Stutz 2012 NBA draft

[Zardoz]

He may or may not be drafted, I think it'll be a close thing. He's worked out for a lot of teams. One of those teams may want to lock him up if they need a big back-up center with his skill set. If not he will more than likely get a shot as a free agent or maybe find a spot on a team in Europe that is more to his liking. I'm sure he can make a very nice living playing basketball for a while.

[rialaigh]

I'd go 30-70 he gets drafted, and 70-30 that he eventually plays in the NBA.

Probably the closest post to reality and the best guess on here. I totally agree

[Dave Stalwart]

I'd go 30-70 he gets drafted, and 70-30 that he eventually plays in the NBA.

With a post that rock solid and a good history of spot on posts, I'd say there is a good chance pinstripers gets drafted. If not, he will probably get signed as a free agent or at least have a worthwhile career in Europe.

He appears to be really great in the post.

[Dan]

whether he does or doesn't, we had 3 guys graduate that are trying out for NBA teams this year - last guy we had get a sniff was Paul Miller. Our recruiting efforts are landing us better and better players every year and its only a matter of time when we routinely sign top 100 players and start putting guys in the NBA.

[shock]

whether he does or doesn't, we had 3 guys graduate that are trying out for NBA teams this year - last guy we had get a sniff was Paul Miller. Our recruiting efforts are landing us better and better players every year and its only a matter of time when we routinely sign top 100 players and start putting guys in the NBA.

Couz played summer league for the Bulls, Clev was D-league

[small tyme baller]

If we need a thread just praising EVERYTHING stutz did at our University why dont we start a thread named "Stutz: the greatest center of recent memory" - its a thread on him possibly being drafted. If people don't wanna hear one once of criticism, than don't read message boards. I've seen on this thread many praises and some criticism and I feel that it perfectly fair. I guess I dont understand why some people on here take any criticism and believe that the poster of the criticism is somehow tryin to undermind what Stutz did in his years here or has some sort of agenda against the said wsu player(s) or university

[Dave Stalwart]

Add the Minnesota Timberwolves to the list. Two different articles from their website. Apparently, he went in Monday and got called back for a second look Tuesday.

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/wolves-host-4-prospects-mondays-workout

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news...esdays-workout

[Dave Stalwart]

its the tone of the criticism not the factual basis for the criticism. insulting or complaining criticism is different from constructive level headed criticism. we all know his flaws and im sure most are open to talking about them, but i dont like it when it sounds negative or personal. thats all. theres just no reason for nastiness. i apologize for my part if it came off like i was singling you out. i went back and read what i posted in response to, and honestly, you didn't say anything that bad. ive just been following a lot of threads lately and im tired of the occasional blasting that you sometimes see...not necessarily anything you said. no hard feelings.

[The Mad Hatter]

If we need a thread just praising EVERYTHING stutz did at our University why dont we start a thread named "Stutz: the greatest center of recent memory" - its a thread on him possibly being drafted. If people don't wanna hear one once of criticism, than don't read message boards. I've seen on this thread many praises and some criticism and I feel that it perfectly fair. I guess I dont understand why some people on here take any criticism and believe that the poster of the criticism is somehow tryin to undermind what Stutz did in his years here or has some sort of agenda against the said wsu player(s) or university

Just to be clear, from my end, I don't mind criticism, I just find your previous statements to be unrealistic. You acted as though it is a near impossibility that Garrett might be drafted or play in the NBA. While the limited roster sizes of the NBA would make it perfectly reasonable to argue that being drafted and/or making a roster would be difficult for Garrett, the rarity of skilled 7-footers means that Garrett is hardly facing insurmountable odds. Certainly, there are areas of his game that need improvement at the next level, but A) he has shown the ability to improve his game (see his rebounding and drives to the basket from the perimeter this past season) and B) he has size, strength, and finesse that are hard to come by so teams will have more patience in waiting for the other skills to develop than they would with a guy with more common body-types.

[small tyme baller]

Def. no hard feelings DJ06. Appreciate the last post. I do agree with nastiness being uncalled for because this isnt a valley forum or forum on a national level but between WSU fans and sometimes outsiders. I definitely dont mean to bash stutz by any means because 1. i have followed him since we started recruiting him 2. have met him many times and love who he is and what he stands for and 3. just because i know he bleeds black and gold and put in thousands of hours of work to make the progress he's made since arriving here.

[Dave Stalwart]

I found an article that was kind of encouraging about the old video we saw of Garrett matching up with Henry Sims while working out for the Clippers. From the footage we saw of the workout it kind of looked like Henry had a better day, but a recap of the Portsmouth Invitational said otherwise when they play each other in a game :) Take a look at the first two paragraphs.

"Stutz, the lone true seven-footer in the field, was having his way in the post with Georgetown's Henry Sims and Norfolk State's Kyle O'Quinn, two of the best big men in this year's field"

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/04/15/portsmouth-day-4/index.html

[small tyme baller]

Valid points Mad Hatter - especially the fact that 7 footers are in such high demad. But I believe Stutz to be too soft against NBA level competition. Plays too close to the ground and does not have the weight to compensate for his lack of rim level play. He tore up some teams this year and really showed he can add to his game and thats why I see him signing as a FA and not being drafted. I think it would take him a few years to be able to compete at the nba level. I do love the fact he is a good FT shooter and has excellent touch with both left and right hands, but his moves are relatively slow compared to the pace of NBA games. The age of the true center is on the steep decline in the NBA when we got guys 6'7'' and above handling the rock, can go in and outside routinely, and then can elevate and finish.

[small tyme baller]

But I feel he will sign with a team, continue to get better, and with the right fit and team ... he could def see some playing time in future.

[Dave Stalwart]

Today from twitter:
"Another good workout today. On my way back to New York. 1 more workout before the draft. Exciting times"

Not too clear on what team it is...Knicks, Nets, or may be a second look with Boston. Who knows.

[Good News]

I've had a couple thoughts on draft prospects for a while that I'll throw on here in lieu of a new thread. I've been going to Spurs games since well before Pop and Duncan started the run, and have been fortunate to sit very close and get a nice perspective. My thoughts on our 3 guys working out:

Stutz - I have two main problems seeing him in the league. First, he never really had an outstanding game on the occasions where he was playing against guys with NBA size and/or ability (Alabama, Creighton x 2, UAB, VCU, UNLV). Second, the league gets quicker and faster every year, and Garrett's acceleration just isn't there. That means a significant defensive matchup problem against at least half the league. HOWEVER - when I compare him to Tiago Splitter, he isn't that much slower, can step out and be a threat from 3, and he sure as shinola isn't going to shoot FTs so poorly that the other team fouls him a gazillion times in a row to try and come from behind (like OKC did in the playoffs). Throw in a 24-karat gold attitude that meshes with a high-character, chemistry-focused squad like the Spurs and... maybe just maybe. But I doubt it.

Murry - the least suited for the NBA in my opinion. Not enough handle and not enough range. But the silver lining is that he has the physical profile to put in a couple of years of hard work at extending range and running some point and taking another crack.

Ragland - maybe I've missed it being discussed somewhere, but I really believe that Joe has the best shot long-term. Iron-clad handle, fireplug body with genuine strength, and a great outside shot. With the exception of an inch or so in height, I honestly believe there's very little difference between him and a 1996 Derek Fisher - similar college stats, with the exception of Joe being a better shooter.