Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

  1. #1

    Default Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    As draft night rapidly approaches, the rush is on for teams to finalize their draft boards, work out players, and try and flesh out their own trade possibilities. One of the players many teams are looking at and considering is the crafty point guard from Virginia Commonwealth, Eric Maynor.

    Maynor is flying a bit under the radar on this draft board and in draft chatter in general, as teams and scouts continue to try and quantify how his game will translate to the next level. Judging point guards is somewhat an art form anyway, so Maynor is likely one player there will be some disagreement on throughout the league, and perhaps on this board.

    I've spent some extra time getting prepared for this analysis, as I had only 2 games of his from this past season prepared to watch. Thankfully, I had some good help from a couple of friends in the coaching world who helped me get some extra film of him. For those 2 guys, who by request are remaining anonymous (but will be reading this sometime in the next few days), I say thank you!

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I want to share with you some of the things I look for when evaluating point guards in order to explain to you properly how I feel about Eric Maynor.

    1. Does he have legitimate size to play the position defensively, and if he doesn't does he have overwhelming quickness or some other attribute to offset a lack of size?

    2. Does he understand how to play the position the proper way? Does he "get it"?

    3. Is he truly a point guard, or a shooting guard in a point guards body? How does he THINK on the court?

    4. Can he fit in to different styles, and what style would best fit him?

    5. Can he give you what I call "opportunity points"? Not necessarily looking to score, but able to score when an advantage exists or the situation calls for him to do so?

    6. Does he make his teammates better, and do players like playing with him?

    I'll try to hit on those points as I continue this analysis.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Athletically, Maynor is not a physical freak of nature like a Rajon Rondo with his length and quickness, or Derrick Rose with his athleticism, or Chris Paul with his blinding speed.

    Maynor seems to have average quickness, straightline speed, mediocre reach, and pedestrian leaping ability. He doesn't appear to me to be a guy who is going to overwhelm anyone in a workout situation, and I can see where teams would think he has a lack of extreme upside. In fact, I think that is exactly right, likely Eric Maynor will not be a top 5 NBA point guard in his career, due to some athletic limitations.

    This doesn't mean he can't play an athletic game however. It just means he isn't a candidate for XMen like some of the truly stud specimens playing the position currently. He will be somewhere between slightly above average athletically overall to right at the median of all the NBA point guards currently playing.

    The one concern I do have with him is his slight build. Weighing in at 165lbs or so is about 15 too few for him to successfully play in the league long term at, so a team will need to fill him out some with a nutritionists and diet probably. In this case playing at a small school like VCU hurts him a bit, as he wasn't exposed to all the opportunities for stuff like that the way a player from North Carolina or Kentucky would be.

    But athletically, I think it is clear that Maynor hits the prerequisites in being able to play the game from a physical and athletic standpoint.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Analyzing a point guard is more art than science, particularly when you add in the circumstances that Maynor played under at VCU, playing basically by himself against good teams. VCU didn't have much talent to work with, yet still managed to win 20 plus games and make the NCAA field, largely due to Maynor.

    Maynor largely stood out to me on film with his ability to already understand the nuances of playing the position. Maynor did so many things as a point guard well that coaches who really emphasize the minute details stress.

    In point guard play, "pace of play" is something you always talk to them about. Many young guards have only 2 speeds: Super fast, or walk it up. In this draft, guards like Jonny Flynn and Ty Lawson look great when the pace is furious, and they had the teammates to run with them! Lawson particularly had a bunch of weapons to choose from, with Wayne Ellington being an outstanding shooter and Tyler Hansborough being an exceptional college big man running the floor. Lawson and Flynn are extremely good when pushing the tempo, attacking the defense with their speed. But, when the game slows down, the effectiveness goes away, particularly as a true half court lead guard. Their gas pedal was always pushed to the floor.

    Usually you can somewhat teach a guard who plays too fast to play somewhat slower if you want to. But there are other guards who play too slow, walking the ball up, letting the defense (and themselves) rest. This tendency is exactly why, even though he was drafted high, that I never thought Bobby Hurley all those years ago would be a good pro. Hurley liked to walk the ball up the floor, a bad indicator of future abilities. There are others who have this tendency as well, usually a team struggles when these type players are at your helm.

    But Maynor plays exactly the way you want a point guard to play in terms of pace....he plays at varying speeds! It is so difficult to fathom how important that is to a teams overall play, but it is a crucial thing in a true lead guard, and Maynor does it naturally. He pushes the ball when it is available, slows it down when situation dictates, and seems to be able to react well to the game situations.

    It isn't so much that Maynor has quickness....in fact he is slower than some other guards in this draft with the ball.....but Maynor has "burst" with the ball....the ability to go quick in short areas to get where he needs to go. Maynor is the type of guard who doesn't blow by you, but he does beat you nevertheless. You don't see many false steps, and he plays with excellent balance. He isnt the strongest, but he is wiry and his excellent balance helps him finish plays when you don't think he will.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Maynor on film showed me some other positive attributes as an offensive point guard that I really like, and that are more rare than you think.

    One of those is that Maynor seems to understand the rhythm and flow of the game. How many times have you seen a Pacer player hit 3 or 4 shots in a row, and really begin to get in a groove, only to see our point guard take 2 or 3 quick jumpers of their own in the upcoming possessions for no good reason? A teammate getting "hot" from the field is something a player like Maynor instinctively understands and doesnt need to be taught. Maynor understands things like "we havent gone inside for three straight possessions, this time I'm going to call a set play and make sure we get it to the mismatch in the post". These are types of things I see from Maynor that I don't think yet cross the minds of some of the other more gifted athletically point guards available to be picked.

    Maynor had almost no help at VCU from teammates, but you can tell he has been coached very well. His coach at VCU, Anthony Grant, is widely considered to be one of the best in the country, and you can see some of the solid fundamentals and maturity that he helped Maynor develop.

    Maynor seems to have the ability to make very accurate passes. This may seem like a small thing, but it isnt. It isn't enough to just make a great decision on where to pass the ball, you need to deliver the ball to your teammates in rhythm, on time, and where they want it. Maynor takes that further even and is able to read his teammates cuts, and how his teammates are being defending coming off screens earlier than most, so he makes passes AWAY from the defender better than any point guard in this draft EXCEPT for Stephon Curry, who is probably even better than Maynor at this skill.

    Accurate passes are so key. Let's say you have a player spotting up and is open on the right wing, as your point guard drives to the lane. Some point guards in this draft will see where to pass, and yet lack the concentration or body control to throw it perfectly....they will throw it slightly too high or too low, messing up the rhythm of the shooter perhaps, or allowing the defender to recover that extra split second. Maynor is better at this little nuance than other point guards he is competing against, with the possible exception again of Stephon Curry.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I've profiled alot of point guards already it seems in this point guard deep draft. Many of them will be really good players either as starters or as off the bench energy types, I think that is fair to say. But ALL of Teague, Lawson, Flynn and the like will be much much better in a more uptempo system. Currently, the Pacers do play a pretty fast tempo (3rd I think last year in "pace factor", someone can correct me if I am wrong), so any of these uptempo point guards might be fine right now.

    But I am of the opinion that Larry Bird sees the game in a much more traditional way than Jim O'Brien does. I think it is likely that Larry will value a point guard who can actually play better in the HALF COURT, traditional play calling style than some of the waterbug guards. Now, Bird I assume will always want to be opportunistic to be able to run, but I suspect he will long term want us to be more "efficient" than "explosive".

    Maynor ranks high to me in his ability to play the half court game. Another great skill I see Maynor having more than many young guards is the ability to "take the ball to the action". In coaching perlance, this means having the ball in your hands, reading the entire floor, then taking the ball to the side where you have the best offensive stuff happening. Maynor isn't Mark Jackson in this (the best I've ever seen in this one skill) but he is very good at this.

    Here is an example of "taking it to the action": Your best shooter is on the baseline (Granger), and your best screener (Hibbert) is coming down the floor to his side getting ready to deliver a quick downscreen. On the other side you have Marquis Daniels cutting out gimpily to the wing area, and Jeff Foster trying to post up early.

    Obviously, you'd want your point guard to take the ball from up top and get it in a position to where he can feed Granger off a screen in rhythm. But do you realize how many guards can't think like that? In our current guards, Ford would probably drive and try to score himself, Deiner would see the play but be unable to get the ball there while being guarded tightly, and Jack would see it too late and get the ball a half a heartbeat too late to Granger.

    A guard like Maynor would see it BEFORE it happens, and read Grangers man as Granger was cutting, and deliver an accurate pass to an in rhythm shooter. And if Hibberts guy would hedge hard and leave Roy open, Maynor would see that too and deliver a strike to the big fella. Our other guards might be dribbling with their heads down, or already circling the ball back out since their first option was thwarted.

    This is true in fast breaks as well. For years, the Pacers point guards have been terrible on 3-2 fast breaks. Tinsley had no timing at all here, either keeping the ball and taking it way too deep, or more often passing the ball way too early and/or passing it to the wrong lane filler. How many times have we seen Foster or someone like him get the ball way too early, have to dribble, and end up missing the shot/charging/turning it over. Maynor seems to stop in exactly the right place in this situation, which is right at the foul line to slightly above it. He will never wow you with a great spectacular pass, but he usually will make the simplest one.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Maynor scored alot in the college game, but I don't see him as a high volume scorer in the NBA. He does have the one signature move of being able to hit the little "teardrop" in the lane. Maynor isn't a guy who gets overly deep into the paint in penetration, instead he smartly stops a few feet further than other guards in this class to keep his passing angles available to him. He lacks the blow by speed to get all the way to the basket, so he developed a very nice in between floater shot that is probably his biggest weapon to score. He also will shoot free throws pretty well.

    To be as good in the NBA as I think he might end up being, he will have to learn what a really good shot for him is and what it isn't. He already is a very smart player, so I don't see that being a problem. Maynor doesnt have text book form as a perimeter shooter, and I bet the NBA three pointer is a problem for him early in his career. His release is a bit slower than you would like, his hand position isn't ideal, and he doesn't get much elevation....he isn't going to rise up and shoot over anyone even remotely close to him.

    Having said that, I think he can develop as a shooter, especially with a team who is good at developing shooters, which we happen to be. Billy Keller seems to be a good teacher of shooting and is on staff, and many Pacer players on this roster seem to be becoming much better in this area to my eye. And I also have in my mind how much improvement Mark Jackson had as a shooter later in his career when "coached up" by Larry Legend. Clearly, to ever be an effective starter and truly maximize his potential, Maynor needs to develop as a three point shooter, and I think he likely will in time, although it isn't a sure thing.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of all the positive attributes he brings to the table, I do think a point guard like Maynor is a really good weapon to have on a team. Offensively he really helps his teammates. He plays at great rhythm, understands the game, is a leader, is vocal, and seems to be very coachable. He also has the little extra bonus of seemingly rising to the occasion in the biggest moments, and making big shots. His best signature games were in the tournament this year against UCLA, and against Duke in the tournament a couple of years ago. Maynor shows the coolness and mojo to take big shots when he has to, and is able to deliver in the bigger moments, at least he was at the college level. He didn't shrink from the moments, he shined.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I mentioned way up above that I think Maynor does have the requirements physically to play defense at this level, if he is able to put on some weight without losing quickness and speed. But let me say that I worry about Maynor as an individual defender somewhat. He clearly saved himself for offense at the college level, and at the stick like frame he has now he can be just engulfed by screens. Currently, I think he will be able to stay in front of most NBA point guards, but clearly as they do to everyone else, the elite ones will be able to score on him. Also, currently he would have a tough time muscleing up against the Chauncey Billups/Deron Williams types.

    I think eventually Maynor will develop into an average individual defender, but one who plays well within a team concept. I think he will become the type of conservative, "keep you in front" , don't gamble defender that you at least can rely on to be where he is supposed to. I of course wish he would be come a Heywoode Workman like ballhawk pressuring attack dog, but that isn't in the cards here I don't think. I don't think Maynor ever really HELPS you defensively a great deal, but I don't think he KILLS you either. His value to me is most certainly on the offensive end and in the lockerroom and huddle.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    So how does he fit with us?

    Maynor in some ways gives some flexibility to you in the future. I think he can play well in multiple systems under different coaches. I think he can play up tempo, and play even better as a half court "medium tempo" point guard. I think Maynor can play as a backup to either Ford OR Jack, as he doesn't exactly duplicate either one.....I think he fits BETTER as a back up to Jack, but it isn't a major issue either way.

    Maynor to me looks like a solid backup in years 1 and 2 perhaps, growing into a starters role at about age 24 or 25, much like Jarrett Jack has here. He isn't strong enough to play big minutes as a starter yet, and he will need some time to get adjusted to the pace/travel/jump in competition/athleticism that he will experience.

    So short term, an excellent back up who makes your team better. Long term, an excellent but limited starting point guard who may not have great highlights or big numbers, but who can really help your team win games in the regular season and into the playoffs. Eric Maynor is going to be an important player on some really good teams I think into the future, whether it be with us or elsewhere.

    Maynor makes a ton of sense for teams lacking point guards, like Philadelphia, Minnesota, Atlanta, etc. But I think it would be better for Maynor to go to a team where he can back up a really good player for year or 2 and develop his game, size, and strength. I don't think he is an immediate starter, more of a 2 year, work him in slowly type. I think Detroit is a good fit for him at #15 perhaps, and Utah would be a nice fit as well as an upgrade to caddy for Deron Williams.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    The paragraph right above that assumes the Pacers aren't taking him at #13 of course, which I do not necessarily think you can assume at this point. In fact, I'll go ahead and say that IF THE PACERS CHOOSE TO TRADE FORD somewhere and don't get a point guard back, that Maynor will very possibly be our selection. 4 year starter, solid character guy, plays more of a half court oriented game that I think Larry Bird covets, plays with a smoothness and maturity....I can definitely see Maynor being a Pacer. If the Pacers don't trade a point guard and DO bring Jack and Ford both back, then picking Maynor probably doesn't make any sense.

    In an ideal world, you would trade down just a few spots, gain a big guy/extra pick and pick Maynor slightly below our current selection. If Maynor is truly your guy, you'd need to drop no further than Chicago's selection at #16, as the teams all right below them all are likely Maynor fans.

    Some trade with our hated rival Detroit might make sense, involving players like Aaron Afflalo and Amir Johnson and the #15 in exchange for the #13 and something else. In fact, I would love a move like that.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    So who can we compare Maynor to?

    Currently playing in the NBA I think are 2 very good comparables to how I think Maynor projects long term if he pans out like I think he will.

    ANDRE MILLER is a non spectacular point guard who seems to really help his team win while not compiling giant statistics, although he is a bit better defender and a bit worse offensive player than I think Maynor will be.

    I think the best NBA comparable to Maynor's long term possibilities is:

    JAMEER NELSON. Both small school kids, without alarming athleticism. Nelson is very popular with his teammates and is an excellent offensive player. He is tough minded, heady, and smart although not supremely talented. He rode his teammates to an all star berth this year, so he is probably being overrated a tad at this point. But irregardless, he is a really good point guard who inspires his teammates to play well, who plays smart, and who scores when the opportunity presents itself. A pass first, heady, winning player.

    Maynors career path looks pretty clear to me. Effective back up early as he learns the game and gets stronger. Good NBA starter on very good teams for a few years, then a fine back up and mentor and savvy veteran as his athleticism fades in his early thirties.

    The Pacers could do a whole lot worse in this draft....Eric Maynor is going to be a very good selection for someone in the mid to late first round I think. Don't be surprised if someway somehow that Eric Maynor is a Pacer in a couple of weeks.

    .................................................. ................................................


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 06-09-2009 at 05:33 AM.

  2. The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to thunderbird1245 For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  3. #2
    Member themayhem87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    I love your post man. I have a feeling we end up taking maynor and are able to salvage some more talent like we did last year by moving down and getting our guy. Hes a tall, smart, and experienced guard that I feel we would covet in this draft. Again I love your analysis and think your contributions here are fantastic. Keep up these posts man but they are definetly appreciated and are a great read

  4. #3
    Member PR07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,963

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Maynor just seems like a winner to me. It's hard to put my finger on exactly who he reminds me of (maybe Chauncey Billups in that regard), but I think whoever drafts him is going to get a guy who can lead and really understands the nuances of the PG position.

  5. #4
    Member Taterhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,288

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Maynor has always intrigued me a great deal and I'm pretty excited to see your post on him. I know I loved what I saw in the very limited action available out west. I would be very pleased to land him in this draft.

  6. #5
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,628

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    ANDRE MILLER is a non spectacular point guard who seems to really help hsi team win while not compiling giant statistics, although he is a bit better defender and a bit worse offensive player than I think Maynor will be.
    On this one we don't agree. Maynor is a poor defender IMO and far more limited in his creativity as a playmaker for others. He doesn't see the possibilities that are out there for his teammates, he doesn't see the pending cuts, holes, places to make a pass that aren't overtly obvious.

    Not only does he not see them, he can't imagine how they could be there if only he took some action or directed others.

    Maynor has handles. Maynor has an NBA floater that he 100% can score with in an NBA game. But while he's not the chuck-tastic PG some of these guys are, I just didn't see the kinds of passes that you see out of just a single game played by T Williams. - see the Earl Clark thread for just one.

    That's my issue. If he was making at least some of those TWill passes, or even some of the passes Holliday showed in PnR situations, or some of the flair Jennings brings, then I'd be all for him. He has the potential, but he's a 4th year guy and strikes me more as a player getting by on maturity level than overall basketball awareness.

    He's learned to be pretty good with his skills, but given his competition level and age he should be much further along than that. He easily could have just dominated people by year 4.

    instead he smartly stops a few feet further than other guards in this class to keep his passing angles available to him.
    Angle, singular. He likes to dump to the corners from his tear drop point. That's his play, go right often, get to about the FT line, and if the tear drop is there let it go, otherwise kick to the corner man coming along the baseline.

    Certainly he made other plays, but to me that just blatently dominated his game and his mindset and turned me off to him in a hurry. I like his POTENTIAL more than Lawson, Flynn and maybe Mills. Between he and Teague I'm torn because Teague has more growth ahead of him and isn't so far behind him to make that seem out of reach.

    He might be one of the more reasonable guys left on the board when the Pacers pick, but I don't see how he's really even as impressive as Bayless was last year.

    but he usually will make the SAME one.
    Fixed for my view on him. 2 months in they have the book on him, deny the floater and camp on the corner dump. His man breaks out on the pass, baseline steal on the step between by the SF, throws it ahead to that PG breaking out, dunk the other way.

    He got lucky not to be challenged more, but unless he finds other plays at the next level I think he could struggle. The fact is that outside of Holliday, UCLA was a train wreck. I picked VCU to win that game in my bracket specifically because of this, and in big part because while I don't see him as a great prospect he is one of those great one on one college guys that can barely be denied his go-to shot at that level.

    That said, he had the ball in his hands at the end of that game with his team down by 1 and they went home. Shortly after that so did UCLA. Neither were random events.

    His UCLA game was not that good were it not for the FTAs he got, some of which you credit to him but some of which was also sloppy defense by a confused team.



    * this does not mean that Holliday was beyond Maynor at this point, just that Holliday was a FR who had to beg to get to play a few minutes of point while Eric was long ago handed the keys as THE man on his smaller school's team



    VCU didn't have much talent to work with, yet still managed to win 20 plus games
    People said this for Maynor, Curry and Mills. Problem is these guys all had problematic games even when playing other teams at their level, ie teams no better than them and without an NBA prospect on the other side. It's not like VCU and Davidson got nothing but Duke, UConn and Pitt every game. That actually was what Duke, UConn and Pitt had to face.

    If Maynor was all 12-18 with 13 assists vs those schools of the VCU caliber and only slipped to just okay against great teams then okay, but he had some duds against guys who won't play a lick of professional basketball. I mean UNC-Wilmington shouldn't force you into 7 of 23 and 0 for 11 from 3.

    When they played OK he was 5 for 19 with 3 assists. 10 of 26 with 3 assists vs flipping Nevada. LOTS of FGAs in his game. Lots.

    Meanwhile double digit assists TWICE in 34 games. 2 times despite a steady dose of Townson, Delaware, Hampton, et al.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-09-2009 at 01:51 AM.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Naptown_Seth For This Useful Post:


  8. #6
    Custom User Titleist
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pacer Purgatory Praying for Paul
    Posts
    3,564
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    In that I don't follow VCU at all, I am just making a guess based on TBird's post about the VCU coach. If their coach is a high quality coach at the collegiate level, wouldn't he possibly have a tendency to run a structured offense? If so, might that explain Maynor's tendency to be seemingly regimented in what he does as a player?

  9. #7

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    His "cold-bloodedness" and offense-first demeanor as well as confidence reminds me of Sam Cassell, who was a much better NBA player than a college player. People also doubted Cassell's PG skills since he shared the role in college with Bob Sura, and his size, concerns about D, and slim body build helped him slide to the bottom of round 1 for the Rockets to get him.

    I wouldn't be too disappointed with Maynor at #13
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-09-2009 at 10:06 AM.

  10. #8
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,117
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    I like Maynor, but only if we get him later and added assets with that.

    If he is the sole backup this year, he is going to struggle mightily. He is not ready to contribute right away. Maybe a Rush emergence later in the season. But not right away.

  11. #9

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    The only way I see the Pacers taking Maynor is that they have to get rid of 2 of their existing PG's. Granted Tinjury won't be here, but drafting Maynor puts Jack and Diener exactly where?

    If they draft a PG, are the Pacers trying to force Diener to opt out? What if he says no. If they draft Maynor, are they not going to re-sign Jack? If a PG if drafted, Jack re-signed, Diener doesn't opt out, and Ford isn't traded, then the Pacers are PG poor with 4 PG's. B4 anyone says anything, I know in the past the Pacers have carried 4 PG's, but the Pacers need wings and bigs to b/u those positions more than a 4th PG.

    WHAT IF, the Pacers manage to not have to buyout Tinjury and can't trade him? 5 PG's!?!? Can't see drafting another PG, unless 2 existing PG's are gone. The question is, which two. It's going to be an interesting draft, and one that Bird has to make the best make of!

    On Maynor, at the present I'm a fence rider, but never at #13. Trade back and pick up assets plus Maynor could work depending on the other assets.

  12. #10
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    I am telling you guys that Maynor SEES the game. He understands the game. Its an innate ability he has.

    He was coached by Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant. Two excellent young coaches. He has always been a mature player, even as a freshman. I have lived in Richmond for his college career. I have seen him on local television. I wouldn't scoff at the CAA as a conference. No it isn't the ACC, but those teams are capable of playing with some of the larger schools. George Mason did alright against those bigger schools a couple of years ago. They have started getting teams in as at large bids. This conference is a solid basketball conference and I trust the top tier talent coming out of this conference.

    Eric Maynor will be a very good point guard in the NBA. He fits the NBA game. It is a smarter game than what they play in the ACC. Jeff Teague will not be a good fit for the NBA. He is a scorer. That's it. He needs to become a more well rounded player and he is making a MOSTER mistake by coming out of school. He is a "shooting guard in a point guards body" to quote Tbird. Eric Maynor averaged 22 points and 6 assists on a team that RELIED on his offense. They needed him to score more than pass. He is an excellent passer. I completely disagree with Naptown in that he only can make one pass. That is completely inaccurate IMO. They had a guy by the name of Rodriguez who was literally 5'9" playing shooting guard. The guy can shoot, but he is ineffective doing much else. If the defender closes on him in the corner Rodriguez had to make a play to get the ball back to someone else. Chris Paul lives and dies on making that same pass to the corner (except theres a big difference between a 5'9" shooting guard and Peja). And you wouldn't disagree that he is a top five point guard in the NBA. Paul also relies on the alley oop pass as well. He becomes largely ineffective when his teammates don't produce. Those circumstances are eerily similar to the way that Eric Maynor plays. I would say that Paul has some of the best vision in the NBA. Chris Paul is not as tall as Eric Maynor, but is obviously stronger. I am comparing Maynor to Chris Paul in the way they see the game.

    Maynor ran a terrific pick and roll with their best front court player in Larry Sanders. Sanders has NBA athleticism, but like Maynor needs to bulk up some for the next level. They ran a terrific pick and roll together. The problem with Sanders is that he really struggled against bigger, stronger players and was completely ineffective against UCLA (which most of you saw). It made it difficult for Maynor to utilize Sanders rolling to the basket when Sanders couldn't complete his half of the play. Maynor will be able to utilize an NBA front court player in the pick and roll. I have no questions about it. He consistnetly made excellent and creative passes to hit the man rolling to the basket. He knows where to put the ball and how to utilize a correct screen.

    Maynor could be the best point guard in this draft IMO. I think if you will knock Maynor for not being strong enough, then you ABSOLUTELY must condemn Rubio twice as much for being even weaker. I think Rubio, Evans, and Holiday have more upside and are flashier. I don't care for flashy, because I see right through it. But with most players with potential, the bigger question is their work ethic. If Rubio, Evans, and Holiday work as hard as Maynor they will be better, but Maynor has all the tools to be a solid point guard in the NBA. I think with a bit more strength and NBA coaching around him, Maynor will excel and we will be looking back at a Granger-like steal in the teens of this draft. I am confident that Maynor will have a better NBA career than Lawson, Flynn, Teague, and Mills.

    PS - I have said this before, but I went to the U. of Richmond and am not being a homer in my analysis of this guy. I feel as strongly about Maynor as I did about Speights and Rush last year.

  13. #11
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    From the Pacers perspective, I think you are spot on Justin. I would hate to see us draft a PG if our roster does not change. I think our roster absolutely has to change and there needs to be a Ford for backup front court player trade this summer. And we need to figure something out with Tinsley. I pray for Tinsley for Cardinal or Blount. Absolutely positively pray for that.

    And if we are to take a serious look at Maynor, I would love to see us move down a couple spots with the frenzy there will be on Clark/Blair/Johnson and even Mullens because there will be so many PGs available. I think we would be remissed if we made the necessary roster moves to select a PG and didn't trade down a few spots to take him. I would love to see Maynor in a Pacers uniform, but I don't know that we will see it happen.

  14. #12
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,628

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by pacertom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    His "cold-bloodedness" and offense-first demeanor as well as confidence reminds me of Sam Cassell, who was a much better NBA player than a college player. People also doubted Cassell's PG skills since he shared the role in college with Bob Sura, and his size, concerns about D, and slim body build helped him slide to the bottom of round 1 for the Rockets to get him.

    I wouldn't be too disappointed with Maynor at #13
    Cassell, interesting. I could see that as an upside maybe.

    My main concern, the same one I have with AJ Price and even a tiny bit with TWill, is that some guys benefit from being the oldest kid in the gym. A kid like Holliday is playing almost at Maynor's level in his first year while Maynor is wrapping up his 4th. By my standards Maynor should be much better than Holliday if he is simply an equal talent.

    When I watch him (and Price) I get the "nice, but feels maxed already" reaction. It's just the aesthetics of his game.

    I suppose it could be that he's come to the system, but I guess my point would still be "what do you actually see from him" that makes you see this potential. I mean whatever the reason for his style, that is his style, so why would you assume some other game is just lurking underneath.

    It's not the same as a Holliday who has these flashes that seem to almost counter the restrictions he's under and suggest that more is there. Maynor just felt like the oldest kid on the playground beating up on the youngsters, though Curry felt even more that way.

  15. #13
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The only way I see the Pacers taking Maynor is that they have to get rid of 2 of their existing PG's. Granted Tinjury won't be here, but drafting Maynor puts Jack and Diener exactly where?

    If they draft a PG, are the Pacers trying to force Diener to opt out? What if he says no. If they draft Maynor, are they not going to re-sign Jack? If a PG if drafted, Jack re-signed, Diener doesn't opt out, and Ford isn't traded, then the Pacers are PG poor with 4 PG's. B4 anyone says anything, I know in the past the Pacers have carried 4 PG's, but the Pacers need wings and bigs to b/u those positions more than a 4th PG.

    WHAT IF, the Pacers manage to not have to buyout Tinjury and can't trade him? 5 PG's!?!? Can't see drafting another PG, unless 2 existing PG's are gone. The question is, which two. It's going to be an interesting draft, and one that Bird has to make the best make of!

    On Maynor, at the present I'm a fence rider, but never at #13. Trade back and pick up assets plus Maynor could work depending on the other assets.
    Of course, they could trade Ford, give Jack a 3-4yr contract, and let Diener expire... which would place Maynor in a good position to be starting PG in a couple of years, if he outplayed Jack.

    Diener has certainly not proved he's anything more than a decent backup, and my guess is that the decision to keep Ford off the bench the latter half of this year is a stronger indicator of his future here than people are acknowledging at this point.

    Jack strikes me as the only one who made the case this year for having a long term role with the team, and he's the only one that has been solidly acknowledged by the team as a whole, as having a comfortable place.
    Last edited by docpaul; 06-09-2009 at 02:04 PM.

  16. #14
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Cassell, interesting. I could see that as an upside maybe.

    My main concern, the same one I have with AJ Price and even a tiny bit with TWill, is that some guys benefit from being the oldest kid in the gym. A kid like Holliday is playing almost at Maynor's level in his first year while Maynor is wrapping up his 4th. By my standards Maynor should be much better than Holliday if he is simply an equal talent.

    When I watch him (and Price) I get the "nice, but feels maxed already" reaction. It's just the aesthetics of his game.

    I suppose it could be that he's come to the system, but I guess my point would still be "what do you actually see from him" that makes you see this potential. I mean whatever the reason for his style, that is his style, so why would you assume some other game is just lurking underneath.

    It's not the same as a Holliday who has these flashes that seem to almost counter the restrictions he's under and suggest that more is there. Maynor just felt like the oldest kid on the playground beating up on the youngsters, though Curry felt even more that way.
    Naptown... I completely understand your assessment on these "type" of players. I completely agree. I think when assessing AJ Price, you are looking at a different player than Maynor. I think Price hasn't fully recovered yet from his ACL surgery and got better as last year progressed. I don't think Price is an NBA point guard. I just don't think he has the skill set to be a starter in the league. I think he could serve a role as a backup throughout his career, but his ACL surgery took away a lot of the athleticism he relied on and he wasn't an effective player without that athleticism. He doesn't have point guard skills when it comes down to it. He has solid value as a second round though.

    I agree with your point though that the "mature" players you see can generally get by on experience much the same way that veterans in the NBA get by on maturity and gamesmanship. I like veteran role players, not rookies that will be nothing more than role players. That I believe is your sentiment and I cannot disagree. I just see something completely different in assessing Maynor than I guess you do. To each his own. I really think Holiday could be magnificent, I just really am concerned with his mental makeup. I don't know enough about that to really say he will or won't be good at the NBA level. I just hate the idea of taking 19 year olds on potential. I would love to get a talent like Evans or Holiday, but I largely have issues with their ability to become a mature NBA player. When looking at a guy like Maynor, you are seeing the other side... where is this guys athletic potential to become an NBA player?

    Many people condemn Bird/Walsh for the Shawne Williams experiment. I think it is the same rationale behind people liking Holiday and Evans. Loads of talent, but trying to project the unknown of how they will mature. The same people that want the high potential guys don't inherently assume that risk with their lack of emotional maturity. I like "safer" draft picks, as I believe Bird does as well. He wants more mature players that can grow their skills through practice and hard work, even if their upside isn't as high. Their downside isn't quite as bad as "train wreck", which is how I would describe Williams' time here.

    PS - I can hit home runs in baseball, but I choose to hit the other way and for average. Maybe that says something about me in my assessment of talent.

  17. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,440

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by pacergod2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Many people condemn Bird/Walsh for the Shawne Williams experiment. I think it is the same rationale behind people liking Holiday and Evans. Loads of talent, but trying to project the unknown of how they will mature. The same people that want the high potential guys don't inherently assume that risk with their lack of emotional maturity. I like "safer" draft picks, as I believe Bird does as well. He wants more mature players that can grow their skills through practice and hard work, even if their upside isn't as high. Their downside isn't quite as bad as "train wreck", which is how I would describe Williams' time here.

    PS - I can hit home runs in baseball, but I choose to hit the other way and for average. Maybe that says something about me in my assessment of talent.
    The Shawne Williams pick in retrospect was a #18 pick in a weak draft that didn't pan out. No big deal.

    This is what I don't understand: Everyone mentions the catastrophe of guys like Kwame and Shawne and other "unknown" quantities.

    Well, how come it's not as big of a deal when Adam Morrison is a washout? Or Shelden Williams? Or Ed O'bannon? Or Shawne Respert? Or Mateen Cleaves? Or Todd Fuller? (FYI, Fuller led the ACC in scoring when Duncan was still playing in that conference).

    When guys like Kwame bust, everyone considers it an example of why not to draft a guy straight from HS. They serve as "cautionary tales" about drafting these unproven guys. Yet when supposedly "proven" guys like Ed O'bannon bust, why does nobody consider it a cautionary tale to drafting the next 4 year college player?

    Shouldn't Ed O'bannon be every bit the example as Kwame Brown? Why the double standard?

  18. #16

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ... I'm a fence rider ... depending on the other assets.
    Doesn't that hurt?!

    J/T, J.T. I agree that Maynor could be an attractive pick -- if and only if it is concurrent with/followed by a trade (down) to adjust the roster.

    That said, however, I'm hopeful that better opportunities will present themselves. For this draft, because I don't care (much) about what the new draftee contributes next season, I'm in favor of choosing someone -- or selecting two role players a bit further down, both of whom offer at least one great strength -- who can really shine in two-to-three years.

    One of my preferred alternative wishes is to trade the #13 and Tinsley to Minnesota for their #18, #28 and Brian Cardinal's expiring. Another idea, however -- one to contrast with the idea of selecting a PG like Maynor -- would be to trade with Memphis for Mike Conley, Jr. (if the Griz truly want Mayo ... or Rubio ... to become their PG). My analysis suggests that Conley is well within a normal development curve to becoming a very good starter, and he's more athletic than any of our alternatives.
    Last edited by DrFife; 06-09-2009 at 02:50 PM.

  19. #17
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by d_c View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Shawne Williams pick in retrospect was a #18 pick in a weak draft that didn't pan out. No big deal.

    This is what I don't understand: Everyone mentions the catastrophe of guys like Kwame and Shawne and other "unknown" quantities.

    Well, how come it's not as big of a deal when Adam Morrison is a washout? Or Shelden Williams? Or Ed O'bannon? Or Shawne Respert? Or Mateen Cleaves? Or Todd Fuller? (FYI, Fuller led the ACC in scoring when Duncan was still playing in that conference).

    When guys like Kwame bust, everyone considers it an example of why not to draft a guy straight from HS. They serve as "cautionary tales" about drafting these unproven guys. Yet when supposedly "proven" guys like Ed O'bannon bust, why does nobody consider it a cautionary tale to drafting the next 4 year college player?

    Shouldn't Ed O'bannon be every bit the example as Kwame Brown? Why the double standard?
    I don't know that I am ignorant in my double standard. I think I am just considering the Pacers recent history of Shawne Williams in his Risk vs. Reward. I am not really stating a contrast in who pans out and who doesn't. Every player has an ample chance of not making it in the league. My point is that I prefer the conservative approach to the homerun approach in drafting players. I will take my chances on an older player, because there is more to see in their maturation as a player and person over someone with a few less years to go on, but who has higher POTENTIAL. I was actually happy with the pick of Williams when it happened because it was a chance at taking the most talented player on the board with a ton of upside. I understood the approach and it was a good selection. I tend to prefer a draft like last year when we took Rush and Hibbert. But it all depends on value in your draft spot and the approach you prefer.

  20. #18
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,815

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The only way I see the Pacers taking Maynor is that they have to get rid of 2 of their existing PG's. Granted Tinjury won't be here, but drafting Maynor puts Jack and Diener exactly where?

    If they draft a PG, are the Pacers trying to force Diener to opt out? What if he says no. If they draft Maynor, are they not going to re-sign Jack? If a PG if drafted, Jack re-signed, Diener doesn't opt out, and Ford isn't traded, then the Pacers are PG poor with 4 PG's. B4 anyone says anything, I know in the past the Pacers have carried 4 PG's, but the Pacers need wings and bigs to b/u those positions more than a 4th PG.

    WHAT IF, the Pacers manage to not have to buyout Tinjury and can't trade him? 5 PG's!?!? Can't see drafting another PG, unless 2 existing PG's are gone. The question is, which two. It's going to be an interesting draft, and one that Bird has to make the best make of!

    On Maynor, at the present I'm a fence rider, but never at #13. Trade back and pick up assets plus Maynor could work depending on the other assets.
    As TBird suggested, the decision to draft Maynor ( much less any PG ) is dependant on whether we keep Ford or resign Jack....if we do both...then there is no point to draft a PG.

    But assuming that is the case.....where we go with one or the other ( Ford or Jack )....we would "technically" be stuck with 4 PGs....but "essentially" be stuck with 3 PGs. Tinsley isn't going to be a factor IMHO...so he's out.

    There's no question as to who the Starter is....either Jack or Ford. The question comes down to Diener. Although I really prefer to play Diener as a backup more often then not.....it's a no-brainer what we do with him if we draft a PG.....Diener i's a 3rd String PG ( that can play 10-15 mpg ) that can fill in as a 2nd stringer ( when needed ) but isn't paid enough ( nor good enough ) for me to worry about getting him a large # of minutes. Besides, Diener will be on the books for 1 season.....a season where Diener would be sharing minutes with whatever PG that we draft ( assuming we do that ) as a backup PG. In his rookie season, whatever PG that we draft, hewouldn't have the pressure to produce as the only backup PG. In this role, he can learn from the other PGs in the lineup grooming him to be ready to take on the role full time in his Sophmore season when Diener is gone.

    << basically what docpaul said >>

    I agree about Maynor at 13. He sounds like a solid Backup PG that can develop into a Starter....but at the 13th pick...I'm hoping for something more.
    Last edited by CableKC; 06-09-2009 at 05:28 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.

  21. #19

    Default Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #7: Eric Maynor

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Maynor on film showed me some other positive attributes as an offensive point guard that I really like, and that are more rare than you think.

    One of those is that Maynor seems to understand the rhythm and flow of the game. How many times have you seen a Pacer player hit 3 or 4 shots in a row, and really begin to get in a groove, only to see our point guard take 2 or 3 quick jumpers of their own in the upcoming possessions for no good reason? A teammate getting "hot" from the field is something a player like Maynor instinctively understands and doesnt need to be taught. Maynor understands things like "we havent gone inside for three straight possessions, this time I'm going to call a set play and make sure we get it to the mismatch in the post". These are types of things I see from Maynor that I don't think yet cross the minds of some of the other more gifted athletically point guards available to be picked.

    Maynor had almost no help at VCU from teammates, but you can tell he has been coached very well. His coach at VCU, Anthony Grant, is widely considered to be one of the best in the country, and you can see some of the solid fundamentals and maturity that he helped Maynor develop.

    Maynor seems to have the ability to make very accurate passes. This may seem like a small thing, but it isnt. It isn't enough to just make a great decision on where to pass the ball, you need to deliver the ball to your teammates in rhythm, on time, and where they want it. Maynor takes that further even and is able to read his teammates cuts, and how his teammates are being defending coming off screens earlier than most, so he makes passes AWAY from the defender better than any point guard in this draft EXCEPT for Stephon Curry, who is probably even better than Maynor at this skill.



    Tbird
    T-bird, I hope you don't get bored doing these player evalutions because I find it very interesting to hear your opinon.

    Of the pgs in this draft I find Maynor to make the most sense in the long run. Simply put he is a pg that is a pg and not sg in a pg body which I think is very important for our team. This is one of the reasons why i like Diener so much. He makes the passes right on time where they need to be with a very low risk high reward. Unfortunately for Diener he wasn't blessed with a NBA body but all that aside we need a pg that can function in a half court style as well as in a uptempo style. Maynor seems to be the best at doing both in this draft. If we don't get a pf I hope we have him slotted at 13.

Similar Threads

  1. So, What does a draft pick get ya? (Part 1)
    By count55 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 11:38 AM
  2. Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair
    By thunderbird1245 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 06-22-2009, 09:04 PM
  3. Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague
    By thunderbird1245 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-16-2009, 11:54 PM
  4. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 04:46 PM
  5. Tbird draft analysis: Kevin Love
    By thunderbird1245 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 05:56 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
  •