Bullets Forever: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Getting Marshawn Lynch touches is key for Bills' success Bar-right-arrows

Thoughts after the first viewing

Gheorghe_tiny by Pradamaster on in Summer League

Philly outrebounded the Wiz 41-29.  They grabbed 17 offensive rebounds and scored a ton of second-chance points.  That pretty much sums it all up.

On the bright side, Andray Blatche and Dominic McGuire looked pretty good out there, and Gary Forbes played pretty good defense on Thaddeus Young.  JaVale McGee looked a lot more active, even if he still looks very raw. 

On the down side, Nick Young looked absolutely awful and Dee Brown continues to commit too many turnovers offensively and surrender too many blow-bys defensively.  I like how he pushes the ball offensively and at least tries to pick up full-court defensively, but there really doesn't seem to be much there in terms of production.  He needs to learn how to be more under control.

Also, Frank Elegar needs more than 8 minutes in the next game.

Marreese Speights sure looks nice, doesn't he?

0 recs | Comment 65 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

could Nick Young get cut?

Presumably they’d try to trade him first, but at this rate, who’d want his contract? The Wiz need that roster spot for a genuine NBA player.

by billyjoe on Jul 17, 2008 6:43 AM EDT   0 recs

He Had a Horrible Summer League Last Year Too

Then he came out and averaged 17.4 points per 36 minutes, 4th on the team behind the Big 3. I wouldn’t worry too much, Nick will be OK.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 8:11 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I am going to try and make my comment civil

Nick Young will start the season most like as the number 7 or 8 man in the rotation. You don’t cut a 1st round draft pick, who was a very effective scorer off the bench during the playoff run last year, based on SUMMER LEAGUE GAMES. It is getting hard to stomach how many are placing so much emphasis on SUMMER LEAGUE GAMES when history has shown many players tearing up the Summer league and doing nothing during the NBA season and vise versa.

by LoneWiz54 on Jul 17, 2008 8:14 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

NIck has been da Bust from the beginning

He does score, and when he isn’t, he’s dribbling the ball off his foot, not passing, not rebounding, and not playing defense. He’s one dimensional, and even at that one dimension he’s not that good. It’s not just summer league.

by billyjoe on Jul 17, 2008 8:47 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Having the ability to score is not a given trait

for any NBA player. It is a gift. Nick has this gift. Can the rest of his game develop? Time will tell. Should Wizards give up on him, before his SECOND season? I don’t think EG is that dumb. The Wizards team as a whole need to work on it’s defense. Jordan places NY in game situations to do one main thing, score. He was rebounding very well from what I saw last night, but again his main function for the team right now is bench scoring. This is so crazy (cutting NY) that it does not deserve further comment from me.

by LoneWiz54 on Jul 17, 2008 9:23 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Let's Compare

Let’s compare Nick Young’s performance this year against another guard in this league (not Kobe this time) at age 22 to get an idea of how bad Nick Young really was. The numbers below are per 36 minutes and adjusted to the Wizards pace last season.

Player      Age     PTS     TRB     AST     STL     TOV     TS%
------      ---     ---     ---     ---     ---     ---     ---
Nick Young  22      17.4    3.6     2.0     1.1     2.9    .481
Player X    22      18.2    4.3     4.7     1.7     3.8    .460

As you can see, Player X was a slightly better rebounder and ball-thief, but not by much in either of those categories. Player X was a better passer and turned the ball over more, but I should point out that he is a point guard and Nick Young a shooting guard, so that may explain both of those stats away. What stands out to me the most is the true shooting percentage. Nick Young is already a more efficient scorer at age 22 than Player X was. What’s even more impressive is that Player X put up his numbers after 2 full years in the league, while Nick Young put up his in only his first.

So who is Player X? None other than our very own Agent Zero.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 9:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Correction

The True Shooting Percentage stats should look like this:

Player       TS%
------       ---
Nick Young  .527
Player X    .512

The numbers I pasted above were actually both player’s effective shooting percentage. My previous points remain the same.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 9:41 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

compare with Arvis

Below is a comparison on Arvis and NY last year. Virtually identical seasons, except Arvis had 50% more rebounds (2.2 vs. 1.5) and less than half the turnovers (.57 vs. 1.25). Hayes was a much better player last year, and he essentially got cut from Detroit. Maybe NY will get better, but Hayes strikes me as a much cannier player who will do what it takes to stay in the league.

Jarvis

15.7 0.431 0.376 0.750 0.4 1.7 2.2 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.57 1.70 6.7

Nick Young

15.4 0.439 0.400 0.815 0.3 1.2 1.5 0.8 0.5 0.1 1.25 1.70 7.5

by billyjoe on Jul 17, 2008 9:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's a Deal!

But let’s not compare NY to Jarvis from last season. After all, Jarvis is turning 27 next month (entering his prime) and has 5 full seasons in the league. Let’s instead compare NY to Jarvis when Jarvis was 22 and also a rookie.

Player          Age     PTS     TRB     AST     STL     TOV     TS%
------          ---     ---     ---     ---     ---     ---     ---
Nick Young      22      17.4    3.6     2.0     1.1     2.9    .527
Jarvis Hayes    22      11.6    4.5     1.8     1.3     1.8    .456

The only thing Jarvis did clearly better than Nick was turn the ball over less, which isn’t that big a deal when you consider that he plays forward (handles the ball less) and Nick plays guard. In fact, considering that, it is downright inexcusable that Jarvis only had 0.9 more rebounds per 36 minutes than NY.

Go ahead and take a good hard look at the true shooting percentages. Nick Young is no Arvis Hayes.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 10:10 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

One More Point

Even last season, at the ripe age of 26 and with 4 full seasons under his belt, and playing on a highly efficient offense, Arvis Hayes had a true shooting percentage of .520. Still less than a rookie who is just getting his feel for the NBA game in his first season. Absolutely no comparison between the two.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 10:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

they had essentially the same ts

520 vs 527. That’s what I said, basically the same offensive stats, but Jarvis was more careful with the ball and a better rebounder. My point was that Nick Young is going to have to get better, and play smarter, or else he’s not even going to be the next Jarvis Hayes. Not every rookie gets better, and that’s the issue with NY right now. Not whether he’s going to be the next Arenas, not even close.

by billyjoe on Jul 17, 2008 10:24 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Let it go

Nick Young was a first round pick. A 6’6” SG w/ a 7’ Wingspan and a 40” vertical. Not to mention a gift for putting the ball in the hoop. Players like that don’t grow on trees. And please don’t compare Nick to Jarvis, as Nick’s size and athleticism give him a higher ceiling as a player then Jarvis ever had. Jarvis spent half his time in the trainers room. Sure he has his problems, but no one w/ any knowledge of the NBA would ever consider cutting him at this point. His rookie year was solid by any standards. Worst case, he peaks as a scorer off the bench, ala Eddie House. I’ll admit he’s been playing like garbage in these two summer league games, but dude, it’s two freaking summer league games. That is not going to change what I saw over a full season. Give it a rest.

by DT711 on Jul 17, 2008 10:35 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But That's the Point

Jarvis has peaked at where NY is just starting. Jarvis was a higher draft pick than Nick was, and even after his first disappointing season we all had high expectations for him. How much more should we have for a guy who is already putting up numbers better than a key reserve on an elite team? Before Jarvis got to Detroit (an elite offense, BTW), the highest TS% he ever had in his career was .502. NY is already well above that kind of scoring efficiency, and he’s just a 22 year old rookie!

Also, the rebounding and turnovers can easily be explained by the positions that they play. Guards tend to turn the ball over more (because they handle the ball more) and have less rebounds (because they play further away from the basket). But please, take another look at the true shooting percentage between the two players at age 22. .527 is a ton better than .456. And I mean a ton.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 10:41 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Umm

Hayes didn’t get cut…Detroit just didn’t re-sign him.

They took a gamble on a one-year deal with Hayes and he fell out of the rotation.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 10:35 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

yes but.......

that does show that he has potential.

but does he have the desire and drive that helped take arenas to the next level? it doesn’t seem so, at least so far. it’s very possible to read too much into the way he carries himself, the perceived effort level, a feeling that he seems clueless much of the time.

but still – you can see the drive and determination on bayless’s face – i don’t see it – anything close to it – on young’s.

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 10:01 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

OTOH

You can see the “drive and determination” on Michael Ruffin’s face too.

On Young’s face, you see scowls, hurt looks, incredulousness….... (Sort of the same types of emotions you can see on LeBron James’ face. Does that mean LeBron James doesn’t have drive and determination?)

by Rook6980 on Jul 17, 2008 1:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

otoh

i know a lot of this is pure speculation. but still, you can see a lot just looking at a person. and i don’t see the same thing on lebron’s face as i see on youngs. far from it it. i think young needs some of the anger and feirceness of lebron…......

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 1:45 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Nah, I disagree

You can see a lot, but what everyone sees is affected by their own biases. Nobody can say they are an impartial observer. Nobody can possibly read anything as to what happens behind the scenes based on what they see in a few snippets of game action. You can only counteract what you see with several other factors to get a vague idea of what the dude is like off the court.

Really, this comes down to the level of the player. If Nick Young was producing at LeBron James’ level, I guarantee you people would be loving his on-court demeanor.

LeBron’s “anger and fierceness” only can be categorized like that because he is a superstar basketball player. If he wasn’t any good, he’d be considered an annoying, petty complainer like Nick Young.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 1:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh come on....

Cut? Really?

I was a big critic of the kid last year…...but let’s give him a chance.

If anything, his play now will make us yearn for the Potomac Rainmaker.

Representing DC with Wizards & Stuff - Truth About It Dot Net

by Truth About It on Jul 17, 2008 9:30 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Seriously dude

Do you come here for any other reason than to rag on Nick Young?

"Now, obviously individual production does not unilaterally equal better team production, but there's a high level of causation."

by Vanilla Gorilla on Jul 17, 2008 9:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

don't cut him yet

i wouldn’t cut him, at least not yet. I’m not a fan, but he does still have some potential. However, it’s looking less and less likely that he will ever amount to anything special, or even above average. just from watching his facial expressions and body language, admittedly not much to go on, he doesn’t seem to have the drive and attitude to improve his game. I wonder if he even thinks he needs to improve. i hope so.

i hope we aren’t having the same conversation about McGee next year.

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 9:33 AM EDT   0 recs

I'd be careful about reading too much into body language

All it really says is that one person looks more intense than the other. This is exactly the same way that people put down Brendan Haywood and elevated Etan Thomas.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 10:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Is this where we get in a Haywood fight again?

But seriously, while the numbers point to good things for NY, and I would never in a million years cut him, its the technique that concerns me. A player who can create his own shot at will should not be settling so often for off balance jumpers.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 10:58 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh, I agree

I’m just saying that just because he doesn’t look like he’s trying out there doesn’t mean he’s not trying.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 11:06 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

KG Corollary

Since KG is super intense and a great player, therefore a player must be intense to be great.. (end sarcasm)

by DT711 on Jul 17, 2008 11:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

while KG is on the extreme side

i’m struggling to think of a single great player who wasn’t intense on the court.

anyone got one for me?

at the least, these guys were all very intense:

jordan
bird
magic
barkley
malone
stockton
kobe
duncan
kg
...

by DarrellWalkerFan on Jul 17, 2008 12:27 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Robert Parish

was always mocked for his passivity.

but yes, I immediately thought, jeez Kobe is pretty good and he is super intense….

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

thanks. good example

but that seems like the exception rather than the rule.

by DarrellWalkerFan on Jul 17, 2008 12:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Kareem and David Robinson maybe?

This is all speculation. I think it is telling that all my examples are centers. It demonstrates (along with my strong dislike of Haywood), that people tend to be naturally prejudiced towards people who have been given genetic gifts, but don’t make “obvious” efforts.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not Necessarily Great Players

Baron Davis and Allen Iverson are two players that I’ve heard don’t try very hard. I wouldn’t consider either great, but if that’s NY’s ceiling I’ll take it.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 12:49 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

iverson

i wouldn’t say that about iverson. he seem to play very intensely – i’ve always been surprised he’s not always on the injured list.

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 1:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Both of Those Players Are Guards

Which is why I mentioned it in response to your comment:

I think it is telling that all my examples are centers.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 12:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But here's my issue with this

Stockton was always known as being completely stoic on the court. Now, he never hung his head like NY did, but if Stockton was as good as, say, Johnny Dawkins, there would be people complaining about how he didn’t show much emotion out there. Instead, because he was so good, he was praised for his intensity when, really, his on-court demeanor is about 180 degrees opposite of someone like Kobe or Jordan.

Another player like that is Sam Perkins. He drove coaches crazy with his carefree demeanor, but the dude was definitely trying hard out there.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 12:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I Agree

Body language is very different than level of effort. Although they often mirror each other, one can mislead you about the other, as your example about Sam Perkins illustrates.

I think NY’s body language is indicative of his desire to do well. He just needs to learn to not be discouraged. Baron Davis and AI don’t get discouraged because (apparently) they just don’t care as much. So at least their performance doesn’t spiral down when they’re not having a particularly good game.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 1:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

i guess

it’s not about how you act, it’s about whether you play intensely, and to me, robinson, iverson, baron davis, and stockton all played with tremendous intensity on the court.

perkins and kareem were more laid back. those are also good examples.

nick young’s demeanor doesn’t bother me so much. i think he’s trying out there. blatche’s does. he seems downright lackadaisical most of the time. there’s a difference between playing relaxed and focused, and playing without focus.

by DarrellWalkerFan on Jul 17, 2008 1:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But how does one measure intensity

That’s my biggest problem with the term. Is it yelling and screaming on the court? If so, how are Sasha Vujacic or Andres Nocioni less intense than Michael Jordan? Is it not showing any emotion? Then how is Blatche any different from Sam Perkins?

Intensity seems to me to be an easy way to simply say one looks like he’s playing well. If that’s the case, no wonder Young and Blatche don’t measure up to the superstars.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 1:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

measure intensity

there’s a difference between a stoic athlete – bjorn borg – and the look of a guy that’s lost already before the match is even over (to use tennis terminology). slumped shoulders, blaming the refs, woe is me, everybody’s against me…........... nick young, to me, is showing a lot of the later. but that can change…. aggasi used to do the same thing but got over it. most don’t change thou.

i guess i should find a tennis blog :0)

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 1:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This is a silly argument

You’re assuming that one’s “body language” has a profound effect on one’s level of play, but by assuming that, you’re making the leap that there is one single right way to act on the playing surface. As has been demonstrated in this thread, that’s just ridiculous. Michael Jordan didn’t carry himself the same way Stockton did. Magic Johnson wasn’t the same as Kareem, Larry Bird wasn’t like Parish, etc. etc. Hell, to use a tennis analogy, Rafael Nadal doesn’t carry himself like Roger Federer.

Hell, let’s take a look at the problems you have with Young.

-Slumped Shoulders: Sam Perkins and Parish often looked like this. They were fine.

-Blaming the refs: Every single star player in the league blames the refs.

-Everybody’s against me: The same quality can lead to the “chip on my shoulder” mentality that our very own star player carries with him.

What it really comes down to, then, is whether one plays well on the court. If one can succeed, the negatives in one’s body language turn into positives even if they aren’t doing anything differently. Take Kobe, for example. In years past, his on-court demeanor was criticized heavily. He was called out for yelling at his teammates even though MJ and Bird did far worse things. Suddenly, this year, his teammates got better, and there’s talk of a “new Kobe,” even though Kobe wasn’t doing anything differently. He was still yelling at his teammates, only his teammates were better players.

The same thing happened with Jordan early in his career. Criticized for riding his teammates too heavily when they didn’t win, lauded for great, high-intensity leadership when they did. Nothing changed.

If Nick Young improves, it won’t be because of his body language, it’ll be because he improves his shot selection, gets stronger, drives to the rim more and plays competent defense. None of that has to do with how he carries himself out there.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 2:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If You Want a Tennis Analogy

Just consider John McEnroe. I’ve never watched an athlete get more down on himself than Johnny Mac used to get when he was playing poorly. Early in his career, his game would spiral out of control on the court as his disappointment in himself grew to anger that would quickly deteriorate into rage. Yet he later harnessed that emotion to take his game to new heights, and was able to knock Bjorn Borg off at Wimbledon in the process.

Before John McEnroe became a champion, he was labeled a crybaby. After he became a champion, he was labeled intense. But he was always a fierce competitor. Of course, Borg was also a fierce competitor, but he displayed a completely different body language on the court.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 2:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

this is an example of something

that is hard to quantify

but i think you can usually tell whether a player is focused or whether he’s mailing it in.

some qualitative assessments:

playing with intensity and focus/playing with lack of focus
playing aggressively/playing passively
playing physical/playing soft
playing with confidence/lacking confidence

NY often starts out confident, but often loses it when his J isn’t falling. NY seems to always play soft. NY seems to aggressively pursue jumpshots and fadeaways, but NY doesn’t agressively take it to the rim or drive to the bucket. i’m not sure NY lacks focus or intensity, but i would like to see him be a bit less passive both offensively and defensively. sometimes you have to put aside the smoothness and take it strong or get in a guy’s grill, at least in the NBA.

that’s my opinion anyway.

by DarrellWalkerFan on Jul 17, 2008 2:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

parish

but he was high all the time…. somebody should check nick young’s ashtray…...

by stevie on Jul 17, 2008 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

parrish

has been quoted saying, “if it werent for marijuana I wouldnt have made as long as i did in the association.” this is right after he said he smoked blunts after every game

by stlballa on Jul 17, 2008 3:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

he also wasn't such a nice man in his homelife

but, as for his life on the court, he didn’t earn the nickname “the Chief” for outward displays of emotionalism.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 3:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

and Gilbert Arenas while we’re at it, we need Marcus Banks!
He averaged an eye popping 42 points, 6 rebs, 3 ast, and 3 steals last year in summer league play.
Just because he averaged 6.6 ppg during the regular season doesn’t mean he’s not going to dominate this year. The only reason he didn’t live up to his high summer league standards was due to Steve Nash and the rest of the Suns’ selfish play.
If only YOU PEOPLE would recognize a proven commodity…

In short, you gotta love summer league… it ticks people off, gives false hope, and brings out the crazies.

by TremendousUpside on Jul 17, 2008 10:09 AM EDT   0 recs

Wizards Roster is made up of 3 divisions

1) The Starters
2) Bench rotation of Song, Daniels, BulletProof and/or Thomas
3) The rest of the team is athletic players still learning to play the game. It is the prefect combination in that there is no need to rush the young players because they are not in the rotation and it allows you to draft athletic frecks like McGee (You can’t teach a kid to be 7’0 with a 7’6” wingspan, but you can teach him the game…see AB first and second year with the Lakers) and let them learn from the Vets on the team and time in the NBADL. If you want players to come in and be productive as rookies, Wizards better trade the Big 3 so that they can draft in the lottery for that type of player.

by LoneWiz54 on Jul 17, 2008 10:18 AM EDT   0 recs

Wherein lies the problem

If your statement holds true, then I can’t really appreciate the drafting of McGee. EG has stated that he thinks the team as presently constituted can contend. If that is the case, why not draft a player with more experience who can spell are oft injured stars? You are right, you can’t teach 7’0 with a 7’7 wingspan, but Kwame was built like a freak too. And before anyone gets hysterical about me mentioning Kwame, he was also a “project.” By the time McGee becomes anywhere near good, Jamison will be gone, Caron will be up for a new contract ect ect.

I just don’t see the point on having 1/2 the roster stocked with players who “need time to develop.”

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 10:56 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Kwame did not come under EG watch

remember, that was Mr. Jordan’s mistake. You asked “If that is the case, why not draft a player with more experience who can spell are oft injured stars?” At number 18, what player was left that you believe can enter Wizards rotation? There was not a player on the board that would have cracked the Wizards rotation. That is why they went after Posey. They will have to sign a FA it back up Butler, his position is the only on in the rotation that does not have an exprience backup. Kobe was screaming “trade the project AB (can’t spell his name) for Jason Kidd” after his rookie year. Now look what he is doing for the Lakers. We really don’t know the time table for when/if McGee and the other young players will develop. It took BulletProof 3 years to get into the rotation. Now if he can stay out of jail, there is no telling how good/great he can be. Has he been worth the wait?

by LoneWiz54 on Jul 17, 2008 11:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But

If you look at the Lakers bench, the one exception is Bynum. Who, coincidently, had nothing to do with their playoff run…if you look at other players such as Turiaf, ect., they came out of established programs and were ready to contribute immediatly.

Again, the argument I’m making, and you can feel free to disagree, is that sometimes it behooves a team to take the more experienced player with the lower ceiling in an attempt to win now, instead of hoping for good things down the line…

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

but I should also add

that this is a pendulum shift in a different direction. For years the Wizards drafted players with average skills from good programs like Blake or Jahidi, and even Hayes, where there were more talented athletes on the board. I just wish there was a happy equilibrium we could reach. Remember, for every Blatche there is a Party John Ramos.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wasn't Party John Oft-Injured?

If JV McGee can stay healthy, he will already be a big improvement over PJR.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 12:27 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

So is Stewie

Which might be another reason occasionally take a look at players with a longer history…

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah

I think OPEC is probably our worst prospect at this point. Still, let’s hope he can’t get healthy and contribute more this season, since it looks like he’s going to make the roster.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 12:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Exactly

I don’t think it behooves us to root against our prospects. I like Blatche and OPEC because I originally thought that EG was attempting to create Phoenix East with hybrid PF/C who could run the floor and spot up. I just don’t agree with consistently gambling on development…

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree with you, mostly

I think the lesson from the Lakers is to do both. Spend a lot of time picking guys from established programs, but once in a while, take a chance on a guy like Bynum.

The thing I don’t like is that the Wizards have been taking chances on guys in two of the last three drafts. That’s why I liked the 2007 draft, even if Young doesn’t turn out well. Young was a more established college player, and McGuire was as well even if people hadn’t heard of him.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 12:39 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Mario Chalmers?

There were a number of players from good programs with high pressure experience who could have been drafted before McGee, but did not have his upside.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:38 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There was also J.J. Hickson

CDR, Arthur, etc.

I will say that I like LoneWiz54’s point is different. I read him saying that, because we already have AD, Songaila, Etan and Blatche around, plus Young, it’ll be difficult to find time for anybody, no matter how established they may be. I don’t really agree with that either, but I think that argument makes a little more sense.

As good as Hickson is (he definitely grew on me by the end of the draft process), he’d still be behind Jamison, Songaila and probably Blatche in the power forward rotation.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 12:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think his point definitely has credence

I would just like to see more of a mix, which is where you and I agree. With the rate of injuries this team sustained (AD was injured, Songalia was injured for a large part of the previous year, Etan’s heart, the fragility of the Big 3, Stevenson being held together with duct tape and heart), that I would have rather seen a more “NBA ready” player selected in this particular year. Especially with our window being in the next three years.

Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!

by ledellforlife on Jul 17, 2008 12:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Whoa, mistyped

Should read “I will say that I think LoneWiz54’s point is different.”

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 12:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

For that matter

If we were going to give away our 2nd rounder, why not trade it with our first to move up two spots and grab Hibbert? That would have been an impact off the bench.

by zeke5123 on Jul 17, 2008 2:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

One Spot

We only needed to move up to the 17th, if I remember correctly. Hibbert was taken one pick ahead of ours.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 2:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah

but the Pacers wanted him. So we needed to leap frog them.

by zeke5123 on Jul 17, 2008 3:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

one more point

Looking at his TS% in isolation from his turnovers and ballhogging is misleading. NY had a .67 assists/to ratio last year. As far as I could tell, that was the lowest among all guards last year.

NY TO

Only big men like Dwight Howard and Reggie Evans had lower ratios. And NY had the 14th highest TO/48 among all players last year. That’s what’s wrong with NY, he doesn’t play within the offense, he freelances, and then he turns the ball over. Is that going to change? Will Eddie get him to play within the offense? I don’t see it.

by billyjoe on Jul 17, 2008 10:46 AM EDT   0 recs

Good Point

Nick Young’s passing definitely needs to improve. I won’t argue with you there. However, his assist to turnover ratio wasn’t that much worse than Kevin Durant (also a SG), and I don’t think that Oklahoma City is ready quite yet to give up on Durant.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 11:06 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You're right

But nobody’s saying that Young is a perfect basketball player. We’re just saying it’s absolute lunacy to consider cutting him. Not to mention that you can’t do that because of the rookie contract scale.

The point is that he’s shown more than Jarvis ever did, and he still has room to improve. It’ll take more than two Summer League games to change a lot of minds.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Pradamaster on Jul 17, 2008 11:08 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Another Point

In response to these comments:

Looking at his TS% in isolation from his turnovers and ballhogging is misleading.
...
Is that going to change? Will Eddie get him to play within the offense? I don’t see it.

In Gilbert Arenas’s first year in Washington, he was 22 years old and his coach was Eddie Jordan. Gil had more turnovers per 36 minutes (3.8) that year than Nick (2.9). Gil also “hogged the ball” more than Nick, averaging one more shot per 36 minutes and did so at a lower efficiency (see my Player X breakdown above). Gilbert got better each successive season in Eddie’s offense. I see no reason why NY can’t do the same.

Admittedly, Gil did have a lot more assists per 36 minutes, but he was also the point guard and not a shooting guard.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Jul 17, 2008 11:27 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed