Scar-You conveniently forgot that Dunleavy is a much better passer and dribbler than Battier. As for smarts, I would say it's a wash. I think Dunleavy will have equal success as Battier in the NBA. One thing for sure, is that he could be the best SF in Rockets history, which is enough for me.
Yes, Dunleavy is a pretty good athlete: he can jump and he gets up and down the court well for someone his size. So I do buy into your argument that he is FASTER than Battier. But he is not QUICKER than Battier, or Mike Miller, or Peja, or any other decent small forward in the pros. And if you want to create your own shot in the NBA, you have to be QUICK with your initial move--I'm talking first step here. Watch when Dunleavy drives, if a defender is already up in his face (i.e. not recovering/running out to contest an open shot), Dunleavy has a hard time getting by him. He often has to reverse his direction once he has already started his drive, and he won't have time to do that in the NBA. Haven, you mentioned that Dunleavy has great handles--yes he can handle the ball, but you can have all the handles in the world and not go anywhere with them if you aren't quick enough to get by your man. Again, I think Dunleavy can definitely be a serviceable player in the league. In terms of the Rockets I think he can do what a Glen Rice was supposed to do, but Matt Bullard could have done that, too. Now I think Dunleavy can be a more versatile version of Bullard--someone who can fill the role of a shooter, but also finish on the break, get a few assists here and there, etc.--but if he ever makes an All-Star game I will, "eat a bug."
Mike Dunleavy is a good player. He is not the franchise-type player that everyone is making him out ot be. He only gets the praise that he gets because he plays for Duke (who by the way is overrrated). If Dunleavy played for any other school, he wouldn't get the run that he does. And yes Dunleavy reminds me alot of Dan Langhi when he was in college, because Langhi had the same game style that Dunleavy has now. Only difference is that Dunleavy has more range. With that said, I think Gooden is the better player, but unfortunately with the Rockets' apparent glut of 4s, we shouldn't select him. I think the pick is better served in a trade for a more established SF already in the league.
Okay, I have made no secret of the fact that I want Gooden, short of Ming...But there is something that happens to us, as basketball fans every year, and it applies as much to Gooden as it does to Dunleavy, and I want to address it.. I saw a study done the year Francis was in the draft that the average draft produces 1 or 2 guys who become All-Star calibre players, a few others who become regular starters, and all the rest become subs or CBA'ers...Think about those numbers for a second..( And please, don't cite me an example or two of a draft that doesn't follow this pattern..The magazine that did this study reviewed every draft, and arrived at it's conclusions based on that, with an emphasis on the modern era..I know there are exceptions...) And yet, every year, come draft time, the top 10-20 guys are all compared with All-Stars...NBA Draft.net does it, take a look...The top 20-30 guys on there are all compared with All-Stars or even all time greats...And on the other side, we forget about most of those evaluations when they don't pan out...People on here saying Piatkowski is nowhere near Dunleavy because he doesn't do this and he doesn't do that, and that's true...now. But is it true that that's what was thought of Pitkowski WHEN HE WAS STILL IN SCHOOL!?!? And it's way more than Dunleavy/Piatkowki...( for the record, I think Dunleavy is better, but that's neither here nor there..).. We look at a pro, and most of us are pretty good at evaluating what he can and can't do...but for some reason, when it comes to prospects, we only compare them favorably with others who have failed..( Ok, there is a minority which consistently does the opposite, ex. every big white shooter is the next Danny Ferry, but they are a lot less prevelant)... Think back to last year's draft...Remember DeMarr Johnson, th next Odom? Odom isn't even the next Odom yet...We're all still fans of Mihm, but has he been remotely what was advertised beore he'd played pro? Or the next Karl Malone, Marcus Fizer? Dooling? Courtney Alexander wasn't a great defender, but offensively he was sure as shooting going to be somewhere between Vince Carter and a young Mitch Richmond...And it goes on and on...and hey, I'm not even writing these guys off yet, but the fact remains that we look at each draft with rose coloured galsses, and we compare these prospects to current lesser players with scorn, forgetting how highly touted those guys were before the bloom fell off the rose...
Anyone who was at the Erwin Center tonight, like me, can tell you that Drew Gooden is the real deal. He is a four-year starter at KU. His post moves are very polished. He can face up to the basket, post up, shoot the fadeaway or the jump hook. He used the whole arsenal today including a few times when he blew by the defender and for a monster dunk. The guy is extremely quick and athletic. At 6'9, 240, he's a good sized PF. I want him on the Rockets next year.
Whoever said that Dunleavy was a franchise player? Neither Haven or I have said that. While we do defend him, it doesn't mean we think he's the next Larry Bird. I have repeatedly said I think he will make a great #2 or #3 option for a good team.
in nbadraft.net Gooden says he wants to be a 3 in the NBA. So Gooden will not conflict with Eddie's position, the 4.
I don't see how we can pay a guy 50 million to come off the bench. He'll either be traded, or he'll start over Griffin.
Kidrock, if you read a little closer I said Dunleavy might be faster than Battier in a foot race or perhaps even has a higher verticle. However, he is substantially less athletic in those athletic areas more important to actually playing basketball--like quickness, body control, and reaction time. (Puedlfor did a great job describing this better than I can) Can anyone explain to me if Dunleavy is this 6'10" great athlete with superior game knowledge and superior anticipation of others on the court why he blocks about a half shot a game playing the PF position in college? This isn't even Terrance Morris level, let alone Battier, EG or Van Horn level. The guys isn't even a dominant defensive player in college, he isn't even going to be an average defensive one against quicker NBA 3s and stronger NBA 4s. It is a very good thing he can shoot, because if he couldn't there would not be even an IR spot available for him in the NBA base don his other skills. I will say this, there is hope for Dunleavy. Because he totally sucked last year except for his last game (Zona left him open because he had been Dukes weak link all last year--it was the right move at the time) and is a very good college player this year. Maybe he is a late bloomer still blooming. If he shows the same level of strides in his game next year (if next year he is a dominant force on both ends) as between this year from last year then we are talking about a serious pro prospect. But he has a long way to go.
Scar-Allegedly Dunleavy was never able to get adapted to his 6 ft 9 frame, after going throught a huge growth spurt since coming to Duke. I don't know if he's still growing or not, but I would think that when he does "adapt" to his frame, he will look less clumsy, as well as being more athletic in the categories you feel that he lacks. Again, I never said Dunleavy was a defensive stopper. Moreover, would he be any worse of a defender than Walt Williams or Glen Rice? My whole premise for wanting the Rockets to draft Dunleavy is because he would be an upgrade over the lackluster SF's we've had over the years. The only "going out on a limb" I have done is by predicting that Dunleavy would make a few All-Star games. I think you have really really hate Dunleavy if you think he will shoot more airballs than Dan Langhi, when he goes to the NBA, or he will be 2X's as bad of a defensive player than Walt or Rice.
Somehow this thread got into a "whose better Dunleavy or Gooden"? As opposed to who would be the BETTER FIT for the Rockets. If you consider that the Rockets are getting absolutely zero production from the SF spot, you might actually see the Rockets need a little bit of help at SF.
I would bet the biggest weakness for the Rockets versus other teams are 1) there own percentage of points scored in the paint (translate-"we don't get many easy buckets"), and 2) opponents percentage of points scored int he paint (translate-"we give up many easy buckets"). I just don't think a lack of being able to knock down open shots is are #1 or even #2 priority to address. The kind of player we most need is one adept at converting inside scoring chances and strengthing our interior D, not a slightly improved version of Walt or Rice that we would <i> hope Dunleavy </i> would be (note: as good as Dunleavy is there is no comparison to the dominant skill levels both Walt or Rice showed in college). Thus I think a guy like Gooden (good interior scoring 4) or Bordchart (solid defensive and offensive 5) far more fits the needs of the team than an outside shooting oriented 3. It is a misnomer that the thing that would really fix the Rockets is just a better shooter on the wing. A Peja would be great for the Rockets, but I'd rather have a Brand or McDyess.
A player doesn't have to fit one mold (pure 3 or pure 4). So am not against EG doing many of the things 3's are suppossed to do. Also, EG is farther along in his outside game than his interior game. The opposite would be true of Gooden, and thus they might make a nice pair of forwards sharing the responsibilities of both spots. I have better spelled out eactly the kinds of player I would most want before (interior presence on both ends IMo is more important than a rangy jump shot).
Scar-You're right in the sense that if Gooden and Griffin did pair up, the Rockets would basically be contributions from a SF and PF, since Gooden is pretty good at slashing, at least he's better than Eddie at that. I just think we need 3 guys in the lineup who can take the ball to the rack with authority from the perimeter. I assume Gooden can do that well?
Basically what you're describing here is a Glen Rice in his prime. Can you imagine the Rockets with Glen Rice in the same shape he was when he was an All-Star on the Hornets?
The Rockets w ould be great offensively and still pretty shabby defensively. Think of the early 90's Suns or TMC Warriors. Of course neither team could deliver the goods. What the Rockets most need is another dominant defensive forward or center player who is also a threat to score, especially from the inside. I am looking for the next Brand or McDyess or Ratliff or Motumbo or even swingmen with games like Snottie Pippen or Shawn Marion, not a swingman in the Glen Rice or Chris Mullin or Dale Ellis or Reggie Miller mold--despite how effective those players are offensively. Oh, another guy I think I like better than Dunleavy for the Rockets is Prince. The problem with Prince seems to me his focus. Him and Dunleavy pretty much played to a draw individually earlier in the year but you could tell whenever Prince decided to score Dunleavy could not stay with him at all (thus I wonder what NBA 3s will do to him when they have the ball). I would rather take the better natural athlete and hope he gets a better shot or mental focus than take the shooter or all-around player with more modest practical for BB athleticism.
Anybody see the SportsCenter piece on Gooden? He is bi-racial; his mother is the daughter of a wealthy Finn farmer. His dad is a effervescent coach-type. Boy, Gooden seems like he would be a good Rocket! He's been through a lot-- seen life's ups and downs. His parents have been amicably divorced since he was a tyke. Drew seems like a kid who has developed a good work ethic. Roy Williams called him the best offensive rebounder he has ever coached. But I love Dunleavy, too. I can go either way on this for now.
