# Ok, it is tournament time. Who blows up?



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

What player does the most to enhance his draft position?

What player thought not to be declaring blows up and ends up coming out?


I think O.J. Mayo really solidifies himself and starts to challenge Rose for #2.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

I think Mayo will, and for some odd reason I feel Netizel is going to explode in the tourney.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Nietzel. Ha, I expect Michigan State to go out in Round 1 again. Mateen Cleaves ain't walking through that door. My pick is AJ Price showing that he is a Mike James type player come tournament time (from UConn). Not exactly a point guard, but is so tough minded that you want to get him on the floor. 

Also think people need to keep an eye on Chris Douglas-Roberts putting Memphis on his back. Since they will have nothing but neutral games, I expect a few close ones.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

bball2223 said:


> I think Mayo will, and for some odd reason I feel Netizel is going to explode in the tourney.


Neitzel? Are you kidding me? 1/10 from the floor, 0 trips to the line, 3 points against Wisconsin. He cannot play point guard. And this guy is going to play in the NBA? Give me a break.

OJ Mayo definitely seems like he's awaken from his season long slumber, and there's a lot of other talented player on that USC team. I would NOT want to play them.

I don't really even know outside of Mayo.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Not that it'll make a difference as far as the draft goes, but I hope Stephen Curry lights someone up.

Other than that, it'd be nice if one of the centers like Lopez, Thabeet and Hibbert really establish themselves as being better than the others.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

It won't be Thabeet. He's faded back into obscurity after a few flashes early in the Big East season. He needs another year.

Lopez is looking like he could be that guy.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Mayo is the easy pick, but hes also the right pick. I think he'll be seen in a more favourable light now...hes really turning it on of late.

Other than that - someone like Jeff Adrien or Chris Douglas Roberts could have a big tourney? Just guesses though.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

Yea I gotta say Mayo, he looks ready to explode (in a good way).


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Mayo and Westbrook(Both peaking at the right time).


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Donte Green!! nah, is syracuse even going to make it?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Stephen Curry
Ramel Bradley
Robin Lopez

Is Courtney Lee's team going to make it?



> Donte Green!! nah, is syracuse even going to make it?


Not so sure right now


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Hope they do i liked watching them on tv, johny flynn, green, guy paul harris, and that white boy who can dunk!! idk his name..
Them and texas I like watching so thats who im rooting for if anyone cares heh.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Courtney Lee's team is in the tournament now.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Ouch! Sadly I think the Nets are going to draft Lee or Foster


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Putting anything more than minimal stock in tourney performance is a waste, IMO.

I think it matters most to the older prospects, because if they can't dominate or excel at that age against college competition, when will they? Hibbert needs to put another great showing together if wants to sneak back into the top 10. The UCLA trio also came to mind; probably affects Collison the most. Being on a championship team also boosts the stock of roleplayers more than the stars (i.e. why McHale drafted the basically NBA-worthless Chris Richards in the top half of the 2nd).


----------



## compsciguy78 (Dec 16, 2002)

Collison is more then a role player.

He played on a team that made the Finals and was the defensive stopper when Jordan Farmar was the PG, and we all know Jordan Farmar can play at the NBA level.

Collison is going to suprise a lot of people.

I think Kevin Love drops. Love is overrated and might be another Big Country in the making(Bryant Reeves).


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Neitzel? Are you kidding me? 1/10 from the floor, 0 trips to the line, 3 points against Wisconsin. He cannot play point guard. And this guy is going to play in the NBA? Give me a break.
> 
> OJ Mayo definitely seems like he's awaken from his season long slumber, and there's a lot of other talented player on that USC team. I would NOT want to play them.
> 
> I don't really even know outside of Mayo.


I wasn't meaning the draft. I agree Netizel won't play in the NBA but I think come tourney time he is just going to take out all his struggles this year on whoever they play first.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

I think Joey Dorsey solidifies himself as a first rounder.

I hope Douglas Roberts doesn't play well, I would cry if the Raptors drafted him. We need Tyler Smith or Bill Walker!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Joey Dorsey is an overrated player


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

DJ Augistin.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

I second bigbabyjesus motion for Billy Walker.


----------



## bruno34115 (Apr 14, 2003)

Robin Lopez and Ty Lawson


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Joe Alexander of WVU.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

I'm gonna say Darren Collison 
He has been terrific lately as he is finally healthy and I think he ends up leading UCLA to a national championship and capture tournament MVP honors

2 other guys to watch
Mario Chalmers - if he plays well enough and leads Kansas to the Championship could make a push for the lottery if he can prove himself a true point

Tyler Hansbrough - has been amazing for Carolina this whole season(and his whole career) but I think getting them a championship could be a ticket into the top 10

3 more no one talks about
Sam Young
Lazar Hayward
James Harden(if he even makes the tourney)


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

as far as Mayo I don't think USC has the depth and experience to get past 2nd round and even if Mayo has 2 25/5/5 games on good percentages that won't raise his stock all that much IMO


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

fjkdsi said:


> as far as Mayo I don't think USC has the depth and experience to get past 2nd round and even if Mayo has 2 25/5/5 games on good percentages that won't raise his stock all that much IMO


I think it all depends on who he plays. If he has a 25/5/5 game against a very good defensive team like Georgetown I think he will raise his stock, as long as it is efficient and not shooting 30 times or so to get that number.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

compsciguy78 said:


> Love is overrated and might be another Big Country in the making(Bryant Reeves).


:lol: Oh my gosh. Please actually watch a UCLA basketball game.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I've changed my pick to Earl Clark of Louisville. I think if he takes Louisville to the Final Four he is gone. I expect him to take them to the Elite Eight and them to lose a road game to UNC. There is no one in that region that can defend that kid.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

fjkdsi said:


> as far as Mayo I don't think USC has the depth and experience to get past 2nd round and even if Mayo has 2 25/5/5 games on good percentages that won't raise his stock all that much IMO


Well, they play Wisconsin in the 2nd. I'm terrified. Michael Flowers is a fantastic one on one defender in college, but OJ Mayo is an NBA caliber scorer; he's gonna get torched.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

fjkdsi said:


> 3 more no one talks about
> Sam Young
> *Lazar Hayward*
> James Harden(if he even makes the tourney)


VERRRRRRY interesting. I wasn't aware that anyone outside of Milwaukee has any idea who Lazar Hayward is. Yeah, he's going to be some player, but this isn't his year. And frankly, even though I really like the first few match ups for Marquette this year, I don't think this is their year. Next season is going to be sick for the Golden Eagles though; no one on that team has improved their stock high enough to warrant going pro.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

HKF said:


> I've changed my pick to Earl Clark of Louisville. I think if he takes Louisville to the Final Four he is gone. I expect him to take them to the Elite Eight and them to lose a road game to UNC. There is no one in that region that can defend that kid.


Pitino wont give him that much freedom


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

I like Hayward he reminds me sort of Sam Young
he has to play PF and even Center for Marquette(a very undersized team)
but I think he has true SF even SG potential for the NBA


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Well, they play Wisconsin in the 2nd. I'm terrified. Michael Flowers is a fantastic one on one defender in college, but OJ Mayo is an NBA caliber scorer; he's gonna get torched.


It depends what Mayo shows up. The one who looked like one of the better guards in America (the 2nd half of the year), or the one who looked uninterested (1st part of the year). If it's the 2nd half OJ Mayo then your right Flowers is going to get torched.


----------



## luther (Nov 2, 2007)

RebelSun said:


> Putting anything more than minimal stock in tourney performance is a waste, IMO.


I agree with you, but it's also true that, if it doesn't happen every year, it certainly isn't unusual for a guy who has a nice tournament to suddenly watch his NBA stock rise. A friend of mine and I still joke about 1996, when John Wallace and Dontae Jones both ended up mid-first rounders after nice tourney runs. Wallace was closer to justifying his position, but Jones had never demonstrated that kind of potential.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

The NCAA made Tyrus Thomas a multi millionaire from a complete unknown...


----------



## bruno34115 (Apr 14, 2003)

I also believe Mario Chalmers is about to blow up. I have Kansas winning it all, with Chalmers getting most outstanding player.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Rawse said:


> Not that it'll make a difference as far as the draft goes, but I hope Stephen Curry lights someone up.


Props for me.


----------



## bruno34115 (Apr 14, 2003)

bruno34115 said:


> I also believe Mario Chalmers is about to blow up. I have Kansas winning it all, with Chalmers getting most outstanding player.


:whistling:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Chalmers won the most outstanding player award, but the most impressive player on Kansas by far was Darrell Arthur.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Quite frankly, I think Derrick Rose made the best case for MOP from a losing player that I've seen in some time. Kansas spread it around too much for anyone to warrant it, but Derrick Rose snapped in every game and took his team to OT in the Title game.


----------



## thaKEAF (Mar 8, 2004)

HKF said:


> Chalmers won the most outstanding player award, but the most impressive player on Kansas by far was Darrell Arthur.


Yeah Arthur killed us tonight, he was the one who stuck out the most for me.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

So does Arthur go pro?


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

He should. He reminds me more and more of Bosh everytime I watch him.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

He's not Bosh, but the Antonio McDyess comparison that was brought up a while back seems sort of apt. He's not as long as Bosh. Arthur is 6'9, but Bosh is 6'11 and his wingspan is off the charts. Arthur is a tremendous athlete though. He also has a jump shot out to 18 feet. 

If I were him, I would declare because Kaun, Robinson and Jackson are gone, might as well ride the wave into a high lottery selection.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

i really like Arthur as well.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

So does anyone agree with me now that he is a better prospect than Brook Lopez ?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

He seems bored most of the time. With his skills he should be getting the ball everytime down the court.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

He has had a 20/10 game on the biggest stage of college basketball and dominated the paint, he was a big reason why Dorsey had only two rebounds and Kansas a total of +10 in that area. I'll take that from a bored player any day.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Well hasnt he always been considered a lottery pick? Its the motivation that has been questionable

Regarding if he will be picked over Brook, thats a tough one. Just way too many power forwards in the NBA right now, that position is stacked.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

I never like when motivation comes into the evaluation of a player unless he has the tendency to get in trouble off the court or be a bad guy. Arthur does not which is why I believe that is one of the most overrated aspects, if not _the_ most overrated. You can't question a player's desire if he hasn't even been a pro yet, that's a knock just to find something negative.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

How do you explain Dorsey then?

He is playing for millions, thats motivation for any body. He put up 20/10 in the biggest game of his career, dont you think motivation played a role in that? I am really confused about that above statement croco. You can't question a guy's desire when he hasnt been a pro? How about 90% of the NCAA that will never turn pro, would questioning their desire be faulty


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

I think you have misunderstood my post.

I imagine that most, if not all college players have the desire to play in the NBA. The reality is that only very few make it, that's not because of a lack of motivation or desire, it's because they aren't athletic, tall, skilled or basketball smart enough. Not every future NBA star or very good player has looked dominant in college, this is very rare. You need to mature first before you can exploit all of your potential, some never do, some do it though.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

croco said:


> I never like when motivation comes into the evaluation of a player unless he has the tendency to get in trouble off the court or be a bad guy. Arthur does not which is why I believe that is one of the most overrated aspects, if not _the_ most overrated. You can't question a player's desire if he hasn't even been a pro yet, that's a knock just to find something negative.


No, motivation is big. If you look at this game it is a tell tell sign of why you DON'T draft him. Yes, he had 20 and 10 in the title game. Which is great. Then you remember that he hasn't scored 20 points or had 10 rebounds in a game since February and this is only his 2nd 20/10 game of the season. I understand Kansas is deep but a guy with his physical gifts should be more productive in college, especially on a fast paced team.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

In a perfect world he would have been more productive, he was not which is not good, I can agree with that. However he is still young enough to not judge him by stats too much, his talent is undeniable and I'm not buying that a 20 year old lacks the motivation to get better.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I disagree with both HB and MemphisX. Kansas was a dominant team this year destroying teams by 19 points per game all year. They suffered 3 losses with a balanced attack. The same reason why people shouldn't be detracting from Roy Hibbert sharing the offensive load, is the same reason they shouldn't detract from Arthur. This is how a guy like Rudy Gay falls to 9th, when he is clearly one of the top 3 prospects. Just because a guy plays with other good players and doesn't take it upon himself to take every shot, doesn't mean he's not motivated.

Arthur did exactly what I expected him to do in the Finals and truthfully he was the difference because he dominated Memphis on the interior.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Yeah I expected someone to bring up Gay. But I never questioned Gay's motivation because he had great games, just not in the two biggest games of the tournament. Quite frankly up until the last two Kansas games, I didnt think Arthur was going to come out this year. Horford played on a very talented team last year, and got touches on almost every possession. He didnt have to dominate the ball either to be successful. To me Arthur at least during the season just seemed to be coasting, as compared to his frontcourt partner, the difference in their attitudes was like day and night.

Lets not forget that Arthur is going to be picked in the most stacked position in the league.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You have to look at Arthur's tools. He has pro tools. He wasn't coasting, he was on a team with 5 players in double figures. I have no doubt if you put him in the place of Hansbrough he averages 20 ppg.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Negative. Especially since most of Tyler's game is based off effort. Look at that UNC team, most of those guys are finesse players, without Tyler the team has no emotional leader whatsoever. I dont see who is going to get Arthur to play to his potential without a Hansbrough type player on the team.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> Negative. Especially since most of Tyler's game is based off effort. Look at that UNC team, most of those guys are finesse players, without Tyler the team has no emotional leader whatsoever. I dont see who is going to get Arthur to play to his potential without a Hansbrough type player on the team.


Listen, I know you have a man love for Hansbrough, because you are a Carolina fan. This is a draft site. Arthur will be a better NBA player than Hansbrough by far. It's not about emotional leader garbage. It's about talent.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

But I am not denying that, I am saying on the UNC team I don't see how Arthur is going to average 20ppg when there is no one that can challenge him. Arthur is the better pro prospect, I never questioned that. I am however saying it is untrue that Arthur would have averaged 20 ppg on the Tar Heel squad if roles were switched


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

i like Arthur he definatly has some skills but come on....

replace hansbrough with him and he would average 20???? that doesnt seem plausible at all


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

So you think Hansbrough would duplicate his numbers on Kansas then? I sure as heck don't. Frankly, the reason Hansbrough scored so many points is because Brandan Wright wasn't there anymore. I mean Deon Thompson and Alex Stepheson are decent, but they rarely take any shots.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Meh HKF, I was desperately trying not to mention Rudy Gay because he is Exhibit A and that ends the discussion automatically. :biggrin: But yes, they are comparable in some way because none of them dominated in college or wanted to dominate and you could still see the talent.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Well everyone said Rudy Gay didn't have it in him, well he's the first 2nd year player to average 20 ppg since Wade, Melo and Lebron. So obviously it didn't hurt him. To me saying someone is going through the motions is a guy like Budinger, who is playing on a talent deficient team and still tries to let the game come to him, even when they need him. 

Arthur (like Gay) played on a dominant team and delivered when he was called upon. However, once he gets in the pros and people realize it will be his talent that is needed, he will be a force. It seems it's the same arguments every single year, but I take one look at Arthur and think this man has footwork, hands, a jumper, a drop step and the ability to make shots over bigger defenders as well. Plus the fadeaway.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So does this mean Donte Greene is going to be a force in the pros going by the same logic, because really there is nothing offensively that Arthur can do, that Greene cant

And I find it hard to believe Tyler wont score 20 plus points on Kansas. The guy is a blackhole, which for UNC happens to be a good thing. I'd be shocked if his shots went down


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> So does this mean Donte Greene is going to be a force in the pros going by the same logic, because really there is nothing offensively that Arthur can do, that Greene cant


Donte Greene never even liked going into the paint. He wants to shoot 3's all day long. Arthur plays to his strengths, while Greene would prefer to be a poor man's Kevin Durant. I am not seeing your logic here.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

They both have issues with motivation IMO

Here's an excerpt from DE's article on Arthur. This was before the Final game



> Will Darrell Arthur finally be able to put together a good game in the NCAA tournament?


Here's from his prospect profile



> Arthur has been one of the most inconsistent draft prospects we’ve followed over the past few months, often following up one good performance with two bad ones, and then getting back on track the next game as if nothing happened. As we’ve expressed in the past when evaluating him, very few of our concerns with Arthur revolve around his physical tools or skill-set…for him, it’s all about the mental aspect of the game and whether the light bulb is on on any particular day.


I didnt even have to read all that to know the guy takes games off


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

So because cheezdoodle and John Watters say something, that makes it accurate? It's easy to take games off when a team is balanced. There is no such thing as shooting your way out of a slump. Like I said, if you play on a team that has 7 guys who can score 15 points in a game it completely changes the game plan. If one guy has it going, they feed the hot hand, if another guy has it going, they feed him instead. This isn't rocket science. What aren't you understanding?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol I knew you would say that, but come on man, you gotta give them some credit, that site does the most extensive work on prospects than any other. I'd rather read what they have to say on a prospect than a guy like Chad Ford. More times than not, they do give a pretty accurate description of the prospects.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> Lol I knew you would say that, but come on man, you gotta give them some credit, that site does the most extensive work on prospects than any other. I'd rather read what they have to say on a prospect than a guy like Chad Ford. More times than not, they do give a pretty accurate description of the prospects.


I am not taking anything away from them, but they are no different than you or I. They have a site, but they aren't NBA director of scouting Marty Blake and his son Ryan. So even what they say, should have filters through it and context.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

With Darrell Arthur it's not a matter of the ball getting spread around, because of that was the case he would still dominate some games. Arthur never dominates a game. The only games I remember seeing him dominate were the Final and a big early season game against Florida last year.

Bringing up Rudy Gay is unfair because despite being on such a stacked team, Gay was averaging 15/6/2/2. That's not the same thing I'm talking about with Arthur who is at 13/6. I know it's only two points, but the rebounds are a concern, and watching him play is a concern too. He never stands out. There are games where you could forget that Arthur is even on the team. Rudy Gay always was a force, and the motivation knock was something that idiots like Bill Simmons fabricated out of thin air.

Arthur's tools are phenomenal, but I would just be worried about drafting a kid who can't get it done consistently in college.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't know, Arthur is once again on a team that shares minutes with two seniors in Sasha Kaun and Darnell Jackson and also plays with guards who rebound well in Rush, Chalmers and Robinson. Stop getting hung up on their actual numbers. Let's be real, if you took Arthur and put him on Arizona and got rid of Jordan Hill, Arizona would have been a much better player. You guys saying Arthur didn't stand out, is exactly what I heard about this entire team the whole year. No one stands out. 

How can anyone like a 23 year old Rush more than a 20 year old Arthur? It really seems like Rudy Gay all over again, the knocks on him were that he never took over a game.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

i honestly think that Hansbrough would put up better numbers than Arthur on Kansas not 20 points of course

however Arthur lets the game come to him more, he isn't selfish and doesnt mind deffering to his team mates... which might be more effective for Kansas than Hansbrough's approach

Watching Arthur play sometimes he doesn't even attempt to dribble in the post or make any sort of move just turn around fade aways when he has the positioning to make a more aggressive move

I honestly think Hansbrough is better and will be the better pro but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Arthur proved me wrong
As far as his skill set he might be the best pure PF prospect in NCAAs


----------

