Pops, the Rockets reluctance to take high school players has been very obvious throughout the years. We all know that Rudy T loves 4 year players with experience. My question is, do the Rockets execs still look at high school players who might still develop into solid players, or do they generally dismiss HS players and concentrate on the older, more experienced college players? For instance, if we managed to trade up to a spot that is 7-9, and Loren Woods and Sagana Diop are still available, would the Rockets consider taking Diop? Do you think Woods is better than Diop, because if you and the Rockets do, that blows my question.... I guess what I am asking is, if there was a marginally better HS player available to fill the same needs as another 4 year player, would Rudy and company consider the HS player? Might they take them? I am concerned, because HS players are coming out more and more, and a lot of talent is bundled in these guys. We have seen what kind of mistakes teams like Golden State have made when they decided to not even give players like Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett a chance, and I would not like it to happen to the Rockets (*ahem* Rashard Lewis *ahem*). ------------------ Feeling claustrophobic, like the walls are closing in. Blood stains on my hands, and I don't know where I've been. I'm in trouble for the things I haven't got to yet. I'm chomping at the bit, and my palms are getting wet. Sweating Bullets Runnin', Ravin', Endin', Out.
Hardwood: That’s THE tough predraft question. I have read some very interesting articles over the years on everyone from Willis, Iverson, MJ, Barkley, Hakeem, Moses, etc…. and it is always possible to find some guy saying they have reached their limit and cannot play this game etc,etc… Likewise we will always have respected journalist and sports people tittering exclamations of overpowering dominance that will “shock the league into a new era” on everyone from Ed O’Bannon to Cato. With that said, Ralph Sampson is the guy that seems to stick out in my mind when we talk of Woods and predraft hoopla. Both were tall, skinny (forward position) kids with questionable health (Ralph had back and knee problems) waiting to be either blown away in the big bad NBA, or making the critics pay for all their scathing columns by ROY-type performances. I do think the league of Ralph Sampson and the one today were a lot different. In fact being skinny at any position will kill your career in today’s NBA. Especially in the West. Loren Woods would be a nice gamble in my mind. Especially if the team that takes him allows him to learn the 3-4 position with ease. I would not stick him at the five. (Well almost never, maybe a couple of shifts at select times.) He can move real well, handles the ball well, shoots with some accuracy, but his strength, in my mind is his potential to elevate to a Camby type role. Gone in sixty seconds, in the air, and goodbye. I think it’s the way he moves his shoulders or something. That is not taught. That is talent. Fluidity. I loved that about Ralph and a young Hakeen (Akeem) too. Raven: ” … I guess what I am asking is, if there was a marginally better HS player available to fill the same needs as another 4 year player, would Rudy and company consider the HS player? …” Well, in my mind it is never the fact that they are HS players. It is the overall condition of the athlete combined with the talent, both expressed/demonstrated and latent. The biggest problem with HS players is that they have flash, they display enormous talent, and even great promise. They get the press. But they are fundamentally unsound in both overall and specific judgement. That makes them immature thinkers and poor team players. On top of that, the basic tools used to play a two way game is very frequently not there. These young phenoms have been handed the ball since grade school. “Go do your thing.” The game is centered around them. THEY are the team. It is hard to unteach that. In a four-year player you know more of what you are getting. He has had transitions and you can measure how he adjusted to those transitions. So if you are asking me if we choose between a young High School stud (Kedrick Brown) or a fundamentally sound four year man (Battier) all things(talent) being equal(except the stud has more potential) …. Battier gets the nod. And it’s not even a tough decision for me. Remember these two things: 1. You lose all that time required to train/teach a young player to play the game. It is lost coaching man-hours. Someone has not only spent the time, but when it was being used for that new phenom it was NOT being used for someone who may have needed it more. Plus you lose that roster spot that could have been filled by someone who was producing team goals. 2. When he starts to get to the point of producing for the team, playing a team concept with clear(or clearer) outcomes foremost in his mind, you either lose him to Free Agency or he costs you an arm and a leg to keep. All that being said …… if the High Schooler is a genuine phenom, drafted by a team with a patient nature, who can afford to absorb the loss of productivity and there is no one is at his level even close to that draft spot ….. I pick him in a heart beat. It is a win-win. Kwame Brown versus Loren Woods. Kwame …. No contest. Read the HS tidbit in another thread I started this AM. ------------------
oeilpere speaking of Woods: He can move real well, handles the ball well, shoots with some accuracy [B/], but his strength, in my mind is his potential to elevate to a Camby type role. What? Woods can handle for a center, but I just can't see him ever getting on the wing and taking a 3 to the hoop. He does not have that kind of coordination. ------------------
OP, A couple of more questions if you don't mind. How much stock do you put into the rumors of Kedrick Brown to the Celtics at 11 and Brendan Haywood to the Pistons at 9? According to Fox Sports and Andy Katz, the Celtics promised Brown that they would take him, and that could explain why he didn't go to the Chicago pre-draft camp. In addition, an article the other day in a Michigan paper said that Haywood was the only guy the Pistons planned to bring in twice, and that they really liked the fact that he could contribute immediately and let them move Ben Wallace to the 4. Would you describe either of these two rumors as accurate? Because, if they were, and two players who weren't supposed to make the lottery made it, it greatly enhances the chance that Joe Johnson or Woods, the players I like most, fall to us at 13. Would you say that one of those two guys has a realistic opportunity to fall to 13? ------------------ "Basketball players win basketball games. Athletes win track meets."-- Shane Battier Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more! Cat's Mock Draft
I have think Woods is a 4 his first year or two, but do you see him as emerging as a center in year two or three? ------------------ [This message has been edited by Joe Joe (edited June 22, 2001).]
