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 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

    6 days until draft day 2017, and the analysis train heads down to Winston-Salem North Carolina, to Wake Forest University to shine a light on the analytical darling of this particular draft, Demon Deacons big man John Collins. Previous editions of this years profiles have featured Bam Adebayo, T.J Leaf, OG Anunoby, Semi Ojeleye, Luke Kennard, and Derrick White. Those articles and ones from previous seasons can be found elsewhere on Pacersdigest.com, or through the magic of google.

    Born John Collins Martin III, Collins is the son of John Collins Jr, and Lyria Rissing-Collins. A military family, (John Jr. in the Navy and Lyria in the Air Force) meant that John had to move alot as a youngster, he was born in Layton Utah, but finally played basketball at Cardinal Newman High in West Palm Beach Florida. Ranked as the 136th player in one publication, and outside the top 200 by others just 2 years ago, Collins used a strong work ethic, really good big man coaching by Danny Manning at Wake Forest (a long time former NBA player and once high draft pick), and good athleticism to rocket toward becoming a lottery prospect in this years draft. Still just 19, Collins won’t turn 20 until late September….which means that despite being a sophomore, he is very close in age to many of the more well known players at the top of draft boards.

    Collins measurements are not typical for for a higher draft pick at his position, as he has shorter arms than many of the elite PF/C. He measured at 6’9 ½, but with just 6’11 ¼ arms, which had me and others I assume fooled a bit, as I assumed from tape he’d be taller and longer. A wiry 225lbs, like many 19 year old bigs he will need to add some weight and strength ultimately to succeed at a high level. His hops are no problem, as he measured in at 37 ½ inches in the max vertical. Training with former UCLA standout and trainer extraordinaire Don MaClean, Collins has been a very popular man these last few weeks, as his name has popped up all over the NBA map in workouts all over the country. Collins merits further discussion by us about pick #18, so let’s put him in the examine room down below.



    As mentioned above, if you are a scout who puts high value on numbers and analytics, then you likely have Collins ranked very, very high. Collins scored 19.2 PPG last year in just 26.6 minutes played, a very high scoring rate. He did that by being an extraordinary finisher around the rim (69%+ from there), by shooting a solid 74.5% FT on a high number of attempts, and by averaging 9.8 RPG. He was the first Demon Deacon since Tim Duncan to get 600 points and 300 rebounds in the same season. He had 12 straight 20 point games. He lit up opponents like Duke, when he torched Jayson Tatum and Harry Files for 31 pts and 15 rebounds. Lastly, if you like John Hollinger’s “PER” stat, Collins led the country in that number.

    When you talk about production, Collins delivered it offensively and on the glass.



    But high production doesn’t always translate to the NBA. I think in this case you have to really take a careful look at the “how” and “why” of Collins, and see if his strengths will carry over. Those strengths, to me anyway, are clear to see on tape.

    First, Collins is a big time rim runner. Collins runs the floor in a straight line like a gazelle…..especially if there is a basket to be had. He takes big, long strides and covers ground quickly, and more impressively to me has a very large catch radius, meaning he can catch the ball on the run even if it isn’t totally on target. Collins can adjust and contort his body in air, and has the hands and balance to corral the ball, then finish through contact. In fact, Collins seems to relish contact, seek it out even, so he can go eat at the line. Wake Forest was one of the best teams in the country at fouling out opponents last year, and Collins is a main reason why.
    As a ballscreener, Collins gives you a legitimate roll/dive man in the middle of the floor, and has decent range to about 12-15 feet for a short roll/face up pop game after a screen. Mainly though you want him rolling to the rim for lobs, as his love for points and big time hands make him a great candidate for lobs. Even better, because his jumper isn’t really a thought in his mind, he is a little better than average screener, and occasionally really lays the wood to ballhandlers who aren’t prepared for his physicality. On top of that, he sprints hard to most screens, has the dexterity to move his feet last second and change the screen angles, and since he loves to get the ball so much, he will normally explode out of the screen quickly and roll hard, instead of just kind of floating/coasting after a screen like some bigs do.

    As a post player, Collins has been highly productive, and he clearly has been well taught by his developmental coaches all along the process, and especially by Danny Manning, who is considered a premier big man coach in the college game. Collins I think is the best post player in the country at showing a target to the post feeder, and getting his numbers around to the passer to get himself open. Collins does work early, taking advantage of defensive post player mistakes, establishing position well, sealing guys who fall asleep or play him “even” in the post. Before the catch, Collins is a much better than average post player, especially for this time and era of basketball.

    Now after the catch, the outlook isn’t as rosy. Collins would much rather go “through” a defender or go over him, instead of putting some high level move on. Collins is very reliant on a left shoulder move when he is on the right block especially, and he has very little use of his left hand. Most of his moves are only highly effective against guys who will work in office buildings next year, so he will have to add some sophistication to his game to score against comparable athletes at the next level, especially if he ends up being a 5 man offensively, which seems pretty likely to me.



    Collins plays like an old fashioned post player, a relic from a different age. We used to call guys like him “black holes”.....because when the ball goes into him on the block, it isn’t coming out. “Thirsty” is more of a modern term now I guess, but no matter what you call it, Collins is a bucket getter in his mind, and if you throw it to him on the box, don’t expect to get it back. Not sure if it is a lack of skill or just selfishness, but either way it is bothersome to me…..just 24 assists in 2 years of college basketball for Collins is all he amassed, and quite frankly I am surprised by his tape that he had that many.

    Teams double teamed Collins a ton, and had success with it. Collins usually just tried to score anyway, or tried to make a move before it got to him. Make no mistake, he clearly played hard enough and had the skills to make it work, but I am not sure how much of that will translate. I liked him when he opened up and jabbed people off of him to shoot, but not so much when he just tried to bull his way through walls of opponents. Against a double, Collins lack of vision was a turnover waiting to happen, and when he faced up and put it on the deck, he usually still looks down at the ball and loses sight of his same colored shirts. He is some combination of an unwilling and/or awful passer. Teams will have to decide for themselves if that can be fixed with better spaced NBA offense, less double teams, and less touches in general in a smaller role with much better teammates than he had on tobacco road.

    As a jump shooter, his current range is about 12-15 feet. In fact, he took no, nada, zero, nil, zip 3 point shots last year, so he is most definitely an old fashioned type post player currently. Being a very intelligent kid though, he has no doubt been working on his longer range game in workouts, and in fact has shot the ball very well I am told all spring, especially at the combine, from long distance. Still, making jump shots with folding chairs and brooms defending you isn’t the same thing as shooting in games, so I am not overly impressed by the results I have read about with his expanding range. Form wise, I despise his spot up jumper, as he puts his left hand way too much on top of the ball for my taste, separates his hands at the release point way too far, somehow ending up with his guide hand higher than his shooting hand. It hurts my pupils, but maybe he is going to groove that into something productive eventually…...but I wouldn’t think it will be anytime soon.

    I will say this: his obvious thirst and love for the feel of a Spalding/Wilson basketball is real. It may hurt him offensively sometimes, but that love for the rock helps on the glass. Collins is a balltracker on the boards, relentless in his pursuit of both defensive and offensive caroms. Collins does most everything you want a rebounder to do. He blocks out when he has to and “sits” into the box out so he can’t get shoved under, he leaps well enough and quickly enough, and he relentlessly chases the ball like a golden retriever chases a tennis ball. He keeps balls alive by tipping them, gets rebounds both inside and outside his area, and seems to never get tired of chasing balls down. That particularly shows up on the offensive glass, where Collins had one of the single best offensive rebound rates in the country, and he did that almost all by relentless pursuit more than anything else.




    Of course, proximity has something to do with that. Not having any real range to speak of, Collins pretty much opened office hours on the low blocks or elbow areas, so he was in prime offensive rebounding real estate by design...but still, he chased them down relentlessly, and those extra possessions are valuable.

    Despite the obvious flaws, productive offensive post players who run well, screen hard, and rebound like demons are still good assets, so why isn’t he ranked higher as a player?

    One word...it starts with the letter “D”.

    Collins puts up some big guy defensive stats….he blocks his share of shots, so maybe the analytics look better for him than my scouting eye.
    I don’t think Collins doesn’t care defensively, in fact, all evidence shows that he is a high character guy who wants to do well…..but it looks like that sometimes. At best, Collins is very, very, very, very, very raw defensively. Right now, he can’t play. Most rookies will struggle with NBA defensive schemes and concepts and speed anyway, but Collins, aside from the occasional blocked shot, was about as bad as I have seen for a legitimate prospect on that end.

    He really doesn’t have a single defensive strongsuit that I see.

    In isolation against quicker bigs, he is bad. Collins has terrible alignment with his feet, opens up his hips, and lets guys drive by him pretty easily, and he lacks the athleticism and length to influence a shot in recovery.

    When trying to closeout, he doesn’t chop his feet, doesn’t play with urgency, doesn’t level people off, doesn’t slide his feet well, and quite frankly it looks like he hopes they do shoot it, so he can go chase the rebound.

    Ballscreens confuse him. Maybe their scheme was messy at Wake I don’t know, but I do know that good teams ballscreened Collins repeatedly. You’d think athletically he’d give at least some rim protection, but college ballhandlers just drove it and went at him at will…..I shudder to think about what good NBA attackers will do. In college, Collins just matadored drivers or fouled them, and his foul problems will be even bigger at this level.

    Maybe he might be a good help defender you ask? Nope. Collins is mostly unaware of what is happening, easy to screen, not a good communicator, loses track of things, has poor attention span, and is usually late to react to anything other than a missed shot. Collins is an asset defensively if a shot is missed….but his defense before that causes shots to go in too often. While Collins shows rebounding toughness, he clearly does NOT show any defensive toughness, savvy, or desire to this point. His expression in this picture shows more annoyance than enthusiasm for the defensive task:



    Now, he is very young, just 19 years old. And by all accounts he is a very smart, well spoken, intelligent kid off the floor. I don’t think Collins is lazy at all….no kid who rebounds like he does, sprints the floor like he does, dives for as many loose balls as he does, can be called lazy. But fundamentally, defensively in this college tape he is terrible. And NBA offenses are faster, better skilled, and more sophisticated than ever before…..he will need some major coaching up on defense, even more than most draftees will.

    Some franchises and some coaches think defense is much easier to teach than offensive skills are…..Larry Bird even spoke about his belief of that in prior years. If you are someone who buys into that way of thinking and that you’ll take a natural scorer and make him a passable defender, then you likely like Collins more than I do. Those “offensive” first teams may have it right…….but as for me, I’d pass. It isn’t so much that I don’t think his defense can improve (clearly, some experience and added weight plus better defensive coaching can help him), but I am not in love with his offensive game as much as others are either. I see the potential and I see the reasoning, but I am just not there. He looks like a guy who gives you ice cream for dinner…..it sounds good, but all those empty calories just give you a growling stomach and headache before bedtime.

    One offensive minded team who could take him I think is Portland at pick #15, who has multiple picks and can take a shot on his upside. The Blazers are a team that clearly favors offense, and maybe they’ll value his advanced low post game. He wouldn’t see many double teams in their “flow” offense either, so that would help him. Brooklyn or the Lakers also make sense to me, as they have the time to bring him along slowly and give him court time now, where winning isn’t a huge priority for them yet. And like alot of kids, San Antonio’s developmental machine would help him too, as Chip Engalland could fix his jumper and expand his range, and the rest of their team could teach him how to play. Ultimately though I think he ends up a Blazer at the end of the night, and I kind of think he might have a promise from them anyway. Just a hunch.

    Basically, I think the kid has alot of naturally ability, but just doesn’t really know how to play yet. I do believe he has a chance to be pretty good someday just because he is smart and plays hard mostly, but he has a long way to go and is going to be on the G-League shuttle for at least this year, and maybe more.

    Indiana can do better, especially when you consider the very awkward fit next to Myles Turner. Indiana passes in my judgment even if he gets to us.

    NBA comparable: Chris Wilcox, JJ Hickson

    As always, the above is just my opinion. Time will tell how accurate this ends up, and I have certainly been wrong before. Feel free to discuss!

    Tbird


  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

    JJ Hickson? Hard pass on Collins, hard pass.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

      . . . NBA comparable: Chris Wilcox, JJ Hickson
      I liked Wilcox and thought Hickson was the dumbest player in the league. Since Myles is a 5, it doesn't make much sense to draft another one, given the desperate need for another wing.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

        Originally posted by imawhat View Post
        JJ Hickson? Hard pass on Collins, hard pass.
        remember when JJ Hickson was the road block that kept the Cavs from getting a (good) Amare Stoudemire?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

          The Pacers may think otherwise as they are bringing him back for a second workout against Giles. He has a Clint Capella type of game. Although, I hope they swing for the fences and take a hard look at Giles.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

            Black hole and type of game that doesn't always translate to the NBA? Reminds me of a certain #50 who used to play for the Pacers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

              Originally posted by Handoverfist View Post
              Black hole and type of game that doesn't always translate to the NBA? Reminds me of a certain #50 who used to play for the Pacers.
              Yeah that review really gave me Psycho T vibes, still think he can be decent but not the top choice at 18 I don't think.
              "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

              ----------------- Reggie Miller

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

                I want some tbird head coach break downs. NCAA, NBA, whichever. guys with careers like Eric Musselman's, who by all accounts is a solid person far as I know, fascinate me. dude's a really good coach but every couple years it's on to the next gig.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

                  Originally posted by eldubious View Post
                  The Pacers may think otherwise as they are bringing him back for a second workout against Giles. He has a Clint Capella type of game. Although, I hope they swing for the fences and take a hard look at Giles.
                  Still the first workout for Collins, I think? He was originally scheduled for an earlier workout (with the TJ Leaf group) but cancelled. This seems to be a resked.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

                    Still waiting on that Harry Giles analysis
                    Pacers fan since April 9th 2004 - New Jersey 80 Indiana 90.
                    Been to 42 Pacers games since November 2017.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

                      I want a Jarrett Allen scouting report.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis#7: John Collins

                        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                        Indiana can do better, especially when you consider the very awkward fit next to Myles Turner. Indiana passes in my judgment even if he gets to us.
                        In a basketball universe according to Grimp where only offense exists - Collins would appear to be a great pairing with Myles, especially if his passing eye would develop a bit.

                        Based on this post, they would also form one of the worst defensive big man duos all-time. Unable to stop anyone anywhere (bruisers, skill players, speed, hops, inside or on perimeter)

                        PAAASSSSSSS!!!!!!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X