Hey Oeilpere, interesting list. A lot different from the list I was picturing. Any reason why you don't have Rodney White on there? Does he lack certain qualities the Rockets desire? ------------------ "All you need is love."
Hey sailor, old buddy: I'm rather shocked they have Haywood ahead of Richardson, or even Woods, Bradley, Johnson, Jefferson, White or Randolf or Gasol. Could you tell me why they think he's so special? I thought the knock on him was that he often isn't motivated, ala Cato. I would think theres a real good chance he'll be there at #13, but if we were able to pick Richardson up at #13, I'd take him in a second over Haywood. He could play SF and backup Mobely at the 2. I love your insights and this list is the best inside info on how they are thinking I've read. Is this list based on your intellegent guess or on feedback? Thanks again for the info! ------------------ the more I know, the more I know I don't know... [This message has been edited by Sherlock (edited May 25, 2001).]
[/QUOTE] Thanks for the kudos. Not really sure I deserve them Relatively speaking. They will have a short list that probably looks something like this (except for the top three all others are grouped: 1. Curry ( okay so he’s a high schooler, but they will break their mold and go get him anyway) 2. Griffin ( absolutely best small forward out there) 3. Chandler ( second best SF out there) 4a. Kwame B (great moves and still growing) 4b. Battier ( minimal waiting, a known commodity) 6a. Diop (another HS, but against Haywood he gets a slight nod) 6b. Haywood 8. Richardson ( the fact that he is a Michigan guy is not lost on RT, good all-around game) 9a. Bradley (we don’t need another PF but he and Randolph are being liked) 9b. Randolph ( both he and Bradley would fit the Rockets up front as sliding 3-4’s) 11a.Woods 11b. Jefferson ( it would be hard to pass him by) 13a. Joe Johnson (another toss up between him and Gasol) 13b. Gasol ( he’ll be there at #13, watch Golden State at the #14 for a switchback trade) 15. Wallace (the Rockets, and me for that matter, like Alabama forwards) 16a.Collins ( he and Murphy will be neck and neck but Collins may fit us a little better ) 16b. Murphy 18. Prince (his stock is rising and he’s in a tough conference, still has some questions whether he can play the NBA game, but this is not a tough gamble) 19a. Forte (Okay, they may draft for trade here. They don’t need him. Likewise with Omar Cook. But if they have a deal with any Eastern Conference team pending, watch Forte (NC) and Cook’s (St John) stature rise up. Listening New Jersey, New York, Washington??) 19b Cook 21. K Johnson Remember this is a list of what the Rockets may do … not who is the best draft talent arranged in descending order. All teams will have a priority list. The fact that several teams will be maneuvering big time and have specific gaping holes/needs this year, makes it possible for us to get as far up as the eighth spot on the shopping list as our first (#13) pick. ------------------
What happen to the 7th spot owned by Jersey? I thought you mentioned that there might be a chance that we can deal with them? ------------------ Congratulations Bill!!!! Willoughby gets college degree Willoughby graduation video (At the bottom of page)
He's referring to the 8th spot on his list, not the eighth spot in the draft... But if we were able to trade to NJ or Vancouver, we might get the 3rd spot on his list. ------------------ the more I know, the more I know I don't know...
The question on Rodney White: He's a good Power forward at 6-9 230#, can create but does lack some intensity at times. Let's look at Bradley who has a defemnsive liability and despite being a quick spotter, is not very fast on the court. A second or two slower than Googs with a little less range. Let's look at Haywood who is a 7 FOOT 264 athletic specimen. Virtually nonstoppable when motivated. carries a pretty respectable 12PPG - 7 RPG - 3.5 BPR. He will swat anything close to him, is imposing physically and is deadly inside when the ball is in his hands(60%). His free throw sucks, but then what percenatge (the majority) of "phenoms" coming in at the first fifteen spots don't have that knock. In retrospect Rodney probably should be inserted there somewhere as you contend, and probably well before Murphy(who I personally am not overly imopressed with). But as the draft ages up the line, the priorities start to affect the selection moreso than the talent. I know that sounds ludicrous. But the fact is that you are trying to fill a hole, get talent for the pick and yet still maintain balanace within the team. That is why there are so many "surprise" picks. I liked Mo Pete last year. Thought he should have been bumped up to our next pick. We passed. The point is ... the choice to pass on him was the proper decision for the Rockets. Regardless of how he showed at Toronto this year. MoPete could not have developed on our team the way he did on the Raptors. Picking him would have created a problem with contract negotiations within our roster. Plus we would not have filled a need that was IMMEDIATE to us. One more factor before I jump off my high horse soapbox .... Good general managers and good coaches do not rely on, or give credence to, press kit evaluations designed by talent management(agents or sub contractors). They are for the media. They for the fans. Not for professionals whose job is to develop a winning team. Some guys rise up the polls and actually are found to be placed lower initially than they deserve. An adjustment should, as is usually, made. But a vast majority of these pre-draft "Top Five Players" have personal media "consultants" generate the speculation because of obvious self-serving interests. ------------------ [This message has been edited by oeilpere (edited May 25, 2001).]
Why are people so high on Woods? He has severe mental lapses in games. He has been unable to put on weight and really hasn't developed his game since his freshman year at Wake Forest. I would rather the Rockets take Haywood, who has the same traits as Woods, but has the NBA body. Woods seems like a shorter version of Shawn Bradley. ------------------ [This message has been edited by SlamN (edited May 25, 2001).]
I'm glad to see somebody (oily) having good things to say about Brendan Haywood. I've seen him a lot out here in ACC country. He is a hard-working, big kid who started for 4 years at Carolina. He is a solid kid wit no character issues. You want somebody to lean on Shaq-- he's your guy. Why not get both Woods and Haywood with 13 and 18?! We could get big fast thataway. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
RichRocket, What you're saying is almost exactly the opposite of what I've heard about Brendon. I've always heard he doesn't always show up to play hence the nickname Brenda. Everything I've heard is that he has the physical tools to dominate, but he hasn't simply because he's a slacker. Is this wrong? ------------------ "If a nuclear bomb dropped on earth, two things would survive: roaches and David Falk." -- Kevin McHale quote courtesy of Patricia Bender's website.
I live 60 miles from Chapel Hill and follow college basketball pretty well. In fact, Haywood is from my town. I have NEVER heard him referred to as Brenda except here on this board, so I am suspicious of that. Could it be just a rumor started by someone hoping to see him slide? I don't know but in four years I've never heard him referred to that way. I'm a Duke fan, but I always liked Haywood. He seemed like a hard-working kid. Maybe he didn't dominate the way some would have liked but you see that less and less because of increased parity. Did he ever disappear? Maybe. But perhaps a good coaches game plan got the best of him. Carolina was not strong across the frontline and, I believe, were constantly outrebounded as a team. Julius Pepper had his moments but he is, after all, a football player. The other big kid plays more of a high post position. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that he was ever benched for any significant stretch because of lack of effort or any such concern by either Guthridge or Doherty. I'm not saying he is a polished gem, but I think he is a player. At least, he plays with enthusiasm and intensity. I saw Ken Johnson here in the NCAA Regionals and he seemed lackluster to me. I know he is sought-after by many of the folks on this board. I think the Rockets should hit the trifecta. sign and trade Olajuwon for Horry. Draft Woods (13), Haywood (18), and Johnson (22) or some of the other big men available. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Haywood at 13= bad, Haywood at 18= good. I just don't think we need to take him at 13, because I honestly believe he'll be there at 18. Haywood reminds me of Jamal Magloire, who was picked 19th last year in a weak draft class. ------------------ [This message has been edited by tacoma park legend (edited May 25, 2001).]
Who would you compare Haywood to in the NBA? IF you want Ken Johnson which I think he will be there at 18. Then you get a younger Ervin Johnson ( No not MAGIC ) But it all comes down to these practices they are having. By the time draft is coming near, come back to this topic and see which players you ranked high or low and watch to see where they are being ranked. Remember Crawford? Or how about Paul Pierce, was projected to go top 3 but slipped all the way to 9. Its going to be tough. The 2 guys I really like on the draft that think houston can get are Joe Johnson and Richard Jefferson. Johnson first because of his handles and the way he sees the floor well. Francis and Cuttino would love someone like this to play with them. ------------------ "Break off the block like Maurice Green" --- Steve Francis President of the Moochie Norris fan club.
MManal In your opinion, does Woods' lateral movement and smooth offensive skills compensate for his lack of physical play? I too like his offensive capabilities, but fear that he will be routinely overpowered. I can't even imagine him trying to box out Shaq, Duncan, Mutumbo, Ben Wallace or any NBA 4 or 5. ------------------
Bay Rock, yes I think that makes up for it. Thing is, critics love to hit a big man with the "soft" label if he plays away from the basket and doesnt exclusively bang inside. Rudy T and co. dont really care too much about this b/c the last thing they need is a paint clogging center on this team. The middle needs to remain open for the guards to penetrate, and a big that can step out and hit the 15-18 ft shot is a big help to this offense. Instead of just drafting blindly, the Rockets front office makes sure first and foremost that the player will have a seamless transition into the offense and chemistry wise on this team. From my view, Brendan Haywood appears to be a real horrible fit with this group of players while Woods should provide a seamless transition. Based on my observations, Brendan Haywood is a bust waiting to happen. I know folks look at the guys physique along with his ability to block shots and feel he will be a stud. However, my opinion on evaluating big men starts with the footwork, lateral speed and fluidity first then moves to the body last as that can be developed; Haywood fails the first tests miserably. Just take a look at the successful centers around the NBA, which ones are slugs for their height? None of them. Take a look at the busts or ones that have not panned out to full expectations ie. Jim McIlvane, Bryant Reeves, etc these guys just dont move well and/or simply have a terrible feel for the game. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net [This message has been edited by MManal (edited May 26, 2001).] [This message has been edited by MManal (edited May 26, 2001).]
SlamN, the reason folks like Woods (including myself) is that he has very good lateral movement, is very smooth in his skills and runs the court like a gazelle. I realize Brendan Haywood has the better NBA body, but his footwork and lateral movement are simply bad. Just watch the guy play, everything he does looks so mechanical and the farthest thing from being fluid. Lateral movement and footwork are SO important for big men in this league, and Haywood just doesnt have it. Think about it, someone like Bryant Reeves has an NBA body at the center position, has soft hands and shoots well. However, he is a total scrub b/c he moves like a slug. Comparing Woods to Shawn Bradley isnt even funny, Shawn Bradley is a total stiff. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
I have NEVER heard him referred to as Brenda except here on this board, so I am suspicious of that. Could it be just a rumor started by someone hoping to see him slide? I don't know but in four years I've never heard him referred to that way. No, it's not just on this board. Try these links: MSNBC/The Sporting News: http://www.msnbc.com/news/538015.asp?cp1=1#BODY CBS SportsLine: http://ww1.sportsline.com/u/ce/multi/0,1329,1876963_55,00.html ------------------
Nevertheless, living 60 miles away from Chapel Hill, I have never heard the term. It's just a convenient insult probably assigned by the Cameron Crazies. They will say or do just about anything within reason to demoralize their competition. I guarantee they would have liked to have Haywood in a Duke uniform. Now, if the NBA scout's were using that term, I would be more worried! ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited May 28, 2001).]
I don't think that comparing Haywood to Cato should be such a bad thing (even though I hate Cato as much as anyone). The problems I have with Cato, I have not heard attributed to Haywood. These are: - Terrible hands - Always injured - Huge contract The lack of motivation doesn't bother me as much because it is something that is based on perception by others. It could also be attributed to many issues that may exist in the college game that won't exist in the NBA. Anyone would be an improvement over Cato as long as they are able to step foot on the court. ------------------ "If you don't understand it, don't try to understand it." -Carl Everett
