PDA

View Full Version : Who do you want at #11 and #17?



SoupIsGood
06-25-2008, 07:47 PM
Now that's we've got an additional pick in the teens, what combo of new players is everyone hoping for? (And don't say Rose and Beasley.)

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 07:48 PM
Gordon and Speights.

eldubious
06-25-2008, 07:51 PM
Gordon and Arthur or Ajinca.

Coop
06-25-2008, 07:52 PM
Eh..I just posted this in the trade thread.

I'm going with Rush at 11. It might seem like a stretch, but I feel he's the safest choice and he will pair up well with Ford and Granger.

At 17, we need to go big. I have no interest in Jordan, McGee, Hibbert, or Koufos. I'll be disappointed if we end up with any of them. My final 2 choices are Jason Thompson of Rider or Marreese Speights of Florida. Speights is my first choice, but if he isn't there, we should go with Thompson.

Edit: I'll also add in that I do like Ajinca, so I guess it would be a wash between him or Thompson.

robocop's cousin
06-25-2008, 07:55 PM
Augustin and Hibbert

Shawne#4
06-25-2008, 07:55 PM
Gordon? If he's available at #11, I'd take him, but where did you guys get the idea he'll be there?

I'll go Speights and Rush in the more likely scenario.

SoupIsGood
06-25-2008, 07:59 PM
You know, if Portland really does trade up to #10 to take DJ, we're probably going to end up with one hell of a player, possibly Gordon. THat would be exciting.

Rose, Mayo, Beasley, Westbrook, Gordon, Love, Bayless, Alexander, Galinari, and Lopez seem to be agreed upon as the 10ish best players out there. Already, chances are great that at least one will slip--and if Portland move to 10 and takes DJ, one of them can't not slip. I really think Larry went and got this #17 because there is a player in the 12-19 range who he really really likes, but he also sees that with what we've got going at 11, it'd be stupid to reach for a favorite.

Rose, Beasley, Mayo, Bayless, and Westbrook won't be there for us. That means Alexander, Galinari, Gordon, Love, and Lopez are all in play.

I really hope we snag Love or Gordon at #11. But any of those ten would be great.

Not sure about #17.

Hicks
06-25-2008, 08:02 PM
Gordon if he's there at 11, if not then Brandon Rush.

I'd be intrigued by Hibbert at 17.

Erik
06-25-2008, 08:02 PM
I see two picks here for Gordon, you guys are really setting me up for a disappointment. :( I can't be getting my hopes up like that. I think they'll take Chalmers and Hibbert. Although I want Gordon, Hibbert and D.J. White in this draft.

Shade
06-25-2008, 08:02 PM
Rose
Beasley
Mayo
Bayless
Gordon
Love
Westbrook
B. Lopez

If any of those guys are on the board at #11, you have to go with him.

If Chalmers falls to #17 (I have a feeling he'll go #12 now), I definitely want him there.

Putnam
06-25-2008, 08:04 PM
Augustin and Hibbert, speaking as a Hoya myself.

I think Hibbert is probably the most mature of the big candidates and probably the smartest, too.

SoupIsGood
06-25-2008, 08:04 PM
I also wouldn't complain about getting either (both?) of the Kansas guards.

Hoop
06-25-2008, 08:06 PM
Augustin or Rush at #11, depending on if they think we need another PG or go for the best SG left. I'd be really happy if Love were here at #11, but not much of a chance for that.

and Hibbert at #17 would be fine with me.

jcouts
06-25-2008, 08:09 PM
Rush at 11 and Hibbert at 17

Moses
06-25-2008, 08:16 PM
Gordon and Speights.
I like these picks as well.

And I cannot even fathom how anyone could possibly want Hibbert. The guy is a 7 foot robot.

CableKC
06-25-2008, 08:16 PM
I'm going with Rush and Hibbert....both will help us immediately.

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 08:20 PM
Let me ask this...when was the last time the projected top ten guys in a draft went top ten in the actual draft? Ever? Chances are one will drop, it is very likely that two will drop. I think Gordon given the circumstances is the most likely one to fall to us. I've been saying it for a week or two.

Coop
06-25-2008, 08:20 PM
I don't really understand all the love for Hibbert around here. Is he still riding on all the hype he was given during the tourney last year? I didnt see anything this year from him that would make me even remotely interested at 17. I don't think he fits into the system here at all.

Oneal07
06-25-2008, 08:21 PM
Gordon, Rush, Hibbert. Maybe Patrick Ewing's son. Daniel Ewing I think his name is lol. Just to get Patrick mad

Shade
06-25-2008, 08:22 PM
I don't really understand all the love for Hibbert around here. Is he still riding on all the hype he was given during the tourney last year? I didnt see anything this year from him that would make me even remotely interested at 17. I don't think he fits into the system here at all.

QFT :amen: :iagree:

CableKC
06-25-2008, 08:24 PM
I like these picks as well.
And I cannot even fathom how anyone could possibly want Hibbert. The guy is a 7 foot robot.
I'm going under the assumption that Bird wants NBA ready players that is a Center.

Hibbert is more ready then Jordan or McGee. If not Hibbert...then Speights.....but I consider him more of a replacement for JONeal then Hibbert is a replacement for Foster.

Kegboy
06-25-2008, 08:27 PM
Kansas kids. As Meat Loaf would say, "2 out of 3 aint bad."

indygeezer
06-25-2008, 08:28 PM
Trade the two and move up to take Love or a damn good big. (do we really wanna pay two top twenty contracts)

Justin Tyme
06-25-2008, 08:35 PM
NO Augustin, Koufos, or Hibbert! PLEASE LORD!

Speights and Lee /Rush.

Coop
06-25-2008, 08:37 PM
NO Augustin, Koufos, or Hibbert! PLEASE LORD!

Speights and Lee /Rush.

Amen.

/thread

Justin Tyme
06-25-2008, 08:42 PM
Kansas kids. As Meat Loaf would say, "2 out of 3 aint bad."


LOL! That's going back aways.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 08:48 PM
I don't know any of these players. But I pray we don't draft any "big white stiffs" and I hope we don't take the safe pick.

Rajah Brown
06-25-2008, 08:55 PM
The guy that slips will probably be Galinari. Whoopeeee !

Mr. Sobchak
06-25-2008, 08:56 PM
The guy that slips will probably be Galinari. Whoopeeee !

He wouldnt have stayed in the draft if he thought there was a possibility of slipping out of the top 10.

Suaveness
06-25-2008, 08:58 PM
Chalmers and Speights.

eldubious
06-25-2008, 08:59 PM
Here is my take on Hibbert, he's big, skilled, and smart. He was one of the top players last year. But, Hibbert only made sense to the Pacers if he was going to play with O'Neal. If people expect Hibbert to be JO's replacement, they're going to be disappointed. I'd rather have Arthur or Ajinca to try and fill JO's shoes.

Taterhead
06-25-2008, 08:59 PM
I think it will be

11-Brandon Rush
17-Darrell Arthur

Just a hunch.

Jose Slaughter
06-25-2008, 09:02 PM
I did some serious looking last night after I viewed the Bird press conference.

I'm with Heartland Fan from above. I think it'll be Rush at 11 & Jason Thompson at 17.

Kegboy
06-25-2008, 09:03 PM
I think it will be

11-Brandon Rush
17-Darrell Arthur

Just a hunch.

:hug2:

Isaac
06-25-2008, 09:21 PM
I am praying Chalmers falls to 17 but it doesn't look like that's going to happen now.

I'd like to get Speights, and I think Hibbert would be a good guy to pair with him.

pacergod2
06-25-2008, 09:26 PM
I would be happier than a pig in **** if we got Rush and Speights.

I wouldnt hate Gordon, Love, Lopez at 11 because that is serious value.

Please no Koufos. I think he is justa smokescreen for Speights because the front office knew they were trading Jermaine. As soon as there was an agreed upon trade, they started pushing Kofous' name around a bit in hopes that he goes ahead of Speights and nearly guarantees their guy is there at 17.

I would be seriously in love with the future lineup of

Ford, G. Hill (41)
Rush, S. Graham
Granger, J. Graham
Williams, Diogu
Speights, Murphy

That is some solid talent. That would be the first time I have thought that since the 2004-2005 season.

Next up: Trade Dunleavy for an expiring and another draft pick. If it is a 2009 first rounder thats fine. It gives us a year to see what some of these guys can do together.

We eat Murphys contract anyway. Foster is a deadline deal and Marquis we dont exercise next year. Thats loads us up on draft picks for next year and gives us some continuity going forward as an organization in terms of contracts expiring while players develop.

croz24
06-25-2008, 09:36 PM
i'll be upset if we go "safe" with both picks. i think it'd be very wise to go "potential" with 1 of the 2 picks and "safe" with the other...i guess i'd like a combination of randolph or someone who slips to #11 AND a big along the lines of hibbert or thompson, or again a player who slips, at #17...

croz24
06-25-2008, 09:40 PM
Here is my take on Hibbert, he's big, skilled, and smart. He was one of the top players last year. But, Hibbert only made sense to the Pacers if he was going to play with O'Neal. If people expect Hibbert to be JO's replacement, they're going to be disappointed. I'd rather have Arthur or Ajinca to try and fill JO's shoes.

i've never been that high on hibbert, but he does remind me of a poor man's rik smits. something also needs to be said for georgetown's defense. there's a reason they were always a top 5 defensive team while hibbert was there...why ajinca? all anybody knows of the kid are his recent 1v1, 2v2 nba workouts and suddenly he's a top 20 pick? riiight...

D-BONE
06-25-2008, 09:43 PM
Any of these guys:

Bigs: Speights, Arthur, Thompson, Hibbert

Guards: Agustin, Chalmers, Rush

Certainly any top ten drops if they materialize. I'd love for it to be B. Lopez, but it seems highly unlikely.

Coop
06-25-2008, 10:01 PM
Also something to keep in mind...

Next year looks to have a great crop of centers and point guards. As of now, DraftExpress has 9 of the top 12 picks as a PG or C. Would everyone rather still focus on players like Augustin and Hibbert, or turn your attention towards players like Speights, Thompson and Rush with the intention of going after a premier PG/C next year?

PG's next year- Ricky Rubio, Brandon Jennings, Tyreke Evans, Darren Collison

C's next year- Hasheem Thabeet, BJ Mullens, Blake Griffin (PF/C)

croz24
06-25-2008, 10:05 PM
patrick patterson is anything but a center. patterson could even be classified as an undersized pf. same can be said for griffin and hansbrough. so only two of the 5 players you mentioned are actually centers. and those two will most likely be drafted top 5-10...it's so hard to predict who is and isn't coming out the year before a draft to even consider that into your thought process while drafting.

Major Cold
06-25-2008, 10:10 PM
speights/Randolph/ #11

Chalmers/Rush/CDR #17

laft
06-25-2008, 10:14 PM
I likes me some Kansas ballers. Either way we're all possibly looking at this the wrong way: whoever we draft won't be named Tinsley and won't ride the pine while collecting roughly 20 million dollars. WHATEVER happens tomorrow, Pacers basketball will be moving in a new direction for good!

Justin Tyme
06-25-2008, 10:14 PM
I did some serious looking last night after I viewed the Bird press conference.

I'm with Heartland Fan from above. I think it'll be Rush at 11 & Jason Thompson at 17.

I feel 17 is too high for Thompson. Early 20 is where he will go.

eldubious
06-25-2008, 10:15 PM
The #17 pick will come down to Hibbert or Arthur. I don't think there was any reason for Bird to put out smoke-screens about these players, he truly likes them. Looking at the current make-up of the team, whose only real big is Rasho, I'm leaning toward Hibbert. Now, if the Pacers were to pick up another big in free agency, then I would say Arthur. But, having Arthur along with Foster, Murphy, Diogu, and Rasho doesn't make too much sense.

Coop
06-25-2008, 10:16 PM
patrick patterson is anything but a center. patterson could even be classified as an undersized pf. same can be said for griffin and hansbrough. so only two of the 5 players you mentioned are actually centers. and those two will most likely be drafted top 5-10...it's so hard to predict who is and isn't coming out the year before a draft to even consider that into your thought process while drafting.


You won't know exactly who is coming out, but you do get a general idea. I think its pretty obvious we'll see Rubio, Jennings, Thabeet, Hansbrough, Griffin, and possibly Mullens and Evans next year. My point was, you know help is coming at those positions. With that in mind, would it be wise to address other needs such as SG (Brandon Rush)? IMO, I think we take Rush this year at 11, then someone like Thompson or Speights at 17. Then you can address the C position next year. You can also choose to switch it up at PG if you aren't happy with how TJ performs.

sig
06-25-2008, 10:16 PM
Donta Green has a lot of potential, IMO, if you are looking for a high risk/reward pick. Maybe at 17.

Young
06-25-2008, 10:25 PM
If Ford does indeed come on board then no we don't draft Augistin.

At 11 I would LOVE for Gordon or Bayless or fall there to us.

I think the others I would look at with either pick is Rush, Speights maybe, Thompson, Hibbert, Arthur would be my guesses.

I really don't know who I would take at 17. I'm not to excited about the 11th pick unless its Gordon or Bayless so I don't know what to think of the 17th.

Rush and Thompson might be ideal at this point. Rush WILL NOT be a star but he can be a glue guy. Thompson is as good as any of the big man prospects so almost have to go with him there.

laft
06-25-2008, 10:30 PM
Also something to keep in mind...

Next year looks to have a great crop of centers and point guards. As of now, DraftExpress has 9 of the top 12 picks as a PG or C. Would everyone rather still focus on players like Augustin and Hibbert, or turn your attention towards players like Speights, Thompson and Rush with the intention of going after a premier PG/C next year?

PG's next year- Ricky Rubio, Brandon Jennings, Tyreke Evans, Ty Lawson, Darren Collison

C's next year- Hasheem Thabeet, BJ Mullens, Blake Griffin (PF/C), Patrick Patterson, Tyler Hansbrough

If I'm not mistaken Tyreke Evans is a SG. Also, do we really want Lawson after his stock falling due to off-court issues? Sorry to say it, but your story's full of holes.

Coop
06-25-2008, 10:32 PM
I think everyone is being a bit critical with my post. Evans is listed as a PG/SG on DraftExpress (similar to Mayo, Bayless). I was just saying its something to think about when looking at who's available with our picks this year.

What I posted is by no means "a story".

Edit: Changed the names in my other post so you girls can stop complaining.

DisplacedKnick
06-25-2008, 10:35 PM
I think you look hard at Arthur - solid citizen, should be productive. At 17 I think you'll be looking at Hibberd or Robin Lopez.

Don't forget - you'll end up with a couple other players in the JO deal. If it's Kapono you'll have a dead-on 3-pt shooter and yet another swingman - I think you have anough of those.

Chalmers would be a good pick at 17 but for some reason I get the sense he'll be gone by then.

I highly doubt Gordon's there at 11 - obviously, if he is you grab him but I'd be surprised. I can't see Bird going for Randolph though in some ways that may be the best move. Of course if he's still hanging around at 17 he's another guy you'd have to think about.

laft
06-25-2008, 10:35 PM
Sorry, just a popular quote amongst friends whenever they're in question- "Your story's full of holes". I do absolutely love the thought of 'Reke a year from now; chills down my spine.

esabyrn333
06-25-2008, 10:37 PM
If Gordon or someone else does not slip I would go Augstin or Randolf at 11 and go with Thompson or Hibbert at 17 unless Jordon or McGee really Impressed at the tryouts. I really like the Idea of Ford & Augustin being our PG rotation.

Plax80
06-25-2008, 10:37 PM
I would be happier than a pig in **** if we got Rush and Speights.

I wouldnt hate Gordon, Love, Lopez at 11 because that is serious value.

Please no Koufos. I think he is justa smokescreen for Speights because the front office knew they were trading Jermaine. As soon as there was an agreed upon trade, they started pushing Kofous' name around a bit in hopes that he goes ahead of Speights and nearly guarantees their guy is there at 17.

I would be seriously in love with the future lineup of

Ford, G. Hill (41)
Rush, S. Graham
Granger, J. Graham
Williams, Diogu
Speights, Murphy

That is some solid talent. That would be the first time I have thought that since the 2004-2005 season.

Next up: Trade Dunleavy for an expiring and another draft pick. If it is a 2009 first rounder thats fine. It gives us a year to see what some of these guys can do together.

We eat Murphys contract anyway. Foster is a deadline deal and Marquis we dont exercise next year. Thats loads us up on draft picks for next year and gives us some continuity going forward as an organization in terms of contracts expiring while players develop.

yeah-

I think we would at least be a 3 seed in the West.

I might even make the trip to Provo to watch the first two rounds.

croz24
06-25-2008, 10:41 PM
You won't know exactly who is coming out, but you do get a general idea. I think its pretty obvious we'll see Rubio, Jennings, Thabeet, Hansbrough, Griffin, and possibly Mullens and Evans next year. My point was, you know help is coming at those positions. With that in mind, would it be wise to address other needs such as SG (Brandon Rush)? IMO, I think we take Rush this year at 11, then someone like Thompson or Speights at 17. Then you can address the C position next year. You can also choose to switch it up at PG if you aren't happy with how TJ performs.

i understand what you are trying to say, and you were incorrect on the position listing of some of those players...mullens is a top 5 pick next year unless he completely flops which is HIGHLY unlikely. thabeet doesn't have that much "upside" than the centers coming out this year. honestly, this year's center class, while unspectacular, is littered with capable centers to the likes i have never seen before. there are about 9 or 10 LEGIT centers who could be drafted in the 1st round this year. i'm not 100%, but i feel safe in stating that that many centers have never been drafted in round 1 before...

as for the pgs, of course i'd wait and not draft one this year. it'd be a wasted pick imo. pgs like westbrook, augustin, chalmers, etc etc come out EVERY YEAR and slip and slide all over the place. if we don't draft a pg at #11 this year, i guarantee you we'd have pgs equally as talented available to us no matter where we picked next year or the year after. it's that top 1 or 2 pgs in each draft you crave. beyond that, they're all the same and history proves that...

Plax80
06-25-2008, 10:41 PM
I think everyone is being a bit critical with my post. Evans is listed as a PG/SG on DraftExpress (similar to Mayo, Bayless). I was just saying its something to think about when looking at who's available with our picks this year.

What I posted is by no means "a story".

Edit: Changed the names in my other post so you girls can stop complaining.

I think most real Pacer fans will spend much more time analyzing the players that you mentioned next season.

Only 366 days until the 09 Draft.

Better get to the TV by 7.02 if you want to see the Pacers pick.........although with our luck we'll slip to 4th no matter how bad the record.

Coop
06-25-2008, 10:50 PM
i understand what you are trying to say, and you were incorrect on the position listing of some of those players...mullens is a top 5 pick next year unless he completely flops which is HIGHLY unlikely. thabeet doesn't have that much "upside" than the centers coming out this year. honestly, this year's center class, while unspectacular, is littered with capable centers to the likes i have never seen before. there are about 9 or 10 LEGIT centers who could be drafted in the 1st round this year. i'm not 100%, but i feel safe in stating that that many centers have never been drafted in round 1 before...

as for the pgs, of course i'd wait and not draft one this year. it'd be a wasted pick imo. pgs like westbrook, augustin, chalmers, etc etc come out EVERY YEAR and slip and slide all over the place. if we don't draft a pg at #11 this year, i guarantee you we'd have pgs equally as talented available to us no matter where we picked next year or the year after. it's that top 1 or 2 pgs in each draft you crave. beyond that, they're all the same and history proves that...


Yeah, when I originally went through the 09 mock, I just typed out some of the names I saw and where I thought they would be playing. After going back and looking at positions and heights, I realized a couple of those players didn't fit. Thus my edit.

I think picking a Center this year could be acceptable depending on the choice (No Koufos or Hibbert). But, I absolutely would not pick a PG. With players like Rubio, Jennings, and Evans coming, you have to wait. My main point in bringing this all up was to question those who are still interested in taking Augustin or Hibbert. I feel like from where we're picking, we can get much better value.

croz24
06-25-2008, 10:55 PM
yea, i'm with you as far as pgs are concerned. i wouldn't mind a hibbert selection as long as we took bpa or a player with upside with pick #11. i really think "upside" + "safe" is the way to go. a rush + hibbert or arthur + chalmers is just way too boring for me and leaves us without much future potential imo.

Indianapolis_girly
06-25-2008, 11:19 PM
ahhh, my dream would be Gordon at #11 and Rush at #17.

:)

Mr. Sobchak
06-26-2008, 12:13 AM
11: Gordon, Bayless, Lopez..if not one of them then Brandon Rush

17: DeAndre Jordan- Not such a good pick at 11 but a great value pick here..

CableKC
06-26-2008, 12:17 AM
17: DeAndre Jordan- Not such a good pick at 11 but a great value pick here..
Didn't Bird said that he values "polish over potential"?

Although Jordan would be a good pick if we were to ignore this....I don't think that he's going to gamble in this draft.

PR07
06-26-2008, 12:23 AM
I'd really like Anthony Randolph at #11, but Bird wants polish apparently.

I think Brandon Rush would be an awesome pick at #11.

Koufos, Speights, or Arthur at #17.

George Hill or Mike Green at #41.

Kid Minneapolis
06-26-2008, 12:25 AM
Well, after taking some time to analyze this trade, and the situation of the Pacers new roster, I generally feel comfortable with Ford at PG, Dunleavy at SG, and Granger at SF as starters. I also generally approve of Diener backing up Ford, Rush behind Dunleavy, and Graham behind Granger, although I wouldn't certainly wouldn't reject an upgrade in talent at those positions. I assume (hope) that Tinsley won't be a factor for us, and I honestly have no expectations of Daniels.... I guess you could throw him in there behind any of those guys, I can't figure the guy out. Granger technically has Shawne behind him, and he's a talented player, but I don't know if he's long for this team.

I actually feel like our front-court talent could use a shot in the arm. We're looking at Murphy, Foster, Rasho as the known quantities... who really knows what will become of Diogu, and Harrison is a screwball, if you ask me.

So ya, I think our front-court needs some addressing. I like Foster, and Murphy has his days, but neither one is getting any younger.

And there's plenty of good big-man help to get in this draft. I say go big. I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Love or Lopez or Koufos were still available to us at #11... there's a nice number of big guys that could work at #17, although I could almost see Bird goin for someone like Donte' Green at #17 with his athleticism and ability to play the 3 middle positions.

croz24
06-26-2008, 12:33 AM
you have 2 first round picks relatively close to each other and not much "star" potential on your team, and you aren't going to take the necessary gamble with one of those picks? that'd be a very dumb move imo.

Jose Slaughter
06-26-2008, 12:34 AM
I feel 17 is too high for Thompson. Early 20 is where he will go.

I had thought that too but I think Bird has had it with young guys with potential. I think he's looking at guys that are ready to step in & help next year, not 3 years down the road like Randolph, Jordan, Koufos or McGee.

If thats the case & we have our point in Ford & a serviceable center in Nesterovic, I would look to shore up 2 area's of concern.

1. Outside shooting. With an O'Brien coached team, we will almost always be looking to add guys that can drill the 3. Rush shot 41.9% from beyond the arc last season, he did better his first 2 years, 47.2% & 43.1%.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=18881

2. Rebounding. Only 6 team had a worse +/- than the Pacers on the board last season.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable2.html?cnf=1&prd=1#top

So, I think we need to address that area, especially with out JO playing his 40 or so games a season here. Thompson, in the 6 mocks I follow was listed at 20, twice, 23 twice, 28 & 29. So, your right 17 might be a little high for him but considering the amount of "young guys with big po" being available in that area, I could see Bird getting the guy he wants, even if it is a few spots early. Other than his FT%, his numbers seem to be getting better each season.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?playerId=19222&draftyear=2008

Slick Pinkham
06-26-2008, 12:49 AM
I'll set my expectations as low as they can go, so that I might be pleasantly surprised.

I'll say Koufas at 11 and Hibbert at 17.

Over 14 whole feet of stiffness.

BigMac
06-26-2008, 12:52 AM
My personal opinion is that the Pacers will take Hibbert at #11 and #17 will be a 2 or a combo guard-definitely not named George Hill. I have read that he may sneak into the first round. That would be a shock.

Hibbert will be a very good center for a long time in the league. Why risk missing him at #17 when Augustin could slip to #17-unless someone trades up for him. I'm not sold on the little guy, though.

thunderbird1245
06-26-2008, 01:03 AM
I'll take Bayless or Westbrook if they drop to #11, which I think has about a 20% chance of happening now as I type this.

If Gordon drops to #11, which I think is somewhat more likely, I would pass on him, even though that decision will be controversial. I actually have this happening in my own mock draft, in which I included trades I think may happen too, just for fun.

Realistically, I think the Pacers need another point guard still with size to pair up with TJ Ford, and now you need a big man to replace JO who is potentially good enough to be a low post scoring threat.

Because of how the teams behind us are put together, and the lack of point guards I trust, I'd be forced to take the point guard first, even though that is a bit of a reach, and then see which big guy falls to me at #17.

So, knowing what my thinking is, assuming the draft goes how I think it will, I'll go with:

Mario Chalmers at #11.
Marresse Speights at #17.

317Kim
06-26-2008, 01:12 AM
I'm thinkin' Arthur and Rush as of now.

NapTonius Monk
06-26-2008, 01:16 AM
I'll take Bayless or Westbrook if they drop to #11, which I think has about a 20% chance of happening now as I type this.

If Gordon drops to #11, which I think is somewhat more likely, I would pass on him, even though that decision will be controversial. I actually have this happening in my own mock draft, in which I included trades I think may happen too, just for fun.

Realistically, I think the Pacers need another point guard still with size to pair up with TJ Ford, and now you need a big man to replace JO who is potentially good enough to be a low post scoring threat.

Because of how the teams behind us are put together, and the lack of point guards I trust, I'd be forced to take the point guard first, even though that is a bit of a reach, and then see which big guy falls to me at #17.

So, knowing what my thinking is, assuming the draft goes how I think it will, I'll go with:

Mario Chalmers at #11.
Marresse Speights at #17.

Flip-flop...and then agreed.

I wouldn't mind them going double big with Hibbert/Speights or Arthur/Speights. How about maybe Courtney Lee with #17?

blanket
06-26-2008, 01:21 AM
I want:
11 - Speights
17 - Chalmers

I expect:
11 - Rush
17 - Hibbert

and I'd actually be OK with that (I guess)

Isaac
06-26-2008, 01:30 AM
Flip-flop...and then agreed.

I wouldn't mind them going double big with Hibbert/Speights or Arthur/Speights. How about maybe Courtney Lee with #17?

Chalmers and Speights is what I'm hoping for too, and I think Chalmers at 11 and Speights at 17 is the more likely scenario. I don't think Chalmers gets past Sacramento.

Anthony Randolph wouldn't bother me at all at 17 either.

thunderbird1245
06-26-2008, 01:32 AM
Flip-flop...and then agreed.

I wouldn't mind them going double big with Hibbert/Speights or Arthur/Speights. How about maybe Courtney Lee with #17?


I had it that way originally, with Speights at #11 and Chalmers at our "acquired pick", early in the week when we didnt know exactly how the draft would shake out.

It appears to me now as I break it down that Chalmers won't fall to #17....I think Sacramento will take him at #12 right behind us in fact. Since the bigs are all falling, we will have our choice of a few different bigs I think at #17, but all the decent point guards will be gone by then. So to achieve both goals, you have to take Chalmers first, at least the way I am trying to read the other teams thoughts.

jhutt50
06-26-2008, 01:47 AM
It appears that Danilo Gallinari will be taken in the Top 10, either by the Knicks or Nets. Rose, Beasley, Mayo won't slip out of the Top 10 at all. That leaves Love, Lopez, Bayless, Westbrook, Gordon, Alexander, and Augustin that are all top 10 talents. Out of those Alexander is a swingman and we don't need another one of those. I don't think we should take Augustin after getting Ford, they are both small. If any of the other guys are there (hopefully) we should take whoever it is. It looks like Lopez and Love will be gone, so it's down to the combo guards. Westbrook didn't work out for us so he is somewhere in the Top 10. That leaves Gordon and Bayless, who both are excellent players. Granted we can use a bigger point guard/insurance for Ford, but if one of those guys are there we should take them. If they are all gone I like either Rush or Chalmers at 11.

I think the next tier of bigs is going to be available at 17, whether it be Hibbert, Lopez, Arthur, or Speights. I really like Hibbert even though he doesn't have a ton of upside, I think he will be a solid pro. I think he can average 10 pts/ 8 rbs / 2 blocks a game, and he protects the rim pretty well.

So, I would like to see:
11 - Bayless
17 - Hibbert

But I would be happy with Rush or Chalmers at 11, and any of those other bigs at 17.

croz24
06-26-2008, 01:56 AM
nothing cracks me up more then seeing people scoff at the idea of drafting alexander because he's a "swingman", yet are very open to the idea of drafting rush...A SWINGMAN :rolleyes:

jhutt50
06-26-2008, 02:05 AM
Yeah, Rush is a swingman, but he is more of a SG then a SF. He would fit on the team, while Joe Alexander is a SF/PF like Granger and Shawne Williams. Rush will be a 3 point shooter, and I believer he can be a good perimeter defender. Anyways, it is irrelevant because I don't think Alexander will fall past the Bucks.

Tony Valente
06-26-2008, 02:17 AM
I'd still take AJ Augustine with the 11th. Then work out some trade with Phoenix for DJ Strawberry. We will end up with AJ, TJ and DJ, hence we'll be the team with the funniest names.

And ... oh yeah ... where is that guy PJ Brown now?

Isaac
06-26-2008, 02:18 AM
Um, his name is DJ Augustin...

LoneGranger33
06-26-2008, 02:22 AM
Don't we have the right to name him if we draft him? This is the freakin' NBA after all.

Isaac
06-26-2008, 02:31 AM
I googled AJ Augustin, apparently he helped right a report on blood substitutes and oxygen carriers on dogs.

I think we're really getting a stand-up citizen with this pick. :thumbsup:

PR07
06-26-2008, 02:31 AM
Rush can play the 2 and 3 interchangeably. Also, he can handle the ball really well. He has an all-around solid game, and can shoot and defend. An excellent 6th man to start his career, and probably the longterm answer at SG. With Shawne Williams on thin ice and Marquis Daniels's inconsistency and lack of shooting ability, Rush makes a lot of sense. Plus, it gives you the ability to go with a lineup of Ford, Rush, Dunleavy, Granger, and Foster which could wreak havoc in certain situations. Small ball works at times, ask Boston.

Mourning
06-26-2008, 02:37 AM
i'll be upset if we go "safe" with both picks. i think it'd be very wise to go "potential" with 1 of the 2 picks and "safe" with the other...i guess i'd like a combination of randolph or someone who slips to #11 AND a big along the lines of hibbert or thompson, or again a player who slips, at #17...

I agree that atleast one of the two picks should be used on a player who has got big untapped reservoirs of talent. Speights fits that bill fine for me as does Randolph. The other pick could be used to pick more "safely". Offcourse if one of the big-10 is available you HAVE to take one of those.

I'm not for picking Hibbert. At. All. He seems like a nice guy, but we are trying to build a good basketball team and I am just not impressed by him. Besides we need someone who is quicker on the court given the system we play. Arthur would make a lot more sense, but Chalmers with #17 would be great too.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

TheSauceMaster
06-26-2008, 03:03 AM
I'd really like Anthony Randolph at #11, but Bird wants polish apparently.

I think Brandon Rush would be an awesome pick at #11.

Koufos, Speights, or Arthur at #17.

George Hill or Mike Green at #41.

We don't get a pick at 41;)


ESPN.com has also learned that the Raptors will get the 41st pick from the Pacers as part of the deal while the Pacers will receive Raptors forward Maceo Baston (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3301) to complete the deal.

rel
06-26-2008, 03:18 AM
We don't get a pick at 41;)

WHAT!...talk about a load of poop

Justin Tyme
06-26-2008, 07:14 AM
I think everyone is being a bit critical with my post. Evans is listed as a PG/SG on DraftExpress (similar to Mayo, Bayless). I was just saying its something to think about when looking at who's available with our picks this year.

What I posted is by no means "a story".

Edit: Changed the names in my other post so you girls can stop complaining.

Your idea and thought about next years draft is a GOOD one! The Pacers don't need to draft a PG this year. Maybe not even a SG. I'm not opposed to drafting 2 bigs with Speights being one to replace JO.

Justin Tyme
06-26-2008, 07:21 AM
you have 2 first round picks relatively close to each other and not much "star" potential on your team, and you aren't going to take the necessary gamble with one of those picks? that'd be a very dumb move imo.

What your saying has some merit, BUT Bird can't take the chance this year. He's under the gun to produce now to get the Pacers back into the playoffs. He and his job can't afford the luxury of drafting "POTENTIAL." Next year is a possible different situation.

Justin Tyme
06-26-2008, 07:39 AM
I had it that way originally, with Speights at #11 and Chalmers at our "acquired pick", early in the week when we didnt know exactly how the draft would shake out.

It appears to me now as I break it down that Chalmers won't fall to #17....I think Sacramento will take him at #12 right behind us in fact. Since the bigs are all falling, we will have our choice of a few different bigs I think at #17, but all the decent point guards will be gone by then. So to achieve both goals, you have to take Chalmers first, at least the way I am trying to read the other teams thoughts.

I would take those 2 and feel real happy with it. If those are the 2, I don't care which is drafted where.

I could be happy with 2 bigs, with one being Speights to replace JO.

I could be happy with Speights and Rush/Lee.

I won't be happy with Koufos or Hibbert. Well, I guess if necessary, I could live with Hibbert at C ONLY with Speight at PF, but not Hibbert with a PG or SG. I'd have to do all in my power to restrain myself from going Birdal/postal.

Justin Tyme
06-26-2008, 07:53 AM
nothing cracks me up more then seeing people scoff at the idea of drafting alexander because he's a "swingman", yet are very open to the idea of drafting rush...A SWINGMAN :rolleyes:



I believe that people feel a swingman is a player who plays SF & SG. I don't see Alexander playing SG. I can see Alexander playing SF and some PF, but I don't see that as being called a swingman. I see it more of a difference in what people perceive the definition of a swingman is. JMOAA

Justin Tyme
06-26-2008, 08:02 AM
We don't get a pick at 41;)


Bird had best be figuring how to get in the 31-34 pick then. Shawne Williams I would hope would get it done.

Rajah Brown
06-26-2008, 08:12 AM
PR07-

Actually, Rush's handle is pretty questionable. He's mostly a catch and
shoot guy who can't really go to his left via the dribble at all. But
you're right, he's predominantly a SG with a pretty solid, if
somewhat streaky, perimeter shot.

Alexander is a SF all the way (ok, he could probably play some PF in
a D'Antonio-esque system). And for now anyway, he has no perimeter
shot/range to speak of and a handle that's dubious at best.

D-BONE
06-26-2008, 08:15 AM
Bird had best be figuring how to get in the 31-34 pick then. Shawne Williams I would hope would get it done.

Could be a good spot to pick with guys like Weaver and Hickson still on the board to name a few. Would that be palatable in return for Shawne Williams?

wjs
06-26-2008, 08:31 AM
More than anything, I hope Pacers' scouts and coaches have done their homework and have a good fix on how good, or not, some of these guys are and what their relative values are; i.e., assessments based on players' workouts and their body of work, not just a few highlight clips.

Most of us just don't have that insight; I know I do not.

That said, we definitely need at least one big guy. From all the media analysis, Speights seems to stand out. But at 11 or 17?

I also like Hibbert. And Rush. And Bayless. No Eric Gordon, please.

We really need a 3rd pick in the top 20.

Whatever, I hope they know what they are doing.

RWB
06-26-2008, 09:23 AM
I'm not for picking Hibbert. At. All. He seems like a nice guy, but we are trying to build a good basketball team and I am just not impressed by him. Besides we need someone who is quicker on the court given the system we play.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Absolutely makes sense and yet I still want Hibbert. My reasoning is in another year we'll see this style does not work in the playoffs and the Pacers will go back to a grinding style that does seem to work.

A 7'2" Center with a hookshot in Indy and not New York this time is fine by me.

Coop
06-26-2008, 10:08 AM
I hope you honestly don't think that Hibbert will have 1/10th the impact Patrick Ewing did. Both he and Koufos would be terrible for this team, at any pick.

All excitement that I may have experienced yesterday from the JO trade will be squashed if we end up with either of these two guys.

RWB
06-26-2008, 10:16 AM
I hope you honestly don't think that Hibbert will have 1/10th the impact Patrick Ewing did. Both he and Koufos would be terrible for this team, at any pick.

All excitement that I may have experienced yesterday from the JO trade will be squashed if we end up with either of these two guys.

Well, since you're giving percentages then yes I do believe Hibbert can have 1/10th the impact Patrick Ewing did. And yes I believe he is worth the selection at #17. Maybe I'm too old school, but I still believe you need a legit center and not a converted power forward when it comes to the real season (playoffs).

Dukins
06-26-2008, 10:20 AM
For JOB's system we dont need a slow center in Koufos or Hibbert, we neeed an athletic type PF/C that can run up and down the court. At this point I believe we need to take a bigger point first, whether it be Bayless that drops or Chalmers. Then for the PF/C take Arthur with the pick at 17, there will be more than enough bigs to choose from at 17.

Like someone suggested earlier we definitely need to get into the higher end of the second round to get a local prospect. Either Hill, Lee, or Green(which I think will not even be drafted). We need to put the fans back into the seats with a GOOD local prospect.

Trader Joe
06-26-2008, 10:21 AM
I'm completely fine with taking Koufos at 17. Not at 11 though.

JHcutt18
06-26-2008, 10:28 AM
I just read that the Heat have gotten many offers for Shawn Marion. One of the teams being the Pacers. Also Bird might be trying to move Dunleavy and his contract.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/basketball/heat/sfl-flspheatnote26sbjun26,0,7171482.story

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/chris_mannix/06/25/oneal.trade/?eref=sircrc

Coop
06-26-2008, 10:31 AM
That would be another 17.8 million expiring.

RWB
06-26-2008, 10:32 AM
For JOB's system we dont need a slow center in Koufos or Hibbert, we neeed an athletic type PF/C that can run up and down the court.

As stated above I believe those who have posted similar thoughts as your's are correct (in JOB's system). However, I believe in two years Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Bird will not be in their current positions. Of course JMO.

Shade
06-26-2008, 10:33 AM
I just read that the Heat have gotten many offers for Shawn Marion. One of the teams being the Pacers. Also Bird might be trying to move Dunleavy and his contract.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/basketball/heat/sfl-flspheatnote26sbjun26,0,7171482.story

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/chris_mannix/06/25/oneal.trade/?eref=sircrc

Even if we traded Dun, we still have no major need for Marion. I'm not for acquiring anybody that's going to get in Granger's way.

Shade
06-26-2008, 10:34 AM
Unless a no-brainer falls to us at #11, I would like Chalmers at #11 (I don't think he'll drop below #12), and the best player available (hopefully a big like Arthur or Speights) at #17.

I want no part of Koufos, Hibbert, or Jordan at all.

idioteque
06-26-2008, 10:36 AM
All I will say is that, I am watching the draftcast from work tonight, and I'll probably destroy the work computer monitor if they pick Randolph and Kofus.

Rajah Brown
06-26-2008, 10:39 AM
Unfortunately, the kind of 'big' we need (basically, a blend of Dale
and Antonio Davis) may not be available in this draft. If he is, it's
a crapshoot as to which of the young guys with supposed
'upside' might eventually grow into that type of player.

If we go small at #11, as dubious as I am of his seeming lack of
intangibles, I'd probably roll the dice on Jordan at #17.

ab2cmiller
06-26-2008, 10:44 AM
When are JO and Ford having their physicals?

If this deal is really contingent upon them both passing their physicals and those don't happen before the draft, how does this impact the #17 pick.

If Bird tells the Raptors who to pick with #17 and one of the guys fails the physical later, I'm assuming the raptors are stuck with whoever we told them to draft unless their is a backup deal in place for the draftpick if one of the guys fails the physical.

Anyone have any insights?

Dukins
06-26-2008, 10:53 AM
When are JO and Ford having their physicals?

If this deal is really contingent upon them both passing their physicals and those don't happen before the draft, how does this impact the #17 pick.

If Bird tells the Raptors who to pick with #17 and one of the guys fails the physical later, I'm assuming the raptors are stuck with whoever we told them to draft unless their is a backup deal in place for the draftpick if one of the guys fails the physical.

Anyone have any insights?


Not quite sure how that works, but I was thinking the same thing. I would hate to see the trade nulled, because either player hasnt passed their physicals yet. I would like to more info about this as well.


#11 Chalmers or Rush , #17 Arthur or Thomson or McGee <-----lol

Aw Heck
06-26-2008, 11:01 AM
Even if we traded Dun, we still have no major need for Marion. I'm not for acquiring anybody that's going to get in Granger's way.
Remember, Marion played the 4 spot in Phoenix for quite a while. If the Pacers traded for Marion, I think he would play PF here.

I'd trade Dunleavy/Tinsley/Williams or Diogu/future draft pick for Marion if that could get it done. But I'm not sure I'd offer anything more than that.

MyFavMartin
06-26-2008, 11:02 AM
koufos and speights... aisle 3

or speights and koufos... aisle 9

Speed
06-26-2008, 11:16 AM
This is stupid, but I have such a good feeling that someone falls to them at 11, from Lopez to Bayless to Gordon. You have to take them, you just have too.

What if its Galleneri? A small forward type, maybe that is why they are trying to have at lease some kind of deal in place for Dunleavey, if that happens, you could justify taking him or Alexander at 11.

I am really really impressed with Morway/Bird. It really sounds like they have contingency plans all over the place.

But if everything goes to the way it probably will. I'd say

Chalmers and Speights (stealing this from T bird.)

If things go perfect and I know this is a dream of dreams.

I'd say

Bayless and Lopez (and I mean Brook not Robin)

Ya I know that is a reach, but I've said all along Brook will fall and maybe far, no one wants to draft slightly above average or solid and that seems to be the perception.

Hicks
06-26-2008, 11:46 AM
Even if we traded Dun, we still have no major need for Marion. I'm not for acquiring anybody that's going to get in Granger's way.

Shawn Marion would be our power forward, replacing Troy Murphy.

Plax80
06-26-2008, 11:49 AM
Even if we traded Dun, we still have no major need for Marion. I'm not for acquiring anybody that's going to get in Granger's way.

Were clearly not interested in extending Marion long term so its nothing to get real excited about. I'm surprised about Dunleavy but less so today than yesterday.

Apparently the Simon's want to clear all the money off the books with decresed interest and attendance, finish at the bottom for a few years and rebuild with young future draft picks that don't cost any money.

I won't be surprised to see Granger's name floated around next summer since he will begin to cost some money soon as well.

And to be fair..........if I owned the team today I might do the same exact thing. Why pay $65-75mm/yr for a team to win 38 games in a small market with a dwindling fan base ???

Making moves that only slightly improve the roster isn't changing the big picture any...........and with teams like Atlanta, Cleveland, Chicago, Miami and possibly Philly and Milwaukee all poised for solid improvement and potential long playoff runs..........than why not get rid of everybody and start over from the bottom, hopefully acquiring a sorely needed franchise player from one of the next few drafts.

Let the 09 draft scouting begin in earnest now.

Rajah Brown
06-26-2008, 11:51 AM
Plax80-

Blake Griffin, c'mon down ! Only kidding. Unfortunately, we won't suck
nearly enough to grab him next year.

naptownmenace
06-26-2008, 11:54 AM
If he slips - Kevin Love at #11 and CDR at #17.

If Love is gone - Chalmers at #11 and Speights at #17.


I like Chalmers' defense and size and think he'd be an excellent backup for TJ Ford.

Kraft
06-26-2008, 11:55 AM
I really wouldn't mind seeing a guy like Courtney Lee at 17 if you don't pick Brandon Rush at 11. There's still really no one on this team who can guard truly athletic shooting guards. Watching our defensive corps play against Dwyane Wade won't be pretty. Ford was a start to shoring up the perimeter defense, but you can't stop there.

Coop
06-26-2008, 11:56 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-3mM336_tY8

Griffin is a beast. I don't know that he would be my first choice though. He's a bit undersized. I think I'd rather go for someone like Mullens.

I'm getting way ahead of myself though. We're still a full year away :D

Mr. Sobchak
06-26-2008, 12:03 PM
We should take Hibbert at 17 and demand something valuable from Charlotte for him...

Plax80
06-26-2008, 12:08 PM
Plax80-

Blake Griffin, c'mon down ! Only kidding. Unfortunately, we won't suck
nearly enough to grab him next year.


Other than the Knicks, and they have much more talent, name me one team that would swap rosters with us right now ??

I can't think of anybody. Maybe Seattle, but they have Durant and #4..........all we have is Granger and Dunleavy.

Its going to be a very long season.

Blake Griffin sounds pretty good to me as does patterson from Kentucky or possibly Brandon jennings.

Plax80
06-26-2008, 12:11 PM
I really wouldn't mind seeing a guy like Courtney Lee at 17 if you don't pick Brandon Rush at 11. There's still really no one on this team who can guard truly athletic shooting guards. Watching our defensive corps play against Dwyane Wade won't be pretty. Ford was a start to shoring up the perimeter defense, but you can't stop there.

it won't matter as much this year since no one will be able to guard the post either..........Wade will just dump the ball inside during the 21 minutes he's on the floor.

Dukins
06-26-2008, 12:22 PM
#11 Chalmers

#17 And with the 17th pick in this years NBA draft the Indiana Pacers select.... Yokis Viskatoria from the Ucatan territory.

Please Larry don't screw this up...:eek::censored::buddies:

Rajah Brown
06-26-2008, 12:25 PM
Plax-

I hear ya. I figure Griffin may well go #1 next year if he has a big
soph season. I dunno that we'll be THAT bad. We are still in the EC.

RWB
06-26-2008, 12:25 PM
Guess I forgot to actually list both picks.

#11 First whoever would be a top pick who accidently falls. But being realistic...

#11 Rush
#17 Hibbert

MyFavMartin
06-26-2008, 12:53 PM
i believe there's a group of players that bird likes at 17... not that he's holding his breath for a particular player to be there at 17.

grab BPA at both spots.

obviously, at 11, anybody who falls...

or

augustin, koufos, rush, speights, chalmers, arthur, courtney lee, r. lopez

I'd be happy with two of the above. With TJ Ford, I don't think we NEED another PG as Diener will provide a quality 15 minutes as a backup.

bird might also like hibbert, who i don't like.

croz24
06-26-2008, 01:02 PM
What your saying has some merit, BUT Bird can't take the chance this year. He's under the gun to produce now to get the Pacers back into the playoffs. He and his job can't afford the luxury of drafting "POTENTIAL." Next year is a possible different situation.

the problem with what you are saying, is bird is going to miss on one of these kids with "potential" by taking the "safe" pick, who then amounts to be nothing more than a role player. the kid with "potential" goes on to be an nba all-star. between 11-17, the "safe" picks' ceilings are as solid role players to average starters. there are no solid starter to all-star "safe" players that can be had between 11 and 17. one of those players needs to be "potential" for the sake of this franchise.

Shade
06-26-2008, 01:08 PM
For those wanting Rush, do we really need a SG more than a PG or big man right now?

2minutes twowa
06-26-2008, 01:11 PM
the problem with what you are saying, is bird is going to miss on one of these kids with "potential" by taking the "safe" pick, who then amounts to be nothing more than a role player. the kid with "potential" goes on to be an nba all-star. between 11-17, the "safe" picks' ceilings are as solid role players to average starters. there are no solid starter to all-star "safe" players that can be had between 11 and 17. one of those players needs to be "potential" for the sake of this franchise.

That's why I'm wondering if Bird shouldn't use 1 pick on a solid low risk guy and the other on a high risk/high reward guy like Arthur or Randolph.

RWB
06-26-2008, 01:18 PM
For those wanting Rush, do we really need a SG more than a PG or big man right now?

I'm of the opinion our talent level is so poor other than Danny and Dun does it really matter? :blush:

croz24
06-26-2008, 01:21 PM
That's why I'm wondering if Bird shouldn't use 1 pick on a solid low risk guy and the other on a high risk/high reward guy like Arthur or Randolph.

i agree. one safe pick and one potential pick is the way to go imo. i think we must to go that route actually.

Cactus Jax
06-26-2008, 01:27 PM
My personal opinion is that the Pacers aren't going to stay at 11, cause the offers from Sacramento and Portland, will be too much to pass on.

Portland can give up 13, and/or/both 33/36 to move up to 11.

PR07
06-26-2008, 01:34 PM
^That actually makes a lot of sense. Portland wants Augustin, but Sacramento probably takes him if he's there. If we want Roy Hibbert though, I don't think we bite because he may very well be Sacramento's second choice.

Kid Minneapolis
06-26-2008, 01:52 PM
Actually, Rush's handle is pretty questionable. He's mostly a catch and shoot guy who can't really go to his left via the dribble at all. But you're right, he's predominantly a SG with a pretty solid, if somewhat streaky, perimeter shot.

Decent description of Rush... sounds familiar. Oh wait... we already have a SG named Rush who has a solid, if somewhat streaky, perimeter shot.

Don't understand why people want to draft Kareem's little brother.

Mr. Sobchak
06-26-2008, 01:59 PM
Because he will be about 100x better than his older brother.

Unclebuck
06-26-2008, 02:00 PM
Really though the pacers should take the same player they would have taken before and or without the TJ Ford trade. Take the best player available. if it is a small point guard, then fine

Kid Minneapolis
06-26-2008, 02:01 PM
Because he will be about 100x better than his older brother.

Heh, hokay. We'll see about that.

Rajah Brown
06-26-2008, 02:16 PM
Kid-

I think that Brandon will end up being better than Kareem. He's longer,
a much better finisher in transition/the lane and a better defender.
That said, depending on who he has playing around him and what's
req'd of him, I'm not sure I see him as a long term answer as a
starting SG on a good team.

But if he can develop his (or a) game off the dribble, he might be.

Kid Minneapolis
06-26-2008, 02:19 PM
I think Rush will be a decent player in this league. For that matter, so is Kareem.

But I don't see Brandon being "100x better" than Kareem. Maybe "slightly better" would be a more accurate adjective.

Mr. Sobchak
06-26-2008, 02:24 PM
You're right that was an exaggeration without much elaboration...I think B. Rush is more athletic, is a better passer, and plays better defense than Kareem. I want him on this team because of his lock down perimeter defense which this team needs badly.

Plax80
06-26-2008, 02:27 PM
Really though the pacers should take the same player they would have taken before and or without the TJ Ford trade. Take the best player available. if it is a small point guard, then fine

I agree.

And if Ford proves to be healthy, you might be able to unload his salary at some point anyway. I don't consider his money to be quite as dead as Jamaal's.

I'd take :

Augustin, Bayless, Lopez, or Westbrook at 11
Hibbert at 17

I think Larry will take:

Hibbert or Koufas or Rush at 11
Arthur at 17

jmoney2584
06-26-2008, 05:35 PM
wow, didn't know Koufos had a 36-inch vertical...not very stiff like at all. Maybe Larry knows what he is doing afterall if we go after him... http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftWatch-080625&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftWatch-080625

Isaac
06-26-2008, 05:38 PM
Brandon Rush is miles better than Kareem. That is not debatable.

mrknowname
06-26-2008, 05:39 PM
My personal opinion is that the Pacers aren't going to stay at 11, cause the offers from Sacramento and Portland, will be too much to pass on.

Portland can give up 13, and/or/both 33/36 to move up to 11.

very tempting. could pick up koufos at 13 since GS seems interested in him

mrknowname
06-26-2008, 05:47 PM
draftexpress has us taking Bayless and Koufos. wow that would be one hell of a draft.

hopefully the basketball gods will get this done

Plax80
06-26-2008, 06:12 PM
Brandon Rush is miles better than Kareem. That is not debatable.

Kareem would destroy him 1 on 1..........thats not debatable either.

Maybe in three or four years brandon wins.........but not now.

RWB
06-27-2008, 12:14 AM
Guess I forgot to actually list both picks.

#11 First whoever would be a top pick who accidently falls. But being realistic...

#11 Rush
#17 Hibbert

Sorry to bump this, but it's the first time I ever predicted something right. :blush:

CableKC
06-27-2008, 12:49 AM
Sorry to bump this, but it's the first time I ever predicted something right. :blush:
Well...you should have predict Bayless and Hibbert. ;)

That way...we won't have PD split 1/3 being okay with this draft and the 2/3 rest of the board totally peeved. :lol:

Hoop
06-27-2008, 01:27 AM
Augustin or Rush at #11, depending on if they think we need another PG or go for the best SG left. I'd be really happy if Love were here at #11, but not much of a chance for that.

and Hibbert at #17 would be fine with me.
I picked it right too. :eek:

I was upset at first that we traded Bayless. I forgot this is what I wanted to happen to start with, plus we get J.Jack to boot. Not a bad day at all.

There has to be some reason Bayless dropped, he was a can't miss top 5 two weeks ago. If he can only play SG like some say the 6'3" size is not in his favor. B. Rush has the size to play with any SG in the L and is suppose to be a better defender. I've only seen Bayless play one game, I just thought he must be awfully talented if he was a top fiver in a pretty decent draft.

CableKC
06-27-2008, 01:32 AM
I picked it right too. :eek:

I was upset at first that we traded Bayless. I forgot this is what I wanted to happen to start with, plus we get J.Jack to boot. Not a bad day at all.

There has to be some reason Bayless dropped, he was a can't miss top 5 two weeks ago. If he can only play SG like some say the 6'3" size is not in his favor. B. Rush has the size to play with any SG in the L and is suppose to be a better defender. I've only seen Bayless play one game, I just thought he must be awfully talented if he was a top fiver in a pretty decent draft.
Since I didn't think that Diogu was going to used on this team anyway....he was useless filler for me....but I look at it this way.....Bird drafted Rush/Hibbert/Jack. We got 3 players of use out of this draft....he didn't hit a homerun...but I think he did the safe thing and hit a solid double.