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 analysis, 2022 NBA draft profile #2: Johnny Davis

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

    Tbird analysis, 2022 NBA draft profile #2: Johnny Davis



    We continue the 2022 NBA draft analysis today on the Saturday before Memorial Day by staying in the Big 10, with a deep dive on Wisconsin wing Johnny Davis. In the previous edition of the draft articles for 2022, we took a hard look at Iowa’s Keegan Murray. You can find that piece, and all articles on the draft prospects from this year, elsewhere on this website. Also, while this writer isn’t a big fan of social media, if you are so inclined to share these articles on twitter and other sites, and therefore this entire pacersdigest forum, please feel free to do so.


    By starting with Keegan Murray in article #1, you may remember I mentioned something called “The Secretary’s Dilemma.” For those of you who skipped over that point, what I was trying to say was this: Murray establishes a baseline, a floor if you will, of a player good enough for you to draft. Now, the job we all have is to try and decide if the remaining players I profile are better choices than he will be. Picking at #6, Indiana will have their choice of quite a few talented players who will all be quality NBA players, perhaps not sensational superstars per se, but high caliber, NBA starting level guys who can really help our franchise grow. The questions are, as I see them:
    1. What kind of team are we specifically trying to build?
    2. With what physical, mental, and skill characteristics are important to us?
    3. Who on our team currently fits that long term plan and vision?
    4. How do we most efficiently and quickly get to the point of rising to be a championship contender that can sustain itself over a longer period of time?


    So, keep all that in mind as we examine these players and people, as we try and decide which pieces to add to our future next great Pacers team, whenever that may come to fruition. I have my own opinions on what kind of characteristics are important to me for a team to possess, but everyone’s mileage may vary.


    —--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    First, the background, numbers, and measurables.


    Johnny Davis, by any account, had a tremendous sophomore year in Madison this past season. Despite playing for a somewhat talent challenged ballclub at UW, and despite being asked to play a somewhat outsized role for his skill set, Davis led the Badgers to a very good season, along the way becoming Big 10 player of the year, a first team All-American, and winner of the Jerry West award for the best shooting guard in college basketball. Highly productive, Davis was a stat sheet stuffer at UW, averaging 19.7ppg, a whopping 8.2 rpg, and 2.1 assists. Reading deeper into the numbers, Davis had an extremely high usage rate in college, which led to some inefficiency: just 42.7% overall from the field, just 30.6% from deep. The analytically minded of you will note that he shot a strong 79.1% from the foul line on a high number of attempts, showing that perhaps it was some other mitigating factors about his college team/staff/teammates/system that led to the types of numbers he had.


    Born in La Crosse Wisconsin, Davis was and is a life-long resident and “cheesehead”, who stayed at home to play his college basketball. Despite a pedestrian freshman year, Davis was chosen to play for USA basketball last summer, and while his playing time on that squad was limited, that exposure to a different style and higher level teaching and training really helped mature, and helped his game take off this past season.


    Measuring in at 6’5 and ?, with a wing span on 6’8.5 at the NBA combine, Davis possesses an NBA ready body. A solid 196lbs, with an 8’7.5 standing reach, he solidly fits into the mold of a modern day NBA 2 guard, with I think the positional flexibility to play a little bit of 3 in certain situations in small ball lineups at the next level. Interestingly, as with Murray, Davis has a twin brother (Jordan) who he is close to. Had things broken differently Johnny Davis might have had opportunities at a different sport, as he was an outstanding All State quarterback in football in high school. But born to a basketball family, (his Dad Mark was a 4th round pick of the Cleveland Cavaliers back in the 1985 draft, back when the draft was much longer), a career in hoops was always the first option for him. Now on the cusp of being a millionaire NBA draft pick, it certainly appears as if Davis made the right choice.


    Taco Bell certainly thinks so, he already has a national TV ad for them. I find that interesting, if not necessarily predictive. He and his brother were quite popular locally on Wisconsin television, doing ads for Pepsi among others in the new world of NIL for college players.


    Born February 27, 2002, Davis will be 20 on draft night and turn 21 somewhere just after next season's all-star break.


    —-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Let’s examine the game of Johnny Davis closely, starting on offense.


    Starting with the positives, Davis is a tough shot maker from mid range. That’s both good and bad of course, but finding a way to score the ball is an important skill, and Davis was the primary weapon for UW, and the focus of every opponent all year long. Davis moved all over the court in the Badgers' very old school “swing” offense, and did most of his damage in the mid range and low post areas, where he could use his strength and toughness to hit difficult shots in traffic. Davis thrived in what I sometimes call a “junkyard” player, as he was able to manufacture points and free throw attempts in clutter. That’s a good thing, because at Wisconsin, he had way less space to operate with than he will in the NBA. The lower percentages in all his shooting stats are scary to some degree, but shake that off. UW constantly asked Davis to bail them out in late clock situations, which along with their glacial pace and poor spacing, led to many ugly ill-advised shot attempts he was forced to take.


    Davis has a solid, really strong, mid-range pull up game, with some caveats. To be effective, he really needs to have an advantage on the catch. Heads up, forced to create against a set defense, is not going to be his strength in the NBA. But he can drive a close out, and he can take poor to average defenders near his size off the dribble. His best asset in this regard is great balance, and he is able to stop on a dime and rise up to shoot over mediocre defense, and he has the nuance of the fadeaway game as well, contorting his body to improve his space in mid-air. He also has the great fundamental skill of making his last dribble extra hard, so he can get knee bend and athleticism into his pull-ups, likely something he really picked up playing for USA basketball. I have a future profile of a player coming who completely doesn’t do that, as you will read about in a future piece coming soon. So, all of that is good.


    As mentioned above, he posted up smaller guards with extreme success in college. A staple at Wisconsin, the Badgers have long since been a great program of teaching their guards big man skills, and Davis has them. His footwork and balance are really good here, and Davis relishes and likes contact. He can put his shoulder into people, get angles, and use his toughness to score near the restricted area. While he is definitely a below the rim scorer, it is still useful to have the ability to score against a smaller, or less tough minded, interior defender either on a switch or in some other situation.


    Having said all of that, there are some red flags here. First, Davis is pretty clearly going to have to play a much, much smaller offensive role than he played at UW. If he is anywhere close to a first option for an NBA team, rest assured that team really really is bad. He’s a 3rd to 4th option level player at best on a good team at any one time he’s on the floor.


    Secondly, I think really high quality, NBA length and athleticism is going to be a problem for him. If he has to create his own shot from a neutral position, he is going to fail most of the time, he just doesn’t have the elite burst or athleticism to be able to function effectively that way. So, Davis is going to have to play with someone who can give him some help, someone with some gravity, to let him have an advantage already pre-catch. This feature doesn’t make him a bad player, it just makes him one with some limits.


    Now, his 3 point shot at Wisconsin wasn’t very good, as mentioned above. But I actually believe in his shot, as long as he has his feet set and takes only good looks. I think over time he will become a guy who can sidestep a bad closeout into a 3 point shot, but I don’t know if I see him ever becoming a “movement” shooter, coming off staggers or what not. But put him in a 5 out type system where he catches the ball facing the rim, standing still and with space, and I think he ends up being above average, particularly from the corners and eventually to the wing areas.


    Davis didn’t have big assist numbers at Wisconsin, but I still rate him as a good passer. His teammates missed a ton of open shots he created for them, and while often on tape it looked like he didn’t trust them and potentially showed some lack of vision, I watched enough games to know that he had reason not to trust them. I think he won’t make high level NBA passes, and he offers no positional flex to be able to play the point for you, but he will make the simple pass, the right pass, and the next pass, and his playmaking will increase at the next level when he can play with way more pace and space and better teammates.


    I think he has some potential as a ball screen attacker, and he will need to develop that as his career progresses if he is to “take a leap”, and rise above what his perceived floor is. We know he can make mid range jump shots against drop coverage, but we also have to at least figure out if he can be a guy who can extend his range off the dribble to 3 point land, and if he can develop his passing skills to draw 2 defenders and put the opponent on skates. I’d bet on yes, he can do that…..but it would be a small sized bet, not betting the house on it.


    All in all, you’ve got a smart kid with some old school offensive game here, but someone who is going to have to play off of others in the NBA. He is a guy who’ll need to space the floor, run the lanes, and take advantage of the right situations to produce points. But, what he will also be is fearless, have the ability to make tough, big shots in some situations, and he will score by the basket and at the foul line. He will grow into a trustworthy, role player who gives you some 3 point spacing if he can adapt to a much smaller NBA offensive role, which I believe he will.


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


    The tape shows pretty clearly that I think that Davis will not be an offensive stud. But he can be a stud in 2 areas: rebounding for a guard, and defensively.


    On the glass, you have to have the mentality, toughness, hands, coordination, and effort to be a rebounder. Davis has every bit of that. While playing for Indiana (and most teams) will limit his chances on the offensive glass, Davis is going to rebound the ball off the defensive glass for you. And in an era where teams are launching 50 3 point shots a game against you, you are going to have to have guys in your backcourt who have the cajones and stamina to get tough long rebounds and outfight people for them. Davis will do that happily for you. And like every good rebounder, (and this is a tip for you all who are reading this) Davis is the FIRST guy in the air almost every time he goes for a rebound. That is yet another aspect of what I call “hidden athleticism”. It’s a big deal to me when I break down players rebounding potential.


    On the defensive end, Davis is a bulldog. One of the best defenders this year on tape in terms of effort. Davis is awesome at avoiding being screened, as he gets exceptionally thin and skinny when dodging contact, and he has a relentless motor, he just never stops and takes a play off. While he had to carry a huge load offensively at UW, his defense never suffered because of it, like most players would have had happen to them. No, Davis locked up guys all over the big 10, including a player projected above him, Jaden Ivey from Purdue. (Davis kicked Ivey’s *** all over the gym in January).


    In addition to being hard to screen or even get open against, Davis is physical at the point of attack. He will chest you up, bounce you, and not budge against forceful contact. A football mentality definitely shows up for him on defense….Davis LIKES contact, and I bet he liked getting hit as a QB if you asked him. But even better than that, when guarding a driver, Davis can stop on a DIME, with great balance, and immediately rise up to contest a shot. And on top of that, he does it consistently with high effort all game every game. In other words, his stamina is at elite level already and his toughness is unquestioned. You wish he was longer, you wish he was a bit quicker, but he will give you everything he has, and when you put the entire defensive package together, it adds up to being really, really good.


    This is not to say he doesn’t have some defensive weaknesses to shore up. Davis is definitely better as a guy with not as much help responsibilities (i.e., more of a “stopper” mentality than a help defender). I think he likes the challenge of one-on one defense, mano vs mano. And he will have to learn NBA rotations and defensive schemes, which will be a whole new world than the old school packline defense he learned at UW. Lastly, and maybe most importantly, his closeout defense isn’t always very good technique wise. He definitely is a “lunger”, instead of a guy who chops his feet properly to stay in front of an offensive player he is closing out to. So much so that I almost wonder if UW taught it this way. If so I don’t like it, as it was pretty easy to shot fake or side-step Davis on a closeout and put his defense in harm’s way. But I found that annoying but fixable, and good coaching at the NBA level should take care of that problem.


    As an entire defensive package, I find Davis to be a potential high level NBA defender at potentially 4 spots, being able to match up differently against different opponents, using his combination of strength, elite balance, stamina, length, and effort to be an incredibly pesky and annoying defender. I think he can draw the number 1 assignment most nights for more than half the teams in the NBA, and very definitely ours, as he’d be by far our best perimeter defender. I think, in time, he ends up being one of the top 10 wing defenders in the league perhaps, a potential 3rd team all NBA defensive guy if he plays enough, or at least in that neighborhood.


    —-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    So, what do we have in Johnny Davis?


    I think we’ve got a somewhat average to slightly above offensive player, who will have hot and cold nights on that end. We’ve got a guy who will need to play a smaller offensive role, play with good to great talent around him offensively, but who has a well rounded mature game that will be pretty low maintenance. Team and scheme will be important for him offensively.


    Defensively, we’ve got a stud, a guy who can guard people his size extremely well and who can perhaps play up a notch. We have a guy with a relentless motor, who is smart, tough, and has exceptional balance and stamina. We have a guy who rises quickly and consistently to contest shots, and we have a guy who has shown that he can play winning basketball.


    Davis to me is a high character, tough minded, winning basketball player who helps herd your locker room and changes the character of it for the better. He is a guy who has shown in college that he plays hard every night and every possession, and who cares about the right things. Davis played through a pretty severe ankle sprain this past season, and I suspect he will come close to playing damn near all 82 games for whatever team drafts him. Davis is a “foxhole” guy I think, and it is easy to imagine him playing in these NBA playoffs for some of the best teams in them with the best cultures in the league.


    Davis will play a very long time in the NBA I believe, though I can see him having a career where he might bounce around some. He will be a valued member or high caliber teams who make deep playoff runs and perhaps can even win titles with him playing a key role for them.


    I think ultimately he is a borderline starter, but more than likely key rotation guy, a 6th, 7th, or 8th guy for a top team, but also a guy who definitely can play and contribute big to winning basketball. I am a believer in him and his game/character/toughness.


    —------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Having said all of that, would I take him at pick #6?


    Personally, it is a really hard call. I personally think it is very close between him and Murray, and I could be persuaded either way. Ultimately, using the secretary’s dilemma as a guide, I think we have to keep looking, which we will on this blog in this series of articles over the next few weeks. But you can probably tell from above that I certainly won’t be sad to watch Davis wear blue and gold these next few years, if it comes to that.


    Star quality? Nope. But a high quality guy you are glad plays for your team? Absolutely. Does he fit here with whom we have plans to keep long term? He absolutely does I think, especially if you believe in the 3 point shot. Is he better than Chris Duarte, the pick from last year? No question in my mind that he is ultimately more valuable than Duarte, though they are different players. Especially when you factor in the age difference, I think Davis over Duarte is an easy call. Based on my view that they both really can’t play together at the same time, at least in my view of what I want Indiana to try and become, is a demerit against Duarte, not Davis.


    At the end of the day I’d probably pass on Davis though, and perhaps aim for a player with a higher ceiling. But if Indiana goes with Johnny Davis at the end of the day, we can’t be too disappointed.

    Assuming Indiana passes, New Orleans looks like a very very interesting fit for Davis at pick #8, which looks like a very interesting team of players that is beginning to come together there. If not New Orleans, Davis could slide a bit, as teams immediately after the Pelicans pick don't seem like natural fits for him.


    —---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Comparables are usually the hardest thing for me to finish every year….but so far this year on the ones I have already posted and the ones that will post soon, they’ve been easy.


    Johnny Davis has about the easiest NBA doppelganger I’ve done so far. If I am right, and this is who he is, how do we feel about that? It’s a discussion worth having.


    NBA comparable: Josh Hart.


    As always, the above is just my opinion. Feel free to discuss, criticize, and share with others as we continue to try and figure out the best piece to add to the next Pacers top contender.


    Tbird
    Tags: None
    • 10 likes
  • #2
    I love me some Johnny Davis he is one of my favorite players of this draft, he has all the tools to be great.


    Nobody in this draft has the tools he already has, he can post up, shoot of the dribble, already clutch, can guard anybody.


    Also combine measurements came up better than expected his size won't be a problem, give me Davis all day.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment

    • #3
      i've not seen anyone put him as high as 6
      • 3 likes

      Comment

      • #4
        As Boston and Miami have shown this year, defense can still take you places in this league. If we keep the 6th pick, we could do a lot worse than picking our 2nd Johnny Davis (I watched the original have the best year of his career with us in the late 70s)!

        Comment

        • #5
          Could he be like some sort of Trevor Ariza? Good 3 and D Guy, who at his prime will be overvalued into a close to allstar level player but will never live up to the hype?
          Trying to enjoy every Pacers game as if it is the last!

          Comment

          • #6
            Marcus Smart was picked #6. So do you think he could be that level of on the ball pest?

            Seems he’d make a lot of sense if we get the 10th or 11th pick in a Brogdon trade.

            Comment

            • #7
              This dude has bust written all over him. Why not analyze AJ Griffin? Who shoots like Klay Thompson and is totally a potential star. A SG that shoots .30 from college three can never play in the nba.
              • 1 like

              Comment

              • #8
                Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post
                This dude has bust written all over him. Why not analyze AJ Griffin? Who shoots like Klay Thompson and is totally a potential star. A SG that shoots .30 from college three can never play in the nba.
                Lol, Check out Marcus Smart’s college stats.
                • 2 likes

                Comment

                • #9
                  I don't see him in the conversation for the 6 pick, maybe if we trade down.
                  Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.
                  • 2 likes

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

                    Lol, Check out Marcus Smart’s college stats.
                    lol back at you. Smart was drafted in 2014 before Steph, Klay, Draymond, and Steve Kerr changed basketball forever. Right now his situation in Boston is an acception and not a rule. He’s a unicorn- and not necessarily in a good way, but he has no player comp.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Like Murray, not my top choice but wouldn't be upset if he ended up a Pacer. This team needs toughness and he'd help.
                      Danger Zone
                      • 1 like

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Another guy, like Murray, I've been lower than consensus on all season. There are some draftniks very high on him still (and yes top 6 Dal) but I just don't see the ceiling they do. I'd love him on the roster if we we're picking in the teens but 6 is way too high for me. I'd easily take Murray over him.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Not the guy to take at six for me but the Pacers will very much need a tough, hard nosed defender as Halliburton's backcourt partner. Certainly a long shot but a great draft day for the Pacers IMO would be to take Murray at six and then use Brogdon and some mix of the Cav's picks to move up and get Davis. Neither guy is likely to be star but great odds to very capably fill two important roles in the rebuild. Much rather they do something like this than spend the capitol to move up for one guy into the top five....

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                            Not the guy to take at six for me but the Pacers will very much need a tough, hard nosed defender as Halliburton's backcourt partner. Certainly a long shot but a great draft day for the Pacers IMO would be to take Murray at six and then use Brogdon and some mix of the Cav's picks to move up and get Davis. Neither guy is likely to be star but great odds to very capably fill two important roles in the rebuild. Much rather they do something like this than spend the capitol to move up for one guy into the top five....
                            I was thinking this same thing. Looking at the Celtics, you have one superstar, one star, one dynamic veteran, then a bunch of role players. Hali definitely projects to be a JBrown level player. If you can get Murray and Davis, you plug them in and play the heck out of the young guys. Trade Buddy for draft capital next year.

                            Then in 2023 you have Pacers lottery, Cavs pick, and whatever we can get for Buddy to get your potential Superstar. I don’t see our future Superstar in this draft at #6.
                            • 3 likes

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              This is a very shallow view, but NBA comp, Josh Hart, is pretty hard to get excited about at 6.

                              Having said that, he is a guy I wouldn't mind getting my hands on if we get a second pick later in the lotto.
                              Last edited by Trader Joe; 05-29-2022, 04:14 PM.


                              • 2 likes

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X