2013/14 NCAA Game Thread/Prospects Watch

[RadioKiller]

It's not like MKG has performed that great lately either (with the exception of tonight).

But I am with you, Barnes has been so underwhelming. MKG at least looks like he can bring energy, hustle, and a good work ethic.

[homestarunner93]

I don't want Barnes. There, I said it. I think he's lazy on defense and his supposed strength, shooting, is inconsistent. I don't think he's a leader and I don't think he can really carry a team to do something special. Plus he's underperformed drastically since he came to UNC. I love MKG.

My order of preference for the draft is:
1. Davis
2. MKG
3. Drummond
4. Beal
5. Robinson

He has more talent than anyone not named Anthony Davis. The Bobcats can't keep drafting mediocre talents with major holes. Barnes has vastly underperformed at UNC for the most part. That being said, he's a phenomenal talent, and one of the players who could be a true star in this class. You have to draft him if it isn't Davis (or maybe Drummond) and at least give it a shot. He needs an attitude adjustment and not much else. He can be a great player in the NBA.

[RadioKiller]

You can't draft on talent alone though.

[NBA_Starter]

Rick Bonnell ‏ @rick_bonnell Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Pretty good chance next #Bobcats lottery pick is on TV tonight: Kentucky's Davis or Kansas' Robinson.

Oh Please no

[homestarunner93]

You can't draft on talent alone though.

You can when you have to hit big. Absolutely, yes you can. If you draft a solid, mediocre talent, your team drifts towards mediocrity. This team will never make a big FA signing without vastly overpaying. The Bobcats have to build through the draft. I would rather the Bobcats swing for the fences and totally miss on a guy like Barnes than draft a guy like MKG that will be a good player but nothing particularly special. If Barnes is awful, you still suck, and you get more high draft choices. Russell Westbrook is a good example here. The Thunder took him despite questions about what position he fit at, how much of an NBA player he was, what his work ethic was like, etc. That being said, the Thunder knew they needed big time players in the draft if they were ever going to compete. The Bobcats are the same way.

[JDM]

I understand Barnes has great talent but his actions and mannerisms, like lack of hustle, is as big of a flag to me as it gets. It's easier for a guy like MKG, who hustles and has a great attitude, to overcome his weaknesses right now and become a great player, than a guy like Barnes who has the tools to be successful but doesn't seem to have the attitude to best utilize his tools and improve. If there is one thing I hate more than anything on a basketball court, it's lack of hustle and leadership. To me, it has been apparent all season long with inconsistent games and spotty play. And last night I finally just said "screw it, I'm calling what I see." And I see a player who's reputation coming out of high school has been used to counteract any suggestions of weaknesses and flaws. And last night was a perfect example, without Marshall he sucked. He couldn't make a shot to save his life, and for a player who is supposedly as good as he is, he should have taken over his team (which in fact he should have done since day 1) and beat Ohio. To me he is only as good as the players around him, and he makes no one around him better. MKG makes everyone around him better and plays the same, hardnose game day-in and day-out.

I understand the philosophy of taking players with good talent, which Barnes certainly has, but what good is talent without a good attitude and humbleness? MKG, on the other hand, has talent and the attitude and humbleness which would put to shame most NBA players right now. To me, character and drive is just as important as physical talent.

[homestarunner93]

I understand Barnes has great talent but his actions and mannerisms, like lack of hustle, is as big of a flag to me as it gets. It's easier for a guy like MKG, who hustles and has a great attitude, to overcome his weaknesses right now and become a great player, than a guy like Barnes who has the tools to be successful but doesn't seem to have the attitude to best utilize his tools and improve. If there is one thing I hate more than anything on a basketball court, it's lack of hustle and leadership. To me, it has been apparent all season long with inconsistent games and spotty play. And last night I finally just said "screw it, I'm calling what I see." And I see a player who's reputation coming out of high school has been used to counteract any suggestions of weaknesses and flaws. And last night was a perfect example, without Marshall he sucked. He couldn't make a shot to save his life, and for a player who is supposedly as good as he is, he should have taken over his team (which in fact he should have done since day 1) and beat Ohio. To me he is only as good as the players around him, and he makes no one around him better. MKG makes everyone around him better and plays the same, hardnose game day-in and day-out.

I understand the philosophy of taking players with good talent, which Barnes certainly has, but what good is talent without a good attitude and humbleness? MKG, on the other hand, has talent and the attitude and humbleness which would put to shame most NBA players right now. To me, character and drive is just as important as physical talent.

I absolutely understand the frustrations with Barnes. But I disagree that character is as important as talent, especially in basketball. One player can conceivably make a team, like LeBron for example. Now, Barnes is not that good. Attitude can be fixed, though, and I don't think a team like Charlotte can ignore a talent like that, regardless of his attitude. An attitude problem can be overcome, but you can't give a player talent he doesn't have. Like I said, what do the Bobcats have to lose? Right now, we can't get any worse. Marginally improving the team only hurts the long term future more. I think you have to swing for the fences in the next few drafts, and hope you come up big at least once.

[JDM]

I understand, and agree, that we have to get good players and help this team now, but I think MKG is the better prospect. The only thing that Barnes is better at than MKG is at shooting. IMO, that's it. And throughout the season Barnes' shooting has come and gone. His defense is sloppy, he should be a better rebounder, he's one-dimensional, and after watching UNC games he appears to have a lackluster attitude. That leaves shooting, and, like last night, that can be disappointing too. With that said, MKG needs to improve his shooting, but beyond that he's good. He is a good rebounder, great defender, and does all the little things to help Kentucky win that does not show up in the stats. So besides shooting I think he's better, and, like I said, with his attitude he will improve his shooting and become even better.

I can understand where you may feel that he would "marginally" improve this team because of his reputation as a poor offense player, but when you compare their stats Barnes is not that much better than him, and he's even worse in others:

Barnes: 17.3 PPG, 5.2 RPG, 45.3 FG%, 72.8 FT%, 1 APG, 1.1 SPG, .4 BPG
MKG: 11.5 PPG, 7.6 RPG%, 47.9 FG%, 73.5 FT%, 2 APG, 1.1 SPG, 1 BPG

So except for the 5.8 PPG advantage over MKG, Barnes is worse in the stats I have above. I just think Barnes' reputation has allowed him to still be considered the #1 SF in this class, which I wholeheartedly disagree with.

[RadioKiller]

You can when you have to hit big. Absolutely, yes you can. If you draft a solid, mediocre talent, your team drifts towards mediocrity. This team will never make a big FA signing without vastly overpaying. The Bobcats have to build through the draft. I would rather the Bobcats swing for the fences and totally miss on a guy like Barnes than draft a guy like MKG that will be a good player but nothing particularly special. If Barnes is awful, you still suck, and you get more high draft choices. Russell Westbrook is a good example here. The Thunder took him despite questions about what position he fit at, how much of an NBA player he was, what his work ethic was like, etc. That being said, the Thunder knew they needed big time players in the draft if they were ever going to compete. The Bobcats are the same way.

So is Drummond third on your list?

[homestarunner93]

So is Drummond third on your list?

I would say he's 2nd/3rd. Tough to differentiate between him and Barnes for me personally.

[RadioKiller]

Ah, I can't believe you base players off talent alone. Drummond has as much talent as the next person in the draft but hasn't produced because of his mindset and lack of desire. Not saying Barnes lacks desire but has been very underwhelming this year. I do believe he has an higher ceiling than MKG though. Actually has a better chance to become a superstar but there just seems to be something missing.

EDIT On a side note, not sure if this has been discussed here, but Beal is definitely slated for the 2 position in the NBA. He is a great rebounder for a SG but a lot of people are hoping he can play 3 for Charlotte. Today was a good example as he struggled fighting through screens. I just don't see him being big enough to guard 3s on a consistent basis.

[JDM]

He's a combo guard, not a SF. That's wishful thinking.

[RadioKiller]

He's a combo guard, not a SF. That's wishful thinking.

I wouldn't even consider him a combo guard. He is a SG. A combo guard to me in this years draft would be someone like Rivers.

[JDM]

I consider both combo guards, because they both can handle the ball and are a tad smaller than you would like in a SG (apparently). But it's kind of splitting hairs. He's definitely not a SF, though.

[RadioKiller]

No I realize he is no SF. Some are thinking if the Bobcats draft him then we could play him at 3. I just don't think it's feasible. Hendo would be better at the 3, I guess.

But the reason I consider Rivers much more of a combo guard because he does'nt do nearly as well off the ball. He almost has to have the ball in his hands to be successful. And is more of a soccer than shooter.

Beal, on the other hand, is much better without the ball in his hands. He is a good penetrator and finisher around the rim but I don't think his handles are all that polished. Still pretty solid though.