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

Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

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

  • #16
    Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

    Filling in the Blanks: NCAA Scouting Reports
    April 28, 2010
    Kyle Nelson

    Toward the end of his freshman season, Cincinnati shooting guard Lance Stephenson surprisingly announced that he would return for his sophomore year. Weeks later, he shocked few when he reneged on that announcement and entered the NBA Draft with an agent (reportedly his lawyer, Alberto Ebanks). While Stephenson always seemed like a one-and-done player, he had a subpar freshman season that exposed many of his flaws and showed the limit of his potential.

    Physically speaking, Stephenson has solid height for an NBA shooting guard at 6-5 with good length and a strong frame. As was the case in high school, he relies on his strength to overpower weaker players and compensate for his lack of athleticism. From a conditioning standpoint, he did not appear to be in ideal shape this past season, likely carrying an extra 10-15 pounds on his thick frame. He is quick in the open floor, but lacks the explosiveness and lateral quickness expected from wings (!!!! if he ain't quick enough for WINGS......)
    at the next level.
    While he will continue to work on his strength and conditioning, there is no doubt that Stephenson is a below average athlete in the NBA.

    His offensive skill set, which is heavily reliant on isolations and muscling his way to the basket, will probably have to be adapted at the next level, given his lack of explosiveness and quickness. While Stephenson’s touch around the basket is not bad, his overall shooting during his freshman season was extremely poor. He shot a dismal 21.9% from beyond the arc, converted under 50% from inside the arc and made just 66% of his foul shots.

    On film, his shooting motion with his feet set is not terrible. He has a fairly fluid motion and release. But he has issues with excess lower body movement, and when he shoots off the dribble, his mechanics are less consistent and he has a tendency to fade away while shooting.

    The biggest issue here is Stephenson’s decision making. He settles for bad shot after bad shot, in spite of miserable percentages and open teammates. He seems to lack any sort of understanding of shot selection. Even when his shots were not falling, he forced the issue and, if his teammates sought their own offense, he tended to pout and fade into the background. This is likely the primary cause for concern from NBA scouts, as Stephenson has never really shown the ability to play team-oriented basketball and could certainly have issues adapting to a situation where he’s simply a role player.

    Stephenson does a good job of creating space off the dribble, showing solid ball-handling skills for his size. The effectiveness of his mid-range game suffers due to his poor shot selection, but he has shown an ability to find shots inside the arc and pull up off the dribble. Similarly, he was at his best last season when he attacked the basket both in transition and in half court situations, where he could use his size and strength to his advantage. He must improve his willingness to find the open man, though, as his tunnel vision often results in offensive fouls and untimely turnovers.

    Though Cincinnati did not field the most competitive or disciplined team last season, Stephenson’s lack of offensive efficiency and selfish style of play have been omnipresent throughout his career. During workouts, he must somehow convince scouts that he is capable of playing team-oriented basketball and has the ability to produce efficiently in a smaller role. As we have written before, Stephenson possesses NBA-caliber scoring abilities. His average athleticism and questionable decision making ability, however, may force him to work his way up through the D-League first.

    On the defensive end, Stephenson did a decent job at Cinncinati, but his lack of lateral quickness limits his potential in this area at the next level. He will struggle to guard bigger and more athletic guards in the NBA, though his strength and length will likely work in his favor. His strong frame also helps him on the boards, where he averages 7.5 rebounds per 40 minutes, pace adjusted -- solid numbers for a wing player.

    His behavior off of the court has also been a well-documented issue in recent years. He stayed out of trouble at Cincinnati, but he has accumulated quite a collection of red flags during his brief time as an amateur basketball player. Any NBA team that considers drafting him will have to do extensive research about his background, and decipher why he was in such a big rush to leave Cincinnati after such a sub-par freshman season.

    While there are a tremendous amount of obstacles in his way, Stephenson still has the potential to be a contributor at the next level at some point down the road. While his lack of explosiveness and mediocre shot selection are areas of significant concern, he has good scoring instincts and a decent offensive repertoire. Stephenson is sure to be one of the most controversial players in the draft. There is no guarantee that he will even be picked, but he may be able to carve out a career for himself regardless, a la Stephen Jackson

    From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...#ixzz0sT7mupMo
    http://www.draftexpress.com

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

      Originally posted by odeez View Post
      Listening to JMV, Lance comparing himself to Dwayne Wade... we could only hope!
      That worries me. Anyone picked in the 2nd round probably shouldn't be thinking that highly of themselves. Goes along with the idea of self entitlement I've heard about him, however.

      I didn't hear how it was said, or the context, but to me he should just be talking about working his *** off to be sure he makes the team, or to prove all the people who didn't draft him wrong. Not how he compares to an All NBA player.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

        2010 Draft Profile - Lance Stephenson
        STRENGTHS: Lance is a big, strong, mobile and athletic scorer with an unquestionable scorer's mentality which has served him well in high school as well as at the University of Cincinnati. The Big East as well as non-conference play has been a successful audition for a guard that came on the scene with a chip on his shoulder and a desire to showcase his skills for one year before moving to the Association. His build allows him to shoot over smaller guards while also exhibiting surprising quickness at 6'5" and 200 pounds. In some cases Lance almost looks or craves physical contact en route to the basket on an athletic drive. Stephenson has demonstrated the ability to dish the rock in traffic and rebound with bigger players. He can be a streaky shooter but has an uncanny ability to always be around the rock and ready to score. While he has played some point for the Bearcats; his true position may be at small forward because smaller and quicker point and shooting guards provide trouble on the defensive end. But the tables quickly turn on the other end of court to an advantage for Mr. Stephenson.

        WEAKNESSES: If he's one and done then Lance definitely needs to work on his mid to long range jumper and cut down on his capacity for turnovers. I wonder about his level of maturity and whether his off the court antics will subside or reappear in the pros. Does he need to be the man? Because he may be the man on a D-League team if he doesn't stick with an NBA team. May want to also work on conditioning because most of the guys he'll guard at the two spot or the three spot will be his size and just as strong. Will also have to work on his defense if he is going to see real minutes on the floor in the Association.

        NBA OUTLOOK: What's the hurry? Stick around for another year; exhibit some leadership skills and show scouts that you are both physically and mentally ready for the grind of the NBA. Erase any doubt that you could be an impatient and unhappy bench and role player entering the NBA. Lance's hurry could put him squarely on a D-League squad or in Europe with a non-descript team. Talent can sometimes override good judgement; I hope it doesn't in Lance's case.
        Player profile submitted by: Bruce C. Jett

        Would you like to write a player profile for any prospect that may be entering the 2010 NBA Draft? Email profiles of any player (even player’s not on our list) to our Webmaster. Credit will be given to the author of the profile.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

          Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
          Player profile submitted by: Bruce C. Jett

          Would you like to write a player profile for any prospect that may be entering the 2010 NBA Draft? Email profiles of any player (even player’s not on our list) to our Webmaster. Credit will be given to the author of the profile.
          If you're quoting this to back up any statements, you just undercut your own debate.

          Any Joe Schmoe can write an article and send it in. Meh.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

            NBA Comparison: Aaron McKie/Ron Artest

            Strengths: Nineteen year old freshman with an NBA-ready body ... At 6'5 210, has a rare combination of power and quickness ... Completely dominated the New York PSAL, almost single handedly leading Lincoln HS to four titles (Owns the all time scoring record in the State of New York) ... Was often the biggest and strongest guy on the court, and took advantage of it, routinely dismantling opponents using brute force ... Relentless attacker of the basket, seeking out contact and getting to the free throw stripe where he converts at a high % ... Excellent penetrator with a quick first step ... Utilizes change of pace dribbles, cross-overs and spin moves to get into the lane ... Able to slither his way in between small creases ... Superior ball handler with a flare for the dramatic (good or bad) ... Good court vision. Aesthetically pleasing shooting stroke ... Supreme accuracy on pull up J's, especially when dribbling to his left ... "Easy" three point range. Has shown flashes of lock down on the ball defense with his strength and 6'10 wingspan ... Should be an instant fast break running the point at Cincinnati with his rebounding ability ... "Born Ready" has been hyped since day 1 at Lincoln, playing under tremendous pressure and scrutiny every night, even appearing in a documentary about him ...

            Weaknesses: Legitimate question marks surrounding his character and mental makeup (high school carrer marred by an assault charge) ... The hope is that he will gain maturity at Cincinnati ... His on court body language is awful ... Often seen pouting, dragging his feet, arguing with referees and yelling at teammates ... If he believes he should get the ball and doesn't, or doesn't get a call, he's inclined to allow it to affect his game and take a play or two off ... Despite his athletic gifts, lacks explosive elevation on his jumper and on drives to the rim ... Needs work on leg strength, but just not a very explosive leaper ... Tends to fade away and abort follow-through on his jump shot from time to time ... Capable of making the spectacular pass, but does not always make the simple, smart pass ... Shows glimpses of extraordinary court vision, but too often has tunnel vision toward the hoop and doesn't look for teammates ... Seems to predetermine when to shoot and when to pass, rather than natually allowing the flow of the game come to him ... Gets wrapped up in 'style points' and getting oohs and aahs from the crowd instead of playing sound fundamental basketball ... Prone to stagnant over-dribbling. Lateral quickness is just average - looks lead footed ...Too much standing around on defense rather than being proactive on help D ...

            Adam Ganeles 10/30/09
            SEASON

            TEAM

            MIN

            PTS

            REB

            AST

            TO

            A/T

            STL

            BLK

            PF

            FG%

            FT%

            3P%

            PPS
            2009-10 CIN 28.2 12.3 5.4 2.5 2.4 1.0 0.9 0.2 1.9 0.44 0.664 0.219 1.14
            PerGame 28.2 12.3 5.4 2.5 2.4 1.0 0.9 0.2 1.9 0.440 0.664 1.14

            SEASON

            TEAM

            GP

            MIN

            FG

            FGA

            FTM

            FTA

            3PM

            3PA

            PTS

            OFF

            DEF

            TOT

            AST

            TO

            STL

            BLK

            PF
            2009-10 CIN 34 960 162 368 79 119 16 73 419 63 119 182 84 81 31 6 66
            Totals 34 960 162 368 79 119 16 73 419 63 119 182 84 81 31 6 66
            YouTube Clip - 5/16/2008
            Download:
            FLVMP43GP
            YouTube Clip - 06/09/2010
            Download:
            FLVMP43GP
            Related content

            * Orlando Summer League Schedule & Roster Sat, 06/26/2010 - 5:50am
            * 2010 Draft Night Recap Sat, 06/26/2010 - 5:31am
            * 2010 NBA Draft Grades Fri, 06/25/2010 - 2:07am
            * 2010 NBA Draft Workout Master List, Expanded! Thu, 06/24/2010 - 2:40am
            * 2010 Draft Impacted by Impending Lockout Wed, 06/23/2010 - 1:21am
            * Draft Buzz Tue, 06/22/2010 - 5:58pm
            * Forum All Star's 2010 Mock Draft Tue, 06/22/2010 - 12:27pm
            * High Risk/Reward Prospects Tue, 06/22/2010 - 2:45am
            * 2010 NBA Draft: Top 5 Lists Mon, 06/21/2010 - 3:40pm
            * NBA Draft Combine: Shooting Drill Results Fri, 05/28/2010 - 10:58am

            Click to see more
            RSS: Syndicate content
            Follow us on Facebook
            Follow us on Twitter
            Countdown to NBA Draft 2010

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
              That worries me. Anyone picked in the 2nd round probably shouldn't be thinking that highly of themselves. Goes along with the idea of self entitlement I've heard about him, however.

              I didn't hear how it was said, or the context, but to me he should just be talking about working his *** off to be sure he makes the team, or to prove all the people who didn't draft him wrong. Not how he compares to an All NBA player.
              Yeah, sorry, the context was JMV asked him who he would compare himself to in the NBA. Lance said Wade, because he is a leader, makes great plays, and is a great player... that's not verbatim, but in general that is what he said...
              Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                If you're quoting this to back up any statements, you just undercut your own debate.

                Any Joe Schmoe can write an article and send it in. Meh.
                And so if you hadn't really seen a player, you would take the time to fill out a misleading and false report????????????? uh huh
                The only statements that I'm responding to are the silly ones suggesting he might be a point guard.
                Guess all those are just bs, eh?
                meh
                Last edited by MLB007; 07-01-2010, 05:52 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                  Hopefully he will end up getting quicker by lowering his body fat some from the workouts the pacers will have him do... if he wants to succeed at this next level he is going to have to continue to work hard and listen to what the coaches and trainers have to tell him...

                  I wish him the best....
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                    well from what I can gather he has been working his @$$ off since committing to the draft and it has paid off a lot. that's why his stock rose so much in the days leading up to it.
                    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                      He's 6'5. Clearly O'Brien sees him as a center.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                        Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                        And so if you hadn't really seen a player, you would take the time to fill out a misleading and false report????????????? uh huh
                        The only statements that I'm responding to are the silly ones suggesting he might be a point guard.
                        Guess all those are just bs, eh?
                        meh
                        Doesn't mean they haven't seen the player, but it doesn't mean they have any clue what they're talking about either.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                          Here is one of Chad Fords takes on Stevenson...


                          May 13 Update: (Las Vegas Workout Report) Cincinnati freshman Lance Stephenson was also in the house. Stephenson was ranked in the top 10 by many scouting services coming out of high school (No. 12 by ESPNU), but a bad reputation scared away a lot of colleges and has marred the opinion of many who've watched him play.

                          What I saw on Tuesday and Wednesday may cause some to reconsider. Abunassar has been working on Stephenson's conditioning. He is down to 227 with 9.4 percent body fat. He looks as cut and as lean as I've ever seen him. The better conditioning has clearly helped his game. He's lighter on his feet, more explosive and able to keep his intensity up for longer periods of time.

                          The guy can flat-out score. He's got a nice midrange jumper, can pound it down low and is always hunting for his shot. He wasn't overly selfish (despite the rep), but when a scoring opportunity came, he took it.

                          I pushed him a little bit after the workout on his bad rep. He was up-front with me that he may have let things get to his head in college. But the last season has been a humbling one for him. He has realized that hype alone won't get him into the league, and he has buckled down to work on his game.

                          While I don't think Stephenson is a lottery pick, there aren't 30 more talented players in the draft. I'm not sure how he'll handle all the distractions that the NBA brings, but his game is well-suited to the league.

                          In 3-on-3 games on Wednesday, he challenged Oklahoma State's James Anderson for the most points scored in the morning. He got his points in a variety of ways. He was unconscious from midrange, took the ball to the basket and even posted up a little. While there is clearly more room for maturity on and off the court, he's a talent who could get minutes immediately in the NBA.
                          Why so SERIOUS

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                              I don't think he is a point guard, but neither were Bledsoe and Bradley in college and people including me were willing to give them a chance at the position.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                Thank you, back at ya
                                Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X