Can your combo guard run the point?

In the lead up to the draft, talk centered on college combo guards moving to the point in the NBA. Will your combo guard make the transition? I answer the question here, where I write about the "Personality of a Point Guard."

Also, on the topic, I have to comment on Brandon Jennings. I knew someone would go straight from high school to Europe eventually. Makes too much financial sense. However, I find it hard to believe that a top European club would sign Jennings. Few top clubs like American rookies from college programs; they typically want a player with NBA or European experience. So, I imagine that Jennings is looking at the bottom tier teams in the top leagues (Spain, Greece, Russia and Italy) or a second-tier league like France, Germany, Belgium, Israel, Turkey, etc.

If Jennings and his representatives are smart, they should be contacting Angelico Biella in Italy, which has developed a reputation as a club that develops players who leave for bigger contracts after a year or two.

Hypocritical Pro Sports

The NBA apparently wants to raise the age limit to 20-years-old, which would have eliminated nearly half of this year's 1st Round draft picks. The NFL already requires three years of college before a player can enter the draft, while Major League Baseball has a loophole - either go pro out of high school or play three years of college ball.

However, if a player resides outside the U.S., all bets are off.

The Oakland Athletics and prized 16-year-old pitching prospect Michael Inoa agreed Wednesday to a minor league contract with a $4.25 million signing bonus.

It's okay for a 16-year-old from the Dominican Republic to be signed to a professional contract, but not an American teenager?

In the comments below an article I wrote recently about the NBA Draft, oneposter wrote:

Are you picking out the squad for the 2010 Prison All Star Squad?

and another:

Picking Mayo would be a mistake. He can't stay out of trouble and would be a bane to any team that took him.

I don't understand why so many people vehemently dislike Mayo. Did he take money from a runner? Very likely. Does that make him a bad kid? Not to me. If these people think that every kid playing college basketball is clean, they are naive. Mayo is simply a big name and apparently got caught, just like the situation with Reggie Bush.

Mayo has been a media star since he was in junior high school. He is a product of that environment. He has been promised a shoe deal since seventh grade. Why wouldn't he receive money from an agent to get some new clothes and a flat screen? Why live the life of an average college student when everyone has told you since you were 12-years-old that you aren't average?

To my knowledge, Mayo has never really been in trouble. I just don't get the contempt for the kid. In any other country, he would have signed a professional contract when he was 16 or 17-years-old and been paid to play. But, since the U.S. media and NCAA want to market this "wink wink" amateur system to the masses, players like Mayo are caught between taking some money under the table and living the life of the poor college student.

If U.S. professional franchises are able to sign foreign kids to contracts at 16-years-old, why not U.S. teenagers? Or, if U.S. organizations are so preoccupied with the players educational opportunities, why not insist foreign kids seek the same educations within their own countries? I don't understand the discrepancies.

The State of Golden State

Last year, after the draft, I wrote that I did not believe the Warriors improved their team compared to the rest of the Western Conference. Angry Warrior fans wrote in protest, believing Brandon Wright, Kosta Perovic, Stephan Lasme and Austin Croshere would solidify the interior and Belinelli would replace Jason Richardson.

Now, after losing Baron Davis, and drafting another skinny project, are the Warriors the worst team in the Western Conference?

Everyone loves Monta Ellis, but nobody really believes he is a point guard. C.J. Watson, who I like, is their other option at PG.

On the wing, they will likely allow Mickael Pietrus to leave via free agency, leaving Stephen Jackson, Kelenna Azuibike, Belinelli and Matt Barnes.

And, this is a guard-oriented, fast breaking team that often plays four guards and wings.

Instead, they have a bunch of skinny project kind of big guys with Patrick O'Bryant, Wright and Anthony Randolph to go along with Al Harrington and Andres Biedrins.

Is a line-up with Ellis, Jackson, Azuibike, Harrington and Biedrins with Belinelli, Watson and Wright off the bench going to strike fear in anyone? Is it better than the potential line-ups in Memphis, Minnesota and Seattle?

Seattle presumably will start Westbrook, Durant, Green, Wilcox and someone else.
Memphis has Conley, Mayo, Gay, Arthur and Gasol/Milicic.
Minnesota has Telfair, Foye, Brewer, Love and Jefferson.

The only direction I see the Warriors heading is backward. At this point, they might as well see if Keith Smart can coach. They might as well play the young guys and let them develop, like Seattle did with Durant last season. Play Ellis, Jackson, Randolph, Wright and Biedrinis.

Or, look to deal Jackson and Harrington. Jackson should have value for a host of teams. He would be a perfect compliment to LeBron James on the wing in Cleveland or a great pick-up for a second stint in San Antonio or a replacement for James Posey in Boston or the missing piece in New Orleans or the answer in Phoenix (Jackson for Diaw? Jackson for Barbosa? Can you imagine Barbosa and Ellis in the same backcourt, or on the same relay team?).

Or, more realitically, in Portland. Steve Blake or Sergio Rodriguez and Travis Outlaw for Stephen Jackson. Outlaw will eventually leave anyway, especially since Portland drafted Batum. Portland drafted Bayless, so I assume either Blake or Rodriguez will be the third PG, not to mention the minutes Roy plays at the position with a bigger line-up with Fernandez in the back court.

So, Portland will barely miss its departing pieces. But, Jackson is the type of defender and shot maker who would fit at the SF for Portland. Bayless, Roy, Jackson, Aldridge and Oden would be a great offensive and defensive team with Blake (or Rodriguez), Fernandez, Webster, Diogu, Frye and Pryzbilla on the bench. Wow.

Golden State adds two young pieces, gets a true PG to play with Ellis, adds some shooting and acquires a young, versatile talent to play SF. Rodriguez, Ellis, Outlaw, Wright and Biedrins would be starting over, but it would be starting over with more nice, young pieces in the mix.

Then, Golden State would have to find a taker for Harrington. Play out the season and add Ricky Rubio or B.J. Mullens in the 2009 NBA Draft.

The Warriors were the talk of the NBA about 14 months ago. Now, they are on the brink of irrelevance.

The Wisdom of the NBA Crowd

After last week's NBA Draft, I read the minute by minute coverage on SacTown Royalty, which was quite funny. Beyond the humor, I was struck by the knowledge of some of the fans, both of the players in the draft and the history of the Kings.

Over the weekend, I read the latest issue of ESPN the Mag which includes a small tidbit about the book the Wisdom of Crowds in relation to the problems with NBA officiating. The article says that crowds make better decisions than individuals, and cites Who Wants to be a Millionaire, where crowds were correct over 90% of the time, while experts gave the correct answer about 60% of the time.

This spring, Bill Simmons openly lobbied, through his column, to be the Milwaukee Bucks General Manager. He cites some times when he made what turned into accurate predictions - he said the Bucks should draft Chris Paul. However, he omitted the dozens of times he has been incorrect, in hindsight. It happens. Anyone who writes as frequently as Simmons is bound to be right and wrong in print.

I believe Simmons had the popular support, he would have been hired if it was a popular election, because people had the idea that he would listen to the fans. While most see listening to the fans as a recipe for disaster, after reading SacTown Royalty and ESPN, I think it is a great idea.

I cannot wait for the first enterprising organization to save itself millions by investing in the fans. With the information available via the Internet, an organization could replace its General Manager, International and college scouts with its fan base. Imagine the savings in salary and travel expenses.

A General Manager hires the Head Coach, makes draft picks and searches for trades to improve the team. I am sure most GMs have other roles, but the administrative roles could be sourced to an administrator for less money than the half million per year or more that an NBA General Manager makes. Maybe even outsource the administrative responsibilities to India for even bigger savings!

Imagine if Sacramento, a team looking to save money, dumped Geoff Petrie and its scouts and turned the organization over to its passionate fan base. The Maloofs could hire SacTown Royalty's Tom Ziller as the de facto General Manager and give him the authority to contact teams about trades. But, all final decisions would be made through a vote on the blog.

Of course, there would have to be some security precautions to prevent opponent's fans from trying to alter the voting: let's say anyone who buys any kind of season ticket package gets a vote. Instantly, rather than relying on a "guru" like Petrie, the organization would empower 10,000 or more people to make decisions. Wouldn't everyone in Sacramento want to be a season ticket holder to get such influence on the team's future?

On draft day, when the Kings are on the clock, the SacTown Royalty blog would quickly feature a poll with five players narrowed from the list by pre-draft voting. As the Kings time ticked down, season ticket holders would vote and the poll results would decide the new pick.

Sure, this process would ignore those who impressed at pre-draft workouts, unless Ziller could film the workouts and put the footage on the blog for everyone to assess (that would be awesome!). But, is picking a player based on a workout really a good idea anyway? With the new college age limit, all the players, minus the internationals, are known quantities. So, maybe the Kings would miss on the next Nowitski, but they would miss on the next Milicic too. The five players who likely would have appeared when the Kings picked at #12 this year: Mario Chalmers, Darrell Arthur, Anthony Randolph, Robin Lopez and Trade Down At All Costs and pick a player like Roy Hibbert or Jason Thompson.

We can see how the theory plays out as we watch Chalmers, Arthur, Randolph and Thomspon over the next couple years. The problem, of course, is the nimbleness to make a deal: for instance, what if there was a way for the Kings to make a deal to move up one spot and acquire Jerryd Bayless before the Trailblazers made their move. This would be the problem with the system. Kings fans would give up their power if their voting power cost them a chance at a Bayless because they could not mobilize the vote quick enough. I am guessing a vote to move up one spot for Bayless would have won overwhelming, unless the Kings had to part with Kevin Martin. To land Ike Diogu and Bayless, I'd happily part with Quincy Douby - a combo guard like Jarrett Jack.

Hiring a coach could proceed in the same manner, though voting to fire a coach would be more problematic. You cannot have a weekly vote on the fate of the coach. So, the Kings would forfeit the ability to fire the coach in the middle of the season - unless there was a transgression that led to an immediate vote of confidence - and the voters would vote at the end of each season on the future of the coach.

The criticism, of course, is that fans are notoriously fickle. However, with over 10,000 people, the vote evens out.

Now, this will never happen. No organization would risk their investment by empowering the fans. Unless, the Green Bay Packers do it. The Packers are owned by shareholders, not rich beer distributors or real estate investment guys. If anyone could legitimately do this, it would be the Green Bay Packers and their shareholders. Plus, they are a small market team, so it would be a way to cut expenses.

Otherwise, I could see a minor league team trying it. Imagine a fledgling Major League Soccer or Triple A baseball team handing over soccer or baseball decisions to its fans by way of majority vote. Wouldn't you pay closer attention to your hometown team? Wouldn't you visit the team's web site more frequently to get more information? Wouldn't the local papers have to cover the team more in-depthly, if for no other reason than the local citizens would want more information? If you're a struggling franchise, how much could it hurt?

Gunnin' for that #1 Spot

I saw Gunnin' for that #1 Spot tonight, an interesting look at some of the top high school and college players in the country. After watching the Elite 24 game, there shold have been little argument: Michael Beasley showed by far the most talent, and he was hilarious too. Without Beasley's antics, I'm not sure if there is a movie.

My favorite part of the movie, however, was listening to the youth basketball power brokers criticize the yoth basketball system. Chris Rivers, Darren Matsubara, Clark Francis and Ron Matena criticized the development system.

Rivers and Mats criticized those who rate players at a young age, which I found ironic considering Mats is an adidas grassroots guy and adidas runs the Phenom camps where Clark Francis rates the 5th graders. Rivers is the Reebok grassroots guy and Reebok has tried to build its national showcase business again, with younger players (just can't remember the name of the series of camps). Francis and Matena are the guys who rate the players.

They were accurate in their comments about the youth system becoming big business and the problems which this causes in the development system. However, they are the system. They are basically criticizing the companies they work for and the jobs they perform.

Anyway, it was a good lck at elite high school basketball and did a pretty good job representing all angles.

Analyzing the Draft Analysis

I just read Chad Ford's draft analysis. Unlike some, I generally like the information Ford provides, even though I have no idea how a job as a professor in Hawaii translates into being an NBA insider.

I do, however, have a problem with the selectivity with which he likes upside. I just see some incongruity in his analysis, which is common among most who attempt to read the future.

He gave the Golden State Warriors an "A" which I think is way too high a grade for drafting LSU's Anthony Randolph. Here is what he writes about Randolph:

Randolph has as much upside as anyone in the draft not named Beasley or Rose. But as with the huge upside guy they took last year, Brandan Wright, it might take Randolph a while to realize it.

Randolph is a 6'11, 195 pound forward. Some questioned his production last year, as well as his team's dismal performance, but Ford loves the pick. Now, the Warriors have drafted Patrick O'Bryant, a skinny seven-footer, Wright, a skinny 6'9 forward, and Randolph in consecutive drafts and nobody really expects any of the three to contribute next season.

Now, as for Ford's incongruity, he did not like Charlotte's pick of Alexis Ajinca. He writes:

Ajinca is intriguing on paper and in workouts, but I'm highly skeptical he can turn 5 points per game in the French league into a solid NBA career. I think they wasted some cash buying the pick.

Charlotte picked Ajinca at #20, six picks after Randolph. Ajinca is 7'1 and 240 pounds with a 7'8 wingspan. Now, he could easily be like Sene, still mired on Seattle's bench. But, he is as athletic and bigger than Randolph and by some accounts, dominated workouts against more proven players. So he scored only 5 points in France. Many European teams do not play young players as consistently as a freshman would play in college here.

Basically, Ford likes upside with a tweener forward at #14, but not in a legit seven-footer at #20.

Ford gave Seattle an A-. He also loved Seattle's selection of Serge Ibaka:

Ibaka is a great keeper pick for later. He's got amazing athleticism, but they're going to have to be very patient.

Ibaka is a strong 6'11 post playing in the Spanish Second Division. Seattle chose him at #24. So, Ford likes potential and upside at #24, but not at #20. Ajinca may only score 5ppg, but at least he is in France's highest division; Ibaka cannot even claim to play in Spain's highest league.

Ford also did not like Washington's selection of Javale McGee. I tend to agree with Ford here, as Washington is one of those teams that needs to add a complimentary piece for now, not a project for three years from now. Washington already has Andray Blatche; they could use a Mario Chalmers to solidify the back court or Chris Douglas-Roberts to play on the wing or a Darrell Arthur to provide more front court scoring off the bench. Kosta Koufos made sense as an offensive center who can play facing the basket and fit into Eddie Jordan's offensive system.

But, Washington selected McGee. I like McGee as a player. I liked him at Nevada. I think #18 was a little high, and he should have stayed in school for another season to add strength, but he has major upside just like Randolph or Ibaka. However, Ford doesn't really think so:

McGee has upside -- kind of like Andray Blatche does. McGee made a big mistake coming out early, and I doubt he'll ever turn all that upside into a real NBA game.

Now, maybe Ford really studied these four players and loves something about Randolph and Ibaka. Maybe he knows them personally and believes Randolph and Ibaka possess the mental skills and work ethic to develop their talent.

However, on the surface, his comments seem contradictory and confusing. I would like to know what it is that makes him believe in Randolph and Ibaka, while not believing in Ajinca and McGee. That is the type of analysis I would like to read, but rarely find.

Draft Stunners

Admittedly, I know very little about Jason Thompson from Rider, the Sacramento Kings 1st Round pick. However, I did see him play in one game in his conference tournament and was underwhelmed. I hoped D.J. Augustin would fall to the Kings. My second choice, based on who I thought would be available, was Kansas Darrell Arthur. I never even considered that the Kings would take Thompson. I like Patrick Ewing, Jr as a 2nd Round pick, but not Sean Singletary. As a Kings' fan, I am disappointed.

I was in the car when the Kings made the selection. I was listening to some San Diego area sports talk show. The host admitted that he had never heard of Thompson. Of course, he also referred to San Diego State Head Coach Steve Fischer as a "legend of the game."

Well, everyone thought Memphis might be a little gun shy after the criticism of the Pau Gasol trade. Then they decided to give away Mike Miller.

I understand trading to get O.J. Mayo because he is the player that you covet, even though your interior is a weakness. However, I do not understand giving up Mike Miller to make the trade happen, not to mention acquiring more bad contracts that they gave away. Minnesota instantly upgraded its team with this trade, as Love can play inside with Jefferson (though, defensively they have nobody to protect the rim, which is never good) and Miller can play on the wing with Foye, McCants and Brewer. I think Memphis severely undervalued Miller - I thought the Lakers should make a run at Miller with Lamar Odom, though I figure Memphis may never make a deal with the Lakers again.

Memphis did manage to salvage something by trading Donte Green to acquire Darrell Arthur, potentially the draft's biggest steal at #27. Arthur now becomes the inside player the Grizzlies desperately need, while Mayo fills the two-guard spot vacated by Miller. The Grizzlies still have an extra PG to deal if anyone (Sacramento? Denver?) is interested, but adding Arthur and Mayo certainly upgrades the talent level, even though I am not sure it was worth losing Miller.

Portland stayed busy. I warmed to the Brandon Rush pick right around the time the Blazers dealt him to Indiana. Rush seemed like a great fit in Portland as a small forward who can defend and shoot the three. I am not a huge Jerryd Bayless fan. They later managed to acquire Nicolas Batum, who they obviously wanted, before the San Antonio Spurs managed to draft him. So, Batum and Bayless seem like a talented duo to add to the team and address the Blazers' weaknesses. However, they could have drafted Mario Chalmers with the late pick, leaving them with Rush and Chalmers (though they would also have Jack instead of Diogu). They also acquired another three future second round draft picks.

Bayless has talent and can make shots. It will be interesting how Portland plays together with a potential starting line-up of Bayless, Roy, Outlaw, Aldridge and Oden. That is a talented team, but will there be enough ball to share and keep everyone happy?

Diogu actually could be a nice addition as a scoring big off the bench. With the above starting line-up, the Blazers have Blake, Rodriguez, Fernandez, Webster, Diogu, Frye and Pryzbilla off the bench with Batum likely joining Joel Freeland and Pettri Kaponen in Europe. Everyone keeps mentioning assets and the Blazers certainly have them. They have a minimum of eight "lottery talents" on the roster: Oden, Aldridge, Roy, Outlaw (likely would have been a lottery pick had he played another year of college), Bayless, Batum (considered a lottery pick until the last 2-3 weeks), Fernandez (was a top player in the Spanish league last season) and Webster.

I cannot believe Kosta Koufus fell to the #23 pick and the Utah Jazz. I thought he was a top ten player when I saw him play during the college season. There is no way he should have slid outside the top 15. I like him better than last year's #10 pick, Sacramento's Spencer Hawes.

Miami has to be happy. They draft Beasley and acquire Chalmers, so they upgrade two positions. If they can deal Shawn Marion for some additional talent, the Heat may be relevant again.

New Jersey managed two of the top "value" picks in the draft, as they landed Brook Lopez at #10 and Chris Douglas-Roberts at #40. CDR may be able to step-in right away and add some of the offense New Jersey lost when it dealt Jefferson to the Bucks, while Lopez solidifies its front line. Adding Ryan Anderson is a bonus. The Nets are flush with athletic big men who could stand to add a few pounds of muscle: Anderson, Yi, Sean Wiliams, Josh Boone, Nenad Kristic and Lopez. However, with this length, they should be able to deter some shots around the basket.

Last Minute Draft Thoughts

Since Kevin Prichard took over the Trailblazers, I have been a closet Blazers' fan. I like the team that he has put together. As the draft starts in two hours, I had this thought:

The Blazers have two picks. They do not have a lot of room for new players and nobody available at #13 is really going to make an impact this year. Plus, they add two great rookies in Greg Oden and Rudy Fernandez.

They have a weakness at PG and I do not believe their SFs necessarily complement the rest of the personnel, though they have talent at that position, and young talent which presumably is still developing (Travis Outlaw and Martell Webster).

So, I think the Blazers go in this direction:

They take two European players. Alexis Ajinca has been all over the mock draft boards and some reports have him outplaying other more highly rated players. While the Blazers are interested in several players, why not draft Ajinca at 13? He stays in Europe for another year or two and continues to develop. When Channing Frye or Jake Pryzbilla's contract is up, Portland signs him and adds a defensive presence off the bench behind Oden.

If Danilo Gallinari, Russell Westbrook or Joe Alexander manage to fall to the Blazers, they have to take him. Alexander is a great athlete who would compete at the SF position. Gallinari is the type of playmaker who would be great at the SF position with the other talent and Westbrook is a big, defensive point guard like Nate McMillan apparently desires. I would not draft Augustin as they have Sergio Rodriguez, but he does not seem to fit McMillan's demands, so I do not know how Augustin changes anything.

At #27, Portland takes Nicolas Batum if he is available or Serge Ibaka. Batum is the SF of the future who could develop in Europe until Outlaw is traded or departs via free agency. Ibaka would be another raw big man who would develop in Europe.

Can you imagine the Blazers in three years when they have Aldridge and Oden starting and Ajinca and Ibaka (on rookie contracts) off the bench in the post? Dangerous.

Of course, if Mario Chalmers is available at #27, he would be tough to pass on. However, if they draft Chalmers, they would have four point guards...

Early in the second round, I would gamble on Bill Walker if he is available with the 3rd pick of the 2nd Round. If the Blazers drafted Walker, Ajinca and Ibaka, they could potentially get three lottery talents in one draft. Walker is a question mark, but the Blazers can afford to take risks because of the young talent stockpiled. If healthy, Walker could be a star at the SF position next to Roy, Aldridge and Oden.

With the 6th pick, assuming they grabbed Ibaka, Ajinca and Walker, I would go for a PG like Jamont Gordon or Kyle Weaver or a shooter like Shan Foster. With the final pick, I'd draft another European player like one of the Turkish centers.

Beyond Portland...

It looks like the Kings might luck into D.J. Augustin, which would be great.

I don't understand the Clippers giving up a 1st round pick to move from seven to four, but it shows Sam Presti's savvy in Seattle.