# Jonathan Givony: Redick could be ROY alongside Yao and TMac



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Givony is an independent scout who has built up a great reputation over the years. Very credible guy along with Aran Smith of nbadraft.net. Givony runs DraftExpress.com and recently had a Q&A section with fans from China and DraftExpress. Lots of stuff about Yi and Houston in this article:

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1276



> *Question:* Are Yi Jianlian and Sun Yue constantly mentioned among NBA scouts? Which team is mostly interested in them? Any words from the Rockets? Don't they want to have another skilled big man from China? Yi's better than Stro!
> 
> *Answer:* I don’t know if constantly, but they are definitely on their radar screens. Every NBA team has been out to see them this year I believe. It’s very hard to say who is most interested in them. If they were, they wouldn’t tell us about it, that’s for sure. I don’t think the Rockets are interested in either Yi or Sun. *Not because they aren’t good players, but more because it’s well established that they don’t consider their window of opportunity to win a championship with Yao and T-Mac that big. They are looking for someone like Brandon Roy or J.J. Redick to help them out right away.* In the 2nd round with their very early pick (#32) I expect them to also draft a college senior or established European player like Thabo Sefolosha.


JVG recently said McGrady only has 3 years left as a top player, so they better take advantage of him. Roy would be great if he falls to the #8 pick, and Reddick would also work well with Yao and TMac. Bigger question, IMO, is what to do with Luther Head. And should we trade him to a team with a 11-15 pick in hopes of picking up Redick?


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

I'd rather have Redick than Head. Redick can potentially be a great shooter, and while Head might can do more things good, he can't do anything great.


----------



## Pasha The Great (Apr 9, 2005)

If we could trade Luther Head for a 11-15 pick in order to get JJ Redick, I'd do it. I'll really miss the guy but we'd be so good with Redick. 

I'd wait a while until I trade for a draft pick because anything could happen, and that could be JJ Redick's stock going up past the 11-15th pick.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

He thinks too damn highly of JJ Redick. This guy will be worthless in the pros. He can't dribble and he's going to be a 6'4 shooting guard with no hops. C'mon.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HKF said:


> He thinks too damn highly of JJ Redick. This guy will be worthless in the pros. He can't dribble and he's going to be a 6'4 shooting guard with no hops. C'mon.


Moving well away from the ball is equivalent to creating your own shot, especially when you can catch and shoot like Redick. Going to get some ridiculous looks with TMac and Yao on the floor, and has an incredible work ethic. Top 10 pick isn't a reach.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

He's as good a shooter as they come, and I doubt that shot will be lost once he reaches the NBA. 

Like Mr. Roger's Cardigan and others have said, Redick would get plenty of looks with Yao and McGrady and Houston desperatly needs somebody that can knock down open jumpers. If teams are having to play Redick honest then McGrady and Yao will have so much more opened up to them. 

So if Roy isn't available at our pick then I might would even consider Redick as high as 8th overall. 

The perfect thing to me would be for us to get the first pick in the draft and draft Tyrus Thomas and turnaround and trade Head and someone else for Redick. But I know that won't happen.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

Redick is a pure shooter right? I am thinking if he can do catch and shoot with that accuracy I wouldnt mind drafting him at all, but personally I would like to keep Head. If you want to trade Head for Redick, I think it's not worth it.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Head is proven; Redick isn't.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

WTChan said:


> Head is proven; Redick isn't.


head has a lot more to prove before he is a proven player.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Man we play this game on a year in, year out basis, but you know how many pure shooters come to the league and then all of a sudden can't find their shot. Do you think people aren't going to read scouting reports on Redick? We'll see how effective he is, but I have a feeling if the Rockets select him, the same people who are biggin him up are going to be pissed at passing on someone who can actually do other things in the NBA.

The guy is a 9th-10th man and you want spend a top 10 pick on him.


----------



## Pasha The Great (Apr 9, 2005)

We need a PF and SG, trading Head for a 11-15th pick will give us the chance to draft a good PF with our first pick and then a pure shooter SG(Redick) with our second pick. Doing this will solve alot of problems we will be facing in the offseason.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HKF said:


> Man we play this game on a year in, year out basis, but you know how many pure shooters come to the league and then all of a sudden can't find their shot. Do you think people aren't going to read scouting reports on Redick? We'll see how effective he is, but I have a feeling if the Rockets select him, the same people who are biggin him up are going to be pissed at passing on someone who can actually do other things in the NBA.
> 
> The guy is a 9th-10th man and you want spend a top 10 pick on him.


 How many "pure shooters" average 27 ppg as the only option playing in the ACC? Luke Jackson, Trajan Langdon, Mike Dunleavy... none of these guys were huge scorers or volume shooters in college. And Redick is being put in a position to succeed if the Rockets draft him. Shooting IS this teams #1 priority. When you have guys like Yao and McGrady, surrounding them with specialists is more important than versatility. 

On the other hand you have guys who enter the league and aren't really good at one thing. Reece Gaines, Rodney White, Kris Humphries and Jonathan Bender are recent examples of guys who were drafted early because of their versatility and couldn't deliver. It goes both ways.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

The Hornets will probably have the 13th pick and since they will also have the 17th pick they'd be a good canidate for a trade involving Head.


----------



## reno2000 (Aug 23, 2005)

If Redick could learn how to move off the ball like reggie miller, he would be such a great asset for us. He has a great shooting motion and is a lights out shooter in college. The problem is how this will translate to the nba where guards are larger, quicker and better defensively. Thats why he needs to develop good off the ball movement to get himself open, where he is automatic.

If he can learn that, then i would take a chance of him with a 11-15 pick for luther head.


----------



## iverson101 (Mar 4, 2006)

This is draft freakin' express we are talking about. Definitely low on the ladder of credibility. Those guys are jokes.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

i'd rather have Redick...'Nough said.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I'm going to bump this thread when he proves to be worthless.


----------



## CrackerJack (Jul 2, 2005)

people who are saying that Redicks shot will disappear if he enters the NBA are full of ****, peoples shots dont just disappear overnight when you can shoot like JJ, even if he lost half his shot hed still be more effective than all of the spot shooters in the league and with the defense collapsing on Yao and T-Mac on nearly every possession you just kick it out to JJ and he will knock down the open trey, now who wouldnt want that and id defiantely ship Luther away for a pick to get him but as someone else said a PF is the main priority so if we can get 2 lotttery picks i think we will be much better than we were this year even if Yao and T-Mac are struck down by injury

the trade i think we could look for is Luther to NO because they have two early picks so they may be willing to trade one away for a pretty decent all around player who would most likely be in the lottery had he been drafted this season


----------



## debarge (Nov 13, 2005)

HKF said:


> He thinks too damn highly of JJ Redick. This guy will be worthless in the pros. He can't dribble and he's going to be a 6'4 shooting guard with no hops. C'mon.


 :clap: I could've said better myself brother. JJ was a great collegiate scorer on a great collegiate team, but that's it. He's not a playmaker, he's not a good defender, he's little and not strong. Chauncy Billups is strong, JJ is not athletic at all, not a great passer or rebounder. JJ won't even be a starter in the NBA for long. I don't want him, he can't help us...that would be a drafting mistake! :curse: 

I actually don't think Jeff wants JJ at all right now. He sounds like he wants a RJ Caron Butler type along w/ another Forward/Center.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

I Start Fires said:


> head has a lot more to prove before he is a proven player.


He's still a more proven NBA player than Redick.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Head is more proven in the NBA than Thomas, Aldridge, Gay, and Roy but that doesn't make him better than any of those guys.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

I know very little about Redick. But there's a world of difference between Bruce Bowen-type spot up shooters and the guys who can do more than stand around and wait for the ball. I don't know which category Redick belongs to.

What I do know is that Luther Head's game is unappealing at this point. I thought he was going to be a reliable outside shooter when he started the season well -- and, admittedly, because of his nice form and lift -- but he's been inconsistent for the past 60 or so games.

Not much of a mid-range shooter, either. No playmaking ability at all. Looks nervous passing into the post. Can't play defense, though he's improved a little there. Not particularly good on the break, however, again, he's shown improvement. Only marginally better than Rafer Alston at finishing, and that too probably only because of his superior confidence. A chucker, a spark plug, a pinball guy. Ideally suited to coming off the bench, IMO.

What does/will he bring to the table that JJ Redick won't?


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Hakeem said:



> I know very little about Redick. But there's a world of difference between Bruce Bowen-type spot up shooters and the guys who can do more than stand around and wait for the ball. I don't know which category Redick belongs to.
> 
> What I do know is that Luther Head's game is unappealing at this point. I thought he was going to be a reliable outside shooter when he started the season well -- and, admittedly, because of his nice form and lift -- but he's been inconsistent for the past 60 or so games.
> 
> ...


I agree that Luther Head is a better 6th man than starter. But he is a much better defender than JJ Redick can be. JJ just loses too much foot speed and athleticism to survive in today's guard-dominated league. With the no touch rule, quicker guards can easily break him down and subject Yao to more fouls. The problem may be reduced if we pick up a strong inside defender, but we all know that isn't going to happen.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

HEAD!!!!!! The guy's the best rookie we've ever had since Yao, I'm not about to give him up for a guy who can very well be a complete bust in this league. If you think Head will never be a starter in this league, what makes you think Redick can? 

Head's gonna get better with experience, you guys talk like he's hit his peak already.


----------



## debarge (Nov 13, 2005)

Yao Mania said:


> HEAD!!!!!! The guy's the best rookie we've ever had since Yao, I'm not about to give him up for a guy who can very well be a complete bust in this league. If you think Head will never be a starter in this league, what makes you think Redick can?
> 
> Head's gonna get better with experience, you guys talk like he's hit his peak already.


Let me say this, I DO LIKE JJ at Duke! This is not a "not like a duke guy, or a white guy that spots up?" I loved JJ at Duke, but yall come on, this a Major Applewhite situation::: The guys great in college but in the Pros he just can't physically compete? He just doesn't even have the PG passing skills of a Steve Kerr or a John Paxson, or hell a Bob Sura? Why would we want someone whose not even as good an all-around player as Sura??? Does that make any sense at all? :raised_ey 
As for Luther, I agree unless he makes some unreal fantasy-style leap like Gilbert Arenas, he's always gonna be a bencher. But a very good bencher... :biggrin: These are the types of guys you keep on your team and mold them? The good teams know you don't let a productive player go for nothing just because he's not a superstar? You guys don't think he can an Earl Boykins/Watson/Craig Hodges type of bench guy for us. I do. 

Unless we get somebody significantly better than Head thru FA/Trade or drafting, then you keep him. That's just good basketball sense...Not everybody has to light up like firecrackers to be helpful to a team. If all Lu ever does is come in play solid D, hit some 3's, make a few Ast, then that's fine w/ me. All JJ would be able to do is Spot up, he's too dependent on the play of others, that is a RED FLAG. :naughty:


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Redick is a guy who carries plenty of stereotypes. All many people see is a skinny white guy who can barely dunk and whose main asset is knocking down 3-pointers. A lot of people don't see past that. They don't see beyond a 6'4 vanilla-skinned guy wearing the same royal blue Duke jersey that plenty of sub-mediocre white NBA players have worn before. The window is too dark to see through. Since the days of Larry Bird, people haven't ever witnessed a plain looking white kid translate his college-dominant game over to the NBA level. And people don't want to believe it will happen now. "He can't create his own shot." "He can't dribble." "He can't pass." "He can't do anything but shoot." "His shot will disappear in the NBA." Thank you all for the assessments. Redick will be a fine shooter in the NBA, and his talent won't disappear the second he steps into the League: shooting won't be his only asset in the NBA. Redick won't be a superstar but whoever drafts him will be adding a solid offensive weapon.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

jworth said:


> Redick is a guy who carries plenty of stereotypes. All many people see is a skinny white guy who can barely dunk and whose main asset is knocking down 3-pointers. A lot of people don't see past that. They don't see beyond a 6'4 vanilla-skinned guy wearing the same royal blue Duke jersey that plenty of sub-mediocre white NBA players have worn before. The window is too dark to see through. Since the days of Larry Bird, people haven't ever witnessed a plain looking white kid translate his college-dominant game over to the NBA level. And people don't want to believe it will happen now. "He can't create his own shot." "He can't dribble." "He can't pass." "He can't do anything but shoot." "His shot will disappear in the NBA." Thank you all for the assessments. Redick will be a fine shooter in the NBA, and his talent won't disappear the second he steps into the League: shooting won't be his only asset in the NBA. Redick won't be a superstar but whoever drafts him will be adding a solid offensive weapon.


 :clap: There you have it folks, another great argument by the one and only "jworth" from Beaumont, Texas. Who will be the next poster to fall to the almighty "jworth." When he speaks, you listen, then you just shut up..Who's Next?

LoL.. :cheers:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

jworth said:


> Redick is a guy who carries plenty of stereotypes. All many people see is a skinny white guy who can barely dunk and whose main asset is knocking down 3-pointers. A lot of people don't see past that. They don't see beyond a 6'4 vanilla-skinned guy wearing the same royal blue Duke jersey that plenty of sub-mediocre white NBA players have worn before. The window is too dark to see through. Since the days of Larry Bird, people haven't ever witnessed a plain looking white kid translate his college-dominant game over to the NBA level. And people don't want to believe it will happen now. "He can't create his own shot." "He can't dribble." "He can't pass." "He can't do anything but shoot." "His shot will disappear in the NBA." Thank you all for the assessments. Redick will be a fine shooter in the NBA, and his talent won't disappear the second he steps into the League: shooting won't be his only asset in the NBA. Redick won't be a superstar but whoever drafts him will be adding a solid offensive weapon.


I can tell you it's not that he's white. It's what his skills are. His main skill is shooting, but guess what so was Fred Hoiberg and Voshon Lenard and they at least had the ability to dribble somewhat against NBA defenses.


This what makes it hard to take Redick seriously, because everyone keeps sayng he's the best shooter in the world, but he's not even a better shooter than Ben Gordon, Jason Terry, Steve Nash or Mike Bibby.

He has belong average ball handling for an NBA guard. He plays one position, which is SG, where he is undersized. Since he will not be creating his offense off the bounce, you're telling me NBA teams are going to cater an offense to running a career 8th-10th man off of screens.

He is simply a guy who comes off the bench and is asked to hit open shots off penetration, but what will happen is since people realize that's all his role is going to be in the NBA, they will take that away from him and then how will he succeed? Will he be a defensive stopper? Will he simply be a mini-Madsen? 

When will people finally realize that the NBA is a totally different animal from college. You can be a superstar in college and have to go overseas. It happened to Randolph Childress, it happened to Rodney Monroe, it happened to many many others.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

jworth said:


> Head is more proven in the NBA than Thomas, Aldridge, Gay, and Roy but that doesn't make him better than any of those guys.


Those guys have potential. Redick has none. I'm a JJ supporter, but the guy has zero potential.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Lenard? Hoiberg? Players who almost went undrafted... LOL. 

Gordon, Terry, Bibby and Nash are great shooters with great arcs on their shots. What distinguishes their shooting from Redick? Certainly nothing on the collegiate level. Redick had to force up alot of stuff at Duke and still shot 47%. I think you're being stubborn on this one, but only time will tell. He'll atleast be more versatile than Kyle Korver, who does squat outside of shooting off-balance treys.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

He'll be exactly what Korver is and that aint saying much, considering Korver is 6'7 and I'm not a fan of his game either.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HKF said:


> He'll be exactly what Korver is and that aint saying much, considering Korver is 6'7 and I'm not a fan of his game either.


 So the Rockets address a need and move on. Not something they did last offseason. Redick takes minutes from Rafer in the 4th quarter and plays the 1 with Bogans or an offseason signing at the 2. McGrady brings the ball up the court when it matters.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

I do know that Redick's release is quicker than Korver's, and Redick is quicker on his feet for that matter as well.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

jworth said:


> I do know that Redick's release is quicker than Korver's, and Redick is quicker on his feet for that matter as well.


 And there is no way Redick can translate into a worse defender.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You just said Redick playing the 1 in the NBA? He didn't play the 1 in college, what makes you think he can do it in the pros?


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HKF said:


> You just said Redick playing the 1 in the NBA? He didn't play the 1 in college, what makes you think he can do it in the pros?


 ONLY if he plays with the Rockets. Because McGrady and Yao are playmakers in their own right in a half court offense, so he plays the 1 primarily to defend opposing PG's. People are forgetting how easy it is to plug the holes with a healthy Yao+TMac.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

Ok if you guys really need a situation think of this, 1 year from now Lakers visiting the Rocks, we draft JJ, who's guarding Kobe? 

Option 1: We put JJ on him, but since he's totally inferior to defense and so one dimensional he's going to get his rear end run all over.

Option 2: We put T-Mac on Kobe, but then who's guarding Lamar?


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

The funny thing with JJ is that people say his strongsuit is shooting, specifically 3 pt shooting. He's an above average shooter at best. AT BEST. Put him on any other team than Duke and most of you people would have never even heard of him, let alone pick him top 10.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> The funny thing with JJ is that people say his strongsuit is shooting, specifically 3 pt shooting. He's an above average shooter at best. AT BEST. Put him on any other team than Duke and most of you people would have never even heard of him, let alone pick him top 10.


I heard about Redick and his shooting ability before he ever even committed to Duke. There was plenty of hype on his above-average lethal shooting ability when he was a high school junior.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

jworth said:


> I heard about Redick and his shooting ability before he ever even committed to Duke. There was plenty of hype on his above-average lethal shooting ability when he was a high school junior.


Maybe his lethal shooting ability disappeared during college? I never saw it. Only heard it.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> Maybe his lethal shooting ability disappeared during college? I never saw it. Only heard it.


i saw it. he burned my team.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> Maybe his lethal shooting ability disappeared during college? I never saw it. Only heard it.


...


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

CbobbyB said:


> ...


Oops! Sorry. Lemme try again.


Did you see JAY JAY hit that shot baby?!!!! Oh my god BAY BAY, its JAY JAY REDICK! GREATEST SHOOTER OF ALL TIME!!!

He can't dribble, he's slow, he can't defend, he can't jump, he can't pass, he can't rebound, and he's an overhyped above average shooter (barely). Salim Stoudamire was 10 times the shooter in college that JJ was, and he could do some of those other things that JJ can't. He didn't even go first round.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> ONLY if he plays with the Rockets. Because McGrady and Yao are playmakers in their own right in a half court offense, so he plays the 1 primarily to defend opposing PG's. People are forgetting how easy it is to plug the holes with a healthy Yao+TMac.


but redick won't be able to defend anyone at the nba level. maybe if he's lucky enough to play against ryan bowen every night. pgs and sgs will light him up.

that said, he would be a solid player on the rockets. but he is best suited to come off the bench(and head should already fill that role for us) and i can't see him being the best player available to help the rockets team. it would be a perfect situation for him though as he would just have to play off tmac and yao and hit the open shots he got.

and honestly, why take redick with a top 10 pick when you can get a guy like mike gansey in the 2nd round?


----------



## CrackerJack (Jul 2, 2005)

Gotham2krazy said:


> Ok if you guys really need a situation think of this, 1 year from now Lakers visiting the Rocks, we draft JJ, who's guarding Kobe?
> 
> Option 1: We put JJ on him, but since he's totally inferior to defense and so one dimensional he's going to get his rear end run all over.
> 
> *Option 2: We put T-Mac on Kobe, but then who's guarding Lamar*?


brandon roy


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

Luther is a much better all around player than JJ. Pretty much JJ is a shooter. That has been his job. He isn't much of a defensive playmaker (imho) and he has spent the last four years launching a shot instead of finding his pass. 

On the other hand, Head was more of a team player. He can make a defensive play and make that pass. Plus he has a nice jump shot. He will only get better within the right system. Now whether or not Houston is the right system... I don't know.

But! I voted for Luther.. mainly because I have never been that impressed with JJ.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

rocketeer said:


> but redick won't be able to defend anyone at the nba level. maybe if he's lucky enough to play against ryan bowen every night. pgs and sgs will light him up.
> 
> that said, he would be a solid player on the rockets. but he is best suited to come off the bench(and head should already fill that role for us) and i can't see him being the best player available to help the rockets team. it would be a perfect situation for him though as he would just have to play off tmac and yao and hit the open shots he got.
> 
> and honestly, why take redick with a top 10 pick when you can get a guy like mike gansey in the 2nd round?


 None of the guys people are comparing Redick to (Gansey, Douby) work as well off the ball, or have his catch and shoot potential. Redick squares himself up with the basket so quickly, I think it's an underrated part of his game. All this is gravy in a half court offense.


----------



## Pasha The Great (Apr 9, 2005)

I was just thinking, if we draft JJ Redick, what will we do when he hits the rookie wall and cant shoot worth crap.. he will pretty much become useless for us. I guess we should go for a more balanced player who if is struggling from one aspect of his game can focus on his other skills where as Redick would just be there doing nothing.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

CrackerJack said:


> brandon roy


Word.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

Pasha The Great said:


> I was just thinking, if we draft JJ Redick, what will we do when he hits the rookie wall and cant shoot worth crap.. he will pretty much become useless for us. I guess we should go for a more balanced player who if is struggling from one aspect of his game can focus on his other skills where as Redick would just be there doing nothing.


Draft Brandon!


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> None of the guys people are comparing Redick to (Gansey, Douby) work as well off the ball, or have his catch and shoot potential. Redick squares himself up with the basket so quickly, I think it's an underrated part of his game. All this is gravy in a half court offense.


Douby does. Douby was double and triple teamed constantly throughout the whole season. Rutgers's opponents sole goal was to _not_ let Douby get the ball. He had to constantly work without the ball and he is a supreme catch+shoot player who also has the ability to create his own shot.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> Oops! Sorry. Lemme try again.
> 
> 
> Did you see JAY JAY hit that shot baby?!!!! Oh my god BAY BAY, its JAY JAY REDICK! GREATEST SHOOTER OF ALL TIME!!!
> ...


That's the funniest thing I've ever heard.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Gotham2krazy said:


> Draft Brandon!


The problem with this is that Brandon Roy is becoming the highest rated perimeter player in the draft and he'll probably go in the top five.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

jworth said:
 

> That's the funniest thing I've ever heard.


You're right. It is pretty funny.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> You're right. It is pretty funny.


Funny since it's so far from the truth that it's hilariously stupid.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

Dark Knight vs. jworth....one of these two will be crowned the winner..who will it be?
we shall see...


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

Redick can't defend, can't handle, can't pass, can't drive, isn't athletic, is an above average shooter at best, and still managed to average 27 ppg in the ACC and win national player of the year. Just how did he do it? Ask Texas, a team full of NBA-level talent, how mediocre Redick is. 

My prediction is that JJ Redick has a very long, very successful NBA career as a 6th man/bench shooter role. He's not going to be a star, but not every team wants a star. Redick is going to succeed as a roleplayer in this league, which is something you can't say about some of the higher upside guys that will likely even be drafted ahead of him. The Rockets seem to be at the point where the could use a roleplayer like Redick, instead of a high risk/high reward guy that may never get off the bench..


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> My prediction is that JJ Redick has a very long, very successful NBA career as a 6th man/bench shooter role. He's not going to be a star, but not every team wants a star. Redick is going to succeed as a roleplayer in this league, which is something you can't say about some of the higher upside guys that will likely even be drafted ahead of him. The Rockets seem to be at the point where the could use a roleplayer like Redick, instead of a high risk/high reward guy that may never get off the bench..


and there will be a player better than that at the 8th pick. redick should have a long nba career as long as he doesn't lose his shot 30 games into the nba season like he seemed to do in college. i assume takes less shots in the nba will help in that aspect. but why take a bench shooter with the 8th pick? bench shooters are available in the 2nd round. one of branon roy, rodney carney, and rudy gay should be there at 8. no reason to take redick over any of them.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

jworth said:


> Funny since it's so far from the truth that it's hilariously stupid.


No, no. It's the truth. Are you a Rockets fan? I hope the Rockets draft JJ Redick.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

The talent won't dissapear and that's all that matters. What he has is enough. Redick will succeed at the NBA level despite the words of his cynics.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

jworth said:


> The talent won't dissapear and that's all that matters. What he has is enough. Redick will succeed at the NBA level despite the words of his cynics.


it all depends on what you mean by succeed.


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

Jonathan Watters said:


> Redick can't defend, can't handle, can't pass, can't drive, isn't athletic, is an above average shooter at best, and still managed to average 27 ppg in the ACC and win national player of the year. Just how did he do it? Ask Texas, a team full of NBA-level talent, how mediocre Redick is.
> 
> My prediction is that JJ Redick has a very long, very successful NBA career as a 6th man/bench shooter role. He's not going to be a star, but not every team wants a star. Redick is going to succeed as a roleplayer in this league, which is something you can't say about some of the higher upside guys that will likely even be drafted ahead of him. The Rockets seem to be at the point where the could use a roleplayer like Redick, instead of a high risk/high reward guy that may never get off the bench..


ummm.. how was he so successful??? maybe the rest of his team?? He wasn't surrounded by a bunch of useless players. I will be honest and say I probably saw only about 15 of their games this season tops (probably a few less then that the last couple of years). But his teammates made him look very good on the offensive end. On the defensive end he was decent, but he was not such a strong defensive player that he will be able to successfully defend faster players in the SG spot in the NBA.

His potential contributions: square up jump shooting and dribble driving off screens 

I hope he is successful somewhere in the NBA... because he seems a quality player that works hard.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

Redick's teammates didn't allow him to hit 25 foot contested fadeaways at a 50% clip over the first 25 games of the season. Sure, the Duke system was designed around Redick's strengths, but Phoenix's system is designed around Steve Nash's. If you saw Redick in 15 games this year, you absolutely know that he created just as many shots with his quick release and one dribble stop and pop jumper as his teammates did for him. You don't score 27 ppg solely because you happen to play in a good system. It just doesn't happen. 

As for the comment about there being better players available at #8, there obviously will be. Odds are, a player or two will end up being better than the #1 pick as well. There will be plenty of busts that get taken after Redick. Depending on what you are looking for, if you can get a 10 year double digit scorer at pick #8, you may have done a very good job. I think it is pretty obvious that not every team is looking for the next big thing, especially once you get out of the top 5...


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Jonathan Watters said:


> Redick's teammates didn't allow him to hit 25 foot contested fadeaways at a 50% clip over the first 25 games of the season. Sure, the Duke system was designed around Redick's strengths, but Phoenix's system is designed around Steve Nash's. If you saw Redick in 15 games this year, you absolutely know that he created just as many shots with his quick release and one dribble stop and pop jumper as his teammates did for him. You don't score 27 ppg solely because you happen to play in a good system. It just doesn't happen.
> 
> As for the comment about there being better players available at #8, there obviously will be. Odds are, a player or two will end up being better than the #1 pick as well. There will be plenty of busts that get taken after Redick. Depending on what you are looking for, if you can get a 10 year double digit scorer at pick #8, you may have done a very good job. I think it is pretty obvious that not every team is looking for the next big thing, especially once you get out of the top 5...


Agree with all of that.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> Redick's teammates didn't allow him to hit 25 foot contested fadeaways at a 50% clip over the first 25 games of the season. Sure, the Duke system was designed around Redick's strengths, but Phoenix's system is designed around Steve Nash's. If you saw Redick in 15 games this year, you absolutely know that he created just as many shots with his quick release and one dribble stop and pop jumper as his teammates did for him. You don't score 27 ppg solely because you happen to play in a good system. It just doesn't happen.
> 
> As for the comment about there being better players available at #8, there obviously will be. Odds are, a player or two will end up being better than the #1 pick as well. There will be plenty of busts that get taken after Redick. Depending on what you are looking for, if you can get a 10 year double digit scorer at pick #8, you may have done a very good job. I think it is pretty obvious that not every team is looking for the next big thing, especially once you get out of the top 5...


Just for curiosity's sake, what did he shoot after those first 25 games?


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

Jonathan Watters said:


> Redick's teammates didn't allow him to hit 25 foot contested fadeaways at a 50% clip over the first 25 games of the season. Sure, the Duke system was designed around Redick's strengths, but Phoenix's system is designed around Steve Nash's. If you saw Redick in 15 games this year, you absolutely know that he created just as many shots with his quick release and one dribble stop and pop jumper as his teammates did for him. You don't score 27 ppg solely because you happen to play in a good system. It just doesn't happen.


I agreed in my post that he can shoot and that he can create off screens. (in fact I said that those two things were his potential contributions) What I said was that his teammates made him look better, not that they were the only reason he did well.

But is that what the Rockets need? Or do they need a player that can create defensive stops on other teams shooting guards?


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

HayesFan said:


> ummm.. how was he so successful??? maybe the rest of his team?? He wasn't surrounded by a bunch of useless players. I will be honest and say I probably saw only about 15 of their games this season tops (probably a few less then that the last couple of years). But his teammates made him look very good on the offensive end. On the defensive end he was decent, but he was not such a strong defensive player that he will be able to successfully defend faster players in the SG spot in the NBA.
> 
> His potential contributions: square up jump shooting and dribble driving off screens
> 
> I hope he is successful somewhere in the NBA... because he seems a quality player that works hard.


wow are you serious the only two scorers on that team was jj and williams...averaging 27 points in the acc is serious any basketball player with division one experience would tell you that


----------



## hitokiri315 (Apr 30, 2004)

my vote was for reddick

though i think the rox could make alot better pick with their first pick. One of the main reasons for me not to get reddick is that he is only 6" 4'. I think the rox need to get a 2 with some size to give t mac and yao another option who can defend and get loose boards and make good passes and have a decent shot to start out with. Everybody is saying roy, i have not seen him play but from what i hear is a good choice. im gonna do some research on him to decide on what i think of him.

oh and jworth will destroy darkside or whatever his name is.


----------



## hitokiri315 (Apr 30, 2004)

don't know why that happened 

anyway go rox and get that boy Roy


----------



## Smooth Lotion (Jan 7, 2005)

Yeah everyone is saying Roy but he is a top 5-6 pick in every mock draft I have seen. Guys like Carney will probably have a better future down the road but Redick fits our current needs and is ready to contribute. Or so I hope.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> As for the comment about there being better players available at #8, there obviously will be. Odds are, a player or two will end up being better than the #1 pick as well. There will be plenty of busts that get taken after Redick. Depending on what you are looking for, if you can get a 10 year double digit scorer at pick #8, you may have done a very good job. I think it is pretty obvious that not every team is looking for the next big thing, especially once you get out of the top 5...


that's just a bad way for someone to convince themselves to take redick. if you feel there is a better player left, you draft that better player.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

rocketeer said:


> that's just a bad way for someone to convince themselves to take redick. if you feel there is a better player left, you draft that better player.


NBA teams take players that fit within their systems. This is a fact. Just because a player wouldn't be as good on 25 out of 30 teams doesn't mean he won't be better in yours.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

CbobbyB said:


> Dark Knight vs. jworth....one of these two will be crowned the winner..who will it be?
> we shall see...


my money is on jonathan watters. i wouldnt bet against him in a draft argument.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

If Houston wants to draft someone who can be a consistent impact shooter at SG then the only two guys to go for are Brandon Roy and JJ Redick. Since Roy will likely be selected before our pick, drafting Redick would be logical if we want to grab a very solid shooter that can average 10+ ppg from the start. Redick will never be a future HOF but we don't need that. We don't need to wait on a project. We need someone to contribute right away and Redick WILL do that.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Jonathan Watters said:


> NBA teams take players that fit within their systems. This is a fact. Just because a player wouldn't be as good on 25 out of 30 teams doesn't mean he won't be better in yours.


right. i'm not arguing that. but there is no way that redick is the best player in this draft for the rockets or that he is the best player for them at the 8th pick. if you've watched the rockets much this year, they need another couple of players that can play within a team game but also can create their own shot or shots for others when yao and tmac are out of the game. redick gives them another spot up shooter, but he's another guy that isn't going to be able to create his own shot. brandon roy would be ideal, but he probably doesn't slip to the rockets unless they luck into a top 3 pick. after that, i really doubt the rockets would pass a guy like rodney carney to take redick. if those two guys(and rudy gay) are gone by the rockets pick, i still don't know that they should go with redick. they would probably instead address the power forward need.

redick wouldn't be a bad pick for the rockets. he would be a decent player and a good shooter off the bench. but i just see better players out there for the rockets to pick. shooting is a need the rockets have, but there should be several guys that could help with that in the 2nd round or even that go undrafted. guys like allan ray, quincy douby, maurice ager, dee brown, richard roby, mike gansey, steve novak, kevin pittsnogle, rashad anderson, and others could possibly be available at the rockets next pick and could all help with shooting. spot up shooter just isn't the best way to use the 8th pick in the draft.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

jworth said:


> If Houston wants to draft someone who can be a consistent impact shooter at SG then the only two guys to go for are Brandon Roy and JJ Redick. Since Roy will likely be selected before our pick, drafting Redick would be logical if we want to grab a very solid shooter that can average 10+ ppg from the start. Redick will never be a future HOF but we don't need that. We don't need to wait on a project. We need someone to contribute right away and Redick WILL do that.


rodney carney?


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

rocketeer said:


> rodney carney?


He's more athletic and a better defender, but with a suspect shot he wouldn't provide the shooting touch that we need.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

rocketeer said:


> redick wouldn't be a bad pick for the rockets. he would be a decent player and a good shooter off the bench. but i just see better players out there for the rockets to pick. shooting is a need the rockets have, but there should be several guys that could help with that in the 2nd round or even that go undrafted. guys like *allan ray, quincy douby, maurice ager, dee brown, richard roby, mike gansey, steve novak, kevin pittsnogle, rashad anderson*, and others could possibly be available at the rockets next pick and could all help with shooting. spot up shooter just isn't the best way to use the 8th pick in the draft.


Those guys are by far not on Redick's level as a shooter. Douby is the closest.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

jworth said:


> Those guys are by far not on Redick's level as a shooter. Douby is the closest.


i didn't say they were as good as redick, just that they could fill a similar role. most of them could also offer other things that redick doesn't bring to the table. no reason to take him at 8 when you can get guys that are just a little lesser shooters in the 2nd round. and while i would agree that redick is the best shooter in this draft, i don't think he is that much better of a shooter than a few of those guys i listed.



> He's more athletic and a better defender, but with a suspect shot he wouldn't provide the shooting touch that we need.


much more athletic, a much better defender, and still brings almost 40% shooting from the college three point line. not only does he help with his shooting but he brings a lot more to the table and gives us legitimate size on the perimeter.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Now don't get my started on Douby versus Redick. Douby is a better shooter than Redick, and from all parts of the floor. I've seen people in this thread praising Redick for scoring 27 ppg in the ACC whilst playing with _only_ All-American Shelden Williams. Douby put up 25+ ppg being the absolute only option on Rutgers, which I'm sure you kno is in the Big East, a conference known much more for tough, physical D than the ACC is. There was not one point this season where Douby wasn't at the very least double-teamed. Many times he was triple-teamed. A lot of these times he didn't even have the ball.

I do wonder, though, jworth, why do you say that Redick is on a different level of shooting, by far, than Douby? I'm not quite sure I understand.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

rocketeer said:


> i didn't say they were as good as redick, just that they could fill a similar role. most of them could also offer other things that redick doesn't bring to the table. no reason to take him at 8 when you can get guys that are just a little lesser shooters in the 2nd round. and while i would agree that redick is the best shooter in this draft, i don't think he is that much better of a shooter than a few of those guys i listed.


If Douby isn't going to be a 1st rounder, he won't be in the draft. And, even if he will be a 1st rounder, it's not definite he's leaving college.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

After watching Carney play this season the biggest problem I have with him is, that despite his athleticism, he struggles to create his own shot. He's a good off-the-ball slasher if you have another player who can penetrate and catch him on the cut. As far as his shooting goes, it's decent but inconsistent. I'll admit that I'd be happy with picking Carney since he'd add the athleticism and defense that we also need on the perimeter, but I don't think he'd be the answer to the shooting problems. And the problem with those other shooters is that I feel even compared to Redick they would have a lot of liabilities on the court as far as defense goes.


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> I do wonder, though, jworth, why do you say that Redick is on a different level of shooting, by far, than Douby? I'm not quite sure I understand.


Most likely I wouldn't have said it because I didn't believe it.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

jworth said:


> Most likely I wouldn't have said it because I didn't believe it.


Let me rephrase my question. Why do you feel Redick is the better shooter, and so much better that he is by far on another level?


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

Dark Knight said:


> Let me rephrase my question. Why do you feel Redick is the better shooter, and so much better that he is by far on another level?


Redick's quicker release makes the biggest difference to me, and that will be a big factor at the next level.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

jworth said:


> Redick's quicker release makes the biggest difference to me, and that will be a big factor at the next level.


I guess we just have differing opinions, then. I see Douby as the faster shooter.


----------

