Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

Rule #1

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

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

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

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

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

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #2

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

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

The right places to do so are:

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

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

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

Rule #3

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #4

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

Rule #5

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

An example:

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

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

Rule #6

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

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

Rule #7

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

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

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

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

Rule #8

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

Rule #9

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

Rule #10

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

Rule #11

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

Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

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

  • Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

    After a weekend of rest and more tape watching, we continue the 2012 draft profile series with a look at the productive young freshman from St John’s University, Moe Harkless. Harkless was part of a highly touted recruiting class that has sort of fizzled out, partly due to the illness of his charismatic college coach, Steve Lavin.

    Harkless almost comes from central casting as an NBA perfect specimen wing man for the modern era,checking in at 6’8, and a slender but solid 208lbs. He clearly has the build to add weight as he continues to get older, so I would expect him to eventually play much heavier than his current listing. Having just turned 19 years old last month, Harkless has plenty of time to grow and fill out his body. With a wingspan of 7’2, Harkless has all of the physical attributes you would ever want in a player you’d look to draft. But does he have the game and potential? Those are the questions that must be answered….but he must hit the weights and develop his body, no doubt...and that will take time.

    Let’s start with the defensive end first, which is where I believe Harkless has the most potential to someday be an NBA difference maker.

    In contrast to Arnett Moultrie, a big man who I felt really struggled to know where the ball was defensively (and therefore hurts his team’s overall defense), Harkless is going to be a very nice asset from day one away from the ball defensively. He has extremely active eyes, and almost always gets himself in position to make really good defensive plays off the ball. He does a really nice job of playing “up the line” which along with always having his head on a swivel and being energetic puts him in position to make plays. He can come off his man to steal poor passes, block shots, or take the occasional charge. He seems to relish playing defense and really understand what he is doing.

    On the ball on the perimeter, he has a lot of potential just in terms of how his body moves and how active and energetic he is. He plays with high hands, traces the ball well and generally is hard to play against outside. He projects to be a nightmare to play against defensively someday for smaller players, as his length should allow him to play off a step and still be able to really harass shooters. I really like how he slides his feet with balance, and how energetic he is. He seems to LIKE playing defense on the perimeter, and it shows.

    At St John’s and for most of his life he has had to guard bigger players inside. When doing this, he lacks the strength and technique to be able to really do this currently at the NBA level. He lacks the leverage, balance, strength, and quite frankly the attention spa nto keep players from posting him up in deep position. Up to now, I imagine his superior athletic ability has bailed him out most of the time, but at the NBA level that won’t often be the case. To me, he will be a 3 defensively in the NBA, mostly guarding non post up threats, but he still will need to get stronger and play with better leverage in the painted area.


    What I like best about Harkless from a pure basketball point of view his ability to hit the glass.

    Harkless was extremely productive on the glass in the rugged Big East, averaging almost 9 rebounds per game (8.6 rpg to be exact). While this is somewhat inflated due to the up tempo pace favored by St John’s and the fact that he played extended minutes, keep in mind that Harkless did this at 208lbs and at 18 years old, which to me is a very impressive accomplishment.

    As always with rebounding as a scout, you have to look past the raw numbers. So what impresses me more than anything with Harkless is his relentlessness to chase rebounds down, and his ability to rebound outside his area. Most guys can rebound the ball if it is near them. But in Harkless I saw a man who got balls out of the air away from him that most people simply lack the ability to get. Harkless has a tremendously quick twitch, and is almost always the first guy to jump and react. And in situations where there are multiple chances to get rebounds, Harkless has an innate ability to get in the air twice and even three times, and was willing to put forth the effort to go after the ball.

    The word that comes to me in regard to him rebounding is “enthusiastic”,and as a perimeter player projecting forward I hope he keeps that trait .Playing against bigger guys in high school and college, Harkless has always been counted on by his teammates to rebound in big numbers near the basket, and because he has had to guard bigger guys he has been in position to rebound well.

    I hope and believe that he will still retain that quality and tenacity as a perimeter defender on the next level, and I am positive he will be a major plus on your offensive glass as a 3 man for you given enough time to develop.



    Harkless somehow manages to score the ball at this point, mainly due to I think his overall athleticism and will, but he really doesn’thave much offensive game at this point. It is his inexperience and rawness that makes it somewhat possible however that he will be in our draft range. But make no mistake, though productive in college right now, that Harkless has a lot of progress to make offensively.

    But what he can do right now, besides being a potential elite offensive rebounder for his position, is to play right around the elbow/high post area. From here, he can do damage, and it is where I think his game fits the best. He lacks strength to hold ground at the low block, but from the elbow area in a “horns” type post or “pinch post” area, where he can face up his man and attack off the bounce with one dribble to the rim, he can score. He is nifty, and can go by you, over you, or around you from this particular area, which is something I think the Pacers lack in their current players and scheme.

    Harkless is better when he can catch the ball on the move, and he does move well from the foul line on down. If you scheme it right, he can score with his back to the basket in the painted area, but he can’t hold ground for very long, so there has to be away from the ball action/movement to get him free. He can score with either hand inside and has good enough balance and strength that will only get better with time.

    If you played super small ball and played him as a “4” man(which some teams likely will, just not Indiana and probably I wouldn’t either)I think in time he can potentially be someone who can take you off the dribble .But for now, he is a well below average ballhandler for a traditional small forward at the NBA level. He is not a guy now nor will he likely ever be someone who you clearout for, as he can’t get his own shot against NBA level defense at this time. My hope for him is that he does work hard on his handle though, and at least become someone who can beat back up level players off the bounce, and who is a guy who when “hard closed out” on that can fake a jumper and drive at that point. But for now, that part of his game doesn’t really exist. He really lacks any “shiftiness”, and basically his best dribble move is an “in and out” dribble, keeping the ball in his right hand. He lacks a really good crossover dribble going either way, as he tends to get too upright when dribbling more than once or twice.

    Lots of wings in the NBA don’t handle the ball however, so can Harkless be a catch and shoot guy, or a man who can at least spot up? At this point, the answer is no….but you have to draft him on potential, not the finished product.

    Right now, his shooting mechanics and form are all off. His shooting elbow is way too loose and low, and he misses both short and wide on any shot outside of about 12-15 feet. Basically, he is a wing with no jumper right now. He leans on his shot to try and self correct his elbow position, and that just makes the problem worse. He made 24% of his 3 point shots last season according to the numbers, and watching his shot quite frankly I am surprised he made that many. However, this doesn’t really bother me much at this point, as likely he has been so strong and athletic that he has yet to be forced to shoot very well to score….at lower levels, he likely got to the rim whenever he wanted.

    I’ve thought a lot about how I’d try and fix his shot if I were in charge of him. I see lots of potential in him and I think he can get there. I think I’d move his release point out further from his body, which in turn would give his shooting elbow more room to get under the ball as he heldit. Then I’d really emphasize hard for him to get his elbow above his eye on release. I thought for a night before writing this about maybe suggesting that he hold the ball to the side a lot more and change his “viewing window”, but for an athlete who is as explosive and talented as he is I don’t think he needs that radical of a change. I’d stick with moving his release point an reallystretching that elbow to get higher on release.

    No matter the fix, Harkless needs major time and reps to groove his shot. Right now, he seems like a very coachable kid who tinkers with his shot a lot, and who never has anything grooved, therefore his mechanics change constantly. He needs coaching stability and to learn and commit to one way of doing it, and then stick with it.

    While there is absolutely no evidence to back this up to this point, I believe that Harkless will eventually be a really good NBA 3 point shooter, with his feet set and aimed at the goal. I don’t see him coming off staggered double screens or taking a ton of pullup long jumpers, but as a spot up, wide open set 3 point shooter, I think he eventually makes that his major weapon offensively.



    So, what do we have in Moe Harkless?

    I think we have a charismatic, energetic, athletic 3 man who is currently a tweener without a true position, but who will in a few years be one of the top 10 players taken in this draft as a defensive minded, high enthusiasm 3 man. I think that he can be an NBA starter on a good team or even championship level team, as long as he is their 4th or 5thbest player. His rebounding can be elite, and I think he can grow into a high level wing defender.

    But, he isn’t at all ready to contribute now. Harkless really cost himself a lot of money by coming out now,he really should have stayed in college one more year at least and improved on some of his weaknesses. Instead, he will have to have the discipline and work ethic to get better sitting on the pine at the NBA level for a couple of years, as he lacks the basic skills to be able to contribute immediately I believe. I think Harkless is a 2-3 year project, so it may end up being on the second contract that Harkless really helps someone, not on his first. So, if you take him now, you have to be a patient team willing to develop him for a couple of seasons down the road, maybe in his second or 3rd year he can be really ready to play. But the upside is definitely there if you are patient, in my judgment.


    Picking #26, Indiana is in a position to draft for talent,not need, if they so choose to do so. If you are thinking way ahead of our current situation, Harkless could be a very nice replacement for Danny Granger after his contract runs out in 2 more years, if he develops the way I think he will…..which is no guarantee of course. Potentially, a defensive wing combination of Harkless and Paul George could be frightening for opponents in the middle part of this decade. On the other hand, Offensively they don’t complement each other really, and it is a “win now” league. Harkless is definitely a pick for 2014 and beyond, not a pick that will help us next year.

    I myself really like Harkless and his game, and think he will be good value at #26 if available. BUT, I think long term I want someone who compliments Paul George’s game a little better offensively, and when you factor in our current situation of wanting to compete right away, I think I might go with someone who helps me today rather than 2/3years from now. But, I’d have to see who is out there when we pick….at #26 you can’t be sure. I can say this, I am pretty certain that Harkless would be the best player available if he is still there for us, and normally you can’t go wrong picking the best player, no matter if you need him right away or not.



    Probably, it won’t matter what I or anyone on this board thinks of Harkless, because I suspect he will be gone before us, perhaps way ahead of us in fact.

    I see Harkless as possibilities for the Trailblazers at #11,Rockets at #16, Mavericks @ 17, or Magic at @19.

    But I actually see when the draft is over a few weeks from now that Harkless somehow belongs to the Golden State Warriors. The Warriors pick #7, and I think they would like to trade back a few notches and still pick Harkless. But failing that, I believe that Golden State will pull the trigger on Harkless wherever they are, as I am guessing that Jerry West will love his potential, athleticism, and personality.

    How is THAT for my first wild prediction of this draft season? Time will tell if I have called that one right. I have no inside sources there, just a hunch.



    Current NBA comparable: a more slender Stephen Jackson
    Former NBA comparable: a young James Posey

    As always, the above is just my opinion>

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 06-06-2012, 06:43 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

    Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    Former NBA comparable: a young James Posey
    When J.O.B. read that I'm sure his eyes lit up!

    Great Analysis as usual

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

      Great analysis. He's definitely intriguing. I prefer Jae Crowder but I'm way on the Crowder bandwagon.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

        Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
        Great analysis. He's definitely intriguing. I prefer Jae Crowder but I'm way on the Crowder bandwagon.
        Me too!

        High motor, plays defense, high basketball IQ. If he can transition to SF/SG, he'd the be ultimate steal. Hell, he's built enough to play some PF, but he's short at 6'6". I'd still take this guy...and Tyler just plain sucks.

        Can't wait to read a write up about Crowder.

        Hopefully you do a write up on Quincy Miller, Doron Lamb, Jeff Taylor, Crowder & Darius Miller.
        Last edited by Sparhawk; 06-04-2012, 10:29 PM.
        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


        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

          Moe sounds like he has potential, but the Pacers need some scoring off that bench. I don't see how this guy could be picked.

          Thanks for the write up. You rock my man.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

            Wouldn't mind him after reading this. I LOVE these reads!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

              I haven't given this guy too much thought because I think there's little chance he'll even be an option at #26. I do like him quite a bit, but I just don't see him being within reach without a trade. If I was going to trade up within a range I could pick him, I'd probably be more interested in Moultrie.

              I'd also like to see the T-bird take on Jeffrey Taylor. I'm impressed with his defense, and I'd like to know how you think he might (or might not) fit into the Pacers plans should he available at #26.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

                I loved watching tape of Moe this year. I think he goes early teens very skilled on both sides of the ball. I think he has 20ppg potential at the NBA level.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

                  Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                  Me too!

                  High motor, plays defense, high basketball IQ. If he can transition to SF/SG, he'd the be ultimate steal. Hell, he's built enough to play some PF, but he's short at 6'6". I'd still take this guy...and Tyler just plain sucks.

                  Can't wait to read a write up about Crowder.

                  Hopefully you do a write up on Quincy Miller, Doron Lamb, Jeff Taylor, Crowder & Darius Miller.
                  Crowder is losing weight and working on his 2, wants to go back to his original position of SG.
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

                    Originally posted by Really? View Post
                    Crowder is losing weight and working on his 2, wants to go back to his original position of SG.
                    Dont think he is skilled enough to be a nba SG

                    how much weight is he down?? And is his ball handling and jump shot improving drastically?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2012 NBA draft analysis #3 : Moe Harkless

                      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                      Dont think he is skilled enough to be a nba SG

                      how much weight is he down?? And is his ball handling and jump shot improving drastically?
                      http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...s_At_Pro_Level

                      That is what his plan is, and I meant working on his 3, trying to lose about 20 lbs, not sure how he has done so far, but I bet there will be tons of reports on his progress after the combine.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X