Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

  1. #1

    Default Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    This is the first of my 2009 draft analysis threads, giving a detailed breakdown of players who may be available at or near the Pacers draft slot at #13.

    I begin this series today with a look at the national champion point guard from North Carolina, Ty Lawson. Lawson is a player who it was rumored was highly thought of last draft season by the Pacers front office, before pulling out of the draft because of a DUI charge. Lawson rebounded from that mistake by being the central driving force to lead his Tar Heels to a national championship last march.

    And make no mistake, Lawson did LEAD them to the title. It is remarkable really on film when you look at how dominant UNC was with him on the floor, and how much of a dropoff they experienced when he was either on the bench or injured. Lawson was clearly the most valuable player on a very talented roster coached by the affable Roy Williams.

    Like most players in this draft not named Blake Griffin, Lawson has some very specific strengths and some glaring question marks and weaknesses that need to be thought about strongly. Whatever team/coach/system Lawson ends up in will likely play a determining factor in his long term NBA success.

    Lawson's strengths are numerous. The most standout thing to see on film is just his outstanding straightline quickness with the basketball. His game was a perfect marriage with the high octane system played at UNC, where their famous running game was fueled by Lawson's ability to just fly up court with the basketball, getting UNC into scoring position quickly. Teams at the college level usually didn't dare to attempt to try to pressure Lawson at all, fearing his amazing speed dribble. I think many teams may have been remiss in not trying full court pressure against him, because Lawson doesn't show a great deal of "wiggle" in his dribble, although since he was rarely pressured, he really had no need to. Even when some teams did attempt to rattle him with backcourt pressure, he basically was so much quicker than his opponents at the college level that he was able to manuever through them.

    His breakneck speed getting up the floor with the dribble is interesting to think about, because it isn't clear to me that that is a skill that will always translate to the NBA. It would be useless to get the ball up that quickly for instance, if none of your teammates bother to run with you. You would have to wonder about Lawson in a half court controlled type system, as that style would clearly hinder him and not be a good fit for his best skill. It is also not clear how in the course of an 82 game schedule how much of this particular talent would simply fade away due to fatigue and extra minutes.

    Unlike many players in this draft, Lawson is a true point guard with a pass first mentality. He clearly would rather drive and pass the ball to someone else that be forced to finish a play himself. However, at the college level he was able to score in traffic, but again, whether he can do that in the NBA would be a question mark due to his lack of ideal size. One thing in his favor that I really like is that I thought Lawson showed really good strength and balance after contact, showing good upperbody coordination and toughness when bumped on a drive, even while in mid air. Like most young guards, Lawson does leave his feet a little too often, but while aggravating that isn't a fatal flaw. I will say that Lawson is obviously short at barely if at all 6 feet, and he also from what I can tell doesnt make up for that by being a dynamic leaper either. He lacks the freakish athleticism of a Rajon Rondo, for example.

    His ability to stay balanced and be strong with the basketball enables him to get to the line very well, and gives him a chance to finish the play too. That is a skill that will translate very well I think, and portends well for his future as a double figure scorer in the NBA. Lawson is one of the strongest guards upperbody wise in this draft, along with being the quickest with the basketball by a good margin.

    Lawson shoots fairly well off the dribble, although my guess would be that is a function more of his ballhandling skill than shooting prowess. His speed and quickness enable him to get more open than other average guards, enabling him to make a better percentage of shots....it won't be that he is a better "shooter" per se, just that he will get himself free a bit easier than most.

    Lawson will need to put in serious work to improve his jump shot and gain NBA three point range. Some players dedicate themselves to that skill and get at least somewhat better at it, and some players come into the league and do not. Almost everyone that guards Lawson will try to back off him and cut off his drive, so he will need to at least be able to hit enough of a percentage from the perimeter to make teams guard him closer. Due to his lack of height and awkward release, Lawson will need to be able to have room and time to be accurate, but his speed will likely get him that time on most nights. He'll be a player that teams will want to double off of but won't be able to, because if he catches a return pass from the post and is unguarded he will be into the paint before your defense can rotate.

    In the screen/roll environment in the NBA, teams will definitely need a strategy to try to contain him. The obvious best one early in his career will be to have his man go "under" the screen, and force him to make the wide open jumper. If he gets the ability to make that happen, he might be almost unguardable in this area, as most bigs won't be able to step out on him and prevent him from turning the corner, and once he does that almost no one in basketball will be able to contain his dribble.

    As a decision maker, so far he appears to be pretty good, although his team at UNC and their style of play kept him out of "difficult decision" situations. He makes great decisions while driving into the paint or in transition, but is a much weaker decision maker in a half court controlled set. As a point guard, he rarely was asked to survey the floor from the top and "choose a side and take it to the action", which is a critical skill in my opinion for a point guard to have. Generally, Lawson created easy decisions for himself, and Coach Williams did a great job of not getting in the way too often by slowing him down or overcoaching him.

    Speaking of Coach Williams, the freedom to play he gives players within the UNC controlled break system has got to make him a blast to play for. I'm not sure we'd be talking about Lawson so much if he hadn't played for Williams, a soft touch who clearly got the most out of Lawson's skills. Players play free and easy for Williams, and it is easy to see why the nation's best high school players gravitate to him.

    Having said that, the soft touch Williams displays does give me pause when evaluating UNC players. A person cannot be sure how a player from UNC will respond in losing streaks, or when a coach really chews and rides them....as that will be a new experience for them. UNC rarely calls set plays from the bench, so a more half court oriented team will have to be cautious when trying to decide how a UNC player will fit their style.

    Williams also substitutes more often than any coach in college basketball. I think that is a great thing in general, and its exactly what I would do if I were him, playing a breakneck offensive style with a roster full of All Americans. As good as Lawson was in college, he only played around just over 2/3's of the possessions. Even more noticable, he played in short spurts, often playing in much shorter intervals than he will asked to at the NBA level. Perhaps a small thing, perhaps not. Lawson wasn't asked to play through fatigue, play through tough stretches, or play through failure or mistakes for very long.

    In short, you have to at least wonder about his ability to play through being winded, through being heckled by veteran opponents or hostile crowds, or playing for a tough coach who is hard on rookies. Lawson will not be a finished product in these areas when he gets to training camp.

    Basically, I really like Lawson as an offensive player....but now we need to talk defense.

    UNC under Roy Williams is generally a team that outscores you, not a team that really buckles down. Lawson shows some good defensive traits, such as the ability to get steals and read passing lanes, but sometimes his effort and concentration just isn't there. He should/could be a really good ball pressure point guard defensively, and sometimes in college he was, but not consistently. Again, his athleticism was just too much for college guards to handle, but that won't be the case in the NBA....he'll be a good athlete among many.

    To be an all-star or difference maker, Lawson will need to be coached up to be at least a good and consistent defender that you can count on. Right now he can get steals and convert them better into transition opportunities better than most, but he also is just as likely to drift off and lose his man due to lack of concentration. Lawson shows much better on the ball than off, and in a defensive system based on help more than ball pressure that could be a problem.

    A smart coach would use Lawson as a big time pressure defender I think, as I suspect he has the lateral quickness to handle a role like that. I will say though that I don't think his lateral quickness is as impressive as you would think....it isn't all world like I project his quickness with the dribble to be. Like Roy Williams did, I think it would be smart for an NBA coach to limit his minutes somewhat in his first year or 2 just to let him get acclimated into the NBA.

    Lawson will basically just need to get tougher to be a good defender....more concentration, more coaching, more effort.....the skills and talent are there.

    He will always struggle defensively in the low post, as his lack of height will be an issue there. However, his upperbody strength will negate that to a degree as he will be strong in the chest and be able to be physical with people. I wouldn't demerit a point guard for not being a good post defender too much anyway.

    But, I would demerit a defender for Lawson's biggest defensive weakness I see, which is overall "lazy arms". Lawson has a major defensive tendency to play with his arms dropped and hands not being active. This hurts his ability to slide his feet, and is devastating to his ability to contest shots. Not being a great leaper along with being short already, you simply can't be a decent defensive player playing with your hands and arms that low. Lawson doesn't contest shots well, he just lets guys shoot over him, often then leaking out to recieve an outlet pass after a make or a miss in the UNC fast break/early offense system.

    That won't work for me, and it will need to be fixed by someone at the NBA level. Again, I view that as an effort, concentration, and coaching issue, not one of talent. Can't do anything with his height, and can do little with his leaping ability. But you can certainly improve his conditioning and technique, and he will need to be individually coached up at this big time at the NBA level.

    Because he will never rate as a superior NBA defensive player (his ceiling is likely average to slightly above at max) to ever be a player on a championship team he will need to be on a team with a great defensive system and coaching, and ideally be with one or 2 superior individual defenders. Offensively, Lawson will be good enough to win big with, but defensively will be the question, making where he fits in to be very important to him for early success. In the perfect world he will need a bigger backcourt partner, and possibly a defensive oriented back up point guard as a caddy early in his career.

    Even though he has negatives, you certainly in my view cannot ignore the talent and championship pedigree of Ty Lawson. To me he rates as a definite NBA starter early in his career, and a fine offensive player that you can win with big if he improves a little defensively.

    Is he a great fit for the Pacers currently in our present system???? That is debateable, but by the time we are contenders again for a title/consistent playoff runs our system likely won't be the same anyway. Lawson will be most effective with the ball in his hands with the freedom to create and use his alarming speed, not as effective in a "passing game" motion system as we run currently. He wouldn't necessarily be a defensive upgrade currently over what we have either, particularly playing in the sagging defensive scheme we use now. However, that will likely change as our roster and coaching staff evolves anyway, so you would need to think big picture when evaluating Lawson for the Pacers future.

    Coming up with NBA comparables for Lawson isn't that difficult to me. I think he projects as slightly below Tony Parker, closer to his fellow UNC brethren Raymond Felton. Felton by the way I predict will be a great free agent pickup for somebody this off season.....he has gotten significantly tougher and better playing a year for Larry Brown, a great teacher of point guards.

    Keeping my tradtion of the past NBA players to compare him to, the easiest and most obvious one to me is Terrell Brandon, long time point guard of the Cleveland Cavaliers.....and I see now by looking that's exactly who one of the draft web sites used as well.

    Lawson will be a very effective and good long time NBA starting point guard, and certainly should and will be a strong consideration for the Pacers at #13, especially if the Pacers have plans to move another similar player to Lawson: TJ Ford. I see Lawson long term as a slight upgrade on Ford, and in the short term would be cheaper and healthier obviously. If the Pacers do select Lawson, you can almost certainly guarantee that Ford would be on the move....those players would be somewhat redundant on the same roster I think. If we pass on Lawson, I highly doubt he gets past Philadelphia at #17, as I think the Sixers would be a strong fit for him. In fact, a deal with the Sixers and the Pacers makes some sense involving either the rights to Lawson or Ford.

    And obviously, in building a team with a future championship mentality you can't overlook Lawson's pedigree and past successes of being the best and most important player on a title winning team. Lawson looks like a good long term point guard to me in the right situation....not perfect, but definitely starting quality in the very least.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 05-24-2009 at 05:41 PM.

  2. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to thunderbird1245 For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  3. #2
    Member Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,629

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Lawson will be a very effective and good long time NBA starting point guard, and certainly should and will be a strong consideration for the Pacers at #13, especially if the Pacers have plans to move another similar player to Lawson: TJ Ford.
    My reoccurring thought while reading your breakdown was "but we've already got one of these".

    Like you mentioned, I don't think we take him unless we are moving TJ Ford.

    I think our need in "interior toughness / post defense" is bigger than our need at PG.
    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

    - Jimmy Buffett

  4. #3
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,079
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    How does he compare to DJ Augustine and Acie Law?

  5. #4
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,561

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    TBird, when I read your analysis of Lawson....I think to myself that he's a "pass first, score second" version of Ford.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  6. #5
    Member owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,201

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    It seems to me that if the Pacers take Lawson and then trade TJ all you have really
    done is made a lateral move. Plus it takes time to know the point. Is Lawson significantly better than TJ?
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

  7. #6
    Lifer 2minutes twowa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Middletown, IN
    Age
    38
    Posts
    618

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    I could see the Pacers taking Lawson, signing Jack and trading Ford for a big. This way, Jack is the starter and Lawson would have no problem being a back up. I still have a feeling that TJ isn't real comfortable coming off the bench.

    Like someone said earlier, I see Lawson as a pass first score second version of TJ.

    Lawson is the only one of the 6' and under PG's that I wouldn't mind the Pacers picking at #13. I'm personally hoping that Blair falls to us.
    Last edited by 2minutes twowa; 05-25-2009 at 12:46 AM.
    Turn out the lights, this party's over!

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to 2minutes twowa For This Useful Post:


  9. #7
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    The simplest answer is drafting Lawson as the replacement to Jack, allowing him to walk this summer. This would set Lawson up to apprentice under Ford.

    This would be the cheapest solution, but I don't think it's necessarily the best short or long-term option for the Pacers. I believe they need to use the #13 to add talent, not replace it.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to count55 For This Useful Post:


  11. #8
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,079
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    If we do go for a replacement to Jack I would like Evans or Jrue. If we go for a replacement for TJ, Lawson and Jennings.

    I just think that Lawson will be the only one available.

  12. #9
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,981

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    How about Flynn though? Wouldn't he be a better fit for the Pacers? Just asking.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  13. #10

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Thanks everyone for your responses so far.

    To Major Cold: I project him to be much better than Acie Law, and probably close to the same as DJ Augustine. I think Lawson is stronger upperbody wise than Augustine, which may help him slightly long term, plus even though Lawson is small in height I think he is slightly taller than DJ, although it's close.

    To Count: I think your point is accurate, as far as it goes. But I also think that if indeed that is your plan (and if it were me, it would be because I think Ford is better than Jack as a true point guard, but lets not have that debate again) then it might be smarter to take a bigger, less similar player to Ford. However, one unintended perk to having 2 point guards of roughly the same dimunitive size would be to force Coach O'Brien to not play them together at the same time.

    To 2 minutes twowa: Your solution is the most commonly thought plan Pacers fans have I think. One idea I've thrown out the last couple of days is TJ Ford to Sacramento for Thompson (young big) and Kenny (edit: thanks cablekc!) Thomas expiring contract. Not sure what Kings fans would think of that, but they would still have 2 draft picks to fill needs and wouldnt necessarily need to draft a point guard at #4 in that case.

    To Mourning: I'll have more on Jonny Flynn at some point before the draft once I'm finished evaluating him. I have some early preliminary thoughts about him but I'm going to keep them to myself until I'm finished watching film of him. I watched Syracuse play several times this year, and took notes on Flynn as I did so, but I need to rewatch what I have to really focus in on him.
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 05-25-2009 at 01:10 PM.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to thunderbird1245 For This Useful Post:


  15. #11
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,561

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To Count: I think your point is accurate, as far as it goes. But I also think that if indeed that is your plan (and if it were me, it would be because I think Ford is better than Jack as a true point guard, but lets not have that debate again) then it might be smarter to take a bigger, less similar player to Ford. However, one unintended perk to having 2 point guards of roughly the same dimunitive size would be to force Coach O'Brien to not play them together at the same time.
    Based off of what I have read from your previous posts....I would think that you would not be in favor of getting 2 "similiar" PG since they would not "complement" each other.

    About playing 2 undersized PGs in the line-up....although I could be wrong....haven't we seen games where JO'B played both Ford and Diener together? In an effort to foster ball movement......I'm under the impression that JO'B prefers to have as many ball-handlers on the floor as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To 2 minutes twowa: Your solution is the most commonly thought plan Pacers fans have I think. One idea I've thrown out the last couple of days is TJ Ford to Sacramento for Thompson (young big) and Kurt Thomas expiring contract. Not sure what Kings fans would think of that, but they would still have 2 draft picks to fill needs and wouldnt necessarily need to draft a point guard at #4 in that case.
    I did suggest some trade of Ford to SacTown if they got Griffin....but now that they dropped to 4th, coupled with the possiblity/rumor that Rubio dropping to the 4th spot ( which I doubt would happen ) and the liklihood that the Kings would reach for Jennings / Evans / Holiday at the 4th spot.....I don't see them taking on Ford while giving up Thompson. They need the frontcourt depth.

    Unless we are able to move Ford for an expiring Contract ( like Ford for Kenny...not Kurt...Thomas+23rd pick )......I'm thinking about a Ford for Nocioni+$1mil+23rd pick trade. Nocioni has 1 more contract year....but is only owed about $1.5 mil more in guaranteed $$$ while reducing the SalaryCap hit over the next 2 seasons. I like Nocioni as an aggressive/tough backup SF/PF that can spread the floor and provide some solid Defensive help.
    Last edited by CableKC; 05-25-2009 at 12:59 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  16. #12
    Member Trophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    8,556

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by Mourning View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How about Flynn though? Wouldn't he be a better fit for the Pacers? Just asking.
    A lot of the mock drafts have us taking him. I wouldn't be surprised if we drafted him. He would make a good backup PG to Jack believing that Ford is traded. I actually like Flynn I think he would be great for us. Also Eric Maynor is a big name in mock drafts for us. He's ok. I like Flynn or Lawson better.

  17. #13
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,519

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Personally I think the Pacers are going to have to have a top flight point guard in order to be successful again. A great PG can change the entire fortunes of a team- look what Billups is doing in Denver right now.

    Ty Lawson is simply not that guy. He could be a very good backup PG- yes- and maybe he is worth taking for that role, but like many have said, we already have this type of player in TJ Ford. I think the long term prospects of TJ's health will play a big role on TPTB's outlook on Lawson. Right now, I don't think he would do a lot to help the fortunes of the team.

    If both Lawson and Henderson are available at 13, I'd keep the PG rotation we have for another year and draft Henderson, grooming him to be our sixth man of the future. Henderson gives us some things we don't really have, and Lawson is very redundant.

  18. #14
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The simplest answer is drafting Lawson as the replacement to Jack, allowing him to walk this summer. This would set Lawson up to apprentice under Ford.

    This would be the cheapest solution, but I don't think it's necessarily the best short or long-term option for the Pacers. I believe they need to use the #13 to add talent, not replace it.
    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To Count: I think your point is accurate, as far as it goes. But I also think that if indeed that is your plan (and if it were me, it would be because I think Ford is better than Jack as a true point guard, but lets not have that debate again) then it might be smarter to take a bigger, less similar player to Ford. However, one unintended perk to having 2 point guards of roughly the same dimunitive size would be to force Coach O'Brien to not play them together at the same time.
    To clarify my earlier response, I was not advocating it as a plan. It is just my belief that drafting someone like Lawson is far more likely to be indicative of the Pacers waving the white flag on re-signing Jack than anything else.

    I don't disagree that Ford is a better true PG than Jack. However, I like the package and the price on Jack better than Ford.

    I would be ok with Lawson in two instances: (1) we really felt that he was going to be the long-term answer at the point...he could really become Terrell Brandon. (2) We had a plan in place to move Ford that would fill in holes elsewhere on the roster, specifically, physical "4", defensive "2/3", or cheap versions of both.

    However, I don't think (1) is true, and I don't think (2) is a practical possibility. Therefore, I would expect (pessimistically) that drafting Lawson would basically turn out to be a trade of Lawson for Jack. I don't like that on two counts: (1) I don't think Lawson will be as good as Jack, and (2) I would not be happy about the fact that we couldn't use the #13 to add talent rather than attempt to backfill a loss.

    Reason #2 would be the most troubling, because we can't afford to waste any opportunity to move forward.

  19. #15

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To clarify my earlier response, I was not advocating it as a plan. It is just my belief that drafting someone like Lawson is far more likely to be indicative of the Pacers waving the white flag on re-signing Jack than anything else.

    I don't disagree that Ford is a better true PG than Jack. However, I like the package and the price on Jack better than Ford.

    I would be ok with Lawson in two instances: (1) we really felt that he was going to be the long-term answer at the point...he could really become Terrell Brandon. (2) We had a plan in place to move Ford that would fill in holes elsewhere on the roster, specifically, physical "4", defensive "2/3", or cheap versions of both.

    However, I don't think (1) is true, and I don't think (2) is a practical possibility. Therefore, I would expect (pessimistically) that drafting Lawson would basically turn out to be a trade of Lawson for Jack. I don't like that on two counts: (1) I don't think Lawson will be as good as Jack, and (2) I would not be happy about the fact that we couldn't use the #13 to add talent rather than attempt to backfill a loss.

    Reason #2 would be the most troubling, because we can't afford to waste any opportunity to move forward.

    No question, the Pacers choices they have to make concerning Jack and Ford, and their mutual status with the team will be the deciding factor I think in how they structure an overall draft plan.

    -They have to determine somehow an idea of what Jack is worth around the league, who their primary competition for him is, and how signing him will effect the salary structure for both 2009-10 but also 2010-11, as you have so eloquently pointed out before. You and I each have an opinion on what Jack will sign for, and for our sake I hope you are correct and I am wrong.

    -They have to along with that have to quietly shop TJ Ford and see what kind of return they can get on him. Because of the draft being deep in point guards and thin on bigs, you almost have to make a difficult "small for big" trade. While not impossible, this is somewhat problematic normally.

    -Simultaneously with that, they need to evaluate all the available point guards and determine which one they like best, if one of our two point guard are indeed going to be on the move. I'll be doing my analysis of all these guys as well, so at least this board will have lots of opinions and information about them beforehand to drive the debate.

    -If they can bring back both point guards, then they ned to try and identify a big who can play as a rotation with who we have now, or a wing player who can compliment what we already have. Depending on how my as of yet unfinished analysis continues on, their may not be a "big" available that is a perfect fit....then they have to decide to "reach" for a big or take the wing player, who might be a better prospect but is also an easier position to fill.

    No matter what, they Pacers will need to think 3 or 4 moves ahead with this draft pick....and the offseason will just begin in draft night, not end.

  20. #16
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    From both my own observations and reading this thread, I think Lawson would be an excellent fit for the Knicks. If there's any coach who's going to give Lawson a chance to flourish in the NBA, it's going to be D'Antoni. That being said, I think #8 is certainly too high for Lawson. Maybe a Pacers/Knicks trade involving a pick switch?

    All in all, I'm not sold on Lawson as a good pick for the Pacers. I don't think he represents enough long term upside that stashing him away behind Ford and Jack for a year or two (I think they'll both be back next season) makes any real sense. While improved PG play is something we'd all like, PG is not exactly a hole on the current roster. It's arguably our 2nd strongest position.

    Thanks for the analysis Tbird. I love the draft and having these reports and discussions to read only makes it more fun.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  21. #17

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    This draft is a crapshoot from pick #2 on down. My over/under on NBA starters out of the first round is 4.

    That said, I liked the determination Lawson showed in college.

  22. #18
    Member Dr. Awesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    4,247

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by 2minutes twowa View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I could see the Pacers taking Lawson, signing Jack and trading Ford for a big. This way, Jack is the starter and Lawson would have no problem being a back up. I still have a feeling that TJ isn't real comfortable coming off the bench.

    Like someone said earlier, I see Lawson as a pass first score second version of TJ.

    Lawson is the only one of the 6' and under PG's that I wouldn't mind the Pacers picking at #13. I'm personally hoping that Blair falls to us.
    Agreed completely.

  23. #19
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,885
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    This is such an anticipatory issue for our team. I think we are floating our pick to every team in the league right now. Just to get an idea of where the interest lies. I think it is so dependent on who falls that we need to figure out who has interest in whom. Therefore, we are floating the idea that we aren't happy with our PG's to generate more interest in the PG position. I think we are more interested in guys like Johnson and Blair. I think the bad mouthing of Johnson is all heresay because there is genuine interest in this guy. I had heard he was an extremely hard worker earlier in the year at Wake. He is a 22 year old sophomore. I think we would be VERY VERY remissed if we pass this guy up. He blocks shots, rebounds, and can score. He is extremely athletic and has great body control. I really think he will be good, given the right situation (isn't that the caveat for everyone though).

    From the Wake Forest Athletic Department Website:
    http://wakeforestsports.cstv.com/spo...n_james00.html

    The premium in the draft will be on Hill/Blair/Clark/Johnson this year. I think that will become evident the closer we get to the draft. This will inevitably push the PGs down and give better value on a PG later. I really think when you look at a lot of the teams between 10 and 20, almost every single team has a need for front court players. I think there will be pressure to move up and it will happen. I think the watered down PG class will provide a supply of several starters for the league, but many will drop due to the large crop of PGs available.

    As for our PG position, I think we might draft a PG if the big men are off the board before us. If that's the case, it will be unlikely that somone would want to move up. That will spell the end of the line for Deiner, Ford, and obviously Tinsley when they expire. I think we would like to draft big, but if we can't I think Count is right where we will let Jack go because we will need to spend the little money we have on a big man in free agency. We can get a very productive PG, but it will leave our roster a little lopsided.

    As a side note, my ranking of PG's in this draft:
    1. Ricky Rubio - wow potential. excellent showman. huge marketing ability. has nba range although he doesn't jump much on his jump shot (works ok for Billups) but otherwise pretty good form, much better rotation than when he was younger, unbelievable vision and passing. questionable toughness and steadiness.
    2. Tyreke Evans - wow potential. unbelievable athlete. questionable game IQ. he can make plays at the college level in a "loose system", but what will he do when going against PROFESSIONAL athletes? does he have the makeup to be as great as his talent?
    3. Eric Maynor - steady, mature decision maker. great handle. excellent court speed. very smooth. lots of long term developmental upside.
    4. Ty Lawson - love this guys heart and game. might be too short, but makes up for it in many ways.
    5. Jrue Holiday - could turn out to be the best pg in the draft if he truly knows how to work.
    6. Patrick Beverly - nobody really knows this guy, but he has an NBA body with his length. very good defender and will earn playing time for his defense. i love defense. he has developed his decision making by playing the point full time in europe.
    7. Jonny Flynn - overrated. alot of people saw syracuse go on a nice run in the big east tourney and he is being overhyped. very good for the college game, but i have serious doubts about his ability to translate to the pros. not as good as lawson imo. a lot will depend on the patience of the team that drafts him. i think he will struggle with the size in nba front courts, because he lives off of penetration.
    8. Brandon Jennings - lots of potential, but i think this kid is rushing to the nba. he would be better served staying in europe for a couple more seasons, but i think his value is there in his potential and he has to come over.
    9. Stephen Curry - excellent shooter. will be in the league for a while, but i just don't see him being the impact player that others do.
    10. Patty Mills - this guy is shorter than both flynn and lawson. great pure PG game, but HUGE question mark in his size. and i am one that hates the size excuse, but he is real short.

    There will be some excellent value as well on PG's in the second round this year to supply depth. Passing PG's: Darren Collison, AJ Price, Jeremy Pargo, Curtis Jerrells. Scoring PG's: Jeff Teague (late first), Lester Hudson, Toney Douglas, Scottie Reynolds, Tyrese Rice. I don't know much about Nando de Colo, but he seems to be high in the mocks. I think Curtis Jarrells might be the best PG in this lower group for the pro game.

    Sorry so long.
    Last edited by pacergod2; 06-02-2009 at 03:58 PM.

  24. #20
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #1: Ty Lawson

    Quote Originally Posted by pacergod2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think we are more interested in guys like Johnson and Blair. I think the bad mouthing of Johnson is all heresay because there is genuine interest in this guy. I had heard he was an extremely hard worker earlier in the year at Wake. He is a 22 year old sophomore. I think we would be VERY VERY remissed if we pass this guy up. He blocks shots, rebounds, and can score. He is extremely athletic and has great body control. I really think he will be good, given the right situation (isn't that the caveat for everyone though).
    One of the under-mentioned facets that came out at the combine measurements is that Johnson is big. He's mentioned as a tweener or undersized PF, but he was the 4th heaviest player at the combine. Only Blair, Thabeet, and Mullens were heavier. I think this is a good thing for Johnson as he doesn't appear to be carrying any extra weight.

    At 6'7" (w/o shoes) and 257, you're talking about a guy who's built like Millsap, Bass, Boozer, Artest, etc., and you're also looking at a guy who's got enough of a perimeter game to play the 3. That's pretty intriguing.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 04:46 PM
  2. Fife's 2009 season-end report
    By DrFife in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-22-2009, 01:44 PM
  3. 2009 NBA Draft, Where will we pick and who will we take?
    By FerengiMiller in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 11-28-2008, 06:14 PM
  4. Tbird draft analysis: Mario Chalmers
    By thunderbird1245 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-21-2008, 05:18 PM
  5. The PD NBA Best Pick Left in the Draft 4
    By Hicks in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 08:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •