Crittenton in draft

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Some of you are confusing physical ability with talent.

Crittendon has all the physical ability in the world. He just plays the game in very sloppy untalented way.

---

I disagree and I watched a decent bit of Tech ball this year. He played like a freshman at times but don't try and suggest "sloppy" and "untalented" are somehow related or SYNONYMS. THEY ARE NOT! He played like a freshman at times. At others he was together and awesome. You cannot deny his size and ability at the position. You cannot deny his talent or upside regardless of position. He can be VERY special at Pg. After reading exodus comment on his always holding his head up when dribbling I watched him. He really does it and that to me is the sign of a true point.

W

[thesheedera]

Quote:

---

He played like a freshman at times. At others he was together and awesome. You cannot deny his size and ability at the position. You cannot deny his talent or upside regardless of position. He can be VERY special at Pg.

---

I have to agree with this. The problem with this board is that so many posters feel the need to make huge definitive statements. For example, the comparison of Conley to Speedy, simply because their small, fast, and not great shooters. All of the sudden some posters have convinced themselves that these guys are the same player! It's absurd!!!

Crit is the most inconsistent of the three PGs that seem to be jockeying for the #1 PG spot in the draft. He's also the guy that has the most upside if he can polish his craft and become the best he can be. It's risk and return. He does have a tremendous amount of talent, he's just the most unpolished of the three at this stage. He has much more impressive physical abilities than Law or Conley. If he can figure out the game, he should be better than both. So far I feel like Conley is almost a sure thing at being a dependable and dynamic floor leader, but he has some physical limitations. At his position his physical limitations don't scare me as much as they would at all 4 other positions, but it is a concern.

Javaris' inconsistent play worries me a lot, because you never know if moving to the league will help or hurt his confidence. I have no doubt that if he played 4 years of college ball he'd come out as a slam dunk future all star PG. Coming out early will either stunt his development forever, or increase the pace of the learning curve. It's a gamble for him, and for the team drafting him.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

Crit is the most inconsistent of the three PGs that seem to be jockeying for the #1 PG spot in the draft. He's also the guy that has the most upside if he can polish his craft and become the best he can be. It's risk and return. He does have a tremendous amount of talent, he's just the most unpolished of the three at this stage. He has much more impressive physical abilities than Law or Conley. If he can figure out the game, he should be better than both. So far I feel like Conley is almost a sure thing at being a dependable and dynamic floor leader, but he has some physical limitations. At his position his physical limitations don't scare me as much as they would at all 4 other positions, but it is a concern.

---

I can agree with this. BTW, Chad Ford (I know, I know) says that GM's currently favor Law over JC 3:1. He says that Conley is the clear #1 PG.

I think workouts will be a great opportunity for Javaris to jump up the draft board, possibly into the late lotto. He's definitely a "potential" pick, and with his size I can see a GM getting really excited...

[BossTweed]

What do you guys think about maybe getting Crittendon later in the draft?

It sounds like a lot of people are expecting him to be taken or so. If we only have the 11th pick, maybe we could trade down and pick up a second rounder too? Or keep the 11th and make a trade for a later 1st round pick?

That would probably be too much of a gamble to trade down the 11th pick, unless we only move a few spots.

[BossTweed]

I meant to say "expect him to be taken around 20 or so."

[thesheedera]

To me it depends on how things go earlier in the draft. If only Conley's gone maybe you take the risk that either Law or Crit will still be available if you trade down. If Conley's there you have to take him.

If Conley and Law are gone it's a huge risk to trade down and allow someone else to get Crit or allow someone else to trade up to get him.

If we land a top 2 pick I think I would be more willing to gamble with the 11th, but if it's our first and only pick, we have to value it greatly.

If we get #3 then I'm more inclined to make sure we get a PG with the #11 pick, because no one at #3 is gonna be a groundbreaking acquisition for the team.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

If we land a top 2 pick I think I would be more willing to gamble with the 11th, but if it's our first and only pick, we have to value it greatly.

---

I think we have to gamble either way with the 11th pick, but frankly should we get Oden or Durant our talent needs are less. I could even see going with Law rather than Crittenton in this situation. Law certainly doesn't have Crit's upside, but with Oden or Durant our talent needs should be filled. It would be about merely solidly filling the Pg position (or C with Durant) rather than filling a position ADN improving our talent.

In short, our reason for "gambling" in the 1st place is our talent need. Without Oden or Durant we need an extra base hit at Pg not a sac fly. If the talent need isn't there (we get Oden or Durant), then we don't have two out and we can afford a sac fly.

W

[DrReality]

Don't particularly like the comparisons made on Draftexpress: Steve Fancis and John Gilcrist. ????

Given that he's projected in the 20's, it would make sense that BK would draft him at 11.

[DrReality]

It's also amazing that this thread has gotten so long. Obbiously a lot of interest in Crit.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Don't particularly like the comparisons made on Draftexpress: Steve Fancis and John Gilcrist. ????

Given that he's projected in the 20's, it would make sense that BK would draft him at 11.

---

...than Crittenton. I personally think he is the risk/upside pick we should take because with his size adn still pure Pg ability he could be absolutely special for a team that needs a triple not a single at the Pg position. Workouts for him will really tell the tale. Let's hope BK doesn't pull anymore lame promises out of his "how to be your own (bad) GM" booklet.

W