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

Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

    Today we look at our 2nd draft profile of the 2014 draft potential Pacers targets by putting UCONN's DeAndre Daniels under the Tbird microscope.

    Daniels has a ton of physical attributes that make him an intriguing potential 2nd round target for Indiana. Born April 15, 1992, Daniels just turned 22 years old a couple of months ago...making him one of the older players in this draft. His size is almost prototypical for the NBA, measuring in at 6'8 1/2 and possessing a wingspan of 7'2. His huge length and potential for growth in his game is his biggest asset, as Daniels is one of the guys in this draft that you can dream on....his major physical weakness is that he is rail thin at 196lbs, and plays even skinnier than that. An NBA team that drafts him simply must get Daniels on a pro level training and strength regimen, because if he gets to weigh somewhere around 225lbs someday, he could become an entirely different player. As it is now, he was a guy who put up rather pedestrian stats on a National Championship team....a guy who faded often into the background. 13.1ppg and 6 rebounds normally won't impress anyone at the NBA level, but with Daniels you are drafting what COULD be, not what is......

    "Projectable" is the draft buzzword you can use on Daniels. If he can transform his body, it completely changes what his potential could be. But that of course, is far from guaranteed.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an offensive player, Daniels has a lot of untapped potential, but his lack of strength and weight has really created the type of player he is currently, which is a guy who really struggles in traffic and with physical play.

    That is not to say that he is without skills currently, just that adding 25 lbs of strength would make a massive amount of things available to him that aren't in his game currently. For now, he is at his best as a spot up 3 point shooter, a post threat single covered over smaller guys, and as a runner and finisher in transition.

    He has very good spot up shooting form. Daniels has great arch on his shot, with a high release and consistent mechanics. His follow through is pure, his elbow is consistent, and he takes the ball up through his eye just like you want. His footwork is solid consistent as well.....the first word that comes to mind when describing his shot is "pretty".

    I like Daniels in the post, and you can tell he has been very well taught. He can score either direction, turning over either shoulder. He can score with a baseline fadeaway on either side of the goal, and he has a nice jump hook which he can score in a variety of ways with either hand. I like how he faces up, then turns his back to the defender and uses the correct move for the situation almost every time.

    As a driver, he can drive in straight lines, and takes big steps. He has no "wiggle" to his drive, no cleverness, no real advanced moves....but he does have a nice pull up game which you don't see as much anymore.

    What he can't do as an offensive player is play through contact or play in traffic. UCONN used him in isolations a lot, both to keep him out of traffic and to keep his rather passive personality involved in the game. As smooth as he looks sometimes, he looks radically different when he is bumped or played in a physical way, and he hates being double teamed.....he really was a turnover factory when faced with those 2 scenarios. I viewed that as an indictment of his lack of strength more so than anything else, so again, if you add strength to him he becomes a much different and more potentially dynamic offensive player.

    Daniels also can't pass. I don't view him as selfish at all, but his lack of upper body strength is a major hindrance to him in this regard as well. When he drives and has to deal with multiple arms and bumps, he gets knocked off balance and has to protect the ball so much that he loses vision of the floor around him. But right now, he is like a quarterback who panics when the pocket breaks down around him, or who fumbles every time he is hit.

    Still, I like his offensive potential is a 3 point corner spot up guy, and as a guy who can be a pick and pop threat as a screener. I also like him being able to take advantage of teams who try to put smaller guys on him, as he can shoot over them either off a 1 dribble pull up or into the post. And if you add 25lbs to his body, all of a sudden I think a whole new world off offensive skills may just pour out of him.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Defensively, he has a giant amount of potential as a shut down wing stopper due to his athletic gifts and measurables, though as we sit here right now he is average at best.

    This is where you have to look beyond the tape and see into the future as a scout. Right now, he is a guy who can be beaten in ISO situations, once again due to his lack of strength and also because of one particular technique flaw. But add 25lbs and coach him up, and all of a sudden you have something cooking with him.

    Even today, against smaller guys he can really bother them as a defender. 7'2 length at the 3 spot is no joke, no matter the flaws. Daniels as a guy closing out on you as a spot up shooter is going to be a weapon, as he will be able to influence shots over guys if he gets to them.

    I love his ability to move his feet in a defensive slide repeatedly, THEN come to a sudden stop and ELEVATE to contest a shot. So many guys get "dead feet" when they slide and then can't jump to contest a pull up jumper, but Daniels can do that with great balance and length. This is a major deal to me as a scout who values wing defense probably more than most.

    However, in college Daniels was far from a shut down guy. His (again) lack of strength meant that guys who had him scouted well could just drive DIRECTLY at him, and just use brute strength to knock him back and get angles. Julius Randle types just could overpower him, and that will happen at this level also if he doesn't add strength. It seems like in every paragraph I mention that Daniels needs 25lbs or more added to his frame, and it is very apparent defensively against stronger guys.

    The fundamental flaw I mentioned is tied to that lack of strength. Daniels isn't physical enough for my taste yet, and one of the ways that becomes apparent is his tendency to drop his back foot in a "retreat" slide when guys drive right at him.

    Instead, somebody has to get him to "level off" drivers by sliding right into their path instead of giving them angles. This is common among young defenders, especially those like Daniels who have great length to block shots despite giving up said angle. This is one thing that I like about Lance Stephenson's game, who obviously has a lot better body to do this than Daniels does. He simply has to fix it or he can't play. But he will fix it with added strength and a little technique work, so I am not overly worried about it.

    Daniels also has a nice ability to avoid being screened away from the ball, though when he does get hit he really gets knocked off stride. But his length helps him recover to shooters and influence shots that others simply cannot do.

    He will need to be coached up defensively in terms of where he positions his body away from the ball. He tends to stand at the same level of his opponent inside, and that means he is very very easy to seal and post up. He had to occasionally guard bigger guys in college due to the lack of overall size of UCONN, but he can't ever be caught inside at this level....he is a perimeter defender only. But even with that, playing one step ABOVE the help line is something he needs to do more of to be a better team defender.

    Right now, you'd be drafting an average at best defensive player. But a year or 2 years from now, you potentially could be drafting a well above average one due to his length and athleticism, if he develops and is coached right. I like his substantial upside as a defender.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So, what do we have is DeAndre Daniels?

    I think we have a rail thin 3 point shooter with NBA athleticism and way above average length, with projectable body attributes that lead you to believe that he could be very good defender under certain conditions and with some body improvement. He adds some value in already having an advanced post game, and coming from an NBA system at UCONN and having a winning pedigree.

    If he stays at 195lbs, he can't play.....he'll be in Europe before you know it. But if he plays at 225lbs or so and improves, he can be a long term 3 and D guy in this league for a long time, even on a championship level team. His passivity and timid play I am saying is mainly due to his lack of strength....I am sure the Pacers are studying his tapes, his interviews, and even his psychological profile to determine if that is the case or not.

    At #57, I'd definitely take him....but he likely won't be there.

    So the question is, should we move up to take him, and if so under what conditions?

    My answer to that is this: we should start offering teams pick #57 plus cash to teams below us, and see if we can snag him somewhere in the 40-50 range.

    He could bust out of the league, but I think he projects to be one of the few 2nd round projected American players who I think can potentially play a role either for us or for someone someday in the league.....and in the 2nd round, he has potential if he hits his absolute ceiling to be a major steal in a few years. I like him better than last years pick by us, Solomon Hill.......though that says more about Hill than it does about Daniels.

    Current NBA comparable: Chris Singleton, another player I liked coming out of school, who unfortunately hasn't really had a real opportunity yet.

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

    Isn't Daniels the guy Sookie liked?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

      Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
      Isn't Daniels the guy Sookie liked?
      he played for UConn, what do you think?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

        I highly doubt he will be there at 40. The guy is young, athletic and was a stud throughout the tournament. I wouldn't be shocked if he went in the first round.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

          Not a fan of Daniels. He looked good for 3 months this year, but he was one of the laziest guys I have watched on tape the past 3 years. But I must say he didn't show a lack of strength this year. He was one of the best post defenders in college ball(a lot like Singleton and Leonard were in college). Obviously his frame isn't the same as Khwai and Chris, and the NBA is a different game.

          Funny Tbird and I agreed on Chris Singleton. His issues seem to be upstairs, and work ethic wise. But coming out I had Chris and Kwahi on equal footing, and Chris was more NBA ready IMO. Watch some tape of Khawi his last year at SDST and in the finals this year and you would not believe how much he improved. I think Tim Duncan was the one who pointed that out last night. Just shows you how much you need to trust your scouts. Khawi was hungry and Singleton seems content, work ethic is a big deal.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

            If he's being compared to Chris Singleton, just go after Singleton who is a FA. Singleton won't cost that much to sign. Singleton has a far better build than Daniels too.

            Interesting you like Daniels better than Solo.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

              Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
              he played for UConn, what do you think?
              Actually, I wouldn't suggest drafting Daniels. (I mean, if he's there at 57, by all means..but moving up..nah.)

              He is a guy who is athletic and loaded with talent. But he hasn't managed to develop himself much over three years in college. He's soft. He's a streaky shooter, but he's also a PF who has fallen in love with the three point shot. He reminded me of a less athletic but more skilled Stanley Robinson.

              I'm really not that biased in favor of all Uconn players. I know their games well. Some of them I liked a lot. Some of them I'm ambivalent towards..and some of them drove me crazy.

              The guy I suggested at 57 was Niels Giffey. Moves the ball. Smart. Great shooter. Excellent defender at the NCAA level. But I don't know that he'll be drafted (if he is, it'll likely be by the Mavs, because Dirk put in a good word..) Essentially a 3 and D guy at best. There are questions about whether he could do what he did for Uconn for the NBA..but he's consistently played his role against NBA talent (at Uconn and in International competition). Of course on him I am biased. I (and every Uconn fan ever) love the kid.

              edit: pacers4ever, interesting you thought he was a good defender. Sometimes he was, but I would say it was rare and often times he'd get lost on defense.
              Last edited by Sookie; 06-16-2014, 08:09 PM.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                Actually, I wouldn't suggest drafting Daniels. (I mean, if he's there at 57, by all means..but moving up..nah.)

                He is a guy who is athletic and loaded with talent. But he hasn't managed to develop himself much over three years in college. He's soft. He's a streaky shooter, but he's also a PF who has fallen in love with the three point shot. He reminded me of a less athletic but more skilled Stanley Robinson.

                I'm really not that biased in favor of all Uconn players. I know their games well. Some of them I liked a lot. Some of them I'm ambivilant towards..and some of them drove me crazy.

                The guy I suggested at 57 was Niels Giffey. Moves the ball. Smart. Great shooter. Excellent defender at the NCAA level. But I don't know that he'll be drafted (if he is, it'll likely be by the Mavs, because Dirk put in a good word..) Essentially a 3 and D guy at best. There are questions about whether he could do what he did for Uconn for the NBA..but he's consistently played his role against NBA talent (at Uconn and in International competition). Of course on him I am biased. I (and every Uconn fan ever) love the kid.

                edit: pacers4ever, interesting you thought he was a good defender. Sometimes he was, but I would say it was rare and often times he'd get lost on defense.
                Ok something we can can agree on lol.

                He was a really good post defender this year IMO. He pushed guys off the block and was pretty good. I never said he was a good overall defender. I too agree he was lazy most of the year. I just think he played well guarding the post this year. I don't see him translating very well he will be in Europe pretty soon IMO.


                No way Giffey can play in the NBA he is stiffer than Luke Hancock and less skilled than Hancock I just don't see how he plays in the league.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                  TBird, are you doing your analysis on DeAndre Daniels because he is someone you scouted and think is a possible target?

                  or

                  Did you pick him to do an analysis because he was invited to work out for the Pacers?

                  The reason I ask is because I recall that your Analysis was always spot on....even picking up Players that we had no idea the Pacers were interested in.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                    CableKC: I started doing analysis of players long before I knew who the Pacers would work out and who they wouldn't. I'll have watched a huge amount of tape for this project of guys who I will never write about due to lack of time or for a myriad of other reasons. For this specific year, I am only trying to write about guys who I think have a legitimate shot of making the league, so many of the guys I've studied who I don't think will get picked or will stick I'll put in a separate article closer to draft day. But trying to look at guys for the second round has been harder and quite frankly not nearly as much fun as usual, which is what I assume it has been like for Ryan Carr and the rest of the scouts.

                    And of course like every year due to lack of tape I am excluding all the foreign guys, though I am efforting getting tape at the last second on a couple possibilities.

                    The next profile I will tell you will be on a player that I kind of like, but who is not projected to be drafted, from a small school. I'll have it up in a day or 2.

                    Tbird

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                      Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                      CableKC: I started doing analysis of players long before I knew who the Pacers would work out and who they wouldn't. I'll have watched a huge amount of tape for this project of guys who I will never write about due to lack of time or for a myriad of other reasons. For this specific year, I am only trying to write about guys who I think have a legitimate shot of making the league, so many of the guys I've studied who I don't think will get picked or will stick I'll put in a separate article closer to draft day. But trying to look at guys for the second round has been harder and quite frankly not nearly as much fun as usual, which is what I assume it has been like for Ryan Carr and the rest of the scouts.

                      And of course like every year due to lack of tape I am excluding all the foreign guys, though I am efforting getting tape at the last second on a couple possibilities.

                      The next profile I will tell you will be on a player that I kind of like, but who is not projected to be drafted, from a small school. I'll have it up in a day or 2.

                      Tbird

                      Thanks as always for your analysis. I do hope whomever they draft he is player who can move laterally and has some quickness for his position.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                        CableKC: I started doing analysis of players long before I knew who the Pacers would work out and who they wouldn't. I'll have watched a huge amount of tape for this project of guys who I will never write about due to lack of time or for a myriad of other reasons. For this specific year, I am only trying to write about guys who I think have a legitimate shot of making the league, so many of the guys I've studied who I don't think will get picked or will stick I'll put in a separate article closer to draft day. But trying to look at guys for the second round has been harder and quite frankly not nearly as much fun as usual, which is what I assume it has been like for Ryan Carr and the rest of the scouts.

                        And of course like every year due to lack of tape I am excluding all the foreign guys, though I am efforting getting tape at the last second on a couple possibilities.

                        The next profile I will tell you will be on a player that I kind of like, but who is not projected to be drafted, from a small school. I'll have it up in a day or 2.

                        Tbird
                        Thanks....the only reason I ask is that your 1st 2 Draft analysis happens to coincide with 2 of the Players that have been invited to Camp so far. I didn't know if that was a coincidence or not that both of the Analysis that you did so far were Players that you planning to scout or they just happened to be in the Draft Camp.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          But he hasn't managed to develop himself much over three years in college.
                          That's what I was wondering about. If he didn't add strength during his college days, why assume that he'll be able to as a pro? He may be the kind of guy that needs to wash out and bounce around a bit before he develops the work ethic to make it in the NBA. Maybe he's a candidate to draft and stash overseas.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                            CableKC: I can tell you 2 things:

                            1. The Pacers will almost 100% end up selecting someone who has worked out for them.
                            2. Our Pacers haven't announced everyone who has worked out for them so far....they are being more secretive than in other years, at least at this point.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #2: DeAndre Daniels

                              DeAndre Daniels ended up getting drafted in the 2nd round by Toronto. #37 overall. After the summer league, he signed to play with the Perth Wildcats in the Australian league in 2014.

                              I thought this quote from thunderbird was interesting in light of an article I just read in my morning newspaper:

                              Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                              An NBA team that drafts him simply must get Daniels on a pro level training and strength regimen, because if he gets to weigh somewhere around 225lbs someday, he could become an entirely different player.
                              The article I just read is mainly about DeAndre's younger brother Jon. I'll summarize the high points since the article may not be available online for long without a subscription.

                              Jon is a 6' point guard just entering high school. He's projected to grow to 6'5". His family lived in Los Angeles but last year Jon lived with DeAndre in Connecticut and attended Capital Prep Magnet school where he started as an 8th grader. He had 2 40-point games.

                              DeAndre must have been working hard on his conditioning because he brought Jon to Knoxville, TN with him to work with personal trainer Charles Petrone in the spring of 2013. The family found Petrone through YouTube.

                              And now the family has picked up and moved to Knoxville so Jon can work out with Petrone throughout his high school career. They chose a local high school for him to attend because he liked the hard nosed "old school" coach. But the personal trainer was the impetus for the move, the basketball coach was a secondary concern. Maybe Jon won't end up having the same body issues that plagued DeAndre. We'll know in four years.

                              Here is the promo video for Petrone. He's supposed to be unconventional.


                              And this is the start of the article.

                              Jon Daniels has the highest of aspirations for his basketball career, and he’s bringing them to Knoxville.

                              Daniels, the brother of DeAndre Daniels, who was a second-round NBA draft pick of the Toronto Raptors in June, has enrolled at Bearden High School for his freshman year after moving from the Woodland Hills area of Los Angeles.

                              “I want to play at a good, high-level Division I (college) program, and get to the NBA,” Daniels said Thursday.

                              Daniels, a 6-foot point guard, played last season at Capital Prep Magnet School in Hartford, Conn., where he lived with DeAndre, who played for the University of Connecticut. Jon started as an eighth-grader and had two 40-point games.

                              With DeAndre Daniels leaving college for the NBA after his junior season — and helping UConn win the NCAA championship back in April — Jon Daniels moved back to Los Angeles to live with his family.

                              His focus turned to a new high school career, and was spearheaded by his father, Laron, who considered a personal trainer to be crucial in his son’s career.

                              There is the Knoxville connection.

                              DeAndre Daniels, who recently signed to play in Australia with hopes of returning to Toronto, began training with nationally renowned Knoxville trainer Charles Petrone in the spring of 2013 after his sophomore season at Connecticut.

                              It happened after Laron Daniels saw a YouTube video of Petrone training Harrison Smith, the former Catholic star and Notre Dame safety now in the NFL with the Minnesota Vikings.

                              DeAndre Daniels trained with Petrone before the NBA draft, and brought his brother with him for the trip. Later this summer, Laron Daniels called Petrone and told him they were moving to Tennessee so Jon Daniels could train under him.
                              ...
                              http://www.knoxnews.com/sports/prepe...rpose_35712095
                              Last edited by Strummer; 08-31-2014, 09:21 AM.

                              Comment

                              Previous template Next
                              Working...
                              X