SSBA

2016    170    Kings    Draft PG Earvin Johnson with pick #1 of round 1.
2016    170    Lakers    Draft SF Austin Hudson with pick #2 of round 1.
2016    170    Knicks    Draft PF David Greenwood with pick #3 of round 1.
2016    170    Supersonics    Draft C Bill Cartwright with pick #4 of round 1.
2016    170    Warriors    Draft PF Cliff Robinson with pick #5 of round 1.

Hmmm...  Actually only 4 players I liked in this draft, and I did not get any of them....  Damn...
BTW, cannot believe Greenwood went 3rd....  No question on my mind he should have gone 2nd...

If you arent sold on Uncle Cliffy, I will be more than happy to trade for him

I agreed.  Wondering why Lakers passed Greenwood up.

(http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/8503/magic3tc9.jpg)

Two things....

I actually wasn't surprised that the Lakers picked the SF here.  A history of odd picks, plus a major weakness at SF makes the pick understandable.

Second, I was really hoping for Greenwood, but Cartwright was third on my list.  He'll start right next to Shane Wedge to make a very solid pair of 7-footers.

By the way, does anybody get this reference:

Cartright....four!

Quote from: GoldenStateGM on Today at 01:06:35 PM
BTW, cannot believe Greenwood went 3rd....  No question on my mind he should have gone 2nd...



Maybe because of two guys named Siegal & Laporte.   :)

I know who the 6th pick should be but after that i'm at a loss between two guys. Such a hard decision.

Trade me the pick, I'll take the burden off of you... 8)

I was really hoping to get any one of those 5, but I guess I am going to have to go with BPA...  And that is more than likely Calvin Natt...  I would have liked someone with better potential, but I just don't see anyone left that compares to Natt... 

Bingo, and I didn't feel like being lowballed on whichever player was going to be dealt.

Hudson could be an absolutely studly offensive player.  I would have made the same decision in his spot.  Outside and Defense are the attributes most likely to improve, already having high inside and handles will be very beneficiary.

No doubt i would have taken Greenwood over Austin, seeing how the Raptors won a title behind a similar guy at PF, but the Lakers did the right thing here ... and i guess some "additional" scouting was involved here.

When you see a guy with B+ handles (who don't even play PG) turn it over almost 4 times a game, and another one with A+ (!!!) handles turn it over 3 times, then you know that C+ rating doesn't tell you ANYTHING right now.
 :shock:

Man, i long back for the days when draft scouting actually was fun, when you could zap through those college stats and didn't have to buy a pig in a poke. Don't get me wrong, i don't miss those ugly draftees left available after the top 10, but at least you had an idea what a guy's ratings meant ...
 :?

i disagree here. Just remember guys like hunter who had similar offense ratings and never improved the defense more than 1 rating. Lenard is a similar example. defense improvements are the hardest to get imo.

guess you don´t care about rebounding. Billy is a reach imo.

I like all players in the top 5 but I would have rather seen the Lakers go with Natt instead of Hudson at #2.  I understand that Hudson is a better offensive player but Natt looks to be a bruiser.  I would like for him to slip to 8 to me.

Disagree with that.   Had Bill 4th on my draft list.  B+ inside, B defense, with good size... 

I hope Uncle Cliffy's potential holds up.  If so, he could be a good starting PF for me for many years.  The fact that he is only 18 years old means he has quite a few years to improve...

BTW, it is quite ironic that "Uncle" Cliffy is probably the youngest player in the league right now...   :D

Sorry Hawks, but he ain't slippin'...  After taking a closer look at this draft, I am very happy to be getting Natt...  Could be a 20 and 9 player from the SF...  I just wish that potential was higher(or if I knew the actual potential), I have other places I need to spend that money...

First of all, Lenard's a very good player.

Second of all, one player not improving doesn't mean none will.  I could come up with numerous examples of players who did.  Gordon, for example, went from a C defender to an A defender.

The players who didn't improve defensively likely had low potential.  Obviously, a player has to have potential in order to improve defensively.  But that doesn't mean that defense isn't one of the most likely attributes to change.

There is one thing I am looking foward to...

Watching the Kings attempt to rebuild, full well knowing his dislike for "fake" players.
Should be quite limiting, and quite entertaining....

It's a mission impossible to tell you the truth.

But i never said i'll be back in 2017, (that's Celtics words) that's nonsense. I'm looking at the years of 2018 or 2019 for my full comeback. Considering very weak FA class this year and the fact that i don't have my pick next year, anything sooner then that is pretty unrealistic.

and u have some non-fictional still more or less young players to bid on in FA, like Bosh,Del Negro(30), Gordon(31)
Chandler,Arenas,Jackson,Pietrus,Parker(32), and of course Dampier(40)