Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

so IF we draft McBuckets at #9....


  • Please log in to reply
178 replies to this topic

#111 WOW!!

WOW!!

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 10-October 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,911
  • Reputation: 1,295
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:02 AM

What makes you think he couldn't start or be a cornerstone for the team? You're just making stuff up...you have no idea if that's the case. You're guessing and stating it as a fact.

This entire argument has been...

teeray - Using actual stats and metrics to make a case for McDermott.

You - "HE SUCKS BECAUSE I SAID SO! STATS AND ATHLETICISM EVALUATIONS MEAN NOTHING!"

Your arguments have already been disproven by teeray multiple times. I'm not sure why you're keeping this up. We get it. You have an irrational hate for Doug McDermott. Great. It's unclear why, but if you're not even willing to admit the guy's strengths then there's nothing else to say.


I love how you spazed out when I said we need then just a shooter. Next time post the whole thing I said not just a snippet.

#112 Dorian Gray

Dorian Gray

    Gazing In The Mirror

  • Joined: 17-August 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 441
  • Reputation: 174
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:03 AM

I love how you spazed out when I said we need then just a shooter. Next time post the whole thing I said not just a snippet.

 

When your entire argument is based on a faulty premise there's no reason to quote it all.

 

Also, if you don't think McDermott would be the 2nd or 3rd best scorer on our team, you're crazy.  Who else is gonna be?  Hendo?  McRoberts?  Come on man.


Edited by Dorian Gray, 16 June 2014 - 11:04 AM.


#113 WOW!!

WOW!!

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 10-October 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,911
  • Reputation: 1,295
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:05 AM

Just to add to this a little bit. We need more than just a shooter. We had that last year, his name was Anthony Tolliver.


Don't say that these dudes might freak out comparing him to a player that mostly matches his skill sets that isn't a superstar.

#114 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • Joined: 10-January 11
  • posts: 16,925
  • Reputation: 8,855
SUPPORTER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:10 AM

We need more then just a shooter. When you go into the draft looking for one attribute then you get a bench warmer. A specialist instead of a player who could potentially start and be a cornerstone for your team.

What we really need is a player that can be the 1st , 2nd or 3rd best point producers on the team on most nights. Kemba is the only guy on the peremeriter who can create his own shot or get a shot for other teammates. This will hold us back from taking the next step to being a championship contender. Just getting a shooter still puts us in the slow offensive position mode. When team jump on Kemba and get the ball out of his hands. We need a player who can not only shoot well but run the offense when teams take out Kemba. It would also fit our coach to have a player who could play solid or at least avg. 1 on 1 defense. We already have 2 starting position on the court where we have to hide/help a lacking defender. You add another bad wing defender on the court with Al and Mcbob it show cases their flaws.

 

The problem with that is, the guys who can do all these things you want wouldn't be there at #9.

 

If McDermott or Stauskas were great defenders they would be top 3 picks.  They are both very good shooters and good offensively, so you have to accept the question marks as well at #9.

 

I think McDermott is more than "just a shooter" on offense.  You don't score as many points as he did with the efficiency that he did as "just a shooter" unless he is a remarkable, and unique shooter of the highest order, which by itself would put him above guys like Tolliver or Battier or even a Kolver.  But being a great shooter is just the one thing that will without question translate. 

 

You are accepting the lowest possible outcome as the only outcome.

 

Some of us are just saying that at worst he is an elite shooter.  If nothing else in his game translates, he could just become a Dell Curry type player.  There is always value in elite shooters, so he has value even if the worst possible outcome becomes the reality.

 

But if he can become a passable defender, and continues to show that he has ways to score other than just being a shooter, if some of those things that made him so efficient in college do translate to the NBA, you may have an all-star caliber player and elite scorer.

 

So I look at it like, at WORST he is just an elite shooter, which already has inherit value, but at BEST he is becomes an elite scorer and possible all-star caliber player.

 

Offensively speaking, I think it is a low risk, high reward proposition.

 

Your concerns on defense, I admit, are very valid though. 


Edited by teeray, 16 June 2014 - 11:17 AM.


#115 WOW!!

WOW!!

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 10-October 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,911
  • Reputation: 1,295
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:13 AM

When your entire argument is based on a faulty premise there's no reason to quote it all.

Also, if you don't think McDermott would be the 2nd or 3rd best scorer on our team, you're crazy. Who else is gonna be? Hendo? McRoberts? Come on man.


How the heck is your opinion based on factual knowledge. We are both talking about a college player who has never played in the pro's. We are both making projections based on personal opinion. What he did in college doesn't matter anymore. It can't be a "fact" that what he did in college he can do in the pro's.


Example
Peter Warrick was the best WR in at FSU when him and Lavernius Cole were there.
But did not translate to the Pro's where Cole was the way better player.
By your argument Warrick should have been the best using college "facts".

#116 Dorian Gray

Dorian Gray

    Gazing In The Mirror

  • Joined: 17-August 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 441
  • Reputation: 174
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:17 AM

How the heck is your opinion based on factual knowledge. We are both talking about a college player who has never played in the pro's. We are both making projections based on personal opinion. What he did in college doesn't matter anymore. It can't be a "fact" that what he did in college he can do in the pro's.


Example
Peter Warrick was the best WR in at FSU when him and Lavernius Cole were there.
But did not translate to the Pro's where Cole was the way better player.
By your argument Warrick should have been the best using college "facts".

 

Actually you would've been the Peter Warrick guy.  Because he had better athleticism and more "upside," which seems to be your thing.



#117 WOW!!

WOW!!

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 10-October 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,911
  • Reputation: 1,295
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:21 AM

The problem with that is, the guys who can do all these things you want wouldn't be there at #9.

If McDermott or Stauskas were great defenders they would be top 3 picks. They are both very good shooters and good offensively, so you have to accept the question marks as well at #9.

I think McDermott is more than "just a shooter" on offense. You don't score as many points as he did with the efficiency that he did as "just a shooter" unless he is a remarkable, and unique shooter of the highest order, which by itself would put him above guys like Tolliver or Battier or even a Kolver. But being a great shooter is just the one thing that will without question translate.

But you are accepting the lowest possible outcome as the only outcome.

Some of us are just saying that at worst he is an elite shooter. If nothing else in his game translates, he could just become a Dell Curry type player. There is always value in elite shooters, so he has value even if the worst possible outcome becomes the reality.

But if he can become a passable defender, and continues to show that he has ways to score other than just being a shooter, if some of those things that made him so efficient in college do translate to the NBA, you may have an all-star caliber player and elite scorer.

So I look at it like, at WORST he is just an elite shooter, which already has inherit value, but at BEST he is becomes an elite scorer and possible all-star caliber player.

Offensively speaking, I think it is a low risk, high reward proposition.

Your concerns on defense, I admit, are very valid though.


My problem is what you're asking him to do now is something he hasn't done.
He hasn't been a wing player.
He hasn't had to face other wing players.
He had more scoring option in college then he will have in the pro's as a primary wing player.
You use Dell Curry as a comparison but again Curry was a primary wing player in college not a post player like McDermott was.

#118 WOW!!

WOW!!

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 10-October 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,911
  • Reputation: 1,295
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:23 AM

Actually you would've been the Peter Warrick guy. Because he had better athleticism and more "upside," which seems to be your thing.


Well actually Cole was more athletic then Warrick. Warrick just had more production and opportunities in college.
So you would be wrong here to.

#119 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 17,910
  • Reputation: 6,257
  • LocationMatthews, NC
Administrators

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:28 AM

C'mon, give the white guy a chance.

But not Stauskas. I've seen personally how easy it is to shut him down.


Sent from my iPhone while admiring feet using CarolinaHuddle

#120 Dorian Gray

Dorian Gray

    Gazing In The Mirror

  • Joined: 17-August 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 441
  • Reputation: 174
HUDDLER

Posted 16 June 2014 - 11:28 AM

The problem with that is, the guys who can do all these things you want wouldn't be there at #9.

 

If McDermott or Stauskas were great defenders they would be top 3 picks.  They are both very good shooters and good offensively, so you have to accept the question marks as well at #9.

 

I think McDermott is more than "just a shooter" on offense.  You don't score as many points as he did with the efficiency that he did as "just a shooter" unless he is a remarkable, and unique shooter of the highest order, which by itself would put him above guys like Tolliver or Battier or even a Kolver.  But being a great shooter is just the one thing that will without question translate. 

 

You are accepting the lowest possible outcome as the only outcome.

 

Some of us are just saying that at worst he is an elite shooter.  If nothing else in his game translates, he could just become a Dell Curry type player.  There is always value in elite shooters, so he has value even if the worst possible outcome becomes the reality.

 

But if he can become a passable defender, and continues to show that he has ways to score other than just being a shooter, if some of those things that made him so efficient in college do translate to the NBA, you may have an all-star caliber player and elite scorer.

 

So I look at it like, at WORST he is just an elite shooter, which already has inherit value, but at BEST he is becomes an elite scorer and possible all-star caliber player.

 

Offensively speaking, I think it is a low risk, high reward proposition.

 

Your concerns on defense, I admit, are very valid though. 

 

And the thing is, he doesn't even have to become an elite defender.  If he can just become average, Clifford teaches such good team defense that we finished sixth in the NBA this year in opponents FG%.  It's something McDermott even mentioned in his interview - he's comfortable playing team defense and knows where to be in those instances to give his team the best chance of success.  Kid's smart, great b-ball IQ, and knows where he is on the floor at all times.  I don't think he would be nearly the defensive liability in this system as he would be in other places.  He's never going to be a lock-down guy, but I think he can get better.  And he wants to get better, and is a hard worker, so I think we'll get maximum effort every night.

 

And everybody in this draft has major holes in their game, particularly out of the top 5.  As long as we upgrade our shooting, I honestly don't care who we pick at 9.  I don't want a project player though, Big Al is turning 30 this year and we need somebody that can come in and help immediately.
 


Edited by Dorian Gray, 16 June 2014 - 11:29 AM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users