Sorry if this is cluttering up the top of the board, so mods feel free to move it if that's the case:
http://painttouches.com/2013/05/17/recapping-vander-blues-successful-day-in-chicago/
Thanks for the info Mark.
So Blue is fast, and cannot shoot that great. Nothing new from the past 3 years.
Quote from: JD on May 17, 2013, 07:23:42 PM
Thanks for the info Mark.
So Blue is fast, and cannot shoot that great. Nothing new from the past 3 years.
6' 5 1/2" is a huge surprise to me...
First Round. Book it. Too big and fast plus a great tournament and from a program that delivers "undervalued assets." Someone takes a flyer late in the first.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 17, 2013, 10:57:35 PM
First Round. Book it. Too big and fast plus a great tournament and from a program that delivers "undervalued assets." Someone takes a flyer late in the first.
Watch Tom Duncan tomorrow. He's a 7' power forward/center who's well, well past his prime and close to retirement. He routinely hits bank shots from further out than Vander can make 25% of his shots from. Just about every starting big in the NBA shoots the ball better than Vander does. There's not a ton of room in the NBA for shooting guards who can't shoot from college 3 point range. If someone takes him in the first round they better be prepared to pay a salary for a guy to spend 2-3 years entirely remaking his jump shot in the D League.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 17, 2013, 10:57:35 PM
First Round. Book it. Too big and fast plus a great tournament and from a program that delivers "undervalued assets." Someone takes a flyer late in the first.
I hope you are right Commons. I really do think he has a lot of upside but I am no expert in this.
Quote from: wadesworld on May 17, 2013, 11:03:11 PM
Watch Tom Duncan tomorrow. He's a 7' power forward/center who's well, well past his prime and close to retirement. He routinely hits bank shots from further out than Vander can make 25% of his shots from. Just about every starting big in the NBA shoots the ball better than Vander does. There's not a ton of room in the NBA for shooting guards who can't shoot from college 3 point range. If someone takes him in the first round they better be prepared to pay a salary for a guy to spend 2-3 years entirely remaking his jump shot in the D League.
Yes. You are right. Vander Blue will not be as good as Tim Duncan.
And I have pointed this out before, Vander's stats aren't all that much different than the top five SGs taken last year.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=austin-rivers&i=1&p1=vander-blue&p2=bradley-beal&p3=dion-walters&p4=terrence-ross&p5=jeremy-lamb
I still don't think he is first round, but IMO he's getting drafted.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 18, 2013, 06:43:19 AM
Yes. You are right. Vander Blue will not be as good as Tim Duncan.
And I have pointed this out before, Vander's stats aren't all that much different than the top five SGs taken last year.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=austin-rivers&i=1&p1=vander-blue&p2=bradley-beal&p3=dion-walters&p4=terrence-ross&p5=jeremy-lamb
I still don't think he is first round, but IMO he's getting drafted.
Agreed, I think he will get drafted mid-second round, I'm just saying I don't think someone is going to spend a 1st round pick (guaranteed contract) on a shooting guard who can't shoot. Someone will, however, see his size and athleticism and take a chance that over 2 or 3 years he'll find some sort of respectable outside shot and turn into a valuable player to have.
Quote from: wadesworld on May 18, 2013, 09:37:46 AM
Agreed, I think he will get drafted mid-second round, I'm just saying I don't think someone is going to spend a 1st round pick (guaranteed contract) on a shooting guard who can't shoot. Someone will, however, see his size and athleticism and take a chance that over 2 or 3 years he'll find some sort of respectable outside shot and turn into a valuable player to have.
If Jimmy and Lazar went in the first, so will Vander.
His raw assets and MU pedigree will elevate his stock. Jimmy and Wes and Jae did a lot of heavy lifting for Blue.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 18, 2013, 01:22:14 PM
If Jimmy and Lazar went in the first, so will Vander.
His raw assets and MU pedigree will elevate his stock. Jimmy and Wes and Jae did a lot of heavy lifting for Blue.
+1000
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 18, 2013, 01:22:14 PM
If Jimmy and Lazar went in the first, so will Vander.
His raw assets and MU pedigree will elevate his stock. Jimmy and Wes and Jae did a lot of heavy lifting for Blue.
Solid Second.
Why waste 1st round money on a non-front court defender with an iffy but improving shot?
Might as well use it on a Euro you can stash away.
Second round is the home of the "flyers".
Quote from: wadesworld on May 18, 2013, 09:37:46 AM
Agreed, I think he will get drafted mid-second round, I'm just saying I don't think someone is going to spend a 1st round pick (guaranteed contract) on a shooting guard who can't shoot. Someone will, however, see his size and athleticism and take a chance that over 2 or 3 years he'll find some sort of respectable outside shot and turn into a valuable player to have.
Last year tony wroten went 25th over all after hitting on 16% of his threes. It could happen.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/washington/tony-wroten (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/washington/tony-wroten)
Wroten is listed at 6'5" and I thought that might be overstated, so I wanted to see how he measured at the NBA Combine last year.
NBA Combine Results
w/o shoes / w/ shoes / wt / wingspan / reach / body fat / hand length / handwidth
Tony Wroten: 6'4.75" / 6'6" / 203.2 / 6'9" / 8'5" / 5.2 / 8.00 / 9.00
Vander Blue: 6'3.5'' / 6' 5.25'' / 197.4 / 6' 6'' / 8' 4.5'' / 4.6 / 8.5 / 9.5
|
Wroten is taller and has a larger wingspan. But Vander's hands are bigger and his reach is just as impressive for almost being 2" smaller.
In the end, economics - not the combine results - will rule this draft. Players entered knowing that it was a weak draft, and the NBA teams know it as well. With looming FAs in the horizon and a better draft class next year, I predict more Euros will be drafted in the first round and possibly the second round to save them money.
Second rounder, still.
http://www.mlive.com/pistons/index.ssf/2013/05/detroit_pistons_contact_list_w.html#incart_more_sports
Workout scheduled for the Pistons.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on May 18, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
Wroten is listed at 6'5" and I thought that might be overstated, so I wanted to see how he measured at the NBA Combine last year.
NBA Combine Results
w/o shoes / w/ shoes / wt / wingspan / reach / body fat / hand length / handwidth
Tony Wroten: 6'4.75" / 6'6" / 203.2 / 6'9" / 8'5" / 5.2 / 8.00 / 9.00
Vander Blue: 6'3.5'' / 6' 5.25'' / 197.4 / 6' 6'' / 8' 4.5'' / 4.6 / 8.5 / 9.5
|
Wroten is taller and has a larger wingspan. But Vander's hands are bigger and his reach is just as impressive for almost being 2" smaller.
In the end, economics - not the combine results - will rule this draft. Players entered knowing that it was a weak draft, and the NBA teams know it as well. With looming FAs in the horizon and a better draft class next year, I predict more Euros will be drafted in the first round and possibly the second round to save them money.
You're rounding 1.25 up to 2?
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on May 18, 2013, 02:28:49 PM
Solid Second.
Why waste 1st round money on a non-front court defender with an iffy but improving shot?
Might as well use it on a Euro you can stash away.
Second round is the home of the "flyers".
Look at some of these mocks. If you we're an NBA GM, would you risk your career on Vander or a 5'10" Shane Larkin? Vander by far.
Show me one guy Larkin's size in the league. Nate Robinson is only 5'8", but he's all muscle and as wide as he is short and tough as nails.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 18, 2013, 10:47:25 PM
Look at some of these mocks. If you we're an NBA GM, would you risk your career on Vander or a 5'10" Shane Larkin? Vander by far.
Give me Larkin, even at 5-10, any day of the week. He's just as athletic, and a far, far better player than Vander.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on May 18, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
I predict more Euros will be drafted in the first round and possibly the second round to save them money.
Highest number of international players in the draft since 2005, the year Bogut went #1 overall.
Quote from: MUfan12 on May 18, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
Give me Larkin, even at 5-10, any day of the week. He's just as athletic, and a far, far better player than Vander.
Wow
Quote from: MUfan12 on May 18, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
Give me Larkin, even at 5-10, any day of the week. He's just as athletic, and a far, far better player than Vander.
Are you kidding me!? You risk it on a true PG ALWAYS especially one the pedigree andname of Larkin all d ay long.
MU has developed its basketball profile to the point after DWade where it is forgiveable and plausible to take a gamble on one of their players in a hit and miss situation but usually on cats who stayed 4 years.
But as much as I am a fan of Vander you take Shane Larkin all day long and night...He is a safer gamble.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 18, 2013, 01:22:14 PM
If Jimmy and Lazar went in the first, so will Vander.
His raw assets and MU pedigree will elevate his stock. Jimmy and Wes and Jae did a lot of heavy lifting for Blue. E
Totally different players....both 4 year guys with complete games
Quote from: MUfan12 on May 18, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
Give me Larkin, even at 5-10, any day of the week. He's just as athletic, and a far, far better player than Vander.
Even with his "medical condition"? That is a big "if" when considering giving a kid guaranteed millions, especially an undersized "if".
Quote from: strotty on May 17, 2013, 07:08:35 PM
Sorry if this is cluttering up the top of the board, so mods feel free to move it if that's the case:
http://painttouches.com/2013/05/17/recapping-vander-blues-successful-day-in-chicago/
Never a problem, we're just having technical difficulties with pulling in feeds. In the meantime, I have added a panel on the left side that shows recent Paint Touches articles. Feel free to keep posting them here though, if usually drives good conversation.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 17, 2013, 10:57:35 PM
First Round. Book it. Too big and fast plus a great tournament and from a program that delivers "undervalued assets." Someone takes a flyer late in the first.
Not so sure Jay was BEAST player of the year and he went in the second round.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on May 18, 2013, 10:47:25 PM
Look at some of these mocks. If you we're an NBA GM, would you risk your career on Vander or a 5'10" Shane Larkin? Vander by far.
Show me one guy Larkin's size in the league. Nate Robinson is only 5'8", but he's all muscle and as wide as he is short and tough as nails.
Ty Lawson. More muscular than Larkin but pretty comparable in size.
Maybe we have been looking at this wrong.
What appreciable skill(s) would Vander have to display to be a 1st rounder?
Better shooting? OK
Better distribution? OK.
Everything else, he's already pretty good at, and he's arguably ok at the 2 things listed above.
I guess if a GM thinks Vander can improve his shooting, he's worth at least a second round pick. He should be able to defend both guard positions, and provide nice role-player minutes. If he develops a decent 3pter, he'll be a rotational player. If he doesn't, he'll be in the d-league.
I guess he should def. be a second rounder.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on May 21, 2013, 04:59:49 PM
Maybe we have been looking at this wrong.
What appreciable skill(s) would Vander have to display to be a 1st rounder?
Better shooting? OK
Better distribution? OK.
Everything else, he's already pretty good at, and he's arguably ok at the 2 things listed above.
I guess if a GM thinks Vander can improve his shooting, he's worth at least a second round pick. He should be able to defend both guard positions, and provide nice role-player minutes. If he develops a decent 3pter, he'll be a rotational player. If he doesn't, he'll be in the d-league.
I guess he should def. be a second rounder.
What evidence do we have of Vander being a good distributor. His 1.8 assists per game (2.3 turnovers) last year is not really indicative of being even arguably ok given that he intends on playing point.
Quote from: frozena pizza on May 21, 2013, 04:46:22 PM
Ty Lawson. More muscular than Larkin but pretty comparable in size.
Lawson is listed as 5'11" and 195 lbs. Larkin is 170 lbs. Larkin apparently had freakish numbers at the combine, though. Still think he'll get beat up in league.
Quote from: forgetful on May 21, 2013, 06:42:55 PM
What evidence do we have of Vander being a good distributor. His 1.8 assists per game (2.3 turnovers) last year is not really indicative of being even arguably ok given that he intends on playing point.
Vander's assist/turnover #s don't mean anything from a year he was relied upon to be a primary scorer. He didn't play pg and he was counted on having a high offensive usage, that = low assists and might skew turnovers up in situations he's trying to force scoring when nobody else is.
How successful could his day have been for him to drop out of all the mocks?
Quote from: RawdogDX on May 18, 2013, 02:31:50 PM
Last year tony wroten went 25th over all after hitting on 16% of his threes. It could happen.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/washington/tony-wroten (http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/washington/tony-wroten)
Wroten is the real deal. Not only was he 1st Team Pac 12 & Pac 12 Freshman of the Year but his bloodlines are impeccable. His parents were stars at U Dub, with his father playing for the Bucs as a TE. Mother and aunt were both All Americans. His cousin is Nate Robinson. Wroten struggled from deep but he averaged 17/5/3 in his one season at U Dub.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on May 21, 2013, 08:07:07 PM
Vander's assist/turnover #s don't mean anything from a year he was relied upon to be a primary scorer. He didn't play pg and he was counted on having a high offensive usage, that = low assists and might skew turnovers up in situations he's trying to force scoring when nobody else is.
Understood, but that means we have 0 evidence of his being able to distribute at even a passable level, which was my point.
As others have noted Jerel McNeal put up 20 pts per game and 4 assists his senior year and people questioned his ability to distribute well enough to play point. Vander's numbers in a similar offensive role were significantly worse.
Again I wish the kid the best, and think he has the potential to be a good player in the league, but he really needs someone to bite on potential, the stats don't support a draft pick at this point.
Vander will have to wow a team in workouts to demonstrate he can be even a passable point guard. At MU, he rarely if ever displayed PG skills and intangibles: penetrate and kick; distribute on break; make teammates better; organize the offense; beat pressure in the backcourt; court sense; great ballhandling; etc. That's not his fault because that's not how he was used, but it is a fact.
It would be a real leap of faith for a team at the highest level of basketball to look at Vander's body of work and say: "Of course he can be an NBA point guard."
Still, as many have said, all it takes is one team. One only needs to look at some of the horrible players drafted in the first round over the years to say, "Hey, Vander's better this year than they were in their years."
Quote from: MU82 on May 21, 2013, 09:58:59 PM
One only needs to look at some of the horrible players drafted in the first round over the years
Robert Swift
(http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlesports/files/library/swift2.jpg)
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/03/nba-star-hoarder-foreclosed-robert-swift-downfall-caused-parents-greed-claims/
Quote from: forgetful on May 21, 2013, 06:42:55 PM
What evidence do we have of Vander being a good distributor. His 1.8 assists per game (2.3 turnovers) last year is not really indicative of being even arguably ok given that he intends on playing point.
It's a fair point.
I don't really have a statistic to back up my claim that he is an "ok" distributor.
I'm really just using the eye test. The kid isn't Magic Johnson, but he's also not a black hole either. Also, I think if MU had a knock-down 3pt shooter on the wing, Vander's (and Junior's) assist numbers would look better. How many times did MU drive and kick the ball to a guy who either missed the jumpshot, or didn't even take the jumpshot?
I think he might be good enough to be a combo guard off of the bench. Still a longshot, but I'm coming around to the idea.
Bleacher Report has Vander going with the 53 pick in the draft (second round) to the Indianapolis Pacers.
Where was I when the New Orleans Hornets became the Pelicans?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2013, 03:04:05 PM
Where was I when the New Orleans Hornets became the Pelicans?
Officially? A couple months ago. Rumors came out late last year.
Seth Davis @SethDavisHoops 3h
Vander Blue playing some point but doesn't look natural. It's why he should have gone back to Marquette for one more year
Jonathan Givony @DraftExpress 3h
Lots of everything from Vander Blue today. Made tough shots, also made some very poor decisions. Great athlete. All in all a solid showing.
Quote from: keefe on May 21, 2013, 09:26:14 PM
Wroten is the real deal. Not only was he 1st Team Pac 12 & Pac 12 Freshman of the Year but his bloodlines are impeccable. His parents were stars at U Dub, with his father playing for the Bucs as a TE. Mother and aunt were both All Americans. His cousin is Nate Robinson. Wroten struggled from deep but he averaged 17/5/3 in his one season at U Dub.
Wow. Moomoo bashed me for mentioning high school rankings as a potential factor in a draft and you are going with extended family.