# Measurements for Yi



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

7' 1" in shoes, 7' 4.25" wingspan, 248 lbs. 38" vertical.

Wow. 

This info is from Chad Ford's article on Yi today.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=Yi-Conundrum

Incidentally, Ford thinks we would probably take Noah if both Joakim and Yi are on the board at #9.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Funny you said that. On Spongy's MP3 with Ford being interviewed, he said Yi is going to Chicago in his mock.

He did say he is pretty athletic, not TyTy like, but he's more athletic than you think.

Yi is #1 on my board.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

Athletic,7'1",long arms,248 lbs. Damn, Pax is gonna have to take a good long look at him.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

theanimal23 said:


> Funny you said that. On Spongy's MP3 with Ford being interviewed, he said Yi is going to Chicago in his mock.


Chad has Noah to Charlotte at #8 in his latest mock, so we wouldn't have a choice between Noah and Yi. Words just can't explain the anguish I'll feel if we pass up Yi in favor of Noah.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Nothing surprising. He's big, he's at least somewhat athletic and he has some skills, including a great shooting form.

If he's there, you take him.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Chad has Noah to Charlotte at #8 in his latest mock, so we wouldn't have a choice between Noah and Yi. Words just can't explain the anguish I'll feel if we pass up Yi in favor of Noah.



Thanks. I do agree with you. While Noah maybe more of a sure thing, you gotta risk it with Yi


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

I can't quite believe that a 7'1" 248lb guy who is very athletic and skilled would be available at 9.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Very impressive. I still don't think he'll be there for us at 9, but he remains my top choice if there. Keeping my fingers crossed anyhow.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> I can't quite believe that a 7'1" guy who is very athletic and skilled would be available at 9.


Well, Jason Smith is by all accounts going to be available at 9, and he's 7' tall, and reportedly he's athletic and skilled.

It's a unique draft, that's for sure.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> I can't quite believe that a 7'1" guy who is very athletic and skilled would be available at 9.


He's easily the 3rd or 4th best raw talent in this draft. But when you're talking about a Chinese prospect, politics do play a role. We'll see what happens.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

TripleDouble said:


> I can't quite believe that a 7'1" 248lb guy who is very athletic and skilled would be available at 9.


It'd be for the same reason people want to pass him up at #9 in favor of someone like Noah: he hasn't played at a terribly high level of competition and scouts haven't had as many chances to see him in a game setting so the risk is higher and people are afraid of taking risks sometimes.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Well, Jason Smith is by all accounts going to be available at 9, and he's 7' tall, and reportedly he's athletic and skilled.
> 
> It's a unique draft, that's for sure.


Jason Smith will never be confused with a small forward. Yi apparently could be.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

I still think we could trade Yi to LA as a major part of the Kobe trade. With these kind of measurements they could sell him to the fans as a world class foreign prospect. LA's large asian population could surely help pack the Staples Center. He could probably work with Bynum as a long term front court partner.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Jason Smith will never be confused with a small forward. Yi apparently could be.


Yi shot 18% from the Chinese 3-point line, however many feet back that is. Ford also said today he is "indifferent" on defense. I'm sorry, I don't a defensively indifferent seven footer playing small forward. He's a 4 right now. However, he and Tyrus Thomas could play 3 and 4 together because Tyrus is fast enough to check 3s on the perimeter.

Considering that Yi might grown into being an NBA center years down the line, he could be that versatile big man that completes our roster for now and for the future. It's just so hard to know. He never really impressed me in the Olympics, but that was years ago.

I would be happy with a Noah, Hawes, or Yi pick. All could contribute greatly to our team.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Snake said:


> I still think we could trade Yi to LA as a major part of the Kobe trade. With these kind of measurements they could sell him to the fans as a world class foreign prospect. LA's large asian population could surely help pack the Staples Center. He could probably work with Bynum as a long term front court partner.


They like Yi so I could see the pick being worth more in trade talks with the Lakers if Yi fell to #9 but really it's going to come down to the members of the core they insist on.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

Yes on Yi, No on Noah...........

Interesting point Snake...........

Gordon, Yi, S&T, and future #1 would give LA reason to save face which is the biggest hang up in any deal.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Yi shot 18% from the Chinese 3-point line, however many feet back that is. Ford also said today he is "indifferent" on defense. I'm sorry, I don't a defensively indifferent seven footer playing small forward. He's a 4 right now. However, he and Tyrus Thomas could play 3 and 4 together because Tyrus is fast enough to check 3s on the perimeter.


I think that's a pretty one-sided description of Chad's comments since he also gave somewhat strong counterarguments to each of those points but I agree that Yi isn't a 3, and I don't think we'd want him to be a three.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

chifaninca said:


> Yes on Yi, No on Noah...........
> 
> Interesting point Snake...........
> 
> Gordon, Yi, S&T, and future #1 would give LA reason to save face which is the biggest hang up in any deal.


Gordon, Wallace, rights to Yi, future #1 for Kobe and rights to McRoberts, Splitter, or Jason Smith (taken with the #19 pick). Hmmmmm.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Yi shot 18% from the Chinese 3-point line, however many feet back that is. Ford also said today he is "indifferent" on defense. I'm sorry, I don't a defensively indifferent seven footer playing small forward. He's a 4 right now. However, he and Tyrus Thomas could play 3 and 4 together because Tyrus is fast enough to check 3s on the perimeter.
> 
> Considering that Yi might grown into being an NBA center years down the line, he could be that versatile big man that completes our roster for now and for the future. It's just so hard to know. He never really impressed me in the Olympics, but that was years ago.
> 
> I would be happy with a Noah, Hawes, or Yi pick. All could contribute greatly to our team.


Make no mistake, I don't think Yi is a 3. However, he has some of the skills of a three whereas Smith doesn't. My point is that I think that Yi, based on what I've read, is far more advanced skill wise than Smith.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Make no mistake, I don't think Yi is a 3. However, he has some of the skills of a three whereas Smith doesn't. My point is that I think that Yi, based on what I've read, is far more advanced skill wise than Smith.


OK, I see. Well, I'd still prefer a 7 footer with the skills of a 7 footer, which is why I show a preference for Hawes. I just hope, if we keep our pick, on of Hawes, Noah, or Yi drops to us.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> 7' 1" in shoes, 7' 4.25" wingspan, 248 lbs. 38" vertical.
> 
> Wow.
> 
> ...



Those numbers if accurate surprise me, i had figured 6-11 w/shoes and maybe an inch or two more on the wingspan than his height. The 38 inch vertical is mindblowing really, Greg Oden's max vertical is 34.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> OK, I see. Well, I'd still prefer a 7 footer with the skills of a 7 footer, which is why I show a preference for Hawes. I just hope, if we keep our pick, on of Hawes, Noah, or Yi drops to us.


I'm torn on Hawes vs. Yi. On one hand I totally agree with you that it would be great to have a real low post scorer and Hawes appears to be exactly that. On the other hand, the team seems to be built for up tempo play and in that regard, Yi is a far better fit...


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

People on here know i like Spencer but 9 inch differance in the vertical leap gets my attention.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

If Yi has a 38" vertical, he doesn't use it much judging from his videos. Not to say I don't like Yi -- I just don't trust Ford.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

rainman said:


> People on here know i like Spencer but 9 inch differance in the vertical leap gets my attention.


It's impressive. Tyrus Thomas territory actually.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

McBulls said:


> If Yi has a 38" vertical, he doesn't use it much judging from his videos. Not to say I don't like Yi -- I just don't trust Ford.


I agree on the Ford comment, i'm not sure any of these guys dont have some sort of agenda but at some point you have to trust the info is accurate. As for him not using that athleticism, in all the videos i've seen his head is pretty much at or near the rim when he is dunking the ball, what more does the guy have to do?


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

rainman said:


> I agree on the Ford comment, i'm not sure any of these guys dont have some sort of agenda but at some point you have to trust the info is accurate. As for him not using that athleticism, in all the videos i've seen his head is pretty much at or near the rim when he is dunking the ball, what more does the guy have to do?





McBulls said:


> If Yi has a 38" vertical, he doesn't use it much judging from his videos. Not to say I don't like Yi -- I just don't trust Ford.


So why is Chad fabricating information and risking his career? Did the Chinese government pay him off or does he just have some illness where he'll go to extreme lengths to promote international players. 

Also, why isn't one of the NBA teams who has seen Yi workout going to call him out, at least anonymously through some other writer? If the NBA teams are also being duped then what is the reason Yi's agent is risking his career? Also, what is the reason that veteran scouts and GMs just decided to take the word of Yao's camp's vertical when it appears questionable?



Darius Miles Davis said:


> OK, I see. Well, I'd still prefer a 7 footer with the skills of a 7 footer, which is why I show a preference for Hawes. I just hope, if we keep our pick, on of Hawes, Noah, or Yi drops to us.


I think everyone does but as I asked in another thread, how high does Yi's upside need to be to pass on him to avoid the somewhat higher risk he represents and the fact that he's not an ideal fit. You wouldn't take Hawes over Durant or Marc Gasol over Yi, right?


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> So why is Chad fabricating information and risking his career? Did the Chinese government pay him off or does he just have some illness where he'll go to extreme lengths to promote international players.
> 
> Also, why isn't one of the NBA teams who has seen Yi workout going to call him out, at least anonymously through some other writer? If the NBA teams are also being duped then what is the reason Yi's agent is risking his career? Also, what is the reason that veteran scouts and GMs just decided to take the word of Yao's camp's vertical when it appears questionable?
> 
> ...


I'm just being diplomatic about the whole thing, something about believing half of what you see and none of what you hear. No matter what, the guy has a skill set and athletic numbers pretty much unparalled in this draft and that includes the two darlings at the top, to me its clear he's the 3rd best prospect in this draft.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

> If Yi has a 38" vertical, he doesn't use it much judging from his videos. Not to say I don't like Yi -- I just don't trust Ford.


It's possible he could have added 6 inches or so of vertical after the CBA season ended when working out with NBA predraft trainers specifically targeting his workouts to get important numbers.

Still, I have a really hard time swallowing that one myself. Unofficial measurements are kind of dicey, I've watched about 400 possessions of Yi on offense (non highlight reel stuff, but just every offensive possession he takes) and there are very few plays that he impresses with his athleticism, and this is against much less athletic and weaker players than he'll face in the NBA.


----------



## K-Dub (Jun 26, 2005)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> 7' 1" in shoes, 7' 4.25" wingspan, 248 lbs. 38" vertical.
> 
> *Wow. *
> 
> ...


Indeed. If we take him...do we groom him to be a power forward or a center?


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

I'm broke, but I still feel the need to add my 2 cents...

38" vertical?...GTFOH

He would've AT LEAST participated in the measurment portion of the pre-draft camp...AT LEAST..

This kid Yi is a walking smokescreen and it's really annoying.


----------



## Bulldozer (Jul 11, 2006)

K-Dub said:


> Indeed. If we take him...do we groom him to be a power forward or a center?


PF/C. Versatility for a big is great, especially for a player with Yi's skills.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

smARTmouf said:


> I'm broke, but I still feel the need to add my 2 cents...
> 
> 38" vertical?...GTFOH
> 
> ...


Again, I just don't think it's very easy to fabricate someone's vert. The reasons for not attending the combine have been pretty well documented and I don't think a fear of poor performance has ever been suggested as the reason.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

I don't see anything impressive about this kid. I think if it weren't for the fact that not that many desirable non-American players declared this year, we wouldn't be talking that much about him.

I see 2 major strikes against Yi. 1) He didn't dominate his league. 2) He refuses to competitively show his skills. I remember a few years ago when Gerald Green refused to do this as well, and it cost him hugely in draft position. But if only for the fact that no other non-American is really thought of as lottery material, Yi might still find himself in high lottery territory despite 2 enormous red flags against him.


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

Impressive measurements, but I'm just not impressed with his game. 

Kid is still a project and I don't expect much out of him his first year.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

Mateo said:


> I don't see anything impressive about this kid. I think if it weren't for the fact that not that many desirable non-American players declared this year, we wouldn't be talking that much about him.
> 
> I see 2 major strikes against Yi. 1) He didn't dominate his league. 2) He refuses to competitively show his skills. I remember a few years ago when Gerald Green refused to do this as well, and it cost him hugely in draft position. But if only for the fact that no other non-American is really thought of as lottery material, Yi might still find himself in high lottery territory despite 2 enormous red flags against him.


His numbers in the CBA were 25 and 11, and as far as the workouts go he isnt the only one not working out for certain teams or not working out against other players, just to be fair.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Vertical leap means nothing when you're measured. If you don't rise up and jam on someone in games, how high you can jump is meaningless.

Case in point Kwame Brown has a great vertical, yet he never has ever caught the rock and quick power move slammed on anyone that I can remember. Same with Darko. If you got hops, you need to use em. 

Luke Jackson supposedly had a high vertical than Iguodala. *laughter*


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

No one's answered my question yet: Yi has plus athleticism, a reasonably broad skill set, scouts like him and many consider him a top five pick, but admittedly caries a bit more risk then your average player because scouts have seen him less; if you're an NBA GM, how low would you need to be picking in this draft to take him? Apparently, having a player many consider the #4 or #5 pick in the draft fall to #9 is not enough to gamble on him, people would rather take Noah or Hawes - who I love to death - players who few to no scouts believe have All-Star potential. It's a high risk/high reward approach but I'd be willing to bet a lot of the stars drafted around #9 were players who fell in the draft and not guys slotted as late lotto picks all along.

Also, by all accounts Yi's limited workouts are purportedly designed to allow him to fall to a team like the Bulls, _benefiting the Bulls in the process as a top player in the draft slips to their spot_. For those of you expressing anger as far as the workouts, do you have some reason to believe he has a different motive for the policy? Do you believe the alleged reason is a front of some sort? Why? Again, a top prospect limiting workouts so that he falls and your team gets a "steal" would usually be a reason to be pleased with the player, not upset.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Solid post Jeremy


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Jeremy, I agree with you. Yi is serious value at 9. Yes he is a risk, but weren't TMac and Dirk risks at 9? I'm not saying Yi will remotely touch their skillset, but all of these players had some boom/bust potential. Its up to the organization to put the best atmosphere around them and for the players to take the onus themselves to improve. 

I worry that Yi could go higher. I was snooping around the Hawks board, and well Billy Knight wants Wright, Coach Woodson wants Horford, and the Owners want Yi for marketing reasons. The Bucks GM said that whoever picks Yi, he will have to play their regardless. Thats the point of being drafted. I believe in Ford's workout that Yi did not do a physical workout in front of Milwaukee. 

The teams I believe that *could* pick Yi are Atlanta, Boston, possibly Milwaukee but not likely, and Someone moving to Charlotte's spot. 

I think if he slips past Boston he will fall to us. Ainge could see him as the poor man's Durant, or Ainge could feel that he has to make a solid 'Win Now' pick where he could go Brewer/Green. I think he has enough young talent to wait and develop on that team that he needs to do the Win Now pick. 

For all the reasons Jeremy pointed out, we gotta take Yi at 9. I don't want Noah if Yi is there. I could accept Noah over Hawes (although I'd prefer Hawes) but not this move. Yi seems freakish for a 7-footer. Yes he isn't skilled in the post. Yes he is not great on D. But he is 22 and that is the same age Thabo was when he came over. The kid will learn. We got a good environment. His offensive style for now fits our system. He will be large enough to be a skinny 4/5. 

He is worth the risk. If he pans out, its serious trouble for the rest of the league. If not, how much more could we gain if we take Noah?


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

theanimal23 said:


> Jeremy, I agree with you. Yi is serious value at 9. Yes he is a risk, but weren't TMac and Dirk risks at 9? I'm not saying Yi will remotely touch their skillset, but all of these players had some boom/bust potential. Its up to the organization to put the best atmosphere around them and for the players to take the onus themselves to improve.


Right, I think an established team in the late lottery is one of the best possible situations to swing for the fences.



theanimal23 said:


> I worry that Yi could go higher. I was snooping around the Hawks board, and well Billy Knight wants Wright, Coach Woodson wants Horford, and the Owners want Yi for marketing reasons. The Bucks GM said that whoever picks Yi, he will have to play their regardless. Thats the point of being drafted. I believe in Ford's workout that Yi did not do a physical workout in front of Milwaukee.
> 
> The teams I believe that *could* pick Yi are Atlanta, Boston, possibly Milwaukee but not likely, and Someone moving to Charlotte's spot.


Yeah, I really think the fact that he may very well be drafted in the top five is just about the best possible counter argument to the claim that we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot by drafting him.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Well, first things first. You need to establish, with *100%* certainty, if he's a fraud or not. If he has lied about his age, his visa is invalid, and the team, league, anyone who knew and went along with it, can get in trouble with the federal government. The earliest I'd take him would be about #15 or so. I wouldn't spend a top 10 pick on him, though those #s are pretty impressive I must admit. I'm in the camp of "not impressed at all". His video and the way he's handled the whole draft process to date showed me nothing I'd want to blow a #9 pick on. He's not the position we need to address (SG/C), he is scared to work out against people, he played against pure crap competition, and we don't even know his age for sure. If he's 19, he'd be a lot more enticing to draft, but if he's 22 he's nowhere near as enticing. I'd rather have Wright, Hawes, etc, just based on age alone if he's 22 (as his own teammate thinks he is 21-22).

I still think that you'd have to take Hawes over him, because he has the skill set we need. I'd take Nick Young at #9 before I'd take Dingaling too, simply because he would fill a need. Dinger doesn't fill a need at all. He's either a SF or a PF...last time I checked, we had some very promising young players, 20 and 22 for sure, at those positions already. 

I don't know what to think of him to be honest....he is much bigger, and if his vertical is for real, more athletic than I thought he'd be. I do agree with one poster who said if you have a vertical and don't utilize it properly, it is irrelevant. I had a 38 inch max vertical in high school, but never used it...I was a speed guy instead. It's just the difference in how people play I guess. Dingaling never seemed to use that vertical from what I saw in the youtube videos, and didn't look all that explosive either. If his shooting sucks and he doesn't play D, why would you want him?


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well, first things first. You need to establish, with *100%* certainty, if he's a fraud or not. If he has lied about his age, his visa is invalid, and the team, league, anyone who knew and went along with it, can get in trouble with the federal government. The earliest I'd take him would be about #15 or so. I wouldn't spend a top 10 pick on him, though those #s are pretty impressive I must admit. I'm in the camp of "not impressed at all". His video and the way he's handled the whole draft process to date showed me nothing I'd want to blow a #9 pick on. He's not the position we need to address (SG/C), he is scared to work out against people, he played against pure crap competition, and we don't even know his age for sure. If he's 19, he'd be a lot more enticing to draft, but if he's 22 he's nowhere near as enticing. I'd rather have Wright, Hawes, etc, just based on age alone if he's 22 (as his own teammate thinks he is 21-22).
> 
> I still think that you'd have to take Hawes over him, because he has the skill set we need. I'd take Nick Young at #9 before I'd take Dingaling too, simply because he would fill a need. Dinger doesn't fill a need at all. He's either a SF or a PF...last time I checked, we had some very promising young players, 20 and 22 for sure, at those positions already.
> 
> I don't know what to think of him to be honest....he is much bigger, and if his vertical is for real, more athletic than I thought he'd be. I do agree with one poster who said if you have a vertical and don't utilize it properly, it is irrelevant. I had a 38 inch max vertical in high school, but never used it...I was a speed guy instead. It's just the difference in how people play I guess. Dingaling never seemed to use that vertical from what I saw in the youtube videos, and didn't look all that explosive either. If his shooting sucks and he doesn't play D, why would you want him?


One word can sum up everything you said and why: POTENTIAL.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

My point was that we already have a PF with more potential, who is 2 years younger. We have a SF who is already pretty good, and a lot of people feel will be an all-star next season...who is the same age. What is the point in drafting a guy with our last high draft pick, for the next 5-10 years most likely, who is at a position of one of our young studs? Forward is the LAST position we should be addressing in this offseason, unless we're going to trade Deng or Tyrus. I don't think that's going to happen, so the pick should be someone who can be our 3rd guard, or a Center (or at least a PF/C). We don't need a tweener forward, that will play on the perimeter, at all. 

Unless the player we select can eventually start in the post next to Tyrus, or be the real SG that we need who is bigger, gets to the hoop, and can guard their own guy, they shouldn't even get consideration. That limits our pick to Corey Brewer, Nick Young, Spencer Hawes, Al Horford, and Joakim Noah. Hawes makes the most sense, regardless of ceiling. He has a high skill lvl already, and would be a perfect compliment to our team, as well as being a future starter behind OLD Benedict. Dingaling brings nothing to the table, that wouldn't mean we'd have to sit one of our good young players and play him in their place.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well, first things first. You need to establish, with *100%* certainty, if he's a fraud or not. If he has lied about his age, his visa is invalid, and the team, league, anyone who knew and went along with it, can get in trouble with the federal government.


I haven't heard anyone else suggest this. Assuming his visa is fraudulent, you'd need copies of documents held by the Chinese government and I doubt they'd go out of their way to get one of their national icons in major trouble.



DaBabyBullz said:


> The earliest I'd take him would be about #15 or so. I wouldn't spend a top 10 pick on him, though those #s are pretty impressive I must admit. I'm in the camp of "not impressed at all". His video


Man. I guess I just trust scouts and the buzz enough that if I had a choice between say the 12th most highly regarded player in a draft and the 6th most highly regarded player, I wouldn't hesitate.



DaBabyBullz said:


> and the way he's handled the whole draft process to date showed me nothing I'd want to blow a #9 pick on. He's not the position we need to address (SG/C), he is scared to work out against people, he played against pure crap competition, and we don't even know his age for sure. If he's 19, he'd be a lot more enticing to draft, but if he's 22 he's nowhere near as enticing. I'd rather have Wright, Hawes, etc, just based on age alone if he's 22 (as his own teammate thinks he is 21-22).


Again, the reported reason for his style of workouts is so that he falls to a team such as the Bulls. You should explain either why that upsets you - since it'd seemingly help the team you root for - or explain for which reasons you believe that reason is inaccurate.

We're not getting Wright. Regardless of whether Yi is 19 or 22, he's regarded as having higher potential than Hawes because of athleticism.



DaBabyBullz said:


> I still think that you'd have to take Hawes over him, because he has the skill set we need. I'd take Nick Young at #9 before I'd take Dingaling too, simply because he would fill a need. Dinger doesn't fill a need at all. He's either a SF or a PF...last time I checked, we had some very promising young players, 20 and 22 for sure, at those positions already.


From the sound of it, you think that Young and Hawes are better picks over Yi just based on "best player available" and regardless of fit. How on earth is Young a better fit as a second big guard off the bench behind Thabo? Right now our back court rotation is Thabo, Kirk, Ben, and Du while our front court rotation is BW and Tyrus. You'd rather have a fifth guard and third shooting guard than a third front court player and a second PF?



DaBabyBullz said:


> Dingaling never seemed to use that vertical from what I saw in the youtube videos, and didn't look all that explosive either. If his shooting sucks and he doesn't play D, why would you want him?


Also, what's the explanation behind the "dingaling" thing? It doesn't even resemble his name and if it's some comment on the way Chinese people's names sound, I find it somewhat offensive.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I remember back in 2002, Amare Stoudemire dropped to #9 (or #10...can't remember for sure) because people weren't high on high school prospects that particular year. But he was an undeniable physical specimen and was maybe the best player in that draft (him or Yao at least). 

Now, people are making the Darko/Tskitishvil comparisons to Yi, because he's a tall, long, skilled athlete that nobody knows much about. People are afraid to repeat others mistakes for some reason. But as Amare proved, sometimes being afraid makes you miss a great opportunity.

Bottom line, if Yi falls to #9 we must take him. Just my opinion. I know many disagree, but this is our last chance probably in a while that we have to find a star caliber player (especially a big man). Yi has upside that neither Hawes nor Noah can match - essentially the offensive potential of Hawes combined with Noah's athleticism. For the record though, I don't think he slips to #9 so this will all be moot.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

He'll never have Hawes' post offense, and that's what we need. We don't need Yi from what I've seen. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I remember back in 2002, Amare Stoudemire dropped to #9 (or #10...can't remember for sure) because people weren't high on high school prospects that particular year. But he was an undeniable physical specimen and was maybe the best player in that draft (him or Yao at least).
> 
> Now, people are making the Darko/Tskitishvil comparisons to Yi, because he's a tall, long, skilled athlete that nobody knows much about. People are afraid to repeat others mistakes for some reason. But as Amare proved, sometimes being afraid makes you miss a great opportunity.
> 
> Bottom line, if Yi falls to #9 we must take him. Just my opinion. I know many disagree, but this is our last chance probably in a while that we have to find a star caliber player (especially a big man). Yi has upside that neither Hawes nor Noah can match - essentially the offensive potential of Hawes combined with Noah's athleticism. For the record though, I don't think he slips to #9 so this will all be moot.


I tend to agree with you. Darko and Skitish had little tape b/c I remember both of them being bench warmers on good Euro clubs. But they both had age and potential going for them.

Yi put up 20/10 in an average league and there should be plenty to work with for GMs angling to draft him. I wonder if he is there at #9 with Hawes (a more traditional post player) or Noah (an energy guy who might have been a Bull had he come out last year)... whom exactly Pax would choose.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> He'll never have Hawes' post offense, and that's what we need. We don't need Yi from what I've seen. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.


Neither will Kevin Durant but I'd draft him.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

superdave said:


> I wonder if he is there at #9 with Hawes (a more traditional post player) or Noah (an energy guy who might have been a Bull had he come out last year)... whom exactly Pax would choose.


Chad Ford's guess seems to be that we have them ranked:

1. Noah
2. Yi
3. Hawes

That could always be a smoke screen or speculation though.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

superdave said:


> I tend to agree with you. Darko and Skitish had little tape b/c I remember both of them being bench warmers on good Euro clubs. But they both had age and potential going for them.
> 
> Yi put up 20/10 in an average league and there should be plenty to work with for GMs angling to draft him. I wonder if he is there at #9 with Hawes (a more traditional post player) or Noah (an energy guy who might have been a Bull had he come out last year)... whom exactly Pax would choose.



Skita rode the pines on a good euro team, Darko played on a poor Serbian team. As for Yi's numbers in the CBA 25 and 11.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Also, by all accounts Yi's limited workouts are purportedly designed to allow him to fall to a team like the Bulls, _benefiting the Bulls in the process as a top player in the draft slips to their spot_. For those of you expressing anger as far as the workouts, do you have some reason to believe he has a different motive for the policy? Do you believe the alleged reason is a front of some sort? Why? Again, a top prospect limiting workouts so that he falls and your team gets a "steal" would usually be a reason to be pleased with the player, not upset.


Because:

1) I don't believe that reason. Why in the world would a player want to fall in the draft, getting less guaranteed money, and in this case less guaranteed playing time? That's a bit of a stretch.

2) It still doesn't give teams much to evaluate him on. The "reason" *might* be benevolent, but if the team can't see him play against competition, they don't have much to base a decision around.


----------



## Brothaman33 (Feb 21, 2006)

It seems most people are saying this...

Yi is simply misterious and there isnt mush to go by because he played in China. We cant draft him because its too much of a risk.

People prefer Hawes beacause we know what were getting, a low post scorer.

let me say that, with Hawes' athletisizm he might not be able to get the same postion in the post as in college. people act like he is the best post scorer to come in the draft in years.

You know that Hawes could come into the league and get bustes too... stop acting like Hawes cant be a bust either.

I think Yi is not just a little bit of a better pick, but a whole lot. You saw the measurements. and 25 and 11 in his league is not exactly that bad. Durant averaged the same. Yes he is in China, i understand but comon.

Yi Jianlian should be drafted above Spencer Hawes all day and every day.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Mateo said:


> Because:
> 
> 1) I don't believe that reason. Why in the world would a player want to fall in the draft, getting less guaranteed money, and in this case less guaranteed playing time? That's a bit of a stretch.



1)Because maybe, just maybe in some places outside the U.S.A.....it is about more than the money.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

The Krakken said:


> 1)Because maybe, just maybe in some places outside the U.S.A.....it is about more than the money.


I think the Chinese basketball establishment is still pissed that Yao went to Houston instead of Chicago. To most Chinese, Houston is a backwater hick town in America compared to Chicago.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Again, I just don't think it's very easy to fabricate someone's vert. The reasons for not attending the combine have been pretty well documented and I don't think a fear of poor performance has ever been suggested as the reason.


Don't be naive...


If he performed THIS well, that would be GREAT press for his camp.

7 footer with a 7'4'' wingspan?...AND a 38'' vertical?...Why not get all those measurments official?

That's impressive


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

smARTmouf said:


> Don't be naive...
> 
> 
> If he performed THIS well, that would be GREAT press for his camp.
> ...


Because he doesn't want another Yao situation where he ends up where he doesn't want to play.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I remember back in 2002, Amare Stoudemire dropped to #9 (or #10...can't remember for sure) because people weren't high on high school prospects that particular year. But he was an undeniable physical specimen and was maybe the best player in that draft (him or Yao at least).
> 
> Now, people are making the Darko/Tskitishvil comparisons to Yi, because he's a tall, long, skilled athlete that nobody knows much about. People are afraid to repeat others mistakes for some reason. But as Amare proved, sometimes being afraid makes you miss a great opportunity.
> 
> Bottom line, if Yi falls to #9 we must take him. Just my opinion. I know many disagree, but this is our last chance probably in a while that we have to find a star caliber player (especially a big man). Yi has upside that neither Hawes nor Noah can match - essentially the offensive potential of Hawes combined with Noah's athleticism. For the record though, I don't think he slips to #9 so this will all be moot.


Amare dropped for several reasons. The biggest was the headcase reputation that he developed. Another very good reason was because the players in front of him were simply projected to be better. The high schooler/Euro hype was still alive and well that year.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=623663


> It's disappointing, but I'll tell you what," Babcock said. "We still like him (Yi). He's a good shooter, very skilled, runs. He's not a thin kid. His English is good. He'll be an impact guy in the NBA next year."
> 
> Bucks general manager Larry Harris said he had hoped to give the team's coaching staff a chance to meet Yi and see him in an individual workout.
> 
> ...



http://www.journaltimes.com/nucleus/index.php?blogid=24



> Suffice to say, they were suitably impressed. Yi is 7-foot, has a wing span of 7-foot-4 and an amazing 38-inch vertical leap. Fegan recently told me Yi had also put on weight, which was a concern to many NBA scouts, and reportedly weighs 248 pounds.
> 
> Babcock said Yi, in some ways, has the skills similar to those of former Bucks forward Toni Kukoc, although Yi is more athletic. Perhaps the big knock on Yi is that he hasn’t consistently played against top-flight competition in China. But Babcock is convinced Yi will make his mark in the NBA and make it quickly.
> 
> ...





> ALL WRIGHT: Here’s how one veteran Eastern Conference player personnel director felt the June draft will unfold leading up to the Bucks’ pick:
> 
> 1) Portland — center Greg Oden of Ohio State.
> 
> ...





> BONUS SHOTS: The Chicago Bulls covet a big-time, low-post scorer so much they might consider offering a package that consisted of star guard Ben Gordon and free-agent in-waiting forward Andres Nocioni who, of course, would have to be re-signed before being dealt. ... Phoenix forward Shawn Marion and Indiana power forward Jermaine O’Neal are still being mentioned in trade talks. ... Not one NBA official I’ve spoken with in the last three days believes the Lakers will trade disgrunted guard Kobe Bryant. .... The scuttlebutt is Boston coach Doc Rivers wants to draft Green; Celtics GM Danny Ainge wants to draft Yi and Celtics star Paul Pierce wants the team’s pick to be traded for an established veteran player. Look for Pierce to win this one. ... While Yi is the biggest wild-card in the draft, he isn’t the only one. There is also a wide-range of opinion on Washington center Spencer Hawes. Some NBA officials believe Hawes could be a top seven pick; others believe he’ll be a late lottery selection.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Mateo said:


> Because:
> 
> 1) I don't believe that reason. Why in the world would a player want to fall in the draft, getting less guaranteed money, and in this case less guaranteed playing time? That's a bit of a stretch.


I'm not sure Skiles loves to play semi-raw rookies but right now our front court looks something like:

Wallace - 35 MPG
Tyrus - 25 to 30 MPG

That means there are something 30 to 35 MPG available in our front court right now.

Somebody like Tyrus seems to be driven by relatively small amounts of money but to some players $4 million a year compared to $3 million a year might not be a huge difference.

Players want to go to a well run successful organization like the Bulls as opposed to a poorly run, perennial loser like Atlanta. We're probably the most attractive destination in the lottery for most players.

One of the stated reasons that Yi wants to fall is to go to a city with a large Asian community and Chicago has the third largest Chinese community of the US, larger than any other team ahead of it in the lottery.



Mateo said:


> 2) It still doesn't give teams much to evaluate him on. The "reason" *might* be benevolent, but if the team can't see him play against competition, they don't have much to base a decision around.


Right and that might be gut wrenching for a team like Boston at #5 but you wouldn't think it would be for a team drafting say 20th if they have a shot at a player who scouts consider one of the top players in the draft. Similarly, I don't think it should be a deal breaker for the Bulls, especially if it's the only reason he's still on the board.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Thanks for the links animal. I'm still skeptical that Yi will fall to us.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I'm not sure Skiles loves to play semi-raw rookies but right now our front court looks something like:
> 
> Wallace - 35 MPG
> Tyrus - 25 to 30 MPG
> ...


I see what you're saying, but I still don't agree. I don't think the Bulls can pass up the opportunity to improve their frontcourt on a flyer like this. If this were a draft without any good big men then maybe that would be all right, but this is the last lottery pick the Bulls will get for a long time. I don't think the big risk / big reward is a good idea. Mainly because I don't think the Bulls _need_ the big reward in the first place. I'd go with a safer pick.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Milwaukee can talk about how they will take the BPA, but it takes a lot of guts to commit millions of dollars and a high draft pick to a player you have not met or interviewed. All the scouting reports in the world won't change that. They won't be signing either Noah or Yi if they don't get a chance to work them out.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I agree McBulls. I think if he slips past Boston, he is ours to have unless another team can trade up to get him. Philly is rumored to like him along with the Lakers and Warriors. Philly could move up, but the price to pay maybe 12 and 21, or even all 3 of their 1st rounders. On a Philly board a while back, I read that Iggy and Korver are their 'untouchables'. All other guys don't seem to be valued enough to move up that many spots. GSW won't unless they throw in Biedrins or Ellis.

The more I think about it, Yi will be there. Its a risky pick for Atlanta (Horford is the safe choice) and for Boston - Yi could be the saving grace or the cause of Ainge to be fired. If I'm him, I go with a Florida kid or Green.

If Conley and Wright are there at 6, I wonder who Milwaukee chooses. And would Minny take Hawes over Wright?


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Mateo said:


> I see what you're saying, but I still don't agree. I don't think the Bulls can pass up the opportunity to improve their frontcourt on a flyer like this. If this were a draft without any good big men then maybe that would be all right, but this is the last lottery pick the Bulls will get for a long time. I don't think the big risk / big reward is a good idea. Mainly because I don't think the Bulls _need_ the big reward in the first place. I'd go with a safer pick.


I agree that the draft is the best place to take a big man but I just don't think you can 100% lock yourself into Hawes if he's available just for that reason. A 20 PPG face the basket player is going to help the Bulls win more than a 12 PPG back to the basket player (not that those are my actual projections for the two). As I said before, you'd rather have Bosh over Sean May even if you need a back to the basket player badly. Hawes is definitely a safer pick but I'm not sure how much. There's certainly risk there and with almost any player we're looking at. Just a couple weeks ago people were claiming that Hawes is the biggest risk to be a bust in the draft because of his athleticism. I don't agree but the fact that the point of view is out there says something.


----------



## Hodges (Apr 28, 2007)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I agree that the draft is the best place to take a big man but I just don't think you can 100% lock yourself into Hawes if he's available just for that reason. A 20 PPG face the basket player is going to help the Bulls win more than a 12 PPG back to the basket player (not that those are my actual projections for the two).


I still prefer Hawes. It's become a cliche by now, but the Bulls need someone who can slow the offense down when shots aren't falling. How many times have we seen our guys shoot brick after brick after brick? It seems like if a few guys miss some jumpshots, all the other perimeter guys get rattled (no pun intended) and start clanking theirs too.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Just a couple weeks ago people were claiming that Hawes is the biggest risk to be a bust in the draft because of his athleticism. I don't agree but the fact that the point of view is out there says something.


I was originally on the Yi bandwagon, then Hawes, and now Yi again. Reasons why I dropped off the Hawes bandwagon was of two reasons 1) He could have been gone, so I guess I subconsciouslly tried to convince myself he wouldn't be great and 2) The more I saw the minimal clips of him online (Yahoo, ESPN Motion, SI), the more I saw how little he gets off the ground. I'm not even bringing up the Combine. Just watching his game, I know its polished, but I think he will have difficulty in the NBA. I think a Brad Miller/Z is a very good comparison of his skillset. Its not to say he will be a bust. He could very well be a 15 and 9 type of player. If we pick him, I won't complain at all. I'll think he has Pax's approval and will be excited. But it does warrant some concern for me. 

Noah is the safest bet out of the Big Men not named Oden and Horford. You know exactly what you are getting with him. Its essentially risk free.

Yi brings a lot of variables, and I think his ceiling is higher than Hawes due to his athletic ability. The two are esentially the same height and weight, yet Yi looks slightly skinnier. I give the edge to Hawes in D and Rebounding, but I think Yi's ceiling is just higher for reasons stated several times.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Hodges said:


> I still prefer Hawes. The Bulls need someone who can slow the offense down when shots aren't falling. How many times have we seen our guys shoot brick after brick after brick? It seems like if a few guys miss some jumpshots, all the other perimeter guys get rattled and start clanking theirs too.


Touche. Good points.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

> Yi put up 20/10 in an average league and there should be plenty to work with for GMs angling to draft him.


There has only been one player to ever come from the CBA into the NBA successfully. Yao Ming. He put up 32 points, 17 rebounds on 72% shooting in the Chinese league. Wang Zhi Zhi, who's a better player in the CBA, washed out in the NBA. 

There are very legitimate reasons to be scared about Yi, and it's not just the unknown. I've watched an utter crapload of non highlight reel tape on Yi, and there are a lot of things to be worried about.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Statistics are definitely something for us to look at but I think we need to remember to take them with the appropriate grain of salt. No one has developed an effective way to translate NCAA stats to predict NBA success and the CBA is a far less known commodity. Two players is a horrifically small sample size to try to draw conclusions about how CBA success translates to the NBA.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Hodges said:


> I still prefer Hawes. It's become a cliche by now, but the Bulls need someone who can slow the offense down when shots aren't falling. How many times have we seen our guys shoot brick after brick after brick? It seems like if a few guys miss some jumpshots, all the other perimeter guys get rattled (no pun intended) and start clanking theirs too.


Hmm. I don't know. At some point, points are points. I'm not sure many expect Hawes to average double digits as a rookie or more than 15 PPG two or three years from now I don't see his presence causing Gordon, Kirk, and Lu to all up their production by 3 or 4 PPG.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

> Two players is a horrifically small sample size to try to draw conclusions about how CBA success translates to the NBA.


What about when both guys who couldn't even make it as 12th men in the NBA dominate Yi head to head?

Would you not even qualify that as a red flag?


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

dougthonus said:


> What about when both guys who couldn't even make it as 12th men in the NBA dominate Yi head to head?
> 
> Would you not even qualify that as a red flag?


Correct. I consider the scouting aspect of it to be separate aspect from the statistical aspect and I don't have any good reason to distrust the scouting reports. As far as I can tell our scouts have seen him in person and like his game.


----------



## Hodges (Apr 28, 2007)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I don't see his presence causing Gordon, Kirk, and Lu to all up their production by 3 or 4 PPG.


Hopefully, he'll be able to draw some double-teams and kick the ball out too. NBAdraft.net says he's a fine passer.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Statistics are definitely something for us to look at but I think we need to remember to take them with the appropriate grain of salt. No one has developed an effective way to translate NCAA stats to predict NBA success and the CBA is a far less known commodity. Two players is a horrifically small sample size to try to draw conclusions about how CBA success translates to the NBA.


This is a great point.

Yao Ming was obviously in a league of his own in the CBA. How can any Chinese opponent stop a guy who's bigger, stronger, AND more skilled than just about any other big man in Chinese basketball history? To add to that, his size and skill both translated extremely well to the NBA since he's STILL bigger and more skilled than your average big man.

Wang Zhi Zhi, from a physical standpoint, offered NOTHING special coming to the NBA. He was a sub-par athlete at 7'1 and could do 1 thing well: shoot the ball. He didn't do anything remarkable in terms of rebound, defend, nor putting the ball on the floor. I suppose he dominated the CBA because he was still far above average compared to the competition, but against NBA bodies he's below average.

It appears that Yi has far more potential to succeed given that he is 7-feet and a gifted athlete to go along with above-average skill. I have to imagine these skills translate to the NBA. You can critique his stats all you want saying they don't measure up to Yao, but the fact is he's a far different kind of player and his skill set transfers to the NBA differently.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Hodges said:


> Hopefully, he'll be able to draw some double-teams and kick the ball out too. NBAdraft.net says he's a fine passer.


He won't be able to draw double teams initially but hopefully in time. I think he's capable of eventually spacing the offense and in turn improving the play of those around him but I also think the overall benefits to the team of a solid but unspectacular post scorer are often overstated.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Solid arguement yodurk. Thats something Ford and all other GMs are saying. He is more athletic than you think. He will surprise you. I think he will be a poor man's Dirk. Nothing close to an MVP but hopefully an All-Star level talent.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

dougthonus said:


> What about when both guys who couldn't even make it as 12th men in the NBA dominate Yi head to head?
> 
> Would you not even qualify that as a red flag?


I wouldn't call it a red flag necessarily, just something to keep an eye on and see if it becomes a trend.

I've seen countless times in NCAA games or even draft workouts where a marginal NBA prospect who probably will never be drafted gets the best of a lottery-worthy talent.

Sometimes, a bad matchup is a bad matchup, and a player will get overmatched by someone who's less of a prospect. It happens less in the NBA because rosters tend to have more versatility to minimize these matchups, as well as coaches who can prevent it from happening. But it happens alot in the NCAA to be sure (I don't tend to remember specific games too well in general, so I apologize that I can't give explicit examples).


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Yao Ming was obviously in a league of his own in the CBA. How can any Chinese opponent stop a guy who's bigger, stronger, AND more skilled than just about any other big man in Chinese basketball history?


Yeah, I mean I don't know that much about the CBA but my guess is that Yao's size gave him an unreal advantage there. Obviously Yi's production will also be greatly diminished when facing bigger and quicker players but perhaps not quite to the same extent. Since Yi doesn't seem to rely on his size that much to score aside from being able to shoot jumpers without being blocked, matching up against bigger players might not diminish his production as much as a true post player who relied on his size to get position.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Yeah, I mean I don't know that much about the CBA but my guess is that Yao's size gave him an unreal advantage there. Obviously Yi's production will also be greatly diminished when facing bigger and quicker players but perhaps not quite to the same extent. Since Yi doesn't seem to rely on his size that much to score aside from being able to shoot jumpers without being blocked, matching up against bigger players might not diminish his production as much as a true post player who relied on his size to get position.


You could maybe compared Yao's abilities in the CBA to Wilt Chamberlain playing in the 60's. Wilt had the same grossly absurd numbers because he just overmatched all the 6'7-6'9 centers of the era (except perhaps Bill Russell). I think Wilt's career averages were something like 30 ppg, 20 reb, which are very similar to Yao's in the CBA. Food for thought.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

yodurk said:


> You could maybe compared Yao's abilities in the CBA to Wilt Chamberlain playing in the 60's. Wilt had the same grossly absurd numbers because he just overmatched all the 6'7-6'9 centers of the era (except perhaps Bill Russell). I think Wilt's career averages were something like 30 ppg, 20 reb, which are very similar to Yao's in the CBA. Food for thought.


Great analogy.


----------



## Hodges (Apr 28, 2007)

JeremyB0001 said:


> ...but I also think the overall benefits to the team of a solid but unspectacular post scorer are often overstated.


Maybe I'm overestimating the value of a post player on the Bulls. While watching Duncan in the Finals, I developed a craving for a back-to-the-basket scorer.:biggrin:


----------



## LeroyJames (Aug 22, 2004)

The bigger reason why Yi is willing to drop in the draft and end up in a big market city is NIKE. Yi is contracted with Nike, Nike sees Yi as their posterboy for the big Chinese market, since they lost Yao to Reebok. So Yi misses out on some $$ for being out of the top 5 picks, but the money from NIke will be much bigger if he lands in a big market team. Look at how much Nike wants Lebron out of the Cavs, no way they want Yi in Memphis and Milwalkee, Yi's agent Fagan was picked by Nike, and they refused workouts with the bucks, connect the dots.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

Ah, another shoe company conspiracy theory. Why is it that we see these so often, and despite the fact that they never come to term, people still start new ones.


----------

