# Possible 06 draft players



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

hi i was just checking out the mock draft on draftexpress.com and i said malik hairston was in the draft and baragini(sp) was going first and then lamarcus aldraige and rudy gay is in the 3rd spot which is about where well be.I would like to see malik on the team he is a really talented player.I've never watched a ducks game in person even though my cousin is an alum and she can get me tickets.From what i seen on the tv he's a great player that's gonna be flying under the radar.He plays sg and sf which if were able to trade a few of the scrubs we could use another sg.It shows on the mock draft that a pf-sf will be taken first that's baragini(sp),then aldraige(sp) then gay which gay would be a nice fit to play pf-and some center.Who do u think will get drafted for our team.It would be cool if were able to get gay and then in the second round hairston slips down to the second and we nab him.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I like Malik, but I doubt we draft him unless it's with our Detroit Pick. Portland invested a lot when they took Martell with #6.

I am of the opinion that a big will be the #1 priority, which means Aldridge or Bargnani. But it really depends on what happens between now and March an then again til June.

If they look at the draft board and think Rudy Gay is Grant (pre-injury) Hill revisited or that Adam Morrison truely is of Larry Bird kinda potential. Then I don't think any SF on our roster makes them move on to take a PF instead. It all depends on the Blazers evaluation. 

Personally I am thinking that LaMarcus Aldridge is the guy I'd like to see...But Morrison is working his way into my approval.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

I'm on the Adam Morrison bandwagon, he's going to be a nice player in the NBA.

There isn't a SF on our roster who has more potential than Morrison, imo. If we have a chance to grab Adam, Nash should be all over that. He's by far the best player in the country so far.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

QRICH said:


> I'm on the Adam Morrison bandwagon, he's going to be a nice player in the NBA.
> 
> There isn't a SF on our roster who has more potential than Morrison, imo. If we have a chance to grab Adam, Nash should be all over that. He's by far the best player in the country so far.


As much as one poster here, tooting morrisons horn all the time makes me want to not like him, I have to agree with what you are saying.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

This is a weak draft. I really don't see any immediate impact players. I am hoping we get the #1 pick in the '07 draft so that the franchise can be saved.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> This is a weak draft. I really don't see any immediate impact players. I am hoping we get the #1 pick in the '07 draft so that the franchise can be saved.


SOmetimes you're posts are like a Magic 8 Ball, just enough info to be nothing.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> As much as one poster here, tooting morrisons horn all the time makes me want to not like him, I have to agree with what you are saying.


But you have have to admit I was tooting that horn last year when, it wasn't the "sexy" thing to do, as it is now.....Finally people are realizing this....

Heck, after his first game against St. Joe's his freshman year, in which he came off the bench to hit a near impossible fall away jumper in Delonte West's eye at the Coaches vs. Cancer at Madison Sq. Garden, I knew he was going to be a good player....


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Don't we already have a log jam at sf why would we need morrison since he play's sf.I only think 2-5 of the prospects are gonna turn out.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> SOmetimes you're posts are like a Magic 8 Ball, just enough info to be nothing.



You're a *mod*, right?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Zidane said:


> Don't we already have a log jam at sf why would we need morrison since he play's sf.I only think 2-5 of the prospects are gonna turn out.


Because often when you draft for need, over drafting the best player on the board, you get burned....See NBA Draft 1984


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> You're a *mod*, right?


Yep...I was talking about your post, not you....

And yes I do actually know who and what you were talking about.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

I don't draft a SF this year unless we can move the current ones for PFs.

Or the ones we draft are going to make SUCH an impact that Outlaw, Miles, Khryapa are second thoughts. 

PFs all the way. Sheldon Williams? How's he gonna do?



> The returning National Defensive Player of the Year (the sixth Blue Devil to earn that honor since 1987 - eight times total) ... will be a leading candidate for National Player of the Year, National Defensive Player of the Year and first team All-America honors during his senior campaign ... a tri-captain for Duke entering his final season ... one of the top post players in the nation and is consistently good at both ends of the floor ... has the ability to dominate any game with his offensive and defensive skills ... holds Duke’s single-season blocked shots record with 122 blocks (2004-05) ... second on Duke’s and 10th on the ACC’s career rejections list with 285 ... second at Duke and eighth in the ACC in blocks per game (2.77) ... eighth all-time at Duke with a .568 (450-of-792) field goal percentage ... also 36th at Duke with 1,251 career points ... his 1,251 career points rank third among returning ACC players behind only J.J. Redick (1,805) and Wake Forest’s Justin Gray (1,345) ... the league’s leading returning rebounder with 878 in his career ... averaging 12.1 points, 8.5 rebounds and 2.8 blocked shots per game in 103 career contests ... has at least one blocked shot in 88 of his 103 career games ... also has 38 career double-doubles ... has 68 double-figure scoring games and 43 double-figure rebounding games in his career ... scored 20 or more points 13 times as a collegian ... grabbed at least seven rebounds in 62 of his last 79 games.


Sounds GOOOD to me.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Xericx said:


> I don't draft a SF this year unless we can move the current ones for PFs.
> 
> Or the ones we draft are going to make SUCH an impact that Outlaw, Miles, Khryapa are second thoughts.
> 
> ...



IMO, Sheldon Williams is too small to be a top PF in the NBA.


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Heck, after his first game against St. Joe's his freshman year, in which he came off the bench to hit a near impossible fall away jumper in Delonte West's eye at the Coaches vs. Cancer at Madison Sq. Garden, I knew he was going to be a good player....


You can predict a player's future based on one shot?

Malik Hairston's athleticism is very underwhelming, I don't see him as being that special. Late first rounder probably, and nobody the Blazers should be looking at drafting.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I wish we could trade all our scrubs for picks.


----------



## varejao da beast (Oct 2, 2005)

dee brown is gnna be awsome


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

if we get number3:
Andrea Bargnani 6-11 240 PF Italy 1985
LaMarcus Aldridge 6-11 245 PF Tex. So.

if 6:
Shelden Williams 6-9 250 PF Duke Sr.
Tiago Splitter 6-11 240 PF Brazil 1985
Nick Fazekas 6-11 230 PF Nevada Jr.
JJ Redick 6-4 190 SG Duke Sr.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

#10 said:


> You can predict a player's future based on one shot?
> 
> Malik Hairston's athleticism is very underwhelming, I don't see him as being that special. Late first rounder probably, and nobody the Blazers should be looking at drafting.


No, but I knew he had that "it" that it takes to be a good player....


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

varejao da beast said:


> dee brown is gnna be awsome


Dee Brown has been playing horrible without Luther Head and Deron Williams by his side...


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

tlong said:


> This is a weak draft. I really don't see any immediate impact players. I am hoping we get the #1 pick in the '07 draft so that the franchise can be saved.


LaMarcus Aldridge is an immediate impact player. If you disagree, you haven't seen him play enough.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Utherhimo said:


> JJ Redick 6-4 190 SG Duke Sr.


If we draft this idiot #6, I'll go tlong. 

JJ Reddick is the next Trajan Langdon...only shorter.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I don't think we need to worry about anybody drafting J.J. Redick in the lottery, or even the first round....He will likely be like Salim was last year and end up being an early second round pick.....He just doesn't have the all around game to become a good player in the league...


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

I disagree...

Well actually I haven't seen him play at all, so I figured I'd just disagree.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Right now I say... Best Player Available.

It's too early to tell how the draft will shape up. At this time last year some mock drafts had Chris Taft in the top 5 and none of them had Webster in the top 10.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Spoolie Gee said:


> Right now I say... Best Player Available.
> 
> It's too early to tell how the draft will shape up. At this time last year some mock drafts had Chris Taft in the top 5 and none of them had Webster in the top 10.


Taft was top 8 or so up til the individual workouts and predraft camps, that's where he plummeted.

I do agree with what you are saying though. Looks to me based on play that ALdridge is a guy that was projected top 15 or so and is really setting it off, and climbing fast.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

I don't know about that Schilly... Aldridge has been a top talked about prospect since he was coming out of HS. He sure impressed me in the McDonald's game. He's a big fluid athlete that has always stood out to my eye and those who rate the prospects at nbadraft.net

STOMP


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Aldridge is going to be the next Jermaine O'Neal type player in this league. This kid is really the only NCAA big man that stands out, in my opinion. He has NBA size(6'11) and a great feel for the game. 18 points, 10 .5rebounds, 2.4 blocks, 1.6 steals in 30 minutes as a Sophmore. I may be nuts, but I have a strong feeling LaMarcus will be better than Bogut. 

I also like this Fazekas guy. If he proves to have decent NBA speed in work outs and gets better defensivley he could be a real good player. 

Morrison simply doesnt fit the team. I like the kid, but unless we trade Outlaw, Miles or VK he wont fit. Maby we draft Aldridge and trade Outlaw+Det. 1st rounder for Morrison. Wont happen.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Fork said:


> LaMarcus Aldridge is an immediate impact player. If you disagree, you haven't seen him play enough.



Aldridge is probably the best equipped for the NBA of any of the players in the upcoming draft. However, I'm still not sold on him.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Aldridge is going to be the next Jermaine O'Neal type player in this league. This kid is really the only NCAA big man that stands out, in my opinion. He has NBA size(6'11) and a great feel for the game. 18 points, 10 .5rebounds, 2.4 blocks, 1.6 steals in 30 minutes as a Sophmore. I may be nuts, but I have a strong feeling LaMarcus will be better than Bogut.
> 
> I also like this Fazekas guy. If he proves to have decent NBA speed in work outs and gets better defensivley he could be a real good player.
> 
> Morrison simply doesnt fit the team. I like the kid, but unless we trade Outlaw, Miles or VK he wont fit. Maby we draft Aldridge and trade Outlaw+Det. 1st rounder for Morrison. Wont happen.


He's a better prospect than both Travis and Viktor....Miles IMO won't be around too much longer...I see it as a good possibility that Nash could go after Adam....


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> He's a better prospect than both Travis and Viktor....Miles IMO won't be around too much longer...I see it as a good possibility that Nash could go after Adam....


But that would require us to have the #1 pick, right? What if we don't get the #1? Then who should we draft? I don't think we'll be able to trade up, because every GM is going to want the next Larry Bird and so if we don't win the lottery we won't get him. So... who's your second choice?

barfo


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> He's a better prospect than both Travis and Viktor....Miles IMO won't be around too much longer...I see it as a good possibility that Nash could go after Adam....


I think u have a bias toward's adam because he's a gonzaga player.Nothing wrong with that and ur just saying something i noticed.Outlaw is a good prospect and so is kryapha but they dont get enough time.Why do u think Miles won't be here he is the best player on the team.I wouldn't wind over drafting a position and then trading a few people for a player that can play pf-c.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Adam is a better prospect than Outlaw, Khryapa, and Monia. All three I think will be very nice role players. Morrison is the real deal. I also think Miles will be traded eventually. 

SG: Webster / Monia
SF: Morrison / Outlaw
PF: Randolph / Khryapa

My draft hopes:

1a) Morrison
1b) Aldridge


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

How about we draft Morrison and find a way to deal Outlaw, Det's pick and Miles for Aldridge?

Telfair
Webster
Morrison
Aldrige
Joel


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I like Morrison, but POR really needs to go big if at all posssible in the 06' draft..

Sure, getting Oden in 07' would be incredible, but you can't bank on that strategy...EVEN IF POR had the worst record...there are no guarantees that he would declare or that POR would get the #1 pick...there are just way to many intangibles...so forget about Oden...for now...

LaMarcus Aldridge is as good of a prospect as any...as is Tiago Splitter....I will be interested to see how Splitter performs this year in Euroleague...whether he takes his level of play up another notch or not....


I don't know enough about Bargnani...but "high risk" is the 1st thing that comes to my mind when reading about him....At least Splitter has performed pretty well in top level euroleague, and Aldridge has perfomed good in the NCAA....

The problem I see is what if Rudy Gay is available? Same could be said for Morrison, who has looked amazing...

POR has such a glut of SG\SF...drafting another would seem to be a bad idea...the question I have is ....Are either Gay or Morrison THAT much better than Aldridge or Splitter? I don't know......

I am beginning think that Outlaw may\should be the 1st "young" Blazer dealt away...
Both Monia and Khryapa IMO are\will be valuable "team\role" players for a team to have....they have good overall skill, they are intelligent and make good decisions (overall)...and they stay within (or attempt to) McMillan's game plan....Players like that are valuable to have.

I am just unconvinced that Outlaw will ever fully grasp the nuances of the game...he has unbelievable athleticism...really off the charts...but if POR could package him for a young big man, I think they should do so...

Telfair...Webster...Pryzbilla (hopefully) are the future core...Zach and Miles COULD be...Zach would be a hard player to replace...all his warts aside (defense...recognition...passing) he IS a producer....drafting an Aldridge or Splitter could open the door for him to be dealt down the road...but chances are he is here for awhile...even though, IMO I am unsure whether or not he is best suited for this team...

I think Miles has done nothing but increase his trade value...he is relatively cheap too, and still young...however his latest injury is a setback to possibly dealing him...IF POR could get a good deal for him, they should seriously consider it IMO...

So IF POR dealt Outlaw, and IF POR dealt Miles, then yeah a Gay or Morrison "could" fit right in....Webster\Monia....Gay (or Morrison) and Khryapa...Zach, Telfair & Pryzbilla...Plus whatever POR got for Outlaw (too bad that rumour for Nene was just fiction) and\or Miles....That is a lot of manuevering and rebuilding though for a team at least 2 years into the process...

But the bottom line is you have to go to with the best player available...and if Gay of Morrison are it...how can you NOT draft them?

You HAVE to take them....and then sort the roster out afterwards (or before if Nash is shrewd...which he has not shown himself to be in these matters to date)


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

just wanna make one point and opinion of mine very clear

people speak of portland having to go BIG in this years draft due to our need for size

two objections that i have on that thinking is as follows

1) two words = michael jordan ....it is need or best player thinking that caused that disaster

2) 2007 draft is LOADED with size so there is NO need to jump the gun in this years draft and select a lesser quality player than we can get next year , esspecially consdiering that we will probably be just as bad next year as well with gettin a somewhat identical draft pick




ADAM MORRISON!!!


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

From what I have seen this year, and I have seen good minutes from most top prospects except Aldridge, is that Morrison and Gay have been far and away the most well rounded and productive players I have see. Unless Aldridge impresses me, or some other prospect starts playing extreemly well, I think that the top two picks next year might be SF's. I'm ok with that, because I do not think our sf's in waiting are good enough to turn down a top prospect.


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

completely agree with you....mainly due to the 2007 draft being so loaded with size

and with the detroit pick i would like to see us do a similar move that we made to acquire jarret jack in the last draft....i would like nash to package that pick with our high second rounder to move into the mid to upper teens and snag the best available big man prospect to possibly be the backup 4

options in that area of the draft could potentially be:

taj gray...sheldon williams...josh boone...nick fazekas...paul davis

some of those would have to slide down to the late teens but two of them (williams and boone) apparently have been less than stellar

all of this is from second hand info seein as i am still overseas and missin all action on TV....i will be back in portland this sat though!!! the USA!


so anyways
lineup 


telfair...jack
webster...monia
morrison...outlaw
zach...one of those guys?
joel...theo




also finally....from the word of mouth reports and stat lines that i have seen and reviewed.....the super frosh from memphis in shawne williams is apparently the real deal and one to keep an eye on.....more of a SF than i was originally led to believe....rashard lewis comparisons are intriguing and apparently dead on


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

barfo said:


> But that would require us to have the #1 pick, right? What if we don't get the #1? Then who should we draft? I don't think we'll be able to trade up, because every GM is going to want the next Larry Bird and so if we don't win the lottery we won't get him. So... who's your second choice?
> 
> barfo


I think Adam will be a top 3 pick....My second choice would be Nick Fazekas a big 6'11" Center/Power from Nevada....He has the entire package, can shoot outside, has great low post moves and is a great shot blocker.....he reminds me a lot of Brad Miller....

If Fazekas isn't around I think we should go after Tiago Splitter or Josh Boone.....


Having watched Gay many times this year, he is not what everyone cracks him up to be....He's not a scorer at all, his best asset is that he is extremely athletic but he doesn't have anything besides that athleticism.....Morrison is going to be a better pro than Gay, its just going to take time before people realize it...


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Seeing some of ur post's make me think that morrison is good.Outlaw has so much potential as do kryapha.If we did something like this.Keep Bassy Jack,Webster Monia for sg,Outlaw Morrison for sf,Zach and Channing frye for pf,Pryzbilla ha Frye for c.
Now if we had these people on our team it would be a ossom team not in wins but in potential and age .These people would be gone,Miles,Ruben,Maybe theo,Dixon,Smith,Blake.It would clear salary i would trade Ruben and Miles to knicks for channing frye and 1 first rounder maybe 2 firsts or maybe a first and second.Dixon Smith to someone for a couple picks and a player for salary.Im gonna let john nash know about my idea.These trades are making big assumptions about Morrison,Frye,Outlaw,Webster and Monia.I would do most of these trades next year though so we can get some people drafted and figure out who's gonna be kept.Morrison is coming out next year isint he?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Morrison is coming out next year isint he?



Most likely, he really has nothing else to prove except for to lead his team deep into the tourney and I think he will do that this year along with get the National Player of the Year award...


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Zidane said:


> i would trade Ruben and Miles to knicks for channing frye and 1 first rounder maybe 2 firsts or maybe a first and second. Im gonna let john nash know about my idea.


Don't bother. I'm pretty sure John Nash has already thought of that idea....In fact, he already stated that he tried to make that deal with the Knicks and they said no. (without the Knicks adding in a pick or two) They're not giving up a top ten pick and an expiring contract for a couple guys like Miles and Patterson. 



Zidane said:


> Dixon Smith to someone for a couple picks and a player for salary.


Both of those players are terrible. Anybody who wanted them could have offered a deal to them over the summer...nobody else did. Now you think somebody is going to give us a draft pick or two for them? Not likely.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

WE should go best player available, since looking at the prospects ( most are SF's) they are likely all better options at the 3 than what we have. With the Detroit pick we can go get the backup 4. 

Unless you guys think that replacing Randolph is vital, which it may be. It would probably be easier to move Miles than Randolph based on catract situation though.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Anybody besides me find it particularly sad that we're reduced to talking about potential draft picks in early December?


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I don't this thread helped me figure things out about the draft and player coming out.I don't find it sad that we are talking about drafts.
Here is john nash's reply he is on the ball responsed with in 2 minutes of my email.
(John Nash)
I like your thinking but I am afraid NY would not. Frye will be in NY for a long time. Miles is in need of surgery and could be laid up for a long time. 
Morrison is a SF all the way. He will struggle defensively in the NBA but could never chase SGs. SFs will be challenge enough. (John Nash)


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Nice info from Nash there. Thanks for posting it.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

gay? over hyped we have a player like in in outlaw who is younger dont really need another do we?

since 2007 draft is loaded with bigs and the 2006 is weak on centers then we should big a pf in 2006 and draft a center in 2007. If we could draft morrison and Laridge/Bargnani that would be awesome! I couldnt find any profiles on Laridge which is a bit worrying but this is what about ndadraft.net says about Bargnani:

"Andrea Bargnani
Birthdate: 10/26/85
NBA Position: Power Forward
Ht: 6-11
Wt: 240
Int Team: Benetton Treviso
Hometown: Rome, Italy
Euroleague Profile
2005
Stats


NBA Comparison: Dirk Nowitzki

Good foot work, soft hands even if he's not particularly strong ... A fast player with very quick feet and first step for such a big guy, runs well in the fast break ... Shoots it quickly, with solid release and is also a great catch and shoot player ... Good one on one player who prefers to face the basket ... Bouncy, and will get up multiple times off two feet ... Good shot blocker ... Played an average of 12 minutes per game this season (2004-05) ... Generally impacts game tempo in a positive way when he's on the floor ... Makes plays. 

Weaknesses: Needs to develop more body strength for the NBA, as he can be moved off the block. His strength has really gotten better in the past year, but he still has aways to go... Still very new to the game having played at the professional level for only two seasons ... Missed parts of the 2004-05 season due to illnesses ... Excellent shot mechanics, but could use more arc on his shot ... Favors his right hand, and needs to be a better back to basket offensive player ... Indecisive passer at times, but employs proper tecnique ... With no Italian players in the NBA, it could hurt him slightly in scouts minds ... Emotional player, he needs more experience in order to gain more confidence." 

we will have to see how Tiago and Bargnani do this year.

Oh and havent portland fans used MJ enough? how many Mj's have been picked since he was picked? zero since him, it was a one off. 

So its adam bargnani alridgefor now all that could change when the draft comes but forget gay.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

I don't follow college ball enough to say who to pick but I'd hope we'd get someone with some D. We don't need O as much as some defense. I'd say go big too, but BPA is always best. If there is a couple players with about equal talent I'd go big. 

Nate says Morrison doesn't have D so I wouldn't pick him.

Everyone keeps saying Outlaw has a lot of potential but how long does it take for it to come out? He should be starting to show us that potential in his play. How long has he been a Blazer? At least three years, right? It's not like he wouldn't get playing time if he could perform.

If anyone has descriptions of players being discuss please post the links.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

mgb said:


> Everyone keeps saying Outlaw has a lot of potential but how long does it take for it to come out? He should be starting to show us that potential in his play. How long has he been a Blazer? At least three years, right? It's not like he wouldn't get playing time if he could perform.


 
Couldnt agree more. I love Outlaw's upside but we shouldnt worry about drafting over him.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> I don't follow college ball enough to say who to pick but I'd hope we'd get someone with some D. We don't need O as much as some defense. I'd say go big too, but BPA is always best. If there is a couple players with about equal talent I'd go big.


I disagree, we are yet to score 100 points this season, we need all the offensive help we can get....



> Nate says Morrison doesn't have D so I wouldn't pick him.


That didn't stop him from picking Telfair a couple years back...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> I disagree, we are yet to score 100 points this season, we need all the offensive help we can get....


I agree our offense sucks. I'm not sure that a physically limited, one-dimensional player like Morrison is the type of player we need.



> That didn't stop him from picking Telfair a couple years back...


He was coach for the Sonics. I don't think he had much to do with picking Sebastian.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> I agree our offense sucks. I'm not sure that a physically limited, one-dimensional player like Morrison is the type of player we need.


I guess you haven't seen Morrison's passing ability.....and wasn't Larry Bird physically limited as well?......



> He was coach for the Sonics. I don't think he had much to do with picking Sebastian.


Nash was the one who said that.....MGB mistyped Nate.....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> I guess you haven't seen Morrison's passing ability.....and wasn't Larry Bird physically limited as well?......


Larry Bird was actually a very underrated athlete. He was very capable of finishing at the rim in the NBA, and in college he was even more impressive. Of course, he was a forward that didn't often have to rely on athleticism to beat people off of the dribble and guard people on the perimeter.

Comparing Morrison to Bird is ridiculous... that you don't see that amazes me.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Larry Bird was actually a very underrated athlete. He was very capable of finishing at the rim in the NBA, and in college he was even more impressive. Of course, he was a forward that didn't often have to rely on athleticism to beat people off of the dribble and guard people on the perimeter.
> 
> Comparing Morrison to Bird is ridiculous... that you don't see that amazes me.
> 
> Ed O.


Dude, do you not watch Gonzaga basketball? (and please don't take it as a personal slam, because its not)......Adam is a very underrated athlete as well...Morrison is averaging 30 ppg against some of the best defensive wings in the country....Bobby Jones, Shannon Brown, Chris McCray, Rudy Gay....

He is very athletic but it doesn't get appreciated because of how awkward it looks and his deadeye shooting with people in his eye takes a lot of focus away from it....


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> gay? over hyped we have a player like in in outlaw who is younger dont really need another do we?
> 
> since 2007 draft is loaded with bigs and the 2006 is weak on centers then we should big a pf in 2006 and draft a center in 2007. If we could draft morrison and Laridge/Bargnani that would be awesome! I couldnt find any profiles on Laridge which is a bit worrying but this is what about ndadraft.net says about Bargnani:
> 
> ...


I saw some highlights of Bargnani...he looks like the real deal. I couldn't believe how his game looked like Dirk's...but he was only 19 and a bit quicker!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Dude, do you not watch Gonzaga basketball? (and please don't take it as a personal slam, because its not)......Adam is a very underrated athlete as well...Morrison is averaging 30 ppg against some of the best defensive wings in the country....Bobby Jones, Shannon Brown, Chris McCray, Rudy Gay....


I've seen the Zags play three times this year. He's a very, very good scorer but he doesn't beat people off of the dribble and he doesn't have a back-to-the-basket game that I can see.



> He is very athletic but it doesn't get appreciated because of how awkward it looks and his deadeye shooting with people in his eye takes a lot of focus away from it....


I don't buy it. Sorry.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> I've seen the Zags play three times this year. He's a very, very good scorer but he doesn't beat people off of the dribble and he doesn't have a back-to-the-basket game that I can see.


He scores in all kinds of ways....coming of screens, give and go's, taking his man and using awkward angles with his high arcing shot and he also takes people off the dribble and scores a lot in transition....and I've seen every game since he's came to Gonzaga and the final game of his senior year in high school....I have a pretty good idea of what he can do....



> I don't buy it. Sorry.


He's just as much the athlete as Bird was.....


You're just baiting me.....so stop before I tell the mods on you!


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

Morrison's nice, and the game a couple of days ago was the best I've seen since against the Huskies since, well, Wally Szczerbiak hit them for 43 to eliminate them in the NCAA tournament. I hate to make the obvious comparison, but if the shoe fits... Do the Blazers need a Glen Rice/Szczerbiak type of player? It wouldn't hurt, but I'd be happier with someone like RUdy Gay, who will almost certainly be able to take over games all-aroud, or Aldridge or Bargnani, who sound like perpetual match-up problems.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> I disagree, we are yet to score 100 points this season, we need all the offensive help we can get......


Good D can give you a lot more offense.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> I guess you haven't seen Morrison's passing ability.....and wasn't Larry Bird physically limited as well?......
> 
> 
> 
> Nash was the one who said that.....MGB mistyped Nate.....


Ya, my bad, was repeating what I read before that and meant Nash.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

FeloniusThunk said:


> Morrison's nice, and the game a couple of days ago was the best I've seen since against the Huskies since, well, Wally Szczerbiak hit them for 43 to eliminate them in the NCAA tournament. I hate to make the obvious comparison, but if the shoe fits... Do the Blazers need a Glen Rice/Szczerbiak type of player? It wouldn't hurt, but I'd be happier with someone like RUdy Gay, who will almost certainly be able to take over games all-aroud, or Aldridge or Bargnani, who sound like perpetual match-up problems.


If Gay can't take over games at UCONN, what makes you think he can do it in the NBA....

He is a disappearing act for them and Calhoun is working hard to correct it...

Heck at UCONN he isn't even their main offensive threat.....I like Gay, just not as a top 5 pick...He is very overrated its almost disturbing...


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Morrison strikes me as the next Luke Jackson


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

WTChan said:


> Morrison strikes me as the next Luke Jackson


Both white, both from the Northwest, both SF's......after that the comparison ends...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Both white, both from the Northwest, both SF's......after that the comparison ends...


Widely acknowledged lack of athleticism and questionable lateral movement. Both relatively old for the college game compared to their probable lottery peers.

The defenders of Jackson leading up to the draft (and there were several on this board) seemed to use many of the same arguments that you use to defend Morrison as a prospect. Of course, none that I can recall used the omnipresent Bird comparison, so if/when Morrison fails to live up to expectations it might be simply because the bar was set way, way too high.

You might be right, of course, but I doubt it. We'll see in a year or two.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Widely acknowledged lack of athleticism and questionable lateral movement. Both relatively old for the college game compared to their probable lottery peers.
> 
> The defenders of Jackson leading up to the draft (and there were several on this board) seemed to use many of the same arguments that you use to defend Morrison as a prospect. Of course, none that I can recall used the omnipresent Bird comparison, so if/when Morrison fails to live up to expectations it might be simply because the bar was set way, way too high.
> 
> ...


Was Luke putting up 43 points against teams like Michigan St. and UW his Junior year?.....nope....

In fact, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember Luke ever being a preseason all-american, not even for his senior year.....I could be wrong though....

IMO Luke was a solid offensive college player, but nowhere near the explosiveness as Adam....

I remember watching Luke maxing out his potential against a lousy Oregon St. team and only scoring 40.....

Luke also doesn't have the determination or killer instinct that Adam has.....


Luke couldn't work screens and create space and use his body like Adam does....In fact Luke mainly relied on his outside shot to score his points.....

Adam is averaging 30 ppg as a Junior so far against top competition....(Gonzaga has played the toughest schedule of anybody in the country)......I don't recall Luke putting up those kind of numbers as a Junior, especially not doing it while shooting 55% from the field.....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Was Luke putting up 43 points against teams like Michigan St. and UW his Junior year?.....nope....


Has Morrison been getting more than 2 assists in multiple games this year while I haven't been paying attention? Jackson averaged 3.4 assists for his career, and Adam's only been better than 3 once so far this year.

And Morrison's shooting a much-improved .366 from 3 point range, but it's still well under Jackson's career 40% from the arc (and just a smidge over Jackson's worse season of .360).

Morrison's a superior scorer, but he's got other parts of his game that are markedly inferior to Jackson's.



> In fact, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember Luke ever being a preseason all-american, not even for his senior year.....I could be wrong though....
> 
> IMO Luke was a solid offensive college player, but nowhere near the explosiveness as Adam....
> 
> ...


So Adam has hype and intangibles on his side. Fantastic. Not a good argument for why he's a better prospect, however.



> Luke couldn't work screens and create space and use his body like Adam does....In fact Luke mainly relied on his outside shot to score his points.....


Actually Luke was better at handling the ball and getting to the rim than Adam is, from what I can tell. They get to the line per minute at about the same rate, but Morrison gets a lot fewer free throws per FG attempt than Jackson.



> Adam is averaging 30 ppg as a Junior so far against top competition....(Gonzaga has played the toughest schedule of anybody in the country)......I don't recall Luke putting up those kind of numbers as a Junior, especially not doing it while shooting 55% from the field.....


That's great. He could be averaging 50 ppg and it wouldn't really matter. He's still got limitations in his game that I believe NBA opponents will be able to exploit. There are still basic weaknesses he has as a player that I am not sure that he will be able to correct.

He's been a fantastic NCAA player, no question. But fantastic NCAA players aren't always top-tier NBA prospects.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Has Morrison been getting more than 2 assists in multiple games this year while I haven't been paying attention? Jackson averaged 3.4 assists for his career, and Adam's only been better than 3 once so far this year.


All that tells me is that Luke handled the ball more....Which he did, I remember as a Senior he played a lot of Point, especially while Aaron Brooks was injured which was most of the season while they had no point guard.....



> And Morrison's shooting a much-improved .366 from 3 point range, but it's still well under Jackson's career 40% from the arc (and just a smidge over Jackson's worse season of .360).


That has definitely been one of the struggling points during his career, however like all great players they find a flaw in their game and they improve it....and he has this year, so far he's shooting 36% from beyond the arc....prior to that 1/8 performance against UW he was shooting 41%.....His shot from the outside definetly looks a lot more fluid as he has been working on it....



> So Adam has hype and intangibles on his side. Fantastic. Not a good argument for why he's a better prospect, however.


When he's scoring like that its more than just hype, its reality...

and Luke wasn't as prolific as Adam is, not by a long shot....



> Actually Luke was better at handling the ball and getting to the rim than Adam is, from what I can tell. They get to the line per minute at about the same rate, but Morrison gets a lot fewer free throws per FG attempt than Jackson.


Look at 3fgM and Attempted, its a much more telling stat.....



> There are still basic weaknesses he has as a player that I am not sure that he will be able to correct.


It must not be that important of a weakness that you recognize, because its not stopping him from exploding on more athletic opponents and future NBA players the way he does....

I'm not sure a lot of people understand his work ethic and how fierce of a competitor he is.....he puts everything on the line everytime he goes out there, its not just pure skill that makes him great its the little things....


One thing about Adam that doesn't get recognized is the way he plays without the ball....His court vision is also uncanny he makes just as good passes as he does shots, but often times arent converted or aren't credited as assists....


I guess the reason a lot of people don't see the greatness in him is because they aren't watching every single game like me and don't get to see the little things that he does to be a great player outside of his scoring abilities.....

It won't take long until other people realize this...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> All that tells me is that Luke handled the ball more....Which he did, I remember as a Senior he played a lot of Point, especially while Aaron Brooks was injured which was most of the season while they had no point guard.....


You're grasping at straws, zags. Jackson got 4.5 apg as a senior but 3.3 and 3.6 in his second and third years.



> When he's scoring like that its more than just hype, its reality...
> 
> and Luke wasn't as prolific as Adam is, not by a long shot....


Prolific in what respect? Jackson didn't score as much as Morrison, but he did other things significantly better.



> Look at 3fgM and Attempted, its a much more telling stat.....


Jackson shot more 3 pointers AND he got to the line more. Which is actually a bit amazing, considering a player who shoots inside the arc is more likely to be fouled.

That shows me that Jackson had the superior 3 point game but ALSO was better at getting to the basket and getting fouled.



> It must not be that important of a weakness that you recognize, because its not stopping him from exploding on more athletic opponents and future NBA players the way he does....


"Future NBA players" like Bobby Jones? Hah.



> I'm not sure a lot of people understand his work ethic and how fierce of a competitor he is.....he puts everything on the line everytime he goes out there, its not just pure skill that makes him great its the little things....


Blah, blah, blah.

Nobody succeeds in the NBA without trying hard, and nobody excels in the NBA just by working hard.

I'm happy for Adam that he's a focused guy, but it's not an argument that carries much weight with me.

On the other end of things, if a player is known as a slacker, and he's still a very very good NCAA player it sets alarms off.



> One thing about Adam that doesn't get recognized is the way he plays without the ball....His court vision is also uncanny he makes just as good passes as he does shots, but often times arent converted or aren't credited as assists....


Yeah, I'm sure that Jackson had a MUCH higher assist-to-uncanny pass ratio. 

Actually, I think that's probably just pure bias on your part.



> I guess the reason a lot of people don't see the greatness in him is because they aren't watching every single game like me and don't get to see the little things that he does to be a great player outside of his scoring abilities.....


Anecdotal evidence only goes so far. Unless the games I've seen him have been particularly bad (and I don't think they have been, since you've quoted his performances in them several times) I don't think that watching him more will convince me that he's going to be a great NBA player.



> It won't take long until other people realize this...


OK. 

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> You're grasping at straws, zags. Jackson got 4.5 apg as a senior but 3.3 and 3.6 in his second and third years.


Okay

Not that it really matters that much anyways.....A couple of assists better game doesn't not mean much to me and it definitely doesn't have much influence on a ball game....especially when the player compared to is averaging nearly 10 points a game more....



> Prolific in what respect? Jackson didn't score as much as Morrison, but he did other things significantly better.


Scorer, since thats what I was talking about....It'd be hard for you to find a way to prove to me that Luke was in Adam's league scoring-wise...



> Jackson shot more 3 pointers AND he got to the line more. Which is actually a bit amazing, considering a player who shoots inside the arc is more likely to be fouled.


Amazing...



> That shows me that Jackson had the superior 3 point game but ALSO was better at getting to the basket and getting fouled.


players who score don't need to rely on getting fouled to score their points when they go to the hoop.....

I'm finding no correlation into how this shows that Luke was a better offensive player than Adam is.....



> "Future NBA players" like Bobby Jones? Hah.


Currently projected as being a 2nd round pick......also one of the best defenders in the Pac-10....

How come you don't mention Shannon Brown, Rudy Gay or Chris McCray?.....

oh yea, anything to help out _your_ case.....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Okay
> 
> Not that it really matters that much anyways.....A couple of assists better game doesn't not mean much to me and it definitely doesn't have much influence on a ball game....especially when the player compared to is averaging nearly 10 points a game more....


Jackson doubled Morrison's assist rate. Morrison didn't double Jackson's scoring rate.



> Scorer, since thats what I was talking about....It'd be hard for you to find a way to prove to me that Luke was in Adam's league scoring-wise...


We definitely agree. Morrison is an incredible scorer at the collegiate level, especially when he's able to extend the defense by shooting a high percentage from three point range.



> Amazing...
> 
> players who score don't need to rely on getting fouled to score their points when they go to the hoop.....


So you don't believe that there's a correlation between a player's ability to get to the basket and ability to get to the free throw line?



> I'm finding no correlation into how this shows that Luke was a better offensive player than Adam is.....


Jackson got to the line because he was more capable of dribble penetration than Morrison was. Morrison can shoot over many players at the NCAA level because of his size, but that advantage will disappate in the NBA when bigger, quicker guys guard him.



> Currently projected as being a 2nd round pick......also one of the best defenders in the Pac-10....


Bobby Jones is a nice collegiate player, but he sleepwalks too much. I wouldn't be surprised if he's not even drafted and if he's on an NBA roster this time next year I'll be shocked.



> How come you don't mention Shannon Brown, Rudy Gay or Chris McCray?.....


You think that Shannon Brown or Chris McCray are NBA-caliber players? Sorry, I just don't see it. They're typical of the kinds of players that Adam can exploit in college: short. In any case, didn't each of them score more than their season scoring average against the Zags?

Gay is a taller, longer player and clearly an excellent NBA prospect. He's also over two years younger than Morrison is. And didn't Adam kinda struggle in a loss against the UConn?



> oh yea, anything to help out _your_ case.....


I just don't see it as being that relevant. You've already made the point that Morrison's a good scorer (and I agree). You've already pointed out that Gonzaga's played a tough schedule (and I agree).

Pointing out that he's had some good games against players from those good teams seems entirely redundant to me, especially when only one of those players is even approaching the NBA prospect class that Morrison is in.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Jackson doubled Morrison's assist rate. Morrison didn't double Jackson's scoring rate.


Assists isn't a major point of both players overall games...Sure its nice that Jackson had two more assists per game than Adam does, but in the long run I'd rather have ten more points...

Comparing two good *scorers* assist rate and implying it has as much significance on its team is like comparing apples to oranges....



> So you don't believe that there's a correlation between a player's ability to get to the basket and ability to get to the free throw line?


I look at the players overall ability to score and then look at that players field goal percentage....When a field goal percentage is high (like Morrison's) it shows me that the player is an effective player....I don't look at insignificant ways of _how_ that player scored....and the final score of a game doesn't take into account _how_ the points were scored, just that they were....



> Jackson got to the line because he was more capable of dribble penetration than Morrison was. Morrison can shoot over many players at the NCAA level because of his size, but that advantage will disappate in the NBA when bigger, quicker guys guard him.


Thats malarkey...Most of Adams points come off of his little mid-range floater after he puts the ball on the floor and attacks towards the hoop....He also has shown a pretty effective post up game...



> You think that Shannon Brown or Chris McCray are NBA-caliber players? Sorry, I just don't see it. They're typical of the kinds of players that Adam can exploit in college: short. In any case, didn't each of them score more than their season scoring average against the Zags?





> Gay is a taller, longer player and clearly an excellent NBA prospect. He's also over two years younger than Morrison is. And didn't Adam kinda struggle in a loss against the UConn?


Shannon Brown is considered a 1st round pick in 2007...He's a very solid defensive player and Coach Izzo product, a coach who is known for preaching defense first.....McCray may not be NBA material, but he is a very solid college defender and not a stiff by anymeans....More than their scoring average, yes, over 40 points? no

Gay (the guy you proclaimed to be far better than Morrison and the 1st overall pick) didn't exactly shut down Adam....He still scored 18 on 8/19 shooting, which is 42% from the field....I would hardly consider it shutting him down....Also put into consideration, Adam played 52 minutes the night before in an emotionally draining Triple-Overtime win against Michigan St.

Gay (your savior) on the other hand was 5-10 from the field with only 10 points....


----------



## tbp82 (Dec 7, 2005)

The Raptors, Bobcats, and Hawks have got to be hoping that if they don't get the number one pick that Portland does. It seems here that Portland fans are actually wanting Adam Morrison and are wanting him if they get #1 pick. Now don't get me wrong Morrison would be a great addition to a good team but last time I checked you guys are pretty bad. If Larmarcus Aldridge continues his double double streak and inside play to go along with his athleticism The Raps, Cats, and Hawks will be fighting over him. I know Portland still has a bad stink in thier mouth for not taking that MJ guy but you ALWAYS go BIG. If that Center (Sam Bowie) had not been injured and lived up to half his potential you guys would not have regretted the pick. The Blazers cannot be dumb enough to draft a role player like Morrison with the #1 pick.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Gay (*the guy you proclaimed to be far better than Morrison and the 1st overall pick*) didn't exactly shut down Adam....He still scored 18 on 8/19 shooting, which is 42% from the field....I would hardly consider it shutting him down....Also put into consideration, Adam played 52 minutes the night before in an emotionally draining Triple-Overtime win against Michigan St.
> 
> Gay (*your savior*) on the other hand was 5-10 from the field with only 10 points....


Are you just being mean or are you confused?

I've never said that Gay should be the first overall pick to my recollection. I would be interested to see anything that has indicated I did.

The only time I can recall arguing about Gay's draft spot was last year, when I argued that Bogut would be picked ahead of Marvin Williams and Gay if they both came out.

But please... you seem to be so sure of my opinion (along with Morrison's Bird-like potential): please point me to a post that I've made that indicates Gay should be #1.

If you can't, how's about you drop the attitude and stick to hoops?

Thanks.

Ed O.


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

tbp82 said:


> The Raptors, Bobcats, and Hawks have got to be hoping that if they don't get the number one pick that Portland does. It seems here that Portland fans are actually wanting Adam Morrison and are wanting him if they get #1 pick. Now don't get me wrong Morrison would be a great addition to a good team but last time I checked you guys are pretty bad. If Larmarcus Aldridge continues his double double streak and inside play to go along with his athleticism The Raps, Cats, and Hawks will be fighting over him. I know Portland still has a bad stink in thier mouth for not taking that MJ guy but you ALWAYS go BIG. If that Center (Sam Bowie) had not been injured and lived up to half his potential you guys would not have regretted the pick. The Blazers cannot be dumb enough to draft a role player like Morrison with the #1 pick.


So half of Sam Bowie = Michael Jordan? Hmmm..

I also don't see what Rudy Gay has over Travis Outlaw right now. If Outlaw were in college, he'd be wowing people with his athletisism and shooting stroke. Both Outlaw and Gay suffer from turnovers and lack of handles.


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

tbp82 said:


> The Raptors, Bobcats, and Hawks have got to be hoping that if they don't get the number one pick that Portland does. It seems here that Portland fans are actually wanting Adam Morrison and are wanting him if they get #1 pick. Now don't get me wrong Morrison would be a great addition to a good team but last time I checked you guys are pretty bad. If Larmarcus Aldridge continues his double double streak and inside play to go along with his athleticism The Raps, Cats, and Hawks will be fighting over him. I know Portland still has a bad stink in thier mouth for not taking that MJ guy but you ALWAYS go BIG. If that Center (Sam Bowie) had not been injured and lived up to half his potential you guys would not have regretted the pick. The Blazers cannot be dumb enough to draft a role player like Morrison with the #1 pick.



I think there are a few of us, myself included, that want LaMarcus Aldridge if we get the number one pick.


----------



## tbp82 (Dec 7, 2005)

CelticPagan said:


> So half of Sam Bowie = Michael Jordan? Hmmm..
> 
> I also don't see what Rudy Gay has over Travis Outlaw right now. If Outlaw were in college, he'd be wowing people with his athletisism and shooting stroke. Both Outlaw and Gay suffer from turnovers and lack of handles.


No I didn't say half of Same Bowie=Michale Jordan I said if he would have been half his potential you would not have regretted the pick. Does anyone Portland fans ever hear about Houston regretting not taking Jordan instead of Olajuwaun. Bowie was supposedly almost as good as Olajawaun in college if he would have been half that in the pros it would have been a solid pick. YOU ALWAYS GO BIG.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Adam is taking half again more shots per game that Luke did...That may account for something.

BTW if you are comparing Luke's years other than Senior, then are you factoring the presence of Ridnour his Jr. season and Jones fis Sophmore season?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

WTChan said:


> Morrison strikes me as the next Luke Jackson


IMO Jackson was clearly more athletic as a college player, and Adam has demonstrated more of a scorers mentality/knack for creating his shot. I feel it's a little early to assess LJ's pro career though, especially since he was injured for most of his rookie year. Seeing how the guys in front of him at the 2 and 3 are established young studs, he's not exactly getting much PT in his 2nd year either. He's shown some nice flashes though.

To me the better comparison for Adam is Szczerbiak. I see a lot of similarities in their college careers and physical makeup/abilities. I really really doubt Adam is going #1. If he goes anywhere close to that, I think that would reflect how thin this draft is... of course thats been the buzz for a while now. 

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> To me the better comparison for Adam is Szczerbiak. I see a lot of similarities in their college careers and physical makeup/abilities. I really really doubt Adam is going #1. If he goes anywhere close to that, I think that would reflect how thin this draft is... of course thats been the buzz for a while now.
> 
> STOMP


I'd agree with the Szczerbiak comparison, except that Wally can shoot. I'm not convninced that Adam Morrison can sustain his recent run of good shooting.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Are you just being mean or are you confused?
> 
> I've never said that Gay should be the first overall pick to my recollection. I would be interested to see anything that has indicated I did.
> 
> ...


Here is where you claimed Gay far better than Morrison, which I confused as you saying he was going to be the #1 pick.......however I do remember you saying that it is good that we won't have a winning team this year because it means we will have a better shot at Gay....

http://basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=208982&page=3&pp=15


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Adam is taking half again more shots per game that Luke did...That may account for something.
> 
> BTW if you are comparing Luke's years other than Senior, then are you factoring the presence of Ridnour his Jr. season and Jones fis Sophmore season?


And he's also making those shots so I don't really see how that is bad....

especially with the percentage that Adam is making....Luke shot less with a lower percentage....


and I'm adding in his senior year...and so far Adam is having a better Junior year than Luke's senior year...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Fork said:


> I'd agree with the Szczerbiak comparison, except that Wally can shoot. I'm not convninced that Adam Morrison can sustain his recent run of good shooting.



You're right, I think its just a fluke.... :raised_ey 

Yup, he can't shoot..He's gotten lucky on his 40 point games...Hah, it will just get easier for him as they get into league play, I can see his numbers going up....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> *Here is where you claimed Gay far better than Morrison*, which I confused as you saying he was going to be the #1 pick


Um. What? Where did I mention Morrison?

I guess that I said he appeared to be the best prospect in this year's draft, but I don't think I said he was "far better than Morrison".

I understand you get into a tizzy when anyone disagrees with you about Adam, but please don't distort what I've said.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

This is what you said in that thread:



> I know that Gay is a better prospect than any of the current batch of small forward prospects, but it's too bad that they guy who appears to be the best prospect is at a position where we've already got lots of options for the future...


I would consider that to be you saying Gay is better than Morrison....


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

Luke's senior year: 34.6 MPG, 21.2 PPG, 7.2 RPG, 4.5 APG, 3.0 TOPG, 1.3 SPG, .2 BPG, 48.8% FG, 44.0% 3FG, 86.2% FT, A/T 1.49
Adam's junior year: 39.5 MPG, 29.7 PPG, 6.2 RPG, 1.5 APG, 2.2 TOPG, 1.8 SPG, .7 BPG, 55.1% FG, 36.7% 3FG, 75.0% FT, A/T .69

Adam has 4.9 more minutes, 8.5 more points, one less rebound, 3 less assists, .8 less turnovers, .5 more steals, .5 more blocks, 6.3% higher shooting from 2FG, 7.3% lower shooting from 3FG, 11.2% lower shooting from FT, and his A/T ratio is .80 points worse.

Adam is better in PPG, TOPG, SPG, BP, FG.
Luke is better in RPG, APG, 3FG, FT, A/T

It is really a tossup.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Comparing someone's Senior year to their Junior year?.....


Especially to a player whose team is top rated team in the nation with more scoring threats than just him to a player who was on an NIT team and the only main go to guy the team had...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> And he's also making those shots so I don't really see how that is bad....
> 
> especially with the percentage that Adam is making....Luke shot less with a lower percentage....
> 
> ...


Well looking at Lukes Jr. Season, he averaged 16ppg on 11 FG attempts per game, prorate that out to 21 fg attempts per game and he's scoring 30 ppg so slightly more efficient in his scoreing despite a lower percentage.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Where is Hap to defend Luke Jackson now?

Not that Kirk Snyder (worse...cough cough) is any better mind you


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Well looking at Lukes Jr. Season, he averaged 16ppg on 11 FG attempts per game, prorate that out to 21 fg attempts per game and he's scoring 30 ppg so slightly more efficient in his scoreing despite a lower percentage.


Thats about as accurate as per 48 minutes stat in the NBA......Which has little bearing on what would/could actually happen.....

Why didn't he average 30 ppg his Senior year when all those other great players weren't around him?.....I'm not trying to say that Luke wasn't a good college player (in fact he was one of my favorites) but he is nowhere near the league of Morrison.....Luke wasn't near one of the best players in the nation, many college analysts are saying far and away Morrison is the best player in the nation....


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

If this team drafts Morrison with the #1 pick, I will become a Football fan. Morrison is a great player, but what seperates him from other prolific NCAA scorers. He IS NOT THE NEXT LARRY BIRD. Larry averaged 30 points a game for unheard of Indiana State his Freshman and Sophmore year. He then led Indiana State single handedly to an undefeated season got all the way to the final game. His last season in college he averaged 29 points and 15 rebounds. Morrison has not even come CLOSE to Larry Bird's status. He is not a guy that can carry a team. He is not above average at anything other than scoring. Bird was a terrific rebounder, awesome passer and could defend well for his physical limitations. Morrison is much closer to Wally than Bird. As a junior, Wally averaged 24 points, 7.6 rebounds, 2.5 assists a steal and a block, and shot 50% from the field and 49% from 3. Better than Morrison in every field but scoring.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

all this i love/i hate morrison is really annoying and boring how about we talk about otheres such are bargnani, tiago, williams...etc how about some big men that we actually need. Gay? college version of outlaw who i am rather disappointed he should be shining but he is sagging with viktor coming in that means Nate has seen enough of travis and he isnt liking it. Travis seems to slipping backwards, what has changed between last year which the future looked so bright for him is now but a foggy coal choked london now?

if we pick an sf it should be morrison the only reason Gay is hype is cus he goes to uconn.

wish we could see more of tiago (hope he takes his game to the next level) and Bargnani having a dirk wouldnt be so bad. While Laridge would be sweet as well a board bumping rebounding pf would be nice too considering ours has become a 15+ shooter, does zbo even post up or get down low anymore?

I give zbo a week or two before he is placed on the IL, its looking like we should of traded him while we had a chance and miles? well lol the season is crap canned now.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> I would consider that to be you saying Gay is better than Morrison....


So based on that, Gay is my "savior" and I think that he's "far better than Morrison"?

Whatever, dude.

Ed O.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Thats about as accurate as per 48 minutes stat in the NBA......Which has little bearing on what would/could actually happen.....
> 
> Why didn't he average 30 ppg his Senior year when all those other great players weren't around him?.....I'm not trying to say that Luke wasn't a good college player (in fact he was one of my favorites) but he is nowhere near the league of Morrison.....Luke wasn't near one of the best players in the nation, many college analysts are saying far and away Morrison is the best player in the nation....


Because he was only taking 13 shots per game as opposed to 21 shots per game. 

Best player in college doesn't always equate to great player in the NBA....BTW I want to point out that I was supporting drafting Adam earlier in the thread.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Because he was only taking 13 shots per game as opposed to 21 shots per game.
> 
> Best player in college doesn't always equate to great player in the NBA....BTW I want to point out that I was supporting drafting Adam earlier in the thread.



So you must want us to draft him because you think he'll be a good NBA player.....


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

What has Gay ever done to prove he is better than Morrison? From their game performance this year, Morrison a better scorer.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

WTChan said:


> What has Gay ever done to prove he is better than Morrison? From their game performance this year, Morrison a better scorer.


Gay is bigger, much more athletic, and two years younger than Morrison.

Adam's clearly more advanced, especially offensively, than Rudy. In terms of NBA potential, though, I think that Gay is a superior prospect. I think that almost everyone does.

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

From what I've seen, neither are spectacular NBA prospects. Aldridge would look nice in a Portland uniform next season.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Gay can jump.....But so could Harold Miner.....I'm not sure why everyone is so enamored with Gay, he disappears all to often for UCONN.....

Both are 6'8" 220lbs.....

Rudy Gay and Adam Morrison 

Jim Calhoun stated in an interview prior to the Maui game against the Zags on ESPN that Morrison was the best offensive player they've faced since Carmello Anthony in the Championship game a couple years back...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> So you must want us to draft him because you think he'll be a good NBA player.....


Never said he wouldn't i was only talking the differences between Adam and Luke from a statistical standpoint in college, since the topic came up.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

gay is way overhyped if he was on any other team besides uconn or the big ones no way would be hyped as much.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Gay can jump.....But so could Harold Miner.....I'm not sure why everyone is so enamored with Gay, he disappears all to often for UCONN.....


Oh... so since Harold Miner could jump, therefore Gay isn't any good.

What a lame point.



> Both are 6'8" 220lbs.....


ESPN.com has Gay at 6'9", 220, and Morrison at 6'8", 205.

I'm not sure which is right... I'd guess that Gay is 6'9" and Adam's 220.

Ed O.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Gay can jump.....But so could Harold Miner.....


Yeah sure, but Gay is around 5" taller then Miner (I recall him measuring barefoot @ just under 6'3... we'll see about Rudy and Adam in the pre-draft). He projects to be a good sized SF with superior athletism, where as Harold was an undersized SG with superior athletism. It's pretty obvious that Rudy is highly thought of not only because of what he is today, but because of what he could become as he matures (dude did just turn 19 a couple months back). 

anyways, bad comparison. 

STOMP


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Lets not forget Gay plays for one of the top NCAA teams, and has the versatility Morrison can only dream of. He is a incredible athlete, and at 2 years younger than Morrison, already is consitered comparable to Adam. 28.8mpg, 16ppg, 6rpg, 1.8apg, 2.5spg, 2.2bpg, .466FG%. He is also shooting 12 times a game. He has also managed to get to the line a mere 3 times less than Morrison(33 to 36).


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

If we get the #1 (we'd need a bit of luck for that) Aldridge is a no brainer. Otherwise I have a suspicion we'll end up with Bargnani. Morrison will probably fall a lot farther than anyone expects.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Oh... so since Harold Miner could jump, therefore Gay isn't any good.


That wasn't my point, my point is that anyone can jump and be athletic, but that doesn't make them a great player....



> ESPN.com has Gay at 6'9", 220, and Morrison at 6'8", 205.


Well nbadraft.net says both are 6'9" 220......So I guess we'll both use whatever suits our arguments the best......


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

STOMP said:


> Yeah sure, but Gay is around 5" taller then Miner (I recall him measuring barefoot @ just under 6'3... we'll see about Rudy and Adam in the pre-draft). He projects to be a good sized SF with superior athletism, where as Harold was an undersized SG with superior athletism. It's pretty obvious that Rudy is highly thought of not only because of what he is today, but because of what he could become as he matures (dude did just turn 19 a couple months back).
> 
> anyways, bad comparison.
> 
> STOMP


I wasn't comparing their games, I was simply saying that both are very athletic.....and just because someone is athletic doesn't mean that they're going to do anything in the league....


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Lets not forget Gay plays for one of the top NCAA teams, and has the versatility Morrison can only dream of. He is a incredible athlete, and at 2 years younger than Morrison, already is consitered comparable to Adam. 28.8mpg, 16ppg, 6rpg, 1.8apg, 2.5spg, 2.2bpg, .466FG%. He is also shooting 12 times a game. He has also managed to get to the line a mere 3 times less than Morrison(33 to 36).


And Adam doesn't play for one of the top teams in the NCAA?.....Give me a break, UCONN beat the Zags by a last second shot the night after the Zags played an emotionally draining 3 overtime game....

Those numbers aren't comparable to Adam's......and I think the fact that he's only shooting 46% from the field might have to do with why he doesn't shoot as many shots as Adam does per game....after all Adam is shooting 55% from the field....

And just because someone is superb athlete does not make them a better player....Like Larry Bird, Adam is a very underrated athlete and won't struggle in the NBA.....He didn't struggle against Gay or any of the other athletes he's faced...


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I wasn't comparing their games, I was simply saying that both are very athletic.....and just because someone is athletic doesn't mean that they're going to do anything in the league....


Thanks for the insight. Are you going to post that grass is green next? fyi scoring a lot in college doesn't necessarily mean diddly in the pro's either. 

My point (which undoubtably you'll bypass to promote your broken record) is that a 19 year old good sized 3 with superior athletism has a much better chance of succeeding then an undersized 2 with superior athletism. Factor in that one can shoot and the other couldn't... well, I think you, no we can understand why Rudy is highly ranked by (amoung others) the source you keep posting references to. 

btw... if nbadraft.net lacks an ounce of sanity like the rest of us who disagree with you supposively do, why exactly do you keep refering to them as if they know what they're talkng about?

:raised_ey

STOMP


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I wouldn't say that being 6'5" is extremely small for a SG.......

What makes you think that Gay is a good shooter?....

Its still early and soon nbadraft.net will realize that Gay isn't everything he's cracked out to be...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I just watched Lenny Wilkins on FSN Live talk about Adam.....

He said that there is no way that Adam will be a bust in the NBA and he will become a solid, solid player because he is great moving without the ball, which he said players these days don't understand how to do and he can put the ball on the floor well....He also like the way he can pass and find the open man and agrees that he will be a top pick in the draft.....

I would say Lenny knows a thing or two about what it takes to be a good pro....


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I wouldn't say that being 6'5" is extremely small for a SG.......


neither would I... but dude measured under 6'3 barefoot. Why not read what you're responding to before you post? And what exactly are you trying to prove by continually referencing players from when you'd yet to hit double digits? I seriously doubt what it's what you're intending.

STOMP


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I might have been young when Miner played but I have seen plenty of him to know what kind of player he was....

and he was very athletic...


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> Comparing someone's Senior year to their Junior year?.....
> 
> 
> Especially to a player whose team is top rated team in the nation with more scoring threats than just him to a player who was on an NIT team and the only main go to guy the team had...


The post above you were comparing years



zagsfan20 said:


> and I'm adding in his senior year...and so far Adam is having a better Junior year than Luke's senior year...


What is it? Do you want to compare or not compare?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I might have been young when Miner played but I have seen plenty of him to know what kind of player he was....
> 
> and he was very athletic...


right, no one has said other wise, and I've repeatedly echoed that thought.

but it looks like I was the :swammi: in predicting you'd miss the points I was making.

STOMP


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

Bargnani bargnani bargnani bargnani 
Laridge Laridge Laridge Laridge
Morrison Morrison Morrison Morrison
Forget gay forget gay forget gay


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> Bargnani bargnani bargnani bargnani
> Laridge Laridge Laridge Laridge
> Morrison Morrison Morrison Morrison
> Forget gay forget gay forget gay


Exactly Gay is OVER-HYPED!!!


----------

