CB Draft '09 Mock Press Conference: Central Division

[bucknersrevenge]

Milwaukee:

1) Among your big man, Haywood is coming off of an injury, Milsap is a bit undersized, and Wallace and Battie are older.  Is your playoff rotation solid enough to sustain a playoff run?

2) What are your expectations in the short term?

3) What type of pieces would you like to surround Durant with in the future to solidify your team for the next decade?

4) Do you see yourself closer to the best team in your division or the worst?  (Subject to your own definition)

Excellent questions Roy.

1. To sustain a run. Probably not. I think at best were probably talking 2 playoff series and probably bowing out in maybe 6 games in the 2nd series. Length will certainly give Millsap and Hansbrough some problems and since that position is where our post offense comes from I'd imagine we'll be running a lot of pick n roll to draw opposing bigs out and try to drive around them or count on penetration from Stuckey to help create maybe some offensive rebounding opportunities(both are solid offensive rebounders) or some dumpoffs to the bigs underneath.

Short term, we may be short of winning the division but I'll put Durant against any star in it. My backcourt is truly a wildcard. Stuckey is more lead guard than true point and Smith isn't always as focused as he can be. But what we're most excited about in Stuckey's case is this from a local newspaper article:

Rodney Stuckey's team got dramatically younger, and now the soon-to-be third-year guard said he is ready to become the leader of the Buckss.

"I have no choice," Stuckey, 23, said Thursday. "I just have to do it. The sooner I accept that role the better I will be as a player and as an individual.

"I think next year is going to be a lot more leadership because I am the point guard and I am going to have the ball in my hand and stuff like that. The group of guys we will have next year will be listening. So I am ready for that."

Clearly this kid gets it. He wants the ball, he wants to lead and he wants to win.

3. I'd like to see a young center perhaps with some post game be added as well. Or if Millsap gets exposed due to his height, perhaps he may be parlayed into a 4 with more length, like an Aldridge or a Speights even who I like a bunch. Smith is a wild card and he's confident to the point of being arrogant which is nice at times when it allows him to be aggressive and believe he can make the play but it can also be dangerous so he has to be watched. If he falls through I may move Stuckey to a more traditional 2guard spot if I can find a legit young PG or perhaps a 2 guard with some ballhandling skill.

4. Despite my inexperience I do actually see myself closer to the top. In the end you need talent in this game right? And talent we have. I love the humility and work ethic of Durant, Millsap and Stuckey along with their talent and Smith's talent goes without saying. It's probably focus and execution that may trip us up in the short term but long term I think we'll be there.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Wish I was headed out of the league like Hilton Armstron.....o wait he isnt he started 29 games last year and played in 70 and has played in 191 games in his 3 year career and started in 37. So someone want to explain to me how he is headed out of the league

Well all apologies to Chicago, but here are some salient quotes from a great Hornets247 article, which I posted earlier:

"He turned the ball over on 20% of his posessions. Happily, that number is an improvement over last year. Unhappily it moved him from being the most turnover-prone player in the NBA to the second most turnover-prone player in the NBA."

"Last season, Hilton grabbed 13.1% of all available rebounds, putting him in the bottom 10 among centers. This season, he got worse, grabbing 10% of all available rebounds, putting him 3rd to last."

"Opposing centers averaged an All-Star PER of 21.6 against Armstrong, and a lot of that was due to Armstrong's inability to rebound - and sudden interest in fouling everyone he encountered. Per 48 minutes, Armstrong delivered 8.0 fouls, good for the 6th worst number in the league."

The fact that Hilton Armstrong started 29 games last season is simply evidence of New Orleans injury woes and thin bench. You neglected to mention he was also, on occasion, beaten out by Sean Marks and Ryan Bowen in the rotation.

Of course, in Chicago's defense, the team is already the third to acquire Armstrong, meaning other GMs are clearly seeing something that I'm not?

[KCattheStripe]

I think Cleveland makes a real run at this division. Between this division and the Atlantic, I have 7 potential playoff teams. have fun SE.

[johnnyrondo]

Should WW and Houston really be the expert on centers here?

[Roy Hobbs]

Question for all five GMs:

Who is your biggest division rival, and why won't they win the division?

I'd prefer not to answer this question. I think it does more harm than good. I believe this division will get three or four playoff teams. Most likely three.

Well, I'll concede it's one of the tough questions that you can't necessarily give a "spin" answer to, which is why I asked it.

I appreciate your answers in this thread, but I don't know that you've been truly candid -- or even remotely candid -- in any of those queries that raised legitimate concerns about your team. 

Of course, that probably means you'd be well-suited to be a real GM.   What it doesn't do, though, is give us anything helpful.

[RebusRankin]

To all the GMS, How do you feel your team matches up against some of the perceived contenders (Portland, Phoenix, Toronto, Philadelphia, Buffalo and Orlando)?

[Roy Hobbs]

My thoughts on the Central:

1a. Chicago
1b. Detroit
3.  Cleveland
4.  Indiana
5.  Milwaukee

How should we differentiate between 1a and 1b when we have to vote on teams?  If you and Chicago met in the playoffs, who would win?

[Gainesville Celtic]

For the record, the Bulls starters averaged 90ppg last yr.

In this game/exercise this is a bit misleading (not on purpose)......

It sounds like a lot, but i would imagine most teams in the top 2-3 in their division have starting 5's that average 80-90 ppg (ours = 83, for example).

First to answer Roy. I did say that Martin's will go down and that Horford's and possibly Pau's will go up.

To GC, you are welcome to make the argument that your team will score 83, but I think J-Rich and Charlie V's numbers would go down.

My point was just to say that my bench players don't need to score a lot. They will be playing with great scorers.

this is gonna be my last comment on this probably (heading out to lunch finally). my point is this JR --- maybe i'm not being clear.

In a game like this I believe we all have to assume that our teams will follow the normal bell curve of NBA offensive production ---- not just add up last year's point totals.

So I believe its unrealistic to say Team X's starters will go down offensively, but *my* team's starting 5 won't AND will score more than any other starting 5 in league history.

If you say your bench doesn't need to score much b/c your starters will score enough that bucks really every team in the history of the NBA. Look at 2 of the most dominant offenses in the last 20 years: RUN-TMC era Warriors and the 7-seconds-or-less Suns.

RUN TMC (GSW '91) starting 5 scored 87 ppg on the way to 116 ppg as a team

2007 Suns starting 5 scored 80.9 ppg on the way to 110 ppg

(BTW, Boston's 2008 Championship team = Starting 5 averaged 77.3 ppg, team 100.5 ppg)


I assume that you're starting 5 will/can score 80-85 points easily. The essential questions (which we can all debate for any team till the cows come home) are (a) can your bench realisitcally score 25-30 ppg  and (b) will your team be able to hold the other team to under 100 points if not?

If you're saying your team is a running team then your opponents will also get more possessions.

[Celtic Fan Forever]

My thoughts on the Central:

1a. Chicago
1b. Detroit
3.  Cleveland
4.  Indiana
5.  Milwaukee

How should we differentiate between 1a and 1b when we have to vote on teams?  If you and Chicago met in the playoffs, who would win?

In my honest opinion, it's too close to call. I think that would be one hell of a playoff series.

[Rondo2287]

For the record, the Bulls starters averaged 90ppg last yr.

In this game/exercise this is a bit misleading (not on purpose)......

It sounds like a lot, but i would imagine most teams in the top 2-3 in their division have starting 5's that average 80-90 ppg (ours = 83, for example).

First to answer Roy. I did say that Martin's will go down and that Horford's and possibly Pau's will go up.

To GC, you are welcome to make the argument that your team will score 83, but I think J-Rich and Charlie V's numbers would go down.

My point was just to say that my bench players don't need to score a lot. They will be playing with great scorers.

this is gonna be my last comment on this probably (heading out to lunch finally). my point is this JR --- maybe i'm not being clear.

In a game like this I believe we all have to assume that our teams will follow the normal bell curve of NBA offensive production ---- not just add up last year's point totals.

So I believe its unrealistic to say Team X's starters will go down offensively, but *my* team's starting 5 won't AND will score more than any other starting 5 in league history.

If you say your bench doesn't need to score much b/c your starters will score enough that bucks really every team in the history of the NBA. Look at 2 of the most dominant offenses in the last 20 years: RUN-TMC era Warriors and the 7-seconds-or-less Suns.

RUN TMC (GSW '91) starting 5 scored 87 ppg on the way to 116 ppg as a team

2007 Suns starting 5 scored 80.9 ppg on the way to 110 ppg

(BTW, Boston's 2008 Championship team = Starting 5 averaged 77.3 ppg, team 100.5 ppg)


I assume that you're starting 5 will/can score 80-85 points easily. The essential questions (which we can all debate for any team till the cows come home) are (a) can your bench realisitcally score 25-30 ppg  and (b) will your team be able to hold the other team to under 100 points if not?

If you're saying your team is a running team then your opponents will also get more possessions.

I agree GC  TP on this one

[johnnyrondo]

To all the GMS, How do you feel your team matches up against some of the perceived contenders (Portland, Phoenix, Toronto, Philadelphia, Buffalo and Orlando)?

I think there are a couple more contenders for the Western Conference championship you're missing. In the East, we think Orlando will suffer the same fate as the Cavs have with Lebron not having a sidekick. Yes Big z a few yrs ago was all star caliber and Mo was an allstar, but he needs more help. He's lost the prior three seasons to three star teams (The Spurs: 1. Duncan, 2. Parker, 3. Manu) (Celtics KG, Pierce, Ray) and the Magic (D12, Hedo, Rashard) Mo Williams, Big Z, or in this case Marc Gasol and J-Rich are not stars. In 6 months if Marc Gasol has become a true star, then maybe.

Philly if Baron Davis and the bigs are healthy could make the ECF, but we prefer our backcourt and bigs and chemistry (no offense to Philly)

Man, its hard to answer questions here without possibly upsetting another GM. I think that's a little unfair to ask. i think people should make their case and people should judge.

Fwiw, I think the NBA champions come out of the East.

[Gainesville Celtic]

My thoughts on the Central:

1a. Chicago
1b. Detroit
3.  Cleveland
4.  Indiana
5.  Milwaukee

How should we differentiate between 1a and 1b when we have to vote on teams?  If you and Chicago met in the playoffs, who would win?

In my honest opinion, it's too close to call. I think that would be one hell of a playoff series.

FWIW i have the central as:

1. chicago
1b. detroit
3. milwaukee (Durant is the difference)
4. cavs
5. pacers


RE: chicago vs. Detroit.... i look at it thusly:

Paul has a huge advantage over Watson/Livingston/Marbury that leads to more easy buckets for his teammates and himself. But Mayo and Gay get some (but clearly not all) of that back b/c I don't think Martin and Bell can stop them. Detroit and Chicago's bigs match up very well, probably play to a draw but I think DET's backup bigs (while no all-stars themselves) can come in an slow the CHI bigs more than CHI's can slow DET's.

I'll reserve my judgement on would win... i think it's pretty clear, but would go 7 games.

[The Walker Wiggle]

To all the GMS, How do you feel your team matches up against some of the perceived contenders (Portland, Phoenix, Toronto, Philadelphia, Buffalo Houston and Orlando)?

Speaking of GM "spin."

Well played Buffalo. I hope you don't mind that I made one correction.

[Rondo2287]

To all the GMS, How do you feel your team matches up against some of the perceived contenders (Portland, Phoenix, Toronto, Philadelphia, Buffalo Houston and Orlando)?

Speaking of GM "spin." Well played Buffalo. I hope you don't mind that I made one correction.

I see your point WW but at least he didnt put himself first.  And Buff hasnt been a very vocal GM alot of other GMs have annointed him a contender.  So I will give him a pass

[johnnyrondo]

Run TMC didn't have Pau Gasol..or Horford even for that matter. Martin and Gasol will also rack up points while playing with Raja, J-will and either anderson or armstrong.

CP3 and Horford will also rack up points playing with Bogans, Deshawn and Anderson.

our starters will score a LOT and our bench isn't impotent, but they won't be needed for too much scoring (part of the rationale for the Prince to Martin upgrade).

What differentiates these Bulls to other high offense teams like the Warriors, Mavs with Nash and Dirk, or Suns with Nash and Amare, is that we have a tough long armed center and an amazing defensive point guard.