Page 3 of 238 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 103 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 4750

Thread: 2012 Draft Thursday, June 28th: Raptors select Terence Ross

  1. #41
    Raptors Republic All-Star Letter N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Well what happened in the NHL was they took the average of their 3 years then divided the league into 3 categories. top 3rd (the good) each got 1 ping-pong ball, the middle 3rd (the bad) got 2 ping-pong balls and the lowest 3rd (the ugly) got 3 ping-pong balls. They then mixed it up and picked and the winner got Sidney Crosby, the greatest NHL player since Mario Lemieux.

    If you're wondering the Pens had 3 ping-pong balls, but I believe the Ducks who chose 2nd only had 1 ball.

  2. #42
    Raptors Republic Starter RaptorDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    on top of Jenna Jameson
    Posts
    764
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Bendit wrote: View Post
    BC's purpose in life the next year should be getting pictures of other GMs in "compromising" positions and acquire at least one more lottery pick position.
    I like this! Though I really wouldn't want to see the pictures, no matter how cute the farm animal was.
    Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

  3. #43
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Brandon wrote: View Post
    There's no reason for an age limit. Great players dominate even at a very young age. Talent is what counts, not age, because NBA basketball is about athleticism more than anything else. The kind of precise mental mastery of the game that, for example, baseball requires, is not what basketball is about. Wasting years in college, where the coaches let the players do whatever they want, and they're turned into super-heroes who think they can't do any wrong, does not help their development.

    If there had been an age limit in tennis (another sport that depends very heavily on athleticism), Boris Becker and Maria Sharapova wouldn't have won Wimbledon at 17. And Martina Hingis wouldn't have won the Australian Open at age 16. And the doubles title at Wimbledon at age 15. Hingis played professionally from ages 14-26, which coincides with a player's peak athletic years. The great Swedish player Bjorn Borg played professionally from ages 14-26 as well.

    The league didn't introduce an age limit as a public service. They did it to spare nitwits like Jordan from embarrassing themselves by wasting picks on guys like Kwame Brown. Many players, TJ Fraud and Jose Calderon being two that come to mind immediately, find themselves ineffective when they hit their late 20s and that subtle spark of explosiveness they once had is gone. It's unfair to rob them of potential earnings when their skills are at their peak, as youngsters, just because of the western obsession with college.
    Well, basketball is nothing like tennis, so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. A 16 year old player who could actually compete in the NBA is a 1 in a billion. Or maybe 1 in 7 billion. Basketball players rely more on experience, strength and skill, than athleticism. It's why Championship teams tend to have an average age over 27, which is consider the peak age for basketball players. Have you never noticed that? Young teams in the league tend not to do as well as the more veteran teams. The average age of the MVP winner over the last 20 years is 28 years old. Of the last 20 MVPs of the league, only 4 have won it under the age of 27 years old. And 7 won it OVER the age of 30. So please don't try and tell me that basketball is anything like tennis.

    And the NBA introduced an age limit for several reasons. The first is to prevent naive high school kids with stars in their eyes from entering the NBA draft before they're ready. Guys like Ndudi Ebi and others who either flunked out or didn't even get drafted. It also had the added bonus of slightly raising the level of play that had slowly declined due to more and more undergrads from entering the draft. Some people point to LeBron James as if he's somehow proof that the NBA doesn't need an age limit. That's like pointing to a trained Nascar driver as proof we don't need speed limits. LeBron's not the rule. He's the exception. The vast majority of high school kids are simply not ready to compete in the NBA and I'd rather not see roster space taken up by a player who clearly isn't ready.

    Of all the high kids who came into the league, all but a few could have used a bit of seasoning in college. And it's not an obsession with college. It's an obsession with watching good basketball.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  4. #44
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote JoePanini wrote: View Post
    If they are taking the average for the past 3 seasons then I seriously feel bad for Cleveland.
    They just got the first and fourth pick in the draft. I wouldn't feel too bad for them.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  5. #45
    Raptors Republic All-Star RaptorsFan4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,753
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    KABONGO TO RAPS! Hopefully BC gets it done next draft.

  6. #46
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,400
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote RaptorsFan4Life wrote: View Post
    KABONGO TO RAPS! Hopefully BC gets it done next draft.
    IF he is a franchise talent or best player available, absolutely. However, picking him because he is Canadian and passing over a better talent is not very bright from a basketball perspective. From a marketing perspective it would be genius but I think it would be easier to market a winner.

  7. #47
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,400
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    his year’s NBA draft was a trade-a-palooza of fun. We were entertained.

    But this wasn’t a great draft talent wise. It was a down year. No franchise cornerstone guys, and a lot of guys with high ceilings but serious questions about if they can ever get there.

    Next year on the other hand…

    The 2012 draft should be LOADED. That is the year your team can change its fortunes, and not just with the top overall pick. Guys from this year’s lottery stuck around and there is a whole new crop of deeper talent.

    According to Chad Ford at ESPN, this could be the deepest class since 2003 (The LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh class… whatever happened to those guys?).

    With a potential NBA lockout and other factors in play, an unusually high number of prominent college players passed on their opportunity to jump to the NBA. (North Carolina’s Harrison) Barnes might be the top pick in the (2012) draft, and he could be followed closely by Baylor’s Perry Jones, Ohio State’s Jared Sullinger, Kentucky’s Terrence Jones, Florida’s Patric Young, North Carolina’s John Henson, Kansas’ Thomas Robinson, Duke’s Mason Plumlee and UNC’s Tyler Zeller….

    In 2012 we’re projecting nine freshmen as potential lottery picks: (Kentucky’s potential No. 1 overall Anthony) Davis, Kentucky’s Michael Gilchrist, Baylor’s Quincy Miller, Florida’s Bradley Beal, North Carolina’s James McAdoo, Duke’s Austin Rivers, Kentucky’s Marquis Teague, Texas’ Myck Kabongo and Memphis’ Adonis Thomas. It’s unlikely they all squeeze into the first 14 picks (if they decide to leave school), but the talent is there.

    It’s a year of forwards, both small and power. There are a lot more guys next season who can step in and instantly contribute, then down the line really be a key to a franchise.

    That’s going to make next year’s draft a lot more fun.
    If the Raptor fans can suffer through next year (blah blah blah if there is a next year blah blah blah), and maybe even get another first rounder from a trade, there will be lots to rejoice this time in a year.

  8. #48
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    48
    Post Thanks / Like

  9. #49
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Well, basketball is nothing like tennis, so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. A 16 year old player who could actually compete in the NBA is a 1 in a billion. Or maybe 1 in 7 billion. Basketball players rely more on experience, strength and skill, than athleticism. It's why Championship teams tend to have an average age over 27, which is consider the peak age for basketball players. Have you never noticed that? Young teams in the league tend not to do as well as the more veteran teams. The average age of the MVP winner over the last 20 years is 28 years old. Of the last 20 MVPs of the league, only 4 have won it under the age of 27 years old. And 7 won it OVER the age of 30. So please don't try and tell me that basketball is anything like tennis.

    And the NBA introduced an age limit for several reasons. The first is to prevent naive high school kids with stars in their eyes from entering the NBA draft before they're ready. Guys like Ndudi Ebi and others who either flunked out or didn't even get drafted. It also had the added bonus of slightly raising the level of play that had slowly declined due to more and more undergrads from entering the draft. Some people point to LeBron James as if he's somehow proof that the NBA doesn't need an age limit. That's like pointing to a trained Nascar driver as proof we don't need speed limits. LeBron's not the rule. He's the exception. The vast majority of high school kids are simply not ready to compete in the NBA and I'd rather not see roster space taken up by a player who clearly isn't ready.

    Of all the high kids who came into the league, all but a few could have used a bit of seasoning in college. And it's not an obsession with college. It's an obsession with watching good basketball.
    Basketball is more like tennis than it is like baseball. Playing good baseball requires the mastery of a million small details, hardly any of them athletic in nature. Basketball, like tennis, requires athleticism more than intelligence or mastery of small details.
    Championship/winning teams tend to be on the old side in basketball because of the way the CBA makes it easier to move veteran players. Teams have a virtual stranglehold on players while they're in their primes. If free agent movement were allowed at a much younger age, it is likely that teams full of young players would be winning the championships instead of teams with broken down players like Jason Terry and Jason Kidd. I do believe that veterans on their lat legs tend to be more ready to accept complementary roles than young players, but I don't think it makes much difference.
    Until God himself selects the MVP every year I'm not concerned with who wins it. It is a popularity contest. That is not science, it is anecdote.
    On to your second paragraph. I did not bring up Lebron James, you did. But you neglected to mention many of the other high school players who were drafted or entered the league without any other experience, going back at least as far as Moses Malone, but also including KB24, Jermaine O'Neal, Kevin Garnett -- well hell, just look for yourself:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees
    Most of those players were successful. Only two of them never played in the league. I think if the quality of play had declined it was due to a lack of hoops geniuses, but the 2003 draft had already begun to change that when the age limit rule was instigated. It was also due to the fact that there have been too many expansion teams, which have brought too many unskilled players into the mix compared to the 80s. That's if there was a drop in quality of play, which is another unscientific statement. The main reason the rule was instigated was to force the players to play against div-1 level competition for at least a year to provide reliable scouting information at no cost to the NBA.

  10. #50
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Brandon wrote: View Post
    Basketball is more like tennis than it is like baseball. Playing good baseball requires the mastery of a million small details, hardly any of them athletic in nature. Basketball, like tennis, requires athleticism more than intelligence or mastery of small details.
    Championship/winning teams tend to be on the old side in basketball because of the way the CBA makes it easier to move veteran players. Teams have a virtual stranglehold on players while they're in their primes. If free agent movement were allowed at a much younger age, it is likely that teams full of young players would be winning the championships instead of teams with broken down players like Jason Terry and Jason Kidd. I do believe that veterans on their lat legs tend to be more ready to accept complementary roles than young players, but I don't think it makes much difference.
    Until God himself selects the MVP every year I'm not concerned with who wins it. It is a popularity contest. That is not science, it is anecdote.
    On to your second paragraph. I did not bring up Lebron James, you did. But you neglected to mention many of the other high school players who were drafted or entered the league without any other experience, going back at least as far as Moses Malone, but also including KB24, Jermaine O'Neal, Kevin Garnett -- well hell, just look for yourself:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees
    Most of those players were successful. Only two of them never played in the league. I think if the quality of play had declined it was due to a lack of hoops geniuses, but the 2003 draft had already begun to change that when the age limit rule was instigated. It was also due to the fact that there have been too many expansion teams, which have brought too many unskilled players into the mix compared to the 80s. That's if there was a drop in quality of play, which is another unscientific statement. The main reason the rule was instigated was to force the players to play against div-1 level competition for at least a year to provide reliable scouting information at no cost to the NBA.
    Basketball is also more like tennis than golf or chess. But it's also not very much like tennis. There's a reason that teams with older guys, like myself, tend to consistently beat the young players, despite them having an athletic advantage. Experience. And that's the same in the NBA. It has nothing to do with the CBA. It also doesn't address the issue that the majority of MVPs have been over the age of 27. And the vast majority of high school players who enter the draft struggle. And there are quite a number who entered the draft, but weren't selected. Even the successful ones tend to take at least a couple of years to develop into good players, including Jermaine O'Neal and Kevin Garnett.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  11. #51
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Basketball is also more like tennis than golf or chess. But it's also not very much like tennis. There's a reason that teams with older guys, like myself, tend to consistently beat the young players, despite them having an athletic advantage. Experience. And that's the same in the NBA. It has nothing to do with the CBA. It also doesn't address the issue that the majority of MVPs have been over the age of 27. And the vast majority of high school players who enter the draft struggle. And there are quite a number who entered the draft, but weren't selected. Even the successful ones tend to take at least a couple of years to develop into good players, including Jermaine O'Neal and Kevin Garnett.
    I did address the MVP issue. It's not an issue at all, since the vote isn't even close to scientific.

    The vast majority of players, period, who enter the NBA take a year to acclimate before they live up to their potential. That's because they haven't played in the NBA before, not because they lack age and experience. I reject the age and experience argument completely because it's quite obvious that if you look at a player's production, it wanes as they hit their late 20s and into their 30s. It is simply very difficult to assemble a team full of excellent 22-year-olds because of how the CBA ties those players to their original teams. The only way to accomplish it is to have, say, 6 first round picks over the course of two back-to-back drafts and come away from it with 3 good players and 3 all-stars. That does not happen. It is much easier to trade for, or sign, aging vets than it is to acquire a player in his prime. Imagine a team with Blake Griffin, Derrick Rose, and Kevin Durant, with the 9 youngest Raptors as the supporting cast. Even with all of that hideous youth, that's your NBA champion next year.
    How many years of development time should the NBA insist on? And who is qualified to decide on that number of years? Should they play 4 full years of college ball, should they play 2 years of development league ball after that?

  12. #52
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Brandon wrote: View Post
    I did address the MVP issue. It's not an issue at all, since the vote isn't even close to scientific.

    The vast majority of players, period, who enter the NBA take a year to acclimate before they live up to their potential. That's because they haven't played in the NBA before, not because they lack age and experience. I reject the age and experience argument completely because it's quite obvious that if you look at a player's production, it wanes as they hit their late 20s and into their 30s. It is simply very difficult to assemble a team full of excellent 22-year-olds because of how the CBA ties those players to their original teams. The only way to accomplish it is to have, say, 6 first round picks over the course of two back-to-back drafts and come away from it with 3 good players and 3 all-stars. That does not happen. It is much easier to trade for, or sign, aging vets than it is to acquire a player in his prime. Imagine a team with Blake Griffin, Derrick Rose, and Kevin Durant, with the 9 youngest Raptors as the supporting cast. Even with all of that hideous youth, that's your NBA champion next year.
    How many years of development time should the NBA insist on? And who is qualified to decide on that number of years? Should they play 4 full years of college ball, should they play 2 years of development league ball after that?
    No, the MVP vote isn't scientific, but neither is your argument, so I'm not sure how you can complain. What it is is a pretty decent measuring stick about who the best players in the league are. And more often than nots, they're players over the age of 27.

    I find your argument somewhat puzzling, not only because it goes against conventional wisdom and evidence, but because I'm not even sure how you came up with it. You say that player's production wanes in their late 20's, but what you don't seem to take into consideration is that, as players get older, they become better at the intangibles, which helps you win more. The pre-baseball Jordan was definitely more productive, in terms of stats, but the post-baseball Jordan was simply a better player. What he lost in athleticism he made up for in experience.

    Who is qualified to decide who's ready for the NBA? Are talking about on the grand scheme of things are literally? On the grand scheme of things, who's qualified to say who deserves more money than another player, or why a basketball player makes more money than a teacher? But the people who run the NBA should be able to come up with an age that everyone can agree on. Personally, I think 20 is probably the magic number.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  13. #53
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    No, the MVP vote isn't scientific, but neither is your argument, so I'm not sure how you can complain. What it is is a pretty decent measuring stick about who the best players in the league are. And more often than nots, they're players over the age of 27.
    My argument about production is based on evaluation of the available statistical evidence. It is a scientific argument to the extent that those stats can be called scientific.

    I find your argument somewhat puzzling, not only because it goes against conventional wisdom and evidence, but because I'm not even sure how you came up with it. You say that player's production wanes in their late 20's, but what you don't seem to take into consideration is that, as players get older, they become better at the intangibles, which helps you win more. The pre-baseball Jordan was definitely more productive, in terms of stats, but the post-baseball Jordan was simply a better player. What he lost in athleticism he made up for in experience.
    My argument only goes against evidence if you use the most superficial evaluation of it, ie. 'veteran teams win championships therefore veterans are more valuable than young players, and also athleticism isn't really important next to intangibles and experience'. I explained, accurately, why veteran teams are a lot easier to assemble than young ones. You have rejected that without adequate explanation. The fact remains it is next to impossible to assemble a team full of young players in their primes.
    On the subject of Jordan, your contradictory statements -- on the one hand saying that Jordan was more productive as a young player, but was a better player as a less athletic veteran -- reveal your preference for the subjective and anecdotal over statistically impactful skills. That is one way of interpreting the game, but I think it's intellectually indefensible. You're actually saying that, in your own view, players are better able to affect the outcomes of games if they are less able to score, pass, rebound, play long minutes etc. because, in your view, unprovable factors such as intangibles are what actually count.

    Who is qualified to decide who's ready for the NBA? Are talking about on the grand scheme of things are literally? On the grand scheme of things, who's qualified to say who deserves more money than another player, or why a basketball player makes more money than a teacher? But the people who run the NBA should be able to come up with an age that everyone can agree on. Personally, I think 20 is probably the magic number.
    Here's a way you can come up with an age everyone can agree on: If Team A wants to draft and then sign Player B to a contract, no matter if he's 5, 50, or 100 years old, that's Team A's decision to make. If the player is good enough to demand playing time, so be it. If not, he'll have to do something else for a living. It's up to the player and the team.

    Here's one piece of evidence I looked at to come up with the argument.

    Code:
    Top 10 players ranked by PER, 2010-11 season:	PER		Age
    
    1.	LeBron James-MIA			27.3		25/26
    2.	Dwight Howard-ORL			26.0		24/25
    3.	Dwyane Wade-MIA				25.6		28/29
    4.	Kevin Love-MIN		 	      	24.3		22
    5.	Kobe Bryant-LAL		 	      	23.9		32
    6.	Chris Paul-NOH			       	23.7		25
    7.	Kevin Durant-OKC			23.6		22
    8.	Russell Westbrook-OKC			23.6		22
    9.	Derrick Rose-CHI		 	23.5		22
    10.	Dirk Nowitzki-DAL			23.4		32

  14. #54
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Brandon,

    If you want to argue that there has been an influx of really good talent over the last 5, or so, years and that there is a gap between the really good older players and the new talent, then you've got a point. But if you want to say that a 23 year old player is automatically better than a 28 year old player because he's younger, then you're wrong.

    One thing you're completely overlooking is that older players know a lot more than younger players, including a) how to win, b) how to pick their spots better so they don't HAVE to be as productive, except when they have to and c) things that help you win but don't show up on stat sheets.

    The veteran players understand that what matters more than getting their points is winning. Take a look at the top ten players, in terms of "Simple Rating" which is a combination of their production vs their opponents, and their team's production while they are on and off the court:


    Team Player Min Own Opp Net On Off Net Rating
    ORL Howard 73% 28.5 9.9 +18.6 +8.1 -2.3 +10.4 +15.8
    MIA James 77% 29.4 10.9 +18.5 +9.7 -0.5 +10.2 +15.7
    MIA Wade 71% 27.4 12.0 +15.4 +9.8 +1.6 +8.2 +13.0
    BOS Garnett 56% 22.6 12.8 +9.8 +11.9 -3.1 +15.0 +11.5
    SAS Ginobili 61% 23.2 12.7 +10.5 +10.7 -2.2 +12.9 +11.3
    DAL Nowitzki 63% 25.2 16.6 +8.6 +10.2 -6.1 +16.3 +11.2
    BOS Pierce 70% 21.2 12.8 +8.4 +10.2 -6.2 +16.4 +11.1
    PHO Nash 62% 22.0 14.3 +7.7 +5.5 -11.5 +17.0 +10.8
    NOH Paul 72% 25.5 15.9 +9.6 +4.2 -8.0 +12.2 +10.5
    LAL Bryant 70% 25.0 12.0 +13.0 +7.3 +3.2 +4.2 +10.1
    http://www.82games.com/1011/ROLRTG8.HTM

    Simply put, production is great, but the true measure of a player is whether he can win or not. Young players have the athleticism and can put up lots of points, but rarely do they know how to win. That's usually something they learn with time. And that's why Championship teams are just about always (if not always) veteran teams.

    And it's why older guys like me can compete with the younger players and beat them. It's why guys like Steve Nash and Jason Kidd are still top 10 point guards despite being closer in age to me than Derrick Rose.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  15. #55
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,400
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    HW rundown of top 2012 picks:

    Who's Up For 2012?

    If you were a college basketball player last season considering leaving your university to play in the NBA, a lot of things would've gone through your head as you decided whether to jump for The League or stick around another year in the NCAA. For 2011, however, a few of the top prospects in the draft were probably pushed over the edge for fear of a lockout.

    That means that 2011 was one of the weaker drafts in recent history in terms of available star power, but it also means that 2012 is probably going to be absolutely loaded with talent. We know that guys like Jared Sullinger and Harrison Barnes, both of whom probably would've gone in the top five picks in this year's draft, will be back in the pool for next season, but who what other players are likely to throw their hats into what's already shaping up to be an extremely strong draft class?

    Here's a look at some guys, other than Sullinger and Barnes, who NBA teams will be watching very closely over the next 11 months and 28 days (give or take):

    Anthony Davis, PF, Kentucky – This is the Chicago kid who grew 8 inches between his junior and senior year of high school, and if he continues to develop and mature over the course of the next year, he's a prime candidate for the top overall pick in the 2012 draft. The kid is ridiculously long, a shot-blocking prodigy, and only just now figuring out how to use the giant body he found himself in only a year ago. He came out of nowhere as a prospect, but now he's got an undeniably bright future as a basketball player. Once he fills out a little and adjusts to life as a big man, he's going to be something special.

    Quincy Miller, SF, Baylor – Outside of Davis, Miller is the other upcoming college freshmen with a real shot at being the top pick in next year's draft. Another product of Chicago, Miller's combination of size (he's 6'10") and ability (he plays like a speedy small forward) make him one of the most intriguing prospects of the draft. He's ridiculously athletic and has amazing range on the offensive floor considering how tall he is. Defensively he's a hound on the glass and has a great nose for blocking shots. He's literally all over the place and carries with him that special quality you see in top draft prospects. No one will ever be surprised if he's a career All-Star. That's the sort of promise this young man brings to the table.

    James McAdoo, PF, North Carolina – Nephew of Basketball Hall of Famer Bob McAdoo, James a throwback forward in the style of a Kevin Love. He's extremely smart and extremely mature—so much so that he actually had the option of graduating high school early and heading to Chapel Hill as a 17-year-old. He passed up the opportunity to eek the most out of his waning childhood, however, and now he's headed to one of the top hoops programs in the country. Few of the NCAA's incoming freshmen class have an NBA body already, but McAdoo is certainly one of them, with wide shoulders and plenty of muscle already on his 18-year-old frame. He figures to be a solid pro for many, many years.

    Michael Gilchrist, SF, Kentucky – There are a lot of big personalities on the 2011-2012 Kentucky Wildcats, but Gilchrist isn't one of them. He's just a humble, hard-working kid looking to make his mark on the game. One of the more versatile prospects of the lot, Gilchrist is known for his defense (and he can defend a few different positions well), but he's also very accomplished on the offensive end of the floor. He's a quiet young man, but his game speaks very, very loudly.

    Brad Beal, SG, Florida – Beal is a bit reminiscent of L.A. Clippers guard Eric Gordon. He's got great range as a shooter and is very smart with the ball in his hands. Every draft class has that go-to offensive killer, and Beal could very well be considered that guy in this particular class. He's fearless, if maybe a little undersized (only about 6'4" or 6'5", but maybe still growing), but he's good enough to find a home somewhere in the lottery next year if everything plays out according to plan.

    Austin Rivers, SG, Duke – Doc's son came out of high school rated as the top prospect in the country by many scouts, and Duke certainly is accustomed to landing those kinds of top prospects. He's a wrecking ball on the offensive end of the floor, and when he gets hot it's easy to see why so many colleges vied to get him on their roster. He's also a heck of lot like his father when it comes to dealing with the media, except it's not often you see a kid that young handle himself that well in front of a bunch of microphones. Rivers is a very likeable kid with an even more likeable game, and his will be a name in contention for the a top ten pick as long as he makes the call to leave school early.

    Adonis Thomas, SF, Memphis – At 6'6", Thomas probably won't be able to continue playing small forward on the NBA level, even though his basketball instincts really want him to be exactly that, but he's very athletic and very fast which so far has helped him make up the difference. Offensively he can do a little bit of everything—spotting up, catching and shooting, posting up, and it's that versatility that his him projected as an eventual lottery pick.

    Myck Kabongo, PG, Texas – This little 6'1" point guard has some of the sickest handles you've ever seen, and as far as pure point guards are concerned he's probably the best in his class. He's very, very quick on both ends of the floor and has a giant personality despite his relatively small stature. He's exactly the sort of intelligent, charismatic player that NBA teams eventually are going to fall in love with.

    Marquis Teague, PG, Kentucky – The younger brother of Atlanta Hawks point guard Jeff Teague, Marquis is actually considered the better player. Looking at how well Jeff played in his team's second round series against the Chicago Bulls, that's actually saying quite a bit. He's one of the more physically mature players in his class, but he's also extremely quick. Scoring comes easily to him, especially when attacking the bucket, but he's got great point guard instincts as well. It may end up being a tough call for some teams deciding between him and Kabongo.

    All these players are going to be college freshmen, but there will be some college talent other than Sullinger and Barnes available, as well. Perry Jones, for example, is a likely top-five pick that will return to Baylor next year, somewhat surprisingly after receiving a suspension for his family having accepted illegal benefits. But there are others, as well, including any of a number of Plumlees from Duke. The other non-freshmen collegians include center Patric Young out of Florida, North Carolina forwards Tyler Zeller and John Henson, and Kentucky forward Terrence Jones. This gang plus the freshmen will be very much in the mix, creating what looks to be an extremely strong 2012 draft class. As far as potential All-Stars are concerned, this group has a ton.

    Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?...#ixzz1QNpgwfDK

  16. #56
    Raptors Republic All-Star Letter N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Darn it, they're all North American. Hopefully we can trade out of the draft.

  17. #57
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,400
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Letter N wrote: View Post
    Darn it, they're all North American. Hopefully we can trade out of the draft.
    Riiiiiiight, because the Raptors don't draft North Americans. Where are DeRozan and Davis from? Draft best player available forget where they are from.

  18. #58
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,400
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quincy Miller, Harrison Barnes, or Michael Gilchrist all look like great options - especially Miller. He appears to have the makings of a franchise type player with handle, size, skill, and cocky demeanour. LeBryan Nash isn't mentioned in the HW bit but he is another highly touted wing in the high school class of 2011.

  19. #59
    Raptors Republic Superstar Mack North's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Smoke City
    Posts
    2,951
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Quincy Miller, Harrison Barnes, or Michael Gilchrist all look like great options - especially Miller. He appears to have the makings of a franchise type player with handle, size, skill, and cocky demeanour. LeBryan Nash isn't mentioned in the HW bit but he is another highly touted wing in the high school class of 2011.
    The first three you mentioned are the same three I'll be watching all season for sure. Seems like a great draft to pick up a real nice SF, which is one of our needs. Rivers and Kabongo are a couple of players I wouldn't mind see wearing the Claw next year either.

    C-Jonas Val.
    PF-Ed Davis
    SF-Miller/Barnes or Gilchrist
    SG-DeRozan
    PG-Bayless

    Sounds like an NCAA dream team, could be a solid lineup for years to come for the Raptors!
    Keep Calm & Chive On

  20. #60
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Barnes did not dominate as one would expect an NBA franchise player to do in college. His numbers did not compare to Kevin Durant's one year at Tejas. I think he may be overrated.

Page 3 of 238 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 103 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •