# How Would You Fix the Bobcats?



## RollWithEm

Who would you pick as your head coach?

Who would you consider the Bobcats core players at this time?

How would you instill a winning culture?

What would you do with the 2nd and 31st picks?

What trades would you make?

How would you approach free agency?

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/charlotte.htm


----------



## Dornado

This is what Rotoworld lists as the current depth chart (though I would think BJ Mullens projects as a Center long term):


PG	
1. D.J. Augustin
2. Kemba Walker

SG	
1. Gerald Henderson
2. Matt Carroll
3. Cory Higgins

SF	
1. Corey Maggette
2. Reggie Williams
3. Derrick Brown
4. Jamario Moon


PF	
1. Byron Mullens
2. Tyrus Thomas
3. D.J. White
4. Eduardo Najera

C	
1. Bismack Biyombo
2. DeSagana Diop


----------



## Basel

If you can get Jerry Sloan (who has already said he wouldn't mind starting at the bottom), I'd think you'd go for that for sure. Their core players are probably Kemba Walker and Gerald Henderson and whoever they'll draft with the #2 pick. That's not a very good core, but it's something, I guess.


----------



## Ben

The rosters a mess. At least if they'd got the 1st pick, they'd have a anchor to build around. I'd say they're a good 4 or 5 years from even getting close to a winning record. Kemba Walker showed promise last year, from what I saw of him. 

I think you've got to just clear out the bad contracts, Tyrus Thomas in particular, stock up on draft picks, and do a full rebuild. It's going to take a while but there's really not much else you can do, unless a star comes through free agency solely because of Michael Jordan.


----------



## RollWithEm

They could certainly amnesty Tyrus Thomas, but what good does that do for them really? Diop will obviously opt in. They have to pay Maggette one more year. No top free agents are signing up to come to Charlotte. They will have a real decision to make if anyone offers DJ a significant contract. Have they really seen enough out of him to match a longterm offer sheet?

They've really got to shoot for the stars with that number 2 pick. MKG and T-Rob don't really have the upside of some of the other top prospects. Maybe they should trade down for Drummond (as they will have plenty of time to let him develop) and pick up another first. Maybe something like this...

_Sacramento_ trades #5 pick (if *Drummond* is still on the board) and *the Jimmer*
_Charlotte_ trades #2 pick (because the Kings need a guy like *MKG* in the worst way)


----------



## BlakeJesus

Drummond might be worth the gamble at 2 honestly, I think MKG is probably the consensus second best player right now just because of the fact that he basically doesn't have a basement. He's about as close to a lock as you can get to being an important piece on a winner, and you imagine his work ethic/serious approach is probably infections, which is great and all...but the Bobcats don't need a safe pick. They need a homerun, and they need it badly. If you can move down and get Drummond that might be the best case scenario, but if you can't find a proper suitor (or your getting the feeling he goes before you could snatch him up) than roll the dice. Drummond has a rare package, and absolutely has all the tools to be a dominant big man. His attitude seems questionable, you hear that he's too nice. But you heard those same things about Dwight coming out, so it is what it is. His production was unimpressive at UConn, but it seems too sweet to pass up on.

Bismack doesn't have the size to play center long term, but his tough-nosed shotblocking style would be a great fit at PF next to (the idea of) Drummond. They are going to be bad for awhile anyways, let these kids develop (under a guy like Jerry Sloan would probably be ideal...maybe even Stan Van Gundy if he wants the job).


----------



## RollWithEm

The more I think about that #2 pick, the less likely I think MKG or TRob will be the guy for Charlotte. They also probably will not reach on Beal with Kemba already in the fold. If they keep the pick instead of trading down, they might have to just go ahead and reach on Drummond. Why not swing for the fences? What do they have to lose? They will likely have the worst record in basketball next season even if a guy like MKG means an automatic 10 more wins for them. What good does that do this franchise?


----------



## Floods

*Who would you pick as your head coach?*

Jerry Sloan, no question.

*Who would you consider the Bobcats core players at this time?*

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and Bismack Biyombo.

*How would you instill a winning culture?*

This team was 29th in the NBA in rebounding last year, and dead last in FG%. So, more attention to rebounding and more emphasis on smarter play. Jerry Sloan helps.

*What would you do with the 2nd and 31st picks?*

2nd overall should be MKG. He can do everything and his ceiling is a rich man's Iguodala. The Bobcats cannot afford to **** up yet another draft, so they should stay away from Drummond. MKG's rebounding and defense will be a big step toward getting this team to play the right way.

At 31, draft a rebounding big man.

*What trades would you make?*

You're stuck with Maggette and Thomas. No one in their right mind would deal for them. Maybe shop Kemba and see what his market is.

*How would you approach free agency?*

No big contracts, unless the recipients of those contracts are named Deron Williams or Dwight Howard.


----------



## BlakeJesus

I don't see how another athletic, defensive wing player who can't shoot or pass at a high level is what this team needs.


----------



## 29380

*Who would you pick as your head coach?*
Brian Shaw or Jerry Shaw

*Who would you consider the Bobcats core players at this time?*
Bismack Biyombo

*How would you instill a winning culture?*
Tank 

*What would you do with the 2nd and 31st picks?*
Thomas Robinson and Jared Cunningham

*What trades would you make?*
Trade DJ Augustin/Gerald Henderson for picks


----------



## Floods

Maybe because the Bobcats were a terrible defensive team last year. Maybe because MKG automatically becomes their best wing player. Maybe because yet another risky project is the last thing the Bobcats need after whiffing or trading every first round pick they've had since 2005 (save Henderson, who's not even that good).

Just some theories.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> Maybe because the Bobcats were a terrible defensive team last year. Maybe because MKG automatically becomes their best wing player. Maybe because yet another risky project is the last thing the Bobcats need after whiffing or trading every first round pick they've had since 2005 (save Henderson, who's not even that good).
> 
> Just some theories.


Yet another risky project? I think everybody they've drafted has been pretty safe, honestly. Gerald Henderson was never going to be a bad player. Kemba Walker would have a long NBA career anywhere, Bismack was a little risky in the sense that he might be a total flop on offense but you knew he was going to have a motor and block some shots at the very least. 

They need a homerun, and a rich man's Iguodala is a bad comparison for MKG. How can he be the rich man's version if he's missing one of the most important skills of the guy he's being compared to? Iggy can average 6 assists a game, MKG doesn't have that dynamic to his game. To me MKG is Gerald Wallace, and that's definitely not a bad thing, but the Bobcats already know what a player like that can do for them.


----------



## Ben

Having two projects in Drummond and Biyombo without even an average veteran big to guide them seems like too much of a risk if you ask me. They've got the time to do it, since they'll be awful for a long time, but I doubt it'd pan out.


----------



## BlakeJesus

ßen said:


> Having two projects in Drummond and Biyombo without even an average veteran big to guide them seems like too much of a risk if you ask me. They've got the time to do it, since they'll be awful for a long time, but I doubt it'd pan out.


But what else do the Bobcats have, if not time?


----------



## Floods

They don't need a home run. A double will suffice. MKG is a double. The big thing is to not **** up draft choices like they've done so consistently.

Believe it or not there are more drafts after this one. They're going to be trash this year no matter what, no need to waste the pick on a high risk center. MKG's safe and will readily accept a second-banana role if the Bobcats land Shabazz or somebody in 2013.


----------



## Ben

BlakeJesus said:


> But what else do the Bobcats have, if not time?


Absolutely nothing. No vets to guide a project. They'd be better getting MKG and hoping his work-rate/enthusiasm is infectious and they get an identity as a defense first team. An awful, defense first team.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> They don't need a home run. A double will suffice. MKG is a double. The big thing is to not **** up draft choices like they've done so consistently.
> 
> Believe it or not there are more drafts after this one. They're going to be trash this year no matter what, no need to waste the pick on a high risk center. MKG's safe and will readily accept a second-banana role if the Bobcats land Shabazz or somebody in 2013.


It's only a waste if he doesn't pan out, Drummond has all the tools to be a dominant center in the league. A low pressure situation where he can get ample minutes might be the perfect situation for him.


----------



## Floods

And there's a pretty good chance he doesn't pan out. In which case the Bobcats go back to square one as a historically bad team.


----------



## BlakeJesus

ßen said:


> Absolutely nothing. No vets to guide a project. They'd be better getting MKG and hoping his work-rate/enthusiasm is infectious and they get an identity as a defense first team. An awful, defense first team.


If they get Jerry Sloan, it will severely lessen the need for a "veteran guide" (which can be an overrated aspect at times anyways). 

MKG is a safe pick and I wouldn't have an issue with it, but we're asking how we would fix the franchise. Landing MKG doesn't fix anything, it will just perpetuate mediocrity. That's not a slight towards MKG, because there are a lot of teams that would greatly benefit from everything he brings to the table...but I don't see Charlotte as one of those places.

If you don't want to blow your load on a risky player, I'd take Thomas Robinson before I'd take MKG.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> And there's a pretty good chance he doesn't pan out. In which case the Bobcats go back to square one as a historically bad team.


Them being a bottom dweller next season is basically inevitable no matter who they draft at 2, so I don't really think this point has much relevance.

In fact, I think it strengthens what I'm saying. If Drummond develops into Andrew Bynum you've got a star on your hand, and if he ends up just being a Darko Milicic you have a career rotation big man who never lived up to expectations (and probably gets overpaid). Either way they aren't winning more than 20-22 games next year.

In a perfect world you would trade down with somebody who wants to ensure they land MKG, somebody like Sac Town, and then you take Drummond 5. The idea is to take Drummond, and the most likely scenario is they take him at 2 if they want him.


----------



## Ben

BlakeJesus said:


> Them being a bottom dweller next season is basically inevitable no matter who they draft at 2, so I don't really think this point has much relevance.


So it's fine wasting the 2nd pick in the draft because they'll get another one next year? Of course it has relevance, if they pick Drummond and he doesn't work out, that's another year wasted. MKG they get a nice piece who's ready to go with probably another top 2 pick next year.


----------



## Floods

If Drummond isn't a dominant center next season (or close to it), he never will be.


----------



## BlakeJesus

ßen said:


> So it's fine wasting the 2nd pick in the draft because they'll get another one next year? Of course it has relevance, if they pick Drummond and he doesn't work out, that's another year wasted. MKG they get a nice piece who's ready to go with probably another top 2 pick next year.


The failure in this logic is that you're already chalking up Drummond as a failure. Just as easy as you can say it's another year wasted if he doesn't pan out, I can say it's a massive step forward if he does. If you don't believe Drummond has the ability to be a starting caliber center in the NBA, that's your opinion, but that does not make it fact.


----------



## Floods

BlakeJesus said:


> The failure in this logic is that you're already chalking up Drummond as a failure. Just as easy as you can say it's another year wasted if he doesn't pan out, I can say it's a massive step forward if he does. If you don't believe Drummond has the ability to be a starting caliber center in the NBA, that's your opinion, but that does not make it fact.


This is how you become a perennial lottery team.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> If Drummond isn't a dominant center next season (or close to it), he never will be.


Really smart thing to say about an 18 year old kid.


----------



## Dre

So wait we're not letting people even get a year to develop now


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> This is how you become a perennial lottery team.


The best way to become good is to strike gold in the lotto. You typically don't strike gold picking 7-12, that's how you end up with a team full of Kemba Walker's, Bismack Biyombo's, and Gerald Henderson's.


----------



## Ben

Yeah, I really don't agree with him not being dominant if he isn't in his rookie season. The guy is still real young.



BlakeJesus said:


> The failure in this logic is that you're already chalking up Drummond as a failure. Just as easy as you can say it's another year wasted if he doesn't pan out, I can say it's a massive step forward if he does. If you don't believe Drummond has the ability to be a starting caliber center in the NBA, that's your opinion, but that does not make it fact.


So it's a year wasted if he doesn't pan out, it's worth it if he does.

I'm glad we're agreed on that. 

I haven't presented anything as fact, and I actually like what I've seen of Drummond, but if I'm in Charlotte's shoes, I don't take on another big man project. I'd try and get the identity that a guy like MKG will bring, and then I look for my star in next years draft. They could have really done with the 1st pick in this draft.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Dre said:


> So wait we're not letting people even get a year to develop now


No Dre, if you aren't a dominant center in your first NBA season on a historically bad franchise as a 19 year old kid, you have absolutely no shot.


----------



## Floods

Go find me a dominant center who didn't dominate from day one. Or at least do pretty good for himself. Please, I'll wait right here.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> Go find me a dominant center who didn't dominate from day one. Or at least do pretty good for himself. Please, I'll wait right here.


Andrew Bynum, Dwight Howard...


----------



## Dre

opcorn:


----------



## Floods

Andrew Bynum is not a dominant center. Dwight Howard averaged a double-double and blocked almost 2 shots a game that first year. That qualifies as 'pretty good for himself'. Try again.


----------



## Dre

No, if Bynum isn't considered dominant to you in this day and age it's not worth it.

But I mean you'd feel the pick was a mistake if he turned into Andrew Bynum though?

You made that first "if he doesn't come in dominant" post like that was the only possibility that would be success. Plenty of perennial all-stars weren't what you'd call dominant.


----------



## RollWithEm

Floods said:


> Go find me a dominant center who didn't dominate from day one. Or at least do pretty good for himself. Please, I'll wait right here.


Nate Thurmond
Kevin McHale
Karl Malone (15/9 rookie year as 22 year old rookie)
Shawn Kemp (came in at 20 years old and took a couple years to get going)

And of course this little exercise is ridiculous anyway. Any big man who anyone here throws out you will either say he did, in fact, "do well for himself" or that he wasn't "dominant enough" for your arbitrary criteria. You have set-up a truly unclimbable mountain merely by the way you defined your point.


----------



## Floods

Dre said:


> No, if Bynum isn't considered dominant to you in this day and age it's not worth it.


Bynum, dominant? :laugh:



> But I mean you'd feel the pick was a mistake if he turned into Andrew Bynum though?


When did I say that?



> You made that first "if he doesn't come in dominant" post like that was the only possibility that would be success. Plenty of perennial all-stars weren't what you'd call dominant.


Centers.


----------



## Floods

RollWithEm said:


> You have set-up a truly unclimbable mountain merely by the way you defined your point.


:kanyeshrug:


----------



## RollWithEm

Kanye is the perfect representative of your flimsy and arbitrary point.


----------



## BlakeJesus




----------



## Floods

RollWithEm said:


> Kanye is the perfect representative of your flimsy and arbitrary point.


Then counter it.


----------



## RollWithEm

Floods said:


> Then counter it.


You need more than 4 examples? Give me a specific number you are looking for. I thought it was one.


----------



## Floods

McHale, Malone, and Kemp aren't centers.


----------



## RollWithEm

Floods said:


> McHale, Malone, and Kemp aren't centers.


There's virtually no difference between PFs and Cs in today's NBA. Regardless of that, McHale would have been a center on many NBA teams in the 80's. He just happened to play next to Parrish. Still, he played many of his minutes at center.

Kemp and Malone played next to stiffs at center their whole careers. They were the dynamic frontcourt options for their teams throughout their primes. 

You see what I mean about your argument? It's completely ridiculous. You set up this ivory tower just so that you could judge from it. It's so absurd that even if you were right, which you aren't, it still would not prove a single thing.


----------



## BlakeJesus

It's a pointless discussion to have, if you don't think the 2nd best player at his position is "dominant" than there is no room to meet in the middle. 

Even if Drummond ends up being 75% of what Andrew Bynum is now, he would be a top 5 center in the league...thus validating the risk of taking him 2nd overall.


----------



## Floods

RollWithEm said:


> There's virtually no difference between PFs and Cs in today's NBA. Regardless of that, McHale would have been a center on many NBA teams in the 80's. He just happened to play next to Parrish. Still, he played many of his minutes at center.


6-10, 210 isn't the greatest stature for a center.



> Kemp and Malone played next to stiffs at center their whole careers. They were the dynamic frontcourt options for their teams throughout their primes.


That's nice.



> You see what I mean about your argument? It's completely ridiculous. You set up this ivory tower just so that you could judge from it. It's so absurd that even if you were right, which you aren't, it still would not prove a single thing.


----------



## Floods

BlakeJesus said:


> It's a pointless discussion to have, if you don't think the 2nd best player at his position is "dominant" than there is no room to meet in the middle.
> 
> Even if Drummond ends up being 75% of what Andrew Bynum is now, he would be a top 5 center in the league...thus validating the risk of taking him 2nd overall.


Save Dwight, today's centers aren't dominant.


----------



## RollWithEm

Floods said:


> 6-10, 210 isn't the greatest stature for a center.


----------



## Floods

Anthony Davis isn't an NBA center, he's a power forward.

At least I hope no one's dumb enough to make him their center.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> Save Dwight, today's centers aren't dominant.


The term "dominant" is relative to the competition. If you can consistently impose your will on basically every other guy who defends you, you are quite literally dominating them.


----------



## Dre

He's gonna grow from 210 :gay:

Aren't you a Celtics fan? He can grow to KG's size who's playing Center just fine this year. And yeah he can't guard Dwight or Bynum but who can


----------



## Floods

BlakeJesus said:


> The term "dominant" is relative to the competition. If you can consistently impose your will on basically every other guy who defends you, you are quite literally dominating them.


'Dominant' is a guy who changes and takes over games altogether. AKA not Bynum.


----------



## BlakeJesus

Floods said:


> 'Dominant' is a guy who changes and takes over games altogether. AKA not Bynum.


19/12/2 on 56% from the field with only 1.7 fouls in 35 minutes sounds pretty game changing to me.

And to my point, your ability to change or take over games are based on the competition. Thus dominant being a term that is relative to competition, and being the 2nd best player at your position lends itself to being "dominant" on a consistent basis.


----------



## RollWithEm

Floods said:


> Anthony Davis isn't an NBA center, he's a power forward.
> 
> At least I hope no one's dumb enough to make him their center.


The Hornets will, in fact, be that dumb.


----------



## BlakeJesus

If they keep Okafor it'll be a horse a piece really, so no matter who is listed as the C on that given night it's basically just a formality.


----------



## Floods

BlakeJesus said:


> 19/12/2 on 56% from the field with only 1.7 fouls in 35 minutes sounds pretty game changing to me.


Glad you're so easily pleased.



> And to my point, your ability to change or take over games are based on the competition. Thus dominant being a term that is relative to competition, and being the 2nd best player at your position lends itself to being "dominant" on a consistent basis.


Then why doesn't Bynum dominate more?


----------



## LA68

The Bobcats are so bad they can't even hold their own thread in a discussion! LOL

1)Send Jordan and all his cronies on a golf tour of America and stay away from North Carolina.

2)Stop hiring senior citizen coaches (Sloan, Silas, Brown etc...)

3)Team is far too young, too short (Biyombo 6'8" center ), too inexperienced. Get some cheap vets who can at least show them how to win two or three games in a row. And that its not high school gym all over again.

4)Amnesty Tyrus and cut your losses. And that guy from Kansas is too short also. Since this team won't win anytime soon, draft Drummond. You can't have Drummond and Thomas at the same time. Drummond is younger and cheaper. 

When you're this bad you have to go for the best talent available. You won't get FA's coming and you have no one to trade. 

ps. Actually the answer is to blow it up but, their egos won't allow them to do that.


----------



## Basel

Floods said:


> Glad you're so easily pleased.
> 
> 
> 
> Then why doesn't Bynum dominate more?


Because Bynum's lazy and doesn't yet have the mindset to dominate more. But hopefully that's coming next season. Overall, this season was a step in the right direction but he himself said he wasn't always there 100% mentally at times this season. If that changes, you'll see that domination come.


----------



## LA68

Dre said:


> He's gonna grow from 210 :gay:
> 
> Aren't you a Celtics fan? He can grow to KG's size who's playing Center just fine this year. And yeah he can't guard Dwight or Bynum but who can


And who exactly is KG playing center against ? Anthony ? Turiaf? or even LeBron :lol:

Run that good defense the Celtics had in 2008: Put Okafor in the Perk role, Put Davis and his length in the middle of the key like KG. Ariza takes care of a wing. That's a good defense !


----------



## BlakeJesus

KG has been playing center since the All-Star break, not coincidentally, right around the time that Celtics defense started playing at a championship level (which they need because of how bad their offense can be at times).


----------



## RollWithEm

LA68 said:


> Run that good defense the Celtics had in 2008: Put Okafor in the Perk role, Put Davis and his length in the middle of the key like KG. Ariza takes care of a wing. That's a good defense !


All three are limited offensively, though... especially next season while the Brow finds his way in the league.


----------



## RollWithEm

*Ty Thomas*



LA68 said:


> You won't get FA's coming and you have no one to trade.


Then why would you amnesty anyone? Without any high dollar free agents coming in, it will be tough just to reach the league minimum salary.


----------



## Bogg

LA68 said:


> ps. Actually the answer is to blow it up but, their egos won't allow them to do that.


How much more blown up can it get? That being said, they probably need to be on a two or three year plan to get back to respectability, as about $21 million in bad contracts come off the books next summer, which can be bumped up to a little under 30 if they also amnesty Thomas(who should be gone this summer just to get rid of his influence on the locker room). I actually like the idea of trading down a spot or two to pick up Drummond, but only if they also overpay a little to bring in some veterans who can teach him and Biyombo to, you know, actually play basketball(as an aside, what's Cliff Ray doing with himself these days?). 

Beyond the draft, I'd let Augustin go, because paying role players before you have stars ruins your flexibility. Keep Kemba and Henderson as your frontcourt, and it's still way too early to make a call on Biyombo, so let him keep playing. Mullens doesn't project out as anything more than a rotation big, but you might as well let him at least play out his rookie deal. I don't really see any of the other players on the roster as being of particular consequence, so as long as you don't get locked into any long-term contracts it's whatever. 

Next summer is crunch time for Charlotte, because they'll need to hit on a player in that year's draft as well and they'll have ridiculous cap space to re-shape the roster. Hopefully, at that point, Kemba and Henderson are a decent starting backcourt together, Biyombo's put it together enough that he's a good rebounding/defense power forward, and whoever they pick this year will either be playing at a very high level(MKG or Robinson) or is coming along nicely(Drummond). Then it turns into taking the best player available at the top of the next year's draft and filling some holes in free agency. If all goes well they can hope to make a leap in 2013-2014 from bottom dwellers to "scrappy young team fighting for the eighth seed".

EDIT:


RollWithEm said:


> Then why would you amnesty anyone? Without any high dollar free agents coming in, it will be tough just to reach the league minimum salary.


Just to reiterate, Ty Thomas is worth amnestying just to get him out of the locker room. If you have to overpay a veteran for a year just to hit the floor($15 million for one year of Jason Terry! Where can I sign?!) you still come out ahead.


----------



## LA68

RollWithEm said:


> All three are limited offensively, though... especially next season while the Brow finds his way in the league.


So. There's only one ball on the court. Win games 51/50. They aren't gonna win next year or the year after. At least being a defensive teams gives them an identity. Something they can build on as time goes on.


----------



## LA68

Bogg said:


> How much more blown up can it get? That being said, they probably need to be on a two or three year plan to get back to respectability, as about $21 million in bad contracts come off the books next summer, which can be bumped up to a little under 30 if they also amnesty Thomas(who should be gone this summer just to get rid of his influence on the locker room).


Blown up as in amnesty Tyrus and eat Diop's deal as you say "to get them out of the locker room". This is not just about on the court. That team is hemorrhaging tens of millions a year. And no one in Charlotte cares anything about this team nor wants to spend money on it. 

They really don't have "next year". They have to make some moves to show things are changing and worth coming to see. 



> I actually like the idea of trading down a spot or two to pick up Drummond, but only if they also overpay a little to bring in some veterans who can teach him and Biyombo to, you know, actually play basketball(as an aside, what's Cliff Ray doing with himself these days?).


Biyombo needs to be written off as a mistake and try to get a low first rounder for him. You should never pay a man millions...then, teach him how to play. Its the other way around. Is Charlotte gonna be a D league team or an NBA one ? At 6'8" He'll never be a real center. And he has no skill to play anywhere else. 

Drummond has to be the choice I think. Bringing in old vets ? Bingo ! Lots of guys are on their way out of the league and can use a 2 yr/$3million or so deal. 



> Beyond the draft, I'd let Augustin go, because paying role players before you have stars ruins your flexibility. Keep Kemba and Henderson as your (frontcourt,) Mullens doesn't project out as anything more than a rotation big, but you might as well let him at least play out his rookie deal.


They think Augustin is a starter in this league ! Let Walker and Henderson play 40 mins a night for 82 games and see what you've got. One thing we know, they will play hard every night ! That can set a standard. Mullens for cheap, sure why not. He can fill up mins. 



> Next summer is crunch time for Charlotte, because they'll need to hit on a player in that year's draft as well and they'll have ridiculous cap space to re-shape the roster. Hopefully, at that point, Kemba and Henderson are a decent starting backcourt together, Biyombo's put it together enough that he's a good rebounding/defense power forward, and whoever they pick this year will either be playing at a very high level(MKG or Robinson) or is coming along nicely(Drummond). Then it turns into taking the best player available at the top of the next year's draft and filling some holes in free agency. If all goes well they can hope to make a leap in 2013-2014 from bottom dwellers to "scrappy young team fighting for the eighth seed".


Biyombo might take years. Or may never get it. Can't depend on that. Bynum took five years. Ike Diogu never did. He could be a Reggie Evans. Nice player but, not someone you can depend on. Once upon a time many thought Tyrus Thomas would be a good shot blocking PF. Not they can't wait to dump him. 

One thing we agree on. This franchise needs to make bold moves. Unfortunately, too many people are afraid of losing their jobs to do anything risky. This team will be in the dumps for a long time.


----------



## LA68

*Re: Ty Thomas*



RollWithEm said:


> Then why would you amnesty anyone? Without any high dollar free agents coming in, it will be tough just to reach the league minimum salary.


Believe me. Reaching minimum salary is the least of their problems.


----------



## RollWithEm

Bogg said:


> Just to reiterate, Ty Thomas is worth amnestying just to get him out of the locker room. If you have to overpay a veteran for a year just to hit the floor($15 million for one year of Jason Terry! Where can I sign?!) you still come out ahead.


This is a tough sell to any owner. We're not trying to win immediately, but we just can't learn to win down the road unless we get rid of this cancerous guy in our locker room. Yeah you still have to pay his contract, but don't worry... we'll establish a winning atmosphere this season just because we got rid of one of our top 5 most talented guys who just signed to a 5-year contract 2 years ago.



LA68 said:


> So. There's only one ball on the court. Win games 51/50. They aren't gonna win next year or the year after. At least being a defensive teams gives them an identity. Something they can build on as time goes on.


Hey, I'm all for establishing an identity. I just think that young players' confidence gets wrecked early in their careers when they never win games. The least points averaged by a team with a winning record in the last 10 years was 88.7 per game by the 2003-2004 Utah Jazz. They finished 42-40, but actually had a negative differential. The least points averaged by a team with a winning point differential in the last 10 years was 90.1 a game by the 03-04 Pistons... and in the words of Rick Pitino, "Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace aren't walking through that door anytime soon."


----------



## Bogg

LA68 said:


> Blown up as in amnesty Tyrus and eat Diop's deal as you say "to get them out of the locker room". This is not just about on the court. That team is hemorrhaging tens of millions a year. And no one in Charlotte cares anything about this team nor wants to spend money on it.


I wouldn't call amnestying Thomas "blowing it up", I'd just call it amnestying a guy who didn't play a ton anyway. As far as Diop goes, it's the last year on his deal, so you might as well keep him around for trade purposes if you're going to pay him anyway






LA68 said:


> Biyombo needs to be written off as a mistake and try to get a low first rounder for him. You should never pay a man millions...then, teach him how to play. Its the other way around. Is Charlotte gonna be a D league team or an NBA one ? At 6'8" He'll never be a real center. And he has no skill to play anywhere else.


Dude's still a teenager, and he showed just enough at the end of the season that he just may turn into a competent defense/rebounding/hustle power forward. His trade value is low now, anyway, so it doesn't make any sense to give up on him this early. If he turns into a bootleg Serge Ibaka(who didn't do much his rookie year either) then that's a win. 





LA68 said:


> Biyombo might take years. Or may never get it. Can't depend on that. Bynum took five years. Ike Diogu never did. He could be a Reggie Evans. Nice player but, not someone you can depend on. Once upon a time many thought Tyrus Thomas would be a good shot blocking PF. Not they can't wait to dump him.


If you could go back in time and take Shumpert or Leonard or Faried instead you do, but right now they have to work with what they've got. Guy's a good athlete, is very young, and plays hard. You're not getting anything good for him, so I don't see what the big advantage is in cashing out low on Biyombo. If you do wind up picking Drummond, he could use a front-court mate to act as his enforcer(the guy isn't exactly firey) and to push him in practice.


----------



## Bogg

RollWithEm said:


> This is a tough sell to any owner. We're not trying to win immediately, but we just can't learn to win down the road unless we get rid of this cancerous guy in our locker room. Yeah you still have to pay his contract, but don't worry... we'll establish a winning atmosphere this season just because we got rid of one of our top 5 most talented guys who just signed to a 5-year contract 2 years ago.


It "helps" that Thomas couldn't stay in the rotation on the worst team of all time and got into a locker room fist fight with his elderly coach. If he was just a lazy bum I get it(which is why I'm not advocating waiving Diop), but he actively makes your team worse and creates a half dozen off-the-court headaches a year on a young team searching for an identity.


----------



## LA68

We all don't agree by that much.I just look at the economics. Constant losing does mess with your head. So does an empty arena. This man gave away Wallace and Jackson for free basically. 

They really don't have time to wait to see if someone can learn to play. I have seen this too often, guy plays well at the end when it doesn't matter against second units. Next season its back to the drawing board. 

Walker and Henderson can play , start with that ! 

P.S. Maggette is a cancer too !


----------



## Dre

LA68 you got dunked on when BJ posted the truth about KG at center and you had nothing to say. 

It _did_ happen, just FYI we noticed that


----------



## Bogg

LA68 said:


> They really don't have time to wait to see if someone can learn to play. I have seen this too often, guy plays well at the end when it doesn't matter against second units. Next season its back to the drawing board.


Here's the thing though: they don't have anyone who can play to replace him. It's not like they're keeping productive vets on the bench to play Biyombo, they just don't really have any other options. It's incredibly short-sighted to not give him another season or two to become something just so you can overpay Reggie Evans and play him 35 minutes a night. Took Ben Wallace four years to put it together, and he played in college.


----------



## Dean the Master

Ben said:


> Having two projects in Drummond and Biyombo without even an average veteran big to guide them seems like too much of a risk if you ask me. They've got the time to do it, since they'll be awful for a long time, but I doubt it'd pan out.


Exactly, Let's look back into the history book. When the Bulls had Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry, it was disgusting.


----------



## Dre

Mike know he got people that would kiss his ass to assist Bioyombo and/or Drummond

Noone wanted anything to do with those early 00s Bulls shitshows


----------



## Dean the Master

Well, I think Rich Cho is a pretty good GM. Hopefully he can duplicate what he's done although as an assistant GM in Seattle/OKC. To be honest though, MJ needs to step out of this mess. I think if the team has a good coach and GM combo things can be turned around rather quickly.


----------



## Dre

I agree but he'll still be the Owner


----------



## Bogg

Dean the Master said:


> Exactly, Let's look back into the history book. When the Bulls had Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry, it was disgusting.


Biyombo isn't good enough to be influencing who you draft going forward. If you just don't like Drummond at the second pick that's totally legitimate, but don't pass on him just because you already have Biyombo. Bismack is a project, but you're hoping he turns into a role player, not a star, Drummond might be a borderline franchise guy(or Kwame Brown, who knows).


----------



## RollWithEm

Here's a quote from Chad Ford's latest mock draft. It's not exactly ground-breaking, but it is one insider's opinion.



> There are three schools of thought here. One is the Bobcats go with Kidd-Gilchrist even though he's not really a player you build a team around. But his toughness and desire to win are contagious. He could bring a new spirit to the downtrodden Bobcats.
> 
> The second option is they could go with a big like Thomas Robinson or Andre Drummond. Robinson would add toughness, too, but doesn't have huge upside. Drummond isn't very tough, but his upside is tremendous. The third idea is for the Bobcats to entertain moving down a few spots to pick up additional assets. With no real game-changers at No. 2 -- it might be the smartest move of all.


----------



## Najee

*Who would you pick as your head coach?*

My choices would be Nate McMillan or Brian Shaw.

*Who would you consider the Bobcats core players at this time?*

Gerald Henderson is the closest thing to a keeper, but he is an average shooting guard, IMO. I'll give Bismack Biyombo the benefit of development. Neither has trade value to offer them to another team, but could continue to evolve.

*How would you instill a winning culture?*

1.) It may sound superficial, but the first thing I would do is change the nickname from "Bobcats," which derisively is associated with former owner Bob Johnson. In addition to sounding like the name of a junior-high team, it is suspected the name was chosen as a double entendre of Johnson naming the team after himself.

I would change the nickname of the team to "Cougars." That was the name of the ABA team that played in several North Carolina cities 9including Charlotte) from 1969 to 1974, so there is some connection to its basketball past. It is also a cat-themed nickname, meaning the current logo only has to be modified slightly.

2.) The Bobcats need to define a style of play and build a team with that style of play. McMillan is considered a players' coach and shown he can coach to his personnel -- he coached a perimeter-oriented Seattle team to 52 wins in 2004-05 and led halfcourt-oriented Portland teams to 54, 50 and 48 wins despite injury woes. Shaw is presumably cut in the mode of Phil Jackson, which could translate into someone who can run complex offenses.

*What would you do with the 2nd and 31st picks?*

Charlotte has holes all over the place and I don't see a player projected at No. 2 overall who can cover a good portion of them. I would do a trade with Portland, picking Connecticut's Andre Drummond and trading his rights and Corey Maggette's expiring contract for the No. 6 and No. 11 picks.

*What trades would you make?*

I would use the amnesty clause on Tyrus Thomas. If a team makes an offer to DJ Augustin, I would not match it. Most of the players are available, including Kemba Walker.

*How would you approach free agency?*

Nicholas Batum, Goran Dragic and Michael Beasley would be my biggest targets, though I would not overpay for them.


----------



## Da Grinch

1. hire bill cartwright , he's very good with big men and counsel him to get a screamer/motivational guy as an asst. coach

2 bismak biyombo, BJ, and kemba...tyrus for now but if he continues to suck give him away.

3. change the team name , trade everyone for as many picks as possible , fill roster with hardworking team oriented players, if they are nbdl players fine , the purpose is to surround the core guys with upbeat guys happy to be in the league and to further their core guys development, guys who don't help in this regard are to be cast aside.

4. andre drummond , draymond green.

5. trade down to draft drummond , pick up additional picks 

6. sign gerald green , he's a relatively efficient scorer who is athletic and now hungry to a long term deal....wont cost too much.


----------



## RollWithEm

Najee said:


> Nicholas Batum, Goran Dragic and Michael Beasley would be my biggest targets, though I would not overpay for them.


This is the first time I've heard Dragic's name mentioned for this team. I think that's not a bad idea. He's the type that could step in and really be a leader... and they still wouldn't be in any danger of leaving the cellar of the thing in the short term.


----------



## Najee

RollWithEm said:


> This is the first time I've heard Dragic's name mentioned for this team. I think that's not a bad idea. He's the type that could step in and really be a leader... and they still wouldn't be in any danger of leaving the cellar of the thing in the short term.


Goran Dragic would be my first choice as a free agent. He's a tall point guard, a creative passer and scorer and he can kick-start Charlotte's offense in transition -- all valuable needs for a team as horrible as Charlotte's offense is. Moreover, he just turned 26 so Drgic is a player with experience but who can be with the team for some time.


----------



## Dean the Master

Really though, Dragic is going to be hard to get because he is the Rockets' only point guard right now as Kyle Lowry is demanding a trade. As a Rockets guy, I really hope Goran stays with the Rockets.


----------



## Najee

Dean the Master said:


> Really though, Dragic is going to be hard to get because he is the Rockets' only point guard right now as Kyle Lowry is demanding a trade. As a Rockets guy, I really hope Goran stays with the Rockets.


I can see Houston using one of its first-round picks on a point guard, particularly if Kendall Marshall of North Carolina is available. Houston cannot be surprised by Kyle Lowry's trade demands, given that he was rumored to be on the block during the season.


----------



## RollWithEm

Isn't Dragic unrestricted, though? How much is he worth to Houston?


----------



## Najee

Houston is going to start either Kyle Lowry or Goran Dragic at point guard. Rockets coach Kevin McHale is saying he would like to keep both, but he could be hedging his bets to keep Lowry's trade value from dropping or in case Dragic leaves as an unrestricted free agent. It's unreasonable to think both guys will be there next season.


----------



## Dornado

Is it worth it to amnesty Tyrus Thomas when you have so little committed to salaries right now? You're going to be paying him either way... unless it is the difference between you being over the cap or not you might as well pay him to play basketball. Unless we think FAs would really sign in Charlotte with that cap space.


----------



## RollWithEm

Dornado said:


> Is it worth it to amnesty Tyrus Thomas when you have so little committed to salaries right now? You're going to be paying him either way... unless it is the difference between you being over the cap or not you might as well pay him to play basketball.


Look here: http://www.basketballforum.com/6864915-post68.html


----------



## Najee

Dornado said:


> Is it worth it to amnesty Tyrus Thomas when you have so little committed to salaries right now? You're going to be paying him either way... unless it is the difference between you being over the cap or not you might as well pay him to play basketball. Unless we think FAs would really sign in Charlotte with that cap space.


The second-highest paid player on your team is a 'tweener forward who plays spot minutes on a team that had the worst single-season winning percentage in NBA history. Not to mention he shot .367 from the field despite being more of a power forward type with absolutely no game outside of putbacks. And to top it off, his notable accomplishment was getting jacked up by a 70-year-old coach.

Tyrus Thomas has no trade value and he is due $26 million for the next three seasons. The amnesty clause would be worth it just to get this mental midget off the team, and send the message that this is no longer a D-League franchise.


----------



## Bogg

Najee said:


> Goran Dragic would be my first choice as a free agent. He's a tall point guard, a creative passer and scorer and he can kick-start Charlotte's offense in transition -- all valuable needs for a team as horrible as Charlotte's offense is. Moreover, he just turned 26 so Drgic is a player with experience but who can be with the team for some time.


I mean, Dragic is good and all, but somebody's going to pay him, and you don't want to kill your cap space in the middle of a rebuild(or the start of one, depending on how you view the talent on the roster) by getting into a bidding war for someone who's, at best, a third option. They might as well give Kemba a try-out as the full-time starting point guard and focus on getting a really good swingman and/or a legitimate center. I'm actually cooling on Drummond as time goes on, but I continue to think that a two-year plan involving a high pick this year and next and loads of cap space next season is their best bet.


EDIT: Again, the distractions that Thomas brings, combined with his limited production, actually results in him having _negative_ value. The team's easier to coach with him gone.


----------



## Najee

Bogg said:


> I mean, Dragic is good and all, but somebody's going to pay him, and you don't want to kill your cap space in the middle of a rebuild (or the start of one, depending on how you view the talent on the roster) by getting into a bidding war for someone who's, at best, a third option. They might as well give Kemba a try-out as the full-time starting point guard and focus on getting a really good swingman and/or a legitimate center.


I said in my initial post that I would pursue Goran Dragic as a free agent, but I would not overpay for his services. He is a very good foundation but I agree this is not Chris Paul or Deron Williams we're discussing here.

However, Dragic is a much better player than Kemba Walker, a guy who is not a point guard in any form outside of being 6-feet tall. Walker is a small shooting guard who is a volume scorer with no inclination on leading an offense.

If the tea leaves show that Dragic is going to command a huge paycheck, I would have -- in my envisioned world -- Portland's two lottery picks after trading the No. 2 pick. Dragic is the type of point guard I want, but I could pick one in the draft.


----------



## Bogg

Najee said:


> I said in my initial post that I would pursue Goran Dragic as a free agent, but I would not overpay for his services. He is a very good foundation but I agree this is not Chris Paul or Deron Williams we're discussing here.
> 
> However, Dragic is a much better player than Kemba Walker, a guy who is not a point guard in any form outside of being 6-feet tall. Walker is really a small shooting guard who really is a volume scorer who has no inclination on leading an offense of being an effective ball distributor.
> 
> If the tea leaves show that Dragic is going to command a huge paycheck, I would have -- in my envisioned world -- Portland's two lottery picks after trading the No. 2 pick. Dragic is the type of point guard I want, but I could pick one in the draft.


I disagree about Kemba, he's never going to be Rajon Rondo, but his first two years at Uconn he showed he can run an offense and take a back seat to other players when he needs to. His biggest problem is that he hasn't played with any offensive talent the last two years, I mean, honestly, who would you have had him deferring to this past season? Byron Mullens? If he had played in a situation where there was talent around him, like Boston or the Lakers, he'd have looked like an excellent role player this year.


----------



## Najee

Bogg said:


> I disagree about Kemba, he's never going to be Rajon Rondo, but his first two years at Uconn he showed he can run an offense and take a back seat to other players when he needs to. His biggest problem is that he hasn't played with any offensive talent the last two years, I mean, honestly, who would you have had him deferring to this past season? Byron Mullens? If he had played in a situation where there was talent around him, like Boston or the Lakers, he'd have looked like an excellent role player this year.


A small, undersized, inefficient scorer is not my idea of a point guard. Kemba Walker is more like a miniature Ben Gordon Walker than a point guard. Walker is primary a scorer and not an efficient one at that. Walker is not one who initiates an offense. He's more like Lindsey Hunter, a small scorer. At most, I see poor-shooting Sedale Threatt if Walker maxes out, maybe Mo Williams.

When you're a team like Charlotte, you don't spend lottery picks on role player types -- which is what the Bobcats have done for its history (Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton, Bismack Biyombo, Walker). As you said, Walker looks more like a designated bench scorer on a decent team than a point guard around whom you can build a team.


----------



## Bogg

Najee said:


> A small, undersized, inefficient scorer is not my idea of a point guard. Kemba Walker is more like a miniature Ben Gordon Walker than a point guard. Walker is primary a scorer and not an efficient one at that. Walker is not one who initiates an offense. He's more like Lindsey Hunter, a small scorer. At most, I see poor-shooting Sedale Threatt if Walker maxes out, maybe Mo Williams.


He's inefficient if you cast him as a primary scorer with mostly D-league talent. He's fine if you put him on a roster with actual NBA players and don't ask him to dominate the ball constantly. There's nothing that Ramon Sessions does that Kemba can't do, and most of it Kemba's much better at. Put him on the Lakers or Heat and he's a scrappy role-playing starter who brings the ball up, initiates the offense, and hits open jump shots. Put him in a line-up with Derrick Brown, Bismack Biyombo, and D.J. White, and he's forced to take bad shots because _someone_ has to shoot the ball eventually.



Najee said:


> When you're a team like Charlotte, you don't spend lottery picks on role player types -- which is what the Bobcats have done for its history (Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton, Bismack Biyombo, Walker). As you said, Walker looks more like a designated bench scorer on a decent team than a point guard around whom you can build a team.[/color][/FONT]


Last year's draft had one guy who was a real difference maker(Irving) and every other guy was a role player(unless you're holding out hope for the Lithuanian centers). This is all beside the point, though. Dragic is a role player too, but he's going to cost far more than Walker will over the next three years. Charlotte has a point guard on a favorable contract who may or may not wind up a good starter, so unless you're bringing in an all-star talent, which Dragic isn't, you may as well give him a season or two to find out exactly what you have.


----------



## RollWithEm

Najee said:


> you don't spend lottery picks on role player types


There's nothing wrong with picking up an effective role player in the 10-14 range. The problem with Charlotte is the _HIGH_ lottery picks they've used on those players.


----------



## Najee

Bogg said:


> He's inefficient if you cast him as a primary scorer with mostly D-league talent. He's fine if you put him on a roster with actual NBA players and don't ask him to dominate the ball constantly.


Kemba Walker is primarily a scorer, and an inefficient scorer. That was his profile at UConn (.403 as a sophomore, .428 as a junior). He needs the ball in his hand to be effective and he primarily is creating offense for himself. What was seen in the NBA is not an aberration of Walker's skill set.



Bogg said:


> There's nothing that Ramon Sessions does that Kemba can't do, and most of it Kemba's much better at.


Ramon Sessions (6-foot-3) is bigger than Walker (very generously listed at 6-feet tall), for starters. Sessions is a much more accurate shooter than Walker (.449 for career vs. Walker's .366 in his rookie sseason). Sessions is arguably a better distributor than Walker, if no reason it's not really Walker's game.



Bogg said:


> Put him on the Lakers or Heat and he's a scrappy role-playing starter who brings the ball up, initiates the offense, and hits open jump shots. Put him in a line-up with Derrick Brown, Bismack Biyombo, and D.J. White, and he's forced to take bad shots because _someone_ has to shoot the ball eventually.


So using your own words, Walker is a role player (more like a third guard) on a good team. OK, so why is he being regarded as a linchpin for a team that had the worst single-season record in NBA history? Not to mention he came off the bench behind that monster point guard D.J. Augustin. Walker is not being forced to take bad shots -- he's always been a volume scorer who shot a low percentage. It's just in the NBA his lack of size and inexperience are exposed and more obvious.



Bogg said:


> Dragic is a role player too, but he's going to cost far more than Walker will over the next three years. Charlotte has a point guard on a favorable contract who may or may not wind up a good starter, so unless you're bringing in an all-star talent, which Dragic isn't, you may as well give him a season or two to find out exactly what you have.


My "role player" averaged 17.8 points, 7.9 assists and 3.5 rebounds per game while shooting .487 FG%, .847 FT% and .375 3P% starting 28 games for a team that was fighting for a playoff spot until the end of the season. My "role player" is a tall point guard who can create offense for himself and others and push the ball in transition. I would say most people would take that action from a starting point guard, and would not call him a role player.

I already said more than once that I would not overpay for Dragic's services, but it silly to compare what he did as a starter to what Walker did. I'll give Walker a pass as a rookie, but you have to ask if you see Walker as a future starting point guard when he's not really a point guard. The Bobcats aren't in a position to spend high lottery picks on guys who look to be role players.


----------



## Bogg

Najee said:


> Kemba Walker is primarily a scorer, and an inefficient scorer. That was his profile at UConn (.403 as a sophomore, .428 as a junior). He needs the ball in his hand to be effective and he primarily is creating offense for himself. What was seen in the NBA is not an aberration of Walker's skill set.


Walker has, literally, not played with a better scorer since he was a freshman in college. The fact that he's been surrounded with offensive trash for three straight seasons renders any talk about efficiency pointless. The fact that he was willing to accept the role of facilitator for Stanley Robinson and Jerome Dyson is significant in and of itself. 





Najee said:


> Ramon Sessions (6-foot-3) is bigger than Walker (very generously listed at 6-feet tall), for starters. Sessions is a much more accurate shooter than Walker (.449 for career vs. Walker's .366 in his rookie sseason). Sessions is arguably a better distributor than Walker, if no reason it's not really Walker's game.


Sessions is 6'2", and Walker measured in at 5'11.5", so the difference isn't huge. Considering that Walker digs in on defense and Sessions is apathetic, and Walker is a good rebounder(5 a game as a starter), the difference in height is negligible. 





Najee said:


> So using your own words, Walker is a role player (more like a third guard) on a good team. OK, so why is he being regarded as a linchpin for a team that had the worst single-season record in NBA history? Not to mention he came off the bench behind that monster point guard D.J. Augustin. Walker is not being forced to take bad shots -- he's always been a volume scorer who shot a low percentage. It's just in the NBA his lack of size and inexperience are exposed and more obvious.


Yea, Walker _is_ a role player on a good team. You know who else is a role player on a good team? Goran Dragic, and Walker is going to cost you half to a third over the next three years, when you're going to be bad anyway, and Walker's already there as it is. Dragic could be a nice player somewhere, Charlotte isn't that fit. 





Najee said:


> My "role player" averaged 17.8 points, 7.9 assists and 3.5 rebounds per game while shooting .487 FG%, .847 FT% and .375 3P% starting 28 games for a team that was fighting for a playoff spot until the end of the season. My "role player" is a tall point guard who can create offense for himself and others and push the ball in transition. I would say most people would take that action from a starting point guard, and would not call him a role player.


The last three season the Rockets have had career role players put up big numbers from the starting point guard position that they didn't show anywhere else(anyone remember the Aaron Brooks for the all-star game talk?) and have had other career role players play their best ball with the team(Trevor Ariza, Carl Landry). Either Houston is so incredibly good at recognizing talent that they can afford to cast aside good starters who are squandered by other teams on a yearly basis, or they're just really good at maximizing the talents of above-average players and making them look better than they are. 





Najee said:


> I already said more than once that I would not overpay for Dragic's services, but it silly to compare what he did as a starter to what Walker did. I'll give Walker a pass as a rookie, but you have to ask if you see Walker as a future starting point guard when he's not really a point guard. The Bobcats aren't in a position to spend high lottery picks on guys who look to be role players.


The Bobcats also aren't in position to pay a veteran who isn't going to any better than the fourth best player on a contender before they have players one through three in place. Kemba's on the roster for about two and three quarters a year for the next three. Dragic is going to cost two to three times that, and won't make the team appreciably better. It makes no sense.


----------



## RollWithEm

Chad Ford's latest mock draft has the Bobcats desperately trying to trade the #2 but taking Thomas Robinson if they keep the pick. Is he a better fit than MKG? Does he have enough upside?


----------



## RollWithEm

Mike Dunlap? Well, it's obvious now they don't care about winning any time soon.


----------



## RollWithEm

Seems like there will be a huge head-to-head battle going down tomorrow that could decide the second pick in the draft.



> The 2012 NBA Draft is a week away and the rumors are swirling all over as to player values and where a particular prospect might fall. The latest buzz from Chad Ford of ESPN is that Thomas Robinson is finished working out for teams after Friday’s appearance with the Charlotte Bobcats, and that he will be going up against UConn center Andre Drummond in the process.


LINK


----------



## Bogg

Drummond's not really the "battle" type. He's more the "stand passively in the grey area and wait for someone to throw you an alley oop over a 6'5" center" type.


----------



## RollWithEm

Should be great for T-Rob's chances, then.


----------



## Najee

And the point of Charlotte taking Thomas Robinson, considering the Bobcats took Bismack Biyombo a year ago?


----------



## Bogg

Biyombo's not good enough to influence who you pick at #2 in a good draft. Best case scenario he's a shorter version of "'11-'12 Serge Ibaka", _maybe_ with a little more rebounding, but more likely he's a decent hustle/rebounding big off the bench. If you honestly think that Robinson is going to wind up the best pro out of the 2-6 candidates, you go ahead and take him regardless of who's on the roster.


----------



## LA68

Robinson can work hard and hustle. But, he isn't a game changer. You can't honestly say he is the second best prospect in the draft. But, then this is the Bobcats. Look who they hired as coach !


----------



## Bogg

LA68 said:


> Robinson can work hard and hustle. But, he isn't a game changer. You can't honestly say he is the second best prospect in the draft. But, then this is the Bobcats. Look who they hired as coach !


Well, the alternatives are the swingman who can't shoot or dribble, the swingman who's pretty good at everything but great at nothing, the 6'3" shooting guard, and the center who may or may not like basketball. It's not like there are multiple sure-things in this draft. Robinson's probably going to wind up much more than a hustle big, it all depends on just how good you think the other four guys are going to wind up.


----------



## RollWithEm

Bogg said:


> Well, the alternatives are the swingman who can't shoot or dribble, the swingman who's pretty good at everything but great at nothing, the 6'3" shooting guard, and the center who may or may not like basketball.


Why is everyone so harsh on this draft class? They are going to surprise some people.


----------



## Bogg

RollWithEm said:


> Why is everyone so harsh on this draft class? They are going to surprise some people.


I actually agree. My point was that everyone 2-6 has question marks about them, and Robinson's going to wind up as way more than Brandon Bass, so it's no ludicrous to look at Robinson at 2.


----------



## Najee

Bogg said:


> Biyombo's not good enough to influence who you pick at #2 in a good draft. Best case scenario he's a shorter version of "'11-'12 Serge Ibaka", _maybe_ with a little more rebounding, but more likely he's a decent hustle/rebounding big off the bench. If you honestly think that Robinson is going to wind up the best pro out of the 2-6 candidates, you go ahead and take him regardless of who's on the roster.


It gives credence to the questions I had about Charlotte acquiring Bismack Biyombo in the first place. Charlotte knew going in that Biyombo would be a long-term project, especially on the offensive end. Drafting Thomas Robinson basically states that Charlotte is looking at another player as potentially its long-term solution, one year after acquiring the former No. 7 pick.

Charlotte is falling into that tendency a lot of bad teams do, and that's just taking players at the same position regardless of personnel needs. While I agree a team in Charlotte's case should take the best player available, however most bad teams just continue end up taking multiple players at the same position and the players usually fail. 

Despite having a small, shooting point guard who didn't shoot well in D.J. Augustin, the Bobcats took another small, shooting point guard who doesn't shoot well in Kemba Walker in the lottery last year. Now you're talking about Charlotte picking another power forward with the No. 2 pick just a year after acquiring a power forward who was the No. 7 pick. And it's not like Walker and Robinson were and are considered players with star profiles.


----------



## RollWithEm

Najee said:


> Charlotte is falling into that tendency a lot of bad teams do, and that's just taking players at the same position regardless of personnel needs. While I agree a team in Charlotte's case should take the best player available, howver most bad teams just continue end up taking multiple players at the same position and the players usually fail.
> 
> Despite having a small, shooting point guard who didn't shoot well in D.J. Augustin, the Bobcats took another small, shooting point guard who doesn't shoot well in Kemba Walker in the lottery last year. Now you're talking about Charlotte picking another power forward with the No. 2 pick just a year after acquiring a power forward who was the No. 7 pick. And it's not like Walker and Robinson were and are considered players with star profiles.


I completely agree with this, and I always have. This whole _take the best player available regardless of position_ concept presumes that you have enough stability in your organization and in your head coach to get every player the appropriate amount of minutes and practice time to develop correctly regardless of positional logjams. Instead, what happens far too often is that one of the young guys is buried on the bench because the other guy seems to be playing better in the short term. Many times this leads to the player who was buried on the bench still going on to excel in the league... for another team... who got him relatively cheaply compared to the production they eventually got out of him.

I know this is easy for me to say, but if I were a GM, I'd draft players who compliment each other in the same way Harden complimented Durant and Westbrook better than Tyreke Evans would have.


----------



## Tom

The key is drafting as you want...not because it is expected of you.


----------



## Najee

RollWithEm said:


> I completely agree with this, and I always have. This whole _take the best player available regardless of position_ concept presumes that you have enough stability in your organization and in your head coach to get every player the appropriate amount of minutes and practice time to develop correctly regardless of positional logjams. Instead, what happens far too often is that one of the young guys is buried on the bench because the other guy seems to be playing better in the short term. Many times this leads to the player who was buried on the bench still going on to excel in the league... for another team... who got him relatively cheaply compared to the production they eventually got out of him.


Unless the player is projected to be a star -- a la Orlando taking Shaquille O'Neal with the No. 1 pick in 1992, one year after taking Stanley Roberts in the first round in 1991 -- it makes no sense for a building team to use back-to-back first-round picks on players manning the same position. If Charlotte chooses Thomas Robinson at No. 2, that would mean a team with holes all around will have two top seven picks at power forward in consecutive years. And even in the case of Orlando, Roberts went No. 23 in the 1991 draft and he was considered a project.

It would be one thing if Robinson had the look of a star player, but based on what I seen he looks more like a Paul Millsap-type player. Since Bismack Biyombo cannot play any other position, it tacitly says that the team believes Biyombo is not the long-term answer.

There have been seen in many instances that picking players at the same positions in the draft usually doesn't work out for one or more players. The Washington Wizards are the most recent example. Andray Blatche has a breakout season in 2009-10, and in the draft that summer the Wizards acquire two power forwards -- Kevin Seraphin (No. 17) and Trevor Booker (No. 23) -- in draft-day trades. Then the Wizards take Jan Vesely with the No. 6 pick and Chris Singleton (who played power forward in college) at No. 18 in 2011.

Meanwhile, the team has a thin backcourt that cannot shoot and create shots for others. Blatche is all but gone. The team not has only a group of inexperienced players manning the same position, but it added two veterans who also can play power forward (Nene and Emeka Okafor).


----------



## RollWithEm

If the Bobcats indeed do see Thomas Robinson as "their guy" at the top of this draft, they better not trade down too far. It looks like the Nets are looking to trade back into the lottery to get him: http://www.netsdaily.com/2012/6/26/3119739/nets-want-to-move-up-way-up


----------



## onelakerfan

fire MJ, o wait you can't


----------



## RollWithEm

So they just went with *Jeff Taylor* and *Michael Kidd-Gilchrist* with no trading? Seriously? With all the talk about stock-piling assets? I just don't get it.


----------



## Bogg

Eh, if they didn't get a deal they liked I don't hate it, at least Derrick Brown isn't a starting NBA forward anymore. You can always use a guy who defends.


----------



## RollWithEm

Apparently the Bobcats made a hard play for Goran Dragic but struck out.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8...gic-phoenix-suns-agree-34-million-4-year-deal



> Dragic was also pursued by the Toronto Raptors, Dallas Mavericks and Charlotte Bobcats in addition to the Suns.


----------



## Bogg

$34 million is a lot for a guy who played 30 good games last year. The Bobcats needs to leverage cap space into some extra draft picks and make a free agent splash two years from now, not fill out the roster before you have your stars in place.


----------



## Najee

Meanwhile, in its continual fixation with signing C-level veteran players as stopgaps the Bobcats are discussing signing free agent Antawn Jamison:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...-jamison-charlotte-bobcats.html#disqus_thread

The Bobcats continue to show why it is, IMO, the worst run organization in the NBA.


----------



## Najee

Bogg said:


> $34 million is a lot for a guy who played 30 good games last year. The Bobcats needs to leverage cap space into some extra draft picks and make a free agent splash two years from now, not fill out the roster before you have your stars in place.


I would rather spend $8 million per year on a taller, athletic and creative point guard in Goran Dragic than spend nearly $13 million per year for Ben Gordon, a shot-chucking small guard who duplicates what the Bobcats already have. Seriously, you don't think Kemba Walker and D.J. Augustin were better than Dragic this past year.

But once again, Charlotte continues to show why it is the worst franchise in the NBA. The team refuses to change from its formula of drafting role-player types who mostly aren't around and C-level veterans who are traded for the unused "salary cap space." You almost wonder if Michael Jordan acquired the Bobcats for a tax loss, the way Donald T. Sterling used the Clippers for years.


----------



## Bogg

Najee said:


> I would rather spend $8 million per year on a taller, athletic and creative point guard in Goran Dragic than spend nearly $13 million per year for Ben Gordon, a shot-chucking small guard who duplicates what the Bobcats already have. Seriously, you don't think Kemba Walker and D.J. Augustin were better than Dragic this past year.


How do you still not get what happened with the Gordon trade? Charlotte traded for a mid first-round pick, and taking Gordon was the price they had to pay for it. The fact that he's better than Maggette is ancillary. 

Color me skeptical on Dragic, he's the third journeyman point guard in as many years to step into the starting role in Houston and overachieve. I'm sure he's a halfway decent player and he'll make a competent starter, but he's not a guy who's going to turn a team around, _best_ case scenario he wins you 5-8 extra games next year and drops you four to five spots in the lottery. Getting Charlotte to the playoffs is a multi-season project, and starting it by spending money on the best possible supporting cast is nothing but a sure ticket to winning 35 games a year until you tear it all down again or hit a one-in-one hundred shot in the lottery. 

I mean, really, if they wanted to be as good as possible next season they'd have gone after Lowry, Dragic, or Lin, paid Ryan Anderson, and traded the second overall pick for someone like Iguodala or Al Jefferson.....and they'd have gotten nowhere but tenth in the East for the next three years.


----------

