Instead of Gooden or Dunleavy for SF, what about Qyntel Woods? I still haven't seen him play, but other boards and scouting reports seem to be high on this SF both as an offensive threat and a defensive demon. Any thoughts?
Nbadraft.net has him as a McGrady comparison. I am a huge fan of T-Mac, but we don't need another guy who requires having the ball in his hands for a while. He doesn't seem so much of a shooter as he is a scorer. I think this team badly needs a shooter, which is why I like Dunleavy.
Okay, aside from the fact that I prefer Gooden, let me address Dunleavy on his sole merits... He might turn out to be a hell of a shooter/scorer, although I have extreme doubts about his ability to create his own shot... Having said that, in my opinon, the last thing this team needs is yet ANOTHER player whose entire value is predicated on scoring...On a team with score only guys like Rice, Taylor, Mobley, Thomas, and our two best players also needing their shots, why do we want yet another shooter/scorer who can't rebound or defend all that well? Don't we have enough of those guys? My arguments against getting Rice pretty much apply here, when you compound your weaknesses, you commit suicide...And, conversly, while you can never have too many guys who can play defense, rebound, or handle the rock, if you have too may guys who need to put up shots to maintain their value, the physical limitations of only one ball and one basket tend to present difficulties... So, I don't think that Dunleavy is the guy to go for if we get a really high pick, although I have little doubt that Rudy would love to get him...
We definitely don't need a go-to guy. As long as Francis is a Rocket. Where do you get this idea that Dunleavy can't create? He is great at it because of his dribbling and passing skills as a 6 ft 9 SF. He might be an even better away from the ball player with his ability to find the open spots on the court to spot-up for open jumpers. He is great at reading defenses. He would be the best shooter on the Rockets today, as well as probably the best passer. And without a doubt, the smartest. He is very reliable, and would be the one player on the Rockets you can't really yell at because of lack of effort or stupidity. The fact that would be the best at certain aspects of the game on the Rockets today leads me to believe he would be a good fit. However, if Rudy is not willing to change his offensive philosophy regarding the 3, he is not a good fit, in the sense that his talents would be wasted.
JAG: We have offense. We do not have shooters. Huge distinction. Rice looks finished. Williams is a bit player. In our regular rotatoin, Francis probably has the best shot... and it's not fabulous. Mobley's more of a scorer than a shooter, imo. He has range, but more like "dangerous" than "deadly." We need that guy, who if he happens to be open at the 3 pt line, you just *know* it's going in. We need someone who Francis can dish to off of penetration... who will hit a shot from 15 feet every time. Now, I could be describing Matt Bullard. But I'd also like some more qualities. How about someone who can run the break? Dunleavy's excellent at that. Dunleavy's also a good passer, and has surprisingly quick hands on defense. As far as I can remember, Houston's never had a playre with a deadly shot who had any other value. Dunleavy is a player like that, and I'd really love to have him.
Dunleavy is also great at stealing passes... This might help get the Rockets their 1st fastbreak in 10 years.
Damn kidrock, are we talking about Dunleavy or JESUS here?! ...and to think we were making fun of Spurs fans about Tony Parker I have to go with desert scar here, to a degree, about Dunleavy. While I think he COULD be more than just a role player in the NBA, to make a claim about ANY underclassman being a sure-fire hall of famer is nothing short of absurd, especially with some of the limitations Dunleavy has. He's a great college player, but I think Battier will be the better NBA player, and I don't see Battier ever making an All-Star team. JAG is correct--Dunleavy will have a hard time creating his own shot at the next level, because he lacks the quickness to get by defenders with one move--watch how many times he has to reverse his direction to get where he wants to go if a defender is tightly on him--he won't have time to do that at the next level. This isn't to say he's not athletic, because as we all now he's a good leaper and can run the floor well, but like Battier, I don't see him as more than a spot-up shooter in the NBA. Also I don't think Peja is a very good comparison--Dunleavy will be nowhere near as explosive as Peja, because he doesn't have the quick release that Stojakavic has. Peja's pullup J is really quick, since the form on his jumper starts pretty high up, and I don't get the sense that Dunleavy will be able to do that. I think he'll be better than Langdon turned out to be, but I don't think he's destined for stardom.
And more thing kidrock, and I am not telling you what to do because you are your own person, but you might want to keep the "basketball knowledge insults" in-house--it doesn't do much for the sake of open conversation. I simply disagree with you about Dunleavy's potential, but I am not going to call you out as having a basketball IQ of zero for it, because I don't know that you do. I just disagree with you on this one.
Huh? Are you referring to my sarcastic remark to the Aggie? If so, then I suggest you get rid of the sand that's stuck in your sarcasm detector. If anything, it sounds like you're the one who's full of himself.
"Too bad basketball is a game that requires broad thinking." That's what I was referring to...and I guess your last post applies as well. It wasn't vicious or anything--I just don't think you are in a position to be denouncing someone else's basketball IQ when the point of contention isn't something cut and dry.
Yes, but Duneavly has better ball skills than Peja. If you can get open on your own, you don't need to have as quick of a release. Why do you think Dunleavy won't be able to get open? He dribbles as well as some 2 guards I've seen (not like Bryant or Iverson, of course).
Gooden. Superior offensive game - can score both facing the basket and posting up. Superior defense - better lateral speed, much better shot-blocker, and gets a suprising number of steals Gooden is also exceptionally fast for a PF, and his ball-handling is well above-average. I would take Gooden over anyone in college except Jason Williams.
What's funny is how people say Dunleavy looks uncoordinated or awkward. Peja probably looks more uncoordinated than Mike does. Nonetheless, Peja is one hell of a player. Mike is a better athlete than Peja. The only thing Peja really does better than him is score more on isolation. Mike doesn't exactly have a Mario Elie-like slow release. He can get the ball up pretty quickly. He's not as good as Peja, because Peja probably has the quickest release around. However, quick releases are really only vital when there's a man on you. At 6 ft 9 Mike doesn't really have to worry about getting his shot blocked. I just said that Dunleavy would make a great role player for the Rockets, basically do what Rice was supposed to do and a little more. One of those roles would be hitting open shots, and I see no one better in college than Mike.
I just don't know how anyone sees Dunleavy as more athletic than Battier. When I think of athleticism, I think of speed, quickness, leaping, short reaction time, lateral movement, body control, etc. At best Dunleavy is ahead or even with Battier in 2 categories (maybe outright speed and leaping) and squashed in the rest, and more important categories, for a basketball player. Compare their blocks, steals or charges taken for Pete's sake, he is not in Battier's class. Now maybe Dunleavy can become a better pure shooter than Battier or use his height advantage to give him an edge in the pros, but I have yet to see this from him. With Dunleavy's size and SUPPOSED undertanding of the game (I don't mean intellectual knowledge of the game, but gametime floor sense put in action) and SUPPOSED athleticsm he should be at least putting up Battier or Terrace Morris block numbers, and probably should be putting up Eddie Griffin block numbers. Instead he is a 6' 10" supposedly athletic and smart guy who somehow barely blocks 1/2 shot per game facing mainly 6'5" guys. There are some fine attributes Dunleavy has, he makes an outstanding college player. But he has leaps and bounds to grow to be an impact or even quality pro player. The odds are against him, I would not touch him in the early lottery if guys like Williams, Borchardt or Gooden are available. BTW Prempeh-I think KR was just reacting to my little assertion about his special relationship--it is all in jest. But thanks for joining the sanity patrol in this thread about the next Jesus
I see Gooden as a pure 4. If I'm drafting for need, being SF, IMO Dunleavy is clearly a better SF than Gooden, but not the better player. Dunleavy is the only possible SF in this draft I would feel comfortable drafting and planning on becoming a major contributor/starter. Yarbrough, Prince, Butler, etc. could turn out good, or they could bust. I see very little bust potential in Dunleavy. Again, I liken him to Mike Miller. Remember, everyone said Miller wouldn't be able to create his shot in the NBA, and I see the same characteristics in Miller. He's the leading shot blocker on Duke anyway. I don't see that as a problem. BTW, he starts at PF for Duke, not playing some 6'5'' guys. I don't worry about his shotblocking skills.
I would consider Dunleavy more as a future Dan Langhi or Eric Piatkowski. At best, I would say he will be no better than Jeff Hornacek. You're talking about him being almost as good as Stojakovic? I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, he's not that good.
Aggie is on the money. The odds that Dunleavy has a career along the line of Dan Langhi are greater than the odds he is another Peja. If Dunleavy would "only" be as good as Miller or Battier I would be happy. But those guys are both quicker and more intuitive scorers, and superior defenders (at least Miller has the athletic ability do be a passable NBA 3 even if he isn't yet). It is one thing to be able to knock down a wide open shot--heck, Matt Bullard made a career of this, it is another to be able to create a decent shot for yourself and do the other things a really good NBA player needs to do (pass well, play solid defense). Our need is the best available front line player-regardless of position. Griffin's offensive game is like a 3, his defensive game could be like a 4 or 5. Like Robert Horry, but hopefully better. The best compliment to the current roster would be a player with a knock for easy inside baskets and another defensive presence. It could be a 3 in the Marion/Jamison/Cebollos mold, or a 4 or 5 with those qualities. Even if Dunleavy becomes a decent offensive player like Danny Ferry, he would not help either of our most critical needs, defense and filling easy interior buckets our guards create for our big people. Besides, Dunleavy would be killed defensively as an NBA 3 by smaller faster quicker players. If he really wants to have a long solid NBA career he needs to play the 4, just like Gooden will play.
Again, where does this idea of Dunleavy being slow come from? If anything, he's quicker and faster than Battier, if you watched them both last year.
Langhi? Come on. He has a lot more ball skills than Piatkowski. Dunleavy has a great handle and can take the ball to the rack. As well as being a great cutter. Piatkowski can only shoot open shots. These comparsions are very invalid seeing how you are comparing a highly-skilled player like Dunleavy, to a wheel-chaired grandma. Can you tell me what he's not good at? Both times in this thread you just say things like "Dunleavy sucks" or something. That's fine, just back it up with what you know about Dunleavy. The fact that you see some comparison between Langhi and Dunleavy, really makes me question if you've even seen Dunleavy play to begin with.
