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 #8: Donovan Mitchell

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

  • Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

    The countdown begins in earnest now for the 2017 NBA draft as we reach Saturday, and teams all over the league are finalizing their boards and going over different trade scenarios, plus trying to decipher what others in the league are leaning towards doing. Amidst that intrigue, today we put the game of Louisville guard Donovan Mitchell under high definition. In previous editions, we have examined Bam Adebayo, T.J. Leaf, OG Anunoby, Semi Ojeleye, Luke Kennard, Derrick White, and John Collins. You can find those profiles elsewhere on Pacersdigest, and ones from previous years either on PD or out in the internet universe.



    Donovan Mitchell, who wears #45 in honor of Michael Jordan’s last number, is a freak athlete even among NBA players. Measuring in at 6’3 with a monstrous 6’10 wingspan, the kid they call “Spider” stood out among the very best in athletic testing at the NBA combine. Mitchell scored the best time in the sprint since 2008, with the 4th best max vertical of 40.5 inches and a no step vertical of 36.5 inches. Add to that his sculpted body of 211lbs with low body fat and you can see why I along with others think he has perhaps the most NBA body in the draft. No projection here for Mitchell…..from a physical standpoint he can play right now. Many props of course for the his college coach Rick Pitino, who emphasizes the physical profile of his players to an almost obsessive level. Pitino forced Mitchell to lose 15 pounds after his freshman year at Louisville, and you see the resulting increase in his athletic prowess easily on tape this year.

    Born 9/7/1996, Mitchell actually was on a much different career path in high school. Nicole and Donovan Mitchell Sr had ideas of their son playing in the major leagues, as baseball was young Donovan’s best sport as a youth. Mitchell Sr himself played 7 years as a minor leaguer, and still works today for the New York Mets front office. But a severe infield crash between shortstop Mitchell and his own catcher on a windblown infield pop-up injured both players, and forced Mitchell to miss the summer AAU basketball season, when he soon realized how much he missed the game when it was taken away from him.

    The family made the the key decision after that crash that directly led us to where we are today, which was to send Donovan to the elite basketball prep school, Brewster Academy. The New Hampshire school recruits throughout the northeast, and won back to back mythical high school national championships while Mitchell was there. That exposure nationally got attention for the hyper-athletic guard from the best programs in the country, and eventually Pitino won a recruiting battle with Villanova and brought Mitchell to Louisville.

    Mitchell was highly productive in his sophomore year for the Cardinals, playing in big time games in circus atmospheres against the nation’s best. He averaged 15.6 ppg, 4.9 rpg, and 2.7 assists per game, all while shooting a very good 81% from the foul line and knocking down 35% of his shots from long distance. His real calling card was defensively, as he ranks as a first team all ACC defensive player. Still just 20 years old, Mitchell has a nice combination of track record and potential to dream on for evaluators, scouts, and front offices around the league. How do I see him as a player? Let’s find out down below…...



    First and foremost for me is his defensive potential, so that is where I begin.
    In a time where freak point guards are all over the place, guys like Mitchell are the natural evolution to what teams need, namely a fellow athletic unicorn to help contain and guard the best of the best. Mitchell looks and plays like he was designed in a lab by a mad scientist defensive coach.

    You want length? Mitchell has it in spades. At 6’10 wingspan, shooting over the top of Mitchell is a major hindrance for opposing guards. You want quick twitch? In addition to his length, Mitchell has freak ability to not just jump big time high off 2 feet, but he is bouncy enough to stop quickly out of his slide and rise quickly to contest shots. You want quick hands and anticipation? Mitchell has it. He can get steals both on and off the ball, and he has been taught how to use his hands and move at a maximum efficiency with his body by Coach Pitino and his developmental staff.

    I love how Mitchell moves his feet on the ball and pressures people with marginal handles without fouling or getting off balance. Hand placement is so critical in how well a person can slide, and Mitchell has been well taught. He keeps his head over his feet, which keeps his body in line and allows him the biomechanical freedom to move his body. Mitchell will do as good a job as anyone at staying in front of even the best ballhandlers. If you don’t have a dynamic point guard like a John Wall, or Steph Curry, or Kyrie Irving, or Damon Lilliard, then the next best thing is to have someone who can defend those guys, and cut those teams offensive plans off at the head.

    Having the athleticism to be a big time defender is only half the battle though. You have to have the toughness, desire, and cajones to take the kind of challenge every night, along with the intelligence and conditioning to do the job. Mitchell has all of that with room to spare. I wrote “JYD” all over my notes watching him, which is my scouting short hand for “Junkyard Dog”. Mitchell is relentless, smart, and tougher than a $2 steak defensively. He will give you a big time point guard defender, plus give you the strength and length to let him guard all perimeter positions without much trouble. You’ll be able to match him up, and play whatever defensive schemes you as a coach choose. He will be a premium guard defender, I don’t think there is any question in anyone’s mind about that.



    Offensively, the skills and the fit aren’t nearly as clear, and the potential upside he possesses on that side of the floor is murky.

    I think generally speaking he is a point guard defensively, but isn’t exactly a point guard offensively to my eye. He isn’t “pure” by any means, and if you play him as a point guard only without any mitigating factors to help him in personnel or scheme, likely your team’s offense won’t quite cut it at a championship level.

    Yet, he does have some powers as a ballhandler you can use. Out of the ballscreen game, I think he will shoot much to well to just go under all screens, as he has a nice hard dribble pull up jump shot. He elevates and has the length that you can’t bother his shot really, and I anticipate that he will shoot it good enough you can’t go under him. Mitchell also has the very low crossover and big dribble strides you need to split the screen/roll and get to the paint, which is problematic. What he can’t do yet though hinders him in traffic, as he can’t finish well at all with his left hand, and he can’t seem to elevate quickly off 1 foot for some reason. That is a big weakness, because it takes away a “Euro-step” move from him, and it slows him down, because he has to reign in his steps to elevate from 2 feet. That’s a problem.

    It is also a problem that he doesn’t always see open guys. I think, though I am not sure, that he “predetermines” his move and doesn’t really read the defense. I don’t think he is selfish exactly, but I do think he makes up his mind what he is going to do prior to the catch, and he does ti no matter how the defense reacts or how the offense flows from it.

    I like him much better off the ball, running around screens using his great body and speed, attacking bad closeouts, or spotting up. His 3 point percentage was a mediocre 35%, but a deeper look inside the numbers shows you he is better than that. The numbers say that on “open” shots he was one of the best shooters in the country, and examination of his shooting form along with 81% from the line show that to be true.



    Form wise, he is really, really solid, and I think he will only improve with time. I see no reason why the added distance will bother him at this level, and I project him to be a 40% 3 point shooter in time, as long as he limits himself to open, catch and shoot bombs in rhythm, created by others and not himself. When closely guarded and/or rushed, he will get his right thumb on the ball sometimes, which shows up on tape when he misses some of his jumpers in ghastly ways. But unguarded and unrushed, his form is very clean, and I suggest his future employer try to limit his looks to those open shots in rhythm, instead of hoping he creates something out of whole cloth.

    Mitchell has good footwork, getting good turn with his feet and nice alignment of the shooting elbow to the rim. His release is high and quick off the catch, and off the bounce he can use his advanced hang dribble and jab game to get to his preferred one dribble left pull up game most of the time. I think he will make the spot up shot very well, and he will be able to shake a bad defender or bad closeout at a good level too. I don’t love him as a ballhandler in a ballscreen situation, but he can do it if you play a team with a weakness on the floor in that area.

    Mitchell is fun to watch as a ballhandler after he gets a defensive rebound, but have some antacids handy. Mitchell is going to go at full speed, 100% maximum with no governor right after he gets it. He is going to make some spectacular finishes for you, and he is also going to make some headscratching decisions too. Playing with no fear like he does is both a buoy and a burden for you…..he doesn’t seem to always have a plan with the ball, and he doesn’t always seem to be able to count. Sometimes he’ll crash into 3 or 4 defenders with in disadvantage situations, and he lacks the passing chops and vision to get out of it.

    It’s better for you if he is next to a better ballhandler, instead of being your primary mover and shaker. Filling a wing he can be spectacular both as a lob finisher and as a transition draw/kick open shooter. Basically, you want Mitchell making shots, not making decisions, and that covers pretty much his entire offensive portfolio. Bring his usage down, surround him with guys and a system that fits him, and he can be effective. He can’t be the straw that stirs your drink offensively if your team plans on being any good. But in a more limited role with better space, he can be really good for you, especially as a knockdown shooter in a fast paced game.



    Lastly, we need to talk about this kid’s intangibles.

    Playing hard is a skill….you’ve heard me say that a million times. Playing with enthusiasm is contagious, and so is swagger and confidence and toughness. This kid has “it”....an intangible quality that makes your team better. A kid who was the leader in other sports, a captain, a kid who was a leader in his high school student government, and a kid who plays at a 100 mph all the time. He doesn’t always play smart….we know that. He forces things some, he settles for too many bad shots, can’t finish with his left hand, etc. He isn’t going to be a star, but he will be a high level defender who helps your team win.

    So, in summary, what do we have in Donovan Mitchell?

    I think we have a pitbull defender who can switch and guard all the perimeter spots, and who can lockdown point guards especially. I think we have a limited (to a degree) but very useful secondary ballhandler who also can make open 3 point shots and run the floor, plus who is a high character guy with premium athleticism, and who is young enough to have higher upside and potential than even I predict he will have. I think he is mainly a point guard defender, but you can put him on the opponents’ best guard if matchups dictate that, but offensively you’d rather have him play off someone else, ideally someone bigger who can be your main creator.

    Add that up, if he reaches all of that, and you have an especially interesting and very key player for upper echelon teams, if he develops and gets in the right situation.



    Indiana currently isn’t a perfect natural fit for him at #18, but if it were me, depending on who else might have fallen, I’d take him and sort it out later, and try and use him the way I’ve described. I think he can help you win from jump street, and adding him to a perimeter defense with Paul George would be a big time asset for Indiana. The defensive fit is clear, the offensive fit here not so much….but I’d likely take him anyway. He is too good, too young, with too much upside and a high floor/character to pass.

    It might actually benefit him, long term, to go to a worse team than we are, as they could NOT follow my advice above, and instead could put the ball in his hands and see if he could actually become a full time point guard. I don’t think that would work, but it might. In the very least, you could let him expand his game and skills in a non pressure way, and see if he can become something even better than I imagine him being.

    Or, other teams might like just putting him in slowly, developing him in spots exactly where he can help them when today, so he can experience success earlier and a winning culture. I can easily see how Mitchell could be a trade up target for a team in the back of the 1st round to move up and get, and I’d be trying to do that if I were a playoff team, especially in the west.

    However, despite me having him rated high on our Pacers-centric board, I can see a possibility he would slip to us. The fit for him isn’t clean everywhere, and I do think most teams view him as sort of a combo guard….if you think he is an eventual lead offensive guard, someone likely takes him very high and we don’t have to worry about it. I don’t see that, but I can see how you would.

    I can see the Knicks liking him at #8, and viewing him as a triangle type point guard….I think that is his draft ceiling. But I hope for him he doesn’t end up there, as I think the Knicks are a dumpster fire.

    He’d be scary at Milwaukee at #17, next to Giannis, I think that is his floor...but if I am wrong and they pass, he will potentially be a Pacer. This is an outcome we can root for I think.

    But ultimately I think he fits very well, both culturally, and skill wise, in South Beach, and I suspect he ends up playing for the Miami Heat, next to Goran Dragic, and being creatively used by Eric Spoelstra and Pat Riley. I think the Heat take him at pick #14.

    Certainly, the potential fall of Donovan Mitchell is something for us to watch out for on Thursday. The Pacers are doing their due diligence we know on Mitchell, who worked out for us recently and reportedly has played well in every city he plays in and with everyone he interviews with. His name will be one who is a big topic on the board I think as we finish the run up to June 22 and for days beyond.

    NBA comparable: A better shooting Marcus Smart, a bigger Patrick Beverly, Avery Bradley.

    As always, the above is just my opinion only. Feel free to disagree in the comments below!

    Tbird


  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

    . . . A better shooting Marcus Smart, a bigger Patrick Beverly, Avery Bradley.
    I could live with a better shooting Marcus Smart or a bigger Patrick Beverly. Actually, the thought of a bigger Patrick Beverly is a scary good thing to think about.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

      I strongly suspect we'd have to trade up to select Mitchell -- maybe with Sacramento for their second 1st-round pick (#10)? -- but it terms of fit, Tbird, I'm curious to know your thoughts on pairing Mitchell with Lance Stephenson (switching roles between offense & defense?). Mitchell with Jeff Teague, less so: too similar to what we've been enduring.


      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

        Small combo guards are such a non-starter for me, although I do like the sounds of his potential defense/intangibles. Seems like a winning player, but don't love his fit with the Pacers roster. Kinda think he's gone when we pick anyway.
        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

        - ilive4sports

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

          I love all 3 of the comparables. He definitely shores up one of our bigger weaknesses, and we can always use winning players. I wonder how he'd fit next to Lance.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

            This is who I've wanted all alone. He's gonna be good

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

              Originally posted by DrFife View Post
              I strongly suspect we'd have to trade up to select Mitchell -- maybe with Sacramento for their second 1st-round pick (#10)? -- but it terms of fit, Tbird, I'm curious to know your thoughts on pairing Mitchell with Lance Stephenson (switching roles between offense & defense?). Mitchell with Jeff Teague, less so: too similar to what we've been enduring.
              Stephenson and Mitchell pairing in the backcourt would be interesting at least....kind of overlapping skills though, not a great fit. I'd try it though, just to test it out.

              Try this "what if" on for size: what if we played stretches with Paul George at the point offensively? Could you get creative with a lineup of offensively Paul George at the 1, Donovan Mitchell, Myles Turner, and 3/D shooters with some size? I'm not advocating that exactly, but I'm open to it. Indiana needs to think outside the box a little to compete with the best with a limited roster. One way to hide Myles Turner's lack of rebounding prowess is to be supersized at every position.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                This is the guy I hope the Pacers grab. But we will see.

                Great write up

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                  I see Damian Lillard in Mitchell's game. I can see New York taking him @ 8

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    This is the guy I hope the Pacers grab. But we will see.

                    Great write up
                    He does have a fair bit of George Hill like qualities, doesn't he?

                    Id be shocked if he drops, but he's one of those guys you could pop into the rotation right away.

                    Love his heart.


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                      Off the Ball Defensive Guard that is undersized that many here on the forum likes? Yeah....we're not going to draft him if he falls to the Pacers at 18.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                        He sort of fits the description of the type of player that Pritchard is looking for. I expect that he'll rise higher on draft day.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                          I'd be thrilled to get Mitchell. I think he'd fit well with Lance, and could play between Teague and PG thanks to his length and defense. I'd be in favor of trading up if necessary.
                          It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                            I think he's a star player in the making and some of those negatives will be worked out. I don't see a chance of him being available at 18...more likely he's gone when teams 10-12 probably try and trade down/out. The Knicks are a sneaky possibility at 8.
                            "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


                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #8: Donovan Mitchell

                              Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                              Try this "what if" on for size: what if we played stretches with Paul George at the point offensively? Could you get creative with a lineup of offensively Paul George at the 1, Donovan Mitchell, Myles Turner, and 3/D shooters with some size? I'm not advocating that exactly, but I'm open to it. Indiana needs to think outside the box a little to compete with the best with a limited roster. One way to hide Myles Turner's lack of rebounding prowess is to be supersized at every position.
                              This fits right into a thread I posted several weeks ago where I wondered about running an "inverted offense" to (a) take advantage of our bigs' shooting abilities, and (b) to possibly take advantage of using bigger guards to post up underneath.

                              I'm uneasy about our likely choices at #18: too limited, too raw, too injured. I look forward to the draft as much as anyone, but this year I'm rather hoping we trade up, trade down or trade out. In Pritch I trust!


                              "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                              - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X