NBA Draft 2009 - Page 3

#41 06-24-2009, 11:10 PM

im fixin this quote stuff...

#42 06-24-2009, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

We will know if Rubio is a player by fall? Oberto is expected to re-up with SA, not Bowen.

This is what Cannon posted.
Now we are on track.

dalakhani · #43 06-25-2009, 12:14 AM

[quote=Cannon Shell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

We will know if Rubio is a player by fall? Oberto is expected to re-up with SA, not Bowen.

I think with a a top five pick, you know right away whether or not he can compete long term in the NBA. They arent all superstars but you know early on in most cases whether or not a guy can compete.

Remember, the NBA is not a developmental league especially in the backcourt. Sure guys get better but top 5 draft picks, especially with guards, are expected to deliver something right away. He doesnt have to start. He can play 10-15 minutes a game and you can get an idea of what the future holds.

Cannon Shell · #44 06-25-2009, 05:37 AM

[quote=dalakhani]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think with a a top five pick, you know right away whether or not he can compete long term in the NBA. They arent all superstars but you know early on in most cases whether or not a guy can compete.

Remember, the NBA is not a developmental league especially in the backcourt. Sure guys get better but top 5 draft picks, especially with guards, are expected to deliver something right away. He doesnt have to start. He can play 10-15 minutes a game and you can get an idea of what the future holds.

The NBA is most certainly a developmental league. Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett both "developed" into stars after slow beginnings. While they obviously had talent it was hardly apparent that they would be hall of fame players after the fall of their first year. Hell neither were starters and garnett did not even make all rookie 1st team. Perhaps when the vast majority of guys drafted were 4 year college players you could make that case. But when guys are 18 and 19 they almost always develop into better players, sometimes from guys who don't look like they can play much into all NBA guys.

dalakhani · #45 06-25-2009, 06:36 AM

[quote=Cannon Shell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

The NBA is most certainly a developmental league. Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett both "developed" into stars after slow beginnings. While they obviously had talent it was hardly apparent that they would be hall of fame players after the fall of their first year. Hell neither were starters and garnett did not even make all rookie 1st team. Perhaps when the vast majority of guys drafted were 4 year college players you could make that case. But when guys are 18 and 19 they almost always develop into better players, sometimes from guys who don't look like they can play much into all NBA guys.

First of all, Bryant and Garnett were freakish athletes coming into the league. You can't teach that or develop that. There was no question whether they had the athleticism to not only play but to potentially dominate before they even stepped on the court. Bryant wasnt a top five pick anyway but thats really not the point.

Bryant and Garnett each played 10-15 minutes per game during their first years respectively and anyone that watched them and knew anything about the game could tell they were both going to be studs or at very least had the tools to compete.

Cannon Shell · #46 06-25-2009, 10:19 AM

[quote=dalakhani]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

First of all, Bryant and Garnett were freakish athletes coming into the league. You can't teach that or develop that. There was no question whether they had the athleticism to not only play but to potentially dominate before they even stepped on the court. Bryant wasnt a top five pick anyway but thats really not the point.

Bryant and Garnett each played 10-15 minutes per game during their first years respectively and anyone that watched them and knew anything about the game could tell they were both going to be studs or at very least had the tools to compete.

C'mon. Garnett didnt even make the all rookie team 1st team. They certainly developed into much better players than it looked like they would after the fall of their rookie season. There are lots of guys that dont come into the league and tear it up the first three months that develop into all stars. Not to mention that those players not only didn't start but weren't asked to provide anything more than complimentary minutes. Rubio will have much more pressure and is going to have to play a much tougher role for whatever team takes him. Not to mention that without Saeson Pass you wont get many chances to watch him based on the potential destinations.

#47 06-25-2009, 10:34 AM

[quote=dalakhani]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

First of all, Bryant and Garnett were freakish athletes coming into the league. You can't teach that or develop that. There was no question whether they had the athleticism to not only play but to potentially dominate before they even stepped on the court. Bryant wasnt a top five pick anyway but thats really not the point.

Bryant and Garnett each played 10-15 minutes per game during their first years respectively and anyone that watched them and knew anything about the game could tell they were both going to be studs or at very least had the tools to compete.

Harold Miner... the list of athletic failures is long.
One of the first, Bill Willoughby.

King Glorious · #48 06-25-2009, 10:51 AM

[quote=pgardn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Harold Miner... the list of athletic failures is long.
One of the first, Bill Willoughby.

I played against Miner in high school. Fans were taken in by his alleged great athleticsm. Players weren't. We knew it would catch up with him at some point. James Harden is what Miner was.

dalakhani · #49 06-25-2009, 12:22 PM

[quote=Cannon Shell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

C'mon. Garnett didnt even make the all rookie team 1st team. They certainly developed into much better players than it looked like they would after the fall of their rookie season. There are lots of guys that dont come into the league and tear it up the first three months that develop into all stars. Not to mention that those players not only didn't start but weren't asked to provide anything more than complimentary minutes. Rubio will have much more pressure and is going to have to play a much tougher role for whatever team takes him. Not to mention that without Saeson Pass you wont get many chances to watch him based on the potential destinations.

LOL what are you saying here that i didnt say above in the quote posted? 10-15 minutes a game for guys that were athletic freaks coming out of school at a time when it wasnt in vogue. That was 14 years ago.

No one said Rubio has to be an all star or even start or even be apart of the 7-8 man rotation to be able to tell what type he will most likely be. If he has the tools to play point guard in the nba, you will know it right away.

#50 06-25-2009, 02:13 PM

Ok then...

Why are people quoting themselves.
Cease and desist.

There is a flaw in the code.

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

works apparently

but ....

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

The bolded messes it up. One quotes the wrong person.

I shall experiment on my own post.

#51 06-25-2009, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

Ok then...

Why are people quoting themselves.
Cease and desist.

There is a flaw in the code.

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

works apparently

but ....

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

bracket QUOTE = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

The bolded messes it up. One quotes the wrong person.

I shall experiment on my own post.

The above should be fine pgardn.
But the below attributes your quote to Kermit THE Frog

[quote=pgardn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kermit THE Frog

Ok then...

Why are people quoting themselves.
Cease and desist.

There is a flaw in the code.

bracket = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

works apparently

but ....

bracket = name of poster bracket

bracket = name of poster bracket

then blah blah blah

bracket forwardslash QUOTE bracket

The bolded messes it up. One quotes the wrong person.

I shall experiment on my own post.

yes...

Cannon Shell · #52 06-25-2009, 08:00 PM

See ya Tyreke. Was nice knowing ya.

King Glorious · #53 06-25-2009, 08:10 PM

Minnesota-Dumbest team ever.

There's got to be a trade coming. Back to back point guards? Flynn has to be the one they want and they were drafting Rubio for someone else. I believe it's got to be coming.

Cannon Shell · #54 06-25-2009, 08:10 PM

Flynn must be getting traded.

Cannon Shell · #55 06-25-2009, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Minnesota-Dumbest team ever.

No way they are keeping both guys

Cannon Shell · #56 06-25-2009, 08:24 PM

Knicks get bailed out by Golden State. Hill will do fine under D'Antoni.

King Glorious · #57 06-25-2009, 08:25 PM

I like Hill a lot but I love Curry. Wouldn't be surprised to seem them traded for each other.

Cannon Shell · #58 06-25-2009, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I like Hill a lot but I love Curry. Wouldn't be surprised to seem them traded for each other.

I dont think that much of Curry, though Golden State may be a good spot as they all have a green light at all times. I dont think he is a playmaker and simply isnt good enough to be a 2 that gets big minutes. To me he is a combo guard off the bench, playing 20 min a game at best, or a JJ Reddick, one dimensional type.

King Glorious · #59 06-25-2009, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I dont think that much of Curry, though Golden State may be a good spot as they all have a green light at all times. I dont think he is a playmaker and simply isnt good enough to be a 2 that gets big minutes. To me he is a combo guard off the bench, playing 20 min a game at best, or a JJ Reddick, one dimensional type.

I think he's much better than that. I think he's an excellent passer, second only to Rubio among this year's class. I felt that he had so many turnovers cause his teammates weren't good enough to play with him and he caught them off guard so much but he's a really good passer. His scoring ability is well documented. Redick couldn't create his own shot at all. Curry can because he's a good ball handler. I like him a lot.

Cannon Shell · #60 06-25-2009, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I think he's much better than that. I think he's an excellent passer, second only to Rubio among this year's class. I felt that he had so many turnovers cause his teammates weren't good enough to play with him and he caught them off guard so much but he's a really good passer. His scoring ability is well documented. Redick couldn't create his own shot at all. Curry can because he's a good ball handler. I like him a lot.

We'll see but I think he is a one dimensional gunner who cant guard anyone, has a average first step and will not have a real position to play. While his teammates may not have been very good the vast majority of his competition was awful too. When matched up against athletic players with a little size he struggled. The only plus NBA quality that I can see is range on his jumper.