PDA

View Full Version : Dunleavy, The Pacers, and Top Draft Picks



naptownmenace
12-18-2007, 06:16 PM
I've seen a bunch of people that have been hoping that the Pacers bomb this season so that they can get a top draft pick. The thought is that teams develop from the draft and that if the Pacers can get themselves some top lottery picks they'll eventually develop into a contending team.

Well I realized something last night as I was watching DunDun lighting it up against the Knicks. Dunleavy was a number 3 draft pick. The Pacers haven't had a player drafted that high since Rik Smits was taken #2 overall in 1988. What's the significance of that? Well Dunleavy is currently our new leading scorer (17.4 ppg) and has been playing like a player worthy or a #3 draft selection lately and has been the Pacers best player, IMO thus far, this season.

I also thought about Ike Diogu who was drafted 9th overall in the 2005 NBA Draft. Ike was a stud in College, a former Pac-10 MVP who has shown signs of being a great lottery pick for this team. He's only in his third season - which is the season that most players make the the biggest improvement.

Speaking of Pac-10 MVPs, Danny Granger can be considered a lottery quality draft pick although he was drafted higher. Orlando and Toronto, two teams that had lottery picks and expressed interest in Danny decided to pass on him. Lucky for us they all got scared about his surgically repaired knee and he landed in our lap at #17.

One last player to consider is Shawne Williams. Some felt he was drafted too early at #17 or that the Pacers drafted the wrong Williams. You don't hear those arguments that much any more because we've seen his potential in several games this season. If he had stayed in college one more year, barring injury, he could've been a top 10 pick in this year's draft.

This season and the future hinges on the progress of these 4 players. Now compare that to the situation in Minnesota or Memphis. Yes they have a lot of promising players that they've drafted with consecutive lottery picks but it takes a couple of years of losing before they build up the experience necessary to take the team to the next level. Some may point to Portland and say, "See it's working for them!" But when was the last time they went to the playoffs? They've had some tough seasons the last couple of years as well.

Luckily, the Pacers are playing competitive basketball while stringing some wins together at the same time. I think the "lottery" guys they already have are going to work out okay.

aceace
12-18-2007, 07:28 PM
I think we will win at least 48 games this year. The Pacers have improved as a team as each week goes by. We could easily have a much better record. We have absolutely blown some games that we have had control of. I like our roster, plenty of depth, young guys and experience. Its just a matter of time. I believe we take at least the 4th seed this year. Granger, Williams, Ike are going to keep getting better. Duns contract looks like a bargain now. Tinsley is earning his pay and of course Foster has always earned his. Quis is starting to find his place and minutes at the back up PG and slasher extreme. Since the 6 game losing streak we are 10-6. JO looking better each week. Nobody is playing big minutes (>35) I like where we stand.

OnlyPacersLeft
12-18-2007, 08:36 PM
whoa 48? I don't know about that. I'll say 42-45 games...should be good for a home court seed aswell in the first round! This team excites me and i like our chances in a 7 game series with anyone but Boston...

Anthem
12-18-2007, 08:50 PM
I'll be happy if we end the season over .500.

Claptonrocks
12-18-2007, 08:52 PM
My prediction was 30 wins...
Like what Ive seen so far from the team.
rebounding may be a problem as the season wears on unless JO gets more.
I still dont see them as a .500 team but Id love to be wrong!!!!

Evan_The_Dude
12-18-2007, 09:05 PM
My prediction was 30 wins...
Like what Ive seen so far from the team.
rebounding may be a problem as the season wears on unless JO gets more.


It doesn't matter who's grabbing the rebounds as long as the job is getting done.

andreialta
12-18-2007, 09:41 PM
i still think were just a .500 team but who knows. one little good streak can change a whole season!

Rajah Brown
12-18-2007, 10:19 PM
Dunleavy's merits notwithstanding, the fact that he was the #3
pick in the 2002 draft doesn't have much relevance. That was
an extremely weak draft.

They key aspect in next Summer's draft is that there will likely be
several elite prospects at the guard position (Rose, Gordon, the
freshman kid at AZ who's name escapes me and Mayo, who is
a bit overated). I think that's the point of those who want a
tank-job and high Lottery pick.

As good as JT and Duns look together in O'B's system at times,
they aren't a starting backcourt you can win 55-60 games, grab
a #1 or #2 seed and get to the NBA Finals with.

aceace
12-18-2007, 10:35 PM
IMHO: We are playing much better as a team. Players are finding their role now, consider who we have beaten, our road record and that JO wasn't 100% through the first 15 - 18 or so games. 48 is very attainable.

Kstat
12-18-2007, 10:38 PM
Speaking of Pac-10 MVPs, Danny Granger can be considered a lottery quality draft pick although he was drafted higher.

I'll never forget all those legendary in-conference rivalry games between New Mexico and UCLA...

Claptonrocks
12-18-2007, 10:44 PM
It doesn't matter who's grabbing the rebounds as long as the job is getting done.

I agree but JO's job is to get more than 5 or 6 a game I would presume
Helping the team and all.

FrenchConnection
12-18-2007, 11:12 PM
I'll never forget all those legendary in-conference rivalry games between New Mexico and UCLA...

I wasn't going to saything, but since you hinted at it I'll finish the thought....

New Mexico is in the Mountain West, not the Pac 10.

aceace
12-18-2007, 11:16 PM
I agree but JO's job is to get more than 5 or 6 a game I would presume
Helping the team and all.He's actually avg 7.3 and that is in 30mpg thats only 2 1/2 qtrs When he gets around 35 minutes and completely healthy which I believe he has just reached that point his stats will climb.

andreialta
12-18-2007, 11:39 PM
i know for now that teams are not gonna be taking Dunleavy for granted now. him and granger are gonna be the main focus of the defense along with JO and TIns. basically our whole starting 5 is what teams are gonna focus on.

ThA HoyA
12-19-2007, 12:02 AM
As good as JT and Duns look together in O'B's system at times,
they aren't a starting backcourt you can win 55-60 games, grab
a #1 or #2 seed and get to the NBA Finals with.

Maybe not but Tins showed he can run a team that won 61 games and dunleavy is playing very well we dont need a mvp to make noise or have an outstanding season its actually nice to see different guys take turns leading the team its more balanced and therefore the defenses cant zone in on one guy....everyone they are leading the east in scoring!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TheDon
12-19-2007, 12:04 AM
According to Hollinger's Playoff predicting thing that runs simulations of the remainder of teams seasons 5,000 times best case scenario it came up with had us winning 55 worst case scenario was 31 I think it takes the median cause under the projected it has us winning 44.

naptownmenace
12-19-2007, 02:07 PM
The point I was trying to make was that the Pacer have amassed some young talented players who have the potential to become really good players in this league. The 4 players I mentioned haven't hit their prime but we've seen what their potential best could be.

I'm a little surprised that no one commented on how Dunleavy is our leading scorer. It's not like it was expected by a lot of people going into the season.

andreialta
12-19-2007, 02:14 PM
well expected by me!! haha jk

i have a good feeling that he and Danny will be alternating in the leading scorers of the team. or maybe when JO is able to catch up with them it will be a 3 player battle!

Ragnar
12-19-2007, 02:14 PM
We still need an assassin at the 2. I would move Dun to the 3 and bench Danny right now if we had a killer sg. We do that and we are a contender.

McKeyFan
12-19-2007, 02:18 PM
We still need an assassin at the 2. I would move Dun to the 3 and bench Danny right now if we had a killer sg. We do that and we are a contender.

Yes but no.

Benching Danny removes the only thing we have close to decent perimeter defense.

The assassin you are looking for who is also an excellent defender, sounds like a superstar. We couldn't land him.

naptownmenace
12-19-2007, 02:32 PM
Dunleavy's merits notwithstanding, the fact that he was the #3 pick in the 2002 draft doesn't have much relevance. That was an extremely weak draft.

They key aspect in next Summer's draft is that there will likely be several elite prospects at the guard position (Rose, Gordon, the freshman kid at AZ who's name escapes me and Mayo, who is a bit overated). I think that's the point of those who want a tank-job and high Lottery pick.


The problem with that train of thought is that a tank-job doesn't guarantee that you're going to even have the opportunity to draft any of those players. Just ask Memphis or Boston who've had the worse record in the league a couple of times in the past 10 years and haven't got a pick higher than 3. The first 13 picks of the last 7 years has yeilded about an average of 3 All-Star players and beyond the first 3 picks it's a total crap shoot.

The chances of tanking a season for a draft pick works out less often than people think. In fact, it can really back-fire if you get the wrong guy. Stromile Swift and Marcus Fizer immediately comes to mind.