Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

[Dr. Gymbo]

No chance Beal falls to 5?

Depending on the teams in the top three, it's not a lock that he falls to 4.

If the Cavs can't land the #1 pick, Beal is who I want. I believe he will fit perfectly with Kyrie and give Coach Scott a two-headed monster in the backcourt.

 

[Pavlovic3Ball]

Don't confuse Ron's personality defects with his basketball ability. He was always a brutal defender, and he could score. I think he had as much ability as Paul Pierce for example. Calling him a volume shooter is just not capturing his value on the court. If he were not a head case I would have gladly had him on the Lebron teams.

Defensively, he was a monster. Ability-wise, on offense, I don't think he is close to Pierce. Pierce is one of the most skilled-all around scorers in NBA history.

 

[The Oi]

Why does everybody want to compare every player in the draft to Paul Pierce?

 

[Pavlovic3Ball]

Why does everybody want to compare every player in the draft to Paul Pierce?

Yea, I don't really get it either. I have seen him compared to Artest, MKG, and Barnes now. Am I missing something?

 

[Noonan]

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TH>String</TH><TH>Center</TH><TH>Power Forward</TH><TH>Small Forward</TH><TH>Shooting Guard</TH><TH>Point Guard</TH></TR><TR><TD>Starters</TD><TD>Anderson Varejao</TD><TD>(Stretch Forward)</TD><TD>Michael Kidd-Gilchrist


</TD><TD>(Shooter)</TD><TD>Kyrie Irving</TD></TR><TR><TD>Backups</TD><TD>(Offensive Big)</TD><TD>Tristan Thompson</TD><TD>(Shooter)</TD><TD>Alonzo Gee</TD><TD>Donald Sloan</TD></TR><TR><TD>Thirds</TD><TD>(Defensive Big)</TD><TD>(Shooting Forward)</TD><TD>(Multifaceted)</TD><TD>(Multifaceted)</TD><TD>(Relief)</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

I don't think there's any way the Cavs are going to have Thompson coming off the bench just to accommodate MKG's inability to spread the floor. If anything this chart seems to reinforce that Beal might be the better fit/pick for the Cavs.

 

[Douglar]

I don't think there's any way the Cavs are going to have Thompson coming off the bench just to accommodate MKG's inability to spread the floor. If anything this chart seems to reinforce that Beal might be the better fit/pick for the Cavs.

I also think that Gee is more of a multi faceted forward than a shooting guard. He hasn't shown enough the handle to play big minutes at guard, imho. He'd be like Ira Newble.

 

[rabman_gold]

In my personal opinion, we need to tank one more year to get another great draft pick first and foremost. This can be accomplished primarily by trading Varejao. Trading Varejao will not only allow us to better align the center position's age with Kyrie's and our other future players so that they can grow together and peak together, but we can have another great draft pick through tanking and yet another draft pick through trading Varejao. Basically, we could get a top 5 pick (via tanking) and a top 10 pick if Varejao is moved in situation A, or just a single pick in the 12-18 range if we keep Varejao. I think that this team will be better off in the LONG RUN by trading Varejao.

I vote we fleece Portland or New Orleans for a pick and go all out for one small forward and one shooting guard between Beal, Lamb, Barnes, and MKG. MKG and Beal would be the most ideal, but it would be awfully hard to move up that far. Perhaps MKG and Lamb might be the best we could do, and Lamb still could end up being better than Beal. Draft Doron Lamb in the second round and we have our starting and backups for SG and SF solidified for the future between MKG, Alonzo Gee, Lamb, and, well, Lamb.

Remember, if Andy is as injury prone as he was last year, we may not even need to trade him to lower our record. But I wouldn't recommend having a losing record just because. Our star and his support are going to lose patience with this team and may just leave it after 7 years if we don't show good measures of winning. Trading Andy away would be a poor excuse of that, but if he ACCIDENTALLY lost his footing...

I do agree that a Portland pick seems like a good idea, but then you'll only get an above average guy with question marks. And again, if New Jersey (soon-to-be-Brooklyn) wins a top 3, I doubt that Portland actually lets us get close. It'll be a wait and see approach. And then, only if a home run appears. Like all other years.

I don't think there's any way the Cavs are going to have Thompson coming off the bench just to accommodate MKG's inability to spread the floor. If anything this chart seems to reinforce that Beal might be the better fit/pick for the Cavs.

Sorry about the Beal part, but I changed the rest of the table to really mention MKG. We could always switch the bigs around. Only if Andy and Thompson aren't a good fit. Thompson will need a little more than a 10 foot stroke to actually co-exist with Andy you know... And that's negated if we get a good center who can spread the floor. That's very important when utilizing the Princeton.

 

[czvo]

Yea, I don't really get it either. I have seen him compared to Artest, MKG, and Barnes now. Am I missing something?

I think it may be because people can't seem to accurately peg Pierce's game. He does so many things well, without being a LeBronish type athlete, that people see similarities for multiple prospects.

 

[Jon]

Ron had his moments when you thought he just might be the best player in the league if he could only keep it up. Of course he didn't, and over all I'd call him a chucker.

 

[mds]

Why does everybody want to compare every player in the draft to Paul Pierce?

I think Drummond is going to be a bigger Paul Pierce....I also think Doron Lamb is going to be a smaller Paul Pierce. Paul Pierce reminds me of Grover from sesame street.

 

[Douglar]

Ron ... over all I'd call him a chucker.

Ron had a history of poor impulse control. It made him a chucker, a brawler, and almost made him a Best Buy employee.

I think MKG should be less implusive and end up being a more efficent scorer in the processes.

 

[Douglar]

I think Drummond is going to be a bigger Paul Pierce....I also think Doron Lamb is going to be a smaller Paul Pierce. Paul Pierce reminds me of Grover from sesame street.

And even chicken tastes like him !!

 

[narbar32]

I think it may be because people can't seem to accurately peg Pierce's game. He does so many things well, without being a LeBronish type athlete, that people see similarities for multiple prospects.

Ding, ding, ding! If you're a wing without freakish athleticism, you better believe you're ceiling is going to be labeled Paul Pierce.

It's because everybody knows that everything except height and athleticism can simply be learned (i.e. when so-and-so forward develops a jumper, when so-and-so wing improves his ball-handling, when so-and-so small guard learns to run the point, when so-and-so skinny guy "hits the weight room," etc...).

 

[TitleTown]

And even chicken tastes like him !!

I thought you didn't like humor being part of the board?

 

[mds]

Ding, ding, ding! If you're a wing without freakish athleticism, you better believe you're ceiling is going to be labeled Paul Pierce.

It's because everybody knows that everything except height and athleticism can simply be learned (i.e. when so-and-so forward develops a jumper, when so-and-so wing improves his ball-handling, when so-and-so small guard learns to run the point, when so-and-so skinny guy "hits the weight room," etc...).

Paul Pierce is the ultimate example of a non-atheltic guy who plays incredibly crafty and intelligent basketball. He has terrific fundamentals, plays at his own pace, and dominates. I hate him for being a Celtic, but he has been a fantastic player his whole career and is the anti-Lebron. He's all head, guts, and heart.