# Biedrins workout at Charlotte



## Sigma (Apr 26, 2003)

http://www.nba.com/bobcats/news/draft_central_duo_060204.html

Couple of Bernie answers:
(on Andris Biedrins)
I think he’s a little different than a lot of your European guys in that he doesn’t have the perimeter skills in terms of shooting the basketball. But for a guy that is 6-11, his ball-handling skills are good. I think he probably needs to strengthen up a little bit, but I think probably two to three years down the road that he can be pretty good basketball player. 

(on selecting Biedrins in the first round)
Not with the fourth pick. He’s the type of guy you talk about if you acquire another pick – a late first-rounder. I would think right now he would probably go outside of the lottery somewhere – maybe to the teams that have two or three picks. That’s just my opinion. We like him because he’s 6-11, can handle the basketball, has a good work ethic, is fundamentally sound and can pass the basketball. 


Interesting!


----------



## fugazy11 (Apr 28, 2004)

smoke screen? heh i think so.


----------



## AdamIllman (May 12, 2003)

thats what im thinking


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

"late first-rounder"? = 

BS


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

I don't think its necessarily all a smoke screen, Bickerstaff has a reputation for saying whats on his mind. On top of that, no one would be stupid enough to create a smokescreen like this, no one is being fooled by this.

Maybe Bickerstaff was being a bit serious about Biedrins workout, and a bit flippant as well. Jonathan explained it nicely on another board:

"Biedrins is not a workout type guy, he doesn't have jaw dropping athleticism to do 360's and windmills or the ball handling to do crossovers and no look passes and he most certainly can't hit 10 NBA 3's in a row (or even 10 NBA FT's). He's the type of player you want to see in a real game.

Iguodala is the exact opposite."

I mean, I just keep returning to the fact that this would be an idiotic smokescreen.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> I don't think its necessarily all a smoke screen, Bickerstaff has a reputation for saying whats on his mind. On top of that, no one would be stupid enough to create a smokescreen like this, no one is being fooled by this.
> 
> Maybe Bickerstaff was being a bit serious about Biedrins workout, and a bit flippant as well. Jonathan explained it nicely on another board:
> ...


If it is a smokescreen, then it's obviously a terribly executed one. However, to say that Biedrins is a "late 1st-rounder" is a bit of a stretch when this kid will obviously be a lotto pick.


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

Oh no, I wasn't saying that he should be picked outside of the lottery. I was just saying that maybe he wasn't impressive in this one workout and Bickerstaff decided to clumsily discuss it.

Of course, the answer could be even simpler than that: Bernie doesn't know what he's doing.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I would think he would go mid to later lottery at the very least. But does anyone else think that this draft is going to be a wild one? Byt that I mean players going at places in the draft (either high or low) that no one could have forseen? It sure feels that way to me.


----------



## Jockrider (Jun 25, 2003)

You hit the nail on the head. Bernie doesn't know what he is doing. The guy is flat out brutal. I feel sorry for the people in Charlotte, going from the A hole Shinn to the dunce Bickerstaff. The Bickerstaff hiring will cost the Bobcats 5 years.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> Of course, the answer could be even simpler than that: Bernie doesn't know what he's doing.


We have a winner!


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

Here is the Bull's scouting report on him

"*Andris Biedrins, Skonto Riga (Latvia), Power Forward:*
Unlike many Europeans making the jump to the NBA, he’s a seven-footer who doesn’t hang out on the perimeter shooting jumpshots. He lives in the paint, hustling for rebounds, blocking shots and spinning off of defenders for power dunks. He’s strong, athletic and can jump out of the gym. Although he only turned 18 in April, his affinity for defense could speed up his transition to the NBA game."


----------



## Sigma (Apr 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bunk 040</b>!
> Here is the Bull's scouting report on him


That's not Bull's scouting report, that is Rob Reheuser writing what Marty Blake thinks about possible lottery prospects.

http://www.nba.com/features/lottery_prospects_040525.html


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Biedrins, late 1st Round? You wish, he's almost definitely going Top 10.


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

As I see it Charlotte takes Livingston at 4 and Biedrins at 7th( Which they aquire from PHX for taking J.White or H.Eisley). Which leads to a big smokescreen he set for all the other teams to fall for.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Or it's a PR move...Bickerstaff is going to trash everyone right now so the fan base isn't disapointed with Josh Childress.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

has anyone here actually seen biedrins _play_? or are we going on the basis of internet mocks that have to this point rated him in the lottery?

lots of smokescreens out there, i'm sure of it, but i don't think the fans are really in the best position to expose them. i don't know many people who have seen this kid, and have no reason to *not* believe bickerstaff's assessment. remember, these mocks had kosta perovic, tiago splitter and ha-seung jin in the top 5 just 10 months ago. what happened? how have these kids changed so dramatically? well, they haven't. the mocks, in my opinion, mean little more than nothing. 

it is the workouts (like the one in charlotte) that will determine how well a player fares at the draft. remember maciej lampe? people are likely to believe a player's best review at this point in time, and those reviews happen to be most accessible in the form of online scouting reports, but they're almost always exaggerated. 

bickerstaff may be the one to be believed here, not the amateurs rating players on pure hearsay, speculation, statistics and dimensions. 

just my 2 cents.

peace


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

On Kosta Perovic, Tiago Splitter, and Ha-Seung Jin being in the top 5 10 months ago in mocks: no they weren't. Perovic was in that basic area (4-10), Splitter as well (5-15), but Jin was never in the top 10 (11-25 mainly).

Splitter is still a top pick (10-20) but isn't likely to declare since he won't get a guarantee worth leaving. Perovic isn't likely to declare either. And Jin has dropped because he didn't improve as much at the SFX gym that people thought he would.

And the biggest reason these guys dropped: this draft has gone insane. So many underclassmen are declaring, its pushing mocks to the breaking point. If we include everyone that has declared there are atleast 40 people who would have been 1st rounders last year for sure.


----------



## Sigma (Apr 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ballocks</b>!
> has anyone here actually seen biedrins _play_? or are we going on the basis of internet mocks that have to this point rated him in the lottery?


2 biggest mock draft sites - nbadraft.net and draftcity have both seen him play. Atleast nbadraft.net Matthew Maurer has said that he has seen him play (or atleast seen tape). I think Draftcity scouting report was done by latvian. I think most people are trusting their opinions and Ford Insider report.

It is pretty clear that Biedrins was unknown for Bernie. I have impression (not from Bernie statement) that some GMs like him a lot and some less.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> On Kosta Perovic, Tiago Splitter, and Ha-Seung Jin being in the top 5 10 months ago in mocks: no they weren't. Perovic was in that basic area (4-10), Splitter as well (5-15), but Jin was never in the top 10 (11-25 mainly).


i don't want to get into this discussion, really, but you've insulted my claims. first, you say i'm wrong and then go on to concede that perovic and splitter WERE indeed in the top 5. so which is it? perovic happened to be #2 (after okafor) for a time, and i can't say for sure whether splitter made it to #2, but know for certain that he made it to 4- and was there for quite awhile. 

as far as ha, he was top 3 on nbadraft.net last june. 7 ft 3 300 lbs, etc.etc- all that typical stuff you see that explains how a player who nobody has really seen play the game finds his way into the high end of the lottery. 



> Splitter is still a top pick (10-20) but isn't likely to declare since he won't get a guarantee worth leaving. Perovic isn't likely to declare either. And Jin has dropped because he didn't improve as much at the SFX gym that people thought he would.


i'm sorry, man, but it seems like all the information you're getting is from the abovementioned sources. i've read it all before, too- i'm talking about fans thinking for themselves and not accepting the opinions of these fellow amateurs as gospel truths. 



> And the biggest reason these guys dropped: this draft has gone insane. So many underclassmen are declaring, its pushing mocks to the breaking point. If we include everyone that has declared there are atleast 40 people who would have been 1st rounders last year for sure.


alright, whatever floats your boat. if you want to believe that these guys are better players than they might really be, that's fine, but remember that they will NEVER be different players than they are (i.e. ha seung jin will always be ha seung jin- whether you want him to be yao ming or not). all the mythos that surrounds these talents at this point on the calendar is old news to many folks (myself included). 

fans want to believe that the next superstar is coming overnight, and if no prospect fits the bill, they just assign the title (and the accompanying expectations) to someone undeserving, anyway. happens every year.

i just implore all fans to see these players before they comment on whether execs like bickerstaff are putting up smokescreens or not- otherwise it just becomes bickerstaff vs nbadraft.net/draftcity.com. 

i'll believe the former until i have sufficient reason to believe the latter. internet mock drafts don't qualify. 

peace


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

Umm, 

1. Look at my username.
2. Look at this (read the names):
http://www.draftcity.com/about/index.htm

I have seen almost every player in the draft or spoken to those that have. My associates have also spoken to many players (how do you think interviews happen), a few execs, been to the workouts, and so forth. I'm not saying that I'm right and you're wrong or anything, but is it improper for me to value *my* own opinion more than I value your opinion? (not that I don't respect yours or anything)


----------



## Sigma (Apr 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ballocks</b>!
> i'll believe the former until i have sufficient reason to believe the latter. internet mock drafts don't qualify.


I can see what you are pointing but i don't agree with it (atleast not completly).


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sigma</b>!
> 
> 2 biggest mock draft sites - nbadraft.net and draftcity have both seen him play. Atleast nbadraft.net Matthew Maurer has said that he has seen him play (or atleast seen tape). I think Draftcity scouting report was done by latvian. I think most people are trusting their opinions and Ford Insider report.


yes, i trust that those sources HAVE indeed seen them play. however, we have fans all over the continent (and beyond) who are using their accounts as the bases by which to refute bickerstaff's claims. in fact, we have mockeries- "what a dumb guy, biedrins is a lottery talent- any team would be stupid to pass him up in the mid-first" etc. 

by doing so, they are effectively siding with a no name critic versus an nba executive. now, of course, the no name may yet be right (no one has a crystal ball)- biedrins, for instance, may indeed turn out to be a special player. i'm sure bickerstaff has even seen some of these mocks himself. but until you have a chance to see these players for yourselves (as fans), i don't think any source is worthy of the ridicule and mockery and cynicism that we see being sent in bickerstaff's direction. 

i remember a discussion last year that concerned the 2004 draft. i remember talking to a guy about players like kosta perovic and he said (paraphrased), " no way, we won't have a shot at him. he'd be awesome but he's going top 5 and we probably won't even have a lottery pick."

it is those comments that i take issue with. neither of us had seen him play but yet had blind faith in the few anonymous sources that _had_. it now seems that perovic isn't quite the same "great" player anymore- and yet he's still the same guy. what happened?

i think the mocks have been exposed. and i fully expect the mocks to be exposed yet again (many more times) with players like biedrins (although not necessarily him) who are currently sitting in such high positions. 

bickerstaff may or may not be wrong. just because he's saying something that some fans don't want to hear does not mean that he's "lying" or "stupid" or anything of the like.

peace


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> I'm not saying that I'm right and you're wrong or anything, but is it improper for me to value *my* own opinion more than I value your opinion? (not that I don't respect yours or anything)


i don't have an opinion about biedrins- in a nutshell, that is my point. i have never seen him play. i might even have some friends who have indeed seen him play but i STILL wouldn't want to believe them- i'd prefer to draw conclusions for myself. i'd especially want to see a player for myself before i could justify mocking a league executive's perception/valuation of a prospect. 

i simply see too many people assuming shaun livingston is the 6th best player in the draft, for instance, because that's where he currently sits on a mock. it's ridiculous- the world is not that simple. i know we have a tendency to try to simplify the future like that, but it's something i believe we should try to avoid.

biedrins may be great, he may not be. i don't know. i'm not going to put my blind faith in anyone's opinion until i have one of my own. i'd suggest others to do the same, out of respect more than anything else, but what power do i have...

peace


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

Let me also say I agree with your comments on believing sites (even though I own one). The reasons you mentioned are the very reason I, and those around me, started our own site.

I WANT other people to see these players and evaluate them on their own, But at some point it isn't possible to do that with so many players (and many of them at levels which aren't broadcast to the majority of the public) and in those situations I think it should be fine to go with other resouces. I'd really like to see DraftCity become more like a starting point for researching the player on your own, watching them and using profiles more like starting points (oh, they were right about this; wait, I don't agree with that; etc.).

So no, I don't like how people will use opinions like "DraftCity says and thus it must be", but I'm also willing to stake alot on my opinion because thats all I really have. And in this case I'm willing to come out and say that Biedrins deserves to be much more than a late 1st round pick.

PS: On Livingston, even though we have him ranked #7 it does not mean we feel he is the 7th best player in the draft. Its more of an idea of where he will be picked rather than where we believe he deserves to be picked.


----------



## captain_ballard (Apr 4, 2004)

Jeez man. These are INTERNET MESSAGE BOARDS. Asking people to post here without being deluded by their own opinions is like asking them to post without using a computer. It just can't happen. The opinions and speculations are what drive the boards. Its why this site exists.

I know some people get terribly frustrated by all the speculation this time of year. IMO its the best part. Its fun. Its not based on fact, its just crazy guesses and trying to figure that last little bit into teh few comments you've read. I keep a good perspective. I know exactly how much(or usually how little) value to put on the comments, but I have a great time making them. 

The Bickerstaff comments on Biedrins through me for a loop. You NEVER here a club rep talk that specifically about a player. I'm tempted to say its a smoke screen just because it was so out of character. Could be Bernie is hoping that Chicago doesn't bring him in for a workout. Could be they want to trade back and still have a shot at him.Just seemed funny. I hope he is the real deal. As a Sonics fan I need lots of legit big men to emerge from this draft. 

Totally agree with this years draft being a crapshoot. Lots and lots of wildcard players this year. We haven't even had the chicago camp yet and prerak and the guys who run nbadraft.net are being held accountable for loose predictions made last june after evaluating hundreds of prospects. If you want something more concise or accurate just wait until two weeks before the draft. As is I'm amazed at how accurate they are so far in advance. Its a lot of homework to find out about a guy who may or may not even declare...


----------



## spuriousjones (Apr 24, 2004)

this is a good quote: "Biedrins is not a workout type guy, he doesn't have jaw dropping athleticism to do 360's and windmills or the ball handling to do crossovers and no look passes and he most certainly can't hit 10 NBA 3's in a row (or even 10 NBA FT's). He's the type of player you want to see in a real game.

Iguodala is the exact opposite."

i've heard upper comparisons to kerilinko, gasol, martin. there doesn't seem much unninimity of thought


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>spuriousjones</b>!
> unninimity


If you had spelled that right I would have been forced to ban you for being too smart. Using the word in the correct context though makes you someone that needs to be watched.

Bickerstaff will play the process. He is the one guy that has the least to lose because he is starting with a blank slate with no expectations. I would not be surprised if everything you hear from him here on out is a complete lie and misdirection.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

This is a very weak draft. I believe what Bernie says from a skill standpoint. In his mind the kid isn't that impressive. Bernie's been in the bizz along time. He's been a gm and team prez so he know's way more than any of us do. 

I don't think he was slighting Biedrins he just doesn't think of him that highly from a standpoint of him starting a franchise with him. 

At 4 you want upside and he may not have seen much. 

There are gonna be alot of REACH picks in this draft. Alot of I can't believe they slected that guy that high kinda stuff. There will be 2nd rd projected guys go mid 1st thats what kinda draft this is. Eye of the beholder situations. And quite frankly who can say someone is wrong we haven't seen most of these guys play all that much so who knows who's gonna be really good. 

I think alot of draft sites are kinda like being herded around by each other. 

I feel what Prerak says, them cats at draftcity are pretty thorough they seem to have things covered from a variety of angles. 

Bernie's not a bum .


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> Umm,
> 
> 1. Look at my username.
> ...


You're only 17?!


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Aesop</b>!
> You're only 17?!


Age is but a number.

Anyway, yes, I am. I suppose I should have hidden it because of the questions that would be raised. If it makes others feel better, I'm easily the youngest member of the staff at DraftCity, despite being the owner.


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> 
> 
> Age is but a number.
> ...


OK....no problem at all. You have a great site, by the way.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spuriousjones</b>!
> this is a good quote: "Biedrins is not a workout type guy, he doesn't have jaw dropping athleticism to do 360's and windmills or the ball handling to do crossovers and no look passes and he most certainly can't hit 10 NBA 3's in a row (or even 10 NBA FT's). He's the type of player you want to see in a real game.
> 
> Iguodala is the exact opposite."
> ...


How is a guy who benches 185 10 + times and has a 34" inch vertical unathletic?

Hilarious because that comment is the exact opposite of the truth, you need to see Iggy in a game setting at the NBA level to figure out if he'll be something special, and You need to see how Biedrins' atlheticism stacks up to others in the league.

Obvious, obvious smoke screen, and a very horrible one at that. I think Bernie just revealed his hand the same way a new poker player reveals his ; through total lack of stealth.



> Age is but a number


I'd argue that it's a measuring device more than anything else. Congratulations on getting your own site together at such a young age. I don't know what " owner" of webpage constitutes in the managerial sense, but I have gained a lot more respect for draft city knowing that it's put together by a young indian.


----------



## MentalPowerHouse (Oct 9, 2003)

Mock and draft sites would be most useful if they started putting up video of players.


----------



## soopahpit (Jun 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> 
> 
> Age is but a number.
> ...


17? hahah. I've had rashes that have lasted longer than you've been watching basketball. Could kind of tell by the know-it-all cockiness in your posts.

Great site though. How do you go about checking the veracity of your international "scout" reports? Since you just started the site from the ground up and integrity is everything, I would think you would have to make sure that they both A) have the resources and means to attend games/events and B) have the know-how and eye of a scout. And how do you compensate the writers, since your site just started? 

I don't know if you can reveal all that information, but I'm just curious. I enjoy your reports/interviews/updates immensely. But on the other hand I can read ESPN Insider's Chad Ford and know that everything he reports has some basis in truth. He obviously has the resources to check out players (ESPN $$), and the firsthand NBA front office/scout contacts to put out good information. How can I (the reader) have trust in your information?

I will continue to say, though, that you have the most fan friendly site. so keep up the good work.


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MentalPowerHouse</b>!
> Mock and draft sites would be most useful if they started putting up video of players.


You have no idea how much I want to do that, but the legal ramifications are just impossible to control. NCAA is off limits because they regulate that. Same things is true for anytime an international game gets coverage.

HS games are still fine if you have a camera, but thats hard to do. Rivals does really well in that regard.

We do have 3 extremely short clips going up soon (two for Nemanja and one for Nas Vicius).


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>soopahpit</b>!
> 
> But on the other hand I can read ESPN Insider's Chad Ford and know that everything he reports has some basis in truth. He obviously has the resources to check out players (ESPN $$), and the firsthand NBA front office/scout contacts to put out good information. How can I (the reader) have trust in your information?


hahahahaahhaahah, LMFAO!!!!! lol!!

obviously you don't really read what Chad writes, it is for the most part garbage and I would call him mini-Vescey.

LOl!, thanka for the laugh tho!

btw, draftcity is by far the best site on the draft ALONG with www.hoopshype.com

Thanks draftcity, and keep updating regularly!


----------



## prerak (Oct 22, 2003)

Lost post time. 



> Originally posted by <b>soopahpit</b>!
> 17? hahah. I've had rashes that have lasted longer than you've been watching basketball. Could kind of tell by the know-it-all cockiness in your posts.


Ah, my cockiness is simply the way I debate. You should always believe what you are saying and have the confidence to say that. Or say you don't know. Believe in yourself or other fortune cookie stuff like that.



> Great site though. How do you go about checking the veracity of your international "scout" reports? Since you just started the site from the ground up and integrity is everything, I would think you would have to make sure that they both A) have the resources and means to attend games/events and B) have the know-how and eye of a scout.


Evaluating our "know-how and eye of a scout" is your job, I can't tell you whether we have it or not. I think we do, I think we've picked people who know what they are talking about, atleast as much as others in the business who don't actually work for a team. But like I said, thats your decision.

Anyway, the biggest problem is the "resources" you asked about, namely money. We don't compensate our profilers or writers for any expenses, even travel. We just can't afford to do that. 

If by means you are talking about access... thats an odd thing. Next to money this was the biggest concern we had when we started the site. We had no credibility when we launched, so we were concerned about getting into workouts, getting into pre-draft camps, and so forth. Well, that isn't a problem anymore. I don't want to pat ourselves on the back since it looks really really conceited, but we must have done something right because we're in now.

We were invited to workouts (some we asked, some came forward and asked us). We were invited to the Camp in Treviso, Italy (one of the people directing it asked us if we wanted to come). We were invited to Chicago (we applied for this and then got in). The means are being taken care of nicely. 



> And how do you compensate the writers, since your site just started?


We give them publicity. We give them a place to get their works published in a source read by many people. Something to put on your resume.

For example, just 5 minutes ago I got an application from someone who has written pieces for for Wisconsin State 
Journal and The Badger Herald (college papers). He's someone who wants to get into the business and this is a stepping stone for him.

Some people don't even do it to put on the resume.

We have the people who are just fans. We have a writer on our staff who has a masters degree in "history with a focus on the economics and social impact of cities which lost professional sports franchises". Thats a mouthful to even type. He's writing for us because he just likes to do that.

In contrast we will soon have one writer who is a high school student with no qualifications that people will respect.

Suffice to say writers need to qualification other than the ability to write (and some level of intelligence of course). These aren't the people writing profiles or making evaluations, simply stating an opinion in what



> I don't know if you can reveal all that information, but I'm just curious. I enjoy your reports/interviews/updates immensely. But on the other hand I can read ESPN Insider's Chad Ford and know that everything he reports has some basis in truth. He obviously has the resources to check out players (ESPN $$), and the firsthand NBA front office/scout contacts to put out good information. How can I (the reader) have trust in your information?


Well, I want to ask you something else: how can you trust Chad Ford? A week ago he said he talked to scouts who said that Kirk Snyder got a guarantee from Portland and he won't be working out. Well, luckily Kirk is someone we had a good relationship with from the beginning of the site (first ones to think he was a top 20 pick, interview him, go to his workouts, etc). And we talked to his agent who said he never spoke to anyone about a guarantee, let alone Insider who decided to print this without talking to him, and Kirk plans on working out still. In fact he worked out with Childress in Cleveland and today was scheduled to workout in Seattle. Isn't this a costly omission by a credible "journalist".

Or how about his claim that Ben Gordon is 6' because he stood next to him? Maybe he's right, but I doubt it and we'll find out soon enough in Chicago. If not, isn't that an outright lie?

Or here's another one, not about Ford specifically though. You've read the reports we had on the Atlanta Hawks workouts right? Well, apparently we were too truthful. An agent (I won't mention who he represents, but I bet you can figure it out if you look at what we wrote and which agent as real power) told the Hawks to kick us out because apparently the public shouldn't know what we had to say about his player. Of course, the writers who say good things are invited.

So why can you trust us? Because our staff is very naive and has some sort of odd belief that the press should have some measure of credibility. Hope that belief doesn't burn out of us.

PS: Sounds harsh, but its been a tough week and things like this (outright lies that people will believe) piss me off.



> I will continue to say, though, that you have the most fan friendly site. so keep up the good work.


Thanks.


----------



## soopahpit (Jun 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> 
> 
> hahahahaahhaahah, LMFAO!!!!! lol!!
> ...


dude i know what you're saying.
first pavel is #3, then hes out, and deng/livingston is #3, now theyre out, and its childress, then pavel, then iggy. Super high on high school/euros, down on american college players except emeka. He stumps so hard for emeka and trashes jameer.

Hes very jumpy and takes scouts/team officials opinions too seriously. His opinions aren't worth a great deal. But the factual elements in his reports I don't see how you can argue.

My main point is that he puts himself out there and has the resources to find things out firsthand. And most importantly hes built a reputation through years of experience and puts that on the line with his reporting. I just don't see how a 17 year old Indian kid can do that with any credibility, and credibility was what I was looking for.

I'm not attacking, I'm only questioning. Anyways Draftcity is my 2nd stop after ESPN Insider, and more interesting anyway. The interviews are superb, maybe even more so because they're approached more as conversation rather than interview.


----------



## soopahpit (Jun 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>prerak</b>!
> Lost post time.
> 
> Thanks.


Great. Thats what I suspected, but it was nice to have it spelled out like that. I really do enjoy your site immensely.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

Hey prerak, since this thread has turned into a draftcity discussion, I'd just like to thank you for your work and commend you on your site, and further I really liked the piece about the 8 common profiles of a bust. More material about the nuances of drafts, historical perspective, and just mechanics of the draft in general would be neato. Keep it up.


----------

