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 tadscout View Post
    Denver's pick at 27 is available, teams tell Y! Nuggets open to future 1st, or moving back into 30's. Nuggets like their young roster core.
    If there was a way to get Erick Green and Bullock with the 23 and 27, I'd love for that scenario to happen.
    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


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      This is a draft where you can stock up your bench with NBA ready talent. I hope the Pacers are making a call.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by Twitter"
        Adrian Wojnarowski@WojYahooNBA 18m
        The more teams I talk to in the late 20's, the less enthusiasm I hear from any of them about keeping their draft picks.
        Sounds like there may be multiple picks for the taking.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
          If there was a way to get Erick Green and Bullock with the 23 and 27, I'd love for that scenario to happen.
          I'd rather get Snell and Canaan. But I wouldn't give up a future first for 27.
          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/col...#ixzz2XAEFk7kv

            I love this article ever year


            C.J. Leslie, 6-9 forward, N.C. State: "I'm not a fan. I know he's a great athlete, but he's undersized, turnover prone, and he doesn't shoot. He'll dazzle you every now and then but he's not real consistent. He got nothing done there in three years."
            Trevor Mbakwe, 6-8 forward, Minnesota: "On the court I think he can contribute, but the off-court stuff has to be cause for concern. I think he makes a roster. He's undersized. Maybe he could make it as a Reggie Evans or Paul Millsap type, but he's not as good as either of those guys."
            Ray McCallum, 6-2 point guard, Detroit: "He's an NBA player. He was one of the top point guards in the country coming out of high school, and I don't think he has gotten worse. He's a great athlete for his position, which is an attack point guard. We're getting more of those kinds of point guards in our league. He has to become a better outside shooter and finish better around the basket, but he's a gym rat, a coach's son, and he understands how to play the game. He's athletic, but he doesn't use it enough. I would love to see him go through traffic and dunk on somebody."
            C.J. McCollum, 6-3 guard, Lehigh: "Love the kid. Has intelligence and a little bit of toughness. He's not a true point guard, but he can play a little combo. He gets his own shot a lot for someone who doesn't look like he's blowing by people. His foot injury is no concern."
            Ben McLemore, 6-5 guard, Kansas: "He's not very good off the bounce and he's not great at creating his own shot, but he's the best shooter in the draft. Lack of killer instinct is certainly a question, but the fact that he's humble helps him. I think he'll be a better pro than Nerlens. He's got growth in his game."
            Tony Mitchell, 6-9 forward, North Texas: "I think he's Shawn Marion. He's that good of an athlete. The problem is he falls in line with the Royce Whites of the world where they think they have everything under control. I mean, if you're the only NBA player in the Sun Belt, how is your team one of the worst in the league? Overall intelligence is a question, too. That's something we're digging into. You don't have to be a rocket scientist, but you have to have some innate intelligence. He just didn't have a good year."
            Shabazz Muhammad, 6-6 forward, UCLA: "He takes a lot of criticism for a guy who scored 18 a game as a freshman in the Pac-12. He was very forthright in his interview, didn't shy away from answering any questions. He had 27 assists for the whole year. When I saw that, I thought it was a misprint. What I want to know is, for a guy who is known to work out hard and train, and he has supposedly been trained by some of the best trainers on the west coast, why the hell doesn't he have a right hand? I think he's gonna slide, I really do."
            Erik Murphy, 6-10 forward, Florida: "He's a good shooter, but he really needs space. He can't put the ball on the floor. I don't think he's an NBA player, but he'll be able to play overseas."
            Mike Muscala, 6-11 forward, Bucknell: "He has a tremendous amount of talent, but he's really soft. He wants nothing to do with any physicality down low, and I don't think he has enough stuff off the bounce to be Byron Mullens. At Bucknell, they have one strength coach for all their sports. When he does this for a living, he could get bigger and stronger. But at the end of the day I just don't think he's good enough."
            Nerlens Noel, 7-foot center, Kentucky: "His knee injury shouldn't be a concern. Guys come back from that pretty readily. He's a game changer at the defensive end, but I don't ever see him being a 16-plus-a-night scorer. But Tyson Chandler was the second best player on a title winning team, and he can't score either. His camp seems to be focused on getting him hooked up with Hollywood. He's going to be a solid pro, but he's not going to be your standard No. 1 pick. He's got a little waist and rounded shoulders."
            Victor Oladipo, 6-4 guard, Indiana: "Love his makeup. Great worker. On defense he plays like Tony Allen. He took very limited attempts to get that high (three-point) percentage. My question is, has he had his big jump already of improvement? The fact that he's a top five pick is an indictment of this draft."
            Kelly Olynyk, 7-foot forward, Gonzaga: "He's a big *******, man. He shoots it. You have to hope you can get an average defender out of him. I'm not sure he wants any kind of contact, and I'm not sure about his mental toughness. He had good numbers this year, but when you look deeper, you ask what bigs did he play against? He was a great interview. Really good dude. I enjoyed talking to him as much as anybody we've met with."
            Mason Plumlee, 7-foot center, Duke: "He's 23-and-a-half and he still doesn't have any skill. I don't ever see him becoming a pick-and-pop guy. He can run the court and his post defense is good. He's going to be a solid backup guy but I'm not effusive about him. He's going to have to play center. He has tiny hips. He's not going to get all that much bigger physically."
            Otto Porter, 6-9 forward, Georgetown: "He just knows how to play. He does a little bit of everything. He has come really far. I saw him in high school. He weighed about 45 pounds. The one thing that concerns me about him is he's not an elite athlete, and he has to guard at his position. It scared me that he played so poorly against Florida Gulf Coast, but he's really smart, so I think he'll figure it out."
            Phil Pressey, 6-foot point guard, Missouri: "He didn't have a great year. He's a streaky outside shooter, and his decision making at times is not good. Whether he makes it in the NBA depends on which team drafts him, but he may have to pick the minor league route to make his way into the league. I think Jacob Pullen is a better shooter, scorer and leader, and Pullen is not in the league."
            Glen Rice Jr., 6-6 forward, Michigan/NBDL: "Great bloodlines. Not as good a shooter as his dad, but still one of the better shooters in this draft. He has played the NBA game for a full year so he is slightly ahead of the college guys. I worry that he thinks he's better than he is and he disrupts the game for other people. He still settles too much for his jump shot. Someone could pull the trigger on him in the first round."
            Peyton Siva, 6-1 point guard, Louisville: "He brings you energy and defense. It's just a matter of can he knock down open threes. He can guard a little bit, he's really athletic and strong. Because of his pedigree and Pitino's influence, maybe he gets a year. I can't get over the hump with him. Some guys are just very good college players."
            Tony Snell, 6-7 forward, New Mexico: "He's a really good shooter. Long and lean. He relies too much on the jump shot and not his ability to put it on the floor and create. His motor needs to be a lot higher. I think he plays at his own pace. Some of our guys like him more than I do."
            James Southerland, 6-8 forward, Syracuse: "He's not as good a shooter as I thought he would be. [He] really moves kind of stiff."
            Adonis Thomas, 6-6 forward, Memphis: "He has a great body, but he hasn't produced the numbers we all expected when he came out of high school. He relies too much on his jump shot instead of punishing people going to the basket or posting up. The fact that he wants to be Joe Johnson is borderline ridiculous. He's a four, we're debating whether he can be a three, yet he calls himself a two."
            Deshaun Thomas, 6-7 forward, Ohio State: "He's going to struggle. He has been a mismatch in college because he had the advantage in size and quickness, but that won't be the case in the NBA. He has always been a scorer, but he's too small to be a four, and that's where he played his whole career at Ohio State. He's not athletic or quick enough to create or guard the three, and he's not big enough to play the four. So he's your classic tweener."
            Jeff Withey, 7-foot center, Kansas: "He can be a good shot blocker in the NBA. He can also affect and alter shots around the basket because of his length. He has no upside, but he's really good at what he does. He shot about 70 percent from the foul line, so if he can make a 12-footer and be a pick-and-pop guy, that will make a huge difference."
            Nate Wolters, 6-5 point guard, South Dakota State: "An extremely smart basketball player. He has improved his shot and has a good runner. My main concern is whether he can guard a quick guard. He has a chance to make it in the NBA depending on which team he is with. If you look at his stats this year before he hurt his ankle, he shot like 48 percent from three. I'm not saying he'll be great, but he's definitely an NBA player. His first step is quicker than people realize."
            Khalif Wyatt, 6-4 guard, Temple: "He has an extremely old man's game, where it's dribble-dribble-back-you-in and take a shot over you. He needs some coach to put him out there and let him do his thing, but who's going to give him that type of freedom? I don't know if he can guard anybody. I'm not sure he's a draftable player. I would pass."
            B.J. Young, 6-4 point guard, Arkansas: "I wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot pole. He just goes on his natural talent. I don't think he really knows how to play. I've heard he doesn't work real hard during the summer. He can't shoot and he's wild."
            Cody Zeller, 7-foot forward, Indiana: "The best running big man in the draft. He's a better face-up player than we were shown in college. He has to get stronger on his post-ups, but he handles the ball well for a guy his size. If he develops a jump shot, that will give him more space to drive. I think he has great upside. When you talk to him, you see he's an elite human being. He really gets it, and physically he's an elite athlete."


            Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/col...#ixzz2XAMl7sJe


            All those flights. All those rental cars. All those hotel rooms. And yes, all those games. And practices. Not to mention all those hours and hours spent on the telephone. All of it in an effort to collect every possible crumb of information that will be baked into the cake that gets served up this week. The final result is two or three decisions that everyone agrees are part of a woefully inexact science.
            This is what it's like to be Finch. Your whole life is built around one big guessing game.
            And this is your big week. On Thursday night, the NBA will hold the 2013 draft in Brooklyn. The overwhelming consensus is that this is the weakest crop of college prospects the league has seen in a long time, maybe ever. Even the international guys have generated one big shrug. But don't think for a second that Finch isn't feeling the same amount of pressure he always feels this time of year.
            Regular readers know all about Finch. He is an amalgam of five NBA scouts whom I talked to in recent weeks to get their insights into the main college prospects in this year's draft. Since NBA teams don't like to give away secrets (as if there are any), the scouts spoke with me on the condition that I would grant them anonymity. This also allowed them to tell me what they really think. I'll warn you now: It isn't always pretty.
            (Incidentally, I must give credit as always to my colleague Alex Wolff for coming up with the pseudonym Finch. Several years ago, he assigned it to an anonymous scout whom he followed for several months for an SI magazine story. Alex, he of the literary bent, chose the name because it was the character Scout's surname in To Kill A Mockingbird.)
            I cherry picked the highlights of what the scouts had to say and gathered them as if they were said by a single person named Finch. Can you feel the draft? Good. Here's what Finch had to say about this year's crop. It's everything you need to know from A (Adams) to Z (Zeller):
            Steven Adams, 7-foot center, Pittsburgh: "You see him work out and he does some things athletically at that size that are impressive. He's a funny kid. Different personality than we're used to dealing with. He had no clue how to play. Remember, he's from New Zealand. It's not like he came from Lithuania, where the culture centers around basketball. He grew up on a surfboard."
            Anthony Bennett, 6-8 forward, UNLV: "He got soft as the year went on. Why? His desire to play defense is another question. He's a good athlete but not a great one. He's going to be a better player in the pros than he was in college, because when he was in college he played with selfish teammates."
            Vander Blue, 6-5 guard, Marquette: "He's a really good athlete, but I'm not sure what position he is. He's a little on the small side to be a two-guard. But he's a really good defender, and he's a tough kid, which most Marquette kids are."
            Lorenzo Brown, 6-5 point guard, N.C. State: "He's a converted point guard, so that's where we have him slotted. He has done OK in his workouts. Didn't shoot it extremely well. He's a little wild, a little inconsistent. I like Pierre Jackson more."
            Reggie Bullock, 6-7 guard, North Carolina: "He can really stroke it. Just an OK athlete. OK defensively. I'll tell you what else he does is he rebounds. When they had that run after Roy Williams went small, he averaged like nine rebounds a game. He doesn't pass it much, but he doesn't turn it over, either. We interviewed him, and he was not very good."
            Trey Burke, 6-1 point guard, Michigan: "I like Burke because he's a winner, he's tough, and he can score. He's got some D.J. Augustin in him. He loves to prove people wrong. We like our guards big, but look at guys like Chris Paul and Tony Parker. I think Burke is a solid point guard but I don't see the all-star level."
            Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, 6-6 guard, Georgia: "He takes tough shots, but he makes a lot of 'em. He can score in a multitude of ways. He scores really high in our analytical projections. His weight is a concern because he'll have to defend some of the stronger two guards, but that's about it. He's a great kid, just a southern nice guy, not overwhelmed by the process."
            Michael Carter-Williams, 6-6 point guard, Syracuse: "I like him, but don't love him. He's turnover prone. I think he's a year-and-a-half away from making an impact. If he can shoot, he can be a starter, but right now he's a bad shooter. But that's one thing you can get better at if you work at it. He's going to get you steals -- he is really good in those passing lanes -- but defensively Syracuse players are definitely less prepared for the NBA because they play that zone. In the end he's not going to fall out of the top 10 because he's a point guard with size."
            Isaiah Canaan, 6-foot guard, Murray State: "I'm still trying to figure him out. He's one of the best shooters in the draft, but is he a small two, or is he a converted point guard? I almost see him as too nice. He's not really a killer. For as strong as he is he doesn't really play a physical kind of game. He's not that quick, but scouts have a saying: You automatically become quicker when you can make shots, because people have to guard you out there."
            Allen Crabbe, 6-6 guard, California: "He can really shoot. Smarter player than he's probably gotten credit for. Strength and mental toughness is a little bit of a concern. He has been disappointing in workouts. He looks great as long as he doesn't have to compete."
            DeWayne Dedmon, 7-foot center, USC: "He's another one who should have stayed in school because he's so young in terms of basketball experience. He's not a bad shooter for his size, but he lacks strength. Maybe he gets drafted, but I don't see him being a roster guy."
            Gorgui Dieng, 6-11 center, Louisville: "He's smart. You can play through him. He can make a 15-foot jump shot. People compare him to Roy Hibbert, but Hibbert is bigger and was more of a scorer in college. He has to become a better free throw shooter."
            Jamaal Franklin, 6-5 guard, San Diego State: "Right now, he's not a good enough shooter to be an NBA two-guard. It's tough to get on the court at that position if you're not a great shooter or a great defender. He's got freak athleticism and he can pass better than people know. He works so hard I think he can become a better shooter. Remember, Kawhi Leonard didn't hit threes in college, either."
            Archie Goodwin, 6-5 guard, Kentucky: "He's a good athlete who handles the ball well. Calipari tried to play him at the point but he doesn't have that mentality. I don't see him contributing right away. He's not John Jenkins, he's not Orlando Johnson, he's not Jeffery Taylor. You have to remember, he's just turning 19. He's a D League guy, but he was a McDonald's All-American who was recruited by Kentucky. Let's look back in a few years and see what we have."
            Erick Green, 6-3 guard, Virginia Tech: "He's a scorer, but he's not a great athlete, he doesn't play defense, and he doesn't have an aggressive personality. He's going to have to get stronger. He's OK for me. He's an undersized two guard, and he's not a special athlete. I don't know if he's a first rounder."
            Solomon Hill, 6-7 forward, Arizona: "He was one of the most impressive kids we interviewed. He was extremely serious, articulate, very thoughtful with some of the questions we asked. But I'm not sure what you do with him. I don't know how athletic he is. He's a second rounder at best."
            Tim Hardaway, Jr., 6-6 guard, Michigan: "He has shown improvement because he's an extremely hard worker. Defensively he's just average. He needs to become a better shooter, especially off the dribble. He's a better athlete than Bullock. If I'm picking late teens or early 20s and he's available, I would take him. His problem is the position he plays at the next level is really hard."
            Pierre Jackson, 5-11 point guard, Baylor: "The main concern obviously is his size. He is really little. Now Nate Robinson overcame that, Muggsy Bogues overcame that, so he can overcome it too because he's got strength and athleticism. He was great in that run they had in the NIT. He is one confident dude. I don't think he can get into the first round, but I think he plays in our league."
            Grant Jerrett, 6-10 forward, Arizona: "He's young, but he's a really good outside shooter. He could be a good stretch four. He's almost seven feet, so if he gets stronger and bigger maybe he could play the five. He's doing really well in his workouts, but he's a project. He can shoot but he has a bad body. His body fat is really high. He'll probably get drafted and end up in the D League for a while."
            Myck Kabongo, 6-3 point guard, Texas: "I'm not feeling him. Never have. He probably should have gone back to Texas, although I don't know if they wanted him back. He's one of the fastest guys in the draft so he's intriguing, but his outside shooting and decision making are concerns. I think he's a project."
            Ryan Kelly, 6-11 forward, Duke: "He does nothing for me. He's broken physically. He can shoot it some. He's a typical stretch four and he knows how to play. He may be a tough one for teams to take because he's had the same injury twice, and it's in the foot. The injury and his lack of strength may impede him from being drafted."
            Shane Larkin, 6-foot point guard, Miami: "Stud athlete, stud kid. His size is never going to change, so the question is whether your coach can live with that. He had a 44-inch vertical at the combine. He's gonna be pretty damn good, man. If you have talented pieces around him, he's going to be really good because he likes to get others involved. He's an off-the-charts kid. He is truly about the team."
            Ricardo Ledo, 6-6 guard, Providence: "I saw him in practice. He is very talented. He can slash, shoot the jump shot, pass the ball. He's got a chance to be special if he can play the point, but I don't know if he can think the game at that level. He's had a really tough life. He did a great job in our interview. Talked about some of the other guys in the draft, and he really nailed it."
            Alex Len, 7-1 center, Maryland: "You see someone his size who is talented offensively, but you look up and he averages 11 and 9 and you're like, what the hell is going on? When he wanted to do well, like against Nerlens Noel or Mason Plumlee, he did it, but why wasn't that there every night? He's young and he's still becoming Americanized. The coaches at Maryland swear he's a special shooter, but special shooters don't shoot 68 percent from the foul line."


            Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/col...#ixzz2XAMw2f7r

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              This is not exactly a ringing endorsement:

              Trey Burke, 6-1 point guard, Michigan: "I like Burke because he's a winner, he's tough, and he can score. He's got some D.J. Augustin in him.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Ray McCallum, 6-2 point guard, Detroit: "He's an NBA player. He was one of the top point guards in the country coming out of high school, and I don't think he has gotten worse. He's a great athlete for his position, which is an attack point guard. We're getting more of those kinds of point guards in our league. He has to become a better outside shooter and finish better around the basket, but he's a gym rat, a coach's son, and he understands how to play the game. He's athletic, but he doesn't use it enough. I would love to see him go through traffic and dunk on somebody."
                If our pick at 23 is not a PG, I'd love it if we can pick Ray at #53. Most mocks have him in the 40s and 50s.
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  That was a great read.

                  Btw, "I like Burke... He's got some DJ Augustin in him."

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Trey Burke has an RSB40 of 6.0, Ray McCallum has an 8.2.
                    Burke has a 2 FG% of 50.3, McCallum has 54.5%
                    Burke has a 3.125 A/TO ratio, McCallum has 2.182
                    Burke has a P40 of 21.0, McCallum has a 20

                    Not a lot of separation from the #6 pick to a mid to late 2nd round guy that know one talks about.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                      If our pick at 23 is not a PG, I'd love it if we can pick Ray at #53. Most mocks have him in the 40s and 50s.
                      I really think that at the 23rd spot...there is a greater chance that there will be a quality PG ( Green, Canaan and even Shroeder ) that can be drafted that can come in immediately and play 15 mpg on a consistent basis as opposed to a quality PF ( honestly, I have no clue what quality PFs there are that will drop to 23rd ) that can do the same at the Backup PF spot.

                      Although many may want a Wing Player....I'm inclined to think ( more hope ) that the FO recognizes that there is a need IMHO to fill one of our Backup PG or PF needs via the draft.....and not BOTH via Free Agency.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                        Trey Burke has an RSB40 of 6.0, Ray McCallum has an 8.2.
                        Burke has a 2 FG% of 50.3, McCallum has 54.5%
                        Burke has a 3.125 A/TO ratio, McCallum has 2.182
                        Burke has a P40 of 21.0, McCallum has a 20

                        Not a lot of separation from the #6 pick to a mid to late 2nd round guy that know one talks about.
                        Many here throughout the season have pointed out that this year's draft is one where you can get a quality Player in the mid to early 2nd round draft because of the lack of sepearation in talent that you mention.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                          That was a great read.

                          Btw, "I like Burke... He's got some DJ Augustin in him."
                          Yea, I said he was like Augustin a few months back and I got killed for it by some wannabe scout on here. Guess I'm not the only one to think that about Burke, but I already new this!
                          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Erick Green: RSB40=6.0 Points per 40=27.3 2pnt%= 50.9 3pnt%=38.9 TOper40= 2.4 A/TO ratio= 1.71
                            Trey Burke: RSB40=6.0 Points per 40= 21.0 2pnt%= 50.3 3pnt%=38.3 TOper40= 2.4 A/TO ratio= 3.13

                            Green beats or ties him in every category except A/TO ratio. However if Green's teammates could actually hit shots, he could have easily had 6-7 assists per game. I'll give Burke the edge seeing that Green is 2 years older than him and more strength but its weird how one is projected to go top 6 while the other is working his butt off to try to get drafted into the 1st round.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                              Trey Burke has an RSB40 of 6.0, Ray McCallum has an 8.2.
                              Burke has a 2 FG% of 50.3, McCallum has 54.5%
                              Burke has a 3.125 A/TO ratio, McCallum has 2.182
                              Burke has a P40 of 21.0, McCallum has a 20

                              Not a lot of separation from the #6 pick to a mid to late 2nd round guy that know one talks about.
                              No one talks about?? I have been on the McCallum bandwagon all season. He will be a solid backup. He just needs to keep working on his shot. He needs his 3pter to be money at the next level.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Darren Wolfson: Asked @Flip Saunders about using advanced stats when evaluating prospects. Said Muscala would go No. 1. Uses some, but not end-all. #twolves Twitter @DarrenWolfson
                                Read more at http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm#8qZFmW5WPZ4kpHLI.99
                                "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X