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

2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

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

  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
    23. Indiana Pacers
    The pick: Isaiah Canaan, Murray State Racers


    There were "high fives" in the Fraschilla draft room when Canaan was available. It is not only an area of need for them, but to get a strong, quick, savvy point guard with NBA range at No. 23 is a steal. He could turn out to be as good as any playmaker in this draft. -- F.F.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...ks-first-round


    Love Fran he does great work, one of my favorite college guys + he does international. Great dude too.





    Chad Ford's tier column is up no one made tier one or two lol. I am sure some teams disagree with that, but he goes with the majority of teams say.

    EDIT: Yes, he said McLemore and Noel + Bennett got 2nd tier votes. I would give McLemore a 2nd tier grade as well.


    Like I have said all along tier 5 is where it is at damn near 30 guys in that tier. pick 20-40 is where the value is. The Cavs are sitting so pretty with 3 picks in that range.
    Canaan seems very intriguing. How is his defense?
    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by tadscout View Post
      Why are we arguing about a Pacers-Lakers deal that isn't even a rumor, and is made up?

      Want to talk about a possibility of that type of trade, why not do it in the trade forum (or even make a new thread in the main forum and ask what ppl want to do with our pick, and include the option to trade it with GG to shed salary) and not in the draft prospects forum.

      JMO...
      It was an example in a post about draft prospects. The guy said that the Pacers' workout prospects look like 2nd rounders, and then he said maybe the pick will be traded.

      Maybe the rest of us got off track a little but the original post itself was very much thread related, nothing wrong with it.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        Porter is a player that is seldom if ever mentioned on this board. I realize he's a top 5 player that the Pacers have no chance at getting, but then so is McLemore and he's been discussed plenty.
        What is there to talk about?? He is a really solid player. Weak handle long good defender. He boards and has a good post game. His jumper improved and now turned into one of the best players in the nation who should be a solid pro. Not much to debate with him IMO. McLemore has a lot more raw talent than him, but Porter has already proved he is a great player.

        Like you said no chance we could draft him, but he should be a really solid pro. Good two way guy. I hope his defense stays solid. I could see it slowly declining especially vs elite athletes like he will face in the NBA. He gets the most out of his tools I will say that. He improved a lot more than I though he would this year. Props to him.


        I still prefer Mo Harkless last year to him, but I was super high on Mo. I think Mo has a much higher ceiling.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by tadscout View Post
          Canaan seems very intriguing. How is his defense?
          Not, bad but at the NBA level it will likely be average at best(it could be better. You arent paying him for defense that is for sure lol. I am more concern with his ball handling/ decsion making. He is much better off the ball than on the ball IMO. His pull up off a dribble hand off is a beauty. The rotation he gets on his shot is amazing. He can flat out stroke it both set and off the bounce. I think he will figure it out on defense he has solid tools on that end. It may take him some time to adjust though. The Ohio Valley to the NBA is quite a jump. Lillard tricked me last year. He had solid defense in the Big Sky just based on athleticism. Lillard was bad this year on defense he slowly got better.


          The pg from Ohio is another guy I haven't watched outside of a few tourney games(I wasn't taking notes or anything and focusing). I have the tape on him. I just don't know if it is worth my time. From what I have read Cooper isn't much of a prospect. I will likely get to him eventually especially if he gets drafted.
          Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-20-2013, 05:00 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            Not, bad but at the NBA level it will likely be average at best(it could be better. You arent paying him for defense that is for sure lol. I am more concern with his ball handling/ decsion making. He is much better off the ball than on the ball IMO. His pull up off a dribble hand off is a beauty. The rotation he gets on his shot is amazing. He can flat out stroke it both set and off the bounce. I think he will figure it out on defense he has solid tools on that end. It may take him some time to adjust though. The Ohio Valley to the NBA is quite a jump. Lillard tricked me last year. He had solid defense in the Big Sky just based on athleticism. Lillard was bad this year on defense he slowly got better.
            Way our offense is built around team ball, it sounds like he could fill a similar role as Hill, while Hill is resting.

            Our offense seemed to struggle when we switched to an off ball/team ball PG in Hill and then put in a ball dominate guy in DJ. Offense got initiated slower with DJ as PG and it got very stagnate.
            "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
              I totally disagree that is blasphemy to Lillard . I scouted both of them, and Lillard is on a different planet than CJ IMO. CJ rarely makes the right play especially in traffic. Damian was a rare guy he hardly ever made a bad read and could shoot for days as well as blow by his man off the bounce.

              CJ will be a solid pro IMO as a combo guard. I don't think he will ever be considered a pg. He has major holes in his game for that to serious help for that to occur. He will be a guy who can get to the rim a bit and a solid spot up shooter. I think he is closer to a Gary Neal type of guy or Jason Terry than a great pg in Lillard. The one thing I do love about CJ is the way he finishes left. He has a great left hand and finishes through contact better than most. Lillard was also much quicker than CJ IMO. I think athletically CJ is just average in terms of NBA guys. I think that will hurt him in beating his man off the dribble. I also fear him as a defender not to sure he will be league average in that area.

              I have some questions for you since I watched no college b-ball this year. Keep in mind Lillard might be my all-time favorite prospect, and I'm intrigued by C.J. since we're oddly bringing him in for a workout.

              What do you mean about their (Lillard/C.J.) difference to make the right read and differences in pg ability? I look at C.J.'s best season vs. Lillard's and their AST/TO ratios are pretty similar (Lillard 4.0/2.3 and C.J. 3.5/2.3). In the limited stuff I've seen on C.J., he looked quite smart with the ball. I haven't seen enough to know if he can "run" a team, but the bad plays I saw looked more like a lack of trust in his teammates than anything else. How much of that could be the talent he's surrounded with? Looking at Lillard's numbers, it's surprising that his AST/TO ratio was much better as a rookie (6.5/3.0) and I'm wondering if the same thing could happen with C.J.

              Also, I'm curious why/how you think C.J. is an average athlete. Looking at C.J.'s max vert is 38.5" (Lillard is 39.5") with a longer standing reach than Lillard's, and C.J.'s 3/4 sprint is faster than Lillard's (3.32 to 3.34). What am I missing, and what are the major holes?

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                I have some questions for you since I watched no college b-ball this year. Keep in mind Lillard might be my all-time favorite prospect, and I'm intrigued by C.J. since we're oddly bringing him in for a workout.

                What do you mean about their (Lillard/C.J.) difference to make the right read and differences in pg ability? I look at C.J.'s best season vs. Lillard's and their AST/TO ratios are pretty similar (Lillard 4.0/2.3 and C.J. 3.5/2.3). In the limited stuff I've seen on C.J., he looked quite smart with the ball. I haven't seen enough to know if he can "run" a team, but the bad plays I saw looked more like a lack of trust in his teammates than anything else. How much of that could be the talent he's surrounded with? Looking at Lillard's numbers, it's surprising that his AST/TO ratio was much better as a rookie (6.5/3.0) and I'm wondering if the same thing could happen with C.J.

                Also, I'm curious why/how you think C.J. is an average athlete. Looking at C.J.'s max vert is 38.5" (Lillard is 39.5") with a longer standing reach than Lillard's, and C.J.'s 3/4 sprint is faster than Lillard's (3.32 to 3.34). What am I missing, and what are the major holes?
                CM McCallum is coming in for a workout or CM Leslie?
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Originally posted by owl View Post
                  CM McCallum is coming in for a workout or CM Leslie?
                  McCollum, according to this post.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                    I have some questions for you since I watched no college b-ball this year. Keep in mind Lillard might be my all-time favorite prospect, and I'm intrigued by C.J. since we're oddly bringing him in for a workout.

                    What do you mean about their (Lillard/C.J.) difference to make the right read and differences in pg ability? I look at C.J.'s best season vs. Lillard's and their AST/TO ratios are pretty similar (Lillard 4.0/2.3 and C.J. 3.5/2.3). In the limited stuff I've seen on C.J., he looked quite smart with the ball. I haven't seen enough to know if he can "run" a team, but the bad plays I saw looked more like a lack of trust in his teammates than anything else. How much of that could be the talent he's surrounded with? Looking at Lillard's numbers, it's surprising that his AST/TO ratio was much better as a rookie (6.5/3.0) and I'm wondering if the same thing could happen with C.J.

                    Also, I'm curious why/how you think C.J. is an average athlete. Looking at C.J.'s max vert is 38.5" (Lillard is 39.5") with a longer standing reach than Lillard's, and C.J.'s 3/4 sprint is faster than Lillard's (3.32 to 3.34). What am I missing, and what are the major holes?
                    Lillard in college was so far advanced in the PnR offense, he also played on the ball more than CJ does. He would get into the lane and always read the defense correctly. If the man hedged hard he would make the touch pass to the wing quick so he could touch pass to the other open man(the man who set the screen, or if one helped the other open man) or split it if the hedger had poor feet. If the went under the screen he stroked it. If they went over he would either take his man off the dribble , and if the defense collapsed he hit the open man. If he turned the corner he accelerated into 4th gear to the hole for 2. CJ doesn't have 4th gear, and he also didn't make the right read a lot. In essence when he got into the lane he missed the open man and shot or vice verse.


                    In terms of athlete he is just average IMO. George Hill has outstanding numbers too. The weakness they have is laterally quickness.I do think CJ will be better than Hill in that area. It isn't a huge concern for me his decision making is. I always stress quickness not speed and jumping ability for a guard(Caldwell-Pope is a perfect example dude doesnt jump super high, but moving side to side he is elite). I always said when scouting Lillard he was one of the quickest pgs I had seen, qucick with the ball, and quick decision maker.

                    And the major major difference IMO is pace. Lillard is my favorite prospect ever due to pace. He plays at his pace and always dictates pace on offense(this trait makes him 100x quicker than his combine numbers indicate). He uses changes of speed like only a 10 year vet would. If John Wall had Lillards pace he would be unguardable Wall has one gear fast! CJ is similar he has very little pace IMO.


                    I still think CJ can be a 18ppg type 6th man or SG. I just am not sure I want him as my pg. Also note I am a huge fan of scoring guards as pgs. I just can't stand guys like Terry(when he played pg) and CJ and even Hill (Hill has some of the same issues in terms of missing reads) as a pg they miss way to many teammates that a solid scoring pg wouldn't miss.


                    I just fear CJ is way to poor in traffic to be a great pg. Lillard excelled in traffic. If he was going to be a successful pg it would be in the offense we run though.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Super helpful, p4e. Thanks for explaining.

                      Both C.J. and Canaan would be big upgrades for our bench. I find it intriguing that C.J. is clearly out of our range, but we're bringing him in. With Pritchard running the draft (which gives me much relief, as opposed to Donnie), I'm wondering if we'd pull off some magic to go for McCollum.

                      Do you think the talent difference between C.J. and Canaan is big enough to make giving up another asset (Lance or future 1st?) worthwhile? C.J. is projected in that 6-10 range, and there are 5 teams in that range from the Western Conference (typically easier trading partners). It all seems intriguing.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                        Super helpful, p4e. Thanks for explaining.

                        Both C.J. and Canaan would be big upgrades for our bench. I find it intriguing that C.J. is clearly out of our range, but we're bringing him in. With Pritchard running the draft (which gives me much relief, as opposed to Donnie), I'm wondering if we'd pull off some magic to go for McCollum.

                        Do you think the talent difference between C.J. and Canaan is big enough to make giving up another asset (Lance or future 1st?) worthwhile? C.J. is projected in that 6-10 range, and there are 5 teams in that range from the Western Conference (typically easier trading partners). It all seems intriguing.
                        I wouldn't trade Lance for CJ + Canaan. I think Lance is the perfect complement to Canaan or Erick Green for that matter. (they both excel off the ball and off screens, and both solid with the ball, and have killer pull up jumpers)

                        I think Lance and Canaan would be dynamic as hell. We would probably turn the ball over a lot with that lineup though. I think that would improve in time. I still prefer Green right now to Canaan. I think Green is a much better decision maker. Ball handling to me is a wash. I am still debating who is the better fit for us though.



                        I think I finally found my comp for CJ though. I think he plays like Terry a bit but OJ Mayo (and even has traits similar to our own Orlando Johnson) to me is the perfect comp for him. The movements even remind me a lot of Mayo. I think that would be the best guy to compare him to. I think CJ played a ton like OJ Mayo did at USC as well. OJ played on the ball in college a bit more IMO. But both were the team and both were huge playmakers with a bit of decision making issues in terms of hitting the open man.
                        Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-20-2013, 06:30 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          I should've said C.J. or Canaan. I wouldn't want both.

                          Lance or future 1st + 23 for C.J. or just pick Canaan? I think I know the answer since you wouldn't trade Lance for both combined.

                          O.J. Mayo..that's a scary comparison. I want nothing to do with questionable shot selection or decision-making unless they are a defensive stopper.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                            I should've said C.J. or Canaan. I wouldn't want both.

                            Lance or future 1st + 23 for C.J. or just pick Canaan? I think I know the answer since you wouldn't trade Lance for both combined.

                            O.J. Mayo..that's a scary comparison. I want nothing to do with questionable shot selection or decision-making unless they are a defensive stopper.
                            My bad that was a typo I meant Lance+Canaan isnt worth CJ( like Lance plus #23) IMO.

                            I personally would stay at #23. I think Lance plus Canaan is a lot more dynamic than just CJ. Like I said Canaan is the perfect guy to pair with Lance on the 2nd unit. I think the only area that CJ is truly superior to Canaan is ability to finish at the rim. We have Lance who excels in that area. I just like the idea of Lance and Green or Canaan a lot more appealing to me personally. I still think Green's ability to draw fouls will play a lot on the next level. The way he shoots combined with his penetration ability is really good IMO. I really like his decision making when he penetrates as well it is really solid IMO. He isn't that athlete though, I still like him should be a great backup pg in the right system even with the athletic weakness. I love him for Thibs system and for ours.


                            Also note I only watched one game of CJ this year. I watched the Baylor game where he went nuts for almost 40.(still have that game on the DVR) I am basing most of my assignment on last years tape which I watched a ton of. I figured he was coming out last year. He is only 21 I mean he could of improved a lot. Lillard made his jump after an injury. It could of been a blessing if he worked on his weaknesses.

                            I still like Erick Green+ Lance as option 1A. I do agree with Tbird Canaan is a lot tougher than most and is tougher than Green, but I love Green's skill set on offense for our squad. He is a scoring pg, but he is a pg who makes good reads. I wouldn't be mad with either one. I think both of them have pros and cons. I think Cannaan is the grittier defender and more physical in general, but I feel Green is better on offense especially in penetration. Green plays with pace that I was talking about earlier.
                            Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-20-2013, 07:19 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              If there were ever a time to trade lance it would be now, this is when you would be able to get the most value out of him.
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by Really? View Post
                                If there were ever a time to trade lance it would be now, this is when you would be able to get the most value out of him.

                                I'm not sure I'm following your thinking. What can you really get when Lance makes less than a mil? Maybe some picks, but not much in a returning player.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X