PDA

View Full Version : Bored at Work: The Draft



jhondog28
03-23-2009, 07:05 PM
It is a slow night so i have been diddle daddling with Chad Ford's draft machine and it keeps putting the Pacers in the 11th spot and us drafting Jordan Hill. I have not been following the prospects so i was wondering if someone could evaluate Jordan Hill and his potential.

i also was noticing that if we moved up it had us taking either Curry or the PG/2 guard from Oklahoma. Again not too familiar with the guy from Oklahoma but have seen Curry play. Just wondering what you all thougth about these players.

Shade
03-23-2009, 07:22 PM
If Hill drops all the way to 11 and we take him I will squeal with joy. He is the player I want out of this draft. I think he would be an excellent fit here.

Hill reminds me a little of Dale Davis, but with a better offensive game. He's not as big or tough as Dale, but he's a post player who defends well and we really need one of those.

CableKC
03-23-2009, 07:22 PM
I don't see Jordan Hill dropping to the 11th spot.....some Team ahead of us will take him.

Wierd......I could see Curry dropping to the 11th spot....but can't see Hill dropping to the 11th spot.

grace
03-23-2009, 08:48 PM
If Hill drops all the way to 11 and we take him I will squeal with joy...

...then leap from the ledge when Hill is traded for (insert player here).

:suicide3:





:rip:





I guess I'm bored too.

Spirit
03-23-2009, 09:37 PM
Jordan Hill has no basketball IQ whatsoever. Watching him is like watching Kwame Brown. He can wow you with his athleticism but he can also wow you with how stupid he is.

Shade
03-23-2009, 09:40 PM
...then leap from the ledge when Hill is traded for (insert player here).

:suicide3:





:rip:





I guess I'm bored too.

Well, it's not like there's a precedent for the Pacers drafting and then trading a player from Arizona who drops to them after having been projected in the Top 5, right?

Right?

Infinite MAN_force
03-23-2009, 09:46 PM
Jordan Hill has no basketball IQ whatsoever. Watching him is like watching Kwame Brown. He can wow you with his athleticism but he can also wow you with how stupid he is.

This is kind of the impression I had, He dominates at the college level with athleticism but is very poor fundamentally.

stevo
03-24-2009, 12:05 AM
Im watching Curry now on ESPN2. Davidson is in the NIT. He just pulled up
and hit a three from 6 feet beyond the three point line like it was nothing.
This kid has mad shooting skillz. If this draft is as weak as everyone says,
then lets just take this kid if he's there.

pwee31
03-24-2009, 12:33 AM
The more I see Curry, the more I like the idea. He could actually be the 2nd best player in the draft behind Griffin. I know folks like Thabeet and his size and shot blocking presence, but when it comes to best player available.. he might be the guy. Of course he can shoot, and I think he's proven he can handle the ball as well. He may be a liability on the defensive end, but I think we can make a couple moves to make it work, plus he's a player that I think folks will come out to see

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Chat.asp?CHAT_TOPICS_ID=203



Pierre in Muncie, IN:
Pacers look to be around 8-12 barring any miracles in the NBA Lottery. An athletic big seems like a need, is there a guy they should look at closely to fill that need. I also like Duke's Hendo and T-Will/LVille for a wing player to replace Daniels
http://www.hoopsworld.com/images/hw_icon.gif
Luke Byrnes:
How about Stephen Curry? I think he has shown the ability to run the point and with his ability to shoot the ball and stretch the floor, he would be a nice compliment to Danny Granger and company for a team that certainly could use a guy to handle some of the ball-handling duties and play some minutes at SG. Al-Farouq Aminu could be a consideration as well.

Midcoasted
03-24-2009, 01:52 AM
Is Dejuan Blair going pro? He seems a little undersized at 6'7 but seems to be a post banger. If there is any way we can trade up for Thabeet or win the lottery that is obviously my first pick. I also like Dozier from Memphis and Clark from Louisville if any of these are going pro and are in our choice I wouldn't be mad. We have the C I've been wishing we did for years, in Hibbert, if he develops into what I think he will. He is showing every indicator he had a strong chance. Now it is time for the right PF to split time with Murphy or be on the floor with Murphy as well.

PG is a must to resign Jack. I think TJ has enough team player in him to where I think he can learn to contribute more and dominate less if we are actually winning. I feel TJs plight this year is he really wants to win and feels the need to take the game over to help get the win. This is just an assumption I'm making but I think he plays better when we have a lead.

I'd draft big men in both rounds. I'm still not sold on the "we need to draft a PG' thing because I like what TJ, Jack, and Diener all bring to the table. With a better interior presence I think we could excel. Maybe we could draft a bruising PF/SF and a bruising PF/C and I would be freakin loving it. Rush and Franger are obviously the future but a bruising PF/SF provides depth and a dimension we tend to be lacking. Without Dunleavy though I would question our depth at SG but I tend to like Graham in certain situations and I think we should sign him. I also like the fact Jack can provide quality minutes at SG as well if Rush and Granger are out of the game at the same time.

Sign Jack sign Graham, let Rasho walk, draft two interior bangers, hope McRoberts develops like alot of us swear he will, and we have a solid team.

Naptown_Seth
03-24-2009, 11:05 AM
Chad Ford, paid to cover the NBA. He has Hill dropping to 11th. And during the AZ run to the sweet 16 no less.

Does his dad own ESPN? That's Vescey level insight on Chad's part. Hill has tracked as a top 5-6 all year.



I could see Curry dropping to the 11th spot
I'd call that CLIMBING to the 11th spot. Neither he nor Mills exactly helped their case last night. Dude is an offensive shooting specialist, he has to show a better PCT in a critical game like that, and more so given his so-so return from injury. He's got the touch, but he's looking more and more streaky and obviously a volume based shooter.

I think his stock is really low and I think the Pacers would be smart to stay away from him. Remember how pure Redick's shot was. Curry can make it but I'm not sure he'll be as good as his dad. I guess at 11 that's fine, but considering it's also not a sure thing that he's going to translate...he's a risk.

count55
03-24-2009, 11:37 AM
I just ran it a dozen or so times, and Hill was going 5th or 6th.

It's probably still a little out of date, though.

Anyway, we kept getting Willie Warren.

OakMoses
03-24-2009, 12:41 PM
Anyway, we kept getting Willie Warren.

Yes, and it makes me want to die. Especially if you look and see that Ford has Jrue Holiday and Brandon Jennings being drafted after that.

I know that Bird loved Ben Gordon, but if we draft Ben Gordon v. 2 instead of a pure PG with good size like Jennings or Holiday...

That would make me quite angry.

ReginaldWayne
03-24-2009, 12:51 PM
I would prefer for us to stay away from Curry aswell, especially if we get a top 11 pick. With that being said, I think Curry is going to a fine NBA career, his game will definitely translate. He is certainly not the quickest gaurd, but there is no question he can play pg in the nba. He has very under control handles, and if Eddie House can make a name in the nba, Steph Curry can.

Though he may be looking like more and more of a streak shooter, he will easily be a 40% 3 point shooter in the NBA. There wont be many step backs for 3, off the dribble for 3, or much like that, but a lot of catch and shoots with his feet set. I wouldnt want him as our lottery pick, but anything above 20 I'd love him.

count55
03-24-2009, 12:57 PM
Yes, and it makes me want to die. Especially if you look and see that Ford has Jrue Holiday and Brandon Jennings being drafted after that.

I know that Bird loved Ben Gordon, but if we draft Ben Gordon v. 2 instead of a pure PG with good size like Jennings or Holiday...

That would make me quite angry.

Well, let me put it this way:

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/4816/pacerswin.png (http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pacerswin.png)

I pulled this down on April 1st of last year, so roughly the same time frame.

Besides the fact that the Pacers didn't get Rose, check out the other projections:

Lopez 4th, Randolph 5th, Bayless 6th, Jordan 8th, Love 10th, Speights 11th, Augustin 12th, Westbrook 13th...Griffin and Buddinger weren't even in the draft.

Hell, as late as the weekend before the draft, Lopez and Bayless were listed as top 4 or 5 in some projections.

I wouldn't particularly worry about Willie Warren at the moment.

kellogg
03-24-2009, 12:57 PM
I think it's all way too early to determine who's going when. I remember around this time last year predictions had Kevin Love falling to us, then OJ Mayo...so who knows. So much can change in the predraft camps.

count55
03-24-2009, 01:05 PM
Also, Ford's machine spent the vast majority of last spring and early summer project DJ Augustin to us, with the occasional Kosta Koufos (:shudder:) sprinkled in for good measure. While he did call Bayless dropping, that didn't happen until the eve of the draft.

pwee31
03-24-2009, 01:30 PM
Chad Ford, paid to cover the NBA. He has Hill dropping to 11th. And during the AZ run to the sweet 16 no less.

Does his dad own ESPN? That's Vescey level insight on Chad's part. Hill has tracked as a top 5-6 all year.



I'd call that CLIMBING to the 11th spot. Neither he nor Mills exactly helped their case last night. Dude is an offensive shooting specialist, he has to show a better PCT in a critical game like that, and more so given his so-so return from injury. He's got the touch, but he's looking more and more streaky and obviously a volume based shooter.

I think his stock is really low and I think the Pacers would be smart to stay away from him. Remember how pure Redick's shot was. Curry can make it but I'm not sure he'll be as good as his dad. I guess at 11 that's fine, but considering it's also not a sure thing that he's going to translate...he's a risk.

I think you're missing the point that he is that team. He has to do absolutely everything except set a screen for himself. Even when he gets screen, he usually has to still create a shot for himself.

He creates for himself and others. I'd like to see that around talent, and on a team where he will not be double teamed the entire time.

Curry is a way better ball handler then Redick and Duke always had talent to win some without Redick. He would be focal point, but they had other players they could go to

Mr. Sobchak
03-24-2009, 02:53 PM
Also, Ford's machine spent the vast majority of last spring and early summer project DJ Augustin to us, with the occasional Kosta Koufos (:shudder:) sprinkled in for good measure. While he did call Bayless dropping, that didn't happen until the eve of the draft.


To be fair to Koufos, he has played pretty well in limited playing time with the Jazz.

count55
03-24-2009, 02:59 PM
To be fair to Koufos, he has played pretty well in limited playing time with the Jazz.

Regardless, Koufos at 11 is worth a shudder. Particularly when you consider that we got both Jack and Rush with the 11th pick, and picked up Hibbert at 17, whose played at least as well, if not better, than Koufos has.

Mr. Sobchak
03-24-2009, 03:08 PM
Very true.

Naptown_Seth
03-24-2009, 07:15 PM
Yes, and it makes me want to die. Especially if you look and see that Ford has Jrue Holiday and Brandon Jennings being drafted after that.

I know that Bird loved Ben Gordon, but if we draft Ben Gordon v. 2 instead of a pure PG with good size like Jennings or Holiday...

That would make me quite angry.
He has Greg Monroe going 2nd. What, is this a combo thing where they run next year's draft at the same time? Jrue and Rubio also?

Things can change but Rubio seemed to be a taking a hard stand on not coming out this year. Monroe and Summers were demonstrative about it too and that was before their postseason disappointment. Jrue can't possibly in the remotest sense think he's better off coming out now vs coming out next year after a season as UCLA's top star player rather than the guy waiting for Collison to let go of the ball occasionally.

Jennings out of the top 10? Clark out of the top 10 after the games he's played in the tourney?

At least Hill is back to the top 6, but for the most part this doesn't look the least bit realistic or up-to-date even still.


I think you're missing the point that he is that team.No, my point is that the legend of Curry is outgrowing the actuality of Curry. This is why he's falling in serious mocks that follow the insider buzz and still flying high in these "I barely turn on NCAA games" mocks from all-NBA-all-the-time guys, and why fans will be shocked as he falls to the surprise of no insiders. I mean Mills is St Mary's and that meant that Curry should have been able to win that game himself rather than put up such a poor FG%. Harden has been hurt by his late season and so has Curry. They both need huge camps to turn it around.

I don't even dislike Curry and I do think he's one of the smarter players coming out. I think he's going to make it in the NBA. I just don't think he's Reggie Miller or Rip Hamilton. I don't think he's been as good with the ball for one thing and I think he's shown that he can be shut down.

Case in point the tourney last year, a comment that I was making about Rush, not Curry. Curry goes off on KS in the first half, hurting Chalmers and Collins quite a bit. 2nd half and Self had seen enough, he puts Rush on him. First play Rush goes under a screen, Curry doubles back and buries the shot.

That never happens again the rest of the night and KS rolls on over Davidson. Curry catches defenses off guard with his NBA caliber style of play, actually being organized and using screens effectively. That will still play at the next level. However guys aren't caught off guard nearly as much.

Curry is going to get trapped trying to take the ball over a PnR screen, he's going to get correctly switched on shooting screens and he's going to need a team to run plays for him ala Rip and Reggie. He's good, he's just not Rip good IMO. I don't see the inventiveness and massive diversity that Rip showed when you tried to take away his main two or three plays.

pwee31
03-24-2009, 07:33 PM
He has Greg Monroe going 2nd. What, is this a combo thing where they run next year's draft at the same time? Jrue and Rubio also?

Things can change but Rubio seemed to be a taking a hard stand on not coming out this year. Monroe and Summers were demonstrative about it too and that was before their postseason disappointment. Jrue can't possibly in the remotest sense think he's better off coming out now vs coming out next year after a season as UCLA's top star player rather than the guy waiting for Collison to let go of the ball occasionally.

Jennings out of the top 10? Clark out of the top 10 after the games he's played in the tourney?

At least Hill is back to the top 6, but for the most part this doesn't look the least bit realistic or up-to-date even still.

No, my point is that the legend of Curry is outgrowing the actuality of Curry. This is why he's falling in serious mocks that follow the insider buzz and still flying high in these "I barely turn on NCAA games" mocks from all-NBA-all-the-time guys, and why fans will be shocked as he falls to the surprise of no insiders. I mean Mills is St Mary's and that meant that Curry should have been able to win that game himself rather than put up such a poor FG%. Harden has been hurt by his late season and so has Curry. They both need huge camps to turn it around.

I don't even dislike Curry and I do think he's one of the smarter players coming out. I think he's going to make it in the NBA. I just don't think he's Reggie Miller or Rip Hamilton. I don't think he's been as good with the ball for one thing and I think he's shown that he can be shut down.

Case in point the tourney last year, a comment that I was making about Rush, not Curry. Curry goes off on KS in the first half, hurting Chalmers and Collins quite a bit. 2nd half and Self had seen enough, he puts Rush on him. First play Rush goes under a screen, Curry doubles back and buries the shot.

That never happens again the rest of the night and KS rolls on over Davidson. Curry catches defenses off guard with his NBA caliber style of play, actually being organized and using screens effectively. That will still play at the next level. However guys aren't caught off guard nearly as much.

Curry is going to get trapped trying to take the ball over a PnR screen, he's going to get correctly switched on shooting screens and he's going to need a team to run plays for him ala Rip and Reggie. He's good, he's just not Rip good IMO. I don't see the inventiveness and massive diversity that Rip showed when you tried to take away his main two or three plays.

I personally feel that if he's on the right team, he'll do well. In college he's the target... he's the best and I feel only player on his team. In the pros he will have talent around him and folks he can defer to take pressure off of him.

I think the pick and roll, with him at the point, and Murph setting the screen would be money.

He doesn't have to be to main guy like Reggie or Rip, and in our up and down offense, he's going to get open shots.. hell everyone does.

My problem is his defense. Other then that I think he'll put fans in the seats, and help our offense even more. You can play him at the PG and the SG if need. As long as we sure up our team defense, we'll be fine.

I doubt Bird will draft him, but he would be smart to think about it IF the best player available isn't a need

stevo
03-24-2009, 08:46 PM
Im not sure I see Curry as a point guard in the NBA. Just for the reasons mentioned below. He will be trapped and defenses will focus on him. I could be wrong. His main weapon is rolling of screens and draining threes from 2 feet behind the arc. Other than that he is not a creator with the ball. He would however, complement a speedy point guard in a up tempo offense, ala the Pacers. just my opinion.

Shade
03-24-2009, 09:58 PM
Why are we talking about guards? We need a post player much, MUCH more than another guard.

As for Curry, I'd pass. He's a bit of a ballhog and very weak defensively.

LOCBLB613
03-24-2009, 10:18 PM
EARL CLARK OR SAMARDO SAMUELS

MillerTime
03-24-2009, 10:37 PM
Theres no way Hill is dropping that low. He'll go top 7 for sure

Mr. Sobchak
03-24-2009, 10:58 PM
Why are we talking about guards? We need a post player much, MUCH more than another guard.

As for Curry, I'd pass. He's a bit of a ballhog and very weak defensively.

Ballhog? Have you seen the rest of Davidson's team? He needs to put up that many shots if they even have a remote chance of winning..

MillerTime
03-24-2009, 11:04 PM
Why are we talking about guards? We need a post player much, MUCH more than another guard.

As for Curry, I'd pass. He's a bit of a ballhog and very weak defensively.

Isn't the rule, we take who is next BEST available, now necessarily what we need? I think we did that with Granger (and it worked out for us) and Bayless.

As for Curry, I agree, hes not someone I would want on the Pacers. He seems like a chucker and a defensive liability

stevo
03-24-2009, 11:30 PM
[QUOTE He seems like a chucker and a defensive liability[/QUOTE]

This is why I would not draft him for the most important position on the
floor. But it can be argued that he is at least a top 10 talent in this
weak draft. It could also be argued that he could very well end up the
BPA. His games are over. So what we have to go on is his resume.
Career average 24.6 ppg. 08-09 league leader in scoring at 28 ppg playing
out of position. Last year when he had a capable pg his shooting percentage
was 44%. This year he did not have this and was forced to create his
own shots, thus the poor fg percentage. Give him a good point guard
in the NBA and I believe he could flourish.

MrSparko
03-24-2009, 11:38 PM
Who exactly is Curry supposed to pass to? If you're told by the coach to shoot first, second, and third then you do it.

MillerTime
03-25-2009, 03:37 AM
Curry reminds me a lot of Ben Gordon. Undersized SG that has the shoot 1st mentality

idioteque
03-25-2009, 01:32 PM
Curry reminds me a lot of Ben Gordon. Undersized SG that has the shoot 1st mentality

What are you talking about. I'll reiterate a point another poster made, have you ever seen Davidson play? Other than Curry there is no one on that team who should even be on an NBDL roster. I watched them throughout the NIT and they are TERRIBLE. Curry is the only player on that team worth squat when it comes to basketball skills. Otherwise, they'd have a tough time handling the Wabash College Division III basketball team.

I think that Curry will probably always be a defensive liability and I'm not sure if I'm sold on him or not, but it is very intriguing to think of him in an NBA setting where he's not the best player on the court and can't be double and triple teamed constantly. There's something to be said for a good stroke, a lot of NBA players are great athletes but are absolute bricklayers. I thought Curry will have a decent role on an NBA team.

Will Galen
03-25-2009, 02:42 PM
Does his dad own ESPN? That's Vescey level insight on Chad's part. Hill has tracked as a top 5-6 all year.

Not quite. Chad's top 100 is what he hears from scouts, etc.

stevo
03-25-2009, 04:16 PM
Isn't the rule, we take who is next BEST available, now necessarily what we need? I think we did that with Granger (and it worked out for us) and Bayless.

As for Curry, I agree, hes not someone I would want on the Pacers. He seems like a chucker and a defensive liability


What are you talking about. I'll reiterate a point another poster made, have you ever seen Davidson play? Other than Curry there is no one on that team who should even be on an NBDL roster. I watched them throughout the NIT and they are TERRIBLE. Curry is the only player on that team worth squat when it comes to basketball skills. Otherwise, they'd have a tough time handling the Wabash College Division III basketball team.

I think that Curry will probably always be a defensive liability and I'm not sure if I'm sold on him or not, but it is very intriguing to think of him in an NBA setting where he's not the best player on the court and can't be double and triple teamed constantly. There's something to be said for a good stroke, a lot of NBA players are great athletes but are absolute bricklayers. I thought Curry will have a decent role on an NBA team.

I guess you could say Im on the Curry bandwagon. Partly because Im not all that impressed with Brandon. In college, he averaged 13 and 5 ,13 and 5, 13 and 5. If it walks and talks like...... then he is what he is. A defensive stopper who has streaky three point range. I would love to have a starting sg that scoring is his specialty not his defense. Just like we did with Ford and Jack. Thunder and lightning, only it was the other way around because Ford was starting. If not Curry, then we need a starting sg who can score.
When its time to bring in stopper because someone is going off then we have a great defensive backup in Brandon.

If only we could keep JJ, our defense at the point of attach would be good enough to offset a sg that has more offense than defense. know one thought that Reggie would be all that great defensively, but in reality he wasn't that bad. He didn't bring the team down. We had good defensive pgs that could defend the POA. well besides the Tin man.