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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    The more I think about the "future" of the Pacers, the more I think we need to "mortgage the farm" (yeah, it's a hoosier phrase...lol) to make whatever necessary deal we can to get Rose. No matter who's the GM, Coach or complementary players on our roster (or any other team for that matter) PG play is CRITICAL to success. Which teams have made the biggest moves in recent times? N.O. got CP3, Jazz got Deron, Nash in Phx the past couple years, Calderon in Toronto has greatly improved their team ability to win any game on any given night, Atlanta is seeing immediate dividends with Bibby, and Billups in Detroit is a veteran, calming influence in their deliberate offense. Yes, Tinman when healthy (is that an oxymoron???) is in that group. But he's not the answer with the unpredictability of his injury status.

    So SF's are literally a dime a dozen. Easiest position to pick up players thru trade, draft or just looking deeper on your current roster. Serviceable 4's and 5's that put up respectable rebounds, 10 pts and decent D are available each year thru free agency. You can rent a SG for a couple years as they'll gravitate to a team where they know the PG will get them the ball in their comfort zone. But do we keep limping along without a fulltime dependable floor general in the hopes that Tinman will be healthy or that we can sneak a Diener type led team into the playoff finals hunt? A resounding No is the only correct answer.

    I'm not saying we should give up JO, DG, SW, Jf and anything else requested in the way of future #1's and cash. But I think we'd be seriously remiss in not taking a long, HARD look at whoever ends up with the #'s 1 and 2 picks and not making EVERY effort to secure that Rose ends up with the Pacers.

    If the Pacers are really going to "rebuild" and not just put another band-aid on our spurting artery, then we have to start the process with a legitimate franchise PG.

    (all this was done with the help of coffee and chocolate covered espresso beans, so excuse me if any of it rambles...lol)

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Originally posted by Ballerzfan View Post
      The more I think about the "future" of the Pacers, the more I think we need to "mortgage the farm" (yeah, it's a hoosier phrase...lol) to make whatever necessary deal we can to get Rose.
      I stopped reading right here. Whoever gets that pick isn't trading it.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        It's starting to feel this way for sure. I love the guy personally so I don't mind, but that salary and this team's situation sure make moving him seem tempting.
        Absolutely. But I simply don't think a deal can be made.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
          Chad Ford: All of the above. Jermaine is playing right now to prove to teams that he can still play. He's 29 and still an important presence on the defensive end. I think they'll move Tinsley for just about anything ... and if they're drafting in the 10 spot ... I think Texas' DJ Augustin or UCLA's Russell Westbrook would be very good choices.

          Do you think Ford reads on this board very much?

          "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Ballerzfan-

            I totally agree. But the list of teams trying like heck to move up
            for Rose will be a long one. I doubt any of them will get a deal
            done.

            As you said, having an elite PG is huge. In today's NBA, it might
            be the biggest key to success.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
              Ballerzfan-

              I totally agree. But the list of teams trying like heck to move up
              for Rose will be a long one. I doubt any of them will get a deal
              done.

              As you said, having an elite PG is huge. In today's NBA, it might
              be the biggest key to success.
              In Deron and Paul's rookie season they were the difference makers. They turned their teams into a playoff team in their rookie year.....Wait no they didn't...

              No matter what we as Pacer fans should expect a few more lackluster years before things get better.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                I stopped reading right here. Whoever gets that pick isn't trading it.
                Not so fast! That would depend on who got the pick. For instant, Memphis already has three young point guards, so they would probably do a deal if Beasly was gone and they had the next pick. The problem is all we have to trade is small forwards and they have a good one in Gay. I don't think Ike and our pick would come close.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by DanGrangerPwrRanger View Post
                  Do you think Ford reads on this board very much?
                  Don't know, but he is better then most with knowing what's going on with each team.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                    Not so fast! That would depend on who got the pick. For instant, Memphis already has three young point guards, so they would probably do a deal if Beasly was gone and they had the next pick. The problem is all we have to trade is small forwards and they have a good one in Gay. I don't think Ike and our pick would come close.

                    What about Daniels, Diogu, and our pick for

                    Cardinal and their 1st.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                      What about Daniels, Diogu, and our pick for

                      Cardinal and their 1st.

                      Probably not. I think the only player we have that would get other teams attention is Granger. If we offered our pick and Granger they would at least think about it.

                      I was thinking about this yesterday and wondered what Walsh would do if NY had the 2nd pick and Bird offered him Granger and our pick for it. (Providing Rose was still there at #2 of course)

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                        What about Daniels, Diogu, and our pick for

                        Cardinal and their 1st.
                        Depends on where each pick lands. Memphis is currently tied with the Knicks for 4/5, we're currently 10th. If the picks end up 3 or less spots a part, I could see Memphis possibly going for it.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                          Not so fast! That would depend on who got the pick. For instant, Memphis already has three young point guards, so they would probably do a deal if Beasly was gone and they had the next pick.
                          If I'm Memphis, I'd trade all three of my young point guards and keep Rose.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Here's a RECENT (ie, not Nov or something, this is early March) snippit from a report on Westbrook by Draft Express.

                            Wow, how odd that they see the exact same things that several of us have been saying about his game and his role with UCLA (not a PG that is).

                            Again, just like Fred Jones, he's is certainly capable of bringing the ball up and getting a basic offense started. That's started, NOT created. For himself he can create, for others he doesn't. He's a smallish SG with great hops, decent but not great handles, and no sign of a deep.

                            I will maybe give you Ellis, though he's not as fast as him and again less of a PG.
                            You draft Westbrook to be used off the bench with the intentions of replacing either starting guard in the future, exactly the way the Warrior's used Ellis his rookie season, behind Davis and Richardson. He's young with a reputed great attitude and work ethic, so he will improve. If he becomes a point guard, great. If not, he's plenty big enough to be a successful starting SG. Either way, his upside is too much to pass up at the 10 spot.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Collison I would say is still higher rated even in terms of NBA athlete. Size no, but he is ready to handle NBA pressure on his dribble and is already at the Daryl Armstrong level of talent.
                            I'm not following you here. You say Collison is a higher rated NBA athlete, then your justification is that he's a better ball handler? That makes no sense to me. Clearly you're judging athleticism by different standards than the rest of the world.

                            If you're implying Collison would go before Westbrook in the draft, I'll have to disagree. Collison is what-you-see-is-what-you-get player. A low-end starter or good backup. Those types go in the 20's (Nelson, M. Williams, Jack, etc.). Westbrook is a new-wave SG with developing point guard skills. Iverson, Wade, Ellis, and even lesser known guys like Louis Williams are being very successful in that role. They're in high demand, which is why Westbrook has shot up the mock drafts.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            And while Love doesn't blow people away as a physical player this is just like the freaking combine that says guys will be great...as long as no actual basketball craft is asked of them. Smarts is a skill that scouts look at, just like clutch. For all the hops in the world it's worthless if you choke it up like the Pacers did vs Boston the other day.
                            What NBA scouts judge prospects based solely on athleticism? None that I know of. From the other perspective, it's just as goofy to judge based solely on skills and college production. You think the Bobcats are regretting taking Adam Morrison over Brandon Roy and Rudy Gay? Or the Magic for wasting a lottery pick on J.J. Redick? Or what about our own Ike Diogu? He destroyed people in college, now he can't get playing time over Troy Murphy. You think the Warriors wish they would've went with that big high school center out of New Jersey?

                            Of course as the lottery dwindles down, there will come a point where drafting an under-skilled physical specimen will be worth the gamble, which is why guys like DeAndre Jordan and Hasheem Thabeet will almost certainly be picked ahead of NCAA studs like Tyler Hansborough and D.J. White.


                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            More scoring options means more options for assists, yet like Collison he fails to make halfcourt plays for assists on a regular basis.
                            It also means less time with the ball in your hands, meaning less opportunity to pick up assists. He's a SG, right? So making halfcourt plays for assists isn't his primary job. Still, with that said, he's putting up 4.3 apg at the SG position. How can you not like that? Production is production.


                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            PPG might be limited on a true team, but other numbers can be raised simply because you are free to do what you need to and have help along the way. You can lock a guy down if you don't have to double off all the time. You can get a board if you have guys that can actually block out. And you can get transition assists if a guy like Shipp is breaking out on a rebound.
                            Wade dominated the ball at Marquette. Westbrook does not dominate the ball at UCLA. It's as simple as that. Make up all the excuses you want, but if you're put in a position to where you're allowed to dominate the ball and everything the team does revolves around you, your stats will be padded. That's not a knock on Wade, as it got his team to the Final 4, but it remains a fact. Put Westbrook on a mid-major team where he's the #1 guy, and you're telling me his stats wouldn't inflate considerably? If Westbrook stays and Love and Collison declare, I'd be shocked if he wasn't a near 20/5/5 guy next season.

                            And before anyone accuses me of implying it, Westbrook will almost certainly never be as good as Wade. Not many players are.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Westbrook does play first string. He's their starting SF with Shipp at SG and Collison at PG. This is all season, not just lately.
                            Everything I've read and seen has Westbrook as the starting SG, Shipp the starting SF. Given their sizes and skills, it certainly makes more sense that way.

                            LINK
                            Starting Line-Up Introductions (video)


                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            And I'm not even worried about this. Love is above the Pacers at this point, they won't get him at 10-11. Augustin might be gone too.
                            It's certainly possible, but not a lock. You're underestimating just how much stock NBA scouts put into size, conditioning and especially athleticism. Love is clearly lacking in the later two, and very well could be slightly lacking in the former. Let's see how he performs against an NBA-caliber defender like Joey Dorsey. If he can dominate Dorsey, I'll give him his props.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              I vividly recall Wade being drafted just a tad higher than Fred Jones, no need for Google. So the NBA SCOUTS gave you their opinion, Wade was considered better than Jones. Actually picking the guy is action, and actions speak louder than words.

                              When Westbrook is taken 5th like he's Wade, and Love goes 20th like a fat loser, then the NBA scouts will have agreed with you.
                              No need for the troll-like mocking. You're above that.

                              Did I, at any point, say Wade wasn't a better NBA prospect coming out then Fred Jones? Clearly he was. Bigger, faster, better body control, significantly more skilled, and led his team to better success than Jones led a more talented Oregon team. Jones was projected as a late 1st to early 2nd rounder that Isiah Thomas developed a man-crush on, and convinced Walsh to pick at #14. Wade, at his lowest, was still considered a top-20 pick....

                              Which is the primary point - Wade wasn't some can't-miss superstar coming out. There were questions about his size and his shooting. He was a late-lottery to mid-first round prospect up until he blew the scouts away with his pre-draft performances. Here's NBADraft.net's 2003 mock less than a month prior to the draft - Wade at #14. Not long after this mock, the pre-draft workouts began, Wade started to wow the scouts, became a lock for the top-10, and was considered going as high as #5 (he was never going before LeBron, Darko (lol), Melo, or Bosh) which is where he ended up going.

                              I have a hunch, given his athleticism, attitude, and youth, that Westbrook will do the same, provided he declares. I don't think he'll go as high as #5 like Wade, but I see him going top-10, ahead of guys like Love and Jordan, and possibly ahead of Gordon and/or Mayo.

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              Also, from Draft Express, is this bit on "athletes" and the combine that measures that ability...

                              Originally posted by Draft Express
                              In 2004, we found a similar story. Kirk Snyder came out as the top overall athlete, while players like Andre Iguodala, Luol Deng and Al Jefferson’s draft stock supposedly took a hit by measuring out as relatively poor athletes. That same Andre Iguodala who was robbed of the slam dunk championship a few months ago, only recorded a 34 inch vertical leap, one inch more than J.J. Redick this year. Rickey Paulding, Timmy Bowers and Luis Flores were all declared amongst the top 10 athletes in the draft. One struggled to average double figures this past season in France, one starred in the Israeli league, and another is currently playing in the Dominican Republic.

                              The 2005 draft combine was equally as pointless. Monta Ellis ranked as the worst athlete of all the players measured, coming out slow, weak and with very little leaping ability. Once the NBA season started and the ball actually rolled out on the court, though, he magically transformed into a spectacular athlete who can get his shot at will and dunks anything and everything that is remotely close to the basket, despite only being 6-3. Eventual rookie of the year Chris Paul was declared only the 15th best athlete amongst the players tested, and was somehow deemed slower than Deron Williams, Sean May and Wayne Simien. The athletic tests also led you to believe that Andrew Bogut was some kind of stiff who would never be able to keep up with the speed of the NBA--that is, until the players actually started playing basketball and we found out that he is actually a fine athlete for a player his size.
                              Bogut 14-9.5 at 50% FG this year, 1.7 blocks.
                              Bogut is also over 7' in shoes and isn't 30 pounds overweight. With that said, those numbers aren't exactly mind-blowing, and the Bucks are losing more than we are with a higher talent level (taking into account J.O. and Tinsley being out). Bogut has been a disappointment. If you could get that same production out of 10th pick, it'd be a good (not great) pick-up. If you think Love can reach that level and your content with the "safe pick" go for it. Personally, I'd rather shoot for the moon than settle for average. Some people would consider making the playoffs as an 8th seed a successful season. I'm not one of them.

                              As for Ellis, he came up short in the pre-draft measurements primarily due to being unable to bench press 185 pounds. That, combined with his size and lack of point guard ability, scared teams away. Needless to say, he's proven them wrong.

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              For all his slow fatness, Love seems to be keeping up with the spry young kids just fine. He's no Beasley, but no one is claiming he is. The claim is that Love uses a smart game to succeed. Why would that go away at the next level?
                              Because the next level isn't full of under-skilled 6'8" power forwards like the NCAA is? You're oversimplifying things. Yes Love has good smarts and instincts, but he also has good size and great strength by NCAA standards. Those two are a deadly combination, hence his great success. At the next level, he'll be undersized and outclassed physically. His smarts may be enough to overcome his physical disadvantages, but to what degree? To the point where he's a starting caliber PF, or just a serviceable back-up? That's the important question.

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              Frankly athletic players without smarts are the ones most likely to flop.
                              Absolutely. But players that don't show "smarts", even if they are athletically gifted, usually aren't drafted very high. See: White, James
                              Last edited by Kofi; 04-04-2008, 05:01 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                I like Jason Thompson out of Rider. He's 6-10 with a smooth offensive game. If we're looking at eventually cutting ties with JO, he'd be a nice pick if we possibly made a move to grab an extra 1st rounder. He reminds me SOMEWHAT of Chris Bosh, but he'd have alot of work to do to get to that level. Plus he's a senior, and he sounds like a levelheaded guy. I'm looking forward to checking out his workouts.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X