PDA

View Full Version : Tyler Hansbrough anybody?



vnzla81
05-22-2009, 10:23 PM
I been watching highlights of him and it seems that he plays in overdrive all the time, this guy has the heart of a champion(I think) he rebounds, score, plays D, does anything to make the team better, the Pacers been saying all this time that they are looking for a younger Jeff and the only guy I can think of is Tyler, I really think that if the Pacers have the chance to get this guy either getting a late 1st round pick or early second round they should do it, he could be that spark of the bench, somebody that does not care about numbers and plays hard every time.
I also think that Larry Wants older players that been in college for few years, he is not looking for any long term projects. what do you guys think?

Here are some of his highlights

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZGNV8rgAmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inH0SBGFbUc

d_c
05-23-2009, 12:40 AM
In the 2nd round, sure.

Kemo
05-23-2009, 02:58 AM
ya Hansbrough is nice.. I think he is one of the most underrated guys in the draft personally ..

I remember seeing that 360 dunk (in the first clip ) that he done in a game and literally bout crapped my pants at the time ..

Dude is pretty damn athletic , and has that drive to be a good player .. I think he may be one of these guys who's game translates well in the nba ..

.
.

PR07
05-23-2009, 03:00 AM
I believe Larry Bird mentioned that he'd like to find a younger guy to eventually relieve Jeff Foster of his role of team "hustler" inside. Can Josh McRoberts develop into this guy, assuming the Pacers can bring him back? If not, UNC's Tyler Hansbrough looks like a good fit if we could trade down or acquire a pick later in the draft, no?

bruno: McRoberts has the athleticism and energy but needs to work on the mental and physical toughness. Although asking anyone to be as tough as Foster is probably too much to expect. Hansbrough's a wild card. He's commonly mentioned as a second-rounder but I find it hard to believe a guy that productive at the highest level of college basketball for so long would be anything other than a respectable pro at worst.

Bruno didn't rule it out, so perhaps the Pacers are considering it. I think he'll get taken late first round though.

MillerTime
05-23-2009, 03:04 AM
If we can pick him up late 1st rounder or any time in the 2nd, I wouldnt mind. Hes definitely not going at #13. He reminds me of Mark Madsen

OakMoses
05-23-2009, 08:08 AM
In the 2nd round, sure.

We need a ditto button.

owl
05-23-2009, 08:49 AM
If we can pick him up late 1st rounder or any time in the 2nd, I wouldnt mind. Hes definitely not going at #13. He reminds me of Mark Madsen

He is better than Madsen by a bit IMHO. His productivity over 4 years was not done with
mirrors in a very tough conference. I would like for the Pacers to get two picks in this draft.
A g/f and pf. Taking Tyler late in the 1st would not be a bad move. Sign Gortat for the back up big and see what happens.

Tom White
05-23-2009, 09:16 AM
It would certainly follow the pattern the Pacers have recently established of taking a player with more college experience, and from a proven program.

Hibbert (Georgetown) and Rush (Kansas) were the tone setters for that.

Major Cold
05-23-2009, 09:25 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NUzxBa_yuCs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NUzxBa_yuCs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

vnzla81
05-23-2009, 10:15 AM
It would certainly follow the pattern the Pacers have recently established of taking a player with more college experience, and from a proven program.

Hibbert (Georgetown) and Rush (Kansas) were the tone setters for that.

I agree, that is why I think they would try to get him and I hope they get him. I think he is going to get pick between 15 and 25, they have players in the mock drafts that have not show anything and are rated higher than him.

NapTonius Monk
05-23-2009, 11:58 AM
<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NUzxBa_yuCs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/htwkRYa0gOk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/htwkRYa0gOk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

DrBadd01
05-23-2009, 12:04 PM
Since we won't get Griffen or Rubio Hansbrough is the one player I want from this draft. Kids is athletic, and has basketball IQ. Moreover, he did things the right way; He could of come out of college last year and been drafted higher. I like the fact that he stuck it out and didn't leave before his senior season. We need players with that kind of character here.

diamonddave00
05-23-2009, 01:33 PM
Part of the reason for lukewarm evaluations on Hansbrough deal from his age , as a 24 year old rookie , many believe he has pretty much reached his peak in developmentand he has very limited upside. Also at likely 6'8 as most believe the question is what position is he suited for in the NBA?

Many believe the fact he shoots the ball from a low position will lead to his shot being blocked inside against superior athletes of the NBA.

In most opinions Tyler is seen as a player who used his maturity being almost 5 years older than some opponents to his advantage , something that will be negated in the NBA.

Tyler will probably be a solid 9th or 10th guy on an NBA team for 8-10 years but I expect little from him beyond that. Is he worth a 2nd round pick of course he is ; but anything above 25 seems a major reach.

BlueNGold
05-23-2009, 04:14 PM
I think he's pretty limited along the same lines as Madsen, Sean May or Troy Murphy. He's better than Madsen and probably May, but I doubt he is better than Troy.

d_c
05-23-2009, 05:20 PM
Part of the reason for lukewarm evaluations on Hansbrough deal from his age , as a 24 year old rookie , many believe he has pretty much reached his peak in developmentand he has very limited upside.


This is a big thing a lot of his supporters have been overlooking. He'll be 24 by the beginning of the next NBA season. There are several players who have been in the league for 2-3 seasons already who are younger than Hasnbrough. Dwight Howard is in his 5th year in the league and he's younger than Hasnbrough, for example.

It's not just that he's topped out developmentally, but it's that he's spent the better part of his UNC career bullying around physically less developed players. So that makes what he did in college a little less impressive.

Trophy
05-23-2009, 05:44 PM
He might be like a Mario Chalmers kind of draft selection in the early 2nd round.

flox
05-23-2009, 06:31 PM
Since we won't get Griffen or Rubio Hansbrough is the one player I want from this draft. Kids is athletic, and has basketball IQ. Moreover, he did things the right way; He could of come out of college last year and been drafted higher. I like the fact that he stuck it out and didn't leave before his senior season. We need players with that kind of character here.

That's not character, that's called staying for himself because he wants a title, this is a weaker draft, and he is a basketball god in the college and a backup big in the NBA.

Putnam
05-23-2009, 06:42 PM
I'm content to wait and see that Larry Bird does, based on the advice of the whole fleet of Pacers scouts and talent evaluators.

.

d_c
05-23-2009, 06:45 PM
That's not character, that's called staying for himself because he wants a title, this is a weaker draft, and he is a basketball god in the college and a backup big in the NBA.

Agreed.

What you did or didn't do in college doesn't matter in the NBA. It's all about how developed you are and how well your game translates to the NBA. Hansbrough isn't going to get a single call from the refs because he stayed 4 years or because he won some award named after John Wooden.

The NBA didn't care that Ed O'bannon stayed 4 years and won an NCAA title. Didn't care that Mateen Cleaves did the same thing. Didn't care that JJ Redick did just about everything right in college and was one of the greatest shooters in college history. None of that matters anymore when talking about the NBA.

What you deserve in the NBA depends on how well you play the NBA game, not what you did in college.

Country Boy
05-23-2009, 07:12 PM
Agreed.

What you did or didn't do in college doesn't matter in the NBA. It's all about how developed you are and how well your game translates to the NBA. Hansbrough isn't going to get a single call from the refs because he stayed 4 years or because he won some award named after John Wooden.

The NBA didn't care that Ed O'bannon stayed 4 years and won an NCAA title. Didn't care that Mateen Cleaves did the same thing. Didn't care that JJ Redick did just about everything right in college and was one of the greatest shooters in college history. None of that matters anymore when talking about the NBA.

What you deserve in the NBA depends on how well you play the NBA game, not what you did in college.


Wow, some very flawed logic at work in this post.

Anthem
05-23-2009, 09:29 PM
Wow, some very flawed logic at work in this post.
What's flawed? Looks pretty logical to me.

BlueNGold
05-23-2009, 09:42 PM
d_c could not be more correct. There are a littany of great college players who flopped in the NBA...including Indiana players. Steve Alford is another good example. Sean May has never shown much promise. But I think Tyler will be better than either of them, because it would be hard to be worse.

DrBadd01
05-23-2009, 11:42 PM
d_c could not be more correct. There are a littany of great college players who flopped in the NBA...including Indiana players. Steve Alford is another good example. Sean May has never shown much promise. But I think Tyler will be better than either of them, because it would be hard to be worse.

I don't think that Hansbrough fits that mold. Obviously nobody will know until he gets drafted and plays, but I think that Hansbrough is the kind of special player that can be a leader on the court. He may not have all the flash of some people who will be drafted ahead of him, but he has all the right tools to be a great player.

As for him going back for a title that very well could of been one of his reasons. However, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that another big reason was for a college degree. If that is selfish so be it, but it also shows character. He understands that there is life after basketball.

Big Smooth
05-23-2009, 11:54 PM
The fact he stayed in college for 4 years is more a warning sign for his NBA career rather than a badge of honor. If the Pacers want to take a flyer on him with a 2nd round pick then I'd be fine with that. But he is not worth a 1st round pick.

MrSparko
05-23-2009, 11:58 PM
Why does this vaguely remind me of Sarunas? Not athletic but has intangibles and "knows how to get it done"....

DrBadd01
05-24-2009, 12:10 AM
The fact he stayed in college for 4 years is more a warning sign for his NBA career rather than a badge of honor. If the Pacers want to take a flyer on him with a 2nd round pick then I'd be fine with that. But he is not worth a 1st round pick.

That is the very thing that I will never understand. Why is it a bad thing to play for four years in college before going pro? Plenty of players such as Tim Duncan, Patrick Ewing, Reggie Miller, and Danny Granger have done it and have been/are very good NBA players. Four years of college didn't hinder them any. You can site all the JJ Reddick's and Matteen Cleeves you want but for every one of those there is a Tim Duncan, Danny Granger, or Shane Battier.

MrSparko
05-24-2009, 12:14 AM
Well it is just one warning sign. Height is usually a requirement for power forward but look at Charles Barkley. No one is saying 4 years in college = Suckage. Just that 4 years is something you have to look at closer.

d_c
05-24-2009, 02:46 AM
As for him going back for a title that very well could of been one of his reasons. However, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that another big reason was for a college degree. If that is selfish so be it, but it also shows character. He understands that there is life after basketball.

That's great that he went for his degree, but really, no NBA team is going to care one bit about his college degree. I realize that sounds superficial and completely ignores the value of a good college education, but that's also the truth.

If a guy is dumb as rocks but can stay out of trouble and play really good basketball, an NBA team will take that guy 10 out of 10 times over a guy who finished his degree but can't play basketball as well.

Teams don't care that he'll lead a good life after basketball because they care about what he can do for the team while he's playing, not when he's retired.

pig norton
05-24-2009, 09:24 AM
Why does this vaguely remind me of Sarunas? Not athletic but has intangibles and "knows how to get it done"....

Sarunas was awesome.

DrBadd01
05-24-2009, 02:11 PM
That's great that he went for his degree, but really, no NBA team is going to care one bit about his college degree. I realize that sounds superficial and completely ignores the value of a good college education, but that's also the truth.

If a guy is dumb as rocks but can stay out of trouble and play really good basketball, an NBA team will take that guy 10 out of 10 times over a guy who finished his degree but can't play basketball as well.

Teams don't care that he'll lead a good life after basketball because they care about what he can do for the team while he's playing, not when he's retired.

No NBA team? Tell that to the Utah Jazz, the San Antonio Spurs or the current management of the Indiana Pacers or Portland Trailblazers. I would think that recent experiences in the case of the Pacers and the Blazer would indicate otherwise. The Spurs and the Jazz ( with the massive blunder that was Dennis Rodman) have always chose high character players. In the case of the Jazz Larry H Miller consistently drafted players who were college grads. So it is a complete fallacy that no NBA team cares about what kind of life their players lead.

MyFavMartin
05-24-2009, 02:32 PM
Wasn't Malone in a heap of trouble with eligitimate children?

And hasn't Finley had some problems?

At the end of the day, it's about winning. Yes, those teams want good character guys, but someone isn't going to choose a choir boy in the draft based on character. You need guys that can play and there are plenty that can both play and be positive role models. Let's just hope that the interview and background checks keep working.

And isn't Utah a little guilty of taking Boozer?

flox
05-24-2009, 02:57 PM
No NBA team? Tell that to the Utah Jazz, the San Antonio Spurs or the current management of the Indiana Pacers or Portland Trailblazers. I would think that recent experiences in the case of the Pacers and the Blazer would indicate otherwise. The Spurs and the Jazz ( with the massive blunder that was Dennis Rodman) have always chose high character players. In the case of the Jazz Larry H Miller consistently drafted players who were college grads. So it is a complete fallacy that no NBA team cares about what kind of life their players lead.

I don't think you watch the NBA very closely.

The Spurs have had plenty of problem players in the past few years, Steven Jackson, Jackie Butler to name a few.

The Jazz had a shady deal with Boozer and there are a lot of players who could bolt..

To say that they always take high character is a very misleading idea. Sure they have great character stars but they are no worse than some other teams in the L.

DrBadd01
05-24-2009, 03:37 PM
I don't think you watch the NBA very closely.

The Spurs have had plenty of problem players in the past few years, Steven Jackson, Jackie Butler to name a few.

The Jazz had a shady deal with Boozer and there are a lot of players who could bolt..

To say that they always take high character is a very misleading idea. Sure they have great character stars but they are no worse than some other teams in the L.

Living in Utah I hear about the Jazz all the time. Boozers deal with the Jazz was not considered shady here. When Larry H Miller ran the team he would constantly bring in high character players like John Stockton, Jeff Hornacek, Mark Eaton, Adrian Dantley, Darrell Griffiths and most recently Deron Williams.

Besides when Stephen Jackson was on the Spurs he wasn't considered a problem player. He hadn't occupied the Club Rio at that time. Their marquee players like Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Sean Elliot, Tony Parker, and Many Ginobli have always been high character players who (again save for Dennis Rodman) were people that kids could look up to. Duncan, Robinson, and I believe Elliot all earned their bachelors.

Big Smooth
05-24-2009, 03:44 PM
That is the very thing that I will never understand. Why is it a bad thing to play for four years in college before going pro? Plenty of players such as Tim Duncan, Patrick Ewing, Reggie Miller, and Danny Granger have done it and have been/are very good NBA players. Four years of college didn't hinder them any. You can site all the JJ Reddick's and Matteen Cleeves you want but for every one of those there is a Tim Duncan, Danny Granger, or Shane Battier.

I just don't think Tyler's game will translate to the NBA very well. My comments about staying 4 years I will admit is a generalization. I still think it holds true more often than not.....I mean sure there are exceptions to every unwritten rule.

d_c
05-24-2009, 05:12 PM
No NBA team? Tell that to the Utah Jazz, the San Antonio Spurs or the current management of the Indiana Pacers or Portland Trailblazers. I would think that recent experiences in the case of the Pacers and the Blazer would indicate otherwise. The Spurs and the Jazz ( with the massive blunder that was Dennis Rodman) have always chose high character players. In the case of the Jazz Larry H Miller consistently drafted players who were college grads. So it is a complete fallacy that no NBA team cares about what kind of life their players lead.

Let's roll back the tape and see how socially conscious these 3 NBA teams are:

Jazz drafted one the last American HS players to skip colllege and go straight to the NBA in CJ Miles. 2 years ago, they drafted Kyrylo Fesenko, who never went to college.

And socially conscious and responsible as Larry Miller was, the Jazz drafted Deshawn Stevenson straight from HS. Nevermind the fact that Stevenson is the guy who was charged with sexually assaulting a minor while still in HS (and the Jazz and every NBA team knew about this). Oh, but his name's not Stephen Jackson, so what he did isn't really that bad.

The Blazers, with the #1 pick in the draft chose between two guys who went to college for one season (and would've both skipped it if not for the new rules). They never even for a second considered Al Horford, the guy who played 3 years of college ball and won 2 NCAA championships.

They also drafted guys like Travis Outlaw, Victor Kryhapa, Petri Koponen, Martell Webster, Sergio Rodriguez and Rudy Fernandez. The combined years of college experience between all those guys? ZERO.

In addition, they traded away two 4 year college players (Jarret Jack and Brandon Rush) in order to acquire a 1 year college player (Jeryyd Bayless).

The Spurs have acquired guys like Ian Manhimi, Beno Udrih, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Fabricio Oberto and Stephen Jackson. None of those guys have spent a day in a college classroom.

The evidence is overwhelming. The NBA cares about guys that can play basketball. They don't care how long they went to school and what they studied.

DrBadd01
05-24-2009, 06:07 PM
Fine. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. just answer me this question: How many of these players who forego college a college education become successes outside of Basketball? A Good NBA players career is maybe 15 years. 20 at most. If given the option of a full successful life or 20 years and millions of dollars I would choose the college education. I would rather have a long fulfilling life than remain ignorant of all the virtues a college education provides somebody.

d_c
05-24-2009, 06:48 PM
Fine. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. just answer me this question: How many of these players who forego college a college education become successes outside of Basketball? A Good NBA players career is maybe 15 years. 20 at most. If given the option of a full successful life or 20 years and millions of dollars I would choose the college education. I would rather have a long fulfilling life than remain ignorant of all the virtues a college education provides somebody.

In general, I agree with you that it's almost always better that any given person in life gets a college education, but that's not what I'm arguing. I'm not arguing about how much more successful a guy with a 4 year college degree is going to be than a guy who skipped college after they're retired from playing basketball.

I'm just saying, what do NBA teams look for? It's been clear to me that they don't care whether or not a guy graduates from college, and that's been reflected in the types of players teams acquire.

NBA teams don't care what a player is going to do with themselves after they're done playing for their team. They don't care if they blew all the money they made. They only care about what those players did for them one the basketball court.

Kemo
05-24-2009, 07:53 PM
sorry , but if I had the skill and athleticism to actually BE in the NBA, you're damn right I'd rather take the MILLIONS of $$$$$$$ and retire a $$$$$$$-aire.. A person can ALWAYS get their degree(s) in whatever they choose to study .. Being in the NBA and making millions of dollars doing something you love is pretty much a once in a lifetime deal ..

A college degree doesn't guarantee you squat ... Sure , you have that piece of paper showing you know what you know, and have more opportunity to get into a career focused around what you studied and got your degree for, but I know of lots of people who spent thousands upon thousands of dollars going to college getting their degrees and with the current job market, they are hard pressed to find employment making enough money to even pay back their college loans , let alone live comfortably .. Yes a small percentage luck into their dream job with their degrees, but not very often ..


Hell , even a player making the league minimum , even the rookie salary , is going to be well off for the rest of their lives, granted they are smart with their money ..


I could personally invest and live off of only 1 million dollars for the rest of my life COMFORTABLY ...

I guarantee you that, unless said player was gonna be a specialist surgeon for example, they aren't gonna make , in their whole career , what an NBA player makes in the time they are playing in the league... and that goes for players who AREN'T superstars, such as the Fosters ,the Jarret Jacks , heck even the Chris Andersons of the league ...

Country Boy
05-24-2009, 09:14 PM
What's flawed? Looks pretty logical to me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by flox
That's not character, that's called staying for himself because he wants a title, this is a weaker draft, and he is a basketball god in the college and a backup big in the NBA.

Agreed.


Agreeing with this post is a whole lot more than flawed logic.

BlueNGold
05-24-2009, 10:43 PM
sorry , but if I had the skill and athleticism to actually BE in the NBA, you're damn right I'd rather take the MILLIONS of $$$$$$$ and retire a $$$$$$$-aire.. A person can ALWAYS get their degree(s) in whatever they choose to study .. Being in the NBA and making millions of dollars doing something you love is pretty much a once in a lifetime deal ..

A college degree doesn't guarantee you squat ... Sure , you have that piece of paper showing you know what you know, and have more opportunity to get into a career focused around what you studied and got your degree for, but I know of lots of people who spent thousands upon thousands of dollars going to college getting their degrees and with the current job market, they are hard pressed to find employment making enough money to even pay back their college loans , let alone live comfortably .. Yes a small percentage luck into their dream job with their degrees, but not very often ..


Hell , even a player making the league minimum , even the rookie salary , is going to be well off for the rest of their lives, granted they are smart with their money ..


I could personally invest and live off of only 1 million dollars for the rest of my life COMFORTABLY ...

I guarantee you that, unless said player was gonna be a specialist surgeon for example, they aren't gonna make , in their whole career , what an NBA player makes in the time they are playing in the league... and that goes for players who AREN'T superstars, such as the Fosters ,the Jarret Jacks , heck even the Chris Andersons of the league ...

I agree. I have a doctorate and value education, but anyone who passes up a chance to play in the NBA...as long as they are truly ready for that career...is economically foolish in most cases. For example, I would trade all of my degrees to have the remainder of Tinsley's contract....because I could always retire on 14 million and go back to school to study basket-weaving. McRoberts' contract might not be worth it now, but he's likely to get a bigger deal either here or overseas...so IMO, he is better off in the NBA too.

flox
05-25-2009, 11:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by flox
That's not character, that's called staying for himself because he wants a title, this is a weaker draft, and he is a basketball god in the college and a backup big in the NBA.

Agreed.


Agreeing with this post is a whole lot more than flawed logic.

Are you saying that I am illogical? That would be quite hilarious.

We are talking about a kid who had his jersey retired before he left the school. So basically, he is living like a god in UNC for the past 2 seasons. I don't understand how you don't comprehend this.

Even if he ends up like Foster, Foster doesn't get nearly as much love as Tyler does.

Anthem
05-25-2009, 11:56 AM
Agreeing with this post is a whole lot more than flawed logic.
Ok, gotcha. That makes more sense. So you agreed with this part?


What you did or didn't do in college doesn't matter in the NBA. It's all about how developed you are and how well your game translates to the NBA. Hansbrough isn't going to get a single call from the refs because he stayed 4 years or because he won some award named after John Wooden.

The NBA didn't care that Ed O'bannon stayed 4 years and won an NCAA title. Didn't care that Mateen Cleaves did the same thing. Didn't care that JJ Redick did just about everything right in college and was one of the greatest shooters in college history. None of that matters anymore when talking about the NBA.

What you deserve in the NBA depends on how well you play the NBA game, not what you did in college.

Kstat
05-25-2009, 12:18 PM
I think Hansborough would be perfect for Indiana at #13. I really mean that.

He can play in Obie's system, he will rebound and score in the post, he can defend at least at an average NBA level, looking at how well he played Blake Griffin, and he will be a glue guy.

In this weak draft, I think he's a gem that a lot of teams are going to overlook because of the 4-year thing, just like they did to tayshaun prince.

Country Boy
05-25-2009, 01:09 PM
Are you saying that I am illogical? That would be quite hilarious.

We are talking about a kid who had his jersey retired before he left the school. So basically, he is living like a god in UNC for the past 2 seasons. I don't understand how you don't comprehend this.

Even if he ends up like Foster, Foster doesn't get nearly as much love as Tyler does.

I think presumptious would be the word for your post. What makes you the expert in deciding whether a player has character or not?

flox
05-28-2009, 01:56 PM
I think presumptious would be the word for your post. What makes you the expert in deciding whether a player has character or not?

I can turn around and ask you why your position is any more defendable, what evidence do you have for your logic, and what makes others more qualified than I am?

BoomBaby31
05-28-2009, 02:14 PM
"unathletic" I'm tired of hearing/reading this. How can such a great basketball player be "unathletic." Just say "he can't jump 50ft in the air and isn't super aggressive." The dude needs to be get aggressive to be in the NBA, you see it with so many guys and I don't think it's them being "unathletic" it is them being unaggressive. To be a great big man you need to be aggressive to get that $ in the NBA. Take Birdman for example, if he has even the 1/4 of aggressiveness as Birdman Hansbrough would be a stud because he can shoot.

Since86
05-28-2009, 02:28 PM
He's not unathletic. He has shown a lot of athleticism throughout his career. Uncoordinated would be the word. Which is seriously whacky.

Usually athletic people are very fluid in their motions. They don't look awkward. Tyler is the exact opposite. He looks like a high kid that just grew 7inches.

Let's not confuse the two terms.

EDIT: I've never liked him, for a lot of reasons. I think he's a crybaby, first and foremost. And him going to UNC didn't help the fact.

But he is a very good player. He might not ever be an All Star, but he will get you a double double consistantly, and if he doesn't average it he will just just under. In a stronger draft, no where near 13, but in one like this you should take a hard look. He can be that tough inside defender, and he definately can get you those "real" rebounds everyone is such in favor of.

Slick Pinkham
05-28-2009, 02:56 PM
I think that he will be a very safe and solid late 1st round pick who will play 10 years, a shorter Jeff Foster with a jump shot, if you will. Very low chance of being a star and very low chance of not being around to earn a non-rookie contract with somebody. At #13 I'd rather take a chance on someone with more star potential, but who knows... that person with more star potential is likely to have more bust potential as well.

Trophy
05-28-2009, 03:26 PM
How good is his post defense?

Country Boy
05-28-2009, 05:12 PM
I can turn around and ask you why your position is any more defendable, what evidence do you have for your logic, and what makes others more qualified than I am?

Why should I defend your position? You put it out there that staying in college for the whole 4 years doesn't show character but shows a players selfishness and wanting to win a title as his only motive. I say that is hogwash and is painting with a very broad brush.

pwee31
05-28-2009, 06:21 PM
Hansbrough reminds me of David Lee when he was at Florida, except Hansbrough had the National spotlight on him.

And for this reason, I think it's underrated

Here's David Lee scouting report

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/David-Lee-87/

And now Hansbrough's

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/tyler-hansbrough


seem pretty similar to me

vnzla81
05-28-2009, 06:53 PM
Tyler Hansbrough is going to be a nice player, he is more like a Jeff Foster with a jump shot, at least with him the Pacers know what they are getting, another thing that people keep saying about his height 6.9" is that he is going to have issues playing Vs big guys, I don't see any problem with this because he would play with the second unit and in the NBA at this time are not many 7foot tall guys that come of the bench.

Kstat
05-28-2009, 08:25 PM
Jeff Foster with a scoring touch would be a pretty damn good player.

d_c
05-28-2009, 08:28 PM
Jeff Foster with a scoring touch would be a pretty damn good player.

Should be noted that it would be smaller Jeff Foster with a scoring touch, and that does play a factor.

d_c
05-28-2009, 08:32 PM
Tyler Hansbrough is going to be a nice player, he is more like a Jeff Foster with a jump shot, at least with him the Pacers know what they are getting, another thing that people keep saying about his height 6.9" is that he is going to have issues playing Vs big guys, I don't see any problem with this because he would play with the second unit and in the NBA at this time are not many 7foot tall guys that come of the bench.

If he was 6'9" in socks, it wouldn't be an issue at all, but he's going to measure out shorter than this.

The bigger issue about Hansbrough is his age. He's going to be 24 at the beginning of the season. And this isn't an issue about how much closer he is to his "ceiling" as it is about how he spent the majority of his college career bullying around younger, less physically mature players.

vnzla81
05-28-2009, 08:33 PM
Should be noted that it would be smaller Jeff Foster with a scoring touch, and that does play a factor.

He would play in the second unit and would go againts players not taller than 6,10", he could be that energy guy off the bench.

d_c
05-28-2009, 08:37 PM
He would play in the second unit and would go againts players not taller than 6,10", he could be that energy guy off the bench.

Agreed. He could be that guy.

Just remember that not everyone is going to be satisfied with a bench player at #13. If those are your expectations of Hansbrough, there's a good chance he can meet them. Most fans just want a starter at that point in the draft.

Hicks
05-28-2009, 08:46 PM
Kevin Love just showed us that being 6'8-6'9 isn't a death sentence.

d_c
05-28-2009, 09:14 PM
Kevin Love just showed us that being 6'8-6'9 isn't a death sentence.

Sure, but Love has a level of skill and coordination that Hansbrough simply doesn't. Their styles of play just aren't the same.

Love's game isn't predicated on just outhustling/outmuscling physically less developed opponents, and he showed that even in college. His game is diversified enough to the point to where he can be a long term starter instead of just a one/two trick pony role player off the bench.

vnzla81
05-28-2009, 09:24 PM
Agreed. He could be that guy.

Just remember that not everyone is going to be satisfied with a bench player at #13. If those are your expectations of Hansbrough, there's a good chance he can meet them. Most fans just want a starter at that point in the draft.

Remember that this draft is not deep, any team after the 5th pick should consider them self lucky if they get a good second unit player who can give them minutes. I would be more worry if they get a guy like Blair because he is smaller and does not have a jump shot.

vnzla81
05-28-2009, 09:50 PM
I just found this info about him

http://www.nba-draft.com/TylerHansbrough.html

#50 Tyler Hansbrough | F Profile


Hometown: Poplar Bluff, MO


Height: 6'9"


Weight: 250


Position: Power Forward


Team: North Carolina


Class: Senior

The Scouting Report:
Strengths
Good strength
True leader
Very high basketball IQ
High intensity
Great determination
Runs well
Great post positioning
Improving offensive repertoire
Jump hook
Up-and-under
Spin-move
Mid-range game out to 15'
Solid free-throw shooter
Soft-touch around the rim
Tremendous offensive rebounder
Soft hands
Tends to draws fouls on opposing players

Weaknesses
Questionable athletic ability
Not very explosive
Not much lateral quickness
Needs to improve post footwork


Basic Statistics
Year League Team GP Min Pts FG FGA FG% 2Pt 2PtA 2P% 3Pt 3PtA 3P% FTM FTA FT% Off Def
2005/06 31 30.4 18.9 6.4 11.3 57.0 6.4 11.1 57.1 0.1 0.1 50.0 6.0 8.2 73.9 3.6 4.3

TOT Asts Stls Blks TOs PFs
7.8 1.3 1.2 0.7 2.5 2.8

GP Min Pts FG FGA FG% 2Pt 2PtA 2P% 3Pt 3PtA 3P% FTM FTA FT% Off Def
2006/07 38 29.9 18.4 6.0 11.4 52.5 6.0 11.3 52.8 0.0 0.1 25.0 6.4 8.3 76.8 3.1 4.8

TOT Asts Stls Blks TOs PFs
7.9 1.2 1.1 0.4 1.9 2.4

GP Min Pts FG FGA FG% 2Pt 2PtA 2P% 3Pt 3PtA 3P% FTM FTA FT% Off Def
2007/08 39 33.0 22.6 7.4 13.7 54.0 7.4 13.5 54.7 0.0 0.2 0.0 7.8 9.7 80.6 3.9 6.4

TOT Asts Stls Blks TOs PFs
10.2 0.9 1.5 0.4 2.1 2.4

GP Min Pts FG FGA FG% 2Pt 2PtA 2P% 3Pt 3PtA 3P% FTM FTA FT% Off Def
2008/09 34 30.3 20.7 6.6 12.8 51.4 6.3 12.1 52.1 0.3 0.7 39.1 7.3 8.7 84.1 3.0 5.1

TOT Asts Stls Blks TOs PFs
8.1 1.0 1.2 0.4 1.9 2.3

Anthem
05-28-2009, 11:54 PM
Just remember that not everyone is going to be satisfied with a bench player at #13. If those are your expectations of Hansbrough, there's a good chance he can meet them. Most fans just want a starter at that point in the draft.
We don't NEED a backup PF; we have one. What we need is a starter.

vnzla81
05-29-2009, 12:03 AM
We don't NEED a backup PF; we have one. What we need is a starter.

I don't think there is a real starting PF after Griffin in this draft, the Pacers pick is to low for them to get one, the best thing they could get is either a PG or a future PF like him who could be your back up for years to come.

flox
05-29-2009, 03:24 PM
I don't think there is a real starting PF after Griffin in this draft, the Pacers pick is to low for them to get one, the best thing they could get is either a PG or a future PF like him who could be your back up for years to come.

And waste the 13th pick on a role player rather than a starter? The guy measured out decently at the combine, but is still relatively short.

d_c
05-29-2009, 04:06 PM
And waste the 13th pick on a role player rather than a starter? The guy measured out decently at the combine, but is still relatively short.

Agree. When you're a 36 win team looking to get better, you worry about drafting guys who can start, not guys who fill spots on the bench.

quinnthology
05-29-2009, 05:40 PM
No more white guys, 6 is very much enough. If we draft Budinger or Hansborough I might have to cancel League Pass and take a year off. BRush needs to come off the bench so let's grab Wayne Ellington and throw him next to Danny for some deadly scoring. Tyreke Evans will probably be around to play the 2, also. And if you really want a big, why aren't you petitioning for Blair, a big with some serious skills? I thought this post was a joke. A more athletic Tyler Hansborough is(was) already on our bench, his name is Josh McRoberts.

vnzla81
05-29-2009, 05:48 PM
No more white guys, 6 is very much enough. If we draft Budinger or Hansborough I might have to cancel League Pass and take a year off. BRush needs to come off the bench so let's grab Wayne Ellington and throw him next to Danny for some deadly scoring. Tyreke Evans will probably be around to play the 2, also. And if you really want a big, why aren't you petitioning for Blair, a big with some serious skills? I thought this post was a joke. A more athletic Tyler Hansborough is(was) already on our bench, his name is Josh McRoberts.

A big? he is 6'6 with shoes, Danny is taller than him, don't get me wrong I like him but he is not big enough and regarding McRoberts I like the guy but I don't think he is not even close to Hansborough, Tyler got a jump shot and can score with his back to basket.

quinnthology
05-29-2009, 05:54 PM
A big? he is 6'6 with shoes, Danny is taller than him, don't get me wrong I like him but he is not big enough and regarding McRoberts I like the guy but I don't think he is not even close to Hansborough, Tyler got a jump shot and can score with his back to basket.

Blair is 265 pounds and has a post game. The last time they played UCONN he went 22 and 23, demolishing the best defensive big in the draft. Ben Wallace is what, 6'9'', yet he fit into Detroit's system perfectly. We're one of the quickest teams in the league, why not draft an undersized PF who can thrash under the rim?

I wasn't saying McRoberts was good, I'm just saying I don't want another one, even if this one's offensive game will translate to the NBA better (arguable).

DrBadd01
05-29-2009, 07:02 PM
A big? he is 6'6 with shoes, Danny is taller than him, don't get me wrong I like him but he is not big enough and regarding McRoberts I like the guy but I don't think he is not even close to Hansborough, Tyler got a jump shot and can score with his back to basket.

Charles Barkley was 6'6 and he is in the Hall of Fame. It is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog that matters. Anybody who has seen Tyler in college knows he has that kind of fight.

pwee31
05-29-2009, 07:04 PM
Blair is gone before #13. I'm about 95% sure of that

count55
05-29-2009, 07:10 PM
A big? he is 6'6 with shoes, Danny is taller than him, don't get me wrong I like him but he is not big enough and regarding McRoberts I like the guy but I don't think he is not even close to Hansborough, Tyler got a jump shot and can score with his back to basket.


Charles Barkley was 6'6 and he will be in the Hall of Fame. It is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog that matters. Anybody who has seen Tyler in college knows he has that kind of fight.

First, he was referring to Blair, not Tyler.

Second, Barkley? Seriously?

DrBadd01
05-29-2009, 07:17 PM
First, he was referring to Blair, not Tyler.

Second, Barkley? Seriously?

Firstly, yes. Charles Barkley was 6'6 look it up. ;) Secondly,Upon second look Tyler is listed as 6'8 on some websites. and Thirdly,why are you discussing Blair on a Tyler Hansbrough thread?

flox
05-29-2009, 07:32 PM
Firstly, yes. Charles Barkley was 6'6 look it up. ;) Secondly,Upon second look Tyler is listed as 6'8 on some websites. and Thirdly,why are you discussing Blair on a Tyler Hansbrough thread?

Are you joking? I can't believe you could seriously compare Barkley and Tyler. That comparison is so far off it made me incredulous.

Not to mention at least Barkley dominated and showed all the necessary tools. He was a freak. Guys like him don't come around often, and there are more than enough undersized failures in the league to suggest that small guys fail more often than they succeed.

DrBadd01
05-29-2009, 08:39 PM
I never compared the two, just stated that Charles Barkley was 6'6. If you want to compare the two players then fine. They are two different players in terms of style. The one thing I was highlighting was that Tyler has "fight" in him. That kind coincidentally is common in all the special players in NBA Charles Barkley included.

Major Cold
05-29-2009, 09:47 PM
I think there is enough evidence that smaller, wider PFs are successful in the NBA. Please find something else.

How about lack of lateral movement? How about lack of standing vertical leap?


Foster is wider and more solid than Tyler, but he has a similar motor.

vnzla81
05-29-2009, 11:04 PM
Are you joking? I can't believe you could seriously compare Barkley and Tyler. That comparison is so far off it made me incredulous.

Not to mention at least Barkley dominated and showed all the necessary tools. He was a freak. Guys like him don't come around often, and there are more than enough undersized failures in the league to suggest that small guys fail more often than they succeed.

He was comparing Blair to Barkley, and for those who keep comparing Barkley to Blair, there is a lot of differences, Blair can only rebound and score here and there, when Barkley as you said was a freak could shoot from almost anywhere and post up, in other words their game is not even similar or even close.

quinnthology
05-29-2009, 11:10 PM
I think I hijacked the discussion by bringing Blair into it - I have no idea whether people are talking about him or Ty Hansborough.

DrBadd01
05-29-2009, 11:15 PM
htwkRYa0gOk

f0jQ8g0W7e0&hl

Lack of lift you say?

05TYnf2jjpU

By the way he is also pretty clutch.

Anthem
05-29-2009, 11:30 PM
And waste the 13th pick on a role player rather than a starter? The guy measured out decently at the combine, but is still relatively short.


Agree. When you're a 36 win team looking to get better, you worry about drafting guys who can start, not guys who fill spots on the bench.

Yes and yes.

DrBadd01
05-29-2009, 11:40 PM
This article seems pretty relevant to the conversation: ( Hope it is formatted the right way)

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009/news/story?id=4216570&campaign=rss&source=NBAHeadlines



Hansbrough wants to disprove doubts

CHICAGO -- There was more than a touch of defiance in Tyler Hansbrough's voice while he spoke Friday at the NBA predraft camp.

"Doubt me all you want, but I think I have a lot to prove," the winner of the 2008 Naismith and Wooden awards said.

There are plenty of doubters whether Hansbrough's abilities will translate into a successful NBA career after a wildly successful college career.

Hansbrough, who measured 6-foot-8 1/4, 234 pounds at the predraft camp, averaged 20.3 and 8.6 rebounds for his career and led North Carolina to the NCAA championship in April. However, many predictions have labeled him a middle first-round pick.

"I'm not worried about it," he said. "It's just a bunch of people saying whatever they want. I think I'll prove a lot of people wrong.

"They kind of doubted me in high school and said I wouldn't be a good college player. I'll bet a lot of people wouldn't have thought I would have wound up being the ACC all-time leading scorer. They can doubt me or whatever, but I got the job done and won a national championship."

North Carolina teammate Ty Lawson understands the chip Hansbrough carries on his shoulder.

"That would be motivation for anybody," he said. "Last year everybody told me I would not go until the second round, and it made me want to work harder and come back this year."

Concern over Hansbrough's quickness and scoring ability led to much of the criticism. He hopes the predraft camp calms any such fears among NBA personnel.

"I think a lot of times people perceive me as a hard worker," he said. "Sometimes my skills get overlooked. I'm a capable midrange shooter. I think I'll prove that at a lot of these workouts.

"Some people say I'm not athletic. I think I move very well, and I move my feet well, too."

Hansbrough thinks the NBA style of play will make it more possible for him to score.

"I've had three people guarding me for the past three years, so when I get to the NBA it's going to be more one-on-ones. I think that's a little different for me. I'll be able to handle that."

Lawson said he has seen evidence of Hansbrough's offensive potential.

"You had me and Wayne Ellington and Danny [Green] taking the shots, so there was no point in him doing it, but he had to add that last year at times," Lawson said. "I really think he's done a good job with that."

At this point, the only team to give Hansbrough a private workout is Chicago, although he expects to schedule several more soon. The Bulls had him at the Berto Center last weekend and while there he took a look at the six championship trophies on display at their headquarters.

"I like the tradition," Hansbrough said. "At North Carolina, we've had our tradition ourselves. It would be nice to go to a place that has that same tradition, has a winning program kind of style.

"I saw their [playoff] series against Boston. They're a pretty tough team. We'll see what happens."

Hansbrough had a reputation with college basketball fans for being the sport's biggest villain, possibly a college version of former Detroit Piston Bill Laimbeer. Regardless of where he goes in the draft, in a higher league Hansbrough can look forward to blending in more while inciting fewer crowds.

"Maybe a little bit, but I'm always going to have people who hate me so much just for some of the things I've done at Carolina," he said. "It's no big thing for me, but I enjoy it and I have fun with it."


Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press

Love that the kid has spirit.

flox
05-30-2009, 12:45 AM
I never compared the two, just stated that Charles Barkley was 6'6. If you want to compare the two players then fine. They are two different players in terms of style. The one thing I was highlighting was that Tyler has "fight" in him. That kind coincidentally is common in all the special players in NBA Charles Barkley included.

No, I'm more incredulous that you would use Barkely as an example of why short people succeed in the league because they have this so called "fight", which if Barkely really had he probably would have been a much better player since he didn't reach anywhere close to his full potential.

DrBadd01
05-30-2009, 11:33 AM
No, I'm more incredulous that you would use Barkely as an example of why short people succeed in the league because they have this so called "fight", which if Barkely really had he probably would have been a much better player since he didn't reach anywhere close to his full potential.

Barkley made the Hall of Fame and didn't reach his full potential. . . ok . . .

flox
05-30-2009, 05:03 PM
Barkley made the Hall of Fame and didn't reach his full potential. . . ok . . .

Of course he didn't, just look at him before 92 and after 92, and how much better he could have been if he didn't drink/gamble/smoke so much. And if he was actually in shape for his entire career...oh goodness.

quinnthology
05-31-2009, 12:46 AM
I can say the same thing about Jordan. "He didn't hit his potential because he left for a year, he could have kept getting better instead of coming back rusty in terms of scoring and missed out on a ring or two." Once a player hits the elite level, you can't really knock him for what could have been.

d_c
05-31-2009, 02:41 AM
I don't know why Hansbrough should even be mentioned with Charles Barkley. He has about 1/100th the talent that Barkley had. Just because Barkley was short doesn't mean that other short PFs will succeed like he did. They'll succeed if they have talent like Barkley, not because they're the same size.

Just because Barkley was a short PF doesn't mean that every short PF should be compared to him. Being short for your position puts you at a disadvantage, and guys like Barkley and Chris Paul are the exceptions and not the rules.

Taterhead
05-31-2009, 01:47 PM
I do not think Tyler could even crack our rotation, so no I don't think we should bother taking him. He doesn't give us anything we don't have already. He is the type of guy another team could use for sure, but not us at this time.



He was comparing Blair to Barkley, and for those who keep comparing Barkley to Blair, there is a lot of differences, Blair can only rebound and score here and there, when Barkley as you said was a freak could shoot from almost anywhere and post up, in other words their game is not even similar or even close.

Also, are you comparing a polished Barkley to a freshly turned 20 year old Blair? The problem with Dejuan is that he has never had to develop an outside game to this point. He has been the strongest guy on the floor every night from HS to college. Why in the world would he bother? In the NBA he'll be forced to work on that and who really knows if he can or not? The workouts will give teams a good idea about his ability to improve there. He is a known hard worker though, so I suspect he'll make great strides in those facets of his game.

Barkley? Not quite. But Charles is a great example of how a guy that size can succeed in the post. Have you ever seen him standing next to Kenny Smith? He is at best 6'4".

Taterhead
05-31-2009, 04:46 PM
I took the time to dig up Barkley's statline through 2 years of college.

Barkley

12.85 points
61.95%
9.2 rebounds
1.35 assists
1.65 blocks
.75 steals

Blair

13.7 points
56.8% shooting
10.7 rebounds
1.1 assists
1.0 blocks
1.6 steals

I am not sure if Chuck had the inside out game at that point or not. But Dejuan had a hard time getting touches with Fields and Young taking most of the shots for Pitt. Blair played in an extremely tough conference also. I don't think the comparison is unfair at all. BTW, Barkley is actually 6'4", he said so in his book. I just wouldn't write Blair off just yet.

flox
05-31-2009, 05:22 PM
I can say the same thing about Jordan. "He didn't hit his potential because he left for a year, he could have kept getting better instead of coming back rusty in terms of scoring and missed out on a ring or two." Once a player hits the elite level, you can't really knock him for what could have been.

Chris Webber.

vnzla81
06-04-2009, 09:22 PM
I would still take Hansbrough over Blair, he is showing in the combine that he is a better athlete than people think. The Pacers could trade Foster and replace him with Tyler, like another poster said, If they get a guy like Blair, him and Hibbert are going to use the same space and in the cases where Hibberts gets double team he is going to make the pass to a PF who can't shoot in Blair, the Pacers need a guy who complement Hibbert a guy who can hit the 10 foot jumper and play decent D and I think Tyler could be that guy.

danman
06-05-2009, 12:10 PM
Barkley does not belong in the conversation with either of these guys. He was a freak athletically, even with his weight issues. And yes, he did sabotage his own career with effort and weight issues. Still an easy call for the HoF.

Oh, and Charles measured 6'4.5 in the runup to the Olympics.

Charles did have issues despite his freakishness on the court, bigger forwards could sometimes shoot right over him.

But he illustrated the mismatch rule -- you gotta hurt them worse than they hurt you. Barley could do damage inside and out, and he was scary strong. Throw in awesome rebounding, nice hops, a sweet handle... yeah, HoF talent.

This is why Roy Hibbert has to find an offensive game. Though he'll no doubt improve on shotblocking, he's never going to be able to defend away from the rim... and there are a ton of forwards who can hit from 15 feet or more. Nor is Roy a natural rebounder.

His Rik Smits lesson is that he's just got to kill the other team inside on offense. Like, 15 ppg or better with high efficiency.

Short of that, Roy will never turn into a starter. He'll get yanked because he takes more off the table than he adds. Pau Gasol is another good example of the principle. Can't defend worth a crap inside or out, but no one cares because he brings an efficient 20/10 regularly, so teams worry about matching up with him, no the other way around.

Granger-Rush09
06-05-2009, 02:16 PM
Only if he is taken in round 2, Round 1 is CurryLand.

Unclebuck
06-11-2009, 09:16 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/bobcats/2009-06-10-hansbrough-workout_N.htm


Hansbrough's school ties show in workout for Bobcats

CHARLOTTE (AP) — If there was ever a player who could skip an audition in front of a bunch of North Carolina alums, it's Tyler Hansbrough.
Pass a television set in these parts in the past four years and you probably saw Hansbrough — at the foul line. Sporting that signature glare and relentless work ethic, he helped the Tar Heels reach two Final Fours and win a national title, while setting the Atlantic Coast Conference career scoring record.


TOP CHOICE?: Blake Griffin rounds into shape
But there was Hansbrough on Wednesday, being led through drills in a pre-draft workout by Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown and assistant Phil Ford, whose career scoring record Hansbrough broke last season at North Carolina.

It's no surprise Brown, North Carolina class of 1963, wasn't about to join the group of critics questioning how the 6-foot-8 Hansbrough will fare in the NBA.

"You know big guys in our league don't like to block out. They don't run on every play. They don't rebound every ball," Brown said. "So if you have the mentality to do those things you have a chance.

"And he's a much better athlete than most people think."

Hansbrough's motor was at full speed in the portion of the workout reporters were allowed to watch. He went first in drills, sprinted up the court and showed a decent touch with his mid-range shot.

Likely no player in this draft has had his weaknesses dissected more. Perhaps that comes from playing 141 college games, the majority of them on national TV, for one of the nation's elite programs.

There's talk that Hansbrough, who set an NCAA career record with 982 made free throws, isn't athletic enough to use that style of play in the NBA. There are questions about his quickness, athleticism and shooting range.

No one criticizes his effort. But to Hansbrough, projected to go somewhere in the latter half of the first round in the June 25 draft, that's become a backhanded compliment.

"There's a lot more to me than just someone that works hard," Hansbrough said. "I can do a lot of different things. I think my skills get overlooked because people judge me as a hard worker. But I've proven myself and expanded my game a lot."

It's unlikely the Bobcats, who hold the 12th pick, would select Hansbrough that high. But Charlotte, managed by the most famous ex-Tar Heel, Michael Jordan, is an organization stocked with baby blue products.

"He's going to get better. I don't think he's even gotten close to where he could be. And we all know he'll work," Brown said. "We need athleticism and we need size. I'm sure we'll look at him very carefully."

Brown believes too much is made of Hansbrough's weaknesses, claiming similar shortcomings among players who didn't stay in school four years are overlooked.

Brown compared Hansbrough to Ben Wallace, a similarly undersized forward whom Brown coached in Detroit. Wallace just finished his 13th NBA season with Cleveland.

"Everybody said Ben was undersized, he couldn't shoot the ball, he couldn't handle the ball," Brown said. "He's had a phenomenal career. There are a lot of players like that."

Chatter around the league indicates Hansbrough's stock has risen. He's also worked out for Detroit (15th pick), Chicago (16th) and New Orleans (21st) and has workouts planned with Indiana (13th), Utah (20th) and Portland (24th).

So after countless games on college's biggest stage, Hansbrough is ready to make the jump — and prove his critics wrong.

"I'm not worried about it," Hansbrough said, "because when people get me in the gym they're kind of surprised."

Notes: Bobcats GM Rod Higgins said they'll make a qualifying offer to G Raymond Felton, an impending restricted free agent, by the June 30 deadline. Higgins said they still haven't decided whether to do the same for F Sean May, who has battled weight and injury issues. ... Taj Gibson of Southern California, Juwann James of James Madison, Ben McCauley of North Carolina State, Ahmad Nivins of Saint Joseph's and Shawn Taggart of Memphis also auditioned for the Bobcats. Charlotte was McCauley's first NBA workout and Brown said he's "a little better athlete than I thought."

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

vnzla81
06-11-2009, 06:57 PM
[QUOTE=Unclebuck;893119]http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/bobcats/2009-06-10-hansbrough-workout_N.htm



Chatter around the league indicates Hansbrough's stock has risen. He's also worked out for Detroit (15th pick), Chicago (16th) and New Orleans (21st) and has workouts planned with Indiana (13th), Utah (20th) and Portland (24th).

I like this, does anybody know when he is coming to the fieldhouse?

Spirit
06-11-2009, 11:28 PM
<object width="425" height="344">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/htwkRYa0gOk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>:eek:

Wow

MyFavMartin
06-12-2009, 07:42 PM
Same complaints with Hansbrough as there were with Carl Landry.

Dude can hit the open 15-18 footer, has decent size and athleticism, can run, no serious injury issues, can jump, rebound, plays hard, can pass and plays within the team and has a high bball IQ.

Trade back, dump Tinsley, and pick up Psycho T.

NapTonius Monk
06-12-2009, 08:38 PM
Agree. When you're a 36 win team looking to get better, you worry about drafting guys who can start, not guys who fill spots on the bench.

When you're a 36 win team ,it's probably a good bet that you have problems, whether they be starters, or role players. Hansborough will produce and add much needed heart. Plus, he's a winner. I think we'd do well to get him.

NapTonius Monk
06-12-2009, 08:44 PM
Trade back, dump Tinsley, and pick up Psycho T.

Ah, if it were only so simple.

CableKC
06-12-2009, 09:47 PM
With Blair "supposedly" dropping in some Mock Drafts....in a PF weak draft....I'm guessing that Hansborough is going to move up the draft.

How does Hansborough compare to David Lee?

Anthem
06-12-2009, 11:19 PM
With Blair "supposedly" dropping in some Mock Drafts....in a PF weak draft....I'm guessing that Hansborough is going to move up the draft.
Seems a fair bet. Somebody's gotta.

Dr. Awesome
06-13-2009, 12:43 AM
:eek:

Wow

Fearless.

Seriously, no player in this draft has had their weaknesses picked apart more than Hansbrough. People forget about all the great things Hansbrough can bring to the table.

After the combine measurements, I'd be happy with him at #13. Problem is, I'm very high on McRoberts as well, so I'm torn. But I love what Hansbrough is going to bring to the NBA. The NBA needs more players with his kinda passion.

vnzla81
06-22-2009, 07:05 PM
I am Bringing this thread back because I feel that he is going to be the guy the pacers draft thursday.:)

Merz
06-22-2009, 07:16 PM
I would vote NO but the poll is closed. (If the Pacers were to draft him I'd certainly root for him, I'd much rather be proven wrong for the benefit of the team than be proven right)

cdash
06-22-2009, 08:08 PM
I really hope we don't draft him. Jesus. I don't want to be depressed on my birthday.

Dukins
06-22-2009, 08:16 PM
A BIG Emphatic :censored: NO

I know its no substance behind it. But I may jump off a bridge if we drafted him. Mind you a short bridge, where I break an ankle or something. LOL :hmm::D

vnzla81
06-22-2009, 08:40 PM
This guy is nice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZGNV8rgAmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cq1m4YzaP0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inH0SBGFbUc

pwee31
06-23-2009, 01:01 AM
I would be happy with Psycho T

Mourning
06-23-2009, 05:08 AM
I wouldn't, but ok...

I think he could add something, but as a backup at most. I would be ok with him IF we were to acquire a second first round pick between 20-30 IF he's still there, but I wouldn't pick him much higher.

We do not have to solve all of our problems that our team has in one season, so if we don't get a starter in this draft then maybe we can look for a trade to bring one in this summer or next winter or look at the next years draft. I prefer to fill another hole then bringing in a backup player. We are going to have more then our fair share of those this season anyway.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

lavell12
06-23-2009, 02:26 PM
He also won't be able to get to the foul line 20 times per game. Handsobrough was a good college player but also benefited treamendously from poor officiating. He won't get those calls in the NBA.

Kid Minneapolis
06-23-2009, 02:28 PM
I'm of the opinion that Psycho T is my likely top choice for the Pacers at the 13-spot, but I have a feeling he might not even last that long.

Jose Slaughter
06-23-2009, 02:32 PM
He also won't be able to get to the foul line 20 times per game. Handsobrough was a good college player but also benefited treamendously from poor officiating. He won't get those calls in the NBA.

I agree, the officals at the NBA level are first rate. :laugh: :laugh:

lavell12
06-23-2009, 02:34 PM
I agree, the officals at the NBA level are first rate. :laugh: :laugh:

They do suck but that won't play favorites for him they do that for guys like Kobe and LeBron.

Another problem I have with drafting him is that he isn't a very good defender. In fact he averaged less than one block per game through is college career. If your going to be a role player especially an inside role player you better be able to play D.

IndyProdigy
06-23-2009, 02:40 PM
:eek:

Wow

its a shame he traveled on that play. and kenny george? gimme a break. The Great Khali has more basketball skill.

IndyProdigy
06-23-2009, 02:41 PM
I agree, the officals at the NBA level are first rate. :laugh: :laugh:

i agree with you. but thats not what he means. he means every time hansbrough would flail his arms in the air, the ref would blow the whistle. that wont happen next year for him. when he DOES get off the bench.

diamonddave00
06-23-2009, 02:48 PM
I'm pulling for Hansbrough to go to the Nets. Chicago papers say they want Henderson if he's available the Pacers should take him and move him to the Bulls for 16 and 26. Personally I'm hoping DeJuan Blair ends up in Blue and Gold , plus 26 could acquire a 2nd decent playerin the draft.

jhondog28
06-23-2009, 02:55 PM
I'm pulling for Hansbrough to go to the Nets. Chicago papers say they want Henderson if he's available the Pacers should take him and move him to the Bulls for 16 and 26. Personally I'm hoping DeJuan Blair ends up in Blue and Gold , plus 26 could acquire a 2nd decent playerin the draft.

Wait!!!! I hope you all do not think Blair will make a better pro than Hans Solo. Blair has foul trouble written all over him. Extremely long arms, short verticle and small heigth makes for being in foul trouble consistently throughout his NBA career. Hans Solo is who I would pick as long as Jennings is not there if nothing more than base do the fact that he is a proven winner. Potential always gets people in trouble in a draft. I would always rather take the conssitent player that has proven himself vs. the all hype players coming out of college or high school.

diamonddave00
06-23-2009, 03:07 PM
Hansbrough will be 24 when the season starts his upside is very limited. He is not a good rebounder even playing in the UNC uptempo offense , his slow feet do not make him a stellar defender.

Blair is only 20 and at workouts showed the ability to hit the 15-17 foot jumper , we know he can board and is phsyical inside. Yes , he will be called for fouls (much like Hibbert) but at this point if its Blair or Hansbrough they will be a back up not a starter.

Adding a physical rebounder like Blair for 18-25 minutes a night is something this team needs. Hansbrough is not the rebounder Blair is and on this team scoring is not a huge need.

BobbyMac
06-23-2009, 03:25 PM
I think Hansbrough is the best of a very weak draft for big men....Draft Tyler then resign Jack and let Quis go....keep Graham as the third wing until MDJ gets back.

PaceBalls
06-23-2009, 03:36 PM
Fearless.

Seriously, no player in this draft has had their weaknesses picked apart more than Hansbrough. People forget about all the great things Hansbrough can bring to the table.

After the combine measurements, I'd be happy with him at #13. Problem is, I'm very high on McRoberts as well, so I'm torn. But I love what Hansbrough is going to bring to the NBA. The NBA needs more players with his kinda passion.

Watching McBob seem totally lost out there on the court quite often (though he always played hard), I gotta think Hanbrough is a bit smarter when it comes to know WTF is going on.

I am really hoping we get Hansbrough with #13. He is a hard worker, good skills, can hit his shots, he is tough minded and the guy is a winner. Never underestimate the psychology a winner and what that attitude brings. I would expect him to be in the Pacers rotation from the very start.

d_c
06-23-2009, 03:39 PM
Never underestimate the psychology a winner and what that attitude brings. I would expect him to be in the Pacers rotation from the very start.

Mateen Cleaves, Sean May, Ed O'bannon and Juan Dixon were all winners in college. Remember Doug Collins also said Juan Dixon had "the heart of Michael Jordan".

They had about as winning attitudes as you could get coming out of college, but that didn't seem to do much for the teams that drafted them.

PaceBalls
06-23-2009, 03:43 PM
Mateen Cleaves, Sean May, Ed O'bannon and Juan Dixon were all winners in college. Remember Doug Collins also said Juan Dixon had "the heart of Michael Jordan".

They had about as winning attitudes as you could get coming out of college, but that didn't seem to do much for the teams that drafted them.

I'm sure you could make a much bigger list of players who did have winning attitudes that were successful =/

d_c
06-23-2009, 03:46 PM
I'm sure you could make a much bigger list of players who did have winning attitudes that were successful =/

You could, but as the years have progressed, you'll notice that a player's NCAA success has had less and less to do with his subsequent NBA success.

Keep in mind the 6 best players in the NBA Finals this past year had a combined total of 1 year of NCAA experience.

PaceBalls
06-23-2009, 03:48 PM
You could, but as the years have progressed, you'll notice that a player's NCAA success has had less and less to do with his subsequent NBA success.

Keep in mind the 6 best players in the NBA Finals this past year had a combined total of 1 year of NCAA experience.

That is also not a very fair argument... If Kobe, Lebron, and Dwight Howard had gone to college, there is a very high possibility that all of them would have led their teams to championships.

billbradley
06-23-2009, 03:56 PM
at #13 i would be so sad. not angry or disappointed, just sad.

d_c
06-23-2009, 04:58 PM
That is also not a very fair argument... If Kobe, Lebron, and Dwight Howard had gone to college, there is a very high possibility that all of them would have led their teams to championships.

The point is that these guys DIDN'T go to college. These top talent guys didn't play NCAA ball.

So that lessens the significance of what guys like Hansbrough accomplished, because he's doing everything in a watered down NCAA league (compared to the days when MJ, Ewing, Hakeem, etc.. were in the NCAA landsacpe).

naptownmenace
06-23-2009, 05:00 PM
You could, but as the years have progressed, you'll notice that a player's NCAA success has had less and less to do with his subsequent NBA success.

Keep in mind the 6 best players in the NBA Finals this past year had a combined total of 1 year of NCAA experience.

That is a very good point, especially if you expand it to players that lead their teams during the playoffs. None of these stars from this year's playoffs played NCAA ball:

Kobe
Dwight
Lebron
Yao
Dirk
Rashard
Pao Gasol
Turkoglu
Tony Parker
Andrew Bynum
Jermaine O'Neal


That list could've been longer if KG and TMac had been available to play during the playoffs.

If you account for players that played only 1 season of NCAA ball you'd have to include:

Carmelo
Derrick Rose
DWade
Lamar Odom
Tervor Ariza
Greg Oden


Those combined lists have 1 DPOY award winner, 3 NBA MVPs, 3 Finals MVPs (4 if you count KG), 5 ROY award winners, and 11 (13 counting KG and TMac) All-Stars. It does make you think that having 3 or 4 years of college ball is overrated.

cdash
06-23-2009, 05:02 PM
at #13 i would be so sad. not angry or disappointed, just sad.

:laugh: I don't know why, but that made me laugh really hard.

PacerDude
06-23-2009, 05:12 PM
Actually, Wade played 2 years for Marquette, but I get your point anyway.

One-and-done is a stupid thing. But, if someone isn't good enough to go to the NBA after 1 year, maybe the other 2 or 3 help in their development.

Hall O'Point
06-23-2009, 05:40 PM
Hans is a good player, man. He was a hell of a lot of fun to watch at UNC because he played like an angry linebacker out there. He is able to turn it on so strong that he actually increases his ability on the floor by feeding off his intensity. I seriously think that if you gave him some ritalin or some depressants to calm him down, he would be a very below average player.

He's exactly what I like in a basketball player, and I'd love for the Pacers to have a maniac like that on the floor (I was a huge Artest fan).

But my problem is, he's not a smart pick at number 13, and I'm not sure he's a smart pick anywhere in the first round. Are you really ready to mortgage your future on a guy who's biggest strength is his ability to play angry and crazy? There are just too many guys who can do the same things as him.

I think the best comparison is Antonio Davis. That's the top end of Tyler's potential. If he ends up as good as Antonio, then he will have succeeded. Trouble is, Hans is shorter and smaller (rumors are that he's NOT 6'9" and he's around 230lbs, not 250), and he'll never be as good of a defender. He's also a lot less athletic.

That's the biggest problem you get with Hans. He's already 24, and which parts of his game do you think he'll improve on in the next 8-10 years?

-he'll never be an outside shooter like a Dirk or a Hedo
-he'll never be able to defend anyone but people his exact size. He can't guard big centers or fast guards/ combo forwards.
-he's not going to get much stronger or faster
-he's not going to suddenly develop great passing skills or handles

So, in as much as I like the guy, and I really do, I just think he's maxed out on too many skill sets already to be a lottery pick.

circlecitysportsfan
06-23-2009, 06:04 PM
We already have McRoberts.

billbradley
06-23-2009, 07:00 PM
We already have McRoberts.

we also already have bigs that can't defend and aren't known for their quickness. i can see psycho having some good years, just not with us.

Naptown_Seth
06-23-2009, 07:07 PM
In the 2nd round, sure.
Don't be a jerk.

25th is what you meant.

:-p



The point is that these guys DIDN'T go to college. These top talent guys didn't play NCAA ball.

So that lessens the significance of what guys like Hansbrough accomplished, because he's doing everything in a watered down NCAA league (compared to the days when MJ, Ewing, Hakeem, etc.. were in the NCAA landsacpe).
Strong point d_c


I'd rather have the bouncy, shot blocking capable Chase if you want to reach. Or Sam Young/Henderson to replace Dun. And of course a guy capable of making NBA passes, TWill.

You don't have to settle at 13. There are guys that can play pro ball. They might not be the position you want, but at least they'll still be in the NBA in 3 years if you need to trade them or a teammate. It's kinda hard to trade the dude you had to cut.

Or what was it again the Pacers got for trading James White?

Young
06-23-2009, 07:18 PM
Hansbrough does everything you ask of a player. He is the perfect college player.

I just don't see this guy doing anything exceptionally well in the NBA. Great shooters or great defenders can make up for being poor in other areas because of that one skill they have that they are so good at. I don't see Tyler being that great at anything to make him so special.

He does a lot of things good on the college level. However he will struggle to do anything good on the NBA level let alone do anything great.

I think at best he is an energy player off your bench who makes a bigger impact in the locker room and on the practice court than in a game. I'm not out to bash this guy I just don't see him as being anything near a starting quality player.

Country Boy
06-23-2009, 07:31 PM
The point is that these guys DIDN'T go to college. These top talent guys didn't play NCAA ball.

So that lessens the significance of what guys like Hansbrough accomplished, because he's doing everything in a watered down NCAA league (compared to the days when MJ, Ewing, Hakeem, etc.. were in the NCAA landsacpe).

BS, watered down? Your thowing out a handful of All stars and then calling the NCAA watered down. MLB could also now be called watered down with so many teams. We get it, you don't like Tyler but don't insult him by using that watered down logic as the final word on his NBA chances.

d_c
06-23-2009, 07:48 PM
BS, watered down? Your thowing out a handful of All stars and then calling the NCAA watered down. MLB could also now be called watered down with so many teams. We get it, you don't like Tyler but don't insult him by using that watered down logic as the final word on his NBA chances.

The NCAA is severely watered down compared to 15-20 years ago. It's not just the TMAC, Kobe KG superstars not going to college at all or the one and done supestars like Durant. That's just a fraction of it.

It's guys like Andre Igoudala and Thaddeus Young leaving early way. Back in the day, guys like Gary Payton and Tim Hardaway were 4 year players. Nowadays, you get the Jrue Holidays and Johny Flynns taking off after 1-2 years (just as a few examples, there are plenty more). You can't possibly say that this hasn't hurt the level of play in the NCAA.

Remember back when Chris Webber and his Fab 5 freshman made it to the NCAA finals? Back then, that was absolutely unprecedented for a group of freshmen to do that.

Flashforward several years and you get freshman like Carmelo, Greg Oden and Derrick Rose leading their teams to the finals as freshmen (and then leaving right after), and people don't think it's a big deal.

I don't hate on Hansbrough. I think about as highly as him winning an NCAA titles as I do Mateen Cleaves, Carmelo Anthony or Brandon Rush. It is what it is. It's college in a watered down landscape.

BlueNGold
06-23-2009, 08:11 PM
I would have to agree with d_c.

The best players in the league these days did not spend much time in college. In fact, three of the very best players in the league are Lebron, Kobe and Dwight and they never played in college at all.

BTW, while I think allowing 18 year olds to play in the NBA leads to some problems, the one and done rule is silly. I seriously doubt that a 19 year old is that much more mature. The league should instead attack any problems with rules that target behaviour not age. JMHO.

Merz
06-23-2009, 08:16 PM
BS, watered down? Your thowing out a handful of All stars and then calling the NCAA watered down. MLB could also now be called watered down with so many teams. We get it, you don't like Tyler but don't insult him by using that watered down logic as the final word on his NBA chances.

You can't be serious. The college game is clearly watered down from what it once was.

There hasn't been a senior coming out as a sure-fire franchise player since Tim Duncan.

d_c
06-23-2009, 08:19 PM
The best players in the league these days did not spend much time in college. In fact, three of the very best players in the league are Lebron, Kobe and Dwight and they never played in college at all.


And I just want to emphasize that it goes beyond the superstars.

Back then, Elden Campbell and Dale Davis were 4 year players. And even guys who were slightly worse NBA prospects than Campbell or Dale stayed 4 years and were very good college players.

Nowadays guys like Chris Wilcox or Mareesse Speights leave after 2 years. That kind of stuff hurts the NCAA.

Even guys who end up busting like Marcus Haislip or Rodney White leaving early hurts the NCAA, because even though they made for crappy NBA players, they sure as heck were good college players.

Country Boy
06-23-2009, 09:37 PM
You can't be serious. The college game is clearly watered down from what it once was.

There hasn't been a senior coming out as a sure-fire franchise player since Tim Duncan.

If the college game is clearly watered down as you say, what the hell does it say about the NBA game if they have to depend on 18 and 19 year old players to keep the game afloat? Do you think that the NBA players are bigger and better than they were 20 years ago? If so why would this not be the case with college players? To throw out a blanket statement that the college game is clearly watered down is total bs.

ChicagoJ
06-23-2009, 09:43 PM
Those 18-20 year olds sit at the end of the bench waiting on the stork to bring their potential. They are only watering down the NBA's reputation of having the best 12th man.

Expanding to 30 teams didn't just hurt the NBA, it also hurt college, the CBA, Europe, etc.

cdash
06-23-2009, 09:44 PM
If the college game is clearly watered down as you say, what the hell does it say about the NBA game if they have to depend on 18 and 19 year old players to keep the game afloat? Do you think that the NBA players are bigger and better than they were 20 years ago? If so why would this not be the case with college players? To throw out a blanket statement that the college game is clearly watered down is total bs.

I don't think this is a battle you are gonna win man. The NBA doesn't "depend" on those young guys at all. They are there, they have the talent and potential to be stars, so teams draft them. That's it. NBA players may not necessarily be bigger or better, but their conditioning and diets are vastly improved. Plus, it's now a global game. There are more people playing basketball now than there were 20 years ago. The cream rises to the top. The college game is watered down, for all the reasons dc stated. It is what it is. I love the college game, but I won't argue that it isn't what it used to be.

BlueNGold
06-23-2009, 10:16 PM
And I just want to emphasize that it goes beyond the superstars.

Back then, Elden Campbell and Dale Davis were 4 year players. And even guys who were slightly worse NBA prospects than Campbell or Dale stayed 4 years and were very good college players.

Nowadays guys like Chris Wilcox or Mareesse Speights leave after 2 years. That kind of stuff hurts the NCAA.

Even guys who end up busting like Marcus Haislip or Rodney White leaving early hurts the NCAA, because even though they made for crappy NBA players, they sure as heck were good college players.

Sure, the 2nd tier players leaving do damage too. That certainly lowers the overall talent...so I get it. However, I do think the tier 1 players leaving is really where the lustre has been taken out of the league...because honestly, players who perform like Speights did in the NCAA's are not that terribly uncommon....while a player like Durant comes along once a decade. Basically, I think there are more than enough tier 2 players left in the NCAA that it doesn't matter all that much that a significant number leave.

And this gets to my main point. I think winning the NCAA championship still requires a pretty good tier 2 level player....and I think that level is good enough talent to make it in the NBA and do pretty well....IOW start. As a result, I believe Tyler's NCAA championship...and Brandon's...still carry weight.

Hall O'Point
06-23-2009, 11:29 PM
Not only do we already have McRoberts, he should end up being BETTER than Hans. Remember, Hans is almost 2 years older than McRoberts. In 5 to 6 years, assuming neither get hurt, and both are still in the league, what would you expect out of each of them?

At best, Hans is an undersized rebounder/short range stocky guy that can bring some energy and toughness- maybe he's Charles Oakley.

McRoberts, on the other hand, is younger, taller, faster, and a better jumper. If the 20 lbs of solid muscle are true, then I'm expecting to see Josh at 6'10" 250 and Hans at 6'8.5" 235. That's a pretty big difference for two guys wanting to play the same position. Josh's upside is huge. Hans' upside is limited.

Hans was the better College player by far and away, and he may be a better NBA player in 2009-2010 as well, but if you've watched enough Pacer games, you know that in 2 or 3 years, McBob is gonna be more than just a slow robotic white guy who yells a lot.

d_c
06-24-2009, 12:34 AM
And this gets to my main point. I think winning the NCAA championship still requires a pretty good tier 2 level player....and I think that level is good enough talent to make it in the NBA and do pretty well....IOW start. As a result, I believe Tyler's NCAA championship...and Brandon's...still carry weight.

I agree there is a lot of truth to that. But Holy Cow, did you see those Villanova and Michigan St. teams that UNC beat in the Final Four?

Those were just awful, awful teams that would have been taken to the cleaners had they played a typical Final Four team in the early-mid nineties. They were just embarrassingly hard to watch.

Lance George
06-24-2009, 01:33 PM
I'm growing on Hansbrough. You can't deny how successful the kid was at UNC. The big question marks were around whether or not his game could translate to the next level, primarily because he was perceived as too small and not athletic enough. He answered both of those questions at the draft combine. What I love about him in his determination. You can tell he's a guy with a huge chip on his shoulder, a guy who comes across as being obsessed with proving his detractors wrong. The kind of guy who's first in the gym and the last to leave. That's the kind of fire that can get a GM's attention, especially a guy like Bird with a similar obsessive work ethic.

I wont be disappointed if we take Hansbrough #13. I think he's as likely to be another Carlos Boozer as he is another Adam Morrison.

d_c
06-24-2009, 02:20 PM
I'm growing on Hansbrough. You can't deny how successful the kid was at UNC. The big question marks were around whether or not his game could translate to the next level, primarily because he was perceived as too small and not athletic enough. He answered both of those questions at the draft combine. What I love about him in his determination. You can tell he's a guy with a huge chip on his shoulder, a guy who comes across as being obsessed with proving his detractors wrong. The kind of guy who's first in the gym and the last to leave. That's the kind of fire that can get a GM's attention, especially a guy like Bird with a similar obsessive work ethic.

I wont be disappointed if we take Hansbrough #13. I think he's as likely to be another Carlos Boozer as he is another Adam Morrison.

One thing I wouldn't put much stock into is the athletic combine measurements (vertical leap, sprints, lane agility, etc). That's workout warrior stuff.

When it comes to evaluating a guy's basketball athleticism, just remember: a guy is athletic as he looks playing basketball, not as athletic as he measures out during his combine drills.

Remember: Luke Jackson measured out as a better athlete than Andre Igoudala at the combine. When they're on the basketball court, who looks more athletic between the two?

Carlos Boozer at his absolute peak was a dominant PF. He was putting up 30 and 15 against Yao Ming in the playoffs. I just don't picture Hansbrough doing the same thing.

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 02:23 PM
Since 1988, there have been more NBA All Stars selected in the second round of the draft than with the second overall pick.

Second round picks, Arenas, Carlos Booxer, Ginobili, Micheal Redd Rashard Lewis, Mehmet Okur and Mo Williams as compared to one second pick, Steve Francis.

Something to ponder.

Speed
06-24-2009, 02:24 PM
One thing I wouldn't put much stock into is the athletic combine measurements (vertical leap, sprints, lane agility, etc). That's workout warrior stuff.

When it comes to evaluating a guy's basketball athleticism, just remember: a guy is athletic as he looks playing basketball, not as athletic as he measures out during his combine drills.

Remember: Luke Jackson measured out as a better athlete than Andre Igoudala at the combine. When they're on the basketball court, who looks more athletic between the two?

Carlos Boozer at his absolute peak was a dominant PF. He was putting up 30 and 15 against Yao Ming in the playoffs. I just don't picture Hansbrough doing the same thing.


This I agree with. It's about how it translate on the court. He did seem to bully up alot of shots in the paint, never really over anyone. I'm not sure you can do that in the NBA.

Speed
06-24-2009, 02:26 PM
Since 1988, there have been more NBA All Stars selected in the second round of the draft than with the second overall pick.

Second round picks, Arenas, Carlos Booxer, Ginobili, Micheal Redd Rashard Lewis, Mehmet Okur and Mo Williams as compared to one second pick, Steve Francis.

Something to ponder.


Uneven comparison, but I get what your saying.

Approximately

20 second overall picks

vs.

600 second round picks

d_c
06-24-2009, 02:27 PM
This I agree with. It's about how it translate on the court. He did seem to bully up alot of shots in the paint, never really over anyone. I'm not sure you can do that in the NBA.

I was a bit disturbed in the semi-finals when he went up against that Villanova team with no starter over 6'7" and was still getting his shots rejected. Yikes.

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 02:29 PM
Hans is a good player, man. He was a hell of a lot of fun to watch at UNC because he played like an angry linebacker out there. He is able to turn it on so strong that he actually increases his ability on the floor by feeding off his intensity. I seriously think that if you gave him some ritalin or some depressants to calm him down, he would be a very below average player.

He's exactly what I like in a basketball player, and I'd love for the Pacers to have a maniac like that on the floor (I was a huge Artest fan).

But my problem is, he's not a smart pick at number 13, and I'm not sure he's a smart pick anywhere in the first round. Are you really ready to mortgage your future on a guy who's biggest strength is his ability to play angry and crazy? There are just too many guys who can do the same things as him.

I think the best comparison is Antonio Davis. That's the top end of Tyler's potential. If he ends up as good as Antonio, then he will have succeeded. Trouble is, Hans is shorter and smaller (rumors are that he's NOT 6'9" and he's around 230lbs, not 250), and he'll never be as good of a defender. He's also a lot less athletic.

That's the biggest problem you get with Hans. He's already 24, and which parts of his game do you think he'll improve on in the next 8-10 years?
-he'll never be an outside shooter like a Dirk or a Hedo
-he'll never be able to defend anyone but people his exact size. He can't guard big centers or fast guards/ combo forwards.
-he's not going to get much stronger or faster
-he's not going to suddenly develop great passing skills or handles

So, in as much as I like the guy, and I really do, I just think he's maxed out on too many skill sets already to be a lottery pick.

I'm glad that you were not around to tell Larry Bird that he was maxed out when he left ISU.:p

Speed
06-24-2009, 02:31 PM
I was a bit disturbed in the semi-finals when he went up against that Villanova team with no starter over 6'7" and was still getting his shots rejected. Yikes.

I think he anticipates contact and just takes it up strong without fully jumping, it's the only thing I can think of.

I think of Antonio who would A-take it up strong B-take it up to his full jump.

Just thinking of playing pick up ball, it's harder to go strong and all the way up in traffic because you lose the ability to be the pusher instead become the pushee, if that makes sense. I guess what I'm saying if you go all the way up you can get undercut and that's not fun.

Anyway, it is what he does and so he ends up shooting it very low. If he gets the whistle, it's fine, if not it's a blocked shot or at the least an altered bad shot, imo.

Mourning
06-24-2009, 02:39 PM
I was a bit disturbed in the semi-finals when he went up against that Villanova team with no starter over 6'7" and was still getting his shots rejected. Yikes.

Ok. That does it for me then. I hadn't even seen that game and I wasn't enthousiastic about Hansbrough before, but to me it's clear it would be a bad draft night if we picked this dude at #13.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 02:44 PM
You guys crack me up, besides griffin this whole draft is a reach. You got tons of young guys going at the top of the draft. Hans carried UNC in the ACC tournament, won player of the year, and also won a NCAA title. He has a resume and a damn good one at that. All of you guys who dont want him are the "drafting potential" kind of GMs. You know what Hans can do because he has done it, whether or not it was a different stage or not. If you are a GM of a business and you are looking at hiring someone new for your business you always look at their resume. Do you want to hire the guy who has a winning attitude and is talented but never has accomplished winnning consistently or the guy who has a outstanding resume filled with awards, solid numbers and still desire to accomplish more. I will always take the latter.

Naptown_Seth
06-24-2009, 02:49 PM
And this gets to my main point. I think winning the NCAA championship still requires a pretty good tier 2 level player....and I think that level is good enough talent to make it in the NBA and do pretty well....IOW start. As a result, I believe Tyler's NCAA championship...and Brandon's...still carry weight.
I disagree simply because as I've said elsewhere NC was a wonderfully BALANCED team with lots of depth. They didn't need 2 guys like some NBA thing, they had Ellington, Green, etc to also make plays. This is also how MSU got to them, with a sound plan and enough balance to avoid weak links.

Hansbrough was less athletic than Green but few people are up in arms wanting Green at #13. He has the same title, right?


As for KS, I expect them or UCLA to win last year specifically because of their depth. It happened that they had star depth rather than just balance and you saw that with Love and Westbrook both going top 10. KS also had just a ton of quality guys who were also playing an NBA like system. I never sighted Rush as an all-star and I loved his game and hoped to see the Pacers get him.

What he was, and Chalmers and Arthur and Jackson, were good team players as a group. And last year it took better than just okay talent of that amount to win it all simply because UCLA and Memphis also brought that kind of star depth (CDR, Dozier, etc, not just Rose).

So you did see NBA caliber paired with a title, but only because you had several teams loaded with potential NBA talent. The teams hanging on 1 or 2 guys, such as USC or OK or TX, those teams tended to struggle. And this year NC was a team that pulled a Florida and hung together an extra season which had a huge benefit.

Titles are about the overall team, the structure they play and having enough solid role players to help give you emergency bumps along the way to avoid pitfalls. That doesn't mean the top 2 guys are automatically going to the NBA.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 02:53 PM
When is being a good team player something the Pacers do not need or want?

Naptown_Seth
06-24-2009, 02:58 PM
All of you guys who dont want him are the "drafting potential" kind of GMs.
No. I'm the "watching player play" kind of GM. Hans has had 4 years, just as Chad Ford said. Nothing has changed. He's 24. That's it. What he does now, the moves, the style, that's his game. It's not NBA stuff. If you watch enough NBA you get a feel for the types of fakes, jumps, timing, shot quickness, handles, etc it takes to win a particular battle.

You switch the Tivo over to an NC game and you don't see those plays. I see Henderson make them for Duke. I see Blair rebound like an NBA pro. I even see Maynor yank the ball on a chain to call his own dribble drive score. But I don't see it during UNC games.

I'm NOT HOPING that Jennings or Jrue or Henderson can become something. I know they ALREADY have some of those required skills. It will take even more development to be true impact guys in the NBA, but they already have skills that could earn them playing time.

If Hans was 19 and a sophmore and was much better this year than last then the work ethic angle might have impact. If he had big hops or a quick fake or shot block timing or set tight, clean screens (like Blair does) then I'd like him.

If anything I hear the supporters saying two things - he has a title/he's a winner and he works hard. Neither of those things are actual NBA physical skills that you apply during a game. Those are aspects that can complete the package of NBA skills, that make those NBA skills work together as a whole better, but on their own they are the sleeve to a book that's gone missing.

count55
06-24-2009, 02:59 PM
I've fired more than one solid gold resume, because they simply couldn't do the job I needed them to do.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 03:00 PM
I see Blair rebound like an NBA pro. .

God shoot me in the head please

Naptown_Seth
06-24-2009, 03:05 PM
When is being a good team player something the Pacers do not need or want?
You're right. I'm a good team player and I'll be happy to accept the #13 pick contract and play for my hometown team. I had a high GPA and my BS degree if you like 4 year guys. I also like to write in my spare time so I think I communicate fairly well which the public will like.

This is the kind of response you should expect when you bring out a strawman argument. In this case the idea that ANYONE is saying they don't want a good team player. What we are saying is THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.

Sheesh.

Lance George
06-24-2009, 03:10 PM
One thing I wouldn't put much stock into is the athletic combine measurements (vertical leap, sprints, lane agility, etc). That's workout warrior stuff.

When it comes to evaluating a guy's basketball athleticism, just remember: a guy is athletic as he looks playing basketball, not as athletic as he measures out during his combine drills.

Remember: Luke Jackson measured out as a better athlete than Andre Igoudala at the combine. When they're on the basketball court, who looks more athletic between the two?

Carlos Boozer at his absolute peak was a dominant PF. He was putting up 30 and 15 against Yao Ming in the playoffs. I just don't picture Hansbrough doing the same thing.


Who looks more athletic? It's hard to say since Luke Jackson spent almost his entire career riding the bench. From what he showed at Oregon, I would think it's pretty close, much closer than one would expect. That's exactly what the measurements show. Maybe if they remeasured today Iggy would come out slightly ahead, maybe not. Either way it's a bit of a petty argument. The measurements showed that both are great athletes, which they both are. All that really matters is whether or not a player has a sufficient level of athleticism, something the measurements can tell us for the most part. Hansbrough runs the court well and is a decent leaper. He measured out reasonably well at the combine. All indicators are that, while he's far from a great athlete, he does in fact have sufficient athleticism to succeed in the NBA.

As far as Carlos Boozer goes, true Hansbrough will likely never be as good, but he doesn't have to be in order to be a good pick at #13. Boozer was just used as an example of a guy who was viewed in the same light coming into the league as Tyler Hansbrough is viewed now. A skilled and productive college player who was too short (under 6'8" barefoot) and too limited athletically to succeed at the next level. Boozer proved his detractors wrong. Why shouldn't I think Hansbrough will do the same?

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 03:17 PM
You're right. I'm a good team player and I'll be happy to accept the #13 pick contract and play for my hometown team. I had a high GPA and my BS degree if you like 4 year guys. I also like to write in my spare time so I think I communicate fairly well which the public will like.

This is the kind of response you should expect when you bring out a strawman argument. In this case the idea that ANYONE is saying they don't want a good team player. What we are saying is THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.

Sheesh.

Just expressing my opinion. Dont get argumentative there is no need.

cdash
06-24-2009, 03:29 PM
I support everything Naptown Seth said in this thread. Everything he says makes sense and is stuff I have noticed all 352 times Hansbrough has been on TV the past four years. I really can't see the appeal of him. The only player whose NBA potential I liked on UNC was Danny Green. I don't get why he isn't getting any late first round buzz.

pwee31
06-24-2009, 03:29 PM
You're right. I'm a good team player and I'll be happy to accept the #13 pick contract and play for my hometown team. I had a high GPA and my BS degree if you like 4 year guys. I also like to write in my spare time so I think I communicate fairly well which the public will like.

This is the kind of response you should expect when you bring out a strawman argument. In this case the idea that ANYONE is saying they don't want a good team player. What we are saying is THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.

Sheesh.


I think I'll stick with Hansbrough :laugh:

j/k... but seriously :hmm:

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 03:35 PM
No. I'm the "watching player play" kind of GM. Hans has had 4 years, just as Chad Ford said. Nothing has changed. He's 24. That's it. What he does now, the moves, the style, that's his game. It's not NBA stuff. If you watch enough NBA you get a feel for the types of fakes, jumps, timing, shot quickness, handles, etc it takes to win a particular battle.

You switch the Tivo over to an NC game and you don't see those plays. I see Henderson make them for Duke. I see Blair rebound like an NBA pro. I even see Maynor yank the ball on a chain to call his own dribble drive score. But I don't see it during UNC games.

I'm NOT HOPING that Jennings or Jrue or Henderson can become something. I know they ALREADY have some of those required skills. It will take even more development to be true impact guys in the NBA, but they already have skills that could earn them playing time.

If Hans was 19 and a sophmore and was much better this year than last then the work ethic angle might have impact. If he had big hops or a quick fake or shot block timing or set tight, clean screens (like Blair does) then I'd like him.

If anything I hear the supporters saying two things - he has a title/he's a winner and he works hard. Neither of those things are actual NBA physical skills that you apply during a game. Those are aspects that can complete the package of NBA skills, that make those NBA skills work together as a whole better, but on their own they are the sleeve to a book that's gone missing.



Now tell me how old Larry Bird was when he entered the NBA? Was Larry's game complete when he entered the NBA? I hate it when someone throws out bs and then takes exception to anyone who has a differing viewpoint. Yeah, I know OZ speaks and we listen.

pwee31
06-24-2009, 03:35 PM
I think this draft, more than any in the past might be revisited the most in the future, about all of making predictions and putting on our GM cap.

There will be some crow eating. I'm fully prepared for it to be me, but I'm also pretty confident in my scouting! haha

Naptown_Seth
06-24-2009, 03:38 PM
God shoot me in the head please
First of all, nearly every worthwhile pundit agrees that this is his main skill. Second of all, I just showed Gnome footage of Blair leveraging Thabeet off the block and then using his reach and strong hands to yank the ball down on the offensive glass with the quick putback - NBA quality. Then at the other end he reaches up in traffic and again with strength pulls the ball down hard into two hands with force.

He takes the ball from people. He has good hands like you want in a rebounding big. He has those positioning skills at the rim, the ability to move and adjust people without pushing them and without extending out his arm (NBA foul). He doesn't go over the back on guys. He moves laterally well in terms of rebounding, ie in traffic and as the ball is coming off the rim.

How are those skills not NBA skills? I'm not talking about some general "he good, he big". I'm talking about seeing a rebound by him, rewinding the Tivo and going step by step to see how he got it. Gnome and I see one, we stop to look at it, and then when we go on watching the game CBS comes back to diagram exactly the skill we were noticing.

This isn't wishful, it's factual.

These are also things that Tyler doesn't do very well. He's persistant on the glass but he doesn't take rebounds away from people. If he gets a spot early then okay, but if runs into Blair he's going to lose that battle because he'll find himself 2 feet away and unable to outreach Blair at that point.

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 03:42 PM
First of all, nearly every worthwhile pundit agrees that this is his main skill. Second of all, I just showed Gnome footage of Blair leveraging Thabeet off the block and then using his reach and strong hands to yank the ball down on the offensive glass with the quick putback - NBA quality. Then at the other end he reaches up in traffic and again with strength pulls the ball down hard into two hands with force.

He takes the ball from people. He has good hands like you want in a rebounding big. He has those positioning skills at the rim, the ability to move and adjust people without pushing them and without extending out his arm (NBA foul). He doesn't go over the back on guys. He moves laterally well in terms of rebounding, ie in traffic and as the ball is coming off the rim.

How are those skills not NBA skills? I'm not talking about some general "he good, he big". I'm talking about seeing a rebound by him, rewinding the Tivo and going step by step to see how he got it. Gnome and I see one, we stop to look at it, and then when we go on watching the game CBS comes back to diagram exactly the skill we were noticing.

This isn't wishful, it's factual.

These are also things that Tyler doesn't do very well. He's persistant on the glass but he doesn't take rebounds away from people. If he gets a spot early then okay, but if runs into Blair he's going to lose that battle because he'll find himself 2 feet away and unable to outreach Blair at that point.

OK, post some numbers backing up your theory on taking away rebounds. I say you are wrong, most rebounds are not taken away in some kind of wrestling match. Positioning and ball anticipation are as important as brute strength, ie your favorite wipping boy, Troy Murphy.


It appears that someone doesn't want to defend his posts.

Naptown_Seth
06-24-2009, 03:43 PM
I think with Green there might be a belief that he didn't sustain that level of play all the time. Plus as a wing it's tough to shine. Sam Young just tore people up down the stretch and was, IMO, the best prospect on PITT (yes, Blair included). He has this outstanding upfake that destroys guys, he's got Henderson's jumper, he's nearly got Henderson's hops, and he's way back at the end of 1, early 2 as well.

My concern with Green is that while he's a great athlete he hasn't yet shown a fully developed set of go-to skills. It's not like he's got those 2 moves that he likes to score off of over and over. So I'd worry that he's a tantalizing athlete that just doesn't quite figure it out. But certainly you could see how he'd sneak up and become a quality NBA bench guy that was a 2nd round steal.

d_c
06-24-2009, 03:55 PM
Who looks more athletic? It's hard to say since Luke Jackson spent almost his entire career riding the bench. From what he showed at Oregon, I would think it's pretty close, much closer than one would expect. That's exactly what the measurements show. Maybe if they remeasured today Iggy would come out slightly ahead, maybe not. Either way it's a bit of a petty argument. The measurements showed that both are great athletes, which they both are. All that really matters is whether or not a player has a sufficient level of athleticism, something the measurements can tell us for the most part. Hansbrough runs the court well and is a decent leaper. He measured out reasonably well at the combine. All indicators are that, while he's far from a great athlete, he does in fact have sufficient athleticism to succeed in the NBA.

As far as Carlos Boozer goes, true Hansbrough will likely never be as good, but he doesn't have to be in order to be a good pick at #13. Boozer was just used as an example of a guy who was viewed in the same light coming into the league as Tyler Hansbrough is viewed now. A skilled and productive college player who was too short (under 6'8" barefoot) and too limited athletically to succeed at the next level. Boozer proved his detractors wrong. Why shouldn't I think Hansbrough will do the same?

I agree. Hansbrough's athleticism is probably sufficient to be a decent role player in the NBA. My point is that the combine measurements don't mean much to me. You judge a player's athleticism by what you see when he plays 5 on 5 basketball. Kevin Durant measured out rather poorly athletically. His veritical leap and court sprints were below average for his position. He couldn't do a single 185 lb bench press (the only person the combine who couldn't do it). Yet when he gets out on the court, nobody calls him a poor athlete.

I guess the point I'm making is that my opinions of Hansbrough and Durant didn't change after seeing their combine results.

Boozer is an anomaly that doesn't happen very often. The Boozer in the pros is very different than the one at Duke. He shed a lot of weight and became a lot more mobile in the pros. He was knocked for having slow footwork. Wouldn't surprise me if he was one of the guys on the juice.

cdash
06-24-2009, 05:27 PM
I asked Tyler Hansbrough a question in the ESPN Prospects chat. Amazingly, he answered it:


kenny (Indianapolis)
Tyler, what is your "one skill" that is above average for the NBA? Or to put it differently, what skill will be your best skill in the NBA?
Tyler Hansbrough
I'd say my mid-range jump shot. I'll show I can hit the 15-footer, and then mix it up with some jump hooks and things inside.

So, there you have it. Straight from the horses mouth. I guess.

Slick Pinkham
06-24-2009, 05:41 PM
In the same draft as Bozer I remember people going gaga over Chris Wilcox. Sure at Maryland he hadn't really done much. But he could run. He could jump. You could put together a great highlight film of NBA moves (though they were rarely on display in college games). He was young and raw and unknown, so he was ever so much more exciting than a "finished product" like Boozer.

It turned out the "finished product" worked really hard to get better and maximize the effectiveness of what he could do best, and Wilcox became another "woulda coulda" top 10 el-busto who apparently never worked on anything.

Hopefully Larry has ideas in an interview of how to sort out the workers from the slackers among those with the requisite ability to begin with.

count55
06-24-2009, 05:44 PM
In the same draft as Bozer I remember people going gaga over Chris Wilcox. Sure at Maryland he hadn't really done much. But he could run. He could jump. You could put together a great highlight film of NBA moves (though they were rarely on display in college games). He was young and raw and unknown, so he was ever so much more exciting than a "finished product" like Boozer.

It turned out the "finished product" worked really hard to get better and maximize the effectiveness of what he could do best, and Wilcox became another "woulda coulda" top 10 el-busto who apparently never worked on anything.

Hopefully Larry has ideas in an interview of how to sort out the workers from the slackers among those with the requisite ability to begin with.

Yeah, but I had a different feel about Boozer than Hansbrough. I was shocked that he slid that far.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 05:45 PM
Here's what we do. Trade Foster to Utah for the pick. Move McRoberts into more of a primary role. Draft Maynor and Hans. Then go to bed happy knowing you have another two 4 year guys who can only make our team better.

d_c
06-24-2009, 05:47 PM
In the same draft as Bozer I remember people going gaga over Chris Wilcox. Sure at Maryland he hadn't really done much. But he could run. He could jump. You could put together a great highlight film of NBA moves (though they were rarely on display in college games). He was young and raw and unknown, so he was ever so much more exciting than a "finished product" like Boozer.

It turned out the "finished product" worked really hard to get better and maximize the effectiveness of what he could do best, and Wilcox became another "woulda coulda" top 10 el-busto who apparently never worked on anything.

Hopefully Larry has ideas in an interview of how to sort out the workers from the slackers among those with the requisite ability to begin with.

I remember that.

That's the same draft where my Warriors took 3 year Duke starter Dunleavy and totally ignored that unsavory highschool kid Stoudemire.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 05:50 PM
The fact he stayed in college for 4 years is more a warning sign for his NBA career rather than a badge of honor. If the Pacers want to take a flyer on him with a 2nd round pick then I'd be fine with that. But he is not worth a 1st round pick.


Really so Hibbert and Rush have warning signs attached to them?

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 05:55 PM
I remember that.

That's the same draft where my Warriors took 3 year Duke starter Dunleavy and totally ignored that unsavory highschool kid Stoudemire.

Oh no not the Dunleavy debate! Avoid bringing that up. That draft was garbage. He almost went number 1 to Houston taht year if there was going to be signing problems with Yao coming over from China. Gooden was the 4th pick I believe.

Roaming Gnome
06-24-2009, 05:59 PM
First of all, nearly every worthwhile pundit agrees that this is his main skill. Second of all, I just showed Gnome footage of Blair leveraging Thabeet off the block and then using his reach and strong hands to yank the ball down on the offensive glass with the quick putback - NBA quality. Then at the other end he reaches up in traffic and again with strength pulls the ball down hard into two hands with force.

He takes the ball from people. He has good hands like you want in a rebounding big. He has those positioning skills at the rim, the ability to move and adjust people without pushing them and without extending out his arm (NBA foul). He doesn't go over the back on guys. He moves laterally well in terms of rebounding, ie in traffic and as the ball is coming off the rim.

How are those skills not NBA skills? I'm not talking about some general "he good, he big". I'm talking about seeing a rebound by him, rewinding the Tivo and going step by step to see how he got it. Gnome and I see one, we stop to look at it, and then when we go on watching the game CBS comes back to diagram exactly the skill we were noticing.

This isn't wishful, it's factual.

These are also things that Tyler doesn't do very well. He's persistant on the glass but he doesn't take rebounds away from people. If he gets a spot early then okay, but if runs into Blair he's going to lose that battle because he'll find himself 2 feet away and unable to outreach Blair at that point.

I second this. Hell, as mentioned. I was in the room! As for the main question. My stance has gotten a little "frostier" on Hans. I've gone from getting him with a later selection to not being interested.

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 06:15 PM
Again, show me the stats on how many rebounds are wrestled away. Brute strength is not the only factor in rebounding, Troy Murphy anyone? I am not even a Hansbrough supporter but damn let's not pretend that he is garbage either. If rebounding was all about tearing the ball out of opposing players hands then Hulk Hogan would have been All World.

Roaming Gnome
06-24-2009, 06:21 PM
Again, show me the stats on how many rebounds are wrestled away. Brute strength is not the only factor in rebounding, Troy Murphy anyone? I am not even a Hansbrough supporter but damn let's not pretend that he is garbage either. If rebounding was all about tearing the ball out of opposing players hands then Hulk Hogan would have been All World.

CB, I don't mean to be flippant here, but I don't have to prove my point thru the statistics that you are wanting. I know what I've seen. It's safe to say in my own mind that "i'm not interested in Hansbrough". Seth is stating it in his way, and I'm stating that I agree. We don't need proof. We are just answering the question of the thread with our opinion. That's all, nothing more!

vnzla81
06-24-2009, 06:29 PM
First of all, nearly every worthwhile pundit agrees that this is his main skill. Second of all, I just showed Gnome footage of Blair leveraging Thabeet off the block and then using his reach and strong hands to yank the ball down on the offensive glass with the quick putback - NBA quality. Then at the other end he reaches up in traffic and again with strength pulls the ball down hard into two hands with force.

He takes the ball from people. He has good hands like you want in a rebounding big. He has those positioning skills at the rim, the ability to move and adjust people without pushing them and without extending out his arm (NBA foul). He doesn't go over the back on guys. He moves laterally well in terms of rebounding, ie in traffic and as the ball is coming off the rim.

How are those skills not NBA skills? I'm not talking about some general "he good, he big". I'm talking about seeing a rebound by him, rewinding the Tivo and going step by step to see how he got it. Gnome and I see one, we stop to look at it, and then when we go on watching the game CBS comes back to diagram exactly the skill we were noticing.

This isn't wishful, it's factual.

These are also things that Tyler doesn't do very well. He's persistant on the glass but he doesn't take rebounds away from people. If he gets a spot early then okay, but if runs into Blair he's going to lose that battle because he'll find himself 2 feet away and unable to outreach Blair at that point.

I know that all this sounds good, but I don't understand how you want an undersize PF whose knees according to him today on the radio and reports are gone? do you remember JO, Bender Dunleavy? hell even Danny was out for some games because he played with a messed up knee and over compensated and injured his ankle.:confused:

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 06:35 PM
CB, I don't mean to be flippant here, but I don't have to prove my point thru the statistics that you are wanting. I know what I've seen. It's safe to say in my own mind that "i'm not interested in Hansbrough". Seth is stating it in his way, and I'm stating that I agree. We don't need proof. We are just answering the question of the thread with our opinion. That's all, nothing more!

Well Gnome, I understand what you are saying, however I disagree with you on it is just "opinon" part. My post was directed more to Seth and his over bearing attitude towards another poster who did not share his"down from the mount" opinion. I pointed out where he needed to back up his forceful"opinion" with a few stats. How can anyone say that Tyler at age 24 has reached his full potential and keep a straight face? I pointed out the example of Larry Bird and how his game was not a finished project when he entered the NBA as one example of a player who is older who elevates his game to a higher level. Furthermore it could be argued that Tyler has more raw physical ability than Bird had as a college player.

Two people sitting in a room and agreeing on something doesn't make it true without a doubt. Just saying.

d_c
06-24-2009, 06:42 PM
How can anyone say that Tyler at age 24 has reached his full potential and keep a straight face? I pointed out the example of Larry Bird and how his game was not a finished project when he entered the NBA as one example of a player who is older who elevates his game to a higher level. Furthermore it could be argued that Tyler has more raw physical ability than Bird had as a college player.

Two people sitting in a room and agreeing on something doesn't make it true without a doubt. Just saying.

Larry Bird and white American college players who stay 4 years in school should be used in analogy even less than Charles Barkley and other undersized PFs.

cdash
06-24-2009, 06:55 PM
Again, show me the stats on how many rebounds are wrestled away. Brute strength is not the only factor in rebounding, Troy Murphy anyone? I am not even a Hansbrough supporter but damn let's not pretend that he is garbage either. If rebounding was all about tearing the ball out of opposing players hands then Hulk Hogan would have been All World.

Troy Murphy is a bad example to use. How many rebounds did he rip out of his teammates' hands this year?

Roaming Gnome
06-24-2009, 07:52 PM
Troy Murphy is a bad example to use. How many rebounds did he rip out of his teammates' hands this year?

Man, I was hoping no one was going to go there. :shakehead:

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 08:24 PM
Troy Murphy is a bad example to use. How many rebounds did he rip out of his teammates' hands this year?



Oh come on, I was not saying that Troy was an example of a player using brute force to rebound. I was making a point that Troy is a good rebounder and he actually uses the other aspects of rebounding. I specifically stated in a prior post that brute strength was only one part of rebounding and that positioning and ball awareness were equally important.

Country Boy
06-24-2009, 08:25 PM
Larry Bird and white American college players who stay 4 years in school should be used in analogy even less than Charles Barkley and other undersized PFs.

Now that is just nonsense.

d_c
06-24-2009, 08:27 PM
Now that is just nonsense.

Not nearly as much as comparing Bird to Hansbrough at any level.

BlueNGold
06-24-2009, 08:41 PM
I'm not a big Hans fan, but I must say this reminds me a little of the concerns people had with Kevin Love...who by they way averaged almost a double double as a rookie in just 25 minutes. Not quick enough. Not athletic enough. Love is getting it done...and Hans is cut from the same blue chip cloth.

Sure, Hans is a smaller player and perhaps not quite as good as Love....but I seriously doubt there is a huge difference if you add up everything. We are not talking the next Tim Duncan here. At mid first round, you're lucky to get a player that sticks in the league anyway...and I have no doubt Hans is going to stick. He just may not be your all-star PF.

I am moving toward the "he's being underrated" camp.

d_c
06-24-2009, 08:54 PM
I'm not a big Hans fan, but I must say this reminds me a little of the concerns people had with Kevin Love...who by they way averaged almost a double double as a rookie in just 25 minutes. Not quick enough. Not athletic enough. Love is getting it done...and Hans is cut from the same blue chip cloth.

Sure, Hans is a smaller player and perhaps not quite as good as Love....but I seriously doubt there is a huge difference if you add up everything. We are not talking the next Tim Duncan here. At mid first round, you're lucky to get a player that sticks in the league anyway...and I have no doubt Hans is going to stick. He just may not be your all-star PF.

I am moving toward the "he's being underrated" camp.

Love is a different type of player than Hansbrough. They're both white, play PF and are of similar size (Love is actually shorter), but that's about where the comparisons end.

Love's game is multi-dimensional. He's a much better passer and could develop into one of the best passing bigs in the league. He's got better moves in the post offensively. He's smoother and more refined at that end of the floor even though he's younger. He doesn't rely on outmuscling and outhustling his opponents the way Hansbrough has.

BlueNGold
06-24-2009, 09:19 PM
Love is a different type of player than Hansbrough. They're both white, play PF and are of similar size (Love is actually shorter), but that's about where the comparisons end.

Love's game is multi-dimensional. He's a much better passer and could develop into one of the best passing bigs in the league. He's got better moves in the post offensively. He's smoother and more refined at that end of the floor even though he's younger. He doesn't rely on outmuscling and outhustling his opponents the way Hansbrough has.

Passing is a gift that Hans will never have to that extent IMO. That's one reason Love will probably always be the better player. Post skills, however, can be learned...but I doubt that will be his game anyway. He will be an energy guy who can grab boards and hit the mid range jumper...and probably move better than Love. IMO, he will not be as good as Love, but will be effective in a different way....and don't expect him to shy away from contact prior to getting to the line. I expect a smaller version of Jeff Foster with a lot better offense. Not a bad player...and probably in the league for a long time.

Anyway, good points all around. I don't see Hans as total blue collar...but I've seen him enough to agree with a lot of what you have to say. I do, however, know that effort and determination can take you an awfully long way toward your goals...even if your talent level or intelligence are below average.

cdash
06-24-2009, 10:59 PM
Love is a vastly superior player to Hansbrough in nearly every aspect. Better rebounder, better scorer, much better passer, better shooter, yeah. They are white power forwards. That's where the comparisons end.

jhondog28
06-24-2009, 11:32 PM
I will go ahead and say it. I think Love is a better passer but I do not agree with the notion that he is better at everything else. MY opinion is that Hans would make a great fit for the Pacers but if you can trade down to get him then do it. I have faith the Pacers will make a good draft decision. I have not sat in a room and watched a ton of footage of al the draft prospects mainly because I do not have that kind of time but I did watch a lot of college hoops and what can I say I love Hans passion and sometimes that kind of heart and desire really want that person on your team. Do you want Apollo Creed or Rocky? Many want the athletic fast Apollo I want the heart and inner strength. But hey thats just me.

d_c
06-25-2009, 01:21 AM
what can I say I love Hans passion and sometimes that kind of heart and desire really want that person on your team. Do you want Apollo Creed or Rocky? Many want the athletic fast Apollo I want the heart and inner strength. But hey thats just me.

Look, I think Hansbrough is going to have a place in the league and he'll be in the NBA for many years, but it'll be because of whatever talent he has to offer. Mateen Cleaves had all kinds of heart/desire at Michigan State. He was the charismatic leader of that team. Doug Collins said Juan Dixon had the heart of Michael Jordan when he got drafted in 02'.

Did you see Sean May in the 2005? That guy had 26 points and 24 rebs in a Duke-Carolina game and looked like he was on a mission in the tournamount. Where's the heart from those guys right now? Why aren't they displaying the same fight?

Remember Ed O'bannon in 1995? That guy practically carried UCLA on his back with sheer force of will all the way to the title. What happened to his passion, heart and leadership once he started playing for the New Jersey Nets? Why didn't he display this same kind of character in the pros as he did in college? Adam Morrison, what happened to his swagger?

You gotta judge a player on his skills and talent level. Heart is a great thing, but plenty of great college players have burned out all their heart in the pros. At some point, it's gonna be about talent. I think Hansbrough has the talent to be a good role player in the pros.

jhondog28
06-25-2009, 08:07 AM
Look, I think Hansbrough is going to have a place in the league and he'll be in the NBA for many years, but it'll be because of whatever talent he has to offer. Mateen Cleaves had all kinds of heart/desire at Michigan State. He was the charismatic leader of that team. Doug Collins said Juan Dixon had the heart of Michael Jordan when he got drafted in 02'.

Did you see Sean May in the 2005? That guy had 26 points and 24 rebs in a Duke-Carolina game and looked like he was on a mission in the tournamount. Where's the heart from those guys right now? Why aren't they displaying the same fight?

Remember Ed O'bannon in 1995? That guy practically carried UCLA on his back with sheer force of will all the way to the title. What happened to his passion, heart and leadership once he started playing for the New Jersey Nets? Why didn't he display this same kind of character in the pros as he did in college? Adam Morrison, what happened to his swagger?

You gotta judge a player on his skills and talent level. Heart is a great thing, but plenty of great college players have burned out all their heart in the pros. At some point, it's gonna be about talent. I think Hansbrough has the talent to be a good role player in the pros.

Well I like the kid and I hope we get him. Thats all I can say. I will politely disagree with everyone's perspective that seems to be against us getting him on this thread for other people such as Blair. He is the one guy I do not want. I am a fan of Jennings, Hans, and Henderson. If I had to pick one of these three I couldnt because they all bring something to the table. But sorry I understand your skills and athleticism debate but I dont think it is everything. Tinsley has skills and ability but he doesnt have the attitude. NBA is also about marketability and the Pacers need that desperately. Hans is not the most marketable guy, but he is one of the most known players enetering the draft so that wont hurt.

Putnam
06-25-2009, 08:34 AM
Let's face it, Hansbrough is different

http://images.stltoday.com/stltoday/resources/burwell235story.jpg
Sports Columnist Bryan Burwell





ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

06/24/2009

by Bryan Burwell

Can we stop tap-dancing on this for one little minute?

Can we just for once stop talking in those tiresome athletic code words we've become all too comfortable with and just come on out with it?

Tyler Hansbrough is a white basketball player.

Isn't that what everyone's really saying with all those awkward descriptions and sideways "compliments" of the 6-foot-9 Hansbrough, the former college basketball player of the year, as we approach Thursday night's NBA draft? Read any story about the University of North Carolina power forward who averaged more than 20 points and nearly nine rebounds for his four-year collegiate career, and this is exactly what you read. People tap-dancing very delicately around old and uncomfortable hangups.

Let's be real. If someone with Hansbrough's impressive collegiate résumé was a brother from Philly instead of a white guy from Poplar Bluff, we wouldn't be hearing any of these color-coded evaluations, and I wonder if he'd have to listen to all these questions about his athletic ability.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/8C43FA7BAFDE0DCD862575DF0005B240?OpenDocument


Let's be real. If someone with Hansbrough's impressive collegiate résumé was a brother from Philly instead of a white guy from Poplar Bluff, we wouldn't be hearing any of these color-coded evaluations, and I wonder if he'd have to listen to all these questions about his athletic ability.

But that's what we keep hearing, as if he's destined to be a bust in the pros because of the reflex impulse to compare him to Raef LaFrentz instead of Glenn (Big Baby) Davis.
Why does everyone assume that Hansbrough is going to be a lumbering journeyman instead of a talented major contributor? Why does everyone assume that he will be greatly limited when they didn't think that way about brutish, hard-working black ballplayers?

The NBA draft has become in recent years a rather curious place to observe talent evaluation. Too often teams speculate on unproven kids with incredible athletic ability and intriguing potential while thumbing their noses at unspectacular but highly successful athletes who had distinguished three- or four-year college careers. Too often it seems like the worst thing that can happen to a ballplayer is to stay in college too long, even if staying makes him a better player and earns him more championship experience.

But maybe some of that is about to change. Over the past few weeks, Hansbrough has proven through his individual workouts with various NBA clubs that he just might be better than advertised.

"He could go anywhere between 12 to 22," said ESPN college and pro draft analyst Jay Bilas. "He's another one of those guys with a wide range of opinion on him. It's funny, with most big time prospects we don't question their talent. We question whether they have the motor or the work ethic to be good or great in the NBA. But we don't have to worry about that with Hansbrough. He has the motor and the work ethic that is second to none. With him, it's the only issue, can he get shots off in traffic?"

If you watch Hansbrough's game, he's a banger who can get off the ground (his dad was a 7-foot-2 high jumper at Mizzou), but he's not a guy with explosive jumping skills.

Unlike a lot of guys in basketball, Bilas doesn't talk in codes. His evaluation of Hansbrough is accurate and unbiased. Does he have questions about what sort of pro Hansbrough will be? Sure he does. There are very few sure things anymore in the NBA draft except for expected No. 1 pick Blake Griffin. I talked to a friend of mine who is a longtime NBA scout, and he maintains that Griffin is the only player in the draft who his team projects to not only be a surefire starter, but also a surefire star.

But I get annoyed with people who automatically assume that Hansbrough will be a flop in the pros, as if there is no other possibility in his future but to be some end-of-the-bench practice player.

"He's a much better athlete than he gets credit for," said Bilas, "but I've never seen him consistently extend to get shots off over bigger defenders, which he'll have to do in the NBA. With one step he can really elevate. Without one, he doesn't, and he doesn't elevate in traffic very well. But the kid does get to the free throw line. He outworks people. He has talent. He can make a face-up jumper. He moves his feet so he can guard a bit out on the perimeter, which not a ton of guys his size can do. I like him."

I like him, too. And here's what I hope happens to him. I hope a lot of bad teams ignore him, going for the flashier players with a ton of "effort" questions. I hope enough bad teams pass on him so that Hansbrough lands in the midst of the late first round where all the playoff-quality teams are lurking.

Put this guy on a talented team that appreciates his tools and understands the value of a guy who can give you 10 points and 12 rebounds a night, and he will prosper just like he did in college.

"He's going to come in and make your team better, your practices better," said Bilas. "And I think he's going to play in the league a long time."

DrBadd01
06-25-2009, 08:47 AM
I have said it before and I will say it again: Outside of Rubio and Griffin Hansbrough is the only player I want from this draft.

owl
06-25-2009, 09:42 AM
Hansbrough and Lawson would be great for the Pacers. Hansbough is durable and
productive.

jhondog28
06-25-2009, 09:56 AM
My dream draft would be Hans and Jennings but I do not think that will happen. I would not be too disappointed with Hans and Lawson.

aero
06-25-2009, 11:15 AM
IF...and thats a big IF...we draft Hansbrough do you think we will look to trade Jeff ? ...personally id like to see jeff teach tyler a thing or two...but eh....

Just about everyone i talk to think we are going to draft him...im not one who wants to draft him.

count55
06-25-2009, 11:20 AM
IF...and thats a big IF...we draft Hansbrough do you think we will look to trade Jeff ? ...personally id like to see jeff teach tyler a thing or two...but eh....

Just about everyone i talk to think we are going to draft him...im not one who wants to draft him.

I think there's really very little chance that we trade Foster. Though many may disagree (vociferously), the front office almost certainly believes that his value on the floor outweighs his value in a trade.

Country Boy
06-25-2009, 11:23 AM
If the Pacers draft Tyler and keep him, I promise you all that I will quit posting here.


Let's be clear, I wouldn't mind if the Pacers drafted Tyler, I just don't believe it is very likely that they will.

vnzla81
06-25-2009, 12:33 PM
Let's face it, Hansbrough is different

http://images.stltoday.com/stltoday/resources/burwell235story.jpg
Sports Columnist Bryan Burwell





ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

06/24/2009

by Bryan Burwell

Can we stop tap-dancing on this for one little minute?

Can we just for once stop talking in those tiresome athletic code words we've become all too comfortable with and just come on out with it?

Tyler Hansbrough is a white basketball player.

Isn't that what everyone's really saying with all those awkward descriptions and sideways "compliments" of the 6-foot-9 Hansbrough, the former college basketball player of the year, as we approach Thursday night's NBA draft? Read any story about the University of North Carolina power forward who averaged more than 20 points and nearly nine rebounds for his four-year collegiate career, and this is exactly what you read. People tap-dancing very delicately around old and uncomfortable hangups.

Let's be real. If someone with Hansbrough's impressive collegiate résumé was a brother from Philly instead of a white guy from Poplar Bluff, we wouldn't be hearing any of these color-coded evaluations, and I wonder if he'd have to listen to all these questions about his athletic ability.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/8C43FA7BAFDE0DCD862575DF0005B240?OpenDocument


Let's be real. If someone with Hansbrough's impressive collegiate résumé was a brother from Philly instead of a white guy from Poplar Bluff, we wouldn't be hearing any of these color-coded evaluations, and I wonder if he'd have to listen to all these questions about his athletic ability.

But that's what we keep hearing, as if he's destined to be a bust in the pros because of the reflex impulse to compare him to Raef LaFrentz instead of Glenn (Big Baby) Davis.
Why does everyone assume that Hansbrough is going to be a lumbering journeyman instead of a talented major contributor? Why does everyone assume that he will be greatly limited when they didn't think that way about brutish, hard-working black ballplayers?

The NBA draft has become in recent years a rather curious place to observe talent evaluation. Too often teams speculate on unproven kids with incredible athletic ability and intriguing potential while thumbing their noses at unspectacular but highly successful athletes who had distinguished three- or four-year college careers. Too often it seems like the worst thing that can happen to a ballplayer is to stay in college too long, even if staying makes him a better player and earns him more championship experience.

But maybe some of that is about to change. Over the past few weeks, Hansbrough has proven through his individual workouts with various NBA clubs that he just might be better than advertised.

"He could go anywhere between 12 to 22," said ESPN college and pro draft analyst Jay Bilas. "He's another one of those guys with a wide range of opinion on him. It's funny, with most big time prospects we don't question their talent. We question whether they have the motor or the work ethic to be good or great in the NBA. But we don't have to worry about that with Hansbrough. He has the motor and the work ethic that is second to none. With him, it's the only issue, can he get shots off in traffic?"

If you watch Hansbrough's game, he's a banger who can get off the ground (his dad was a 7-foot-2 high jumper at Mizzou), but he's not a guy with explosive jumping skills.

Unlike a lot of guys in basketball, Bilas doesn't talk in codes. His evaluation of Hansbrough is accurate and unbiased. Does he have questions about what sort of pro Hansbrough will be? Sure he does. There are very few sure things anymore in the NBA draft except for expected No. 1 pick Blake Griffin. I talked to a friend of mine who is a longtime NBA scout, and he maintains that Griffin is the only player in the draft who his team projects to not only be a surefire starter, but also a surefire star.

But I get annoyed with people who automatically assume that Hansbrough will be a flop in the pros, as if there is no other possibility in his future but to be some end-of-the-bench practice player.

"He's a much better athlete than he gets credit for," said Bilas, "but I've never seen him consistently extend to get shots off over bigger defenders, which he'll have to do in the NBA. With one step he can really elevate. Without one, he doesn't, and he doesn't elevate in traffic very well. But the kid does get to the free throw line. He outworks people. He has talent. He can make a face-up jumper. He moves his feet so he can guard a bit out on the perimeter, which not a ton of guys his size can do. I like him."

I like him, too. And here's what I hope happens to him. I hope a lot of bad teams ignore him, going for the flashier players with a ton of "effort" questions. I hope enough bad teams pass on him so that Hansbrough lands in the midst of the late first round where all the playoff-quality teams are lurking.

Put this guy on a talented team that appreciates his tools and understands the value of a guy who can give you 10 points and 12 rebounds a night, and he will prosper just like he did in college.

"He's going to come in and make your team better, your practices better," said Bilas. "And I think he's going to play in the league a long time."

Nice article. Is true if Tyler was a black players I think he at least could be talk to be the 2nd round pick or in the first five.

count55
06-25-2009, 12:37 PM
Nice article. Is true if Tyler was a black players I think he at least could be talk to be the 2nd round pick or in the first five.

Nonsense.

vnzla81
06-25-2009, 12:39 PM
Nonsense.

with his numbers in college? he is second to Griffing in PF's and people only sees him as a late 1st round pick

Mourning
06-25-2009, 12:49 PM
with his numbers in college? he is second to Griffing in PF's and people only sees him as a late 1st round pick

Maybe that has amongst other things to do with the following:



"He's a much better athlete than he gets credit for," said Bilas, "but I've never seen him consistently extend to get shots off over bigger defenders, which he'll have to do in the NBA. With one step he can really elevate. Without one, he doesn't, and he doesn't elevate in traffic very well.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

pwee31
06-25-2009, 12:57 PM
I think the Nets are going to take Psycho T at #11.

I know this will make most of you happy, but I was hoping for him to be the pick.

Guess I'll have to wait for the draft.

d_c
06-25-2009, 01:56 PM
Well I like the kid and I hope we get him. Thats all I can say. I will politely disagree with everyone's perspective that seems to be against us getting him on this thread for other people such as Blair. He is the one guy I do not want. I am a fan of Jennings, Hans, and Henderson. If I had to pick one of these three I couldnt because they all bring something to the table. But sorry I understand your skills and athleticism debate but I dont think it is everything. Tinsley has skills and ability but he doesnt have the attitude. NBA is also about marketability and the Pacers need that desperately. Hans is not the most marketable guy, but he is one of the most known players enetering the draft so that wont hurt.

And I never said that you shouldn't like the kid and that the Pacers shouldn't draft him. The only thing I'd argue is that I wouldn't draft him as high as #13, but that's another topic.

You don't understand my debate about skills and athleticism? I'm saying players need a certain level of skills and athleticism to stay in the league and I said Hansbrough has a sufficient level to do so. It's not everything, no. But it is a requirement.

All I said was that plenty of guys with great attitudes, heart, drive, leadership, charisma and a winning background from college have failed in a major way in the NBA. And it's usually because they didn't have the skill level to play in the NBA. People talked big about why a lot of these guys would be great NBA players based on what they did in college and then when they fail, they don't even want to debate why and they'd just rather forget they even existed.

jhondog28
06-25-2009, 02:10 PM
And I never said that you shouldn't like the kid and that the Pacers shouldn't draft him. The only thing I'd argue is that I wouldn't draft him as high as #13, but that's another topic.

You don't understand my debate about skills and athleticism? I'm saying players need a certain level of skills and athleticism to stay in the league and I said Hansbrough has a sufficient level to do so. It's not everything, no. But it is a requirement.

All I said was that plenty of guys with great attitudes, heart, drive, leadership, charisma and a winning background from college have failed in a major way in the NBA. And it's usually because they didn't have the skill level to play in the NBA. People talked big about why a lot of these guys would be great NBA players based on what they did in college and then when they fail, they don't even want to debate why and they'd just rather forget they even existed.


Basically what you are saying is that he is not someone you would want for the Pacers and what I am saying is he is one guy I really would like to have. I mentioned earlier everything I liked about the guy and I think he will do a very good job in the NBA. Seth and I obviously disagree about Blair and Hans and I think that is what started this debate. He feels as strongly about Hans as I do about Blair. Personally I want Jennings before them all but I would love to see us get both Jennings and Hans which I think we can do if we move a couple of spots down. I understand your point about athleticism and skill. I think Hans athleticism is very underated and I think he has tremendous skill. I will always cheer on this guy if nothing more than his personality, because when I played sports thats the kind of guys I liked playng and playing with.

Lance George
06-25-2009, 02:31 PM
Hansbrough's stock is on the rise to the point where taking him #13 may be unfathomable, not because it's too soon, but because he may not even be there. He's impressing like crazy in work outs.

Here's a good article from Atlanta Journal-Constitutional (Sekou Smith) that has some news on Hansbrough's work out with the Hawks: http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/06/22/psycho-t-brings-the-pain/


Psycho-T brings the pain

12:26 am June 22, 2009, by Sekou Smith

Tyler Hansbrough didn't leave anything on the floor after his workout with the Hawks Sunday morning.

Tyler Hansbrough didn't leave anything on the floor after his workout with the Hawks Sunday morning at Philips Arena. The rugged North Carolina forward is a a player to keep an eye on this week with the Hawks drafting 19th in Thursday's NBA draft.

HAWKSVILLE - The reviews were unanimous.

On 10-point scale, Tyler Hansbrough’s Sunday morning workout for the Hawks at Philips Arena ranks at the very top of anything conducted in the past five days.

It wasn’t any one thing in particular that had the Hawks’ coaches buzzing. It was everything. Hansbrough’s energy, effort and obviously better-than-advertised shooting and athleticism caught more than a few folks in attendance by surprise.

“He kicked the meter up. It was off the Richter Scale,” said Hawks assistant coach Larry Drew, who ran the team’s workouts all week. “That was one of those 8.0s, one of those quick, hard earthquakes. Because his energy is at another level. You just don’t see many players capable of playing with that type of energy and effort and can sustain it through a game, or even a workout. He plays at a totally different level than some of these young guys out here.”

I felt like I needed an ice bath after watching his 90-minute workout. But Hansbrough proved a theory that a wise Eastern Conference executive reiterated to me Sunday night, “effort is a skill in the NBA.” And Hansbrough has it in reserve.

Alade Aminu (Stephenson High and Georgia Tech) and Shawn Taggart (Memphis) were the other bigs on hand Sunday. And they were also impressive in the individual drills and two-on-two work that was done. But Hansbrough’s refusal to go at anything but full bore during the entire workout had everyone buzzing afterwards.

Love him or hate him, and Hansbrough laughed about the fact that he’s inspired the masses to do either one or the other and sometimes both, he’s going to do it his way. And the truth is the Hawks could do a lot worse with the 19th pick. But they probably won’t have to worry about Hansbrough there, as I haven’t spoken to anyone anywhere that believes he’ll still be on the board when the Hawks are on the clock Thursday night.

“If this kid is still there at 19, the Hawks better not hesitate,” another Eastern Conference executive told me Sunday afternoon. “The kid’s a dream for coaches in our league, because he’s going to come in and crank things up automatically. He’s just wired differently than most of these other guys.”

pwee31
06-25-2009, 03:20 PM
He's at the top of my draft board, barring no one unusual drops

billbradley
06-25-2009, 03:36 PM
Nice article. Is true if Tyler was a black players I think he at least could be talk to be the 2nd round pick or in the first five.

thats like saying jennings would be going #2 if he was white (character). ridiculous. people like the mystery of upside and psycho doesn't seem to be getting better.

Slick Pinkham
06-25-2009, 08:55 PM
:sad:

jhondog28
06-25-2009, 08:56 PM
bump hahahahahaha early on the pick but I love the guy

McKeyFan
06-25-2009, 08:58 PM
Yes, Tyler Hansbrough, everyone.



;)

McKeyFan
06-25-2009, 08:58 PM
Yes, Tyler Hansbrough, everyone.



;)

danman
06-25-2009, 10:06 PM
Not excited about this pick -- see previous posts in this thread -- but I'll accentuate the positive.

Tyler makes sense from a PR standpoint. I'm sure he'll bust some hustle plays that hoosiers will appreciate.

I'm a believer in energy guys that amp up your practices. Most fans don't think about this much, but even in the NBA, there are benchwarmers who sometimes make the team ahead of more talented guys because they bring it in practice. Tyler will be appreciated by the coaches.

Finally, I didn't see any exciting talents slide to the Pacers at #13. If I was really going to hate on this pick, I have to call out the diamond in the rough we passed over... and I can't.

Good luck, Tyler. Hope Larry's "Dave Cowens" dream comes true.

hoosierguy
06-25-2009, 10:44 PM
If the Pacers draft Tyler and keep him, I promise you all that I will quit posting here.



I guess this is goodbye then.:-o

Infinite MAN_force
06-25-2009, 11:41 PM
Not excited about this pick -- see previous posts in this thread -- but I'll accentuate the positive.

Tyler makes sense from a PR standpoint. I'm sure he'll bust some hustle plays that hoosiers will appreciate.

I'm a believer in energy guys that amp up your practices. Most fans don't think about this much, but even in the NBA, there are benchwarmers who sometimes make the team ahead of more talented guys because they bring it in practice. Tyler will be appreciated by the coaches.

Finally, I didn't see any exciting talents slide to the Pacers at #13. If I was really going to hate on this pick, I have to call out the diamond in the rough we passed over... and I can't.

Good luck, Tyler. Hope Larry's "Dave Cowens" dream comes true.

This is the reason that even though Im not thrilled with this pick at all, I am ok with it because the only guy that we might have missed on seems like it could be Holiday. For some reason, I have a bad feeling about Holiday, he has the natural talent, but Im just not sure if he has the drive to be a succesful NBA player. Time will tell.

That being said, I am more exited about Josh McRoberts upside than Hansbrough... but Hansbrough is very "low risk" and the hoosier faithful will love the kid, so we probably got the best we could out of the pick.

Trophy
06-25-2009, 11:59 PM
WOO HOO! I'm really we got him.

bdcbdc7
06-26-2009, 12:13 AM
Ok, I have a very different take. I think Hansborough really struggled against top talent Bigs. I think the Pacers needed to improve team athletic ability and Defense, Hansborough does neither. He will get destroyed on both ends of the court. I see him as little more than a high energy guy off the bench about 8th or 9nth player down the bench that comes in and mops up. IMO his skill set does not translate to the NBA. On the positive side he will be in the league for 10years. Way to play it safe on draft night.

vnzla81
06-26-2009, 12:15 AM
I been watching highlights of him and it seems that he plays in overdrive all the time, this guy has the heart of a champion(I think) he rebounds, score, plays D, does anything to make the team better, the Pacers been saying all this time that they are looking for a younger Jeff and the only guy I can think of is Tyler, I really think that if the Pacers have the chance to get this guy either getting a late 1st round pick or early second round they should do it, he could be that spark of the bench, somebody that does not care about numbers and plays hard every time.
I also think that Larry Wants older players that been in college for few years, he is not looking for any long term projects. what do you guys think?

Here are some of his highlights

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZGNV8rgAmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inH0SBGFbUc



I called this one long time ago :D

CableKC
06-26-2009, 12:23 AM
I'm okay with Hansborough......at the 13th pick....IF we truly were looking for a Big Man....and not a PG or a GF ( since TWill and Henderson ).....then it was down to Blair, Johnson or Hansborough. With Blair dropping due to concerns about his ACL....it was down to Johnson or Hansborough.....although I'd slightly prefer Johnson ( only cuz he's a better shotblocker )...I can't really argue with picking Hansborough given his intangibles/Basketball IQ/Energy/Hustle/Rebounding/Scoring/Effort/blah blah blah. I don't see Johnson being "heads and shoulder" pick where it was clear cut obvious pick over Hansborough.

Again....Hansborough is the EXACT type of player that Bird loves......NBA-Ready, high charecter, high Basketball IQ, "gives 100% everything" type of guy. With TWill and Henderson off the board....I'd prefer Lawson...but I'm guessing that we shopped Ford and got no takers....which means we're likely stuck with a Ford/Jack PG rotation for the next 2 seasons.

Smoothdave1
06-26-2009, 02:04 AM
My concern with Hansbrough is that he'll be 24 the first week of the season. Does he have any more upside or has he peaked?

I feel like we drafted Jeff Foster's replacement with maybe a little more offensive game. Certainly not a bad thing, but was it smart to do at #13 when we probably could have gotten him a few picks later and added something else?

Trophy
06-26-2009, 02:06 AM
My concern with Hansbrough is that he'll be 24 the first week of the season. Does he have any more upside or has he peaked?

I feel like we drafted Jeff Foster's replacement with maybe a little more offensive game. Certainly not a bad thing, but was it smart to do at #13 when we probably could have gotten him a few picks later and added something else?

He'll get offensive rebounds like Jeff did. I feel Tyler being a rookie can learn to improve his defense over the summer in workouts with us.