PDA

View Full Version : Westbrook or Augustin



granger33
05-21-2008, 11:19 PM
Been much debate on this forum about it.

If both players are still avaliable who do you want?

BlueNGold
05-21-2008, 11:28 PM
I expect to be in the minority here, but I don't think PG's and leaders are typically invented...they are born.

No doubt Westbrook's ceiling is higher, but I want to see some experience at PG. Unless someone can distinguish what Westbrook would bring versus Quis, I would stick with Augustin...

Hicks
05-21-2008, 11:34 PM
Westbrook is tempting because of his defense, but he seems less likely to be a starter than Augustin down the road because he's not a PG but is the size of one. At least Augustin seems capable of being a respectable, if unspectacular, starting PG down the road.

Will Galen
05-22-2008, 12:15 AM
I voted other because I think either would help the Pacers. Since we need both a big and a point, I think Bird and company will take who they think is best and then try to trade for what they didn't get.

croz24
05-22-2008, 12:42 AM
my god, NEITHER please...this augustin or westbrook talk is becoming very annoying and really pains me as a pacers fan...

Haggard
05-22-2008, 12:54 AM
We should be looking to move up in the draft. Besides, if we should keep the 11th there should be enough decent bigs to get at 11

jcouts
05-22-2008, 12:59 AM
Neither of these players are going to excel at the NBA level. They will both be career backups. The temptation for Bird to draft another 6'7 guy who can play multiple positions (Brandon Rush) will prove too tempting.

Dece
05-22-2008, 01:48 AM
I think the big man options at 11 are better than the guard options, I voted neither.

granger33
05-22-2008, 01:58 AM
I don't think the Pacers will draft a big man though.

I believe there either gonna keep Jermaine, or trade him for another big man.

So we need to draft a PG because obviously Tinsley is gone, and Murray might be gone.

BBALL56HACKER
05-22-2008, 06:09 AM
I would trade for a point (chicago) then draft a big (Love)

Speed
05-22-2008, 07:38 AM
I think Westbrook has the potential to be a Bruce Bowen type at worst, which is sorely needed on any team.

I think Augustin would make a difference now on this team that lacks a starting caliber point guard.

Westbrook has that very very high ceiling and seems to be willing to work as well. You have to be patient with him, but in 5 years from now it could be Westbrook is a potential all defense 2nd teamer and Augustin is a nominal starting point guard.

I understand the opposite side where Augustin could be a very good starting point guard and Westbrook is Freddie Jones annd though I don't think you should reach on potential only at 11 and for this team.

I think you keep the future in mind and say Westbrook could be a key cog in a contending team, potentially. So I picked Westbrook, I teetered on picking other and saying Love.

If its any conselation, I don't think 2 of the 3 will be there and Augustin is probably the pick, but its early in the process.

count55
05-22-2008, 07:51 AM
I would fine with either...I think Augustin is a purer point guard and more likely to be an NBA starter, but I think Westbrook could be a really good pro.

I think both could contribute next year.

DGPR
05-22-2008, 08:00 AM
I voted for Augustin obviously. I think he's going to be better than some people think.

Putnam
05-22-2008, 08:10 AM
Westbrook.


How long has it been since the fastest man on the floor was in a Pacer uniform?

DisplacedKnick
05-22-2008, 09:33 AM
Augustin. Westbrook is more versatile but he isn't a real good SG or a real good PG - he's sort of a morph between the two and typically those aren't as successful in the NBA as players who are a "pure" one or the other.

Augustin is a pure PG.

That said, I think the Pacers should find a way to trade either up to the top 5 or down to about 20. I'm not sold on either of these guys. The top 5 are the monster talents while I think you can get someone at around 20 who'll help you as much as picking at 11.

Naptown_Seth
05-22-2008, 11:12 AM
A repeat of stuff I've already said.
1) This team is not "one PG away". This is a rebuild with plenty of holes to patch.

2) DJ doesn't appear to be much of a step up from Diener to me. Calls his own number too much and he's not a great defender.

3) Westbrook is not a PG solution. That's not why I take him. He's a defensive SG that will be forced to drive more than spot up. You have a lanky SF who likes to spot up so you don't really need your SG to be the same. Let Westbrook be the off-the-dribble threat and the break out on a steal threat. Let Danny be the bomber. Then go fix the PG, PF, C and contract issues that are still on the board.


Unless someone can distinguish what Westbrook would bring versus Quis,
Other than much better hops, quickness, speed, defense and nose for the ball, not much.


BTW, I don't dislike DJ or Quis. And Kofi spent months ticked off that I wasn't lapping up W'brook as a PG solution. But I've seen these guys play enough to know that W'Brook isn't just flukey, he's got insane physical talent and does apply it in a scrappy jack-of-all-trades way. The Pacers can certainly use a bit of that, even if its nowhere near solving all their problems or even a good chunk of them.

Don't expect this pick to be the new star and it shouldn't be a problem. Barring Bease-Rose falling to 11. ;)



How long has it been since the fastest man on the floor was in a Pacer uniform?
Travis Best? Mike Williams? Dudley Bradley? Not sure if that was true on a regular basis in any of those cases even.

himikey
05-22-2008, 11:20 AM
Westbrook reminds me too much of Antonio Daniels and Keyon Dooling. I'm not too high on Augustin either. He'll be a Travis Best-type: too good to be a backup but not quite good enough to start. But the thought of Diener playing 40 mins a night next year while Tins nurses another random injury makes me slightly nauseous.

croz24
05-22-2008, 11:49 AM
That said, I think the Pacers should find a way to trade either up to the top 5 or down to about 20. I'm not sold on either of these guys. The top 5 are the monster talents while I think you can get someone at around 20 who'll help you as much as picking at 11.

pretty much spot on...i'd rather have one of the players available at 20, than reaching for westbrook or augustin. neither of those two will amount to much at the nba level.

Swingman
05-22-2008, 11:59 AM
I put Westbrook and other. If I had to choose between the 2, then I'd go with Westbrook. I think he could compliment Dunleavy well in our starting lineup.

I put other because I'd rather see us trade up or trade down or even take a big rather than either of those guards.

SoupIsGood
05-22-2008, 12:01 PM
I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.

DisplacedKnick
05-22-2008, 12:07 PM
I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.

I still think CDR will be a very effective NBA SG - and I'm gonna stick with that until he proves me wrong.

Kegboy
05-22-2008, 12:21 PM
I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.

Oh, I think we'd take Love easy, but he'd have to fall to us first.

And I've gotten to the point where I just don't believe these mock drafts. We'd trade down into the mid-20s and Rush and CDR would have been taken 15-20.

Jared Jammer
05-22-2008, 12:22 PM
I went with Westbrook. His upside is just too high to pass up. Chad Ford compared him to Rajon Rondo, but Westbrook is bigger, stronger, and a better shooter than Rondo. Westbrook has 20 ppg, 6 apg, 4 rpg potential to go along with some top-tier defense. That's too good to pass up. Of course other teams realize how good Westbrook is, so there's no way he's still there at #11, but we can dream, can't we?



How long has it been since the fastest man on the floor was in a Pacer uniform?

http://hoopedia.nba.com/images/a/a5/Armstrong_330_drives.jpg

LoneGranger33
05-22-2008, 12:41 PM
I hope we just choose the best talent available and then hit the trade market if necessary.

NuffSaid
05-22-2008, 12:44 PM
IMO, who the Pacers draft will depend greatly on three primary factors:

1) who Bird/O'Brien views as the core players. (We'll get to that in a moment);

2) what position they feel is in need of an upgrade; and,

3) whether they feel a desperate need to upgrade said position now or if they believe they can afford to wait a year or 2 for the draftee to develop.

Of course, there is a forth option if you will:

4) picking the best players available @ #11 and trading him to get the more experienced player(s) you want.

Now, let's talk about each of the above factors.

1. Both Bird and coach O'Brien agree that Granger, Dunleavy and JO make up the core players (http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_080222.html). (For Bird's assessment of the core players, see the question from the linked article herein that inquires about the nucleus of the team right above JO's picture; for Jim O'Brien's perspective, listen to his last radio show; link provided below.)

Key reserves: Diener, Graham (recently signed new contract w/the Pacers), Shawn Williams and Jeff Foster

Looking at this list of seven players, the one position that cannot easily be changed by one of the inner-changeable players is PG.

2. In an April 17th interview w/Conrad Brunner (http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/wrapup_obrien_080417.html), as well as coach O'Brien's last radio show of the season (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...show041708.mp3), coach was very specific about the need to "shore up the PG position" with "defensive toughness". The question then becomes how desperate are they to upgrade this position? Which leads us to item #3.

3. The Pacers used five different players at the Point last year: Tinsley, Diener, Flip Murray, Quis and Owens. It's clear that neither Owens nor Murray will be back next year - Owens moreso because he lacks overall skill at the Point, and Murray because he's not a true PG and because the Pacers already have a unique "combo-Guard" in Quis, but in truth he didn't run the Point very well either. That leaves Tinsley and Diener as the Pacers only two viable PGs. Odds are Tinsley won't be back next year (per the radio show link above), but if he does return, it's likely he'll lose his starting role because of his lack of dependability (health wise, but there are obviously other factors that go along with his dependability issues). So, how desperate are the Pacers to upgrade at the Point? I'd say very, but they're not in panic mode just yet. Which leads me to item #4 - picking the best player available and trading him to get a more experienced player (or players). I doubt that will happen, but it remains a plausable option.

Admittedly, the Pacers haven't faired very well when trying to pick up a PG through FA. They had a solid backup in Darrel Armstrong, but let him go due to his age and lack of quickness (though you had to admire the defensive effort he put forth, as well as his seemingly tireless energy; I'd have kept him myself, but I'm not the team's decision maker...). Over the years, they've played "patch-work" at the Point continuously seeking out a viable backup for Tinsley. But in recent years, it's become more and more apparent that despite Tinsley's talents at running the offense, he's not very durable and, thus, can't be relied on for extended play throughout any given season. So, now TPTB are re-thinking their approach to the PG position. Instead of finding "patches" to fill the reserve PG spot in case Tinsley goes down, they want to find a reliable PG for the near future who can defend, score and create shots for himself. And that leds us to where we are now trying to guess who the Pacers might take in the draft.

Among the three leading candidates, D. J. Augustin, Russell Westbrook and Eric Gordon, it is my opinion based on details as outlined above that the Pacers will select Westbrook. NBADraft.net (http://www.nbadraft.net/) describes Westbrook as follows:

"Attacks the basket with a lethal first step and crossover ability … Can handle the rock well and gets into the lane effortlessly … Huge wingspan allows him to play much bigger than his 6-3 height … Solid passer with unselfishness, always looks for the open man … Has an excellent mid-range game … A gym rat, really works hard to improve … Has a great attitude, extremely coachable … Has the potential to be a big-time scorer when given the chance … Really excels defensively and has a chance to develop into a great defender …Must become better at handling ball pressure at the point guard position."

The only negative on this guy seems to be that he gets alittle rattled when pressed hard (either in the half-court or when doubled). In time, this is something that he can overcome. The key selling point, obviously, is his ability to play solid defense which is what Bird and JOB have both stressed as vital from this position. Now, I'd love to get Augustin because this guy he's a bonafied play maker (based on the scouting report and what I've seen of him), but we've got Granger, Graham and to a limited degree Dunleavy and Quis for that. What the Pacers need is a solid, all-around PG who can pass, shot well from the field, has the ability to finish at the rim AND defend well. Westbrook seems to have all those traits. Of course, the debate will continue until draft night. So, let the debates go on...

Mourning
05-22-2008, 01:05 PM
Augustin. Westbrook is more versatile but he isn't a real good SG or a real good PG - he's sort of a morph between the two and typically those aren't as successful in the NBA as players who are a "pure" one or the other.

Augustin is a pure PG.

That said, I think the Pacers should find a way to trade either up to the top 5 or down to about 20. I'm not sold on either of these guys. The top 5 are the monster talents while I think you can get someone at around 20 who'll help you as much as picking at 11.

What he said. Though picking at 6 could also still yield you some of the very nice talents.

Btw Rim who would you rank 1-5?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Speed
05-22-2008, 01:15 PM
I guess another reason I like Westbrook better because I think next year he's a rotation player who could be the first guard off the bench, just based on his ability to defend and 5 years down the road, if he truely is a gym rat, then you have something maybe special.

Anytime I hear gym rat, I'm interested.

NuffSaid
05-22-2008, 01:30 PM
Neither of these players are going to excel at the NBA level. They will both be career backups. The temptation for Bird to draft another 6'7 guy who can play multiple positions (Brandon Rush) will prove too tempting.
Are you kidding me? Augustin has so much potential and Westbrook is just one helluva finisher. He plays more like a PF than a Guard.

Pacers can't lose with selecting either. My hope is that they select Augustin, but my gut tells me they'll choose Westbrook.

Jared Jammer
05-22-2008, 01:34 PM
I guess another reason I like Westbrook better because I think next year he's a rotation player who could be the first guard off the bench, just based on his ability to defend and 5 years down the road, if he truely is a gym rat, then you have something maybe special.

Anytime I hear gym rat, I'm interested.

Great point. Westbrook went from not on the NBA radar to likely top-10 pick in a single season. That type of improvement takes a serious work ethic. That work ethic, combined with his physical gifts, is a recipe for major success.

He's our man if he's there at #11.

DisplacedKnick
05-22-2008, 01:39 PM
What he said. Though picking at 6 could also still yield you some of the very nice talents.

Btw Rim who would you rank 1-5?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

In terms of pure talent I think the top five are Beasley, Rose, Bayless, Mayo and Randolph.

But we've all heard that Lopez will go early and nobody projects Randolph that high.

I'm still hoping for Mayo but if he's not there I'd like DW to go for Randolph. We can wait a couple of years - we'll suck for at least that long anyway. There will be surer bets at 6 but nobody, except maybe Jordan, with as much upside.

naptownmenace
05-22-2008, 03:49 PM
Yeah, this is definitely the guy we should draft! He reminds me of Penny Hardaway before his knees went bad.


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qJUkr1xDiJs&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qJUkr1xDiJs&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Naptown_Seth
05-22-2008, 04:13 PM
Oh, I think we'd take Love easy, but he'd have to fall to us first.

And I've gotten to the point where I just don't believe these mock drafts. We'd trade down into the mid-20s and Rush and CDR would have been taken 15-20.
Agreed. He's not getting to 11, too many GMs and other sources have commented on his game in a way that matches stuff I've thought too. Meaning that I think the read I've had on him is the one a lot of people get when they see a lot of his game action, rather than just me being on his jock or something. ;)

Mayo, EJ, Love, Westbrook - when I watched them I thought they clearly stood out. And typically the commentators of the game were agreeing at the time. They aren't slipping off radars. If anything they might be overvalued, though I don't think that's true either.

Of the "past 15 or so" SG types I think CDR has the best set of offensive moves, but I haven't thought much of his defensive ability. Rush isn't quite the scorer CDR is but he really plays smart and like Westbrook he finds his way into lots of plays, more of a glue guy than a focal point. Lee also has some pretty nice scoring moves, maybe not CDR, but he seems to give you more defense.

Keep in mind that Lee went straight up against Westbrook in the tourney and basically handled him fine. Considering that he can be had in the 2nd round allegedly that might be a nice bargin.

I'm calling Bill Walker a SF. He's so Jackson it's not funny (physical tweener SG/SF with really streaky offense and a habit of getting overly emotionally charged). Technically you could use him at SG, certainly a better fit there than Dun is.


DJ quick as Best? Hmm, I guess but I never saw that myself. To me Collison seems much quicker than DJ. To me DJ is like the smaller version of Bayless and honestly I think Bayless also has the better passing game. How DJ is the pure PG and Bayless is a combo is beyond me. DJ often took over and called his own number, especially in the tourney. That's not "pure PG" to me.


That type of improvement takes a serious work ethic
So did Love, and in both cases it wasn't work ethic directly that made that happen, as in "used to suck but he got a lot better". This was simply where a guy was projected and then people got to see what his actual game is and views changed. I don't think EJ dropped a bit because he doesn't work at it, people just got to see him with prime time NCAA minutes and saw the flaws that were already there.

To me a drop or climb in cases like this have more to do with mocks guessing at a player's talent rather than their own in-season improvement. Now a 4th year guy might drop or flatten out from year 3 and hurt his stock (Hibbert), but Westbrook was never a guy people thought "he stinks". More like "haven't thought about it".

First game I saw of UCLA this year he was noticeable. Same with Love. I was watching for Collison only at the time, didn't even know about the other two. Same with KS and Rush/Chalmers, Memphis and CDR/Dorsey, and so on.

This isn't to say that Brook didn't work at it, it's just saying that his climb doesn't directly indicate "gym rat" status or something.

d_c
05-22-2008, 04:17 PM
Anytime I hear gym rat, I'm interested.

That's great and all, but I think it's something I'd expect more than something I'd get excited about. The majority of NBA players work hard in the gym, come to practice on time, listen to their coaches and don't slack during the offseason.

Austin Croshere and Troy Murphy are a couple examples of bigtime gymrats. For some reason, their work ethic gets reported more than others, but there are plenty of other guys like that in the league.

And I'd take Westbrook, FTR.

croz24
05-22-2008, 04:20 PM
be careful with those highlight videos...a highlight video can be edited to make anybody look like a future all-star. what you see in that video from westbrook is not really indicative of his game for the full 40minutes...

Roaming Gnome
05-22-2008, 06:52 PM
be careful with those highlight videos...a highlight video can be edited to make anybody look like a future all-star. what you see in that video from westbrook is not really indicative of his game for the full 40minutes...

James White, anyone?

Will Galen
05-22-2008, 07:25 PM
IMO, who the Pacers draft will depend greatly on three primary factors:

1) who Bird/O'Brien views as the core players. (We'll get to that in a moment);

2) what position they feel is in need of an upgrade; and,

3) whether they feel a desperate need to upgrade said position now or if they believe they can afford to wait a year or 2 for the draftee to develop.

Of course, there is a forth option if you will:

4) picking the best players available @ #11 and trading him to get the more experienced player(s) you want.

Now, let's talk about each of the above factors.

1. Both Bird and coach O'Brien agree that Granger, Dunleavy and JO make up the core players (http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_080222.html). (For Bird's assessment of the core players, see the question from the linked article herein that inquires about the nucleus of the team right above JO's picture; for Jim O'Brien's perspective, listen to his last radio show; link provided below.)

Key reserves: Diener, Graham (recently signed new contract w/the Pacers), Shawn Williams and Jeff Foster

Looking at this list of seven players, the one position that cannot easily be changed by one of the inner-changeable players is PG.

2. In an April 17th interview w/Conrad Brunner (http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/wrapup_obrien_080417.html), as well as coach O'Brien's last radio show of the season (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...show041708.mp3), coach was very specific about the need to "shore up the PG position" with "defensive toughness". The question then becomes how desperate are they to upgrade this position? Which leads us to item #3.

3. The Pacers used five different players at the Point last year: Tinsley, Diener, Flip Murray, Quis and Owens. It's clear that neither Owens nor Murray will be back next year - Owens moreso because he lacks overall skill at the Point, and Murray because he's not a true PG and because the Pacers already have a unique "combo-Guard" in Quis, but in truth he didn't run the Point very well either. That leaves Tinsley and Diener as the Pacers only two viable PGs. Odds are Tinsley won't be back next year (per the radio show link above), but if he does return, it's likely he'll lose his starting role because of his lack of dependability (health wise, but there are obviously other factors that go along with his dependability issues). So, how desperate are the Pacers to upgrade at the Point? I'd say very, but they're not in panic mode just yet. Which leads me to item #4 - picking the best player available and trading him to get a more experienced player (or players). I doubt that will happen, but it remains a plausable option.

Admittedly, the Pacers haven't faired very well when trying to pick up a PG through FA. They had a solid backup in Darrel Armstrong, but let him go due to his age and lack of quickness (though you had to admire the defensive effort he put forth, as well as his seemingly tireless energy; I'd have kept him myself, but I'm not the team's decision maker...). Over the years, they've played "patch-work" at the Point continuously seeking out a viable backup for Tinsley. But in recent years, it's become more and more apparent that despite Tinsley's talents at running the offense, he's not very durable and, thus, can't be relied on for extended play throughout any given season. So, now TPTB are re-thinking their approach to the PG position. Instead of finding "patches" to fill the reserve PG spot in case Tinsley goes down, they want to find a reliable PG for the near future who can defend, score and create shots for himself. And that leds us to where we are now trying to guess who the Pacers might take in the draft.

Among the three leading candidates, D. J. Augustin, Russell Westbrook and Eric Gordon, it is my opinion based on details as outlined above that the Pacers will select Westbrook. NBADraft.net (http://www.nbadraft.net/) describes Westbrook as follows:

"Attacks the basket with a lethal first step and crossover ability … Can handle the rock well and gets into the lane effortlessly … Huge wingspan allows him to play much bigger than his 6-3 height … Solid passer with unselfishness, always looks for the open man … Has an excellent mid-range game … A gym rat, really works hard to improve … Has a great attitude, extremely coachable … Has the potential to be a big-time scorer when given the chance … Really excels defensively and has a chance to develop into a great defender …Must become better at handling ball pressure at the point guard position."

The only negative on this guy seems to be that he gets alittle rattled when pressed hard (either in the half-court or when doubled). In time, this is something that he can overcome. The key selling point, obviously, is his ability to play solid defense which is what Bird and JOB have both stressed as vital from this position. Now, I'd love to get Augustin because this guy he's a bonafied play maker (based on the scouting report and what I've seen of him), but we've got Granger, Graham and to a limited degree Dunleavy and Quis for that. What the Pacers need is a solid, all-around PG who can pass, shot well from the field, has the ability to finish at the rim AND defend well. Westbrook seems to have all those traits. Of course, the debate will continue until draft night. So, let the debates go on...

Good explanation of your thinking. Very logical, and probably the way management is thinking. The question is will Westbrook be available? One thing though, they didn't sign Graham, they picked up his option.

croz24
05-23-2008, 03:37 AM
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GStunZYqZ5o&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GStunZYqZ5o&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

aero
05-23-2008, 03:55 AM
we WILL be drafting a Point Guard...

NuffSaid
05-23-2008, 12:01 PM
Good explanation of your thinking. Very logical, and probably the way management is thinking. The question is will Westbrook be available? One thing though, they didn't sign Graham, they picked up his option.
I stand corrected. :p Still, the point is we retained him as a key component to the team's immediate future. The question TPTB have to answer is, "How many above the rim players can this roster handle?" Granger has ups, but Graham can really throw down. Should they draft Westbrook they'd certainly be adding another "above the rim" type player into the mix. Bird/Morray will then need to decide if it's improved perimeter defense w/playmaking they want at the Point or playmaking with ball distribution and the ability to run the offense?

As I said, if it's between Westbrook and Augustin I think they'll go with Westbrook, but I'd rather they took Augustin instead.

Naptown_Seth
05-23-2008, 12:20 PM
James White, anyone?
Exactly. As soon as you see 20 dunks and oops you know the reel is basically worthless for seeing a guy's game. I went on YouTube looking a bit last night and watched some reels on guys I'd seen in plenty of full games. Kevin Love's reel had ZERO outlet passes, and when you grab it baseline, toss it 3/4 court for the zero dribble layup by a teammate, that's a highlight. Yet his real suggests he is an undersized PF who either takes dunks or spots up for jumpers. None of his clever post work, none of his steals or quality inside defense since he rarely gets a shot block...the reel showed nothing that would make you draft him.

This was true for all these guys. I need to see Bayless dunking on an oop maybe once just to show his in-traffic hops. Show me some stop and go's, pivots, hand changes, cross-overs and a variety of the passes he can make, not just the same behind the back or oop assist over and over.

Worst is this no-brainer stuff like the previously mentioned open dunks. Really, a quality NCAA player can dunk it when left wide open. Wow, you sold me on the kid.
;)

count55
05-23-2008, 12:25 PM
I stand corrected. :p Still, the point is we retained him as a key component to the team's immediate future. The question TPTB have to answer is, "How many above the rim players can this roster handle?" Granger has ups, but Graham can really throw down. Should they draft Westbrook they'd certainly be adding another "above the rim" type player into the mix. Bird/Morray will then need to decide if it's improved perimeter defense w/playmaking they want at the Point or playmaking with ball distribution and the ability to run the offense?

As I said, if it's between Westbrook and Augustin I think they'll go with Westbrook, but I'd rather they took Augustin instead.

I don't necessarily think this is true. I think they picked up Graham's option because (A) we're tax-strapped, so we're going to need guys at or around the min to fill out the last three or four roster spots, (B) Graham's option is right there (@ about $800k), and (C) Graham is a known quantity.

I think he showed enough to get another shot as bench fodder, but I have a hard time believing that anyone is really considering him a key component of the team's immediate future.

Jared Jammer
05-23-2008, 12:43 PM
Exactly. As soon as you see 20 dunks and oops you know the reel is basically worthless for seeing a guy's game. I went on YouTube looking a bit last night and watched some reels on guys I'd seen in plenty of full games. Kevin Love's reel had ZERO outlet passes, and when you grab it baseline, toss it 3/4 court for the zero dribble layup by a teammate, that's a highlight. Yet his real suggests he is an undersized PF who either takes dunks or spots up for jumpers. None of his clever post work, none of his steals or quality inside defense since he rarely gets a shot block...the reel showed nothing that would make you draft him.

This was true for all these guys. I need to see Bayless dunking on an oop maybe once just to show his in-traffic hops. Show me some stop and go's, pivots, hand changes, cross-overs and a variety of the passes he can make, not just the same behind the back or oop assist over and over.

Worst is this no-brainer stuff like the previously mentioned open dunks. Really, a quality NCAA player can dunk it when left wide open. Wow, you sold me on the kid.
;)

It showed off his fantastic transitional game. He's unguardable in the open-court. We also saw some very nifty ball handling, strengthening the argument that he's capable of being a Devin Harris-type point guard in the NBA. I think Westbrook will be even better, as he's clearly more physically gifted than Harris and seems to have a that fiery competitiveness to him that few players can match. With what I've seen, I don't think 20 ppg, 6 apg, 4 rpg is out of the question by his 3rd or 4th season. Of course, like I've previously said, once he wows teams during workouts, he's gone long before #11. I could see him going as high as Seattle at #5.

Anthem
05-23-2008, 01:20 PM
I don't necessarily think this is true. I think they picked up Graham's option because (A) we're tax-strapped, so we're going to need guys at or around the min to fill out the last three or four roster spots, (B) Graham's option is right there (@ about $800k), and (C) Graham is a known quantity.
And the league pays a good part of that.

Even if we didn't think he was a key piece, picking up the option was a no-brainer.

NapTonius Monk
05-23-2008, 02:56 PM
Neither of these players are going to excel at the NBA level. They will both be career backups. The temptation for Bird to draft another 6'7 guy who can play multiple positions (Brandon Rush) will prove too tempting.

I disagree that both of these guys are destined to be career backups. Especially with the way the NBA is setup rules-wise. These guys are both lightning quick, and Westbrook could excel on defense alone. If Larry opts for a 6'7 guy though, I'm hoping it's CDR. I really, really, really want thig guy in a Pacers uni!

Ownagedood
05-23-2008, 02:59 PM
Westbrook hands down.. I don't even want Augustine.. I think he will be a flop.

NapTonius Monk
05-23-2008, 03:18 PM
Also of note, Westbrook apparently has really big hands, which allows him to have greater control with the ball. Players used to make note of how MJ's hands were so big, and it allowed him to do more stuff with the rock. I'm pulling for a Westbrook/CDR backcourt next year!

Anthem
05-23-2008, 04:22 PM
The more I've thought about it, the more it's made sense that Westbrooke could play guard next to Dunleavy.

Honestly, I might call Dun the PG and Westbrooke the SG, then switch them on defense. It really would be easier to hide Dun if he was on the court with Danny and Westbrooke.

Merz
05-23-2008, 04:37 PM
The more I've thought about it, the more it's made sense that Westbrooke could play guard next to Dunleavy.

Honestly, I might call Dun the PG and Westbrooke the SG, then switch them on defense. It really would be easier to hide Dun if he was on the court with Danny and Westbrooke.

Thats been my thought the whole time. Dun can initiate the halfcourt offense like he so often does and Westbrook can D up the opposing point.

BlueNGold
05-23-2008, 06:40 PM
Why would Westbrook be better alongside Dunleavy than Quis? He'd better be a whole lot better or he will not improve our back court. Does he have a better handle? How much better? Can he initiate the offense? What about his game differs from Quis's substantially that make him such a good fit?

Shade
05-23-2008, 08:24 PM
Chalmers!





Seriously, I wouldn't take Chalmers with the #11, but I really want him if we can acquire a late first.

My biggest hopes are for us to move up and grab EJ, get another late first and take Chalmers, and then move up in the 2nd and take White.