Stauskas No. 11 on Chad Ford's new Big Board
http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/mock/?season=2014&version=10&source…
it's a $ link, so the relevant info - Stauskas at 11; if he can prove "that he can be a playmaker as well as a shooter" [drink!], he can crack the top 10.
GRIII is the first off his Big Board (technically No. 31) and MM is 33.
I feel he's right around the 8th best player in the draft.
I have him much higher than 8th. Guy has the potential to become the greatest shooter in the history of the NBA and he can beat a guy off the dribble too. Also he brings instant excitement to your team instead of just being another drive in the lane and try to draw a foul kind of player.
I'd take Nik #1.
Yep I'd take Nik number one, then I'd trade up to take GRIII number two, and then I'd trade up again to take Mitch Number three.
There is a legit reason I'm not an NBA GM.
Nik isn't even the best shooter in Michigan history. He's NOT going to be the best shooter in NBA history. I know the 3-point line was a bit shorter back then, but Rice hit nearly 52% of his 3's in 88-89 and shot nearly 58% from the floor overall. Nik is great, but he's not Glen Rice And Glen Rice was far from the best shooter in NBA history.
Now Glen Rice was also a senior, and Nik was a sophomore, so I know he has a lot of development still to come. But c'mon, how about some realistic goals for him, like being a solid starter and double-digit scoring?
I wouldn't complain, but I think McDermott is perfect for what SVG wants to do.
Depending on what they do with the logjam in the front court, I think Nik is a much better positional fit for the Pistons that McDermott. Neither plays much defense, but Nik is a true 3, maybe even a 2 in the right situation, whereas McDermott is a 3/4 hybrid or tweener. Pistons need more on the wings, than another guy whose best position might be the 4.
Nik is certainly not a true 3 at the NBA level. He's a 2.
Early tea leaves suggest SVG wants to keep Drummond and Monroe and will do anything to trade Smith.
I think it's funny that at this time last year people were saying that Harris was the guy who could do it all while Stauskas was just a shooter.
Now that we've gone through the season and this combine process it's actually the opposite.
Stauskas is the guy who can do it all, score in catch and shoot, pull up jumpers, off screens, in pick and roll, attacking the rim...He can handle the ball and play a bit of point.
Harris is now, "just a shooter" because he struggles in iso situations, has poor shot selection and makes bad decisions with the ball in his hand.
Also, being 6'2.5" isn't going to work wonders for getting his shot off at the next level.
The pistons just drafted a 2 last year (oops) and Nik isn't going to play PG. Imagine if the Pistons drafted Trey last year???
Nik and KCP could definitely play together. Nik can handle the point on offense, and KCP can guard the point on defense. Nik can't be worse on D than Brandon Jennings, so it would work just fine. KCP can also play some 3.
They guy who wouldn't work for the Pistons IMO is Gary Harris. Also, McDermott who scouts have predictably fallen in love with, and people seem to want to slot for Detroit even though we already have a Doug McDermott type in Kyle Singler.
It's kind of annoying that it always comes back to the "not just a shooter(?)" thing, but it's hard to argue that it's the main question going forward for him. Are his ball handling skills and athleticism good enough to be more than a sharpshooter at the next level?
Yet being 'just a shooter' can keep you in the league for an extended period of time. Matt Bonner and Steve Novak are a few that come to mind. Bruce Bowen just stood in the corner all day on offense, though his defense was quite strong to go along with his shooting. I would say Nik has staying power at the very least.
If you can run through multiple screens, catch and shoot, and have a quick release, you go from longevity to relevance. Ray Allen and Reggie Miller come to mind. Admittedly HOFers yet they honed a very specific craft of shooting and were great for years and years.
And if you can create off the dribble, with legit shooting ability, you can turn into someone like Steph Curry. Scary to think what that guy can do over a career if he stays healthy.
Here's to hoping that Nik's ball skills (and his defense) continue to improve so he can be a multi-dimensional weapon for a long and successful career.
Chad Ford has a horrible record of draft placement.
i don't think it's very useful to grade draft predictors as if nailing the exact position drafted is most important. ford is typically very good at assessing the range a player will be drafted and that's what i'm looking for. plus, like lunardo, kiper, mcshay, etc., maybe they're not the best scouts, but they have good sources and since the sources are the ones doing the drafting, that's generally good information.
He also has an archive where you can find articles saying Darko was going to "own the game."
from a bunch of people plus GMs and scouts who gushed on Darko's potential.
Not like Ford. Not even close.
Anyone who followed that draft closely will vouch for me on this. Ford's Darko articles were some of the most sensational examples you will ever see of sportswriting. You can still find them out there, but it's hard. That he is still considered an NBA "draft expert" after that shows how little accountability there is for opinion at the Worldwide Leader.
Ford was annointing Darko as pretty much a future HOFer. Considering Darko is barely an adequate backup, it's unbelievable how wrong he was. I'm not sure you could make a worse prediction.
Did you really watch him play? He looked ridiculously bad when he played. I mean completely outmatched. You could have played him 40 minutes a game--he was never going to be good enough.
While I'm very happy that people are seeing Stauskas for the incredible talent he has become, it makes me a little sad because my Sixers will likely be picking JUST AFTER Stauskas goes. I know I would love having MCW rifling it to Nik in the corner for three...
He can play 3 positions (which I agree with), he's a 2, but he can give you minutes at the 1 and the 3 easily.
Anyway, I don't think Stauskas is a superstar, but I think he's a legit NBA starter in the right system.
I think he can have a Reddick, Sefolosha, Chalmers, type impact as a legit 4th-5th guy who will have games as your 1st or 2nd leading scorer and games where you probably want to pull someone off the bench for him.
Nonetheless, that's a starter and a key contributor.
Nik is Marco Belinelli Jr.
Yes.
Let me find my VISA card. I don't know anywhere else I can get draft rankings.
I knew that a long time ago.
used to be interesting before there were 71 of them. Now everyone and their brother does one to the point that they are all meaningless.
And after awhile people started realizing..."wait, they call that guy an expert and his picks are worst than the local weather man, shit, I can do better...or at least as bad and still be called an expert."
You start looking at how (in)accurate those guys were and it was complete bullcrap.
No one ever does the March Madness (except other major sports providers that can't steal/link ESPN) because #1 it's hard, but #2 Lunardi is always correct. He routinely he's 95%+ correct on predicting who's in and who's out.
Then you get all the CBB experts who want to tell you who's going to win, and they have some of the worst brackets in the country. For example, the past 3 years I've had a better final bracket than every single ESPN analyst each year. But they get paid to talk, so they're the expert.
They do a million brackets each, they do the ESPN inSIDER content that you have to pay for, they do a 3 hour show after the selection show to breakdown everything...and they all end up wrong.
Mock drafts are the same thing, and now what's funny is they've gotten so out of control that they don't even try to accurate, they just do mockdrafts based on random stuff and then put it out for the world to see debate. ESPN did one where they asked a reporter in the city for every team who they'd pick - it was a day long event. Kiper and McShay did one where they only picked based off the player, not off of a team need. I think they did one by tossing darts.
So yea, it's out of control...better off ignoring all of it.
of a lot of them is just that they're kind of a fun exercise. Just a way to look at who your team might get in the range you pick in. Anybody who thinks they can sit down and look you in the eye and say "this is the way it's going to go" is a moron. Especially in the NBA where you're almost guaranteed to see a few trades that shake the order up.
ford sucks
According to reports out of the draft combine and other workouts, Nik is showing enoug ball handling skill that NBA types think he can play limited minutes in a 1-spot, is most likely a 2, but could also go to a 3 in a small ball lineup. His athleticism he's showing in workouts along with his rep as a "smart" player is easing GM's concerns about his defensive prowess, in that if he's in a consistent system, he'll likely be able to fill his role in a rotation heavy defensive scheme. The performance in the tourney where he showed he can play the passer out of a pick and roll set as well as a pull up shooter has many NBA types saying he could be highly effective in either a analytics-influenced motion offense or a set play pick and roll. As long as he lands with a coach who has more knowledge than "give it to my 3 and get out of the way" offense, he should be successful. My personal feeling is he'll be a taller Vinnie Johnson or Micheal Cooper type. Borderline starter / definite 6th man with high offensive ceiling and valuable because of positional versatility.
the Pistons, please!