Chad Ford's new #5 mock draft

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...-mock-draft-50

He still has us taking Alex Len at 6, which I really hope is the case if Porter, McLemore, or Oladipo is off the board. He says that he still has some doubts that McLemore will go in the top 5. He may end up being the player that drops like usual in every draft instead of Otto Porter. Will Dell take McLemore if he falls to sixth? I sure hope he would do it. Below is Ford's analysis of McLemore going to the Suns at 5.


{Mod edit-Please do not post ESPN Insider articles}

The Pelicans did interview McLemore at draft combine, so I would say Dell has interest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

The Pelicans did interview McLemore at draft combine, so I would say Dell has interest.

---

draft McLemore and get rid of Gordon

^^^ this guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rebelman

draft McLemore and get rid of Gordon

---

:2thumb2::2thumb2:

That would be most choice.

if it comes down to ben or len, there is no question we're getting ben

If we got McLemore, is it safe to say that Gordon is as good as gone?

Yes by trade deadline.

No way Len gets to 6 now IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by All Metro

Yes by trade deadline.

---

So I would assume you would bring McLemore off the bench until then? Just trying to gauge how many people feel he can start day 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

So I would assume you would bring McLemore off the bench until then? Just trying to gauge how many people feel he can start day 1.

---

Depends on when Gordon gets hurt (sorry, it was too easy :) )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Depends on when Gordon gets hurt (sorry, it was too easy :) )

---

:)

The more I watch Draft Express scouting videos on youtube, the more I want the Pels to grab Bennett at 6th if he's there. Even if it ment moving Davis to center and moving Anderson to SF or dealing him to get a true SF.

What do you guys think about a Bennett, Anderson, Davis line up? and IMO Bennett could slide into the SF spot in some situations, I know people say he can't defend the SF, but I don't know, He's athletic and quick as hell.

On a related note, most of the scouting videos I saw of Burke show him as a very "shoot 1st" PG. Granted, He's excellent at it, but is that what we want out of out PG? of do we want a distributor, who can score when he needs to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

The more I watch Draft Express scouting videos on youtube, the more I want the Pels to grab Bennett at 6th if he's there. Even if it ment moving Davis to center and moving Anderson to SF or dealing him to get a true SF.

What do you guys think about a Bennett, Anderson, Davis line up? and IMO Bennett could slide into the SF spot in some situations, I know people say he can't defend the SF, but I don't know, He's athletic and quick as hell.

On a related note, most of the scouting videos I saw of Burke show him as a very "shoot 1st" PG. Granted, He's excellent at it, but is that what we want out of out PG? of do we want a distributor, who can score when he needs to?

---

We would have no good post defenders. Bennett would have to commit to that end and then hope he can do so well enough. Not to mention Anderson, Bennett, or Davis would have to guard some of the games best athletes out on the perimeter that scares me. IMO this makes us far too weak defensively with little upside offensively I don't like the trade off. If I'm drafting Bennett I'm trading Anderson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

We would have no good post defenders. Bennett would have to commit to that end and then hope he can do so well enough. Not to mention Anderson, Bennett, or Davis would have to guard some of the games best athletes out on the perimeter that scares me. IMO this makes us far too weak defensively with little upside offensively I don't like the trade off. If I'm drafting Bennett I'm trading Anderson.

---

Just read a BleacherReoprt article that projected Tiago Splitter as a good fit for the Pels in free agnecy. If we did take Bennett and sign Splitter and taking your stand on trading Anderson we should be able to get a pretty solid return for Ryno to help us out on the perimeter. But Who might the be?

If I recall, he is restricted. I don't see Splitter leaving the Spurs anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

Just read a BleacherReoprt article that projected Tiago Splitter as a good fit for the Pels in free agnecy. If we did take Bennett and sign Splitter and taking your stand on trading Anderson we should be able to get a pretty solid return for Ryno to help us out on the perimeter. But Who might the be?

---

I wouldn't go the Splitter route. I'd look to play Davis and Bennett more as a college two power forward set as opposed to playing one at the 3.

I think that the obvious choice is picking the best player that is available at the time, regardless of position. If Mclemore is still on the board at this sixth pick, we need to take him. If its Oladipo, we need to take him. If its Bennet or Porter or anyone who could fall, we need to take them. Lets build our talent base and then figure out everything else.

Chad Ford saying that the Pelicans may prefer MCW over Burke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

Chad Ford saying that the Pelicans may prefer MCW over Burke.

---

Chad Ford needs to check himself.

Trade Gordon for Wilson Chandler, is that fair? Should they get more or should we?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Chad Ford needs to check himself.

---

Thats what he is saying he heard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

The more I watch Draft Express scouting videos on youtube, the more I want the Pels to grab Bennett at 6th if he's there. Even if it ment moving Davis to center and moving Anderson to SF or dealing him to get a true SF.

What do you guys think about a Bennett, Anderson, Davis line up? and IMO Bennett could slide into the SF spot in some situations, I know people say he can't defend the SF, but I don't know, He's athletic and quick as hell.

On a related note, most of the scouting videos I saw of Burke show him as a very "shoot 1st" PG. Granted, He's excellent at it, but is that what we want out of out PG? of do we want a distributor, who can score when he needs to?

---

I suggested this a while back on here. I'd like to draft Bennett and trade Ryno. Pretty sure we can get a good deal for Ryno. This kid has the most upside in this draft.imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Chad Ford needs to check himself.

---

Been saying that as well. I wouldn't be upset at all. Have faith man.lol. If McW hadn't had a bad shooting season this wouldn't even be a problem what so ever. Love his length and athleticism. His vision is second to none. Turnovers and shooting are 2 things that are very much fixable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

Thats what he is saying he heard.

---

Maybe his source was MM

If Ford was saying the Pelicans loved Burke and will take him no matter what, he would be the prophet and quoted up and down/believed. But he says things that we don't like and he is questioned. That is inconsistent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

Thats what he is saying he heard.

---

But his comments seem somewhat contradictory-

Quote:

---

Mike (Detroit)



Any chance we see Burke to the Pelicans? I know they say they believe in Rivers but PG seems like a position of need.

Chad Ford
(1:16 PM)



Yes. There's a chance. There's interest there. But if Alex Len falls to them? I think he goes ahead of Burke. Ditto if Otto Porter, Nerlens Noel are on the board. Not sure how they feel about Bennett, Oladipo or McLemore.


Andrew Z. (Struthers, OH)




Vishal (Orlando)



Is there a chance that a team looking for point guard help drafts CJ McCollum before Michael Carter Williams and Trey Burke? I think the Magic would be a good fit.

Chad Ford
(1:21 PM)



Maybe. I think the Suns like McCollum more than Burke or Williams. Ditto for the Blazers. Think the Kings prefer Carter-Williams. Pistons are neck-and-neck with Burke/Carter-Williams. Have heard the Magic and Pelicans both may prefer Carter-Williams.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

Thats what he is saying he heard.

---

Can still be just as wrong.

He says there is a chance. There is a chance we take KCP. There is always a chance.

Ford has talked several times about how much teams change their mind last minute. For instance, he told a great story about Bird deciding to go with George when Pacers were on the clock. Wasn't even a strong consideration, then Bird just did it.

Eight days out seems like a short amount of time, but almost every team will change their board 150 times between now and then, and might change it twice when they are on the clock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kclaboy504

Been saying that as well. I wouldn't be upset at all. Have faith man.lol. If McW hadn't had a bad shooting season this wouldn't even be a problem what so ever. Love his length and athleticism. His vision is second to none. Turnovers and shooting are 2 things that are very much fixable.

---

Personally, I don't get MCW. He cannot shoot at all. His defense is an unknown. His turnover ratio is very concerning. If it were one thing, you could say it was fixable. However, that seems to be a lot of things to "fix" for a #6 pick.

Read the whole comment. He goes on to say "There is interest there" and mentions several other players, none of which are MCW. He specifically says Len would go ahead of Burke (which I agree would happen) and never says, "but they like MCW better and he could go ahead of Burke). That is why I say it sounds a bit contradictory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

On a related note, most of the scouting videos I saw of Burke show him as a very "shoot 1st" PG. Granted, He's excellent at it, but is that what we want out of out PG? of do we want a distributor, who can score when he needs to?

---

This?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Read the whole comment. He goes on to say "There is interest there" and mentions several other players, none of which are MCW. That is why I say it sounds a bit contradictory.

---

Condradictory would be if he said, "Pelicans have Burke as their top PG" and then said what he said about MCW over Burke.

Remember, this is a live chat. The guy is probably getting 1000+ questions a minute. And like I said, if he is talking to someone (Dell likely), then Dell probably has a lot of good things to say about a lot of guys. At this point in the process, you haven't crossed anyone off your board.

We ask for this kind of inside info, then we bash it or don't believe it or whatever. Twenty years ago, we would have nothing. We would read the occassionally newspaper prospect profile. Now we have all of this at our fingertips. We dont have to take everything as gospel, but I don't think this underlying cynicalness is productive either. Especially when the cynicalness goes away when reporter X says what we want to hear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

If Ford was saying the Pelicans loved Burke and will take him no matter what, he would be the prophet and quoted up and down/believed. But he says things that we don't like and he is questioned. That is inconsistent.

---

The same would happen if he said we hated Burke and we wont take him no matter what. But saying he is "hearing" we "may prefer" guy x over guy y means absolutely nothing to me and is just purposefully ambiguous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

This?

---

Trey Burke runs an offense the way it's meant to be run. He is perfect at running the pick and roll game. Just like you're used to seeing Chris Paul run the pick and roll with the Hornets, that's how Burke ran it at Michigan. He will get by his man, and then use his body to keep his guy back while he makes the other defender commit. If the defender lags back, he shoots. If the defender commits, he dishes. And he's very good at it. Running an offense is his strength. I don't think anyone would label him as a shoot first PG per se, he just happens to be one of the best shooting PG's in the draft.

I've seen him questioned as far as passing with his left hand. That's about as far as I've seen his passing skills questioned.

Now his pick and roll defense, that I think you could validly question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Condradictory would be if he said, "Pelicans have Burke as their top PG" and then said what he said about MCW over Burke.

Remember, this is a live chat. The guy is probably getting 1000+ questions a minute. And like I said, if he is talking to someone (Dell likely), then Dell probably has a lot of good things to say about a lot of guys. At this point in the process, you haven't crossed anyone off your board.

We ask for this kind of inside info, then we bash it or don't believe it or whatever. Twenty years ago, we would have nothing. We would read the occassionally newspaper prospect profile. Now we have all of this at our fingertips. We dont have to take everything as gospel, but I don't think this underlying cynicalness is productive either. Especially when the cynicalness goes away when reporter X says what we want to hear.

---

Sorry, have to disagree. My opinion is that the two appeared somewhat contadictory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spaniard

Trey Burke runs an offense the way it's meant to be run. He is perfect at running the pick and roll game. Just like you're used to seeing Chris Paul run the pick and roll with the Hornets, that's how Burke ran it at Michigan. He will get by his man, and then use his body to keep his guy back while he makes the other defender commit. If the defender lags back, he shoots. If the defender commits, he dishes. And he's very good at it. Running an offense is his strength. I don't think anyone would label him as a shoot first PG per se, he just happens to be one of the best shooting PG's in the draft.

I've seen him questioned as far as passing with his left hand. That's about as far as I've seen his passing skills questioned.

Now his pick and roll defense, that I think you could validly question.

---

Thanks Spaniard, Having not watched a lot of collage ball, I have to rely on the highlight vid's and obviously those are skewed to the information the creator wants to highlight.

After we traded for Lopez I combed the net looking for videos of Robin, and found virtually nothing but low-light reels and bloopers really showing Robin in a negative light. Pleasent surprise when he actually hit the floor for us. he wasn't the bumbling imbicle some people on youtube made him out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davisistheman

Thanks Spaniard, Having not watched a lot of collage ball, I have to rely on the highlight vid's and obviously those are skewed to the information the creator wants to highlight.

After we traded for Lopez I combed the net looking for videos of Robin, and found virtually nothing but low-light reels and bloopers really showing Robin in a negative light. Pleasent surprise when he actually hit the floor for us. he wasn't the bumbling imbicle some people on youtube made him out to be.

---

Highlight tapes are definitely hit or miss. They are very useful as long as you know to take them with a grain of salt. Seeing how the Hornets seasons have gone these past two years, I've watched a lot more college basketball than I otherwise would have. So any time a Michigan(Burke) or Kansas(McLemore) or Georgetown(Poter) etc were on tv, I usually watched. Burke and Porter in particular were just such gamers. They seemed to play their best in the biggest games. Which is why I was so surprised to see Porter struggle in the tourney, and Burke have a couple of down games. If the Pels become a playoff team, I probably won't know a thing about college basketball anymore, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rebelman

draft McLemore and get rid of Gordon

---

Yeah, but do it after this coming season after Gordon proves he can stay (mostly) healthy. If that's possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B504ever

Chad Ford saying that the Pelicans may prefer MCW over Burke.

---

I wouldn't be surprised is he is correct. MCW fits this team better than Burke does IMO. When you have a small shooting guard like Eric Gordon, you are better off having a bigger point guard to switch off on bigger 2s that Gordon would have trouble with. We would get handled easily with a back court of two guys under 6'3"! That's why I would rather take Anthony Bennett or Cody Zeller over Trey Burke if all the other top talent is off the board. I would even rather Shabazz Muhammed than Trey Burke!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrimeTimeWhoDat

I wouldn't be surprised is he is correct. MCW fits this team better than Burke does IMO. When you have a small shooting guard like Eric Gordon, you are better off having a bigger point guard to switch off on bigger 2s that Gordon would have trouble with. We would get handled easily with a back court of two guys under 6'3"! That's why I would rather take Anthony Bennett or Cody Zeller over Trey Burke if all the other top talent is off the board. I would even rather Shabazz Muhammed than Trey Burke!

---

but bazz is an undersized SF...

Is a Wilson Chandler for Eric Gordon fair? If not, what would make it fair?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neitzelbaby12

Is a Wilson Chandler for Eric Gordon fair? If not, what would make it fair?

---

Denver can't afford it. Too much salary coming back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

Denver can't afford it. Too much salary coming back.

---

Even if they don't re-sign Iggy?

Anything but Alex Len. I see nothing in him other than being a 7'1 stiff that can't rebound and is often invisible on the court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yankeesman77

Anything but Alex Len. I see nothing in him other than being a 7'1 stiff that can't rebound and is often invisible on the court.

---

His rebounding numbers are .1% from being the exact same from Noel's.

He'll be one of the most agile big men in the league.

Scouts pretty much all agree that Maryland did a horrible job of getting Len involved.

There are reasons not to like Len, but none of them are what you are listed.

agreed. The foot thing is legitimately scary and even when he got the ball in the low post, he only shot like 43%. There are issues here, but I think this idea that he is a "stiff" comes from the fact that he is white, not from anything real. Like I said, he was a very good gymnist growing up. Extremely agile for his size.

I wish everything falls the way the team wants it to fall. Hopefully they can get someone they would have gotten if they drafted higher.

It's not the white thing, it how just from watching game tape how he just doesn't impose his will on opposing defenses, his body won't even be equipped to handle the NBA game out of the gate with the injury and being in the ACC, even with a terrible backcourt situation, Len should have been more dominant and I'm sorry he never stood out in any game except for the one against Duke. You can make arguments for wanting him and not wanting him but for a guy that size, there has to be a discernible trait other than his size that stands out and he showed nothing at least to me in when I watched him play. As I said, anything but Len will suffice and do. Pref. a wing or a guard.

All those things you point out are fair, but they don't say stiff IMO.

I guess if you meant stiff as in "he will suck" then yeah.

I took it as you meant stiff, as immobile, not agile, etc.