Author Topic: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft  (Read 5348 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« on: April 17, 2014, 11:06:58 PM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
Entire 1st rd in link

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140417/nba-mock-draft-andrew-wiggins-jabari-parker-joel-embiid/#all


Quote
1. Milwaukee Bucks -- Andrew Wiggins, G/F, Kansas
Wiggins has quickly emerged as an early favorite among executives from many lottery teams. He has his warts -- a lack of aggression and tendency to drift during games being chief among them -- but his ceiling is considered higher than anyone else's. At 6-foot-7, 200 pounds, Wiggins can conceivably play two positions, though multiple executives say the best fit is two-guard. A Wiggins-Giannis Antetokounmpo-Larry Sanders trio is a nice core for Milwaukee to build around.

2. Philadelphia 76ers -- Joel Embiid, C, Kansas
Word around the league is that the Sixers are high on Wiggins. They will settle for Embiid, the draft's best center prospect, who would pair with Nerlens Noel to form an athletic frontcourt. Embiid's back isn't an issue -- yet. NBA executives are eager to get their hands on his medicals at next month's draft combine in Chicago.

3. Orlando Magic -- Jabari Parker, SF, Duke
Parker -- who announced his decision to declare for the draft on SI.com -- is an NBA-ready scorer. He can score inside and out and is a strong rebounder. Orlando has needs everywhere. While there are lingering questions about Parker's defense (does he play any?) and position (at what forward spot does he belong?) his talent makes him a natural building block.

4. Utah Jazz -- Dante Exum, G, Australia*
The 6-6, 188-pound Exum is a dynamic talent. Scouts rave about his quick first step, and his jump shot has improved significantly over the past year. The combine and individual workouts will be the first time many league execs get a firsthand look at Exum, but those who have observed him see a star quality in the Australian guard.

5. Boston Celtics -- Julius Randle, PF, Kentucky
Boston has two young power forward prospects in Jared Sullinger and Kelly Olynyk, but Randle's potential could be too much to pass up. Randle possesses a diverse offensive repertoire. He can score inside and out, drawing comparisons ranging from Zach Randolph to Michael Beasley. The Celtics figure to be active in trade talks this summer, so increasing the team's frontcourt depth should not be an issue.

17. Boston Celtics (via Brooklyn) -- Kyle Anderson, G, UCLA**
The success of Michael Carter-Williams this season has increased teams' fascination with taller point guards. Anderson is a natural playmaker who thrived when UCLA handed him the reins this season. Scouts question Anderson's speed and defense, but when paired with a two-guard who can defend point guards -- like, say, Avery Bradley -- those issues can be ironed out.

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2014, 11:14:38 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
I sure hope he's wrong.  Randle is the only guy in the top 8 I'd be legitimately disappointed to see the Celtics take.

He's Carl Landry 2.0 in my book.  Not confident he'll be that much more valuable a player than Sullinger or Olynyk.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2014, 11:18:23 PM »

Offline Lucky17

  • DKC Commish
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16021
  • Tommy Points: 2352
I'm also not so keen on Randle.

And I can't see Ainge passing up on McDermott at #17.
DKC League is now on reddit!: http://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2014, 11:24:53 PM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833
It is not a well thought out mock draft.

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2014, 11:26:21 PM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
And I can't see Ainge passing up on McDermott at #17.

I can't see that either, except if he trades Rondo. Then the Anderson selection makes more sense.

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2014, 12:06:31 AM »

Offline esel1000

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11547
  • Tommy Points: 587
Let's be real this wouldn't be the order..

While I really want a top 3-5 pick (not getting my hopes up in case) I wouldn't really hate anyone in the top 8, though Saric would kind of be a disappointment... I'd rather Vonleh at that spot if somehow everything went wrong and we ended up at 8...

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2014, 12:11:16 AM »

Offline blink

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18040
  • Tommy Points: 1469
please no Randle, and please no Anderson.  uggg

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2014, 01:50:30 AM »

Offline Kane3387

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8269
  • Tommy Points: 944
  • Intensity!!!
Randle will be a stud. A better version if ZBo.


KG: "Dude.... What is up with yo shorts?!"

CBD_2016 Cavs Remaining Picks - 14.14

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2014, 02:15:50 AM »

Offline j804

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9188
  • Tommy Points: 3060
  • BLOOD SWEAT & TEARS
Yuck please no I don't want Randle
"7ft PG. Rondo leaves and GUESS WHAT? We got a BIGGER point guard!"-Tommy on Olynyk


Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2014, 02:39:25 AM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
Why is everyone so down on Randle?  He was thought to be the #1 pick by some prior to the season... he went further in the tourney than any freshman.  What gives?
« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 02:52:58 AM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2014, 02:54:49 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Why is everyone so down on Randle?  He was thought to be the #1 pick by some prior to the season... he went further in the tourney than any freshman.  What gives?

the same beef everyone's always had with him -- he's a guy who relies on his athleticism to bully his man around, only he won't be able to do that nearly as well at the NBA level as he did at the college level. And no one seriously entertained the idea of Randle going #1 -- it's always been some combination of Parker or Wiggins, with the expectation that Embiid was going to be at least a two-year prospect.

It is not a well thought out mock draft.
Shocking, considering the source. He's got the order of players more or less right, though, I think.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2014, 04:15:01 AM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
Why is everyone so down on Randle?  He was thought to be the #1 pick by some prior to the season... he went further in the tourney than any freshman.  What gives?

Past rosters have led some posters around here to underrate any big man prospect who is seen as deficient in height/length/athleticism.  A lot of the concern over Randle seems to be based on his bottom-of-the-barrel wingspan.  Some of the concern is over a lack of lift that makes him a "below the rim" player.  And he's seen as a guy whose stats are padded against bad teams, with a larger-than-normal decline in his numbers when up against teams with above-average defenses.  He's sometimes described as having a poor BBIQ.

Descriptions of him make him sound like an energy big with the athleticism and defense (but not the offense) of Kevin Love, who has limited offensive upside.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #12 on: April 18, 2014, 04:35:03 AM »

Offline obnoxiousmime

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2421
  • Tommy Points: 258
It looks like Mannix is down on some players like Clint Capela (25), Doug McDermott (20), and Zach LaVine (22). Regardless of the eventual order there should still be talented players remaining around 17-18 so hopefully the Celts get one of them. I think the draft is deep enough so that there are still potential starter-level players available in the mid-first round.

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #13 on: April 18, 2014, 04:44:27 AM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
It looks like Mannix is down on some players like Clint Capela (25), Doug McDermott (20), and Zach LaVine (22).

That's probably the lowest I've seen McDermott, but I've seen LaVine mocked lower and NBADraft.net even has Capela going 39th (but international guys are sometimes hard to peg).
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Chris Mannix's Mock Draft
« Reply #14 on: April 18, 2014, 06:21:06 AM »

Offline JBcat

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3642
  • Tommy Points: 512
Why is everyone so down on Randle?  He was thought to be the #1 pick by some prior to the season... he went further in the tourney than any freshman.  What gives?

Past rosters have led some posters around here to underrate any big man prospect who is seen as deficient in height/length/athleticism.  A lot of the concern over Randle seems to be based on his bottom-of-the-barrel wingspan.  Some of the concern is over a lack of lift that makes him a "below the rim" player.  And he's seen as a guy whose stats are padded against bad teams, with a larger-than-normal decline in his numbers when up against teams with above-average defenses.  He's sometimes described as having a poor BBIQ.

Descriptions of him make him sound like an energy big with the athleticism and defense (but not the offense) of Kevin Love, who has limited offensive upside.

Worst case he turns into Thomas Robinson?