PDA

View Full Version : Combine Interviews



purdue101
06-09-2009, 11:24 PM
I'm interested as to whether any of you pay much attention to the combine interviews. Draftexpress.com has a video interview of each draft prospect from the recent combine. If you do watch these videos, do they sway you in anyway as to whether you're interested in us drafting that particular player?

The reason I ask is b/c I was watching these interviews tonight and found myself shying away from certain players based upon their interview. It's my opinion that you can get a general idea of the character of the player by watching their composure, manneurisms, and listening to their overall answers. I try not stereotype, but it's difficult, as I feel there is a clear distinction at times.

For instance, there is an obvious difference between how Tinsley or Shawne carries themself when compared to a Granger, Rush, Dunleavy, etc. At times you can pinpoint who may have a little bit of that thuggish mentality, which clearly we want to avoid. I feel it's somewhat consist throughout the NBA.

After reviewing the tapes I found myself really impressed with Holiday, Teague, Henderson, Ellington, Hansborough, etc. I liked Curry although I sensed some cockiness on his part. I was put off by Clark, T Williams, and Mullens.

imawhat
06-10-2009, 01:03 AM
Watching player interviews definitely shapes my opinion of players.

From this year's draft, guys like Blair, Jennings and Henderson impressed me in interviews, while several players have been off-putting. For instance, I really didn't like Terrence Williams because of his unfriendly attitude, and Holiday because his personality screams JO.

Still, there are times when interviews are misleading. For instance, I thought Brandon Rush's interviews were off-putting and simple, but he plays basketball like with nuances and intellect that most players never reach.

I didn't think Jarrett Jack came across as a good communicator in his initial Pacers interview but he now appears to be great.

dohman
06-10-2009, 01:51 AM
Watching player interviews definitely shapes my opinion of players.

From this year's draft, guys like Blair, Jennings and Henderson impressed me in interviews, while several players have been off-putting. For instance, I really didn't like Terrence Williams because of his unfriendly attitude, and Holiday because his personality screams JO.

Still, there are times when interviews are misleading. For instance, I thought Brandon Rush's interviews were off-putting and simple, but he plays basketball like with nuances and intellect that most players never reach.

I didn't think Jarrett Jack came across as a good communicator in his initial Pacers interview but he now appears to be great.



Public Speaking scares the living crap out of most people. I would venture to say 75% of the population would rather get stung by bees then talk in front of people.

pianoman
06-10-2009, 10:21 AM
Public Speaking scares the living crap out of most people. I would venture to say 75% of the population would rather get stung by bees then talk in front of people.

Although I enjoy public speaking, this is absolutely true. I just took Speech class and the speech givers would ask the teacher if everyone could put their heads down, or if they could do it after school in private. I'm not going to judge personalities based on the interviews.

Jonathan
06-10-2009, 12:42 PM
I am calling for a literacy test. I believe every NBA player should be able to read at a 10th grade level.

count55
06-10-2009, 12:47 PM
I am calling for a literacy test. I believe every NBA player should be able to read at a 10th grade level.

Why should they have to be able to read better than everyone else? I've worked with executives that I'm pretty sure couldn't read at a 10th grade level.

JB24
06-10-2009, 01:05 PM
I thought Flynn and Blair were by far the best interviewees. I do agree that T-Will's was off-putting, but he does seem like a nice enough guy in other interviews.

In general though, meh. Speights sounded like a complete dunce in last season's workout interview but there's no doubt the guy's a player.

Roaming Gnome
06-10-2009, 01:53 PM
So we are judging how someone does at public speaking to determine what kind of person they are on and off the basketball court? Please correct me if I'm not getting the gist of this. I hope that isn't what I'm reading between these lines.

I just listened to the interview with T-Williams. The content of the answers he gave seemed rather honest. I didn't find anything in the content of his answers that said, "steer clear". Are some of you,"put-off" by how he speaks?

I guess I don't get it? Yeah, and I agree with what UB is saying in the next post.

Unclebuck
06-10-2009, 01:58 PM
I don't pay any attention to these - just don't see a direct correlation between giving a good interview and being a good player. Sure, if I were TPTB I would want to interview the prospect, but as a fan i don't care

Coop
06-10-2009, 02:13 PM
The interviews really don't make much of a difference to me. I still listen to them, just because I think it's interesting to see how their minds work and how well they can communicate. That really doesn't have much of an effect on their basketball playing abilities though. The only way I could see an interview making a difference would be if a player came across as extremely arrogant and derogatory towards other people. Most of the time, these interviews have been practiced so many times by the prospects that anything you hear has been pre-fabricated anyways.

Lance George
06-10-2009, 02:23 PM
Blair was by far the best in my opinion. He came across as incredibly charismatic, personable, and humble.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-BVmy1SYgEc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-BVmy1SYgEc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

I thought Holiday's was one of the worst. A whopping 77 seconds of what seemed to be disinterest on Holiday's part. He couldn't even bother to remove his earbud for the interview.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AegtQLZYgTY&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AegtQLZYgTY&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Anthem
06-10-2009, 02:26 PM
I don't get it. What's off-putting about TWill's conversation? The fact that he's wearing a red hat? The fact that he'd probably look at going overseas if he wasn't a first-round pick?

JB24
06-10-2009, 02:30 PM
So we are judging how someone does at public speaking to determine what kind of person they are on and off the basketball court? Please correct me if I'm not getting the gist of this. I hope that isn't what I'm reading between these lines.

I just listened to the interview with T-Williams. The content of the answers he gave seemed rather honest. I didn't find anything in the content of his answers that said, "steer clear". Are some of you,"put-off" by how he speaks?

I guess I don't get it? Yeah, and I agree with what UB is saying in the next post.

No, you're right. It is unfair to judge players based on the interviews, but they're still interesting to listen to.

The only player i was put off by ( and it genuinely surprised me) was Williams. It's got nothing to do with the way he speaks, but more about the booking tickets to Europe if he didn't think he was going in the first round bit. While it is honest, it's something i personally don't like hearing from players. Is he just in it for the guaranteed money? Would he not be determined to prove teams wrong and work for his money if he fell to the second round?

It surprised me because i've seen other interviews, i follow him on twitter and he's said that he doesn't at all mind where he goes and his demeanor is that of a hard working guy with a strong work ethic. So i don't know, just hearing him say that was a little disappointing.

Naptown_Seth
06-10-2009, 03:10 PM
This is not because I'm a TWill fan, and I haven't had the chance to watch the interview yet, but it doesn't bother me if a player says he'd rather take a HIGHER PAYING JOB.

Sheesh, either some people here are still teens or just aren't living in the same world as me. You go to a job fair and IBM says they might have a spot for you but it might be in the mail room (you have a BA Acct). You get an offer from some Italian company to move to Rome and be a Jr VP of accounting and make twice the money.

In the logic I've read here you are a jerk if you take that Italian job. Yes, that does make sense. :rolleyes:

From now on I want all of you to take only jobs from the most prestigious companies, even if they are below the pay you could get elsewhere or for a lower position than you could have elsewhere. Just put your money where your mouth is.

Josh Childress = selfish little punk, good riddance to him
Argh.


*I'm not saying TWill comes off good or bad, I'll have to watch first to have an opinion on that. But I won't have a problem with him suggesting he'll keep other offers in mind when he goes to take the job he trained for in college...you know, like every single person in this country (and most others) does every day.



Funny, not knowing of this thread I said the following in the TUE workout thread...

No info to add, but as far as interviews go I'm much more skeptical of them in general in this era of PR coaching and such. The agents put them in training for how to interact with the teams, publicity, etc. Maybe it's genuine, maybe it's new but will stick, or maybe it's just saying the right things.

It's just a lot harder to be sure. I do think you can sometimes read into it, but it's better if you can get them in a non-canned interview situation, something a bit more dynamic that is tougher to prep for. If you just walk through the standard "are you going to come in and work hard" set of questions you are only going to get the wrong answer out of 100% idiots, and the rest are all going to "sir" you up plenty.

That's why I like in-season interviews when their agent interaction has to be a lot more restricted (should be none, but come on).

d_c
06-10-2009, 03:18 PM
It's got nothing to do with the way he speaks, but more about the booking tickets to Europe if he didn't think he was going in the first round bit. While it is honest, it's something i personally don't like hearing from players. Is he just in it for the guaranteed money? Would he not be determined to prove teams wrong and work for his money if he fell to the second round?


By that logic, you should blame every draft prospect (and there are a number of them) who refuses to workout for the Blazers, as was reported, for not being determined enough to work for playing time and money.

All these young guys know the Blazers are already young, talented and stacked. So going to the Blazers means less playing time sitting behind those good players.

So what that tells you is that young guys are ALREADY looking out for their first contract extension. They would rather go to a bad team so they can get more minutes and put up better numbers than go to a better team where they would be further down the depth chart.

Terrence Williams is just another guy looking out for Number 1, just like everyone else in the draft.

billbradley
06-10-2009, 04:03 PM
the only interview that bothered me was ty lawson saying


"They talked to my agent and they said they need a point guard to come in," Lawson said this afternoon. "They've got T.J. Ford and Jarrett Jack, but I don't know if they're happy with them. They said they need one to come in."

he's not even a rookie and he knows what pacers management wants? why say that about possible future teammates?

Dece
06-10-2009, 04:12 PM
Just seems like he's stating the obvious, if our management was in love with the TJ/Jack/Diener rotation we wouldn't be drafting a point, unless we planned on trading that guy away.

billbradley
06-10-2009, 04:20 PM
Just seems like he's stating the obvious, if our management was in love with the TJ/Jack/Diener rotation we wouldn't be drafting a point, unless we planned on trading that guy away.

when did any pacer management or coach say they were looking at drafting a PG? the only thing i've heard them say is they want to keep jack, and tj will grow after spending a season in JO's offense. other than that don't they just want the best available player? if i'm wrong shoot me a link.

Putnam
06-10-2009, 04:21 PM
If I were TPTB I would want to interview the prospect, but as a fan i don't care

This is me, too.

It is the job of the Pacers scouts and executives to sort all this out, not mine. I trust they're doing a thorough job. I'll watch on draft night and take a genuine interest in the player the Pacers draw. But I know I'll never be as well informed as TPTB and I don't think my opinion matters.

As a fan, I derive no pleasure out of the pre-draft scrutiny. Others may if they wish, but with the tape measuring and all that it strikes me as being a little too much like a cattle show.

Dece
06-10-2009, 04:22 PM
"'They talked to my agent and they said they need a point guard to come in,' Lawson said this afternoon."

They meaning someone representing the Pacers, unless you're claiming that Lawson is outright lying.

billbradley
06-10-2009, 04:50 PM
"'They talked to my agent and they said they need a point guard to come in,' Lawson said this afternoon."

They meaning someone representing the Pacers, unless you're claiming that Lawson is outright lying.

No I don't think he's lying, just making assumptions that makes me not want him. First, saying you need a PG to come in doesn't mean we're looking to specifically draft one. We need all positions to come in because as it stands now we don't have depth at any position (and Jack and Diener aren't officially Pacers yet).

And if you don't know if a team is happy with a player or not, why would you question it? You're talking about possible future teammates. It just seems a little immature to call out proven pros as a rookie before the draft, even though I trust that wasn't his intention.

Maybe his agent told him to say that to help his stock. But if I'm Jack or TJ, I wouldn't want my pupil telling me whose happy with me before he's even on the team.

Anthem
06-10-2009, 05:40 PM
No I don't think he's lying, just making assumptions that makes me not want him. First, saying you need a PG to come in doesn't mean we're looking to specifically draft one.
Um, if we weren't (at least possibly) interested in drafting him why would we bring him in?

Heck, the Pacers have publicly said that they're looking in the draft for a PG. The dude's not saying anything that isn't public knowledge.

I think you're making a lot out of a little.

Anthem
06-10-2009, 05:42 PM
when did any pacer management or coach say they were looking at drafting a PG?
http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=46359

billbradley
06-10-2009, 07:52 PM
http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=46359

I couldn't watch the video again for some reason, but the consensus of the thread seemed to be that he was asked about JOB wanting a big guard and larry said Tyreke Evans fits that.


Um, if we weren't (at least possibly) interested in drafting him why would we bring him in?

Heck, the Pacers have publicly said that they're looking in the draft for a PG. The dude's not saying anything that isn't public knowledge.

I think you're making a lot out of a little.

I never said that there wasn't a possibility that the Pacers draft Lawson or a PG. If Lawson is the best available player in their eyes, I think they will take him. That being said, I'm sure we can agree that there have been players brought into teams that were fairly sure they wouldn't pick that player. I'm not saying this is the case with Lawson because I don't know. But Lawson's quote assumes that because he will be brought in, the Pacer's happiness with they're current PGs are in question. In a statement by JOB, he debunks Lawson's theory and lends one of many reasons you would bring in a PG.


"We need to realize at some point in time we're going to have to become taller maybe and a little more athletic at the point guard spot even though we're very happy with the guys that played the point for us this year. But down the road it'd be nice to maybe have a young point guard that we might be able to draft if that's what Larry determines that we can bring along over a period of a couple of years." JOB

Let's just say that Lawson's agent was told some info and we are looking at moving TJ or JJ via sign and trade. Before this statement the only comments made by JOB have been positive in regards to a TJ JJ duo. Now potential trade partners may think we are unhappier with our situation than we appear. Do you think that works for us or against us?

I'm not making a big deal of it, I just said it was a little immature to call out proven pros and I trust that wasn't his intention.

At the end of the day Lawson saying we may be unhappy with our players doesn't help us move them if we are, it could hinder him being our selection, and is not public knowledge.

imawhat
06-10-2009, 10:20 PM
I don't get it. What's off-putting about TWill's conversation? The fact that he's wearing a red hat? The fact that he'd probably look at going overseas if he wasn't a first-round pick?

On paper it looks like a great interview (some very intelligent answers with some humor), but there's something off-putting about his connection with the interviewer. There seems to be a slight lack of respect. It's not a perfect world and I can live with it, but as a teammate I can see how that type of attitude could create an issue over an 82 game season.

Maybe it's because I'm currently interviewing to fill a couple of positiions at my company and have been immersed in interview techniques and responses.

I have no problem with his answers though.



I don't pay any attention to these - just don't see a direct correlation between giving a good interview and being a good player.

It's not about being a good/bad interview. It's about recognizing character traits (desire, responses to stress, etc.) and how they may affect the future development of a player.

With a player like Roy Hibbert, he's young and raw but has the physical tools to be an impact player. If you tell me you see no direct correlation between Roy's personality traits and his ability to improve and the future, then you better be prepared to tell me a player with identical physical tools but the personality traits of Jamaal Tinsley leaves you with the same gut feeling.

A really good case study is David Harrison. He's intelligent AND more physically gifted than Roy. And if you ask me, I think David is a good/GREAT interview.

At a closer examination you notice certain traits, particularly a defense mechanism similar to a conscious transference and a lack of respect for authority (go read his interviews; a lot of them have this). Then it starts making sense why he never grew as a player. He never took responsibility for his actions (i.e. the refs were always wrong and out to get him) and therefore was never able to correct something that he didn't view as a mistake. Also, his reactions to stress (i.e. foul calls, coming out after playing poorly) made it obvious he wasn't going to develop.

But here's Roy struggling with the same problem. Yet in the papers and in videos he acknowledges fouling as a problem he needs to correct, and his plan to correct it. Fundamental, obvious difference between the two players that can be detected in interviews.

Anthem
06-10-2009, 10:27 PM
there's something off-putting about his connection with the interviewers
Plural. Fixed.

The dude is surrounded by random dudes with minicams, none of whom work for big-time reporting agencies. He's not super engaged, I agree, but it's not like he showed up for that interview. They caught up with him in a moment where he wasn't doing anything.

I think comparing this interview to one where a guy comes in for a position is apples to oranges.

Naptown_Seth
06-10-2009, 10:43 PM
the only interview that bothered me was ty lawson saying



he's not even a rookie and he knows what pacers management wants? why say that about possible future teammates?
He knows what TPTB said to him or implied in conversations with him and/or his agent.



edit: okay, so I got home and watched that TWill interview. You guys have got to be kidding me. Not only is it NOT problematic, I think he comes off great. The reality is that he's coming from a poor education situation so the grammar is an issue, but the HONESTY is outstanding. He doesn't come off as polished and running through the standard schtick.

He says that if he didn't THINK he was going first round he'd be shopping for Euro deals, as in he's been given a good indication of where he'll go and that if that indicator was 2nd round then he'd be looking for better options financially (and otherwise perhaps, going to Europe if you are an Ivy grad is a great way to find yourself, but ballers are jerks if they do that).

But worse yet is that you guys completely dismissed what he says RIGHT AFTER THAT - This is why you stay in school for 4 years, to get to this level (of the draft).

And prior to that he's talking at length about improving his understanding of the game, when to shoot, when to pass, etc, and IM informed opinion his game showed just that. He was running the show at both ends. So his discussion here matches that to me, it sounds like a street kid with low education that's grown his game and actually listened to people as they taught him how to play.

I think he comes off as extremely mature, which makes sense coming from a senior. That's also why I like SR players, they've gotten more education in their chosen field. Just like I prefer my doctors to complete their education too.


I'm not saying he's Roy Hibbert, he's clearly not the scholar Roy was, but I do think AS A PERSON he's mature and maybe what a sergeant is vs a lieutenant. You can know more and be a better leader without having the classroom brawn to go with it. I'd prefer the full package, but that's tough to find and given a choice I'll take the mature leader type every time.

Naptown_Seth
06-10-2009, 11:55 PM
I don't see the problem with Holliday either. Strikes me as a normal college freshman. Clearly he's more well spoken than TWill. Seems like a sincere, good kid. Frankly he surprised me a bit, I thought he'd be more brash as a young star type.

Jennings - mixed, but he's definitely matured in Europe.


I liked Blair's interview quite a bit with Xpress + workout vid. Hill's similar video wasn't all that bad (neither are the combine interview vids, these are the workout tour vids, Blair in Indy).

I don't know, seeing that footage combined with his interview gets my interest going again. He kinda came off more Hibbert like than I would have thought. Sure seems humble and fairly smart at least.

I didn't really like DeRozen's interview much personally.