Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

    Since I keep trying the Mock Draft and I can never get anyone for the Pacers except Whiteside or Monroe, I took a look at this ESPN report. Thought I'd share with the Digest.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5136346

    We're close. Oh, so close. Thanks to the NCAA's new May 8 draft deadline, the decisions of 34 draft-eligible early entrants will come sooner than ever this year. In two weeks, college coaches agonizing over stars' futures will be sated and the 2010-11 hoops picture will be clear.



    In the meantime, we can evaluate the decisions of those players who have taken the agony out of the process by signing with an agent, making them ineligible to return to college next season. Those decisions range from the obvious and easy -- John Wall, Evan Turner -- to the shockingly ill-advised and questionable. Everyone wants to be in the NBA. Some players are ready. Some aren't. In that spirit, let's analyze some of the decisions of the agent-signed players on a scale those players won't have to worry about ever again: grades A-F.

    A+ through A-: The "duh" group.


    John Wall, Fr., G, Kentucky: Duh.



    Some players have very difficult decisions to make when deciding whether to declare for the NBA draft or return to school. Evan Turner was not one of those players.

    Evan Turner, Jr., G, Ohio State: Double duh. (If only every draft decision was this easy to analyze. Strap on your seatbelts, because this is where things get fun. And long.)



    DeMarcus Cousins, Fr., F, Kentucky: Cousins isn't quite the slam dunk Wall and Turner are -- he could get better on the defensive end of the floor, and his occasional blow-ups on the court speak to the type of attitude some NBA general managers will be eager to avoid. But Cousins also got better as the season went along, and it's impossible to dispute his ability. As a freshman, he was already the strongest big man in the country in 2009-10, and his polish around the hoop -- along with his unparalleled rebounding ability -- should make him an impact pro.



    Wesley Johnson, Jr., G/F, Syracuse: Johnson has much he could improve, too, especially as an on-ball defender. But after his breakout season at Syracuse, it would be foolish for the formerly unknown transfer from Iowa State to return to school. This time last year, few NBA scouts would have drafted Johnson near the first round. Now he's a likely top-five pick. The getting is good, and Johnson isn't wasting any time. Hard to argue with that.



    Ed Davis, So., F, North Carolina: This might seem counterintuitive, seeing as Davis saw his productivity drop off a steep cliff in North Carolina's horrific 2009-10 season, but stick with me here: Davis is actually making a fantastic decision coming out in this year's draft. Here's why: NBA scouts have been in love with Davis since his arrival in Chapel Hill, and as a projected top-10 pick this season, those scouts apparently don't care that Davis often looked unprepared for big-time hoops in his sophomore year. If he stuck around for another year, Davis would risk exposing himself as even more unready than he already seems. Best to get out while the scouts are still swooning.



    Scouts have long been enamored with Ed Davis' NBA potential, despite a lack of production at the college level.

    Al-Farouq Aminu, So., F, Wake Forest: Much like Davis, Aminu gets a spot in this category not because he seems ready for the NBA -- he's not -- but because he and his agents have recognized that NBA scouts are hopelessly in love with him. Why not leave now?



    Greg Monroe, So., F, Georgetown: Monroe is another of the not-exactly-a-slam-dunk-but-still-really-good players in this draft, but he gets an A- just for agreeing, after much deliberation and a second-straight high-lottery projection, to come out of school and get his NBA career underway. It would have been borderline silly to see Monroe back for a third year. It was time.



    B+ through B-: The "Respectable, If Not Exactly A Sure Thing" group.


    Cole Aldrich, Jr., C, Kansas: Aldrich is a dominant interior defender and rebounder. He is not, however, an elite interior scorer -- he still needs work on his footing and his moves with his back to the basket. Another year of college basketball might serve him well in this regard. With Sherron Collins and Xavier Henry no longer at Kansas, Aldrich could get a chance to play college basketball in a situation where he wasn't a total afterthought on offense. Still, this isn't a bad decision; Aldrich can develop that game in the NBA.



    Derrick Favors, Fr., F, Georgia Tech: Favors has an NBA-ready body, but that's about all that's ready, and it's a lot easier to get by with an NBA-ready body in college than it is in the NBA. Favors will have a lot of development to do in the next few years to justify his top-five projected draft spot.



    Patrick Patterson, Jr., F, Kentucky: Patterson has been a lottery pick for much of his three-year Kentucky career, and his decision to come back in the midst of a John Calipari-induced talent influx paid off. Patterson debuted an even bigger, stronger body, which he used to dominate the post alongside Cousins, and his work on his inside-out game should make him even more attractive to NBA scouts.



    James Anderson, Jr., G, Oklahoma State: Anderson's decision is pretty easy: He came from relative obscurity to have an All-America type season in Oklahoma State's backcourt, and while he has a few things he could work on -- creating his own perimeter shot, for one -- Anderson is as pure a shooting guard prospect as this draft has.



    Hassan Whiteside, Fr., F, Marshall: Yes, Whiteside could use another year in school. He's still pretty raw. But his freshman campaign at Marshall was so impressive that he's gone from a total unknown to one of the more intriguing picks in the draft, and Whiteside is taking advantage of his skyrocketing stock.



    Dominique Jones, Jr., G, South Florida: Jones finally got the attention his talent deserves this year, leading South Florida to the fringe of the NCAA tournament and becoming something of a household name in college hoops circles. That hype is probably as wide as it's going to get, and now's the time.


    Solomon Alabi, So., C, Florida State: Some have questioned Alabi's decision to come out this early. Like Whiteside, he's still very raw. He needs to get stronger. He needs to learn how to play offensive basketball. But for a guy like Alabi to look at his draft stock and see that possible top-20 spot, well, it's pretty hard to tell him to work on that offensive game in college.



    His offensive game is far from ready, but NBA teams will surely take a chance on Florida State center Solomon Alabi, if only for his defensive potential.

    Elliot Williams, So., G, Memphis: Williams' college career will end up being a little shorter than either Duke fans or Memphis fans would have preferred, and it would be interesting to see what Williams could do with another year of college eligibility and a talented recruiting class arriving for Josh Pastner this fall. Williams' pro potential didn't dwindle in his swift transfer from Durham to Memphis; he's still a likely first-round pick. This isn't a great call, but it's not the worst.



    Larry Sanders, Jr., F, VCU: Sanders' mid-major affiliation hasn't hurt his draft stock; he's a likely lottery to mid-first-round pick. Sanders is in definite need of offensive improvement, but at this point it's hard to see Sanders climb too far up the scouts' lists in a year's time.


    Armon Johnson, Jr., G, Nevada: Johnson's main weakness is his jump shot, which is streaky and prone to poor shot selection. His athleticism more than makes up for it, though, and it's plausible to see a team's late first-round pick panning out quite nicely in a year or so.



    C+ through C-: The "Bad Circumstances Breeds Questionable Decisions" group.


    Willie Warren, So., G, Oklahoma: Warren should have come out last year. He was a likely lottery pick in last year's draft, but he instead gambled on returning to college be the star of Oklahoma's post-Blake Griffin year. That did not go well. When Warren was healthy, he spent much of the time feuding with coach Jeff Capel, and Warren wasn't healthy all that often. But Oklahoma's a mess and staying isn't exactly an option, either. Warren's stuck.



    Luke Babbitt, So., F, Nevada: Babbitt is probably a little underrated as a mid-to-late first-round pick; he's an elite low-post scorer whose profile is low thanks to his far-flung college. Another dominant season could boost Babbitt's stock into the lottery.



    Xavier Henry, Fr., G, Kansas: The Kansas guard is a pure scorer, but he struggled to adapt to the rigors of the college game for much of his freshman season. Another year at Kansas -- without shot-heavy Sherron Collins in the mix -- could push Henry's stock into the stratosphere. As it is, he's a solid first-round pick. But he could be so much more.



    Gani Lawal, Jr., F, Georgia Tech: Lawal, like Favors, could use another year in school to refine his low-post game. He's nearly there, but with so many big men in this draft, Lawal's status as a late first-rounder would probably improve next season.



    Craig Brackins, Jr., F, Iowa State: Brackins is another of the players who would have probably benefited from either coming out last year or waiting until 2011 -- he, like his fellow Cyclones, had a largely disappointing 2009-10. But Brackins' athleticism and interior knack should prove tempting for plenty of NBA scouts.



    Mac Koshwal, Jr., F, DePaul: Yet another big man who could use more time developing and whose draft stock dipped after a disappointing, oft-injured season. But with DePaul's situation in flux after the firing of coach Jerry Wainwright, it's hard to fault Koshwal for trying to get into the league now.



    Charles Garcia, Jr., F, Seattle: Thanks to big games, thundering dunks and ever-increasing buzz, Garcia started to become a well-known name throughout the 2009-10 campaign. That said, Garcia's talent and buzz aren't big enough to get out of that dreaded "second-round to undrafted" in this year's draft, and a dominant year at Seattle with all eyes on Garcia could have made his 2010-11 draft much more intriguing.



    D+ through D-: The "Talented, But Not So Much" group.


    Lance Stephenson, Fr., G, Cincinnati: Stephenson went to Cincinnati after an ugly recruiting period -- as lauded as his talent were the questions about his eligibility and attitude. He largely disappointed. It was the sort of year that not only revealed Stephenson wasn't ready for the NBA, it was the sort of year that brought his future potential into question. Stephenson needs more time. His nickname, "Born Ready," couldn't be any less relevant.


    A.J. Ogilvy, Jr., C, Vanderbilt: Ogilvy needs another year. He has talent, but in a draft this loaded with big men, Ogilvy needs a more versatile offensive game to impress scouts, and he doesn't have it.



    Manny Harris, Jr., G, Michigan: Harris' game is a poor man's version of your prototype NBA shooting guard -- he's 6-foot-5, lanky, athletic, can shoot the 3 and create his own shot, and he has all the tools to be successful. The problem is Harris' attitude and two disappointing seasons that have plummeted his draft stock into second round/undrafted territory. Harris is dissatisfied at Michigan, but this isn't the right time.



    Eniel Polynice, Jr., G, Ole Miss: Polynice is a second round-to-undrafted guy at this point, and he will be lucky to get in the draft this year.





    Sylven Landesberg, So., G, Virginia: Landesberg is already a very good player, but his academic issues and falling out with Virginia coach Tony Bennett have sped his decision to get in the draft by at least a year; Landesberg would undoubtedly be better off waiting until his talent is fully developed.



    F+ through F-: The "Wow, Is This Is A Bad Decision" group.


    Keith "Tiny" Gallon, Fr., F, Oklahoma: Gallon is a big body with a knack for rebounding, but no one who's seen him play would call him NBA-ready. Gallon's decision might have more to do with Oklahoma's issues -- including an internal investigation into money allegedly wired to Gallon's account from a financier in Florida -- than with his likelihood of sticking in the pros. Gallon probably can't stay at Oklahoma, even if he wanted to, but that doesn't make the decision any less terrible.



    Derrick Caracter, Jr., F, UTEP: Caracter isn't ready. The formerly troubled Louisville big man experienced a renaissance at UTEP this season, rebuilding his once-promising career into something recognizable during UTEP's impressive C-USA regular-season title run. It was great to see. But it doesn't change the fact that Caracter, while skilled in the post, is undersized, a tad overweight, and unlikely to be drafted earlier than the late second round. He needs another year to rebuild his stock; a player with a history this volatile needs two years of renaissance to be all the way back.



    Tommy Mason-Griffin, Fr., G, Oklahoma: Speaking of the Sooners. Mason-Griffin is similar to Gallon in that both players had nice freshman seasons, but neither player is anywhere near being ready for the NBA. Mason-Griffin is undersized and lacks the athleticism necessary to succeed at the point guard spot in the NBA. He simply needs more time.



    Jahmar Young, Jr., G, New Mexico State: No one questions Young's talent, but after two battery charges -- one recent, one in 2007 -- Young needs another year to rehab his image, stay out of trouble, and convince NBA GMs he's not a problem child. As it is, he'll probably go undrafted.



    Courtney Fortson, So., G, Arkansas: Fortson's decision is baffling. The guard can get to the rim with relative ease, but at 5-foot-11 and without a reliable outside shot, it's unlikely an NBA team will take a risk on him anywhere near the first round of the draft.


    Eamonn Brennan covers college basketball for ESPN.com. You can see his work every Monday through Friday in the College Basketball Nation blog.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

    I just started reading the list before I realized it was conditional on signing an agent.

    Purdue basketball is only held hostage for 12 more days.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

      Here's why: NBA scouts have been in love with Davis since his arrival in Chapel Hill, and as a projected top-10 pick this season, those scouts apparently don't care that Davis often looked unprepared for big-time hoops in his sophomore year. If he stuck around for another year, Davis would risk exposing himself as even more unready than he already seems. Best to get out while the scouts are still swooning.
      That's a bingo!


      X Henry: Another year at Kansas -- without shot-heavy Sherron Collins in the mix -- could push Henry's stock into the stratosphere. As it is, he's a solid first-round pick. But he could be so much more.
      Completely agree. Perfect time to mature and shine, ala Evan Turner. He will NOT get picked as high as Evan Turner this year.

      Gani Lawal, Jr., F, Georgia Tech: Lawal, like Favors, could use another year in school to refine his low-post game. He's nearly there, but with so many big men in this draft, Lawal's status as a late first-rounder would probably improve next season.
      Completely disagree here. Lawal has size concerns, but his actual post game is the best in the country, at least the low-post portion. He can also face up a bit and hit middies. He's ready, he just needs another inch and some of the Favors muscle to be a top 10 guy.


      Charles Garcia, Jr., F, Seattle: Thanks to big games, thundering dunks and ever-increasing buzz, Garcia started to become a well-known name throughout the 2009-10 campaign. That said, Garcia's talent and buzz aren't big enough to get out of that dreaded "second-round to undrafted" in this year's draft, and a dominant year at Seattle with all eyes on Garcia could have made his 2010-11 draft much more intriguing.
      This is the worst decision out there, at least of the guys who really could be something. He stunk this year, his game is immature and his competition was woeful. Scouts lost interest in a hurry and declaring won't help win them back. He needs to show people he can put his talent to good use on the court.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

        No grade on Udoh?

        Is that a good or bad thing?
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

          Also should add that every guy in the D and F range made a HUGE mistake. Just an epic fail for all those guys. I can't imagine what they were thinking at all.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            No grade on Udoh?

            Is that a good or bad thing?
            No agent I assume. Yet.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              Also should add that every guy in the D and F range made a HUGE mistake. Just an epic fail for all those guys. I can't imagine what they were thinking at all.
              Best guess: They're scared of the new CBA/the lockout.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                I'd love to trade down and pick up Lawal and Henry. Is that wishful thinking?

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                  I don't think I understand what constitutes NBA ready production at the college level.

                  To clarify, Davis has had solid production comparable to guys like Lawal, Cousins, and Aldrich, who he does not say failed to produce at the college level. I agree that Lawal is much more NBA ready and has a more refined low post offensive game. But I thought production was numbers.
                  Last edited by judicata; 04-27-2010, 02:36 AM.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                    Purdue basketball is only held hostage for 12 more days.

                    Same with Butler, no Hayward on this list?

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                      Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                      I'd love to trade down and pick up Lawal and Henry. Is that wishful thinking?
                      I think both could help themselves in workouts quite a bit, I don't know if they'll get the momentum to displace current guys listed in the lottory. Henry is a freshman who deferred quite a bit, it seems, but in a workout scenario he'll show an NBA body with the skillset needed for his position. I don't know what he'll look like defensively, though. Lawal may have a little more trouble getting past the measurements, if he measures out better than expected and brings a high motor and skill level in workouts he'll climb. He may be faced with teams feeling he's not quite the ideal size and have a ceiling just outside the lottery.

                      The guy who looks like he's all over the board is Bledsoe, at this point. If he puts together some great workouts and outplays the guys he's match with, teams could fall in love and he goes early. Especially in one of the thinnest Point Guard drafts I can remember in a long time. If he proves he's really far away from playing point guard, since he didn't play the position with Wall at Kentucky then he could drop to the 20s I think.

                      I guess what I'm saying is all 3 of those guys, I have interest in, but all 3 aren't slotted as solidly as they will be post workouts. So in the trade down scenario, you might get them or you might not. How's that for a non answer.

                      The thing I can't wait for is when the talent gets tiered or grouped. It looks like right now the tiers are 1-2, then 3-5, then 6 to ????, so I'm not sure where the next drop off is. I'm not really even sure 3-5 is right, that group could really be 3-15 or something like that. Everyone past Turner seems to be a project type (Favors, Aminu, Wesley Johnson) or limited in their ceiling (Cole Aldrich, Patrick Patterson) to a decent starter, great role player type status.

                      If you move down and get 16 and 22 for your troubles, I think it's something you really have to think about, especially if it's Monroe and Whiteside sitting there at 10 as the best available.

                      If it's Monroe, everytime I read about him he sounds like Roy Hibbert light or a slight variation at the PF position. Not a bad thing, but Roy is a workhorse and is maximizing his potential, no doubt in my mind. Is Monroe the same? Plus you can't have Roy at Center and Roy light at PF, athletic frontcourts (see most of the league) will kill you.

                      Whiteside appears too far away for something that would interest the Pacers. I doubt he'd see the court next year if you picked him.

                      On a side note is Stanley Robinson, I think his athleticism, defense, and tenacity will shine in workouts and he'll be a climber too. If I was another prospect, scheduling a workout for a team, I'd avoid workouts that included me going against Robinson. I think he'll make you look bad. I have a pipe dream that he falls to the Pacers pick in the second round, much like Sam Young did last year. I'd love to see an upgrade in defense and athleticism and a guy who can replace Dunleavy on the roster after next year and give you almost exactly the opposite skill set. NBAdraft.net compares him to Luc Richard Mbah a Moute. That sounds good to me. They currently have him as the 2nd pick in the 2nd round, I think that's very good value. I could get behind a physical defensive set of players that featured D Jones, Brush, Stanley Robinson and Tyler Hansbrough. Opposing teams wouldn't care for that in a finesse oriented league, imho.

                      ....but it's early. I don't know nearly as much as Seth and the like.
                      Last edited by Speed; 04-27-2010, 07:38 AM.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Completely agree. Perfect time to mature and shine, ala Evan Turner. He will NOT get picked as high as Evan Turner this year.
                        Seth, do you think his ceiling can be that of Evan Turner?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          I just started reading the list before I realized it was conditional on signing an agent.

                          Purdue basketball is only held hostage for 12 more days.
                          Only 9 more days to decide now. I am surprised they didn't have Johnson or Moore on that list. Hopefully they only listed players they think possibly will stay in the draft.
                          If Hummel had not gotten hurt and Purdue would have had a final four run this year, I think Johnson would be gone. That 20-25 ft. jumper from the top of the key is almost automatic. That will be a great asset at the next level. One more year at Purdue without the injury bug hitting us and we could have 3 guys go in the first round.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                            I like that it's sooner, but it's ridiculous the timeline now. They basically can't work these guys out until tomorrow, then they have to decide to stay in or not in basically 9 days. Weird thing is, if this is true and it's just the way I understand it, if they are having workouts I haven't heard one thing about them. Has anyone else?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Final exam: Grading early-entrants As draft withdrawal date nears

                              I'd love to take a shot at Henry. Then trade Rush, and try to get a late 1st round pick.
                              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X