Looking to the Future: Ranking by Position

Published: April 21, 2012

Positions are dead, so we create classes of players in this new edition, and rank them accordingly. 

If you have ever listened to one of our Hornets247 Podcasts, you probably know that I believe positions are dead. There are no such things as point guards or shooting guards. Tim Duncan is not a power forward, nor is he a center. Guys have roles on the team nowadays, roles that are too broad to be contained by a simple positional name. So I say positions are dead, but on this week’s Grantland podcast, Jalen Rose went one step further and said that they never existed. “Positions are listed so the novice fan can keep up with the game,” Rose stated. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

So while the novice fan spends his or her time putting a dream roster together by position, a GM constructs his puzzle by making sure he has guys who play roles that compliment each other and trying not to have too many pieces that overlap. Most teams look like they put their roster together the conventional way because seven footers are usually the most adept at getting rebounds, while six footers are usually the best at getting into the lane and dishing the rock, but it is the role the player plays (not their listed position) that is the most important thing in the GM’s eyes.

Because most fans and analysts are still stuck in the idea of “positions”, we see heated debates that simply don’t need to exist. The topic of whether Russell Westbrook is a “true point guard” comes up whenever OKC goes on a two or three game losing streak, as if there is such a thing as a “true point guard.” People think of Chris Paul or Steve Nash when they illicit this phrase, but how many titles have those guys won? Meanwhile, how many have Derek Fisher and Tony Parker won? In fact, here are your starting “point guards” for the last 21 championship teams: Jason Kidd, Derek Fisher, Rajon Rondo, Gary Payton, Tony Parker, Avery Johnson, Ron Harper, Kenny Smith, and BJ Armstrong.

Of those guys we have two pass first guards in Rajon Rondo and the washed up Jason Kidd, two defensive minded big guards in Harper and old Gary Payton, a scorer in Tony Parker, three floor spacing big shot makers in Armstrong, Smith, and Fisher, and an emotional leader in Avery Johnson. Aren’t these guys more different than they are similar? Then why do we all insist on labeling them by the same position?

Instead, I propose we just list guys as perimeter players or bigs and focus on the strengths that they bring to the table. And since I proposed it, that is exactly what I am going to do in this weeks LTTF column. And per these roles, we are going to list the need that the Hornets have for these types of players. We are only going to focus on the offensive roles that each player can fill, because the NBA is more about team defense nowadays, and frankly we don’t have enough space to get into sub categories. Let the ranking begin!

Perimeter Players



These guys are always looking to get their teammates involved first, and only look for their own to keep the defense honest or because their teammates are struggling.

Think: Chris Paul, Steve Nash

Hornets Need (On a Scale of 1-10): 3– There is not much need for a distributor if Eric Gordon is locked in for the long haul, since he is best with the ball in his hands. The Hornets are built to be in a lot of close games, and Gordon will be the guy making plays in the final five minutes, meaning a distributor would be relegated to the bench or sitting in the corner as Gordon works. If Gordon leaves, however, this would be a huge need for the Hornets.

1. Kendall Marshall, UNC– Marshall was second in the NCAA in assists, but did have a fairly high turnover rate to match. He would benefit the Hornets by getting some of their lesser skilled bigs easy buckets and Aminu the occasional fast break dunk, but he would be worthless as a deep threat when Gordon ran the offense.

2. Scott Machado, Iona- The only reason Marshall didn’t lead Division I in assists is because Scott Machado was making plays at Iona. Machado won’t go until the late first/early second round, but Dell could acquire another pick if he sees this as a need. Machado doesn’t have Marshall’s size, but he is a much better shooter from deep, giving him a better chance to stay on the court with Gordon in crunch time.

3. Marquis Teague, Kentucky- Teague was more of a bucket filler in high school, but learned to play the role of distributor after being paired with all that talent at Kentucky. For him to succeed in the league, he will have to continue that evolution and cut down on the turnovers. His wingspan allows him to cover multiple positions, but his outside shot needs a lot of work.


These guys can get their own or create for others, depending on the situation. They simply “make plays”. Hence, the name.

Think: Eric Gordon, Dwayne Wade, Russell Westbrook

Hornets Need- 5. Would it be the worst thing in the world if the Hornets had two Eric Gordon’s? People point to Golden State and their lack of success, but they had a playmaker and a bucket filler- neither of which could play defense. Two playmaker’s could actually work in a backcourt, and it doesn’t hurt that Gordon excels on the defensive end- allowing him to cover either position.

1. Bradley Beal, Florida- He is too nice of a guy to say it, but Beal was hurt this year by having to play with some irrational confidence guys at UF. Kenny Boyton and Erving Walker are two of the most delusional players I have ever seen and they are more responsible for Beal’s offensive inconsistencies than Beal. He has a beautiful stroke, he plays hard, can attack the rim, and can make plays for others- and that is why he is a lock for a top 5 pick this year despite the average numbers. A pairing of him and Gordon would leave defenses seeing double.

2. Damian Lillard, Weber State- A truly gifted scorer who can fill it up by attacking the basket or shooting from the perimeter, Lillard is also capable of making plays for his teammates. He has greatly improved as a point guard from year to year, raising his assist rate and dramatically cutting his turnover rate since he became a starter. His quickness and wingspan also give him the potential to be an above average perimeter defender. If he can adjust to the level of competition, he might be the ideal backcourt partner for Eric Gordon.

3. Tony Wroten, Jr., Washington- What if Wroten would have gone to Kentucky? You can’t help but wonder what might have been if he went to a big program and played on the big stage with other highly talented players. Calipari has done tremendous things with similar point guards (Derek Rose, Tyreke Evens) and Wroten would have likely benefited from his tutelage. Instead, he is a supremely talented guy coming out a year or two too early and whichever team takes him is taking a huge gamble on a boom or bust prospect.

Bucket Fillers

While they can do other things from time to time, their primary strength is scoring, and they can do it in a variety of ways. Don’t expect a ton of assists from these guys. 

Think: Danny Granger, Marcus Thornton, Melo

Hornets Need- 9. While Monty and Dell preach defense, you still need to score points to win and the Hornets desperately need somebody else who can create buckets for themselves. A guy on the wing with Gordon who can get 20 PPG could make his life a lot easier and could actually make this team fun to watch.

1. Harrison Barnes, UNC- Barnes came into UNC and spent too much time behind the arc. This year, he took less three’s, took more shots in the paint, and raised his free throw attempts per game by 50%. Perhaps he was a little over-hyped coming in as a freshman, but media perception should not effect the evaluation of a players’ game. He is great in catch and shoot situations, is fluid and can handle being hit when he goes to the basket, and he developed a solid post up game at the end of his sophomore season. Just 19 years old, Barnes should be a top 10 scorer in the league when his game fully matures.

2. Austin Rivers, Duke- Rivers was another guy who didn’t live up to lofty expectations in his freshman year, but it is clear that he can get points in bunches. He was in a disciplined system in Duke that didn’t take advantage of his skill set, and it is more than likely that he will be a better scorer in the NBA than he was in college. He should be able to get to the bucket at will, and once his outside shot becomes more consistent, he could be a perennial Sixth Man of the Year Candidate a la Manu or Jason Terry.

3. Jeremy Lamb, UConn- Though immensely skilled, Lamb never got to be the clear go-to guy for the Huskies, as he took a back seat to Kemba Walker his freshman season and Shabazz Napier this past year. Lamb was clearly more talented than Napier, but Napier had the ball in his hands, so Lamb was not featured as much as he should have been. Like Beal and Rivers, Lamb might actually be a better pro player than college player if a team showcases him. He has several ways of scoring off the dribble and can fill it up from deep. To become an elite scorer, however, Lamb is going to have to get to the free throw line more often.

Lane Fillers

These guys are at their best running in the open floor  and scoring around the rim. The great ones also attack the offensive glass and get points that way.

Think: Shawn Marion, Kerry Kittles, Richard Jefferson, Paul George

Hornets Need- 4. While it would be nice to have some athleticism on the wing that could attack the rim, guys like this are most useful when they can get out and run. We have not seen any indication that Monty wants to push the ball, and the Hornets have been in the bottom ten in pace for the last seven years.

1. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Kentucky- MKG ranked #1 amongst prospects this year in transition scoring efficiency, converting 71% of the time in those situations. He has the speed and athleticism to fill the wing, and perhaps more importantly, he has the desire. Anybody who watched Kentucky play this year can probably recall five or six nasty falls that they saw MKG take while attacking the bucket hard on the break, yet he never stopped. Teams hate going against guys like that. His three-point shot is practically non-existant at this point, but being just 18, he has plenty of time to work on that. He has all the things that can’t be taught, including work ethic, and that is why there is every reason to believe he will develop the rest.

2. Perry Jones III, Baylor- He just simply can not be listed as a big in my “roles” piece. If he is going to make it in this league, it will be as a super lengthy, super bouncy wing who gives opposing perimeter players nightmares. Imagine Trevor Ariza with three extra inches of height, eight extra inches of wingspan, and more raw skill and athleticism. If I draft Jones, that is where I am trying to take him- forget about putting on bulk and developing a low post game. I want Paul George 2.0 (or at least Al-Farouq Aminu 1.5).

3. Moe Harkless, St.Johns– A darkhorse candidate for the Hornets, Harkless could be a guy that the Hornets could target if they get another first round pick, and especially if they get rid of Ariza. His outside game is pretty much non-existent, but Harkless does a fantastic job of finishing in transition and on cuts in the half court. Another kid who is just 18 years of age, Harkless will need some time to develop, but could be a diamond in the rough down the road.


Bucket fillers without the versatility, Marksman score primarily from the perimeter and are larger dependant on others to get open looks.

Think: JJ Reddick, James Jones, Gary Neal, Kyle Korver

Hornets Need: 5. This could increase if the Hornets let Belinelli go, but after Monty’s recent comments, one would expect him to stay. Still, the more shooters the better on a team with a penetrator like Gordon.

1. Terrance Ross, Wahington- Most look at Ross’s body and think ‘slasher’, but nearly 70% of his shots this year were shots from 16+ feet, including nearly 6 three-pointers per game. Ross is one of the best players in this draft coming off picks, and that is one of the staples of Monty’s offense. If Marco is gone, Ross could be a suitable replacement with a higher ceiling.

2. Doron Lamb, Kentucky- Lamb might be the best pure shooter to come out in the last 3-4 years, but he really can’t do much else. He can play point guard in a pinch, similar to Marco, and is a willing defender, but he is going to make it in this league as a shooter. If the Hornets are lucky and can acquire Davis, it might be wise to pick up another first round pick and acquire Lamb to help space the floor.

3. John Jenkins, Vanderbilt- Jenkins is slightly more versatile than Lamb, but is a notch below as a spot up shooter. He might be better than Lamb, however, coming off of screens and shooting off the dribble. Jenkins is another guy who can space the floor and he doesn’t seem to have a conscious, as evidenced by his nearly 9 three-point attempts a game.

Big Men


The Centerpoint

The rare low-post option that the whole offense runs through. These guys must be able to score anytime they are covered one-on-on and can also make a play for their teammates when doubled.

Think: Tim Duncan, Chris Webber, Hakeem Olaquwon

Hornets Need: 10. This is a 10 for every team in the league.

Doesn’t Exist in 2012 Draft

Mr. Inside-Out

These guys are most effective in the low post, but can take their game to the perimeter if needed. 

Think: LaMarcus Aldridge, Pau Gasol, Al Jefferson

Hornets Need: 9. Even if Landry and Kaman are brought back, the Hornets will have a huge need here because those two have drifted further and further away from the rim each year they have been in the league. Jason Smith is deadly from 16-20 feet, and Gustavo has a limited ceiling. An inside force would balance this team offensively.

1. Anthony Davis, Kentucky- Those who want to pick apart the clear #1 choice will say that he is an offensive liability, but that simply isn’t true. He only took 8 shots a game at Kentucky and was 5th in usage rate at Kentucky, yet he still was uber-efficient and displayed a variety of offensive moves/skill sets. Of course we know he can convert alley-oops and he was the best in the NCAA at converting after getting an offensive rebound, but he also displayed a hook from the left post, a turnaround from either side, and the ability to hit the jumper- all the way out to the three-point line. For all his offensive “deficiencies”, he is further along than guys like Malone, Ewing, and Olaquwon at the same age.

2. Thomas Robinson, Kansas- Robinson has a wide array of skills as a post player, though all of them will need some refinement as he comes into the league. He is able to shoot the hook over either shoulder and he can also face up from either the high post or the low post a la Tim Duncan. His jumper is smooth for a big man, and he too has shown some three-point range, but where he is most deadly is on the pick and roll. That is nice, because that just so happens to be Eric Gordon’s biggest strength as well. Hopefully, Robinson can get his FT% closer to 80% (68% last year), because he figures to get fouled a lot with the way he attacks the rim.

3. Jared Sullinger, Ohio State- Some mocks have Sullinger dropping out of the lottery, but I just don’t see how that can realistically happen if you look at his low-post game. He has such a great touch down low, and his wide body allows him to get position while creating an excellent entry target. While he does struggle against bigger guys, he has the versatility to take his game outside where they will have to handle him off the dribble or chase him out to the three-point line. The tales of Sullinger’s demise have been greatly exaggerted, and he would be a steal if he lasted all the way to the Hornets second pick in the draft.

Mr. Outside-In

These guys often are too quick to be covered by traditional four’s and too big to be covered by traditional three’s, so they start outside if covered by a big and work the low post if covered by a wing. More pick and pop than pick and roll.

Think: Antawn Jamison, David West, Al Harrington

Hornets Need: 3. The pick and pop game is alive and well with Jason Smith and Aminu can even swing over to play the stretch four. There is not much of a need here for this type of player.

1. Terrance Jones, Kentucky- It’s hard not to think of Antawn Jamison when you watch Jones, as their skill set and overall demeanor are remarkably similar. Jones likes to catch the ball at the top of the key and take what the defense gives him. If they play off him, he is more than capable of hitting a long two or three, and if they play up on him he can take the ball to the hole and finish in a variety of ways. Many will argue that he settles for the three too much, and Calipari has called him selfish and lazy in the past, but if a coach can get through to him, he is one of the three or four most talented offensive players in this draft.

2. Royce White, Iowa State- White is a throwback in a lot of ways, and when we look back in five years, he will have been way over drafted or way under drafted. He does everything (literally, everything) well, but nothing great as evidenced by the fact that he led his team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks, but did not finish in the top 30 in the NCAA in any of those categories. What that most likely means is that White can be some sort of role or niche player in the NBA; perhaps a guy who can be the leader of a second unit and can give a team a new dimension that opponents have to account for. White running the point forward with Aminu playing stretch four, Ayon at center and two dead-eye shooters in the backcourt would be intriguing and would most second-units nightmares.

3. Draymond Green, Michigan State- Big Baby Davis, with more toughness. Green is a load on the glass and can step out to the three point line, but will probably be at his best as a high post player who can work well with a dominant low-post presence. He has a high basketball IQ and gets the most out of his ability, but unfortunately the Hornets already have enough guys who fit that profile.

Straight Postin’ Garbage Pickers (SPGP for short)

If these guys leave the low block, it is by mere accident. They are always on the low block and score via simple post move, alley-oop, or on an offensive rebound.

Think: Tyson Chandler, Dejuan Blair, Serge Ibaka

Hornets Need: 7. If Okafor were two inches taller and played with more fire and passion, this spot would be filled for the Hornets, but that is simply not the case. Somebody with length around the rim would be great to clean up Gordon’s misses when he draws 2-3 guys at the rim.

1. Andre Drummond, UConn- There is no better way to show that you belong in this category than to shoot under 30% from the free throw line, and Drummond did just that this past year. And not only was he bad at the free-throw line, but he was equally horrible in post-up situations, converting just 32% of those opportunities. He is strictly a easy putback and dunk guy at this point in his career, similar to DeAndre Jordan and TC early in their careers. The hope is that he will develop the other aspects of his game and that his defense will make a team happy they took him with a top five pick. At least, that is what I will tell Ryan Schwan if the Hornets select him.

2. Tyler Zeller, UNC- Zeller did step out and hit 17 footers this year and he has one or two ugly low-post moves that work against inferior competition from time to time, but in the NBA he is going to make his living cleaning up the glass and running the floor in transition. If Zeller is guarded by tradition center’s in the NBA, he should be able to beat his man down the floor nearly every possession, giving him the ability to get easy points or develop deep low post presence. The bad news with Zeller is he is a black hole when he gets the ball in the post, but the good news is that he is an excellent free-throw shooter and will likely get you two points when his tenacity gets him to the line.

3. John Henson, UNC- Henson has showed more potential than Zeller offensively, developing a turnaround jumper this past season and an almost unstoppable lefty hook, but he is still pretty raw. People will think of Branden Wright when they look at Henson, but they are completely different players. Henson is far more fluid and has bulked up considerably at UNC, while Wright has been unable to do so. Henson has put on nearly 40 pounds since coming in as a freshman, and if he can put on 10-20 more while continuing the development in his offensive game, he can be one of the top five players in this draft when we look back years from now.

Looking to the Future is a weekly piece that you can find every Saturday only on Hornets247.com. For past articles, click here. 




  1. Jack

    April 21, 2012 at 8:44 am

    How far could Barnes fall?

    • ImSorryMonty

      April 21, 2012 at 10:48 am

      6 i think would be farthest behind Robinson, Beal, MKG, Davis, Drummond.

  2. ImSorryMonty

    April 21, 2012 at 10:49 am

    I’m with you though Mike. If we end up with anybody but Drummond top 5 + Sully that is a damn coup for the Bees.

  3. Chuck

    April 21, 2012 at 12:05 pm

    “So while the novice fan spends his or her time putting a dream roster together by position, a GM constructs his puzzle by making sure he has guys who play roles that compliment each other and trying not to have too many pieces that overlap.”

    I’d like to point out that this only applies to competent GMs, not Billy King or whoever is running the Knicks.

    I’m a little confused by your Hornets Needs number. For example you have Bucket Fillers as a 9 and Lane Fillers as a 4. I’m not sure how you have stacked these guys against each other overall, but in that scenario, if we had pick #2 would you take Harrison Barnes over MKG because he would fit better in Monty’s system? If we got MKG along with Zeller or Marshall and put them with Gordon and Ayon, Monty would be crazy not to have the guys run more when it would give us a clear advantage (see Scott, Byron). At this point in the team’s development, assigning a level of Need to any “position” seems pointless since we really need everything

    Also does this factor in defense and intangibles? Almost all these guys will have to learn how to play real NBA defense, but for a few of them you can see some signs of how they will fare, like MKG with his tenacity and athleticism vs. Terrence Jones with his (alleged) attitude issues.

    • NoJoke

      April 21, 2012 at 8:41 pm

      When you say Scott, Byron, do you mean the “Crescent City Connection?” a.k.a CP3 plus Chandler

    • simon

      April 22, 2012 at 8:13 pm

      If he had pick number two I imagine he’d take Robinson so the Barnes/MKG argument would be moot..

  4. edbballin504

    April 21, 2012 at 2:14 pm

    Would any of the teams picking ahead of us at 10 be willing to swap their pick and a bad contract for Ariza and our #10 pick? Maybe CLE? If so that allows us to potentially grab Davis or Robinson with our 1st pick, then Barnes with our 2nd pick. Like I’ve been saying for awhile here, Barnes is the PERFECT 3 next to Gordon. The guy is an NBA player despite what you heard elsewhere. As a #1 option he might struggle, but Gordon is our #1, and a top PF would be #2. Barnes as a #3 option would be a huge steal for us.

    • Eli

      April 21, 2012 at 5:24 pm

      Let’s Go!!

      • simon

        April 22, 2012 at 8:14 pm

        I don’t think anyone would take Ariza for a pick that could land Barnes. Barnes will be a good enough defender in the pros to not make that a worthwhile swap

  5. 504ever

    April 21, 2012 at 4:37 pm


    I think your categories, and lack of any focus on defense, over inflate Harrison Barnes and Austin Rivers. [I also think you are pigeon holing players in a more restrictive way when you assign them to categories which are much narrower than positions. Where would you put 6′ 11′ clutch 3pt specialist Sam Perkins? 6′ 8″ PG Magic Johnson? 6′ 5″ PF Charles Barkley?]

    Barnes was basically a catch and shoot perimeter player, and in college was “soft”. He was not a rebounder (offensive or defensive) or defender. He was also a poor passer, who never adjusted his game when Kendal Marshall was hurt. In those two tournament games without Marshall, Barnes shot 8-30 (26.7%), 2-14 (14.3%) from 3pt, and had a 1:1 assist to turnover ratio. This includes a game against Ohio University who has no NBA prospects.

    In has last 5 games, ACC Championship and four tourny games, Barnes was 7-27 (26%) from the college 3pt line. (And that is padded by going 3-6 against lowly Creighton; he was 4-21 (19%) without that game.) I am not even sure Barnes can be a quality catch and shoot guy in the NBA.

    As far as Rivers goes, he is a shorter and slightly more athletic version of Greivis Vasquez, and just as positionless. (Positions do count, especially on defense where Rivers won’t be able to guard quality PGs or SGs.) Like Greivis at Maryland (where he was a star!), Rivers was great when he brought the ball up and could set himself up to choose between shooting or driving. When he receives a pass with a defender on him, Rivers is much less effective.

    With Rivers, what you see is what you get. Rivers wasn’t held back by a Duke system; the Duke system is guard freindly and very flexible. What held Rivers back was his athleticism and decision making. Only one of those may improve in the NBA: decision making. Rivers decision making has a long way to go. Rivers, like Barnes, also had a 1:1 assist to turnover ratio in college, but Rivers was a guard who ran the offense a lot. More than just about anyone in this article but Drummond, Rivers would have benefitted from another year in college to work on his decision making. (I doubt he gets that chance in the NBA. If you put him at PG it will kill your team. Think Greivis in the 3rd quarter of the game at Memphis.) On a playoff NBA team, I don’t see Rivers being more than a 2nd team SG. Maybe his upside is Steve Blake, not Manu or Terry.

    • Eli

      April 21, 2012 at 5:39 pm

      You have to think of how these prospects could help the Hornets. The Tar Heels are not built the same way that the Hornets are, so the way the Hornets would utilize Barnes is different than the way the Tar Heels utilized him.
      Look above at edbballin’s comment, he makes a great point. In UNC, Barnes was expected to be their offensive go-to guy and focal point, and expected to score a lot. While Marshall was a good passer, he didn’t drive into the lane enough or draw enough defensive attention to himself to get Barnes more open. Barnes’ defenders were usually glued to him.
      On the other hand, Gordon is that playmaker as Michael says, who could drive the lane, draw a couple of defenders, and kick it out to Barnes for the open three. Depending on who else we do or do not get, Barnes would be our No. 2 or No. 3 scorer.
      You have to look at all of these prospects, not just Barnes, from a perspective of how they’ll fit in with the Hornets, not just what they did in college.

      • 504ever

        April 21, 2012 at 8:48 pm

        There is no substitute for watching a player and his team in college. UNC started four likely 2012 lottery picks, including Marshall. Marshall got into the lane all of the time, then made passes to his teamates where they like to get the ball. That’s how Marshall averaged a massive 10 assists per game with a super 3.5:1 assist to turnover ratio.

        Barnes had plenty of open looks, especially when teams focussed on stopping UNC’s high percentage 2pt shots from deep in the paint. Plus, Barnes is 6’8″ and could shoot over most college small forwards. Look at Barnes’ performance in college in that light.

        I come from the Jim Finks school: draft for performance and durability over “potential” (whatever “potential” means.) To me, Barnes didn’t shoot well enough in college to be a 3rd option in the NBA. Barnes could end having a nice long NBA career, like Rasual Butler: 11 years in the NBA with 4-5 teams, and 30 playoff games averaging 13 minutes/playoff game.

      • Blattman

        April 22, 2012 at 2:19 am

        @504ever : I’m sorry but you can’t bash Barnes and say “I come from the Jim Finks school: draft for performance and durability over “potential””.
        To prove my point :

        Player A: 34.2min 14.8pts FG%: 44.5, 3PTS%: 33.9, FT%: 76.9
        Player B: 29.4min 15.7pts FG%:42.3, 3PTS%: 34.4, FT%:75

        Player B seems the best scorer but player A is Bradley Beal as a freshman, player B is Harrisson Barnes as a freshman.

        Barnes may have been terrible during the tourney but he was pretty clutch last year. You can’t judge on only one tourney.

        Plus don’t forget that sophomores are always overlooked in the draft. Does anyone remember how Monroe was labelled ? “soft”, “no leader”, “poor rebounder”. Did that translated well in the NBA ?

    • Gabe

      April 22, 2012 at 6:01 pm

      I’m sorry but I don’t know where Barnes no defense label came from. I think it is because they know that he is a inefficient high-volume scorer a la Monta Ellis. Chuckers are thought too not care about defense and suck, however Barnes was an excellent defender. From DraftExpress : “On the defensive end, Barnes still shows the same promise that we noted last year, thanks to his solid physical tools and fundamentals. His size, length, and strength should serve him well defending small forwards at the NBA level, and he does a nice job moving laterally, understanding positioning, and challenging shots.

      • simon

        April 22, 2012 at 8:17 pm

        Barnes is not an inefficient score.

        He scored 18ppg in 28 minutes on 13.5 shots.

        If you can explain to me how 45/40/75 splits makes someone inefficient then good luck to you

      • 504ever

        April 22, 2012 at 9:27 pm

        @blattman: I am not a big Beal fan either

        @Gabe: “Promise” isn’t the same as prowess. And rather than quote DraftExpress, please watch some game film on Barnes (especially from the NCAAs either year he played or against quality opponents in the ACC).

        To all: I have named an NBA player that I think reasonably approximates what Barnes (and Rivers) could be in the NBA. If you disagree with my evaluation of Barnes, then add the name of the NBA player who you think most approximates what Barnes will be in the NBA. That way we will have yardsticks to evaluate our opinions of Barnes down the road.

  6. Jason Calmes

    April 21, 2012 at 6:34 pm

    I kept looking for paladin, bard, wizard.

    If that’s what I was looking for, Ryan must be disconsolate.

  7. NOH Domination

    April 21, 2012 at 7:05 pm

    You think PJIII is going to be a “lane filler”? First of all I disagree with your assertion that positions are dead. Positions were created to typify roles. For example the “lane filler” is typically a small forward. There are 5 positions on the floor and there needs to be one of each position but the peoples roles can vary. For example, some teams have big guys that would rather shoot 3’s than get rebounds. There are a lot of different role combinations that can be used.. Now to PJIII. By saying he’ll be a “lane filler” is essentially condemning him to be a 3. He’s never, ever going to be a defense first player and he’s not built to be a wing. He has a ton of talent, but he’s lazy so what determines if he makes it in the league will be his determination to do so (I don’t think he will make it). He’s definitely more in the “Mr. Inside-Out” role. He’s long, lanky and can finish well and has a pretty nice stroke. He’s more like a Bosh-type guy.

  8. David

    April 21, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    There are two things this team needs to upgrade this offseason: Athleticism and 3 point shooting. That’s it. Not a position. The Hornets are solid everywhere, but they are missing elite athletes who can match up and win those 15 plays a game where fundamentals go out of the window and the best athlete just wins. When you do everything correctly (like denying Blake Griffin the ball in the post, pushing him to the wing facing up, letting him get the ball w/ 12 secs on the shot clock, forcing him to the sideline, making him give it up for an off balance 18 footer by a bad shooter, and boxing him out) and then losing anyway (Griffin proceeds to jump over your box out and posterize you off the rebound because he is that much better of an athlete). The hornets lost most of these swing plays this season, which is why they lost so many close games.

    Personally, If we don’t get Davis, I think Bradley Beal is a perfect fit for us. he is listed as a combo guard, who has the handle to play point. He is big for a “2 guard,” but guarding opposing teams points he would be a mismatch defensively. He could play off of Gordon’s pick and roll beautifully both as a spot up shooter and a backside cutter. He upgrades the teams athleticism and 3 point shooting. A starting backcourt of Gordon-Beal would be a tough matchup for anyone in the NBA. In fact, I would prefer Davis-Beal to any other Davis-(insert name here) combination that we could possibly get.

    Sullinger is short, fat, and doesn’t play defense. I don’t want him. He’s tractor Trailor or Sean May or Glen Davis or Sheldon Williams.

  9. George

    April 22, 2012 at 4:11 am

    Possible Hornets Lineups next year:
    PG Beal/Gordon/Vasquez/Taylor
    SG Gordon/Beal/Belinelli
    SF Ariza/Aminu
    PF Josh Smith/Jason Smith
    C Kaman/Seraphin

    PG: Augustin/ Jack
    SG: Gordon/ Henry
    SF: Kidd-Gilchrist/ Aminu
    PF: Sullinger/Jason Smith
    C: McGee/Pachulia

    PG: Lillard, Vasquez
    SG: Gordon, Henry
    SF: Ariza, Aminu
    PF Robinson, Jason Smith
    C: Kaman, Seraphin
    Take your pick?

    • ImSorryMonty

      April 22, 2012 at 12:28 pm

      as much as i love DJ being from the Catholic League and all, he is not better than JJ or Vasquez imo.

      • simon

        April 22, 2012 at 8:18 pm

        Dragic owns them all.

        Should definitely go after him in FA and trade Jack so he can go back up for someone else.

      • George

        April 22, 2012 at 10:21 pm

        I like Dragic but someone is going to overpay him the offseason, not sure which point guard would be a good fit for Gordon. Lillard has the potential to be, but is a gamble given his mediocre performanes against good teams in college. Maybe Mo Williams?

  10. NOS-3RD GEN

    April 22, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    To me what’s the point of having all of these offensive type guys, athletic, and update our roster w/ mostly offensive guys when this team is all about defense,defense and oh yea did I mentioned defense. As long as M.Williams is head coach. Which mean offense will not be focused on.U see what happens when we have offensive players. They get benched, loses minutes, & loses money, (ex:MT5 and Carl Landry) while players Atom and Smith gets plenty of minutes and not produce enough wins.

    • simon

      April 22, 2012 at 8:22 pm

      Offensive players who can play defense would get plenty of burn under monty.

      Just because he focuses on D doesn’t mean he takes O out the window. MT and Landry are below average defenders for their position.

      Beal and Barnes (and obviously Davis) are not. They will be average at worst. Even the Jones’ will be above average defenders if they play under monty. PJIII could be Durantesque (defensively) if Monty gets him locked in.

      Marshall doesn’t fit because he can’t (not won’t – can’t) defend in the pros. Rivers doesn’t fit coz he’s not the kind of player Monty would like.

      Personally I’d take both Terrence and Perry Jones over Sullinger if they’re all available with our Minny pick.

  11. David

    April 23, 2012 at 12:34 am

    anybody over sullinger. I think I’d rather Trew over that short fat lazy slob. bleh

  12. Joe P

    April 27, 2012 at 11:05 pm

    Thanks for the insightful writing. Billups had a championship. Great article, though.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.