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

2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 37
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 34 37 template Next
  • #346
    Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

    I don't think this draft class is a weak one. Not at all really. I think this is a relatively strong class. The difference between this class and others is that there really is not a definite top 10. This draft has a lot of internationals from about 6-15, where a lot of basketball "people" immediately dismiss them as prospects. If they played at Duke or UNC, it would be a strong class.

    I think the depth of this draft is fairly strong. I think the 20-40 are as strong as any of the last few drafts. I would contend last year was probably the strongest draft in a while, top to bottom. This year isn't as strong as last, but it should produce a few All-Star caliber guys from the top and a couple of break out guys from the second round. Like last year, it seems there is a lot of value to trade back for multiple picks. We got George, but I was a bit surprised that he fell to us. I was even more surprised that we took a SF, but am so glad we did. I trust Bird.

    I am expecting/praying for us to pick 15 and 45. We will probably make a move this off-season, which may dictate the direction we go in the draft. If we don't trade our first as part of a bigger package, I am looking to go best available. I think the strength of this draft is the late first to early second round. I think picking 15 is a bit of a quandry. There are several players in the top 15 I don't like, but there are also some guys projected later around 25 I do like. So either someone falls to us or we take a guy a little earlier than expected because he is our guy. I would love to package this pick with either our 2013 pick and/or a young guy or two for an upgrade in the front court. I am thinking a guy like Maureese Speights or JJ Hickson or Anderson Verajao. Somebody like that who would really solidify our front court rotation.

    I think there is a lot of value in the second round this year. I see players like Klay Thompson, Rick Jackson, JaJuan Johnson, Justin Harper, Kyle Singler, Marshon Brooks, Trey Thompkins, Norris Cole, Nolan Smith, and Markieff Morris as valuable players who will be capable of contributing to a team. I think there are a lot of players who will move up come closer to the draft, but I think teams like the Heat and Knicks should look to acquire some second rounders to fill out their rosters. They can become productive players around their superstars.

    I am high on Thompson in the second round. I think he could be a breakout type of starting SG. I am thinking he compares to Kevin Martin, but a little stronger and better defensively, even though this isn't a strong suit. He needs to improve defensively. Martin is probably better at finishing at the rim, but both are versatile scorers.

    I LOVE Rick Jackson's size. He lost a lot of weight last off-season and has shown vast improvement. He is still a legit 6'9" with a good frame. If he continues to work on his body and fitness level, he will contribute to someone's front court. He rebounds the ball well and blocks shots. He is solid defensively and continues to improve offensively. A project for sure as he is clearly a second round pick, but I think worth the risk. I say the same thing about Markieff Morris (I don't want to take his brother at 15, because I don't like his value there).

    Justin Harper and JaJuan Johnson are definitely guys who will be on NBA rosters. Both are long and lanky. Harper is a 6'10" SF/PF who is has a versatile game. If someone like the Lakers or Spurs take this kid watch out. He needs the right situation though. JaJuan needs to add some strength big time. I like his athleticism and he is solid offensively, but will get pushed around in the NBA. I think if he can focus on getting stronger and improving his pick and roll game, he will be a very attractive prospect... although most of you on here overrate him because of being a Boilermaker.

    I put Singler and Smith in the same boat here. Both are very smart players who will probably be long-time NBA veterans, but won't be the All-Star caliber some hope. I really like how Smith translates as a PG. Reminds me of a young Derek Fisher. Singler is a SF. He reminds me a lot of Dunleavy, but plays a bit bigger without as good of a natural stroke as Dunleavy coming out. He could be a Dirk type, but that is not realistic. I see him as a backup SF who minimizes mistakes and plays smart basketball. He will make others around him better, but he is not a big enough difference maker to be a starter.

    Brooks, Cole, and Thompkins are three guys with huge upside, but have glaring weaknesses in their games. For them, it will be how hard they work and how well they mature as basketball players in order to maintain a career. They each have the natural ability, though.
    Last edited by pacergod2; 03-16-2011, 11:36 AM.
    "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

    • #347
      Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

      Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
      In you're ongoing search for Dale Davis:

      http://www.nbadraft.net/players/tyler-hansbrough
      Hilarious post, but I saw NBADraft.net had us taking Markieff Morris in the first round. I would approve. I think a guy like that is a little closer to Dale Davis in size, but it is hard to say that Tyler doesn't have that DD grit and toughness. His jumper is light years ahead of DD, though.

      Morris is the big bodied PF/C who rebounds and blocks shots. He is very good defensively at this point, and he makes typically youthful mistakes defensively. I think he is the type of guy that would fit extremely well in our front court rotation for his "Dale-like" abilities.
      "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

      • #348
        Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

        Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
        I don't think this draft class is a weak one. Not at all really. I think this is a relatively strong class. The difference between this class and others is that there really is not a definite top 10. This draft has a lot of internationals from about 6-15, where a lot of basketball "people" immediately dismiss them as prospects. If they played at Duke or UNC, it would be a strong class.

        I think the depth of this draft is fairly strong. I think the 20-40 are as strong as any of the last few drafts. I would contend last year was probably the strongest draft in a while, top to bottom. This year isn't as strong as last, but it should produce a few All-Star caliber guys from the top and a couple of break out guys from the second round. Like last year, it seems there is a lot of value to trade back for multiple picks. We got George, but I was a bit surprised that he fell to us. I was even more surprised that we took a SF, but am so glad we did. I trust Bird.

        I am expecting/praying for us to pick 15 and 45. We will probably make a move this off-season, which may dictate the direction we go in the draft. If we don't trade our first as part of a bigger package, I am looking to go best available. I think the strength of this draft is the late first to early second round. I think picking 15 is a bit of a quandry. There are several players in the top 15 I don't like, but there are also some guys projected later around 25 I do like. So either someone falls to us or we take a guy a little earlier than expected because he is our guy. I would love to package this pick with either our 2013 pick and/or a young guy or two for an upgrade in the front court. I am thinking a guy like Maureese Speights or JJ Hickson or Anderson Verajao. Somebody like that who would really solidify our front court rotation.

        I think there is a lot of value in the second round this year. I see players like Klay Thompson, Rick Jackson, JaJuan Johnson, Justin Harper, Kyle Singler, Marshon Brooks, Trey Thompkins, Norris Cole, Nolan Smith, and Markieff Morris as valuable players who will be capable of contributing to a team. I think there are a lot of players who will move up come closer to the draft, but I think teams like the Heat and Knicks should look to acquire some second rounders to fill out their rosters. They can become productive players around their superstars.

        I am high on Thompson in the second round. I think he could be a breakout type of starting SG. I am thinking he compares to Kevin Martin, but a little stronger and better defensively, even though this isn't a strong suit. He needs to improve defensively. Martin is probably better at finishing at the rim, but both are versatile scorers.

        I LOVE Rick Jackson's size. He lost a lot of weight last off-season and has shown vast improvement. He is still a legit 6'9" with a good frame. If he continues to work on his body and fitness level, he will contribute to someone's front court. He rebounds the ball well and blocks shots. He is solid defensively and continues to improve offensively. A project for sure as he is clearly a second round pick, but I think worth the risk. I say the same thing about Markieff Morris (I don't want to take his brother at 15, because I don't like his value there).

        Justin Harper and JaJuan Johnson are definitely guys who will be on NBA rosters. Both are long and lanky. Harper is a 6'10" SF/PF who is has a versatile game. If someone like the Lakers or Spurs take this kid watch out. He needs the right situation though. JaJuan needs to add some strength big time. I like his athleticism and he is solid offensively, but will get pushed around in the NBA. I think if he can focus on getting stronger and improving his pick and roll game, he will be a very attractive prospect... although most of you on here overrate him because of being a Boilermaker.

        I put Singler and Smith in the same boat here. Both are very smart players who will probably be long-time NBA veterans, but won't be the All-Star caliber some hope. I really like how Smith translates as a PG. Reminds me of a young Derek Fisher. Singler is a SF. He reminds me a lot of Dunleavy, but plays a bit bigger without as good of a natural stroke as Dunleavy coming out. He could be a Dirk type, but that is not realistic. I see him as a backup SF who minimizes mistakes and plays smart basketball. He will make others around him better, but he is not a big enough difference maker to be a starter.

        Brooks, Cole, and Thompkins are three guys with huge upside, but have glaring weaknesses in their games. For them, it will be how hard they work and how well they mature as basketball players in order to maintain a career. They each have the natural ability, though.
        Like I was saying hard to just a drafts strength until years from now but if someone is trying to judge a drafts strength then you have to look at how good the TOP players will be.

        You are right this draft is is deep, but with the potential that most top players seem to have as viewed by scouts, this draft gets a weak grade, thats why most people call this a weak draft.

        Also I think most of those names that you listed will be taken in the 1st, singlar, smith, johnson, jackson, thompson, morris, tompkins and maybe a few more.
        Why so SERIOUS

        Comment

        • #349
          Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

          Originally posted by Really? View Post
          Like I was saying hard to just a drafts strength until years from now but if someone is trying to judge a drafts strength then you have to look at how good the TOP players will be.

          You are right this draft is is deep, but with the potential that most top players seem to have as viewed by scouts, this draft gets a weak grade, thats why most people call this a weak draft.
          Agreed. But the other 25 teams that don't pick in the top five only care about the draft's depth. There is a possibility that only three teams pick in the top five with the Jazz and Cavs both having a chance to have two top five picks. The majority of GMs are more concerned about the depth of the draft and the majority of sports writers that are championship chasers only care about who is at the top.

          Originally posted by Really? View Post
          Also I think most of those names that you listed will be taken in the 1st, singlar, smith, johnson, jackson, thompson, morris, tompkins and maybe a few more.
          That is why I said "I think the 20-40 are as strong as any of the last few drafts." There is a tremendous amount of talent between 20-40, which is where most of those guys are. This draft is not as strong as last year, IMO. But I also think that this draft not being as "top heavy" doesn't mean it isn't a strong draft class.
          "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

          • #350
            Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

            When it comes to this upcoming draft.....we should simply draft the best possible player available.....regardless of positional need.

            Reason 1 why I think we should draft the BPA:

            IMHO we need to get a Starting Quality SG ( or a "very solid 1st SG/SF off the bench....depending on how far you think that PG is ) and a Starting Quality PF ( IMHO, Hansbrough would be a much better "1st Big Man off the bench" then a Starting PF ). Unless a "no-brainer" Player drops to us....I think that these "needs" should be filled via Free Agency or a Trade....not via the Draft.

            Reason 2 why I think we should draft the BPA:

            Looking at our likely roster going into the offseason, I think that we need to fill the following lineup needs:

            Point Guard - Depending on whether you think that AJ and/or Lance can fill our future backup PG needs, we may or may not need another PG. My guess is probably not.

            Backup Frontcourt Players at the PF and C spots - Foster and Solo need to be replaced to provide us some depth in the Frontcourt. The good thing is that with our Frontcourt needs, I think that the FO should try to bring over Stanko or Lorbek while trying to sign Magnum to fill out the Frontcourt lineup. We can even try to re-sign McBob if needed.

            So what does that leave us with when it comes to the draft if we don't really need any more Backup PGs, Wing Players or Frontcourt Players?

            The same old answer as always....draft the BPA.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment

            • #351
              Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

              how did fareid look? didnt see the game, but his shooting numbers were pretty brutal...his block on the three at the end was ballsy though

              Comment

              • #352
                Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                That is why I said "I think the 20-40 are as strong as any of the last few drafts." There is a tremendous amount of talent between 20-40, which is where most of those guys are. This draft is not as strong as last year, IMO. But I also think that this draft not being as "top heavy" doesn't mean it isn't a strong draft class.
                Ok, sorry about that, thought u were saying that we might be able to get those guys in the 2nd
                Why so SERIOUS

                Comment

                • #353
                  Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                  Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                  how did fareid look? didnt see the game, but his shooting numbers were pretty brutal...his block on the three at the end was ballsy though
                  He looked good... doubt he will ever be a scorer in the NBA though.. but a very good defensive presence...
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment

                  • #354
                    Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                    Originally posted by Really? View Post
                    He looked good... doubt he will ever be a scorer in the NBA though.. but a very good defensive presence...
                    He reminds me of Trevor Booker

                    Comment

                    • #355
                      Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                      If Jimmer is there at 15 I think that would be a decent pick depends who is there though. ( this is assuming we get the last playoff spot)

                      Comment

                      • #356
                        Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                        how did fareid look? didnt see the game, but his shooting numbers were pretty brutal...his block on the three at the end was ballsy though
                        I thought Faried did great. Seems to have a great motor and a good attitude. He was pretty dominant.

                        For what its worth, Malcolm Lee is absolutely demolishing Kalin Lucas (on defense) in the UCLA Mich St game. Maybe a good 2nd round pick?
                        Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                        Comment

                        • #357
                          Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                          Right now, hoopshype have us taking Honeycutt. What are your guys's thoughts on him?
                          Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                          Comment

                          • #358
                            Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                            Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                            Right now, hoopshype have us taking Honeycutt. What are your guys's thoughts on him?
                            I dont like him. But ive only watched him a few times he isnt what I would like us to draft he is a good defenseive wing and if we are going defensive wing mys well take Leonard from SDSU. But again I dont think we will draft wing.

                            Comment

                            • #359
                              Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                              What do you guys think about this Lavoy Allen guy, just watching the Temple game yesterday and I spotted him and pegged him as a potential NBA player. Checked up a little on him today and Draft express has him ranked as their #34 senior

                              But their reasons for this is that although he is talented he isn't consistent wit his play. Looking at the game I thought he was like a sophomore who could still refine his game but come to find out that he is a SR which made me concerned once I found out about the inconsistency.

                              But I think a possible summer league invite might not be out of the question, the guy seems like he has big upside.

                              The past 8 games he has had a double double, and also a couple of blocks in each, he is a low post player but has a little jump shot.

                              Against Duke this year he put up 17pts 13reb 3 assist, 2 stls and 2 blocks, also 3-4 from 3pt, I am assuming those were lucky though seeing that he is a 6-9 pf that has taken less than 20 3's this year.

                              I think he really has some potential.

                              http://espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=36614

                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGycv...eature=related
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment

                              • #360
                                Re: 2011 Prospect Scouting Thread

                                Bernard James looks like a solid PF option possibly small center in the rotation as well
                                "To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice the gift." - Steve Prefontaine

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 34 37 template Next
                                Working...
                                X