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

2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

    Today we head to North Texas University, to put the enigmatic athletic forward Tony Mitchell under the scouting microscope. This is #6 in the 2013 draft analysis series, you can see the articles I've done so far on Gorgui Dieng, Alan Crabbe, Isaiah Canaan, Jeff Withey and Reggie Bullock elsewhere on this site.

    Mitchell measures up very very well from a physical point of view, checking in at the NBA combine and 6'8 3/4", with a wingspan of 7'2 1/2". Weighing in already at 236lbs, Mitchell clearly has an NBA body and NBA level athleticism. Only 21 years old, born on April 7, 1992, Mitchell still has some room to improve and isn't necessarily a finished product.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Offensively, Mitchell is somewhat caught in between positions. He seems to want to play like a perimeter wing "3" man in his heart of hearts, often drifting to the perimeter even though he really lacks the skills to play there. But inside as a "4" man, he hasn't really shown alot of toughness as an interior post player or a lot of high level skill. I think he best projects probably as a face up/mid post type 4 man who you can move around some depending on matchups....a little like Josh Smith is, except Mitchell is nowhere near as good as Smith, not even close.

    Mitchell takes alot of mediocre to bad jump shots, and he misses most of them. Playing in the Sun Belt conference, Mitchell should have been able to post or get to the rim with relative ease, as not a night went by that he wasnt the most talented player on the floor. Yet, Mitchell seemed content to hoist tough contested jumpers with little regard to whether that was the proper thing to do.

    His mechanics on his jumper arent awful, but they were inconsistent. More than bad mechanics though, Mitchell played uninspired and uninterested offensively. His shot selection was awful, and he seemed to favor doing whatever was easier to do and whatever would require less effort or chance of contact. I actually think he could be a relatively good face up jump shooter on open shots, but his judgment on when to shoot and when not to was pathetic.

    As a driver, he showed some real weaknesses that belie what many feel his God given athleticism should allow him to do. Mitchell is weak with the basketball, losing his balance against the slightest of contact and becoming very turnover prone. "Great pass by Mitchell!" was clearly something never said on a North Texas radio broadcast, not totally because of selfishness, but because Mitchell is so weak with the ball that his focus was on getting the shot off without turning it over, not scanning the floor for open teammates. He was very much a "right foot-go left" type, preferring to drive to his left with his right foot going first (a crossover step). This predictablility made him easy to guard, and his lack of counter move led to a lot of spinning, off balance, ill advised jump shots.

    Mitchell is a bad cutter who stands a lot offensively and surveys the action rather than move to an open area, and he screens people like the defense has a contagious disease. On ball screens, Mitchell either slips them way too early or stands so "skinny" and weak that the defense runs right through them, gaining North Texas nothing, and allowing his defender not have to help much off of him.

    Mitchell should project as a good ballscreen/lob type of guy, but he will have to get over his allergic reaction to contact and physical play if he is to do that.

    Another real weapon he should have but doesn't is an ability to out run opposing 4 men for early offense, as with his natural running gate and style being a rim runner should be an obvious strength to his game. However, as Mitchell tends to jog up the floor rather than sprint, it hasn't yet turned into that for him. In fact, Mitchell is much more likely to stop somewhere around the 3 point line, drift for a while, and then hoist an ill advised jumper rather than sprint the floor and get a dunk by running hard in early offense.

    Essentially, Mitchell doesn't know how to play. I found him to be lazy, plays much slower than he measures out, and is soft and selfish.

    As a post player, he has some promise but looks like that he hates being in there, where contact and physical play can happen. Mitchell recoils when defense gets rough with him, and can't seem to fight through contact to even get from one side of the lane to the other. He struggles to establish low post position, and looks like he hasn't been taught the fundamentals very well of how to use leverage before the catch. After a catch (which he didn't get as many of as he should have), he lacks any single go to move that he can rely on. Instead, he usually just fired up some version of a softer turnaround jumper which led more often than not to misses.

    Mitchell is not a good offensive player, and doesn't project to be one in the NBA either in my opinion.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a rebounder, there is some hope, but I do view his numbers as very inflated relative to his actual performance.

    Mitchell averaged 8.5 rebounds per game, which is a very respectable number. But, I saw a bunch of situations where I felt he got alot of "cheap" rebounds. Situations like missing his own shot that he should have finished the first time, then outleaping a much worse player for a putback. And a huge amount of times Mitchell would play incredibly horrible help defense, staying in rebounding areas hoping for misses instead of actually helping his teammates defensively as he should have. Clearly, Mitchell is a leaper and can get off the ground quickly and with burst. But keep in mind that he was a clearly superior athlete than all of his teammates and opponents, so it wasnt like he was rebounding in the same way that he will have to at the NBA level. If you refuse to hedge defensively on a ballscreen, stay back in front of the rim, and allow some kid in the Sun Belt who will sometime soon be working in an office building sometime soon shoot a jumper, then sky up and get a rebound when they miss over a bunch of future accountants, that doesnt exactly impress me.

    He clearly has the required physical tools and outstanding length to be a good NBA rebounder, but I'm not sure I see the drive, determination, and toughness to make that happen. I see him getting rebounds he is supposed to get that require little to no effort, but those tough rebounds in traffic vs strong tough men........I don't see it. In other words, this is the type guy that people like Tyler Hansborough out rebound every night, just by hustling and playing hard nosed basketball.

    I see the potential to be a decent rebounder, but that is about it. I wouldn't trust Mitchell to get big rebounds in crucial spots for me.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mitchell SHOULD/COULD be a dominant defender as an extra long 3 man or athletic quick 4. But, he won't be unless he changes his overall attitude and basketball priorities drastically. In college, Mitchell was a sieve.

    Yes, he came over from the weakside and got some blocked shots. 2.7 blocks per game in college is nothing to sneeze at. In fact, I found Mitchell's timing to be extremely impressive, as he wasnt one of those guys who jumped wildly to block shots, instead he seemed to have a knack of jumping just high enough and at the right moment to reject/influence shots in the Sun Belt.

    But defensively overall, Mitchell played with the motor of a rusted out Ford Pinto. Completely and totally reliant on his athleticism, Mitchell had little to no concept of a team defensive structure or in how to play defense against contact. At his best Mitchell was when he played the back middle of the North Texas 2-3 zone, that alloed him to roam freely and see the ball constantly. Way too often though, Mitchell would either rotate incorrectly, or totally stand up out of his stance and refuse to help versus drives past his teammates, allowing easy shots to be taken by the opponent. Essentially, I felt like watching him that he played about as SELFISHLY DEFENSIVELY as anyone I've broken down in the years I've done this for Pacersdigest.

    Playing man to man, Mitchell rarely showed hard on screens, never bumped cutters, never contested a shot that he couldnt block, wouldnt close out hard on shooters, and way too often refused to help his teammates. He seemed to not be a guy who talks on defense (unlike our own Roy Hibbert, who in my report in him in college I noted that he was an extremely good verbal help defender, Mitchell looks like he has never spoken to his teammates defensively) and who basically wasn't bothered when North Texas opponents scored.

    What was even worse than that on tape was watching Mitchell consistently not run the floor hard. If Mitchell didn't get the ball on offense, or if he took a shot and missed, or if he was simply pouting over the score of the game, way way too often Mitchell simply JOGS BACK DOWN THE FLOOR DEFENSIVELY. Yes, watching highlight tapes of Mitchell, you think this kid can play.....you see the blocked shots, you see the athleticism, you see the length, and you think this kid can help you defensively in the NBA. But in my view, a kid with that low of a motor can't be trusted against real men in the NBA.

    Watching Mitchell jog back repeatedly on defense was a poor example of a leader and best player to set for his teammates, and I felt like that he drug his teammates down in what ended up being a disastrous season for the Mean Green. I know that the prevailing thought in the NBA among scouts is to blame the new coaches at North Texas, and that some executive or coach somewhere is thinking that they can motivate this guy and turn him around....I guarantee you somewhere somebody is cocky enough to believe they will be the guy who lights this man's pilot light. That is why at some point in a couple of weeks he will become a rich man.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So what do we have in Tony Mitchell?

    I believe we have an athletic speciman young player who has no clue how to play basketball, how to work, how to be a teammate, and how to be a winner. He has no real NBA position and plays with an extremely low level of toughness, professionalism, and motor. Despite the natural lengths and extreme athletic gifts he seems to possess, I wouldnt touch Mitchell personally with a 10 foot pole. I don't believe you win with guys like Mitchell in your building.

    Mitchell's lack of effort, basketball passion, and athletic character offend my basketball sensibilities. I personally would have Mitchell off my board entirely, and not even have him as a choice to sign as an undrafted Free Agent. Of course he will be drafted somewhere, but I believe I can safely say that it will not be in Indiana. Which for Mitchell personally is a real shame, because this type of culture here is exactly what he needs......but even with the right kind of attitude, I still don't like his game all that well. I know others will disagree vehemently, and in fact my own is the absolute worst report I've read anywhere on Mitchell....but this is how I feel. A franchise wins with both high caliber talent and even higher caliber character, and I don't see either one in Mitchell, despite what every other draft analyst seems to think.

    Indiana should, and I believe will, pass on Tony Mitchell come draft night.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I have no idea where Mitchell ends up on draft night. I've heard him talked about in the mid teens by non NBA scouts, and I've heard it mentioned that his workouts are going extremely well. The Knicks are supposedly enamored with him after their workout with him at the pick following ours at #24. I hope that is true, but I suspect that it is all smoke.

    I know I would hate to the team that guarantees a contract worth millions to this player, and I have to believe that I am not the only one who thinks that. There is one team that seems to like to take risks on players like this though, and that is the Houston Rockets. I think Daryl Morey picks Mitchell at pick #34 in the early 2nd round, substantially lower than he is currently projected to go.

    Obviously I am out on a limb here with my very negative evaluation of Mitchell and that he will slip out of the first round. I might very well end up being wrong on both predictions, but as always, time will tell.

    Current NBA comparable: A homeless destitute man's Tyrus Thomas
    Former NBA comparable: A low character version of Maceo Baston.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 06-15-2013, 02:57 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

    "A homeless destitute man's Tyrus Thomas"

    damn lol

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

      Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
      Current NBA comparable: A homeless destitute man's Tyrus Thomas
      Tell us how you really feel, TBird

      I'll admit to being intrigued by his athleticism and physical tools early on, but yeah. This guy needs a lot of work. Hopefully we'll have better options to choose from.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
        "A homeless destitute man's Tyrus Thomas"

        damn lol
        Lol it doesn't get worse than that. If that's your nba comparison, you shouldn't be drafted in the first round. Lol

        I personally don't think he'll be THAT bad, but he does desperately need to figure out what he's going to be in the league.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

          Speaking of, next time you want to complain about Gerald Green remind yourself that Tyrus Thomas is making about 17 million over the next 2 years.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

            I found some tape of him this season last week(I watch him 15 time last year ) for the first time. He looked clueless out there on the court compared to last year. He didnt play hard last year, but he played well in the spots they put him in. I have to admit his coach last year did a fabulous job of using him. He was very effective in what they did last year(like Tbird says he drifted out way to much this year). His tape this season was so discouraging his motor got worse(and it was bad last year). He is a guy I just wish I could trade bodies with. No joke he has HOF type abilities he just doesn't try it is very sad. I still think he is worth a gamble, but we need a guy who isnt a risk in the 1st so I would pass and that would be hard to do because his talent doesn't come a long often. Like Tbird said he has the talent to be a DPOY type stopper at the 3/4. Watching him in transition defense is the saddest thing ever. I am surprised his coach never laid into him for it. He has so many flaws, but they all are correctable, I have said all along it would depend on his character if I drafted him. If our scouts say he can be coached I would have him on the draft board. If not than I would take him off.

            I had the same questions about Lance on his draft night(although Lance knew how to play the game better Tony is even rawer) and said the same thing if he can be coached we should draft him. Look 3 years later he developed a motor and now plays in a team concept. He would be a major project, and like Lance the risk would be worth the reward IMO he has rare talent. I would for sure try to get a pick if he slides into the 2nd.


            I agree with Tbird with the culture here and that is the reason I would take the risk on him in the 2nd. If I was a team like the Kings or what not I wouldn't draft him at all.

            Also agree on his rebounding #s the dude was just bigger and more mobile than everyone in his conference, He never blocked out and never tried on the boards he was just more gifted. His fundamentals in general need a lot of work.


            I know our FO and scouts will do there homework and make the best decision on him. I know whatever decision they make will be way more informed than any of us could make due to all the background they have of him. I agree with whatever decision they make on him. I have said all season I can't comment on if I would fraft him due to the lack of background info on him(and in this situation it is vital).
            Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-15-2013, 05:13 PM.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

              I think we should draft a guy that we know can come in and help right away with our first rounder. If Mitchell slips into the second round I wouldn't mind trading up to get him. There's a lot of risk with him obviously, but we turned Lance into an NBA player and if we could do it with Mitchell I think it would be well worth it.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                Lance played hard all the time in college. Maybe not totally smart on a consistent basis and he had some off the court issues, but on the court he played hard, with force and with passion. Mitchell plays like he doesn't care, and like he can't wait until the game is over. That is a big big difference.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                  Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                  Lance played hard all the time in college. Maybe not totally smart on a consistent basis and he had some off the court issues, but on the court he played hard, with force and with passion. Mitchell plays like he doesn't care, and like he can't wait until the game is over. That is a big big difference.
                  I don't know there were times at Cincy where Lance seemed dis interested on the floor so I guess we disagreed on that( if he wasn't getting the ball). Lance rarely played hard for a full game IMO. I saw glimpses of him playing hard for a full half and the next he played pretty relaxed. I mean if you told me Lance would turn into a hard nose defender who plays hard all game I am not sure I saw that at Cincy(but props to you if you saw that, I knocked his motor a bit in watching him play). I kind of compare Lance at Cincy to Shabazz Muhammad at UCLA this year. At times he was showing why he was so highly recruit, but a lot of the time he was playing me ball with bad body language. I think that is normal to an extent though for a top recruit learning to play the game and being in a role they have never been in.

                  But I agree Lance was always in love with basketball(and if you are a gym rat flaws can be overcome)

                  Mitchell looks like he is being forced to play the game. He never looks like he is having fun playing. I was hoping he would improve this year, but he clearly didn't in fact he regressed IMO. I have a feeling our scouts who talked to him throughout the season will come away with the same conclusion that you did he is a kid who doesn't like basketball, and doesn't really care. He took full games off in college in fact almost every game Lance never came close to doing that.



                  ESPN Insiders breakdown of Mitchell makes me lol. I noticed it the day I got insider here on PD. It states his strength as his motor and that couldn't be farther from the truth.
                  Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-15-2013, 05:34 PM.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                    Personally, I'm not interested in Mitchell even as a 2nd rd pick. Too bad Tyler doesn't have Mitchell's athleticism and wingspan. If he did, we/d have one hellva good b/u PF.

                    Maybe Muscala will grade out as possible big.

                    I'll say this again, if the Pacers draft a big it's b/c they aren't enthralled with Miles. I'd probably say the same if they p/u a b/u PF FA. To me it's obvious the Pacers have to get a big either thru the draft or FA that can help the bench this coming season. It's a must!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      I'll say this again, if the Pacers draft a big it's b/c they aren't enthralled with Miles.!
                      I don't see it that way. We can agree that if we re-sign West (as expected) and let Hansbrough walk, we still need a backup PF, and perhaps one who can grow into a starter as West ages. But Mahinmi, to me, is just a decent stop-gap: if he surprises us with improvement, great, but I think his value diminishes after next season. Plumlee MIGHT develop into a rotational back-up big, and if so then we'll likely see Mahinmi traded next summer. But we still need a PF with developmental talent, one who can score on the block. Dieng's my first choice here; Muscala my second. Both would benefit from playing alongside an athletic banger like Plumlee.


                      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                        Sounds about right when it comes to Mitchell.....he's raw with the tools to be a basketball player...but not the basketball IQ to put it all together. Sounds like all the other uber-athletic Players that can leap out of a building but doesn't have the brains to figure out what to do with the talent.

                        As TBird has suggested when it comes to drafting our backup PG or PF....I'm beginning to think that if the Pacers do this....that they end up drafting a backup PG and go after a backup PF in free agency. The depth at the PF spot in the draft doesn't appear to be that deep from where we draft.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 06-15-2013, 09:12 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                          I think the Pacers draft Green or make a surprise pick with Wolters in the 1st round. In the 2nd round, I see them going with Ryan Kelly or Mbwake. If the bench wasn't so bad, I really would take a flyer on Giannis.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                            Originally posted by eldubious View Post
                            I think the Pacers draft Green or make a surprise pick with Wolters in the 1st round. In the 2nd round, I see them going with Ryan Kelly or Mbwake. If the bench wasn't so bad, I really would take a flyer on Giannis.
                            If we take Wolters in the 1st I will break my TV. I would hate picking Ryan Kelly or Mbwake to. That would be a nightmare draft for me. I agree Cable the PFs in this draft are pretty bad. I would go pg or wing in the draft.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 2013 NBA Draft analysis #6: Tony Mitchell

                              Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                              Today we head to North Texas University, to put the enigmatic athletic forward Tony Mitchell under the scouting microscope. This is #6 in the 2013 draft analysis series, you can see the articles I've done so far on Gorgui Dieng, Alan Crabbe, Isaiah Canaan, Jeff Withey and Reggie Bullock elsewhere on this site.

                              Mitchell measures up very very well from a physical point of view, checking in at the NBA combine and 6'8 3/4", with a wingspan of 7'2 1/2". Weighing in already at 236lbs, Mitchell clearly has an NBA body and NBA level athleticism. Only 21 years old, born on April 7, 1992, Mitchell still has some room to improve and isn't necessarily a finished product.

                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Offensively, Mitchell is somewhat caught in between positions. He seems to want to play like a perimeter wing "3" man in his heart of hearts, often drifting to the perimeter even though he really lacks the skills to play there. But inside as a "4" man, he hasn't really shown alot of toughness as an interior post player or a lot of high level skill. I think he best projects probably as a face up/mid post type 4 man who you can move around some depending on matchups....a little like Josh Smith is, except Mitchell is nowhere near as good as Smith, not even close.

                              Mitchell takes alot of mediocre to bad jump shots, and he misses most of them. Playing in the Sun Belt conference, Mitchell should have been able to post or get to the rim with relative ease, as not a night went by that he wasnt the most talented player on the floor. Yet, Mitchell seemed content to hoist tough contested jumpers with little regard to whether that was the proper thing to do.

                              His mechanics on his jumper arent awful, but they were inconsistent. More than bad mechanics though, Mitchell played uninspired and uninterested offensively. His shot selection was awful, and he seemed to favor doing whatever was easier to do and whatever would require less effort or chance of contact. I actually think he could be a relatively good face up jump shooter on open shots, but his judgment on when to shoot and when not to was pathetic.

                              As a driver, he showed some real weaknesses that belie what many feel his God given athleticism should allow him to do. Mitchell is weak with the basketball, losing his balance against the slightest of contact and becoming very turnover prone. "Great pass by Mitchell!" was clearly something never said on a North Texas radio broadcast, not totally because of selfishness, but because Mitchell is so weak with the ball that his focus was on getting the shot off without turning it over, not scanning the floor for open teammates. He was very much a "right foot-go left" type, preferring to drive to his left with his right foot going first (a crossover step). This predictablility made him easy to guard, and his lack of counter move led to a lot of spinning, off balance, ill advised jump shots.

                              Mitchell is a bad cutter who stands a lot offensively and surveys the action rather than move to an open area, and he screens people like the defense has a contagious disease. On ball screens, Mitchell either slips them way too early or stands so "skinny" and weak that the defense runs right through them, gaining North Texas nothing, and allowing his defender not have to help much off of him.

                              Mitchell should project as a good ballscreen/lob type of guy, but he will have to get over his allergic reaction to contact and physical play if he is to do that.

                              Another real weapon he should have but doesn't is an ability to out run opposing 4 men for early offense, as with his natural running gate and style being a rim runner should be an obvious strength to his game. However, as Mitchell tends to jog up the floor rather than sprint, it hasn't yet turned into that for him. In fact, Mitchell is much more likely to stop somewhere around the 3 point line, drift for a while, and then hoist an ill advised jumper rather than sprint the floor and get a dunk by running hard in early offense.

                              Essentially, Mitchell doesn't know how to play. I found him to be lazy, plays much slower than he measures out, and is soft and selfish.

                              As a post player, he has some promise but looks like that he hates being in there, where contact and physical play can happen. Mitchell recoils when defense gets rough with him, and can't seem to fight through contact to even get from one side of the lane to the other. He struggles to establish low post position, and looks like he hasn't been taught the fundamentals very well of how to use leverage before the catch. After a catch (which he didn't get as many of as he should have), he lacks any single go to move that he can rely on. Instead, he usually just fired up some version of a softer turnaround jumper which led more often than not to misses.

                              Mitchell is not a good offensive player, and doesn't project to be one in the NBA either in my opinion.

                              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              As a rebounder, there is some hope, but I do view his numbers as very inflated relative to his actual performance.

                              Mitchell averaged 8.5 rebounds per game, which is a very respectable number. But, I saw a bunch of situations where I felt he got alot of "cheap" rebounds. Situations like missing his own shot that he should have finished the first time, then outleaping a much worse player for a putback. And a huge amount of times Mitchell would play incredibly horrible help defense, staying in rebounding areas hoping for misses instead of actually helping his teammates defensively as he should have. Clearly, Mitchell is a leaper and can get off the ground quickly and with burst. But keep in mind that he was a clearly superior athlete than all of his teammates and opponents, so it wasnt like he was rebounding in the same way that he will have to at the NBA level. If you refuse to hedge defensively on a ballscreen, stay back in front of the rim, and allow some kid in the Sun Belt who will sometime soon be working in an office building sometime soon shoot a jumper, then sky up and get a rebound when they miss over a bunch of future accountants, that doesnt exactly impress me.

                              He clearly has the required physical tools and outstanding length to be a good NBA rebounder, but I'm not sure I see the drive, determination, and toughness to make that happen. I see him getting rebounds he is supposed to get that require little to no effort, but those tough rebounds in traffic vs strong tough men........I don't see it. In other words, this is the type guy that people like Tyler Hansborough out rebound every night, just by hustling and playing hard nosed basketball.

                              I see the potential to be a decent rebounder, but that is about it. I wouldn't trust Mitchell to get big rebounds in crucial spots for me.

                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Mitchell SHOULD/COULD be a dominant defender as an extra long 3 man or athletic quick 4. But, he won't be unless he changes his overall attitude and basketball priorities drastically. In college, Mitchell was a sieve.

                              Yes, he came over from the weakside and got some blocked shots. 2.7 blocks per game in college is nothing to sneeze at. In fact, I found Mitchell's timing to be extremely impressive, as he wasnt one of those guys who jumped wildly to block shots, instead he seemed to have a knack of jumping just high enough and at the right moment to reject/influence shots in the Sun Belt.

                              But defensively overall, Mitchell played with the motor of a rusted out Ford Pinto. Completely and totally reliant on his athleticism, Mitchell had little to no concept of a team defensive structure or in how to play defense against contact. At his best Mitchell was when he played the back middle of the North Texas 2-3 zone, that alloed him to roam freely and see the ball constantly. Way too often though, Mitchell would either rotate incorrectly, or totally stand up out of his stance and refuse to help versus drives past his teammates, allowing easy shots to be taken by the opponent. Essentially, I felt like watching him that he played about as SELFISHLY DEFENSIVELY as anyone I've broken down in the years I've done this for Pacersdigest.

                              Playing man to man, Mitchell rarely showed hard on screens, never bumped cutters, never contested a shot that he couldnt block, wouldnt close out hard on shooters, and way too often refused to help his teammates. He seemed to not be a guy who talks on defense (unlike our own Roy Hibbert, who in my report in him in college I noted that he was an extremely good verbal help defender, Mitchell looks like he has never spoken to his teammates defensively) and who basically wasn't bothered when North Texas opponents scored.

                              What was even worse than that on tape was watching Mitchell consistently not run the floor hard. If Mitchell didn't get the ball on offense, or if he took a shot and missed, or if he was simply pouting over the score of the game, way way too often Mitchell simply JOGS BACK DOWN THE FLOOR DEFENSIVELY. Yes, watching highlight tapes of Mitchell, you think this kid can play.....you see the blocked shots, you see the athleticism, you see the length, and you think this kid can help you defensively in the NBA. But in my view, a kid with that low of a motor can't be trusted against real men in the NBA.

                              Watching Mitchell jog back repeatedly on defense was a poor example of a leader and best player to set for his teammates, and I felt like that he drug his teammates down in what ended up being a disastrous season for the Mean Green. I know that the prevailing thought in the NBA among scouts is to blame the new coaches at North Texas, and that some executive or coach somewhere is thinking that they can motivate this guy and turn him around....I guarantee you somewhere somebody is cocky enough to believe they will be the guy who lights this man's pilot light. That is why at some point in a couple of weeks he will become a rich man.

                              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              So what do we have in Tony Mitchell?

                              I believe we have an athletic speciman young player who has no clue how to play basketball, how to work, how to be a teammate, and how to be a winner. He has no real NBA position and plays with an extremely low level of toughness, professionalism, and motor. Despite the natural lengths and extreme athletic gifts he seems to possess, I wouldnt touch Mitchell personally with a 10 foot pole. I don't believe you win with guys like Mitchell in your building.

                              Mitchell's lack of effort, basketball passion, and athletic character offend my basketball sensibilities. I personally would have Mitchell off my board entirely, and not even have him as a choice to sign as an undrafted Free Agent. Of course he will be drafted somewhere, but I believe I can safely say that it will not be in Indiana. Which for Mitchell personally is a real shame, because this type of culture here is exactly what he needs......but even with the right kind of attitude, I still don't like his game all that well. I know others will disagree vehemently, and in fact my own is the absolute worst report I've read anywhere on Mitchell....but this is how I feel. A franchise wins with both high caliber talent and even higher caliber character, and I don't see either one in Mitchell, despite what every other draft analyst seems to think.

                              Indiana should, and I believe will, pass on Tony Mitchell come draft night.

                              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              I have no idea where Mitchell ends up on draft night. I've heard him talked about in the mid teens by non NBA scouts, and I've heard it mentioned that his workouts are going extremely well. The Knicks are supposedly enamored with him after their workout with him at the pick following ours at #24. I hope that is true, but I suspect that it is all smoke.

                              I know I would hate to the team that guarantees a contract worth millions to this player, and I have to believe that I am not the only one who thinks that. There is one team that seems to like to take risks on players like this though, and that is the Houston Rockets. I think Daryl Morey picks Mitchell at pick #34 in the early 2nd round, substantially lower than he is currently projected to go.

                              Obviously I am out on a limb here with my very negative evaluation of Mitchell and that he will slip out of the first round. I might very well end up being wrong on both predictions, but as always, time will tell.

                              Current NBA comparable: A homeless destitute man's Tyrus Thomas
                              Former NBA comparable: A low character version of Maceo Baston.


                              As always, the above is just my opinion.

                              Tbird

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X