I ment Thabeet.

Unlike last year I’m not going to argue the PG big man debate, as it looks almost obvious the Clippers will take Griffen even though Mike Dunleyvy hates B Diddy.  I personally would grab Rubio as I think he is more of a sure thing than Griffen, but thats beside the point.

What i am here to do is critique your mock, whick i did so greatly last year .  I’ll start off my argument with the #2 pick.  I personally think they take Ricky Rubio here.  I know they have players like Mayo and Gay who need the ball in their hands, but Gay looks to be on his way out, so they could use an other creator.

The other reason I don’t agree is because they have Marc Gasol, who they really like at C.  If they don’t take Rubio they could go PF, but this is too high for Hill and any others they could look at.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, the Thunder like Westbrook at PG, and truthfully that is where he needs to be.  If Rubio is still available here (which I don’t think he will be) they trade the pick to someone like Phoenix, who would consider a package of Amare and the #14 for Greene, Collison, and the number 3. 

If Rubio has been selected they will go with either Harden or Rubio.  The only way they go Hill is if they are eyeing someone like Marcus Thorton, Terrence Williams, or Wayne Ellington (yes he could fall that far) later in the draft.

I think Curry is way too high, and if Harden is there the Wizards will take him in a seconed.  They have plenty of shooter, and all Curry will be is a shooter.  Harden is more of a complete player, and he fits what they are trying to do.

Other than that I can’t really argue anything else.  This is a pretty solid mock draft, and IMO better than the first one I saw you put out last year.

-James Harden:  Classic example of a guy that people are WAAAAY overjudging for having a bad tournament.  In fact, I’d say one of the worst predictors of talent is only relying on their tournament production, and ignoring their accomplishments against the regular season competition.  Harden was unquestionably the best player in the Pac-10 all year.  He isn’t flashy, very true…but he shows poise, efficiency, is an excellent shooter from 3 point land and midrange J’s, showed HUGE defensive improvement from fresh to soph year…and is an extremely good rebounder and passer for a SG.  IMO, athleticism has and will always be the most overrated trait in this sport.  Harden can ball, he has a great IQ, and his work ethic and maturity are that of Thad Young.  He, like Eric Gordon of last year, should be top 4 pick talents that will slide a few spots uneccessarily.

Thabeet:  He will certainly fill a role for a team like Memphis or Minny at C…but I have to say, the dude’s basketball IQ rivals that of Sammuel Dalembert, and that’s saying something.  Can he block?  Hell yes.  Can he alter shots?  Very much so.  But if you want some great unintentional comedy, watch Thabeet on offense WITHOUT the ball.  Dude is one of the worst screeners for a big man I have ever seen, is slow to recognize any type of floor spacing, and has no eye whatsoever for passing out of the post.  And while he’s slowly improved his footwork, as did Roy Hibbert over his career, his offense is still a joke.  The fact he’s going #2-5 shows just how weak this class is for bigs.  He is a poor man’s Mutumbo.

Demar Derozen:  This kid has done nothing.  Most classic example of all hype with no substance from this year’s draft that is leaving far, far too early.  Just like Paul Harris from ‘Cuse, who would have declared for the NBA out of high school, only to learn, “Wait a minute, I’m an athlete and haven’t actually learned the game yet at a high level…”  this is Derozen.  He’s a great athlete with amazing quickness and slashing ability.  He showed promise as a future scorer someday at USC and improved during the year, but he’s a joke to me to go this early.  Can’t see him being a solid contributer for three years in the NBA…just a gamble of a risky pick.  I feel the same about…

Tyreke Evans.  So let’s see…he has one of the worst 3 point FG %’s for a starting PG in all of college basketball.  Has absolutely no midrange game either.  So we’ve established he can’t shoot.  Now, if you are Brevin Knight or Eric Snow and are a cerebral PG, that’s great…T Evans is nothing like this.  He is a ball dominating guard that IMO is the classic shoot first, street ball mentality.  Calling him a PG is an insult to the position’s name.  The “leadership” he showed at Memphis that Calipari raves about is because they put the ball in his hands and allowed him to slash to his hearts content.  He’s a mediocre passer.  At best.  Looks for his own shot first.  Goes for the flashy play instead of the efficient one…can’t shoot.  Why would anyone take him based on his possible potential over other polished products?

Wayne Ellington…on the flipside…is the guy I WOULD bank on with his potential that is not yet fulfilled.  I really thought last year was a make or break year for him and Lawson to really show improvement in their games, and both came to the table having worked hard on their game over the year.  We all know Ellington’s shooting ability…but what impressed me most during the second half of the season is other little things.  His fundamentals seemed better…his on ball defense had improved, he chased after rebounds with more hunger, blocked out his man so opposition guards weren’t able to run in the lane and grab boards, and at times surprised me with a passing game that was inconsistent, but he showed me enough to think he will improve on it.  He’s also improved his handle, and showed a nice ability to even post up on the block against smaller players with a drop step, or turn around with a “face the basket” post game.  He’s got the shot (lost art), work ethic, well coached, and while he’s not there now, I think he will be a very versatile offensive player in the NBA when he develops more.  Many mock drafts have him going in the late 20′s…laughable to me, he should be in the 10-18 range easily.

Chase Budinger:  One thing you guys didnt mention in your blurb about him is his passing ability.  He’s not just a 3 point gunner…he brings some Luke Walton IQ-isms to the offensive end, which in the NBA, if you are a shooter and not a great defender, is the other most important trait you need to bring to the table.  It’s clear he’s not a go to guy in college or the NBA, but the guy just flat out knows the game.  He has an intuitive sense of where to be and rotate to on the offensive end, can really thread the needle and find seems almost PG like at times from the wing with passing, and is extremely crafty in traffic in his ability to score or dish in the lane.  Shooting is obviously the most coveted trait, but he brings more to the table then I hear a lot of people give him credit for.  Great size too, and has really started to bulk up.  

Mayner:  Would like him as a pickup for us…IF we bank on him not being our starting PG, but rather as a Delonte West type of combo guard to come off the bench that can give us scoring punch, 3 point shooting, and some assists and energy.  I just don’t see this guy as a starting NBA PG.  That means if we take him, I want him claiming Lou Will’s spot, and Lou gone.  It also still means we need a PG of the future.  I think he CAN play PG at the NBA level…but I don’t think we are shooting high enough tabbing him as the guy we hand A-Miller’s torch to.  If we can’t land Lawson, Flynn or Curry for the PG spot, more worth it to draft a backup SG/SF.  

Jordan Hill:  If he were being picked in the 10-15 range, he would be this year’s classic “real underrated player”.  Unfortunately, this class lacks with so many big men, he’s in the top 5, which is just weird.  One thing I wanted to add though…so many people talk about his defensive ability and toughness…both true…the one thing I dont hear much is about his offense.  He’s really impressed me since his frosh year with how much he’s worked on his game…he’s improved it very Dante Cunningham-like.  His offensive game blows a guy like Thabeet’s out of the water…Jordan Hill has excellent footwork, a true back to the basket game, can finish with either hand around the rim, and has a variety of reliable post moves.  With that work ethic, it’ll only get better in time…I really like him as a non-all star talent, but very solid 6’10 PF in the NBA.  Eventually good for 15 and 9 or so.  

Earl Clark:  Biggest mystery of the draft, IMO.  As the poster said, if he meets his potential this is an all star waiting to happen.  His consistency, intensity and desire have always been problems though…I don’t even think Pitino has any idea if Clark will be looked back on as one of the top players from this draft or a total bust that fades away to Europe.  

Best exhibit of them all is Chris Paul if we are talking 6-foot or below guys.

I think Flynn has to be penetrating to make a big impact because of his still developing shot. 

Ty while very good penetrating, can also be a very good spot up shooter and that is the biggest need.  On the Sixers I expect touches for Brand in the post (low and high) and pick and roll.  I expect a lot of touches for Thad and Iguodala to drive and post up as well.  That leaves much less opportunity for the point guard to be dribbling around all the time like Miller did.  On the Sixers the point should be able to defend, manage the game with smart decisions, push the ball and force the break, make open catch and shoot jumpers AND then weave in some sharp, timely penetration for scores and dishes.  Key word is sharp, straight line with a purpose.  Not what Miller did which forced a lot of guys to stand around.

Also the point needs to know the right times for each of those situations. Needs to know when Brand needs a touch, when Thad needs a touch and when Dala needs a touch. Needs to know when he needs to make a play to score or pass. Know when to get Sam and open dunk to keep him happy.

Honestly the point guard I just described is Chauncey Billups.

My biggest questions are:

• Can he play that way in the NBA?
• Can he extend his good shooting to three point range?
• Does he have potential still or is he at his ceiling?
• Can he defend well enough?

I think Ty will be good.  Like I told Pete size is less of an issue in today’s NBA where you can’t touch, ride, guide and body up perimeter players (any players).  So his quickness will always be an advantage and in full effect.  He is smart, with good vision and capable of executing sharp passes.  He is strong so he can take contact when it does occur.  He is athletic.  He has the potential to be a very good defender.  He increased his shooting every season which is a good predictor of future growth as well.

If he is in spot up catch and shoot situations I think he can make NBA threes at a good rate in a short time (most rookies need to adjust).

The one thing he will have to work on is getting his release quicker because I think guys will play back off him and he will need to pull them in and keep them honest by pulling up and knocking down that shot (inside the arc and beyond three).

Flynn is a similar player that doesn’t shoot as well as Ty but is more explosive to the rim with his leaping ability.  If Flynn measures out better (taller, longer arms etc) and/or Ty measures poorly ppl will probably take Flynn before Ty which in my opinion would be a mistake.  Ty is a more NBA ready player with more skills shooting the ball and managing a team since he just doesn’t turn it over at all.

Give me Ty 100% over Flynn if that is a choice.