Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 20:00:53 GMT
Barkley celebrating entering the casino with $50,000 and winning $2,000 back.
1. Suns: Charles Barkley
PF 20 6'6'' 236 B+ C C B B+ B
PF 55 31.4 15.2 10.8 2.4 1.2 0.8 1.8 .422 .761 .286
This was not a very good draft to win the lotto in. No player really stood out above the rest so the Suns played it safe and went with Sir Charles first overall. So far, he has not done much to make himself worthy of going first overall. He's a good rebounder for a rookie and he can score although not very efficiently. The problem is he can't even block a shot a game and he shoots too many threes considering he can't even hit a third of them. If he become more efficient he could be a solid option scorer for a balanced offensive team, but even then his mediocre defense holds him back a bit. Unless TC treats him very kindly he seems destined to be the next Kevin Love here, which isn't bad but isn't' all that exciting either.
Grade: B
2. Clippers: Magic Johnson
PG 21 6'9'' 215 B- C+ A- B+ C B
PG 46 31.7 12.8 4.4 7.4 1.5 0.2 3.0 .461 .833 .229
After the Oscar debacle a year prior you would think teams may stay away from PGs who can't shoot this high in the draft. Sadly, you would have thought wrong. To say the least, Magic looks to be a rich man's Oscar, which isn't a good thing. He makes one 3pt shot every half dozen games so it is clear his range is very limited and will likely never be even average. His poor handles and average steals along with what looks to be average inside scoring ability make his chances of becoming a star even worse. He would have been worth a gamble in the latter half of the lotto but this high was a disaster waiting to happen. At least he does have C+ outside scoring so there is still some hope he can become average there.
Grade: D
3. Pacers: Bob Petitt
PF 21 6'10'' 238 B C- C- B- B+ B
PF 54 29.2 15.3 10.1 2.2 0.8 1.2 2.4 .448 .652 .000
Bob Pettitt is almost a carbon copy of Barkley except he can block shots better and does not shoot any threes. Basically, he's a better version of Barkley at least so far. His turnovers are a little higher, but he is also an option unlike Charles. Can't really knock his equal scoring while actually being an option because I am pretty sure he has not been camped yet while Charles has been. Before the draft Pettit sounded like the best player in this draft but his shot blocking is not as developed as most probably thought. Still, once camped he should be able to reach close to two a game which would be serviceable enough.
Grade: A-
4. 76ers: Paul Arizin
SF 21 6'4'' 190 B- B+ C+ B- C- B
SF 51 32.0 19.8 5.1 4.1 1.0 0.1 2.4 .422 .732 .323
When looking at Arizin I am reminded of Michael Ray Richardson who had identical ratings sans rebounding in his second season. Arizin is in his first of course, so his peak should be and is hopefully higher than Michael Ray's, not that being a 19-21 ppg option scorer is a bad thing. His turnovers are a little high since he gives you nothing stats wise defensively but they aren't high enough to ruin him in any way. As of right now you could make an argument Arizin is the best player in this class which is nice considering he was drafted fourth. His weak rebounding makes him destined to be a SG for life which lessens his versatility but that's mostly just cherry picking. There may be one or two players drafted after Arizin who are more valuable but they were not really even in the conversation here during the draft.
Grade: B+
Joe Barry Carroll better than the multiple legends in this class? Logical.
5. Magic: Joe Barry Carroll
C 21 7'0'' 235 B+ C- C- B+ C+ B
C 45 31.3 22.4 9.7 2.3 1.0 1.6 2.8 .454 .686 .000
One player you could argue over Arizin is Joe Barry Carroll. While Carroll's stats are inflated a bit by being on such a bad team, the fact he's the most efficient shooting big man out of all drafted in the lotto while also scoring 22.4 ppg makes them a little more impressive. Sadly, his handles are not very good and they hopefully fix themselves a bit through TC. His rebounding also needs works but he seems to be near average there at least. Defensively he looks like he will average around two blocks a game in his prime which is usually a necessity for big men. With all that said, it's still hard to really rate him as a player until we see if he can improve his rebounding. If he can get to the point where he is at least a B there while keeping his turnovers closer to two than three, it will be hard for anybody else in this class to be better than him. That is great value for the fifth pick in the draft.
Grade: A-
6. Wolves: Bill Laimbeer
C 20 6'11'' 260 C+ C+ C- B- B+ B
C 51 28.9 6.5 9.2 1.5 0.8 1.3 0.9 .393 .754 .241
The flip side of a great value like Carroll going fifth overall is a terrible value like Laimbeer going sixth overall. Laimbeer is an above average rebounder it seems, but he doesn't give you much else. For a player like him that isn't going to score you many points blocking shots becomes even more vital but he only blocks 1.3 a game. For him to ever be worthy of being a starter he'll have to at least reach two blocks a game while also improving his field goal percentage if possible. While no world beaters were drafted after him Laimbeer looks to be bottom three without argument out of players drafted in the lotto.
Grade: C
7. Knicks (Traded to Grizzlies): Kurt Rambis
PF 21 6'8'' 213 C+ C- C- B+ B- B
PF 49 28.5 6.4 7.6 1.5 0.6 1.0 1.2 .365 .661 .000
Much like Laimbeer, Rambis looks to be a big destined to come off the bench for his career. He looks worse off than Laimbeer though thanks to his average at best rebounding and only blocking a shot a game. He even tops it all off by shooting 36% which is likely a bit flukey but it's not like he'll ever be a good scorer. Luckily for Rambis, there is one far worse player we have yet to get to drafted in the lotto that lets him off the hook a bit. Sadly that player was not drafted top 10 though.
Grade: D
8. Knicks (Traded to Lakers): Kevin McHale
PF 21 6'10'' 210 B C- D B+ B- B
PF 52 30.6 15.7 8.6 1.4 0.6 2.1 1.3 .436 .654 .000
I know the Knicks drafted four players in a row and probably did not put too much thought into the order, but McHale still should have gone before Laimbeer at least with or without notes. He looks to be the best shot blocker in this class sans Eaton but everything else about him is not too exciting. He's a low B inside and B- rebound thanks to camps and that shows with his average at best scoring and rebounding numbers considering the bad team he is on. He will likely be a good starter throughout his career but that looks to be his peak unless TC treats him very kindly. He should have gone a couple picks higher than this though, so it was obviously a good pick.
Grade: B+
Uncle Cliffy the prototype tweener.
9. Knicks (Traded to Lakers): Cliff Robinson
SF 20 6'9'' 220 B- C+ C- B+ B- B
SF 52 33.9 13.6 7.2 3.0 1.3 0.3 3.1 .425 .668 .302
The other piece in the Wiggins package the Lakers received is much less impressive. Cliff is not a very good scorer and he turns it over three times a game while also not being a great stats defender. His rebounding is solid for a small forward but that's really the only positive with him. If Kiki is allowed to play SF like he surely should be he looks like a much better tweener prospect and probably should have gone here instead of Cliff. Taking into account the few players lesser than Cliff drafted before him this was about the right spot for him to be drafted so by no means was it a bad pick, he just does not look like he will be starting caliber as of now.
Grade: B-
10. Knicks (Traded to Hawks): Sidney Moncrief
PG 22 6'4'' 190 C+ B- C B- C B
PG 52 34.0 20.8 5.6 5.4 1.8 0.2 4.0 .428 .735 .312
The last of the run of Knicks traded rookies is Moncrief who during the draft looked to be the steal at tenth overall. His scoring looks to be solid and he averages nearly two steals a game like it was assumed he would, but the four turnovers are very concerning. They are in part because of the terrible team he is but even at three or so a game that is iffy. With camps and a decent TC he could be a top five player in this class as long as the turnovers are under control, which is a bit of a stretch as of now. That is good value in the latter half of the lotto though and on this Atlanta team they will likely be very patient with him.
Grade: B
11. Nets (Traded to Grizzlies): Mark Eaton
C 21 7'4'' 274 C C- D B C+ B
C 54 27.4 6.6 8.0 1.2 0.5 2.8 1.3 .409 .679 .000
The player that's slip was probably most surprising was Mark Eaton. Eaton is the prototype role player big who just blocks shots and rebounds yet two other role player bigs were drafted before him. It is confusing to say the least. His shot blocking is not as good as hoped, but it is still very good for a rookie. He needs to work on his rebounding but if he can become average there he will be a valuable starting big for some time, as long as his scoring isn't too bad. The Nets should have tried harder to keep him but considering how hopeless they looked they likely had no choice.
Grade: A-
12. Magic: Calvin Natt
SF 20 6'6'' 220 B- C- C C+ B- B
SF 45 26.1 8.1 6.6 1.4 0.6 0.2 1.4 .403 .653 .000
Not sure anybody will ever understand why Calvin Natt was a lotto pick, especially when Kiki did go right after him. Natt is a solid rebounder for a wing player but that is all he is even average at. He does not defend, he can't score inside, he can't shoot, there's really no positives here. Few players fully 'bust' after just one TC but Natt is one of those players. It is a bit unfair though because he probably should not have been drafted for at least another dozen picks so it is not like there should have been lotto pick expectations placed on him.
Grade: F-
13. Blazers: Kiki Van De Weghe
PF 22 6'8'' 220 B B- C C C+ A
PF 49 27.6 14.1 6.2 1.9 1.0 0.5 1.5 .429 .729 .411
The steal of the draft as long as he is moved to SF, which all signs point to happening very soon. Kiki shows decent scoring ability and while his defense is not good he does look like he'll give you a half a block a game on the wing along with a steal and manageable turnovers. He is the most interesting rookie depending on how the transition to small forward goes and if it goes well he could be a top five player from this class. When drafting at the very end of the lotto there's no much more you can ask for, and even if he's just a solid small forward he is still better than a handful of players drafted before him.
Grade: A
