# RebelSun's Top 16 Prospects



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

I'm not going to do a mock with team needs before the lotto, so I'll just list my top 16 prospects:

1. Greg Oden - huge frame and awesome athleticism; there's not much of a debate between he and Durant, IMO; can't pass on a bigger Mourning

2. Kevin Durant - the no-brainer #2; no reason he can't at least be Rashard Lewis

3. Brandan Wright - lots of interesting bigs available after the big two; needs strength, but i like his length, athleticism, and upside; just edges Horford

4. Al Horford - best Gator NBA prospect; nice size/strength/athleticism, should have a very high 'basement'

5. Yi Jianlian - there are a lot of question marks, but he's huge, athletic, and has perimeter skills; i'll gamble on him here

6. Spencer Hawes - already has great skill for a true C; not a great athlete, but his skill at that size make him pretty valuable

7. Mike Conley - easily the best PG available; should be able to play heavy minutes immediately

8. Thad Young - needs refinement, but upside is just too much to ignore here

9. Joakim Noah - won't be dominant on offense, but will be very active on the glass and defense at the very least; high 'basement'

10. Julian Wright - great size/athleticism, but can't shoot; has chance to be great or be very mediocre; still worth a top 10 pick

11. Marcus Williams - the biggest surprise of the list; he's still my favorite true SG in the draft; really surprised to see him in the mid-20s in many mocks; he's 6'7, 205+lbs, has a 7'1 wingspan, can shoot from everywhere, and has solid ball skills; showed he can handle the forward spots with AZ this year; i just really don't see any major flaws in his game; think Chase's hops stole the spotlight from him; think he's very underrated right now and should be a very good pro 2

12. Corey Brewer - tall and athletic but needs a lot of strength; should be an impact defender immediately, but who knows how effective he'll be on offense; think he'll be a rich man's Posey; not a bad thing, but i'm wouldn 't take him top 6 like many mocks have him; high 'basement' like the other Gators

13. Josh McRoberts - another relative surprise; he's not great operating in the post right now, but the guy just has too much skill and athleticism at 6'10-6'11 to pass on; i do think that Duke wasn't the best situation for him; i don't see how he slips past GS at #18; many have written him off already, i'm not quite ready to yet

14. Jeff Green - very solid, but unspectacular; i'm not sure he has any major flaws, but i don't see an A/S or borderline A/S player in him; the more i look at him, the more i see a glorified Luke Walton; again, not a bad thing, but not a high lotto pick for me

15. Al Thornton - crazy athlete that was comfortable dominating games; think he has a high bust factor though; not a distributor; seems like he has to have the ball in his hands to be effective; i think he has the chance to be Gerald Wallace, and that's why I have him this high

16. Roy Hibbert - has developing skills for his size, but will always be a step slow; i don't think he'll be quite as effective as Z, but should definitely be better than Ostertag; not many players his size have decent footwork, let alone can execute pirouette drives during games, albeit slow ones

Now you can laugh at it, lol.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

I can't say I'd disagree with the list in general. Of course I'd move a few players around, and possibly throw in Javaris Crittenton and Tiago Splitter. I'd take Splitter over McRoberts right now. And probably Crittenton over Williams. Of course, my view might change after workouts. If Crittenton can show more of a killer instinct and attack the hoop he'll shoot up the draft board. He has great size for the PG position and is definitely a better option than Gaines was a few years ago.

A lot of people are down on Thad Young, he didn't have the best season but a lot of that was due to the way GT ran the offense. I'd like to see Thad be forced to improve his dribble instead of being on the block. He certainly has the speed, athleticism and range on his jumper to be used exclusively on the wing. His potential is enormous, someone should take him high. He's still only 18 years old too.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Interesting list. Accurate for the most point though as I dont have a lot to disagree with. 

Marcus Williams, Thad Young and McRoberts were somewhat surprising - all are decent players, but I would have had Acie Law in here somewhere. Thad Young intrigues me though - i do see a bright future for him and hes worthy of a top 20 pick. Tiago Splitter doesnt get a mention however? 

I agree with Brandan Wright - hes to thin for now, he may always be on the thin side - but thats a mammoth wingspan and hes an athletic freak.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Yeah, I'm praying Atlanta can land one of either Crittenton or Conley (first option) at the 11 slot.. Conley is probably not going to last that long..


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Also - I agree with lachlanwood with Crittenton, he does have great size - has youth on his side too. Some good workouts could push him higher.

ATLien - i agree with u, the Hawks desperately need a young point with potential that they can give the reigns too right now. The hawks are on the cusp of playoff potential - just need consistency from the PG. Anthony Johnson and Claxton were letdowns this season - Conley would be a great fit next to JJ and JSmith. I think Pachulia is a solid center, but he may be better suited as a 6th man. He is good enough for now, however.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Roy Hibbert is 16th? That's just ludicrous.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Bigger is not necessarily better. Do i think Hibbert should be higher as a prospect? no doubt - but i spose there is a case for him not to be at the same time. 7'3 is a big unit though, plus his showing against Oden, would put him around 7-8 if i had a list.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

BG44 said:


> Also - I agree with lachlanwood with Crittenton, he does have great size - has youth on his side too. Some good workouts could push him higher.
> 
> ATLien - i agree with u, the Hawks desperately need a young point with potential that they can give the reigns too right now. The hawks are on the cusp of playoff potential - just need consistency from the PG. Anthony Johnson and Claxton were letdowns this season - Conley would be a great fit next to JJ and JSmith. I think Pachulia is a solid center, but he may be better suited as a 6th man. He is good enough for now, however.


Yeah, Conley should play big minutes whoever drafts him. Crittenton would struggle as a rookie if he is given big minutes, even on a team like ATL. But I still would prefer him over a guy like Acie Law who isn't what the Hawks need. Unfortunately, I have faith in Billy Knight's ability to make the wrong pick.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't know how anyone can tell me that Marcus Williams, Julian Wright and Joakim Noah will be better than Roy Hibbert. I think many of the people who are sleeping on Hibbert are going to feel really stupid in a few years.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Its funny, big men arent usually the ones that get slept on. Lets see if he proves the doubters wrong.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

HKF said:


> Roy Hibbert is 16th? That's just ludicrous.


As ludicrous as watching him trying to chase the Suns and Warriors up and down the court, lol.

I think Roy could be a solid 20-25mpg starter but just don't see him as a 35mpg, 15/10 guy.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

RebelSun said:


> As ludicrous as watching him trying to chase the Suns and Warriors up and down the court, lol.
> 
> I think Roy could be a solid 20-25mpg starter but just don't see him as a 35mpg, 15/10 guy.


The guy has better offensive ability than Dampier, Diop and Bynum right now. He will actually score in the paint, can pass, is patient, can rebound, block shots, uses his length. I guarantee if Hibbert was in this game right now, he would have scored at least 15 points on easy layups.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Dampier & Diop had no offensive ability to begin with outside of a dunk, so thats no biggie. Bynum has good offensive touch though, nice low post repetoire.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

ya i agree on the top 4 but I have Hibbert right there... in number 5...

i also wanna say that I think DJ Strawberry is a sleeper... i have him in my top 16 but i would wait til 2nd round to pick him cuz he will probably be there....

i wanna see all the vertical leap/bench press etc results too


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

Rebel, i like the way you slipped Hibbert in at 16 to get everyone's attention. I'd have Hibbert at 7 so i guess i'm not as high on him as some but i think he'll do well at the next level. I think there are a couple of foreign players that will probably slip into that list of 16, not sure which ones but my guess is probably 2 out of 3 from Belinelli, Splitter and Fernandez.


----------



## E-MO_416 (Oct 17, 2006)

Conley may be gone before the hawks pick thereofor I see them getting Crittenton. Knight cannot be this foolish. Critt is a point guard with HUGE potential. Plus dude is from atlanta and played with Josh Smith and Dwight Howard...With Critt and Smith there all they need to do is pick up Randolph Morris, with that maybe Dwight would rejects the Magics offer and comes back home(wishful thinking lol)and remakes the Atlanta Celtics lol.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

You already know how I feel about Thaddeus Young, but other than that my main problem like most other people is Hibbert so low. Mine would probably switch some people around, move Marcus Williams out...heck, I'll just do a Top 16 myself.

1. Greg Oden
2. Kevin Durant
3. Brandan Wright
4. Al Horford
5. Roy Hibbert
6. Yi Jianlian
7. Spencer Hawes
8. Al Thornton
9. Mike Conley Jr.
10. Corey Brewer 
11. Julian Wright
12. Nick Young
13. Joakim Noah 
14. Jeff Green
15. Josh McRoberts
16. Javaris Crittenton


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

We see in the NBA that big man who can catch the ball and finish tend to become superior players. Hibbert can pass, has moves and can catch. He is going to be a capable big man on a playoff team. A definite starter in the NBA. I would stake every thing I have ever said about a prospect on it.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

HKF said:


> We see in the NBA that big man who can catch the ball and finish tend to become superior players. Hibbert can pass, has moves and can catch. He is going to be a capable big man on a playoff team. A definite starter in the NBA. I would stake every thing I have ever said about a prospect on it.


Seeing as most of us in here think he'll be pretty good who are you trying to convince?


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

rainman said:


> Rebel, i like the way you slipped Hibbert in at 16 to get everyone's attention. I'd have Hibbert at 7 so i guess i'm not as high on him as some but i think he'll do well at the next level. I think there are a couple of foreign players that will probably slip into that list of 16, not sure which ones but my guess is probably 2 out of 3 from Belinelli, Splitter and Fernandez.


I didn't include Roy to get attention. I was making my list and had Hibbert around in the beginning, but he just kept getting bumped down. The reason I included him at 16 is because I knew people would ask where he was. And I didn't have him lower and just put him at #16, that's the number I like him at.

For the record, I don't think Hibbert will be some ginormous bust; I just don't think he'll be an outstanding NBA player. I see him as a solid 20-25mpg guy; I don't see him being dominant in 35mpg over an 82 game season.

If he turns out to be a 15/10 guy in the league, I'll be the first one to say I was wrong.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

RebelSun said:


> I didn't include Roy to get attention. I was making my list and had Hibbert around in the beginning, but he just kept getting bumped down. The reason I included him at 16 is because I knew people would ask where he was. And I didn't have him lower and just put him at #16, that's the number I like him at.
> 
> For the record, I don't think Hibbert will be some ginormous bust; I just don't think he'll be an outstanding NBA player. I see him as a solid 20-25mpg guy; I don't see him being dominant in 35mpg over an 82 game season.
> 
> If he turns out to be a 15/10 guy in the league, I'll be the first one to say I was wrong.


Get ready to be lectured to.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

I feel sorry for the team drafting McRoberts at 13


----------



## DavidCain (Nov 22, 2006)

Mcrboerts is an interesting case in that if hes picked too high he will be a bust if hes picked late in the first round he can be a very solid pick

people expected too much out of him,hes never gonna be a great scorer he is what he is,a very solid rebounder and passer for a big man whos not a great finisher

i dont see why he cant be every bit as good as a david lee in the pros who really solid


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Pioneer10 said:


> I feel sorry for the team drafting McRoberts at 13


McRoberts if flying under a lot of people's radars because he played at Duke and was less than stellar. He proved to me that he doesn't have the mentality to dominate games on a consistent basis, but he has a very nice skill set and his game should translate well to the next level. He's a borderline lotto pick in my opinion, but I think he'll end of being one of the better players from this draft.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

BTW, if Javaris stays in the draft, I would put him somewhere 8-15.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> McRoberts if flying under a lot of people's radars because he played at Duke and was less than stellar. He proved to me that he doesn't have the mentality to dominate games on a consistent basis, but he has a very nice skill set and his game should translate well to the next level. He's a borderline lotto pick in my opinion, but I think he'll end of being one of the better players from this draft.


Everyone loves to hate on Josh, but how many guys have his combination of skill and athleticism at 6'10-6'11?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

RebelSun said:


> Everyone loves to hate on Josh, but how many guys have his combination of skill and athleticism at 6'10-6'11?


Exactly, he didn't shine at Duke (he didn't play lousy either) but he isn't playing for Duke anymore. He'll be in a different type of system and won't be forced to be the number 1 option, which he's proved he really can't handle. He has the ability, but it's a mental thing.

Something people don't quite seem to realize about this league, talent trumps all. Even if there's something holding back the talent teams WILL take a chance on them because they CAN ball. That's the case with McRoberts, if he gets put in a good situation in the NBA he can be one of the top 5-7 players coming out of this draft IMO which is saying quite a bit considering the depth.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I think Hibbert is soft. He has skill, but he doesn't get in there and kick some *** like I want from a 7'3'' center. If he's going to be a homeless man's Yao Ming, that's fine, but don't pretend like he's Patrick Ewing. I would still probably take him over Josh McRoberts, who I still am fascinated with and would never let slip out of the First Round, even though his play dictates that he should.

I see Crittendon as a Shooting Guard. Everyone always wants to make everyone under 6'7'' a point guard. No one comes into the league as a Shooting Guard. It's always "they have to prove they can play the point" a la Dwyane Wade, or "they can play multiple positions" like Brewer. Just draft a kid with an obvious SG skill set and play him at ****ing SG! What's the problem here! The only guys who come into the league as Shooting Guards are one dimensional shooters like JJ Redick. Everyone else is a combo guard who can run some point, or a wing. That's stupid. Take Crittendon, play him at SG, and enjoy your All Star caliber player for the next 12 years.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Nimreitz said:


> I think Hibbert is soft. He has skill, but he doesn't get in there and kick some *** like I want from a 7'3'' center. If he's going to be a homeless man's Yao Ming, that's fine, but don't pretend like he's Patrick Ewing. I would still probably take him over Josh McRoberts, who I still am fascinated with and would never let slip out of the First Round, even though his play dictates that he should.


Can you give me some recent examples of big men who went to college who were complete kick some *** players on the college level? I am asking this because I see reluctance from a lot of bigs with true size due to the fact that they get in foul trouble. People were complaining that Oden was not physical enough but every time he got physical he picked up 4 fouls. 

I am just wondering how you can judge if Hibbert is soft when he actually sticks his nose in for rebounds, will post deep, kick out and re-post and uses his height to his advantage. 

When I think of someone soft, I think of Josh McRoberts because he refuses to post and get his hands dirty. His biggest liability is that he wasn't born a wing player, because if he were, he'd probably be awesome. As a big, McRoberts is not an ideal NBA player. I don't think Hibbert has ever shown me that he is soft. He plays in the Big East for goodness sake. Not to mention, Hibbert is not some big who constantly falls down like Aaron Gray either. He is sturdy.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Fair point. I will be anxious to see how he plays in the NBA and I wish I could watch him workout before the draft.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

hobojoe said:


> McRoberts if flying under a lot of people's radars because he played at Duke and was less than stellar. He proved to me that he doesn't have the mentality to dominate games on a consistent basis, but he has a very nice skill set and his game should translate well to the next level. He's a borderline lotto pick in my opinion, but I think he'll end of being one of the better players from this draft.


He's a role player and that is pretty much where he should get drafted(late lottery), you dont normally draft #1 or #2 options at that area of the draft. Where he goes will be key in how he fits it in my opinion.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I think he could be a David Lee with better handles and passing ability if he comes into the league with the right attitude.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I see Crittendon as a Shooting Guard. Everyone always wants to make everyone under 6'7'' a point guard. No one comes into the league as a Shooting Guard. It's always "they have to prove they can play the point" a la Dwyane Wade, or "they can play multiple positions" like Brewer. Just draft a kid with an obvious SG skill set and play him at ****ing SG! What's the problem here! The only guys who come into the league as Shooting Guards are one dimensional shooters like JJ Redick. Everyone else is a combo guard who can run some point, or a wing. That's stupid. Take Crittendon, play him at SG, and enjoy your All Star caliber player for the next 12 years.


Chad Ford is figuring it out...



Chad Ford on Cal St. Fullerton prospect Bobby Brown said:


> On Sunday, I started seeing things differently. I quit evaluating him as a point guard and started assessing his ability to play the 2 in the pros. A number of undersized 2-guards, such as Allen Iverson, Ben Gordon and Monta Ellis, are excelling in the NBA these days. Other guys like Charlie Bell, Willie Davis and Flip Murray have found a place in the league too.
> 
> Judged from that perspective, Brown starts looking like a legit NBA prospect. He has great quickness, showed good range on his jumper from NBA 3-point range, is an explosive athlete and, yes, could play some point in a pinch for an NBA team.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

can you explain to me why McRoberts over Hibbert?

I think Hibbert will have a 17-12 career. I think he'll even have a better career than Noah and Hortford barring injuries.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Dee-Zy said:


> can you explain to me why McRoberts over Hibbert?
> 
> I think Hibbert will have a 17-12 career. I think he'll even have a better career than Noah and Hortford barring injuries.


You don't think 17-12 is a stretch for a whole NBA career seeing as how he was only able to manage 13-7 in his junior college season? I think there's an outside chance he'd be more valuable than Noah, but I don't see him being a better player than Horford at all.

The reason I took Josh over Roy is because he's athletic and versatile. Guys with Roy's size and athleticism don't have a great success rate in the league. Josh's combination of height, athleticism, and skill make his long-term success more likely.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

I see. It isn't illogical.

The thing with Hibbert though is that he is so calm and steady. He has good IQ and I expect his IQ to rise faster than most of the class. Also he has an NBA ready body. 
His strength is defense, not offense. Although I think he will do well on offense. He is the prototypical NBA center which is so rare nowadays. He has size and he is big, he isn't like Loren Wood.

In terms of stats, Greg Oden is "only" 15.7 and 9.6 as the FIRST option on his team. Also, if you look at the team rebounds, nobody else can rebound the ball on OHST. GT on the other hand, Hibb's 12.9 and 6.9 is deflated because they play a slower pace and Hibb is not the primary option on offense, Green is. On OHST, lewis is the second highest scorer at 11.7ppg. 

In terms of rebounding, GT after Hibbert has green at 6.1, 4.0 and 4.0 rpg. Where as OHST is 4.8, 4.6, 3.4 rpg after Oden. I do admit that 12rpg for a career is too high. I think more like 10rpg as a career but that he can avg 12rpg for a season.

Hibb is also playing less min than Oden and Roy is shooting a 69.3% FG%, that's nuts. Even Oden doesn't shoot that high. Oden's FG% is lower mainly because he has more touches, but anyways, you get my point.

I think Hibb should be top 3 pick, or top 5 pick. If he isn't drafted that high, a few years from now when we look back I think he will be regarded as the top 3 or 5 of this draft.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Greg Oden was not the first option of his team until maybe the Final Four.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Greg Oden was not the first option of his team until maybe the Final Four.


Yeah you beat me to it. Apparently that guy didn't watch many Ohio State games this season.


----------



## CentralValleyBallin (Nov 25, 2006)

HKF said:


> I don't know how anyone can tell me that Marcus Williams, Julian Wright and Joakim Noah will be better than Roy Hibbert. I think many of the people who are sleeping on Hibbert are going to feel really stupid in a few years.


Or you'll feel stupid for all the praise you're throwing at him, and then he busts. LOL


----------



## NetIncome (Jan 24, 2004)

HKF said:


> Roy Hibbert is 16th? That's just ludicrous.


Not as ludicrous as Marcus Williams over Corey Brewer because BREWER needs more strength. Williams is a toothpick. I see Williams as the most likely player with first round talent slipping to the second.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

If Marcus Williams slipped to the 2nd round some team would get extremely lucky.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

CentralValleyBallin said:


> Or you'll feel stupid for all the praise you're throwing at him, and then he busts. LOL


Not likely.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

TucsonClip said:


> If Marcus Williams slipped to the 2nd round some team would get extremely lucky.


That would say something about the depth of this draft, Don't see it happening by the way.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

Jameh said:


> Yeah you beat me to it. Apparently that guy didn't watch many Ohio State games this season.


Dude is leading his team in ppg. Perhaps I did not watch enough games of OHST but everytime I watched him, they looked at giving him the ball in the post, most of the time it was just him unable to get proper positioning or they couldn't feed him so they would just move the ball around.

Oden has his offensive deficiencies but he was still the first option on offense (from the games I saw, a few before the tournement and the tournement).


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

that's besides the main point anyways, all I am saying is that Hibby is putting up similar numbers to Oden despite playing less minutes, on a slower team and with Green.

No I don't think Hibbert should go #1 overall, but that he shoud be top 3-5. Further than 10 would be ridiculous.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Dee-Zy said:


> Dude is leading his team in ppg. Perhaps I did not watch enough games of OHST but everytime I watched him, they looked at giving him the ball in the post, most of the time it was just him unable to get proper positioning or they couldn't feed him so they would just move the ball around.
> 
> Oden has his offensive deficiencies but he was still the first option on offense (from the games I saw, a few before the tournement and the tournement).


Oh, no no no no no no no. Oden was often in great position calling for the ball, but Ron Lewis, or Daequon Cook, or Ivan Harris, or Jamar Butler would jack up a contested 3. Oden was only the main options in a handful of games, and when they did get him the ball he dominated. He averaged 9 FGAs per game, the four guys I mentioned who jacked 3's combined for 17 3PTA per game! This was not a team that fed the post, it was a perimeter oriented team that jacked 20 threes every game.

Here's a breakdown of the typical Ohio State Game:

65 Posessions

11 Ohio State Turnover
20 Threes attempted
9 Shots By Oden
25 Other (other 2 point shots or FTs)


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Dee-Zy said:


> Dude is leading his team in ppg. Perhaps *I did not watch enough games of OHST* but everytime I watched him, they looked at giving him the ball in the post, most of the time it was just him unable to get proper positioning or they couldn't feed him so they would just move the ball around.
> 
> Oden has his offensive deficiencies but he was still the first option on offense (from the games I saw, a few before the tournement and the tournement).


The part I highlighted needs to be re-emphasized, over and over again. I have to disagree with this entire post.


----------



## jsm27 (Jan 9, 2003)

Dee-Zy said:


> Dude is leading his team in ppg. Perhaps I did not watch enough games of OHST but everytime I watched him, they looked at giving him the ball in the post, most of the time it was just him unable to get proper positioning or they couldn't feed him so they would just move the ball around.
> 
> Oden has his offensive deficiencies but he was still the first option on offense (from the games I saw, a few before the tournement and the tournement).


I also agree this is inaccurate. I watched anywhere from 8-12 Ohio State games on TV and one in person, and they really did not run the offense through Oden much until the Tournament. Not that they needed to. However, I do think they would have been a much better offensive team had they utilized him more. He could have averaged 20 ppg and maybe even 2 assists with the right game plan.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

ok


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Dee-Zy said:


> Dude is leading his team in ppg. Perhaps I did not watch enough games of OHST but everytime I watched him, they looked at giving him the ball in the post, most of the time it was just him unable to get proper positioning or they couldn't feed him so they would just move the ball around.
> 
> Oden has his offensive deficiencies but he was still the first option on offense (from the games I saw, a few before the tournement and the tournement).


So bascially this post told me I was 100% right when I said you didn't actually watch many Ohio State games. And it didn't tell me that because you actually SAID you didn't watch a lot of them. What told me was your ridiculous statement that Oden was just "unable to get proper positioning" because he did that nearly every possession. He literally dominated in the post, offensively (less so than defensively, but still wasn't overly hard for him to post people up) and defensively and 90% of that was BECAUSE of his phenomenal positioning.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Oden never got the ball enough, just take a look at OSU's 3pt attempts...

When you have a player like Oden, he needs to touch the ball every other play if not every play. He also needs 12+ shots per game, because nobody can guard him. Oden only had 9.5 shots per game, not nearly enough.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

huh? yes I said that you were right.

I'm taking your words for it.

I said that for the games that I did see him play, he did not get good positioning at all, gets into foul trouble and most of his points were off putbacks. I really don't see what the hell people see in his offense. Kevin Durant is good offensively. Oden is much more of a defensive player and you don't need to watch 10+ games to see that though.

I watched maybe 5 or 7 games. I would find it hard to believe that he wasn't "in the groove" offensively. He still racked up like 20+ points, but like I said, it wasn't like he was really working for them. His size advantage and rebounding got them like 10 pts, he had a surprisingly good FT shot. He had a nice baby hook, but that's about it. His footwork in the post is def raw.


----------

