Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Hornets Are Interested In McDermott At #9?


rscott94

Recommended Posts

I think the Hornets might be high on Doug McDermott for the 9th pick. Nothing firm, but an indication.

— Rick Bonnell (@rick_bonnell)

June 9, 2014
 

Heard the same RT @rick_bonnell: I think the Hornets might be high on Doug McDermott for the 9th pick. Nothing firm, but an indication.

— Chad Ford (@chadfordinsider)

June 9, 2014

 

Not sure I like that too much.. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn. I hope not. McDermott could score in college, no doubt. But like many, I'm not sure how he's going to transition to the pros. I guess he would at least be that perimeter scorer that we need, and maybe if Clifford can scheme around Al Jefferson on defense, he can scheme around McDermott's defensive issues too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was a part of the thug-a-nomic Creighton team that tried to hurt Henson and succeeded at breaking Marshall's wrist. no thanks. I hate him for just being on that team, plus I don't think he's capable of scoring the way he did in college and he's not that quick so his defense is suspect. Maybe @24, but NOT @9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at the top of my list but I wouldn't hate the pick. Depends on who is there. I don't want another developmental big man. 

 

Positives: He is a proven scorer in a variety of ways. Can really shoot from 3, would help expand spacing on the court. Is very good coming off screens and shooting quickly. Willing to post up and has ability to use both hands on hook shots with multiple post moves and fakes. Has a good fade away shot (looks much like Dirk with leg kick) to help make space on post spin jumper. High effort guy that works hard. Good size at 6'8"

 

Negatives: Athleticism and defense are the obvious problems that cannot be overlooked. Very low steal rate is troubling. Can he defend at NBA level? Can he create space on offense to get his shot off without screens. Still a questionable ball handler even though it has improved a lot since his first college years. 

 

I am not sure what he could translate into, at worst I see Kyle Korver and I could live with a great sharpshooting SF/PF to come in off the bench and space the floor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea how his game will transition to the NBA.  No doubt he can score/shoot, but can he create his own shot and defend an NBA small forward?

 

Probably just a smokescreen, or a reverse-psych smokescreen where we really do pick him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea how his game will transition to the NBA.  No doubt he can score/shoot, but can he create his own shot and defend an NBA small forward?

 

Probably just a smokescreen, or a reverse-psych smokescreen where we really do pick him.

So what you are saying is we're either going to draft him or we're not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...