# 8:00 Sene Clip up on Draft Express; Rumors from Bulls Workout



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

I'm sure this can be merged with the master thread later, but thought it was worthy of its own platform for now.

http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1358
 
Word on the Street: Sene Highlight Reel Clip, Jordan, Trade Talk

Jonathan Givony - President 

June 20, 2006
Sene to Chicago at #16?

A team source informed us that the Chicago Bulls were blown away by Saer Sene’s “athleticism, upside and speed” at a workout he recently conducted at the Berto Center. According to the source, Sene “blew the roof off the workout” and is now considered a legitimate option for the Bulls at #16. "He might be the longest person in the world!"

When talking about potential problems he might face in the NBA with the speed the game is played at, the source was adamant about the fact that he tested out extremely well off the court and that his learning curve appears to be very sharp.

Similar questions we posed via email to a coach he worked with this past year in Belgium garnered the following response: “If you saw the progression he’s made you would be amazed. His talent to pick up fundamentals is amazing. In the games he wasn't always ready to catch the ball, but for me it was more inexperience than bad hands. He's a good kid, with a golden heart. With the necessary aid of personal coaches who take their time, I really believe that he has a great future in the NBA.”

* * * * * 

Recent talk has the Phoenix Suns potentially packaging both of their picks (#21+#27) into the teens to draft him.

DraftExpress has exclusively obtained an 8 minute long highlight reel of Sene for our users to enjoy. The clip features plenty of plays from the Nike Hoop Summit in April, as well as game footage from this past season in Belgium with Pepinster.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

That doesn't sound good for us getting him though. He has always been one of my top choices for the #16. Reddick being another, and O'Bryant but he most likely won't be around at 16. Now it's sounding as if Reddick is going to go in the low teens before 16, and also Sene might even be gone now. Not looking good


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> Similar questions we posed via email to a coach he worked with this past year in Belgium garnered the following response: “If you saw the progression he’s made you would be amazed. His talent to pick up fundamentals is amazing. In the games he wasn't always ready to catch the ball, but for me it was more inexperience than bad hands. He's a good kid, with a golden heart. With the necessary aid of personal coaches who take their time, I really believe that he has a great future in the NBA.”


I wonder what was the context for his coaches comments. Was he prepped with: "Are Sene's hands going to be a problem in the NBA?" Because, while Sene's hands didn't look good in the Hoop Summit game, he looked good in the club clips. He goes after rebounds hard. 

What do you do with that? I also don't anticipate that he's going to be available at our pick.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

such sweet thunder said:


> I wonder what was the context for his coaches comments. Was he prepped with: "Are Sene's hands going to be a problem in the NBA?" Because, while Sene's hands didn't look good in the Hoop Summit game, he looked good in the club clips. He goes after rebounds hard.
> 
> What do you do with that? I also don't anticipate that he's going to be available at our pick.


I think it was saying that when he would "fumble" passes before, it was due to not being ready for the ball, not that he doesn't have good enough hands to catch well. In the workout when he knew it was coming apparently he had a better handle, so they're attributing the difference to inexperience rather than just bad hands. 

As for him not being there, if they're smart they'd wait for him at 16, and if he was got taken see if they could work a trade out either with a bench player and our 16, or a future pick and the 16.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I think it was saying that when he would "fumble" passes before, it was due to not being ready for the ball, not that he doesn't have good enough hands to catch well. In the workout when he knew it was coming apparently he had a better handle, so they're attributing the difference to inexperience rather than just bad hands.
> 
> As for him not being there, if they're smart they'd wait for him at 16, and if he was got taken see if they could work a trade out either with a bench player and our 16, or a future pick and the 16.


I understand what the quote meant. What I was asking was, did the coach just bring up Sene's hands on his own. Or, was he prompted by a question from draftexpress specifically asking about them.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

such sweet thunder said:


> I understand what the quote meant. What I was asking was, did the coach just bring up Sene's hands on his own. Or, was he prompted by a question from draftexpress specifically asking about them.


Ah, ok, well I guess I have no idea. I doubt they'd be bragging him up so someone would jump ahead of them to grab him, but it is possible I guess. The only good thing I can see about him going before us is maybe Reddick or O'Bryant would slip down to 16.....IMO it depends on who we take at #2 with who would be the best choice at 16 between those 3 (assuming we could pick). Bargs and Reddick are my first choice. If we take say Gay, Sene woudl be my choice at 16. Roy, Thomas, Morrison it'd be O'Bryant.


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

The way I read it, it seems to me that his hands were specifically brought up, but i'm not completely sure. It was nice to finally see some footage of him though, he really attacks the boards and those long arms seem to block everything arund the rim. On defense he looked like a 7' foot Tyrus Thomas to me when he was blocking those shots, he just outjumped everyone and stuffed them, just like Thomas did in the NCAA tournament.

I'm all for drafting Sene at #16, and it sounds like the Bulls staff liked him very much as well. I love the "_He might be the longest person in the world!_" comment. 

Bargnani and Sene is officially my dream draft, especially now after Splitter isn't declaring.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

I really wonder if this is subterfuge on the Bulls part. Bulls insiders haven't been that vocal so far so i find it strange they are chirping now. Whatever the Bulls motives are he sure has a lot of energy out there. I say draft him and let him go out there for 15-20mpg and go crazy on the floor. Has the same game as Tyson at a fraction of the price.


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

remlover said:


> I really wonder if this is subterfuge on the Bulls part. Bulls insiders haven't been that vocal so far so i find it strange they are chirping now.


It's really hard trying to figure out who the Bullls really want, I for one have no idea.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

ALREADY more offensive ability than Mr. Chandler.

Paxson wants length and athleticism...Sene is that guy that definatly might be there @ 16.

could clear the way to address size in the backcourt.


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

smARTmouf said:


> ALREADY more offensive ability than Mr. Chandler.


Well, to be fair it's hard to have less offensive ability than Chandler, but I did see Sene dunk the ball with one hand, I don't think I've ever seen Tyson do that...


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

Our very own mizenkay posted this picture in the measurements thread, this is just insane: 










*Senegal bigman Saer Sene's whopping 7'8.5 wingspan is 10.3% greater than his 6'11" height.*


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

The Bulls wont pick him. Its a smokescreen. Though I did hear the same things Jonathan said and the source said it was convincing and came from both the Bulls and Senes camp.

He has huge hands. I dont think he has bad hands. Its just him getting used to the speed of the games in the Nike Camp. It should be pointed out that Utah worried about his hands and tested that extensively during their workout and were rumored to come away with no worries. I wouldnt worry about it.

I have seen this tape before but I will make some comments on it

1) This kid is all hustle and energy. He doesnt give up on plays. He dives on the floor, he guards players all over the floor. 

2) His reach is absolutely tremendous. He can really guard the rim. But I was most impressed with the fact that not only was he a great help shot blocker, but that he could guard guys on the ball and block their shots too. In an NBA that is smaller and more technically gifted, youll need more people who can guard out on the wing. He showed he can do that. His length and athleticism allow that.

3) You dont need a tape measure to see how long he is. Condor like length

4) Serious lift and speed in changing ends. He has explosion in his lift as well. 

5) Does seem to like to play with his back to the basket in this tape, when the offense is run through him. However, every workout that he has had says that his offense is far farther along then first rumored. He is knocking down the 15 -18 footer with regularity.

6) Great off the ball movement in offense and attacks both the offensive and defensive boards

7) He will need to get stronger, but Im not sure it means that much to him. He is going to be a length player. 

All in all, the videos show what we knew about him. A project, no doubt about it. But one that has come a long way and still could go a long way. It shows that he works hard, that he has serious length and athleticism. He is a tremendous call option on the future. If his offense is where alot of people say it is now, then he could be a real good player in the pros. He reminds me of Spurs big man Ian Mahinmi, an NBA comparison might be a bigger Theo Ratliffe. I hope the Bulls take him at 16, but I dont see it.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> The Bulls wont pick him. Its a smokescreen. Though I did hear the same things Jonathan said and the source said it was convincing and came from both the Bulls and Senes camp.
> 
> I hope the Bulls take him at 16, but I dont see it.


Smokescreen for what? Making tems think we are drafting a gurad forward with the number 2?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

unBULLievable said:


> Smokescreen for what? Making tems think we are drafting a gurad forward with the number 2?



Sene has lots of fans lower then us. Dallas, Phoenix, NJ and Washington are all fans of his. To say we love him at 16 means the Bulls could trade down with any of those teams and perhaps pick up a player OR draft picks down the line. Thats the smokescreen.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

im sold on bulls picking him with the 16th. after watching the clip on him. sure the blocking and dunking with ease was impressive. but his hustle. willingness to dive for the ball. even after losing the ball he'll go after it again. thats very impressive for a big man.. 

now it just makes me wanter Brewer/Roy even that much more. and add Sene with the 16th. Then add Joel and Nene through free agency. 

Hinrich/Gordon/Brewer

Deng/Noc

Chandler/Sene/Nene/Pyrizbilla

just that team in itself is impressive. 

just imagine. tight game. needing a few stops at the end of the game with a line up of. Hinrich. Brewer. Deng. Sene. and Chandler. The length. the speed. the hustle of that line up. did i mention the LENGTH!! forget about the pistons. with that team we'll be a defensive powerhouse for a decade!


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> The Bulls wont pick him. I hope the Bulls take him at 16, but I dont see it.


Why do you think that ?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Why do you think that ?



There is nothing in Paxsons past to indicate he wants anything to do with Projects. As much as I like Sene, he is a project. I think he is a project worth taking on in a big way, but Pax has always gone for the finished product.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

He's tiny.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

rlucas4257 said:


> There is nothing in Paxsons past to indicate he wants anything to do with Projects. As much as I like Sene, he is a project. I think he is a project worth taking on in a big way, but Pax has always gone for the finished product.


but you've also go to realize pretty much everyone in this draft class is a project. there are no sure things espically the bigs. and i wouldn't call hinrich. deng or gordon finished products..


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> There is nothing in Paxsons past to indicate he wants anything to do with Projects. As much as I like Sene, he is a project. I think he is a project worth taking on in a big way, but Pax has always gone for the finished product.


If we draft Roy at #2 I guess part of me would like to see Pax swing for the fences and take Sene 

We can always buy help upfront in free agency anyway which is what we will have to do regardless of which bigs are on the board at #2 and #16

I must say I have been very impressed with this guy's test results


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

kulaz3000 said:


> but you've also go to realize pretty much everyone in this draft class is a project. there are no sure things espically the bigs. and i wouldn't call hinrich. deng or gordon finished products..



Deng, maybe not. the other two guys were ready made NBA Players who were pretty closed to finished products. Brewer, for instance, is not a project. He will help some NBA team and do within a year. Sene, I actually think could help someone defensively within half a year. But the consensus among NBA people is that he will need a year to contribute. Pax is on the far right of GMs, so I would imagine if everyone is saying a year, he thinks itll be 2. I dont think Sene is the pick. Though I am sure they were impressed by him. I wouldnt be surprised if they are angling at sending 16 to Phoenix for the Suns 2 first round picks and maybe hoping Sefolsha, another near finished product, or Marquinhos, falls there.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> If we draft Roy at #2 I guess part of me would like to see Pax swing for the fences and take Sene
> 
> We can always buy help upfront in free agency anyway which is what we will have to do regardless of which bigs are on the board at #2 and #16
> 
> I must say I have been very impressed with this guy's test results


I like TT and I like Sene. Sene is kind of a bigger version of TT. If TT is the pick, then Sene is just the same pick but lower, overlapping skills. So alot will dictate on where Pax goes with #2. I agree, if its Roy, then Sene be the guy. But I have to think its Tyrus Thomas. Though I dont think the BUlls have made him a promise


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Either Sene is there for us at 16 or someone takes him a head of us but either way if he moves up then someone will fall down to us (Carney or Brewer) or he is there and we take him at 16. A;so if Shawne Williams also gets goes in the top 15 or Rando some SG will be there for us if we take a bag at 2. I also read pax is moving down from 2 if that is true he must be taking Roy and will use what he gets to trade down to move up from 16.

david


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

giusd said:


> Either Sene is there for us at 16 or someone takes him a head of us but either way if he moves up then someone will fall down to us (Carney or Brewer) or he is there and we take him at 16. A;so if Shawne Williams also gets goes in the top 15 or Rando some SG will be there for us if we take a bag at 2. I also read pax is moving down from 2 if that is true he must be taking Roy and will use what he gets to trade down to move up from 16.
> 
> david



So david, If I read this right, you think if Sene is there at 16, he is ours, if he is gone by then we are happy still because we get someone who has fallen? It sounds like a cant lose. But thats sort of how I feel. Personally I think Utah is the key pick in regards to Sene. GS likes Sene but feel they need a more ready big man and look to have settled on OBryant. But Utah loves Sene. I look at their roster and it is screaming for a 2 guard. But Sene is going back to work out again WITH Malone, not FOR Malone. Could they shock everyone and take him? I dont know. But they might the wild card in this whole Sene thing. But a Sene, Kirilenko, combo could be scary defensively.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas + Sene might mean Pax packages Tyson for a more accomplished post player or the envision a group of long shotblockers guarding the goal. I mean this rotation would be interesting:

PF Chandler(Al Harrington or Nene), Tyrus Thomas
C Przyzbilla, Nazr (3 year deal), Sene

It kind of allows Gordon and Hinrich to play because of the back stops. It all depends on if Tyrus can develop some offense


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

FWIW DraftExpress and NBADraft.net still have Sene going #21 and #18, respectively, in their mocks.

I wouldn't mind Pax taking a flyer on this kid at #16. That length is crazy, he is athletic, and hopefully the coaches are right in saying he is a fast learner. He can develop behind Chandler, the FA bigs we need to get and the Center of the Future we hope to get next summer, and in 3-4 years be a force of his own, when those FA contracts are coming to an end.

All the more reason to me that Roy at #2 is the way to go.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> FWIW DraftExpress and NBADraft.net still have Sene going #21 and #18, respectively, in their mocks.
> 
> I wouldn't mind Pax taking a flyer on this kid at #16. That length is crazy, he is athletic, and hopefully the coaches are right in saying he is a fast learner. He can develop behind Chandler, the FA bigs we need to get and the Center of the Future we hope to get next summer, and in 3-4 years be a force of his own, when those FA contracts are coming to an end.
> 
> All the more reason to me that Roy at #2 is the way to go.


I absolutely agree with everything that you said. Beside the Roy part at the no.2. I still want BREWER. Maybe not with the no.2. Maybe trade down the no.2 with someone within the top 10. and get an extra late 1st round or future draft picks.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Very smart thing for the Bulls camp to say! I think Rlucas is right. The lower teams love the guy! The bulls may love him too! In that case what they are saying is, you want him? We do too. Let's talk. Smooth!


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

truebluefan said:


> Very smart thing for the Bulls camp to say! I think Rlucas is right. The lower teams love the guy! The bulls may love him too! In that case what they are saying is, you want him? We do too. Let's talk. Smooth!


thats a very interesting point. but for who? which lower pick could they possibly want? maybe pick him for another team for a future pick? regardless. interesting point. but i still think he'd be an intruiging player to pick for ourselves. because if you want to pick on potential you have to remember bigs are the way to go. bigs always have higher value in the nba. which means high trade bait for the future. options are limitless...


----------



## mr.ankle20 (Mar 7, 2004)

this guy still scare me, I think this guy is the next chandler .From what I read on he has the exact same strenghs and weakness chandler has. really quick and really big . His offense is non existant .So basically the guy is a chandler clone . No thanks


----------



## LIBlue (Aug 17, 2002)

As they would say on Monty Python, "Now for something completely different".

If the Bulls truly want length and athleticism, plus a veteran presence, how about this scenario.

*Selection # 2: * Tyrus Thomas  - amazing athlete with off-the-charts length. Thomas measured officially at 6-8.25 (w/ shoes), had the # 11 Longest Standing Reach at 9-0, the # 12 Longest Wing Span at 7-3, and is a leaper to boot. His current strength in defense and hustle, both Paxson/Skiles skill sets. In reviewing the NBA.com videos, they kept on talking about his amazing upside, and his ability to play either the 3 or the 4.

*Selection # 16:* Saer Sene  - he is a major project, but he appears to be a great athlete, and is said to be a quick learner. Plus, he has the # 1 Wing Span (7-8.5), the # 1 Standing Reach (9-5 ties with O'Bryant), and the # 3 Height (7-0 with shoes). He provides the length and athleticism that Paxson wants, plus he is a defensive player.

Now, you have a front line of Chandler, Thomas, Sene, Songalia, with either Allen or Harrington. You could maybe even add in a Joel Przybilla  for more muscle, and for some veteran leadership, replacing Allen and Harrington.

Now, in free agency, you go after Peja Stojakovic. He brings veteran leadership (29 years old) while playing on a winning franchise (Sacramento). He is a scorer, who has played successfully under Skiles in Greece. With Sene, Thomas, and Chandler, his defensive liability will not be as devastating, as you have excellent help defense behind him. He also brings height (6-10, 229), and can play either the 2 or the 3.

Just a slightly different perspective, assuming that Stojakovic is still a free agent.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

LegoHat said:


> Our very own mizenkay posted this picture in the measurements thread, this is just insane:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Look at the Mr. Ankle's on that guy. REALLY skinny.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

I remember hearing that this guy had a 40" vertical and was such an amazingly freakish athlete. He only has a 31" vert. (less than Aldridge and Armstrong) and his 3/4 sprint time was the same speedster J.P. Batista's. Really, it seems his only freakish attribute is his reach.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> I remember hearing that this guy had a 40" vertical and was such an amazingly freakish athlete. He only has a 31" vert.


He's not the only one though, Tyrus Thomas was sposed to be really freaky, nearing the 50" mark, look where he tested. One that suprised me the most really was the comparison between Gay and Roy, nothing noteworthy between them.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

step said:


> He's not the only one though, Tyrus Thomas was sposed to be really freaky, nearing the 50" mark, look where he tested. One that suprised me the most really was the comparison between Gay and Roy, nothing noteworthy between them.


Didn't Brewer suprise alot of people with his overall atheletic ability?? he was the no.1 or no.2 in overall wasn't he??


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

He fits Pax's bill of length and athletism, but he is a project. Pax doesn't seem to gamble on projects and we suck at developing big men. 

Sene looks good though. I'd take a gamble on him.

Think he was one of the unidentified men who worked out with Hilton Armstrong?


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> Didn't Brewer suprise alot of people with his overall atheletic ability?? he was the no.1 or no.2 in overall wasn't he??


Well I wouldn't call him much of a suprise and yes he was high overall. Much of that falls on the bench press though, something Roy and Gay did quite terrible at. Exclude that and they're pretty much the same.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Why do you think that Sene's a smokescreen? At our pick, there could just bo comboguards, point guards, and crappy big man left. Of course someone will fall, but I think it'll be Randy Foye who I don't want, so Sene makes perfect sense. If someone takes Sene over O'Bryant, then that could lead to O'Bryant falling to us, especially if it comes down to Golden St. for O'Bryant, and they choose Sene instead.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Truly sad thing about that video, is that in 8 minutes I saw more offensive from a player Sene, who has only played the game for a couple years, than I've seen from Chandler in 5 yrs in the NBA


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

sloth said:


> Why do you think that Sene's a smokescreen? At our pick, there could just bo comboguards, point guards, and crappy big man left. Of course someone will fall, but I think it'll be Randy Foye who I don't want, so Sene makes perfect sense. If someone takes Sene over O'Bryant, then that could lead to O'Bryant falling to us, especially if it comes down to Golden St. for O'Bryant, and they choose Sene instead.


i think that really depends on what Paxson decides to the with the no.2 pick. if he goes big. i see him taking a combo gaurd like Ager or Collins with the 16th. or a Carney or Brewer IF they fall which i highly doubt. If he goes for a small with the pick. Roy.Brewer even Gay. i think he will go for someone like Sene.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> I remember hearing that this guy had a 40" vertical and was such an amazingly freakish athlete. He only has a 31" vert. (less than Aldridge and Armstrong) and his 3/4 sprint time was the same speedster J.P. Batista's. Really, it seems his only freakish attribute is his reach.


Reach is enough if he's quick. He doesn't need a big vertical to be effective. Looks like he has a well developed upper body. Draft him at 16 and send him to the NBADL for two years; or leave him in europe. If the Bulls draft one of the small forwards with the #2, they need to add some hope for the future on the front line at #16. Sene may be all that's available.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

hi rlucus,

What is up? Yes i totally agree about Sere. I also think you are right on and the real issue is what GS is going to do. If you look at there team they need a starting center bad. If you think BDavis is staying then they are strong at SG as backup SG (Pieturs), they have Dunlovy at SG and Pieturs can play SF as well and they have two solid PF but IMHO their centers are weak and it only makes sense to get a center for the future.

I also think Seattle is key. If they take a PG, which i think they will do (i think either Foye, Williams, or Rando will be there) they NO, Sixers, and Utal will all take a big man and i think you are right that Malone loves Sere and IMHO that is where he is going to go.

If the bulls really want Thomas then either carney or brewer should be there as well as the player from Switzerland (i did hear he had a secret workout?) at 16. But i think if pax takes roy he will trade down and use what he gets to trade up to get the best big man and maybe that is Sere and he will have to move ahead of the jazz.

I have to say the thing that i dont like about roy is the way he finishes around the rim based on the clips i have seen and i think i read that in some of his workouts this was mention as well. I know he has this super jumping number but it seems like he likes to finish under the rim and not over it. I really wonder if brewer will not turn out to be a better pro in 5 years than roy?

david


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

giusd said:


> I really wonder if brewer will not turn out to be a better pro in 5 years than roy?
> 
> david



More like by the end of their rookie season.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Some weeks ago I said the Bulls working Sene out was a great opportunity to set some kind of smokescreen. Good.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

giusd said:


> hi rlucus,
> 
> What is up? Yes i totally agree about Sere. I also think you are right on and the real issue is what GS is going to do. If you look at there team they need a starting center bad. If you think BDavis is staying then they are strong at SG as backup SG (Pieturs), they have Dunlovy at SG and Pieturs can play SF as well and they have two solid PF but IMHO their centers are weak and it only makes sense to get a center for the future.
> 
> ...



There are alot of variables. 

GS I dont think is one of them. If Obryant is there, they will take him. If not, they will try and trade up for him. They love him. They like Sene, but they are under the gun to win now.

I dont think Seattle is one of them either. They are trying to trade out of the draft altogether because Mr Starbucks, as though he doesnt have enough money, is trying to keep payroll down. They will swap this years number one for next years number in a heart beat.

Utah is a variable. They love Sene. They had him stay an extra day and are now going to have him back. But I look at their roster and their recent trade and it doesnt scream for a center. But they have a big presence in Europe and have taken projects before. I seem to recall a very raw kid they drafted from Russia about 6 years ago who isnt that bad a player. 

Chicago. I would think they are serious about Sene if they go Roy or Morrison at 2. I dont think Gay is on the chart at that spot. If they go Roy, they are hoping for Sene. I really think that. Sene overlaps Thomas in terms of skill set. So their is no need to pick both. If the Bulls go with Thomas at 2, then I think Sene is off their board at 16. Why? Because this FA crop doesnt possess the swing man they want, so they will have to get it out of the draft. I also think Phoenix, NJ, Washington are all looking at Sene, and in particular, Phoenix could trade 21 and 27 for 16. 

In the end, Sene showed enough in this video, particularly in the Nike draft camp to show he has a real shot at being a factor in the league. I think the Bulls are considering him, which I wouldnt have thought 10 days ago. So I am happy at that. I like Brewer at 16, Sefolsha is a possibility as well. I would hope the Bulls would look at Marquinhos as well but it doesnt appear to be in the cards. I think Senes upside is much higher then anyone else they will get at 16. But as I stated earlier, Pax likes finished products, not projects. But perhaps Senes skill, physical characteristics and hard work may have won him over. All I know is that both sides (the Bulls and Senes) are saying they he really nailed it in his workout.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Well, we have been hearing this Tyrus Thomas to Chicago thing for weeks and he is far from being a finished product. Moreover, among the consensus top prospects, I think he is the least finished product of them all (Morrison, Gay, Aldridge, Roy, Bargnani, Shelden Williams).


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> Well, we have been hearing this Tyrus Thomas to Chicago thing for weeks and he is far from being a finished product. Moreover, among the consensus top prospects, I think he is the least finished product of them all (Morrison, Gay, Aldridge, Roy, Bargnani, Shelden Williams).


Defensively, TT is the finished product. You dont hear the term "project" associated with him very much now, do you? All the finished guys at the top are at positions we already are loaded at.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> Defensively, TT is the finished product. You dont hear the term "project" associated with him very much now, do you? All the finished guys at the top are at positions we already are loaded at.


What? I hear all the time the word "project" along TT's name. Project and potential. He is not polished and he wasnt coached for a long time before making the jump to LSU. If this Tyrus Thomas we saw at LSU was a finished product already, he would be considered a mid first rounder at best. His ceiling is what could land him in the top 3.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> What? I hear all the time the word "project" along TT's name. Project and potential. He is not polished and he wasnt coached for a long time before making the jump to LSU. If this Tyrus Thomas we saw at LSU was a finished product already, he would be considered a mid first rounder at best. His ceiling is what could land him in the top 3.



I havent seen the term project associated with him but perhaps you read more then me. Regardless, defensively he is there already. Tyrus Thomas can jump into any rotation in the league, right now. Thats not a project. Paxson likes those types. I just dont see him taking a guy who some people, meaning you, think the player might have to go to the D League for awhile.


----------



## BULLS23 (Apr 13, 2003)

Tyrus isn't a finished product . . . A finished product contributes (or fits in) on both ends of the floor.  This guy won't have much effect on the offensive end this year, and God love him, but I wouldn't take Ben Wallace with the #2 overall pick and I don't think Pax would either given the other players avaliable.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> There is nothing in Paxsons past to indicate he wants anything to do with Projects. As much as I like Sene, he is a project. I think he is a project worth taking on in a big way, but Pax has always gone for the finished product.


Paxson's past as a GM consists of a little over 2 seasons. I can understand his not going for projects while trying to overhaul the roster and change a losing culture. That said, now that there's some sort of foundation in place, I can see him going for a guy like Sene who needs longer to develop.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

This kid is who I want at 16th. I hope he gets to us. It seems like his stock keeps rising. 

Props to rlucas who talking about him months and months ago when nobody else really knew who he was.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

As i said really early this morning i think there is something going on from teh Bulls part. Maybe they are hoping to sell Sene so a team will jump in front of the Bulls and take him, thus the player the Bulls truly covet (who knows who that is) drops to them.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Paxson's past as a GM consists of a little over 2 seasons. I can understand his not going for projects while trying to overhaul the roster and change a losing culture. That said, now that there's some sort of foundation in place, I can see him going for a guy like Sene who needs longer to develop.



Perhaps J

What I meant by finished product is a guy who can contribute on day one, guaranteed. Projects dont do that. I dont see Paxson drafting, or even working out HS kids when they were eligible. He has shown minimal interest in Europe, particularly among players in the lower leagues. Thts what I am saying. Sure, youll be a better player at 25 then 21, thats a given. But Pax isnt going to take a risk on a guy, who might have huge upside but might not play for 3 years over a guy who can do something on day one. You can look at financially or economically and make a case for his logic, or an argument. But its his logic. Tyrus Thomas would be in almost every rotation in the league. Those are not projects. A project would be a guy like Johan Petro, who could one day become a dominant player but for now is just learning. There is a big difference. And Paxs picks have shown that. Thats ok. Maybe he saw that Sene isnt the project that some people think he is. And that would be a good thing as well.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I also wonder would pax take both thomas and sere? I know that doesnt really make much sense since we need a big SG bad and there are not any good ones in FAs. But on the other other hand maybe pax thinks two players like thomas and Sene, along with Chandler, would really settle the big men for years to come. Just thinking out load. 

david


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> This kid is who I want at 16th. I hope he gets to us. It seems like his stock keeps rising.
> 
> Props to rlucas who talking about him months and months ago when nobody else really knew who he was.



Thank you Sir.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> There is nothing in Paxsons past to indicate he wants anything to do with Projects. As much as I like Sene, he is a project. I think he is a project worth taking on in a big way, but Pax has always gone for the finished product.


Paxson has never had a mid first round draft pick before. 15-30 is a great place to take a project.

Hmm. I like the video a lot. It's the first chance I've seen to look at Sene. I do worry about kids who come on the draft scene right around the end of the regular season. 

I'm starting to come around to this idea. I really love the intensity that Tyrus Thomas brings to the game, but I'm not sold on his size, skill set, and attitude. If we can get a player at #16 with ridiculous athletic upside, incredible size and defensive presence, and a better attitude, AND take Brandon Roy at #2, I can't say I'd be unhappy with that draft.

Roy/Sene is gettting up there with ideal draft pairs such as Aldridge/Brewer for me.

However, I think Utah may take at #14, specifically if Randy Foye is off the board.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

giusd said:


> I also wonder would pax take both thomas and sere? I know that doesnt really make much sense since we need a big SG bad and there are not any good ones in FAs. But on the other other hand maybe pax thinks two players like thomas and Sene, along with Chandler, would really settle the big men for years to come. Just thinking out load.
> 
> david



I dont think so. two huge reasons you dont go big in both picks

First off, the FA crop this year for wing players is slim at best. I would like Jared Jefferies as a huge 2 guard who might blossom or a trade of an unsettled Mickael Pietrus, but there is not a huge supply of talented big guards out there. Meaning the draft is the only avenue for that this year. 

Second, next years draft is a bigs bonanza. There is so much talent among the bigs that if you dont get a star next year, your likely to get one next year. But if you take, in this case Thomas and Sene, and then draft a big next year, that does 2 things. Hurts development because they will all be vying for the same minutes and second, hurts the trade value of the bigs. More supply = lower prices. If a team is loaded at a spot and forced to deal, teams are not going to give fair value back.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Perhaps J
> 
> What I meant by finished product is a guy who can contribute on day one, guaranteed. Projects dont do that. I dont see Paxson drafting, or even working out HS kids when they were eligible. He has shown minimal interest in Europe, particularly among players in the lower leagues. Thts what I am saying. Sure, youll be a better player at 25 then 21, thats a given. But Pax isnt going to take a risk on a guy, who might have huge upside but might not play for 3 years over a guy who can do something on day one. You can look at financially or economically and make a case for his logic, or an argument. But its his logic. Tyrus Thomas would be in almost every rotation in the league. Those are not projects. A project would be a guy like Johan Petro, who could one day become a dominant player but for now is just learning. There is a big difference. And Paxs picks have shown that. Thats ok. Maybe he saw that Sene isnt the project that some people think he is. And that would be a good thing as well.


Fair enough.

All I'm saying is that we've seen how Paxson operates while overhauling a roster. We haven't seen how he works while tweaking one. I would hope that it's not in the exact same manner.

BTW, I really like Petro. I would love swing a trade with Seattle for he or Robert Swift. What do you think of Swift?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

giusd said:


> I also wonder would pax take both thomas and sere? I know that doesnt really make much sense since we need a big SG bad and there are not any good ones in FAs.


Personally, I still maintain that Paxson will take Rudy Gay. That's just a feeling I get. I think it would be fantastic if we came out of this draft with Gay and Sene. 

Nobody really strikes me as a difference maker at the 16th pick, except for Ronnie Brewer and Saer Sene. Nobody really strikes me as a big difference maker at the 2nd pick either (relative to draft position, obviously) except Bargnani and Gay. 

For my own preference, I hope we walk away with one of Bargnani/Gay and one of Sene/Brewer.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> All I'm saying is that we've seen how Paxson operates while overhauling a roster. We haven't seen how he works while tweaking one. I would hope that it's not in the exact same manner.
> 
> BTW, I really like Petro. I would love swing a trade with Seattle for he or Robert Swift. What do you think of Swift?



I would take Swift or Petro. Totally different players but both look to me. Swift really has a refined post game for someone his age. He needs work on his body, but you wont have to teach him footwork or skill set. Petro really has a pro body, a good motor and can change ends very quickly. In a smaller, more technically driven NBA, you can live with a Johan Petro manning the middle due to his athleticism and ability to rebound and defend.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> I dont think so. two huge reasons you dont go big in both picks
> 
> First off, the FA crop this year for wing players is slim at best. I would like Jared Jefferies as a huge 2 guard who might blossom or a trade of an unsettled Mickael Pietrus, but there is not a huge supply of talented big guards out there. Meaning the draft is the only avenue for that this year.
> 
> Second, next years draft is a bigs bonanza. There is so much talent among the bigs that if you dont get a star next year, your likely to get one next year. But if you take, in this case Thomas and Sene, and then draft a big next year, that does 2 things. Hurts development because they will all be vying for the same minutes and second, hurts the trade value of the bigs. More supply = lower prices. If a team is loaded at a spot and forced to deal, teams are not going to give fair value back.


Add to that the fact that none of the bigs appear to be developed enough to contribute major minutes right away, meaning we still have to sign FA bigs to improve next season, and I doubt we get anyone worthwhile on a 1 year contract, meaning we go into next years draft with the bigs we already have under contract (most notably Tyson and his albatross contract), two project bigs one year into their rookie contracts, one or 2 vets we signed as FAs this summer AND we will be looking to get one of the marquee bigs from the 2007 draft class.

Holy log jam, Batman!


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Personally, I still maintain that Paxson will take Rudy Gay. That's just a feeling I get. I think it would be fantastic if we came out of this draft with Gay and Sene.
> 
> Nobody really strikes me as a difference maker at the 16th pick, except for Ronnie Brewer and Saer Sene. Nobody really strikes me as a big difference maker at the 2nd pick either (relative to draft position, obviously) except Bargnani and Gay.
> 
> For my own preference, I hope we walk away with one of Bargnani/Gay and one of Sene/Brewer.



Gay and Sene would be very out of the box thinking. That would really change the way the Bulls can attack in the open court. And I dont think Skiles is adverse to a more wide open game, so while a distant possibility, certainly an interesting one.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Add to that the fact that none of the bigs appear to be developed enough to contribute major minutes right away, meaning we still have to sign FA bigs to improve next season, and I doubt we get anyone worthwhile on a 1 year contract, meaning we go into next years draft with the bigs we already have under contract (most notably Tyson and his albatross contract), two project bigs one year into their rookie contracts, one or 2 vets we signed as FAs this summer AND we will be looking to get one of the marquee bigs from the 2007 draft class.
> 
> Holy log jam, Batman!



Exactly. I just cant see it. And I couldnt blame Pax if he just passed on Sene after taking Thomas or Aldridge at 2 for that reason exactly. Just dont draft Paul Davis though.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Gay and Sene would be very out of the box thinking. That would really change the way the Bulls can attack in the open court. And I dont think Skiles is adverse to a more wide open game, so while a distant possibility, certainly an interesting one.


This is OT and perhaps in can be redirected to the draft thread, but what is your take on Thebo? Would you be happy with him at 16?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Gay and Sene would be very out of the box thinking. That would really change the way the Bulls can attack in the open court. And I dont think Skiles is adverse to a more wide open game, so while a distant possibility, certainly an interesting one.


Our guys can run. Skiles needs to adjust to that. If we had Gay, you know that kid can run and finish with the best of them. Hinrich at Kansas was a dominant fast break player, he knows how to make the right passes at the right times, and pushes the ball extremely quickly. Nocioni and Deng want to run, you know that. Whenever the Bulls do run, those guys are the first ones filling the lanes. Gordon will run too, but I'd rather have him following the break and spotting up at the three point line. Duhon, like Hinrich, can push the tempo pretty well. 

And really, we all rip Tyson Chandler, but for a seven footer, he can get out and run on the break as well as anyone. Saer Sene would just add to that.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> This is OT and perhaps in can be redirected to the draft thread, but what is your take on Thebo? Would you be happy with him at 16?


Only seen tape and limited tape at that. Long as heck, can clearly handle the ball. Looks like a point forward. The guy he reminds me of is a slightly longer Paul Pressey, have to go way back for that. But thats based on limited knowledge.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Our guys can run. Skiles needs to adjust to that. If we had Gay, you know that kid can run and finish with the best of them. Hinrich at Kansas was a dominant fast break player, he knows how to make the right passes at the right times, and pushes the ball extremely quickly. Nocioni and Deng want to run, you know that. Whenever the Bulls do run, those guys are the first ones filling the lanes. Gordon will run too, but I'd rather have him following the break and spotting up at the three point line. Duhon, like Hinrich, can push the tempo pretty well.
> 
> And really, we all rip Tyson Chandler, but for a seven footer, he can get out and run on the break as well as anyone. Saer Sene would just add to that.


Gays absility to finish is a dimension we dont have, and Senes ability to block shots would help in igniting transition. Its out of the Box SP, and I like it.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

For a guy being termed a project. Sene looks like a near fiinished product there. Reminded me of Mutumbo watching that video, blocking shots he shouldn't even be able to. Sene's offensive and defensive game are better than anything I saw in a Bulls uniform playing downlow. I love because of his extension, how quickly he is there for the block and dunks, its just quick, we need that. No wonder Utah is taking so many looks at him, kid looks good, better than O'Bryant imo.


----------



## eljam (Aug 1, 2003)

BULLS23 said:


> Tyrus isn't a finished product . . . A finished product contributes (or fits in) on both ends of the floor. This guy won't have much effect on the offensive end this year, and God love him, but I wouldn't take Ben Wallace with the #2 overall pick and I don't think Pax would either given the other players avaliable.



IMO - that's a very vague definintion. Can't someone fit in on both ends of the floor but still have room for growth in their game like extending the range on their jumpshot, improving their offensive rebounding, being better at keeping their man in front of them? According to your definition, most of the players in the draft, let alone in the NBA, aren't finished products. Ben Gordon wasn't (especially with the way Skiles berates his ball handling and defense) but we took him with the third overall pick. Finished product doesn't necessarily mean 'Star' or 'Starter' either. Tyrus has holes in his game, just like the other top five. 

I don't think Tyrus is a finshed product by an means. However, I don't think he's a 'big' project in the sense that the staff has to 'make him a basketball player instead of just an athlete'. He's a excellent rebounder and plays great defense. Also, from those who've watched him for this past season, not just the NCAA tourney, he's flashed some offensive skills, but wasn't in a role that would allow him to do more.

This team is still being built by Paxson and he might think now is the time to gamble on a player who might need a year or two before we see the player he could be. I'd rather have what we do on the bench than what Atlanta does. I'd prefer growth of potential to be more of an option for us than 'necessary' like it is for Atlanta.

Since Pax has been GM, his talent evaluation of draft picks has been fairly good and has had success with some second round selections. I trust him when it comes to draft picks: If he thinks Tyrus is worthy of the 2nd pick, then I want him to take him. If he feels like Roy is, then take him. In fact, if Morrison is Pax's guy, then I want him to take him. Unless we get a potential All-Star in a trade for the 2nd pick, I'd prefer Pax to keep the pick instead of trading down. True, we might get Brewer who is IMO, is the best fit for our backcourt, but the top five are a bit more special than anyone else in the rest of the draft and this year's FA market isn't particularly sharp.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Personally, I still maintain that Paxson will take Rudy Gay. That's just a feeling I get. I think it would be fantastic if we came out of this draft with Gay and Sene.
> 
> Nobody really strikes me as a difference maker at the 16th pick, except for Ronnie Brewer and Saer Sene. Nobody really strikes me as a big difference maker at the 2nd pick either (relative to draft position, obviously) except Bargnani and Gay.
> 
> For my own preference, I hope we walk away with one of Bargnani/Gay and one of Sene/Brewer.


I would agree with such wishlist but I would add Nene (as post presence and defensive big who won't be pushed around).


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

From what I've read here, some people are thinking like me in that we could build the team to be fast, uptempo, underisized yet athletic. Of our young core, pretty much everyone is pretty fast and athletic, with good athleticism to make up for lack of size. If we were to get Bargnani or Gay at #2 that would fit a more uptempo type of play, and Sene at 16 would really enforce that. Also, if you were able to get a bunch of guys like Bargs, Sene, Chandler who are all around 7', with good athleticism and shot blocking, they could definitely make up for Gordon and Hinrich's lack of height if they were coached right to rotate over and be shot blockers. I don't know if this would be possible, but an interesting lineup assuming they'd be able to play the positions would be Hinrich, Gordon, Bargnani, Chandler, Sene. You'd have 3 7' shot blockers, and 2 quick, good guards out there. Or Hinrich, Gordon, Gay, Chandler, Sene....that would be a more traditional lineup, and if need be, Gay could move over and guard the big SG like Scottie used to. 

I'm all for swinging for the fences. That's how you get a superstar. Always taking the safe pick usually will land you with quality, but not stars, and we are pretty loaded with high quality players that just aren't bonified superstars. I really see Bargs, Gay, & Sene as potential superstars, which is why they get my vote. If Sene is gone, and they go with the uptempo type of ball, Reddick would be a good choice cause he could spot up at the 3 point line and can it in transition and hit the game winners.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

What I dont get is why a future superstar that is THAT long isnt projected as a top 10 pick in such a weak draft.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> What I dont get is why a future superstar that is THAT long isnt projected as a top 10 pick in such a weak draft.



Who said he was a future superstar?


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> Who said he was a future superstar?


Poster above talked about him as a potential superstar.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> What I dont get is why a future superstar that is THAT long isnt projected as a top 10 pick in such a weak draft.


maybe not future superstar. but he's actually quick enough to play in the nba, looks agressive battling for rebounds, and is 7'0''. I would have to give him a better chance than the more refined O'Bryant, who may not be quick enough to play as a starter. And if you're going to pick Thomas at two for the same attributes, project or not, shouldn't Sene be rumored higher?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> Poster above talked about him as a potential superstar.


Bull ****. Where did I say he was a future superstar? 

Its quite obvious that your MO is to come and watch my posts and try to get into little tiffs, which is fine, but get your facts straight.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> Poster above talked about him as a potential superstar.



My apologies, didnt see that Babybullz said that. I would disagree with dababybullz on that but its his opinion.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

El Chapu said:


> What I dont get is why a future superstar that is THAT long isnt projected as a top 10 pick in such a weak draft.


Kwame Brown, Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Darko Milicic, Nicholas Tskishvilli, Maciej Lampe, et al. Far too many talented yet raw players are preceeding him. Even in a weak draft, I think that GM's/coaches who want to keep their jobs will tend to shy away from guys like Sene. I also think that's why teams like Pheonix and Utah are interested... The GM's/coaches of those two teams aren't going anywhere in the very near future. I think Pax and Skiles have that same job security and I certainly hope they are considering Sene at #16 (if he's still on the board at that time...)


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

rlucas4257 said:


> Bull ****. Where did I say he was a future superstar?
> 
> Its quite obvious that your MO is to come and watch my posts and try to get into little tiffs, which is fine, but get your facts straight.



Is he referring to you? He said "poster" not "post" above.

Also, please both of you be civil.


EDIT: I see the confusion has been cleared up.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> Bull ****. Where did I say he was a future superstar?
> 
> Its quite obvious that your MO is to come and watch my posts and try to get into little tiffs, which is fine, but get your facts straight.


Calm down, dude. I said poster above, not a guy that goes by the name rlucas4257 (or post above). Read the message posted by the guy before my original message of "What I dont get is why a future superstar that is THAT long isnt projected as a top 10 pick in such a weak draft."

:raised_ey


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

fl_flash said:


> Kwame Brown, Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Darko Milicic, Nicholas Tskishvilli, Maciej Lampe, et al. Far too many talented yet raw players are preceeding him. Even in a weak draft, I think that GM's/coaches who want to keep their jobs will tend to shy away from guys like Sene. I also think that's why teams like Pheonix and Utah are interested... The GM's/coaches of those two teams aren't going anywhere in the very near future. I think Pax and Skiles have that same job security and I certainly hope they are considering Sene at #16 (if he's still on the board at that time...)



O.T. but I hate the phrase "weak draft." Its a stretched assumption. Is it really that hard to imagine that Roy, Morrison, and Bargnani do very well early in their careers?


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

rlucas4257 said:


> My apologies, didnt see that Babybullz said that. I would disagree with dababybullz on that but its his opinion.


In regards to Sene having the potential to be a superstar, who else that might be available around 16 has more potential to be one? He has more of a chance not to be one, but the athleticism and size gives him the potential at least. As someone else said, he'd be a better pick than O'Bryant most likely, due to athleticism alone. I haven't went back and reread what I wrote, so can't remember how I worded it exactly, maybe I worded it wrong and it sounded like I said he would be one...that's not the case, just that he might turn out to be one due to his potential.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

fl_flash said:


> Kwame Brown, Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Darko Milicic, Nicholas Tskishvilli, Maciej Lampe, et al. Far too many talented yet raw players are preceeding him.


Europe and the high school ranks (now thankfully removed by Stern) are both big question marks. I'd bet an up and down consideration of the backgrounds of all active players will find that the NCAA is the most reliable "farm system" the NBA has.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> O.T. but I hate the phrase "weak draft." Its a stretched assumption. Is it really that hard to imagine that Roy, Morrison, and Bargnani do very well early in their careers?


How many superstars in the first 30 picks?

http://nbadraft.net/2002.htm


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Sene looks like he has the talent to be a superstar. 

Top 10 centers next season:

Sene could easily be a top 10 center by the end of next year, he seems like he has the fundamentals on some post moves down, he dunks the ball so easily, he moves fluid as hell, runs the floor well, and his defense, he could be the best defensive center in the league the moment he steps on the court, I saw shades of Mutumbo in that highlight video, his long arms allow him to block shots that everyone else in the league can't. He's a freak, he has talent too, he has a good attitutde to boot. My only fear it that the Jazz will take him at 14. I think it might be in our best interest to part with maybe Sweetney and future 2nd's to leap frog the Jazz and take Sene. Kid looks like he's going to be a star in this league.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

btw, does anyone have his freethrow percentage stat? He looks like he'd be able to draw fouls like crazy, just hope he isn't another Shaq/Ben Wallace at the line.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

sloth said:


> btw, does anyone have his freethrow percentage stat? He looks like he'd be able to draw fouls like crazy, just hope he isn't another Shaq/Ben Wallace at the line.


If I'm reading it right - he shot 36.8% (14-38). He also was 71.7% from the field (43-60)!!!! He only played 307 minutes total.

Here's the link... http://www.rbcverviers-pepinster.be/saison05-06/joueurs/sene.php


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Looks like he's going to need to work on his freethrows a bit.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

GB said:


> How many superstars in the first 30 picks?
> 
> http://nbadraft.net/2002.htm


 I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. Do you mean, it's more than the top three picks that decides a weak draft?

In that case I can name a slew of players form this years crew who I think have *a chance* to be major contributors early in their careers. How about J.J. Reddick, he was only one of the best shooters in the history of college ball. Would it really be that surprising if he won rookie of the year? Or the entire Uconn team (Willaims, Gay, Armstrong); my little secret is that I actually like both Williams and Armstrong more than Gay. I bet Williams could be rookie of the year. O'Bryant ROY? Perhaps, if his conditioning takes leaps. Tyrus Thomas, Aldridge, hell . . . Sheldon Williams could be the best of all the big men. I want to see what his body looks like after working with NBA trainers for a summer. 

We don't know how good any of these players are going to be. 

The phrase "weak draft" is the perfect example of a cascading norm. Someone six months ago, before serious scouting was even completed and when no one knew who was even going to be in this draft, called this a weak draft. And people just kept repeating it without forming their own evaluations.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

I, like some others, wouldn't be surprised to see him gone by the time #16 rolls around. I liked what I saw on the tape as well. Frankly, the Bull IS in a position to gamble on this position this season, as I fully expect them to bring in a seasoned PF/C or two through FA. Ultimately, we'd have the time and patience to bring him along at whatever rate we needed.

I see him as an "Oop" just waiting for the "Alley". I also see him fouling out in five minutes for his first six months in the league.

If he's there, I say take him.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

such sweet thunder said:


> I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. Do you mean, it's more than the top three picks that decides a weak draft?
> 
> In that case I can name a slew of players form this years crew who I think have *a chance* to be major contributors early in their careers. How about J.J. Reddick, he was only one of the best shooters in the history of college ball. Would it really be that surprising if he won rookie of the year? Or the entire Uconn team (Willaims, Gay, Armstrong); my little secret is that I actually like both Williams and Armstrong more than Gay. I bet Williams could be rookie of the year. O'Bryant ROY? Perhaps, if his conditioning takes leaps. Tyrus Thomas, Aldridge, hell . . . Sheldon Williams could be the best of all the big men. I want to see what his body looks like after working with NBA trainers for a summer.
> 
> ...


I'm sure that Reddick will come into the league and be a stud. Reddick and Morrison are the 2 most skilled players by far in the draft, so they should be able to start right away IMO. Granted Reddick and Morrison are both defensive liabilities, so it's possible they'd be situational players, and come in for last second shots, or to start shooting the 3 if their teams get down instead of full time starters. You're actually the first person I've noticed aside from myself that has mentioned Reddick (aside from his DUI of course lol).


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Wynn said:


> I, like some others, wouldn't be surprised to see him gone by the time #16 rolls around. I liked what I saw on the tape as well. Frankly, the Bull IS in a position to gamble on this position this season, as I fully expect them to bring in a seasoned PF/C or two through FA. Ultimately, we'd have the time and patience to bring him along at whatever rate we needed.
> 
> I see him as an "Oop" just waiting for the "Alley". I also see him fouling out in five minutes for his first six months in the league.
> 
> If he's there, I say take him.


What's the difference between him, and say....Chandler?


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I'm sure that Reddick will come into the league and be a stud.


I'm not. 

But the assumption that one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball (who also has pro size and grittyness) is never going to be star, is attenuated at best.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

Wow, has the Sene hype picked up.


I like the guy as a HIGH RISK - High Reward pick at 16. Unless Brewer or Sefalosha are available and we went big with #2.

Let's be realistic. The guy if nothing else is five defensive fouls to use. He can contribute on Defense immediately (as can any big man - see Luke Schensher). 

On the offensive side, he's got a very long way to go. Come on, he's played organized ball for a few years. I'd be surprised if he understands all the rules at this point (like - don't call a time out when you don't have one or call one with only one left and another free throw coming from your opponent)lol.

Point is, if you are willing to gamble and I think we can gamble if we go Big with the #2 pick because we can also grab a big man in FA, then grab him if no BIG SG is available (Brewer, Carney, Gay, Sefalosha).

BTW, trading down with Phoenix in this draft doesn't grab me. Two later picks in a thin draft aren't the way I'd go.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

such sweet thunder said:


> I'm not.
> 
> But the assumption that one of the best shooters in the history of college basketball (who also has pro size and grittyness) is never going to be star, is attenuated at best.


He'll be another Paxson/Kerr type player, who are STUDS because they fill their role perfectly. Kerr won 3 titles with the Bulls, went on to win a couple more with the Spurs, Pax won 3 with us. Both of those guys were key parts to those championship teams too. That's what I see Reddick doing, and if he's able to do that, he's a stud. Not a superstar, but any time you make key contributions in your team winning and can be that clutch that's extremely valuable. Superstar no, due to speed and defensive shortcomings; but sure scorer, most definitely.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Vintage said:


> What's the difference between him, and say....Chandler?


Not really much of a difference at all. He seems more fluid and looks to have better hands. I've said before (in support of Przybilla) that having two of Chandler isn't that bad of a thing. We'd definitely want to develop some offense from any of these players, especially if we wind up with them in plurality. For me, though, as long as they can defend and crash the offensive boards for second chance points and put-backs, we've got what we need out of them.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Vintage said:


> What's the difference between him, and say....Chandler?


Maybe the difference between Sene and Chandler is that they are two different people.

Chandler was a brilliant prospect coming into the league. He had the speed of a guard and the height of the best big men. He could shoot, if with an unorthodox style.

Chandler has developed little of what we thought was possible. Some of his skills may have even regressed.

I know this is obvious, but Sene is a different person than Chandler. He has many of the same attributes as the young Tyson, but we don't know he is going to fail to develop like Chandler has.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Chandlers a poor man Sene.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

If a Chandler clone were available at #16 I'd pick him. 
Sene should be so lucky as to someday be as good as Chandler is.

It seems to be fashionable to kick Chandler this off season, but I think he'll come back without the health problems, have a good camp and a great season next year.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

McBulls said:


> If a Chandler clone were available at #16 I'd pick him.
> Sene should be so lucky as to someday be as good as Chandler is.
> 
> It seems to be fashionable to kick Chandler this off season, but I think he'll come back without the health problems, have a good camp and a great season next year.


Especially given that he should have some help in the front court next season. I think we'll see a much more dominant player when we are able to pair the Chan-Chan man with another NBA quality player.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Wynn said:


> Especially given that he should have some help in the front court next season. I think we'll see a much more dominant player when we are able to pair the Chan-Chan man with another NBA quality player.


He's a quality 4, just not a quality 5. He needs a big guy to take the banging duties from him, so he can be a roving shot blocker and rebounder at the 4 position. He was good at that IMO.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Heres a good question, say we do draft Sene is he a Chicago Bulls starter? 

Say we add Pryz and Nene where does Sene fall, in between Chandler and Sweets?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> where does Sene fall, in between Chandler and Sweets?


All I know is I hope Sweetney is the bottom piece of bread in THAT sandwich.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> All I know is I hope Sweetney is the bottom piece of bread in THAT sandwich.


Wouldn't it make more sense for Sweetney to be the meat? Chandler's not a good piece of meat.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

anyone check out my idea in the bulls draft thread?

Seattle want rid of their pick to save money.
Their ownership wants to save money in general.

my idea - they sign/trade Chris Wilcox along with the #10 to Chicago for the #2 (and possibly filler or future picks).

This would work with the Tyrus Thomas being picked solely for a trade rumours; and it saves a lot of money for seattle whilst still leaving them 2 deep at every position (with Nick Collison perfectly capable of starting if they don't trust that job to Ty).

Chicago can then select Brewer at 10, and Sene at 16.

which gives them:

C FA (przybilia?) / Sene / Harrington
PF Wilcox / Chandler / Allen, Songaila or Sweetney
SF Nocioni / Deng
SG Gordon / Brewer
PG Hinrich / Duhon / Pargo

plus a veteran free agent swingman such as Shandon Anderson (plenty of playoff experience, good basketball IQ).

on paper, i'd say that's at least a second round team, whilst also being doable.. of course, if seattle doesnt co-operate, i doubt chicago can get Wilcox (as i see Atlanta or maybe Milwaukee offering him more money). But in that case, they can probably get Nene, and then draft Roy (trade down if necesarry)


----------



## mw2889 (Dec 15, 2005)

I don't see how you can pass sene at 16, I don't think he'll make it that low though


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

sloth said:


> Wouldn't it make more sense for Sweetney to be the meat? Chandler's not a good piece of meat.



Clearing mind. . . must clear mind. . . Selma Hayec, Selma Hayec, Selma Hayec. . . clear mind. . . happy place.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

He looks like a lanky Dalembert.......

As long as we got a big @ #2...I wouldn't be mad if he fell to #16


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

I think that Sene is going to be a riser a la Robert Swift, Andrew Bynum et al. Someone will take him basically because he's a centre with potential, because they don't come around too often. Could go 10-14. The above plan to trade with Seattle for #10 could work... although you should work in the #16 instead of #2. Take Roy then Sene. Highly sexual.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

I'll tell you guys now that it's really unlikely Utah will pass on the kid. Karl Malone attended his workouts and gave him tons of compliments over the guys he was competing against. He's scheduled for another on the 25th, and there is a lot of reason to believe that we will nab him.

Just thought I'd let you all know what's going on over here.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Vintage said:


> What's the difference between him, and say....Chandler?


About 70 million bucks.


----------



## mgolding (Jul 20, 2002)

Im not saying he cant be good but this hype comes around about physically gifted big men projects every year.

Top 10 centre in this coming year sloth? please

If taken by the Bulls at 16 I see him in the NBDL for one or two years. He wont be ahead of Chandler or Sweetney for a fair while, if ever, and thats saying something. The guy has been playing in Belgium. A US high school team could dominate basketball in Belgium. 

Diop was more developed when he got to the NBA and he's taken 4 years to get meaningful minutes.


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

I am reading this guy averaged 4 pts a game, shot 30 something percent from the free throw line, and some think this guy is going to be a big time player? Highly unlikely. All he is is a physical specimen. This is a big gamble, especially if someone like Reddick is available. How many times do these 7 foot projects pan out? How many of these guys are in the NBA now and dominating that came in as a completely unknown, unproven super project? NONE! This guy to me is a tease because of his physical body, but likely would be a huge dissapointment.

Only draft him if no other options are better, you are assured of signing some decent free agents, and you can give this guy loads of time to develop and are patient, knowing full well he will be passing out towels for a few years and seeing no court time. Skiles is going to give a guy like this minutes? Think "Bagaric".


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Salvaged Ship said:


> I am reading this guy averaged 4 pts a game, shot 30 something percent from the free throw line, and some think this guy is going to be a big time player? Highly unlikely. All he is is a physical specimen. This is a big gamble, especially if someone like Reddick is available. How many times do these 7 foot projects pan out? How many of these guys are in the NBA now and dominating that came in as a completely unknown, unproven super project? NONE! This guy to me is a tease because of his physical body, but likely would be a huge dissapointment.
> 
> Only draft him if no other options are better, you are assured of signing some decent free agents, and you can give this guy loads of time to develop and are patient, knowing full well he will be passing out towels for a few years and seeing no court time. Skiles is going to give a guy like this minutes? Think "Bagaric".


thats why we call him a "gamble". but it all really depends on who we get with the no.2

if we go big which it all seems to be pointing to at the moment. id prefer someone like Ager or Collins to fill the big guard need. both can play multiple positions. and Ager can just flat out play and is explosive..


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> The above plan to trade with Seattle for #10 could work... although you should work in the #16 instead of #2. Take Roy then Sene. Highly sexual.


thanks.
however, i thought this way works better for both teams - Seattle fullfils a need (after they trade away Wilcox, but still get a good player, and this fits in with the Thomas trade rumours); and i see brewer as a better fit for Chicago - better defender than Roy, more size, and i feel Roy would.. not need the ball too much, but would take more minutes from Gordon, if you see what i mean.
Another option at 16 (albeit a reach) is Hilton Armstrong.

And yes, Sene would be a project, but he's slimmer than Diop, and more athletic. I think he could contribute in limited minutes, say 12 a game maybe, which would help him develop, as well as adding a shotblocker (or at least an intimidator, face it, he has a 7'8 wingspan!) to the lineup.
and can you imagine the fast breaks?
Sene, Wilcox, Chandler, Deng, Brewer.. even Gordon and Hinrich too!


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

no matter how you put it his a project. and the boy is going to have to scoff down so cheese burgers for him to be successful any regard. sure he may get a few blocks by just standing there. but he'll going to get beat down at his current weight. but i do love his hustle. you don't see many seven footers with that type of hustle. diving for balls and going for steals...


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

He may very well be a project; however, remember the last time the bulls camp used the words, "Blown away?" It was Ben Gordon. And we did draft Ben Gordon. 

We could get this kid. He could be one of our 12 through 15 players and that way he can develop through practice and limited minutes. I am concerned about his offense but we need his size and defense.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

mgolding said:


> Im not saying he cant be good but this hype comes around about physically gifted big men projects every year.
> 
> Top 10 centre in this coming year sloth? please
> 
> ...



But could just any other US High Schooler dominate at the Nike Camp against the best incoming class of bigs in HS history? He was the best player there, and there were plenty of studs there. Think Kevin Durrant, Thaddeus Young, Brandon Wright and Spencer Hawes, all good to great prospects. And Sene crushed them. Thats what most people dont get. Throw the stats out of Europe. Sometimes a guy with great stats, like Nachbar, cant cut it in Europe. And then guys like Nenad or Kirilenko, who werent exactly setting the world on fire, make it. They dont run offense very often in Europe for young guys, no matter how good they are. They didnt for Gasol for a long time, only at the end of the his Barca career did he explode, stat wise, even though he was the best player on the team for a few years. Sene is a better player then Sweetney now. And if he was drafted by the Bulls, he would make fatboy obsolete on day one.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

NO WAY is Sene a better player than Sweetney right NOW...You must be kidding me.

Sweetney is NOT a scrub...Yeah...He's fat...But he is NOT a scrub...He has lowpost skills Sene won't have til his 3rd season.

Sene is just a physical freak of nature...Yeah...His physical attributes are quite blinding, but lets get back to earth people.

We need someone that can create in the post....SIMPLE AS THAT.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

smARTmouf said:


> NO WAY is Sene a better player than Sweetney right NOW...You must be kidding me.
> 
> Sweetney is NOT a scrub...Yeah...He's fat...But he is NOT a scrub...He has lowpost skills Sene won't have til his 3rd season.
> 
> ...


i must say i agree. Sure Mike "big foot work" Sweetney is fat but to put it nicer "overweight". but the kid has skills. he has great foot work for a big man. he has good hands. and he has decieve post moves when his in the mood. though his confidence gets shattered quite fast which can effect him for the rest of the game or continously for a few games there after. im not going to go to the road of "if he ever lose weight" he could be this type of player. its just too fustrating. its like "if chandler had bigger hands and put on a 30 more pounds" he could be a top 3 centre of the leauge behind Shaq or Ming. Or "if Gordon suddenly had a 5 inch growth spurt" he'd probably be a star in this leauge by now thoughts. some players are the way they and you can't do much about it. 

but thats besides the point. Sene is a project. its as simple as that. no matter where he goes. he'll be pasted on the bench. and will only get time when the other two centres infront of him gets into foul trouble. kid is a few years away. but is he worth the patience? i don't see why not. but most teams don't have the patience... so we'll see.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

smARTmouf said:


> NO WAY is Sene a better player than Sweetney right NOW...You must be kidding me.
> 
> Sweetney is NOT a scrub...Yeah...He's fat...But he is NOT a scrub...He has lowpost skills Sene won't have til his 3rd season.
> 
> ...



Spoken like someone who hasnt even Sene play? Lets put it this way, if Sene guarded Sweetney right now, Sweetney wouldnt score. Sene plays both ends of the floor and plays hard. Cant say that about fat boy. Sene is not only the better player now, but will certainly be better in the future by a large margin. Next


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> Spoken like someone who hasnt even Sene play? Lets put it this way, if Sene guarded Sweetney right now, Sweetney wouldnt score. Sene plays both ends of the floor and plays hard. Cant say that about fat boy. Sene is not only the better player now, but will certainly be better in the future by a large margin. Next


Although lanky and unorthodoxed, I'd have to agree.

Not only did he show he had a smooth jumper from about 12ft out but he's a defensive BEAST. Hell, he looked like Greg Oden out there on defense. He also did a few up-n-under's in the vid which shows he does have SOME sort of skill under the basket.

Hell, all we'd have to do is throw the ball anywhere near the backboard, I'm sure sene could catch it and put it back.

His defense is SMOTHERING. I see why the Bulls love him.


----------



## Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! (Jun 10, 2003)

So, if the Bulls know all this about Sene, whom I presume to be Chandler with better hands (does that make him Dalembert?), wouldn't teams drafting, say, 10-15 also know about this?? I mean, seriously, there are no secrets out there.

Given this, the question becomes: who in the later stages of the lottery would want/need/most likely draft him before Stern comes to the podium to announce Pax's 16th selection and thus ruins it for the Bulls?


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Spoken like someone who hasnt even Sene play? Lets put it this way, if Sene guarded Sweetney right now, Sweetney wouldnt score. Sene plays both ends of the floor and plays hard. Cant say that about fat boy. Sene is not only the better player now, but will certainly be better in the future by a large margin. Next


I like how you say it like you actually know it.

I find it amusing. He "will certainly" be better in the future "by a large margin."

Like, as if you say it, it will come true. Or that you couldn't possibly be wrong about Sene...amusing.

Now....will us a championship while you are at it.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! said:


> So, if the Bulls know all this about Sene, whom I presume to be Chandler with better hands (does that make him Dalembert?), wouldn't teams drafting, say, 10-15 also know about this?? I mean, seriously, there are no secrets out there.
> 
> Given this, the question becomes: who in the later stages of the lottery would want/need/most likely draft him before Stern comes to the podium to announce Pax's 16th selection and thus ruins it for the Bulls?


when its all said and done. all teams wants a big man. and all big men with an exception of once a decade will there be a sure thing centre that comes out. meaning that most bigs are gambles. but the point is that GM's and organizations love to take gambles on bigs. and why not? having a good quality big is so rare if your going to take a gamble it should be on a big. thats why you hardly ever see a big that goes late in the draft that become stars. because bigs are always converted early on in the draft. and either they make it or not. but as they say "you can't teach size" and its a gamble to pass up on a big. and a gamble to take one. year in and year out everyone has taken a reach at a big guy.. and i don't see this year being any different. Sene will go higher than people expect him to go.. someone will take a gamble late lottery.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! said:


> So, if the Bulls know all this about Sene, whom I presume to be Chandler with better hands (does that make him Dalembert?), wouldn't teams drafting, say, 10-15 also know about this?? I mean, seriously, there are no secrets out there.
> 
> Given this, the question becomes: who in the later stages of the lottery would want/need/most likely draft him before Stern comes to the podium to announce Pax's 16th selection and thus ruins it for the Bulls?


He might go earlier - maybe as high as Boston (#7). Starting with Utah at #14 and anytime after that I think he's pretty much a lock. I'd be surprised if he slips past Pheonix at #21. It's those teams that are between 7-13 which I'm not sure if they'd be inclined to take him... Houston? I don't think so. They've got Ming and really need more wing help and not interior help. Golden State? Maybe. They've got Biedrins, Diogu, Foyle and Cabarkapa. They really don't need another big man project in Sene. If they're gonna take another big, I'd think they'd go after someone a little more polished like Simmons or such. Seattle? They've got Petro, Swift and Wilcox. They also don't need another big man project. Orlando? I doubt it. They've got Darko and Howard with Vasquez waiting in the wings. They need help at the off-guard and SF spots. New Orleans? I'd think they'd be lookin for some size and they'd be a possibility. I tend to think they'd go after someone more like Simmons, Armstrong or O'Bryant over Sene - but ya never know. The Sixers? Probably not. They really should be grooming Iverson's replacement and they've got Dalembert. And then you get to Utah. Sene makes pretty good sense there. A front line of Sene, Okur and Kirilenko would be pretty damned impressive. Defense and scoring.

That's what makes this draft so interesting. Who knows where Sene or almost anyone else is going? There are so many players who could fit in so many slots. It's very fluid and I, for one, can't wait for next Wednesday just to see how this all plays out. Not only for the Bulls, but just in general.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! said:


> So, if the Bulls know all this about Sene, whom I presume to be Chandler with better hands (does that make him Dalembert?), wouldn't teams drafting, say, 10-15 also know about this?? I mean, seriously, there are no secrets out there.
> 
> Given this, the question becomes: who in the later stages of the lottery would want/need/most likely draft him before Stern comes to the podium to announce Pax's 16th selection and thus ruins it for the Bulls?


The correct name your thinking of is Dikembe Mutumbo. Its not like he needs too much weight, another 15-20 pounds, and he is perfect size for an NBA center.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

I'm not sure what the point of comparing Sene to Sweetney is. They seem to be very different players to me. I don't doubt that Sweets couldn't score on Sene. But I'm not sure Sene could score on Sweets either.

As for the European stats - I wouldn't get too distracted by them. The 38% from the line is alarming, but he did averaged 10 and 13 every 30 minutes. Not terrible by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

jbulls said:


> I'm not sure what the point of comparing Sene to Sweetney is. They seem to be very different players to me. I don't doubt that Sweets couldn't score on Sene. But I'm not sure Sene could score on Sweets either.
> 
> As for the European stats - I wouldn't get too distracted by them. The 38% from the line is alarming, but he did averaged 10 and 13 every 30 minutes. Not terrible by any stretch of the imagination.


With Sweetney's lack of vertical, I think Sene blocks almost everything Sweetney puts up, his arms are just that long. And with Sweetney's slow movement, no vert, and sene's long arm and height advantage, Sene is at an advantage in the post against Sweetney.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Spoken like someone who hasnt even Sene play? Lets put it this way, if Sene guarded Sweetney right now, Sweetney wouldnt score. Sene plays both ends of the floor and plays hard. Cant say that about fat boy. Sene is not only the better player now, but will certainly be better in the future by a large margin. Next



How bout you say next when you tell me what NBA player Sene has EVER scored on?

Ether.

Let it burn slow.

Let's wait til Sene gets to the league before we say he's better than established professionals with such certainty.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

smARTmouf said:


> How bout you say next when you tell me what NBA player Sene has EVER scored on?
> 
> Ether.
> 
> ...


Wow.

May as well shut down the message board.

Not much to talk about if you can't compare potential draft choices to "established professionals" like Sweetney.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Wow.
> 
> May as well shut down the message board.
> 
> Not much to talk about if you can't compare potential draft choices to "established professionals" like Sweetney.



Let's keep it focused on this particular comparison

Really though...You CAN compare for the sake of a freaking message board...of course..(way to patronize spark-plug)...But you can't speak like your word is God.

Yeah..Sene is better than Sweetney cause he can block 9 shots against high schoolers....I don't care how highly touted that class is...It's just plain irresponsible to say such things

Sweetney would've eaten those kids alive...Sene is no different.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

sloth said:


> With Sweetney's lack of vertical, I think Sene blocks almost everything Sweetney puts up, his arms are just that long. And with Sweetney's slow movement, no vert, and sene's long arm and height advantage, Sene is at an advantage in the post against Sweetney.


Great analysis. Sene is tall so he will block Sweetney on defense. Sene is tall so he he will score on Sweetney on offense.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

smARTmouf said:


> How bout you say next when you tell me what NBA player Sene has EVER scored on?
> 
> Ether.
> 
> ...



What NBA player has Greg Oden scored on? I guess we should write him off of our 07 wish list too huh?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

fl_flash said:


> He might go earlier - maybe as high as Boston (#7). Starting with Utah at #14 and anytime after that I think he's pretty much a lock. I'd be surprised if he slips past Pheonix at #21.





> They saw three prospects for Wednesday's first round - Senegal's 7-foot Saer Sene, Ukraine's 6-foot-10 Oleksiy Pecherov and Temple 6-6 point guard Mardy Collins. The big men may be in the range of Phoenix's 21st pick, while Collins fits more at its 27th slot.
> --
> Sene's potential would be hard to pass. The one-year pro showed he is "two or three years away for sure," Suns coach Mike D'Antoni said, in a two-on-two workout. But David Griffin, Suns vice president of basketball operations, said his game play differs notably.
> 
> ...


http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/articles/0623suns0623.html

If he's going to be the next great player, Pax should not let him slip through his fingers the way Wade did.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Yeah, I definintely don't think he's gonna let him slip.

My problem is, if you move up and have both Sene & Brewer availible?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Sene, Odom, Pryzbilla

Call it a summer.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

You guys are talking about Sene like he is the next sure thing. He is a PROJECT...which means he might be good in a few years and he might suck. There have been plenty of long atheletic players that have failed in the league and it is just as likely that Sene is more like Loren Woods than Chandler or Wallace. I think folks are getting a little carried away and counting chickens before they hatch. If Sene is there at 16 and there are no other prospects, fine, take a flyer on him. But thats exactly what it will be..a flyer. I have seen people penciling Sene into the starting lineup! The guy will probably be in the NBDL all year next year if we draft him, lets keep it real here folks and stay grounded.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Based on some of the stuff I read today, it looks like the Jazz are going to take Reddick at 14, and the Hornets are going to take Hilton Armstrong or Cedric Simmons, so Sene should still be there.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> What NBA player has Greg Oden scored on? I guess we should write him off of our 07 wish list too huh?



Stop with the lame comparisons.

No one is writing ANYONE off.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

sloth said:


> Based on some of the stuff I read today, it looks like the Jazz are going to take Reddick at 14, and the Hornets are going to take Hilton Armstrong or Cedric Simmons, so Sene should still be there.


Aren't the Jazz supposed to be looking at Sene as well? Sounds like they're after the 2 guys I want at 16 for the Bulls. Redick and Sene all the way at 16!


----------



## mw2889 (Dec 15, 2005)

I'm pretty sure Sene will be a Bull, paxson seemed very impressed with him!


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

mw2889 said:


> I'm pretty sure Sene will be a Bull, paxson seemed very impressed with him!


Yeah I heard that too, but they can't take him at 16 if the Jazz do at 14.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Im sure Sene will be there when the Bulls pick @ 16.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Reading that last article out of Utah, Reddick is their #1 option regardless of his injury.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

The ROY said:


> Reading that last article out of Utah, Reddick is their #1 option regardless of his injury.


Myself I'm torn between Redick and Sene at 16, if we could have our choice. Sene has huge upside, but is a huge risk. Redick is as sure of a bet as there is in this draft, but doesn't fill AS BIG of a need. A deadly 3 pt shooter is ALWAYS a need, unless you already have one of his caliber on the team, which we don't. Sene on the other hand would fill a HUGE need, IF he works out...that's a big if though.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

That would be a easy one for me and about 95% of the board

Sene


----------

