PDA

View Full Version : What if PGs are off the board?



pwee31
06-16-2008, 10:41 PM
I'm not going to conduct a poll b/c that would leave a variety of players, but what if the PGs and combo guards are all off the board?

As the draft is nearing, they're a lot of rumblings that Westbrook and Augustin are rising on draft boards.

Realgm has them gone by the time we pick. I think Chad Ford may have them off the board in his next mock as well.

It's really possible that picks 6,7, and 8 could consist of Augustin, Westbrook, and Gordon (in no particular order)

Do we then choose a big? What if the best player available is a wing? Do we take ANOTHER wing and trade a guy like Dun Dun?

Do we trade down and try to get Chalmers while adding a piece, since Lawson is out of the draft?

Do we try and trade for a PG?

Do we not worry about it and hope Tinsley is healthy and has no hard feelings about the comments surrounding him?

Do we try and move up to get one of the guards?


I'm just curious what others think the Pacers should do, if it's looking like the guards will be off the board at #11?

Mr. Sobchak
06-16-2008, 10:58 PM
I would try to trade the pick for the best young guard that we are able to get. Someone like Randy Foye, Kirk Hinrich, or TJ Ford.

Eindar
06-16-2008, 11:12 PM
Trade the pick, or go for broke with a guy like McGee who is a big project. What I don't want to see us do is draft a career backup who we know will never be a star in the league. I think we're in the position where we need a break.

Kegboy
06-16-2008, 11:20 PM
It'd be nice to trade down, but I don't see that happening in this draft. If we're stuck, take whichever Kansas kid you like the best.

Roaming Gnome
06-16-2008, 11:31 PM
BPA (that doesn't play a wing position). Not because of our situation with them, but due to the fact that wings seem to be a "dime a dozen" and don't hold the value that a front court or point does right now.

Anthem
06-16-2008, 11:36 PM
If Augustin, Westbrooke, and Gordon are all picked before us, somebody good should have dropped. I mean, we all agree that Rose/Beasley/Mayo/Bayless are gone, so that's 7 players. Hard to imagine Gallinari dropping out of the top 10. Who's left?

Love, Lopez, Randolph are probably the top 3 players left... one of them has to be there at #11.

Midcoasted
06-16-2008, 11:45 PM
If Augustin, Westbrooke, and Gordon are all picked before us, somebody good should have dropped. I mean, we all agree that Rose/Beasley/Mayo/Bayless are gone, so that's 7 players. Hard to imagine Gallinari dropping out of the top 10. Who's left?

Love, Lopez, Randolph are probably the top 3 players left... one of them has to be there at #11.

Exactly, this pick will get us some1 good. I think we should take a big man anyways, but we do need a point.

No matter what we do I know we will be getting a good player at 11 if we are wise. I think this draft relies on our second round pick and the impact this player has. This is were I'd like to see us trade up. Maybe we can unload JO and trade up our second rounder for a 25 or later pick?

Gamble1
06-17-2008, 12:27 AM
There is no way DJ Augustine is going to the Knicks. They would be stupid to draft him that high and it sounds like Walsh is throwing some false information out there for people like Chad Ford.

I agree that it would appear that someone would drop if all the guards are picked before 11.

Anthem
06-17-2008, 12:31 AM
I just don't see Augustin being picked before #11.

Isaac
06-17-2008, 01:13 AM
Marreese Speights!

Speights, Westbrook or Augustin would make me very happy.

Jose Slaughter
06-17-2008, 01:20 AM
I think its far more likely that Love, Lopez & Randolph are gone at picks 6, 7 & 8 than the trio of Gordon, Westbrook & Augustine.

I'm agreeing with Anthem here too. I think Augustine will still be on the board at 11.

Eindar
06-17-2008, 04:29 AM
This is why I love the draft. In theory, Augustin should be there at #11, but then again, in theory, Danny Granger should have been drafted in the top 5. It's a huge guessing game, but either way, I get the feeling someone with a lot of talent is going to fall to us, whether it's Gordon, Love, or Westbrooke.

Justin Tyme
06-17-2008, 07:55 AM
Trade the pick, or go for broke with a guy like McGee who is a big project. What I don't want to see us do is draft a career backup who we know will never be a star in the league. I think we're in the position where we need a break.


We've already had one of those for 4 years in Harrison! Thanx but no thanx, I'm out of patience waiting for another project to develop... if ever.

count55
06-17-2008, 08:18 AM
If Augustin, Westbrooke, and Gordon are all picked before us, somebody good should have dropped. I mean, we all agree that Rose/Beasley/Mayo/Bayless are gone, so that's 7 players. Hard to imagine Gallinari dropping out of the top 10. Who's left?

Love, Lopez, Randolph are probably the top 3 players left... one of them has to be there at #11.

We're doing a Mock on RealGM Pacer board (http://http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=797146&st=0&sk=t&sd=a), (15 different guys, each with two teams, to get the "surprise" factor a little more) and exactly this scenario happened. Gordon went 6, Westbrook 7, then, surprisingly, Augustin 8. This was the top 10:


1 Bulls darkflashfox - Derrick Rose, PG, Memphis
2 Heat FreeRon - Michael Beasley, PF, Kansas St
3 Wolves Grang33r - O.J. Mayo, SG, USC
4 Sonics blaha112 - Jerryd Bayless, PG/SG, Arizona
5 Grizzlies darkflashfox - Kevin Love, PF, UCLA
6 Knicks dcbaseballer52 - Eric Gordon, SG, Indiana
7 Clippers PR07 - Russell Westbrook, PG/SG, UCLA
8 Bucks FreeRon - DJ Augustin, PG, Texas
9 Bobcats DGrangeRx33 - Anthony Randolph, PF, LSU
10 Nets PR07 - Brook Lopez, C, Stanford


It was Gallinari who had dropped, but the poster who had the Pacers took Mareese Speights. Here was his comment on the deal:


Well you guys have joined forces to create the worst-case scenario for the Pacers at #11. :lol: No Westbrook...no Augustin...and the guy who "falls" to us is the one consensus top-ten player who is a small forward, Danilo Gallinari.

If this is really how the first ten picks are going to go, then I hope our front office manages to trade our pick, hopefully at a highly inflated price on draft night. But as there are no trades allowed in this thread,

"With the eleventh pick in the 2008 draft, the Indiana Pacers select Marreese Speights from the University of Florida."

Apologies to Gallinari, DeAndre Jordan, and Darrell Arthur. But I like Speights's combination of tangible results (14.5/8.1/1.4 blocks, in less than 25 minutes per game), size, and "upside" (sorry Count, it's that time of year). Here's a little reading material on Speights:

Speights Profile on Draft Express (http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Marreese-Speights-1183/)

which seems like a fairly balanced report to me. No one available to me at #11 in this draft is without a few warts...I'm going to play my hunch that the whispers about poor work ethic and etc. are overblown, much like Granger's supposed knee problems were overblown when he fell to us in the 2005 draft. Because otherwise, Speights sounds kinda like a young JO to me.

We debated back and forth in the thread, (I had come to the conclusion that we'd need to take Gallinari, but that was before the "Fran Vasquez situation" comparisons), but I've actually come to be OK with the idea of Speights if the PG's are gone. Considering that I think Love has become pretty much of a lock for top 10, I'd feel more comfortable with Speights than either Lopez or Randolph.

Disclaimer: I am in no way trying to pretend the Mock on RealGM was even vaguely scientific. However, I think by having 15 different people doing it, it did a decent job of simulating the uncertainty of draft night. The wild card nature of what can happen if one guy jumps or one guy slips.

avoidingtheclowns
06-17-2008, 09:48 AM
even if dj and russell are available i'd still be looking at trades, so if they're gone that too would continue. but i agree with count that i'd look at speights or arthur.

Naptown_Seth
06-17-2008, 10:25 AM
I'm still in the Arthur camp, but if it's Westbrook out there I'd be interested as long as they moved Dunleavy to clear up the SG position for him. If that brings back a PG and a later pick then you've addressed several issues without even moving JO yet.

But Gallinari slipping past the Knicks is the one that I doubt. How can D'Antoni not want him?

MyFavMartin
06-17-2008, 11:13 AM
Love, Lopez, Randolph are probably the top 3 players left...


I would be happy with any of these...

but I'm hoping for a PG whose nickname would be Russell the Love Muscle...

Major Cold
06-17-2008, 11:31 AM
how often do rookie PGs or big men make a great impact their rookie year? Conley struggled to crack the lineup (injury did not help) until after Damon was released. Acie Law was a disappointment.

I would try to draft the best PG or big man available, but not really solely on their acquisition. If we get Westbrook or Augustin can we truly depend on them to be a solid backup to a solid backup. I really think that the approach that Bird takes is to draft a front court player who can contribute a few years down the road. Play David Harrison minutes the first year or so. Ty Thomas is a good example.

Hicks
06-17-2008, 12:02 PM
We debated back and forth in the thread, (I had come to the conclusion that we'd need to take Gallinari, but that was before the "Fran Vasquez situation" comparisons), but I've actually come to be OK with the idea of Speights if the PG's are gone. Considering that I think Love has become pretty much of a lock for top 10, I'd feel more comfortable with Speights than either Lopez or Randolph.

Disclaimer: I am in no way trying to pretend the Mock on RealGM was even vaguely scientific. However, I think by having 15 different people doing it, it did a decent job of simulating the uncertainty of draft night. The wild card nature of what can happen if one guy jumps or one guy slips.

I could live with taking Speights in this scenario.

Gallinari would be interesting from a talent stand point, but then again if he drops that probably means he's more likely to be a SF Darko in terms of panning out, so forget it.

gph
06-17-2008, 12:47 PM
Not that they are very accurate, but yeah RealGM has us taking Speights. Me? I would rather skip a big guy whose main weakness is his motor. If Westbrook Augustin or Alexander aren't there, I would like to see a trade down for a PF like Hickson or White.

All that is dependent on who we have on the roster or any trades we do, but as of right now, that is what i want to see.

croz24
06-17-2008, 12:47 PM
if we aren't drafting alexander, love, ej, or randolph at #11, we might as well try to trade down.

count55
06-17-2008, 01:23 PM
Not that they are very accurate, but yeah RealGM has us taking Speights. Me? I would rather skip a big guy whose main weakness is his motor. If Westbrook Augustin or Alexander aren't there, I would like to see a trade down for a PF like Hickson or White.

All that is dependent on who we have on the roster or any trades we do, but as of right now, that is what i want to see.

Yeah, RealGM's mock done by Chris Reina that came out today had the Pacers taking Speights, too, but, to be clear, I was talking about the one being done by the posters on the Pacer board. Not that it's particularly accurate.

We had discussed allowing trades in the thread, but decided it was too difficult to administer. Even mizzou had said he'd trade down in that position, but that's easier said than done...given the limited amount of time available on draft night, you'd almost have to have the deal in place contingent on how the first 10 picks went.

Anthem
06-17-2008, 01:44 PM
Gallinari would be interesting from a talent stand point, but then again if he drops that probably means he's more likely to be a SF Darko in terms of panning out, so forget it.
Gallinari has said he'll stay in Europe if anyone except New York or New Jersey drafts him.

Mr. Sobchak
06-17-2008, 02:30 PM
Gallinari has said he'll stay in Europe if anyone except New York or New Jersey drafts him.

Actually thats not technically correct. He said he would like to go to those teams because he likes the area but has opted to stay in the draft despite not having a promise from either team.

This was an article posted over at realgm. http://www.gazzetta.it/Sport_Vari/Basket/Italia/Primo_Piano/2008/06_Giugno/15/gallinari.shtml

This is what an poster from Italy had to say about the situation:


It basically reports that Danilo is 99% in the draft but he has no promise from NY or NJ since he'll work out in Los Angeles this weekend for other NBA teams (Memphis and Indiana cited in the article).

His father and agent, Vittorio Gallinari, says that all the 11 first teams in the draft are somehow interested in Danilo, especially Miami, Minnesota and Memphis.

So he still likes New York Area the most, but he'd be ready to play for other teams as well.

QuickRelease
06-17-2008, 02:43 PM
I realllllllly want Speights! Really I do! :pray:

idioteque
06-17-2008, 03:13 PM
So Gallinari thinks that, without playing a second in the NBA, he is somehow entitled to play for a large market team?

Huge red flag.

Chewy
06-17-2008, 03:47 PM
Really? He only said that he likes New York and New Jersey, and appearently all the talk about him only playing if gets drafted by those two teams came from his agent, why would he work out for clippers, wolves and grizzlies then?

2minutes twowa
06-17-2008, 03:54 PM
Really hoping to get Augustine or Westbrook, but if they're not there, then go big. Speights, Randolph or Arthur. I'm not sold on Lopez or Love. Everytime I think of them I keep thinking "Chris Mihm " for some reason:) And there's no way Bird picks a 3 unless another trade is brewing.

will567
06-17-2008, 05:38 PM
I would be fine with Westbrook because he has good size and can guard a 1 or a 2 but D.J. Augustin is so small and I think he would be really similar to Diener! If Westbrook is gone I say we go for Joe Alexander! He is athletic and has a solid midrange game that could extend to the 3 point line. Plus if we are realistic about improving the team via trades I do not see how we do it and keep both Mike Dunleavy and Granger! If we go big Kosta Koufos or Marreese Speights would be a good fit here. I also like DeAndre Jordan or Brandon Rush as picks but not at 11. If we add a pick Jordan would be a good project big man. I like Rush and hope we would find a way to get him later in the draft.

Justin Tyme
06-17-2008, 05:59 PM
I would be fine with Westbrook because he has good size and can guard a 1 or a 2 but D.J. Augustin is so small and I think he would be really similar to Diener! If Westbrook is gone I say we go for Joe Alexander! He is athletic and has a solid midrange game that could extend to the 3 point line. Plus if we are realistic about improving the team via trades I do not see how we do it and keep both Mike Dunleavy and Granger! If we go big Kosta Koufos or Marreese Speights would be a good fit here. I also like DeAndre Jordan or Brandon Rush as picks but not at 11. If we add a pick Jordan would be a good project big man. I like Rush and hope we would find a way to get him later in the draft.


The Pacers don't need a project big man. They have had one for 4 years, and he's produced exactly zilch.

Mr. Sobchak
06-17-2008, 06:12 PM
So Gallinari thinks that, without playing a second in the NBA, he is somehow entitled to play for a large market team?

Huge red flag.

He says its because New York reminds him of Milan...:whoknows:

Mr. Sobchak
06-17-2008, 06:16 PM
The Pacers don't need a project big man. They have had one for 4 years, and he's produced exactly zilch.

Agreed but there is a large difference in taking David Harrison and his questionable attitude at the end of the first round and a lottery bound center who is compared to Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard athletically.

MyFavMartin
06-17-2008, 06:37 PM
alexander or speights should be available.

any chance we can get NJ's #10 and #21 with a deal involving JO?

Would love to come away with a couple first rounders this year...

count55
06-17-2008, 07:17 PM
Agreed but there is a large difference in taking David Harrison and his questionable attitude at the end of the first round and a lottery bound center who is compared to Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard athletically.

Yes, you have much, much more to lose.

Eindar
06-17-2008, 07:41 PM
Yes, you have much, much more to lose.

And much, much more to gain.

It's fun playing that game.

Regardless, comparing David Harrison to the talent available at #11 as a prospect is ludicrous. If you were going to make that argument, your best evidence is Bender, but most people think it's his knees that inevitably failed him, not his ability to play basketball, so even that's not a really good example from the Pacers' past.

count55
06-17-2008, 08:33 PM
No, you really don't. Jordan will have to improve exponentially as a basketball player just to be on a par with Harrison. He has only rudimentary skills and hasn't really demonstrated anything to this point to say that he's going to make quantum leaps in ability.

It's easy to look at his size and some of his athletic attributes and get excited over what he could be, when, sadly, he is almost certainly just going to be what he is.

Bender may be a good comparison in that he had plenty of tools to become a good, even great player, but simply never knew how to play basketball. The knee injury ended Jonathan's career, but he was a bust before that. Jonathan got to the pros by being taller and more athletic than anyone else. When the NBA demanded that he be more skilled rather than just more talented, he couldn't make the leap.

Maybe, maybe, maybe...Jordan can be touched by the hand of God and marry his freakish physical attributes with actual basketball ability, but the odds of that are obscenely long. In fact, they are probably longer odds than those of David Harrison being a productive player. Harrison, at least, only had to overcome his attitude/foul issues. By all accounts, Jordan will have to overcome a hugely lacking skill set in addition to serious questions about his maturity and attitude.

The Pacers aren't in a position to waste a first round draft pick, especially at 11, but even if they trade back into the 20's, I can't help but think they'll be far better off, both in the short and long term, taking a guy like Courtney Lee or Mario Chalmers, or any of a number of other players over Jordan.

I don't even consider him a gamble. I basically consider him a wasted pick.

PR07
06-17-2008, 09:55 PM
From a pure athletic standpoint, Jordan may be in the same ballpark as Dwight Howard. However, Howard entered the league with much more developed offensive as well as defensive skills.

http://www.nbadraft.net/profiles/dwight_howard.asp

All DeAndre Jordan is, essentially at this point, is an big, long athletic body that can probably get some close put-backs at the rim, run the floor, and rebound. He really has no offensive skills he can rely on. His low post game is very primitive, and he has no jump shot. On defense, he has potential as a shotblocker, but hasn't been the force he should be with his athletic ability. Until he gets stronger, he's going to get pushed around, but that's basically true for most big men entering the league.

Dwight Howard didn't enter the league looking like the chiseled Superman he does today. I guarantee you he hit the weight room, and he hit it hard as well as the gym. Does DeAndre Jordan have that motivation...that drive? By all indications, no. If you read the ESPN article on him, he seems overly sensitive and doesn't really have that passion for the game. What's he going to do when he gets that first NBA paycheck?

The Pacers don't really have the luxury of striking out with the #11 pick. I'd like to take someone with a high upside, but even I think DeAndre Jordan is too boom or bust....and more than likely, I think he'll be a bust. Big men take a long time to develop as it is, but when you aren't particularly motivated, who knows if Jordan will develop at all.

Eindar
06-17-2008, 11:21 PM
No, you really don't. Jordan will have to improve exponentially as a basketball player just to be on a par with Harrison. He has only rudimentary skills and hasn't really demonstrated anything to this point to say that he's going to make quantum leaps in ability.

It's easy to look at his size and some of his athletic attributes and get excited over what he could be, when, sadly, he is almost certainly just going to be what he is.

Bender may be a good comparison in that he had plenty of tools to become a good, even great player, but simply never knew how to play basketball. The knee injury ended Jonathan's career, but he was a bust before that. Jonathan got to the pros by being taller and more athletic than anyone else. When the NBA demanded that he be more skilled rather than just more talented, he couldn't make the leap.

Maybe, maybe, maybe...Jordan can be touched by the hand of God and marry his freakish physical attributes with actual basketball ability, but the odds of that are obscenely long. In fact, they are probably longer odds than those of David Harrison being a productive player. Harrison, at least, only had to overcome his attitude/foul issues. By all accounts, Jordan will have to overcome a hugely lacking skill set in addition to serious questions about his maturity and attitude.

The Pacers aren't in a position to waste a first round draft pick, especially at 11, but even if they trade back into the 20's, I can't help but think they'll be far better off, both in the short and long term, taking a guy like Courtney Lee or Mario Chalmers, or any of a number of other players over Jordan.

I don't even consider him a gamble. I basically consider him a wasted pick.

Saying that Harrison "only" needing to overcome attitude/foul issues is better than someone like Jordan "only" needing to overcome a lack of knowledge is like saying that an electician with a heroin addiction "only" needs to get off heroin to be a good electrician. I'd much rather hang my hopes on the apprentice electrician who only needs to be taught how to be an electrician.


That's simplified, and obviously Jordan (and every other big at 11) has some questions marks, but no more than David had coming out of college. Remember, when we drafted Harrison, there were questions about his work ethic, drive, heart, upside, and attitude. Turns out, he has shown good work ethic and heart, but indeed, his T-Rex arms and bad attitude have kept him from becoming a dominant center. What I'm saying is, every big has question marks, but there's a reason Harrison fell to the bottom of the first round, and there's a reason guys like Jordan, McGee, and Hibbert won't.

I challenge you to go find game tape of Bender's final 20 games. Despite having microfracture surgery on both knees, he was developing a very, very good post game, to the point that the Spurs were double-teaming him. Also, Bender never relied solely on his height and athleticism in high school, otherwise all those points he scored in the All-American game would have been on dunks and putbacks instead of jumpshots and 3-pointers. There's so much revisionist history regarding Bender it makes me sick. Kid really had a legit shot at being Garnett with handles and 3 point range. Sure, he had a lot to work on, but it's not like the Pacers didn't know that, and while it took him several years, he was starting to "get it" when his knees finally gave out on him.

I guess it also depends on what your definition of a "wasted" pick is. To me, a wasted pick also includes drafting a guy that you KNOW will never be an All-Star, and for me, Augustin falls into that category. I'd rather gamble and lose than not gamble and still lose. This team needs athleticism and talent, because we have plenty of backups who are skilled but flawed.

croz24
06-17-2008, 11:34 PM
From a pure athletic standpoint, Jordan may be in the same ballpark as Dwight Howard. However, Howard entered the league with much more developed offensive as well as defensive skills.

which is saying a lot because dwight wasn't that great offensively at all coming out of high school.

PR07
06-18-2008, 12:31 AM
He was still lightyears ahead of where Jordan is in his development, and that was with no college experience. Jordan has had 1 more year and is probably less of an offensive threat than Jeff Foster.

Read the draftprofile, Dwight Howard at least had a groundwork laid offensively, Jordan has nothing except "potential".

croz24
06-18-2008, 12:50 AM
He was still lightyears ahead of where Jordan is in his development, and that was with no college experience. Jordan has had 1 more year and is probably less of an offensive threat than Jeff Foster.

Read the draftprofile, Dwight Howard at least had a groundwork laid offensively, Jordan has nothing except "potential".

and that's my point. howard was not that great on offense which shows just how bad of an offensive player jordan is at this point.

PR07
06-18-2008, 12:55 AM
Sorry, misread your post. I'm in agreement.

pwee31
06-18-2008, 11:41 AM
I think I read somewhere that Westbrook cancelled workout with NJ and they pick at #10.

So it seems like he may have a promise in the top 9

blanket
06-18-2008, 11:44 AM
I think I read somewhere that Westbrook cancelled workout with NJ and they pick at #10.

So it seems like he may have a promise in the top 9

If that's the case, then why is he still scheduled to work out for the Pacers on Thursday? Maybe it's more like NJ made a promise to Gallinari, so Westbrook thinks it would be a waste of time to work out for them...

Naptown_Seth
06-18-2008, 12:20 PM
Boy, lot of head games going on with promises, workout schedules, etc.

Half these guys are going to do zilch, but luckily for us we won't know who on draft night, thus we'll have a night loaded with excitement, surprises and perhaps real drama.

Could be the most exciting Pacers night this season (07-08 I mean). :)

2minutes twowa
06-18-2008, 01:46 PM
If that's the case, then why is he still scheduled to work out for the Pacers on Thursday? Maybe it's more like NJ made a promise to Gallinari, so Westbrook thinks it would be a waste of time to work out for them...

Plus Jersey is pretty well set at the PG position. Kinda like how the Pacers don't have many workouts scheduled for SF prospects.

will567
06-18-2008, 11:26 PM
Looks like Westbrook is out! He must have a promise in the top 9! I got this list from th pacers.com web site and do not see Westbrook on it. That leaves D. J. Augustin. I just think he is to small to be an impact player!





Plenty of star power in final group for pre-draft workouts
With LSU's Anthony Randolph and Kansas' Darrell Arthur headlining a strong seven-man group, the Pacers will have plenty of star power in Conseco Fieldhouse for their final pre-draft workout Thursday. Also due in are Mario Chalmers (Kansas), Jamont Gordon (Mississippi State), Mike Green (Butler), Trent Plaisted (BYU) and Shaun Pruitt (Illinois).

Mr. Sobchak
06-18-2008, 11:39 PM
Someone good is definitely going to slip. I can feel it. Clippers and Bobcats are going to take Augustin and Westbrook and Lopez is going to fall. Book it.

Anthem
06-18-2008, 11:51 PM
Someone good is definitely going to slip. I can feel it. Clippers and Bobcats are going to take Augustin and Westbrook and Lopez is going to fall. Book it.
I sure hope so. I'd hate for Augustin to be available at #11.

wintermute
06-19-2008, 12:11 AM
mike wells just posted the same question in his blog:

http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/archives/2008/06/what_if_westbro_1.html



What if Westbrook and Augustin are already off the board?
Posted by Mike Wells

Did anybody else stay up late last night to watch the Lakers get embarrassed by the Celtics?

I originally said I was going to go to bed at halftime when Boston was up by 23 points. I decided to stay up so that I could see the Big Ticket (Garnett) win his first NBA title. I've always enjoyed watching K.G. play. He plays hard all the time and he knows how to get his teammates to follow his lead.

I remember Minnesota officials telling me that they had force Garnett off the court after practice. He also hated when his squad didn't win scrimmages in practice.

Just think, K.G., Pierce, Allen, Rondo and Perkins will all be back next season. The Celtics will likely be favored to win it all again.

All eyes can shift to the draft now that the season is officially over - two months after the regular season ended.

There's been plenty of talk about the Pacers possibly taking UCLA's Russell Westbrook or Texas' D.J. Augustin with the No. 11 pick.

That got me thinking, what if both players are already gone by the time their selection rolls around?

I've seen Westbrook going as high as No. 6 to Donnie Walsh's New York Knicks and Augustin going in the top 10, too, on some mock drafts.

Without tipping his hand, one Pacers official told me they have a backup plan if both players are gone.

Big men Anthony Randolph, DeAndre Jordan and Kosta Koufos should be available at No. 11. I don't get how a player - Jordan - that averaged 7.9 points, 6.0 rebounds and 44 percent from the free throw line last season is a possible lottery pick.

Should the Pacers look to trade down if they can't get Augustin or Westbrook? Should they keep the pick and go big?


check the bolded statement. confirmation or smokescreen?

btw, i don't mind if we end up with augustin. he's probably the safest pick for us. but i'd prefer if we swing for upside at #11 and pick up chalmers a little later, if we can get an extra pick.

blanket
06-19-2008, 02:37 AM
Looks like Westbrook is out! He must have a promise in the top 9! I got this list from th pacers.com web site and do not see Westbrook on it. That leaves D. J. Augustin. I just think he is to small to be an impact player!





Plenty of star power in final group for pre-draft workouts
With LSU's Anthony Randolph and Kansas' Darrell Arthur headlining a strong seven-man group, the Pacers will have plenty of star power in Conseco Fieldhouse for their final pre-draft workout Thursday. Also due in are Mario Chalmers (Kansas), Jamont Gordon (Mississippi State), Mike Green (Butler), Trent Plaisted (BYU) and Shaun Pruitt (Illinois).

Interesting. Thanks for sharing this.

My dream would be Randolph or Speights at 11, then trade into the mid/late first for Chalmers (or Lee). In the 2nd round, Hendrix, Gordon or Hill would be worth a look.