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
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
    I was reading something about Kentucky and what they're doing with Patterson, is that they wanted him to play some Troy Murphy like role on their team.

    He had taken 4 three point shots the first couple years, and this year has already taken 24 (granted he's made 10 for 40%).

    I thought that was kind of odd.

    -- Steve --
    Yeah, when you watch them it's weird. I mean the kid has the jumper so it's nice as a weapon, but he stands and watches Wall feed Cousins in the low post most of the time. The freshman are really dominating the plays for whatever reason.

    Every time he gets near the ball you wonder why that's not happening 75% of his playing time. I like their freshman and Cousins is a big kid, but you've got a returning top 10 pick with more maturity just lingering there.


    Conspiracy - to get his primo class Calipari had to give in to the requests of World Wide Wes and others behind the scene to feature the freshman to help their NBA goals, leaving Patterson on the outside looking in.

    Hmmm, it appears to me Seth is liking a stretch forward. (giggle, giggle, snort
    I will kill you

    Wouldn't it be tragically ironic if they got him and then instead of being this great power forward inside with tons of boards and force he just sat outside jacking up threes?

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      VCU vs Hofstra
      Larry Sanders disappointed me in this game. Last year he caught my (and others) eye when we stopped to watch Maynor in action. Sanders in the couple of games I saw was far more the overall impact player for them, constantly involved in each play.

      In this game there were tons of scouts, just like Garcia, but for nearly 32 minutes I don't think Sanders bothered to show up. Unlike Garcia it wasn't foul trouble, just an utter lack of involvement. MANY TIMES he didn't even cross half court, and I'm not kidding. It looked like 4 on 5.

      He gave up several offensive rebounds when he clearly was in the mix for a defensive rebound and just didn't even make much effort. On offense, other than the 4-5 plays called for him he just stood and watched. He almost never got a good rebounding seal on either end.

      Now the few times they used him he did produce, he's got a decent, slowish turn jumper like JO, and showed a nice drop step and duck under for a layup too.

      But at halftime due to his making the few shots he got, he appeared to be having a good statistical night. I couldn't figure it out. Then it continued into the 2nd half. Where was this great player, why wasn't he making his presence felt.

      Then over the final 8 minutes or so they suddenly went to him nearly every time and he couldn't be stopped. He made shot after shot, mostly from the post. He showed a few nice jumpers and general good handles for a big. He looked like the star player during that time.

      So I don't know what to make of it. I hate guys that aren't involved because to make it in the NBA talent alone isn't enough. There are too many good working guys with talent at the next level.

      Was he coasting, is this the new coach in action?

      I will say he's got hops and his reach is ridiculous (best in the NCAA), he's something in the range of Garcia, maybe a tad better, and last year was a big impact guy for all 40 minutes when I saw him.

      Hopefully later in the season I catch a couple more games from him and see more of the "I'm the best guy out here" game for an extended period of time.



      Right now of the bigs I've seen recently I guess my list is Patterson and then a fair gap down to a logjam of Davis, Garcia, Sanders. If I see a couple more good games from Clemson's Brooker I might move him ahead of those guys.

      I think Garcia has the most upside because he's so athletic, but the competition is so weak that you can't be sure. Sanders has the 2nd best upside, but Davis is close. I that they all lack a constant inside game and all are struggling to show consistantly high awareness. These guys aren't Kevin Love or DeJuan Blair at this point.


      Brackins also seems to be more of an outside PF guy right now, not sure if I can put him in with this group though.


      They all give size to Aldrich, but run circles around him when it comes to being athletically gifted.



      Guys I like - Wall, Patterson, Singler, a bit curious to see where Ndiaye's year at Rutgers goes

      Down on - Samuels, Davis a bit, Henson (way down), Aldrich, M Lee, Warren, Ebanks a bit, Sanders a bit

      Need to see - Syracuse, Wake, Ga Tech, and Texas. Gtown, UConn and Fla St slightly less.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        I have it taped to watch, but stats wise the Ebanks vs Johnson showdown looks like a wash with both guys a bit below their norms (Syr vs W Va)

        Looks like Lawal made yet another case to be rated higher than Favors, modest numbers for Ed Davis.

        And I trash on Samuels, my pet guy from last year, and then he goes 12-20 vs Pitt in a barn burner.

        Big East is sick with talent this year. It's like the Pac10 from the Love, Westbrook, Mayo, Bayless, Weaver season.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          I have it taped to watch, but stats wise the Ebanks vs Johnson showdown looks like a wash with both guys a bit below their norms (Syr vs W Va)

          Looks like Lawal made yet another case to be rated higher than Favors, modest numbers for Ed Davis.

          And I trash on Samuels, my pet guy from last year, and then he goes 12-20 vs Pitt in a barn burner.

          Big East is sick with talent this year. It's like the Pac10 from the Love, Westbrook, Mayo, Bayless, Weaver season.
          For the year - actually I think his career, Lawal is a .500+ shooter. Ed Davis held him to a 5-15 game.

          I guess thats what I like most about Ed Davis, he is a very good defender and will only get better as he adds weight. He is raw offensively, but has all the tools he needs to be a elite player, just needs the right coach to get him there.

          Hmm, after that last line, maybe we shouldn't draft him unless we get rid of Obie.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            What does anyone think of Travis Leslie who plays for the Georgia Bulldogs. I live in Atlanta and just saw this guy on tv yesterday. He's fast, plays D and has to be one of the best rebounding guards in college. The guy can jump. I'm not sure this guy will jump (no pun intended) this year to the draft, but he really intrigues me.

            He also had a monster dunk over Demarcus Cousins.

            Doesn't shoot the 3 so I doubt Obie would like him much. I'd say he's a very light Wade. Doesn't seem to score, but like Wade, he is a good rebounded and averages over 1 steal and 1 block per game.

            Stats in his last game included 14 pts, 15 boards, 5 assists, 4 steals, & 1 block.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              It would seem that many of you have focused on SG/SF and or PF/C.....and not really on too many PGs.

              After Wall....are there any PG prospects that we should consider beyond Wall?

              I figure that we will be drafting our future Starting PG over the next 2 drafts.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Cable, for my approach I don't bother by position or anything. Two years ago I just wanted to be sure to see all the top 15-20 guys so I would have an opinion (I do the same thing with films before Globes/Oscar noms).

                Along the way I ended up noticing other guys farther down like Price, but they weren't targets. Right now that's Ndiaye and Rosario at Rutgers, for example.

                Anyway, I don't think there really are many PGs in the top 15. Sherron Collins at Kansas (and teammate Taylor) are on the radar to start the year. Collins is quick but the last 2 years I haven't viewed him as a next level guy. I'm going to scout KS more closely later on.

                Duke's Jon Scheyer has had some moments and maybe could be a Diener type, a control guy that doesn't give up the ball and can come up with some big plays. But he's been up and down (4 TO game today).

                I don't think Nova's Scottie Reynolds is really a PG prospect, hard to place him right now, but he is one of their main playmakers and runs 6'2". Nova is following up last year with another great season, so he'll be on the radar in some manner.



                The fact is that last year was dripping with PGs and few bigs and this year is just the opposite. This doubled my frustration at passing on the one great big besides Griffin because of the knees concern and taking a PF that would be rated about 8th of PFs coming out this year.



                Maybe elsewhere you saw my comment about Rubio. Now he might not be a target we can reach, but I'd bet you could get him with Granger or maybe less. I mentioned Dun plus a pick, maybe our pick this year. You'd have to still wait a year at least, but that's one way to "draft" a PG.

                Might not be able to get the PG thing finished out in a traditional way. It would be nice to see Price improve (he is old, so growth might be limited) to take away some of the need at PG. If they are able to lean greatly on Granger and Roy then all you need from PG is a guy that can get those 2 the ball, and Price does fit that description.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  hey Seth what do you think about Greivis Vasquez? I seem him playing few times, he is not that fast but he can shoot the ball and pass it too, I think he could be a nice back up maybe an starter in the future.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    Cable, for my approach I don't bother by position or anything. Two years ago I just wanted to be sure to see all the top 15-20 guys so I would have an opinion (I do the same thing with films before Globes/Oscar noms).

                    Along the way I ended up noticing other guys farther down like Price, but they weren't targets. Right now that's Ndiaye and Rosario at Rutgers, for example.

                    Anyway, I don't think there really are many PGs in the top 15. Sherron Collins at Kansas (and teammate Taylor) are on the radar to start the year. Collins is quick but the last 2 years I haven't viewed him as a next level guy. I'm going to scout KS more closely later on.

                    Duke's Jon Scheyer has had some moments and maybe could be a Diener type, a control guy that doesn't give up the ball and can come up with some big plays. But he's been up and down (4 TO game today).

                    I don't think Nova's Scottie Reynolds is really a PG prospect, hard to place him right now, but he is one of their main playmakers and runs 6'2". Nova is following up last year with another great season, so he'll be on the radar in some manner.



                    The fact is that last year was dripping with PGs and few bigs and this year is just the opposite. This doubled my frustration at passing on the one great big besides Griffin because of the knees concern and taking a PF that would be rated about 8th of PFs coming out this year.



                    Maybe elsewhere you saw my comment about Rubio. Now he might not be a target we can reach, but I'd bet you could get him with Granger or maybe less. I mentioned Dun plus a pick, maybe our pick this year. You'd have to still wait a year at least, but that's one way to "draft" a PG.

                    Might not be able to get the PG thing finished out in a traditional way. It would be nice to see Price improve (he is old, so growth might be limited) to take away some of the need at PG. If they are able to lean greatly on Granger and Roy then all you need from PG is a guy that can get those 2 the ball, and Price does fit that description.
                    Thanks.....this is what I was looking for. The likelihood is that there isn't a PG that would be decent enough to draft next season season. I'm okay with that since I feel that we'd have to draft/sign another Big Man sometime between now and the start of the 2011-2012 Offseason. From what I have read about Patterson ( not only your glowing remarks about him and from scouting reports ), I'd be okay with drafting him since it appears that he'd fit a need.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Syracuse vs West Virginia
                      Ebanks vs Wes Johnson
                      (note: Johnson was playing while recovering from the flu)

                      Neither player really faced each other directly due to zone play, but at times you got to see them side by side or fighting for a rebound together.

                      They are both SFs, though Ebanks has a bit of an SG game to him. Ebanks also has more muscle, broader shoulders. His movement and dribble is a bit like Rush's, perhaps a tad better.

                      Johnson doesn't quite have the same handles, but he's overall smoother on the court and more graceful in recovering from tough situations or challenges. He made a late layup that was all body control to adjust midair around a post defender, the kind of thing you need to be able to do in the NBA.

                      Ebanks is the better passer and made several of nice entry passes to the from the zone buster middle, one a soft touch bounce pass under the defender's arms. His touch and placement of the pass was very good. Bear in mind that most of his passing was from that zone high post (cut to the middle of the FT line inside the zone), so I don't know that his passing/awareness applies as well in a more one on one game.

                      Ebanks reads steals a bit better, Johnson looks to defend the glass better.

                      Johnson used his length to protect several passes that came to him, not just hipping out a defender reaching over but also stepping out with his long stride. That was instinctive and smart.

                      Court awareness was close. At times Johnson had the advantage. He ran his transition break lane better and would stagger it by slowing or speeding up to improve the passing angle and attack opportunity. But especially in the 2nd half Ebanks read rebounding lanes better and it got him some nice OReb, including at least one for an easy putback.

                      Key - neither player was satisfied to just watch a play if they were anywhere close to impacting it. I've seen several guys where this wasn't true. This is a major item for me when I'm scouting.

                      Johnson has the better stride and can get out on the run a little better.

                      Neither kid was constantly "the man" in this game, though both were active and did come up with big plays. They didn't have all the action going through them and weren't setting up other guys with their own plays, especially off the dribble or posting up.

                      What most bothered me in this game was that neither had any offensive go-to moves. They are athletes with decent handles and hops that just ride with the flow hoping to get points where they can. What you want to see is them having some moves for scores, assists or rebounds that seem to be something they can rely on.

                      Neither player had to be accounted for by the other team.

                      Until they develop that they will be no better than bench fodder in an SF loaded NBA. It's a long season so we'll see if they make improvements as the year goes on. I can see both with the potential to end up as quality picks.

                      Wes Johnson hits about a #8 pick, Ebanks maybe 11-12 range. But these two guys are really close right now. At times I liked Ebanks a bit more, and this was a nice improvement from the last game I saw.

                      Ebanks moves/looks like Brandon Rush, Wes moves/looks more like Durant. This is not a talent level comparison, just what their body movement looks like. Wes does not have anything in the ballpark of Durant's shooting.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        UPCOMING GAMES NOTE
                        I'm watching UNC vs Ga Tech right now, impressive play by Lawal - Favors on bench all first half due to 2 quick fouls.

                        But while looking into things I noticed that we get a shot to see some more good benchmarks for them and using them. Ga Tech vs Clemson on TUE night will give you the two best post-strength rebound bigs I've seen, Lawal vs Booker, both seniors. Plus Favors and his size.

                        Then Ga Tech faces Florida State and Solomon Alabi next SUN at noon. It would be nice to see Alabi vs Favors especially.

                        In both games I'll be looking for established post position, able to hold it, leveraging, swimming and other strength rebound moves, and holding screens/picks.

                        Not sure how ESPN360 will play into this, but if you can't get the games on dish/cable you might check there too.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          I need find out when Varnado plays again. He is averaging 14/12/5blocks.
                          And his pps is 1.78. He has to be doing something right. He may be a Bird type pick as he
                          is a 4 year player. He apparently is very athletic.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Seth, I agree with a lot of your sentiments. One thing though was that Maynor was that VCU team from last year. Sanders has a ton of athleticism and will FLY up the board in combine like testing. I just don't see him as a guy that actually gets the game. I doubt his work ethic as well. I just would not want to use a high pick on him. If I am a team like the Spurs, with a later first round pick and a need for athleticism in the front court, I would definitely consider him.

                            I am really really really high on Greg Monroe as well. I think this kid is going to explode as the year moves on. He is in an offense that doesn't get the most out of his abilities. He is a monster on the glass, even though his numbers may not be quite as impressive as you would like. He is the antithesis of Troy Murphy. He fights hard for contested rebounds. He has very good handles for a big man and can take his man off the dribble. He has a good repertoire of post moves. And I have seen him take over for his team in late game situations.

                            I am with you 120% on Patrick Patterson. I would take him over Favors. Onb top of all your analysis, I would say that he has the work ethic that many of these other bigs high in the draft have yet to prove. I will take a proven worker. Patterson has improved his ball handling and outside shot this off-season. Patterson should be the one being fed in the post, but the difference between having him at weak side and Cousins at weak side is huge. I really like the added bulk he put on as well. He has filled out and I think he would be a perfect fit on the Pacers.

                            Gani Lawal I have seen a couple times this year. He may be the one player that benefited the most from coming back to school for another year. He is doing so many things off the ball in the flow of the game that I have really come to like him. He has good athleticism and bulk, while actually seeing the game and making his team better for all the things he does. He has been very good in the pick and roll and his PG is not that good from what I saw. He blocks out and makes efficient cuts through the defense. He is a good rebounder and shot blocker. I don't think he is an NBA All-Star caliber of a player, but he is a guy that could definitely make a difference on your team and I couldn't positively say that last year around draft time.

                            I would hope that we get either Patterson or Monroe with the assumption that we are around 6-11. They would both be solid fits next to Hibbert IMO. Both are smart players with big bodies and great rebounders. I like Ed Davis as well and would not be disappointed to draft him either.

                            There are no PG's worth talking about at this point. Neither Wall (not going to have #1) or Collins (later first rounder) will be in our draft range. I wouldn't mind drafting Collins if he falls to our second rounder though.

                            I think that Turner would be a great player, but I think he will be gone before we pick and our dire need for a starting PF is too big to not take a PF/C anyway. Hansborough for all of you who love him, and I definitely don't hate the guy, is a perfect first big off the bench. That is his long-term role in the NBA, so please don't be disillusioned that he is our starting PF.

                            We don't need to draft a PG at this point. Our options at PG are Price, Price, and well Price, so we have to give him an opportunity to get better. That or we need to make a trade for a PG that would actually improve our team. We won't be able to draft a PG that can make a difference for us. I think if we solidify our front court and coaching positions, we will be an attractive destination for a PG to be willing to be here.
                            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              If the mock drafts are accurate and Jarvis Varnado goes late 1st--2nd, there's no question that he's the steal of the draft. He's a more physical, more athletic, better rebounding version of Theo Ratliff. He's exactly what we need.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                I don't know that Varnado will be the steal of the draft. Varnado has a loong way to go to be a capable NBA player. He is a complete liability on the offensive end outside of his offensive rebounding. IMO, he is like Jeff Foster who has a chance to stay in the NBA for a long time because he specializes so much. He is a good defender and rebounder, and a great shot blocker. He will only be so effective on the court, unless he is paired with a great scorer. Think Dikembe Mutombo on the Sixers with Iverson.
                                "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X