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 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

    Hello all. This is my official 2017 NBA Draft Pacer-Centric Big Board for this year.



    Before I list the players in my particular order, let me make some comments about the list. First, I have not included any players that played overseas last year. I just simply lack the access to the volume of film work I want on those players in the time allowed. Most likely, some of those guys would have clearly made my list somewhere, but without the sufficient film study on them, I am not going to include them. If we end up with one of the overseas players, I’ll make more of an effort, and put something together in the days following the draft for all of you.I made a mistake a few years ago when I tried to guess about Porzingis without putting in the time it took for a full study, and I will never do that again.

    Next, I have no access to medical records, personality tests, psycholigical exams, private workouts, etc etc. This is all based on film work plus research and analytics. You’ll see that I have, based on the research, eliminated some players based on character or medicals from my board. The Pacers and other teams will have much more information than I have about such things, so they may, and likely will, make different decisions about such things as I do here.

    Also, I think big boards you read in the media are somewhat useful, but I don’t really understand how you rate them with that amount of certainty without having a specific team in mind to rate them for. Fit, coaching strengths and weaknesses, scheme, other roster construction, situation in time….all of those things have to at least factor into rankings, in my mind. In this big board, I’ll have certain players ranked higher or lower than you may see other places, based on those factors as I see them pertaining to Indiana. If I were analyzing for another franchise, my board with obviously be slightly different.

    Lastly, obviously really smart people can totally disagree with my board, and that is fine. These are totally my opinions only. This isn’t a mock, and I am not trying to make predictions about other teams or anything else. I may do a mock tomorrow (they are generally fun to write about but basically also worthless), but this is not a mock. I have no motivation here other than to rank players, in the order I would want them, as a Pacers fan who has making our team an eventual champion as a goal. This isn’t for “clicks” or money, or advertising, or anything else….it’s just as I see it.

    With all of that said, here is my Pacers draft “big board” for 2017….with commentary as warranted.

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

    Off my board:

    Harry Giles---injury red flag. 3 serious knee injuries at this young age, plus pretty bad tape last year, plus some reported mental issues about getting over the injuries and the rehab process. The final straw for me was finding out that (supposedly) his camp was refusing to share medical records with teams. I may be all wet, but he is an easy pass for me. I doubt he makes to #18 anyway.

    Edward Somner---injury red flag. I would have had him likely as a draftable second rounder, or at least in the running for it. Knee and other injury history makes me queasy.

    Damyean Dotson-----character red flag. His history is well reported. My personal tolerance for this issue is nonexistent and consistent, and I realize I may be too harsh in judgment, but that’s me. I had Lance Stephenson off my board years ago as well, so I am consistent at least. I don’t think his talent merits any benefit of the doubt.

    Cameron Oliver----character red flag. This is more from personal information I was able to get, and from a general dislike of his body language and playing style on film. If I were actually with a franchise, I would have investigated him further and in more detail. For now, without being specific, I am going to pass. Yes, I do realize some of you like him, and that he has lots of fans in the media world. I am prepared to be proven wrong if need be.

    Along with those 4 not being listed, I have eliminated, due to lack of film study, the following players:

    Mathias Lessort
    Isaiah Hartenstein
    Jonah Bolden
    Anzejs Pasecniks
    Frank Ntilkina
    Vlatko Cancar
    Aleksander Vezenkov
    Wesley De Silva
    Terence Ferguson
    Ognjen Jaramaz.

    If I forgot to mention anyone else from outside the continental United States, you can include them on the “no draft” list as well.

    With those 14 guys being eliminated from my board consideration, I have 38 players listed as draftable players who I think can play in the league….yes, I realize the draft has 60 picks.

    Here is my rundown of those 38 players, in order of how I rank them for Indiana.

    #1 Markelle Fultz…...I think he is a bigger Damion Lillard with more D.

    #2 Jonathan Isaac….I love him. He’s only 19. Looks like Paul George, except better at that age. Floor is a bigger Iguodala, but he will be better than that I am almost sure. He will fill out and become a monster.

    #3 Jayson Tatum….high floor. His comp is Danny Granger. Bucket getter extraordinaire….can get you 20pts a night eventually.

    #4 De’Aaron Fox….love him except for his jumper. He is a little risky, because to be elite PG’s have to score these days and stretch the defense. I believe in the kid and the character though. Love his speed and defense at the point of attack.

    #5 Josh Jackson…..going to be a 2 way really good player. Ceiling is Jimmy Butler if he reaches it. Some character concern admittedly, still for us he fits here.

    #6 Lonzo Ball….he will go #2 most likely, but for us I rank him here. I worry about his inability to get his own shot, and a lack of wiggle in his dribble game. I don’t think he can make shots off the bounce going to his right with that shooting form. But man, he will be fun to play with, and is an absolute ELITE passer, great vision. I prefer in general more defensive point guards than he is, but he is going to be a force multiplier type in LA, and other great players want to play with a guy like that.

    #7 OG Anunoby….absolute beast athletically, assuming he comes back strong from the knee injury in college. I believe he has given his medical history to teams, unlike Giles. Unbelievable potential is an absolute lockdown monster, and can switch from positions 1-4. I also think he can play some small ball 5 on occasion with creative coaching. In general, I think he is likely a 4 on offense, but you can literally play him with such a wide variety of players it’s unreal. All NBA type defender, I think he has some offensive upside yet to be untapped too. Still just 19 years old on draft night. I think he can be Ron Artest level impact on the game, maybe more even if some offense comes. Worst case he is a bigger Tony Allen, but he already shoots better than Allen.

    #8 Donovan Mitchell…...Tough as nails, athletic as hell, super long defender. I love his personality better than almost anyone in this draft. His game will come eventually, he gets it. I think he is basically Avery Bradley. Not really a pure anything exactly, but you can go to war with guys like this and win.

    #9 Malik Monk….I see him as a one way scorer, with potential to grow from that. Lack of length is a small concern, but he can clearly shoot the ball, and it’s a shooters game right now. I see some Vinnie Johnson to him. He is likely a starter or top bench guy on a good team.

    #10 Dennis Smith…..I view him as a 1 way scorer, not alot of defense there on tape….really good off the dribble scorer who can get his own. Might be underrated by me and others. Wish he was a hair bigger, but he can really score, and he wants to score. Not sure he makes his teammates better, not sure about his body language on the floor. I think he is a score first, maybe score only, point guard and those don’t really suit my eye, but the talent is there. Length can hurt him, not sure if he isn’t scoring if he helps you much. Not sure he’d be much fun to play with. He reminds me of Steve Francis a little bit.

    #11 Luke Kennard….I think he is mostly a offensive minded player, you’ll have to hide him defensively a little...great shooter though, and he is a playmaker with the ball when he isn’t scoring himself. There is some Ginobili to his game, a certain offensive creativity that is fun to watch, plus 2 guards are the scarcest resource in the NBA right now.


    #12 Lauri Markannen….Mostly an offensive player only, but he is an elite offensive perimeter big on tape. He will need to play with a big man who is a rebounding and defensive specialist in order to reach his potential, which at the moment doesn’t exist here…..but who knows what Turner will turn into for sure yet? I don’t love him or love the fit, could easily turn into Mirotic or Bargnani if he isn’t coached well and surrounded with the right kind of players around him. Still, the offensive talent is undeniable. He’d be a nice fit in Orlando, playing next to Biyombo actually, and in Sacramento playing next to Cauley-Stein…..he needs to end up next to guys like that.

    #13 Justin Jackson….I see him as a big 2 guard, if used that way I think he can be a long time NBA player. Has some Mike Dunleavy traits, maybe some Danny Green, maybe some Matt Barnes. Not a premier guy, but he can play on good teams and make open shots, and he is smart as hell on both ends.

    #14 D.J. Wilson….easiest comp in the draft...he is Tobias Harris. I think if ends up the right place he will be on the all rookie team next year. He is ready to be who he is, which is a small ball 4 on a team with a big time, low post center. Perfect fit for a team with Dwight Howard, or Andre Drummond, or someone like that. Stan Van Gundy should take him and turn him into Rashard Lewis, who he had in Orlando. Wilson does everything well except play with physicalness and rebound….he plays soft as cotton vs contact.

    #15 Derrick White….love the kid, love the player. Pretty close in skill level to Kennard actually, just not quite as good a shooter projecting ahead. He will help your team score, high level passer, super smart, makes shots, plays the right way. Not going to be a sieve on defense either, I think he will mostly hold his own vs 1s and 2s. Great story too.

    #16 Semi Ojeleye….high character, 3 and D guy. High floor, low ceiling. Built like he was chiseled out of stone.

    #17 Ivan Rabb….has some Greg Monroe to him, who I liked coming out of college but probably overrated at the time. Fits here because he is an absolute rebounding machine, and we need that with Turner. Can finish with both hands around the basket, in fact he is almost confused which hand to use sometimes. Blocks shots with both hands too, which I love. High IQ kid. Might be a 4 on offense, and a 5 on defense, but no matter what he is an elite board guy. I think he can play next to Turner in some lineups. Still very young.

    #18 Johnathon Motley…..very long, modern 4 man on D, very well rounded and mature. Good shooter to 17 feet, will need to expand that to be a starting level player. Love his measurables, and I think he is a good fit long term next to Turner.

    #19 Bam Adebayo…..freak athlete, very very raw, pretty much a dive man/screener on offense only at this point….kind of has some Dale Davis to him, except this isn’t the 90’s so it isn’t as valuable now….long term, he is such a moldable piece that I think he MIGHT be able to play with Turner, if Turner becomes more of a 4 man instead of a 5…..very young. No moves to speak of at this point. I think he is Montrezl Harrell, but if you are optimistic you might see him as Tristan Thompson, but bigger.

    #20 Tony Bradley….he is raw similar to Adebayo but not quite as physical, yet more skilled at this point. Going to be an A plus rebounder…..young and athletic enough that he MIGHT be able to play with Turner some.

    #21 T.J. Leaf…..he is Ryan Anderson, but a little tougher and little more versatile offensively. Fits the modern game well, but not a great fit next to Turner. I think he fits better with a more physical center next to him and surrounded by better defenders….he can make shots and run the floor, but not a good defender. He’d be interesting in New Orleans for when they stagger the minutes of Davis and Cousins….for him, I hope he ends up there somehow.

    #22 John Collins...skilled offensively from 17 feet and in. Might be the worst defensive player I have ever seen though. Pitiful effort and technique defensively. Too skilled to rank any lower though, and he has utility as an off the bench scorer for your second unit, and if he is a bench guy you can hide him on non scoring bigs. Any smart team will just run him off the floor if they can though. Really good rebounder and offensive technician. He has some Al Jefferson to his game.

    #23 Caleb Swanigan….high character, non rim protecting 5 man. He can play with Turner offensively, but on defense we’d get torched, so he ranks here. Some concerns about his weight still, but he is productive and skilled, and can make open face up shots. Like Collins, he can score with your second unit, but he is a 5 man instead of a 4. Positional rebounder, below the rim type, very strong with great hands. Gonna be tough to find him guys to guard though vs NBA starters, so I think he is a bench guy. Jered Sullinger comp, maybe better than that but we will see.

    #24 Zach Collins…..yes I know I have him ranked lower than the rest of the free world. To me with us he is a back up center only though, as I don’t see the ability for him and Turner to ever play together. Very active, but raw and foul prone. Didn’t even start for his high school team, let alone his college team. I also think centers are becoming easier to find, so I don’t value them as highly.

    #25 Justin Patton….again, I know I have him lower than most. I see just a backup center for us, as he can’t play with Turner in the modern NBA game. Still, a cheap back up center isn’t a bad thing I guess. I think he has some potential but he is raw and will take time to develop.

    #26 Jarrett Allen….super raw, but super long. Again, he can’t appear on the floor with Turner, so he is a back up center prospect only in my ranking. I wasn’t impressed with his tape, but he is so young, and bigs take time usually. Very slow, kind of soft I thought watching him play, but ask me again in 4 years.

    #27 Ike Anigbogu…..even more raw than Allen, but young and highly intelligent. I ranked him here because of injury concerns I have, I didn’t take him off my board but he does have a history to worry about. He is 3 years away from being able to help you I think, but he MIGHT be able to play with Turner someday. I do see some skill here, but it is a long way down the road.

    #28 Kyle Kuzma….right now, Kuzma looks good in pieces, and has alot of potential….but man is he raw. Love the body type, love the possibilities, but the production isn’t there. You have the ingredients, but the cake isn’t made yet and I don’t know if it will be. He is the kind of gamble though that we should consider making a play for in buying an extra pick or moving up slightly in the 2nd round, because of what he COULD become, not what he is. Right now, he can barely play...but he will look better in the more spread out NBA I think. He’d be a guy I consider trying to get an extra pick to get in round 2, maybe even late #1. He is a long 3 or small ball 4, not a great fit here currently, but this would be a longer range play. He can be a starter in this league if everything comes together for him, but it’s not a sure thing by any means.

    #29 Davon Reed…..No risk here, I think he is a sure bet as a 3/D wing guy. Smart, tough, well coached, defends his butt off, makes open 3 pointers, has a strong NBA physique. Can give you some small ball 4 minutes in places. Glue guy, coachable. Jim Larranaga was his college coach, and his son Jay is on the Celtics staff….so watch out for Boston here. I’d move up to get Reed in the late first/early 2nd area if I could. Higher floor than Kuzma, just not as high a ceiling. He will play 8 years or more in the league.

    #30 Taylor Dorsey…..has one elite skill, which is as a shooter. Knockdown sniper as a deep shooter. No in between game at all, can’t really drive it much, totally assassin from deep. Small for his position as a 2 guard, might have to hide him on point guards. Profiles as an instant offense, small doses, bucket getter from deep. Think about Craig Hodges, Steve Kerr, Eddie House, Flip Murray...those type of guys. Fun to watch play.

    #31 Sterling Brown….similar type of 3/D guy as Reed, just not quite as good. He is solid, well taught. Has to continue to improve to get to Reed’s consistency level shooting it. See no reason why he can’t, but we will see. Worth a small trade up to get him in round 2.

    #32 Jordan Bell…..talent is there. Plays hard 99% of the time, but has some inexplicable brain farts. PF type, has some ability in ballscreen game as a short roll creator. Pursues blocks and rebounds like they are going out of style. You can find tape where he dominates the game, and you can find tape where he vanishes. Hates to block out, just chases the ball and jumps for it….that trait may have cost his team the NCAA championship game at the end. Still, high character guy, experienced….wish he was better. Worth a small trade up to get him in the 2nd round.
    #33 Juwan Evans….he’ll go higher than this, but I have him here. Smallish point guards generally aren’t my thing. I do think he can stick as a backup PG, and definitely on our team as a 3rd point guard replacing what we have now. Not an elite anything at his size makes him a backup, change of pace guy to me. He sticks in the league though no question if he gets the right landing spot. I would NOT move up to get him probably, but might if the price is low.

    #34 Dwayne Bacon…..he loves to score! Shooting guard/wing type, irrational confidence guy. Has an NBA mentality as a scorer. I’d like to have him actually, but he needs to time to develop his skills quite a bit. Might be a good guy to draft, play him in the G league every game for 2 years, and see if you can turn him into something in your developmental program. I would NOT move up to get him unless the price was very low. He has a chance to stick in the league eventually, might even be better than that just due to the swagger he has. Marketing would love the Tshirt opportunities too, plus the “Bacon” memes would be funny.

    #35 Frank Jackson….very much a long term, smallish 2 guard/combo guard project. He has some game, and is just 19 years old I think. Smart kid, lacks any one real skill at this point to make it, but give him 3 years and then re-evaluate. He will be in the G league.

    #36 Tyler Lydon…..he makes it as an end of the bench, designated shooter type. I think he will be able to make the corner 3, but who can he guard? Not a bunch of upside here, but he can survive a few years as an 11th or 12th man someplace.

    #37 Josh Hart….high character smallish wing guy with a winning pedigree. No real NBA top notch trait other than toughness and fight at this point, but he will make someone’s team, and probably ours, as an 11th or 12th man type. Looks good in a press release when you sign/draft him too, very accomplished player in college.

    #38 Frank Mason….smallish shooting guard in a point guards body. He will be somebody’s 3rd point guard, maybe ours, if we draft him. High character, played in big games and excelled, smart, somebody will take him around our pick, maybe earlier even.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There you have it. Those are the players I believe would make our team if they ended up in Indiana with our franchise.

    There are other players who I believe could make other teams, like Sindarius Thornwell, Wesley Iwundu, Dillon Brooks, and a few more…..but I think they get cut in Indiana, based on what I know now.

    As far as to who I would select at #18, the answer is easy…. I would just follow and trust my board. Wherever I’d pick, I’d just take the highest rated player at that time.

    Keeping in mind I took 14 players off my board due to lack of tape, character, or injury concerns, I ranked the players I did extensive scouting reports on like this:

    #1 OG Anunoby (7th overall)
    #2 Donovan Mitchell (8th overall)
    #3 Luke Kennard (11th overall)
    #4 Justin Jackson (13th overall)
    #5 Derrick White (15th overall)
    #6 Semi Ojeleye (16th overall)
    #7 Bam Adebayo (19th overall)
    #8 T.J. Leaf (21st overall)
    #9 John Collins (22nd overall)
    #10 Ike Anigbogu (27th overall)

    Ok, so the board is set, and the start of the 2017 draft is about 30 hours away. Rumors are already flying all over the place, so brace yourself, this is potentially going to be a franchise altering couple of days, with the draft process and pressure being a big part of it.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

    Thanks again for all the time you put into these evaluations, TBird! I really look forward to these every year.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

      Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
      #1 OG Anunoby (7th overall)
      #2 Donovan Mitchell (8th overall)
      #3 Luke Kennard (11th overall)
      #4 Justin Jackson (13th overall)
      #5 Derrick White (15th overall)
      #6 Semi Ojeleye (16th overall)
      #7 Bam Adebayo (19th overall)
      #8 T.J. Leaf (21st overall)
      #9 John Collins (22nd overall)
      #10 Ike Anigbogu (27th overall)
      Anybody in your #1-4 would absolutely make my day.

      I like DJ Wilson a bit more than you do. Davon Reed is who I'm really hoping for in the second, and we've worked him out twice, so I think the team has solid interest in him as well.

      Can't wait!
      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

        If you need (hopefully) to scout Pasecniks properly, you can find a lot of his games from the most recent season in youtube. Just search HERBALIFE GRAN CANARIA

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

          Do you have any notes on Malcolm Hill at all?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

            Thanks T-bird, I always look forward to your input.
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

              I had also been reading about Jonathan Isaac and wondering why he wasn't rated higher than Josh Jackson.

              In the dream scenario of getting the second pick and trading down for both Kings picks (not happening, but still) I'd be trying to come out of the top ten with Isaac and Donovan Mitchell.
              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

              - ilive4sports

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                Do you have any notes on Malcolm Hill at all?
                I'm sure he is a fine, upstanding human being.

                I don't think he has that one outstanding trait that makes him unique enough to find a spot. I'd suggest he head overseas, make some money, and see what he can develop into. I could be wrong though, he is still fairly young, and his Illinois team was a mess.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                  Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                  I'm sure he is a fine, upstanding human being.

                  I don't think he has that one outstanding trait that makes him unique enough to find a spot. I'd suggest he head overseas, make some money, and see what he can develop into. I could be wrong though, he is still fairly young, and his Illinois team was a mess.
                  I think getting Johnathan Issac/Josh Jackson would be a decent haul for PG.

                  Turner
                  OG (his stock has fallen)
                  Issac/Jackson
                  Something
                  Lance

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                    These reports are what really make draft day interesting for me. Thanks!
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                      No way OG is better, or will ever be better than Malik Monk. I understand the size concerns with Monk, but he is a big time scorer, and can shoot with range. In today's NBA you have to put extra emphasis on the ability to hit the 3
                      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                        Originally posted by immortality View Post
                        I think getting Johnathan Issac/Josh Jackson would be a decent haul for PG.

                        Turner
                        OG (his stock has fallen)
                        Issac/Jackson
                        Something
                        Lance
                        My dream scenario in this draft is to come out of this with 3 picks and grab Jonathan Isaac(5), Donovan Mitchell(10), and OG Anunoby(18). Probably not possible but man what a nice jump start for the future that would be.
                        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                        - ilive4sports

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          These reports are what really make draft day interesting for me. Thanks!
                          I especially love TBird's Big Board post.

                          I love watching and marking off whose on his list, get to the Pacers pick and then get disappointed when I see the Pacers passing on who TBird has ranked high on the board that has dropped to us.

                          This isn't a knock on TBird...cuz honestly, I trust his analysis more than what I've seen come out from the Pacers in recent years.....this is more of a knock on the Pacers Scouting department
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                            Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                            No way OG is better, or will ever be better than Malik Monk. I understand the size concerns with Monk, but he is a big time scorer, and can shoot with range. In today's NBA you have to put extra emphasis on the ability to hit the 3
                            Keep in mind the following ( per TBird's caveats in the start of his post ):

                            Fit, coaching strengths and weaknesses, scheme, other roster construction, situation in time….all of those things have to at least factor into rankings, in my mind. In this big board, I’ll have certain players ranked higher or lower than you may see other places, based on those factors as I see them pertaining to Indiana. If I were analyzing for another franchise, my board with obviously be slightly different.
                            He is taking Pacers factors into consideration. This isn't a Big Board for every Team...it is TBird's Big Board that is Pacer Centric. That skews his Player ranking a little.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird 2017 NBA Draft Analysis #12: My 2017 Pacers-Centric big board, with explanations and comments

                              Hoping for OG if Harry Giles doesn't work out. Still very tempted but didn't realise his reps were withholding info.
                              Pacers fan since April 9th 2004 - New Jersey 80 Indiana 90.
                              Been to 42 Pacers games since November 2017.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X