# 2011 NBA Draft Thread



## Dissonance

Tonight on ESPN at 7:30EST.


----------



## croco

One thing that is great about this draft is that there is a lot of uncertainty after Irving and Williams, most teams in the lottery have been linked with a handful of players and there is no consensus order. A single surprising selection could jumble a lot of draft boards.


----------



## jokeaward

Elefino what the Wolves will do, but hopefully with their 20th pick or somewhere around there they can get Jordan Hamilton. Or Burks.

They should trade/have traded Rubio, but they won't. Now if they move down they could snag Kemba. Imagine Curry, Lawson, Kemba, but now it's just Ricky and the husk of Flynn for guards. Yikes.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

This draft may be "weak" or certainly not filled with star power, but teams can still find some real value if they have done the work. I expect the teams that usually draft well to come out of here with some good pieces, the other guys could make some decisions that will set them back heavily. It may be exciting to unfold.


----------



## HB

> RT @chadfordinsider: Starting to hear pretty strong signals that Biyombo is going to Raptors at 5.


Why does Colangelo have a job again?


----------



## Porn Player

People know about the 3 way Bobcats, Kings and Charlotte trade already in here right? Pretty bummed the Raptors couldn't get involved in that action. 

Does anyone have a link to watch the draft coverage live?


----------



## Dissonance

Porn Player said:


> People know about the 3 way Bobcats, Kings and Charlotte trade already in here right? Pretty bummed the Raptors couldn't get involved in that action.
> 
> Does anyone have a link to watch the draft coverage live?


Yesh. 


myp2pforum should have a bunch of links.


----------



## HB

Espn3.com


----------



## Tooeasy




----------



## Wade County

Yeah I can see the Lurch comparison.


----------



## Dissonance

Comedy Hour with Tooeasy.

Been killing it :laugh:


----------



## Tooeasy

Dissonance said:


> Comedy Hour with Tooeasy.
> 
> Been killing it :laugh:


Hah my unemployment has been leaving me with all too much free time. Gotta stay social somehow, and apparently smartass bbf posts is the ticket


----------



## Porn Player

@ Diss. Hero alert.


----------



## HB

He calls himself a hybrid of Billups and Chris Paul. The Cavs win if he truly is that.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Well I'll take Biyombo on my team. I saw him at the Worlds and I was picking up what he was putting down.


----------



## Porn Player

How long till this gets underway? 8 minutes or an hour an 8?


----------



## Tooeasy

Porn Player said:


> How long till this gets underway? 8 minutes or an hour an 8?


starts at 4:30 pacific time


----------



## Porn Player

Tooeasy said:


> starts at 4:30 pacific time


Let me just hop on a plane...


----------



## Tooeasy

Porn Player said:


> Let me just hop on a plane...


7:30 eastern time


----------



## HB

Supposedly this Vesely guy is really athletic


----------



## Porn Player

Thanks bro.


----------



## Porn Player

HB said:


> Supposedly this Vesely guy is really athletic


He's white?!? ... Slow twitch mother!


----------



## Tooeasy

lol at stern trying to flip the non stop boos to his appearance by throwin out the "lets hear it for new jersey" line


----------



## croco

I actually loved the comment about those Dallas Mavericks.


----------



## Adam

Hey Archivist, I'm going on record that Kyrie Irving will never make an all-star team. I'm not impressed by him or his potential.


----------



## gi0rdun

Opening a big bag of Tostitos... should probably be done by the end of the draft.


----------



## Dissonance

> POR & DEN seriously discussing point guard trade sending Andre Miller back to Den for Raymond Felton, source said. They would also swap 1sts


SpearsNBAYahoo


----------



## Dre

lol @ "hopefully" from Williams right there


----------



## Tooeasy

gi0rdun said:


> Opening a big bag of Tostitos... should probably be done by the end of the draft.


I apologize on behalf of my western society for being the sole influence on your skyrocketing cholesterol issues. done with the tostitos by the end of the draft, starting cardiac arrest before the end of the night.


----------



## Porn Player

gi0rdun said:


> Opening a big bag of Tostitos... should probably be done by the end of the draft.


I've seen ya and trust me, I'll be surprised if they last past the lottery...


----------



## Dre

OK _now_ it gets interesting.


----------



## Dissonance

Irving #1 to Cavs. No surprise.


----------



## HB

Gottlieb is right in that most of the guys in this draft will stick in the league for years.


----------



## rebelsun

This draft is Kyrie and then everyone else.


----------



## futuristxen

Kyrie has one of the most boring highlight packages of a number one pick in awhile. How about some ankle breaking cross-overs? Some sick layups or dunks? 3 pointers with five defenders hanging all over him. No look around the back passes?

Get me excited ESPN!


----------



## gi0rdun

Heather Cox is an absolute MILF.


----------



## Adam

rebelsun said:


> This draft is Kyrie and then everyone else.


I don't buy that. This kind of thing gets said every year and it almost never turns out true.


----------



## Wade County

No surprise with Irving at one. He's what they need, despite the 10000 PG's on their roster


----------



## Wade County

futuristxen said:


> Kyrie has one of the most boring highlight packages of a number one pick in awhile. How about some ankle breaking cross-overs? Some sick layups or dunks? 3 pointers with five defenders hanging all over him. No look around the back passes?
> 
> Get me excited ESPN!


He didnt play enough games to really put together a sick highlight package to be fair.


----------



## Tooeasy

clock runnin all the way down, takin last minute phone calls??


----------



## Porn Player

Kahn takes Kemba. No surprise.


----------



## Dissonance

TWolves take Derrick Williams #2.

Won't be surprised if there's some kind of deal soon though.


----------



## Dre

So either Williams or Beasley will not be Timberwolves come the start of the season


----------



## rebelsun

Adam said:


> I don't buy that. This kind of thing gets said every year and it almost never turns out true.


Ultimately, probably not. As prospects going into the draft, though, Kyrie is the only one for me that doesn't have any significant weaknesses.


----------



## Wade County

Derrick Williams to TWolves. Either he or Beas is on the block.


----------



## Porn Player

Williams is a monster.


----------



## futuristxen

Ahhh....6-8 tweener forwards...it's like the 90s all over again.


----------



## Dre

Everyone hates Derrick but I bet he'll make the most all-star teams


----------



## gi0rdun

The Tostitos probably last to the end of the first round. I forgot how slow the first round takes.


----------



## futuristxen

Wade County said:


> Derrick Williams to TWolves. Either he or Beas is on the block.


Maybe we can trade Mike Miller for him?


----------



## Wade County

I honestly dont think Derrick Williams is better than Mike Beasley.


----------



## rebelsun

Two things that concern with Derrick Williams - average rebounding numbers (not good for being undersized) and low defensive turnover numbers.


----------



## Porn Player

Dre said:


> Everyone hates Derrick but I bet he'll make the most all-star teams


He's one of my favourite guys from the draft. He is the safest pick in the whole draft. I truly believe that.


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> Everyone hates Derrick but I bet he'll make the most all-star teams


I doubt he ever makes the all-star team.


----------



## Dre

Kanter here right? Or maybe Knight


----------



## Dre

futuristxen said:


> I doubt he ever makes the all-star team.


He's going to put up points.


----------



## futuristxen

Wade County said:


> I honestly dont think Derrick Williams is better than Mike Beasley.


Yeah I don't think he'll even start next year if the Wolves keep Beasley.


----------



## Wade County

Kanter to the Jazz. Good pick IMO.


----------



## croco

Dre said:


> Everyone hates Derrick but I bet he'll make the most all-star teams


Zero?


----------



## HB

Dre said:


> Everyone hates Derrick but I bet he'll make the most all-star teams


Dont know about all star teams, but I like the guy's game. With that said, dont the Wolves have W.Johnson and Beasley? Makes no damn sense.


----------



## Dre

Millsap, Jefferson, Favors, Kanter

At least one of these things will not be like the others I don't think

And if Jamison can make all-star teams Williams will trust.


----------



## gi0rdun

Awwww Enes.


----------



## Tooeasy

put 10 more pounds of muscle on kanter and he'll be able to push around the majority of nba centers, hes a big guy no doubt


----------



## futuristxen

Kanter
Career averages will be:
9/7


----------



## Porn Player

This leaves Knight open for my Raptors. STOKED.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Wow ESPN just made me remember Nikoloz Tskitishvili


----------



## rebelsun

futuristxen said:


> Kanter
> Career averages will be:
> 9/7


Ouch.


----------



## Porn Player

Jonas will go fourth. No doubt in my mind.


----------



## gi0rdun

WOW

wtf


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> And if Jamison can make all-star teams Williams will trust.


Jamison made it in a dilluted talent era. Williams has virtually no shot at getting to the all-star game as a forward in the NBA.

He'd have to be a coaches selection, and the Wolves will probably never be that good. He'd have to be a superstar for that to happen.


----------



## rebelsun

lmfao, Tristan Thompson at 4.


----------



## gi0rdun

Porn Player said:


> Jonas will go fourth. No doubt in my mind.


8)


----------



## Porn Player

What The ****


----------



## HB

Solid pick. Very conservative. I guess they didn't want to gamble on the internationals. Now the Raptors must take Knight


----------



## Wade County

Cavs go with Tristan Thompson. Trade?


----------



## croco

I like Thompson, but not at #4.


----------



## Ben

huh, not sure


----------



## Dre

Thompson is a surprise. I was expecting the Jonas kid, all indications were that

They were partly scared off because he won't be here for a year...but what playoff race do they need him for next year


----------



## HB

> The Cavs didn't break the Spurs hearts, but the Pistons'. Thompson played Derrick Williams to stand-still in workouts and won Cavs over


 - Woj


----------



## Dre

futuristxen said:


> Jamison made it in a dilluted talent era. Williams has virtually no shot at getting to the all-star game as a forward in the NBA.
> 
> He'd have to be a coaches selection, and the Wolves will probably never be that good. He'd have to be a superstar for that to happen.


FOH. He made it like 4 years ago


----------



## Porn Player

So so foolish. I love TT but not at the 4.


----------



## futuristxen

Who is better: Tristan Thompson or Darrell Arthur? Who is better?


----------



## hobojoe

We all knew this was a weak draft, but Tristan Thompson at #4? Jesus.


----------



## HB

futuristxen said:


> Who is better: Tristan Thompson or Darrell Arthur? Who is better?


That's why we watch games


----------



## Ben

Gotta be Knight to Toronto, right?


----------



## croco

Valanciunas. It's not that hard if you are trying just a little bit.


----------



## HB

All the folks shouting TT at 4? Who else should the Cavs have picked there when they had taken Irving at 1? Everybody else is a gamble.


----------



## Porn Player

It better be Knight to Toronto. 


These Biyombo rumours are killing me though. I literally can't sit still.


----------



## Dre

HB said:


> All the folks shouting TT at 4? Who else should the Cavs have picked there when they had taken Irving at 1? Everybody else is a gamble.


And he's not


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> Thompson is a surprise. I was expecting the Jonas kid, all indications were that
> 
> They were partly scared off because he won't be here for a year...but what playoff race do they need him for next year


Yeah, pretty crazy thinking. Particularly with the lockout looming. You've already got Irving, so you can let your euro guy sit overseas and veg out and then have him come in next year with your other lottery pick, and it will be the same as two picks this year. If anything it would help your chances next year of landing a true superstar in the draft.

The Cavs have made some strange moves post-Lebron. Trading for Sessions, I still don't understand.


----------



## croco

HB said:


> All the folks shouting TT at 4? Who else should the Cavs have picked there when they had taken Irving at 1? Everybody else is a gamble.


And taking a guy whose offensive game is as raw as sushi isn't risky business?


----------



## futuristxen

Ballsy pick for Colangelo since he's probably getting fired anyways.


----------



## Kidd

Yet another international player for the Craptors. I swear Colangelo has a fetish.


----------



## Ben

Brandon Knight to Sacramento?


----------



## rebelsun

Brandon Knight is ridiculous value from this point on.


----------



## Dre

Eh I would have to put like the terminator next to Bargnani to feel comfortable. I would've gone Knight


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Daaaamn Skeeta get's a verbal shout out!


----------



## Porn Player

I stayed up for this bull****. 


My drinking has just taken on a new meaning.


----------



## futuristxen

croco said:


> And taking a guy whose offensive game is as raw as sushi isn't risky business?


At a position where you have two veterans he won't get minutes in front of.

I mean, does anyone think Thompson is even going to play next year with Jamison, Varejao, and Hickson all ahead of him on the depth chart?

Especially with Byron Scott on the hot seat for his job, he's not going to play the youngsters just for the sake of it.

Hell Irving may have trouble getting a ton of minutes, unless they get rid of Sessions, Boobie, or Baron. All three of those guys can probably school.


----------



## Tooeasy

jonas is mighty eloquent with his words lol


----------



## gi0rdun

I I I I I I I don't know... I move fast.


----------



## Diable

I wonder if the Wizards will pass on Knight. I am thinking that he will be a 2 guard any way


----------



## Porn Player

I hate my team. I finally hate them.


----------



## croco

rebelsun said:


> Brandon Knight is ridiculous value from this point on.


I stand by my comment from a few months back that he will end up being the best player in this draft.


----------



## Dre

This is ugly. Noone left I care about for the Wiz. Noone realistic.


----------



## futuristxen

The Toronto Raptors are the crappy euro version of the Atlanta Hawks sans Joe Johnson


----------



## bball2223

Wade County said:


> I honestly dont think Derrick Williams is better than Mike Beasley.


I thought Beasley was on another level coming out from Williams, but I guess we will see if Williams handles himself a lot better once he gets into the league. I like some of the tools Williams has to work with, but he is too mechanical and he is a tweener. I see him being a solid player, but I don't know if I see much else.


----------



## Ben

Interesting draft so far, that's for sure


----------



## gi0rdun

That is a hot girlfriend.


----------



## Dre

I _guess_

And per Beasley vs. Williams...Williams has a better mentality


----------



## rebelsun

Wow, didn't they just trade Yi?


----------



## bball2223

Vesely to the Wizards.


----------



## Tooeasy

still no trade rumor/chatter, this thing is gonna lull me to sleep. I remember how exciting the 2007 draft was. lol at this jan dude goin in on his chick


----------



## Diable

Veseley is doing well off the court apparently


----------



## croco

Four international players in the Top 6. Interesting...


----------



## futuristxen

The Wizards are going to have sick dunk contests in their practices.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Damn Fran cat calls his girl...


----------



## Diable

Wow the Wizards drafted Ivan Drago


----------



## Dre

Gotta go for Knight here right

Bioyombo is good but he's no game changing type defender and he can't do anything but rebound, defend and be tall.


----------



## futuristxen

Vesely has the best highlight package of the lottery


----------



## gi0rdun

Kings trading down to 10. I guess they're locked in on Jimmer.


----------



## Tooeasy

with how much of a crap shoot these international guys are, hating on this draft and how weak it is seems somewhat presumptuous.


----------



## rebelsun

Jimmer before Knight would be an epic fail.


----------



## Wade County

Brandon Knight here, surely.


----------



## Tooeasy

wow this draft is certainly full of parity isnt it


----------



## rebelsun

I like Biyombo next to Cousins.


----------



## Dre

Damn Jordan picked him, he's gonna be a bust


----------



## futuristxen

Biz Mackie


----------



## Wade County

Bismack to the Cats :laugh:


----------



## Dre

rebelsun said:


> I like Biyombo next to Cousins.


That was a pick for Charlotte


----------



## Dre

lol @ the urgency Fran said "you can not run _any_ plays for him" with


----------



## Ben

rebelsun said:


> I like Biyombo next to Cousins.


What about next to Kwame?


----------



## Dissonance

futuristxen said:


> Vesely has the best highlight package of the lottery


His dunks were ridiculous in that. Especially, that one towards the end.


----------



## gi0rdun

Sounds like Kwame Brown all over again.


----------



## rebelsun

ßen said:


> What about next to Kwame?


I don't think I like anyone next to Kwame, ha.


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> lol @ the urgency Fran said "you can not run _any_ plays for him" with


I had to double check to make sure this was indeed a lottery pick.


----------



## Ben

What did Knight do wrong at the workouts


----------



## Ballscientist

Bismack Biyombo, Congo 

Michael Jordan say "WOW" when he watch him play.


----------



## Dre

Can people get off Dumars' nuts like hasn't been living off that title for 6 years now


----------



## hobojoe

About time Knight gets picked.


----------



## rebelsun

Well, that was a gift for DET.


----------



## Ben

Finally


----------



## croco

Dumars goes with BPA - usually a successful strategy.


----------



## Dre

Williams and Beasley

Kanter, Jefferson, Okur and Favors

now Stuckey, Gordon and Knight


----------



## Laker Freak

Brandon Knight = Rodney Stuckey 2.0?


----------



## futuristxen

You can judge the quality of a lottery by how many combo-guards, and tweener fowards are in it.
Brandon Knight...someone needs to fetch Rodney Stuckey's donuts.


----------



## Dre

He doesn't like this situation you can see it on his face

They're a bit of a mess.


----------



## hobojoe

Dre said:


> Williams and Beasley
> 
> Kanter, Jefferson, Okur and Favors
> 
> now Stuckey, Gordon and Knight


As I always say, "When you blow, best player available is the way to go."


----------



## HB

Wow Colangelo is an idiot


----------



## Adam

Minnesota could have had Beasley, Cousins, Love, and Kemba. That would have been a fun team to watch grow.


----------



## croco

Dre said:


> He doesn't like this situation you can see it on his face
> 
> They're a bit of a mess.


Knight always has that expression on his face when the cameras are on, almost regardless of the situation and circumstances.


----------



## bball2223

Detroit's a mess and Dumars has done a pretty bad job for a while now, but I honestly can't complain with this selection. I think Dumars was eyeing Biyombo, but he went BPA, so I'll take it. They need an overhaul in the backcourt anyways.


----------



## Dissonance

Kemba to Charlotte.


----------



## croco

There goes Kemba.


----------



## Dre

Nice pick. Walker is my favorite player here


----------



## HB

MJ and co. have done well.


----------



## E.H. Munro

croco said:


> And taking a guy whose offensive game is as raw as sushi isn't risky business?


Let's face it, he couldn't score on Paris Hilton with two quarts of Patrón and an eightball of coke.


----------



## futuristxen

Kemba Walker is a "Winner"
Not anymore buddy. Welcome to the Bobcats.


----------



## gi0rdun

Wait isn't Kemba going to Milwaukee or something?


----------



## HB

As for Croco, with age catching up to Varejao, they picked up a nice defensive piece. There are very few lost post players in the draft that play better D than TT. All those Euro guys are gambles, the Cavs went with a safe pick. Dont get why they are being panned for it, most draft sites had TT as a top 5-10 pick.


----------



## Dissonance

futuristxen said:


> Kemba Walker is a "Winner"
> Not anymore buddy. Welcome to the Bobcats.


:laugh:


----------



## bball2223

Kemba is my favorite player to come out in quite sometime, I really hope that he succeeds in Charlotte.


----------



## rebelsun

Don't they already have two undersized points that won in college?


----------



## Adam

D.J. Augustin and Kemba. Another team with two more starting point guards than Miami. ****, I'm so envious.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Laker Freak said:


> Brandon Knight = Rodney Stuckey 2.0?


The look on Knight's face was priceless.


----------



## Dre

DJ Augustin/Kemba Walker, Bioyombo, Ty Thomas. Looks like roleplayers for whoever they get next year.


----------



## HB

Jimmer to SAC, Knicks fans rejoice!


----------



## futuristxen

Jimmer Fredette...this year's Luke Jackson award goes to you


----------



## 29380

HB said:


> Jimmer to SAC, Knicks fans rejoice!


YES!!!


----------



## Dre

Yeah I'm gonna say that Spurs situation is dead. I don't see Fredette to San Antonio for Parker


----------



## Wade County

LOL Jimmer. To be fair, it's a good situation for him in Sac-town.

Jazz fans everywhere revolt.


----------



## rebelsun

Jimmer = Eddie House.


----------



## Dissonance

futuristxen said:


> Jimmer Fredette...this year's Luke Jackson award goes to you


Adam Morrison, JJ Redick.


I'm white and I'm sick of these overhyped scorers.


----------



## Tragedy

futuristxen said:


> Jimmer Fredette...this year's Luke Jackson award goes to you


Ouch


----------



## Porn Player

Kemba and Biyombo to Charlotte is beautiful.


----------



## HB

Tragedy said:


> Ouch


Once Jamel comes in here and Archives that...its a wrap for futur lol


----------



## futuristxen

The Kings have a lot of ball hogs


----------



## E.H. Munro

I guess that the Kings backcourt is the 'Rekettes?


----------



## rebelsun

Jimmer's a good fit next to Tyreke. He can just camp and shoot.


----------



## Dre

Let's be real would you rather your backup point be just some guy or a talking point like Fredette :2ti:

Fredette is a decent fit next to Evans. They both kind of do the same thing, one from inside one from outside. But I think Fredette can defer.


----------



## Adam

HB said:


> Once Jamel comes in here and Archives that...its a wrap for futur lol


Where the hell is the Archivist? He better notice my Irving post.


----------



## croco

Erik Spoelstra is Jimmer's brother?


----------



## HB

Adam said:


> Where the hell is the Archivist? He better notice my Irving post.


LOL archiving things of course. He probably is watching this thread taking notes


----------



## rebelsun

I really like Burks to GS here.


----------



## HB

Thompson is the pick, they love them shooters out there


----------



## Geaux Tigers

He and Marcus Thornton will be fighting for minutes. I don't count out Marcus.


----------



## Dre

Thompson looks like a decent fit in the Warriors' circus


----------



## hobojoe

Singleton to Utah please.


----------



## croco

Hand down man down, Klay Thompson.


----------



## rebelsun

Dre said:


> Thompson looks like a decent fit in the Warriors' circus


Following the Don Nelson path to perpetual 105ppg, 41 win seasons.


----------



## futuristxen

I have no comment on Klay Thompson...


----------



## Laker Freak

futuristxen said:


> I have no comment on Klay Thompson...



He looks nothing like Mychal.


----------



## HB

The Bulls coulda used Klay


----------



## rebelsun

Jazz draft good.


----------



## futuristxen

Alec Burks is not an NBA name. It's the name you give a Canadian cartoonist


----------



## Dre

Boy's soft he don't even hug right


----------



## Tooeasy

is that fly like a g6 song comin from outside my house or from the damn tv??


----------



## Wade County

Burks to Jazz.


----------



## futuristxen

Laker Freak said:


> He looks nothing like Mychal.


Hahaha. Yeah I noticed that.


----------



## Porn Player

I like Burks.


----------



## Tooeasy

suns goin for morris??


----------



## E.H. Munro

Penes Kanter and Alec Burks, they had a better draft than the Cadavaliers.


----------



## rebelsun

Can't wait to see what this nutty Suns' administration does here.


----------



## Dre

Mark still sounds like he's commentating


----------



## croco

LOL @ Van Gundy interviewing Mark Jackson.


----------



## Tooeasy

lol mark jacksons thinkin in his head "stop treatin me like i aint a damn coach"


----------



## Dissonance

Suns are going Morris. Ugh.


----------



## HB

Meh at that pick


----------



## Tooeasy

thatd be funny if the suns unintentially drafted the wrong morris twin and tried to go back and get a re-do


----------



## futuristxen

The suns love twins


----------



## Wade County

Good pick for the Suns. Their PF stocks are god awful.


----------



## rebelsun

Markieff is probably the safest pick here.


----------



## croco

Tooeasy said:


> lol mark jacksons thinkin in his head "stop treatin me like i aint a damn coach"


Seriously.


----------



## rebelsun

Tooeasy said:


> thatd be funny if the suns unintentially drafted the wrong morris twin and tried to go back and get a re-do


ha, 'gimme Markieus!'


----------



## futuristxen

The Suns always draft the weaker brother


----------



## croco

Some of these questions are embarrassing.


----------



## Wade County

Leonard still on the board.


----------



## gi0rdun

I got excited over the Jimmer pick and I never finished the chips.


----------



## rebelsun

Morey and his undersized bigs.


----------



## E.H. Munro

The other Morris to Houston.


----------



## Tooeasy

houston now with morris/hill/ming/patterson/scola/an oversized raptor on their roster


----------



## Nimreitz

My mock is on 8. Not bad for an amateur without contacts.


----------



## Dre

Rockets always got the smallish 4s. Landry, Hayes, now Morris


----------



## gi0rdun

Some team is going to get a steal in Singleton


----------



## Tooeasy

its so sad to be reminded that the pacers made it to the postseason last year despite a 38-45 record. the eastern conference at its finest


----------



## Wade County

Leonard to Indy.


----------



## rebelsun

lol, another SF for the Pacers. He's interesting, though. Reminds a lot of Damion James.


----------



## Jamel Irief

Adam said:


> Hey Archivist, I'm going on record that Kyrie Irving will never make an all-star team. I'm not impressed by him or his potential.


Agreed.


----------



## HB

LOL he's baaaccck


----------



## Dissonance

Blah. I hate the NBA.


----------



## Tooeasy

morris twins look like some old school mobsters in that photo shoot, pretty dope


----------



## HB

Kawhi has been traded to the Spurs for George Hill


----------



## Porn Player

For a weak draft, I really like some of these picks. Maybe it's the draft day hype or the beer but I really expect this draft to go down a lot better than people expect.


----------



## Dre

Irving might sneak into one or two with some hype when/if the Cavaliers get good again. Those midseason lovefests got Mo and Jameer in there before. 

Plus injury replacements and all that. 

But in theory I agree he's probably not on that caliber especially when we're in a golden age for PGs.


----------



## Dissonance

Reports saying Leonard to Spurs for George Hill.


----------



## Dre

Porn Player said:


> For a weak draft, I really like some of these picks. Maybe it's the draft day hype or the beer but I really expect this draft to go down a lot better than people expect.


I feel like that every draft. Then I forget some of these people exist within two years

It's the commentators having to say nice things that makes you go :/...._maybe_....


----------



## Tom

I think that is a nice pick for the pacers. They get the athleticism to compete. Plus, him and tyler will be a bizarre duo.


----------



## croco

Porn Player said:


> For a weak draft, I really like some of these picks. Maybe it's the draft day hype or the beer but I really expect this draft to go down a lot better than people expect.


It's the beer.


----------



## Wade County

HB said:


> Kawhi has been traded to the Spurs for George Hill


I actually like that deal for Indy - George Hill is a good player.


----------



## rebelsun

Vucevic should be a solid 15-20mpg backup post.


----------



## Wade County

LOL Philly. Fail.


----------



## gi0rdun

Chris Singleton...


----------



## Dre

Faried or die


----------



## HB

I feel like the GMs just decided to throw away all reason and just pick any name that sounds good.


----------



## futuristxen

Who will knicks fans boo this year?


----------



## Porn Player

I'll stay awake for this Knicks pick just 'cos I wanna hear the fans boo when they take Donotas Monafloozywoozy.


----------



## gi0rdun

Watch them draft Motiejunas


----------



## 29380

Pick Singleton


----------



## Dre

Singler :2ti:


----------



## futuristxen

Good trade for Indiana. George Hill is a good pro


----------



## gi0rdun

It's Motiejunas... BOOOOOO


----------



## Jamel Irief

Dre said:


> Irving might sneak into one or two with some hype when/if the Cavaliers get good again. Those midseason lovefests got Mo and Jameer in there before.
> 
> Plus injury replacements and all that.
> 
> But in theory I agree he's probably not on that caliber especially when we're in a golden age for PGs.


Maybe, but the PG crop is getting there again. Kind of like how Andre Miller entered the same time as Marbury, Nash, Iverson, Billups, Francis and Davis and never made an all-star team.


----------



## futuristxen

ahahahahaha ahahahaha ahhhahahahaha hahahah
god I love the Knicks


----------



## HB

Knicks pick Shumpert, who actually has some upside IF he can ever figure out the game.


----------



## Dre

Carmelo said he wanted that pick. They must have some pre-conceived clap once clap twice thing


----------



## gi0rdun

Hahaha.


----------



## HB

futuristxen said:


> ahahahahaha ahahahaha ahhhahahahaha hahahah
> god I love the Knicks


You are laughing at the pick? Shumpert is really talented.


----------



## Porn Player

Shumpert addresses no needs. Why do GMs do that?


----------



## Jamel Irief

HB said:


> Kawhi has been traded to the Spurs for George Hill


Really? Great trade for the Pacers.


----------



## Wade County

Guess the Knicks are picking up a PF/C in FA then?


----------



## gi0rdun

Haha she said Carl Landry.


----------



## Kidd

CARL LANDRY lol


----------



## HB

Porn Player said:


> Shumpert addresses no needs. Why do GMs do that?


Shumpert is more talented than Douglas or did we not watch the playoffs last year.


----------



## Jamel Irief

LOL Carl Landry was a great pick huh?

Dont know if it's funnier that she said that or that Spike never heard of Landry Fields prior to the draft.


----------



## hobojoe

LMAO Knicks got a diamond in the rough with Carl Landry last year.


----------



## Porn Player

Also. The boo'ing wasn't loud because people were like 'WTF this kid wasn't even on our radar'. They literally didn't know what to do 'cos they didn't have a clue who he was.


----------



## King Joseus

LOL at the fat Knicks fan in green.


----------



## rebelsun

He's not bad to put next to Carmelo.


----------



## Dre

Yeah George Hill is great. I like how you hear Parker's gone all day then Hill is the guy to go.

Leonard better turn out to be a hell of a player because Hill is no slouch.

lol @ Carl Landry


----------



## Diable

I saw a lot of Georgia Tech games and Shumpert never showed me anything to make me think he could be a good pro at anything. Wow I almost feel bad for Spike Lee. No that was the pizza repeating on me


----------



## Adam

Add Indy to the list of teams with two more starting PG's than Miami. *sigh*


----------



## futuristxen

HB said:


> You are laughing at the pick? Shumpert is really talented.


I just love how every year everyone says who the knicks should pick, and the fans all want someone, and then they pick someone that no one has talked about and the fans go nuts.


----------



## Dre

Man Faried was the pick. He doesn't do **** but rebound but he does it better than everybody. And let's be real, D'Antoni could've put Amare at 5 and him at 4 and run most teams into the ground.


----------



## FSH

after Vucevic went i think the Knicks just said screw it


----------



## Porn Player

HB said:


> Shumpert is more talented than Douglas or did we not watch the playoffs last year.


That may be fair enough but they needed toughness, defense and rebounding. Singleton and Faried were both on the board and they didn't take either, it baffles the hell outta me. (but not because I don't like Shumpert, he's a solid allrounder)


----------



## Tooeasy

surprised to see george hill on the outs, I like him going forward more than tony parker


----------



## futuristxen

Adam said:


> Add Indy to the list of teams with two more starting PG's than Miami. *sigh*


It's weird how that happens. PG is probably the easiest position in the NBA to fill, and yet the Heat make it look impossible.


----------



## Dre

futuristxen said:


> I just love how every year everyone says who the knicks should pick, and the fans all want someone, and then they pick someone that no one has talked about and the fans go nuts.


Never fails. I like how Stern did the extra closeup of the name too, he knew what he was doing

Is Rautins still alive?


----------



## Dre

I love this pick.


----------



## HB

Dont know how true those measurements are, but he's a 6'6 point guard, though he looked smaller at Tech. With that said I have seen him have some big games against UNC and Duke, not sure what Diable is talking about. Anyhoo before I get confused for a fan of his, just saying in this draft, it doesnt really matter. Teams are just taking gambles at this point.


----------



## rebelsun

I love the Wizards. They seem to just say eff it and draft the highest upside guys.


----------



## 29380

Expected Shumpert he has been rumored to be the pick for a while.


----------



## Wade County

Wizards love PF's it seems.


----------



## Dre

HB said:


> Dont know how true those measurements are, but he's a 6'6 point guard, though he looked smaller at Tech. With that said I have seen him have some big games against UNC and Duke, not sure what Diable is talking about. Anyhoo before I get confused for a fan of his, just saying in this draft, it doesnt really matter. Teams are just taking gambles at this point.


So HB fighting for this guy pretty much seals he'll be an underachiever who shows flashes. I like how trends help us decide who will be what before they get on a court.


----------



## Porn Player

Wizards just love talent. What an exciting roster that team has for next year.


----------



## FSH

Knicks need to trade up in the 2nd to try to get JuJuan Johnson someone that can help them right away


----------



## Dre

Wade County said:


> Wizards love PF's it seems.


I'm hoping the writing on the wall is clear and Blatche is gone.

Even if not they can let Young walk and give Singleton minutes at the 3.


----------



## HB

Dre said:


> So HB fighting for this guy pretty much seals he'll be an underachiever who shows flashes. I like how trends help us decide who will be what before they get on a court.


Fighting for him? Lol like I have any clout in the Knicks FO. I could care less about that team though. Which actually just makes me remember that Melo's pick is still on the board lol


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Reminds me of when they picked Renaldo Balkman.


----------



## rebelsun

Just say no to combo forwards.


----------



## HB

Tobias didnt do much at TN. Wiz just playing around right now


----------



## FSH

HB said:


> Tobias didnt do much at TN. Wiz just playing around right now


He's got alot of raw talent if he can just develop it


----------



## Dissonance

HB said:


> You are laughing at the pick? Shumpert is really talented.


Suns almost took him at 13. I would've liked that much more.


----------



## HB

I realize GM's are just picking any one that comes to mind at this point, but all first round picks are guaranteed contracts.


----------



## 29380

> carmeloanthony Goodnight. I'm out.


Guess Melo not a fan of the pick.


> Amareisreal Gr8 Pick. Welcome to the team Iman Shumpert. Can't wait to get started to become a better Defensive team. Let's go. #ChrisBrownVoice


Amare likes it.


----------



## Tooeasy

such an anti-climactic evening. its especially hard considering the impending lockout. I was really looking forward to some good trades to get my fix in until the cba crap is resolved


----------



## HB

Knicks4life said:


> Guess Melo not a fan of the pick.
> 
> Amare likes it.


Thats because Melo was asking for Shelby, like Shelby even played better than Shumpert this season.:laugh:


----------



## E.H. Munro

George Hill for Leonard. I guess Parker's staying.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Leonard is going to do very well with the Spurs. I think they got better.


----------



## Dre

HB said:


> Thats because Melo was asking for Shelby, like Shelby even played better than Shumpert this season.:laugh:


Yeah I got the Sh-'s confused


----------



## bball2223

Knicks4life said:


> Guess Melo not a fan of the pick.
> 
> Amare likes it.


Melo's mad we didn't take Selby. :laugh: at Amare glad were getting better on defense. I love his enthusiasm, but you have to start getting better on that end too Amare.


----------



## HB

Brad Miller is off to MN, Flynn to HOU


----------



## Tooeasy

this donatas kid looks like a spelling bee champion, not a basketball player


----------



## FreeMason Jr.

So the Spurs trade Pop's favorite player. This Leonard guy better pan out. Also, word is Spurs got Indiana's 42nd pick as well, not that that means much.


----------



## Wade County

Wolves pick Montaj....


----------



## Dre

6 years ago this Donatas kid would be a top 5 prospect


----------



## futuristxen

Stuart Scott:
"Someone on twitter once said about this guy"

SPORTS JOURNALISM!!! YEAH!


----------



## Dre

lol Brian Skinner was dying his beard somewhere like ":jr:...they said I was re-surging" when he heard that from Stu


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Hahaha Fran is cracking me up tonight. "conscientious objector" when it comes to rebounding


----------



## Nimreitz

bball2223 said:


> Melo's mad we didn't take Selby. :laugh: at Amare glad were getting better on defense. I love his enthusiasm, but you have to start getting better on that end too Amare.


It's the right pick. You can't take a 3 or a 4 when you're committed to Melo and Amare.


----------



## croco

Geaux Tigers said:


> Leonard is going to do very well with the Spurs. I think they got better.


I'm not sure. Developing into an elite defender takes time and the Spurs don't have time, Duncan is 35, Ginobili will turn 34 in a few weeks.


----------



## FSH

Toronto Trailblazers!


----------



## HB

> The Rockets and Wolves have agreed to trade J Flynn and Montiejunas to Houston for Brad Miller, 23rd pick and future 1sst, source says


 - Woj



> Nuggets get Andre Miller back from Portland for Raymond Felton. Probably swap picks.


 -Spears

Did any of these teams conduct workouts this year? Anyone listening to the GMs and coaches talking about their players? Its like they have no clue


----------



## FSH

lol even ESPN was shocked by the pick


----------



## bball2223

Nimreitz said:


> It's the right pick. You can't take a 3 or a 4 when you're committed to Melo and Amare.


I never said it was the wrong pick? As a Knicks fan I actually don't mind the pick, but putting an athletic big who can rebound like Faried with this team would not have been a bad idea either.


----------



## Wade County

Wow, TWolves dumped Flynn bad.

Smith at 21?


----------



## E.H. Munro

Nolan Smith? What the ****ity **** ****?


----------



## hobojoe

The most surprising move of the night is the Spurs giving up George Hill. Horrible deal in my opinion. Looking at the players straight up, I'd take George Hill without thinking twice. Take into account the Spurs' situation with Duncan and Ginobili's age, I don't know why the hell you do this trade. Very puzzling.


----------



## Tooeasy

farieds gotta go here to the nuggets


----------



## Dre

bball2223 said:


> Melo's mad we didn't take Selby. :laugh: at Amare glad were getting better on defense. I love his enthusiasm, but you have to start getting better on that end too Amare.


I know right. He thinks it's like shooting where a couple players make you better. He's like "he's gonna defend everybody for me!"

:2ti:


----------



## HB

Andre is back in Denver. Salmons back with the Kings. A night of surprises


----------



## futuristxen

I feel like the NBA is on crazy pills tonight with these trades


----------



## Nimreitz

bball2223 said:


> I never said it was the wrong pick? As a Knicks fan I actually don't mind the pick, but putting an athletic big who can rebound like Faried with this team would not have been a bad idea either.


I quoted you, but I guess I wasn't really responding to your post.


----------



## Tooeasy

felton is a nice player for the blazers if they get him.


----------



## Dre

Miller is gonna find the same people bitching about his pace in Denver. He's a dinosaur of an other era

Felton in Portland is dope for him though. Plenty of options


----------



## FSH

Great pick by the Nuggets


----------



## Dre

I stand by what I say Faried will be within the top 5 most impactful players of this draft


----------



## Tooeasy

wouldve liked to have seen faried and his rebounding/toughness on the hornets


----------



## croco

Motto of the night: "But he doesn't score"


----------



## Dre

croco said:


> Motto of the night: "But he doesn't score"


"Don't run _any_ plays for him...the world's survival depends on it"


----------



## 29380

> SpearsNBAYahoo Marc J. Spears Minny trades 23 to CHI for 28, 43 and cash.


http://twitter.com/#!/SpearsNBAYahoo


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> I stand by what I say Faried will be within the top 5 most impactful players of this draft


This draft is so bad, that doesn't even sound crazy.

Why are teams trading proven vets for draft picks in this draft?


----------



## Wade County

Wish we could've got George Hill  He'd be perfect


----------



## gi0rdun

Rockets picking up Flynn? Weird.


----------



## futuristxen

So this Houston pick was actually Chicago, right?


----------



## King Joseus

futuristxen said:


> So this Houston pick was actually Chicago, right?


So it would seem. Stash mode activated.


----------



## 29380

futuristxen said:


> So this Houston pick was actually Chicago, right?


Yeah.


----------



## bball2223

OKC promised this kid in April? What?


----------



## futuristxen

Reggie Jackson has Mario Chalmers arms


----------



## Wade County

There goes Reggie. Damn.


----------



## gi0rdun

Seriously looks lie a crapshoot. Reggie Jackson is good. Has no one taken Tyler Honeycutt?


----------



## futuristxen

Heat wanted Reggie Jackson. I have a feeling that kid must be good for them to shut him down like that.


----------



## rebelsun

Reggie has fantastic efficiency numbers across the board, but he doesn't get to the line much. Reminds a lot of George Hill.


----------



## futuristxen

Wade County said:


> There goes Reggie. Damn.


Whoever we draft probably won't even make the roster


----------



## Dre

Teams that know they're going to be in the 20s typically target players they think will fly under the radar and learn everything about them down to their social security on the chance they'll find that steal. You'll tend to not be able to predict how the 20s go because a) those contenders have established players everywhere and b) they're honed in on that one particular role they want to feel.


----------



## gi0rdun

bball2223 said:


> OKC promised this kid in April? What?


It's one of those things where OKC promised to draft Reggie Jackson whatever their pick is and they tell Reggie Jackson to deny work outs to other teams. Other teams are skeptical and don't want to draft a player they know nothing about so OKC picks up Reggie Jackson.


----------



## rebelsun

I think Danny takes Jordan Hamilton.


----------



## Dre

gi0rdun said:


> Has no one taken Tyler Honeycutt?


I hope he doesn't amount to too much 'cause I'm gonna want a turkey sandwich every time I see that name


----------



## HB

> Reggie Jackson never worked out for teams, never met with them, never provided physicals. He hid for two months. This shouldn't be allowed.


 - Woj


----------



## gi0rdun

Marshon is off the board! The way Marshon scores reminds me of Kobe.


----------



## Wade County

Marshon Brooks. Ray Allen replacement in a few years.


----------



## Dre

Woj via HB said:


> Reggie Jackson never worked out for teams, never met with them, never provided physicals. He hid for two months. This shouldn't be allowed.


Oh shutup. He got his money didn't he. If Jackson becomes even a starter _maybe_ he has a point, but if not, who the **** is that hurting but him? 

People would try to reform the ****ing bible if they had the chance


----------



## 29380

Marshon Brooks to New Jersey.


----------



## HB

Dre said:


> Oh shutup. He got his money didn't he. If Jackson becomes even a starter _maybe_ he has a point, but if not, who the **** is that hurting but him?
> 
> People would try to reform the ****ing bible if they had the chance


Other teams didnt get a shot to evaluate him.


----------



## Dre

Don't hate New York y'all know you guys would love Cuban as an owner


----------



## Dre

HB said:


> Why didnt you quote the part about Woj? You realize I am reporting what he tweeted right


lol I was my bad. I edited it when you were making this post


----------



## futuristxen

Are the Thunder going to trade Maynor? Otherwise it is weird that Jackson's agent would want him to go to the Thunder


----------



## HB

Dre said:


> lol I was my bad. I edited it when you were making this post


Did a quick edit too.

Dallas got themselves a very talented kid. Might not need Vince after all.


----------



## rebelsun

Would be sad to Singler drop out of the 1st after being a probable lotto pick two years ago.


----------



## Dre

HB said:


> Other teams didnt get a shot to evaluate him.


He needs the NBA not the other way around, we're not talking about even a starter most likely. So who is that hurting but him. If someone crazy had slipped and set off dominoes the Thunder would have scooped up someone else if they felt he was distinctly better than him, so who's out of luck. 

And he acts like he hasn't had a college career to scout. **** a workout where he shoots open jumpshots all day, put your scouts to work. 

Woj is off base here


----------



## futuristxen

This Mavs pick is going to Denver, and the Mavs are getting Rudy Fernandez. Nice bit of business for the Champions. Solves that 2 guard spot pretty summarily.


----------



## Dre

futuristxen said:


> Are the Thunder going to trade Maynor? Otherwise it is weird that Jackson's agent would want him to go to the Thunder


They're actually shopping him. No idea why but yeah they might.


----------



## gi0rdun

JaJuan Johnson works for Boston too. I think a couple years back the Blazers did something similar to what the Thunder did to Reggie Jackson. The Blazers did that to Jon Brockman so it was like whatever.


----------



## croco

Dallas has made a trade also. Reported to be with Portland, no details yet.


----------



## 29380

> STEIN_LINE_HQ Mavs are trading No. 26 to Portland to acquire Rudy Fernandez, with Portland moving the pick on to Denver in the Miller/Felton deal


http://twitter.com/#!/STEIN_LINE_HQ


----------



## Dre

futuristxen said:


> This Mavs pick is going to Denver, and the Mavs are getting Rudy Fernandez. Nice bit of business for the Champions. Solves that 2 guard spot pretty summarily.


Insurance on Barea and Butler, but I'd still prefer either


----------



## FSH

Remember a couple years ago when everyone wanted Rudy Fernandez?


----------



## Tooeasy

rudy fernandez is so god awful.


----------



## Tooeasy

**** you kobe bryant, take that hornets hat off


----------



## futuristxen

This draft is impossible to follow. ESPN needs to do a better job of tracking these trades.


----------



## croco

Meh. Not a fan of Fernandez.


----------



## rebelsun

Jajuan Johnson would be so much more interesting with 15lbs of muscle.


----------



## Dre

gi0rdun said:


> JaJuan Johnson works for Boston too. I think a couple years back the Blazers did something similar to what the Thunder did to Reggie Jackson. The Blazers did that to Jon Brockman so it was like whatever.


There's promises in this range every year


----------



## FSH

JaJuan Johnson is my darkhorse ROY pick if he is going to Boston


----------



## croco

JaJuan Johnson to the Celtics makes a lot of sense, I think he will have a decent NBA career.


----------



## FSH

Im shocked Honeycutt is still on the board


----------



## Tooeasy

bulls take this honeynuts dude?


----------



## HB

FSH said:


> JaJuan Johnson is my darkhorse ROY pick if he is going to Boston


Lol no shot at it


----------



## Dre

:hano: @ the MJ joke

For a sec I was like Jordan's son is in it?


----------



## Dre

"Kahn" sounds like some bat**** crazy leader


----------



## Tooeasy

ya stuart just sonned himself somethin awful on that


----------



## Tooeasy

anyone with a high top fade is ok in my book


----------



## 29380

Minn takes another point guard.


----------



## futuristxen

Norris Cole? Do these guys know that 1st Rd picks are GTD contracts?

Good god.


----------



## futuristxen

Haha and the Heat have now traded for Norris Cole.

Did I mention how great I think Norris Cole is?


----------



## kbdullah

I think Rudy is a good fit in Dallas actually. He can shoot and handle the ball. I mean when you're talking about a late pick, that's good value.


----------



## Wade County

Who the **** is Norris Cole?


----------



## HB

The year they made second rounders millionaires


----------



## futuristxen

Wade County said:


> Who the **** is Norris Cole?


Our new starting point guard apparently
Riley needs to hire someone else to do drafts for him.


----------



## Tooeasy

that wilfred show looks abysmal. And i find it interesting that the bulls would do ANTHING to assist the heat, seems like itd be wise to put that phone number on block.


----------



## rebelsun

Jenkins?


----------



## Wade County

It's cause he's from Cleveland, isnt it Riles...


----------



## HB

Josh Shelby should have stayed in school.


----------



## Wade County

Do we still have #31 or no?


----------



## Dre

kbdullah said:


> I think Rudy is a good fit in Dallas actually. He can shoot and handle the ball. I mean when you're talking about a late pick, that's good value.


You forget we're playing for a championship next year.


----------



## Dissonance

:laugh: Bilas is struggling to say anything about Joseph without knocking him too much. Reminds me of Chargers drafting Mouton strictly for special teams in rd 2.


----------



## Tooeasy

good to see jimmy butlet get drafted, im a fan. stern gettin **** on by those fans like always lol


----------



## FSH

bet Jimmy Bulter mom wants him back now


----------



## futuristxen

Wade County said:


> Do we still have #31 or no?


No we swapped it plus cash for Norris Cole. So this pick is going to be the Wolves...

We basically both got our old picks back.


----------



## King Joseus

Everybody loves Silver.


----------



## bball2223

Don't know about Butler's fit in Chicago, but I'm rooting for him to succeed in the league.


----------



## Nimreitz

futuristxen said:


> No we swapped it plus cash for Norris Cole. So this pick is going to be the Wolves...
> 
> We basically both got our old picks back.


We? I could have sworn you were a Cavs fan from years back. Take your support to South Beach?


----------



## Nimreitz

@DraftExpress said:


> Not to toot the DX horn too much, but we had the most accurate mock draft. 10 picks correct. ESPN 7, others less - Hard work pays off.


I also got 10 by following the Hoops Hype Rumor Page for the last 2 weeks, having no contacts in the League at all, and not actually watching the NBA.


----------



## FSH

man there is a ton of underclassmen still left


----------



## rebelsun

Singler, Honeycutt, Selby, Hopson, Darius Morris, Trey Thompkins, Jordan Williams, Dunigan, Lighty, McCamey, Rick Jackson, Jereme Richmond still available.


----------



## Tooeasy

yes, **** on the miami heat on a plasma screen to make me feel better


----------



## Dre

lol @ the drunken second round fans booing everything from this point on

Dude couldn't even analyze their cap situation :2worf:


----------



## Nimreitz

Jereme Richmond isn't getting drafted. That kid probably won't even play professionally.


----------



## FSH

rebelsun said:


> Singler, Honeycutt, Selby, Hopson, Darius Morris, Trey Thompkins, Jordan Williams, Dunigan, Lighty, McCamey, Rick Jackson, Jereme Richmond still available.


Mack from Butler also


----------



## Dre

:2ti: @ Futur ****ting on the Knicks for making reach wtf picks and the Heat do the same basically


----------



## Tooeasy

wolves just love grabbin guys that wont garner them a god damn thing in jersey sales dont they. Im sure that bogdanovic merchandise is just gonna fly off the shelves


----------



## Dre

I'd love to see a percentage of international players that actually sign NBA contracts compared to college ones over the past 12 years.


----------



## SheriffKilla

Who will be better next season, Tristan Thompson or Iman Shumpert?


----------



## Nimreitz

Tooeasy said:


> wolves just love grabbin guys that wont garner them a god damn thing in jersey sales dont they. Im sure that bogdanovic merchandise is just gonna fly off the shelves


Going to the Nets.


----------



## Dre

Tooeasy said:


> wolves just love grabbin guys that wont garner them a god damn thing in jersey sales dont they. Im sure that bogdanovic merchandise is just gonna fly off the shelves


Cmon bruh. Kahn is bumpin this right now shovelin snow outside his house


----------



## Tooeasy

Dre said:


> Cmon bruh. Kahn is bumpin this right now shovelin snow outside his house


hahah, well played good sir


----------



## Dissonance

Nimreitz said:


> We? I could have sworn you were a Cavs fan from years back. Take your support to South Beach?


Wherever Bron goes, she goes.


----------



## hobojoe

Singler to the Pistons


----------



## kbdullah

Dre said:


> You forget we're playing for a championship next year.


So a rookie is gonna provide more to the Mavericks on a championship run than Rudy? The Mavericks were chasing trades for guys like Kevin Martin and Monta Ellis and Rudy is a bit of a lite version of those guys and we get him relatively cheap. 

If guys like Peja, Cardinal, and Stevenson can contribute to that, so can Rudy. He'll do fine.

I'd love to have a guy that was established on both ends of the floor, but I'm not gonna knock this trade where we get a 2-guard. We'll probably bring back either Caron or Deshawn so we should still have a defensive sub if that's what you're worried about.


----------



## gi0rdun

Singler finally! It's weird how he was like a surefire lottery pick.


----------



## croco

Good draft for the Pistons.


----------



## Dre

I kind of disagree with their assessment. I feel like if Baron has any type of motivation a) Irving can learn from him and b) everyone will get easier looks than most rookies


----------



## HB

Poor Singler.


----------



## SheriffKilla

Seriously though, don't doubt Shumpert. We saw the Knicks making something out of all their reach picks nearly every time. Even Balkman wasn't that bad as a rookie. 
Shumpert certainly has some NBA skills as an athlete. The problem is he is very inconsistent as a shooter and decision maker so I wasn't very high on him but I honestly trust that cerebral Knick's scout more than I do myself when it comes to these things, so I'm pretty sure Shumpert is going to do some things. Just like David Lee, Trevor Ariza, Landry Fields, Wilson Chandler, Toney Douglas and so on.


----------



## Nimreitz

gi0rdun said:


> Singler finally! It's weird how he was like a surefire lottery pick.


When was that? Out of high school?


----------



## Dre

kbdullah said:


> So a rookie is gonna provide more to the Mavericks on a championship run than Rudy? The Mavericks were chasing trades for guys like Kevin Martin and Monta Ellis and Rudy is a bit of a lite version of those guys and we get him relatively cheap.
> 
> If guys like Peja, Cardinal, and Stevenson can contribute to that, so can Rudy. He'll do fine.
> 
> I'd love to have a guy that was established on both ends of the floor, but I'm not gonna knock this trade where we get a 2-guard. We'll probably bring back either Caron or Deshawn so we should still have a defensive sub if that's what you're worried about.


I guess. My thing is it seemed like you were framing him as a real asset.


----------



## futuristxen

Dre said:


> :2ti: @ Futur ****ting on the Knicks for making reach wtf picks and the Heat do the same basically



:2ti: did you SEE my post about Norris Cole? :2ti: :2ti:
:2ti: :2ti::2ti: :2ti::2ti: :2ti:


----------



## Dre

Nimreitz said:


> When was that? Out of high school?


He was in high school last year?


----------



## Nimreitz

SheriffKilla said:


> Seriously though, don't doubt Shumpert. We saw the Knicks making something out of all their reach picks nearly every time. Even Balkman wasn't that bad as a rookie.
> Shumpert certainly has some NBA skills as an athlete. The problem is he is very inconsistent as a shooter and decision maker so I wasn't very high on him but I honestly trust that cerebral Knick's scout more than I do myself when it comes to these things, so I'm pretty sure Shumpert is going to do some things. Just like David Lee, Trevor Ariza, Landry Fields, Wilson Chandler, Toney Douglas and so on.


Well, and the thing is that they don't really need points with Melo and Amare.


----------



## Nimreitz

Dre said:


> He was in high school last year?


Singler has not been considered a lottery pick in the last 2 years.


----------



## gi0rdun

Shelvin Mack!


----------



## hobojoe

SheriffKilla said:


> Seriously though, don't doubt Shumpert. We saw the Knicks making something out of all their reach picks nearly every time. Even Balkman wasn't that bad as a rookie.
> Shumpert certainly has some NBA skills as an athlete. The problem is he is very inconsistent as a shooter and decision maker so I wasn't very high on him but I honestly trust that cerebral Knick's scout more than I do myself when it comes to these things, so I'm pretty sure Shumpert is going to do some things. Just like David Lee, Trevor Ariza, Landry Fields, Wilson Chandler, Toney Douglas and so on.


HKF has compared him to Jamal Crawford. I can see that, he's not quite the shot-maker Crawford is but he'll play a lot better defense.


----------



## Tooeasy

kinda wish hornets would make a play for a second rounder and go after honeycutt, doubt he'll be there in 10 more picks


----------



## rebelsun

Honeycutt is fantastic value at 35.


----------



## gi0rdun

Nimreitz said:


> Singler has not been considered a lottery pick in the last 2 years.


He definitely has. Honeycutt is going to do solid relative to where he was picked.


----------



## Dre

lol @ New Jersey fans knowing they're on thin ice and cheering anything


----------



## Tooeasy

disappointed that my team sat on their hands all evening, I'm sure they worked the phones but with the pieces on the roster it just seems like adjustments need to be made and draft day is a great time to do it


----------



## gi0rdun

"pretty good if you're a sea lion"


----------



## Nimreitz

gi0rdun said:


> He definitely has. Honeycutt is going to do solid relative to where he was picked.


You guys are completely wrong. Not since after his freshman year and even then it was borderline. I don't know who you think you're talking to, the NBA Draft is what I do.


----------



## SheriffKilla

I still think by draft position Tristan Thompson is the biggest bust here. He might someday be a solid player but there was much better talent available at 4. If they really didn't like Valanciunas and Vesely, they should have just taken Derrick Williams and got Kemba or Knight to go with him.
Jordan Hamilton is a better prospect IMO than Thompson. They will probably put up similar numbers(with Thompson getting more rebounds and Hamilton being more effective on the perimeter), the main difference being Hamilton will be doing it for a championship caliber team and Thompson will be doing for one of the worst in the league.


----------



## gi0rdun

I don't get the logic behind cheering during the NBA draft.


----------



## gi0rdun

Chandler Parsons! Good pick up at whatever pick this is.


----------



## SheriffKilla

BTW, Singler has NOT been considered a lottery pick by most draft pundits but "experts" that follow the NBA as a whole but not the draft in particular have mentioned him as a lottery pick as late as 2010.


----------



## Wade County

Sucks there wont be a summer league to suss half these players out.


----------



## bball2223

I think Parsons could be a solid role player on the NBA level.


----------



## Adam

The problem with Rudy Fernandez is that nobody anywhere should be writing 2 paragraphs related to him. He's worth one sentence and move on. He's going to rack up DNP's and hit the occasional three. Nothing more needs to be said on the subject.


----------



## Damian Necronamous

Damn - wanted to see Tyler go to a real team. No way he pans out in Charlotte.


----------



## Dre

Mike makes all the picks the casual fan would want


----------



## rebelsun

MJ couldn't get Kwame to care. You wonder if he can w/ Tyler.


----------



## Nimreitz

Come on, Leuer to Milwaukee......


----------



## Nimreitz

LEUER!!!!

That's cool. Hope he gets a chance.


----------



## Dre

rebelsun said:


> MJ couldn't get Kwame to care. You wonder if he can w/ Tyler.


Let's see how Tyler reacts to being called a ****** in front of all his teammates by MJ in practice


----------



## gi0rdun

I have definitely seen Kyle Singler in the lottery. Maybe surefire lottery pick is exaggerating a little.

I think we can all agree that he would be drafted a lot higher if he declared a season or maybe even two seasons earlier.


----------



## rebelsun

Nimreitz said:


> Come on, Leuer to Milwaukee......


The next Brad Lohaus!


----------



## gi0rdun

Going to put this out there... Kings draft Mark Payne with the 60th pick.


----------



## SheriffKilla

I'm not sure who is still on board because I've been eating dinner and missed most of the last 40 minutes but I think Leuer could be the best prospect in the 2nd round and is going to end up a sleeper. He is going to contribute ala Ryan Anderson.


----------



## FSH

SheriffKilla said:


> I still think by draft position Tristan Thompson is the biggest bust here. He might someday be a solid player but there was much better talent available at 4. If they really didn't like Valanciunas and Vesely, they should have just taken Derrick Williams and got Kemba or Knight to go with him.
> Jordan Hamilton is a better prospect IMO than Thompson. They will probably put up similar numbers(with Thompson getting more rebounds and Hamilton being more effective on the perimeter), the main difference being Hamilton will be doing it for a championship caliber team and Thompson will be doing for one of the worst in the league.


Bismack Biyombo will be a bigger bust then Tristan Thompson


----------



## Dre

:sarcasm:

Everyone is more athletic than given credit for according to Bilas. He probably thinks he is


----------



## Nimreitz

gi0rdun said:


> I have definitely seen Kyle Singler in the lottery. Maybe surefire lottery pick is exaggerating a little.
> 
> I think we can all agree that he would be drafted a lot higher if he declared a season or maybe even two seasons earlier.


Like SheriffKilla said, you might have seen someone like Dick Vitale or Ric Bucher say that, but you definitely haven't seen it from Chad Ford or Draft Express. It was the opinion of someone who doesn't evaluate prospects.


----------



## Luke

Don't hate the pick.


----------



## bball2223

Golden State bought the Jeremy Tyler pick from Charlotte. 

Darius Morris to the Lakers.


----------



## Damian Necronamous

LOL! Mark Jackson clearly just texted Van Gundy that the Warriors bought Tyler from the Bobcats...glad he won't have to rot in Charlotte.


----------



## Luke

He'll be able to spot guys off the bench and atleast keep the offense fluid. If he can develop any kind of a 3ball I would be extremely pleased. That being said I don't know a whole lot about him so we'll see what happens.


----------



## rebelsun

Too bad seeing Thompkins and Leslie leave early only to go in the 2nd. They would've had a great Georgia team next year.


----------



## FSH

gonna be funny when JVG is the one to break Monta Ellis getting traded out of GS


----------



## Dre

....did the Bulls get the 2nd round steal?


----------



## rebelsun

Dre said:


> ....did the Bulls get the 2nd round steal?


I think either him or Honeycutt - ironically both UCLA guys.


----------



## Tooeasy

mess around i bet my damn team will pawn their pick and ill have watched the last 3 hours for nothing


----------



## Tooeasy

who the hell is josh harrelson??


----------



## 29380

> WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
> The Knicks will select Josh Harrelson with the 45th pick, source says. Hornets sold to Knicks.


http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA


----------



## rebelsun

Tooeasy said:


> who the hell is josh harrelson??


Not an NBA player.


----------



## FSH

Tooeasy said:


> mess around i bet my damn team will pawn their pick and ill have watched the last 3 hours for nothing


lololol


----------



## Tooeasy

Tooeasy said:


> mess around i bet my damn team will pawn their pick and ill have watched the last 3 hours for nothing


----------



## bball2223

:laugh: I can't even try and defend that. Harrelson was a nice player as a senior, but he is going to get abused in the NBA. Of course the Knicks can't make it a full draft night without completely dropping the ball.


----------



## Geaux Tigers

Oh man!


----------



## rebelsun

Lakers should be able to get a 3rd PG out of either Morris or Goudelock.


----------



## Tooeasy

so the knicks gave the hornets 1 million for that 45th pick, but the hornets are owned by the league. So basically, the knicks just fined themselves 1 mil to take a garbage player, and the hornets get absolutely nothing to show for it


----------



## rebelsun

Both Georgia guys end up on the Clipps.


----------



## bball2223

Nice to see a small college kid from Michigan get drafted in Keith Benson.


----------



## Dissonance

Selby to Clips.


----------



## Nimreitz

Diebler.

Cut before the end of summer league.


----------



## rebelsun

Hopson, McCamey, Lighty, Dunigan, Greg Smith, Rick Jackson still left.


----------



## Dre

Damn my man Vernon. I forgot about him. Really hyped out of HS


----------



## Tooeasy

scotty hopson killed himself in his draft interviews.


----------



## Dre

lol @ JVG knowing more about the Warriors than the Magic

DAMN @ JVG sneak calling Arenas a clown


----------



## rebelsun

Macklin has the frame and athleticism, but dude is 24 y/o.


----------



## bball2223

Its cool to see Diebler get drafted because he is local and I have been watching him play since he was in middle school, but I don't see him sticking in the league.


----------



## Dre

smh @ I'm not sure he'll ever come over here. The draft is over


----------



## Nimreitz

These guys are getting all offended for the likes of Ben Hansbrough? That dude can't play in the NBA. I think sometimes they forget that this is the best league in the world and not just ANYBODY can play. If Hansbrough has a 0% chance of making it (which he does), and this guy has a 2% chance, then you take the guy with the 2% chance, accolades be damned.


----------



## Dre

lol @ him pickin up his phone like "they're showin you on TV"


----------



## Nimreitz

I'm sick of this bull****. "There are guys in college just as good." But everyone has the book on them and it's consensus that they can't play in the League! 2% > 0%, and with the college guys they have a good handle on the players; international guys, not so much. If the rest of the world could get scouted as much as the NBA, then I'm sure the second round would look just like the first round.

And... it's starting to sound patronizing, but Bilas is right. It's better to not get drafted if you're outside the top ~40.


----------



## Adam

The Archivist hasn't pointed out that New Jersey took another Williams? I hear HB has already predicted Hall of Fame for him


----------



## rebelsun

Must be a tough ego-check for Hopson. Will be interesting to see how he responds.


----------



## HKF

I love the Shumpert pick for the Knicks. That was a talent pick. Dude has it. Also love the Clippers picks in the second round. That team might be the most athletic team in the league between Leslie, Bledsoe, Aminu and of course Griffin. It's going to be a dunk-a-thon in LA this year.


----------



## Luke

If the Clippers could have snagged Iggy for Kaman I would have really liked their chances to make the postseason.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

Man, I think the entire country had Thompson underrated. 

The guy can play, as those who watched him shut down Derrick Williams in the tourney know. My guess is that his "last minute" addition to the Cavs workout proved to be telling. The guy absolutely will not be a bust - I don't know about upside, but he does way too many things well to be a bust. 

I'm super psyched about the Celtics getting Moore and Johnson. Those two could be starting for Boston in a couple of years.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

SheriffKilla said:


> . They will probably put up similar numbers(with Thompson getting more rebounds and Hamilton being more effective on the perimeter), the main difference being Hamilton will be doing it for a championship caliber team and Thompson will be doing for one of the worst in the league.


Well, Hamilton has no idea how to be a roleplayer. That means he will be starring on a championship caliber team. That is ridiculous. He's talented, but not nearly that talented. Thompson, on the other hand, projects as a fantastic roleplayer.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> I'm super psyched about the Celtics getting Moore and Johnson. Those two could be starting for Boston in a couple of years.


Will that be the year that they're in the running for Drew Wiggins lottery?


----------



## Jonathan Watters

Yeah, those stupid Celtics. Wasting late round picks on two guys who have done nothing but win and continue to improve for the last four years, both guys who display multiple NBA tools...

But yeah, the mock drafts didn't have them as lock first rounders so they must suck.


----------



## rocketeer

Jonathan Watters said:


> Man, I think the entire country had Thompson underrated.


how is thompson underrated? he can offensive rebound and he is a good all around defender. that is literally all he is. brings nothing else to the table. bad free throw shooter. bad defensive rebounder. no post moves. no offense outside of 5 feet.

seems like a great kid. definitely a hard worker who appears to have the right attitude. should be very coachable. if he had anything at all to build off of offensively, i wouldn't be surprised to see him drafted so high. but he's really got nothing.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

Much better offensively than most give him credit for, and better than he showed last year at Texas as well. Can create for himself on the block and in the mid-post, has a quick and polished release on his spinning hook move. 

Poor FT shooter, but not nearly as bad at everything else as people seem to think he is.

I say he's underrated because it appears most people were shocked and appalled he went #4. He's very much worth the #4 pick in this draft, and I would be willing to bet people will forget his supposed offensive issues by the end of his rookie year.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Yeah, those stupid Celtics. Wasting late round picks on two guys who have done nothing but win and continue to improve for the last four years, both guys who display multiple NBA tools...


Jesus christ, man, you're an adult. Act like one. If you're starting JuJuan Johnson and E'twan Moore, unless your other three starters are Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, and a borderline all star SF you're headed deep into the lottery. Johnson has already put on 40lbs or so since high school, in other words, he's already filled out. And he's about 20-30lbs shy of being an effective starter in the NBA. 

And I don't give a **** that Moore was projected as a first round lock in a draft where second round talent was getting drafted in the lottery. He's a roleplayer. Both he and Johnson might be effective backups on an NBA team, but if they're starters, and you're counting on them for key contributions, you're in a lot of trouble.


----------



## Pacers Fan

rocketeer said:


> how is thompson underrated? he can offensive rebound and he is a good all around defender. that is literally all he is. brings nothing else to the table. bad free throw shooter. bad defensive rebounder. no post moves. no offense outside of 5 feet.
> 
> seems like a great kid. definitely a hard worker who appears to have the right attitude. should be very coachable. if he had anything at all to build off of offensively, i wouldn't be surprised to see him drafted so high. but he's really got nothing.


Yeh, Thompson to me seems like a somehow less offensively refined, more athletic version of Ed Davis. He's an outstanding defender and his rebounding might translate, but I'll be shocked if the guy eclipses 15 mpg as a rookie.

Edit: And let me clarify, I would take Ed Davis over Tristan Thompson, easily. If Ed had stayed in school, he might have gone #3 or #4 this year.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> Jesus christ, man, you're an adult. Act like one. If you're starting JuJuan Johnson and E'twan Moore, unless your other three starters are Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, and a borderline all star SF you're headed deep into the lottery. Johnson has already put on 40lbs or so since high school, in other words, he's already filled out. And he's about 20-30lbs shy of being an effective starter in the NBA.
> 
> And I don't give a **** that Moore was projected as a first round lock in a draft where second round talent was getting drafted in the lottery. He's a roleplayer. Both he and Johnson might be effective backups on an NBA team, but if they're starters, and you're counting on them for key contributions, you're in a lot of trouble.


Moore wasn't projected as a first round lock. He was mid-second round from everybody, a very real shot he wouldn't get drafted at all. 

Pretty funny that you think the Celtics are "losers" in this draft for having the gumption to pick effective roleplayers with late picks. 

E'Twaun Moore was absolutely worth a late first round pick, he can be a rotation player on a very good NBA team. He went in the second round. That's an absolute steal, any way you shake it.

Did you bother to read the names of the clowns that were drafted around Moore?


----------



## E.H. Munro

I think they're losers not for the Moore pick, but for drafting in the first round and then picking a guy that won't play next year and has no upside. Did you miss the part where I labeled Dallas and Indiana winners for _not drafting_? For Boston it simply made no sense to draft a single position player with no upside at a spot where they already have a starter and two backups.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

Pacers Fan said:


> Yeh, Thompson to me seems like a somehow less offensively refined, more athletic version of Ed Davis. He's an outstanding defender and his rebounding might translate, but I'll be shocked if the guy eclipses 15 mpg as a rookie.
> 
> Edit: And let me clarify, I would take Ed Davis over Tristan Thompson, easily. If Ed had stayed in school, he might have gone #3 or #4 this year.


He's very similar to Davis, who put in a very productive rookie season. Thompson's intangibles are much better, Davis a little more offensive polish. Thompson isn't a good #4 pick in a typical draft, but this was an extremely poor draft. You have to compare the drafted players against each other, not vs prior drafts. 

And Thompson might only play 15 mpg as a rookie. He was a freshmen, and he has some developing to do. But we are talking about a Cavs team that will be lucky to win 25 games. Gotta think bigger picture...


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> I think they're losers not for the Moore pick, but for drafting in the first round and then picking a guy that won't play next year and has no upside. Did you miss the part where I labeled Dallas and Indiana winners for _not drafting_? For Boston it simply made no sense to draft a single position player with no upside at a spot where they already have a starter and two backups.


Because there was so much talent available to help a 50-60 win team at #27...right?


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Because there was so much talent available to help a 50-60 win team at #27...right?


Are you really this stupid or is it all an act?


----------



## Jonathan Watters

I would ask you the same thing...since you clearly have no ability to assess the value of a first round draft pick.


----------



## E.H. Munro

I have as much confidence in my ability as yours. Check that, I have more confidence in mine. A #1 in 2012, 2013 or 2014, _no matter how low_, will be better than JuJuan Johnson in NBA terms. I'm not sure why it is seemingly so hard for you to grasp this fact. Not only would that future first be better than Johnson, it would have more trade value as well. Hell, Rudy Fernandez would have had more impact on Boston's chances next year than Johnson.

You can go on ranting all want about how Johnson will add another 30lbs to the 40-50 that he's already added but the simple fact is that he won't. His frame can't carry it. Nice kid, hard working. But contrary to your orgasmic assertions, a quality NBA starter he isn't and won't ever be.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> I have as much confidence in my ability as yours. Check that, I have more confidence in mine. A #1 in 2012, 2013 or 2014, _no matter how low_, will be better than JuJuan Johnson in NBA terms. I'm not sure why it is seemingly so hard for you to grasp this fact. Not only would that future first be better than Johnson, it would have more trade value as well. Hell, Rudy Fernandez would have had more impact on Boston's chances next year than Johnson.
> 
> You can go on ranting all want about how Johnson will add another 30lbs to the 40-50 that he's already added but the simple fact is that he won't. His frame can't carry it. Nice kid, hard working. But contrary to your orgasmic assertions, a quality NBA starter he isn't and won't ever be.



You are right about Rudy. He was an absolute steal. Jordan Hamilton is an overrated bum, however. 

And if you really think that a late first rounder in 12, 13 or 14 is going to have some sort of tangible impact to the freaking Celtics, it is time for you to go back and review some of the players that have gone in that range. This would be why Rudy was an overwhelming steal for the Mavs. 

The Nets never would have offered a pick without Top 20 protection. If they offer a pick with protection, it could easily sit for 5 years and provide no value. The Celtics got a potentially early 2nd round pick in the 2014 draft, which is very similar (within 10 spots) to what they would have gotten with that first rounder. Many think an early 2nd has more value than a late first since the advent of expanded rosters and the D-League. 

AND they got JuJuan Johnson. 

And this is a bad thing?


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> And if you really think that a late first rounder in 12, 13 or 14 is going to have some sort of tangible impact to the freaking Celtics, it is time for you to go back and review some of the players that have gone in that range.


Two things here, one, the reason that this draft cesspool sucked like Paris Hilton after three quarts of rum is that all the best freshman stayed out because of the pending lockout. So, contrary to what you're implying here, the odds of a low first round pick in the next three years turning out to be a rotation player are far greater than the odds of anyone picked in the same range this year, including JuJuan "Paumar'e Garnitzki" Johnson. 

You can dance like a white man on crystal meth all you want and the math won't change on that. The next three draft pools are going to be far more talented than this one because all of this year's best freshman, plus all the one & doners from the class of '11 are going to deepen next year's pool. And there'll be a domino effect, because a lot of the class of '11 guys that might have been mid first rounders otherwise will delay entry for a shot at a higher selection.

Two, that's why a future pick would have a much bigger tangible impact on the Celtics than Paumar'e Garnitzki, _because the pick wouldn't have been made yet it would have a lot more trade value than JuJuan Johnson_. Johnson's trade value is limited to the size of his salary. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> The Nets never would have offered a pick without Top 20 protection. If they offer a pick with protection, it could easily sit for 5 years and provide no value.


Unless you expect the Nets to lose Deron Williams and be unable to replace him there's no way the Nets remain bad. And if they did lose Deron Williams and not replace him that pick would have a ton of value. Either way future first>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Paumar'e Garnitzki.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

Pretty damn funny how there is no middle ground between a combination of the greatest PF's in the game and actually having negative value. 

Yet I'm the one dancing around like a white man on meth...

I don't see why the Nets would give up this mythical first round pick if future drafts are going to provide so much more opportunity. And you have yet to explain how this first round pick (guaranteed to be late) is worth so much and yet a potentially high second round pick from around the same time frame is completely worthless. 

There's also that little detail about the umpteen arguments I've made about Johnson's game, to which your only reply is "he's skinny". 

But keep telling me about how the Celtics absolutely had to have this mythical late first rounder for trade value, that the Nets absolutely would have been stupidly generous enough to dole it out, and about how the Nets are a stone cold lock to become a winning team by 2014 even with a female centerpiece like Brook Lopez.


----------



## rocketeer

Jonathan Watters said:


> Jordan Hamilton is an overrated bum, however.


why? hamilton basically has a complete offensive skillset. needs to work on actually taking the ball all the way to the basket instead of almost always pulling up, but he has everything else you want offensively. 3 point range, mid range game, post game. improved his shot selection this year despite being relied on much more for his scoring than last year. he also should be a good rebounder for his position and there really isn't any reason for him to not be at least an average defender.


----------



## Tom

The Jazz can have a very nice unjazz like team in the future. They have some nice TALENT on the team. Some skills are lacking.


----------



## HB

At least the Cavs have some options now. They can package Davis with one of their Pfs. Varejao and Hickson can play for contending teams. Hopefully they get back draft picks for next year.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Pretty damn funny how there is no middle ground between a combination of the greatest PF's in the game and actually having negative value.


There's plenty of middle ground, but I'm not the one making inflated claims of a marginal player's greatness. That would be you.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I don't see why the Nets would give up this mythical first round pick if future drafts are going to provide so much more opportunity.


Because they clearly valued Marshon Brooks enough to pull the trigger on a deal lest Dallas select him



Jonathan Watters said:


> And you have yet to explain how this first round pick (guaranteed to be late) is worth so much and yet a potentially high second round pick from around the same time frame


Because first round picks have more trade value than second round ones? I mean, call me crazy, but I do notice that when teams are dealing away good players, they generally demand future first round picks rather than future #2s. For the reason that it's easier to convince the fans you're getting value by taking back first round picks.



Jonathan Watters said:


> There's also that little detail about the umpteen arguments I've made about Johnson's game, to which your only reply is "he's skinny".


215lb PFs don't have a great history of success as quality starters in the last decade. Could he be good bench player? Sure, maybe. He also could very well be playing in Europe in four years. When Chris Bosh can overpower you, you're not going to be a quality starter. Unless the rumours of Boston dealing Green this summer are true, there really isn't a point to JJ in Boston.



Jonathan Watters said:


> But keep telling me about how the Celtics absolutely had to have this mythical late first rounder for trade value, that the Nets absolutely would have been stupidly generous enough to dole it out, and about how the Nets are a stone cold lock to become a winning team by 2014 even with a female centerpiece like Brook Lopez.


Since when is Brooke Shields the centerpiece of the Nets? Did Deron Williams jump to Spain when I wasn't looking? The Nets wanted Marshon Brooks badly enough to trade for #25. Johnson has less trade value than a future first. Because if he really was a ****ing lottery pick, _someone would have picked him in the ****ing lottery_. Rudy Fernandez>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Paumar'e Garnitzki.


----------



## HB

LOL Brandan Knight is still pissed


----------



## E.H. Munro

The look on his face when it was announced he was headed for the Post-Apocalyptic Wasteland Pistons was hilarious.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> There's plenty of middle ground, but I'm not the one making inflated claims of a marginal player's greatness. That would be you.


Oh, so now I'm claiming that Johnson is great. Fantastic. Whatever it takes to keep your little fantasy alive...



> Because first round picks have *more* trade value than second round ones? I mean, call me crazy, but I do notice that when teams are dealing away good players, they generally demand future first round picks rather than future #2s. For the reason that it's easier to convince the fans you're getting value by taking back first round picks.


So there is middle ground here? Fact of the matter is that NBA decision makers aren't as dumb as you make them out to be. A late first rounder is a late first rounder, one that has financial baggage and lot less freedom than an early 2nd. The 1st is likely more valuable, but it isn't night and day like you need to make it out to be for your ridiculous scenario to hold water. 



> *215lb PFs don't have a great history of success as quality starters in the last decade.* Could he be good bench player? Sure, maybe. He also could very well be playing in Europe in four years. When Chris Bosh can overpower you, you're not going to be a quality starter. Unless the rumours of Boston dealing Green this summer are true, there really isn't a point to JJ in Boston.


Late first rounders don't have a great history of success. 

The ones that do find success are almost always quality roleplayer types. The reason for this is that teams actually are interested in making a good pick, and not fulfilling some message board goon's trade scenario/fantasy.



> Since when is Brooke Shields the centerpiece of the Nets? Did Deron Williams jump to Spain when I wasn't looking? The Nets wanted Marshon Brooks badly enough to trade for #25. Johnson has less trade value than a future first. Because if he really was a ****ing lottery pick, _someone would have picked him in the ****ing lottery_. Rudy Fernandez>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Paumar'e Garnitzki.


Your opinion is that JuJuan Johnson has less trade value than a future first. And you've yet to say anything to defend that claim, except to repeat that he weighs 215 lbs - as if this is some exclusive piece of information that the rest of us weren't aware of. 

If Johnson weighed 250, he would have gone #1 this draft. You've basically assumed that a guy who has put on weight each of the last 4 years is going to stop, even though skinny players not gaining bulk well into their NBA careers would be very much the exception, and not the rule. But you just assume this, and expect everybody else to take it as a fact. 

I've listed a dozen reasons why he's a decent prospect. Feel free to actually respond, but don't ignore them and then repeat the same line I've already responded to half a dozen times.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Oh, so now I'm claiming that Johnson is great. Fantastic.


Your temper tantrum started when I made fun of your claim that Johnson & Moore were going to be good starters in a few years, and you got viscerally angry when I said that if you're starting those two guys your team's in a lot of trouble. If you're now conceding that you got carried away again then fine, welcome back to the real world.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Fact of the matter is that NBA decision makers aren't as dumb as you make them out to be. A late first rounder is a late first rounder, one that has financial baggage and lot less freedom than an early 2nd. The 1st is likely more valuable, but it isn't night and day like you need to make it out to be for your ridiculous scenario to hold water.


It's a marketing matter. When GMs are forced, for one reason or another, to trade popular players, they don't like announcing to fans that they did it for second round picks. Fans don't want to hear "But this pick is only ten to twenty spots later in the draft and it will cost us a lot less!" They really don't. When Boston (thankfully) unloaded a very popular Antoine Walker (don't ask me why, but Garden fans loved Chucker) for a large insurance policy their marketing strategy was simple "We got first round picks for him". Did Memphis ask for LA's vast quantity of #2s when they were dealing Gashole? Nope. They took a couple of low firsts. By your logic they should have been looking for four or five of that treasure chest full of second rounders that they'd hoarded, but that would have been a much tougher sell to the paying customers.

Look around at all these sorts of trades. Teams want first round picks to make the medicine go down a little easier. That's reality. Yes, these are all businesses, but cutting expenses isn't the only part of running a business, placating the customers is pretty important too. Especially when trading popular players.




Jonathan Watters said:


> Late first rounders don't have a great history of success.


So why make one? Why not trade for Rudy Fernandez instead? He'd be better suited for West's role anyway.




Jonathan Watters said:


> Your opinion is that JuJuan Johnson has less trade value than a future first. And you've yet to say anything to defend that claim


I've told you why. Johnson is a done deal. He doesn't have any value but his salary unless some team is really desperate for a backup PF that can't play any other position. A future first round pick hasn't been made yet, so it could produce a player you need.




Jonathan Watters said:


> If Johnson weighed 250, he would have gone #1 this draft.


If Anthony Randolph weighed 250 he could well be an all star. The problem is that neither guy does and neither has the frame to carry that sort of weight. So neither guy is going to weigh 250 unless it's in a Kelvin Duckworth sort of way on their path to a coronary. 




Jonathan Watters said:


> You've basically assumed that a guy who has put on weight each of the last 4 years is going to stop, even though skinny players not gaining bulk well into their NBA careers would be very much the exception, and not the rule. But you just assume this, and expect everybody else to take it as a fact.


I can see the size of his legs and wrists, and the width of his shoulders and hips, and see that he doesn't have the frame to carry the extra weight. There's no magic that trainers can perform to grow a 22 year old's skeleton to make it carry the extra bulk. 

So, yeah, I still can't see any reason for the pick unless they're planning on trading Jeff Green after the new CBA is signed because there just isn't a role for him on Boston's roster at the moment. There are already two guys ahead of him on the depth chart at the 4. Fernandez would have been a much better pickup for them.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> Your temper tantrum started when I made fun of your claim that Johnson & Moore were going to be good starters in a few years, and you got viscerally angry when I said that if you're starting those two guys your team's in a lot of trouble. If you're now conceding that you got carried away again then fine, welcome back to the real world.


My temper tantrum? I'm not the one typing in all caps, swearing up and down, taking everything to the extreme, and making up new words. 



> It's a marketing matter. When GMs are forced, for one reason or another, to trade popular players, they don't like announcing to fans that they did it for second round picks. Fans don't want to hear "But this pick is only ten to twenty spots later in the draft and it will cost us a lot less!" They really don't. When Boston (thankfully) unloaded a very popular Antoine Walker (don't ask me why, but Garden fans loved Chucker) for a large insurance policy their marketing strategy was simple "We got first round picks for him". Did Memphis ask for LA's vast quantity of #2s when they were dealing Gashole? Nope. They took a couple of low firsts. By your logic they should have been looking for four or five of that treasure chest full of second rounders that they'd hoarded, but that would have been a much tougher sell to the paying customers.


I'm pretty sure trading Gasol for a bag of peanuts is trading Gasol for a bag of peanuts, and I'm pretty sure all 3 of the Memphis fans out there were as horrified and outraged as 3 fans can possibly get. If a GM is horrified over the thought of pissing off his fanbase, he doesn't make the trade in the first place. 



> Look around at all these sorts of trades. Teams want first round picks to make the medicine go down a little easier. That's reality. Yes, these are all businesses, but cutting expenses isn't the only part of running a business, placating the customers is pretty important too. Especially when trading popular players.


And these late first rounders are available for almost nothing at almost any time, just like an early 2nd. There's nothing that says that this was Ainge's last chance to get one, even though you act like it was. 

Once again, we have you extending the fantasy that a late first rounder instead of the early 2nd they got is going to make some sort of marked difference in the acquisition of Chris freakin' Paul. Or, we could just go with the idea that most GM's are able to understand basic market values and account for this in all trade scenarios, not just the ones that you cherry pick to make your fantasy work. 



> So why make one? Why not trade for Rudy Fernandez instead? He'd be better suited for West's role anyway.


I didn't say I wouldn't rather have Rudy Fernandez. It can still be a good pick even if it wasn't the perfect pick. 



> I've told you why. Johnson is a done deal. He doesn't have any value but his salary unless some team is really desperate for a backup PF that can't play any other position. A future first round pick hasn't been made yet, so it could produce a player you need.
> 
> 
> I can see the size of his legs and wrists, and the width of his shoulders and hips, and see that he doesn't have the frame to carry the extra weight. There's no magic that trainers can perform to grow a 22 year old's skeleton to make it carry the extra bulk.


Yes. The guy that has shown significant improvement every year for the past half decade is suddenly a finished product. Sorry, this is just a conclusion you have come to because you don't like the guy. There's nothing that says he is done gaining strength or done improving. You want to say he is 22 so he is done, but you refuse to acknowledge the blatantly obvious fact that Johnson isn't on the same development curve as everybody else. 




> So, yeah, I still can't see any reason for the pick unless they're planning on trading Jeff Green after the new CBA is signed because there just isn't a role for him on Boston's roster at the moment. There are already two guys ahead of him on the depth chart at the 4. Fernandez would have been a much better pickup for them.


Visit a Boston message board, and you'll hear all sorts of fans claiming he fills a need. Do you really expect Kevin Garnett to stay healthy the entire season? Do you really think Green doesn't slide up to SF ever, or Big Baby to C? 

Even up here in the stratosphere of absurdity, you are trying to stretch things...


----------



## Pacers Fan

As a guy who's followed Johnson's entire career at Purdue, the guy has improved much more than most Seniors over the course of his time there, and his body has changed as well. His frame might not be able to hold 270 pounds, but there is no reason to think he can't get up to 230-240 of raw muscle. The improvements he's made in his game every year suggest he is far from finished. Just because a guy is a Senior doesn't mean he can't improve anymore.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

Boston was supposed to trade for a similarly placed pick several years down the road when the best players are on their team are in their mid-thirties? That doesn't seem like it helps them win a championship.

Who is in front of Johnson for backup minutes anyway? Jermaine O'Neal and Glen Davis? These are platoon type players anyway with position versatility. Look around the league at what most teams have in the middle. Garnet, O'Neal, and Davis can all play the 5 against almost any team. There are plenty of ways they will be able to get Johnson in the lineup.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> My temper tantrum? I'm not the one typing in all caps, swearing up and down, taking everything to the extreme, and making up new words.


As I don't type in all caps, I have no idea what you're talking about here. And language is a playground, so I always do my best to add to the fun by inventing new words. And, contrary to your claim here, you _have_ been taking things to extremes (you always do when someone disagrees with you). You're one of the shortest tempered people on this forum. I mean, r-star is worse, but not many others are.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I'm pretty sure trading Gasol for a bag of peanuts is trading Gasol for a bag of peanuts, and I'm pretty sure all 3 of the Memphis fans out there were as horrified and outraged as 3 fans can possibly get. If a GM is horrified over the thought of pissing off his fanbase, he doesn't make the trade in the first place.


As usual, you're wrong. When the deal was made the Memphis fans here all supported it. I was one of the few non-Grizzlies fans that thought it was a good deal. And, as usual, you're misstating the argument in hopes that everyone else forgot what was actually said. 

Memphis had to move Gashole, just as Ainge had to move Walker (they were over the luxury tax limit that year and the investment group that bought the team had no intentions on missing out on the lucrative bonus money for a 45 win team). If you think teams aren't in the habit of spin control, you understand nothing about running a business. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> And these late first rounders are available for almost nothing at almost any time, just like an early 2nd. There's nothing that says that this was Ainge's last chance to get one, even though you act like it was.


And yet, when the time comes for teams to trade away popular players they always seem to demand first round picks rather than those second rounders that you claim they prefer. Maybe they're just not smart enough to know what they really want? 



Jonathan Watters said:


> Once again, we have you extending the fantasy that a late first rounder instead of the early 2nd they got is going to make some sort of marked difference in the acquisition of Chris freakin' Paul.


No, the deal will end up being either Westbrook (if OKC) or Rondo (if Boston) for Paul. But, no, Demps isn't going to be demanding second round picks as throw-ins. We all get it, you're the greatest basketball mind alive today, and Demps should be taking your advice, but ultimately he isn't. And when he trades Paul it's going to be for a marketable young player and first round picks. Not the second rounders that you're convinced he actually wants.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I didn't say I wouldn't rather have Rudy Fernandez. It can still be a good pick even if it wasn't the perfect pick.


But, see, my more than reasonable position is that by drafting a superfluous player and not trading for a player that fills an actual role on their team Boston falls amongst the draft losers. Boston overplayed Pierce & Allen last year (especially Pierce) and both were gassed by the postseason. So, despite the drafting of Johnson, Boston _still_ needs to sign big men because Johnson can't provide them with post defense, and they need to find more help at the 2/3 because West's injuries keep mounting up and they can't count on him. Fernandez would have at least plugged one of those holes.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Yes. The guy that has shown significant improvement every year for the past half decade is suddenly a finished product. Sorry, this is just a conclusion you have come to because you don't like the guy. There's nothing that says he is done gaining strength or done improving. You want to say he is 22 so he is done, but you refuse to acknowledge the blatantly obvious fact that Johnson isn't on the same development curve as everybody else.


Will his skeleton expand? No. So, yeah, there's pretty much no upside here. He won't get quicker (in fact, track athleticism usually starts declining around ages 23-25), he isn't going to be getting bigger. He's already packed on a pile of weight since high school. A good kid? Yes. Hard working? Yes. Superfluous on Boston's roster? Yes.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Visit a Boston message board, and you'll hear all sorts of fans claiming he fills a need.


You mean the same people that maintain, with a straight face, that Rajon Rondo is already better than Chris Paul has ever been and once he learns how to shoot he'll go down as the greatest point guard in NBA history? Those people? You know what else they're saying? They're saying that Johnson is going to be as good as prime Garnett. They should probably spend less time reading you.


----------



## Porn Player

Most pathetic argument I have ever seen. And that's saying something because I've been into it over some pretty dumb **** on this board.

60 players taken and you two girls have been back and forth over Johnson for 5 pages. Smh. You've talked about him more here than we will ever see about him during his career.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Mrs. Thang said:


> Who is in front of Johnson for backup minutes anyway? Jermaine O'Neal and Glen Davis?


Jermaine O'Neal is the center, and an injury factory. So they still need another 5 anyway. Even if they bring back Davis, at which point they would have O'Neal, Davis, and some random vet at the 5 (because Davis is 6'7" and short armed, they'd still need another body to cover for O'Neal's injuries) and Garnett, Green, and possibly Davis (again, if they bring him back) at the 4. That's why Johnson's superfluous.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Porn Player said:


> Most pathetic argument I have ever seen. And that's saying something because I've been into it over some pretty dumb **** on this board.
> 
> 60 players taken and you two girls have been back and forth over Johnson for 5 pages. Smh. You've talked about him more here than we will ever see about him during his career.


How can you say that about a sure-fire future first ballot hall-of-famer? :bsmile: (I'm with you on this, all Johnson has in common with Kevin Garnett is that they'll both likely be finished with their NBA careers in four years)


----------



## Porn Player

Next years draft really blows this one out of the water. I tried to get myself hyped for it but after really looking into the 2012 class I have to wonder if Irving would have even been a Top 10 pick. He might not have made the lottery. How ridiculous is that?


----------



## E.H. Munro

Porn Player said:


> Next years draft really blows the one out of the water. I tried to get myself hyped for it but after really looking into the 2012 class I have to wonder if Irving would have even been a Top 10 pick. He might not have made the lottery. How ridiculous is that?


By virtue of his position alone he would have made the lottery (just to intercept the chuckleheads by that I mean that he looks like someone that will be a pretty good NBA point guard, which would always inflate his draft value). But I agree about that top ten. That's going to be a pretty fierce group.


----------



## Porn Player

Marquis Teague, Myck Kabongo and Austin Rivers all project to be better than Irving at this point in time @ PG. 

He would have probably made the lottery, but only just.


----------



## E.H. Munro

I'll agree on Teague, but I don't think that Baby Doc's NBA position is set in stone yet. He's just as likely to be playing the 2 as the 1.


----------



## Porn Player

Yeah, I just think the kid has so much talent he could do either. Shame Duke will probably ruin him and curse his NBA career into the ground.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Well, if Boston ends up using the Clippers' selection next year and Baby Doc's there then he just might well end up Boston's PG of the future (presuming they could move Rondo for a cornerstone player at the 2/3).


----------



## Porn Player

Please tell me that pick has some kind of protection on it?

The Clippers are an embarrassment. Gave away Irving for nothing. Gave up a draft pick in the draft that could go down as the greatest ever. 

Gotta wonder how Blake feels about all of these horrible decisions.


----------



## Luke

He's just getting ready to join the other L.A. team at this point.


----------



## Porn Player

The thing that really gets me is the only things valuable on that team have come from draft picks, yet they keep giving them away? 

I mean they could be at Irving/Gordon/Aminu/Griffin/Drummond status in 2012/13 if they had just kept hold of what they already owned.


----------



## Luke

It's the Clippers so I haven't been overly surprised at anything that's happened. Griffin will play out his contract and then leave, at which point Clipper nation can get ready for another decade of suckage.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Porn Player said:


> Please tell me that pick has some kind of protection on it?


The reason this year's pick was unprotected is because they'd previously traded a #1 pick to OKC (now in Boston's possession), so they weren't permitted to trade a protected pick. (Because Boston's first would would always take precedence if they lottery protected it it would have been a theoretical first that likely never materialised and Cleveland wasn't eating Baron Davis for theoretical assets) The pick they owe Boston is top ten protected unless the Clippers use Minnesota's 2012 #1 (in other words, if they deal that Minnesota pick the protection on the pick carries) so far as I know.


----------



## HKF

Austin Rivers is not a point guard. Heck, Avery Bradley is still on Boston and no one has any expectations for the kid now. What a difference a year makes.


----------



## Porn Player

He's a HSSR, I think it's a little early to be deciding his position.


----------



## bball2223

Porn Player said:


> Yeah, I just think the kid has so much talent he could do either. Shame Duke will probably ruin him and curse his NBA career into the ground.


Or shame that he picked to go to Duke? Thats on Rivers. And HKF is right he isn't a PG. 

I've watched him probably 10-15 times over the past few years and the kid is an elite scorer and thats about it. He can make plays for himself, but I can count on one hand the amount of times I have seen him create for others and I have watched him play quite a bit. I have no doubt he will be a great college player, a lottery pick in 2012 and could eventually score 15-20 a game at the NBA level, but I just don't see him projecting as a franchise player. He reminds me a lot of Eric Gordon, Gordon can give you 20 almost every night out, but he isn't a PG and that's how I view Rivers ceiling on the NBA level.


----------



## RIP CITY

If this isn't the worst Draft Class ever I don't know what is. I don't see one sure fire elite player in this entire Draft. I'm sure there will be a star or two out of this Draft because there is just bound to be 1 or 2 out of each Draft, but I couldn't tell you who it will be. That said, I'm happy with the Brandon Knight pick for the Pistons, we needed a big man much more but I think Knight was the best player available at #7 so I'm ok with it. Now we just need to trade everyone on the roster besides him, Monroe and Jerebko and we'll be on the right track, lol.


----------



## NOFX22

E.H. Munro said:


> Well, if Boston ends up using the Clippers' selection next year and Baby Doc's there then he just might well end up Boston's PG of the future (presuming they could move Rondo for a cornerstone player at the 2/3).


That pick is protected...


----------



## E.H. Munro

NOFX22 said:


> That pick is protected...


Unless LA is using Minnesota's pick so far as I understand, in which case Boston gets the lesser of LA's picks.


----------



## NOFX22

Porn Player said:


> Please tell me that pick has some kind of protection on it?
> 
> The Clippers are an embarrassment. Gave away Irving for nothing. Gave up a draft pick in the draft that could go down as the greatest ever.
> 
> Gotta wonder how Blake feels about all of these horrible decisions.


It wasn't for nothing we got rid of B-diddy huge contract which was considered impossible to move at the time. Even the Cavs want to get rid of Biddy and there's been no takers. We got a Solid veteran in Mo Williams who gave us 15/7 last season. It also free up cap space for this year and 2012. Yea we got rid of our pick but the draft lottery was fricking rigged! No way would the Clips would have gotten 1st pick if they were in the lottery. Stern wanted the Cavs back! Besides as someone previously mentioned Irving wouldn't even be in the top ten in next year draft! And the Clips have Minny unprotected pick next year! This team needs more vets than youth! If we can get any of these two through free agency or trade Granger, Gay, Iggy, Prince or Battier than u will c us in the playoffs next year!


----------



## NOFX22

E.H. Munro said:


> Unless LA is using Minnesota's pick so far as I understand, in which case Boston gets the lesser of LA's picks.


If LA finishes with a record better than 10 teams yes it goes to Boston if not than the Clips will have 2 picks in the top 10...


----------



## E.H. Munro

Then take it up with all the sources that say that if the Clippers end up with two picks in the 2012 draft that the lesser pick gets conveyed as per the trade for Blount.


----------



## NOFX22

E.H. Munro said:


> Then take it up with all the sources that say that if the Clippers end up with two picks in the 2012 draft that the lesser pick gets conveyed as per the trade for Blount.


Ok from my understanding the Clippers get minny unprotected pick from the Cassel/Jaric trade which was top ten protected until 2012. Than the Clippers traded for Eric Bledsoe from OKC in an exchange For a protected 1st round pick which now belongs to Boston. Boston only get our pick if we finish with a better record than 10 teams. That Minny pick has nothing to do with Boston. So the Clips potentially could have two picks in the top ten in 2012


----------



## E.H. Munro

According to everything I've seen, when they made the deal with OKC the terms were that if they ended up with two picks in 2012 then the lesser pick was to be conveyed, but if they traded the Minnesota pick then the top 10 protection applied. And if Sterling were serious that's how it would go because the Clippers are on the short list of teams that can make a run at CP3. And he'd sign the extension with Blake & Gordon to run with.


----------



## HB

Thery love Jimmer in the Kings country


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> As I don't type in all caps, I have no idea what you're talking about here. And language is a playground, so I always do my best to add to the fun by inventing new words. And, contrary to your claim here, you _have_ been taking things to extremes (you always do when someone disagrees with you). You're one of the shortest tempered people on this forum. I mean, r-star is worse, but not many others are.


I claimed that Boston wasn't a loser in this draft. I claimed that JuJuan Johnson could be a starter someday. That is it. 

You, on the other hand, decided to mask multiple swearwords in every post you've made, and took my liking Johnson as the #27 pick and turned it into me "taking things to extremes" and referring to JuJuan as a combination of the top PF's in the game. 




> As usual, you're wrong. When the deal was made the Memphis fans here all supported it. I was one of the few non-Grizzlies fans that thought it was a good deal. And, as usual, you're misstating the argument in hopes that everyone else forgot what was actually said.
> 
> Memphis had to move Gashole, just as Ainge had to move Walker (they were over the luxury tax limit that year and the investment group that bought the team had no intentions on missing out on the lucrative bonus money for a 45 win team). If you think teams aren't in the habit of spin control, you understand nothing about running a business.


If you understood anything about running a business, you would make an effort to understand the true value of an asset instead of claming that a late 1st round pick from some date in the distant future is going to make a difference in acquiring Chris freakin' Paul. This fantasy GM'ing you are doing is about as far away from "running a business" as we can possibly get. Go fire up NBA 2k and run your simulation league - real business transactions are made because both parties see value created. They aren't made on a series of cascadingly ridiculous assumptions that have little to basis in reality. 



> And yet, when the time comes for teams to trade away popular players they always seem to demand first round picks rather than those second rounders that you claim they prefer. Maybe they're just not smart enough to know what they really want?


First rounders are part of most packages, but you just assume that means they are significant parts of most packages. Also, you apparently think the GM acquiring this heavily protected first round pick won't account for the fact that it is heavily protected. Plenty of first rounders have been included in trades over the years, but that really has nothing to do with this specific situation. If Demps wants first round picks, Ainge will get him first round picks. One protected pick that may not come up for years has nothing to do with anything. 



> No, the deal will end up being either Westbrook (if OKC) or Rondo (if Boston) for Paul. But, no, Demps isn't going to be demanding second round picks as throw-ins. We all get it, you're the greatest basketball mind alive today, and Demps should be taking your advice, but ultimately he isn't. And when he trades Paul it's going to be for a marketable young player and first round picks. Not the second rounders that you're convinced he actually wants.


You would be the "greatest basketball mind alive today", somehow believing that Boston is actually going to accomplish putting this fantasy trade together down to your absurdly specific details. 

And I'm not even saying Demps would want a 2nd round pick. I am saing that Demps isn't a retard. He realizes that there is little difference in value between a heavily protected 1st and an early 2nd. Your entire scenario is predicated on Demps not being able to figure this out, but your end scenario isn't based on Demps creating value - it is based on Demps trading Chris Paul.

He's not going to consider either pick much of an asset in trade - certainly not a dealbreaker either way, considering a similar could be had by Demps or Ainge pretty much any time they want to acquire it. 

All I've done here is point out that protected late 1st has no significant difference to a GM when the end game is Chris Paul. This isn't super smart me, this is a fact. Sorry I'm using common sense shoot holes in your cracked out GM fantasy world. 



> But, see, my more than reasonable position is that by drafting a superfluous player and not trading for a player that fills an actual role on their team Boston falls amongst the draft losers. Boston overplayed Pierce & Allen last year (especially Pierce) and both were gassed by the postseason. So, despite the drafting of Johnson, Boston _still_ needs to sign big men because Johnson can't provide them with post defense, and they need to find more help at the 2/3 because West's injuries keep mounting up and they can't count on him. Fernandez would have at least plugged one of those holes.


Love it. West's injuries "keep mounting up", but not Garnett or O'Neal's. 



> Will his skeleton expand? No. So, yeah, there's pretty much no upside here. He won't get quicker (in fact, track athleticism usually starts declining around ages 23-25), he isn't going to be getting bigger. He's already packed on a pile of weight since high school. A good kid? Yes. Hard working? Yes. Superfluous on Boston's roster? Yes.


So frame is a finished product, when the vast majority of players who add weight their frame their entire careers, but his athleticism is going to start declining. Not that declining athleticism would have anything do with the weight veteran players almost always add. Right? 

Just more and more contradictions. I think Dallas should have traded for a future first instead of Rudy Fernandez, because they can use the future first in a trade for Chris Paul! Chris Paul is way better than Reggie Fernanjordan! Quit jumping to extremes! %()#&$#!!!! Wheeeeeeeeee!!!!!



> You mean the same people that maintain, with a straight face, that Rajon Rondo is already better than Chris Paul has ever been and once he learns how to shoot he'll go down as the greatest point guard in NBA history? Those people? You know what else they're saying? They're saying that Johnson is going to be as good as prime Garnett. They should probably spend less time reading you.


Seems like the real delusional fan here is the one that thinks the difference between one late first and one early second is going to make a difference in acquiring Chris freakin' Paul. 

But what do I know, I just keep jumping to extremes like talking about how I think JuJuan Johnson was good value at #27. What an extreme position, why can't I just settle down and come up with reasonable things to say like how the Celtics ruined the future of their franchise because they ended up with JJ + future #35 instead of just future #25.

Yeah, so much more reasonable there.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> How can you say that about a sure-fire future first ballot hall-of-famer? :bsmile: (I'm with you on this, all Johnson has in common with Kevin Garnett is that they'll both likely be finished with their NBA careers in four years)


Oh man, there's me jumping to extremes again, claiming JuJuan Johnson could develop into a starter and you deciding that means I think he's going to the hall of fame...

Man, me and my extremes. Claiming that drafting a 6'10 kid with plus athleticism and elite shooting at the freaking #27 pick doesn't make the Celtics draft night losers...what extremes I jump to!


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> I claimed that Boston wasn't a loser in this draft. I claimed that JuJuan Johnson could be a starter someday. That is it.


And I asked a very reasonable question in response. You got upset and turned insulting after. Not that this is anything new for you. You always fly off the handle when someone questions your judgments. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> You, on the other hand, decided to mask multiple swearwords in every post you've made


I don't "mask multiple swearwords in every post I make". I do what one is supposed to do, I type the words out and let the language filter handle it. And as I do this in nearly every post, I'm not sure why you think it a big deal. I'm the son of a construction contractor, I've spent most of my life around guys from the trades. So my mode of speech is appropriately salty.



Jonathan Watters said:


> took my liking Johnson as the #27 pick and turned it into me "taking things to extremes" and referring to JuJuan as a combination of the top PF's in the game.


I was more referring to your febrile insults after the fact. And, yeah, after I asked whether Boston would be starting Moore & Johnson in their attempt to win the Drew Wiggins lottery you went into full frontal anger mode. Because you obviously don't think they'll be bad starters (and they would). 



Jonathan Watters said:


> If you understood anything about running a business, you would make an effort to understand the true value of an asset instead of claming that a late 1st round pick from some date in the distant future is going to make a difference in acquiring Chris freakin' Paul.


And here's an example of you taking things to extremes again. Unless the team trading for Paul is the Clippers (who would be dealing just the single pick, Minnesota's 2012 #1), whomever does trade for him will be dealing multiple first round picks. That's the reality. Teams really hate telling their fans "We traded away our most popular player for some second round picks, because those picks in the 40s and 50s are every bit as valuable as picks in the 20s because they cost us less money!!!!" (And this is indisputable as the #2 in question is a 2014 #2, when New Jersey will be a much better team than Boston in your fantasy scenario where Johnson and Moore are starting.)

I know you hate admitting that you're wrong, and you'll dance faster than Lindsay Lohan after three hits of meth to shift the goalposts and distract people. But here's the reality, when teams proactively deal star players away, it's future firsts they request (whether as the centerpiece or as throw-ins), not second round picks. And certainly not mid to late second round picks which you're still hilariously insisting are every bit as valuable as picks 15-25 spots earlier. They ain't.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Go fire up NBA 2k and run your simulation league - real business transactions are made because both parties see value created. They aren't made on a series of cascadingly ridiculous assumptions that have little to basis in reality.


So, you're still insisting that teams _want_ mid to low second round picks when trading away star players? Why is it then that I only see those picks trade hands in situations like the Bosh/James sign & trades? You know, when the other team has little to no choice in the matter. 

Chris Paul is leaving the Hornets unless the NBA gets a franchise player designation in the new CBA. That's the reality. The question is how do they maximise value for him? Are you going to tell us with a straight face that they'll take Chauncey Billups and second round picks because those #2s are more valuable than first round picks from Boston or OKC? Especially as those #1s would be packaged with Westbrook or Rondo. No, sorry, the deal for Chris Paul is going to look like the deals for Garnett (which involved a player heavily overrated by a certain draft site) or Deron Williams rather than some Jon Watters fantasy involving second rounders.



Jonathan Watters said:


> First rounders are part of most packages, but you just assume that means they are significant parts of most packages.


Are you seriously claiming that the first rounders would be more significant than Westbrook or Rondo? Or are you trying to create a strawman because you don't want to admit that you're wrong? Did you think it was some sort of magical ****ing coincidence that I singled out OKC and Boston as two of a very short list of teams that have the means to acquire Paul? Did you think I meant they could send Dell Demps the best drugs & hookers or something? 

There aren't many teams that have star players that they would want to deal for Paul. New York doesn't want to trade Amar'e or Melo for CP3, they want to add him to them. So the best they're going to be able to do is (maybe) a top 5 pick next year (if the Clippers get serious about winning) or a star PG from another team looking to upgrade the spot, plus some first rounders to balance the ledgers. Of those second tier points available, Westbrook and Rondo are the best of the lot, that's why their teams are going to be the top of the list when the deal happens. Having extra #1s when that day arrives is a huge advantage. Capisce? 

I haven't bothered reading the rest of your response yet, as I have better things to do with my time. I'll get around to it eventually though, never fear.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> And I asked a very reasonable question in response. You got upset and turned insulting after. Not that this is anything new for you. You always fly off the handle when someone questions your judgments.


What was this reasonable question? The only argument you've made other than making up hybrid PF's is that Johnson is skinny. 



> I don't "mask multiple swearwords in every post I make". I do what one is supposed to do, I type the words out and let the language filter handle it. And as I do this in nearly every post, I'm not sure why you think it a big deal. I'm the son of a construction contractor, I've spent most of my life around guys from the trades. So my mode of speech is appropriately salty.


I don't think it is a big deal. You were the one who said I was posting like I was on meth, I merely pointed out that your demeanor is much more "off the handle" than mine ever was. And even if I did turn insulting, I've provided sound reasoning for every claim I've made. That certainly isn't something you can claim. 



> I was more referring to your febrile insults after the fact. And, yeah, after I asked whether Boston would be starting Moore & Johnson in their attempt to win the Drew Wiggins lottery you went into full frontal anger mode. Because you obviously don't think they'll be bad starters (and they would).


Wrongo. This whole thing was in response to your calling the Celtics "losers" in this draft. When all they had was the freakin' 27th pick. Impossible to be a top loser when you have very little to begin with. Another lesson you'll want to learn if you are at all involved with a business. 

I never once said Johnson and Moore WILL be starters. Either one of them "could" develop into a starter - and that is fantastic value for where the Celtics picked. That was my point, but you would much rather pretend I turned Jujuan Johnson into a future hall of famer than actually respond to any of my arguments. 




> And here's an example of you taking things to extremes again. Unless the team trading for Paul is the Clippers (who would be dealing just the single pick, Minnesota's 2012 #1), whomever does trade for him will be dealing multiple first round picks. That's the reality. Teams really hate telling their fans "We traded away our most popular player for some second round picks, because those picks in the 40s and 50s are every bit as valuable as picks in the 20s because they cost us less money!!!!" (And this is indisputable as the #2 in question is a 2014 #2, when New Jersey will be a much better team than Boston in your fantasy scenario where Johnson and Moore are starting.)
> 
> I know you hate admitting that you're wrong, and you'll dance faster than Lindsay Lohan after three hits of meth to shift the goalposts and distract people. But here's the reality, when teams proactively deal star players away, it's future firsts they request (whether as the centerpiece or as throw-ins), not second round picks. And certainly not mid to late second round picks which you're still hilariously insisting are every bit as valuable as picks 15-25 spots earlier. They ain't.


I never once insisted they have "the same" value. Is their value close? Absolutely. Close enough that attempting to use that difference as any sort of lynchpin in a deal for Chris freakin Paul makes you the fantasy meth head GM here? Absolutely. 




> So, you're still insisting that teams _want_ mid to low second round picks when trading away star players? Why is it then that I only see those picks trade hands in situations like the Bosh/James sign & trades? You know, when the other team has little to no choice in the matter.
> 
> Chris Paul is leaving the Hornets unless the NBA gets a franchise player designation in the new CBA. That's the reality. The question is how do they maximise value for him? Are you going to tell us with a straight face that they'll take Chauncey Billups and second round picks because those #2s are more valuable than first round picks from Boston or OKC? Especially as those #1s would be packaged with Westbrook or Rondo. No, sorry, the deal for Chris Paul is going to look like the deals for Garnett (which involved a player heavily overrated by a certain draft site) or Deron Williams rather than some Jon Watters fantasy involving second rounders.


I think New Orleans will probably get a couple of first rounders, and that the team recieving Paul in return will have no trouble whatsoever acquiring a heavily protected pick to be included in the deal, considering there is no shortage of them. Were you aware that a team gets one every year unless they trade it? You seem to believe that a heavily protected first rounder from a team that has been locked into the lottery for half a decade is some sort of finite commodity? 



> Are you seriously claiming that the first rounders would be more significant than Westbrook or Rondo? Or are you trying to create a strawman because you don't want to admit that you're wrong? Did you think it was some sort of magical ****ing coincidence that I singled out OKC and Boston as two of a very short list of teams that have the means to acquire Paul? Did you think I meant they could send Dell Demps the best drugs & hookers or something?
> 
> There aren't many teams that have star players that they would want to deal for Paul. New York doesn't want to trade Amar'e or Melo for CP3, they want to add him to them. So the best they're going to be able to do is (maybe) a top 5 pick next year (if the Clippers get serious about winning) or a star PG from another team looking to upgrade the spot, plus some first rounders to balance the ledgers. Of those second tier points available, Westbrook and Rondo are the best of the lot, that's why their teams are going to be the top of the list when the deal happens. Having extra #1s when that day arrives is a huge advantage. Capisce?



You obviously don't get it. I don't think protected "first rounders" are significant at all. Picks that at least have the chance to be in the lottery might have some value. But any deal for Chris Paul will have to be about the other players involved - unless a lousy team makes the trade. If it is Rondo the Hornets are getting, Demps will take Rondo+Celts 2012 pick+another future first+NJ 2014 2nd just the same as he would if it was a 3rd first rounder. It is essentially the same deal. If we try to put some value on it and Chris Paul is 100, the first deal is Demps getting 76 in return and the second is 75. The breakdown of that value is 70 for Rondo, 2 for a first rounder, and 1 for the 2nd rounder. It just doesn't freaking matter! 

The thing you don't seem to understand here is basic supply & demand. This is a star-dominated league, and Chris Paul is one of the 2-3 best point guards to ever play the game. It doesn't matter that Demps "has" to trade him. He holds all the trump cards here. Teams will be falling all over each other to acquire him. Paul is instant contender status for whoever lands him. Everybody out there knows it, and the only thing worse than not acquiring Paul is for your divisional rival to get him. 

This will be one heck of a bidding war, and it won't be Demps making the phone calls to potential trade partners. He will play hardball, pitting potential trade partners against each other in a bidding war. Perhaps this increases the risk of him walking away for nothing, but he certainly doesn't take a beggar's mentality and end up with a couple of first rounders. A couple of first rounders from Chris Paul's new team might as well be nothing when the entire league would give up half their roster for a chance to rebuild around Cp3. At that point, Demps is fired anyways. He knows this, the team acquiring Paul knows this, and Danny Ainge knows he will give Demps Rajon Rondo+whatever picks he's got+his holy soul to get his paws on Chris Paul. There will be absolutely zero haggling about a pick that will be in the 20's or else be 5 years from now, vs a 2014 2nd rounder. 

Maybe your scenario would have some value if Boston had no other picks to offer, but that isn't the case. Once again, with you it is about the fantasy instead of about what is actually going to happen. I'm just curious, did the fantasy predate our little draft argument or did you concoct in response to my ripping your whole "boston is a draft loser" argument to shreds? 




> I haven't bothered reading the rest of your response yet, as I have better things to do with my time. I'll get around to it eventually though, never fear.


I'm still over here trembling...


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> What was this reasonable question?


That would have been the one I asked that sent you into your full frontal _spoiled five year old brat temper tantrum_ post mode. If Moore and Johnson are starting for your NBA team, your team is in trouble. And that very suggestion got you angry, hilarious that you're now claiming that you never stated that they'd be any good, when the mere suggestion that they might not be got you so furious to start with. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> Wrongo. This whole thing was in response to your calling the Celtics "losers" in this draft. When all they had was the freakin' 27th pick.


Really now, let's review, shall we? Let's see where this debate started...



Jonathan Watters said:


> E.H. Munro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan Watters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm super psyched about the Celtics getting Moore and Johnson. Those two could be starting for Boston in a couple of years.
> 
> 
> 
> Will that be the year that they're in the running for Drew Wiggins lottery?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, those stupid Celtics. Wasting late round picks on two guys who have done nothing but win and continue to improve for the last four years, both guys who display multiple NBA tools...
> 
> But yeah, the mock drafts didn't have them as lock first rounders so they must suck.
Click to expand...

Nope, looks like it started in this very thread and had nothing to do with a later post from another thread at all. If you hadn't spent this entire thread being so douchey and intellectually dishonest with _everyone_ that disagreed with you here I'd probably assume that you just forgot. But after your snide and condescending post to Nimreitz after he demonstrated how full of it you were I think it's safe to assume that you're continuing to invent **** because you're simply incapable of admitting that you're wrong. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> I never once said Johnson and Moore WILL be starters. Either one of them "could" develop into a starter - and that is fantastic value for where the Celtics picked. That was my point, but you would much rather pretend I turned Jujuan Johnson into a future hall of famer than actually respond to any of my arguments.


And yet you got angry when I suggested that Moore and Johnson might not be good starters. And you've continued to angrily post in response for no reason apparently, because now you're claiming to agree with me. But, hey, don't let me interfere with your continuing temper tantrum. Because god knows you won't admit that you were wrong, even when you're shifting the goalposts to a new position that's in direct disagreement with the one you started with.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Close enough that attempting to use that difference as any sort of lynchpin in a deal for Chris freakin Paul makes you the fantasy meth head GM here? Absolutely.


Do you go through eight or ten keyboards in a year? You post so angrily that I can't imagine they last very long. Also, do you sincerely believe that if you repeat a lie long enough it magically becomes true?



Jonathan Watters said:


> I think New Orleans will probably get a couple of first rounders, and that the team recieving Paul in return will have no trouble whatsoever acquiring a heavily protected pick to be included in the deal, considering there is no shortage of them. Were you aware that a team gets one every year unless they trade it? You seem to believe that a heavily protected first rounder from a team that has been locked into the lottery for half a decade is some sort of finite commodity?


But why would New Jersey have put on these monumental protections? According to you the best player in the draft was picked at #27, so either you're claiming that the Nets were too stupid to realise that the potential #1 pick was on the board at #27, or they realised it and thought that Marshon Brooks was even better than the potential first pick in this draft. In which case they should have been happy to settle for mere lottery protection.




Jonathan Watters said:


> You obviously don't get it. I don't think protected "first rounders" are significant at all. Picks that at least have the chance to be in the lottery might have some value. But any deal for Chris Paul will have to be about the other players involved - unless a lousy team makes the trade.


Jesus you may be the _most_ dishonest poster on this board, bar none. You're the 23AJ of the draft forum. Not only do I get that, I actually explicitly stated it earlier, _and you called me an idiot_ for saying it. Does this mean that you're an idiot for agreeing with me? 



Jonathan Watters said:


> The thing you don't seem to understand here is basic supply & demand. This is a star-dominated league, and Chris Paul is one of the 2-3 best point guards to ever play the game. It doesn't matter that Demps "has" to trade him. He holds all the trump cards here.


Actually he doesn't. Paul's an impending free agent, so no one's going to trade for him without getting that signature on the dotted line. That immediately puts a limit on what Demps is going to get, because it's going to limit the number of teams in running. I mean, I'm sure the Wiz just might be willing to deal Wall for him (which Demps would take in a cocaine heartbeat if it _were_ available), but there's a zero percent chance that Paul agrees to sign an extension in that zoo. So the deal would never happen.

I'm sure the Mavericks would love to have him, but they aren't giving up Dirk for him. The Knicks'd love him, but they're not dealing 'Melo or Amar'e for him. The Lakers'd love him, but what Demps could get there is the rapidly aging Gashole or the eternally injured Bynum. Orlando would kill for him, but all they have to deal is Nelson and hideous contracts because they're not trading Howard for him. 

That's the reality, anything else you're cooking up involves a lot of good drugs. The teams on the short list have the supporting cast and either a really high pick to trade (like the Clippers) or a second tier point guard. That's why it's going to be a short list.



Jonathan Watters said:


> This will be one heck of a bidding war, and it won't be Demps making the phone calls to potential trade partners. He will play hardball, pitting potential trade partners against each other in a bidding war. Perhaps this increases the risk of him walking away for nothing, but he certainly doesn't take a beggar's mentality and end up with a couple of first rounders.


I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. Are you saying that Westbrook and Rondo are the equivalent of two first round picks? So why aren't we reducing other players to similar equivalents? I know that someone that repeatedly boasts of his posting integrity wouldn't be lecturing me that the Paul trade was going to resemble the Garnett trade (in terms of being perceived as approximate value) or other similar deals when I already explicitly stated that. But wait, when I said that, _you argued with me and called me an idiot_. So you obviously can't be adopting my position now since, according to you, it was wrong just a couple of pages ago.


----------



## Nimreitz

Tell ya what guys, Valanciunas sure is dominating this U-19 international tournament they got going on right now.


----------



## Porn Player

You watching? What a star and more importantly for my Raptors, what a leader. He has willed LTU to the Finals tomorrow and has put up simply huge numbers. 

I said it somewhere in here, he will be the steal of the draft even at the 5th pick. Stupid, stupid Cavs.


----------



## E.H. Munro

I mean, with a lockout looming you'd think they'd grab the freebie. But, hey, according to Jonny boy there was no better player available than an undersized defensive roleplayer. Oh, and JuJuan Johnson. :bsmile:


----------



## Bogg

Porn Player said:


> You watching? What a star and more importantly for my Raptors, what a leader. He has willed LTU to the Finals tomorrow and has put up simply huge numbers.
> 
> I said it somewhere in here, he will be the steal of the draft even at the 5th pick. Stupid, stupid Cavs.


You've come a long way from sipping scotch in the "I give up" aisle.


----------



## Porn Player

I was caught off guard. I 100% expected Brandon Knight. It took me like 30 minutes to give this draft pick the thumbs up and the scotch turned into a celebratory drink.


----------



## Bogg

Porn Player said:


> I was caught off guard. I 100% expected Brandon Knight. It took me like 30 minutes to give this draft pick the thumbs up and the scotch turned into a celebratory drink.


It's a versatile drink, scotch is.


----------



## Porn Player

:laugh:


----------



## E.H. Munro

Hey, even Cutty Sark makes for a good marinate. :bsmile:


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> That would have been the one I asked that sent you into your full frontal _spoiled five year old brat temper tantrum_ post mode. If Moore and Johnson are starting for your NBA team, your team is in trouble. And that very suggestion got you angry, hilarious that you're now claiming that you never stated that they'd be any good, when the mere suggestion that they might not be got you so furious to start with.
> 
> 
> 
> Really now, let's review, shall we? Let's see where this debate started...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, looks like it started in this very thread and had nothing to do with a later post from another thread at all. If you hadn't spent this entire thread being so douchey and intellectually dishonest with _everyone_ that disagreed with you here I'd probably assume that you just forgot. But after your snide and condescending post to Nimreitz after he demonstrated how full of it you were I think it's safe to assume that you're continuing to invent **** because you're simply incapable of admitting that you're wrong.





> Losers: Cadavaliers (an undersized PF to backup your present undersized PFs?), Boobcats, Slumberwolves (give Kahn a chance and he'll turn lead into raw sewage), Celtics (drafting the new Mikki Moore in the first round was a terrible idea, you should have let the Nets have the pick for a future first)


Did you or did you not post this in a different thread about winners and losers before my rant began? The debate was going in both threads and it spilled over here eventually, but it would be the absolute height of intellectual dishonesty to try and claim that my "tantrum" in which you called me a methhead, cursed up and down and made up new words had nothing to do with your winners/losers post. 




> And yet you got angry when I suggested that Moore and Johnson might not be good starters. And you've continued to angrily post in response for no reason apparently, because now you're claiming to agree with me. But, hey, don't let me interfere with your continuing temper tantrum. Because god knows you won't admit that you were wrong, even when you're shifting the goalposts to a new position that's in direct disagreement with the one you started with.


There's no "might" in your posts. You have posted that they won't be good starters, and there is no room for anything else in your opinion. 

I absolutely posted "could" in my original post, it has been my argument all along. You are the one that has attempted to fabricate things by making up new words and inflating my claims to make me sound more ridiculous. I have attempted time and time again to get you off your single-minded "he's skinny, he sucks, now the Celtics can't trade for Chris Paul" track. You simply aren't interested, and are in "do or say anything" mode to try and save face. 




> Do you go through eight or ten keyboards in a year? You post so angrily that I can't imagine they last very long. Also, do you sincerely believe that if you repeat a lie long enough it magically becomes true?


What am I lying about again? I'm not the one making things up here. I've stuck to my guns the entire thread, regardless of your attempts to change what I'm actually saying. 



> But why would New Jersey have put on these monumental protections? According to you the best player in the draft was picked at #27, so either you're claiming that the Nets were too stupid to realise that the potential #1 pick was on the board at #27, or they realised it and thought that Marshon Brooks was even better than the potential first pick in this draft. In which case they should have been happy to settle for mere lottery protection.


According to me the best player in the draft was picked at 27? Really? Are you going to accuse me of changing my argument now? Are you going to quote me saying JuJuan Johnson is the best player in the draft? 

You were the one who said the Celtics could have landed a protected 1st instead of the 2011 pick! You never once provided any sort of source that the Celtics turned down such an offer, but I went with it. You've spent half the thread arguing how stupid the Celtics were for not trading for a pick in a better draft, but now you want me to believe that the Nets would have given an _unprotected[/] pick in this better draft? You are getting pretty desperate, my man...






Jesus you may be the most dishonest poster on this board, bar none. You're the 23AJ of the draft forum. Not only do I get that, I actually explicitly stated it earlier, and you called me an idiot for saying it. Does this mean that you're an idiot for agreeing with me?

Click to expand...

The difference being that I'm not arguing the Celtics made a stupid decision not to add another late first rounder because it would matter in a CP3 deal. That would be you. My entire premise has been that this future first you claim has so much value that it put the Celts in the "loser" category on draft night don't have value. You have completely argued yourself in a circle now, but I'm sure you'd rather commit ritual suicide than admit it. 




Actually he doesn't. Paul's an impending free agent, so no one's going to trade for him without getting that signature on the dotted line. That immediately puts a limit on what Demps is going to get, because it's going to limit the number of teams in running. I mean, I'm sure the Wiz just might be willing to deal Wall for him (which Demps would take in a cocaine heartbeat if it were available), but there's a zero percent chance that Paul agrees to sign an extension in that zoo. So the deal would never happen 

I'm sure the Mavericks would love to have him, but they aren't giving up Dirk for him. The Knicks'd love him, but they're not dealing 'Melo or Amar'e for him. The Lakers'd love him, but what Demps could get there is the rapidly aging Gashole or the eternally injured Bynum. Orlando would kill for him, but all they have to deal is Nelson and hideous contracts because they're not trading Howard for him.

Click to expand...

You don't think the knicks would give up Melo or Amare for Paul? removed Mr. Angry's Temper Tantrum And you are completely delusional if you think somebody is going to walk away with Paul for peanuts. That will never happen. Not in a million years. Denver just got half of NY's team for Melo, and Paul is twice the player. Nets had to pay for Dwill as well, and Paul is the better player. 





I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. Are you saying that Westbrook and Rondo are the equivalent of two first round picks? So why aren't we reducing other players to similar equivalents? I know that someone that repeatedly boasts of his posting integrity wouldn't be lecturing me that the Paul trade was going to resemble the Garnett trade (in terms of being perceived as approximate value) or other similar deals when I already explicitly stated that. But wait, when I said that, you argued with me and called me an idiot. So you obviously can't be adopting my position now since, according to you, it was wrong just a couple of pages ago.

Click to expand...

Westbrook and Rondo are worth way more than 2 first round picks. The two first round picks are afterthoughts in any deal involving Chris Paul, which has been my point from the beginning. You are the one putting all the value on this mythical first round pick that Johnson (supposedly) could have been. 

removed Mr. Angry's Temper Tantrum_


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Did you or did you not post this in a different thread about winners and losers before my rant began?


You really are the 23AJ of this forum, even after I explicitly showed where your temper tantrum began you're still denying it.



Jonathan Watters said:


> There's no "might" in your posts. You have posted that they won't be good starters, and there is no room for anything else in your opinion.


I simply asked whether the year that Johnson and Moore were starting for Boston would be the year that Boston was competing for Drew Wiggins, and you flew off the handle. I imagine that you've probably shattered another keyboard by now.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You are the one that has attempted to fabricate things by making up new words and inflating my claims to make me sound more ridiculous.


You really don't need my help to sound any more ridiculous.



Jonathan Watters said:


> What am I lying about again? I'm not the one making things up here.


Really? Here's a sample from this very post.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I have attempted time and time again to get you off your single-minded "he's skinny, he sucks, now the Celtics can't trade for Chris Paul" track.


Could you go find where I said that? Because looking over my posts I can't find that anywhere. And, of course, this is about the 37th time you've hit this variant of "UR A MURON FUR THINKING THAT BOSTON CUD TRADE A HEVILY PROTECTED NEW JERSEY #1 FOR CRIS FREKIN' PAUL". I can understand why you keep going there, it's easier to attack people that disagree with you using stupid arguments they didn't make. I should probably change your user title.



Jonathan Watters said:


> According to me the best player in the draft was picked at 27? Really? Are you going to accuse me of changing my argument now? Are you going to quote me saying JuJuan Johnson is the best player in the draft?


I was making fun of your ephebophilia. But, one of us wrote the line "If JuJuan Johnson were 250 he'd be the first player drafted!" and it sure as hell wasn't me.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You were the one who said the Celtics could have landed a protected 1st instead of the 2011 pick!


If they couldn't, then they should have made the deal for Fernandez, because unlike Johnson he'd likely make a contribution to Boston. Now that it appears that Johnson (and Moore) are headed overseas the decision to make the pick is even more puzzling. But New Jersey sure wanted Marshon Brooks, so trading out of 2011 would have made a hell of a lot more sense.



Jonathan Watters said:


> The difference being that I'm not arguing the Celtics made a stupid decision not to add another late first rounder because it would matter in a CP3 deal.


You understand that there's a limit on the number of its own firsts a team can convey, right? And therefore by having extra firsts from other teams you actually have a leg up in these sorts of auctions, right? You do get that? Don't you? The world's leading basketball expert? 



Jonathan Watters said:


> That would be you. My entire premise has been that this future first you claim has so much value that it put the Celts in the "loser" category on draft night don't have value.


No, my claim was that Boston was a loser because they made an unnecessary first round pick. Johnson's _only_ utility is theoretical future value, and there's not enough of it to warrant having made the choice. He won't play for them at all next year (if there's even a season) and maybe not ever if he ends up in Europe. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> You don't think the knicks would give up Melo or Amare for Paul?


No, they won't.



Jonathan Watters said:


> And you are completely delusional if you think somebody is going to walk away with Paul for peanuts.


Could you point out where I actually said that? Because I'm pretty certain that I've explicitly said the opposite of that about 27 times now. Do you realise how pathetic you look when you pull this bull****?



Jonathan Watters said:


> Denver just got half of NY's team for Melo, and Paul is twice the player. Nets had to pay for Dwill as well, and Paul is the better player.


In other words, the self-proclaimed preeminent basketball mind on this board actually believes that Denver preferred the vast collection of spare parts they got for Anthony rather than the deal that New Jersey offered contingent on Anthony signing an extension? Are you that desperate to "win" that you're willing to type such drivel? As no one alive could have typed that with a straight face without being downright furious and smashing his keyboard I can only conclude that anger got the best of you. Again.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Westbrook and Rondo are worth way more than 2 first round picks.


So they're "peanuts" above and now "worth way more than two first round picks"? Can you make up your mind, you're making me dizzy with the speed at which you reverse your positions. And may I say how hilarious I'm finding it that after calling me an idiot for saying that the Paul trade would resemble the Garnett or Allen deals in terms of being perceived as good value, you're now screaming even angrier insults for allegedly not understanding _something that I explicitly stated and that you mocked_. Really, dude, you need help with that temper of yours.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> You really are the 23AJ of this forum, even after I explicitly showed where your temper tantrum began you're still denying it.
> 
> 
> 
> I simply asked whether the year that Johnson and Moore were starting for Boston would be the year that Boston was competing for Drew Wiggins, and you flew off the handle. I imagine that you've probably shattered another keyboard by now.


Did you or did not make the statement I quoted in my above post before I started ranting? Pretty simple question, I wonder why you won't answer it? 


We both know that you did. But don't let that get the in way of your pathetic attempts to discredit me - why you think anybody is still reading this thread, or why this supposed person would think that your nonsense has anything to do with what I am trying to argue here, I have no idea. 



> Could you go find where I said that? Because looking over my posts I can't find that anywhere. And, of course, this is about the 37th time you've hit this variant of "UR A MURON FUR THINKING THAT BOSTON CUD TRADE A HEVILY PROTECTED NEW JERSEY #1 FOR CRIS FREKIN' PAUL". I can understand why you keep going there, it's easier to attack people that disagree with you using stupid arguments they didn't make. I should probably change your user title.


Is typing in all caps, swearing up and down, calling me names, and changing my username - all the while accusing me of throwing a temper tantrum - something you pulled out of the moderator handbook? I've made fun of your arguments, I haven't made fun of you. You've done nothing but make fun of me for your last 5 posts, and you are supposed to be a moderator. You must be real proud of yourself. 

And me "going there" isn't an attack on you. You calling me a meth head, that is an attack. I have attacked your arguments, in a linear and respectable fashion. You were the one who decided to use a Chris Paul trade as the centerpiece of your argument, not me. You have yet to explain how a late first round pick that is readily available any time either Boston or New Orleans wants one has something to do with the potential acquisition of Chris Paul. You get to the point where you need to explain it, but then decide to throw a temper tantrum instead. 

Now quit claiming that I'm changing the argument on you, and explain why this first round pick is something that couldn't be acquired at any point, and why it is so much better than the early 2nd the Celtics actually recieved in the trade. 

Or just keep jumping on your bed in your jammies calling me names. I guess its up to you. 




> I was making fun of your ephebophilia. But, one of us wrote the line "If JuJuan Johnson were 250 he'd be the first player drafted!" and it sure as hell wasn't me.


How much have you come up with on this thread for JuJuan Johnson weaknesses other than weight? Maybe you can quote yourself here? 



> You understand that there's a limit on the number of its own firsts a team can convey, right? And therefore by having extra firsts from other teams you actually have a leg up in these sorts of auctions, right? You do get that? Don't you? The world's leading basketball expert?


I'm the world's leading basketball expert now...partly because I dared to claim that JuJuan Johnson could be a starter someday, but mostly because I had the nerve to stand up to a Type A personality message board goon such as yourself with a bit of common sense. Obviously I have overstepped my bounds - you better change my username. 




> No, my claim was that Boston was a loser because they made an unnecessary first round pick. Johnson's _only_ utility is theoretical future value, and there's not enough of it to warrant having made the choice. He won't play for them at all next year (if there's even a season) and maybe not ever if he ends up in Europe.


Just like every other player that was selected in the late first round. You refuse to debate me on the merits of Johnson's actual ability to play basketball, and then spiral into an increasingly illogical argument about how a first round pick we don't even know if the Celtics could have acquired and has very little value by itself is somehow so much more valuable than an early 2nd round pick that it would make a difference in an entirely theoretical Chris Paul trade. 

Just keep on digging....




> Could you point out where I actually said that? Because I'm pretty certain that I've explicitly said the opposite of that about 27 times now. Do you realise how pathetic you look when you pull this bull****?


I know how pathetic a moderator looks when he erases statements made in one thread is starts swearing and calling names in his very next post. That much is very clear. 



> In other words, the self-proclaimed preeminent basketball mind on this board actually believes that Denver preferred the vast collection of spare parts they got for Anthony rather than the deal that New Jersey offered contingent on Anthony signing an extension? Are you that desperate to "win" that you're willing to type such drivel? As no one alive could have typed that with a straight face without being downright furious and smashing his keyboard I can only conclude that anger got the best of you. Again.


So now its self proclaimed? Are you so arrogant that you think you get to make up what I said? Maybe you are planning to change your name to mine and then call yourself the preeminent basketball mind on the board so you can be right? 

What I know is that Denver got a lot more than a couple of protected first round picks for Melo, and that Melo isn't even close to as good as Chris Paul. The rest fills itself out. It doesn't take a preeminent basketball mind to figure these things out, not even close. 

The funny thing is that as you accuse me of being so angry, your own keyboard has got to be in pieces. I really don't care whether you are angry or not, but try to step outside the situation and look at what you are really doing here. 




> So they're "peanuts" above and now "worth way more than two first round picks"? Can you make up your mind, you're making me dizzy with the speed at which you reverse your positions. And may I say how hilarious I'm finding it that after calling me an idiot for saying that the Paul trade would resemble the Garnett or Allen deals in terms of being perceived as good value, you're now screaming even angrier insults for allegedly not understanding _something that I explicitly stated and that you mocked_. Really, dude, you need help with that temper of yours.


No, try to use your noggin a little bit here. I'm not claiming Westbrook and Rondo are peanuts. Far from it. The theoretical first rounder you've spent half the thread trying to claim makes JuJuan Johnson a bad pick absolutely is peanuts, and that has been my argument since you brought it up. You were the one who brought it up in your desperate attempt to show why the Celtics are losers in the draft, so why did you take such a route if you think the 1st rounders are of limited value? You clearly don't believe that, otherwise you wouldn't have argued so fervently against Boston picking Johnson. 

And I have no idea why you think I'm so angry. There's one person who is sticking to his guns, continuing to attempt to debate the facts. There's another guy typing in all caps, swearing, calling names and making things up out of thin air, all the while completely incapable of following how what he said earlier in the thread still applies to what he says now. 

So feel free to stop with the laughably hypocritical ranting about how angry I am, and get back to answering the relevant questions you felt you didn't have to answer 10 days ago.


----------



## HB

*Looks like Toronto might have picked the right guy after all...the Cavs of course might regret not going with him*



> Valanciunas carried Lithuania over Serbia 85-67 in the final scoring 36 points, adding eight rebounds, three blocks and three steals.
> 
> Valanciunas has now led his country to the gold medal at the European U16 and U18 tournaments and now, the world U19, earning tournament MVP each time, believed to be an unprecedented feat.
> 
> He led this event in scoring (23 per game), rebounding (13.9), blocks (3.2), double-doubles (seven in nine games for 7-2 Lithuania) and was second in field goal percentage to Canada’s Dyshawn Pierre.
> 
> Those numbers were even better than the 14.3/11.1/2.3 and 19.4/13.4/2.7 averages he put up at the U16 and U18 events.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

JV certainly looks like he's the real deal, no doubt about that. Maybe the Jazz regret taking Kanter too?


----------



## seifer0406

Heres my question. Which will last longer? Jajuan Johnson's career or this argument? This might be the longest, boringest, not to mention the dumbest argument regarding a scrub that I've ever seen.

When I read E'twaun Moore I thought this guy is an unknown prospect found somewhere in Africa. Turns out the dude was born in East Chicago. Can there be some sort of law in place for people to use a dictionary when naming their kids? The government is doing all they could to raise literacy rate but it seems like every year there are parents failing to spell common names.

Jonas Valenciunas is the real deal. Maybe Colangelo finally found an Euro that doesn't suck afterall.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> Did you or did not make the statement I quoted in my above post before I started ranting? Pretty simple question, I wonder why you won't answer it?


As your temper tantrum started here, in this thread, at exactly the point I explicitly linked to, what was said in other threads isn't pertinent. And here, yet again, you're incapable of dealing with reality. I showed you exactly where you began stomping your feet on the ground and pouting. 




Jonathan Watters said:


> But don't let that get the in way of your pathetic attempts to discredit me


Generally I let you do that for yourself.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Is typing in all caps, swearing up and down, calling me names, and changing my username


I think you may be getting us mixed up. The only personal insults in this debate have been yours, the only person typing in all caps, with a straight face (because I will confess to making fun of that habit of yours), is you, and the last time I checked your username is still the same. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your temper tantrum. 

While you may not like my metaphors about your posting/argument style, you're continuous use of red herrings and goalpost shifts, those aren't "personal insults". Those are critiques of the content. Calling people retards, morons, idiots, etc. (i.e. what you do every time someone disagrees with you) on the other hand, are personal insults. I understand that you get a lot of leeway here because of DX, but you may want to have a friend read your posts in the future before submitting them. Because one day you're going to run across a staff member less forgiving than myself and they're going to assign you the appropriate infractions.



Jonathan Watters said:


> And me "going there" isn't an attack on you.


True, you inventing moronic arguments that the person you're pissed off never made so that you can justify calling them idiots isn't a personal attack, per se. But when you call them idiots right after for the argument they never made? That's a personal insult. And it happens _every single time_ someone disagrees with you. Believe me, I've witnessed enough of your temper tantrums by now to have seen it a dozen times over. 

This is the downside of being on staff, back when I was a mere poster I was allowed to just put you on my ignore list. But once I got promoted I lost the ignore list.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You calling me a meth head, that is an attack.


Except that I never called you a meth head. The comment ("I know you'll dance faster than a white man on crystal meth to distract people here") was explicitly aimed at your posting habit of shifting the goalposts while firing off a chaingun full of red herrings to distract the crowd. If you're incapable of reading and understanding simple metaphors that isn't my problem, it's yours. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> I have attacked your arguments, in a linear and respectable fashion


No, you haven't. You invented arguments to attack, but because of your anger issues even then you couldn't restrain yourself.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You were the one who decided to use a Chris Paul trade as the centerpiece of your argument


And here we have an example of you making **** up to attack people. The centerpiece of my argument for Johnson being an unwise use of a first round pick was that there simply wasn't enough value in Johnson justify the selection over a future pick or Rudy Fernandez. That was the argument I made in the other thread, and it's been the one I keep stating over and over and over again. But you keep running to a retarded argument that you helpfully invented to justify calling someone else an idiot. Again.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Now quit claiming that I'm changing the argument on you, and explain why this first round pick is something that couldn't be acquired at any point, and why it is so much better than the early 2nd the Celtics actually recieved in the trade.


The Celtics didn't get "an early second round pick" unless Deron Williams never returns to the NBA (and I don't even see how that would be possible). They got a 2011 #1 and a late second round pick in 2014. If they actually had got an early second round pick, as in next year's, I would have liked the deal more (say #25 for #36 and New Jersey's 2012 #2). The reason they didn't get an early #2 is that they opted to take a first this year for a player that it increasingly appears will never suit up for them (because if he jumps to Europe he won't be getting an easy out in his contract to return to the NBA, an established NBA player he ain't). 

So, again, for the 47th time, the Celtics got little/no value for trading away the pick, when there were better deals available, and we know this because the team drafting after them made it. I've been pretty clear about this from the start. There's no sense in drafting guys whose upside is "possible rotation guy in three years". 

I also find it odd that you're simultaneously arguing that New Jersey would never surrender a first rounder in the last third of the draft under any circumstances (because apparently they guard them to the death) and that such picks are easily available. Which is it? Do teams defend them to the death or trade them away at a whim? My problem with Boston's approach was that it would have been better to have that pick in pocket now than have to go hunting for one when the time came.



Jonathan Watters said:


> How much have you come up with on this thread for JuJuan Johnson weaknesses other than weight? Maybe you can quote yourself here?


You mean aside from noting that he has only one available defensive role in the NBA and that Boston already has two or three guys that fill that same role? And that he won't be backing anyone down in the NBA? And that he's superfluous to the players that Boston already has? Nothing I guess.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I'm the world's leading basketball expert now...


Given the way you fly off the handle every time someone disagrees with you? You obviously get pissed off when people don't kowtow. Witness your snide and condescending response to Nimreitz vis a vis Brooke Lopez when the proper response was "You're right, I'm sorry."



Jonathan Watters said:


> Just like every other player that was selected in the late first round. You refuse to debate me on the merits of Johnson's actual ability to play basketball


I laid out all the reasons that I thought Johnson was a poor use of value from the very beginning. That you don't read/choose to ignore them isn't my problem. It's yours.



Jonathan Watters said:


> I know how pathetic a moderator looks when he erases statements made in one thread is starts swearing and calling names in his very next post. That much is very clear.


Except that I haven't called you names. I have ridiculed your worst posts, but posts are fair game. Calling people _idiot, moron,_ and _retard_, on the other hand, generally draw infractions.



Jonathan Watters said:


> So now its self proclaimed? Are you so arrogant that you think you get to make up what I said?


Assuming that I did (and I didn't), I might ask why turnabout isn't fair play? Given your longstanding habit of inventing stupid arguments for the people you're pissed off at in order to justify your angry name calling I find this remark hilariously ironic.



Jonathan Watters said:


> What I know is that Denver got a lot more than a couple of protected first round picks for Melo


Denver got Gallinari and the right to overpay Wilson Chandler if they want. Wilson Chandler might be a solid NBA starter eventually, he ain't yet (and for the record I was very high on him coming out of DePaul). As we've been over this 73 or 74 times now, I just _know_ you can't be claiming that I think Paul is worth only a couple of late firsts. So therefore I can only conclude that your intent is to claim that Westbrook or Rondo are only the equivalent of a couple of late firsts, which is an incredibly stupid argument. Oh, and that a top five pick in the 2012 draft is only the equivalent of a pair of late firsts. I'm not sure how you're working out these equivalencies, but however you're doing it you need to stop. Because they're S-T-OO-OO-PID stupid.



Jonathan Watters said:


> The funny thing is that as you accuse me of being so angry, your own keyboard has got to be in pieces.


Laughter doesn't break keyboards unless you have the misfortune to knock over a beverage while doubled over. 



Jonathan Watters said:


> No, try to use your noggin a little bit here. I'm not claiming Westbrook and Rondo are peanuts.


Yet when I identified OKC, Clipperland, and Boston as three teams that would be on a very short list of teams able to make the trade you went into full mockery mode and ridiculed me for claiming that Paul would be dealt for peanuts. As Westbrook or Rondo would be the players involved in two of those scenarios, either you're claiming that they're worth peanuts or _you're inventing a strawman_. Which is why I've taken to making fun of this terrible argument every time you resort to it. It's stupid. You should just stop tilting at strawmen and start arguing honestly. People would like you more.



Jonathan Watters said:


> And I have no idea why you think I'm so angry. There's one person who is sticking to his guns, continuing to attempt to debate the facts. There's another guy typing in all caps, swearing, calling names and making things up out of thin air, all the while completely incapable of following how what he said earlier in the thread still applies to what he says now.


And lines like "Christ, you're even stupider than I thought" "you're a moron" and your continuous angry typing of, in all caps, "You're a ****ing idiot if you think Chris Paul is being dealt for peanuts!!!". Are those examples of you "sticking to facts"? I have neither the will nor the time to review the thread and pull back all the stupid crap that you've attempted to stick in my mouth in an attempt to "win". But that one line you've gone to so many times that I've lost the ability to count.


----------



## Pacers Fan

Will this ever end? This is like the Clash of the Stubborn Titans. And for the record, JaJuan Johnson (yes, his name is spelled with an a) is going to put in some solid minutes for the C's this year.


----------



## HB

Have you ever seen him play? He can't even play the 4 at the NBA talk less the 5. Guy is way too skinny.


----------



## Jonathan Watters

E.H. Munro said:


> As your temper tantrum started here, in this thread, at exactly the point I explicitly linked to, what was said in other threads isn't pertinent. And here, yet again, you're incapable of dealing with reality. I showed you exactly where you began stomping your feet on the ground and pouting.


How come you get to decide what is pertinent and what isn't? I happen to think the argument was going on in two threads at once and that I responded to both comments on this thread. But that wouldn't be convenient for your view of things, would it? 




> I think you may be getting us mixed up. The only personal insults in this debate have been yours, the only person typing in all caps, with a straight face (because I will confess to making fun of that habit of yours), is you, and the last time I checked your username is still the same. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your temper tantrum.


You haven't typed in all caps in this thread? Really? I'm pretty sure you did it in your last post. But once again, keep the fantasy going...



> While you may not like my metaphors about your posting/argument style, you're continuous use of red herrings and goalpost shifts, those aren't "personal insults". Those are critiques of the content. Calling people retards, morons, idiots, etc. (i.e. what you do every time someone disagrees with you) on the other hand, are personal insults. I understand that you get a lot of leeway here because of DX, but you may want to have a friend read your posts in the future before submitting them. Because one day you're going to run across a staff member less forgiving than myself and they're going to assign you the appropriate infractions.


Says the moderator who swears up and down, insults to no end, and has to distort my argument at every turn because I had the nerve to disagree with him.

Newsflash: I don't write for DX, and the reason I am kept around is because I am willing to take the time to post my opinions on the draft. You guys don't have many of those folks around anymore, as you and your fellow mods run them off with your need to control a discussion and to participate in exactly the type of flame war it is your job to stop. So if you don't feel "generous" anymore and want to ban me, go right ahead. You can moderate over the crickets this year. 




> True, you inventing moronic arguments that the person you're pissed off never made so that you can justify calling them idiots isn't a personal attack, per se. But when you call them idiots right after for the argument they never made? That's a personal insult. And it happens _every single time_ someone disagrees with you. Believe me, I've witnessed enough of your temper tantrums by now to have seen it a dozen times over.


But you, you would never go on a temper tantrum - right? You are a moderator, moderators don't have temper tantrums! 



> This is the downside of being on staff, back when I was a mere poster I was allowed to just put you on my ignore list. But once I got promoted I lost the ignore list.


Back when you were just a regular human being, a common poster like me? Thank god those days are over!



> Except that I never called you a meth head. The comment ("I know you'll dance faster than a white man on crystal meth to distract people here") was explicitly aimed at your posting habit of shifting the goalposts while firing off a chaingun full of red herrings to distract the crowd. If you're incapable of reading and understanding simple metaphors that isn't my problem, it's yours.


I've shifted nothing. You are the one who has to make false statements about my arguments to keep this going. 



> And here we have an example of you making **** up to attack people. The centerpiece of my argument for Johnson being an unwise use of a first round pick was that there simply wasn't enough value in Johnson justify the selection over a future pick or Rudy Fernandez. That was the argument I made in the other thread, and it's been the one I keep stating over and over and over again. But you keep running to a retarded argument that you helpfully invented to justify calling someone else an idiot. Again.


Assuming Rudy Fernandez was offered to Celtics. Assuming a future first round pick was available. Did you get to make these assumptions when you were just a common regular poster? 



> The Celtics didn't get "an early second round pick" unless Deron Williams never returns to the NBA (and I don't even see how that would be possible).


Here we go assuming again. Deron Williams doesn't single-handedly make a team, but for some reason you think you get to make it a given that the Nets are going to make dramatic improvements. You don't get to do that with me, and that is why you are really flying off the handle here. 



> They got a 2011 #1 and a late second round pick in 2014. If they actually had got an early second round pick, as in next year's, I would have liked the deal more (say #25 for #36 and New Jersey's 2012 #2). The reason they didn't get an early #2 is that they opted to take a first this year for a player that it increasingly appears will never suit up for them (because if he jumps to Europe he won't be getting an easy out in his contract to return to the NBA, an established NBA player he ain't).


How do you know they had the option to get an early #2 in 2012? Moderator instinct again? 



> So, again, for the 47th time, the Celtics got little/no value for trading away the pick, when there were better deals available, and we know this because the team drafting after them made it. I've been pretty clear about this from the start. There's no sense in drafting guys whose upside is "possible rotation guy in three years".


That is your opinion of his upside, and you are unwilling to even take the discussion into something past what he weighs. 



> I also find it odd that you're simultaneously arguing that New Jersey would never surrender a first rounder in the last third of the draft under any circumstances (because apparently they guard them to the death) and that such picks are easily available. Which is it? Do teams defend them to the death or trade them away at a whim? My problem with Boston's approach was that it would have been better to have that pick in pocket now than have to go hunting for one when the time came.


Or is it you simultaneously arguing that a pick was available and they chose to draft JuJuan Johnson? Funny how you won't apply the same standard of logic to your own arguments. You fully claim that this was a weak draft and that is why Boston should have traded out of it, yet expect me to assume that NJ was more than willing to give away a future first or early 2nd in a stronger draft (that won't be an early 2nd in 2014, but absolutely would be next year). You don't get to assume things just because it fits your argument and you are pissed off that I'm making you argue. 



> You mean aside from noting that he has only one available defensive role in the NBA and that Boston already has two or three guys that fill that same role? And that he won't be backing anyone down in the NBA? And that he's superfluous to the players that Boston already has? Nothing I guess.


Did you even watch JuJuan Johnson in college? Do you really think I'm projecting him as a "back someone down" type of player in the NBA? 



> Given the way you fly off the handle every time someone disagrees with you? You obviously get pissed off when people don't kowtow. Witness your snide and condescending response to Nimreitz vis a vis Brooke Lopez when the proper response was "You're right, I'm sorry."


Where in the world did Nimreitz prove anything? He provided one argument to counter mine, that doesn't automatically make him right. Except in your world, where you get to assume whatever you want. Did you miss the rest of my argument there, where I point out how his own source makes just as many comments which would support my conclusion as disagree with it? Did you miss how he never responded after that? 

Or is it just you assuming that because he was able to word a 1 sentence reply that makes him right? You really do seem to think that you get to make up your own reality on the fly, don't you? 




> I laid out all the reasons that I thought Johnson was a poor use of value from the very beginning. That you don't read/choose to ignore them isn't my problem. It's yours.


Actually, you didn't. "Mikki Moore" is not a reason. That is an opinion. Can you tell the difference? Johnson having defensive potential would be an opinion. Johnson's track record of physical and statistical improvement would be a reasonf or me to disagree. Johnson anchoring an elite NCAA defense while a 6'5 unathletic natural wing plays the four would be a reason for thinking he's not nearly as soft as you make him out to be. 

I'm sure you will either not respond to this (like you did throughout the thread), or come up with more opinions that you will expect me just to accept as facts. 



> Denver got Gallinari and the right to overpay Wilson Chandler if they want. Wilson Chandler might be a solid NBA starter eventually, he ain't yet (and for the record I was very high on him coming out of DePaul). As we've been over this 73 or 74 times now, I just _know_ you can't be claiming that I think Paul is worth only a couple of late firsts. So therefore I can only conclude that your intent is to claim that Westbrook or Rondo are only the equivalent of a couple of late firsts, which is an incredibly stupid argument. Oh, and that a top five pick in the 2012 draft is only the equivalent of a pair of late firsts. I'm not sure how you're working out these equivalencies, but however you're doing it you need to stop. Because they're S-T-OO-OO-PID stupid.


Where did I say anything about a top 5 pick in the 2012 draft? You are lost on this one, completely throwing stuff out there to see what sticks. None of it sticks. My argument all along is that the first rounders are for all intents and purposes irrelevant when it comes to a trade for Chris Paul, it is the Rondo/Westbrook part that matters - a protected first round pick is a standard part of this trade, and Boston has plenty of late first round picks they can throw into the mix. This isn't difficult to understand. You are playing dumb at this point, which is no more than I would expect you to do. 



> Laughter doesn't break keyboards unless you have the misfortune to knock over a beverage while doubled over.


Laughing so hard you've been swearing at me, insulting me, making up my arguments for me, and spending weeks carrying on with a bunch of nonsense that is so incoherent you can't even follow it yourself anymore. Geez, you sure seem to be putting a lot of effort into being humored. 



> Yet when I identified OKC, Clipperland, and Boston as three teams that would be on a very short list of teams able to make the trade you went into full mockery mode and ridiculed me for claiming that Paul would be dealt for peanuts. As Westbrook or Rondo would be the players involved in two of those scenarios, either you're claiming that they're worth peanuts or _you're inventing a strawman_. Which is why I've taken to making fun of this terrible argument every time you resort to it. It's stupid. You should just stop tilting at strawmen and start arguing honestly. People would like you more.


You clearly misinterpreted what I was saying, and I've clearly corrected you on it half a dozen times. OKC, "Clipperland" and Boston are trade partners precisely because they bring more to the table than a couple of late first round picks. 

The first round picks are irrelevant, and thats why adding a player that has accomplished just about everything there is to accomplish at the college level but maintains significant upside is a good idea when you have the chance. The potential first you keep talking about may or may not have been there for the taking, but it most certainly will be there for the taking at a later date. 



> And lines like "Christ, you're even stupider than I thought" "you're a moron" and your continuous angry typing of, in all caps, "You're a ****ing idiot if you think Chris Paul is being dealt for peanuts!!!". Are those examples of you "sticking to facts"? *I have neither the will nor the time to review the thread and pull back *all the stupid crap that you've attempted to stick in my mouth in an attempt to "win". But that one line you've gone to so many times that I've lost the ability to count.


So you have the time and the will to sit here and berate me for two weeks, but you don't have the time to keep track of what has actually been argued? You just know that you are right, and what was actually said or argued "isn't pertinent".

Right?


----------



## Diable

Johnson will play as many minutes for the Celtics as anyone else they could have gotten would have played...but I am not really emotionally involved in this matter.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Diable said:


> Johnson will play as many minutes for the Celtics as anyone else they could have gotten would have played.


Right, and the answer is probably in the double digits in terms of total minutes for the entire season. Presuming a full season, because if the strike ends with a 35-50 game season he's going to be a spectator, either here or in Europe. Whereas Fernandez would actually have a role on the Celtics.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Jonathan Watters said:


> How come you get to decide what is pertinent and what isn't? I happen to think the argument was going on in two threads at once and that I responded to both comments on this thread.


Except that the explosion came with specific reference to the post of mine that I added so that you couldn't weasel out of this. And yet you're weaseling anyway. You may, after the fact, be trying to justify your temper tantrum by pointing to other threads. But your remarks made zero reference to anything written anywhere else. But, again, great attempt at trying to distract everyone.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Says the moderator who swears up and down


I'm the offspring of a tradesman, that's just how I talk. I lead the forum in asterisks. I've explained this to you about 49 times now, if you're taking my naturally salty language personally, that's on you. (And, jesus, it's not like you even have to read it as it's censored.)



Jonathan Watters said:


> and has to distort my argument at every turn because I had the nerve to disagree with him.





Jonathan Watters said:


> Laughing so hard you've been swearing at me, insulting me, making up my arguments for me, and spending weeks carrying on with a bunch of nonsense that is so incoherent you can't even follow it yourself anymore


I'm beginning to worry about you, you seem to be getting the two of us terribly confused. Because, as I pointed out, your explosion started because _I_ disagreed with _you_. But, god knows the pseudo-persecuted need to whip out the victim card. Oh, I know, here's the point where you can type, again, "BUT I'M NOT THE ONE STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN TRADE TWO LATE FIRST ROUND PICKS FOR CHRIS ****ING PAUL!!!!!" Because lord knows we haven't read that stupid line 174 times already.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You guys don't have many of those folks around anymore, as you and your fellow mods run them off with your need to control a discussion and to participate in exactly the type of flame war it is your job to stop.


No one runs people off this board. Stop being such a drama queen. You really need to grow a thicker skin.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Back when you were just a regular human being, a common poster like me? Thank god those days are over!


Back in the good old days when I could put thin-skinned miscreants that fly into a rage every time someone disagrees with them on ignore. And back when I could tell such people "Stop complaining and put me on ignore." Yes, I actually do miss those days. I find it somewhat perverse that you actually take pleasure in inflicting yourself on others.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You are the one who has to make false statements about my arguments to keep this going.


No, I have made no false statements.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Assuming Rudy Fernandez was offered to Celtics. Assuming a future first round pick was available. Did you get to make these assumptions when you were just a common regular poster?


Are you saying that Fernandez would never have been available because Portland valued the 26th pick more than the 25th pick and would never have given Fernandez up for the earlier pick? And you accuse _me_ of assuming that NBA GMs are stupid? :laugh:



Jonathan Watters said:


> Deron Williams doesn't single-handedly make a team, but for some reason you think you get to make it a given that the Nets are going to make dramatic improvements. You don't get to do that with me, and that is why you are really flying off the handle here.


How dramatic do those improvements have to be when they already have their franchise player? They already have a 2nd/3rd offensive option in Brooke Lopez and the cap space to sign another running mate. and, hey, since they have the franchise player it's a whole lot easier to get another player to come in. In other words, they don't need to improve all that drastically to become a 50 win squad. 

In a situation where a team has a franchise player and one sidekick, it's a risky proposition to declare that they're going to suck in three years time (which is what you're doing here) when the odds are that they're going to be pretty good. I'm going with the odds here. Is there a chance that Deron Williams could suffer a career ending injury? Sure. And there's also a chance that I'll win the lottery. Neither is terribly likely, though.



Jonathan Watters said:


> How do you know they had the option to get an early #2 in 2012?


And here we have another prime example of you making something up out of whole cloth so that you can go back to your "UR A IDJIT!!!!" bag. I wrote "Had Boston traded the pick for a high #2, say next year's, I would have liked the deal more." I was making a comparison of values, had they traded for New Jersey's #2 this year and next, I would probably have liked the deal the more.

And here we go again, out of one side of your mouth you're claiming that first round picks grow on trees, while simultaneously implying that New Jersey would defend, to the death, a second round pick that's as likely to be in the 45-50 range as anything higher. Are you saying the Nets are too stupid to realise that they can have any first round pick in the 20-30 range at will? And therefore wouldn't so much as even consider dealing a second rounder that's likely to be a mid round pick?



Jonathan Watters said:


> Or is it you simultaneously arguing that a pick was available and they chose to draft JuJuan Johnson?


I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. Boston traded MarShon Brooks for a first round pick and a late #2. So we can say, for an absolute fact, that Boston got a first and a (likely) late second for Brooks. I'm not sure how I'm arguing out of both sides of my mouth by saying that Boston traded Brooks for two draft picks _when that's what actually happened_. 

Did Boston make a wise trade? In my opinion no because they took back a 2011 pick to select a player that's superfluous on their roster and due to labor issues might never play for them. And yet, if we're to take your revisionist history at its face, _your temper tantrum came in response to your disagreement with my opinion_.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You fully claim that this was a weak draft and that is why Boston should have traded out of it, yet expect me to assume that NJ was more than willing to give away a future first or early 2nd in a stronger draft (that won't be an early 2nd in 2014, but absolutely would be next year).


Did, or did not, New Jersey want MarShon Brooks? Did or did not Dallas trade #26 for an NBA player? See, I can see how things happened and see that New Jersey obviously wanted Brooks _because they traded for him_ and that Dallas did, in fact, trade #26 for Rudy Fernandez and know that reality is on my side here.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Where in the world did Nimreitz prove anything? He provided one argument to counter mine, that doesn't automatically make him right.


Except that he was right, and rather than admitting it you were snide and condescending. And invented a new definition for the term "average athleticism" to justify your rudeness. And all to "win".



Jonathan Watters said:


> Actually, you didn't. "Mikki Moore" is not a reason. That is an opinion. Can you tell the difference? Johnson having defensive potential would be an opinion. Johnson's track record of physical and statistical improvement would be a reasonf or me to disagree. Johnson anchoring an elite NCAA defense while a 6'5 unathletic natural wing plays the four would be a reason for thinking he's not nearly as soft as you make him out to be.


Not only have I given a list of reasons, repeatedly, (none of which you addressed in your eagerness to type some variant of "You're an idiot if you think that Chris ****ing Paul will be traded for peanuts!!!!!" for the 193rd time), but I re-listed them in that very post. Just as I have from the start. And Mikki Moore wasn't soft, he just didn't have the size to hold position in the paint or set effective picks (too easy for strong guards to run through the pick). Not really his fault. Nice guy. Hard working. I liked Mikki. He just wasn't built for NBA starterdom.



Jonathan Watters said:


> Where did I say anything about a top 5 pick in the 2012 draft?


You began hurling insults right after I listed three teams that would be on the short list when the sweepstakes finally opened. The centerpiece would be Westbrook, Rondo or Minnesota's 2012 #1. Yet you keep shouting some variant of that line you've typed 206 times in this thread. The only possible logical conclusion is that you're either creating an equivalency scale in terms of late first round picks, which is completely off the charts crazy, or you're being intellectually dishonest every time you type it. Take your pick.



Jonathan Watters said:


> You clearly misinterpreted what I was saying, and I've clearly corrected you on it half a dozen times.


You're getting us confused again, I'm not the one that's typed some variant of "You're a ****ing moron if you think that Chris freakin' Paul is getting traded for two late first round picks!!!!!" enough to get out of detention for the rest of my life. That would be you. Since you're going to insist on typing it I'm going to ridicule it every time you do, in hopes that you have somewhere within you the capacity for shame or at least embarrassment and just stop it. Apparently it's going to take decades.


----------



## Pacers Fan

HB said:


> Have you ever seen him play? He can't even play the 4 at the NBA talk less the 5. Guy is way too skinny.


Yes. I remember him as a senior in high school and I know people who went to high school with him. I live in Indiana, go to IU, and watch a ton of Purdue games every year because they're our rivals and they've kicked the **** out of us at basketball for a few years now. Purdue and Butler have been the only good things about Indiana basketball of late. I've watched JaJuan every year of his collegiate career and have seen him improve each year. This year he looked a lot stronger and I have no doubts that he can effectively play the 4 in the NBA. People need to stop thinking that bigs in the NBA have to be 6'11" 250+, when guys like Jared Jeffries, Chuck Hayes, and Glen Davis have seen a ton of minutes at the 5. JaJuan is built similarly to Marcus Camby, who is only 15 pounds heavier than him and had his strength questioned early in his career, only to have few problems at all being an effective Center from his mid-career onward. JaJuan's going to bulk up to 230 before long and maybe max out at 235-240. I have no problems believing he can play the 4 very well and at least spot minutes at the 5. Dude is a talented shot blocker and will be a very nice high post and/or pick & pop player.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

E.H. Munro said:


> RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!!!





Jonathan Watters said:


> PEAS AND CARROTS PEAS AND CARROTS PEAS AND CARROTS!!!!!


You both look like blithering idiots! 

Why don't you just exchange numbers and scream at each other over the phone? It will save you both a lot of time. Don't worry about the rest of us missing out, we'll manage.


----------



## HB

I skipped their arguments, but back to Pacers fans post. Jajuan built like Camby? Look at their legs. Jajuan looks like a twig out there. What center can he possibly guard in the post effectively?


----------



## Pacers Fan

HB said:


> I skipped their arguments, but back to Pacers fans post. Jajuan built like Camby? Look at their legs. Jajuan looks like a twig out there. What center can he possibly guard in the post effectively?


JaJuan's ripped. He's actually pretty strong for a guy 215 pounds. You see Chris Johnson getting minutes on the Celtics and Blazers because he's tall, long, and can block shots, even though he's a twig. JaJuan's a lot more skilled than Chris Johnson as well, and he can add mass to his arms and bulk up his legs in the next few years.

To answer your question, a lot of bigs in the NBA just aren't very good offensive players, so I'm not worried about JaJuan guarding guys like Zaza Pachulia in the post. I'd be concerned about his rebounding potential more. But since you asked, I'll just answer with guys he'll struggle to guard because he'll be easily overpowered: Nene (maybe), Andrew Bynum, Blake Griffin, Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, Andrew Bogut, Amar'e, Dwight Howard, and Al Jefferson. Problem is, most of the bigs in the NBA struggle to guard these guys on the block. I worry about JaJuan's ability to rebound at the 4/5, not his ability to play defense.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

JaJuan Johnson isn't any less physically prepared for the NBA than Taj Gibson was, and he's been great with the Bulls. JaJuan Johnson was a better college player and is more talented than Taj Gibson.

Nobody is saying he's going to be a star, but he can be a productive depth big man similar to guys like Gibson, Carl Landry, pre-ACL Leon Powe... I like him more coming out of college than any of those guys.


----------



## HB

You have more faith in him than the Celtics coaching staff at this point. As for Taj, Taj is bigger than Jajuan, and he was misused at USC. So was Mayo. Little wonder people were shocked at how good he was when he got to the Bulls.


----------



## bball2223

So HB, you're not going to be making John Henson out to be a future good NBA player anytime soon right?


----------



## HB

Henson has a position, he's not a tweener. What does Jajuan Johnson have in common with Henson? You were better off comparing Jajuan to Warrick


----------



## E.H. Munro

Mrs. Thang said:


> Nobody is saying he's going to be a star, but he can be a productive depth big man similar to guys like Gibson, Carl Landry, pre-ACL Leon Powe... I like him more coming out of college than any of those guys.


Actually someone said he had the talent to be a #1 pick, so someone is actually saying that. And I've said from the start that the problem is that he's superfluous on Boston's roster. But, as the labor troubles look to be sending him overseas it's probably irrelevant as the odds of him ever suiting up for the Celtics are decreasing rapidly.



bball2223 said:


> So HB, you're not going to be making John Henson out to be a future good NBA player anytime soon right?


There's another guy that I don't think will ever live up to the hype.



Pacers Fan said:


> This year he looked a lot stronger and I have no doubts that he can effectively play the 4 in the NBA. People need to stop thinking that bigs in the NBA have to be 6'11" 250+, when guys like Jared Jeffries, Chuck Hayes, and Glen Davis have seen a ton of minutes at the 5. JaJuan is built similarly to Marcus Camby, who is only 15 pounds heavier than him and had his strength questioned early in his career, only to have few problems at all being an effective Center from his mid-career onward.


You picked an awful lot of short guys built like NFL defensive linemen there. Those are pretty awful comparisons. Because Mr. Chuckles and the Baconator make their living shoving around less massive guys in the post. And they tend to avoid injury by dint of being so massive.

The Camby one is interesting, do you know how many times in his 15 year career Camby has been able to play 70 games or more? I do. It's not a lot. The Knicks were able to keep him on the court during the strike year by playing him sparingly. Which means that his healthy seasons account for a third of his career. And one of those seasons was foreshortened. Basically he's been injured for his career.


----------



## Bogg

E.H. Munro said:


> Actually someone said he had the talent to be a #1 pick, so someone is actually saying that. And I've said from the start that the problem is that he's superfluous on Boston's roster. But, as the labor troubles look to be sending him overseas it's probably irrelevant as the odds of him ever suiting up for the Celtics are decreasing rapidly.


Well, that and Doc doesn't play rookies unless his hand is forced. I mean, Rondo couldn't get on the court the first half of his rookie year, and that team finished with the worst record in the east. Glen Davis didn't play much his rookie year either, though he was probably 15 pounds heavier and a pre-injury Powe made him a bit redundant. Beyond those two I'm having trouble coming up with rookies who've played much under him in the last five or so years.


----------



## E.H. Munro

If the lockout continues I'm assuming he gets desperate enough to take his agent's advice and go to Europe, but those teams are going to want a longer term deal with no outs for basically developing an NBA player. So he's probably going to end up a throw-in in some trade so that they can justify the pick.


----------



## Pacers Fan

E.H. Munro said:


> Actually someone said he had the talent to be a #1 pick, so someone is actually saying that. And I've said from the start that the problem is that he's superfluous on Boston's roster. But, as the labor troubles look to be sending him overseas it's probably irrelevant as the odds of him ever suiting up for the Celtics are decreasing rapidly.


How exactly is a big man going to a team with a 3-man big rotation of JO, maybe Glen Davis, and KG superfluous? You act like he has no position. JaJuan's going to get minutes at the 4 and 5 because he's skilled and the Celts need bigs. I don't get what's so hard to understand about that. Rudy Fernandez is hardly any better than Von Wafer, too.



> You picked an awful lot of short guys built like NFL defensive linemen there. Those are pretty awful comparisons. Because Mr. Chuckles and the Baconator make their living shoving around less massive guys in the post. And they tend to avoid injury by dint of being so massive.


And as usual, you're not understanding the point. Not every big has to be 6'11" 250+. You can be one or the other and play Center effectively. You can be a scrawny-ass tall big or a short, muscular big. It's when you're 6'6" 225 that you're going to have some big trouble.



> The Camby one is interesting, do you know how many times in his 15 year career Camby has been able to play 70 games or more? I do. It's not a lot. The Knicks were able to keep him on the court during the strike year by playing him sparingly. Which means that his healthy seasons account for a third of his career. And one of those seasons was foreshortened. Basically he's been injured for his career.


Do you know that that's also not the point? The point is that Camby has been skinny and productive. If you think JaJuan's going to be injury-prone in the NBA because he's small, then that's on you. The issue at hand is whether or not he can be effective in the NBA. I've seen nothing to suggest that he'll be injury-prone.

And since you weren't satisfied with my examples, I'll throw out Tyson Chandler (who has bulked up), Hakim Warrick (who was mentioned), Jermaine O'Neal (who was rail thin when he came into the league), Ryan Hollins, Chris Andersen, Jeff Foster (who bulked up), Chris Bosh, Kevin Garnett, Channing Frye, and LaMarcus Aldridge (before this year) who have all been effective players despite being scrawny. And that's just in the modern age.

I came back in here because I thought this was so ridiculous, but now you're trying to pull me into this **** show. So, I've said all I need to say in this thread, and you and Watters can battle it out until the end of time about whether or not an extremely productive four-year player in college can even sniff time in an NBA game because he's skinny for a rookie. Enjoy. I'm out of here.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Pacers Fan said:


> How exactly is a big man going to a team with a 3-man big rotation of JO, maybe Glen Davis, and KG superfluous? You act like he has no position. JaJuan's going to get minutes at the 4 and 5 because he's skilled and the Celts need bigs. I don't get what's so hard to understand about that. Rudy Fernandez is hardly any better than Von Wafer, too.


Fernandez is better than Von Wafer. As for Johnson, I've been over this, he has one defensive role, the exact same role that Garnett, Green and Davis already fill. He simply doesn't have the mass to defend the paint in the NBA, so he's fourth in the depth chart at his one role. Unless Boston wants to sacrifice Garnett to make time for Johnson (which wouldn't happen if Johnson were actually here which is looking increasingly unlikely).



Pacers Fan said:


> You can be a scrawny-ass tall big


No, you can't. Not if you're going to do the job effectively. Those guys tend to get injured often from the scrums. The reason the Baconator and Mr. Chuckles succeed despite their height is that they're generally the biggest guys out there. And frankly it doesn't help the Baconator as much as you think (because he has short arms which limit his effectiveness as a post defender).



Pacers Fan said:


> Do you know that that's also not the point?


That actually is the point. The pipecleaner sized post defenders get injured _a lot_. When your team can't count on you from day to day it's really hard to justify their presence on the roster because they're productive 30-40 games a year.



Pacers Fan said:


> I've seen nothing to suggest that he'll be injury-prone.


And I'm sure that some UMass college student was arguing the very same thing about Camby on AOL 15 years ago. But, of course, the NCAA and the NBA are two very different animals.



Pacers Fan said:


> I'll throw out Tyson Chandler (who has bulked up), Hakim Warrick (who was mentioned), Jermaine O'Neal (who was rail thin when he came into the league), Ryan Hollins, Chris Andersen, Jeff Foster (who bulked up), Chris Bosh, Kevin Garnett, Channing Frye, and LaMarcus Aldridge (before this year) who have all been effective players despite being scrawny. And that's just in the modern age.


Garnett, Chandler, O'Neal and Bosh were bigger coming out of _high school_ than Johnson is after four years of bulking up. There's only so much weight a frame can carry. And 40-50lbs later Johnson's already there. Hollins, Foster, Frye, Aldridge, Anderson were all _much_ bigger coming out of college than Johnson was. And, yes, they _were_ too thin entering the NBA.


----------



## Mrs. Thang

Why do you think his only role is as a defender? Have you honestly ever watched him play? He was probably the most offensively refined true college big man in the draft. Yeah, he's too skinny. That's the whole point. If he wasn't too skinny he wouldn't be available at the end of the first round. The body is a concern, but the talent is a steal for where it was drafted. These types of players have precedent for success too.

Tayshaun Prince weighed about 195 pounds after 4 years at Kentucky. Was the SEC player of the year his senior year. Fell to the end of the first round because he was skinny despite having lottery talent. Johnson 4 years at Purdue, Big 10 player of the year his senior year, etc...

The only reason you are pissed about this is because of some pipe dream where Boston gets Chris Paul and Dwight Howard next year.


----------



## HB

E.H. Munro said:


> There's another guy that I don't think will ever live up to the hype.


What hype would that be?


----------



## E.H. Munro

Mrs. Thang said:


> Why do you think his only role is as a defender?


I mean that he has exactly one defensive role on the floor (and as I explicitly said that I'm not sure how you could misinterpret the remark). He can't anchor a defense, so Garnett would need to be used as the primary post defender so that they could put JuJuan Johnson on the floor, something which makes zero logical sense. Beyond Garnett Green fills the exact same role when he's at the 4, and Davis to boot. 



Mrs. Thang said:


> Tayshaun Prince weighed about 195 pounds after 4 years at Kentucky. Was the SEC player of the year his senior year. Fell to the end of the first round because he was skinny despite having lottery talent. Johnson 4 years at Purdue, Big 10 player of the year his senior year, etc...


I was unaware that Prince was an NBA power forward. I obviously need to watch more basketball (you probably want to drop this as an example of Johnson becoming a successful NBA power forward).


----------

