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 Will Galen View Post
    I now think Cousins will go #2 in the draft in front of Turner with a lot of teams. In fact I'm thinking if a team like Minny got the first I think they would pick Cousins #1 over Hall.

    I really want a top 3 pick this year. Hall, Turner, and Cousins are all going to be very good pros.
    After watching him tonight I can see where that might happen. He has excellent footwork and is a very good rebounder. He is exactly what the Pacers need. Can PF or center.

    Cousins,Favors and Patterson probably are the best of the PF's. I am very confident
    the Pacers will choose one of these three if they keep the 4-6 position in the draft.

    I still like Varnado late in the first.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      Minnesota needs an small guard bad, if they get the number one pick the could move down to get ET I think, they already have Al and Love so I don't think that they would get another pf

      Minnie would take Cousins, and trade Jefferson in the offseason. They'd look for expiring and player/picks. They need a SF and can pick up one in a trade or someone like Outlaw in FA. They have 2 other 1st to draft SF or SG if they want.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        Minnie would take Cousins, and trade Jefferson in the offseason. They'd look for expiring and player/picks. They need a SF and can pick up one in a trade or someone like Outlaw in FA. They have 2 other 1st to draft SF or SG if they want.
        trust me if Minny is picking at the 2th spot I hope they get Cousins and then hope for the other teams to pass on Turner so we could get him at 4th or 5th or whatever
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Wall nearly ended up with a triple double tonight as well. His defense...it's good, and he has room to improve. His shooting stroke is really smooth, and he shoots 80% from the line, so it's safe to assume his outside shot will come around. Kentucky has a wealth of talent. My two faborte guys in the draft are Wall and Cousins right now, with Turner a close third. I'd be thrilled with any of them.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by owl View Post
            After watching him tonight I can see where that might happen. He has excellent footwork and is a very good rebounder. He is exactly what the Pacers need. Can PF or center.

            Cousins,Favors and Patterson probably are the best of the PF's. I am very confident
            the Pacers will choose one of these three if they keep the 4-6 position in the draft.

            I'd be thrilled if the Pacers' choices were between Favors and Cousins. I think both of those guys could end up being really good. But I want them to give Cousins a personality assessment measure and psych eval to make sure he's not crazy before they make their selection.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
              I'd be thrilled if the Pacers' choices were between Favors and Cousins. I think both of those guys could end up being really good. But I want them to give Cousins a personality assessment measure and psych eval to make sure he's not crazy before they make their selection.
              I always wondered why the NBA doesn't also adopt the Wunderlich test or perhaps a similar modified aptitude test like the NFL does.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                When Cousins made the "Call me" sign to the fans*, it reminded me a little bit of this;



                * Cousins kept getting racial calls from the Miss. State fans a couple days before the game, and every time he scored a big bucket, he would say and make the "Call me" sign directed towards bashing the fans. It was brilliant.
                "I keep wondering the same thing. Last week they had the 4th worst record in the league, had an 11.9 percent chance of winning the lottery and were in line to land a franchise type player like Derrick Favors or DeMarcus Cousins. This week? They have a 1.7 percent chance of winning the lottery, have the 8th worst record and are in line to draft Cole Aldrich or Greg Monroe. Way to go Jim O'Brien. Rest Danny Granger the rest of the season (if it isn't too late) and give Josh McRoberts lots of minutes. That ought to do it." - Chad Ford on winning meaningless games

                Way to go Jim, you may have just put our franchise back another 4+ years.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by Kraut N Beer View Post
                  I always wondered why the NBA doesn't also adopt the Wunderlich test or perhaps a similar modified aptitude test like the NFL does.
                  I'm not specifically familiar with that test, but I know they do have personality tests because Jim O'Brien talked about them last year with regards to drafting Brandon and Roy.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    I'm not specifically familiar with that test, but I know they do have personality tests because Jim O'Brien talked about them last year with regards to drafting Brandon and Roy.
                    The Wonderlick is an aptitude test. I don't think it contains any personality trait profiling to it. I think it is geared toward sports applicable problem solving without actually being about sports knowledge.


                    I solve the issue by taking Patterson over both Favors and Cousins, no personality or development risks at all. For all the great play by Cousins, it was Patterson that was able to run a lot more minutes last night and stay out of foul trouble.


                    I obviously disagree about Favors being better than Lawal as a PF. The difference in footwork, both getting position and then scoring from the post, is night and day. Lawal has Kevin Love potential as an offensive player in the low block, though he's not as good on the glass as Love.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      I have a truckload of stuff backing up to watch, including the VCU game last night (Sanders).

                      Syracuse/Gtown is a must watch to see Monroe vs Wesley. Monroe has been the better looking prospect the last couple of weeks and the fight for position in the tourney is really heating up.

                      I also have the Nevada game from the other night to watch, the guard Armon Johnson is their prospect and I haven't seen him yet.


                      I'm the first to say that box scores mean less because it's more about the HOW than the what, but after seeing some guys 3-4 times I feel more comfortable in keeping up with them via box scores. Recapping some games of note:

                      Baylor wasn't a top 25 when I said they were a serious contender for the tourney, sweet 16 or better perhaps. Now they are top 25 ranked and rolling along with 3 serious prospects. They thumped the weak Texas Tech last night.

                      Dunn - went off for 30 on 13 FGAs

                      Tweety Carter - only 5-11, but 11 assists

                      Udoh - really coming on with his game, 6-11, 11 rebounds, 9 blocks

                      All 3 look really good in their positional core game (SG, PG, C). As I've said, scouts came into the year watching Udoh, so they are seeing the other 2. Plus their ranking will get them notice going into the Big 12 and NCAA tourney. Lace Dunn out past 20, Tweety out past 25. Nice picks...if they come out.


                      Wake vs VaTech (on Tivo to watch still)

                      Aminu had a strong game 8-15 for 25, 11 reb, 2 ast, 1 stl, 2 blk, 2 TOs
                      It bothers me that they lost this critical (for them) game, but they have all sorts of issue, especially at the guards (other than Ish Smith). Their bench bigs stink. This is almost a one man show for Aminu.

                      I'll watch it in the next few days and talk about the details.


                      Rutgers beat the horrible DePaul to cling to some kind of tourney hope.

                      Ndiaye was strong it appears. 6-6 for 15 points, 13 rebounds (5 off), 3 blocks, 2 ast. He did foul out in 30 minutes of play. But that team is turning into a one man show just like Wake. Rosario is killing them with his chucking. I posted interest in him about 6 weeks ago, since then he's been a train wreck. He looks good shooting, but he just can't hit the shots.

                      I feel bad for Ndiaye, especially if they miss the tourney. And how does a 10 board, 3 blocks guy in the Big East get overlooked as a prospect?? I mean not even 35th? Come on. He's a monster, very powerful at the rim, what's not to like.


                      Seattle's Garcia is now coming off the bench which is an interesting development. He did go 7-10 with 10 rebounds vs the mighty UC-Davis team. Gotta figure he's not coming out this year, which would be smart. Keep in mind that his scholastic ability kept him limited to the Seattle option rather than a major. He's way down in mocks anyway after being listed top 15-20 by some in preseason.


                      As I mentioned, I Tivo'd the VCU-Drexel game to get an update on where Larry Sanders was at. Looks like when I watch I'll see him go 13-15 for 29, 13 rebounds, 5 blocks, 1 ast, 2 steals. Obviously he's holding strong on a top 15 slotting, maybe top 12 still.

                      I want to see how much of this game he plays back to basket vs face up. Last time I watched him he was more like Brackins than Patterson.


                      You guys saw the KY game it looks like. My issue here is how to leader kids almost lose a game like this? They've got a tinge of the same thing Texas does - maturity questions.

                      I know you guys love Wall's shooting motion and dribble, but I still see him making some really poor choices and that worries me a bit. The SEC has not been that strong this year and IMO it was ripe for KY to go perfect for the season.

                      Wall - 6-16 and 0-3 deep is not good from your PG. 10 reb, 8 ast are nice, but keep in mind this is 48 minutes of play, not the more standard 35 from college stars. 3 stl, 2 blk, only 3 TOs are nice

                      Cousins - 7-11 for 19, 14 reb in only 30 minutes are nice, but then the 30 minutes of play itself is an issue. He's gotta be able to keep himself on the floor in a game like this.

                      Patterson - 7-12 for 19, 10 rebounds in 42 minutes looks to be about where his per minute production has been (ie, less involvement than the freshman). He did show 3 blocks, a steal and only 1 TO.

                      Vanardo - welcome to reality. 4-8, 5 rebound, 2 blocks, fouled out in ONLY 23 minutes. Very, very raw "chase all shots" shot blocker type. Not up to the challenge of facing perhaps the best big tandem this year (close with Favors/Lawal).


                      GaTech vs UNC

                      Didn't see it but it looks like Tech called off the dogs after going up by TWENTY in the first half. Hensen put up rebound numbers, but Lawal and Favors appear to have less involved overall games almost like autopilot. The only thing that stands out to me was them going 1-5 and 1-6 from the FT line.

                      UNC is a wreck and are certain to miss the NCAA tourney.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-17-2010, 12:52 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                        Wall, Cousins, and Patterson had good games offensively. Defensively UK stepped up when it counted. Eventually in the tourney they will have to play with 40 minutes of the same intensity they had in the final 3.

                        Varnado got sucked into some ticky tack fouls. But when he was in there UK had to change their attack. Wall could not dribble drive as deep. Cousins could not dominate the paint. Which left slow rotation and ultimately not enough space for Patterson to face up shoot or drive.

                        Varnado is real good. I can see him having a better NBA career than Thabeet, which may not say much.
                        I'll defer to your opinion over my box score based one and go out of my way to watch this replay on E360.

                        When I've seen Varnado I saw a block chaser more than a great defender. Ndiaye gets a lot of blocks but often does it while defending the ball in the post rather than leaping in to destroy a guard driving into the trees.

                        Maybe the question between Varnado vs Ndiaye would be one of Camby vs Dale Davis in terms of style. To me that's a tough call. Plus I just don't see the same overall game out of Vanardo.

                        Right now I think Udoh is definitely a better, slightly similar player to Vanardo. Bear in mind that my original scouting of Udoh was that I didn't want "air up there 2" . He's won me over since then.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog...name=nba_draft

                          Mids still have major talent
                          Wednesday, February 17, 2010 |

                          Posted by Fran Fraschilla

                          As usual, not every NBA draft prospect will be coming out of the six power conferences this season. Here are three guys that are household names to many college basketball fans even though they are not in the limelight every night during the season. Each has already been scrutinized very closely by NBA teams, but here is my prognosis for each player's NBA career.

                          Gordon Hayward, Sophomore, ButlerIt was only six years ago that Hayward was a 5-foot-11 high school freshman PG in Brownsburg, Ind. And, although he has sprouted 10 inches since then, the Butler sophomore has retained the agility of a guard in a small forward's body.
                          Hayward, considered one of the nation's best sophomores, has helped the Bulldogs to a 22-4 record and has been on the minds of many NBA scouts since a 25-point, 7-rebound performance last season at Ohio State. This past summer, he impressed NBA teams as a member of Jamie Dixon's FIBA Under-19 World Championship USA team.
                          Hayward is a very good athlete for his size who runs well, jumps well and has good quickness, body control and agility. Skill-wise, he possesses a better than average handle, passes well and sees the game well. He is a creative player with very good basketball instincts. Put him in a structured NBA set offense that requires reading screens and he will excel.
                          Normally an excellent outside shooter who shot 44 percent from the 3-point line as a freshman, Hayward has been mired in a recent shooting slump behind the arc. In the last 11 games, he made only 8-38 from deep, yet, remains a consistent 84 percent from the foul line.
                          I believe his inconsistent shooting this season could be from a lack of strength, something must be improved upon when he gets the opportunity to play in the NBA. He did not play his best at the end of his freshman season, so the question of fatigue will likely come up again.
                          Another area of improvement would be in his ability to drive to his right. He is twice as likely to drive left and his coach, Brad Stevens, an excellent offensive mind, puts Hayward in positions in the offense to take advantage of his strong left hand.
                          Ultimately, I think Hayward has a bright NBA future, even possessing lottery-pick potential, assuming that he works on some of the weaknesses in his game. His improved physical maturity will make his adjustment to the league much easier. But that is likely still at least one more season away.

                          Matt Bouldin, Senior, Gonzaga
                          Bouldin is one of the most complete guards in college basketball and deserves serious All-American consideration. In fact, I wonder how he would be perceived if he were playing in the Big East or the ACC on a nightly basis. In nine games against schools from the six power conferences, Bouldin is averaging almost 17 points, over five rebounds and four assists. So, how does his backcourt versatility translate to the NBA level? I would say favorably.
                          The first thing you like about Bouldin is his offensive efficiency. He shoots over 50 percent inside the arc, 40 percent from behind the arc and 86 percent from the free throw line. He has good size at 6-5 and has an excellent catch-and-shoot release, putting to use his good shooting touch. And, he can also make midrange shots off the dribble, especially going to his left.
                          While coach Mark Few has called him the Zags' best player the last two years, Bouldin has never needed to score to be valuable. Bouldin possesses a playmaker's feel for the game. While he doesn't have great quickness, he handles the ball well enough to get a team into its offense and has proven to be effective in Gonzaga's pick-and-roll game. His size helps him effectively find open teammates.
                          Bouldin's overall athleticism is below average for the NBA and, because of that, he will be a liability on the defensive end of the court. But he won't be the only guy in the league with that issue. His skill level and understanding of the game, on the other hand, is above average. He won't be a first-round selection, but as a "system player," he'll get a good look in the second round and has a chance to be playing in the league next season.

                          Jerome Jordan, Senior, Tulsa
                          No one is really talking about Jordan and I sense that some NBA scouts have given up on him. But, in his last nine Conference USA games, Jordan is averaging 17.3 points on 10.7 shots a game, 8.3 rebounds and 2.3 blocks. He recently dropped 20 points on a long and athletic UTEP Miners squad during a 7-for-11 shooting performance. Not bad for a guy who is playing without a true point guard and is seeing double- and triple-teams nightly.
                          The 7-foot, 250-pound native of Jamaica is still a work in progress and in the infancy of his game. He didn't play as a high school senior and played sparingly as a freshman at Tulsa. Since his sophomore season, however, he has become one of the most effective low-post players in college.
                          The criticism of Jordan is in his ability to hold his ground in the low post because of his narrow lower body base. Yet, when I saw Jordan early in the season, he had clearly improved his frame and his strength and he can still handle another 25 pounds of weight easily. I really liked his agility and athletic ability, but everything revolves around playing more physically. Interestingly, he is drawing seven fouls a game, according to kenpom.com and is shooting seven free throws a game.
                          In the low post, Jordan can turn over both shoulders and on both blocks, though he prefers the left side of the court. He possesses a nice jump hook to his left shoulder and a turnaround jump shot over his right shoulder. This year, he's added a soft 17-foot jumper which will fit nicely into a pick-and-pop game in any NBA screen-and-roll offense. And Jordan has gotten better at recognizing the various traps that come at him and he has improved his passing ability.
                          While Jordan is ranked No.45 on the latest draft Big Board, given that this is a weak draft, in my opinion he is a steal after the 20th pick. Physical strength still holds him back, but in a draft devoid of low-post players, he's had a more productive college career than anyone not named Aldrich.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            Minnie would take Cousins, and trade Jefferson in the offseason. They'd look for expiring and player/picks. They need a SF and can pick up one in a trade or someone like Outlaw in FA. They have 2 other 1st to draft SF or SG if they want.
                            Granger for Jefferson, plus one of their picks so we can grab something else ourselves? #17.

                            Or Granger and our #6 for their #2 to get Turner plus #17 and #24?

                            I like Granger, but with a draft deep in bigs you might still swing a guy like Lawal or Sanders with the #17 pick. Or Udoh or Ndiaye. Then you can still jump back in and get someone like Lace Dunn at 24. Pretty tempting.

                            That's Granger and #6 for Turner, Ndiaye and Dunn (among other options, could get Robinson at 17 maybe though that's unlikely).

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              I love Matt Bouldin and started following him last year, but I can't sell myself on him at the NBA level. Definite winner, smart game, iffy on having those couple of things that he can do so well that it works in the NBA game.

                              He is my favorite Zag, but he's not their top prospect.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Granger for Jefferson, plus one of their picks so we can grab something else ourselves? #17.

                                Or Granger and our #6 for their #2 to get Turner plus #17 and #24?

                                I like Granger, but with a draft deep in bigs you might still swing a guy like Lawal or Sanders with the #17 pick. Or Udoh or Ndiaye. Then you can still jump back in and get someone like Lace Dunn at 24. Pretty tempting.

                                That's Granger and #6 for Turner, Ndiaye and Dunn (among other options, could get Robinson at 17 maybe though that's unlikely).

                                Watch yourself for even mentioning trading Batman. I got raked over the coals in the rumor of Granger for Jefferson thread for being in Favor of trading everyone's favorite boy for Jefferson.

                                Bird needs to be dogging Kahn about making a trade. I can see all kinds of possible trades with Minnie. Don't forget Minnie's 1st 2nd round pick either!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X