Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

Rule #1

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

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

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

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

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

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #2

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

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

The right places to do so are:

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

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

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

Rule #3

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #4

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

Rule #5

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

An example:

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

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

Rule #6

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

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

Rule #7

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

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

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

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

Rule #8

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

Rule #9

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

Rule #10

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

Rule #11

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

Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

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

    Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

    Today I take a look at another prime draft prospect, the dynamic guard from Wake Forest, Jeff Teague. In the first five editions of this series, I've looked at Ty Lawson, Gerald Henderson, JaRue Holiday, DeJuan Blair, and Jonny Flynn....you can find those threads elsewhere on this site.

    Jeff Teague is a high level prospect that would be a popular selection with local fans, as he and his family are from Indianapolis. Teague played at Indianapolis Pike High School, and his brother is currently being recruited by the likes of Rick Pitino and Tom Crean. The deep Hoosier ties are no factor in this evaluation, other than it would be a nice story, perhaps could bring some extra fandom into Conseco Fieldhouse, and with easing the adjustment to NBA life that otherwise could be overwhelming.

    Like almost all players in this draft, evaluating Teague is a mixed bag. Teague has major things to like about his game, and he has some flaws as well, the biggest question being exactly what position he will play in the league, as there is some doubt over whether he is a point guard at the next level, or just one of many smaller shooting guards. At barely over 6'2", being a traditional shooting guard will be difficult unless surrounded by players who compliment him in special ways, which is hard to do. The potential to maybe become a point guard is what he will be drafted on by some hopeful franchise.

    Playing last year for the Demon Deacons, Teague was asked to attempt to learn the point guard position. The Deacons coaching staff didn't make this easy to do, as they played a brutal schedule and the quickest pace in college basketball, or at least one of the quickest. How highly you think of Teague almost solely is determined by how well you thought he adapted to this role, and his likelihood of continuing that development at the next level.

    Teague definitely has an extreme amount of talent in many areas. I would rate him as one of the best scorers in this class, particularly at shooting off the dribble. He shoots a high percentage off the bounce, and particularly is blessed with great balance when doing so...he doesn't drift to his left or right like so many players do. He has good hangtime when driving, and seemingly is able to score in situations when it looks like he won't be able to. His size limits him here a bit, but there were no guards in college basketball that he played who could consistently stay in front of him and keep him from driving. Teague has such a great first step with the ball that it really stands out on film...no false steps/baby steps, covers a huge amount of ground with his first dribble, explosive, and able to pull up or drive to the paint.

    Sounds really good so far I bet, doesn't it?

    Unfortunately, Teague gives you almost no value on offense unless he has the ball. Away from it, he doesn't cut well enough to get open against good defenders, he lacks size to shoot over people when coming off screens, and seems to lack the patience to set up people, read screens, and get free. He also doesn't shoot as well off a pass from the low post or an offensive rebound back out to the perimeter....he seems like he is only in rhythm to shoot if he has a dribble to get himself started. With a dribble he is a weapon, with no dribble he is a bricklayer.

    People always talk about wanting a "true" point guard. By that I guess they mean they want a Mark Jacksonesque "pass-first" type of player to man this critical position. Teague is so far from a pass first point guard it isn't even funny! Teague has a swagger I love to see, and plays with a bit of a chip on his shoulder, also a good trait. But that swagger also means he has the tendency to try and do way more than he is capable of in terms of taking shots. In my coaching vernacular, Teague is a player we say who "shoots til he gets hot, then keeps shooting". Teague likes to make and take big shots, and deliver the "dagger"....he definitely likes to be center of attention I think.

    I'm not saying I think Teague has a bad attitude or is selfish, let me be clear about that. In fact, I like Teague's attitude and body language. Self confidence is a great thing! It's just that a true point guard thinks about more than just going to the basket and trying to score for himself somehow, and Teague doesn't do that....Teague is a loaded gun out there, for better or worse Teague is going to try and score himself.....any good pass he may make looks like an accident to me. Teague is not a point guard in the traditional sense.

    Someday, I think Teague will be a major offensive weapon as a scorer in a screen/roll situation. He already has all the artillary to be great at this in the NBA, except he needs to learn nuances, like how to set up his man to be screened, and how to wait til the exact right moment to attack. On tape, Teague likes to take off before a ball screen gets to him, hurting himself by moving too quickly. He also has an alarming tendency for some reason in this play to drive the ball way too wide going around the screen, thereby letting his man get thru the screen too easily. Despite those current flaws, I think Teague can be coached up in this area by some smart NBA assistant coaches.

    As a passer, Teague will never be that good...it just isnt in his makeup I don't think. He has all the prerequisites to be, but I don't think its in his DNA. Teague makes bad decisions all the time in games, throwing to the wrong guys on a fast break, leaping into the air with no idea what he's doing, and just making sloppy and inaccurate passes. In fact, "sloppy" is a word you can use to describe his passing and ballhandling against pressure. Most teams backed off Teague to respect his quickness, but I actually think he doesnt handle the ball well against pressure or physical defenses.....I think he can be turned over and rattled with really good defense up in his grill. Teague plays too fast when pressured, and lacks the critical ability to think clearly under deress, and the willingness to slow down or even back up his dribble. When under strain, Teague plays faster and more out of control than normal, which is bad because he is borderline out of control on a good day.

    Like many point guards in this draft, Teague right now is much better suited to a team that plays up tempo. But unlike Lawson and Flynn, I think Teague will have enough offensive game to someday be a fine offensive player in a halfcourt oriented game....that just isnt right now. Lawson and Flynn I project to either play in fast break systems or fail, I don't think that harshly of the Wake Forest scorer.

    Defensively, I think if he is coached up big time, that Teague should be able to be a serviceable NBA defender of point guards. He is a defensive liability guarding anyone else, so he needs to be able to get much better on defending the ball. The entire Wake Forest team last year played like it was double parked outside the arena, and Teague was a main culprit defensively. He likes to gamble, and simply loses interest after a team made about 3 or 4 passes in a given possession.

    Teague basically has every physical tool to be a reasonably good point guard defender, he just needs to make it a priority and dedicate himself to it. Clearly last year it was not a priority to him at all.

    So, if you are looking for a point guard to make the steady play, lead your team, make your teammates better, and play calm in crisis, Teague just isn't it I don't think. I know there are many talent evaluators who think Teague will be a very good NBA point guard, but right now I just don't see it.

    But what I do see is a confident kid who plays with a gunslinger mentality. Absolute no fear of making a mistake or missing shots, Teague looks like he plays with no remorse out there....."relentless" is a word that comes to my mind when I think of his offensive game. Unfortunately, another good word to describe him is "reckless".

    To me, clearly Teague is a 2 guard who was trying to play out of position due to his lack of size and stature. Thats what he still is to me today. That isn't the death sentence it used to be, and coaches have figured out many ways to get around those limitations. You can call alot of set plays with Teague in there so he doesnt have to make decisions, you can coach him up then use him a ton in high pick and roll situations, or you can isolate him and let him drive. Teague clearly will have a role in the league, and I predict a prominent and successful role as big time explosive scorer off someone's bench, although likely an inconsistent one from game to game. Despite his limitations, Teague is going to be a guy who once a week scores a lot of points off some smart teams bench, but struggles otherwise.

    Not completely in game style, but think of Teague as someone's JR Smith (without the attitude). Teague looks like the kind of guy who would be a wildcard in a playoff series, who might get hot and win a game for you....maybe like an Eddie House does (although they are different offensive players to a degree).

    I think the best NBA comparable to me of Teague's long term game playing style and role would be :

    Jason Terry, G, Dallas Mavericks.

    A scorer off the bench for a good team, not a point guard really, but a guy who can score the ball some of the time. Louis Williams of Philadelphia is another one that is a a close comparable to the modern NBA I think.

    I'm struggling to come up with a very good NBA "past comparable" for Teague, maybe some of you can help me list one. [EDIT] It's been suggested to me that Kenny Smith would be a decent past comparable, and since no one else came up with one better, I'm going to go with it. [EDIT]

    If Teague is there for Indiana at #13, he wouldn't be the worst selection the Pacers ever made by a long shot. I can see Teague helping us win the occasional game just by being an offensive force for a few minutes a game every now and then. Teague would have to be paired with Jarrett Jack or some undetermined bigger point guard however to maximize his abilities. A combination of Ford and Teague would make no sense...each has ot have the ball to be effective, and Teague would then be forced to guard bigger guards, which he absolutely cannot do.

    Teague would be a decent for Indiana's fast pace, but a poor fit for Jim O'Brien's outside shooting style passing game. As TJ Ford sometime struggled playing an offense whereby he had to move without the ball, Teague would be lost in a style like that unless major accomadations/simplifications were made for him. Because of this and his other limitations, I think after careful analysis the Pacers probably should and will pass....although like I said earlier, it wouldnt be the worst thing to have a dynamic bench scorer who grew up across town. And there is always the chance that I'm wrong and he ends up being a great scoring point guard in 3 years. I don't think I am of course, but it's not impossible.

    Teague looks to me like a very good fit for Dallas at #22, being groomed to take Jason Terry's role, or even in a wacky lineup playing together with the Jet. Depending on what they do otherwise in the draft, Sacramento at #23, Portland at #24, or Atlanta at #19 look like the most likely landing places for Teague.


    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 06-18-2009, 09:53 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

    Interesting how you added a bit more of a psychological perspective in this evaluation. I really enjoyed it!

    I'm hoping for athleticism as an antidote to our defensive woes and Teague's quickness and length might otherwise suggest the potential for a good PG defender, but you offer a persuasive argument for concluding that he's just not "wired" as such. Reluctantly, I think we must conclude the same with Earl Clark.


    "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

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

      Originally posted by DrFife View Post
      Interesting how you added a bit more of a psychological perspective in this evaluation. I really enjoyed it!

      I'm hoping for athleticism as an antidote to our defensive woes and Teague's quickness and length might otherwise suggest the potential for a good PG defender, but you offer a persuasive argument for concluding that he's just not "wired" as such. Reluctantly, I think we must conclude the same with Earl Clark.

      In Teague's case, I had the advantage of seeing him play in person several times during his high school and AAU career, something I haven't gotten to do with many other prospects. I even sat behind his family once here in Bloomington at the Adidas tournament. So with Teague, I feel like I have at least a beginning understanding of how his mind works in regards to the game.

      Just so I'm clear, I would be ok with us adding Teague depending on what our long term plan is at other positions and who else is left. A bench scorer is a nice thing to have, and at the very least Teague is going to become that I think....he will have many big scoring nights in the NBA, and will have a particular knack of getting to the line alot off his dribble, another valuable trait. They just won't be every night

      Again I say, Jason Terry is a good comparable.....somewhere between Terry and Eddie House production.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

        Seriously T i find it scary sometimes how much more intelligent you are than myself. I wish I could look into your brain just to see all of these players playing a round robin tourney in your head.
        JOB is a silly man

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

          I don't think there is a whole lot of debate on Teague right now. Dude looks like a Jannero Pargo type of back up combo guard. Though he wouldn't be a bad selection at 13, he's not a player I'm excited about (i.e. he wouldn't be dropping to us).
          You Got The Tony!!!!!!

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

            TBird, do you think Teague will have trouble getting his jumpshot off against bigger players? His shot seems really flat with a low release point, it actually reminds me of Murphy's. I'm guessing he'll have quite a bit of trouble shooting over the bigger, more athletic players he'll see in the NBA.
            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

            - Salman Rushdie

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

              Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
              TBird, do you think Teague will have trouble getting his jumpshot off against bigger players? His shot seems really flat with a low release point, it actually reminds me of Murphy's. I'm guessing he'll have quite a bit of trouble shooting over the bigger, more athletic players he'll see in the NBA.

              Well, not really. I think he will be able to get separation off the dribble well enough to get his shot away when he wants to. He has a chance to eventually become a decent "catch and shoot" player too I suppose, but that looks a long way off to me at this point. The key for Teague will be not only MAKE a high percentage of off the dribble jump shots ( a very good skill he already has) but to also show some judgment on when to shoot and when not to ( a part of his game he decidely does not possess currently).

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

                Recent interview with JT after his workout at GS for those interested:
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYtMc0-JDGs

                Talks about trying to show he can play defense and run the pick and roll.

                TBird, I see a lot of Monta Ellis in his game. Explosive scorer, good athlete, very aggressive. Do you see that comparison? Do you think he could put up Monta type numbers? Monta has averaged about 18 4 and 4 the last 3 seasons, but he's not as good of an outside shooter as Teague could potentially be. He's not a true PG, but he has potential. I'm interested in what the Pacers think of him.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

                  Apparently, this guy wants to be a Pacer - although some might say he was led down that road by reporters.

                  http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/jeff_teague_2009.html

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

                    Please god I do not want this guy. Unless every player I am interested in is off the board, I will be upset if he is our selection. I think he should have gone back to school for another year or two. At that point I would have a much different opinion of him. But right now, he is NOT what this team needs. Unless there is some things brewing on the trade front. And even then there are a couple of other PG's who would be available that I prefer.
                    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #6: Jeff Teague

                      I would say Teauge is more of a Moe Williams type of player, Monte Ellis is a stretch.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X