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

Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

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

  • Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...x?name=simmons



    the draft part of the article:

    1. Oden: Earned the spot Monday night.



    2. Durant: Stuck at No. 2 barring a miraculous string of workouts that include his making 24-of-25 halfcourt shots and dunking from the 3-point line. By the way, I'm not ruling this out.



    3. Brewer: A mortal lock to become a quality 3-guard.



    4. Brandan Wright, Al Horford, Roy Hibbert (tie): Depends on the team picking in this spot. If they want an inside scorer who's more of a finished product, they'd grab Horford. If they had time to wait on Wright's UPPPPPPPPPPPPP-side, they'd go with him. If they already had a competitive team and needed a center, they'd reach for Hibbert. Right now, these are the next three picks in some order. Somebody in the 4-6 range will need a center and talk themselves into Hibbert. Guaranteed.



    7. Mike Conley Jr.: The best point guard if he comes out. By a mile. I'd be shocked if one of the first seven lottery teams didn't need a potential All-Star point guard.



    8. Noah: Dropping him here for one reason: I found out from a reader Monday that Noah turned 22 last February. Twenty-two!?!?!?!?!? How did I miss this???? For instance, Wright is only 19, Horford and Hibbert are both 20 ... is it safe to say that Wright, Horford and Hibbert will be better two years from now than they are now? Absolutely. Since Noah hasn't outplayed any of those guys, he HAS to be ranked behind them. With that said, I continue to believe that he'll be a good pro and an asset to any team ... even if his best move last night was hogging 30 inexplicable seconds of postgame camera time from CBS's director so he could find his mother.



    9. Yi Jianlian: He's the 7-footer from China billed by Chad Ford as "the best Chinese prospect since Yao." Wait, so he's better than Sun Ming Ming? Are we sure? Anyway, I haven't seen this guy play and won't pretend to know anything about him ... but he'd have to blow away teams in the workouts to crack that top eight.



    10. Julian Wright: Took a major hit with consecutive no-shows in Kansas' last two games. Does he have a little too much Tim Thomas in him? Possibly. If he's smart, he'll go back to school.



    11. Ty Lawson: Based on the premise that two teams in the top 13 will need a point guard, even one who's not quite ready for the pros. You could call this the Ray Felton Corollary. If he's smart, he'll go back to school.



    (Notice a recurring theme here?)



    12. Jeff Green: We covered this Monday: When somebody's major draft-day gimmick is, "I come through when it matters," and then he disappears in a Final Four game ... well, that's not good. I'm trying to look at this objectively because he was one of my favorite college players, so here's the overriding question: The best comparison for Green is Danny Granger -- they have similar games and do similar things. Well, check out Granger's stats for an underachieving Pacers team this season. Would you spend a top-10 pick on him in a loaded draft? Probably not.



    13. Al Thornton, Acie Law IV (tie): I'd bet on these two guys making it over everyone else in the draft, with the possible exception of Chase Budinger (another guy who needs one more year in college) and Brandon Rush (the sleeper of Round 1).



    So there you go. Yes, that's a list in progress.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

  • #2
    Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

    I find myself getting a Bill Simmons column. I now hate me this morning.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

      8. Noah: Dropping him here for one reason: I found out from a reader Monday that Noah turned 22 last February. Twenty-two!?!?!?!?!? How did I miss this???? For instance, Wright is only 19, Horford and Hibbert are both 20 ... is it safe to say that Wright, Horford and Hibbert will be better two years from now than they are now? Absolutely. Since Noah hasn't outplayed any of those guys, he HAS to be ranked behind them. With that said, I continue to believe that he'll be a good pro and an asset to any team ... even if his best move last night was hogging 30 inexplicable seconds of postgame camera time from CBS's director so he could find his mother.

      9. Yi Jianlian: He's the 7-footer from China billed by Chad Ford as "the best Chinese prospect since Yao." Wait, so he's better than Sun Ming Ming? Are we sure? Anyway, I haven't seen this guy play and won't pretend to know anything about him ... but he'd have to blow away teams in the workouts to crack that top eight.

      10. Julian Wright: Took a major hit with consecutive no-shows in Kansas' last two games. Does he have a little too much Tim Thomas in him? Possibly. If he's smart, he'll go back to school.
      Boy, that just screams "tank", doesn't it?

      Yeesh. Another reason why'd I'd just as soon see ATL take their pick from the Pacers this year and get it over with.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        Boy, that just screams "tank", doesn't it?

        Yeesh. Another reason why'd I'd just as soon see ATL take their pick from the Pacers this year and get it over with.
        exactly what i was thinking while reading this.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Boy, that just screams "tank", doesn't it?

          Yeesh. Another reason why'd I'd just as soon see ATL take their pick from the Pacers this year and get it over with.
          I wouldn't feel bad about taking Law at #10.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

            I'm amazed some of you are taking Bill Simmons word as gospel. The guys a proven know-nothing when it comes to the NBA and his opinion shouldn't ever be taken serious.


            Here's my top-14 list, a much better list.

            1. Greg Oden - Nothing needs to be said. A dominant defender and rebounder with a blossoming offensive game. He's a championship cornerstone and is a lock to go #1.

            2. Kevin Durant - The best college freshman ever. Hard to believe this guy is a lock to go #2 but no one's passing up Oden. He can do just about everything and then some.

            3. Mike Conley - This man must become a Pacer. Sure he can't shoot, but the rest of his game is nearly flawless. He can get to the rim anytime he pleases and is the best passer to come along in years. He's also a solid defender and a good kid who's a local product, that would definitely please the fans, something management has to have at the top of their priorities. Right now he's Tony Parker with 5x the passing ability. If he can learn to shoot in the coming few years, he's the second coming of Chris Paul.

            4. Brandan Wright - The latest in the line of finesse power forwards that includes KG, JO, and Chris Bosh. Easily the best pro prospect on UNC. He needs to add a ton of weight as he's one of the skiiniest players you'll ever see, but his offense is fantastic. His freshman season was about as good as Chris Bosh's, only he did it on a much more stacked team meaning numbers were harder to come by.

            5. Hasheem Thabeet - It's funny, everyones so busy gushing over Hibbert they're overlooking the best young center in college basketball not named Oden. This guys 7'3" 265 lb. and moves like a SF. Don't believe me, watch this.. Here's an amazing number - 3.8. Thats the number of blocks Thabeet averages per game, in only 24 minutes, as an 18 year old freshmen. Unreal. His rebounding is good but not great, as expected for an 18 year old, and his offense is very raw. But he has all the makings of the next Dikembe Mutombo.

            6. Al Horford - He's a much better NBA prospect than Noah or Brewer, but I still don't see anything special in his game. He has some solid skills but he doesn't have the athletic ability to become an All-Star caliber power forward. Then again, I thought the same about Carlos Boozer, who has a very similar game, and he not only had an All-Star caliber season but an MVP caliber season before his injuries. He'll probably go top-5.

            7. Yi Jianlian - I, just like about 99.9999999% of you, know absolutely nothing about this guy outside of what I've read. Still, Yao has been a big success and if this guy is comparable in talent, he's well worth a lotto pick. I've heard him described as KGesque so he'll be a fun prospect to watch over time.

            8. Tywon Lawson - This guys not far behind Conley in terms of NBA potential. If you wanna shoot for the stars at PG and Mike is gone, Tywon is your man. His offense is rough and he's not as good a defender as Conley, but his passing is just as special.

            9. Acie Law - The most NBA ready guard in this draft. He's a lights out shooter and the most clutch player in college basketball, but his passing skills are only average. Unlikely he'll ever be a big time assist producer in the NBA but a 20 point scorer isn't out of the question. Chauncey Billups-ish.

            10. Al Thornton - Maybe the most underrated player in this draft. I've seen prople refer to him as a tweener but I'm 99% sure he's an NBA small forward. Just a great athlete with a great body (no homo) and great scoring instincts. He'll have to improve his ball handling and passing, but he can and will. He's a much better prospect than Jeff Green or Corey Brewer, and I think he'll end up going before either of them unless his age (23) scares GMs off. You know how these guys are, if you've got hair on your balls you're considered old.

            11. Corey Brewer - a bust waiting to happen. Very unskilled - can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass, can't rebound. All he can do is defend due to his great length and athleticism. He's a shorter Hakim Warrick. Anyone who drafts him in the lottery is gonan soon regret it.

            12. Roy Hibbert - I have no idea where all the Hibbert jock riding has come from lately. The guys 7'2" 280, which means hes bigger than 99% of all college players, yet can't even average 13 & 7 a game? He's fat, lazy, slow, and buttery soft. Is he really any better than David Harrison? I doubt it.

            13. Joakim Noah - Bust city. A nice hustle player, nothing more. He reminds me of a more energetic, slightly taller Jared Jeffries. Funny, people were wondering if he's a small forward or a power forward, the exact same thing they wondered about Jeffries coming out of IU. There's no way he goes top-5, NBA GM's aren't that stupid.

            14. Jeff Green - There's absolutely nothing special about this guy. Nothing. He's average across the board. Funny, nimrod Simmons compared him to granger but Granger was light years ahead of Green in college in practically every way. I don't think he'll go lottery unless a team is desperate for a small forward.

            This is just the guys who will likely go lottery, not my list of top players.

            And for the record, Julian Wright is a lock to stay in school another year, hence why he wasn't listed.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

              [quote=Y2J;564111]


              11. Corey Brewer - a bust waiting to happen. Very unskilled - can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass, can't rebound. All he can do is defend due to his great length and athleticism. He's a shorter Hakim Warrick. Anyone who drafts him in the lottery is gonan soon regret it.

              quote]

              Seriously how many florida games have you watched all season?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                Conley may crack the top ten but there is no way he goes number three.
                There are too many big men of quality who will be picked first.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                  Originally posted by owl View Post
                  Conley may crack the top ten but there is no way he goes number three.
                  There are too many big men of quality who will be picked first.
                  I didn't say Conley would be picked #3.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                    [quote=mike_D;564122]
                    Originally posted by Y2J View Post


                    11. Corey Brewer - a bust waiting to happen. Very unskilled - can't shoot, can't dribble, can't pass, can't rebound. All he can do is defend due to his great length and athleticism. He's a shorter Hakim Warrick. Anyone who drafts him in the lottery is gonan soon regret it.

                    quote]

                    Seriously how many florida games have you watched all season?
                    Every single one of them. Brewer can use his athleticism to be an above average college player, but he lacks the skills to be anything special in the NBA.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                      Originally posted by Y2J View Post
                      I'm amazed some of you are taking Bill Simmons word as gospel. The guys a proven know-nothing when it comes to the NBA and his opinion shouldn't ever be taken serious.
                      Sorry, I usually read him on espn page 2.

                      Your writing must be on page 1.

                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                        Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                        Sorry, I usually read him on espn page 2.

                        Your writing must be on page 1.


                        He's a comedy writer.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                          [quote=Y2J;564127]
                          Originally posted by mike_D View Post

                          Every single one of them. Brewer can use his athleticism to be an above average college player, but he lacks the skills to be anything special in the NBA.

                          Just the fact you are saying hes only an above average college player tells me you haven't seen him play nearly enough to determine how good he will be on the next level

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            I wouldn't feel bad about taking Law at #10.
                            I would. Big reach.

                            Now, if you can trade 9-10 to get 17-18 and a 2nd round pick this year, then you get Law and a flier. I'd consider that. Maybe the Clips would like to come up to 9, you go to 17 and 47 and get Law and Strawberry, maybe Marko Tomas instead (Bird loves Euros).



                            Just remember how extremely lethal Travis Best was in college (a 20 ppg player with a 38% 3pt shot his senior year even, very quick too). Now think about how limited he was in the NBA. Tinsley made him expendable to put it in perspective (thus the trade the next year).

                            You never can tell, I'll admit that, but then that's my point anyway. I really don't see anything about Law that says "can't miss" that would warrant a top 10 pick (which is why he's slotted at 20 right now). I see "could be solid". That describes just about the entire first round of every draft.

                            Conley to me is a safer pick and even he has the downside of maybe just being a Watson or someone like that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Sports Guy: NBA draft and the top 14 "safest bets"

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              I would. Big reach.

                              Now, if you can trade 9-10 to get 17-18 and a 2nd round pick this year, then you get Law and a flier. I'd consider that. Maybe the Clips would like to come up to 9, you go to 17 and 47 and get Law and Strawberry, maybe Marko Tomas instead (Bird loves Euros).



                              Just remember how extremely lethal Travis Best was in college (a 20 ppg player with a 38% 3pt shot his senior year even, very quick too). Now think about how limited he was in the NBA. Tinsley made him expendable to put it in perspective (thus the trade the next year).

                              You never can tell, I'll admit that, but then that's my point anyway. I really don't see anything about Law that says "can't miss" that would warrant a top 10 pick (which is why he's slotted at 20 right now). I see "could be solid". That describes just about the entire first round of every draft.

                              Conley to me is a safer pick and even he has the downside of maybe just being a Watson or someone like that.
                              Sorry, but if you're moving from #9 to #17, you'd better get a hell of a lot more out of it then a mid-round 2nd. An additional 1st, no later than #20, is the bare minimum.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X