Doug McDermott is growing on me

Doug McDermott is growing on me

Watching the NBA draft with 25 guys in my basement is always a thrill. Hoping, waiting, watching to see who the Bulls will take. When Doug McDermott was drafted at number 11 several people thought we dodged a bullet. Then we all immediately started looking at twitter for the trade which showed up a minute later.

I've held an NBA draft party since the 2007 NBA draft, and I have to say, more or less, Bulls fans don't ever seem to be too happy with the draft. I was one of the few people excited for Joakim Noah over Spencer Hawes. Everyone hated Taj Gibson so much his nick name was Taj "not Blair" Gibson for about half a season.

Ironically, James Johnson and Marquis Teague were two of the more well received picks, while Nikola Mirotic was somewhat disappointing in that we could have had the Marshon Brooks who was still on the board. I can't say there was a whole lot of excitement over Jimmy "who?" Butler, and there was a mutiny over Tony Snell (okay, that one I think we nailed).

So when I look back at all these draft day thoughts I'm left with the reminder that we don't know jack. I'm quite certain that if the average Bulls fans conducted the draft every year, we'd do far worse than the actual team. It wouldn't even be close. So when I see the Bulls getting McDermott to cries of he's the next Adam Morrison, I'll take a deep breath.

Yeah, I wanted to keep both picks and I would have been pretty psyched with Gary Harris and Rodney Hood or even the picks that actually went where the Bulls drafted as we could have stashed Nurkic and kept Harris. However, the Bulls got one of the best scorers in the history of college basketball.

A guy who shot 48.6%, 49%, and 44.9% from the three point line over the past three seasons while shooting 66.3%, 57.3%, and 56.7% from the field overall. He gets shots in the post, he gets shots from beyond the arc, he gets shots on every play type imaginable. The defense knows he's coming, and they still can't stop him.

A guy who clearly fills a need for us as someone who can make shots. His college stats dominate Adam Morrison, and he measured taller and with five inches of extra vertical, so he's more than a bit more athletic. He was also a proven shooter whereas Ammo only shot well from the three point line for one of his three years in college.

DraftExpress did a nice video breakdown of McDermott against NBA caliber length/athleticism highlighting his games against guys with similar size/athleticism to what he'll see in the NBA. They call all his makes good moments and his misses bad, but I felt pretty encouraged watching the video.

Overall, McDermott still scored efficiently and with volume against legit NBA size, and even a lot of the "bad" moments were times he was able to get a pretty clean look at, but just missed.

Here is their normal scouting report:

So while we're all thinking of the bad comparison's, here's an interesting one that no one else has made. How about Kevin Love? Prior to the draft, many hated on Love due to lack of athleticism and height. He was crafty and skilled, but how would that translate to the NBA without the hops or size?

McDermott isn't Love, and he's more of a tweener, but he faces similar questions, and I bring up Kevin Love not to say that they'll play the same way, but to note that there are plenty of players who've faced similar questions and answered them pretty damn well.

McDermott isn't the sexy pick with huge perceived upside due to both age and athleticism. However, he should step in immediately and fill a valuable need for Chicago. His defense is certainly a concern, but Thibodeau managed to put together an elite defense for four years with Carlos Boozer anchoring one of the core defensive positions.

For the Bulls to be unable to hide McDermott, he'll have to be considerably WORSE than Carlos Boozer on defense. I think Thibs will find a way to make it work. Doug will step on the court for the Bulls and immediately be the best shooter on the team which is something Chicago has needed desperately since Kyle Korver left.

I wasn't psyched about McDermott prior to the draft. When measuring upside by age and athleticism, there are a bunch of guys with more of it than Douggie McBuckets, but McDermott's floor seems pretty high to me, and quite honestly? His upside might be a whole lot more than people suspect too.

In the end, we'll simply have to wait and see. It's hard to get too moved one way or the other by a draft pick outside the top 10, but I'm going to give Doug a chance and hope his skills can translate to the next level.

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • He fills a gaping hole on this Bulls team.
    He was the only real threat Creighton had, and still poured in 25+ ppg.
    He moves without the ball (and keeps moving without the ball).
    And Thibs has already seen him up close and personal.

    There are a lot of concerns, but a lot to like too.

  • I have mixed feelings about this draft. The two guys I wanted most out of this draft were Gary Harris and Nurkic. I've wanted those two guys for over a month. To see them traded for McDermott hurt, but I have to say that I have the same feeling as Doug. He has been growing on me for the last couple of days. A week ago, I didn't want him and didn't think to highly of him. I thought he could be a good shooter, not much else. But the more I read about him and actually looked into what he really did on the court, I don't see why he couldn't be an unstoppable scoring machine. His offensive game is like mixing Dirk, Melo, and Korver in one. By that I mean he scores easily and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I'm very optimistic about this guy.
    I absolutely love, love, love the Bairstow pick!!! The two players I really wanted in the second round were Bairstow and Deonte Burton (couldn't believe he didn't even get picked). Bairstow is a beast and I think can make a real contribution from day one. I saw a New Mexico game this year and the announcer called him the best big man in the country. Don't know if I would go that far, but the guy was way overlooked. I think he could make a Nick Collison type of impact for the Bulls.

  • In reply to PaBullfan:

    Again, I ask about Harris, name another 6'2" shooting guard who made it in the NBA. The best that you could hope for is a Ben Gordon who attempts to play D, because he is too small to actually guard the position anyway.

    The easiest way to talk yourself into the pick is that, you prefer to take your chances on the 6'6" guy who shoots over 45% from 3 rather than the 6'2" guy who shoots 35% from 3.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    As obsessed as I was with trading Noah, you have taken it to another level with this crusade to redefine height measurement. People don't play basketball in their socks. Most shoes measured add an inch to an inch and a half. Yes, Gary Harris two inches added to his height with shoes is b.s. But take 6'2.5 and add an inch, an inch and a quarter and he's closer to 6'4 then he is 6'2. Seriously this specious argument/obsession is getting old. Stop. Please.

  • I have been a long time reader of this blog, and never really posted, but this is the first time I've really felt the need to post. This is a GREAT pick. Honestly, the only reason people keep trying to compare him to Morrison is because they are both white, but their games are very different. This guy can just flat out SHOOT the ball. And for those that think he is just a spot up shooter, they haven't watched Dougie at all. Yes, he probably is the best spot up shooter in the country, but you don't score nearly 30 pts/game in the big east waiting for others to set you up. McDermott scored from ALL areas on the court while being double and triple teamed. He is a little unathletic, so some of those shots won't work in the NBA, but at the same time, on a team with Rose and hopefully Melo, he will only be able to have one guy on him, and that makes him the perfect compliment to those two. I like Gary Harris, but he isn't a third option type of guy. He has the potential to be a first or second option, but that is what it is...potential. He needs the ball in his hands to make an impact. And on a team with Rose (and again hopefully Melo) that isn't what is needed. McDermott is the perfect fit for this team.

  • I like the pick and saving a bit of cap room to move up. Too many people are saying he is not that athletic but that does not jibe with the information at the NBA combine. And he provides a skillset the Bulls need badly, shooting and offensive production. Look at the percentages he shot and realize that when teams played Creighton, they knew he was the only real offensive threat and he still thrived offensively against very athletic defenders.

    Is he a future hall of famer? I don't think so. But he strongly fills a need that the Bulls have and I think he will be able to be an offensive threat for the Bulls with his quick release and shooting ability. Oh and all those folks who keep saying Thibs won't play him or that Thibs won't want him, Thibs was quoted as saying "If you view him as strictly a shooter, you're not casting the proper light on him" because "He's a lot more than that. We think he's a complete player. We think he's capable of playing good defense." Thibs had a birds-eye view of him last summer with USA basketball. That seems to be a ringing endorsement by the coach.

    So let's give this a chance. The only thing that was bad was having to take the contract of Randolph. But clearly that was a deal breaker for Denver to get the trade exception. And the Bulls can still trade Randolph to a place that wants an expiring. Now on to the free agent process to see what happens and then to see how DRose plays with USA basketball this summer.

  • The USA thing was big too. I heard the other day that McDermott and Smart were the only two college players to be in those USA practices and that McDermott more than held his own. That's against top NBA talent. The only thing I'm disappointed with in this draft is that they didn't get a SG. I still think that could be a need. I hope they fill that some other way.

  • Worth noting that we took back Anthony Randolph in the trade which will use up far more cap room than we saved by moving up.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Not if it makes Dunleavy expendable

  • At the very least, if all he ever does is take away Tony Snell's minutes, it would be a step in the right direction. As a 7th or 8th guy in the rotation, I think he'll be just fine.

    This may be the rare instance that Thibs' reluctance to rely on rooks actually benefits the rookie in question.

    If McDermott is expected/required to start or be 6th man right off the bat, I think he may struggle a bit.

    I think I saw somewhere that Anthony Randolph's expiring can only be offloaded individually, and not as part of a package deal. Anyone know if that has any legitimacy, and if so, how it may impact a S&T for Melo or straight trade for Love?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Salvamini:

    I've never heard of that about Randolph not being able to packaged. I actually read that part of why Randolph might have been involved is to package him to NYK.

  • In reply to Salvamini:

    He can go as long as his salary is not being aggregated with that of another player, that is, they are not combining his salary with that of another player in order to match salaries. So for example, let's assume the Bulls amnesty Boozer, renounce all our own FA's, forget about Mirotic this year (otherwise his cap hold still applies), and waive Amundson (non-guar, gets more cap room but leaves the roster at 12 to avoid the incomplete roster charge). to get to the max amount of cap room (also assume McDermott signs for 100% of his slot and Cameron Bairstow signs for the rookie min). The Bulls would be $8.558MM under the cap. In this scenario the Bulls can pay Melo $17,900,000 as long as they don't use Randolph's salary in a S&T to make the salaries match, they can still trade Randolph to the NYK as part of the S&T in what is called a non-simultaneous trade. That specific amount would allow the Bulls to get Melo in a S&T without giving up Taj and still being able to include Anthony Randolphy in a non-simultaneous trade. That's how I understand it anyway.

  • In reply to nolebron:

    Thanks for taking the time to clarify. That makes sense; as far as NBA legalese ever does!

  • The Bulls needed to get an immediate contributor. Their championship window, if it is even open at this point, will start closing shortly as Noah and Gibson waltz into their 30s. This is true even if they somehow get Melo. The window gets pushed out if they somehow get Love, given that he is younger. All things considered, I think they needed to go with someone who could contribute right away. It is a double bonus that he provides the very thing that the team most lacks. The Spurs have shown that having multiple three-point threats on the floor at any one time is critical to beating the Heat. At most, the Bulls have always had only one out there, so this is an important step in the right direction.

  • Doug just likes McD because his name is Doug. :-)

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Changing my name to Dougie McThonus if McDermott becomes the next Dirk and wins finals MVP.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    I heard that Denver wanted to keep him so that they could start an ad campaign around McBuckets and McNuggets.

  • Still too early to give Tony Snell the death puns intended.

    He's got this season to show and prove.

  • In reply to JPesos1230:

    What pun did you disclaim?

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    chill out, dude

  • I have concerns with the McDermott / Melo or the McDermott / Mirotic fit. Any thoughts Doug?

  • In reply to JayJohnstone:

    I'm not Doug, but I'll take a shot. He will be a great fit with Mirotic. Not so much with Melo, but how can teams defend with Rose, Melo, and McDermott all on the floor?

    McDermott shot almost 50% on 3-pointers his previous 2 years. Last year he dropped off - to about 45%! Of course, the NBA 3-pointer is a bit deeper. On the other hand, McDermott was double- and even triple-teamed in college. That would be impossible with Rose and Melo on the floor. Future All-star.

    Bulls still need the SG, however.

  • In reply to rustyw:

    If you have Mirotic/McDermott/Melo you've got the forward rotation sewn up - you're free to trade Gibson for a SG.

  • In reply to JayJohnstone:

    I agree, it's a concern. On the surface, it's hard to see McDermott fitting well with either guy. However, we'll have to hope that it's a problem we face soon with Melo.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Assuming that he is a small forward, that would make him a better fit with Mirotic and Taj than with Melo. My hope is that he can play both SF and SG to give us the most flexibility.

  • In reply to JayJohnstone:

    I think it's an excellent fit. McDermott is a 3, Melo plays both and Mirotic is a 4. You have the 96 minutes at forward locked down with that group.

    Offensively it's off the charts. Melo is, and McDermott and Mirotic should be, 40+% shooters from three. If Rose comes back with his athleticism it's going to be a very difficult to defend for teams, if you pack the paint to stop Rose the forwards are going to rain threes on your head all day.

    Defensively it wont be great, but the Bulls played lots of Dunleavy/Boozer this year while maintaining the second best defense in the league. I think they'll cope.

    Rebounding could be an issue - Melo is a good rebounder for a 3 but only average at best for a 4, Mirotic looks below average for a 4, and McDermott looks probably average for a 3 in the NBA. Lots of responsibility on Noah there.

  • Hey cap space honks, here are the numbers:

    Bulls gave up

    #16 Pick - $1,468,900 cap hold
    #19 Pick - $1,266,000 cap hold
    Total $2,734,900

    Bulls get

    #11 Pick - $1,898,300 cap hold
    Anthony Randolph $1,825,359 guaranteed for 2014-15 (Expiring)
    Total $3,723,659

    Bulls actually lost $988,759 in cap room by making this deal. The reason they traded for McDermott was because he was their guy, not for cap savings. Which is fine, his floor is Korver, his ceiling is Reggie Miller. That's good enough for me in the crapshoot that is the NBA draft. But once again, there were no cap savings.

    The cap saving move (as some have mentioned) would have been a Euro Stash at 16 and whomever (Hood, Harris) at 19.

  • In reply to nolebron:

    Thank you for the numbers!
    This points to a Melo S&T or Love trade as Bulls primary options. With a Boozer amnesty to create cap space being a distant third option.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Well, I always thought was the only real way to do it all along. That and Reiny's devout aversion to amnesty in principle.

  • In reply to nolebron:

    I always thought it was ridiculous when people said we were trading for cap savings. The cap hits on those picks were so small anyway.

    If we didn't take two rookies it wasn't to save cap room, it was because we didn't want that many young guys on the team. Even without Randolph the savings would have been 329k or so if I remember correctly.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Yeah thats right, it was $836,600 less an incomplete roster charge for falling below 12 players.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Totally agree, it didn't add up.

  • In reply to nolebron:

    But it makes Mike Dunleavy expendable, and I wouldn't count on Randolph being on the roster this year either

  • How can thinking Bulls fans be down on this pick? He was the best scorer in all of college BB last season, on high volume shooting. Gasaway on ESPN called him the best player in college last year.

    Others, of course, do not agree. One analyst gave the Bulls only a C+ on their draft, and only 3 teams were just slightly worse! If correct, that would mean that 26 teams drafted better than the Bulls! Yet they got the consensis college player of the year! Go figure!

    OK, guys, which would you rather have, a 26/12 Love at $17 million per, or a 26/7 McDermott at $3 million per? Plus he averaged 46% on 3-pointers over 3 years, much better than Love.
    I think he may be the steal of the draft.

    Also, they got their backup C, who was a 20/7 player last year, and the kid is still learning.

    I would have liked to grab Saric, but with Taj and Noah aging, they needed to shoot for now, and the FO did.

    Of course, they are not done yet. July will be interesting.

  • In reply to rustyw:

    Yes, Bulls now have TWO College Players of the Year on their roster.
    Jimmer Fredette and Doug McDermott.

    The question with McDermott is, does his game translate to the NBA, particularly during playoffs.

  • In reply to rustyw:

    Scorers, especially unathletic ones, typically don't translate to the NBA which is why people can be down. That really is what it comes down to IMO.

    If McDermott's scoring can translate (even if he sucks ass defensively) then it's a great pick. Let's see if that happens.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Scorers don't always translate, but shooters often do, especially when they have the size to play in the league. If Fredette were 6'6" instead of a Gary Harris like 6'2" midget he might have made an impact in the league. The difference between college size and NBA size is huge, even if it is only measured in inches.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Gary Harris is not 6'2!! Players play in shoes. He's 6'3.5 minimum and probably closer to 6'3.75 which is nearly 6'4. Get real.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Plus his wingspan is nearly 6'7. He's tall enough to play SG. Especially with his not exceptional but OUTSTANDING athleticism unlike your so-so athleticism new hero Dougie McSieve.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Just because I don't like Harris doesn't make McDermott my anything.

    Really, if your skin is too thin to tolerate anyone disagreeing with your draft opinions(by the way a person's height is not subject to opinion) maybe you shouldn't be on public forums. Maybe you'd be better served on MSNBC where everyone parrots the same talking points all day every day.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    In shoes, I'm 6 ft, but you know what for some asinine reason I only get to list my height as 5'10 on official documents. You now my real actual height. Get Real may be the single most moronic thing that you have ever said, and that is saying a lot. Gary Harris is exactly 6'2.5" unless they mismeasured at the Chicago camp or lied to us, that is a fact and his actual height. To argue differently is childish ignorance.

    No matter how tall you want to make him out to be, he is absolutely undersized for an NBA 2 guard(which is one of the main reasons that he fell to 19), and he shoots 3's at too short of a rate for an NBA 2 guard(35%). I'm sure that you are 6'6" when you prance around your apartment wearing your stripper shoes. Get a grip on what reality is

  • In reply to rustyw:

    I am down on it because they could have had two players who could have contributed and two assets versus just the one.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    I kind of agree with you, although I didn't care much for who was left on the board after Payne went to Atlanta at 15. Nurkic might be my kind of player once I laid eyes on him, but he is probably a poor mans Pekovic.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    James Young, Gary(nearly 6'4 with 6'7 wingspan with outstanding athleticism which accentuates his size/height even more) Harris, and Rodney Hood, and there was nobody left on the board!? This sounds like Jimmy Butler all over again rationalizing how great the player we have is simply because we are stuck with them. I'd take any of these guys(hood, Harris, Young) over Dougie McSeive any day(and my bet is you would have said the same thing had we drafted them and not the Douger).

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    I'd have been happy with Hood and Young although both are reputed to be bad defenders. Defense is about attitude and both are reputed to have problematic attitudes especially towards defense. McDermott is reputed to have a great attitude and work ethic, the 2 things which correlate with success in life much more than pure talent(athleticism in NBA terms).

    Like Doug, I'm not in love with this pick, But 55% on over 2000 attempts and 46% from 3 allows me to talk myself into it, at least until we actually get to see him play.

  • In reply to rustyw:

    I live in Omaha. My father in law has courtside season tickets to Creighton, and never attends games. I've watched Doug play for 4 years (from 20 feet away) and for three years thought "there's no way this translates to NBA success" - guy seemed like a white Corliss Williamson against WORSE competition.

    Come his senior year, he started shooting more threes and from much deeper. I think this was a response to slightly more athletic competition in the Big Priest compared to the Middle American Bible Belt Valley of the Rockies and Appalachian Mountains Conference. But in reality, dude knew he had to highlight his shooting chops for NBA scouts.

    He was a projected 2nd rounder last year, and now he goes 11th? He has EVERYONE fooled. So much of his game was posting up Joe Schmos for 3 years. Let's get this straight - he's a good shooter. He is not as good a shooter as Kyle Korver. Don't disillusion yourself.

    In March I bet 3 Creighton homers $50 each that Doug wouldn't have as good a career as Korver. This argument led to finding Korver's best year PPG wise (14.4), to which they said "HE'LL DO THAT IN HIS ROOKIE SEASON!" - I quickly made the bet, and for the following months continued to ask if they'd like to up it to $100 each. (I think 15-20 dudes have done this in the last decade - only one last year: MCW).

    Best case scenario - Doug's a stud and I owe $150. Most likely? I make some cash.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Didn't Korver go to Creighton also, what did his stats look like in college. I just looked them up, only 14 ppg on 47% from the field and 45% from 3 against what I would surmise lesser competition back then(99-03). Who knows but thanks for the first hand account, I am an eyeball test kind of guy. I will say that from the few clips that I have seen he looks pretty unathletic, but he does look like he can stroke it from anywhere.

    Maybe/Hopefully we can Nickname him Clarence Carter(Strokin, youtube it)

  • As I said at the party last night, I love this pick. He is exactly what we need, he fills a great need we had. He can score in so many ways, and he made himself into a good player. He doesn't rely on athleticism to score. Also that second round pick Of Bairstow could stick on this team.

  • Question for y'all. Sam Smith wrote the following:

    "Randolph could prove useful. Though even if the Bulls had to release him for cap space, they would be allowed to stretch out the cap room over three seasons. With giving up two picks for one and the possibility of stretching out payments, if necessary, it’s close to the same for the Bulls regarding salary cap space in free agency."

    Am I right that this is completely false as the Bulls already did this with Hamilton's contract?

  • In reply to Hoover:

    They already did it with Hamilton's contract, but under the new CBA anyway waived before Sept 1 is stretched automatically, so if the Bulls waive Randolph, they'd have to pay his salary over three seasons and have a cap hit of around 600k for his contract plus gain a cap hold of 500k for an empty roster spot.

    It's effectively 270k worse than if they kept their picks and 600k or so worse than if they hadn't had to take Randolph.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Depends on when Randolph is waived, if McDermott is signed and then Randolph is waived via stretch, Bulls would still be at 12 and thus no roster charge. That being said, it would be dumb to waive him, especially if we strike out on the Melo front.

  • In reply to nolebron:

    Actually, you're right, I was looking at the wrong spreadsheet.

  • In reply to Hoover:

    you can use the stretch provision on as many times as you want, but they can only spread randolph for 3 years, so you get $608,453 as a cap charge this year. It would be better to just use a 2nd rounder to offload him to a team with cap room or a trade exception or get back a similar non-guaranteed deal.

  • I think cap space still played a role even though he clearly is the Bulls' guy. And I think he fits a desperate need that the Bulls have in terms of offensive production. But in terms of pure cap space the #11 position versus having to take positions #16 and #19 is a savings. Having to take Randolph as well makes it not be a savings but that is only if they cannot trade Randolph and regardless he comes off the books in a year as opposed to three years for two rookies at #16 and #19. Still I agree, the decision was not solely about cap space but to get a guy the Bulls really liked and thought could fill a specific need.

  • Hard to imagine they can dump Randolph for cap room. I will be curious to see if they keep him.

    If they don't land Melo, I think Randolph would be a nice bench player to have.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    I live in the NY media market. I remember a couple years ago when Randolph was on the Knicks there was an article written about how the Knick organization was really high on his potential. Now, one must recognize that any player on the Knicks will get an article written about him stating that he is a potential HOFer, so everything should be taken with a ton of salt. However, it does seem like he has great athleticism. Could Thibs turn him into a serviceable back-up big man? He has a slender body type but in this era that is not as critical. Obviously, since the Nuggets were the ones trying to get rid of him, as opposed to the Bulls wanting him, I doubt he fits into the Bulls plans, but the Bulls can always use good athletes.

  • Your right, the Bulls did do that with Hamilton's contract. However, unlike the "amnesty clause", you are not limited to only one "stretch provision".

  • In reply to mcbecker5:

    Hey thanks. I had thought that was a one time thing too. The CBA Faq explains it well, for the curious. here:

  • My bad, I accidentally linked the wrong scouting report on the first edit. I included the correct one as well as the wrong one now.

  • Check out this extensive analysis of McDermott's game, good and bad. Excellent piece.

    Sports Illustrated's Luke Winn on the shooters in this draft. "McDermott scored almost two points per possession on unguarded catch-and-shoot jumpers. If he's open, that sucker is going in." (!!)

    His actual PPP was 1.95 on uncontested shots. Do we realize that no one in NBA history ever came close to that? Overall, he shot 57% from 2-point range last season. I actually think he can improve on that by staying out of the paint more. He's smart enough to figure that out as he adapts to the bigger, faster defenders of the NBA. His development should be fascinating.

    BTW, he seriously reducued his TOs last season. He's still learning.

  • I predict that in a few years, most of the posters here who love the pick will claim they hated it all along, And the rest will blame Thibs for failing too use him and Jimmer.

  • In reply to sfpaper:

    It is usually the other way around, see Noah, Taj and Asik, 3 of my favorite guys from the second that I laid eyes on them.

  • Mcbuckets is korver 2.0.

    Pros: great shooter, good size for a small forward.

    Cons: no athleticism, speed, agility which means he will struggle creating his own shot. Defenders like lebron, k. Lenard, etc will shut him down.

    We still need melo or love if we want to compete for a title.

  • I think McBuckets is gonna really benefit from playing with star players. I really think he's going to be our six man and because of him our bench is going to outscore a lot of teams. The comparisons to Adam Morrison and even Korver are unfair. This guy is in a another league from them and has way more upside. I'm very happy with the Bulls pick and the only pick in the draft that we could have realistically obtained that better suit our needs is Nik Stauskas but we got the next best thing and maybe even the best thing, only time will tell. Honestly i think we need another athletic wing at the 2 but maybe that can be addressed in free agency depending on whats available.

  • I may not like Gar/Pax as my team's execs, but at least they for once did something as in traded up. Only problem is, we picked a white dude. I'm kidding, please.

    McBuckets was not one of my top picks. If McDermott was a couple of inches taller he could be killer ala Kevin Love as Doug mentioned - but he's not. He's two inches shorter as in 6'7.25 or .5. And his wingspan is only 6'9.25. Freakish strength and athleticism to make up for height disparity? Don't think so. So unless he grows a couple of inches which at 22 I highly doubt, Doug McDermott is a small forward.

    When you look at Creighton's offense(coached by his dad) it so much runs to serve his optimal usage that I don't know how realistic of a model that is going forward to the NBA. While Doug has a terrific basketball I.Q. and a great feel for the game, I just don't know if he's going to be able to perpetually shuffle through screens and exit fronts to the basket for easy lay ins in the NBA. Other then that, mid range step backs ala Dirk and long range bombs is pretty much how he scored his points. That and some nice baseline contortions for spins and reverse layups which I don't see him executing a whole lot against NBA wing defenders.

    Due to the fact that he's an outstanding shooter, very crafty and extremely relentless, I could see him scoring in the NBA, but beyond the Wally Szcerbiac comparison I don't know. The fact that he seems to be about as quality a competitor and individual as you will find might make the difference on him being a good player and somebody who will be fun to watch. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Your comments in the last paragraph usually count for more than everything else combined. When you put those things together with all world athleticism then you have a Jordan, Kobe or Lebron.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Gee thanks for your editorial sensibilities. The same poster armed with the sensibilities to anally retentively bitch about guys heights being invalid when measured in shoes(for months!) which means the whole frickin' NBA and draft system is wrong and you're right. Not to mention pestering Kevin over such an inane point of contention somewhat rudely I might add.

    I will be sure to guide my writing actions based on your critiques oh savant of the blog world. And by the way, the McDermott trade and Gar/Pax's hard on(and now yours apparently) for this kid is so laughibly predictable as in so f-ing funny I forgot to laugh. Denver fleeced them in this deal by the way. I'll take Gary Harris and Nurkic(who cost LESS by the way for the Carmelo payroll trimming )any day of the week over McSeive. You're so geeked up over this thing that you let some honest critiques of your new hero outweigh my kindly gestured positive spin hoping for the best for a good kid. You really maturity wise what are we talking fifth grade, sixth tops? "Ohhh, Doug, Oh Doug, wherefore art thou Doug?"

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Wally scored 18.7 points a game on 51% shooting - 45% from three - in his third year and was an all star. If McDermott can do that (without the injuries that derailed Wally after that) I'd take that any day. That's a steal at 11.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    I know what "Wally's" number were thanks sports atlas. I said "I could see" meaning it's possible, but I don't know meaning I would have much rather drafted James Young, Gary Harris, or Rodney Hood as would most of you who are telling yourselves trying to rationalize how great this pick is because you are stuck with it just the way homers rationalize how great our players are for the same reason.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    The point was people are making the comparison like it's a bad thing ... I'd be happy with getting Wally World from the pick.

    The Bulls desperately need shooting and they got the best shooter in the draft. I would have kept the two picks and tried to bring in two shooters rather than trade up - I said as much both before and after the pick, so I'm not rationalizing anything. I just don't think trading up was a terrible move - they at least went in the right general direction with the pick, and I understand the logic of if you're going to get a shooter, get the best one you can. Time will tell whether it was the right one.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    Its funny how some Bull's fans are never satisfied. Never make any moves and get blasted, but make a bold move for a guy they felt was the one they wanted and still get blasted.

    I for one want to give this pick a chance before holding any judgement. Sure, I think netting both Harris and Nurkic may be a better move than trading up for McBuckets, but lets give this kid a chance before we throw him under the bus. The Bulls needed scoring and they traded up for one of the top scorers (even most efficient) in NCAA history. Only time will tell whether this was a good pick. With or without Melo, Doug has a good chance at being a solid contributor for the Bulls.

  • The only way that he is a tweener is if you think he is a SG or a small forward. I don't see how anybody thinks that he can ever play a single minute at power forward in the NBA. The guy is 6'6" on a good day(just like Aaron Gordon), who despite being the Blake Griffin of athletes in this draft isn't going to make it as a power forward in the NBA either. At least McD can shoot as well as any SG or SF in the league, whereas Gordon can't shoot for shit.

    I watched quite a bit of sports center and NBA TV last night, and it was hard to find anybody with anything negative to say about McD. Everybody more or less loved the pick for the Bulls. One of the ex coaches even said that Sacto should have taken him over Stauskis as he is by far the best shooter in the draft. Almost everybody also said that he is much more than just a shooter, he is a scorer with all the moves. So in that sense he sounds like a combo of Korver and TJ Warren.

    Like you Doug, this is the guy that I dreaded the Bulls taking, lets face it because he is white and the leading scorer in college basketball and not named Larry Bird, but I was talking myself into liking him even before the draft. If we were going to trade 2 for 1, I guess it made sense to do it for the best pure shooter in the draft.

    However, it seems to me if we are going to try and execute any sign and trade deals that it would have been better to have had 2 draft picks/players than only one. This makes me think that the Bulls are going to try the cap space method to get Melo, and I don't think that we have enough to get it done. Is Boozer and our 2015 first and the Sacto pick enough, with a gun to Phil's head it should be.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    I read he measured almost 6'8" at the combine (6.75). That's with shoes, as every player is measured, plays with, & is most often listed as.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    No, measuring players in shoes, as is the way they would be playing the actual game, is all wrong as voiced repetitively for months by the height challenged advocate Don Quixote aka BIgWay.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    There is a reason that player height is measured both in socks and in shoes at the combine. Schools consistently list their players at several inches higher than reality. Then the agents make this same insipid case that they play in shoes.
    But players were showing up at the combine with lifts that clearly are not for playing basketball. Look at the measurements. Some guys are one inch taller in their shoes. Others measured 2 1/2 inches taller in their clown shoes.
    By the way, this year Doug McDermott measured 6'6 1/2 inches.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Aaron Gordon is nearly 6'9 in shoes you twit! "Oh, nobody had a bad thing to say about our young ward, Master Doug(las)!! That's it, I'm sending you a McDouger blow up doll so you two can "be alone."

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Im 6'6" in shoes and can shoot, can I be the Bulls starting SG? :-)

  • I hope the Bulls made the right move on draft more excuses from anyone for the 2014/15 season

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    Agreed. Gary Harris and Nurkic in three years vs Doug McDermott?? Or James Young, Rodney Hood, your choice. I'm sure Wally, er Doug, will be an All-Star while these athletically gifted SG's will be well in his rear view mirror.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    The Bulls are built to win now and needed shooting and someone to spread the floor. Just because someone is more athletically gifted doesn't mean they will be a better player or a better fit. The pick may or may not work but you have no more of a clue than anyone else.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    If being athletically gifted were the single most important factor then we wouldn't have had the 16th pick in this draft, we would have multiple time allstar Tyrus Thomas(maybe MVP), more athletically gifted that all 3 of those guys combined. Didn't we once trade a 20 & 10 machine at power forward for the much more athletically gifted Tyson Chandler, how did that work out for us(not Dallas).

  • It's funny that Gar/Pax were so hot for the Dougster that they threw away their choice of the more boringly, conventional as in athletically gifted(like successes in the NBA generally are) Gary 6'4 Harris, Rodney Hood, or James Young plus another good big prospect in Nurkic while they would have had more payroll room for Melo! Gar/Pax, Denver, like I do, thinks you really are mahhr-velousss!! Really, you are.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    In the real world Harris is 6'2.5". If I was going to take a guy at that height it would have been Payton. Hood, Young and Nurkic at least have the proper size to play their positions in the NBA and having 2 of those 3 might have been the better move. However, McBucketts might be the one guy who has one single elite level NBA skill, 3 point shooting and all those other guys might not have any. Who knows, but we will get to find out soon.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    I'm not sure he is even 6'2.5" in real life as I have played with him in pickup games. Only time will tell which is the better move, but I fully believe McBuckets can be a solid offensive role player (maybe even sixth man) over the next four years, which is what the Bulls have desperately lacked (aka an offensive oriented "star").

  • With draft picks it seems you either have to love them or hate them, rarely there's any middle sort of ground. I want a bit of middle ground on this one - it's not the pick I would have chosen, but it's also not one that has me wanting to jump off the ledge either.

    If he turns out to be Korver 2.0 then that is actually pretty damn good for the Bulls - the Bulls with a healthy Rose were really good with Korver on the floor, as Doug has documented in many posts. Looking at the range McDermott took some of his college threes from - way beyond the line - I think he can do that Korver "open as soon as he steps in the gym" role, of glueing one defender way outside the paint at all times.

    His upside is to do more than that - he showed way more versatility than Korver did in college - but lets just wait and see how much of that translates.

    That said, the Bulls had, before the pick, the following players who are NBA rotation level:


    With a plan to target guys who are either 3/4s like Melo, or 4s like Love.

    Pretty clear need for more bodies at 1-3, so was trading up out of two picks to get just one player wise? Especially since there's a decision coming on Butler, and I'm not sure he's going to be worth what he'll want as a 3 and D guy without the 3.

    A lot of how I feel about this pick is tied up in what happens for the rest of the off season, which I know is unfair since the GMs of the league have to make their moves in chronological order whether they like it or not.

  • when steph curry was drafted, many thought he was a tremendous shotmaker, but a bit of a tweener (too small to play the 2 but not a good enough handle to play the point) and would be unable to guard at the pro level. curry has become maybe the best PG in the league, and his shooting and playmaking greatly outweigh any negatives. I think mcdermott has similar special qualities as a scorer. he is such a deadly outside shooter with exceptional balance, good feet and a quick release. He has the ability to put it on the floor, post and create high pct shots in a variety of ways. Some SFs will not be able to handle him. He may never be a great defender or playmaker for others, but he is one of the best scorers i have seen in the college game in the last 10 years. up there a notch below curry and durant in college. i don't expect him to be as good as curry, but i do think he has similar strengths that should not be overlooked and that will translate to the nba game.

  • Hindsight is always 20/20. When Bulls committed to the trade with Denver (which was before 11 was selected), there was no way to know SG Gary Harris would drop to 19, or even 16.

Leave a comment