From Kurt Helin over at Pro Basketball Talk:
Teams have fallen for Florida shooting guard Bradley Beal and, while he has only worked out for the top four teams in the draft that will be enough. He is not falling past the Cavaliers at No. 4,reports Hoopsworld’s Alex Kennedy (who provides a lot of the rumors on this page), but frankly he may not get that far. Washington at No. 3 likes him also.
You’re going to want to click on the link, because Helin’s linked to a lot of relevant stuff, but I also love me some Brad Beal. I was gchatting about the draft with sometimes-Blog-contributor Tom Pestak yesterday, and one of the things that came up was whether or not the Cavs should trade down. I like that rumored four/24-for-six/11 Blazers swap (if it’s even really a thing; it’s not like any of these reports have been confirmed) because I like the idea of a painfully talent-deficient Cavs team picking up what should be, if they do their homework, two future starters. But if Beal is there at four, I think I’d rather the Cavs take him and hope they can land a rotation player with the 24th pick.
But that’s my underinformed take. The fun thing about the draft is there’s no real right or wrong answers until three years afterward; you kind of forget what you were saying at the time. Well, unless you write things on the internet and then people can dredge up old quotes and make you look dumb. (I’ve said too much.)
So: Beal at four? Barnes and PJ3 at six and 11? Offer Jordan partial ownership of Dan Gilbert’s new casino for the number two? Bueller?
Just offer Jordan free drinks/hotel when he comes to gamble. Beal would be a great fit on this team – spread the floor a little bit and if he’s really similar to Ray Allen and can play well off the ball he would complement Uncle Drew well.
A few thoughts on this:
1. I’m looking forward to my ruined credibility thanks to all the things I”ve written on the internet that can someday be used to make me look dumb.
2. Yes, Beal at 4. We discuss this further in the podcast that should go up soon.
3. Also, yes trade for two if that’s a realistic possibility. Also discussed in podcast.
Can we get some input on Dion Waters at #4 if MKG and Beal are gone? I don’t know much about him, but recently noticed two things:
1) Lots of comparisons recently to Dwayne Wade
2) Highest ranked perimeter player in John Hollinger’s draft rater
If Beal or MKG are available at 4 then take whichever of the two is there. If neither are there, I would jump on a trade of the 4/24 for Portland’s 6/11. But I’m skeptical that Portland would make that trade. If you can’t make the trade and Beal & MKG are gone, then I go with Robinson.
But maybe Barnes is going to be a terrific pro. He makes more sense for the Cavs than Robinson. My biggest concern with Barnes is that he didn’t show that desire to step up and do what needed to be done when his team lost their floor leader in Marshall. Beal, who struggled with his shot most of the season, at least improved towards the end and into the tournament and got better, adapting to a rather odd 3-guard system at Florida. I’m not sure what Barnes’ excuse is. The college game didn’t fit him well? I’m skeptical.
The only scenario I could see trading down to #6 is if MKG and Beal are gone, the Blazers take Drummond, and the Kings take Robinson, leaving us Barnes. Otherwise, they’ll stay at 4 and probably take Beal (given a Davis, TRob, and MKG top 3).
What they’re able to conjure up after that is anyone’s guess.
The problem with Waiters is that someone made him a promise, and he’s shut down workouts/interviews, etc. So to draft him at 4, you’re almost taking him based solely on game film and hearsay.
Also, I’ve heard the Cavs name thrown around when it comes to Sonny Weems and Jamaal Crawford. I would be intrigued by Weems, but the interest there makes me think they might be leaning towards Beal. Crawford I see strictly as a bench player that can back up both guard spots.
Biggest question I have. Who thinks Anderson Varajao is still a Cav on the 29th?
Where do all these Verajoa rumors come from??? What the hell? Yes, he will be a cav on the 29th. No, we should Most certainly not trade him to move from the 24th pick to the lower teens. He is a slightly underpaid BEST PLAYER ON OUR TEAM! Kyrie may take over that role this season, but last year, with Kyrie’s Porous defense, Varajoa undoubtedly led to more wins per game he played than any other cavalier, and he’s still got at least 4 years of high level play left in him.
You’re going to give that up just to upgrade from Festus Ezeli or Nicholson to Tyler Zeller or Perry Jones? Really? Glad none of you run the Cavs. Only way we should trade Verajoa is if we can get the #10 or #11 pick outright (not gonna happen) or if we can package him for Davis (not gonna happen)
I don’t think Sonny Weems brings much, if anything to the table. Jamal Crawford at this point in his career is almost strictly a chucker, so I’ll be pretty disappointed if we pick him up.I think we should be very careful in trading Varejao. He’s our biggest asset and we should only trade him for top, young talent.
If Beal and MKG are gone, I’d imagine the Cavs would take Barnes. If not Barnes, then Lamb, Drummond or trade down.
I haven’t heard a peep about trade talks for Varejao. If they did, you’re putting in a rookie at center. Unless you did Andy for Okafor and the 10th pick. It seems unlikely.
Oh and on topic for god’s sake please don’t let us settle for Barnes. There are dozens of Harrison Barnes out there every year. When a team has a top 5 pick, we should get someone dynamic and special. We must do what we can to get MKG.
Again, people putting too much weight on these players’ performance on the tourney. Yes, we get that that’s the only time most of you have seen these players actually play but guess what? The Cavs have been watching guys all year! Sometimes two years!
In other news, Ramon Sessions is going to opt out of his contract with the Lakers. If he leaves, that will mean we picked up the 24th pick this year, and the right to swap our Miami pick with a Lakers pick that very well could have a regression year.
Anyone left still hate that trade?
Accidentally sent comment early:
All of that was in exchange for half a season of Ramon Sessions. A bad half of a season from Ramon Sessions.
MKG relies on heart and athleticism. Well, most people in the NBA are athletic? Where does is stand out when his greatest asset is matched by 50% of the other wings at the NBA level hm? You DO NOT grab energy/defensive guys in the top 5 (Gerald Wallace, etc). You grab those guys later because they are glorified role players. We need perimiter scoring. MKG’s combine numbers show he will have some difficulty finishing over NBA level big men. If you actually watch his game tape, you will see Kentucky has so many scoring threats that MKG either had open lanes or scored in transition (which any NBA level player should be able to do, finish on a fast break). He was not able to create for himself. And that hitch in his jump shot is not easily fixed. If it was, it would have already been fixed. C’mon, its not like he just started playing basketball, he has been coached and trained for years!
Why all this hate on Barnes? He has been dissected to a new level because he was in college an extra year. Beal is a smaller player who has also had trouble creating for himself. Now he want to be a combo gueard? Sorrt, we have a promary ball handler (kyrie) and we don’t want another player trying to dominate the rock at all. Barnes has all the size and an NBA ready body with a silky jump shot. Remember how Jordan fell in the draft? Its that system that doesn’t feature a go-to-guy and hinders player development. Barnes’ only weakness, the ability to create for himself (ball-handling) is the EASIEST thing to actually teach a player in comparison to the weak areas of all the other prospects we are considering.
Sorry about the typos, lol. Im just trying to say when you look at the 3 players we are discussing, all things considered, Barnes is the best fit. He also is the player whose weak areas are the easiest to work on. Every year we see super athletic players go to the next level and struggle to adjust. Its like we forget how athletic the NBA players already are. Playing style aside, Barnes is the better athlete than MKG anyway. The only thing MKG does better at this stage than Barnes is defend. Defense is not our biggest need. I like Beal, but how will the Cavs play defense at all with him and Kyrie in the backcourt? There are point guards that are taller than them two. Have you watched Monta Ellis and Curry/Jennings try to match up against other frontcourts? They cant, the only hope is to outscore them.
Barnes has an NBA game that matches well with our needs, but more inportantly he is very talented. He is not a reach at all. His floor (worst case scenarion) still places him as a legit NBA starter. People talk about how he didnt step up in the tournament as the #1 guy, well do you see MKG being a #1 go to guy? Absolutely not, so that point is null and void. Beal? I will admit that he has the chance, but he was the number 3 guy in Florida behind guys rated much lower than him. So lets seriously re-think the Barnes hate.
Good news for MKG: Hollinger’s draft rater LOVES him. And if there’s something Hollinger’s system struggles to account for, it’s defense (Hollinger admits it himself.) So even with a poor account of what he can do defensively, he still projects to be a good pro. In other news, Barnes AND Beal did not grade out well.
I’m not saying it’s the be-all end-all, but it is another piece of information to add to the puzzle.
Kj: Unfortunately, we have to put a lot of stock into postseason play for almost all of the freshmen. They only have one season on their resume (not including high school, which I’m sure is also considered), a decent portion of which is against cupcakes like Marist and Radford. If you look at their performances against decent teams, postseason play could make up almost half of those games. But as long as you incorporate a variety of other sources: workouts, interviews, combine, cupcake and international games, etc, it helps paint a more accurate picture.
DJW: Check out the 2001 Draft. I would say Gerald Wallace was the 7th best player drafted that year, even though he was selected 25th. If MKG is truly a better version of Gerald Wallace like we are led to believe, I would take him at #4 in a heartbeat. And I’m an admitted Beal fan, but he’s not a “smaller player” and isn’t a combo “gueard…trying to dominate the rock”. At 6’4.5″, that’s just about average for a shooting guard, according to the DX database. And he’s really a SG that can play a few minutes at point, which is good enough to cover Kyrie when he’s on the bench.
And Barnes is a good player. I just think he’s a small notch below MKG and Beal. As we’ve seen, it’s easier to score when you have a Rondo-type player passing you the ball, something MKG and Beal definitely did NOT have during their college careers.
Alex: Gerald Wallace is a better athlete with a better body than MKG. The reason Wallace goes 25 is because you do not draft energy/defensive players at 4. Guys like that are pieces to a championship team, but not part of the foundation. No team with Gerald Walace as their #2 guy wins a championship. The closest is the Detroit Pistons, and T. Prince was their #3 guy at best. I do not want the Cavs to be the Atlanta Hawks, a play-off team every year that has no chance of winning a championship. Look at the history and team building mechanics from the past decade of NBA champions man. Yes, MKG will help you win games, but he is not what we need right now. You can get a Gerald Walace at 24!
At 6’4 Beal is still undersized compared to starting NBA shooting guards. Especially when you consider the fact that Kyrie isn’t very tall either. He said himself that he wants to be a combo guard. His words. I can provide the link if neccessary.
But none of your comments address the major concerns about the prospects. How is MKG going to scroe against players that according to the DX database are better athletes than him when his greatest asset is athleticism? Why do we assume a backcourt of two guys 6-4 and under can play defense against elite level backcourts? Why do we speak against Harrison Barnes inability to be “the guy” when MKG never has been at any level, and Beal (who was highly touted as well) was the #3 guard on his own team? How is it that Barnes tested more athletic than them both? Why is Barnes’ biggest weakness, inability to creat for himself, also listed as a weakness for Beal who wants to develop into a primary ball handler (his words?)
Marshall in not at all Rondo-level passing, but he is probably the best passer in the draft. Barnes will have Kyrie at the next level. I counter, MKG scored on fast breaks and open lanes because Kentucky had Davis, Jones, Lamb…..need I continue? And Beal was #3 on the pecking order. The only player of the three thad had to deal with double teams and being the focal point of an offense is Barnes, and he still put up very good numbers.
Remember, while I think Barnes is the best fit for us, not once did I say Barnes was better than the other 2 players. What I am saying is, look at their strengths, weaknesses, role on the team, numbers, and coaching (to see how players may have been limited in their development or overachievers.) I believe there is no arguement that clearly places Beal or MKG over Barnes as an NBA prospect.
DJW, Only time will tell. 3 seasons later and we’ll see where things are at.
Remember that Barnes really made a mess choosing his college, making it into a show of sorts. I’m not going to make the obvious comparison here, but it’s probably a little concerning that he show boated so much and failed to live up to the expectations. Expectations he set for himself. I hope he’s matured over the past couple years and that he plays great ball in the NBA.
Yea, I try to forget about that, lol. Him showing up to the combine like it was a job interview says something about maturity and taking things very seriously, but he did bite the bullet on that one.
Would you consider Tyson Chandler to be an energy/defensive player? He was Dallas’ #2 guy. I know big men stereotypically have a larger impact defensively than perimeter defenders, but there are a significant number of scouts that say he could be one of the best perimeter defenders in the NBA. If he develops a decent outside shot, he could definitely be the team’s second best player- he won’t be their #2 option on offense (I don’t think he’ll ever be that good), but that’s doesn’t mean he can’t be their second best overall player. And I don’t see anyone saying that MKG is an athletically inferior prospect. No one is as athletic as Lebron so he will struggle, but Andre Iguodala is doing just fine in the league (MKG’s closest comparison). Like I mentioned before, if he develops some range, that will really help his game and will open up lanes to drive. And just because someone is more athletic doesn’t mean they know how to use it in a game. If that was the case, Josh Smith would be the best PF in the NBA. It seemed that at times, Barnes wasn’t able to use his athletic advantage to dominate like he should have (like the Ohio game).
As far as Beal goes, he’s not undersized. There will always be players taller than him, but if we only took the tallest guys, we’d be taking Drummond or PJ3 at #4. And Kyrie isn’t undersized, either, at 6’3.5″. Would it be great if Beal was an inch or two taller? Of course, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be an amazing player without it. Beal was definitely NOT the #3 guard on that UF team, unless you mean he was the tallest guard in a three guard lineup. Walker was a ballhog and straight chucker and Boynton wasn’t a whole lot better. As we’ve seen with Jamison, just because you take the most shots doesn’t mean you’re the best player. Damn, I hated Erving Walker!! That said, it was incredibly obvious that Beal was the best player on the team last year and should have been more assertive, but it looked like he wanted to play the team game.
MKG had lottery talent on his team, but Barnes had Zeller, KJ’s man Henson, and Marshall on his team, too.
I do think Barnes would fit well on the Cavs, though. In defense of all 3, we won’t be asking them to be “the guy”, just a really good sidekick for Kyrie.
DJW, yes, when trying to sell himself as the 2nd best pick in the draft, he did say he wanted to be able to dribble better and be a combo gaurd, I don’t think he would have a problem sliding next to kyrie at the 2 though if he falls to 4. Regardless, if he can back up kyrie his rookie year even better. Also, at 6’4.75″ with shoes is about an inch below average for a SG, but the guy plays big with good defense and has a standing reach 1.5 inches shorter than the SF Barnes. Alongside Kyrie, who at 6’3.5″ is actually above average for a PG (not everyone is Westbrook.. Oh wait, he also cam in at exactly 6’3.5″ in shoes at the combine), he’ll play defense just fine. This isn’t Ellis and Curry (two 6’3.25″ guys who play small on defense, and don’t board and aren’t known to have ever been decent at defense, which Beal currently is)
Regardless, I don’t know what you love about Barnes so much. For a guy who apparently has the sweetest shooting stroke and can create offense and play defense, never shooting better than 44% from the field or 36% from 3 or 75% from the line is just not impressive. Count in the fact he was playing with great talent and then never even made a final four and he wasn’t a leader, and I just don’t know what there is to get excited over. He easily had the second most talent on his team around him after the Kentucky players, so to say everything opened up for MKG and not Barnes is just not fair. Hey, at least MKG hit 5% better from the field with his open lanes, and didn’t rely on a step back jumper that no matter how good, no coach ever wants to see.
Oh yes, and if you are concerned about combine athleticism numbers, here’s this tidbit of info from draft express itself… “Trying to pinpoint a player’s athleticism based on their combine testing is akin to trying to get a feel for their basketball IQ by watching them play one-on-zero –it simply doesn’t make all that much sense. It does help us get a very general idea of where a player is at in terms of physical conditioning and strength, which often speaks to their work ethic, but rarely sheds much light on what it really aims to portray.”
I think Barnes has a great chance to score more points than MKG, and he’ll probably score around the same number of points as beal, but he’ll never be as efficient as either. We don’t need another Antawn on our team, and inefficient volume scorer that doesn’t do anything else well. Both the other guys were more efficient on offense as freshmen as barnes was as a sophomore, and do other things at an elite level (rebounding and defense, kind of important). And while barnes did shoot more, its not like he was the only option on the UNC offense, chucking it up at 44% was his choice. I will root for him and hope for dramatic improvements from barnes if we are stuck with him, but yes, I would take Beal or MKG over him every day of the week. And thats before you even get into his Branding ego.
Even if Barnes is the better fit (I personally would argue for Beal), the Cavs still have to find a legit center and the wing to play next to the one they draft, they can worry about fit then, get the best player you can at 4, we won’t be drafting this high again for a long time.
The MKG-Barnes debate has taken on a life of it’s own. I think I was in a debate about it two days ago…lol. I like the fact that we can have intelligent conversations about it on this blog. The ESPN forums usually have a bunch of trolls running around.
Just an FYI, Chad Ford’s latest mock has the Cavs taking Beal, then Quincy Miller at #24. Beal works for me. Miller? Not so sure on that one.
Alex, please stop making comparisons to players at other positions. MKG is a good player. My arguement is that NBA Championship teams do not take energy/defensive players in the top 5. Guys like him are neccessary to win, but you can get players to fit that role much later in the draft. Defensive specialist are guys you can even pick up in FA without dedicating much money at all. I agree, MKG is a good player! My point is, WE should not take him this high. His scoring potential is very limited. I don’t assume he will develop a jump shot. Fixing a players jumper is like trying to adjust a QB’s throwing motion. Much easier said then done. When we see players shooting numbers increase its due primarily to an increase in consistency, not “fixing” an akward shot. I bring up the athletic numbers because that is his greatest asset. Do you disagree that the NBA is full of athletes? Igoudala is better offensively, early in his career he was atleast respectable from 3 point range, and a good passer. This is not a good comparison. Wallace is a better one, except for the fact that Wallace is a better athlete. Walking into the NBA MKG would not be a top 15 athlete at his own position. When faced against a player with equal or better athleticism……what does he have to fall back on. Once again, MKG is a good player, but he is not was the CAVS need at #4.
Beal is undersized at 6-4. Lets look at the good SGs in the NBA who are 6-4 or worse. Gordon and Wade, who play with weak pgs so they control the ball. Westbrook and D. Rose who are really SGs but play PG. Terry and Crawford who are 6th men. There is not a single SG at 6-4 that plays with a strong pg. Unless of course you mention Monta Ellis, but he has had no success which leads me to my point: DEFENSE. Kyrie isnt undersized himself, but our backcourt with both of them would be. The Miami Heat with D-Wade, who at the time was an all-world athlete, is the only team in over 20 years to win a championship with a backcourt that small. Lets be honest, Beal does not have the athleticism at 6-4 to match what Wade does at 6-4. It makes all the difference. Im not just talking, I have done the research (I need better things to do). I dont care about “averages” because the average NBA team is watching the Heat and Thunder fight for a championship. I want us to build a Champion.
Lastly, to be honest, we are drafting a player to be “the guy” on Offense. Your PG should NOT be your #1 scoring option. PGs should be your best playmaker, if they are your best finisher to then they might as well just pass to themself. We need a guy Who doesn’t neet to be our best player, but he should be a #1 scoring option. This means, for me, it comes down to Beal or Barnes. We talk about Barnes having so much hype and not living up to it, but Beal was the #4 player in the nation coming in to College and MKG was #3. Barnes was #2 behind…….Josh Shelby! LOL. So in comparison, I don’t think Barnes failed at all. If we could get over the media trying to depict Barnes as a bust because he struggled when the second best player on his team was hurt we would all think more highly of him.
Since none of these 3 players is head and shoulders above the rest, look at team fit. Ask yourself, with a core of Kyrie at PG, TT at PF, and Gee as hopefully your 6 man playing both SG/SF off the bench (I dont Varejao, but if you do it doesn’t change the situation) what do we need? A defensive minded 3? An all-round SG who is a bit undersized but can score inside and out and also slide over to the back-up pg spot when Kyrie needs a rest? Or a NBA sized athletic wing with potential to be an elite scorer/shooter and solid defense? Of these 3 things, I know which two are easier to find and which one all the championship teams seem to already have.
As for the Varajao stuff, I don’t want them to trade him, I was just gauging what direction people think the team is going. I think he’s better than any big they could draft, save Davis. As for the MKG, Beal, Barnes debate, they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Everyone has been RAVING about Beal in workouts, and he’s seriously in play at 2,3, and 4. The one way the NBA has changed more than any other is that smaller players can now be successful if they are quick, since the hand check and new defensive rules went into effect. Beal is not small. He is average for the position.
Some days he’ll play taller players, some days he’ll play shorter. But let’s not forget that Center and 2-Guard are probably the thinnest position in the league. There’s not that many good ones. I would be happy with Beal, MKG, or Barnes. Heck, I wouldn’t be opposed to taking Drummond, Robinson, or even Myers Leonard. All of those players would fit in on the Cavs (with Drummond and Robinson being the toughest in the duplication of skills and weaknesses). I honestly think the draft is six or seven deep, and if we could trade back and get 6 and 11, I’d do it in a heart beat.
Matt, you numbers dont take into account player roles. I can shoot 60% when I am scoring on fast breaks and lay-ups/dunks. Look at MKG numbers on jumpshots and outside of 8 feet. Its a huge wake-up call. Kobe shoots a low percentage as well right? When you are the focal point of the offense and faces every night with the other teams best defender and double-teams your percentages will suffer. These are facts. Yes, Barnes never made it to a Final Four. Plently of great NBA players never have either. I don’t know about his leadership skills because I was never in a team huddle. Yes he struggled when his PG went down because he struggles to create his own shot. Are we done with the negatives yet? Its funny how we act like Barnes is the only player with negatice attributes!
Beal, to be an elite shooter, has pretty weak perentages as well remember? He was a cog in the offense, not the feature player, so why did he at times struggle? And despite what we try to tell ourselves, Kyrie and Beal would form an undersized backcourt. Can we just admit that already? And honestly, last year Kyrie was really underwhelming on defense himself. Who will we match up against the top guards in the league hm? Beal is taller than many expected, but also less athletic that expected as well. You want to argue that he is a good defender and plays bigger than his size because of his athleticism? Do all the taller NBA guards become less athletic over night too? Do they all play under their size all of a suddenly?
If we draft MKG we will win more games, but I dont think we are in the best position moving forward to win an NBA Championship. With either Beal or Barnes I think that we would be in a better position to do so. Both have strengths and weaknessess. My arguement is that #1, Barnes’ weaknesses are the easiest to fix and #2, looking at CHAMPIONSHIP teams over the last 20 years Barnes is the best pick. If you dont agree then fine. but please stop acting like Barnes is so bad in comparison to the other players. Good luck hoping that MKG will dominate athletically like he did in college. I guess we will take his 13 ppg and be happy bout being on our way to a championship! Its not like athletic wings who play with energy, are good on defense, and can score on fast breaks come around very often……..wait! Yes they do! They guy is a better Alonzo Gee!
I really hope the conversation just comes down to Beal or Barnes. I just think that Beal, a combo guard, is easier to find as well personally. Maybe not of his stature, but I’d take Barnes and try to get #10 from Charlotte and draft Rivers. Barnes is NOT a volume guy. We talk about him not living up to being the #1 guy, then complain that he took too many shots? lol. Name one other guy on that team that could score consistently. One thing Barnes has never been called is a ball hog or volume scorer. He struggled with his shot at times and had the pressure of being the #1 option on a very good team. With Kyrie next to him I would be fine with him taking jumpers.
to paraphrase “And despite the size of the players, they are undersized” Whatever you say. Yes, beal is slightly undersized, but he never had a problem gaurding big guys in college, and he gets nearly 7 boards a game. Kyrie is most certainly not undersized. You can say they aren’t as big as you’d like, go ahead, but they would not pose a below average tandem on defense because of their size.
I want to argue that he is a good defender and plays bigger than his size because he was a good defender in college and grabbed 7 boards a game as a guard. I want to say he’s a better shooter because he showed consistent improvement throughout his freshman year, and by the end of it had better numbers than Barnes during Barnes sophomore year outside of ppg. I want to Ignore all evaluation of basketball athleticism based on jumping and cone drills at a combine against no one with no time or coordination being a part of the process.
Barnes #1 weakness is shot selection and dribbling, neither of which are easy to fix. Sure easier to fix than height, but Hollins had no problem with height. You don’t draft someone just cause they are tall. Seriously. Honestly, I won’t have any problem drafting barnes if that is who there is at 4, he’s gonna be a decent NBA player. I’m just giving the reason why I’d take beal and MKG over him.
If the Cavs pick up Beal, don’t forget that Alonzo Gee can be rotated in to help defend top guards that might take advantage of a small backcourt, which would admittedly be a legit concern. I love what Barnes brings to the table for the Cavs specifically — he would be a great fit on the team, I think — but my main concern about him is the fact he posted ridiculous combine numbers, indicating great athleticism, yet he never really seemed to use that athleticism to dominate less athletic opponents in college. His block and rebounding rates are pretty unspectacular, and those are things you’d expect the uber-athletes to take advantage of in college. I give the slight advantage to Beal being a better pick… until I remember that Barnes and Kyrie are like BFF’s or something. In a fluid sport like basketball, team chemistry goes a long way and I don’t think that aspect should be overlooked.
Basically, all the choices are flawed but can be sweet. I don’t think the Cavs have to worry about MKG falling to them regardless, and I wouldn’t be all that upset at just about any possible picks at #4. And call me crazy but am I the only one who thinks Drummond deserves a little more attention?
DJW,
You are basing people’s athleticism of one day at the combine. Those tests aren’t always true of what is indicative on the court. And all your raving about people not being athletic and what not, and yet you want to draft Rivers? Come on, man. Where are you getting that Beal isn’t as athletic as people expected. Because of less than 4 seconds of our lives? Give me what people have shown on the court and on tape over a one time test that people have weeks to build up and train for. Beal is NOT undersized. Is Ray Allen undersized? James Harden? Dwyane Wade? Jason Terry? All listed no more than 6’5″. Beal is 6’4.75″. Not to mention Beal’s 6’8″ wingspan which is infinitely more important than height. Claims of Beal being undersized are idiotic and unsupported to say the least. Do the heat have an undersized backcourt with Chalmers at 6’2″ and Wade? How about the Thunder with Westbrook and Harden? Both would be nearly identical in size to Kyrie and Beal.
Guards are easier to find than SFs? Name me the top SG and then the top SG. You might be a little surprised. At best the two are pretty equal, but I tend to believe SFs have a larger quantity of depth over the SG.
MKG supporters do claim he is an excellent athlete (which he is), but they say the reason he is great is his mindset. He is committed, ferocious, and has unbelievable tenacity on defense all to go along with being one of the greatest leaders to come out of college basketball. Those are things you just don’t teach and they are the reasons he will be successful.
And finally, you claim Barnes as a very efficient shooter while questioning his percentages. One shot 44.0%, the other shot 44.5%. Beal shot significantly better on 2s and slightly better on FTs, while Barnes shot slightly better on 3s. “Name one other guy on that team that could score consistently.” Zeller, Henson, and Marshall will all be lotto picks and McAdoo will be next year for UNC. Florida has one other legitimate 1st round NBA prospect on their team.
You are just talking man. Back up what you are saying with facts
LOL. It is an undersized backcourt. I repeat: UNDERSIZED BACKCOURT. Evolution of the NBA? Before you comment again, check the size of the backcourts of the play-off teams for the last 3 years then, and ignore 2 decades of basketball. You know what you come up with? Its not an UNDERSIZED BACKCOURT. You are right, it is whatever I say in that respect. The cavs already struggle on the defensive side of the ball. Drafting beal would increase our defense from last year…… because it was really bad. Doesn’t change the fact that as a 6-4 SG he will have some very bad match-ups. Once again, look at the starting back courts for the NBA play-off teams. Look at the winning teams and their back courts. Talent beats size, but nothing beats size and talent. I want to say he is undersized because in college he had issues creating his own shot against bigger defenders and when he was forced to play the 3 in their 3 guard offense he struggled defending taller players. I know he won’t be playing 3 in the NBA, but against taller NBA talent he struggled. You disagree? Provide names and examples. I will look them up then come back and say you are right. You cant though, because there are no examples. Once again, if you want him so bad trade up to 10 and draft Rivers.
You claim Beal showed improvement, which he did, but discredit that Barnes struggled with his shot once his pg went down. There were other circumstances that were in play. Barnes’ shot selection has never been an issue. If so, once again, provide proof please. He took bad shots, like everyone does, but that happens when you are they guy who has to take the shot when things break down. C’mon guys, lets be serious. Kobe is selfish. Kobe takes terrible shots. Does that make him any less an offensive weapon? Any less and elite scorer? Your sarcasm is wasted on me. Barnes is an elite shooter. Period. Game tape shows it. The experts agree on it. My arguement is that his biggest weakness, ball handling, is the EASIEST to fix over teaching a player how to shoot and height. Thats it,
And no, you don’t draft Barnes because he is tall. Why even make that statement? I never said draft him because he is tall? Why are you trying to demean everything I have said? In comparing Beal and Barnes, the areas in which Beal are better, like ball handling, are many area that overlap Kyrie: which make them unneccessary at this time. I think Barnes is a better fit and has the athleticism where other things can develop as well. Thats what combine athletic test show. It doesn’t correctly measure up how you play, but give a barometer for a players ability so coaches can tell what areas can be developed in a player. Barnes never consistently played athletically, but numbers show this is an area Coaches can try to get him to better utilize. It also shows how you measure up with current players in the league. We have Kyrie. We need an elite scoring wing. Beal and Barnes fit that. I BELIEVE Barnes is the better shooter and has a game that fits with our team and transitions well to the next level. I BELIEVE he still has room to grow. I BELIEVE he is the type of player every championship team needs. I BELIEVE Beal is a stud, but the areas where he is stronger than Barnes we already have in Kyrie so they become a moot point. I BELIEVE the areas where he is deficient to Barnes are the areas where this team has no other player to compensate. I BELIEVE its easier to find a defender and combo guard than a player like Barnes. We all could be wrong and PJ3 ends up the best player in the draft. But I BELIEVE looking al play-off teams, championship teams, and facts, that I am correct.
In the immortal words of Brady Quinn: “Now i’m done” (LOL!!!)
KYRIE AND BEAL BACKCOURT WOULD NOT BE UNDERSIZED.
Come on people. They are 6’3″ and almost 6’5″ with 6’4″ and 6’8″ wingspans, respectively. That is perfectly fine. Its not ideal or perfect, but ITS NOT UNDERSIZED. Its probably average if not above average. Seriously this line of thinking needs to disappear. It is just plain out wrong. Look at the two current teams in the finals. Their PG and SG that play most of the minutes are no taller than 6’5″ and they seemed to be just fine. Look at the Celtics. Rondo and Allen. 6’1″ and 6’5″. Spurs, Parker and Ginobili, 6’2″ and 6’6″. Where does everyone get the notion that all SGs in the NBA are like 9 ft tall. I mean, damn people.
@DJW
Just looked at the final four teams that were remaining in my last comment. Nobody had anybody with significant height advantage over KI/Beal. But just keep saying they are undersized.
Oooh, another one. Well Aaron:
Did I specifically call Barnes an efficient scorer? Or are you just talking now, putting words in my mouth? Barnes strugged at times. Do I need to put it up on a billboard? According to you guys Barnes should fall out of the lottery. He was the #1 option and struggled at times. Should I put it in caps? He was faced with the best defender and double teams every game. HE STRUGGLED AT TIMES. Why do scouts then never question his ability as a scorer? Why do they concur that he is an elite shooter? I guess they missed the memo that HE STRUGGLED AT TIMES.
Doesnt change the fact that he is a scorer now, and has the potential to be an elite scorer at the next level.
Athletic Defenders are a DIME A DOZEN. That doesn’t mean MKG isnt good, or even elite, it just means I DONT THINK YOU NEED TO DRAFT ONE THAT HIGH! I would take Beal or Barnes and live with a Battier, Bowen, Danny Green type all day. You DO NOT neet to use a top 10 pick on an athletic defender that struggles with his shot.
Beal is not Bad. In fact, Beal is very good. There are vew Elite SGs in the NBA. The reason is….you dont need one either. you need and Elite GUARD, WING, BIG. We have KYRIE, now we need a wing. I prefer Barnes because he has size, the athleticism to be successful, and other intangibles. He has weak areas too. HE STRUGGLED AT TIMES. Everyone does. Kyrie and Barnes wont lead us to a championship, we still need other things. We will need a back-up playmaking pg in case Barnes doesn’t develop his dribble. My point is, all things considered, and despite the fact that HE STRUGGLES AT TIMES, I fell he is the best fit. There are 2 sgs I like at 24 or in the 2nd round to stretch the floor further in case teams gear up on Barnes. This is team building. If you disagree, fine, but I am speaking with facts. Beal was the 2-3 scoring option on his team. He was not the player facing the opposing teams best shot on defense like Barnes was, EVERY NIGHT. His 44 percent from the field holds more weight than the 44.5 percent from Beal.
Aaron, Beal is undersized man. He is not as undersized as people feared, but at under 6-5 he is undersized. Its a fact. Just google: “Is Bradley Beal Undersized?” Thats where it comes from. Look at ALL the play-off teams. Thats where it comes from. These are some of the top NBA sg’s: Wade (elite athlete), kobe (6-6), manu(6-6), harden (6-5), JJ (6-7), eric gordon(6-3), ray allen (6-5). Eric Gordon is the best comparison in terms of height. He is ball dominant, which Beal can not be because of matching up next to Kyrie, and Gordon is also a better athlete. This is why I say there will be match-up problems. I honestly think the 6-5 guys will be able to shoot over Beal as well. You disagree?
@DJW
I can guarantee that the opposing teams’ best wing defender was on Beal just like they did Barnes so Barnes’ 44% doesn’t hold more weight than Beal’s 44.5%. Why would a team put their best wing defender on a 5’8″ Walker or 6’2″ Boynton over the 6’5″ Beal especially when Beal shoots just as well if not better than those two. I was unaware on the memo that all NBA teams got that said you have to have guard, wing, big to win a championship. Might want to tell Dallas that. Or the Heat in ’06. Or the dozens of other teams that didn’t follow that model. You don’t have to have those. You have to have good players. You can have Barnes’ three inches over Beal all day, and I’ll take the more rebounds, steals, assists, and blocks. Odd that such an undersized player had better stats over a player with such good size in so many areas that are somewhat dependent on size. Beal didn’t say he wanted to be a combo guard. He said he could be. Big difference. The latter is just a guy trying to improve his draft stock and I don’t read much into what player’s say about themselves at draft time.
BEAL IS 6’4.75”. He is a quarter inch from being the same size or bigger than half the guys you listed. Not to mention his 6’8″ wingspan and 39″ vertical (better than Barnes btw). HIS SIZE IS NOT AN ISSUE AT ALL.
Thank for being so generous. I will take Barnes’ 3+ inches too. Looking at the Mavs i’d say they had top players at the 3 positions because Dirk plays a perimeter game like a wing. The Heat with Wade and Shaq were a bit different because that whole finals was a joke. But I guess picking 1 team in comparison to all the others makes you right. Good job. Looking at this years Finals though over 6 years ago, I will take my chances with the Wing, Big, PG.
Also, Florida ran a 3 guard line-up. The best defender was often matched up against Boyton because he was the primary scorer and ball handler. Check it out, I know I did BEFORE I started typing.
Check the rebounding Numbers for UNC. They had 2 guys average almost 10 a game, then Barnes was third. For a player playing the perimeter with two towers in the middle the numbers are not impressive, but put in perspective arent terrible either.
Barnes standing Vertical is ridiculous, just saying. And Beals is not high enough to compensate for the height difference for many of the nba SGs. I didnt even mention guys like Kevin Martin, Paul George, Afflalo, Klay Thompson, JR Smith, DeRozan, Nick Young, etc. The 2 6-5 guys….one comes off the bench and the other is in the twilight of his career. There will be match-up problems. These guys range from 6-6 up to 6-9 with athleticism as well.
This conversation has gotten to pointless. We will see in 3 years what happens. After 1 year we will see if the size of Beal matters.
Why should I look at all the playoff teams. Weren’t you the one who stated that you don’t want to be the Hawks? You want to be a championship team. Well looking at the final four teams remaining, the main SG’s are James Harden (6’5.25″), Ray Allen (6’5″), Manu Ginobili (6’6″), and Dwyane Wade (6’4.75″). And where are you getting that Beal is not a good athlete? His rebounding and block numbers are easily best out of this draft group. Second place wasn’t even close. Comparing to Wade (elite athlete by your words) coming out of college: Beal has less body fat, 1.5″ better standing vert and 4″ better max vert. That kinda says elite athlete to me. Quote from DraftExpress about his block numbers: “Bradley Beal sits in a tier by himself here, just like he did in our rebounding rankings. His size, length, and commitment on the defensive end outpace the rest of this group of guards by a significant margin.” Absolutely no concerns about size or length. They actually say thats one of his strengths.
I can guarantee you it won’t. He is averaged sized at worst.
Oh all this and the fact that he will only be 18 when drafted and has said himself that he is still growing
How bout the Lakers? Who was there all important PG in the PG, wing big model? How bout OKC this year? Ibaka and Perkins are defensive oriented bigs. So basically your formula that is absolutely crucial in winning a championship has resulted in roughly 50% of the titles the past decade or so. Doesn’t seem to me like you have to have it.
The fact that Beal played with two smaller guards only helps his rebounding case. He played SF instead of SG so he usually had a bigger guy on him, but stell out rebounded every other SG in the country.
How did the Celtics, Spurs, Thunder, and Heat make it this far with such undersized SG’s? How in the world did they guard all those guys that are like a whole two inches taller? I mean Paul George is clearly the better player than James Harden or D-Wade because he is taller.
Beal is barely undersized, his wingspan covers it. However, I’d still take MKG. We’ll be a lotto team next year too, IMO, and scorers can be found. I’d rather have a guy that’s won at every level, projects out to be a good NBA player even though stats have a hard time measuring defense, his specialty, is a tireless leader, can defend 1s, 2s, and 3s, and is by all accounts a tireless worker who should be able to improve his game over time. He’s got a mind for the game, and it can’t be denied. I don’t care about next year’s Cavs team if I’m drafting – We have, what, 3 or 4 keepers right now? The rest is garbage, and those spots will be filled by players that can be signed as specialists just like you can sign a defensive specialist. There’s no reason MKG can’t average 15 points per game in 4 years with Kyrie feeding him the ball and a game that is worked on every year. Regardless, I don’t draft for fit if I’m the Cavs – I take the best player available, and the majority opinion amongst draft experts is that MKG rates above the other wings in this draft. I’ll take that.
Finally somebody with a little sense
People put waay too much stock in height and combine numbers. You know what the finals teams have in common? Dynamic, efficent wings who can pass and help in multiple ways. Wade, Ginobili, and Harden can all pass, grab some rebounds and handle the ball well (few turnovers for their usage). I think Beal can fill that role pretty well, as long as his shot really does come around. MKG is a complex player. He’s compared to Iggy because of his athleticism, rebounding, steals and defense, but his passing and handle don’t really support that. I think he’s a rich man’s Gerald Wallace, which in mind is a great player and totally worth grabbing. It’s talent and will that net team championships, and he has a perfect blend. His shooting is indeed an issue, so if we could grab John Jenkins or Doron Lamb this draft will be a smash success for us.
I think too many people here are relying on cliches to predict the Cavs future. Look…fears of not enough offense…too much defense…undersized backcourt…it DOESNT MATTER.
The Cavs are a rebuilding team. They need to pick players they believe in…that can grow together…and improve in the next 3 years.
You CANNOT start evaluating these guys until a few years down the road. If you made judgment calls right away, you’d waive Andrew Bynum…cut undersized Jason Terry…or dump poor-shooting Jason Kidd.
We just need good team players at this point. I like all three of these wing prospects. Let’ see who falls.
It seems like DJW has left the building. I thought he made some good points and it was an intelligent, spirited debate. I had to laugh at this quote, “you need and Elite GUARD, WING, BIG,” though. In a five-man sport, if you have elite players at any three of the five spots, I think you’re a championship contender. If 60% of your team is elite level, you’ll be ok.
Plus, SG and SF are the two Wing Position, and he’s throwing the 6’11″ Power Forward his Whole Career Dirk into the wing catagory as well, so clearly any 3 players on the team as long as 2 of them aren’t centers can be smudged around to fit the “Gaurd – Wing -Big” argument. Like Irving, Beal, Verajoa for that matter.
Seriously DJW, beal’s standing reach is 1.5″ shorter than barnes, and you can never have too many players that can get the ball to the rim. Something beal does better than barnes, and something not that easy to learn in the NBA. Does Kyrie do it very well himself? yes. So what! I want someone collapsing the paint who can shoot the J if need be over someone who will more often than not settle for the jumper.
Reach and wingspan are a lot more important measurable than how high the top of your head is off the ground. I rarely see plays made from the neck up. Regardless, measurable also pale in comparison to game tape and production, and beal plays more athletically and does more for his team than barnes, at a year younger. I want someone who can rebound and defend as well as score. People think barnes will do an adequate, maybe above average job at this, but Beal is Elite at rebounding and a good defender. I also don’t want someone who loves the long 2′s, the most inefficient shot in basketball. Beal was roughly 3 for 5.6 from inside the arc per game, barnes was 4.7 for 10.1. True beal loved his 3 pointer too much, but it came on at the end of the year, and he took smarter shots down low. I know barned may have been asked to do more, but he had plenty of help on that team, and those 2 pt % differences are drastic.