Second round Mavs pick? - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

mick · 06-22-2002, 10:12 AM

Projected by nbadraftnet. Maybe Mavs draft and leave him over there for a year.

Mario Stojic
Birthdate: 1980
NBA Position: SG/SF
Ht: 6-6
Wt: 195
Hometown: Croatia
Team: Benetton Treviso
Telebasket Profile
Euroleague Profile

Very smooth athlete with a nice outside shot, though unorthodox. Can fill up the scoring column. Plays with good aggressiveness and is a good defender. Has been criticized for his lack of consistency. Natural born scorer. That's the best way you can describe this guy. He is a strongly build and athletically gifted player. Great slasher with solid midrange game but not the best shooter from outside, but knocks down open 3pt shots pretty consistently. He is solid defensively, especially on the player with the ball. He should improve his passing ability when double or triple teamed as he usually rushes shots in such situations. Also proved he can be a leader, as he was the main reason of success the Croatian junior teams had with his generation, most notably this year when they came second only USA at the World championship under 20 in Japan. Comparison: less athletic version of Jerry Stackhouse. Could be a real sleeper.

-Uros Velkavrh

madape · 06-22-2002, 11:09 AM

I love Casey Jacobsen if he drops

Bayliss · 06-22-2002, 11:33 AM

Read this kid's profile. He's projected to go in the second round. If he drops, I'd pick him up at 55.

Fidel · 06-22-2002, 11:33 AM

Stojic should go a little higher than #55.

Drbio · 06-22-2002, 04:32 PM

I agree with Fidel.

I think the 55 pick will be a roster casualty this year anyway. I'd like to see a "draft and follow" kind of deal where the Mavs take someone and let them play overseas for a year.

scooterj5 · 06-22-2002, 04:36 PM

Nellie can do wonders with a 2nd round pick, Wang for example, so expect him to take a gamble on a foreign player

Dirk77 · 06-24-2002, 01:45 PM

Jeffries is going way higer then 55.

Drbio · 06-24-2002, 03:15 PM

good call scooter.

mick · 06-24-2002, 03:21 PM

<< Jeffries is going way higer then 55. >>

Maybe 20 picks higher.

Drbio · 06-24-2002, 03:44 PM

20th pick or so. Would the mavs look to move up like that? I ahven't heard them saying anything about Jeffries.

Bayliss · 06-24-2002, 04:21 PM

<< Jeffries is going way higer then 55. >>

Depends. Some mocks have him going as high as late first round, others have him going late secound round. The good thing for us about having the 55th pick is that most players in the second round are usually:

1) undersized
2) have work ethic problems
3) projects

hence the reason why they fall. But there isn't much difference between the 35th player and the 55th player. So Jeffries could fall.

With the 55th pick I say we go strictly big whether it be a big man or a small forward. If it is a big man then center possibilities include:
Centers
Chris Christofferson- No, not the singer... the guy that was abused by Yao in New York. Some think he could develop into Todd MaCculough
Andy Ellis- never seen the kid play and can't get any scouting on him. To me he will probably be a BWS.
Lazaros Papadopoulosp- Some have him going higher but he could slide. Some think he hasn't developed quickly enough, so they think he's pretty much reaching his peak.
Peter Fehse- just turned 19. Still a project... but has a lot of potential... Raef-esque in built and ability.... (my guess, better upside than Raef)
Jason Jennings- projected mid secound... but depends on Euro talent whether he drops.

Small Forwards
Randy Holcomb- he's big 6'9"... runs well, rebounds, not a great shooter...
Lubos Barton- Another secound rounder that has been floating **everywhere**... good defender for his size... good shooter.
Chris Jeffries- been everywhere on the mocks... excellent defender.... Scottie Pippen-esque.....
John Salmons- Another kid that has been everywhere, from late 1st to not being drafted... a tweener (much like Finley was when he came into the league)... can even play some point... not flashy but smooth..

Big Boy Laroux · 06-24-2002, 04:36 PM

holy crap if jacobsen dropped to 55, i'd take him in a hearbeat.

Dooby · 06-24-2002, 05:00 PM

You don't draft for need at 55. You take the best guy available (read: upside). If the guy with the most upside happens to be a guard, you take him.

TheKid · 06-24-2002, 05:05 PM

If you all are referring to Jarod Jeffries there is NO WAY he's dropping to 55. That is a PIPE DREAM to think he will fall that low.

Bayliss · 06-24-2002, 05:41 PM

<< You don't draft for need at 55. You take the best guy available (read: upside). If the guy with the most upside happens to be a guard, you take him. >>

Disagree Dooby. In the first round, no question that you draft best player available, but in the second round (especially late secound), you have got to plug holes.

Sure there are some possible second round "steals" but the idea of one player being better than another is a "wash".... that is why you have to draft the second round based on need.

<< If you all are referring to Jarod Jeffries there is NO WAY he's dropping to 55. That is a PIPE DREAM to think he will fall that low. >>

I was talking about Chris Jeffries, not Jared Jeffries.

Chicago JK · 06-24-2002, 05:45 PM

No way. YOu take the best player available at 55. The player at 55 probably has around a 2% chance of making this team. The pickings are slim when you get down there. You look for the 1-2 players who may have slipped through the cracks. There may be none, but you don't look for position.

Bayliss · 06-24-2002, 05:57 PM

Yeah, like last year... was that of need or position? Drafting two point guards?

We passed on Jarron Collins, Alton Ford, Loren Woods, Ruben Bounmtje-Boumtje....

Dooby · 06-24-2002, 06:00 PM

<< Disagree Dooby. In the first round, no question that you draft best player available, but in the second round (especially late secound), you have got to plug holes.

Sure there are some possible second round "steals" but the idea of one player being better than another is a "wash".... that is why you have to draft the second round based on need. >>

Bayliss, I think this is crazy-talk.

If a guy is capable of making an impact in the league in his first year, he will likely go in the first round. If he isn't going to make an impact, then how can you draft for need?

Now if you want to say that the difference b/w 2 players is a "wash", then take the bigger guy. Fine. I will live with that. But I think the notion of taking a big man and praying he developes when there is a guy who is 4 inches shorter who is more likely to play in the NBA is ludicrous.

Too many guards who can play is a nice problem to have. We don't even have that problem. So drafting for need would be silly.

Dooby · 06-24-2002, 06:09 PM

<< Yeah, like last year... was that of need or position? Drafting two point guards?

We passed on Jarron Collins, Alton Ford, Loren Woods, Ruben Bounmtje-Boumtje.... >>

Loren Woods was passed up by how many teams again? Minnisota sure needed his 1.8 points/game. Collins & Ford-whatever. What team doesn't need big men? There are 29 teams and 29 of them have needs in the frontcourt. Who is to say that Collins & Ford weren't the best player available at that spot?

Just because we drafted two jerkoffs who never tried their jersey on doesn't justify your opinion. Crap, arguably we were drafting for need. We didn't have Hardaway and we knew we would trade our backup point for a glass of water.

Bayliss · 06-24-2002, 06:13 PM

<< Bayliss, I think this is crazy-talk.

If a guy is capable of making an impact in the league in his first year, he will likely go in the first round. If he isn't going to make an impact, then how can you draft for need?

Now if you want to say that the difference b/w 2 players is a "wash", then take the bigger guy. Fine. I will live with that. But I think the notion of taking a big man and praying he developes when there is a guy who is 4 inches shorter who is more likely to play in the NBA is ludicrous.

Too many guards who can play is a nice problem to have. We don't even have that problem. So drafting for need would be silly. >>

The reason you draft for need is because you may actually have something. What did we get out of our draft last year? Not a damn thing. We just drafted "best available" or so we thought it was best available. But they had no shot of making the team. If we had gone big then there would've been the possibility that we might have found a capable backup center, power forward, or small forward.

And that is what we have to do this time. Find some relatively big (ie center/power forward/small forward who can give us some quality minutes. A la Collins at Utah....

(And the reason I said it was a wash is because the odds of finding a gem is rare but I'd rather have the gem that fills our needs at certain positions)

Bayliss · 06-24-2002, 06:17 PM

<< Just because we drafted two jerkoffs who never tried their jersey on doesn't justify your opinion. Crap, arguably we were drafting for need. We didn't have Hardaway and we knew we would trade our backup point for a glass of water. >>

Well the time frame may be a little off but we signed Tim Hardaway a week later... and we haqd interest in him long before the draft. So no, we weren't drafting for need.

You are basing the draft like football... which is great for the first round. But in the second, you cannot pull a Jimmy Johnson, because there is no special teams, you have to find position.

mick · 06-24-2002, 08:42 PM

<< No way. YOu take the best player available at 55. The player at 55 probably has around a 2% chance of making this team. The pickings are slim when you get down there. You look for the 1-2 players who may have slipped through the cracks. There may be none, but you don't look for position. >>

You are correct.

mick · 06-24-2002, 08:43 PM

<< You don't draft for need at 55. You take the best guy available (read: upside). If the guy with the most upside happens to be a guard, you take him. >>

You are correct.

mick · 06-24-2002, 08:47 PM

<< Yeah, like last year... was that of need or position? Drafting two point guards?

We passed on Jarron Collins, Alton Ford, Loren Woods, Ruben Bounmtje-Boumtje.... >>

Mavs wasted the picks because Nellie didn't want to fool with any rookies. They should have taken Woods and Nellie admitted as much the next day on Norm's show, he said they were afraid of his back injuries. So what? With the second round pick, take the guy with the most upside anyway, even if you think he may be out for awhile recupperating.

TheKid · 06-25-2002, 09:24 AM

We passed on Jarron Collins, Alton Ford, Loren Woods, Ruben Bounmtje-Boumtje....

I'm going to repeatedly say this until I'm blue in the face. I said we should take Jarron Collins and I think everyone on this board said he would be a WASTED PICK... Well I don't know which is which, but both of them seem to be doing pretty damn well for rookies.

So remember when I say something, chances are I'm right[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Bayliss · 06-25-2002, 09:55 AM

I wouldn't know. TheKid, I wasn't here when the draft was held last year.

My point is this:

Most second rounders never make it. And beuty is in the eye of the beholder. Most GMs think they are taking the best available, so why not do it at the position that you need? Don't pick a player just to pick a player (like we did last year) but pick someone who you think fills some holes.

Dooby · 06-25-2002, 10:38 AM

To which I respond by saying that there is no team that is so deep that they can afford to pass up a better player for a lesser player with size. And who is to say that size doesn't make a guy the better player anyway? Just take the best guy available and be done with it.

TheKid · 06-25-2002, 10:57 AM

Actually you could do both. I think each team during the draft should look at the direction the team is going. The Mavs will need someone of the small forward nature and guard position in the future, so why not draft for those positions in the second round by taking the best available at that position. Since very few second rounders stick, just take a shot at them. If they're worthy of sticking around, they will be here and getting acclamated (sp) to the system so in a few years they would be able to step in when players like Nash or Fin are starting to slow down.

mick · 06-25-2002, 01:03 PM

<< To which I respond by saying that there is no team that is so deep that they can afford to pass up a better player for a lesser player with size. And who is to say that size doesn't make a guy the better player anyway? Just take the best guy available and be done with it. >>

Yep. We need quality depth at all 5 positions. Take the best player period. Can't go wrong.

Dirk77 · 06-25-2002, 02:31 PM

im sorre, but there is 0% chance of Chris Jeffries dropping to 55th.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-25-2002, 02:37 PM

I would have never said not draft Collins in the late of the draft. Him and his brothers were like the twin towers in college.