense and finishing ability (two of his best traits) the Jazz need from a big man off the bench.

24.) Seattle Supersonics: Donte Greene
J: Young enough to get better, but was a very inefficient player at Syracuse. Nonetheless, he should be able to create his own shot in the NBA, being a tall jump-shooter, and that's a first-round type of skill.
H: I really believe he's overrated given his numbers and I think his falling to the Sonics sufficiently illustrates our assessment of his skill set.

25.) Houston Rockets: Jason Thompson
H: They need a big guy to backup Yao, Jason Thompson's a big guy. He's also very good at rebounding.

26.) San Antonio Spurs: J.J. Hickson
J: Hickson's numbers are pretty good for a freshman, yet there is a certain stigma attached to him for playing on an awful team. I don't want to rely too much on team success, but it is a factor, and Hickson couldn't even bring NC State to a .500 level. Still, he's got some upside and would be a nice pick this late in the first round.

27.) New Orleans Hornets: JaVale McGee
H: Take word for word what I said about the Rockets' pick of Thompson, except replace "Yao" with "Chandler" and "rebounding" with "shot blocking".
J: The thing is, if centers aren't dominant in college, they usually don't amount to much in the NBA, where there are many more players who are their size. And it's worse if they're in a small conference. A Jason Thompson has fantastic numbers, but history says that it doesn't mean much playing for Rider. McGee played for Nevada, which is a little higher up the food chain, but was anything but dominant. A scary proposition when he couldn't really do much in a non-power conference.

28.) Memphis Grizzlies: Ryan Anderson
J: A couple years ago, I would have been all over Ryan Anderson as a sleeper, as he was a very productive scorer and rebounder at Cal. However, time has taught me that productivity does not always translate to NBA success (although lack of productivity generally translates to NBA failure), and in the case of Anderson, his woefully low steal and block totals imply that he doesn't have the athleticism to score at the same rates in the pros. Nonetheless, he's a nice pick at #28. Being tall and a very good shooter, he ought to be able to play a role off the bench.


29.) Detroit Pistons: Bill Walker
H: The forgotten sidekick of Michael Beasley. I actually think he's good enough to warrant a pick 6-7 slots higher but given the lack of star talent in this draft I felt team needs should play a larger role than small differences in skills. I'm a little perturbed by his complete lack of outside shooting but he rebounds very well for his size and is a very efficient and potent scorer inside the arc.
J: Walker is the kind of player who could be a huge steal in the late first or early second round. His numbers aren't overwhelming, but he's had a lot of injury problems and has shown some talent. It's not out of the question that he could turn out to be very good, although he would be a big risk with a higher pick, which makes him great for Detroit at 29.

30.) Boston Celtics: George Hill
J: Yeah, George Hill is a 6'2" shooting guard from a small conference. History has not been kind to these types of players. But goddamn, averaging 21.5 points, 6.8 rebounds, and 4.3 assists while shooting 45% from 3 is worth some major props. He showcased a versatile and flat-out dominant game at IUPUI, and apart from scoring 30 plus points a night, did everything possible to earn a long look at the end of the first round. Thanks to Hugh for the suggestion to take him here.
H: My big sleeper of the 2008 draft. Throughout the season I'll be routing heavily for Hill and Chalmers to validate my praise for them.

Three for One Scouting Report: Mayo, Bayless, and Gordon

In my mind, I always lump O.J. Mayo, Jerryd Bayless, and Eric Gordon together. All are shooting guards, although Mayo and Bayless lay claims to playing the point. All were 20+ point per game scorers as freshmen, with developed perimeter games. Bayless and Gordon also were great at getting to the foul line. All show a lack of versatility that could indicate their overratedness as prospects.

First, the numbers (pace-adjusted, per 40 statistics taken from draftexpress.com):

Bayless: 22.7 pts, 3.1 rbs, 4.6 asts, 40.7% 3P, 1.1 stls, 8.5 FTA, -0.85 PPR
Mayo: 22.8 pts, 5.0 rbs, 3.6 asts, 40.9% 3P, 1.7 stls, 5.1 FTA, -3.71 PPR
Gordon: 24.0 pts, 3.7 rbs, 2.8 asts, 33.7% 3P, 1.5 stls, 9.9 FTA, -5.72 PPR

Normally, I would say that in particular, Gordon's lack of versatility kills him as a prospect. His and Bayless' low rates of rebounding are usually signs that they are players whose scoring gifts will not translate to the NBA. However, it is very rare for short guards like Bayless and Gordon to get to the foul line so often, and guards who got to the line more often than 8.0 FTA per 40 in college are a fairly successful group. This includes Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade, Larry Hughes, Jerry Stackhouse, Corey Maggette, Ruben Patterson, and Bonzi Wells. Apart from Iverson, these are all actually bigger guards than Bayless and Gordon, suggesting the uniqueness of the two.

As for Mayo, his more solid all-around game gives him less bust potential in my mind. He is certainly the best rebounder of the three and the best at getting steals. His turnover rate is quite high, but I am willing to chalk this up to being put in the alpha dog role as a freshman. The burning question for me is whether or not Mayo can actually play the point. A look at some other scoring combo guards who could pass might be useful. Stephon Marbury, who came up as a comparable player to Jerryd Bayless under my similarity scores system had a pure point rating of -0.57, but has a career mark of 5.57 in the NBA. Now, Marbury is obviously not a pass-first player himself, but I don't think anyone is expecting Bayless to become the next Paul. As for Mayo, his PPR is probably too low for me to project him gaining more than spot duty at the point, but it is worth noting that a comparable player to him, Chauncey Billups, had a PPR of -2.57 as a freshman before improving to 0.92 as a sophomore.

Ultimately, I rank the three in the following order: Mayo, Bayless, and then Gordon. All are solid prospects who project as NBA starters but carry much more risk than Beasley or Rose. Given their youth, their flaws should be ironed out in time, but I wouldn't necessarily expect any of the three to make an immediate impact on a team next year. It is close between Mayo and Bayless as to which is better, but Mayo's size and rebounding imply to me that he has less chance of being a bust, whereas Bayless' low rebounding and steal numbers are potential red flags. Mayo also should be the superior defender. Eric Gordon is a big risk to me - I do believe that based on his free-throw drawing ability and perimeter shooting, he will be able to score at a high level in the NBA. I should note that I am assuming that he is a better 3-point shooter than his final season numbers show. He was shooting .411 from 3 before a 10 for 62 slump at the end of the year. Considering that this slump coincided with both a wrist injury and team turmoil surrounding the firing of Kelvin Sampson, I am willing to believe that he is closer to a .411 shooter than a .337 shooter from 3. Even so, his upside is as a pure scorer with more or less zero contribution in other facets of the game, and it is possible he could bust altogether. In a stronger draft, Gordon might be better suited as a later lottery pick, but the depth of this draft is questionable.

Final Verdict: Mayo looks like a solid #4 pick in the draft, Bayless #5, and despite my qualms, I would take Gordon at #6 as well.

Scouting Reports: Derrick Rose

Derrick Rose
6'3" 190 lbs
Freshman PG, Memphis

Pace-adjusted, per-40 statistics (from draftexpress.com)

19.5 pts, 5.9 rbs, 6.2 asts, 3.5 TOs, 1.6 stls, 52.3 2FG%, 33.7 3FG%

Although I have cast my lot with Beasley for the #1 pick, Rose is one of three players in the draft who I think is a sure-fire NBA starter and a likely All-Star. The question is whether he will develop more as a scoring point guard, ala Baron Davis, or a superior passer, like Chris Paul and Deron Williams. Based on his statistics, the Baron Davis comparison is particularly apt:

Baron Davis - age 19 (sophomore) (pace-adjusted, per-40)

19.3 pts, 4.4 rbs, 6.2 asts, 4.0 TOs, 3.0 stls, 54.8 2FG%, 34.3 3FG%

The comparison between these two players is an apt one. They are both about the same size, and had very similar college statistics. Rose was the superior rebounder and Davis the superior ball thief, although Davis also committed more personal fouls. I had been concerned about Rose's mediocre 3-point shooting, but Davis, although never becoming a great shooter, has been good enough, as shooting is probably the easiest skill to improve in the NBA.

Ultimately, I think that Rose grades out based on the numbers as a player who may have a similar career to Baron Davis - although Davis took awhile to develop, his career is certainly worth the #2 pick in this draft. Yet some analysts have compared Rose to Chris Paul with Deron Williams' size. At first glance, these comparisons seem off, as Rose's pure point rating was a less than stellar 1.52, while Chris Paul posted PPRs of 3.73 and 4.76 in college, and Deron Williams, whose PPR was above 4.0 all 3 years in college, posted a 4.96 his junior year. DraftExpress has argued that his assist numbers are deflated because Memphis' dribble-drive motion offense is "not conducive to racking up assists." This raises intriguing questions that I unfortunately cannot answer, but may determine how good of a prospect he is. If Rose truly could have averaged 8 assists per 40, as Paul and Williams did, with a different team, then I would consider him a prospect equal to Beasley. His statistics suggest a player who will average about 20 points and 8 assists per game at his peak in the NBA, making him an All-Star, but not a franchise-type player, yet the possibility that he may be a superior passer who was hampered by the Memphis system could make him worthy of the #1 pick. It is up to NBA scouts to answer this question for themselves.

Final Verdict: Whether or not he is truly a franchise PG, it is hard to go wrong with a player who at the very least, looks like the second coming of Baron Davis. You don't find many draft prospects who you can pencil in for ten solid years as a starter in the NBA, but Rose looks like one of them.

Derrick Rose Shot Breakdown:

Dunks/Tip-ins: 5% of shots, 95.0% FG
Layups: 34% of shots, 61.1% FG
2-point jumpers: 38% of shots, 37.1% FG
3-point jumpers: 23% of shots, 33.7% FG

Scouting Reports: Michael Beasley

It seems to me that it's time to breathe new life into this dead sports blog of ours. So starting today, I will kick off a month of wall-to-wall NBA draft coverage with a series of scouting reports on this year's top prospects.


Michael Beasley
6'9" 235 lbs
Freshman PF, Kansas State

Honestly, it's baffling to me how Beasley's personal matters are overshadowing a freshman season that by nearly any standard, was better than Kevin Durant's National Player of the Year run the year before. Both Beasley and OJ Mayo put aside their baggage for their debut college seasons and played motivated hard-working basketball. However, Mayo is seen as having moved beyond his troubles in high school whereas Beasley has not. Yet Beasley's results on the court were far superior, and Pat Riley will woefully regret letting player personalities blind him to the talent that is waiting to fall into his hands.

Pace-adjusted, per 40 statistics (from draftexpress.com):

30.9 ppg, 14.6 rpg, 1.5 stls, 1.9 blks, 56.2 2FG%, 37.9 3FG%

This is a forward who was the top scorer and one of the three best rebounders in the country, athletic enough to average 1.5 steals, a high number for a power forward. Best of all, he has a versatile, high-percentage offensive game that suggests he will continue to be a big-time scorer at the pro level. Here are his shooting statistics when broken down by type of shot:

Dunks/Tip-ins: 9% of shots, 85.1% FG
Layups: 32% of shots, 61.4% FG
2-point jumpers: 42% of shots, 45.3% FG
3-point jumpers: 17% of shots, 37.9% FG

These numbers may not mean a lot out of context, but hopefully as I unveil more of these scouting reports, they will become more meaningful. Here, I should point out that 45.3% is a phenomenal number on 2-point jumpers, and that he has a clearly developed inside-outside game. When translating statistics to the pro level, rebounding usually carries over fairly well, a good sign for Beasley, but it is hard to predict how scoring will translate. However, considering his high volume of shots, his ability to shoot jumpers and get to the rim, and his athleticism, he should be able to get a high number of shots off at the NBA level and score fairly efficiently as well. He can be an immediate 20-10 player and if he is able to put up those kinds of numbers as a 20-year old rookie, then the sky may be the limit.

Scouting can supplement the statistical breakdown by telling us that Beasley may not have the same upside as Durant due to the concerns about his character and work ethic, and thus he projects more as a perennial All-Star than a potential all-time great. Yet a perennial All-Star is still worthy of a #1 overall pick, and it amazes me how many analysts are willing to put too much stock in the upside of a DeAndre Jordan, a player who has shown much less on-court motivation than Beasley (not to mention production), and not consider that Beasley is young enough and talented enough to get a lot better himself.

Final verdict: If Beasley wants it, he can be an MVP-type player. I personally don't see him reaching that level, but I see him as a deadly scorer and rebounder who will make All-Star teams year after year. A great choice at #1.

A's Deal Haren for Stong Package of Prospects

After the Twins couldn't find a suitor that fit, the A's dealt Haren for a bucket of young players. The D-Backs made a great trade partner, having an incredibly deep farm system capable of attracting the A's attention and while Arizona payed a high but fair price, they could certainly afford it. Haren makes for one of the best #2 starters in the game and will give the D-Backs a fierce 1-2 punch reminiscent of Schilling and Johnson. As always, let's take a look at each of the players involved in this deal...

Arizona's take:
Dan Haren - Top tier pitcher who has been eating innings for three years straight. His home run totals are a little worrisome but the switch to the weaker league and one of the worst hitting divisions should keep his numbers around what they were last year.

Connor Robertson - A potential bullpen piece who had dominated minors until he struggled in AAA last year. He's 25 and probably won't get much better, but Robertson is certainly capable of finding a role in Arizona's bullpen if he bounces back well.

Oakland's take:
Dana Eveland - Don't be fooled by the effeminate name, Eveland's a big lefty who could easily be in Oakland's rotation to start the season. Injuries hampered him a bit last year but still maintained a sub-2.00 ERA in AAA last year. Eveland's got strong stuff but he has yet to translate it to the major leagues, getting hammered in multiple stints with the D-Backs and Brewers. Overcoming some weight problems may give him the boost to break into Oakland's rotation this spring.

Greg Smith - A moderate lefty who is ready to make the jumps to the majors. He needs a decent third-pitch behind his quality fastball and curveball, the development of which should allow him to warrant a spot in the back-end of the A's staff.

Aaron Cunningham - A Melky Cabrera-esque prospect who can play all three outfield spots and hits for average, a little power, and can run. Cunningham's not as strong defensively as Cabrera and he'll be 22 when he starts the year in AA or AAA, but he's a top-notch utility outfielder. It's unlikely that he'll be able to maintain his power numbers in the majors but his speed and good average should keep in the pros.

Carlos Gonzalez - Gonzalez was yet another top-quality outfield prospect in Arizona's system and with him being less than a year away from MLB ready it made sense to include him in this deal. Gonzalez hits for average, power, has a cannon of an arm in right and was ranked as the 23rd best prospect by MILB (though a lot of that ranking was based on ceiling rather than performance). Gonzalez will definitely be spending some amount of time in the majors in 2008, it's just a matter of how hot of start he gets in AAA.

Brett Anderson - The 6'4" southpaw put up impressive numbers out of high school in A. He's had some injuries and there have been concerns about his pitching motion but despite these minor issues Anderson has a lot of potential at the tender age of 19.

Chris Carter - The D-Backs ship of Carter after acquiring from the White Sox in the Carlos Quentin deal. Carter is a poor defensive first-baseman who mashed his way through A-ball last year with 25 home runs. He does hit for some average and walks fairly often to compliment his power, but it's his ability to hit the long ball that should eventually get him to the major league level.

All of the guys en route to Oakland are at least B-level prospects and while none of them make your mouth water, the A's got more than adequate value for Haren. I was always hoping the Yankees would make a play for Haren but given what Arizona offered the Yanks would've had to start with at least Horne, Marquez, and Jackson. The D-Backs, despite their massive out performance of their Pythagorean last year look in great shape to take the NL West again.

The Mitchell Report (Post-Release)

Grimsley's testimony was corroborated in all circumstances, making the evidence against those listed in my previous post sufficiently substantiated (at least in my eyes). I won't delve into the complications of how thorough the evidence is for each of the players (because that would be too lengthy) or just the ones considered important (because I feel that neglects the cases of those less prominent). Instead I think it's pertinent to discuss two major issues aroused by this report.

The first is the magnitude of the steroids problem. Names appeared on this list that few saw coming (Denny Neagle and Mo Vaughn both caught me off guard), but the cases against many of these players were built off of a select group of informants. Since a large portion of the evidence is in the form of testimony from players or trainers and because the Mitchell investigation only extracted information from a small number of these groups, the actual number of steroid users is undoubtedly much greater.

Three organizations had a predominantly large number of players using steroids: the Yankees in 2001 (Sheffield, Giambi, Pettitte, Clemens), the Dodgers in 2000 and 2001 (Brown, Gagne, Hundley), and the Orioles in 2003 (Tejada, Bigbie, Gibbons, Roberts). There are numerous other connections and trends one can find, but these stood out to me. Imagine however if the Mitchell investigation found evidence from a trainer on the Braves, the Red Sox, or the Cubs. It's highly probable that there are equally large number of players on other teams that were shooting up at the same time but have yet been exposed. This hypothesis in no way justifies what happened in all the other clubhouses but it makes you wonder if we're really seeing the entire scope of this problem.

The other controversial issue is whether or not to induct steroid users into the Hall of Fame (note: I'm going to use steroids as a term for all banned substances that are considered cheating, including HGH, for convenience). The new name obviously added to this controversial list is Roger Clemens. Here are the two arguments I have heard for why one should vote for Clemens or Bonds or any of the others in comparable situations:
1.) The player had accumulated a sufficiently impressive resume of statistics and awards before he began using steroids. By using steroids he did not surpass the boundary between HOF worthy and unworthy. Therefore the player should be admitted based on his merits before steroid use.
2.) It is impossible to judge how many players used steroids during this era and even more difficult to pinpoint which ones. Due to this difficulty, one cannot deny a player's entry without denying all of the players from this era unless we have absolute proof of their cheating (ie: positive test).

Both of these arguments fail to neglect the moral issues associated with the Hall of Fame in different ways. The first effectively chooses to ignore what a player does after he has reached HOF status. To paraphrase the argument, "a player reaches a certain statistical pedestal than he is absolved of any and all infractions or misdeeds that he may do following the reaching of this mark". When you put a player's plaque on the wall in Cooperstown you can't choose to acknowledge and ignore specified portions of that player's career. This decision sends a message to children that it is alright to use steroids if certain qualifications and circumstances are met.

The second argument is flawed in that it chooses to be selectively naive. By refusing to believe multiple corroborating and independent testimonies against a certain individual one is being very demanding as to what constitutes sufficient proof of cheating. However, when they claim that they cannot consider this person's merits altered based on the presumption that others were likely using too than one is being overly presumptuous based on minimal evidence. Furthermore, the whole conception of judging a player based on the actions of other players is absurd and doesn't acknowledge the consequences of electing a likely steroid user into the Hall of Fame (I'll address the issue of "likely" later on).

One's decision to elect a worthy player to the Hall of Fame who should be dictated by a single belief: whether or not the voter believes the player used steroids. If the voter believes that player used steroids, under any circumstance, he should not vote the player into the Hall of Fame because he violated the rules of the game and by electing him it portrays steroid use in as acceptable to people of all ages. Cheating is not excusable under any circumstances. If the voter believes with all certainty that the player never cheated, than by all means he/she should vote for him.

Herein lies the flaw with the voting system. If one is unsure, they should choose to abstain and thereby require that player to get the necessary percentage of votes from the remaining individuals but not count that particular voter in their percentage calculation. I understand that this description is quite complicated so think of the situation as follows: There are 300 voters and I abstain for one player, than for that player instead of needing say 75% of 300 votes, he needs 75% of 299 votes. Those voters who think it's "likely" the player cheated but are not sufficiently persuaded should take this course of action.

People may not like the idea of turning the Hall of Fame vote into a jury trial but that's what steroids have forced upon us. In a jury one would not declare a person's innocence or guilt without being absolutely confident in one's decision. I will withhold my own beliefs regarding specific players because that is irrelevant here. What is important is that the voters consider the facts in the most objective and comprehensive way possible and make their decisions according to these principles in line with how one would normally vote in terms of deciding a person's guilt.

Tejada, Rowand, and Fukudome

If you were getting bored with the lack of action this baseball off-season then you should get your web browser open cause players are moving all across the country. Let's do a quick synopsis of what transpired to today and what teams came out on top.

Aaron Rowand signs with Giants - Jones got $18.1 million per year, Hunter got $18 million, and the Giants somehow corralled Rowand with a five year deal at $12 million a pop. Rowand's offensive performance has been inconsistent over the last four years but as long as he's hitting at his career average of .286/.343/.462 and plays quality defense in the center this contract is of good value. Rowand plays hard and you wonder if his body will hold up through the end of this contract when Rowand will 35. Despite this fact, Rowand's a great leader and hustle player that you want in your clubhouse.

Kosuke Fukudome signs with Cubs - Fukudome's ability to hit for average, moderate power, and quality eye make him a great signing for the Cubs. Keith Law keenly pointed to Fukudome's likeness to Bobby Abreu and at the age of 30, the Japanese import should put up .290/.380/.460 type numbers.


Miguel Tejada for Scott, Patton, Albers, Sarfate, and Costanzo - For what the Astros gave up to get Tejada this trade would've been a pretty good deal, if the Astros had a flourishing farm system and if the Astros were in any sort of contention for a playoff spot. But neither of those if's are true. Luke Scott's a fourth outfielder who at the age of 29 probably won't put up numbers like he did in his half year stint in 2006. Matt Albers is a mediocre starter in AAA who could fill in as an emergency starter but that's about it. Troy Patton is a quality young starting pitcher capable of being a #4 starter or even better if he can get his strikeout rate back up. Dennis Sarfate is a hopeless 26 year old reliever with no control. Michael Costanzo's a power hitting third baseman but has way too many swings and misses with below average fielding ability.

Other than Patton, there's not much value in this package going back to Baltimore. Still, the Astros have no need for another aging bat considering they already have Lee and Berkman and only have one decent starting pitcher. These barely B-level prospects are also pretty much all Houston had left in their farm system, thus robbing them of the chance to rebuild after Tejada's contract expires in two years. As for the Orioles, I think they could've gotten better value but at least they've finally decided to shut it all down and start fresh, something they've needed to do for nearly a decade.

The Mitchell Report (Pre-Release)

The essential purpose of this post is to allow me to say "I told you [insert name here] was using steroids" to everyone I know. While I hold this opinions strongly take into account that the beliefs disclosed in this article are based on previous data and testimony and in no way represent condemning evidence proving these players' guilt.

That being said, whose names can we possibly expect to see in the Mitchell Report?

To start: Brian Roberts, Jay Gibbons, Miguel Tejada and additional players from the 2004 Baltimore Orioles. This team has the unique distinction of having three confirmed steroid users for an entire season: Rafael Palmeiro, David Segui, and Jason Grimsley. Additionally, Grimsley explicitly named Roberts, Gibbons, and Tejada in his interrogation with federal investigators. There are major statistical anomalies in Roberts' career including his slugging percentage jumping 139 points from 2004 to 2005 and his hitting as many home runs in his first 295 at-bats in 2005 as he had in his previous 1502 at-bats before the 2005 season. While the other two players don't have such eye-raising discrepancies in their performances, I see no reason why Grimsley would have motivation to falsely accuse his former teammates.

Given the high degree of usage within this clubhouse it also wouldn't surprise me to see other players from this team listed. Javy Lopez and Melvin Mora are suspicions of mine given abnormally strong seasons during their stint with Orioles in this time period. Mora went from a career .249/.320/.388 hitter in 1438 at-bats to .331/.407/.539 hitter from 2004-2005 at the not so youthful age of 31. Lopez hit a miraculous 43 home runs (having hit 25 HRs or more only once before in his career) at the age of 32 for the Braves before coming to the Orioles the following year. Lopez' slugging percentage in his last season was 164 points higher than his previous career high.

As we saw with Palmeiro though, steroid use can alter performance in other facets or not at all. A high number of low-key players are likely to be exposed in the report; players who were barely making the cut and resorted to steroids but failed to improve significantly. Others may have prolonged their careers without substantially heightening their skills. This type of usage to extend one's career is suspected by a minority of fans--including myself--to have been exhibited by Roger Clemens.

The belief is that there is a conspiracy behind Clemens' delayed start to the 2006 season and was not due to his questioning retirement. Rather, some believe there was 50-day steroid suspension kept quiet by Major League Baseball. Clemens did sign his contract with the Astros 54 games into their season and if he had been caught, MLB could ill afford to allow such news to be leaked considering Clemens' near immortal status. This theory is based purely on speculation and coincidences that merely lack satisfying explanations (much like Jordan's departure from basketball after in 1993).

Stronger evidence lies in Clemens' remarkable ability to remain competitive at such an old age. His Cy Young worthy seasons from 2004-2006 may be attributable to his incredible work ethic, his relocation to the weakest division in baseball, or possibly cheating via steroids. The final corroborating fact however lies once again in the testimony of Jason Grimsley, who named Clemens in his report. Collectively, the circumstantial evidence and Grimsley's statement make for a compelling case for Clemens' steroid use.

I'm not calling for the damning of these players but merely voicing my speculations as to what I expect from the Mitchell Report on Thursday. Chances are there will few, if any, major players (pun not intended) exposed, but the report may very well provide a trail of drug usage across the league. The release of these names will hopefully give the public an idea of just how rampant this problem was and still is today.

Consistency and other interesting tid-bits...

I recently began reading the Hardball Times again and immediately found it rewarding. Here's a great piece by Sal Baxamusa on run scoring consistency.

For those of you without the stomach to endure the entirety of the statistically heavy article, it essentially breaks down the distribution of how runs are scored on a per game basis. A more powerful offense is not necessarily more consistent than a weak one, but a more consistent scoring pattern is beneficial regardless of how many runs you are scoring. Though this distribution of runs is often uncontrollable, it's interesting to see how the teams fared in the 2007 season.

One of the lesser focuses of this article, but is mentioned briefly, is the marginal utility of runs scored. The first graph depicts how useful each additional run is towards improving a team's overall record. Optimizing one's offense in accordance with this trend would potentially allow a team to maximize its winning percentage. I'm in the process of reforming and old data set to explore this possibility and will post in the coming days about the strategies that could be potentially derived from these trends.

Playoffs??!

Why is the NCAA still taking advice from Jim Mora, Sr.?



But seriously, the idea that we can determine the national champion this way is a joke. Now we should thank the BCS for the Texas-USC matchup of 2005; without the BCS, USC would have been relegated to a Rose Bowl match with Ohio State and would likely still be hailed by ESPN as the 'greatest team of all time.' In general, though, I would argue that we might as well go back to the old way of doing things and admit that there is no true national champion in college football. There's nothing wrong with that, besides the lack of intrigue. What we have now is a half-assed compromise, and one that most years, fails to meet its goal.

Of course, there is the other alternative - a 16-team playoff. I'm not going to spend a lot of time here arguing for it, but I will say that if the NCAA and the college presidents wanted to do it, they could. I believe solutions can be worked out (and have been) to many of the commonly mentioned problems. I once conceived of an 8-team playoff but this of course would be just as unfair to the smaller conferences as the current system. Therefore, an equitable 16-team playoff: 11 conference champions and 5 at-large berths.

So what would this bracket look like*?

1st round:

1. Ohio State - BIG 10 CHAMPION vs. 16. Florida Atlantic - SUN BELT CHAMPION
8. Kansas - At-Large vs. 9. West Virginia - BIG EAST CHAMPION
5. Georgia - At-Large vs. 12. Arizona State - At-Large
4. Oklahoma - BIG 12 CHAMPION vs. 13. BYU - MOUNTAIN WEST CHAMPION
6. Missouri - At-Large vs. 11. Florida - At-Large
3. Virginia Tech - ACC CHAMPION vs. 14. UCF - CONFERENCE USA CHAMPION
7. USC - PAC-10 CHAMPION vs. 10. Hawaii - WAC CHAMPION
2. LSU - SEC CHAMPION vs. 15. Central Michigan - MAC CHAMPION

Tons of great games in this bracket. A first-round match of Missouri vs. Florida. A potential Georgia vs. Oklahoma bout in round 2, with the winner perhaps facing Ohio State. USC-LSU in round 2, and a potential LSU-Virginia Tech re-match in the semifinal. Powerful mid-majors like Hawaii and BYU would get legitimate chances to spring upsets and Ohio State and LSU would be rewarded for great seasons (sorry Florida Atlantic and Central Michigan). Purely from the perspective of watching games, this bracket makes me salivate. I like the bowls, but they don't make me feel that giddy rush of excitement that I feel during March Madness.

And yes, the Illini are the last team out. Sigh.

*The bracket is constructed by ranking the teams according to where they stand in the BCS Rankings - the one exception being that Florida and Arizona State are switched to avoid an all-SEC Georgia-Florida match in Round 1. The ordering of teams 14-16 was at my discretion, but I don't think anyone would argue too much.

Breaking Down the Mega-Deal

The MLB off-season has had only one significant deal so far so let's take a look at what went down. For those not hitting the refresh tab of espn.com every 10 seconds, here are the players that were swapped:

Tigers receive: Miguel Cabrera, Dontrelle Willis
Marlins receive: Andrew Miller, Cameron Maybin, Mike Rabelo, Eulogio De la Cruz, Dallas Trahern, Burke Badenhop

Some of these name may be unfamiliar so a player by player breakdown would be nice to get an accurate sense of the value being exchanged.

Miguel Cabrera - One of the best hitters in the game at the youthful age of 24; probably one of the most coveted offensive weapons in the game.

Dontrelle Willis - Willis was considered a #1 starter in 2005 but since then has plummeted to the level of bottom of the rotation role on an AL squad. His WHIP continues to increase, his strikeout rate continues to fall, and his splits are becoming increasingly troubling. Over Willis' career right-handed batters are hitting .278 while lefties only .202, but last year those numbers spread further to .320 and .123 respectively. Statistically savvy managers can stack their lineups against Willis to take advantage of his weakness against righties. Chances of him rebounding are possible given his age, but the complexity of his windup and his moving to the better league present severe obstacles.

Andrew Miller - Miller is a top-notch pitching prospect who excelled in his 2007 stints in the minors. Miller had no business being in the majors last year, he tore up AA but struggled in his two AAA starts and had less than a year's experience in the Tigers' system. Despite his difficulties at the major league level, he still projects as a mid-to-front end of the rotation starter who is probably a year away from being an impact player.

Cameron Maybin - Maybin had played in six AA games when the Tigers gave him the starting job after they gave Craig Monroe to the Cubs. Another highly talented player who's still raw, Maybin has five tools that should be on display two years down the road. To say the Tigers rushed him through the system is an understatement; his value will grow tremendously if given the time to learn the ropes in the minors.

Mike Rabelo - A cheap backup quality catcher with experience working with young arms.

Eulogio De la Cruz - A fireballer who's worked both as a starter and a reliever. He's erratic and lacks a strong secondary pitch but still has a good shot of finding a role as a 7th-inning reliever or even a setup man.

Dallas Trahern - A mediocre sinkerballer who doesn't get a whole lot of strikeouts but keeps the ball on the ground. Chien-Ming Wang is perfecting the art of the one-pitch sinkerballer and while Trahern is not near Wang's quality, the development of a secondary pitch should let him sneak into the rotation at some point.

Burke Badenhop - Badenhop has dominated A ball and made three impressive starts in AA last year but at the age of 24 and a fastball that barely hits 91 mph his chances are limited. He's still been pitching as a starter, so the conversion to a reliever may allow for him to crack a major league roster eventually.

The Marlins got good value for Miggy and Willis: Two A-quality prospects, two B-quality prospects, a backup catcher, and an additional minor league arm. Presuming the Marlins are patient with Miller and Maybin, they should get a strong return on their investment.

The Tigers now hold one of the most potent offenses in the majors but are taking a big risk on Willis. While Cabrera's and Willis' ages make this deal not a simple future-for-present success swap, it's clear this organization is going to do all it can to win with its current crew--especially after their embarrassing loss in the World Series two years ago.

I'd feel comfortable making this deal from either end, though I think given Willis' level of risk, I would've preferred to have made this deal without having to give up more to include him. Then again, the Marlins may very well have been offering him at a discount rate given the growing speculations about his abilities. The Tigers immediately become a power-house in the AL while the Marlins have set themselves up for another World Series run two or three years down the road.

Dodgers Waste $ Again

Hey, readers. We're back again after a long extended absence. Jeremiah and I are gonna try and be more casual with our posts and post more often. Additionally we want you guys to contribute too. Please feel free to comment on anything in the posts or introduce something totally different.

That being said... the Dodgers organization just got hosed. For the second time in the past three years the Dodgers overpaid for a player that they didn't even need. The Dodgers took enough flak for the Pierre signing (so we'll spare them any more), but the Jones' one may be worse.

Let's first address why Andruw Jones doesn't deserve $18 million. He may only be 30 years old, but he's well beyond his hitting prime. Jones' is an all-or-nothing hitter who consistently strikeouts over 120 times and fails to maintain a decent average. He's a career .263 hitter who doesn't draw walks to compensate for his strikeouts (only once in the last five seasons has he eclipsed a .350 OBP) and hasn't been a threat on the bases for over half a decade. His pitiful .222/.311/.413 season is reminiscent of Jeromy Burnitz' despicable 2002 season for the Mets (.215/.311/.365).

While some may balk and my comparison of these two outfielders, their hitting styles and career paths are very much aligned (Burnitz hit rock bottom at age 33, Jones at 30). The swing-hard and hope for the best mentality quickly led to Burnitz' demise and casts a bleak picture of Jones' offensive future.

Here's where someone feeds me the argument that Jones is an 11-time Gold Glove winner and an excellent outfielder. Jones' defensive prowess has been declining since 1999, to the point where he barely retains the title as an "above average" center fielder. Check his Runs above replacement or average players (RAR and RAA). Both have been dropping drastically since 1999, with Jones being the exact equivalent of an average center fielder in 2006.

Defensive statistics are still highly debatable, but despite this qualm Jones fails to be worth $18 million a year.

The second major reason for why this signing is unwarranted is the Dodgers' proficient amount of young outfield talent. With Pierre now locked in center and Luis Gonzalez becoming a free agent, Andre Ethier and Matt Kemp were projected to be the two corner outfielders for the Dodgers. Each is still on their basic pre-arbitration contracts and each were productive in their sophomore seasons. Jones' presence will take more AB's away from these young hitters without adding any significant production beyond what Ethier and Kemp were providing. Unless the Dodgers are able to turn Ethier for some quality prospects or players (and even then, you're paying Jones $17.5 million more than you would be Ethier) this signing makes no sense given the team's depth chart.

Don't be surprised to see more overspending in the coming weeks. In certain circumstances, it's alright to overpay if your needs are great enough (ie: the White Sox' need for a CF), but in the Dodgers' case, this decision is just inexcusable.

Similarity Scores, continued

After some frustration with my attempts to use Similarity Scores as a prospect rating system, I have decided to try and take a closer look at some of the top prospects' most comparable players.

Although I will try and post more player comparisons in the coming weeks, let's throw out a few intriguing comparables.

Kevin Durant (pace-adjusted, per 32 statistics follow)

Durant: 26.4 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 1.3 apg, .473 FG, .404 3P
Keith Van Horn: 26.5 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 1.7 apg, .492 FG, .387 3P

An astute reader wrote in to Bill Simmons calling Durant the next Van Horn, and on the surface, those fears seem to be realized. Both are skinny 6'10" scoring forwards with 3-point range and eerily similar college numbers. Van Horn went on from this senior season to post a 15.7 PER as a rookie, following it what would be a career high PER of 19.6 in his second season. Although a good offensive player, Durant would be a big disappointment if his peak was Keith Van Horn.

Here are some more stats:
Durant: 1.9 stlspg, 2.0blkspg, 18 years of age
Van Horn: 0.8 stlspg, 1.4blkspg, 21 years of age

Now we see why Durant has more potential. Durant was able to accumulate far more steals and blocks, suggesting that he is the greater athlete and likely the better defender. Most importantly, Durant is three years younger than Van Horn when he entered the draft. Although there are some players who never develop after age 19 (and Van Horn might be one of them), this is rare. The fact is, had Durant spent three more years in college, we might expect his numbers to dwarf Van Horn's. In terms of projecting Durant's playing career, this is quite tantalizing. Instead of saying that Durant's peak will match Van Horn's, we can now see that a slightly more athletic version of Van Horn is probably the worst-case scenario for Durant's career. This is a strong way of suggesting that Durant will easily post PERs in the mid-20s, and should be able to surpass Van Horn's rookie mark of 16.5.

Al Horford

Horford: 18.1 ppg, 13.0 rpg, .608 FG, 3.0 apg, 2.5 blkspg
Elton Brand: 20.3 ppg, 11.2 rpg, .620 FG, 1.2 apg, 2.5 blkspg
Zach Randolph: 20.8 ppg, 12.9 rpg, .587 FG, 2.0 apg, 1.3blkspg
Carlos Boozer: 21.3 ppg, 10.1 rpg, .665 FG, 1.3 apg, 0.7 blkspg

First off, I don't even want to think about how a 20-10 guy shooting 67% from the field dropped to the 2nd round. Secondly, it should be clear that Horford's college numbers hold up pretty well to those of the top power forwards in the NBA today. Although slightly weaker as a scorer, Horford's numbers are excellent in every respect. If he winds up as a better player than Zach Randolph, and I think he will, he was certainly worth the #3 pick.

A disclosure:

Michael Bradley: 22.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, .692 FG, 2.8 apg, 1.9 blkspg

Bradley, a first-round pick in 2001, only had one season in the NBA where he played more than 500 minutes and is currently out of the league. He was drafted two spots ahead of Zach Randolph. Honestly, I can't say what was wrong with Bradley, and until I find out, there is an inherent amount of estimation in this process. Nonetheless, as a #3 pick in a deep draft, Horford is one of those players where the stats and scouts agree, and that's the best recommendation I can give.

Similarity Scores

On the eve of the 2007 NBA Draft, I have elected to reveal the beginnings of my Similarity Scores project. Admittedly, this is not an entirely new development. In fact, I have taken cues from previous articles such as this one. However, a new year brings new information and as far as I know, no one has projected similarity scores for this year's draft.

A little background: Similarity Scores are a method introduced by Bill James in baseball to get an overall sense of where a player's development is heading. The theory behind it is that similar types of players will develop in similar types of ways. In basketball, we are much more excited about a shot-blocking center than a short point guard who can't create his own shot. Similarity scores compare draft prospects to past draftees in order to see which players they statistically most resemble.

I have intentionally limited the categories across which I make comparisons. I have tried numerous combinations, and different weightings, and have been pleased to see that generally similar results are yielded as long as height, weight, and age provide the baseline. My categories are height, weight, age, John Hollinger's pure point rating (an upgrade over assist/turnover ratio), Rebounds/40 minutes, steals/personal foul, blocks/personal foul, and three-point efficiency. The reason these categories have been chosen over more obvious ones like scoring rate and shooting percentages is because except in extreme cases, scoring rate and shooting percentages generally show very little correlation from the college to the NBA level.

Now, the results! For each player, I list his number of comparable players over 800 - this number is very small in some cases, but close to 40 in other cases. I chose to weight it this way rather than have 5 comps for some players and 150 for others. I then list the average rating of the player's top 10 comps, or all comps over 800 for that player, whichever is greater. NBA players are rated on a simple 1-5 scale: 1 is a bust, 3 a starter, 5 a superstar. (NBA players drafted between 1991 and 2003 are included as 'comps' in this project)

First, potential stars:

Greg Oden
Comps: 3
Avg. Rating: 2.4
Similar to: Tim Duncan, Chris Mihm, Joel Przybilla

Oden's average comp rating is only 2.4, halfway between a bench player and a starter. Although this rating is good by normal standards, I fully expect Oden to be a star in this league and a possible championship centerpiece. I don't put a lot of stock in these results because there simply aren't many good centers who have been drafted in the last 15 years. Tim Duncan shows up as his 5th best comp, which is promising, but with only 3 comps over 800, there aren't a lot of conclusions to draw anyways.

Kevin Durant
Comps: 0
Avg. Rating: 3.9
Similar to: Chris Bosh, Chris Webber, Carmelo Anthony

At least since 1991, there hasn't really been anyone like Durant. No freshman has dominated the NCAA like he did in quite a long time. The system comes up with a lot of young forwards who went on to be stars in the NBA, which is a good sign - but Durant may surpass them all.

Mike Conley, Jr.
Comps: 0
Avg. Rating: 3.1
Similar to: Jason Kidd, Mike Bibby, Allen Iverson

Again, there aren't many players truly similar to Conley, who combined an excellent pure point rating with a fantastic steals/pf ratio, all as a true freshman PG. His closest comparable players are strong ones, and like Durant, it is his uniqueness that suggests future stardom.

Brandan Wright
Comps: 0
Avg. Rating: 3.2
Similar to: Chris Webber, Joe Smith, Rasheed Wallace

Another strong freshman talent, his comps all grew up to be gifted offensive forwards in the NBA. He may not have the desire to be transcendent, but he has all the talent to average 20+ points within 3 years.

Al Horford
Comps: 3
Avg. Rating: 2.6
Similar to: Carlos Boozer, Rasheed Wallace, Lorenzen Wright

Horford is where the system stops projecting stardom for players, but I still think he'll be fine. Although it would be a disappointment if he turned into Lorenzen Wright, his comps mostly include solid NBA forwards, and I suspect he'll fall somewhere in between Wright and Boozer in terms of NBA success.

Corey Brewer
Comps: 19
Avg. Rating: 2.26
Similar to: Michael Finley, Latrell Sprewell, Bob Sura

Although I initially was sour on Brewer using this system, I now think he might have a lot of potential. It is probably underrating him, if anything, because it doesn't really pick up on his defensive potential. Moreover, despite my questions about his offense, players like Rip Hamilton and Jim Jackson also show up on his comp list. This suggests it is not unreasonable to expect him to develop an offensive game that will complement his defensive strengths and turn him into a possible All-Star.

Question Marks:

Here are some players who my system is not as high on. A lot of these players have tons of good comps, which suggests their skills are hardly unique, suggesting they are more fit to be bench players in the NBA.

Al Thornton
Comps: 14
Avg. Rating: 1.86
Similar to: Chris Mills, Ruben Patterson, Bryon Russell

Thornton is 23 and better be ready to make an immediate impact. There are zero top-level starters and stars among his 14 comps, suggesting that at best, he will be a solid starter, and possibly just a reliable bench player. This isn't all bad, but it means he lacks the clear upside of a Thaddeus Young.

Nick Young
Comps: 24
Avg. Rating: 1.8
Similar to: Steve Smith, Jalen Rose, Bryant Stith

Although his top 3 comps include Calbert Cheaney and Steve Smith, suggesting he does have some potential to stick in the league, the majority of his comparable players were wash-outs. Dahntay Jones, Lavor Postell, Michael Dickerson, Ed Gray, etc etc. Young is going to have to be a dead-eye shooter because his game doesn't bring much else to the table.

Jason Smith
Comps: 37
Avg. Rating: 1.89
Similar to: Bison Dele, Mark Blount, Francisco Elson

Smith, besides meeting the dreaded stereotype of a big white stiff playing in a small conference, also does not yield a list of promising comps. Many players were similar to him, and the majority of them simply weren't any good. I don't really see Smith bucking the trend.

Warren Carter
Comps: 31
Avg. Rating: 1.55
Similar to: Brian Cook, Roshown McLeod, Brian Scalabrine

Sorry, Warren.

Acie Law IV
Comps: 9
Avg. Rating: 1.7
Similar to: Jason Hart, Kirk Hinrich, Alvin Williams

Although I admire Law's hart, he's a tweener, and most of his comps turned out pretty badly. However, it is worth remembering that similarity scores provide a picture, not the whole story. Although these numbers suggest Law has a lot of bust potential, if some scouts are correct, he could also become a tougher version of Kirk Hinrich, and that wouldn't be all bad.

Solid players:

Joakim Noah
Comps: 14
Avg. Rating: 2.36
Similar to: P.J. Brown, Kenyon Martin, David West

Rodney Stuckey
Comps: 22
Avg. Rating: 2.18
Similar to: Steve Francis, Aaron McKie, Latrell Sprewell

Jeff Green
Comps: 5
Avg. Rating: 2.40
Similar to: Richard Jefferson, Lamar Odom, Jason Richardson

Julian Wright
Comps: 3
Avg. Rating: 2.60
Similar to: Antawn Jamison, Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace

Spencer Hawes
Comps: 3
Avg. Rating: 2.30
Similar to: Tony Battie, Rasheed Wallace, Lorenzen Wright

NBA Mock Draft

Welcome back to those who were with Jeremiah and I (and technically Jim) when we started this blog. We apologize for the extended break (second semester was...how shall we say...not as easy going as the first).

Anyway, with the Simmons and Ford Mock Draft recently completed on ESPN, Jeremiah and I decided to do our own. I drew the odd picks so I'll include commentary for the picks made by myself (and possibly some on Jeremiah's choices for the even number picks). He'll post later tonight about his thought process for some of these picks.

Without further introduction:
1. Portland - Kevin Durant
H: I'm in the camp of believing that Durant is a far better pick for Portland the Oden, but to the point where I'm placing him on a pedestal far beyond the other picks (ala Bill Simmons). If Portland took Oden immediately there's an alpha-dog battle at the 4/5 spots and there'd be a push, as there already is, to move Zach Randolph. As their desparation to move as increased his trade valued has declined and will continue to do so upon Portland solidifying their pick. So the choice is really Durant + Randolph > Oden + .66*Randolph because after the draft they're not getting full market value. I can easily see people's argument for Oden and I really think Portland can't go wrong, just in my opinion (IMO) they'd be better off w/Durant.

2. Seattle - Greg Oden
J: I finally settled for Oden after Hugh said I couldn't take Rich McBride. Excuse me for being a loyal Illini fan.

3. Atlanta - Mike Conley Jr.
H: Another controversial pick on my behalf but this one I feel much more strongly about. Statistical projections are lowering Law's predicted value combining that w/the fact that he's not as true of a point guard as Conley, I don't think the Hawks can pass here. I know this move probably leaves them without a big man at #11, but considering their array of young talent and their financial flexibility, it won't be hard for them to reconfigure their lineup if they don't Noah or Hawes later.

4. Memphis - Al Horford
H: Jeremiah and have long been on the Horford bandwagon before there was one, always believing him to be the best big man available after Oden.

J: Yep, although I don't think Horford will be quite as good as a Zach Randolph or Elton Brand, I still see him as an 18 and 10 kind of player in the NBA.

5. Boston - Joakim Noah
H: Wright doesn't work because you have Jefferson (and both are true PF's not big enough to play C), Yi doesn't work for a truckload of reasons (I'll write a post-draft article about how I believe he's going to be a bust), and J. Green has gotten some discussion but the Celtics already have G. Green and Wally at SF in addition to Pierce who occasionally slides in their. Noah fits talent-wise, need-wise, and personality-wise because he may be the only guy in this draft available at the five capable of convincing Pierce to stay (I wanna see Pierce whine about his supporting cast when Noah's out their busting his ass for 35+ minutes a night).

6. Milwaukee - Brandan Wright

J: There are legitimate questions about Wright regarding his desire and work ethic. Fair enough, but the man did post a fairly impressive freshman campaign (and would be seen if more impressive, if not for the post-Durantian world in which we walk today). He shot 65% from the floor, and at worst, should be a talented offensive big man along the lines of a Chris Bosh. Probably not a star, but a starter.

7. Minnesota - Jeff Green
H: Top-quality player fits into the roster nicely and his hesitancy to declare for the draft shouldn't be an issue with little pressure on him. The team will move Garnett, pick up a young package with picks and set themselves up nicely for a rebuilding stage (hell, if they play their draft cards right they may be able to rope in Hibbert next year).

8. Charlotte - Julian Wright
H: I jokingly offered Boris Diaw (on behalf of the suns) to Jeremiah for this pick, not realizing that a deal based around those two pieces actually make a lot of sense. Wright had been falling on many draft boards but Jeremiah jumped on him here, I have no major qualms w/this pick so I'll let Jeremiah defend it if he feels it necessary.

J: In my eyes, Julian Wright is a better version of Diaw, so I couldn't take that trade. Wright is never going to be a big scorer, but I think he has the versatile game that will allow him to be a valuable piece in a contending team.

9. Chicago - Spencer Hawes
H: I inadvertently hurt Jeremiah's bulls by snatching Noah early. I cringed at being now forced into taking Hawes or Yi (both of whom I dislike immensely). In the end I chose Hawes simply because Chicago needs a big man desperately and I don't see T. Young making it as a PF (I think he'll be a hell of a SF though).

J: Well, I do think Hawes has some upside, if only because of his age.

10. Sacramento - Thaddeus Young
H: This guy started so low on my board but I swear climbs a pick higher every time I go back and look at him. Sacramento could go in a lot of different directions with this pick but I think they needed to go young (ie: Not Thornton). They're gonna need to start rebuilding over the next couple years so I like them picking a player with high upside.

J: Thad Young, however, is much more intriguing to me than Hawes. He certainly did not prove himself to be a great one last season, but again, the heroics of Durant and Conley are completely atypical. Young is still far ahead of the curve for his age, although it is a risk to bet on his development.

11. Atlanta - Al Thornton
H: No doubt Atlanta would shit their pants if Yi fell to this spot, but he's the worst choice for a team like Atlanta or Boston who don't need a project. Thornton gives them an immediate impact and a roster that can easily make a run at the East playoffs in 2008.

12. Philadelphia - Corey Brewer
H: I've seen this guy land anywhere from the late teens to the top-5 in mock drafts but never has he landed in Philly's hands. Actually, I think this may be a nice fit for him. Considering the flak he's been taking, if he falters in Philadelphia it may go more unnoticed considering they are mid-rebuilding phase and the plethora of picks they have make it more likely they'll add at least on strong piece to their roster.

J: My similarity scores method (still in the works) suggests Corey Brewer will be a good, but not great player. I'd say he's definitely not a top 5 pick, because he's never going to average 20 a night (probably not even 15), and I'm concerned about his low block rate for such a supposedly great defender. Brewer could even fall flat on his face and bust, which is not what you want that high up in the draft. That said, I think he could be nearly as good a defender as a Bruce Bowen with a more diverse offensive game.

13. New Orleans - Nick Young
H: The first easy pick I get. Young's been falling in many people's eyes (mine included), but NO needs an SG and Young is still the best on the board.

J: There have been a lot of players with similar college numbers to Nick Young, and most of them sucked. I remain skeptical.

14. Los Angeles (Clipppers) - Javaris Crittenton
H: As mentioned before, Law's stock rose significantly post-tournament but has fallen of late. I don't see him getting past the Clippers but I'll let Jeremiah make his argument before I start ragging on any of his decisions.

J: I'll let you read more about Law when one of us picks him, but I think Crittenton has a lot more potential as a pure point. If not for his high turnover rate, he could already be as highly regarded as Mike Conley. A definite risk, but not a huge one.

15. Detroit Pistons - Rodney Stuckey
H: If Law falls to them, the Pistons very well by opt for him, but considering they've been so infatuated with Stuckey, I really didn't want to throw a huge wrench in the order and just opted for Stuckey. Frankly, the Pistons could go in a variety of directions and I'm comfortable with their expected choice.

16. Washington - Rudy Fernandez
H: I absolutely love this kid and if the Suns manage to get a higher pick but not within the lottery I hope they aim for Rudy. He's more of a catch and shoot guy who plays better off the ball (hence why I want him in Phoenix) so he won't detract from Arenas' ball-handling time and allows them to further spread the floor.

J: I just want to say that Fernandez's Euroleague numbers are so much better than Marco Belinelli's that I just don't see how they can be in the same tier.

17. New Jersey - Sean Williams
H: Marcus Williams feel to us last year because of off-court questions last year and no issues arose. Why not test fate again? I feel with the 17th pick you might as well take a gamble on a guy who could be a dominant defender (and provide more offense than Jason Collins) and work hard to ensure he stays focused. Who's gonna lead this guy astray anyway? Bostjan Nachbar?

18. Golden State - Yi Jianlian
H: I knew Jeremiah would be the one to pick this guy and this match actually makes a ton of sense (they've been coveting him for awhile now). I really hope this scenario happens because I can't imagine another peculiar character joining that rambunctious group. With Yi on the team how can they not make a sitcom out of this? Seriously, how could you not watch Stephen Jackson calling out Yi for not being tough enough in the paint followed by Yi being consoled by Biedrins who undoubtedly got yelled at some point for his absurdly inaccurate foul shooting technique? I'd buy HBO just to watch that show.

J: I actually think we waited way too long on Yi, but I wanted him to go to Golden State. Even if we think Yi is more likely to be a bust, he has too much upside to fall this far.

19. Los Angeles (Lakers) - Josh McRoberts
H: I originally thought of taking Jason Smith but quickly rescinded upon realizing that a guy from Colorado St. is not the best guy to be throwing into the media mess and soap opera that is the Lakers. McRoberts fills a similar need while be far more prepared for the hype considering his experience at Duke. This pick officially allows the Lakers to dangle Kwame's expiring contract as trade bait to try and satisfy Kobe (if he's still there).

20. Miami - Acie Law IV
H: Law fell awfully far in our draft but I think Miami may be a good fit for him. With the Heat slowly pushing J. Williams out the door, this pseudo-PG fills that growing need. It'll be interesting to see how Law and Wade, both combo guards capable of playing at the 1 but are better at the 2, play together when on the court at the same time. Wade's presence may also be a helping factor in allowing Law to tap into that "we're not fucking losing this game" mentality Law exhibited intermittently throughout the NCAA season.

J: Here's my problem: Bill Simmons argues for Acie Law on the basis of his ability to take over games in crunch-time. Regardless of whether you think this is an actual skill, clutch performance is usually irrelevant when drafting, a secondary concern at best. Why? Because we still haven't mastered the art of figuring out which players are going to be any good. My problem with Law is that he's a tweener, stuck between positions, and players that were similar to him in the past didn't turn out very well.

21. Philadelphia - Jason Smith
H: Now I'm forced to choose for a team that really has indicated no directional signs in terms of their desires for this draft. I almost went with Cook, but realized that they Jeremiah had already chosen Brewer for them earlier. Then I tried naming a big man on Philly other than Dalembert. I failed to without resorting to looking online (if you can, then serious props to you) and upon seeing the answer I quickly decided in favor of Smith.

22. Charlotte - Tiago Splitter
H: I have a fear of foreign big men with rebounding, strength, and aggressiveness deficiencies but Jeremiah opted for him claiming that it was his "i have no idea" pick.

J: He had to go sometime.

23. New York - Wilson Chandler*
H: *I opted to switch picks with Jeremiah, making him choose for the Knicks to allow me to pick for the Suns. The Knicks need a new GM really, but Chandler will be a nice addition anyway.

J: Wilson Chandler has mysteriously risen up draft boards of late despite little college hype, but I was surprised to see that he ranks well using similarity scores. I'll admit to not knowing a whole lot about him, but he seems worth a late 1st-round pick to me.

24. Phoenix Suns - Nick Fazekas*
H: I have been coveting this guy since day 1. A big guy who rebounds well and can shoot the three, isn't that precisely what the Suns need? Does nobody remember how perfectly Tim Thomas fit into the Suns rotation? Ehhhh, I can keep dreaming cause the odds of this pick happening wouldn't even be posted in Vegas. Phoenix fears the luxury tax like a soon to be bride fears calories, but they need to just suck it up and take a gamble on the vanilla frosted cupcake. I'm making myself hungry with this ongoing analogy.

25. Utah - Morris Almond
H: I actually have this guy ranked a lot higher on my board, but his true shooter style fits perfectly with the Jazz who need a scoring threat for Deron Williams to dish to. Almond may have trouble adjusting to a secondary role (he was the central figure on Rice's team) but as witnessed in Phoenix, it's hard to be mad when you're winning and have a great point guard getting you easy shots (I'm not saying Deron Williams is going to be the next Steve Nash, but hey, he looked awfully good down the stretch last year).

26. Houston - Glen Davis
H: Fazekas having been swiped, Davis fills Houston's need in the paint. This match may set up yet another great storyline, especially if Davis plays C as opposed to PF. Imagine Davis (6'9") coming off the bench for Yao (7'6") yet there's less than a 20lbs difference. How does this not completely throw off the other team's tactics on offense and defense? Furthermore, maybe Yao's borderline obsessive work ethic rubs off on Davis and he becomes even more athletic (I have to admit he moves pretty smoothly for a fat guy).

J: Glen Davis might just wind up getting too fat, but I see him making an immediate impact as a rookie. That takes him out of the second round, but his limited development potential keeps him in the late first.

27. Detroit - Marco Belinelli
H: With Weber leaving and McDyess one year older (also only one year left on his contract) a big man would probably be the best option. With Davis gone though (who doesn't really fit their system anyway) they'd really have to reach if they wanted front court help. I know people are pushing Byars or possibly even Green, but I couldn't possibly pass up the chance to see Detroit have yet another foreign player possibly implode. Yea, I'm a spiteful bitch who may have stopped taking this draft seriously at this point, but I'm still happy with my decision.

28. San Antonio - Jared Dudley
H: Another player who I think is underrated because I love his intangibles (hence my fondness for Noah, Law, etc.). I would love to see him land in the Suns' lap but the Spurs are a great fit for him. He may just be the next Bruce Bowen, which makes the Spurs even scarier considering the financial flexibility they can after next season.

J: I see him as a definite contributor. The Spurs really only need bench players, and Dudley will be a good one.

29. Phoenix - Petteri Koponen
H: A.) The Suns can keep him overseas if they don't think he's ready and avoid payroll issues. B.) He provides a young protege for Nash who's not named Marcus Banks and can actually shoot ::cough:: Taurean Green :: cough:: C.) He plays for a team called the Playboys! C'mon, that's gotta be reason enough. (Side Note: I'm hoping the Suns grab Jared Jordan in the second round as a plan B for Koponen)

30. Philadelphia - Warren Carter (not really, but Jeremiah insists)
H: A joke pick that can easily be supplemented with one of the numerous guard options available. A PG like Pruit, Green, or Sessions would be good here and allow them to work their way into the rotation behind Andre Miller before taking the reigns in a year or two.

J: I'm insulted that this would be labeled a joke. Carter is a rangy forward with 3-point range and decent athleticism. Like Kevin Durant without a feel for the game.

Final Thoughts:
I'm pretty happy with the result. Clearly the real draft will not resemble this at all, but I feel like Jeremiah and were able to mesh and convey our personal opinions on the skills and needs of the players and teams in this draft. I promise a future rant about my abhorring of Yi Jianlian and will be happy to discuss any questions or comments that you may have. Enjoy the draft!