# OT: Deng is in!



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Announcement will be made sometime this week. Don't ask for a link because I do not have one. It is true though. Everyone on Duke campus knows already. Apparently Livingston is going now as well. So now if we do not luck into Okafor then our next choice is Deng.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90618&forumid=8

Not a link to a hard story, but a link to some links to guys who have inside access according to Hong Kong Fooey.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

If it's true, its encouraging news for the Bulls who only have a 20% of landing the overall first pick. Deng, though only a freshman, fills a real need. It does, however lead you to speculate that if we end up with something other than the first pick and Paxson likes Deng as much as I'm led to believe, we've got to find a way to add some savy and productive talent to the frontline. A combination of TC, EC, and LD isn't going to command the respect of the officials, and it lacks a closer, a go to guy.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I think this brings us back to your suggestion to go after SAR if we get Deng with Chandler as the bait.


----------



## Wild Wild West (Jun 30, 2003)

I certainly hope Deng does come out because I think for us he might be the best choice even ahead of Okafor and Howard. Given that all we know before the lottery is that we will pick 1-3 or 5 or 6, there are several announcements we have a vested interest in.

The way I figure it three players have declared that are possible picks for us, (Okafor, Howard and Iguodala), with three key decisions still to be made, (Deng, Smith, and Livingston). We will pick in the first 6 and those are the 6 I think would help us the most. If one or more of the undeclared three don't come out and we get the 6th pick we would have to consider one of the foreign centers, or maybe someone like Gordon or Warrick if indeed he declares.

Of the six I am interested in the consensus top two are Okafor and Howard, but I would put Deng above either for the Bulls. Smith would be my 4th choice, Iguodala 5th and Livingston 6th.
So we have a reason to root for Deng, Smith, and Livingston to come out. If so we don't have to go outside those six, and the odds of getting the 6th pick are pretty small. We probably won't draft Livingston but if he comes out he could go ahead of Smith or Iguodala and move them down to us.

Deng and Smith are the big decisions because at this moment, there is no SF officially in the draft worthy of picking in the top six, and that is our worst position. So I certainly hope you are right on Deng, and I hope, Smith and Livingston come out too.


----------



## Wild Wild West (Jun 30, 2003)

Sorry I just wanted to add that if we did wind up with Deng, I would still go after someone like S. Jackson with the MLE who could at a minimum back up Deng and Crawford, or start ahead of either.


----------



## Chi_Lunatic (Aug 20, 2002)

could a package of JAMAL CRAWFORD (S&T), TYSON CHANDLER & ANTONIO DAVIS snag us RAY ALLEN? I would think they'd be more interested in EDDY CURRY though.

PG. HINRICH
SG. ALLEN
SF. DENG


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wild Wild West</b>!
> I certainly hope Deng does come out because I think for us he might be the best choice even ahead of Okafor and Howard. Given that all we know before the lottery is that we will pick 1-3 or 5 or 6, there are several announcements we have a vested interest in.
> 
> The way I figure it three players have declared that are possible picks for us, (Okafor, Howard and Iguodala), with three key decisions still to be made, (Deng, Smith, and Livingston). We will pick in the first 6 and those are the 6 I think would help us the most. If one or more of the undeclared three don't come out and we get the 6th pick we would have to consider one of the foreign centers, or maybe someone like Gordon or Warrick if indeed he declares.
> ...


My top five for the Bulls is a little different:

1) Okafor
2) Smith (assuming he commits)
3) Deng
4) Iggy

I agree though, bottom line is we have another player to be excited about. Asuming Dwight Howard gets drafted in the top three, like all the mocks have him ranked, the Bulls will have the option of drafting a player with the potential to make an immediate impact. Even if the lottery gods are unjust, the lowest Chicago can drop is to five. I will be ecstatic if we select any player off my list...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Wild Wild West</b>!
> I certainly hope Deng does come out because I think for us he might be the best choice even ahead of Okafor and Howard. Given that all we know before the lottery is that we will pick 1-3 or 5 or 6, there are several announcements we have a vested interest in.
> 
> The way I figure it three players have declared that are possible picks for us, (Okafor, Howard and Iguodala), with three key decisions still to be made, (Deng, Smith, and Livingston). We will pick in the first 6 and those are the 6 I think would help us the most. If one or more of the undeclared three don't come out and we get the 6th pick we would have to consider one of the foreign centers, or maybe someone like Gordon or Warrick if indeed he declares.


I just dont see how Livingston would help us. Ive seen this kid play and take it from me hes not ready for the NBA, Just look at his body its extreamly Skinny! 

Ps. Does anyone belive that a girl will ever play in the NBA. (Candance Parker?)


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> My top five for the Bulls is a little different:
> ...


Be wary, we can drop to 6. That's the worst case scenario. Unless there's a Euro on Pax's brain for the first round pick, and I doubt it, I bet his top 4 look like this:

1. Okafor
1a. Deng
3. Iguodala
4. Smith


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Be wary, we can drop to 6. That's the worst case scenario.


My bad,

So theres what, a 20% chance were going to take it in the rear and miss my blue chips. I wonder whats going to happen [sarcasm]. This franchise is cursed--six pick here we come! Not that Pox has made any indications that hes interested in Smith or Iggy....


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> Ps. Does anyone belive that a girl will ever play in the NBA. (Candance Parker?)


Haha...

Do you really want someone to answer that?


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

What does smith posses over Iguodala and Howard? Iam just curious as i have very little of the players mentioned.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Haha...
> ...


Ok well answer me this, do you think rusty larue and rick brunson are light years better then the best femal player in the world? just wondering


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm just not very high on Deng...

He had some good games, had some poor ones too...

Just seems to me like another role player, not another superstar.

He does a lot of things good and nothing great, and in the tournament, Duhon was making them go, not him.

I think he and Okafor will be good players, but I'm not convinced yet they will have the impact some of us are thinking they will.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

This is good news Basg!

It gives us more options since I thought if we wouldn't get Okafur , like 2-3 picks , we'd have to trade the pick.
with Deng we still got the option to trade (depends on what we get) the pick or we can pick Deng , it gives our GM more 'power' on the nagotiation table.

And Deng - I think he's great , can help us Tons , plays the position we lack (understatement) , good ethic , lots of will , still getting better , and only 19-20 , with a year exp' under coach K.
allaround good player.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Im not really sold on any college players right now .To me Deng entering only increases the value of but in NO way do I consider him as a lock for us if we get the #2 pick.

Our goal should be to evaluate our current players growth and then make a decision on whether to actually draft a player or trade for a veteran based on that .

My ideal scenario would be that we could somehow parlay our pick into a veteran that can still play and a later pick and try to add depth as well as fill a weakness.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Ok well answer me this, do you think rusty larue and rick brunson are light years better then the best femal player in the world? just wondering


Now she's the best female player in the world?

That's news to me...

This is a pointless argument.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> What does smith posses over Iguodala and Howard? Iam just curious as i have very little of the players mentioned.


Howard and Smith aren't really comparable. Howard is a center/pf in a stretch, Smith is a sf/g in a stretch.

In comparing Iggy vs. Smith: Both are explosive NBA ready athletes but Smith is even a size larger. They both have ball skills, and play aggressive defense. What separates the two for me though is that Smith seems to have a Carmelo Anthony type scorer's knack for putting the ball in the hoop. Josh Smith shows an innate sense of creativity when he finishes. Both players are worth getting excited about, but to me, Smith has a much better chance of becoming a take-over-a-game caliber star. I envision Iggy in more of a Hinrich type solid contributor role. Then again, I thought TJ Ford was going to be a bust...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Now she's the best female player in the world?
> ...


Sometimes your posts are tottally pointless, iam just asking a question and i never said that Candance was the best in the world all iam asking is if RIck and Rusty are light years better then the best female b-ball player in the world whoever that is.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> Howard and Smith aren't really comparable. Howard is a center/pf in a stretch, Smith is a sf/g in a stretch.
> ...


 Hmm the thing that worries me alot is that Athletisism is a very overated thing, i mean if i hear that Deng is a great Player as to Smith is an amazing AThlete with tons of upside and potential, after hearing that about Chandler being a way better athlete then Brand and has tons of potential over Brand iam afraid of going the same route yet again.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Sometimes your posts are tottally pointless, iam just asking a question and i never said that Candance was the best in the world all iam asking is if RIck and Rusty are light years better then the best female b-ball player in the world whoever that is.


I'm not trying to be offensive towards you...

I just don't see the point in us discussing a girl being in the NBA.


----------



## Mr. Bill (Nov 26, 2002)

If we take Deng then I think we should go with Sam Smith's last suggestion and package crawford or chandler for SAR. Then go and sign Turkoglu or Jackson with the MLE. I know if we sign Jackson then we're looking a little like the Hawks, but the hawks didn't have Hinrich and Curry. In any case you have do the best you can with the tools you have and that to me is the best we could do this offseason.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not trying to be offensive towards you...
> ...


 It wount be to long my friend before woman groups make this happen, just look at the Annika Sorenstam thing. And it was just alitle question not looking for debate.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Hmm the thing that worries me alot is that Athletisism is a very overated thing, i mean if i hear that Deng is a great Player as to Smith is an amazing AThlete with tons of upside and potential, after hearing that about Chandler being a way better athlete then Brand and has tons of potential over Brand iam afraid of going the same route yet again.


Yeah thats the trap,

But, I don't see it holding form in this case. Josh Smith has more fundamentals than Ty could dream of having--right now, even with Ty going into his forth season. I'm also not sure that Deng is much more pro ready then Smith. I see Deng as a post orientated type sf and Smith working more on the perimiter. I like Smiths open court skills better, and trust his ability to finish going to the hoop. Though I like Deng's developing post game. Both are physically ready to make a contributions with Deng, because of his strength, perhaps having a slight edge for not finishing the season on the Injured List. 6 of one, half dozen of the other--I'll be happy with either come draft day.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Bill</b>!
> If we take Deng then I think we should go with Sam Smith's last suggestion and package crawford or chandler for SAR. Then go and sign Turkoglu or Jackson with the MLE. I know if we sign Jackson then we're looking a little like the Hawks, but the hawks didn't have Hinrich and Curry. In any case you have do the best you can with the tools you have and that to me is the best we could do this offseason.


The only problem i have with these type of trade talks is that Trading away a Scorer for Another Scorer doesnt allways work. Now if we can Send Chancler and someone else for SAR then good, actually great! But We have to keep JC, hes a scorer and we need scoring, To trade a scorer for a scorer straight up it wount work unless the other guy your getting is light years better. In this Case i trully belive that JC in the west coast might hurt us down the road.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> It wount be to long my friend before woman groups make this happen, just look at the Annika Sorenstam thing. And it was just alitle question not looking for debate.


Cheryl Swoops is probably one of the best female players and yes, she is light years ahead of a guy like Rusty LaRue, there are actually QUITE A FEW, WNBA players who could easily make an NBA roster ahead of a lot of guys that are on teams now.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> It wount be to long my friend before woman groups make this happen, just look at the Annika Sorenstam thing. And it was just alitle question not looking for debate.


I have to jump in here. I don't see how a woman could play in the NBA until they first get on a men's basketball team in college. Until I see women playing on the men's team (and I don't mean a 6'2 PF), then this will never happen.

I am in the camp of this will never happen unless they build a robot and dress that said robot up as a woman.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>whiterhino</b>!
> 
> 
> Cheryl Swoops is probably one of the best female players and yes, she is light years ahead of a guy like Rusty LaRue, there are actually QUITE A FEW, WNBA players who could easily make an NBA roster ahead of a lot of guys that are on teams now.



:krazy: :krazy: You can't be serious. Sheryl Swoopes isn't even the best player in the WNBA. She isn't better than Bryce Drew, Rusty Larue, Calvin Booth, none of them.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>whiterhino</b>!
> 
> 
> Cheryl Swoops is probably one of the best female players and yes, she is light years ahead of a guy like Rusty LaRue, there are actually QUITE A FEW, WNBA players who could easily make an NBA roster ahead of a lot of guys that are on teams now.


I have to disagree with this one. I would say without hesitation that, say, any mens' college team that made the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament (and many of those teams likely won't be putting guys in the NBA) would mop the floor with the best womens' team one could assemble. Men are simply that much faster and stronger than women. I'm not trying to be sexist, that's just how it is.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

lol...

Can someone change the title of this thread to "Deng Is In, Will Candace Parker Follow?"


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah thats the trap,
> ...


 Well what we have in Crawford and Hinrich are perimeter guys, But our team is mostly a jump shooting team, maybe an inside SF inst a bad idea, Josh Smith makes me thing of dunks and highlight reels wich is fine when you have a team that wins, but Deng might do the little things that cause us to win. Its tough, but iam also intrigued by Howard. Its tough i wish these kids would go to college.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> It wount be to long my friend before woman groups make this happen, just look at the Annika Sorenstam thing. And it was just alitle question not looking for debate.


Bizkit,

A woman is not going to appear in a professional men's *team[/bold] any times soon, if ever. This has nothing to do with golf at all.

If you wish to consider continuing this discussion, make an OT thread. This just has nothing to do with Luol Deng.*


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Well what we have in Crawford and Hinrich are perimeter guys, But our team is mostly a jump shooting team, maybe an inside SF inst a bad idea, Josh Smith makes me thing of dunks and highlight reels wich is fine when you have a team that wins, but Deng might do the little things that cause us to win. Its tough, but iam also intrigued by Howard. Its tough i wish these kids would go to college.


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> lol...
> 
> Can someone change the title of this thread to "Deng Is In, Will Candace Parker Follow?"


 LoL , heck if the NBA had 4 rounds in the Draft id take her with the last pick, i mean i dont care iam pretty damn sure shes better the Rusty Larue or Rick Brunson, she has to be, and if shes not i would never bring this up again. ok Ok is she better then Kornel David?!


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


whats so funny? you dont belive Deng would make this team better?


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

I'm on the fence regarding our pick. I think Deng is a better fit today and will likely be a better player for the first year or two, but it's hard to say no to Josh Smith's jaw-dropping athleticism to go with his solid skill set. I have to say I'm a bit gunshy about going the HS route again, but it's not like Deng is a 4 year product himself. I'd say the range of what Deng could become is shorter, ie I think he has less of a chance to be an outright disappointment, but he also isn't likely to ascend to the level of McGrady or Kobe. Smith could be that good, or he could be the most recent HS washout. Both could be really good, though. I'll be happy but cautious in my optimism if we choose either guy.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> whats so funny? you dont belive Deng would make this team better?


Well Crawford, and Hinrich just aren't that good:

You don't pass on a pick, because you have a semi-starter at their position. I understand what your saying--It would be nice to have a player that could help board down low. But, the Bulls are bad. They need all the help they can get. Perhaps you would look other places then pg with Hinirich manning the spot, but there aren't even any guarantees that Craw is going to be here 3 months from now.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Well the problem i have with players like Deng is, he may have all the Talent in the world and be a terrifick athlete but some scouting reports have him as being a below average ball handler, i mean when we talk about Kobe,Tmac,Lebron,Anthony,Kidd,Even Shaq they all have great ball handling skills. Tyson has good athletisism but horrible hands.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't understand the trepidation in regards to this pick. If the Bulls are confident that Curry will be the man, and they are going to re-sign Crawford then if they don't get Okafor, they have to take Deng. 

Josh Smith is going to most likely end up a big time wing player, but he also has the look of a big time gunner as well. If you have Deng-Hinrich-Crawford on the perimeter, you have guys who are more than willing to pass the rock and can put the ball in the hoop. 

I think since you have enough scorers, now you need more talented jack of all trades kinds of guys. I also don't think Smith will improve this team in the immediate, whereas Deng will fill a need and although I don't feel he will be a star, I feel he will be a fit. Deng is a glue guy, who should continue to get better (especially with pro training).


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

PG-Hinrich
SG-Crawford
SF-Deng
PF-Chandler
C-Curry

PG-Hinrich
SG-Crawford
SF-NOBODY STILL
PF-Okafor
C-Curry


I would take Deng and have the first starting lineup unless I could trade Chandler for a SF better than Deng...

best possible scenario would be:

PG-Hinrich
SG-Crawford
SF-Deng
PF-Okafor
C-Curry

i don't know how we get that done though :grinning:


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> I don't understand the trepidation in regards to this pick. If the Bulls are confident that Curry will be the man, and they are going to re-sign Crawford then if they don't get Okafor, they have to take Deng.
> 
> Josh Smith is going to most likely end up a big time wing player, but he also has the look of a big time gunner as well. If you have Deng-Hinrich-Crawford on the perimeter, you have guys who are more than willing to pass the rock and can put the ball in the hoop.
> ...


You paint a more optimistic picture then is diserving of our sorry franchise. With the injury to JWill and the departure of Rose (and I'm the minority who has yet to shed tears that hes gone) the Bulls instantly became undermanned in terms of offensive tallent. More then anything else, the Bulls need someone who can push EC into a second option and Jamal and Hinrich into third. Not that we don't need glue players, but lets face it--this team needs stars.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> Well the problem i have with players like Deng is, he may have all the Talent in the world and be a terrifick athlete but some scouting reports have him as being a below average ball handler, i mean when we talk about Kobe,Tmac,Lebron,Anthony,Kidd,Even Shaq they all have great ball handling skills. Tyson has good athletisism but horrible hands.


He's not a world-class athlete, but IMO he's plenty athletic to excel.

Deng can handle the ball reasonably well, but not like the guys listed above. I don't think slashing off the dribble will be his #1 weapon, though he can do it and will probably still improve on it. Shooting with some range and cutting away from the ball will be how he gets open either for jumpers or for layups. The thing that always impressed me about his was his court awareness. He always found holes in opposing defenses and finished. 

I think he'll also be a solid contributor on defense and will chip in with 6-8 boards a game. He's an excellent post-entry passer as well.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> whats so funny? you dont belive Deng would make this team better?


Whoops, bizkit, my laughing smileys were actually intended for arenas' post. I do think Deng would improved the Bulls, and from what I've seen thus far I'd be quite happy if Deng ended up being our pick.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> He's not a world-class athlete, but IMO he's plenty athletic to excel.
> ...


I meant Smith not Deng, sorry i was talking about Smith but i typed Deng by accisdent.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Anyone think Paxson might have given this guy a guarantee: "We will take you with any pick we have, even #1?" Or maybe some other GM with a guaranteed high pick? What convinced him to go in the end? Perhaps just the understanding that he's going to go top 5?


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> Anyone think Paxson might have given this guy a guarantee: "We will take you with any pick we have, even #1?" Or maybe some other GM with a guaranteed high pick? What convinced him to go in the end? Perhaps just the understanding that he's going to go top 5?


 I think what convinced him was guaranteed money. But Deng might have been next years #1 but who knows.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> I think what convinced him was guaranteed money. But Deng might have been next years #1 but who knows.


shhh, rlucas might hear you!


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not trying to be offensive towards you...
> ...



Why? It's happened before already. Well, at least a woman has been drafted before.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

FWIW, Krause once took the "best athlete available" to the extreme by drafting Carl Lewis for the Bulls (it was a late round pick, I believe).


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Deng was always going to be a top 5 pick if he declared 

If we draft him we have to have a guy to put him in front.. or at least to share the 3 spot with him rather than expect that he contribute straight away 

It also compels consideration to the dealing of one of or both of Crawford and Chandler if you have :

Curry, Hinrich and Okafor/Deng as your core 

Sorry to be playing the broken record guys.. but if that's the reality .. then guys like Matt Harpring, Kurt Thomas and Shandon Andersen .. rounded out by Davis and Williams fit this core like a hand in glove if your focused on what the team needs around the individual talent you are committed to going forward 

And I would seriously like to swap Davis or Williams ( preferably Williams and Chris Jeffries ) for Austin Croshere.. whose outside shooting on the forward line could provide a boon for Eddy Curry

Take Romain Sato and Chris Duhonin the 2nd round

Take Charlie Ward at the $1.6M exception

*

Curry
Thomas
Harpring
Andersen
Hinrich

bench

Davis
Croshere
Deng
Sato
Ward

Austin
Johnson
Duhon

*


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

the bulls aren't good enough to pick for "fits" they have to pick the best talent available at a position of need , that is smith , he has the talent to be a superstar and deng quite frankly doesn't , deng has a lower ceiling and he currently plays out of a top college but that doesn't mean he's carmelo vs. lebron its more like t-mac/vince carter vs mashburn/ harpring as a best case then most likely scenerio.

it may take longer for smith then again maybe not , deng didn't end his season any better than lets say maggette , but maggette wasn't ready for a couple years , people are just saying he looks that way , but he has not yet become anything more than a good college player , personally i say a 23-59 team should swing for the fences and sort it out later because if you find out you have too much talent there is always someout out there willing to give you a less talented player for whomever you are giving.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

Basghetti, what are your sources? I'm hearing much different from HIGHLY reliable sources on campus.

My friend's sister is a freshman at Duke and has dated him over parts of the year and remains good friends with him. The word I'm hearing (as of about 3 days ago) is that Luol's not really sweating his decision and is giving indication that he's in no rush to go to the NBA. While he and his family have been doing the requisite research to determine his options, he is more focused on classes and doing well on his finals.

So if you have a better source than that, I would love to know what it is. I've long since learned to make any definite statements about what a player will do until they make an official declaration (I've seen too many reporters dish out the wrong scoop..... ahem, Seth Davis).


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> ...mashburn/ harpring as a best case then most likely scenerio...


Harpering? What do they have in common aside from the fact that they both play hard? Mashburn I can deal with. 




> it may take longer for smith then again maybe not , deng didn't end his season any better than lets say maggette , but maggette wasn't ready for a couple years , people are just saying he looks that way , but he has not yet become anything more than a good college player


Again, what? Deng acheived a hell of a lot more than Maggette. That doesn't mean he's going to kick it right away, but that's a strange comparison if you ask me. Luol has a much more pro ready all around game after one year even though Maggette is definitely a better athlete.



> personally i say a 23-59 team should swing for the fences and sort it out later because if you find out you have too much talent there is always someout out there willing to give you a less talented player for whomever you are giving.


Fair enough. I'm really into Josh Smith, but I think you may be underrating what Deng is capable of short term and long term.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> Basghetti, what are your sources? I'm hearing much different from HIGHLY reliable sources on campus.
> 
> My friend's sister is a freshman at Duke and has dated him over parts of the year and remains good friends with him. The word I'm hearing (as of about 3 days ago) is that Luol's not really sweating his decision and is giving indication that he's in no rush to go to the NBA. While he and his family have been doing the requisite research to determine his options, he is more focused on classes and doing well on his finals.
> ...


Kurt O'Neill is saying that Deng is gone. Kurt is dialed into the Duke program.

Dave Glenn, of 850 the Buzz (out of North Carolina) is also reporting that both Livingston and Deng will enter the NBA draft.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Harpering? What do they have in common aside from the fact that they both play hard? Mashburn I can deal with.
> ...


harpring is a borderline star at the 3 and a borderline star is dengs most likely scenerio imo.

i didn't say they accomplished the same thing (deng and maggette) i said they ended their freshman year at the same level of player which is basically a good player but not a star college player (if he weren't on duke would anyone know what he did this season ?) same as corey 

i'm not underrating him , i think he'll be a good player just not as good as smith and if a team doesn't have the patience to get the best , they will never be the best so if it takes 4-6 years for smith to be a star it will be worth it if at that star level he continues to get better ...while i believe deng can be a star but that will be the best he can be


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> harpring is a borderline star at the 3 and a borderline star is dengs most likely scenerio imo.
> ...


I am agreeing with your stance but not your reasoning. If nothing, the last two years have taught us that it is possible for HSers to make an immediate impact on the pro ranks. I want the Bulls to draft Josh Smith, but I don't think it necessarily means we have to temper our expectations. Smith has the tools to play almost from day one. Watch out for those Oak Hill grads: that experience is as close to college as you are going to get in prep hoops.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> harpring is a borderline star at the 3 and a borderline star is dengs most likely scenerio imo.
> ...


I say Luol Deng was definitely a college star. He was the best player on his team and led them to the final four, and they almost beat UConn.


----------



## MiSTa iBN (Jun 16, 2002)

If you put an all star WNBA team against a Georgia Tech, Kansas, or even a Clemson they will lose. I've played against a player that is now in the WNBA and she was just another good player on the basketball court, nothing special, just a girl that could play ball. I D'd her up though lol


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/04/21/408661931db56

Not confirmation, but at least we now have a link to show that Deng is reconsidering.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

I might be crazy...

I just see Deng as a role player, maybe a decent starter on a good team and he's the 3rd option.

I do not seeing him being a savior of any franchise or ever even being considered a star in the league.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> I might be crazy...
> 
> I just see Deng as a role player, maybe a decent starter on a good team and he's the 3rd option.
> ...


Don't you think he could be Jamal Mashburn with better defense? I do. 

But I do see Josh Smith, for example, as having a higher ceiling. 

But Tyson Chandler has a higher ceiling than Elton Brand. 

Peyton Manning was the "safe choice" over Ryan Leaf. 

And I didn't think Carmelo would be a good enough athlete to dominate in the NBA. 

Many disperate thoughts...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> And I didn't think Carmelo would be a good enough athlete to dominate in the NBA.


I didn't even think Deng could have the same impact on a team as Melo had in college.

Deng had a good freshman season, but Duhon was making that team go.

That's how I saw it.

Smith higher ceiling?

IMO Smith is a better player right NOW.

I wouldn't give a huge edge to Deng because of his one year at Duke.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I didn't even think Deng could have the same impact on a team as Melo had in college.
> ...


But we already have been told that Deng has a great work ethic. Does Smith, because if he doesn't, he's not going to find favor on the Bulls. I would say outside of a few swooping blocked shots, I think Deng is a much better man defender right now.

You may be right about Smith being a better player. He's a bad mother. And he may well have a great work ethic. Oak Hill is THE PLACE. They know what's up and get a great basketball education there. It's practically like college.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> But we already have been told that Deng has a great work ethic. Does Smith, because if he doesn't, he's not going to find favor on the Bulls. I would say outside of a few swooping blocked shots, I think Deng is a much better man defender right now.
> ...


Our only chance to grab a star IMO is to draft one or to trade for a young talent with potential that could blow into a star.

In regards to drafting one, I don't see that player being Deng.

Smith might need an extra year, but Deng himself isn't that much more experienced, so do you want a Mashburn or a TMac?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Duke continues to sweat out Deng's decision:

http://newsobserver.com/24hour/sports/college/mens_basketball/story/1306170p-8445893c.html


----------



## JohnPaxson (Apr 21, 2004)

I think you are way off on Deng. Smith is a talent but nowhere near as developed in his game as Deng is. Having said that Deng still has a lot of improving to do but his upside is very,very high. I really like both guys. Both guys will be stars eventually. Deng is the safer pick. Dengs upside is much higher than Mashburn IMO.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Our only chance to grab a star IMO is to draft one or to trade for a young talent with potential that could blow into a star.
> ...


But talent doesn't always pan out, Arenas. Look at Leaf, Gerald Wallace isn't doing that much yet, Darius Rice, Darius Miles (he may turn into a player on his third team, but that would NOT satisfy Paxson). 

If we drafted Smith, it could blow up in our faces. I'll be very excited, though a bit concerned, if that's the guy we draft though.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> If we drafted Smith, it could blow up in our faces.


And it couldn't if we drafted Deng?

He's far from a sure thing.

Again, Deng's 1 year at Duke doesn't give him any advantage over Smith.


----------



## JohnPaxson (Apr 21, 2004)

Deng was better as a HS senior than Josh Smith is right now. That is not to say Smith is not good. He is. But Deng was better before he got to Duke and is better now. IMO because of his work ethic, basketball IQ, and leadership qualities will always be the better player. I have seen both play a lot.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> And it couldn't if we drafted Deng?
> ...


Deng excelled against college competition, and I think all of his skills translate. He's big enough to play the position. He's very strong and build, but not too much for the 3. Much like Carmelo, he's one half guard, one half big man, even though he's not as good of a prospect as Melo. He will be able to post up 3's and shoot from NBA 3 point range. He's got a decent handle for an NBA 3 and he can take people off the dribble and get to the rack. He also plays hard defense. The only thing that scares me is that his athleticism is overrated IMO, but I still think he has enough. 

Just for the record, Kirk Hinrich has the same vertical as Carmelo. I could get scared off of Deng if his combine results disappoint.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Does everyone agree that if we drafted EITHER Smith or Deng we need to, with the rest of our summer roster moves, prepare for a draft pick who will not immediately contribute?


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> Does everyone agree that if we drafted EITHER Smith or Deng we need to, with the rest of our summer roster moves, prepare for a draft pick who will not immediately contribute?


I would not be surprised, looking at things now, if Paxson starts Deng. Not Smith. Just a hunch, no proof.


----------



## JohnPaxson (Apr 21, 2004)

Luol Deng would start from day one and give us 15 and 7. Josh Smith would need to come off the bench for a year. By year two I could see him starting. He may however go somewhere that has no choice but to start him. Somewhere like Charlotte.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Deng excelled against college competition, and I think all of his skills translate. He's big enough to play the position. He's very strong and build, but not too much for the 3. Much like Carmelo, he's one half guard, one half big man, even though he's not as good of a prospect as Melo. He will be able to post up 3's and shoot from NBA 3 point range. He's got a decent handle for an NBA 3 and he can take people off the dribble and get to the rack. He also plays hard defense. The only thing that scares me is that his athleticism is overrated IMO, but I still think he has enough.
> ...


Deng's not one half guard...he's a straight up 3.

Before I saw this kid play all I heard were comparisons to Grant Hill, and that was just ridiculous because it's not even close.

Here's a question for you, what does he do that Battier can't do?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JohnPaxson</b>!
> Luol Deng would start from day one and give us 15 and 7. Josh Smith would need to come off the bench for a year. By year two I could see him starting. He may however go somewhere that has no choice but to start him. Somewhere like Charlotte.


Do you want Mashburn or do you want a TMac?

We're not going to be good next year anyway, so if you feel it's going to take Smith an extra year, why not take him for the long run?


----------



## JohnPaxson (Apr 21, 2004)

Those are not good comparisions in either case. Deng has a much higher ceiling than Mashburn. I will also be very shocked if Smith ends up being as good as TMac. Listen though they are both going to be very good ball players. I would go with the one that can make an impact sooner. They both are future all star level talents.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Deng's not one half guard...he's a straight up 3.
> ...


Dribble, create his own shot, finish at the rim, post up better, is a better athlete. He's got some handle and some range. I did NOT say he was a point forward or compare him to Hill. I really think Carmelo is a better comparison.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Dribble, create his own shot, finish at the rim, post up better, is a better athlete. He's got some handle and some range. I did NOT say he was a point forward or compare him to Hill. I really think Carmelo is a better comparison.


I agree. Carmelo, minus a fair amount of his innate scoring creativity, but PLUS a lot of defensive ability - man defense, court awareness, help defense. Granted, Carmelo played his college ball in a zone, but he hasn't impressed me at all defensively in the games I've seen this year. Deng was a great college defender and I think he'll do fine in the NBA after a brief adjustment period. Also, Deng is a fantastic post-entry passer. He made some passes to Williams that I thought were steals for sure, but ended up as uncontested layups. I think sticking him in the high post or the wing and having him feed Eddy could get Eddy 3 or 4 open dunks per game.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> I am agreeing with your stance but not your reasoning. If nothing, the last two years have taught us that it is possible for HSers to make an immediate impact on the pro ranks. I want the Bulls to draft Josh Smith, but I don't think it necessarily means we have to temper our expectations. Smith has the tools to play almost from day one. Watch out for those Oak Hill grads: that experience is as close to college as you are going to get in prep hoops.


yes it is possible for a hser to make an immediate impact but thats not why you draft one , you draft a young player at 18,19 or 22 not for the player he is when you pick him , but for the player he is going to be(ages 25 -30) if he's good before then great but with all young players it requires patience , unless he fits an immediate need like dallas drafting josh howard (they needed a player like adrian griffin or greg buckner whom they lost over the past 2 years) Josh or Luol do not fit this need today IMO , go and look it up if you go by college accomplishments its a no brainer to take dupree for day one because dupree avg. more pts, grabbed more boards , passed for more assists and shot a higher % from the field, but obviously you would take deng because he has more potential


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> Does everyone agree that if we drafted EITHER Smith or Deng we need to, with the rest of our summer roster moves, prepare for a draft pick who will not immediately contribute?


As you can guess from my posts in this thread, I disagree:

It seems the most important atribute for projecting whether a rookie is able to make an impact is their physical build. Deng is strong, even by NBA standards. Josh Smith is slighter, but still has length and build to hold his own -- No Amare, but I don't see him struggling to control his build like Eddy and Ty.

Skills wise, they both are "natural players." Both have developed game instincts in terms of team D and creating within the offense. You just can't down play the Oak Hill experience. I have a flashbulb image of Josh Smith working the post in the International game: He just seemed so composed establishing position; accepting the pass; not forcing and kicking it back out; taking a feed lower; never putting the ball down. These are pro level skills, that will work in the league. Sans Okafor I think the pair is by far the most NBA ready...


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JohnPaxson</b>!
> Deng was better as a HS senior than Josh Smith is right now. That is not to say Smith is not good. He is. But Deng was better before he got to Duke and is better now. IMO because of his work ethic, basketball IQ, and leadership qualities will always be the better player. I have seen both play a lot.


Where have you seen them play? You sound like you've had a lot of opportunities to watch Oak Hill.

We all have heard the refrain of Deng as a character player, do you have an idea what the rap is on Josh Smith in the locker room? Just looking for insights...


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Do you want Mashburn or do you want a TMac?


Who said Josh Smith will be as good as TMac? While Deng could be Mashburn, Smith could be Korloene Young. You pick the guy who you think will become the best player. If it's Smith that's fine. 

I think Paxson knows the Bulls have gambled before in the draft, and I don't think he wants to gamble again. He'll play it safe. He'll take Deng before Smith, IMO.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> 
> 
> Who said Josh Smith will be as good as TMac? While Deng could be Mashburn, Smith could be Korloene Young. You pick the guy who you think will become the best player. If it's Smith that's fine.
> ...


Unless smith shoots lights out during work outs, i think Tyson Chandler was more of a potential ceiling pick then he was a worthy 2nd pick, iam pretty sure Chandler had average or belove average workouts, but because he was 7 feet and the rep on him was that he could be the next KG made teams draft him on potential alone. This time its gonna be different Pax is not gonna draft someone just because they have great potential.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> He'll play it safe.


You'll never get anywhere playing it safe...

Greatness comes from taking chances, not "layin up".


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You'll never get anywhere playing it safe...
> ...


Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf.

It is not true that "you'll never get anywhere playing it safe." Most people thought Leaf had more potential, and supposedly so did a lot of people in the Colts organization. 

Sometimes playing it safe ends up being the right thing to do. Each draft is different. Rlucas' "think outside the box" maxim has much value, but history would show that sometimes the safe pick actually ends up being the best pick, sometimes even the biggest star.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You'll never get anywhere playing it safe...
> ...


Tyson Chandler over Elton Brand?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

"Layin up" or "Playin it safe" is fine, I didn't say it was bad necessarily, but greatness comes from takin chances...

Plain and simple, obviously there are cases that go against that...and there are some that don't...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> "Layin up" or "Playin it safe" is fine, I didn't say it was bad necessarily, but greatness comes from takin chances...
> 
> Plain and simple, obviously there are cases that go against that...and there are some that don't...


your right, i mean Hakeem was a safe pick compared to Jordan, but thank god there was no center for us to pick back then.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> "Layin up" or "Playin it safe" is fine, I didn't say it was bad necessarily, but greatness comes from takin chances...
> 
> Plain and simple, obviously there are cases that go against that...and there are some that don't...


Aha, now a disclaimer! I'm getting somewhere!

All I'm sayin' is that I think Peyton Manning is great. His run to the AFC championship game plus his play in general is enough for me. Many considered him the best QB in the NFL. And he was the safe pick on draft day. So let is be clear that sometimes "layin up" leads to greatness too.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> "Layin up" or "Playin it safe" is fine, I didn't say it was bad necessarily, but greatness comes from takin chances...
> 
> Plain and simple, obviously there are cases that go against that...and there are some that don't...


I don't see how Deng suddenly became playing it safe. Its not like he's a grizzled College vet. Every draft is a risk -- you pick they player you think will contribute. I happen to think thats Smith but would also love Deng on my team. Either way, we get one of these two and I'm sippin Crystal.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't see how Deng suddenly became playing it safe. Its not like he's a grizzled College vet. Every draft is a risk -- you pick they player you think will contribute. I happen to think thats Smith but would also love Deng on my team. Either way, we get one of these two and I'm sippin Crystal.


 Well i think what you see with Deng you get, so its kinda safe. But he still has a great upside with potential, the only difference is that even if he doesnt get way better then he is, he still is a pretty good solid player.


----------

