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 draft analysis: Brandon Rush

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

  • Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

    My NBA draft threads march on today with discussion of Kansas sharpshooter Brandon Rush.

    Much of the discussion of this years potential draftees is about whether they can be stars in the league despite having ideal size or measurables for their projected roles. There are many "tweeners" in this draft: Bigs who lack ideal height (Kevin Love), shooting guards in point guard bodies (Eric Gordon, Jerryd Bayless, Russell Westbrook), and point guards smaller than the norm (DJ Augustin) There are no such worries about Brandon Rush from Kansas, who is a prototypical off the ball "wing" player who will be a very good fit for most NBA teams, having excellent size and body build for long term success in the league.

    Rush is probably, from what I have seen, the best player in the draft at playing away from the ball offensively. He does many things from a fundamental perspective at a very advanced level, such as setting up cuts by faking away from the direction he is going to go to, and by cutting off screens low to the ground, so he is in shooting position with his knees flexed before he actually recieves the ball. In addition, Rush has a very impressive high release on his jump shot, which will help him be able to pretty much get his jump shot off whenever he wants at the NBA level. He wasn't asked to "read" screens often in the system at Kansas, but I believe his pedigree and skill levels tell you will do that well if asked.

    Rush has some clear strengths and weaknesses offensively, and it will be important for him to have two things happen to him: First, he needs to be drafted by a coach who likes players who play in a traditional way. What I mean by that is he will need to play for a coach who likes a one guard front offense, so they can align Rush off of the ball along the baseline, because Rush is a pure "catch and shoot" type of player I think at the NBA level. This team that drafts him will need to be a team that runs plays for him, because he won't be all that creative in breaking people down off the dribble on his own, he will need screens all over the court to get opportunities to get his silky smooth jumper off.

    Secondly, in order to play the way I described in the last paragraph, the team that drafts Rush will get the most out of him if they have a slasher/defender type at the opposite wing playing beside him, and a superior ballhandler playing the point guard for them. There is a perfect fit in the draft for Rush, one that is very very obvious to me as an analyst of the draft and as a viewer, and I will name that team later in the article.

    Rush has all the measurables size wise you'd like in a player at his position. He is long, lanky, clever as a defender, is efficient in his steps, showing very good technical footwork on both ends. Rush isn't a great defender by any means, but he is not a liability from a physical standpoint. He will be good enough that he won't need to be "hidden" in a team's defensive scheme, and will more than make up for any defensive issues he has by being a very good offensive player, in the right system.

    Rush is not a good ballhandler, either in making decisions for others or in trying to create for himself. While I project Rush as being very quick and clever without the ball, with it in his hands trying to make a dribble move he gets slower and more predictable. He will project to be a very good foul shooter in the league, but likely will struggle early on to get many actual attempts, because he will be somewhat easy to guard off the dribble, thereby not getting his defenders off balance enough to get past them.

    So far, Rush hasn't shown much of a post game, but I project that eventually he may have this as a possible weapon down the road. I love Rush's high release, and someday when stronger and more experienced, he will be able to develop I believe a very good "fadeaway" in the low post, again assuming that he gets in the right system.

    I project Rush to be, if he is drafted by the right team and the right coach, to potentially be a better pro player than many drafted ahead of him. He is in my view severly underrated at this point in time for a variety of factors, but first and foremost among them being that he did not fully show a lot of burst and "quick twitch" ability last year at Kansas, due to the fact that he had a serious knee injury, tearing his ACL, a few months prior to the season. I suspect that the view of Rush some people have may be influenced by that fact too much, and that they need to realize that it often takes a player into his second season after that surgery to feel fully confident and strengthened again, and to regain his explosiveness.

    Rush played on a national championship team at Kansas under the classy Bill Self, putting together reasonably good stats although playing in an offensive system that didn't fully use his skills coming off baseline screens, or off of pindowns, "zipper" cuts, "philly cuts", or any of the other creative ways a halfcourt oriented coach will create for him to score. At Kansas in their Henry Iba inspired high/low pattern offense, Rush was often only a spot up shooter, or when he was screened for off their standard "staggered double" screens, it was very predictable where he was going.......in their scheme, he wasn't allowed to read the screen and "fade" he was required to continue his cut to meet the ball at the top of the circle.

    Rush will be a better pro player than a collegian in my opinion, and if in the right system I project him to be on the all rookie team after next season. I think he projects as a slightly above average defender for his position, a slightly above average rebounder, and a superior off the ball offensive force. He won't be a great screener, but he will likely learn that skill in order to have another way to get himself open. Not yet, but someday if he works at it he will be a force to have the ball in his hands in screen/roll situations.

    There are a few of other speciality situations Rush can really help a team with that will be fully realized in the NBA. One, he will be one of the better three point shooters in the league, enabling you to play him when you are trailing late. If you have good ballhandlers with him you'll want him in the game when you are ahead late, because I think he can be a fine foul shooter for you. A smart coach can use him as a zone buster against teams who sag alot (like Indiana). A smart coach will use him as a primary post feeder, because he will have the size to feed the post well, and teams won't be able to lay off of him at all. Lastly, in speciality situations he will be able to take the ball out of bounds for you, and be a threat to come back in bounds and recieve a screen for a late game catch and shoot on the side out of bounds, or recieve screens after stepping in from inbounding the ball underneath.

    A huge amount of postitves for Rush I think, with just the limitations as a ballhandler as a weakness. But, he has to fit in to the right system to fully maximize his talents. Fortunately for the career of Brandon Rush, I think the team he will fit best with is in position to draft him, and I am projecting them to do so. Which franchise do I mean?

    I expect the Charlotte Bobcats to surprise the world and select Rush at nine, creating a buzz on television and on this draft board on draft night. I have not found anyone so far that I have felt is a perfect "fit" for a team so far in my studies as I do Rush with the Bobcats. Larry Brown is the perfect coach philosophically for Rush, as he can use him like has used Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton in the past. The Bobcats I think may be the most improved team in the league next season I think, because their pieces will "fit" together much better than expected under Brown, and Rush fills a need for them in the Brown system they don't currently have. LB will coach up Ray Felton, Gerald Wallace will defend the opponents best player and be a great piece next to Rush, who will be someone Brown can run plays for in the half court, and someone to help feed the ball inside to their bigs.

    Rush is such an obvious pick in my opinion for Charlotte, it almost makes me wonder what I am seeing that everyone else is missing so far.

    Now, I do not think Rush would be a good fit for Indiana, as they are currently constituted. Brown and his system is a perfect fit for Rush, but Jim O'Briens lack of screens and half court play won't fully feature the slinky wing man way other teams could and would. If you factor that in to your thinking, along with the obvious fact that Indiana already has Dunleavy and Granger (a somewhat similar player to Rush, but not exactly), and you realize that there is little logic to Indiana picking him at #11, barring a deal I can't envision yet. If for some reason that I don't anticipate Rush is available at #11, the debate will begin all over the league, this board, and in my own head about taking the best player available vs one who "fits your scheme" and needs. It will be a tough call for Larry Bird and David Morway if that occurs, but if we did select Rush I have no doubt he at least has the requisite skills and talents and size to be an extremely good player in the league. I just like him better in a different system.....I bet Rick Carlisle would love him almost as much as I am projecting Larry Brown will.

    Keeping in my tradition in this series, I need to find a player from the 80's that I can compare Rush to. Rush projects to me to be a super good and efficient offensive player, who probably will be the ideal 3rd best playr on a championship team. Because I really like Rush and think he will have a very good and long NBA career, I'll compare him to one of my favorite players from the 80's: Ricky Pierce.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird

  • #2
    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

    Well, then, if Charlotte takes him, we'll probably be the only ones outside of their war room not surprised.

    Interesting read.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

      Good post per usual.

      I don't remember. Have you said who you think would be the best pick for the Pacers and O'b's system?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

        I like Rush and his overall game. But I must have missed the
        Kansas games where he showed the kind of consitency as
        a shooter req'd to warrant setting up an NBA offense designed
        to run him off of multiple screens to get him looks. From what
        I've seen (and I've seen him play numerous times), he's pretty
        streaky and isn't in the same realm as a shooter as either
        Miller or Hamilton coming out of college.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

          Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
          I expect the Charlotte Bobcats to surprise the world and select Rush at nine, creating a buzz on television and on this draft board on draft night. I have not found anyone so far that I have felt is a perfect "fit" for a team so far in my studies as I do Rush with the Bobcats. Larry Brown is the perfect coach philosophically for Rush, as he can use him like has used Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton in the past. The Bobcats I think may be the most improved team in the league next season I think, because their pieces will "fit" together much better than expected under Brown, and Rush fills a need for them in the Brown system they don't currently have. LB will coach up Ray Felton, Gerald Wallace will defend the opponents best player and be a great piece next to Rush, who will be someone Brown can run plays for in the half court, and someone to help feed the ball inside to their bigs.

          Rush is such an obvious pick in my opinion for Charlotte, it almost makes me wonder what I am seeing that everyone else is missing so far.
          A good analysis of Rush as a player, but I don't see this part happening.

          First of all, if the Bobs were that interested in Rush, they'd probably trade down with someone else, confident that they'd still be able to get their man at a lower pick. I don't see a team within the next 7-8 (at least) picks after Charlotte that would seriously consider taking Rush. If Jordan has any skill as a GM, he'd trade down and still get his man.

          Second, I don't see how you can play Rush, JRich and Wallace at the same time. You probably wouldn't. You'd have Rush coming off the bench and subbing in for one of those two guys. After all those concusions and injuries from playing against bigger guys, Gerald Wallace has said he's done with playing the 4.

          Regardless, I don't forsee Brandon Rush being the #9 overall pick in this draft.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

            Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
            I like Rush and his overall game. But I must have missed the
            Kansas games where he showed the kind of consitency as
            a shooter req'd to warrant setting up an NBA offense designed
            to run him off of multiple screens to get him looks. From what
            I've seen (and I've seen him play numerous times), he's pretty
            streaky and isn't in the same realm as a shooter as either
            Miller or Hamilton coming out of college.

            I think this is an excellent point to bring up, and I tried to explain my thinking about this in the original thread, but may not have done it well.

            The "high/low" offense that Bill Self has utilized in his stops at Illinois, Kansas, and other jobs along the way is a derivitive of the scheme that Hank Iba ran in the 50's, 60's and 70's. It is a patterned offense that got out of vogue for a long time until Self brought it back into prominence. Mike Davis used it at Indiana and now UAB, and it used in several colleges and high schools, particularly in the south.

            It emphasizes patterned movement and cuts based upon where the ball is passed to, not on how the defense is playing. It's primary advantage is that it relies on spacing the floor to create room for the post players to operate, and it requires little decision making from the point guard position. If I had a telestrator, I'd be glad to help draw some of it for you. It is played out of a 1-2-2 set to begin with, with the wings not getting any screens to get open to initiate the offense.

            Anyway, my reasoning about the potential of Rush is in large measure a projection by me of just how much this particular scheme held back the natural offensive skills of Rush. It basically took away what he does best I think, which is come off quick screens and catch and shoot, and made him more of a spot up shooter reacting to how the opposing team defended the low post players, who naturally thrive in a system such as the "Iba" system Coach Self and others use.

            There is nothing wrong with the Iba patterned offense, after all it helped Kansas win a national title and has been successful for many years at many levels. It just doesn't utilize a shooter and cutter like Rush that well.

            Bill Self is not an "adaptive" type of coach. He doesnt change his schemes to fit his particularly personnel, he is in fact a "true believer" in the offense, so he runs the same stuff each year at each coaching stop. That's neither an indictment or an endorsement of Self, it is simply fact.

            Therefore, Rush took worse shots in college than he will take in the NBA, if he is selected by the right team. He still shot a pretty high percentage, which to me is very impressive when I factor in that because his movements were so predictable and easy to prepare for, he often took guarded shots.

            If Rush ends up on the right team and is used the right way, I firmly believe he will be one of the best picks in this draft. If he ends up on the wrong team (and I think Indiana is one of the wrong teams) I think he ends up being fairly mediocre instead of the very good player he has the potential to be.

            Rush is just a very very good shooter, with the size and high release needed to maintain that skill for a very long time.

            I compared him to Ricky Pierce in the original thread.....perhaps Byron Scott might have been a good comparison as well.

            Of course, I could be totally and completely wrong. That's what makes this art instead of science, and is what makes the draft so much fun to talk about.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

              Originally posted by d_c View Post
              A good analysis of Rush as a player, but I don't see this part happening.

              First of all, if the Bobs were that interested in Rush, they'd probably trade down with someone else, confident that they'd still be able to get their man at a lower pick. I don't see a team within the next 7-8 (at least) picks after Charlotte that would seriously consider taking Rush. If Jordan has any skill as a GM, he'd trade down and still get his man.

              Second, I don't see how you can play Rush, JRich and Wallace at the same time. You probably wouldn't. You'd have Rush coming off the bench and subbing in for one of those two guys. After all those concusions and injuries from playing against bigger guys, Gerald Wallace has said he's done with playing the 4.

              Regardless, I don't forsee Brandon Rush being the #9 overall pick in this draft.

              You could be right about the draft strategy of Charlotte being able to trade down and still get Rush. The only problem being someone else would have to want to trade up, and I am not sure that will be all that easy.

              I may be misreading Coach Brown a little bit, but I suspect that he will want to move Jason Richardson, as he doesn't appear to be that good of a fit to me there with Brown as head coach. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bobcats try and package Richardson and Morrison together along with others and get a player(s) who Brown would like better. Some sort of deal with the Bobcats and Blazers makes some sense possibly, although I am just wildly speculating.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                I may be misreading Coach Brown a little bit, but I suspect that he will want to move Jason Richardson, as he doesn't appear to be that good of a fit to me there with Brown as head coach. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bobcats try and package Richardson and Morrison together along with others and get a player(s) who Brown would like better. Some sort of deal with the Bobcats and Blazers makes some sense possibly, although I am just wildly speculating.
                Brandon Roy is going to be the starting SG in Portland for a long time, so the last thing they need is a guy like JRich unless they want the league's most expensive backup SG.

                You'd also need to find a team willing to give something in return for JRich while also taking on his final 3 years and $40M. I don't see Portland being interested in Richardson.

                I wouldn't rule out Brown eventually wanting to trade JRich, but it won't happen over the summer. His salary makes him difficult to move and it's hard for me to see the Bobs supplanting their best player from last year for a rookie who most teams probably won't even consider taking in the lottery. I don't see Brown being in favor of that. Not now anyways.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                  Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                  I think this is an excellent point to bring up, and I tried to explain my thinking about this in the original thread, but may not have done it well.

                  The "high/low" offense that Bill Self has utilized in his stops at Illinois, Kansas, and other jobs along the way is a derivitive of the scheme that Hank Iba ran in the 50's, 60's and 70's. It is a patterned offense that got out of vogue for a long time until Self brought it back into prominence. Mike Davis used it at Indiana and now UAB, and it used in several colleges and high schools, particularly in the south.

                  It emphasizes patterned movement and cuts based upon where the ball is passed to, not on how the defense is playing. It's primary advantage is that it relies on spacing the floor to create room for the post players to operate, and it requires little decision making from the point guard position. If I had a telestrator, I'd be glad to help draw some of it for you. It is played out of a 1-2-2 set to begin with, with the wings not getting any screens to get open to initiate the offense.

                  Anyway, my reasoning about the potential of Rush is in large measure a projection by me of just how much this particular scheme held back the natural offensive skills of Rush. It basically took away what he does best I think, which is come off quick screens and catch and shoot, and made him more of a spot up shooter reacting to how the opposing team defended the low post players, who naturally thrive in a system such as the "Iba" system Coach Self and others use.

                  There is nothing wrong with the Iba patterned offense, after all it helped Kansas win a national title and has been successful for many years at many levels. It just doesn't utilize a shooter and cutter like Rush that well.

                  Bill Self is not an "adaptive" type of coach. He doesnt change his schemes to fit his particularly personnel, he is in fact a "true believer" in the offense, so he runs the same stuff each year at each coaching stop. That's neither an indictment or an endorsement of Self, it is simply fact.

                  Therefore, Rush took worse shots in college than he will take in the NBA, if he is selected by the right team. He still shot a pretty high percentage, which to me is very impressive when I factor in that because his movements were so predictable and easy to prepare for, he often took guarded shots.

                  If Rush ends up on the right team and is used the right way, I firmly believe he will be one of the best picks in this draft. If he ends up on the wrong team (and I think Indiana is one of the wrong teams) I think he ends up being fairly mediocre instead of the very good player he has the potential to be.

                  Rush is just a very very good shooter, with the size and high release needed to maintain that skill for a very long time.

                  I compared him to Ricky Pierce in the original thread.....perhaps Byron Scott might have been a good comparison as well.

                  Of course, I could be totally and completely wrong. That's what makes this art instead of science, and is what makes the draft so much fun to talk about.
                  I'm relatively new to PD, and I've read some of your stuff, but...and I mean this sincerely...this is one of the best posts I've ever seen here, on RealGM, anywhere.

                  It's clear and concise. It addresses the question directly, and, perhaps most impressively, displays incredible depth of knowledge and understanding without being the slightest bit condescending. There is also not one shred of defensiveness or hostility, rather, it shows respect for the questioner that is too rarely exhibited in an internet forum. Just as importantly, it conveys the knowledge to the reader in a way that can be easily understood and digested.

                  My opinion isn't worth anything more than, well, really anything, but I felt compelled to comment. I just wish that I could provide even a fraction of this kind of content and post. I hope all will forgive my gushing, but I now really understand how you've earned the respect I've seen shown to you on this board.

                  Well done, sir.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                    Tbird... i am glad to hear someone else thinking this guy is going to be a good pro. i have been all over his nuts for most of this draft talk. i would love to draft this guy and get rid of dunleavy, or at least have dun as a sixth man. i think that is what dunleavy is in this league because of his poor defense. i would love to slot rush as our sg and granger as our sf, even though as you stated they both have similar games.
                    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                      Originally posted by count55 View Post
                      I'm relatively new to PD, and I've read some of your stuff, but...and I mean this sincerely...this is one of the best posts I've ever seen here, on RealGM, anywhere.

                      It's clear and concise. It addresses the question directly, and, perhaps most impressively, displays incredible depth of knowledge and understanding without being the slightest bit condescending. There is also not one shred of defensiveness or hostility, rather, it shows respect for the questioner that is too rarely exhibited in an internet forum. Just as importantly, it conveys the knowledge to the reader in a way that can be easily understood and digested.

                      My opinion isn't worth anything more than, well, really anything, but I felt compelled to comment. I just wish that I could provide even a fraction of this kind of content and post. I hope all will forgive my gushing, but I now really understand how you've earned the respect I've seen shown to you on this board.

                      Well done, sir.
                      We all have that sense of awe at his posts
                      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                        Brandon Rush will certainly be a better pro than whoever we take at 11.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          Brandon Rush will certainly be a better pro than whoever we take at 11.
                          I'm still in "somebody will drop" mode, but it's getting a little worrisome.

                          Great job, as always, tbird. I'd love to hear your take on CDR.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                            Will he really be any better than his brother? Or put another way, if Kareem got into the right situation could he excel the way brandon might? They seem to have similar skill sets.

                            As far as the pacers are concerned, if we are drafting a wing guy he needs to either have a very high ceiling, or be a defensive slasher type, cause we have plenty of shooters. So I definatly agree with the sentiment that he would be a bad fit here.
                            "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


                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Brandon Rush

                              I'm thinking sixth or seventh man on a championship caliber team. So that means he's not for us...
                              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X