Woods vs. Haywood.

[Achebe]

Alot of guys around here mock Brendan Haywood and love Loren Woods. However, alot of mock drafts (other than nbadraft.net) put Haywood before Woods. What's the story w/ these two? Haywood on paper looks a ton stronger than Woods. He's 20-30 lbs. heavier, has gotten probably a 100 more blocks than Woods this past season...

So why the love for Loren? Offensive potential?

------------------
(===)

[moestavern19]

Loren Woods is a better player than Haywood by far . For one thing Haywood doesnt play man to man defense as well as Woods , And Woods as a better outside shooter . He plays solid defense and also Rebounds well .

------------------
Rockets Player Profile
Cuttino Mobley Position: G
Born: 09/01/74
Height: 6-4
Weight: 190 lbs. College - Rhode Island '98

Personal
Favorite Movie
"Jack"

His full name is Cuttino Rashawn Mobley

Cuttino is a cousin of NFL linebacker John Mobley .

Favorite hobby is shooting pool

[Hobbs]

Ok, I'll be the contrary voice.

Woods is as strong as a toothpick, has a history of injuries and is as mentally strong as a porcupine is cuddly. I think he has a chance to be Marcus Camby minus the rebounding skills.

Haywood hasn't developed nearly as well as he should have, but he's got strength and durability. He could develop into a real nice player with the right coaching or he could just be a space eater for the next decade.

Neither is without problems and both are decent size risks. If I had to take one, I'd take Haywood.

------------------

[NIKEstrad]

Blocks don't tell the whole story of defense. Haywood averages 1 more block per game (3.5-2.5). Last year's number for Woods was 3.9, and also averaged more points, 15.6 compared to 12.5, and rebounds, 7.5-6.2. Woods also shot 53.8% from the field compared to 49.8% this year. Reasons for the dropoff? The missed games, the coach missing games, and teams clamping down more on Woods. Woods did up his assist total to 2.3, which is pretty good for college centers.

The closest comparison IMO to Woods' D, is that of Kevin Garnett's. Physically, they've got the same frame, and Woods has that quickness to stick with just about anyone. The long arms and lateral movement, as well as being the weakside force is a parallel to Garnett. Haywood, I see ending up a lot like Cato (or if you want, what Cato was supposed to be). Ineffective outside of 5 feet, and lost interest.

Another difference between the 2 is the "Shaq factor". Woods shoots a very nice 80.6% from the charity stripe. Haywood? 50.8%, not very pretty.

As you said, the offensive potential is huge difference. Woods has the ability to face up, and hit the J, or take an opponent off the dribble, with a very soft touch. Haywood's offense consists of putbacks, dunks, and basically overpowering the defender. At 7'0'' 270, maybe more, not many college guys match him in size. His hands aren't too much better than Cato's.

Neither is a sure thing, and likely won't start their rookie season's. I see Woods as a guy who could become a key player for a team becoming a solid starter, and with the current state of centers, a top 15 center in the NBA, while Haywood, I don't see as better than a guy in a platoon, or a guy just sort of filling in a position for a team with a gaping hole (see T-Wolves at center right now).

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[Puedlfor]

I'm leery of both of them.

Woods hasn't seemed the same player he was last year, I'm assuming it was because of all the turmoil surrounding the Arizona team, but Woods didn't seem to be all there at times. He's gifted offensively, and a terrific shot-blocker, but he either can't, or doesn't rebound to terribly well for a 7-footer. Some of that might be due to his playing alongside Michael Wright, a viscious rebounder, but I don't recall him ever really crash the boards. He's thin and probably couldn't take much of a pounding in the paint, and there's the serious back injury he had last year.

If I had to put him on a team it would be Detroit. He could act as a secondary offensive weapon and defensive help. His two main weaknesses - lack of toughness and below-average rebounding would be compensated for by Ben Wallace, who excels at both of those, but not much else.

Haywood is Benoit Benjamin. He's Will Perdue. He's a bust waiting to happen. He should be dominating night in and night out, but he's incredibly inconsistent. He can go for 25 and 10 one night, then 6 and 4 the next. He gets a lot of blocks by sitting in the lane all day ,which he can't do in the pros, and his post moves are depressing.

If I could put him on a team in the NBA where he fit's best, its San Antonio. He could sit behind TD and Robinson and spell them while being taught the ropes by both of them, to eventually take Robinson's place when he retires.

But I don't want either one on the Rockets.

------------------
The Rockets will be the NBA champions. Believe.

[Achebe]

Thanks for the input guys. I was right about to start a new thread titled "Since Cato sucks anyway", but b/c of the way in which data is stored for new threads on the server, I figured I'd bring this guy back up...

So w/o further adieu http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

<h1>Since Cato sucks anyway</h1>

Why not get Brendan Haywood? He's cheaper, he looks better than Cato (though I have a hard time extrapolating college to pro).

This is a mix between forums, but if we could unload Cato later on in the draft w/ the Milwaulkee, acquire Morris perhaps w/ the Sac. from Orlando (or whatever), why not get Haywood w/ the 13 if the Rockets don't make the playoffs?

That is, if the Rockets don't make the playoffs, it's because of one problem -- the frontcourt. Why not trade in a $42 million dollar contract for a ~$5-8 million dollar one?

Would Haywood be better than Cato? He at least sounds tougher than Kelvin "I think Los" has to step it up" Cato.

So in light of the Rockets' issues up front and Woods' mid lottery pick status, would you put Haywood in a starting position at the outset next year?

------------------
(===)

[Beck]

I think Cato has more potential than Haywood. I could be wrong, but I think Haywood is another Eric Montross. He can only score from about 5 feet. People are quick to compare him to Shaq because of his size, but it will never happen. Perfect example was the UNC-Penn State game. PSU has no size. Haywood scored early on offensive rebounds, so you would think he had the comfidence to go for a big night. It didn't happen. Even though he was being guarded by a guy 6+ inches shorter than him for most of the game, he refused to do anything with the ball when he got it in the post. Every time he looked to pass as soon as he caught the ball. PSU was doubling him, but he was bailing out before the double-team got there.
In the NBA, he won't get those easy offensive rebounds, and at his size he's not going to get out in transition like Cato can. Shotblocking is close. I just think Cato fits the team better because of his athleticism.
Speaking of Cato, if this guy could only play more like Keon Clark. I've only seen Clark in Toronto about 10 times, but he looks nice. He runs the floor, rebounds, finishes, and blocks shots. All the things Cato is supposed to do.

------------------
- Beck

Dream...bring back the goggles

[kidrock8]

Haywood isn't worth the time to discuss about... He will always be an underachiever who will make Cato look like a passionate player...

The two things about Woods that stands out IMO is that he can face up as well as post up on offense... The other thing is that he has tremendous body control in the air... By this I mean that he can get tip ins from the oddest angles, and is able to block a lot of shots without getting called for a foul... In fact, he averages barely 2 fouls a game for Arizona, and blocks about 3 or 4... Not too bad...

He does need to improve his rebounding and aggresion, as well as gaining 10 lbs or so... Despite being 240-245 he looks lanky...

For a 7-1 player, it's amazing how quickly Woods can jump and down consecutively... Just like Olajuwon back in the day...

------------------
"Awesome baby!"

Dick Vitale

[Achebe]

So both of you guys would rather have Cato than Haywood?

Interesting. I don't particularly care about the offensive skills of either player. If Haywood brought in blocks and boards w/o the silly meek attitude that Kelly Cato has, I'd be happy. The last thing the team needs is a starting Center w/ no sense of shame or no aspirations.

Haywood will be cheaper than Cato, and he certainly has a better attitude. It's not as if the team will look for first option points from the Center spot w/ either Cato or Haywood... all points will be of the clean up variety or off of the alley oop attack that Cato and Mobley had last year.

I can't stand Cato. If he gave a triple nickel every night, of course he'd earn his contract... but who sees him averaging even that?

------------------
(===)

[NIKEstrad]

Contract wise, of course I'd take Haywood over Cato. Skill-wise, it's probably a wash.

Don't be surprised if Wood slips to late lottery, into an area where we could trade up. Woods' weight (240? I doubt it as much as Forte being 6'4'' http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/wink.gif) will be a big issue, and most teams aren't gonna like both. It's one or the other. So say somewhere like New Jersey wants Haywood (toughness) over Woods, but Haywood won't go till the Rockets pick. Package the Rockets pick and a future pick and/or KT and/or take on a cap eater type Jersey wants to lose (in exchange for Walt), and you can get Woods.

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[Achebe]

Why wouldn't the Rockets want Haywood's toughness over Woods though? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

The Rockets are competitive now... and Cato sucks. If Haywood is what Cato is supposed to be, even marginally slower, keep him. Why trade for Woods if he doesn't fit the need at Center?

------------------
(===)

[ROCKETBOOSTER]

What about Ken Johnson out of Ohio state? I'd love to get this guy, he seems to have more potential than Cato. Does anybody have any fresh insight on this guy? Could we possibly draft him with Milwaukees pick or has his value risen higher than that? Personally, I don't like Haywood, he reminds me of Cato too much.

------------------

[NIKEstrad]

Achebe-The Rockets wouldn't want it because Haywood on offense outside of 3 feet is ineffective, and that's a BIG thing to Rudy, where as the Nets in the East, would probably prefer it.

Woods can step out to about 15 feet. Woods can play D just fine against probably any center outside of Shaq. And, if it's strength we want, the Rocket staff is one of the best in the league at working with players. Cato came back from ok to absolutely ripped, Francis added lots of muscle as well.

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[MManal]

I have consistently felt that Brendan Haywood is a bust waiting to happen and still feel that way. A big criteria atleast in my view is that big men need to be mobile and sleek not tripping over their own feet. Forget the body frames for a minute b/c players do tend to bulk up if necessary in the pros and look at the footwork of Loren Woods. The guy is very nimble in his lateral movement and runs the court like a gazelle. Its amazing how well he covers the court on the defensive end. Haywood on the other hand is slow.

Haywood does have a bigger frame but its not like he plays a consistent rough and rugged style. Intensity has come into question several times during his career at UNC. Woods will need to bulk up for the NBA game (which I feel he can do), but he does have the tools to succeed unlike Haywood the slug.

------------------
Check out the Best Source for Draft Info

Draftsource.net (http://www.draftsource.net)

[MattsayzIstillbelieve!!!]

I don't think we should attempt going for Woods unless we don't have to trade up to do so and there isn't better talent on the board that we could use. In my opinion Woods will be like Camby except more injury prone. Haywood might just be better than Benoit Benjamin but not by much. I would prefer Jason Collins who's game I think is gonna have a good translation to the NBA in my opinion he'd outplay Cato at least not that he's more atletic but he's smarter and has desire plus real skill. If not maybe Ken Johnson for center would be worth a thought.Obviously this draft we need to size up the 3 & 5 the most so I would be pleased if say we got Jason and then Terrence Morris at Milwaukee's pick or the Orlando or whatever we get. In my dreams I want Joe Johnson to play a sorta point-forward position. In fact we need to do somethin to get him and never mind about Woods trade up for that guy. Also one free agent out there besides Webber worth thinking about is Eddie Robinson from the Hornets. Of course we could be better right now for sure if Cato we start caring and work up a drool as well as get a clue. Ah well never mind the rambling.


[This message has been edited by MattsayzIstillbelieve!!! (edited March 22, 2001).]

[Achebe]

NIKE, read this and then tell me why Woods is an okay pick. This write up makes it sound like he sucks. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

Loren Woods didn't merely save Arizona with his off-the-mat second-half performance against Illinois, he may have saved his NBA career. The 7-foot-1 senior center has been an enigma all year after looking like a lottery pick after his junior season.
When a scout was asked during the tournament how low Woods' NBA stocked had dropped, the guy said, "Antarctica."
Opposing crowds had been chanting "CBA, CBA" to Woods, and Coach Lute Olson had nearly given up on solving his center.
"It's been a work in progress, no question about that," Olson said this week.
Then, out of nowhere . . . in the first half against Illinois, Woods had no shots from the field, no rebounds and three turnovers. He finished with 18 points and seven blocked shots, and made 12 of 13 free throws.
That performance alone ought to raise Woods' stock to, oh, somewhere in Queensland?
Woods has been more a 7-1 mystery than a 7-1 wonder this season. He was labeled damaged goods when he came to Arizona from Wake Forest, where he played a season with Tim Duncan but became overwhelmed by the comparisons.
After sitting out a season, Woods seemed transformed, winning honors as Pacific 10 Conference newcomer of the year last year as a junior. He averaged 15 points and seven rebounds a game and was a menacing shot blocker.
Yet back problems forced him out of the team's last eight games and Arizona lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament to Wisconsin.
Woods twice had back surgery in the off-season and felt so good about the upcoming season his mouth started moving faster than his feet.
It was Woods, remember, who started all this greatest-team-ever nonsense.
He sat in a ballroom in November during Pac-10 media day and joked about this Arizona team being able to defeat Bill Walton's great UCLA teams in the 1970s. Bill's son, Luke, is a reserve forward for the Wildcats.
"This team can be as good as it wants to be," Woods said then. "I think with the talent that we have, it compares up there with anybody in the nation and the history of college basketball."
Woods set out to prove it by . . . getting suspended for the first six games for taking money from a summer league coach.
This "greatest team ever" started 8-5, and Woods never fully emerged from his funk.
Olson says the six missed games hurt Woods, yet it was no secret the Arizona coach was becoming exasperated by his center's erratic play.
Olson benched Woods for the Oregon State game after he back-talked the coach at practice the day after a humiliating road loss at Oregon.
Woods is prone to mood swings and has a very fragile basketball psyche. You can tell how he's playing by the look on his face.
At one point during the season, a frustrated Olson said: "If he wants to beat himself up, that's his option. It's his life and he'll live with it."
Woods says he now regrets not turning pro last year, when his stock was high--Woods could write the manual for why players should leave early for the pros.
That said, Arizona still needs Woods to defeat Michigan State on Saturday and advance to Monday's national title game.
Why Woods suddenly came alive in the final 10 minutes against Illinois is difficult to say.
"I just kept thinking things would turn around," Woods said.
Woods is not aggressive. True. He doesn't take the ball strongly to the basket. True. He seems lost at times on the court. True.
But also true: There is no replacing his presence.
At 7-1, he runs the court well and is an intimidating defender.
"He's critical to us," Olson said, "just as he was against Illinois, even though he didn't play well the first 25 minutes.
"Down the stretch he was huge. He's the guy who makes it tough for people to take it to the hole, because if he doesn't block it, he's certainly going to affect the way the guy looks at a shot."
Woods is also an anomaly for a big man. He is an 83.3% free-throw shooter.
Is Woods an NBA lottery pick?
Hardly.
Is Arizona one of the greatest teams in college basketball history?
Please.
Yet, with two games separating Arizona from its second national title in four years, there is plenty left for Woods to salvage.


------------------
(===)

[Achebe]

Woods sounds like another Kelly Cato.

------------------
(===)

[a.k.a vince]

Simple, Woods is better!!

------------------

[NIKEstrad]

Woods is still playing, isn't he? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/wink.gif

All Woods needs is some upper body strength. He's got more basketball skills than Kelly could ever dream of.

But doesn't it also sound like Rudy to draft a senior that many people are down on?

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[Mango]

Will the Rockets give extra weight to a player's fire in the belly after the Kelly debacle?

Mango

------------------
Get it right or just don't do it!
Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated.

[RichRocket]

Sounds like Woods may be the next Bison Dele:

http://www.news-record.com/sports/hardin/hardin30.htm

Go with Haywood! Big kid. Hard worker.

------------------
Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
PowerbizOnline.com

[Achebe]

I hope so Mango, that doc that RichRocket gave and the other things that I've read about Woods makes him sound like a loooooser.

Nike, I understand the intuition to get the player that slips b/c of a mental thing but JUST SAY NO. Woods will be sulking and writing kids books in a matter of years. He isn't physical, hell he only rose to the occassion in the Illi game when their front court all fouled out!. This guy is a total pansie. Troy Murphy would be a better pick than Woods, regardless of his speed, just b/c he isn't afraid to get touched.

A center that doesn't bang! What's the point?!? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/eek.gif

------------------
(===)

[Relativist]

Achebe,
I'm inclined to agree. But if Rudy and CD get the opportunity to take Woods and jump on it, I'm going to be thrilled, because we all know they measure a lot of factors in whom they draft, including work ethic and attitude. If they feel good about Woods, I'm going to trust them.

------------------

[Mango]

Yeah, but a year and 1/2 ago, they took Kelly and his agent's word that Kelly would maintain the fire when the team signed him to the sweet contract. Words and previous history were in conflict and history proved more to be more accurate than a person's words.


Mango

------------------
Get it right or just don't do it!
Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated.

[NIKEstrad]

If you don't like Woods for other reasons, but let me make this clear.

Kelvin Cato is an athletic 7 footer with defensive potential, but often falls for fakes or doesn't try, and has a fat contract. He has not the slightest of an offensive game.

Loren Woods is an athletic 7 footer with EXCELLENT defensive skills, and a top rate offensive arsenal for a center. He's got a jumpshot, excellent touch, and is incredibly long. His knock is fire in the belly.

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59936-2001Mar12.html">Article</a>
BUT, read what Lute Olsen and the Arizona staff, as well as his former coach at wake Forest have to say. I'll go look for the article later, but they say Woods' problem is he's a perfectionist. He needs to put on weight, and once he does that, he'll be able to bang. Right now, his body can't handle it.
WARNING: DREAMCAST MODE
But, how about this scenario. Let's suppose we trade off Kelly Cato and change for Lafrentz/starch. What I would do with the picks, is with our #13, IF he's even around draft Woods. Then with our other 2 picks (Milwaukee/via Orlando) I'd take another big man, either White, Jason Collins, Johnson, Jones, Okafor, Gadzuric, or Boumtje-Boumtje, and then a SF or swingman like Butler, Morris, Jefferson, Prince, or one of those foreigners.

Hypothetically, we'll trade KT and with Cato for Radojevic/Lafrentz. For giggles we'll send Walt and free up their pick to Chicago for 1 second round pick and draft a project not affecting the roster now. Olajuwon retires, we don't get Webber, retain Mo, Mooch, Shandon

Lafrentz/Woods/Radojevic/Collier
Taylor/R. White/Rogers (Lafrentz also can log PF time)
Shandon/Langhi/Morris
Mobley/[Shandon]
Francis/Moochie

That's 13 players. 12 man roster and 1 guy on the IL. Also would probably still have cap if desired, could pick up around a 5 mill player.

Loads of athleticism, scoring. A pair of excellent defensive big men in Lafrentz/Woods, and a big guy in Radojevic, with decent potential, but injuries (lotto pick a few years back). Ability to spread the floor, with many excellent shooters up front. Two stopper type SFs in Anderson and Morris, and good scorers at PF. While a little soft in the middle, depth to come in waves at opposition, as well as the length to cause nightmares.
------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[This message has been edited by NIKEstrad (edited March 30, 2001).]

[JayZ750]

Seems to me as if Woods has been playing real well in the tourney. He played a fine game today, and you have to remember it is very difficult to "shine" in college. What did Jordan average for NC...15 ppg or something like that.

Woods looks like he could be something at least better than Shawn Bradley. Now thats not the best compliment in the world, but considering Bradley coudl school Cato any day of the week, Woods woudl definietly be an improvement at center.

------------------

[Achebe]

Did he play a great game??? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

He had some good blocks, but I thought Arenas (sp), Gardner and Jefferson were the difference for Arizona. Woods shot like 1-2000 or something (just trying to get Nike to post again in this thread http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif).

------------------
(===)

[No Worries]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Achebe:
Woods sounds like another Kelly Cato.
</font>

Woods is the next Carlos Rogers, except that he has a better J but is as weak as a kitten. Carlos is also not a head case and thrives coming off the bench.

In the Illinois Woods got pushed under the basket after every Illinois free throw. He will be eaten alive in the NBA. Whoever drafts will regret it.

IMO, Woods is a second round pick in this deep draft.

[NIKEstrad]

Achebe-Unfortunately, I missed the game, and my VCR went down on me. (Or I screwed up the setup in a rush).
Looking strictly at the box score, positives-Woods played 37 minutes against a physical team, and blocked 3 shots, and only picked up 2 fouls in that time. Shot 5-13, not too pretty. But grabbed 8 rebounds-ALL defensive. That's above average as far as defensive rebounds go.

In other center news, Steven Hunter is declaring for the draft. This kid needs weight too, but is also a superathletic 7 footer. A nice 20ish pick, that could develop nicely. With Woods, Chandler, Jones, Curry, Hunter, Johnson, and Dalembert, athletic 7 footers look like they'll be a dime a dozen in this draft.

We'll see how things go vs. Duke, and Boozer.

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[This message has been edited by NIKEstrad (edited April 01, 2001).]

[Desert Scar]

Watched a lot of Pac 10 games, seen Heywood and Johnson a number of times too.

I used to be high on the Collins's, because they are very fundamentally sound and have good size. But, as fundamentally sound they are, they are equally weak in quickness. They both look stuck in the mud when opponents come into the lane, and they are only facing college players. I don't think that forebodes well for the NBA careers. Being stuck in the mud can't be said for Woods, Haywood, Johnson or Gadzuric. The Collin's will last a long time in the NBA, but will never be more that 15-minute bit players. I would not spend a sub-15 pick on either of them.

I would spend a sub-15 pick on the guys below, but none are sure things:

With Woods you also have to consider physical frailty along with mental frailty. Docs did not know how his back was going to respond, though it seems to be holding up so far. Another negative, he is pretty weak (did ya'll see how those Illinois boys pushed him around) and doesn't have much of a post up game. Camby (who I think is a very good player to compare him to), had more of a post-up game at the same stage in their careers. On the plus side, Woods has terrific defensive instincts AND defensive skills, and 7 footers like that are a rare commodity. He also has a good shot facing the basket.

I like Johnson a lot. Almost the defensive skills of Woods and a better rebounder. From what I know (not a lot) his mind and dedication seem more suited for the rigors of the NBA. Overall, a notch below Woods in offensive and defensive ability, but it takes a lot more than ability to be a consistent contributor.

Haywood is risky, but he has the height, bulk and quickness (though not as quick as Woods) to be a good NBA center. Some players get to be better foul shooters and develop a low post game, others don't. I would take a chance on Heywood, he has much more athletic ability than Montross, Purdue and some of the others guys people have mentioned.

I "might" also be willing to spend a 15 pick on Gadzuric. He is quick and hustles, even if he is raw. He sure tore up Woods and the rest of Arizona the last time they played.

Oh, I might as well rank them in terms of my draft interest. I will say at the onset I would rather go for up side over just being a decent contributer IF I have to choose between the two:

1. Haywood (note: he could fall quickly to 3)
2. Woods
3. Johnson

4. Gadzuric

5. Jas C.
6. Jer. C.

[This message has been edited by Desert Scar (edited April 01, 2001).]

[NIKEstrad]

Desert Scar-good post.

Woods IMO is a very tough player to clone-I see Jermaine O'Neal/Camby in him. As I've said a lot, his defense is Garnett-like IMO Lengthy player with a skinny frame, his post game lacks, but he has a very nice face up game, which Camby lacks, and O'Neal's doesn't extend quite as far on the floor.

If we have a pair of 20ish picks (Orlando/Milwaukee), I'm almost sure that Rudy and co. will take either Jones or Johnson if they're available, because they are seniors, even if we were to get a center (Woods, Haywood, Ming, Chandler, Curry, Diop never know about the lotto balls) with our now assured lotto pick. Gadzuric, I feel should go before our later picks, but after our own pick.

The more I watch Gadzuric, the more I like him. If his knees weren't such a huge question, he'd be a great pick. Good physically, tough player, good rebounder, good defender position-wise (not so much a shot-blocking threat), and hustling skills.


------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[RichRocket]

I hope the Rockets can somehow land Haywood. He's a good humble kid (tell me that doesn't count for something) who works hard. He has improved every year. Hey, this is coming from a Duke fan!

------------------
Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
PowerbizOnline.com

[No Worries]

Seeing Woods go against Battier was a preclude to both of their future NBA careers. I see them both 3s in the bigs. Battier has a nice inside / outside game, while Woods has a limited but very effective outside game and an inside game that will work best against smaller 3s.

Woods reminds me a bit of Danny Manning, though with less skills and with more "head case". Woods' passing from the perimeter is excellent, his best skill imo. Woods' defense shows that he is a bit of a tweener (like our own Los). He is too slow to guard a 3 and way too weak to guard a starting NBA 4/5.

From the strength of his March Madness showing, Woods may be a borderline lottery pick. This will be a good thing for the Rocks, if Woods is off the board before their pick.

Battier is another story. He is a real gamer. He plays well and hard at both ends of the court. He may not be a star in the NBA, but he should be a solid NBA starter with a long career. Unfortunately, he will be long gone by the Rocks' pick.

[RichRocket]

Woods is better than I gave him credit. That ambidexterity in the paint is a wonderful advantage. He reminds me of Ralph Sampson.

------------------
Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
PowerbizOnline.com

[moestavern19]

I like Loren Woods , I think He was Tim Duncan's backup , So he might have learned a few things .

------------------
Mark Cuban who? The Rockets own the Mavericks

[Prempeh]

The only thing he learned at Wake was how to run away from high expectations...that being said, he did impress me in the championship game, but overall for the tournament he did not play as well as his stat sheet might say.

The main problem I have with the guy is he doesn't go up and get balls that he should, and this goes back to the whole 'soft' issue, which is definitely an issue.

However, he is going to be the most versatile center in the draft, and if he's there at 13 I think he would be a good pickup, especially if CD can find a bruiser at the 4 to protect him (Ben Wallace comes to mind). Detroit needs a center, right? Maybe package Cato and the pick they owe us (and maybe another one) for Wallace. Of course they have had their share of center without a pulse (ie Montross), so they might not want another one...

------------------
P.S. This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated.

[oeilpere]

I'm siding with Nike.

Woods will be a comer. He is 25 pounds from a top five pick. But will slip maybe to double digits. But make no mistake, he has more intestinal fortitude than Cato has complaints.

My dream cast (since someone mentioned) is Battier and Woods in a Rocket's uni. I do like Curry. And Hay-hay is not far away.

This summer's "pick-me-please-weekend-sweat" is deep in multi-position representation , thick in a variety of styles/body shapes, one of the best swingman drafts ever, possibly the largest volume of quality (and semi-quality) bigmen in a decade and probably the most exciting crop in four or five years.


------------------

[Dr of Dunk]

Reading the article that Achebe posted makes Woods seem kind of like a Rasheed Wallace crossed with a Joe Barry Carroll (Barely Cares). The last thing I'd want on this team is an emotional malcontent.

------------------
"So you say you want some intelligent responses? I say give me something intelligent to respond to." -- Dimwits beware, B-Ball freak tells it like it is. Sing it bro!

[This message has been edited by Dr of Dunk (edited April 04, 2001).]

[BuckeyeRocketFan]

For those who do not know much about him, Ken Johnson is Kelvin Cato with heart.

He is a senior who, despite the opportunity to be drafted, petitioned the NBA for an additional year of college eligibility due to a learning disorder. He is class through and through and would fit well on the Rockets.

His game is still raw (he only started playing late in HS) but he is still improving. Since he stepped onto the court at Ohio State, he has been the best shot blocker in the Big Ten and the last two years has been at worst one of the top three shot blockers in the nation. This year, he added a solid offensive game (esp a nice jump hook) despite being double and triple teamed and not getting many shots. He is not the most intense guy you will see but he will give you his all, will have no off the court problems and is a class act.

Due to his lack of offense, he probably will not be a star (I see him maxing out at 15 pts/game in the NBA) but he will be an exceptional role player and would fit well with the Rockets, with or without Webber. I would compare him to either a Cato with heart or a poor man's Kenyon Martin.

I would be surprised if he goes before the Rockets first pick and he probably will be available with their second and third picks as he is not sexy because he doesn't score a lot of points. But he seems like the type of player Rudy would love (other than he can't shoot the 3). Oh, and no Shaq syndrome here as he averages 70% or so from the line.

If he is available at any of the three Rockets picks, I jump on him, no questions asked. Does that help?

------------------

[No Worries]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Desert Scar:
Woods doesn't have to become a Shaq or Malone to be effective, just be able to get a little more muscle. </font>

Woods does not have to be a Shaq or Malone; he just has to guard them. The pro game is so much more physical than college. I forsee a diificult transition.

What if he is the next Camby guaranteed? How many teams would waste a top ten pick in a deep draft on second tier NBA starter?



------------------

[NIKEstrad]

on Ken Johnson-The biggest problem I see is that he fouls a lot. If he was platooning, I don't think it'd be a problem, but as a primetime center, it'd be bad. Also, he's not nearly as built as Cato, giving up around 30-40 pounds. If he's available with one of our 20s pick, it's definitely a good idea. I also think that 15 ppg for him is stretching it.

No Worries-If that's the case, give me Woods with the Rockets lotto (12 or 13). Camby is a top 7 center in this league right now, and if you had him 5 years on a rookie scale contract, it's a steal. After Shaq, Robinson, Mutumbo, and Ratliff. You could only really argue that Hakeem, and Jermaine O'Neal are better than Camby.

oeilpere-Have you heard anything on what the Rockets front office thinks? If Woods is there vs. a PF of similar caliber (say Michael Bradley or Troy Murphy), would they go for Woods? Woods/Battier would be very sweet, if they got Woods with their first pick, I could see them trading their 2 later picks to move up a few slots for a better SF, like Jefferson, or a 21 year old Euro kid named Fotsis who's 6'10'', and has been compared with Kukoc.

------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[BuckeyeRocketFan]

The first 20 games of the year, Ken Johnson did not have any problems with fouls. The last 10 or so, he did, but I strongly doubt he would have much problem with fouls in the NBA.

Woods looked great in the tournament. Definitely showed off his upside, which is tremendous. I think you still have to worry about the headcase. That said, if he is still there with our first pick (assuming we don't trade up) I definitely take him. If Johnson is there with the second pick, I take him even if I get Woods. I think you could play the two together, especially if you don't get Webber.

I have not seen much of Haywood so I don't know anything about him. Someone mentioned Frank Williams in another post. Being Big Ten, I have seen him. Not worthy of a top ten. In fact, the only big ten player maybe worthy of a top ten might be Richardson, and he is iffy IMO.

------------------

[vj23k]

I would love to get Woods.

I would rather see us pick him up than Haywood.

I think he can be everything Cato hasn't been.



------------------
Never Underestimate the Heart of a Champion

[Relativist]

Given the upcoming rule changes allowing zone defense, etc., how does this change what we value in a center? How does this influence what we like in Woods and others?

------------------

[NIKEstrad]

The zone rules boost Jones, Hunter, and Johnson's stock a lot, while overall it probably brings Haywood/Woods back to the center pack, but helps them in overall ranking. Having a guy like Haywood, a space eating shotblocker, would be huge depending on what type of zone defense is allowed in the NBA. The rule can't hurt Woods, but it certainly helps the defensive only centers in this draft more than the guys who can do both.

One guy who's stock could shoot up is Samuel Dalembert: Seton Hall center from Haiti, he's 6'11'' 265, super athleticism....and a 7'7'' wingspan.


------------------
"That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.

[Desert Scar]

I too like Ken J. and hope he is around. I respect Woods a ton more too the way he finished the season (I have seen his ups and downs all year). I no longer have any (major) mental concerns, just physical ones.
The way Woods played in the turny he will not be around for the Rockets I believe, unless there are still questions about physical health (will his back hold up if he bulks up).

Also, there is no question Woods must play as a 4 or 5 in the NBA, a 3 is completely out of the question (can't handle the ball well, he has quick feet for a center--but not for a 3). But Camby and Ratliff are pretty effective 4/5's being long and lean, Woods doesn't have to become a Shaq or Malone to be effective, just be able to get a little more muscle.

[Desert Scar]

I would say except for K-Mart and perhaps Miles and Miller, Camby is worth more than any other rookie from this year draft. I would take a Camby-caliber C/PF ANY year with a late lotto pick.

And Ratliff is lighter than Woods is, yet he is effective against most players. But if you wait to try to find a player who can single handedly play Shaq or Duncan (Ratliff certainly can't play them either), I guess you are waiting fo the next Hakeem, and he might still not be able to do the job himself.

Finally, the rule changes make a shot-blocker even more valuable because you can't make him follow a decoy player on the weak side near the 3 point line. I don't think Woods is the only choice (in fact I believe he won't be around for the late lotto unless new or recurrent health problems are diagnosed), but I think there seems to be a lot of potential 4/5 that might be available.