Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

    This is my draft big board for Indiana in 2015. First, some explanations:

    -I am including the 3 highly rated overseas players on my board, despite the fact that I have not done much draft preparation on them. I have done some in the last 3 weeks (particularly on Hezonja), but I clearly have not spent the incredible in depth time on them like I have in the 13 guys I did full write ups on.

    -I have 39 players listed on my overall big board. Obviously, there are 60 picks total on Thursday, and many will be spent on overseas "draft and stash" guys I have little to no knowledge, on guys I have off my board totally for attitude or other red flags, or on guys I simply have no chance to stick for us.

    -I do this board as if I work for the Pacers....if I did this for another team, it might look slightly different, simply because each individual team has a certain style and team need to account for.

    -In my rankings, I try to ideally find guys with a combination of a high floor AND a high ceiling. The further down the board you go that perfect balance gets harder to find of course.

    -Chances are, I have missed someone near the bottom of this list.

    -Keep in mind, that all foreign guys I have not studied at all, other than the 3 obvious ones near the top. No draft and stash guys will be on this list, although obviously many will be picked.

    With all of that in mind, here is my 2015 NBA DRAFT BIG BOARD

    (* means link to profile)

    1. DeAngelo Russell. I think he is the best player at the current most important position, and he would perfectly in Indiana between George Hill and Paul George. I love everything about him.

    2. Karl Anthony Towns. Versatile big man with untapped potential still. Going to be a stud.

    3. Jahlil Okafor. Going to be a strong offensive player, but limited to a back to the basket type player. You'll have to build your team in a specific way to suit his game and win big with him, but it can be done.

    4. Mario Hezonja. In my limited study of him, he looks a 2 way strong player with star level potential. His upside puts him ahead of Mudiay in my opinion. He is brash and there are personality concerns, but I love the limited study I have done on him so far. I think he is the most athletic European player I have ever watched. Reminds me of "Thunder" Dan Majerle in his prime.

    5. Emmanuel Mudiay. Limited study of him as well. I think he is a slightly better Eric Bledsoe, and I love point guards who can defend their position at a high level.

    6. *Devin Booker. I love Booker more than most, but I just adore his floor game, and he is the best shooter in this draft. Plus, his attitude, work ethic, and character are off the charts. His ceiling is lower than Hezonja but his floor is higher, so it is very close between them. He is my favorite player of all the guys I profiled for PD this year.

    7. *Frank Kaminsky. Extremely high floor, with room to improve as he adjusts to the NBA game and works on his body. If he develops in a well rounded way I think he can be a major weapon, but in an absolute worst case scenario he is Ryan Anderson. I love his fit here with Indiana and he can play right away.

    8. *Justise Winslow. Winner all of his life and an intense, versatile defender. His shot isn't totaled, but it needs to go to the shop for some warranty work. I think he helps Paul George become better as he can take the best defensive player on that end himself. His ceiling is higher than the guys right under him on this list, but his floor is lower also.

    9. *Stanley Johnson. Safer player than Winslow I think, and just slightly below him on my rankings. I love his character and toughness, but still needs work on the offensive end. Smart, tough, wing defender.

    10. *Willie Cauley Stein. One of the most athletic 7 foot guys I have ever seen. A major defensive weapon. No threat offensively at all, so you'll have to be creative in how you use him if you want to score enough to win. Health question marks, and questions on whether he loves the game or not....but he is unique enough that I am willing to gamble with him. You'll have to have some dynamic playmakers and scorers around him, and he fits best in an up tempo, spread system with him placed right behind the basket to keep your spacing. Greatly helps his usefulness if he can expand his offensive game some eventually.

    11. *Cameron Payne. High character, creative point guard. He is about 80% the potential of Russell. Fun to watch play offense, not as fun to watch play defense. Add 20lbs to his game and he gets a lot more dangerous, still time and room to do that. I think he is a back up to begin with but an eventual NBA starter, and if you have high level defenders around him you can win with him. Makes people better offensively, and can play both on and off the ball. High level modern day PG in a spread ballscreen attack.

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

    Those are the 11 guys I can endorse us drafting at pick #11. We are assured of having at least one of them available, so I will be happy on draft night no matter which one of those we end up with. Because I have ranked another player much lower than others have, we are guaranteed actually to have our choice of 2 of those above listed. I would simply follow the order of my board if I were making the decisions, so you now all know where I'd stand.

    As for the others:

    12. *Bobby Portis.....his character and high floor puts him here.

    13. *Myles Turner.....his upside puts him here at a position of need for Indiana. Floor is low but ceiling is high.

    14. Kristaps Porzingas....nowhere near as good as pundits are saying from what I can see. Who the hell can he guard? How do you build around him so you can win? Still, upside puts him here but he has high bust potential to me. Can't rebound, can't defend his position. Weak physically. How does it help you win to have a 7'2 small forward? That is what he is to me.

    15. R.J. Hunter......his high character and shooting ability puts him here. He fits best on Cleveland at #24 or with Oklahoma City at #14, so he can play off big time players. Atlanta picking him also makes sense.

    16. Rondae Hollis Jefferson.....another high character, big time aggressive defender who can't shoot yet. He might be a Bruce Bowen type eventually, and he rebounds and defends like Dennis Rodman. Total liability on offensive end of floor at this point, but coaches will love his motor.

    17. *Trey Lyles.....I think he is a back up big, but he has potential to be better than that which puts him here. High floor but not a very high ceiling.

    18. Sam Dekker.....tweener type that I think will struggle with NBA athletes. Who does he guard exactly? Doesn't seem overly tough and smart on the floor to me either. If he is starting for you, likely you aren't very good. What exactly will he be good at? I don't know. Looks like a back up big man to me, an 8th or 9th guy.

    19. *Kelly Oubre.....potential is all he is at this point, but he does have some potential....it is just a long way away I think. Might be better in a less restrictive system than the Hank Iba old school offense they run at Kansas.

    20. *Tyus Jones....high character, winning player who will be a long term back up PG for somebody.

    21. *Jerien Grant.....looks like another backup PG to me, has some combo guard defensive potential.

    22. Justin Anderson.....high level wing defender who looked a bit better on D in college than he will in the NBA. Role player, 3 and D potential from corners if he can groove his jump shot.

    23. Delon Wright....a defensive minded point guard who can't shoot yet. I think he defends well enough to stick as a backup for a long time.

    24. *Kevon Looney....higher upside than the last 4 guys, but his floor is much lower. He looks like a guy who won't peak until 5 or 6 years from now.

    25. Montrezl Harrell....rebound specialist, those guys usually always stick.

    26. Rashad Vaughn.....he will stick as a backup scoring threat I think.

    27. Dakari Johnson....you always need a backup center for cheap.

    28. Rakeem Christmas.....back up athletic big who I wish would slip to 43.

    29. Richaun Holmes.....4 man who is productive and works hard. I hope he slips to 43.

    30. Darion Atkins....smart but undersized 4 man who knows how to play. Has a chance.

    31. Terry Rozier.....has back up guard potential. Fun to watch, but inconsistent. He can guard his own.

    32. Olivier Hanlon....undersized shooting guard with high character who can score. Nice 11th man type for us.

    33. Joe Young.....very undersized scoring guard....instant offense type, 11th man type.

    34. Larry Nance Jr. Athletic, but not like his awesome Dad. I think he fits here well.

    35. Brandon Dawson.....well coached, rebounding specialist with untapped potential in my opinion. Upside is higher, but floor is lower.

    36. Pat Connaughton.....he can shoot, and he is athletic enough to play. Tested more athletic than he plays. He has a chance.

    37. Christian Wood......good stats, but not a winning player yet. Worth taking at 43 since he has NBA skills, but his floor is very low. A player who pisses me off watching on tape.

    38. Treveon Graham....played well at Portsmouth, has a chance.

    39. Cliff Alexander....highly ranked in high school, but one year in college was a disaster. He isn't ready yet, and may never be, but has upside also. I think his ceiling is Ike Diogu, but that isn't bad for 43. Likely a D-League guy next year in my opinion.

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

    How strong is this draft?

    I see 11-19 potential starters (if they all hit their ceilings), with 9 more potential rotation players. I think players in my top 6 all have All Star potential, though I know my top 6 is slightly different than others have.

    Tomorrow, I'll do 2nd round possibilities, and do a Q and A draft session in the evening.

    This time until next time!

    Tbird
    Last edited by BillS; 06-25-2015, 10:58 AM. Reason: Add links
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

    Kaminsky ahead of Winslow and WCS. Interesting....and I totally agree!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

      Terry Rozier intrigues me, with the right coaching he could become a steal I think, if he is there in the 2nd, which I don't think he will be I am taking him with no questions asked.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

        I like your thinking about Rakeem Christmas and Richarun Holmes.

        Looking forward to seeing your 2nd rd possibilities!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

          After reading what you said about Kristaps Porzingas I hunted until I found a report on his weakness's. This statement turned me off him; "Porzingis is still working on becoming a consistently accurate threat in game situations (he didn't make a three-pointer in half of his games this year)"

          Can't guard anyone, and isn't an accurate threat in games pretty much sums it up for me.

          Explains too why he doesn't work out with others. (Gets pushed around)

          Should have stayed overseas another couple years. Might amount to something once he grows into his body though, his brother played pro ball for 12 years.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

            I'd love Rakeem Christmas too.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

              just my 2 cents on Pozingas, alot has been said of his light frame, but he is only 19. Very hard for 7fters to built that kind of muscle mass at the age of 18-19 years old. They just got done growing. Dirk was slight of frame in his first couple years in the league as well, Pau Gasol as well. Those guys had to really develop their bodies, but the skill sets were there. I've not seen enough of him to judge anything, but I'd want to know does he have the high release on his shot like Dirk? Does he have a decent handle for a big man like Dirk did in his prime? When he is under the basket how quickly can he recover a rebound and put it back up? Does he have to load up like Hibbert? From the videos i've seen he has pretty good pogo sticks.

              I do think its very telling that he didn't work out against players close to his size, and only works out against his big brother in most of his skills videos.

              I just wouldn't be super concerned about the slight frame though, any team that takes him is gonna put him on a program to add on muscle, and he will come into training camp looking good. Remember when Gordon Hayward was drafted compared to how he looked in the NCAA tournament. He arrived to the Jazz mini-camp looking like a completely different player.
              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                Porzingas seems somewhat Jonathan Bender"ish" for me. A 7 foot SG/SF, in theory could lead to matchup problems. However, in reality you get burned by these kinds of prospects, and they don't work out how you imagine. On ESPN, he said that he imagines himself as a "4", and possibly a "5" in the future. How can a 7 footer not say that he is a center right now? You are seven feet tall, and don't feel comfortable playing with the biggest guys on the court? Huge red flag for me. Seems like a perfect fit for the train wreck that is Philadelphia.
                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                  Guys, it's Porzingis, not Porzingas. The guy is Latvian, not Lithuanian
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                    Said in a whiney voice; "T-bird started it, I copied off him." (Giggle, Giggle, snort)

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                      Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                      After reading what you said about Kristaps Porzingas I hunted until I found a report on his weakness's. This statement turned me off him; "Porzingis is still working on becoming a consistently accurate threat in game situations (he didn't make a three-pointer in half of his games this year)"

                      Can't guard anyone, and isn't an accurate threat in games pretty much sums it up for me.

                      Explains too why he doesn't work out with others. (Gets pushed around)

                      Should have stayed overseas another couple years. Might amount to something once he grows into his body though, his brother played pro ball for 12 years.

                      Every year there is someone who does amazing in workouts and moves up the boards, making executives forget about the mountain of basketball game evidence that suggests other players should be drafted in their place.

                      But hey, without it the Pacers wouldn't be able to get a great player at 11.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                        If Johnson, Winslow, WCS, and even Payne are on the board and Kaminsky is the pick that would be the ultimate meltdown pick.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                          I'd be very happy with (in order):

                          Winslow / Johnson
                          Hezonja
                          WCS
                          Kaminsky
                          Payne

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                            Originally posted by eldubious View Post
                            If Johnson, Winslow, WCS, and even Payne are on the board and Kaminsky is the pick that would be the ultimate meltdown pick.
                            For you maybe. Tbird obviously disagrees. Heck...New York is rumored to be considering Frank at #4. Don't know why you think it's a meltdown pick.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird 2015 NBA Draft Analysis #14: Tbird BIG BOARD

                              Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                              Porzingas seems somewhat Jonathan Bender"ish" for me. A 7 foot SG/SF, in theory could lead to matchup problems. However, in reality you get burned by these kinds of prospects, and they don't work out how you imagine. On ESPN, he said that he imagines himself as a "4", and possibly a "5" in the future. How can a 7 footer not say that he is a center right now? You are seven feet tall, and don't feel comfortable playing with the biggest guys on the court? Huge red flag for me. Seems like a perfect fit for the train wreck that is Philadelphia.

                              He is not as athletic as bender. If you remember, bender can dunk from the free throw line.
                              Porzingis does have the tool to be a good center maybe in 2 years, i like his wingspan and shooting touch.

                              Edit: personally, i like the other euro better (M. Hezonja)
                              Last edited by stew; 06-24-2015, 12:36 AM.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X