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's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

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

  • Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

    It is 72 hours or so before draft night 2012 as I type this, and today we examine the pluses and minuses of the veteran forward from Michigan State, Draymond Green. This is the 10th draft profile this season, for the profiles of Arnett Moultrie,Fab Melo, Moe Harkless, Jeff Taylor, Marquis Teague, Royce White, Tyler Zeller,Andrew Nicholson and Orlando Johnson you can look elsewhere on this site.

    Green measured in at the NBA combine at 6’7” ½, with awingspan 7’1” ¼. He also had his weight down to about 236lbs, but it certainly appeared that Green played heavier than that at Michigan State. A 4 year player of extremely high character and intelligence, Green would appear to be the type of experienced, mature player that our current front office usually prefers. Green is under heavy consideration by Indiana we know, as he is getting a second workout with the team this week before the draft we found out earlier today.

    So with the knowledge that Green seems like the kind of guywith the background that Indiana prefers, let’s put his actual game under theTbird microscope today:

    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… …………………………..
    I think the first thing that has to be discussed with Green is, who can he guard and what position can he play at the next level?

    To me, it has always been obvious to me that he would have to play as an undersized 4 man, more so than a wing…..I am amazed at some of the scouts who project him to be a wing at the next level. Green is clearly a frontcourt 4 man who will have to play against bigger guys and use his strength and intelligence to be able to guard people, he will never ever be able tohandle playing on the perimeter defensively in my view. He has got to guard 4’sat the NBA level or he can’t play.

    But he is a bit of a defensive tweener. Lacking height and athleticism, most NBA 4 men who are decent with their back to the basket will be able to simply turn and shoot over him, as Green’s long arms will be negated by his lack of quick hops and athleticism. Where he can compensate is being strong with a great lower base, and he should be able to push guys off their spot a bit inside and at least make people take semi contested shots over him,but against good offensive players I think Green is a guy who will need double team help quite a bit of the time.

    But clearly this is preferable to asking him to guard guys on the perimeter. Green is slow in his defensive slide, and really stands up out of his athletic stance when he has to guard in space more than 2 slides. He brings his feet together to closely, and can be crossed over by good offensive ballhandlers way too easy. Guarding the ball against anyone in space with decent quickness is going to be a problem for him I think, so he has to guard non ballhandling type big guys.

    I also see him being a bit weak in the ballscreen defense aspect, though I think he can be better at this than some other situations he will be faced with. If asked to hedge and hedge hard, I think he can use a quick one step or 2 step slide to stop a ballhandler reasonably well, but where I see real trouble for him is in the recovery/scramble back to his man. Green stands up out of his stance before he runs back after making a hard hedge,which at the NBA level is death….he will be too late to get to shooters consistently if he doesn’t get better at that. More than likely, with Indiana he would be asked to stay back some in the lane area, and be asked to try and head off a dribbler with a full head of steam. In playing with this strategy, Ithink teams will simply drive by him or stop and shoot in his grill, as Green lacks the ability and burst to jump quickly and contest jump shots right in his face.

    So basically, I think we will struggle in the post against bigger guys, be unable to guard 4 men who can face him up and drive him in space, and will struggle with ballscreen defense. He will be able to use his strength and intelligence to push people off the block some, and he is a smart defender who understands team concepts and scouting reports, but still….the athletic disadvantage I think is a problem.

    Away from the ball, he isn’t and will never be a shotblocker, but his is a guy who will take a charge for you, or at least commit a hard physical foul. His placement and footwork as a help defender are excellent, and you can tell he was very well taught by one of the nation’s best coaches in Tom Izzo at Michigan State. And as a help defender, Green is probably the single best defensive communicator in this class, being very verbal and intelligent defensively is an underrated skill, and I see him as the best communicator on the floor in this year’s draft.

    Overall, a mixed bag, but you can clearly see some major potential issues there.
    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… …………………………….
    Green is a really good rebounder, if you like old school fundamentals. No one teaches the blockout and pursuit of the ball reboundtechnique better than the coaches at East Lansing, and Green was an excellent student of their style.

    Very much a blockout and hold kind of rebounder, Green is aggressive going after the ball within his own area. Rarely will he get any rebounds outside his area though, and as an offensive rebounder he doesn’t have the quickness or quick twitch leaping ability to get them unless the come very close to him. But as a defensive rebounder, he is a blockout machine, and he gets low and physical into your torso and legs, knocking you backwards when blocking you out. He is a space eater, but he doesn’t always keep good balance when blocking out an occasionally he will get a body into you but fail to actually jump into the air. Almost all of his rebounds are below the rim.

    This tremendous blockout has both pros and cons. If you like that and prefer it, you’ll like seeing him blockout opponents hard, and you’ll be sure to know that likely there is no chance that his opponent will get to many balls. But he isn’t going to get anything that doesn’t come near him,which will always keep him from being elite.

    Where his numbers are better than his abilities inrebounding is in a stat that doesn’t exist: rebounding area percentage. He has great hands, and gets his paws on balls at a very high rate within his own space and doesn’t lose them or fumble them. But because they are almost all below the rim, I fear that at this level he will lead the league in rebounds ALMOST gotten, but not actually obtained.

    Overall, I do not project him to be anything but average at the next level on the glass, and he might be below average. But he will blockout his own guy, he will work at it each time, and anything near him that he can reach he will get. But he will be outjumped a lot at the pro level, andI doubt he will be able to get those tough, in crowded places, crucial boards in big moments.

    His one outstanding skill in regards to rebounding his is ability to make the outlet pass out of a defensive rebound. He is really really good at this, always turning to his outside shoulder and having the touch and ability to make the 2 hand overhead pass to start fast breaks. Michigan State’s fast break was extremely hard to stop, and the first reason for that was all the great outlet passes they got from Draymond Green after a defensive rebound.
    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… …………………………

    Offensively, Green is somewhat limited, or at least will beat the next level.


    Green wasn’t much of a post-up threat in college against bigger guys, and his post-up game will be almost non-existent I think at thislevel.

    Green doesn’t have a move that he can get off with any accuracy against bigger defenders. His drop step is ok but he can’t explode off the balls of his feet well enough to go over anyone, and he can’t elevate high enough on any post move going to the middle of the floor to score. He kind of has to score AROUND you inside, more than over you. I project that to be amajor problem. Against any opponent that he can’t just use total brute strength against, I think he will struggle to score in the post over them.

    On the perimeter, he has a very intelligent and “old man”kind of game. He is an extremely high level passer, especially from the middle of the floor. From the wings, he is an above average passer, but from the topof the circle or slot areas, he is deadly….he is exceptional for a big man at reading the defensive rotations and situations and hitting open cutters, an attribute the Spartans took advantage of a lot in college, where they got hithe ball at the top and used him as a “point forward” type in some of their set plays or quick hitters.

    Draymond Green is a very accurate set shooter out to 20feet, and I expect he will try and expand his range to the NBA 3 point line eventually to add another weapon to his arsenal. However, he takes a lot of time to get his shot off, and gets almost no elevation off the floor when shooting it. I worry about that, because I don’t see it changing. If he has to hurry or rush his shot just to get it off, I doubt he can maintain his accuracy. This is a major concern.

    He should be an excellent pick and pop player, because he has nice footwork and can make the open 18 foot shot if he has time. I would imagine that occasionally he might see some minutes at the 5 spot against certain teams, when teams try and drag their opponent’s center out on the floor away from the basket, sort of like Orlando uses Big Baby Davis. But, like I said earlier, his flat footed release and lack of elevation is a little worrisome.

    I will say this, Green is a hell of a screener, and he would immediately be our best screener if we ended up with him. He really lays the wood to people, and is nimble enough to get really good screen angles on defenders,shuffling his feet ever so slightly to get teammates open in the optimum way. And he is so strong with that low center of gravity that teams that try andjust power through his screens are going to feel it the next day.
    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ……………………………
    So what do we have in Draymond Green?
    I think we have an undersized power forward with great intelligence and intangibles, a player who has been a leader and winner wherever he has played. But I also think we have a guy with limited upside thatis going to be a major defensive liability and who has an offensive game that am not sure translates well to the next level.

    I see the appeal he would have for teams, as a glue guy/roleplayer type, and as a guy who would be a great locker room guy. If that is what you want and value, then he can do that for you.

    But as for me, I just think he is too small to be a good quality 4 guy, too slow to play a 3, and without a good enough one translatable skill on the floor to make him a guy I would take as a first round pick.

    If I am Indiana, I’d pass at pick #26. I have serious doubts about Draymond Green’s game translating to the next level. Defensively just way too weak for my vision of how this team can be built is Green.

    Not because I don’tlike the kid (nobody gives a better interview than Draymond Green, or will be more appreciative of the opportunity), but because I think we can do better and I don’t think he fits well with what we already have.

    If Indiana does select Green, I think you have to start raising major red flags at Tyler Hansbrough, because clearly this would be a message to him that he is either going to be dealt or let go at some point. Green, West, and Hansbrough can’t ever play simultaneously, so drafting Green means one of those 2 guys is going to have to go. No way it is West, so Hansbrough would be the guy that would go I would think eventually.

    Green I think is an eventually #10-12 guy on your roster.While high character guys are valuable for those roles, I think with pick #26we can do better.

    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ……………………………>
    Despite the fact that I personally would be unhappy with thepick, I believe that Draymond Green is very likely to be an Indiana Pacer on Thursday night if we stay at pick #26, IF WE CHOOSE TO GO WITH A FRONT COURTGUY.

    Staying at #26, I think if we take a wing guy it will be either Orlando Johnson or Jeff Taylor. If we take a big, I am pretty certain it will be Draymond Green. I like Johnson and Taylor, but I don’t like Green. We will see what happens.

    Having said all of that, I am pretty certain draft nightwill be full of intrigue and movement, and I believe Indiana will be trying to move up into the early teens, perhaps as high as pick #10. Just a hunch.
    ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………………………… ………………………
    Other teams that might show some interest in Draymond Greenwould be Washington at pick #32, Golden State at pick #30, Cleveland at picks #33 and #34, and maybe Miami at #27. At the end of the day I think it is likely that he ends up a Pacer at #26, but if he doesn’t, I think he is destined for the nation’s capital in Washington DC at pick #32.

    NBA comparable: Ryan Gomes, very poor man's Udonis Haslem

    I can't really think of a past NBA comparable to him, maybe some of you can help with that.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird

  • #2
    Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

    We basically see the same thing in Draymond 10th to 12th man is where I see him ending up. Loved him in college I just dont see him as a NBA player.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

      I wasn't interested in Green b4 T-Bird's evauation, and I'm definately not after reading T-Bird's thoughts about Green. The Pacers need more than this from their pick. I don't see how Green can help improve the bench for the Pacers.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

        Taking Green at 26 would be a bigger reach than selecting Johnson at the same pick.

        Pass.
        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

          This analysis lines up well with what I already thought of Green. There seems to be a bit of a love affair with Green with some on this board, but I hope the brass of the Pacers see things differently. Green seems like a terrific person and a great teammate, but I don't want him as a first round pick. I think his weaknesses will limit his success at the pro level.

          I also think Tyler is a better player than Draymond Green. It makes little sense to use this pick to draft a player who is likely to be weaker than a struggling backup. If we pass on Taylor, Melo, White, Wroten, or Johnson (I think at least one or two will be available) in favor of Green, I will not be pleased.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

            Thanks for the clarification, I kept seeing him listed as a SF or SF/PF and was starting to think I was either losing my mind or just thinking of someone completely different by mistake. I will say this he did do a nice job on the battleship to start the season vs NC. I have no idea what his numbers were, but I remember thinking here's a guy who is stronger than everyone else on the floor, which against Zeller and Henson thats a big deal, but TBird had it right, though, Zeller shot over him, he just missed.

            I'd comp him to Dejuan Blair ironically enough. I know he's not as wide as Blair and has a better shot, but its the same grinding type game with the limited lateral quickness.

            I don't think this is a bad pick, and honestly a back up power forward who can get more than 5 boards a night, where 2 of them aren't his own misses, might just make me do a jig. He'll struggle against stretch 4s, but it'd be nice to see D West mentor him. I think you could do alot worse.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Thanks for the clarification, I kept seeing him listed as a SF or SF/PF and was starting to think I was either losing my mind or just thinking of someone completely different by mistake. I will say this he did do a nice job on the battleship to start the season vs NC. I have no idea what his numbers were, but I remember thinking here's a guy who is stronger than everyone else on the floor, which against Zeller and Henson thats a big deal, but TBird had it right, though, Zeller shot over him, he just missed.

              I'd comp him to Dejuan Blair ironically enough. I know he's not as wide as Blair and has a better shot, but its the same grinding type game with the limited lateral quickness.

              I don't think this is a bad pick, and honestly a back up power forward who can get more than 5 boards a night, where 2 of them aren't his own misses, might just make me do a jig. He'll struggle against stretch 4s, but it'd be nice to see D West mentor him. I think you could do alot worse.
              I won't be mad if we draft him, but I won't be happy either.
              "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                I'd rather not get another play-it-safer. The roster doesn't have many glaring holes (aside from a backup center, but good luck with that at #26), so we might as well roll the dice on someone with a little upside if we can get it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                  The one area where I could see Green being really useful for the Pacers is as a facilitator off the bench. West is asked to do a lot of facilitating with the first team offense, but this is a role that Hansbrough is entirely unsuited for. This means we have to essentially have two offenses because we don't have the personnel off the bench to run our first offense. Green would solve that problem.

                  However, there are other players I'd rather have.

                  Green does seem like the type of guy who could/would develop a post game when forced to, as he will be in the NBA if he's going to do anything more than stick.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                    No.

                    God, no.

                    No.

                    God please, no.

                    No.

                    No.

                    Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo!!
                    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


                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                      Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                      No.

                      God, no.

                      No.

                      God please, no.

                      No.

                      No.

                      Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooo!!

                      I couldn't agree more. I think I'd be more disappointed than when we picked up Tyler in the draft.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                        Since Bird usually likes positional purity I thing we pass on Green.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                          Originally posted by Larry Staverman View Post
                          Since Bird usually likes positional purity I thing we pass on Green.
                          Err, Paul George and George Hill immediately come to mind.


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Err, Paul George and George Hill immediately come to mind.
                            Those two can play two positions proficiently rather than being stuck between positions.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird's 2012 draft analysis #10: Draymond Green

                              TBird, maybe I am missing something here......you mention his strengths and weaknesses.....you mention that you think that the Pacers would pick him if we are looking for a Frontcourt Player.....but you don't really mention why the Pacers would pick him.

                              Why would Green be a good fit for the Pacers and why do you think that Bird would choose him?

                              Given all of his shortcomings and ( most notably ) other more talented Players that can possibly fill our Frontcourt needs.....I don't see why he would be the guy that Bird chooses. As I suggested in the other Draft thread.....could it be because his "intangibles" could make him a good "glue guy" ( something that I can totally see Bird wanting on his Team )?
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X