NBA Draft 2012: Charlotte Bobcats Cannot Afford to Trade No. 2 Pick
Per Alex Kennedy of Hoopsworld:
The Charlotte Bobcats are shopping the second overall pick in the 2012 NBA Draft, according to multiple sources. They have yet to contact Thomas Robinson, who many had penciled in as the number two pick after Anthony Davis. On Thursday afternoon, the Bobcats met with a number of players who are projected in the middle of the first round, such as Tyler Zeller, which indicates that they could be looking to move down.
Zeller is a solid big man, but not someone worth taking in the first round when players such as Kansas forward Thomas Robinson and Kentucky forward Michael Kidd-Gilchrist would address real weaknesses on the Bobcats' roster.
Should Charlotte trade the No. 2 pick?
The Bobcats drafted center Bismack Biyombo in the first round last year, so drafting Zeller makes little sense. The North Carolina star also wouldn't drastically improve a Bobcats team that went 7-59 this season.
Charlotte needs to sell tickets and win more games, and using the No. 2 pick to draft a franchise player is the best way for them to continue that process.
Robinson is an improving forward who is an absolute beast in the paint. His rebounding ability would help a Bobcats team that finished 29th out of 30 teams in rebounding this season. At 6'10," Robinson has the size and athleticism to dominate at the NBA level.
Kidd-Gilchrist can score in a variety of ways, defend multiple positions and is a leader. There aren't many skills he doesn't have. He's also a consistent player, which is what you look for when drafting high in the first round. MKG's scoring would be a massive boost to a Bobcats team that finished last in points scored per game this year.
The Bobcats have plenty of options with the No. 2 pick, and won't have to settle for a player that doesn't have superstar potential. Trading the second pick would be an awful idea and has the potential to set back the rebuilding efforts that Michael Jordan and his team have made thus far.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?