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? ------------------ (===)
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
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. ------------------
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.
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.
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 <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? ------------------ (===)
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
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
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? ------------------ (===)
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'' ) 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.
Why wouldn't the Rockets want Haywood's toughness over Woods though? 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? ------------------ (===)
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. ------------------
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.
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
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).]
NIKE, read this and then tell me why Woods is an okay pick. This write up makes it sound like he sucks. 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. ------------------ (===)
Woods is still playing, isn't he? 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.
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.
