Three guys who could be the surprise second best player in this draft

20 Comments

Make no mistake, this is the Anthony Davis draft. He is the franchise player, the guy who can be a top 10 player in the league, the guy you build a contender around, the guy people pay to see. The Hornets have literally won the lottery.

After that there is a consensus of guys going 2-5 — Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and Thomas Robinson among them.

But below them are a few guys who will get picked Thursday with the potential to be the second best player out of this draft, to be a perennial All-Star, a guy who is the heart of his team, three guys who could be to their team what the Hornets hope Davis will be. These are guys that have questions, and will need a few years to develop, but if they do they could be very special players.

Or, they could flame out spectacularly. Which is why none of them are going No. 2. They are risk/reward guys. But these are the three guys with the “upside” potential to be the second best player out of this draft.

1) Andre Drummond (7’0” center, Connecticut) He could be the anchor every team wants in the middle — maybe a Serge Ibaka, maybe even better an Andrew Bynum. He has a rare mixture of size and elite athleticism, he has all the tools and from day one he should get rebounds and shot blocks galore.

Should. The problem is his drive, his motor, his passion is constantly in question. The buzz is his workouts have not impressed teams and he could slide down the board. He dropped 22 pounds after the college season ended, which makes you wonder where that effort was before, and even then he doesn’t blow people away in workouts.

UConn coach Jim Calhoun has said a few times that in three or four years we will see the potential in Drummond realized. Some guys (think Bynum with the Lakers) do put in the work and develop into great players in a few years. But he could become an Andray Blatche kind of talent, too. And if you haven’t seen the work ethic up to now…

One of the biggest risk/reward picks in the draft. He has unbelievable physical tools and, while he needs to develop, he could be an Andrew Bynum/Serge Ibaka like center in five years. But with all that he averaged 10 points and 7.6 rebounds per game in college, there are serious questions about his desire and commitment to himself and the game. He could be a big bust. Workouts drew really mixed reviews.

2) Perry Jones III (6’11” power forward, Baylor) A guy with this much individual talent falling out of the lottery — which is what DraftExpress and every other mock has happening now — says everything you need to know about the concerns about his desire, his commitment to the game and himself. Take him in the lottery and he is the kind of pick that gets GMs fired. There’s also a question about where to play him, Baylor used him as a center but some scouts see him more as a tall three.

What everyone agrees on is this: If he could harness those talents and play to his potential he would be an absolute beast. He can score in the post or out on the perimeter, he runs the floor in transition very well, he leaps out of the building and can rebound the rock. He has the potential to be a Lamar Odom on a good night type of player — but his flake factor is bigger than Odom’s. Which should scare everyone.

3) John Henson (6’10 power forward, North Carolina) If I were going to make a bet on any of the guys on this list, it would be Henson. Why? Because the guy hustles hard every game. He is like a poor-man’s Anthony Davis because from the moment you draft him he can defend and rebound (although he needs to put on weight fast, currently he could turn sideways and you wouldn’t see him). But that is not a great description because he also just has a unique, hard to define game. Well, outside of the fact he is very long and very athletic.

His offense is raw. Also, he’s not a guy that fits easily into a traditional offensive system — he’s too thin right now to bang with fours and fives in the NBA (see the paragraph above) but he’s not a three. However, he is the one guy you know will put in the effort, work on his offensive game, get stronger and in three or four years could be a real force.

Most people don’t think he has the upside of Perry and Drummond, but this is the guy I would be more willing to invest in because some return seems more likely.

Tristan Thompson: Cavaliers’ stated 3-4-week timeline for my injury was never realistic

Jason Miller/Getty Images
Leave a comment

When Tristan Thompson suffered a calf injury early last month, the Cavaliers announced he’d miss 3-4 weeks.

More than five weeks later, Thompson still hasn’t played.

Tom Withers of the Associated Press:

Thompson:

Who said that was the real timetable? They told you guys three to four weeks. That was never the case. The first week, I was on crutches the whole time. So, there was no chance. So, I don’t know. I don’t know who told you three to four weeks. For that, I’m sorry.

Thompson sounds close to returning, so this issue should pass. But teams are usually conservative in these estimates so as not to expose their players to criticism for not working hard enough in rehab. Thompson was left hung out to dry here.

Maybe Thompson, who’s famously low-maintenance, doesn’t mind. But if a 3-4-week timeline was never realistic, I wouldn’t blame him for resenting the Cavs.

Poor communication on injuries might not be limited to only the 76ers.

Heat’s Dion Waiters: ‘I’m not coming off no bench’

Mike Ehrmann/Getty Images
2 Comments

Heat coach Erik Spoelstra said Dion Waiters must be more efficient.

But Waiters’ effective field-goal percentage this season (46.1) is nearly precisely his career mark (46.2). It appears last season’s career high (48.8) in a contract year was the outlier.

What if Waiters just can’t change? Could Miami bring him off the bench?

Waiters, via Tom D’Angelo of The Palm Beach Post:

“I’m a starter in this league, man, that’s who I am. We’re going to nip that in the bud right now. I’m not coming off no bench.”

This is peak Waiters, supremely confident/cocky. He’s not good enough to demand a starting spot, but here he is doing it anyway.

That make’s Spoelstra’s job trickier if he’s considering bringing Waiters off the bench. It might be the optimal basketball move, but NBA coaches must also deal with their players egos.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Waiters should come off the bench. Miami’s starting lineup – Goran Dragic, Waiters, Josh Richardson, Justise Winslow and Hassan Whiteside – is outscoring opponents by 6.3 points per 100 possessions. (The Heat are -3.4 per 100 overall.) That unit defends, and Waiters eases the playmaking burden on Dragic.

But if I were the Heat, I also wouldn’t take the possibility of not starting Waiters off the table. At an underwhelming 12-13, they don’t have the luxury of never experimenting – even if it might upset Waiters.

Bradley Beal: Wizards lost to Clippers after what referees described as a ‘s— rule’

AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill
2 Comments

The Clippers beat the Wizards on Saturday, but not without a controversial finish.

Washington trailed 113-112 with 1.2 seconds left and inbounded the ball from the sideline to Bradley Beal, who made a shot, but after the buzzer sounded. However, the clock started early.

The sequence:

After review, officials gave the Wizards the ball in the corner with 1.1 seconds left. In a tough position with less time and on its secondary play, Washington didn’t score.

Beal, via Chase Hughes of NBC Sports Washington:

“Excuse my language because I’m going to say verbatim what they said,” Beal said. “They said it’s kind of a ‘some s*** rule,’ it’s a freak rule. To me, it didn’t really make sense because you take a basket away. You go back and he says we get the same amount of time, but we didn’t get the same amount of time and then we get the ball in the corner. It’s kind of the tough s*** rule. I don’t understand it. I don’t get it. We ran a great play and now that you take that away, we’ve gotta set up with a different play and they get a chance to set up and change some things. Now we’ve gotta do a different play with the ball in the corner.”

Referee Bill Spooner, via the NBA:

Spooner contradicts himself here. Was the time lost 0.1 seconds or 1.1 seconds? He said both at different points. He also clearly means the game clock, not the shot clock.

Here’s the relevant example from the NBA’s casebook:

Player A1 inbounds the ball at 0.8 of the period and the game clock starts early when the timer thought the ball was deflected. Player A2 receives the ball and the game horn sounds as he immediately turns to shoot a successful basket. How is this handled?

The on-court officials will signal for replay and the Replay Center Official will determine how much time ran off the clock prior to it being legally touched. If the successful basket was released prior to 0:00, the basket will be scored and if from the ball being legally touched until it cleared the net is less than 0.8, the game clock shall be reset to that amount of time. If the ball is still in Player A1’s hands at 0:00, the field goal cannot be scored and Team A will retain possession on the sideline nearest the point of interruption and the game clock reset to the amount of lost time.

Why would the game clock be set to the amount of lost time? I can see the game clock being reduced by the amount of lost time, which seemingly happened – in error, according to Spooner – Saturday. But just setting the clock to the amount of lost time unfairly punishes the team that is already disadvantaged by the timekeeping error.

From the rule to the enforcement, this was just sloppy.

Kevin Garnett: I want to help buy out Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor, not partner with him

AP Photo/Ann Heisenfelt
2 Comments

Kevin Garnett’s rift with the Timberwolves – specifically owner Glen Taylor – is still going strong.

Garnett, via Shlomo Sprung of Awful Announcing:

“I don’t want to be partners with Glen [Taylor], and I wouldn’t want to be partners with Glen in Minnesota,” he said. “I would love to be part of a group that buys him out and kind of removes him and go forward.”

Taylor recently said he’s not interested in selling the franchise. That could be a bargaining tactic, but at face value, Garnett isn’t getting involved anytime soon.

Garnett and Taylor could break the ice with a clearly joyous occasion, a simple number-retirement ceremony. But even that is too much for the two.