PDA

View Full Version : 08 Draft Post-Mortem: Thoughts?



avoidingtheclowns
06-27-2008, 12:23 AM
Just thought I would create a thread where people could post their overall reactions to the entire night. I'll be posting my own in a few (I know, the anticipation is killing you.)

Cherokee
06-27-2008, 12:27 AM
It's difficult to say until all the dust settles this summer, and we see what the Ps have when the season gets ready to start. So far, it's OK. Lot of work left to do, though.

D-BONE
06-27-2008, 12:28 AM
The trade I'm so-so on. Don't think it's the end of the world. Would have liked to get a bit more out of the Blazers in terms of their plethora of picks.

I hope Hibbert can be as effective as some people seem to think. I understand his a fundamentally sound player and has the size. What concerns me is his ability to be beneficial in the uptempo system. He looks awful slow to me.

I think however you slice it, though, we have to be better than we were last year without JO and Tins. Hoping there are some further moves on the way. I am please in the sense that I thought it was important to obtain two solid PG options this offseason and that has happened.

DGPR
06-27-2008, 12:30 AM
I'd say after all these trades we are officially in a rebuilding period. No matter how you slice it.

duke dynamite
06-27-2008, 12:30 AM
For me, I'm just a little shaky on Hibbert. This kid has potential. Let's just hope he isn't another Ike Diogu.

Other than that, I feel that we got out of the draft a lot better than we came in. We honestly have to had put some new life into this team for the better.

LoneGranger33
06-27-2008, 12:31 AM
I can't believe the Nets got CDR and B. Lopez. Wow.

Yi / Lopez / Sean Williams is one hell of a frontcourt.

Ramitt
06-27-2008, 12:32 AM
It is unfair to rate a draft for several years. I am pretty meh!? on it so far, this team needs a lot of work. I am at least pleased that it seems The Larry is starting a major overhaul.

Robertmto
06-27-2008, 12:32 AM
I was really hoping we could snag Hibbert at 18 (thanks for :censored: swiping him)but hey at least we didn't get Koufos!!!!!!! :dance::dance:

I liked Bill Walker at 47. If he was healthy wwe could have the steal of the draft, if not he doesn't cost a dime. Instead we get cash....really helps us fans

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 12:37 AM
I am glad that all our perimeter positions are locked up w/ solid players. Ford and Jack will play every PG minute, and Granger/Dun/Rush will play all the SG/SF minutes. Not a whole lot to dislike there.

We have got serious beef at C for the first time in forever. Our PF position is so bad that we are practically begging Murphy for a breakout year.

Last year our weakness was everything and anything involving the perimeter (okay, that's an exaggeration, but still). It's going to be the opposite this year, as Hibbert learns the game and Murphy chucks threes.

LoneGranger33
06-27-2008, 12:39 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NzYh4CGAbCU&feature=related

How did this guy not get drafted? Best shooter not currently in the NBA.

Whtwudusay
06-27-2008, 12:43 AM
I let the hype get to me and got excited when a projected top-five pick fell to us. Readily admit I freaked out when we traded him. Started to relax and appreciate the actual players we got for him - and how they may fit into the team. Still wish we would have worked more current or future picks out of the deal. The Hibbert pick I don't mind. He was the second realistic big (behind Speights) that I was hoping the pacers would get.

Not really that upset anymore, actually more intrigued by the team rebuild. I do believe the P's could have leveraged more out of Bayless (then again, I still think they could have leveraged more out of Chuck Person and Michael Williams), but it doesn't sound like they did, and it's not the end of the world.

Realistically, if you look at the "Who do you want at 11 and 17" thread, before the draft it seemed the majority would have been happy with Rush and Hibbert. We got those two players along with a backup point guard in Jack. I guess that's not a bad haul for one night.

Still will cheer like heck for the Pacers from down south (now) and look forward to see what other moves will be made this summer and over the next couple of years.

I can't remember who said it, but I'm of the camp that at least Bird and Morway are trying to do something and make changes to the team.

PR07
06-27-2008, 12:49 AM
I think it went really well. The Pacers should have a really good deep team next season. If we could upgrade the PF position somehow, I could see us winning a lot of games, but that's a big if.

We basically filled three needs tonight: big man, point guard, shooting guard.

RWB
06-27-2008, 12:50 AM
For me, I'm just a little shaky on Hibbert. This kid has potential. Let's just hope he isn't another Ike Diogu.


Duke, Ike could only dream of being 7'2". Now if he kept getting chubbier he would get close to Hibbert's weight of 280. ;)

I just think Bird saw someone who could bang with the Shaqs and Odens of the world. The main thing is the guy is very coachable and his work ethic unlike our Colorado failure is unquestioned.

avoidingtheclowns
06-27-2008, 12:51 AM
Here are my thoughts...


1) PORTLAND TRADE: We were Pritch-slapped

I am left nauseated by the Portland deal. Contrary to popular wisdom, this isn't for any particular love of Jerryd Bayless or hatred of Brandon Rush. I hate this deal because I think we could have and should have gotten more for Bayless. Why couldn't we snag the pick they bought from the Hornets or at the very least one of their early second rounders? Why was a guy like McRoberts (who can't even seem to cut it in the D League) considered sweetener? If we had ended up with the #27 or 33 & 36 i would have felt much better about the deal. instead we handed Portland a top 5 talent and our only remaining post player (Ike) for a mid-first talent in rush, a career backup PG in Jack and a joke in McRoberts.

Ultimately I'm disappointed because while some players (like JO, Tinsley, Murphy, etc.) we should just understand we won't get full value, we didn't have to just simply hand Bayless to the Blazers. Wouldn't Rush, Arthur and Jack look a lot better than Rush, McRoberts and Jack? I think Bayless is talented enough where we could have had the #27 but chose McRoberts instead. Even the rights to a guy like Kopponen would have been light years ahead of McRoberts.


2) BIG ROY: Hibbertchi

I can't say I'm thrilled but who else were we going to pick here? Both Speights and Thompson were taken and so was Robin Lopez. Hibbert seems like an acceptable choice for the spot. Besides it gave me some amount of sick joy that my friend who is a Wizards fan, had Rush and Hibbert as his top two choices for #18. Hibbert is certainly big and can play defense; decent passer; robot on offense. We'll see.


3) SECOND ROUND: Sigh

If we didn't get Speights, I was really hoping we could pick up a guy like Hendrix in the second round. At least someone who is capable of post-offense. A shooter like Shan Foster would have been nice too. But alas.


4) THE FALLOUT: Packin' Bags

Jamaal Tinsley, you don't have to go home but you can't stay here. Jamaal is definitely gone. Seems like with the selection of a true center, Foster is probably on his way out too. I'm not sure where for either, I just hope we don't sell Foster for $0.60 on the dollar. For Tinsley, I'd love to be able to sell him for at least $0.60 on the dollar. Shawne is on thin ice, so we'll see what happens.

As of this moment we have 16 players.

FORD / JACK / TINSLEY / DIENER
DUNLEAVY / B.RUSH / GRAHAM
GRANGER / DANIELS / WILLIAMS
MURPHY / BASTON / MCROBERTS
RASHO / FOSTER / HIBBERT

Shade
06-27-2008, 01:28 AM
Before the Bayless trade, I thought it was a phenomenal draft.

Now, I'm just numb.

Our PF rotation is a horrible, horrible joke. And our center spot isn't much better.

I hope to God there are more trades (let me rephrase; more GOOD trades) on the horizon.

RWB
06-27-2008, 01:31 AM
Before the Bayless trade, I thought it was a phenomenal draft.

Now, I'm just numb.



But are you comfortable?

andreialta
06-27-2008, 01:35 AM
So.
PG- Ford,Jack,Diener (assuming Tins is gone)
SG - Dunleavy, Daniels, Rush, Rush, Graham, Murray
SF - Granger or Dunleavy, Williams
PF - Murphy or Foster, Baston,
C - Foster, Nesterovic, Hibbert

is that our roster so far? just trying to map it out

Isaac
06-27-2008, 01:36 AM
I was extremely upset when we traded Bayless. I watched a lot of him during the season and I believe he is the real deal.

However, we are certainly a better defensive team, there is no doubt about that. Rush is an excellent defender and can be a guy we can use to defend the dominant scorers at the wing positions (something Granger proved we can't count on him to do).

Jarrett Jack is a good defender from the PG position and provides us with an excellent backup to T.J. Ford. We now have one of the best point guard rotations in the NBA, which is a serious positive.

Jamaal Tinsley and Shawne Williams are most likely on their way out, so we are not finished seeing changes to this roster.

Obviously, we have to pick up a power forward with Diogu and Jermaine leaving.

Hibbert was an excellent pick, despite all the complaining I saw. He is who I wanted from the 17 spot. He has legit low post skills as a 7'2" center and is a solid defender from that spot also. He is our first real center in a long time (Smits.) I can't say it enough: You guys are going to be very pleasantly surprised by Roy Hibbert. He is a very good player that will produce for us right away.

While it will hurt to see Bayless make all-star teams and put up moster numbers in Portland, I think we did make a move that will bring us a championship faster than drafting Bayless and keeping him would have.

Shade
06-27-2008, 01:39 AM
Chalmers > Jack

Couldn't we have at least gotten Portland's #33 out of the deal?

Robertmto
06-27-2008, 01:39 AM
Wizards took a blood test when Arthur worked out with them, said it came up fine. :confused:

Bball
06-27-2008, 01:41 AM
But are you comfortable?

His hands feel just like two balloons...

-Bball

Isaac
06-27-2008, 01:43 AM
Chalmers > Jack

Couldn't we have at least gotten Portland's #33 out of the deal?

I disagree, I think Chalmers upside is Jack. I'm pleased with that pickup.

At the same time, I agree that we should have been able to snag one of Portland's second rounders.

At the very least I wish we could keep Jawai.

ViperVisor
06-27-2008, 01:45 AM
Not unlike the 49ers draft this year for me.

Meh. Team needed an infusion of excitement but you look up and we got 3 interior Linemen and a tweener DB.

Maybe it works out in the long run but you don't wanna have to force yourself to think that in the present.

Isaac
06-27-2008, 01:47 AM
We will also be a better team next year than we were this year.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 01:55 AM
Not unlike the 49ers draft this year for me.

Meh. Team needed an infusion of excitement but you look up and we got 3 interior Linemen and a tweener DB.

Repeat after me: Patrick Willis. Patrick Willis. Patrick Willis.

CableKC
06-27-2008, 01:58 AM
I am in the minority here....but I'm okay with what transpired with this draft.

Bird did all the things that I wanted him to do in the offseason...improved perimeter defense with getting Brandon that can be paired up and complement both Granger and Dunleavy.....got a solid Center that can man the paint, alter shots, not be a complete offensive liability, be smart enough to grasp our offense/defense and block a few shots ( basically what I think TPTB were hoping that Harrison would turn out to be )......marginally improved our PG rotation where we have a good complimentary PG rotation of Ford and Jack.

Those were my key weaknesses that I wanted addressed....perimeter/improved interior defense and getting a PG that can provide some solid defense.

This move won't transform us into a Championship team overnight......but it's a very good step in the right direction on our long road to rebuilding the team the right way.

Bball
06-27-2008, 02:08 AM
I'm excited to see a team in need of fixing go about the process of making changes and getting something done. No front office doubletalk and excuses... instead we got action. How refreshing!

I also like the idea of the team finding some balance, putting players in traditional roles, and I hope this means that the multi-positional player idea was Walsh's and has left with him.

Of course some of this giddiness hinges on things that aren't 100% official: That would be trades and whatever happens to Tinsley to make him disappear.

I was watching one of the Indy channels the other night and Granger was on and he was asked if he thought he could lead the team if needed. He said be believed he could... and then the rest of the conversation was "we"... "we this... we that". He didn't go on to talk about how he could pick up his game and dominate his position.... or how he'd work to make it to the All-Star game.

He talked about the team. The only time I think JO ever mentioned the team was explaining how his teammates could get him the ball....

There's a reason Jermaine never had the respect of his teammates.... there's a reason Bird and JO didn't see eye to eye. JO NEVER "got it".... and a team 'led' by JO is going nowhere. The prima donna is gone and I for one am glad. If the bad egg (Tinsley) can follow him I may have to throw a party!

I love seeing activity from the FO and I love seeing it make sense.

I'm not convinced Bayless is nearly as special as some of you have proclaimed... and the fact he fell to #11 (and we apparently didn't really want him there either except as a bargaining chip) does make me wonder. Re-reading what Bird said prior to the draft, and realizing Bird spoke frankly, it's clear we ended up with EXACTLY who we'd wanted all along AND got Jarret Jack to boot (assuming the trade actually happens).

I admit, I was so tired of Donnie Do Nothing that I might be impressed and blinded by even crap moves just because I'm finally seeing some activity. But honestly, I think we've turned a corner and I like what I am seeing from Bird and Morway.

CableKC
06-27-2008, 02:44 AM
I'm excited to see a team in need of fixing go about the process of making changes and getting something done. No front office doubletalk and excuses... instead we got action. How refreshing!

I also like the idea of the team finding some balance, putting players in traditional roles, and I hope this means that the multi-positional player idea was Walsh's and has left with him.

Of course some of this giddiness hinges on things that aren't 100% official: That would be trades and whatever happens to Tinsley to make him disappear.

I was watching one of the Indy channels the other night and Granger was on and he was asked if he thought he could lead the team if needed. He said be believed he could... and then the rest of the conversation was "we"... "we this... we that". He didn't go on to talk about how he could pick up his game and dominate his position.... or how he'd work to make it to the All-Star game.

He talked about the team. The only time I think JO ever mentioned the team was explaining how his teammates could get him the ball....

There's a reason Jermaine never had the respect of his teammates.... there's a reason Bird and JO didn't see eye to eye. JO NEVER "got it".... and a team 'led' by JO is going nowhere. The prima donna is gone and I for one am glad. If the bad egg (Tinsley) can follow him I may have to throw a party!

I love seeing activity from the FO and I love seeing it make sense.

I'm not convinced Bayless is nearly as special as some of you have proclaimed... and the fact he fell to #11 (and we apparently didn't really want him there either except as a bargaining chip) does make me wonder. Re-reading what Bird said prior to the draft, and realizing Bird spoke frankly, it's clear we ended up with EXACTLY who we'd wanted all along AND got Jarret Jack to boot (assuming the trade actually happens).

I admit, I was so tired of Donnie Do Nothing that I might be impressed and blinded by even crap moves just because I'm finally seeing some activity. But honestly, I think we've turned a corner and I like what I am seeing from Bird and Morway.
I agree with both you and Peck on this. I have no idea what the true ramifications of this draft will be....but at least I am 100% sure that things will be different ( better or worse ) next season. I've been clamouring for change over the last couple of seasons.....and with Bird's first season running the show by himself.....I get the change that I have been asking....no.....praying for.

The JONeal era is done....Tinsley will likely be bought out....and the last remnant of the Brawl era will be torn down.

Fairweather fans won't realize it....but I too think that we have pointed the ship in a different direction....hopefully it's the right one.

Every season...we've hung our hopes on JONeal and Tinsley being healthy enough to take us to the promised land and would have to pray that they don't get injured. Now, all we have to do is hope that Ford doesn't land awkwardly or get injured somehow.....but guess what? We have a PG rotation that won't really lose a step IF Ford does go down with injury. A Jack/Diener backup PG rotation isn't as good as a Ford/Jack PG rotation...but it's certainly not as bad as Flip/Diener...and can do for a short period of time when needed.

As for the rest of the lineup....we now have enough depth at other positons that I don't have to worry too much if one of our key players go down with injury.

Ford goes down with injury? No problem...Diener steps in to the PG rotation.
Dunleavy or Granger goes down with injury? No problem...Shawne and Rush steps in to the SG/SF rotation.
Foster or Murphy goes down with injury? No problem...Rasho, Shawne or Hibbert steps into the Frontcourt.

I am guessing that this roster is going to remain the same for the rest of the season....unless there does appear to be some need for a Scoring PF....I think that we can do with Shawne filling in when needed and Foster doing the same in a worse case scenario.

I no longer have to worry about JONeal getting an injury....which IMHO...is worth the price that we paid to simply move on.

Kiddies....mark this day on your calender and look in the proverbial rear-view mirror......what you see behind us is the remnants of the Pacers after the Brawl.....that feeling of mild elation that you feel in your head is what it feels like....at long last....to move on in a new direction.

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 02:49 AM
Chalmers > Jack



I think you are totally wrong here.

If chalmers doesn't hit that shot he is a second round pick... oh wait, he was a second round pick. He probably doesn't even get drafted.

Jack can do everything Chalmers can do, probably better, and he is more of a true PG. He is also bigger and probably slightly more athletic.

Kstat
06-27-2008, 02:52 AM
Jack is a solid player. He'd have a place on any team in the NBA.

I'd certainly take him over Chalmers.

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 03:00 AM
I was so excited when we got Jared Bayless.

So as you might expect... it took me a few minutes to figure out exactly how I felt about the trade.

You know what though, Bayless is still not a true PG, he is also not a backup. Rush is a qaulity SG who can improve our perimeter defense a lot. Getting Jarret Jack is absolutley great, because he is the perfect compliment to TJ Ford. I can see a plan here. Instead of swinging for the fences with "potential" Bird is picking high qaulity players to fill certain positions, and he is fixing glaring problems that have plauged the team... PG rotation? fixed. Perimeter Defense? fixed. Lack of a true center? Fixed. Lack of athleticism? Hello TJ Ford, fastest player in the NBA.

I like the new direction of the team. I think Bird has done a bang up job so far. I am looking forward to next season.

Suaveness
06-27-2008, 03:05 AM
Jack is a solid player. He'd have a place on any team in the NBA.

I'd certainly take him over Chalmers.

What do you think about this trade?

Hicks
06-27-2008, 03:06 AM
I think we might have traded sizzle for steak. I hope so.

rock747
06-27-2008, 03:09 AM
I'm okay with the draft. I think that Rush definetly is going to be solid and has upside. Jack is a good back up PG. We finally have talented point guards. Hibbert at 7' 2" is one of the biggest players we have had in a while. Bayless also did fall and had Augustine picked above him so maybe other GM's saw something they didn't like. Of course if Bayless becomes a perrenial all-star, this deal is really going to sting. At least Bird is willing to take a gamble.

Kstat
06-27-2008, 03:12 AM
What do you think about this trade?

I thought the Pacers drafted Danny Granger and then traded him for James Posey and Anthony Johnson.

It's the kind of move I think you'd make if you were a contender looking for that little immediate edge.

For the Pacers, I just don't get it. They aren't contenders even with this trade. It's one thing to go with substance over style when you're looking at two players even on your draft board. But when someone you never expected to be there falls to you, and fits your system to boot, it's a no-brainer. The risk is far and away outweighed by the reward.

Rush and Jack are solid, NBA-ready players. They will make the Pacers better next year than I'd expect Bayliss to.

It's just, barring further moves, what exactly are the Pacers going to have accomplished with Jack and Rush by the time Bayliss matures, and starts outshining the two of them?

Maybe Bird will swing other moves that will allow Jack and Rush to be difference-making glue guys on a contending team. But as the roster stands now, I think it was a terrible move.

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 03:17 AM
I'm okay with the draft. I think that Rush definetly is going to be solid and has upside. Jack is a good back up PG. We finally have talented point guards. Hibbert at 7' 2" is one of the biggest players we have had in a while. Bayless also did fall and had Augustine picked above him so maybe other GM's saw something they didn't like. Of course if Bayless becomes a perrenial all-star, this deal is really going to sting. At least Bird is willing to take a gamble.

I am thinking this deal was already in place with Augustin in mind to swap with Portland for Jack and Rush.

It does almost seem like we could have gotten more for Bayless.

If we had not already aquired Ford I would feel a lot differently about the trade for sure. I really like the results, though I can see the point that we did not take full advantage of Bayless falling into our laps.

Suaveness
06-27-2008, 03:17 AM
I thought the Pacers drafted Danny Granger and then traded him for James Posey and Anthony Johnson.

It's the kind of move I think you'd make if you were a contender looking for that little immediate edge.

For the Pacers, I just don't get it. They aren't contenders even with this trade. It's one thing to go with style over substance when you're looking at two players even on your draft board. But when someone you never expected to be there falls to you, and fits your system to boot, it's a no-brainer. The risk far and away outweighs the reward.

Rush and Jack are solid, NBA-ready players. They will make the Pacers better next year than I'd expect Bayliss to.

It's just, barring further moves, what exactly are the Pacers going to have accomplished with Jack and Rush by the time Bayliss matures, and starts outshining the two of them?

I just don't see it either. Granted, there's no guarantee that Bayless will turn out to be great. But he might, and it doesn't seem as though it's that big a risk. The talent available with Bayless is much greater than whatever Jack and Rush bring to the table.

rock747
06-27-2008, 03:24 AM
I really like the results, though I can see the point that we did not take full advantage of Bayless falling into our laps.

I agree. Portland did not give enough. A pick should have been included at least. Is it not to late? This trade can't be "finalized" until June 9 like the other one right?

King Tuts Tomb
06-27-2008, 04:44 AM
I see a lot of people predicting a twenty win season for us next year, but aren't we basically the same team as last year with a couple upgraded defensive parts?

Of course it would have been nice to have JO playing up to his full potential, but he didn't last year, and we just upgraded our 36-win team with better perimeter defense at both back court positions.

I don't think we're winning fifty games or anything, but 40-plus isn't out of the question, although that's very wishful thinking, and I see us closer to 36 wins again.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 08:07 AM
I'm excited to see a team in need of fixing go about the process of making changes and getting something done. No front office doubletalk and excuses... instead we got action. How refreshing!

I also like the idea of the team finding some balance, putting players in traditional roles, and I hope this means that the multi-positional player idea was Walsh's and has left with him.

Of course some of this giddiness hinges on things that aren't 100% official: That would be trades and whatever happens to Tinsley to make him disappear.

I was watching one of the Indy channels the other night and Granger was on and he was asked if he thought he could lead the team if needed. He said be believed he could... and then the rest of the conversation was "we"... "we this... we that". He didn't go on to talk about how he could pick up his game and dominate his position.... or how he'd work to make it to the All-Star game.

He talked about the team. The only time I think JO ever mentioned the team was explaining how his teammates could get him the ball....

There's a reason Jermaine never had the respect of his teammates.... there's a reason Bird and JO didn't see eye to eye. JO NEVER "got it".... and a team 'led' by JO is going nowhere. The prima donna is gone and I for one am glad. If the bad egg (Tinsley) can follow him I may have to throw a party!

I love seeing activity from the FO and I love seeing it make sense.

I'm not convinced Bayless is nearly as special as some of you have proclaimed... and the fact he fell to #11 (and we apparently didn't really want him there either except as a bargaining chip) does make me wonder. Re-reading what Bird said prior to the draft, and realizing Bird spoke frankly, it's clear we ended up with EXACTLY who we'd wanted all along AND got Jarret Jack to boot (assuming the trade actually happens).

I admit, I was so tired of Donnie Do Nothing that I might be impressed and blinded by even crap moves just because I'm finally seeing some activity. But honestly, I think we've turned a corner and I like what I am seeing from Bird and Morway.
As usual, I generally agree with Bball.

I don't know what to think of the draft because I don't know either Bayless, Rush or Hibbert. Jack is a solid PG though. I'm happy we're finally addressing that situation. And I'm also happy because things are finally changing. JO needed to be traded a long time ago and now finally is. JT is also on his way out of here. I'm glad something is finally happening, although I'm sure not every move will turn out to be a good one. But it's clear that Bird is not just doing something for the sake of doing something, he's really looking for solutions to some long time lingering problems.

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 08:27 AM
I was pumped when Bayless fell to 11, then shocked when he was traded. But the knock on him was that he wasn't a "true" PG, which is what we needed. So we got a "true" PG in Jack and what a lot of scouts were calling the best all-around ball player in Rush. After getting over the initial shock, I like the deal.

I know everyone is concerned about the PF spot, but I'm really not. Murphy and Foster both are better fits there than at C. It will be a hard transition from having an all-star PF every year, but I think we'll get solid production there. Hibberts mobility is a concern for me as well.

Finally, I wonder if Dunleavy is the odd man out. If Rush is as good as advertised, then he is best at the 2, and Granger is without a doubt our starting 3. May not happen this year, but if Rush developes quickly, you have to think of trying to move Dun. That would be way too much $$$ going to a backup.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 08:45 AM
Finally, I wonder if Dunleavy is the odd man out. If Rush is as good as advertised, then he is best at the 2, and Granger is without a doubt our starting 3. May not happen this year, but if Rush developes quickly, you have to think of trying to move Dun. That would be way too much $$$ going to a backup.
If Rush is that good, I'd consider a 3 man rotation of him, Danny and Mike at the 2 and 3. I would hate to see Mike go. Generally, when he's on the court, good things happen.

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 09:32 AM
I've got to get something off my chest. This deal with the commisioner about not being able to talk about trades and players aquired is flat out dumb. Why don't they have the base year compensation deadline and the draft on the same date? They can't even talk about it until July 1, and the trades aren't official until July 9? I hate David Stern.

And another thing. Why did they stop letting other cities host the draft? Do we really have to put up with loud mouth New Yorkers that think they're clever booing the Celtics every year!

Wu-Gambino
06-27-2008, 09:54 AM
I see a lot of people predicting a twenty win season for us next year, but aren't we basically the same team as last year with a couple upgraded defensive parts?

Of course it would have been nice to have JO playing up to his full potential, but he didn't last year, and we just upgraded our 36-win team with better perimeter defense at both back court positions.

I don't think we're winning fifty games or anything, but 40-plus isn't out of the question, although that's very wishful thinking, and I see us closer to 36 wins again.

Agreed. I think that this is true, especially once you factor in how much our backcourt has improved. Granted, we're still far away from being a contender, but I think we've already improved greatly compared to our roster last year.

naptownmenace
06-27-2008, 10:15 AM
I can't help but have the feeling that Rush may be another Paul Pierce type of player. He comes from the same system, about the same size, and has a very similar game.

You also can't discount that he was the best player on the best college team. Similar to Horford from Florida last year. Bayless on the other hand played in a weaker conference and didn't show up in the Big Dance. Bayless is a classic tweener too, not unlike Juan Dixon or Delonte West (but Dixon and West are better defenders) and I don't think his game will translate that well to the NBA.

We also have to consider that Rush was on the way back from an ACL injury and it's possible that he could be much better after a full year of mending.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 10:27 AM
I can't help but have the feeling that Rush may be another Paul Pierce type of player. He comes from the same system, about the same size, and has a very similar game.
Well, I hope so, but from what I read (haven't seen him play) his ball handling isn't very good and he isn't able to create his own shot...

Unclebuck
06-27-2008, 10:30 AM
Getting Jarret Jack is absolutley great, because he is the perfect compliment to TJ Ford. I can see a plan here. Instead of swinging for the fences with "potential" Bird is picking high qaulity players to fill certain positions, and he is fixing glaring problems that have plauged the team... PG rotation? fixed. Perimeter Defense? fixed. Lack of a true center? Fixed. Lack of athleticism? Hello TJ Ford, fastest player in the NBA.



I really like your point about Jack being a perfect complement to TJ Ford. Jack is a bigger point guard who can come in and defend the bigger point guards that Ford will have some trouble with. I've watched Jack play a lot - As I've wanted the Pacers to acquire him for the past two season. But it is very difficult to describe Jack's game. he is the type of player that doesn't stand out, in fact you really don't notice him on the floor. He's the type of player that you only realize what he adds to a team when he is on the bench - he makes the pass that leads to the assist, he defends, he makes the steady play.

Jack is unselfish, nonflashy, very steady - type of player who can do a little of everything, but is not great at any one thing.

What I like is he's an excellent defender - (that and free throw shooting are IMO his best attributes). I would not put him in the top 5 or 6 defensive point guards (whoever they might be) but I surely would put Jack in the second tier - the next 5 or 6 defending point. He has some trouble against the really quick smaller points, but excels against the bigger ones.

I also like his physical toughness - and from what I have seen he plays hard all the time.

is he a great shooter - No
is he a great penetrator - creator or passer - No.

2 last things:
1)I see him also being able to play shooting guard from time to time - he's big enough and that should allow Diener to get some minutes especially when we need spark, someone who will push the tempo.

2) That leads me to my last point - I don't see Jack as a great push guy - the Pacers offense will slow down when he plays point guard

Unclebuck
06-27-2008, 10:32 AM
Well, I hope so, but from what I read (haven't seen him play) his ball handling isn't very good and he isn't able to create his own shot...

I have never seen Rush play, but those exact things were said about Pierce when he came out of Kansas, he was not a good ball handler at all, and wasn't a great creator of his own shot

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 10:34 AM
I have never seen Rush play, but those exact things were said about Pierce when he came out of Kansas, he was not a good ball handler at all, and wasn't a great creator of his own shot

Rush was widely compared to Pierce when he first got to Kansas. I certainly can't set his ceiling that high, but I think he's going to be a solid player for us for many, many years.

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 10:39 AM
What I like is that Rush is a smart two-way player. Hibbert, if he isn't a total bust, is a smart two-way player. Jack sounds like a smart two-way bench player. Granger is a smart two-way player.

About a month back I said that I wanted the Pacers to work on getting a starting five full of smart two-way players. Well if Hibbert and Rush develop into starting quality players (which is what you have to hope for, as the optimistic result, with picks in the 11-18 range) then we've got 3 of that five, lacking only the longterm PG and PF solutions.

I like what we're trying to do here.

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 10:42 AM
Also.... I'm wondering how long it takes for someone to notice just how well Sheed--in terms of his skill set--would fit into our empty PF spot.

(Not that we have anything they'd want for him, anymore.)

idioteque
06-27-2008, 10:46 AM
I must say that I think Bird is probably better at drafting than Walsh so far. I mean, Gallinari at 6, really? He's okay, but as they stand now, I think we got a more athletic, better defending version at 13.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 10:56 AM
What I like is that Rush is a smart two-way player. Hibbert, if he isn't a total bust, is a smart two-way player. Jack sounds like a smart two-way bench player. Granger is a smart two-way player.

About a month back I said that I wanted the Pacers to work on getting a starting five full of smart two-way players. Well if Hibbert and Rush develop into starting quality players (which is what you have to hope for, as the optimistic result, with picks in the 11-18 range) then we've got 3 of that five, lacking only the longterm PG and PF solutions.

I like what we're trying to do here.
Lol I think you can also add Mike and Jeff to your list of smart two-way players.

naptownmenace
06-27-2008, 11:10 AM
I really like your point about Jack being a perfect complement to TJ Ford. Jack is a bigger point guard who can come in and defend the bigger point guards that Ford will have some trouble with. I've watched Jack play a lot - As I've wanted the Pacers to acquire him for the past two season. But it is very difficult to describe Jack's game. he is the type of player that doesn't stand out, in fact you really don't notice him on the floor. He's the type of player that you only realize what he adds to a team when he is on the bench - he makes the pass that leads to the assist, he defends, he makes the steady play.

Jack is unselfish, nonflashy, very steady - type of player who can do a little of everything, but is not great at any one thing.

What I like is he's an excellent defender - (that and free throw shooting are IMO his best attributes).

I've been following Jack since his senior year in college. He's a very solid player and I think he'll be a fan favorite because he's tough PG who plays hard and makes few mistakes.

His defense is good and he can hit open shots. I watched him play in Portland several times this past season and despite the fact that he came off the bench, he's always been their best PG IMO. Or maybe I should say he's always been their most consistent PG. That's the best way to describe Jack - consistent.

He fills the Pacers need for a backup defensive PG perfectly.

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 11:15 AM
Lol I think you can also add Mike and Jeff to your list of smart two-way players.


Nope.

Steve
06-27-2008, 11:24 AM
For what it is worth, someone thought Rush should be picked #4: http://news.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/other_nba/view/2008_06_27_Some_NBA_draft_picks_may_have_been_Rush-ed/srvc=home&position=recent

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 11:25 AM
Nope.
Well, then I will start my own list and add them.

Naptown_Seth
06-27-2008, 11:26 AM
First off, Draft Party was a HOME RUN. Great job Pacers, I do appreciate the team putting the money into this to create a good, involving experience. It was fun to cheer not just Pacers picks but the picks of other teams that helped the Pacers. Fun all around and it felt darn good to be a Pacers fan last night.


Bayless - a bigger, craftier version of DJ. Plays little defense (also like DJ). Had questions regarding attitude coming into draft, coming off surly in some interview or camp situations. Is this why he dropped?

Barring the unknown - A+

Hibbert - slow, plodding, not particular skilled. However he's got great size and is a super nice kid. If you really insist on having a true center, a guy big enough to be thought of as a true center, then this is a pretty decent pick. No upside it would appear which stinks.

I would rather have had Arthur with that pick but he would be a PF on a team that would have to play Foster and Murphy as the center instead.

Considering the situation - B-


Trade - I love Rush and most on here know it. Somewhere between Roy and Bowen is where he falls. A solid all-around SG that plays good, sometimes great defense. He's not the best at anything, Weaver defends better for example, but he plays darn smart and comes off as a great kid. Polished and professional. His main negative has always been that he's sometimes too passive on offense.

Man crush - A

Jack - no Bayless but he does play defense. The backcourt D just went through the roof compared to last year. Good pairing with Ford, gives you a bit more size. Blue collar type something like Workman perhaps.

Lost the upside of Bayless adjustment - B+

Will Galen
06-27-2008, 11:49 AM
I have never seen Rush play, but those exact things were said about Pierce when he came out of Kansas, he was not a good ball handler at all, and wasn't a great creator of his own shot

Reggie couldn't create his own shot either, but he was great coming off picks. I hear Hibbert sets some great picks. And I hear Rush has an even quicker release than Reggie.