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 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 151
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 46 96 136 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 template Next
  • #2176
    Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    http://www.realgm.com/src_feature_pi...n_of_kentucky/

    Draft Report: Patrick Patterson Of Kentucky
    By: Christopher Reina
    RealGM.com Writer

    Viewing him as a pure, albeit somewhat undersized, power forward ahead of the 2009 NBA Draft, I saw Patrick Patterson as a good value pick in the middle of the first round. Here we are a year later, Patterson has shown enough ability away from the basket to show he can be a combo forward in a weaker draft, yet he still looks like a pick in the 10-15 range.

    Nevertheless, I don't think that is necessarily any type of indictment on his future.

    When Patterson arrived in Lexington, he was primarily relied upon in the low post where he would use his combination of size and skill against college competition. He showed an occasional mid-range jumper that was reminiscent of the one we saw for years by Karl Malone, but he was primarily a back to the bucket player. Patterson did always seem like a difficult cover for bigs because he would play physically, yet also had finesse skills.

    With DeMarcus Cousins and Daniel Orton giving Kentucky some legitimate size, Patterson's role in the offense changed considerably, but he still had an outstanding offensive season.

    Perhaps as important as allowing Patterson to play a little on the perimeter because of those two freshmen bigs, the opportunity to play with John Wall allowed Patterson to demonstrate that he can also be an above the rim finisher.

    When it comes to successful undersized power forwards, Elton Brand of course comes to mind, but his 7'5" wingspan puts him into a different class altogether. A more accurate comparison for Patterson would be Carl Landry, who are comparable in terms of height, wingspan and strength, though the latter is more athletic.

    With few exceptions, Patterson will be able to score in the NBA regardless of who guards him in the post. He has a physical build and enjoys being physical. Patterson seals his man well and uses his toughness to initiate strong position. Whether it is in the paint or on the perimeter, Patterson moves extremely well without the ball.

    When he catches the ball, Patterson has the full array of moves you want from a post player, predicated on strong footwork and a soft touch at the bucket. His up and under is strong and easy for defenders to want to bait on, but his baby hook is more impressive to me. Patterson gets good lift and rise, functionally using the length he has to maximum effect.

    In terms of offensive intangibles, Patterson has excellent hands and also possesses a gifted court sense.

    Patterson hit a more than respectable percentage of his 3-point attempts, but he doesn't have the same type of effectiveness as a jump shooter as he does in the post. His shot isn't pure, but it is a little reminiscent of those mid-range jumpers Karl Malone liked to take.

    The combo forward aspect of his game that is most immediately translatable is in transition. He runs the floor really well and is a good decision-maker in those situations.

    Patterson should also rebound well on the next level, particularly on the offensive end where he attacks the ball. His rebounding numbers predictably decreased as a junior, but Cousins and Orton are to be blamed for that.

    On the defensive end, Patterson is very sound and is capable of guarding multiple positions. He is better at guarding the post, but he showcased well defending perimeter ISOs where he had ample lateral quickness to stay in front of his man. Patterson frequently had to guard players shorter than him as a junior and did well in those situations.

    He also has a pair of some of the most effectively active arms you will see from a college player.

    As a shotblocker, Patterson isn't the type to shift a game, but he'll get his fair share and he is a difficult player to shoot over the top of.

    In terms of character, you couldn't ask for more than Patterson. If you had to bet your life on one player outside of the top-four to have an extremely productive 10-year NBA career, I would take Patterson.
    Well, if Bird is a "purist" when it comes to players and the position....Patterson fits that mold as an NBA-Ready, True PF that comes from a strong College Program/Coach that can step onto the court and impact the Team immediately. If it looks like we are trading down....he'll likely be available in the mid-teens.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment

    • #2177
      Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      More interesting read and statistical analysis by DX. I highlighted the Players that would likely fall into our range.

      http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...ard-Crop-3505/

      Situational Statistics: This Year’s Power Forward Crop

      by: Matt Kamalsky - Director of Operations
      June 14, 2010

      http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Situational-Statistics-This-Yearas-Small-Forward-Crop-3503

      http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Situational-Statistics-This-Yearas-Shooting-Guard-Crop-3502

      http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Situational-Statistics-This-Yearas-Point-Guard-Crop-3500

      Continuing our series of analyses, we take a look at one of the more balanced positions in this year’s draft. With a number of high-level and second-round-caliber prospects, the growing diversity of the power forward position has made this the deepest crop we’ve seen in quite some time, something that NBA teams are surely taking note of as they prepare to make their draft picks in 10 days.

      Thanks to our friends over at Synergy Sports Technology, we have access to the most thorough situational statistics available today. Synergy keeps track of all the possession that takes place in nearly every college basketball game, accumulating an incredible wealth of extremely informative data.

      Many of these statistics offer excellent insight into the players we evaluate, so we’ve taken the time to compile and sort through them in an effort to distinguish which players are, for instance, the most productive back to the basket threats, the most effective finishers around the basket, the most likely to draw fouls on a given possession, and the most efficient jump shooters.

      With 24 of the top power forwards tabulated on our spreadsheet, we’ve created a short list of the most interesting things we’ve learned about this year’s crop of prospects.

      Before you look at our findings, it is important to realize that there are some limitations to our analysis. For example, prospects on lower level teams will have some possessions missing each year because not all of their games were logged.

      The exact breakdown of specific possession types can be highly subjective and thus somewhat inconsistent at times, which means that this data always needs to be taken with a grain of salt. We’ve tried to steer away from utilizing data that wouldn’t be considered statistically significant, but considering how short the college season is, that’s not always easy.

      Our data obviously does not account for neither the strength of a player’s teammates, or his level of competition. Our sample of power forwards features two international players, Pablo Aguilar and Ludovic Vaty, and one D-League player, Latavious Williams.

      What We Learned Last Season
      2009 Article

      • A few of the more efficient power forwards on our list carved out niches similar to the one’s that they played on the college level, just on a smaller scale.

      Amongst the 24 power forwards on rankings last season, seven of whom opted to return to school, the three most efficient players included Jeff Pendergraph, DeJuan Blair, and Blake Griffin. Both Pendergraph and Blair wound up having highly efficient and productive seasons for their respective teams, especially when you consider where they were drafted. Both players saw their touches in post-up situations evaporate, allowing them to focus on what they did well at the college level, play tough and score easy baskets at the rim. Griffin wasn’t able to show how his situational stats may have translated for obvious reasons.

      • The project vs. prospect debate made last year’s class very interesting, and gives us some perspective on our analysis for this season.

      Jordan Hill and Earl Clark were two of the highest ranked power forwards on team boards last season, but neither managed to make a major splash with their respective NBA squads, and weren’t as productive in their rookie seasons as some of the players selected after them. Neither player looked particularly impressive statistically a year ago either as you can read in the article above.

      Looking at the 2010 power forward class from top to bottom, aside from Patrick Patterson who was actually in last year’s sample as well, there are few players that could be described as finished products. The growing diversity of the power forward position requires players to be extremely good at playing at least one role, something that some of these players may not be capable of doing for some time. For that reason, it is important to note that players like Larry Sanders and Ed Davis may need a few seasons to develop before we can scrutinize their situational statistics with in a constructive manner.

      Next season, we’ll certainly revisit both the 2010 and 2009 class to check back in Blake Griffin’s first year, and the second seasons of both Clark and Hill.

      Findings

      •Derrick Favors didn’t get a ton of possessions to work with at Georgia Tech last year, but he has some impressive and concerning statistics on his situational resume.

      At 12.1 possessions per-game, Favors ranks right around the average in terms of usage in our rankings. He actually falls behind Patrick Patterson, who notably sacrificed some of his touches to Kentucky’s freshman class. Favors didn’t benefit from playing next to a host of combo guards and no true playmaker with the mentality to get him the ball as often as possible around the rim. In limited touches, Favors shot an impressive 61.3% from the field (1st) and scored 1.0 PPP (5th).

      Receiving some 92% of his touches in half court sets, Favors shot an incredible 84.2% in one fast break touch per-game, but still managed to connect on 59.5% of his other shots. He received roughly 35% of his possessions in post up situations, scoring a point on 43% of those touches. His 0.844 PPP is just average, and his turnover percentage of 21.5% ranks pretty high. Ranking as the fourth most turnover prone player in this sample at 20.9% overall, Favors clearly has to improve his ability to hold onto the ball and likely could have been the most efficient scorer in our sample if he hadn’t given away such a large portion of his possessions.

      Favors’ role at GT is clear in the percentage of possessions he had to create for himself by crashing the glass. While his athleticism certainly played a role, Favors got nearly 20% of his touches by pulling down his teammate’s missed shots, something that his future coach probably won’t mind in the least bit. His interior oriented role is very evident in the 0.4 spot-up possessions per-game Favors used.

      Favors may have get just 0.62 PPP on his 0.9 jumpers per-game, showing that he’ll need time to develop as a midrange, but his 72.1% shooting on finishing opportunities is outstanding. It seems clear that when Favors got the ball in position to score last season, he excelled, and that will help him early in his career, but the development of his post and midrange arsenal will be a key to his learn-term success as a player.

      •Patrick Patterson’s projections vary depending on who you talk to, but a situational analysis supports him as an immediate contributor who could be worth taking in the lottery.

      Ranking right around average with a usage of 12.3 possessions per-game, Patterson ranks first amongst all power forward prospects at 1.139 PPP overall. The only player with a higher overall PPP in our 2010 draft rankings is Syracuse center Arinze Onuaku. On top of his excellent efficiency, Patterson turned the ball over on just 8.3% of his possessions, the second lowest mark in our rankings.

      From a situation specific perspective, Patterson was one of the more versatile forwards on the list. He received some 18% of his total offense in spot-up situations (3rd), 16% in transition (2nd), and 15.4% from offensive rebounds (8th). The impact of Kentucky’s freshman on Patterson’s role is clear in the decline we see in his opportunities to create his own shot. After receiving 35.8% of his possessions in the post last season, he got to go one-on-one on the block just 18% of the time this year. Despite that drop in usage, he led our sample with 65% shooting in the post.

      Patterson is capable of contributing on the next level in a number of ways, as his tools give him the ability to score in all sorts of set plays. His 0.894 PPP in jump shooting situations ranks above average, and it wouldn’t be surprising to see Patterson continue to make progress in that part of the game. Around the rim he ranks above average at 1.368 PPP. Couple his ability to score from multiple areas, with his excellent intangibles, team-first mentality, and athleticism, and Patterson seems like a very safe pick for a team looking to compete next season.

      •Ekpe Udoh has developed into a highly versatile prospect in the past few seasons, but his situational efficiency still makes him look raw on paper.

      Udoh’s 15.3 possessions per-game rank him above average in terms of usage, but his 0.885 PPP ranks him as the third least efficient player in our sample overall. Aside from his lack of efficiency, Udoh is a unique player in terms of where his shots come from. He’s able to step out to the midrange and make an impact while also displaying the length and fluidity to get to the rim.

      Udoh ranks 5th in our sample in both jump shots per-game (3.4) and spot-up PPP at 1.08. He also used an impressive 14.1% of his offensive possessions in isolation situations, which would have ranked him right around average amongst small forwards. Udoh’s 0.831 points-per possession in isolation situations would have ranked him 8th amongst small forwards, and is a prime example of what he can bring to the table at the next level as a mismatch threat.

      Some of Udoh’s overall inefficiency stems from the fact that he was often the one creating his own shots in Baylor’s offense and didn’t finish at a high rate. Nearly 54% of his offense came off post ups, isolations, or offensive rebounds, which is certainly impressive, but his 53.3% shooting in finishing situations is well below average. Udoh’s lack of physical strength, especially in his lower body, and average explosiveness, remain a concern moving forward. Udoh should benefit from having to shoulder less of a shot creating burden for himself in the future, but he still has a lot of room to add polish at age 23.


      •Ed Davis missed quite a bit of time down the stretch, but he accomplished quite a bit early in the year and looks better from a situational perspective than some more polished players.

      Davis’ 12.5 possessions per-game rank him just above Patterson in terms of usage and still right around the average for our sample of power forwards. His 1.0 overall PPP is good for 6th, and shows that despite being a raw offensive player, he still gets the job done efficiently. He certainly helped his cause last season by getting fouled on 12.3% of his shots (3rd).

      Though Davis was pretty productive overall relative to his touches, he ranked right around the average in post up situations in terms of efficiency (0.84 PPP) and usage (4 Pos/G). He benefitted from the play of his teammates, finishing his possessions from basket cuts at an excellent 77.8% clip. In contrast, he shot just 28.6% in a meager sample of spot-up opportunities (0.4 Pos/G). Clearly, Davis still needs to improve his midrange game to become a more capable threat from the elbows and a more versatile scorer.

      Attempting the fewest jump shots on our list at just 0.4 shots per-game, Davis got a larger percentage of his shots in finishing situations than every player on our list aside from Latavious Williams. Though Davis was able to be pretty effective on the whole, he’s a bit limited in what areas he can help a team at this time. Whatever team drafts him will do so with the hope that he’ll be able to round out the rest of his game while still taking advantage of what his teammates can create for him around the basket.

      •Larry Sanders stacks up pretty well with Ed Davis at 1.03 PPP on 13 possessions per-game. He’s come a long way from his freshman year, and it shows in his situational statistics. His 55.3% shooting from the post (4th) is incredible considering how raw he was with his back to the basket when he got to VCU. He still has a ways to go, as his 0.421 PPP in jump shooting situations indicates his lack polish from the midrange, but couple his length and athleticism with his 1.421 PPP in finishing situations (3rd) and Sanders seems like a nice long-term option for a team with the time develop him.

      • Charles Garcia may be maligned for his intangibles and the way he finished the year for Seattle, but he ranks second here in usage (21.2 Pos/G), and yielded a free throw on more possessions than anyone in our rankings (24.1%). His 0.909 PPP isn’t too impressive, but his size and ability to play multiple positions make him one of the most intriguing boom or bust prospects in the draft.

      • Gani Lawal doesn’t really stand out in any one area, with a 0.913 overall PPP. His usage was actually higher than that of teammates Derrick Favors at 13.6 possessions per-game. With nearly 50% of his usage coming from post-ups and 16.5% from offensive rebounds, Lawal will benefit from playing with a true point guard at the next level and did manage to draw free throws on 21.1% of his possessions (3rd).

      • Jarvis Varnado has made a lot of progress since he arrived at Mississippi State. His 1.03 PPP ranks well above average, and his 13.4% shots-fouled percentage ranks first in our entire sample. Varnado took less jump shots than any other player in our sample (0.4 Shots/G), but he made 51.6% of his shots from the post, where he spent the third largest percentage of his usage (46.3%).

      • Craig Brackins took a step back from his 0.9 overall PPP ranking last in this year’s rankings, to 0.86 per-possessions this year. Much like Michael Washington, he didn’t do much to help himself with another season in school, but nearly 40% of Brackins’ shots were jumpers and ranked second in post up possessions per-game at 6.9 each contest. The diversity of his game is intriguing for a player his size, but his polish still leaves a lot to be desired.

      • Pablo Aguilar has the second lowest PPP in our ranks (0.872) and shot just 36.5% from the field for CB Granada in the ACB this season. His 1.11 PPP in spot-up situations ranks third in our standings and reinforces the notion that Aguilar’s best asset is his ability to stretch the floor. His 38.5% shooting as a finisher is a good representation of how the European game impacts a player’s efficiency at the basket.

      • Latavious Williams is unsurprisingly the second lowest player in our rankings in usage (7.8 possessions per-game), but he finished at a well above average 66.1% clip at the rim against NBADL competition. He’s limited in spot up situations, and got a meager 0.6 post up possessions per-game, showing that he still has a ton of room to grow. He’s a player to keep an eye on, as the viability of prep-to-D-League jumps will hinge on his selection and performance in coming seasons.

      • Luke Harangody made a concerted effort to become more perimeter-oriented this season. His 5.3 jump shots per-game rank first on our list in a tie with Craig Brackins. Harangody’s overall PPP of 0.971 is just average because of his questionable shooting (38.1%) on those attempts.

      • Dwayne Collins turns the ball over as often as anyone on our rankings, but also shoots 60.8% from the field and gets fouled on 21.7% of his shots. A highly aggressive and extremely strong big man, it should come as no surprise that Collins has performed well in workouts.

      • Gavin Edwards ranks second in overall PPP (1.06), but is one of the lowest usage players in our rankings at 9.6 possessions per-game. His role as a complementary player at UConn afforded him some success on paper, but he turned the ball over at a high rate for a roleplayer (16.5%), even if he did manage to compensate by getting fouled on 11.3% of his shots (8th).
      From a statisical point of view....the section about Patterson really highlights the type of Player that I think that Bird looks for in a Player. If anything...the last sentence in Patterson's analysis pretty much covers the type of Player that Bird drafts.
      Last edited by CableKC; 06-14-2010, 02:07 PM.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment

      • #2178
        Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Patrick Patterson is one of the most clear spoken, thoughtful, intelligent interviewees I have ever heard in the draft process. It's hard to hear parts of it because of the background noise, but if it's even close I'm convinced that Patterson will be who the Pacers pick. I could see Bird completely being enarmored with this guy.

        OH the Pacers interviews are up on Pacers.com from today.

        http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/all_a...tral_2010.html

        Comment

        • #2179
          Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Not sure if this is posted elsewhere. Let's see if George will actually show up.

          Ebanks is a good guy to bring in against Henry nonetheless.

          http://twitter.com/Wells222

          Wells222

          Ebanks (West Virginia), George (Fresno St.), Grant (Purdue), Henry (Kansas), Milbourne (Maryland) and Rautins (Syracuse) in Indy 2morro

          Comment

          • #2180
            Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            George is my favorite prospect from #10 on, so I'm hoping Bird and co. are seriously looking at him here. I'll be interested to read how he stacks up against Henry and Ebanks.

            Comment

            • #2181
              Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              A knowledgeable poster in another forum claims that "Gordon Hayward canceled his Grizz workout due to having a "promise" higher than 12."

              Hayward at 10? (Utah and Clippers are very high on him though.)

              Bledose and Udoh also refused to workout for Memphis.

              Comment

              • #2182
                Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                Patrick Patterson is one of the most clear spoken, thoughtful, intelligent interviewees I have ever heard in the draft process. It's hard to hear parts of it because of the background noise, but if it's even close I'm convinced that Patterson will be who the Pacers pick. I could see Bird completely being enarmored with this guy.

                OH the Pacers interviews are up on Pacers.com from today.

                http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/all_a...tral_2010.html
                I suspect Udoh or Patterson will be available at #10. I think if both are available the Pacers will pick Udoh. If neither are available, someone good will have slipped, so we should get a good pick. I just hope the Pacers don't mess this up.

                Comment

                • #2183
                  Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by Placebo View Post
                  A knowledgeable poster in another forum claims that "Gordon Hayward canceled his Grizz workout due to having a "promise" higher than 12."

                  Hayward at 10? (Utah and Clippers are very high on him though.)

                  Bledose and Udoh also refused to workout for Memphis.
                  Where are you getting these canceled workouts from? 1st George, then Hayward, and you say Bledsoe and Udoh have refused as well?

                  Perhaps not one wants to workout for the Griz? George is suppose to be in Indy tomorrow, guess we'll see what happens their. Udoh and Bledsoe have been to Indy already, and Hayward is suppose to be in on the 21st.

                  Perhaps someone knows the the Griz are already locked in on a player (Babbitt maybe), or that they won't be keeping #12?

                  Comment

                  • #2184
                    Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                    Where are you getting these canceled workouts from? 1st George, then Hayward, and you say Bledsoe and Udoh have refused as well?

                    Perhaps not one wants to workout for the Griz? George is suppose to be in Indy tomorrow, guess we'll see what happens their. Udoh and Bledsoe have been to Indy already, and Hayward is suppose to be in on the 21st.

                    Perhaps someone knows the the Griz are already locked in on a player (Babbitt maybe), or that they won't be keeping #12?
                    It's usually from tweets. I follow all the beat writers that I can find and they are involved with the workout process.

                    www.ridiculousupside.com can be a good source for this kind of information.

                    Comment

                    • #2185
                      Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                      I just hope the Pacers don't mess this up.

                      I wonder what the odds are that Bird doesn't?

                      Comment

                      • #2186
                        Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Seems like the Clippers are drafting everybody. Guess they need to make up for all those years of Baylor.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment

                        • #2187
                          Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                          I wonder what the odds are that Bird doesn't?
                          IMO, his record is average. Roy was an excellent selection at #17, but Brandon was probably below average for a #13. Tyler remains an unknown. I give Bird a 50-50 shot.

                          Comment

                          • #2188
                            Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                            Seems like the Clippers are drafting everybody. Guess they need to make up for all those years of Baylor.
                            Between the Clippers and Jazz, there may not be anybody left for us to draft at 10.

                            Comment

                            • #2189
                              Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                              Where are you getting these canceled workouts from? 1st George, then Hayward, and you say Bledsoe and Udoh have refused as well?

                              Perhaps not one wants to workout for the Griz? George is suppose to be in Indy tomorrow, guess we'll see what happens their. Udoh and Bledsoe have been to Indy already, and Hayward is suppose to be in on the 21st.
                              seems like a good guess

                              http://www.commercialappeal.com/news...ing-grizzlies/

                              Team officials are routinely dealing with refusals to visit and workout cancellations by prospects who have expressed a desire not to play for the Grizzlies, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the situation.

                              Fresno State small forward Paul George was the latest player to pull out. He canceled his appearance last Sunday, citing a groin injury. But there were indications that George doesn't see Memphis as a place where he can receive significant playing time.

                              The most notable snub came from Butler forward Gordon Hayward.

                              Hayward is emphatic in his desire not to play for Memphis, sources said, adding that his camp indicated as much to the Griz as the reason he skipped last Sunday's workout.

                              Also, the Griz have been unable to negotiate a visit from Kentucky guard Eric Bledsoe, and Baylor forward Ekpe Udoh recently canceled his workout planned for Wednesday. Even Memphis native Elliot Williams has declined to commit to a meeting with the Griz, and he's projected to be drafted late in the first round.

                              Attempts to reach players' agents for comment were unsuccessful.

                              This is the second consecutive year that the Grizzlies have been rebuffed by draft prospects around their highest selection. Last year, guards Ricky Rubio, Stephen Curry and Jonny Flynn refused invitations to work out in Memphis when the Grizzlies had the second overall pick.

                              Comment

                              • #2190
                                Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                On the Memphis thing, ideas on why that is. They had a pretty decent year last year, but there's still ample playing time available. Is it just the city, or Chris Wallace, or what?

                                Interesting note, I looked at their salary. If they chose, they could have no salary going into next year. Of course, they'd have to let go of all their rookie contracts, but that's pretty amazing.
                                Last edited by Kegboy; 06-15-2010, 10:34 AM.
                                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 46 96 136 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 template Next
                                Working...
                                X