Mock Draft: Charlotte is on the clock!

[Joe Mama]

If the Bobcats have any kind of vision or patience they'll take Livingston and not care if their new team has a few more wins...they'll blow regardless so whats the difference. If the Bobcats have 20 or 25 wins I doubt the fans will act any differently.

let's put it this way. If you take one of these other guys you are most likely getting a good NBA player. If you take Livingston there's a decent chance he is going to be a bust, and you aren't going to know it for at least a couple of years if he is. I guess it just depends on how big a gambler the bobcats' GM is, and just how highly they think of Livingston and his chances to be great.

Joe Mama

 

[pokerface]

let's put it this way. If you take one of these other guys you are most likely getting a good NBA player. If you take Livingston there's a decent chance he is going to be a bust, and you aren't going to know it for at least a couple of years if he is. I guess it just depends on how big a gambler the bobcats' GM is, and just how highly they think of Livingston and his chances to be great.

Joe Mama

Obviously teams are seeing enough natural raw talent in Livingston for him to be high in mock drafts. While its true he may be a bust the other side of the coin is he may have more star potential than say a college player that had more training. They may think by putting Livingston in an NBA enviroment with added training plus his natural abilities and height he should pan out at some point. Some of the best players in the NBA are the ones with natural talent...talent that cant be taught but they just have. Dont be confused into thinking a more experienced college player will be more likely to succeed...thats no guarantee of a player being able to thrive in the NBA...maybe just being able to survive.

 

[elindholm]

Obviously teams are seeing enough natural raw talent in Livingston for him to be high in mock drafts.

Obviously writers think they see his talent and potential. That's a huge difference.

Even though their games aren't similar, Livingston feels like this year's Dajuan Wagner to me.

 

[pokerface]

Obviously teams are seeing enough natural raw talent in Livingston for him to be high in mock drafts.

Obviously writers think they see his talent and potential. That's a huge difference.

Even though their games aren't similar, Livingston feels like this year's Dajuan Wagner to me.

Well lets see where he ends up...along with Howard who is another player the "writers" like.


BTW would any of you have drafted Amare?? Sounds like Wilcox would have been your choice!

 

[fordronken]

Obviously writers think they see his talent and potential. That's a huge difference.

Even though their games aren't similar, Livingston feels like this year's Dajuan Wagner to me.

Not that it makes your comparisson wrong at all, but I still think Wagner is gonna be a very good player in this league. Not great, but still very good.

 

[elindholm]

BTW would any of you have drafted Amare?? Sounds like Wilcox would have been your choice!
This comparison doesn't exactly help your argument. Stoudemire was rather low in mock drafts -- I don't remember seeing any that had him in the top ten.

Well lets see where he ends up

Sure, you're on. My guess is that he won't go in the top five.

 

[pokerface]

This comparison doesn't exactly help your argument. Stoudemire was rather low in mock drafts -- I don't remember seeing any that had him in the top ten.

Maybe you dont understand the connection I'm making but it seems you're more inclined to college tested players that are more "NBA ready" than basketball players that are naturally blessed but untested. Raw talent like Amare/Livingston to me is more appealing because I figure when put in the right enviroment they will flourish and the game will probably come easy to them. Players like Wilcox/Gordon might produce more in the short term but longer term their upside seems more limited. Plus as we seen in Amares case raw talent produced high results right away so his lacking NBA ready skills didnt seem a prerequisite.

 

[elindholm]

Maybe you dont understand the connection I'm making but it seems you're more inclined to college tested players that are more "NBA ready" than basketball players that are naturally blessed but untested.

Uh, sure, if you want to extrapolate from a single data point. I thought we were discussing one case: Livingston versus Gordon for an expansion team. If you want to branch out into sweeping generalities, we need to start over.

Raw talent like Amare/Livingston to me is more appealing because I figure when put in the right enviroment they will flourish and the game will probably come easy to them.

Every scouting report on Stoudemire said that, while he was very raw, his body was NBA-ready. The question marks on him were his unstable high-school years, sketchy family members, and lack of any real training.

The scouting reports on Livingston haven't made those the primary concerns. Instead they say that he is, basically, an overgrown 98-pound weakling. (6' 7", 175 -- are you kidding me?) He is woefully lacking in strength and nowhere near ready to compete physically with the world's greatest athletes. Draftcity goes so far as to describe his athleticism as merely "adequate," his speed "average" by the standards of NBA point guards, and says that even now -- in high school! -- he can get muscled out of the post by smaller opponents.

Players like Wilcox/Gordon might produce more in the short term but longer term their upside seems more limited.

Overrating players in the name of "upside" is the most common mistake made by fans. NBA executives aren't quite so prone to make the error, although it's an inexact science in any case.

Surely you've read about how carefully the Suns looked into Stoudemire's personal history, evaluated his mental makeup, and so forth. By the time they drafted him, they had far, far more information about him than was publicly available on line, and it was basically all positive.

So, do you think that Livingston -- who, remember, doesn't have an NBA-ready body by even the most favorable account -- has a whole pile of favorable information waiting to be uncovered by one or two teams really interested in digging it up? It's possible, but it doesn't seem especially likely.

I don't find the Livingston and Stoudemire situations to be comparable at all. No, I didn't expect the Suns to draft Stoudemire, but my reasons didn't have anything to do with his physical ability to compete.

 

[George O'Brien]

Maybe you dont understand the connection I'm making but it seems you're more inclined to college tested players that are more "NBA ready" than basketball players that are naturally blessed but untested. Raw talent like Amare/Livingston to me is more appealing because I figure when put in the right enviroment they will flourish and the game will probably come easy to them. Players like Wilcox/Gordon might produce more in the short term but longer term their upside seems more limited. Plus as we seen in Amares case raw talent produced high results right away so his lacking NBA ready skills didnt seem a prerequisite.

I'm with Eric on this one. I would like two or three years of college for the player to get some higher level coaching, grow up physically, and grow up emotionally.

Let's remember this about Amare - he is and was unique. Compare his rookie numbers to other high school players and the last guy to better was Mose Malone in the 1970's. Even guys like KG and Kobe took a little while to develop and their overall games to start were a lot more advanced than HS guys like Livingston and Josh Smith.

BTW, Wilcox had only one year of college and the consensus is that he was not ready when he came up. He really floundered his rookie year and only started showing life late his second year.

 

[hcsilla]

I agree with elindholm and George (although Wilcox was a sophomore when he got drafted).

People are permanently forgetting that Amare Stoudemire is the EXCEPTION not the rule.

 

[F-Dog]

I agree with elindholm and George (although Wilcox was a sophomore when he got drafted).

People are permanently forgetting that Amare Stoudemire is the EXCEPTION not the rule.

Nene is only two months older than Amare. Wilcox is a month older than Nene.

The lotto teams that went for young players in 2002 made out pretty well, compared to the teams that drafted safe players with experience.

 

[elindholm]

The lotto teams that went for young players in 2002 made out pretty well, compared to the teams that drafted safe players with experience.

The only picks that jump to mind as having been cases of someone safe over someone experienced (after the first two) are Dunleavy, Gooden, and Wilcox.

Dunleavy was a funny choice and so far it appears that the Warriors fell victim to all of the "coach's kid" hype. That said, he did a lot better this year than as a rookie.

Gooden has been disappointing so far, but he has been comparable to Nene in terms of his production. Nene was, frankly, a disappointment this year, having shown virtually no improvement over his rookie year.

Wilcox, with his two years of college experience, was the safer choice than Stoudemire. By draft time, I was down on Wilcox because he hadn't looked all that good in the tournament and was measured to be significantly smaller than advertised. So I think we can call this a mistake -- but it was the Clippers, after all.

 

[hcsilla]

Nene is only two months older than Amare. Wilcox is a month older than Nene.

The lotto teams that went for young players in 2002 made out pretty well, compared to the teams that drafted safe players with experience.

I'm not sure I understand what is your point. I assume you do not either...

 

[Joe Mama]

If you want to compare a current high school draft prospector Amare Stoudemire it should be Josh Smith or Al Jefferson. I'm not sure either of them has his willpower and determination, but they both have NBA ready bodies.

Joe Mama

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

People also forget that Amare is older than most of the other HS players drafted over the years. That was part of the reason his body was so ready. He turns 22 in November I think, and turned 20 in November of his rookie year.

I think that Dunleavy will be fine. I didnt pay attention to him much after xmas, but I remember he threw up some huge games for the Warriors. Now that he has the PT available, I think he will be fine.


I don't think that Denver or Cleavland made out with their young selections in 2002. (Wagner and Skita).

Jay Williams (before accident), Yao Ming were pretty good. Not sure how many years Butler had in school, but he was also a good choice.

 

[George O'Brien]

People also forget that Amare is older than most of the other HS players drafted over the years. That was part of the reason his body was so ready. He turns 22 in November I think, and turned 20 in November of his rookie year.

I think that Dunleavy will be fine. I didnt pay attention to him much after xmas, but I remember he threw up some huge games for the Warriors. Now that he has the PT available, I think he will be fine.


I don't think that Denver or Cleavland made out with their young selections in 2002. (Wagner and Skita).

Jay Williams (before accident), Yao Ming were pretty good. Not sure how many years Butler had in school, but he was also a good choice.

Cleveland's decision to take Wagner over Butler was one of the dumb moves of the 2002 draft. What happened was that Cleveland was really irriated by Andre Miller's contract demands, so they traded him Miles. Since they had traded away their PG in a draft that was very weak in PGs, they took the best little guy they could find. Problem is, Wagner is not a PG or even a combo. He is just a small SG, although injuries made the process worse.

Almost every mock draft had Cleveland picking Butler.