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

[WOW!!]

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.

[teeray]

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. 

[WOW!!]

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".

[Dorian Gray]

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.

[WOW!!]

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.

[WOW!!]

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.

[Jase]

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

[Dorian Gray]

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.

 

[teeray]

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.

 

Does the three point line move further back if you are a 3 instead of a 4?? 

 

This is you weakest point IMO.  I had to make a similar transition when I played with the ACC caliber players at Hargrave Military Academy after playing PF at 6'5 before I enrolled there.

 

Here is what I learned.  If I could shoot the piss out of it playing the 4, I could still shoot the piss out of it playing the 3.

 

It was a piece of cake.

[WOW!!]

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.

Clifford's defensive system is based on the players he has. Kemba is a good press man guard and Gerald and MkG are good wing and help defenders. They cover up the fact that BiG AL can't play a pick roll and we don't have a rim defender. When he and Mcbob are on the court at the same time. That's why we gave up more points a game when MKG was hurt. He needs a elite wing defender to cover up the lacking inside defenders. Mkg wasn't just a 1 on 1 defender he set the defense and help out so much on the inside.

[WOW!!]

Does the three point line move further back if you are a 3 instead of a 4??

This is you weakest point IMO. I had to make a similar transition when I played with the ACC caliber players at Hargrave Military Academy after playing PF at 6'5 before I enrolled there.

Here is what I learned. If I could shoot the piss out of it playing the 4, I could still shoot the piss out of it playing the 3.

It was a piece of cake.

Different jobs

In college he never had to run threw screens after screen like most wing defenders do.

Most of the time he faced a slower PF not use to guarding a player outside of the post. So that gives you a lot of open shots when a player can't play outside of the paint.

Multiple opportunities being the best player on the team. Not anymore.

Nba 3' are some of the best athletes in the world go down the list. They are able to close out on shots faster stop drives and run threw picks and screens to effect your shot more then college PF's.

[davos]

At the end of the day, McD is an NBA ready shooter in my book.  Highly efficient and scores in a variety of ways that can translate to the next level..drives, post-ups, face-ups...uses his quickness wisely as well.  

 

I'd be fine with him.  Not my top choice though but I don't really see that hate.   

 

 

 

 

[teeray]

Different jobs

In college he never had to run threw screens after screen like most wing defenders do.

Most of the time he faced a slower PF not use to guarding a player outside of the post. So that gives you a lot of open shots when a player can't play outside of the paint.

Multiple opportunities being the best player on the team. Not anymore.

Nba 3' are some of the best athletes in the world go down the list. They are able to close out on shots faster stop drives and run threw picks and screens to effect your shot more then college PF's.

 

I agree with some of your concerns on defense, we have to just agree to agree there are questions there, if those questions didn't exist he wouldn't even be available at #9.

 

But often times the teams they faced put their best defender on him regardless of position.  Do you think the great coaches of the Big East and MVC just decided to put defenders on him even if they couldn't defend him??

 

Usually multiple opportunities and being the best player on the team lead to reduction of efficiency even if PPG goes up because defenses focus on you.  Him being the best player on the team, yet still maintaining an unusually high efficiency rating is a tribute to McD not a negative.

 

And the harder you close out on me, the better it is for me.  That is my advantage.  But if McD is an elite shooter, there won't be much closing out, because players won't help off of him.  Thus creating space for other players.

 

Just having an elite shooter on the floor makes it better for everyone else on the team on offense, even if all he does is stand in the corner and occupy his man.

[Dorian Gray]