# OT: JJ Reddick



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Guy just broke the NCAA Career Record for most 3 pointers made.

He is 60 points away from becoming the career leader for points in the ACC, the ACC!!! So many good players passed through there.

This kid is amazingly good.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



sloth said:


> This kid is amazingly good.


In college.

He's awesome baby with a capital A!!!!! This kid is absolutely spectacular!!!! This kid can shoot!!!!!!! One of the greatest shooters of all time, baby!!!!! The Dukies baby, takin it home!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Carrying this over from the other thread:

Kirk Hinrich - 6'3"
JJ Redick - 6'4" (and nowhere near the defender)


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Frankensteiner said:


> Carrying this over from the other thread:
> 
> Kirk Hinrich - 6'3"
> JJ Redick - 6'4" (and nowhere near the defender)


But an even better clutch player, a better scorer, and a better competitor. A Gordon/Hirnich/Reddick backcourt could work, with say Deng filling in if we need a big 2 guard.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



sloth said:


> But an even better clutch player, a better scorer, and a better competitor. A Gordon/Hirnich/Reddick backcourt could work, with say Deng filling in if we need a big 2 guard.


Do you think the Bulls have a need for another perimeter player or do you think that Reddick will be the superstar the Bulls need?


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

JJ can't:
1) create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA
2) run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could
3) rebound
4) pass
5) play NBA defense
6) shoot over anyone because of his lack of height--he doesn't jump nearly as high as Ben
7) play physical--too weak


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

he will be a Rex Chapman type of guy in the NBA, if he is lucky a petrovic type of player. Anyone who watched either of those guys in their prime would love to have them on their team. He is not a superstar, but he will be a player.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I think Reddick will be good. He's different from other undersize sharpshooters in that he's not thaat undersized and he moves very well off the ball. However I don't think he'll be better than Gordon and he certainly is redundent with Gordon.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> JJ can't:
> 1) create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA
> 2) run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could
> 3) rebound
> ...


I heard all those arguments about KH the day he was drafted.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



GB said:


> I heard all those arguments about KH the day he was drafted.


Interesting, I didn't. We knew Kirk could play.

Not saying JJ is going to bust, just that he's a little overhyped and IMO could end up being Trajan Langdon Jr.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> Interesting, I didn't. We knew Kirk could play.
> 
> *Not saying JJ is going to bust, just that he's a little overhyped and IMO could end up being Trajan Langdon Jr*.


You just contradicted yourself.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> JJ can't:
> 1) create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA


Yes he can.



> 2) run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could


He has proven that he can effectively utilize screens to obtain open 3 pointers. He has far better range than Rip, and a ridiculously fast release on his shot



> 3) rebound


Is that important for a 2 guard? 



> 4) pass


Yes he can



> 5) play NBA defense


He’s obviously limited physically, but he works his *** off. He could develop into an average defensive player.



> 6) shoot over anyone because of his lack of height--he doesn't jump nearly as high as Ben


See quick release. And actually, Redick jumps just as high (if not higher) than Ben does on his jump shots. 



> 7) play physical--too weak


This is absolutely absurd. He can’t play physical? He shoots 8 free throws a game (compared to 4 per game for Gordon in his last season at UCONN), and he’s one of the best conditioned athletes in the country. 

But don’t let me stop you from perpetuating outdated JJ Redick myths.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> Interesting, I didn't. We knew Kirk could play.
> 
> Not saying JJ is going to bust, just that he's a little overhyped and IMO could end up being Trajan Langdon Jr.



The Trajan Langdon comparison is so ridiculously simplistic, I don’t even want to bother addressing it. Unfortunately, I’ve addressed it a number of times in the past, so you can just search all forums for “JJ Redick” AND “Trajan Langdon,” and you’ll probably find something I wrote.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



sloth said:


> Guy just broke the NCAA Career Record for most 3 pointers made.
> 
> He is 60 points away from becoming the career leader for points in the ACC, the ACC!!! So many good players passed through there.
> 
> This kid is amazingly good.


He is good, can not be argued. But the question is, can it translate to this level? He will be some player on this level, but I am not sure about a star. He will be better then Kerr and Horny, but not as good as Reggie Miller, just my opinion


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

At the beginning of the year, having not watched much of Redick previously, I was under the same impressions as alot of people that don't seem to have watched him, that he was purely a shooter that didn't do much else and couldn't create his own shot.

But watching him this year, I don't buy that at all anymore. The Truth already hit on all the points I wanted to, but I was going to say I've seen him create his own shot just as much as I've seen him get hit for an open jumper.
Also, I've actually been really pleasantly surprised with his passing, he's not selfish with the ball and he's made some great passes to players cutting to the hoop. It looks like he has exceptionally well court vision when it comes to this. I don't think he's a poor passer whatsoever.

Anyways, I'm not expecting 28 ppg from him again in the pro's, and it's going to take some adjusting, but I think he'll be ok.
I don't know if he's the right fit for the Bulls considering what we already have on the team and what we need, but I wouldn't be upset to have him as an asset.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rlucas4257 said:


> He is good, can not be argued. But the question is, can it translate to this level? He will be some player on this level, but I am not sure about a star. He will be better then Kerr and Horny, but not as good as Reggie Miller, just my opinion


I don't see him as nearly the all around player that Hornacek was. But he could be a better scorer.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Even if the kid was just a shooter, which he isnt, his value would be very high where I come from. The league doesnt have shooters anymore. Its lacking in that. The American game has become all about dunks and hoisting 3s but as most the mid range game. The Euros came in as good shooters but now they are starting to metamorphese into the American style. Shooting comes at a premium. This kid is probably the best shooter we have had since Rodney Monroe was in college. But Monroe was an undersized guard who could never crack the NBA. With the league actually going smaller, Reddick should succeed. I wouldnt be hurt if we picked him. You cant teach a stroke like that.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rlucas4257 said:


> Even if the kid was just a shooter, which he isnt, his value would be very high where I come from. The league doesnt have shooters anymore. Its lacking in that. The American game has become all about dunks and hoisting 3s but as most the mid range game. The Euros came in as good shooters but now they are starting to metamorphese into the American style. Shooting comes at a premium. This kid is probably the best shooter we have had since Rodney Monroe was in college. But Monroe was an undersized guard who could never crack the NBA. With the league actually going smaller, Reddick should succeed. I wouldnt be hurt if we picked him. You cant teach a stroke like that.


He's really overrated as a pure shooter. His percentage from three is not super high. He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that. He will be an average player at best.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> He's really overrated as a pure shooter. His percentage from three is not super high. He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that. He will be an average player at best.


 All of the players who are on the top of the all time three point percentage list played for small schools and hit approximately half as many three pointers as JJ will have at the end of his career.It's possible that he could move into the all time top ten in NCAA scoring by then also.He's almost guaranteed to be in the top twenty all time scoring list barring injury.Of course he'd still be an overrated scorer I am sure.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> He's really overrated as a pure shooter. His percentage from three is not super high. He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that. He will be an average player at best.


He's not even Salim Stoudmire.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> He's really overrated as a pure shooter. His percentage from three is not super high. He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that. He will be an average player at best.


I am not sure how he is overrated. But I do know one thing, coming into this year he was underrated. Most people had him as a second round pick. Thats clearly ludicrous. He is a good player who is more then a great shooter. Sure, as I said I am not sure he is a star or anything, but he can fill a role for a team. Personally, I would take Reddick over Hinrich, even knowing what we now know about Kirk. But thats just my opinion.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> He's really overrated as a pure shooter. His percentage from three is not super high. He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that. He will be an average player at best.


That might have been true before this year. I was among those who were skeptical as to whether Redick had anything in his arsenal besides just hitting shots when he got open. He's proven me wrong this season. I'm usually very surprised when he gets a decent look and misses - and he doesn't get a ton of wideopen looks anymore, making his shooting and scoring that much more impressive. Other teams throw everything they have at preventing him from scoring, and he still does in huge bunches, and he shoots a pretty good percentage from everywhere for a guy who has to carry such a load for his team. He gets open running off staggered screens, he can create off the dribble (I don't think this will carry over to the NBA very well, but he has improved this a TON since just last year), and his midrange shooting is great too. He's not an explosive athlete, but he's sooooo far from being the unathletic one-trick-pony that he has been pegged as that it's not even funny. I think he'll be a very solid NBA player.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

the Redick hate is REDICKUlous


you don't just take jump shots close to mid court and drain it like it's business as usual as JJ does..

HE WORKS FOR THOSE SHOTS....he knows he's not super athletic...and that's a blessing...cause he won't rely on brute force or sheer speed to get open...

get this....he'll use his team through TEAMWORK......


.he get's on a team with a slasher and it's a problem...


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

You'd really take Redick over Hinrich? If so, why?


----------



## MVPKirk (Dec 17, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

The thing JJ has going for him is that he is not just a good shooter, he is a PHENOMENAL shooter, who is squeezing off (and making) long range slots with just a sliver of daylight. When I think of great college shooters, I think of Glen Rice and Dennis Scott. But I think JJ shoots even better- the best pure shooter I have ever seen in the college game.

I don't know if he will have a great NBA career, but he will have one- if nothing more than a Steve Kerr/Pike type 3 point specialist at worst. Reggie Miller at best....


----------



## ChuBerto (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I've watched all but three Duke games over the past five years. If that invalidates my opinion, feel free to stop reading.



lougehrig said:


> He's really overrated as a pure shooter..


Possibly.

Is he the best college shooter ever? I have no idea. He's pretty good though.



lougehrig said:


> His percentage from three is not super high.


Irrelevant. Collect all his 3pt attempts. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I don't know of anyone who'd hit as many of them as he has. Which isn't to say he's forcing shots; if I'm coaching, I don't mind offering the green light to a guy who can hit 45% of difficult 3-pointers. (Speaking of, how many players have the green light -- heck, are encouraged -- to take a 3-pointer on a 4-on-1 break? I rather vividly recall Coach K getting frustrated with JJ for not taking an open 3 on a fast break.)

He's converting a ridiculous 1.62 points/shot this year. (How many players are higher?) I'll take it.



lougehrig said:


> He's certainly no Peter Maravich or anything like that.


That's fine. I would hope nobody's expecting him to be.



lougehrig said:


> He will be an average player at best.


I hope that wasn't supposed to logically follow from the Pistol Pete comment. To be honest, I don't know how well his game will translate to the pros. But I certainly don't think it's clear that he won't be better than average.

A few quick thoughts on this "shooter only" nonsense...Redick's on a team everyone hates -- a team typically getting an opponent's best effort. Opposing coaches talk about plotting defenses to stop the guy from scoring. Sure, he's running off a million and a half screens every play, but despite that, he gets very few open looks. And he's averaging 29ppg. 

He's getting his points somehow, and it's not by spotting up for jumpers. His frosh/soph years, he was a spot-up shooter. To be honest, as a Duke fan, his game scared me to death. If he went cold or was well-defended (see: NCAA tourney, Kansas game), we were toast. This year, he's scored 20+ points in all but 5 games (15, 18, 18, 19, 19 in those 5). Half his attempts are coming inside the arc, where he's shooting 58% (vs. a third his freshman year) -- most of which are from beating his guy off the dribble, since he's usually picking the ball up outside the line. Bottom line: he now knows how to score -- consistently.

So is he going to be a good pro? I'd say it's more likely than not. Should we pick him? To be honest, with Hinrich and Gordon, I'm not sure that he'd be a great fit. But I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand. Just my opinion.

As a postscript, ESPN has a video montage linked from their main page newsbar called "Supremacy." Not that highlight films can reflect how well a guy plays, but it's worth a look if you get a chance.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

but we don't need another guard! we need height. shotblockers. rebounders. someone who can dominate in the paint. 

we need PF/C. or am i just taking crazy pills?



lol to giant killer for the dukeback mountain poster! rep from miz.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

This thread will be fun to come back to a year from now. 

Man the Pros vs. College in terms of what guys can do in it are night and day. We've seen some of the most versatile college studs turn into standstill shooters or worse. 

Some people are going to be disappointed, but all this reminds me of, is the same junk I have to hear every year about someone's favorite college player. Reminds me of the Taylor Coppenrath nonsense from a year ago or the Wayne Simien garbage as well.

These guys go from being All-Americans to nobodies in the League or not in the league at all.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*










One of my favorites.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rlucas4257 said:


> I am not sure how he is overrated. But I do know one thing, coming into this year he was underrated. Most people had him as a second round pick. Thats clearly ludicrous. He is a good player who is more then a great shooter. Sure, as I said I am not sure he is a star or anything, but he can fill a role for a team. Personally, I would take Reddick over Hinrich, even knowing what we now know about Kirk. But thats just my opinion.


Have you not said Hinrich should be considered an All-Star?


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> These guys go from being All-Americans to nobodies in the League or not in the league at all.


Were the guys you mentioned dropping 25-30ppg in one of the toughest conferences in basketball, and considered the most-hated player in college by many? 

I don't think anyone is saying Redick is the next Jerry West here. But the conventional wisdom on him until recently was that he was a late 1st rounder at best and would be lucky to have a Steve Kerr-type of role in the NBA. I think it's fair to say that the way he's played this year has raised the bar for him. As others have noted, a Kerr-like career is now considered the likely worst-case for Redick. That's a big change from a year ago.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> This thread will be fun to come back to a year from now.
> 
> Man the Pros vs. College in terms of what guys can do in it are night and day. We've seen some of the most versatile college studs turn into standstill shooters or worse.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I agree....

sort of like all those guys gung-ho over Deron Williams last year.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Frankensteiner said:


> One of my favorites.


I'm sure it is.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Yeah, I agree....
> 
> sort of like all those guys gung-ho over Deron Williams last year.


And Deron Williams was drafted No. 3 in the NBA and will prove to be a terrific PG. My problem is with Sloan and rightfully so, as he has still not catered to the skills of his team since losing Malone and Stockton. As for JJ, I really do feel bad because when he flames out, everyone is going to forget they said all of this stuff about him. Although I won't.

ACC is not the same conference as a year ago. It's incredibly down and there aren't many pro caliber players playing in the league this year. Next year that changes, but right now, I'm not impressed. Mainly because, Redick is doing this after all of the pro talent went to the League. Sure his numbers are impressive, but when evaluating for the NBA, why should I care about that.

I simply think if Redick is on an NBA floor, he's going to always be the weakest link of any perimeter group. That's just my feelings on it.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> I'm sure it is.


Not sure what prompted that response. Most people would consider that a funny picture.

Lighten up, Francis.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Frankensteiner said:


> Not sure what prompted that response. Most people would consider that a funny picture.
> 
> Lighten up, Francis.



Oh no, you must have misunderstood me. I thought it was hiliarious too. I find all homosexual slurs just riotous! As do most people.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Oh no, you must have misunderstood me. I thought it was hiliarious too. I find all homosexual slurs just riotous! As do most people.


Clearly, a picture of the University of Maryland student section is a reflection of pointed social commentary on homosexuals.

Interpret it as you would like.

Personally, the "slur" is the least interesting part of that picture, but whatever.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Here's a picture sure not to offend:


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

HKF, how come you are so sure that Reddick will flop? He is the best player in NCAA basketball, and the best college shooter ever, and is scoring at a 28.2 points a game....playing in the toughest conference in the league.....its ridiculous someone with such credentials already has already been stamped as an NBA bust....someone said Rex Chapman is what they expect him to become, that wouldn't be bad, we don't neccassarily need a star, we have Gordon, but Reddick has the drive and skill to become a star. Don't just knock off this kid already, he is going to be a a guy that gets 12 ppg and scares the hell out of opponents when he is wide open at the very least, and thats not a bad thing. If we can make teams focus on him, and take some of the focus off Reddick, that would be so valuable to this team, it would open things up for Gordon EVEN MORE, he is still getting it done with the focus on him, and with him and Reddick, if Reddick can draw a teams focus they will have to balance their coverage between two players to focus on, that would improve the team so much better in itself.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Sloth, did you see Rex Chapman? Rex Chapman was a 6'3, athletic guard who basically was a rich man's Eddie House. Since when does Redick have a 39-40" vertical to make up for his lack of height and athleticism at the 2 guard position? 

Man some of you are overvaluing college production. 

There is a reason why Dwight Howard goes over a guy like Emeka Okafor. In the individual workouts, JJ will start to drop.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I think Reddicks future is brighter then Kirks. But he is going to need to go somewhere where he can get open jump shots. That means he will need a very creative PG who can find him in transition or create open looks for him OR a post presence. I think HKF is saying that he doesnt make alot of sense for the Bulls. And if the roster doesnt change much, HKF could very well be right. But I like shooters, and this kid is a great one.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Reddick=Drazen Petrovic?


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Sloth, did you see Rex Chapman? Rex Chapman was a 6'3, athletic guard who basically was a rich man's Eddie House. Since when does Redick have a 39-40" vertical to make up for his lack of height and athleticism at the 2 guard position?
> 
> Man some of you are overvaluing college production.
> 
> There is a reason why Dwight Howard goes over a guy like Emeka Okafor. In the individual workouts, JJ will start to drop.


Someone mentioned Rex earlier, if Reddick has the effect of Chapman, that would be fine. If JJ's value can fall to our 2nd pick, I would be happy, but I really don't think thats gonna happen.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Frankensteiner said:


> Here's a picture sure not to offend:



Yeah, this is what conversations about Redick typically devolve into...jokes about his sexuality and weed.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Man some of you are overvaluing college production.


Maybe, but averaging almost 30ppg in one of the toughest conferences (yes, the ACC is down from some past seasons I agree, but it's still a top conference) just doesn't happen that often. Guys like Simien and Sam Clancy or whoever else didn't put up numbers that jumped off the page like that. Redick's lack of athleticism almost certainly will limit him in the NBA, but I don't see anyone denying that or saying he's going to be a superstar. He certainly could be as good as Rex Chapman. Athleticism is a great thing to have without a doubt, but it's not impossible to be a good NBA player without elite athleticism and I think Redick takes too much heat in that department anyway. He gets decent lift on his jumper, makes good cuts without the ball, and can run for days (kind of like Rip Hamilton, but with more range and less explosiveness).

We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I dont see the Chapman comparison. I just dont. Chapman was an athlete and wasnt as pure a shooter. Drazen Petrovic, carbon copy. And Petrovic was a damn good basketball player who was constantly in attack mode.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rlucas4257 said:


> I am not sure how he is overrated. But I do know one thing, coming into this year he was underrated. Most people had him as a second round pick. Thats clearly ludicrous. He is a good player who is more then a great shooter. Sure, as I said I am not sure he is a star or anything, but he can fill a role for a team. <b>Personally, I would take Reddick over Hinrich, even knowing what we now know about Kirk. But thats just my opinion.</b>


I will go further. Even if we are only basing on their last year at the college, i am drafting Reddick over Kirk. Who is better all round college player is debatable with slight edge for Kirk IMO but who is the better score in college days is not even close. Hands down. Reddick.

And you are right. He is underrated at the start of this season and still underrated by some in terms of his NBA prospect as of now.

I wouldn't mind at all if Paxon pick him even if we already have Kirk and Ben.
Heck, I wouldn't mind if Paxon pick Reddick and Morrison if Aldridge is gone by then. ( I would consider Gay if he is true slasher since we most definately need one but he isn't slasher. I don't see him attacking the rim like Wade did in his college days at all. Most of dunks of Gay are breakaway, not in the traffic. Anyway I was gaga over Wade in his last year at college and I am very lukewarm at this point over Gay.)

I am all for drafting the best talents out there and worry about the fill up the hole in the roster later. 

If it turn out Reddick, Morrison >> Kirk, Gordon, or even Deng, any two of Kirk, Gordon or Deng is good to go. In any case, all these five player mentioned is good enough to draw the interest around the league later on when we try to fill the hole in the roster.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Here are my problems with Redick (in no order):

In the NBA:

He's 6'3 (undersized).
He's not athletic (by NBA standards, he's a below average athlete). Heck he's not even Jon Barry. 
He doesn't handle it well enough at the NBA level.
He's not quick enough to get separation with the dribble. 
No one is gearing offenses around him the way they do Reggie and Rip (who are 6'7 and 6'6 respectively).
Defensively, just who is he going to guard.

Yes he can shoot, but I feel once you read the scouting report and hug him, he will soon become a situational player and basically sit the pine. In four years, his game still isn't well-rounded enough to make him more than an NBA bench player.

And does anyone out there really think this guy is a starter in the NBA? At SG? At 6'3?

If he's a bench player (meaning 7th to 12th man), then why the hell do people talk about him so much?


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Have any of you thought, I dunno maybe, he'll be BETTER when he gets to the pro's!?!?

Michael Jordan in college wasn't exactly MICHAEL JORAN of the pro's...he was like 10x better

not comparing him to mike at all but there is a POSSIBILITY that he may be better than most of you think

Ya'll are the same folks that said Lebron James would be a BUST!


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

all I wanna know is how HIGH this kid could be drafted..

he's lookin like top 5 right now..

if Charlotte got their hands on Reddick or Morrison...it's OVER


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The ROY said:


> all I wanna know is how HIGH this kid could be drafted..
> 
> he's lookin like top 5 right now..
> 
> if Charlotte got their hands on Reddick or Morrison...it's OVER


Over for what? You think they can carry an NBA franchise to the playoffs? Man some of you are so diluted by this ESPN hype I don't know what to do for you.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Over for what? You think they can carry an NBA franchise to the playoffs? Man some of you are so diluted by this ESPN hype I don't know what to do for you.


 _You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to HKF again._



:greatjob:


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Over for what? You think they can carry an NBA franchise to the playoffs? Man some of you are so diluted by this ESPN hype I don't know what to do for you.



I think you mean deluded.

Death 
Taxes
HKF hating Duke players


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



mizenkay said:


> _You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to HKF again._
> 
> 
> 
> :greatjob:



feel free to actually add to the discussion at any time.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> I think you mean deluded.
> 
> Taxes
> Death
> HKF hating Duke players


I knew you were going to get me on that point. I was thinking of editing it to "deluded" but then said Truth will pick it up.

And like the seasons I take a bow. :biggrin:


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> I knew you were going to get me on that point. I was thinking of editing it to "deluded" but then said Truth will pick it up.
> 
> And like the seasons I take a bow. :biggrin:



:wink:


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> feel free to actually add to the discussion at any time.


 ok. i seriously think that this kid is a VICTIM of the espn/dickie hype machine.

is he a good shooter? yes, he's got that down. 

but who is he going to guard? ray allen? michael redd? vince carter? kobe? 

sorry, i know you are very sensitive to this, but i don't think he's going to be "all that" in the nba. he'll be a good player, but this kid is going to get keyed on, and he is, in the immortal words of kevin costner in "bull durham", going to get lit up like a christmas tree in the show.

with all due respect. over. rated. and that's *The Truth*

:angel:


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Over for what? You think they can carry an NBA franchise to the playoffs? Man some of you are so diluted by this ESPN hype I don't know what to do for you.


calm down homie..

u NOR i know how good this kid could be

your OPINION isn't gold........

like i said before, ya'll are the same folks that said Lebron would be a bust..Carmelo would be average & dwayne wade wouldn't be a star....

all three are the FUTURE of the nba..so what do ya'll have to say now?

just shut the hell up and wait

if you're GOOD, u deserve hype


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



mizenkay said:


> with all due respect. over. rated.


Overrated? HILARIOUS.

NCAA all-time leading 3 point shooter

2nd all-time leading scorer in Duke history (in 2 games will be #1)

By regular season's end will be the all-time ACC scoring leader.

Currently leading the nation in scoring (only 1 major conference player has led the country in scoring in the past 20 years).

Averaging 29 points per game, while shooting 50%+ from the floor.

31 points per game in ACC play this season.


How could he possibly be overrated?

Especially since the common sentiment is that he won't be a very good NBA player.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The ROY said:


> calm down homie..
> 
> u NOR i know how good this kid could be
> 
> ...


Who's this "ya'll?" I never said Lebron, Carmelo or Wade wouldn't be stars. Please keep your generalizations to yourself. If you don't like what I have to say, step aside son. Other than that, grown folks are trying to talk basketball. 

What is different from you feeling he will be good and me not thinking that? Nothing. So please just stop talking. You'll make your brain hurt.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

is it ok for me to form my own opinion on this? no?

whenever i watch college ball, i think, man these guys are short. of course he's lighting up the ACC. don't think it's gonna happen when he goes to play with the men, that's all. 

i'm sorry if this offends you. just my opinion.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

He reminds me of Steve Alford. He could shoot, but didnt last long in the NBA. 

Will Reddick be the same? I dont know. I am not going to hype him. 

Some of you dont want the Langdon comparision, but he could shoot too. Are they the same type of player? Dont know. 

I am going to wait and see.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Who's this "ya'll?" I never said Lebron, Carmelo or Wade wouldn't be stars. Please keep your generalizations to yourself. If you don't like what I have to say, step aside son. Other than that, grown folks are trying to talk basketball.
> 
> What is different from you feeling he will be good and me not thinking that? Nothing. So please just stop talking. You'll make your brain hurt.


I remember you saying that Lebron would be out of the NBA after his rookie contract expired.

Didn't you say Wade was a poor man's Harold Miner?





j/k :wink:


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



HKF said:


> Who's this "ya'll?" I never said Lebron, Carmelo or Wade wouldn't be stars. Please keep your generalizations to yourself. If you don't like what I have to say, step aside son. Other than that, grown folks are trying to talk basketball.
> 
> What is different from you feeling he will be good and me not thinking that? Nothing. So please just stop talking. You'll make your brain hurt.



i don't even know who u are?

take your *** to the clippers board ******...

to all else, you're not OFFENDING me...i could care less what he becomes in the league...right now he's on top of his game though...


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

HEY! HKF is allowed to post his opinions just like the rest of us!

agree or disagree, he is welcome here. his knowledge of college ball is outstanding, imo.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



truebluefan said:


> He reminds me of Steve Alford. He could shoot, but didnt last long in the NBA.
> 
> Will Reddick be the same? I dont know. I am not going to hype him.
> 
> ...



Well I'll start with the fact that Langdon scored 17.3 ppg in his best season (as opposed to Redick scoring 29 ppg this season). 

Langdon never received a fraction of the defensive attention Redick receives. 

Redick may not be a great athlete, but he’s a better athlete and faster than Langdon.

Redick is much more adept at creating his own shot.

Redick has a much quicker release on his shot.

Redick has more range than Langdon.

And also consider the fact that Langdon was extremely injury proned and basically had no knees.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

Truth,

For the past 2 months or so, I've seen you get your panties in a bunch any and every time a critical opinion of JJ is offered.

Question: What kind of career do you project JJ to have?? 

I always see you rushing to defend him, but I'm never quite sure how good you actually think he'll be.

I think most people expect him to be a player who, at worst, will be Steve Kerr, and at best, will be a functional starter, if on the right team. Personally, I don't think that's unreasonable. Some obviously think his college career will translate pretty well, others don't, and I think when people say JJ is overrated, it's not a reaction to his college career, which has definitely been stellar, but rather to people who imply, either implicitly or explicity, that his college production will translate pretty well to the NBA. (Dick Vitale, some draft sites, etc.)

What's the highest pick you'd take JJ Reddick with? Not questioning your opinion or calling you irrational or anything, just trying to get a realistic picture on what you actually expect him to do in the pros.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Well I'll start with the fact that Langdon scored 17.3 ppg in his best season (as opposed to Redick scoring 29 ppg this season).
> 
> Langdon never received a fraction of the defensive attention Redick receives.
> 
> ...


Good points. 

What about Steve Alford? Same things?


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



truebluefan said:


> He reminds me of Steve Alford. He could shoot, but didnt last long in the NBA.
> 
> Will Reddick be the same? I dont know. I am not going to hype him.
> 
> ...


See, the thing is, even with all of the attention he's (deservedly IMO) getting, I still don't hear anyone saying that he's going to light the NBA on fire (besides maybe Dickie V, but who cares what he thinks). I don't see anyone saying that in this thread either. But I have been impressed enough with JJ this year that I think he can be a lot better than strictly a spot-up shooter in the NBA. He's obviously put a ton of hard work into improving his game, and he has a nonstop motor when the game is being played too. Those things should help him in the NBA, too. 

I was a kid when Alford played, so I can't make an informed opinion on that comparison, but JJ is a lot better than Langdon IMO. He's much better at the one thing Langdon WAS good at (shooting), he's taller, and he's worked to add a midrange and dribble game that Trajan never really refined.

Can JJ guard the Kobes and Wades of the world? No, but who besides maybe RonRon can? I think JJ might end up being a better defender than people think, anyway. Please don't read anything absurd into that statement - I'm not saying he's gonna be All-NBA or anything.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Yeah, this is what conversations about Redick typically devolve into...jokes about his sexuality and weed.


My god man, did JJ Redick donate an organ to your mom or something?


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rosenthall said:


> Truth,
> 
> For the past 2 months or so, I've seen you get your panties in a bunch any and every time a critical opinion of JJ is offered.
> 
> ...


Let me try to unbunch my panties to put together a response.

I’ve never said that I think Redick will be a superstar. I’ve never said that I think Redick will even be a star.

The only thing I take issue to are the Redick=Kerr or Redick=Langdon or Redick is overrated posts. Coming into the season, overrated was arguable, but I think some people are so terribly blinded by their Duke hatred that they can’t admit that JJ’s having an incredible season and is in no way overrated. I just think those types of posts are reductive and simplistic and add absolutely no value to a constructive discussion.

I think it’s completely reasonable to think that Redick will be a serviceable to good pro. If you disagree, I would love to hear your argument, just please don’t rely on the Redick=Langdon crap. 

I think it's perfectly reasonable for Redick to end up as a top 10 pick, but much of that is due to this being a historically weak draft. 

And I don't have any desire for the Bulls to pick him in the draft.


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



> See quick release. And actually, Redick jumps just as high (if not higher) than Ben does on his jump shots.


no chance in hell that he does


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



truebluefan said:


> Good points.
> 
> What about Steve Alford? Same things?


Like VF, I'm a little to young to remember Alford.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Frankensteiner said:


> My god man, did JJ Redick donate an organ to your mom or something?


So I’m unreasonable because I don’t think a poorly executed and unclever “Dukeback Mountain” poster is funny, and I don’t find yet another “Redick is gay” joke humorous?


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

pahahahahaha.........



giantkiller7 said:


> JJ can't:
> 1) create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA


bull crap. watch a 2005-2006 Duke game.



giantkiller7 said:


> 2) run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could


Reggie Miller and quickness in the same sentence. That in and of itself is a joke.



giantkiller7 said:


> 3) rebound


Since you brought Rip Hamilton up - his career reb average = 3.1... And that's in a game 8minutes longer than Redick's.




giantkiller7 said:


> 5) play NBA defense


Ya, there's a lot of that going on in the NBA.  Only two teams that play hard core defense for 48 minutes are the Spurs and Pistons. Oh, and another thing. You don't go to Duke for 4 years and not know how to play defense. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying he's Bruce Bowen, but he can play defense as well as Kyle Korver.



giantkiller7 said:


> 7) play physical--too weak


Another joke. Kid plays 38+mpg, gets mugged every other time down the court, and averages 28+ a game.

Your arguments are weak at best.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Let me try to unbunch my panties to put together a response.
> 
> I’ve never said that I think Redick will be a superstar. I’ve never said that I think Redick will even be a star.
> 
> ...



Okay.

We probably don't disagree that much then. I agree that the Reddick=Langdon arguments aren't very good either, and I see where you're sentiments on the overrated stuff are coming from too. I think the thing is, some people equate the hype he's getting with what he's doing in college (which is deserved) and some people characterize it a different way, and assume that it also correlates to what he'll amount to as a pro. 

I think his production in the NBA _might_ merit being taken in the mid-lottery, but I kinda doubt it, because he'd have to overcome a lot, but I think he'll more than likely end up a productive NBA player in one respect or another.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> The Trajan Langdon comparison is so ridiculously simplistic, I don’t even want to bother addressing it. Unfortunately, I’ve addressed it a number of times in the past, so you can just search all forums for “JJ Redick” AND “Trajan Langdon,” and you’ll probably find something I wrote.


I'm not saying he WILL be another Trajan Langdon, just that it's not some proven fact that he'll be the best player in NBA history by the end of his career like many would like to think. Just throwing it out there that success in college + big name doesn't always equal NBA success. Sorry if I offended you, or anyone else for that matter--my original comments were just pointing out that just because he could do certain things in college, like play physical, doesn't mean he can do them in the NBA.

I posted those tihngs I originally did about how his game will translate to the NBA. I'm not denying any success he had in college, or traits he showed there, nor am I a hater, I'm just saying it's not a proven fact that he'll be a HOF.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I don't think he has a position defensively in the NBA. I also have doubts about how well, he'd be able to get his shot off in the league. I think he's a great college player, so in the context of college ball, I'd say the hype is just. I think if he doesn't land in the just right situation in the NBA he could struggle. 

Better than Langdon. I don't know if he's better than Respert however.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Babble-On said:


> Better than Langdon. I don't know if he's better than Respert however.


If you're going to knock JJ or say his game won't translate, Respert is actually a good example. That guy scored like there was no tomorrow on a good MSU team and didn't do squat in the NBA after being drafted mid-lottery. There's no denying that that happens sometimes and it certainly could happen to Redick, but I think he'll succeed.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> I'm not saying he WILL be another Trajan Langdon,


You seemed to be implying it.



> just that it's not some proven fact that he'll be the best player in NBA history by the end of his career like many would like to think.


Who said that? Who implied as much? Stop making stuff up.



> Just throwing it out there that success in college + big name doesn't always equal NBA success.


Nobody said that it does...but you provided no evidence--at all--that would prove otherwise.



> Sorry if I offended you, or anyone else for that matter--my original comments were just pointing out that just because he could do certain things in college, like play physical, doesn't mean he can do them in the NBA.


But your comments didn’t effectively “point out” anything because they were inaccurate. You simply asserted that he can’t play physical, but you provided absolutely no evidence that he can’t. 



> I posted those tihngs I originally did about how his game will translate to the NBA.


But you provided no support for those claims and made inaccurate claims.

[/quote]I'm not denying any success he had in college, or traits he showed there, nor am I a hater, I'm just saying it's not a proven fact that he'll be a HOF.[/QUOTE]

Nobody said he will be a HOF. I certainly don’t think he will be.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



ViciousFlogging said:


> If you're going to knock JJ or say his game won't translate, Respert is actually a good example. That guy scored like there was no tomorrow on a good MSU team and didn't do squat in the NBA after being drafted mid-lottery. There's no denying that that happens sometimes and it certainly could happen to Redick, but I think he'll succeed.


Actually I thought about Respert as comparison. Remember though, Resper had cancer that no one knew about that basically destroyed his career. Not sure how good he would have been otherwise. Redick is being hyped a bit too much. He will be a decent to average bench player. He's doesn't do enough of the little things to excel in the NBA. Sure he can run around screens, but he will have to be alot more physical and learn how to pass and dribble and play defense. Let's not get too crazy calling Redick a franchise type of player.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> Let's not get too crazy calling Redick a franchise type of player.


To me, the amusing part about all the JJ Reddick debates is that all the guys who defend him talk about how disrespected he gets, and all the guys who express a critical opinion of him always cite the people who are ready to annoint him as the next superstar, and I don't think either group really exists as much as their opposition would like to believe. I think people have gotten so caught up in using these supposed factions as a basis for their argument that most of the people who use them have falsely put a lot of people in them that really don't belong, and as a result there are these divisive camps that are mostly artificial constructs and more perception than reality.

I can think of a handful of people who think he'll be really good, and a few others who think he's the next Trajan Langdon, but other than that, there seems to be a pretty consistent critical mass of people who think he'll be something inbetween Steve Kerr and a decent starter, and from what I can tell, that group of people is a pretty homogeneous mixture of both factions. 

The JJ Reddick debates seem pretty analogous to the Jamal Crawford/Kirk Hinrich debates we've had over the years. Through all the bickering, I'm not sure if there was too much disagreement on who they were _as players_ , but rather most of the fighting resulted from peripheral philosophical differences among the posters that seaped their way into the arguments. With JJ, I'm not sure if it's as simple as him being a Dukie, or if it's a mixture between that and the fact that he's white and is perceived as being waspy and upper middle class. But when you combine all that together, it makes for some pretty heated arguments.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

IMHO - Reddick is going to struggle. I haven't looked hard at this draft, but in a typical draft year, my scouting report has him as a pick in the 20s. Maybe high-teens.

His coach is going to have to hide him on D. He is going to struggle guarding both starting PGs or SGs. Worse than Gordon. I don't know how much worse.

On O, he isn't a PG. He doens't even have *some* point skills like Ben Gordon.

On O, as a SG, he doesn't have the size and length of Miller or Rip Hamilton. He doesn't have the handles of Ben Gordon.

But he can shoot. That's worth something. On the right team (ie. Miami), he could be a very nice weapon.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



rosenthall said:


> To me, the amusing part about all the JJ Reddick debates is that all the guys who defend him talk about how disrespected he gets, and all the guys who express a critical opinion of him always cite the people who are ready to annoint him as the next superstar, and I don't think either group really exists as much as their opposition would like to believe. I think people have gotten so caught up in using these supposed factions as a basis for their argument that most of the people who use them have falsely put a lot of people in them that really don't belong, and as a result there are these divisive camps that are mostly artificial constructs and more perception than reality.
> 
> I can think of a handful of people who think he'll be really good, and a few others who think he's the next Trajan Langdon, but other than that, there seems to be a pretty consistent critical mass of people who think he'll be something inbetween Steve Kerr and a decent starter, and from what I can tell, that group of people is a pretty homogeneous mixture of both factions.
> 
> The JJ Reddick debates seem pretty analogous to the Jamal Crawford/Kirk Hinrich debates we've had over the years. Through all the bickering, I'm not sure if there was too much disagreement on who they were _as players_ , but rather most of the fighting resulted from peripheral philosophical differences among the posters that seaped their way into the arguments. With JJ, I'm not sure if it's as simple as him being a Dukie, or if it's a mixture between that and the fact that he's white and is perceived as being waspy and upper middle class. But when you combine all that together, it makes for some pretty heated arguments.


Right on.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Right on.


If we are merely talking about Redick as a potential draft prospect and what he may or may not do in the NBA, then why is this thread in the Bulls forum? To me alot of people think he would be a great help to our team and an improvement over players we have right now. I think justifying that he is nothing more than a 6th man at best and not a superstar / franchise player is critical, because that is the only thing that can really improve our team right now.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> You seemed to be implying it.
> 
> Who said that? Who implied as much? Stop making stuff up.
> 
> ...



I find it funny how you're saying that nobody's saying he's going to be great, but you're riding his nuts like crazy.

I was not, again, implying he would be another Trajan Langdon. I've just been saying it's a possibility that he's not going to be as great as you think. Because Trajan could shoot, too. That's all.

You really can't say anything I said is innacurate, because first of all it's an opinion, and second of all, the stuff I pointed out would be innacurate in college, because he's already proven he can do a lot of those things in college, but not necessarily at the pro level. The NBA is much more physically demanding, it's a completely different game. There's no way we can see how accurate it is until he plays in the pros, so it's a moot argument whether or not he is physical enough for the pros. I think he isn't at this point, and there's no way to say it's innacurate when we haven't seen proof either way yet. What support can I provide for those claims? From watching him play, that's what I've seen. That's all I can do.

Sorry you took it so personally, Dickie V.

I like JJ. I hope he succeeds. I just think that it's not a given that he'll be a franchise player.


----------



## ChuBerto (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



johnston797 said:


> His coach is going to have to hide him on D. He is going to struggle guarding both starting PGs or SGs. Worse than Gordon. I don't know how much worse.


The defense thing has come up a lot. To be honest, it confuses me.

Coach K has on various occasions called Redick his "best off-the-ball defender" and a "very good defender." The former comment came last year when Ewing was still on the team, and JJ's classmates Dockery and Williams are well-regarded defensively.

I'm no defensive expert, but I haven't thought Redick to be a defensive liability in his past two years; quite the opposite, in fact. I've been pleasantly surprised at how infrequently he gets beaten off the dribble now and how frequently he denies his man the ball. Is he a great defender? Far from it...but he's very solid at the collegiate level, which is about as much as most in the draft can say.


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

#1 Respert had cancer and didn't tell anyone, he probably would have had a Steve Kerr career if he was healthy. I watched tons of Respert in college, and he was pretty great at what he did. Redick is even better.

#2 Respert was measured at 6-1 and was listed at 6-3 in college. He is 3 inches shorter than Redick, if hinrich can guard a SG so can Redick (just not that well)

#3 Langdon was not on the same level as either Respert or Redick, he is having a nice career in europe, but Redick is a much better shooter than Langdon was (not just percentages, it is about number of shots and range and when you hit shots and keeping fresh legs at the end of the game).

#4 Redick = Rex Chapman. Chapman was a solid pro and could shoot the lights out. He was never a first option, but contributed to his team. His career high was around 18ppg, I could see Redick having a very similar type of career.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



ChuBerto said:


> Is he a great defender? Far from it...but he's very solid at the collegiate level, which is about as much as most in the draft can say.


I guess we have to agree to disagree if you think Redick is going to be about as good a pro defender as anyone that comes out of this draft.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



4door said:


> he will be a Rex Chapman type of guy in the NBA, if he is lucky a petrovic type of player. Anyone who watched either of those guys in their prime would love to have them on their team. He is not a superstar, but he will be a player.


LOL more than lucky. Did you say lucky or drink from the holy grail? Drazen Petrovic would absolutely destroy Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon and if you put him on JJ Redick you could run Redick off of 5 screens and Petrovic would be two inches from his face laughing at him. Redick is in the same category as Hinrich in terms of them both being happy to be as good as Danny Ainge if they stay healthy.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



johnston797 said:


> I guess we have to agree to disagree if you think Redick is going to be about as good a pro defender as anyone that comes out of this draft.


I think what he meant is that all you can do at this point is judge them on how they played in college, since they haven't played against NBA competition yet.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

4door said:


> #4 Redick = Rex Chapman. Chapman was a solid pro and could shoot the lights out. He was never a first option, but contributed to his team. His career high was around 18ppg, I could see Redick having a very similar type of career.


Wasn't Chapman a great athlete? I seem to remember him throwing down some nasty dunks.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

TripleDouble said:


> Wasn't Chapman a great athlete? I seem to remember him throwing down some nasty dunks.


He was in the 91 slam dunk contest.


----------



## ChuBerto (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> johnston797 said:
> 
> 
> > I guess we have to agree to disagree if you think Redick is going to be about as good a pro defender as anyone that comes out of this draft.
> ...


I'm sorry; I wasn't clear. giantkiller7's right about what I meant.


----------



## Dez24 (Feb 28, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

JJ Redick is an awesome college player and I can't wait to see him play in person once March Madness comes around. How he'll translate into the NBA is a great unknown. He probably will go late in the first round. He can create his own shot and plays within Duke's strengths and what is asked of him. He won't be an Allen Iverson but will be a good backup initially as a shooting guard. Need scores? Go to Redick. Not all offensively gifted players play defense (al a Michael Redd of the Bucks). His shots are most often contested so he can shoot against bigger defenders. He does need to play better defense and take the basket to the hoop more often, but that is something that he can and probably will work on. I think it depends on the team he goes to. As a Bucks fan, wouldn't mind seeing him back up Michael Redd. Redick actually may be able to teach Redd a thing or two.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> I find it funny how you're saying that nobody's saying he's going to be great, but you're riding his nuts like crazy.


Just what this thread needed. I guess it's unavoidable in a thread about a Duke player; someone will accuse someone of "riding their nuts" or "get off his nuts." Congratulations, it's you!

Have you ever heard of the Godwin law? It's emerged in the internet message board era and basically states that the first person to draw an analogy to Hitler or nazis automatically loses the debate, and the discussion is over.

Maybe I can start a new law: The Truth's Law. It shall state that the first person to use an "oral sex" or any other genitalia related metaphor as a crutch in an argument shall automatically lose any debate and the discussion shall be over. Hell, they should also be subject to public scorn in whatever internet community they may belong to.




> was not, again, implying he would be another Trajan Langdon. I've just been saying it's a possibility that he's not going to be as great as you think. Because Trajan could shoot, too. That's all.


But Trajan Langdon couldn't do other things that JJ does incredibly well. So it's a flawed argument.



> You really can't say anything I said is innacurate, because first of all it's an opinion, and second of all, the stuff I pointed out would be innacurate in college, because he's already proven he can do a lot of those things in college, but not necessarily at the pro level.


Just because something is an opinion doesn't mean it can't be wrong or disproven. If you're using flawed logic (and in this case you are) an opinion can be discredited.




> The NBA is much more physically demanding, it's a completely different game. There's no way we can see how accurate it is until he plays in the pros, so it's a moot argument whether or not he is physical enough for the pros.


It's a moot argument? You're the one that brought it up. But now that I've actually provided statistical evidence that Redick can play--and thrive--in a physical environment, you say it's a "moot" argument.



> I think he isn't at this point, and there's no way to say it's innacurate when we haven't seen proof either way yet. What support can I provide for those claims? From watching him play, that's what I've seen. That's all I can do.


But you haven't provided support from what you've seen. You're just saying he can't play physical. You haven't even attempted to explain how you've come to such a conclusion.



> Sorry you took it so personally, Dickie V.


You're quite the jokester. Hilarious.



> I like JJ. I hope he succeeds. I just think that it's not a given that he'll be a franchise player.


I don't know how many times I need to say this. Hopefully this will be the last.

I NEVER SAID HE WILL BE A FRANCHISE PLAYER!


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> Wasn't Chapman a great athlete? I seem to remember him throwing down some nasty dunks.


I was just thinking that. Rex could jump through the gym and he was a great shooter and he was a decent NBA player. Redick is a step below that. The NBA requires unique athleticism to excel. Redick is an ordinary athlete. At least Hinrich has PG skills, handles and can play D. Redick is lacking in all areas.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> I NEVER SAID HE WILL BE A FRANCHISE PLAYER!


Then why are we talking about him in the Bulls forum? Shouldn't this be moved to a draft forum, since there is zero chance that we will waste our pick on this guy? We are looking for a franchise player with our top pick. Talking about Redick and comparing him to Gordon and Hinrich implies he is better than those players, which he clearly is not.

WE ALL READY HAVE ENOUGH ROLE PLAYERS. REDICK = ROLE PLAYER. THEREFORE WE DON'T NEED HIM. THEREFORE WE SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT HIM IN THIS FORUM.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

The Truth, you never said he'd be a franchise player maybe word for word, but you've sure been implying it, defending him to death like you are.

I said he can play physical in college because everyone in college is a lot smaller and less physical in the NBA. You can't say whether or not he will be able to play physical in the NBA because he's not there yet. That's what I've been saying. And I'm saying that based on what I've seen from him during his college career, and I personally don't think he'll be able to play that way in the NBA. It's not flawed logic because there's no evidence to prove it wrong. However, for some reason you seem to think everything you say is true, using "facts" we don't know yet--how he will fare in the NBA. So your argument is no better or more logical than mine.

But at the same time I realize arguing with you won't get anywhere, so this is all pointless anyway.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



lougehrig said:


> Then why are we talking about him in the Bulls forum? Shouldn't this be moved to a draft forum, since there is zero chance that we will waste our pick on this guy? We are looking for a franchise player with our top pick. Talking about Redick and comparing him to Gordon and Hinrich implies he is better than those players, which he clearly is not.
> 
> WE ALL READY HAVE ENOUGH ROLE PLAYERS. REDICK = ROLE PLAYER. THEREFORE WE DON'T NEED HIM. THEREFORE WE SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT HIM IN THIS FORUM.



Did you see “ot:” on the thread title? If you don’t want to discuss it, you are more than welcome to refrain from clicking on the thread link and reading the posts.

However, some people in this forum do think the Bulls should pick Redick, and therefore it is relevant. We don’t even know where the Bulls picks will be in the draft, so it could be even more relevant than you think, especially since this is going to be a historically weak draft.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> The Truth, you never said he'd be a franchise player maybe word for word, but you've sure been implying it, defending him to death like you are.


Please show me where I’ve made any statement that indicates that I believe he will be a franchise player / all-star / HOF. The primary points that I’ve been arguing is that it’s pointless, absurd, and simplistic to compare him to Trajan Langdon and Steve Kerr, and I’ve been arguing against outright uninformed misrepresentations (many made by you) of Redick’s game.



> I said he can play physical in college because everyone in college is a lot smaller and less physical in the NBA.


But that doesn’t prove anything. 

You are saying that Redick can play physical in college because everyone in college is small and less physical. 

You then say that he won’t be able to succeed in the physical play of the NBA because NBA players are more physical than college.

That’s absurd logic. If you were to apply that to other players, you could go back in time and argue that Shaq wouldn’t be able to succeed in the physical play of the NBA because the NBA is much more physical than college.



> You can't say whether or not he will be able to play physical in the NBA because he's not there yet.


I can’t say it as a fact, but I can, however, argue that he will be able to play physical in the NBA and provide evidence as to why I think he can. 



> That's what I've been saying. And I'm saying that based on what I've seen from him during his college career, and I personally don't think he'll be able to play that way in the NBA.


So wait a minute; I can’t argue that he can play in the physical game of the NBA because he isn’t there yet and I have no proof, but you CAN argue that he won’t be able to play in the physical game of the NBA because I can’t prove it wrong? Do you need me to even point out the flawed logic there?



> It's not flawed logic because there's no evidence to prove it wrong.


Yes it is. Just because I can’t “prove” it wrong, doesn’t mean it’s not flawed. 

For instance: I can argue that I stubbed my toe this morning and it hurt really bad, so therefore, there is no God.

You can’t prove that statement wrong, but it’s still a logically flawed statement.



> However, for some reason you seem to think everything you say is true, using "facts" we don't know yet--how he will fare in the NBA. So your argument is no better or more logical than mine.


I don’t think it’s true, I just think it’s more credible than what you say because I actually attempt to support my statements. And certainty of the future has absolutely no correlation with the validity of a logical argument.

And may I remind you, while you accuse me of passing off my opinion as fact, you are the one who posted this:



> JJ can't:
> 1) create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA
> 2) run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could
> 3) rebound
> ...


Seems to me like you are the one trying to pass off opinion as fact. And you have yet to provide any evidence that supports these claims. The only argument you’re making is that I can’t prove these wrong because we haven’t seen him play in the NBA yet. I could use that argument too. I could say “JJ Redick is going to be the greatest player of all time, and you can’t prove me wrong because we haven’t seen him play in the NBA yet."


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> JJ can't:
> 1) *create his own shot. Absolutely vital in the NBA*
> 2) *run with enough quickness off the ball like Hamilton and Reggie Miller could*
> 3) rebound
> ...


im sorry,im not a JJ fan but ive seen enough of his play to know your full of it.

is JJ going to be the next Jordon,kobe,Tmac Type? no,but he can shoot.D is something you need in the nba,but i think O has the edge in turms of importance in the nba just look at the SUNS,MAV's.where teams mess up is when they get to much of one and not enough of the other they get stuck being good insteed of being great...


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



The Truth said:


> Did you see “ot:” on the thread title? If you don’t want to discuss it, you are more than welcome to refrain from clicking on the thread link and reading the posts.
> 
> However, some people in this forum do think the Bulls should pick Redick, and therefore it is relevant. We don’t even know where the Bulls picks will be in the draft, so it could be even more relevant than you think, especially since this is going to be a historically weak draft.


I agree that there is the OT in the thread. I just don't think there will be a scenario where we draft Redick when:

1. He isn't an upgrade to anybody on our team.
2. We need a star player.
3. We needs bigs and depth at PF and C.

If we have the 15th pick with our pick we should consider Redick as someone to replace Pargo. Anything higher we could draft a backup center or power forward.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

sigh.

fine.

1) the only shot I've ever seen JJ create on his own is where he just shoots it over a smaller guy. He doesn't have Kirk's moves or Ben's stepbacks, etc. I've never seen him get separation on his own, through crossovers or whatever.
2) He doesn't have breakaway speed like Hamilton does. He probably won't in the NBA, seeing as everyone is obviously much faster.
3) rebounding is more important than you would think. It's not vital, but in order for him to play extended minutes he needs to be able to do a marginal job at it.
4) Passing is also important. One reason Ben didn't start last year is because he couldn't do that well. JJ doesn't do much passing in college--he takes a shot nearly every time he gets the ball, like Ben. He's not going to be able to just shoot over guys in the NBA (unless he's going against Michael Redd), and it's going to be harder for him to create his own shot, so he's going to need to be able to pass out of bad situations.
5) I know Coach K said he's his best off the ball defender, or whatever, but he's going to be going against much better athletes in the NBA and he really only does a marginal defensive job because he plays well within Duke's scheme. Without that scheme, he's not going to be able to do as good of a job, and he's not athletic or long enough IMO do be able to play consistent solid man-to-man.
6) self-explanatory. He can do it in college, but he doesn't get near the air Ben does. Everyone's taller in the NBA.
7) He hasn't had to do a lot of this in college because of his style of play. He's been doing a much better job at this this year but he really hasn't had to get in anyone's face--this ties into his defense as well. There's no stat I can point out for this, or whatever, but he's going to get smacked up in the NBA, and often, because he's going to need to take it to the hole more in the NBA, because he's going to be defended much better. I guess it's not exactly that he can't, only that he hasn't had to play physical and bang bodies because he's a catch-and-shoot guy. And that won't work for him as often in the NBA.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, college hoops and the NBA are two completely different games. He may be able to do some of these things in college, but that won't always translate to the NBA.

I didn't say you couldn't argue that he will be able to play physical in the NBA, just that you really have no way of knowing. I'm drawing my opinion from what I've seen of him on a college level and you are acting like we already know if he will be able to do certain things in the NBA, which we don't. You can argue that he will be able to play physical, but not that we know it for a fact, which is the way you're trying to pass it off.

My first post, where as you say I tried to present that stuff as fact--I didn't mean it that way, as is evidenced by me saying how it's my opinion throughout the thread. I realize it came off that way, but as I've been saying, we have no way of knowing whether or not any of that is true until next season.


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> sigh.
> 
> fine.
> 
> ...



you obviously have no clue what you're talking about or you must not have watched him play much because if you did, you wouldn't post ignorant stuff like he can't create shots for himself, can only create on his own where he just shoots it over a smaller guy or never seen him get separation on his own, through crossovers or whatever.

redick nice behind the back dribble and stepback j against 6'7 wynton whitherspoon of virginia tech
http://rapidshare.de/files/13448343/redick_nice_behind_the_back___stepback_J_vs_vt.avi.html
redick stepback 3 against 6'5 marcus ginyard (a jackie manuel type defender) of unc
http://rapidshare.de/files/13447189..._back_dribble___Stepback_3ptr_vs_unc.avi.html
redick turnaround fadeaway against 6'5 trent strickland of wake forest
http://rapidshare.de/files/13450516..._6_5_trent_strickland_of_wake_forest.avi.html
redick dribbling between the legs and pulls up for a three against 6'7 cameron stanley of wake forest
http://rapidshare.de/files/13450136...pullup_3_against_6_7_cameron_stanley.avi.html

he's not overly quick or athletic, but he's a lot more athletic than haters give him credit for. he has enough quickness to blow by defender when tightly guarded and he can dunk too.

redick 41 points highlights duke- georgetown 
http://rapidshare.de/files/13449755/redick_41pts_highlights_duke-georgetown.avi.html
redick drove past a defender (6'5 dj strawberry of maryland) for a layup
http://rapidshare.de/files/13451630/redick_layup_vs_maryland.avi.html
redick layup and 1 
http://rapidshare.de/files/13451325/redick_layup_and_1_vs_maryland.mpg.html

click the link, scroll down and the click free button, wait a few secs then enter the code and click download.

one more thing, you'll need to install the xvid codec to view them.
http://download.divxmovies.com/XviD-1.1.0-30122005.exe


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

I know he's gotten better at that this year, and become a much better all-around player, but you can't really show two clips and say that happens often enough for me to change my opinion... either way, I'm sure he'll start driving, etc. more, because he'll need to in the NBA, but those moves he does in the clips aren't exactly backbreaking... IMO he'll need to do more than that in the NBA, but... we'll see.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

And I admit I did exaggerate a little to get my point across, but what I'm trying to say is I guess just that you shouldn't call him a franchise player just yet. I'm a huge fan of his though, and if he succeeds, all the best to him, I hope he does. I was just throwing my reservations about how he'll play in the NBA out there.

I guess more than anything I'm just sick of people riding his nuts like crazy, thinking he's the solution to everything.

We don't need another shooter anyway...


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



giantkiller7 said:


> And I admit I did exaggerate a little to get my point across, but what I'm trying to say is I guess just that you shouldn't call him a franchise player just yet. I'm a huge fan of his though, and if he succeeds, all the best to him, I hope he does. I was just throwing my reservations about how he'll play in the NBA out there.
> 
> I guess more than anything I'm just sick of people riding his nuts like crazy, thinking he's the solution to everything.
> 
> We don't need another shooter anyway...



I was about to forgive you, but...

You then violated The Truth's Law for a second time!


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



hoops said:


> you obviously have no clue what you're talking about or you must not have watched him play much because if you did, you wouldn't post ignorant stuff like he can't create shots for himself, can only create on his own where he just shoots it over a smaller guy or never seen him get separation on his own, through crossovers or whatever.
> 
> redick nice behind the back dribble and stepback j against 6'7 wynton whitherspoon of virginia tech
> http://rapidshare.de/files/13448343/redick_nice_behind_the_back___stepback_J_vs_vt.avi.html
> ...


I have heard Reddick has dunked two times in a Duke uniform. That translates to never dunking in the NBA. Somebody like Hinrich who dunked relatively often for a guy his size in college has not been able to translate that skill to the NBA, and we've seen how his finishing is often poor. I wish all of our three guards played above the rim a bit more so they A) finished strong in traffic and B) got fouled more often. JJ may have the ability to dunk, but don't expect to see it emerge against superior NBA defenders. 

That being said, JJ is a master at drawing a foul, and yes, he's considerably better at putting the ball on the floor than he was as an underclassman. It's helped him get to the line even more, where he's just money. As I project his abilities, I don't know if he's going to be able to drive on NBA defenses, but my instincts would say it wouldn't usually work. I'm not sure, though. The threat of the jumper should always give a good shooter a little more space to drive.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Darius Miles Davis said:


> I have heard Reddick has dunked two times in a Duke uniform. That translates to never dunking in the NBA. Somebody like Hinrich who dunked relatively often for a guy his size in college has not been able to translate that skill to the NBA, and we've seen how his finishing is often poor. I wish all of our three guards played above the rim a bit more so they A) finished strong in traffic and B) got fouled more often. JJ may have the ability to dunk, but don't expect to see it emerge against superior NBA defenders.
> 
> That being said, JJ is a master at drawing a foul, and yes, he's considerably better at putting the ball on the floor than he was as an underclassman. It's helped him get to the line even more, where he's just money. As I project his abilities, I don't know if he's going to be able to drive on NBA defenses, but my instincts would say it wouldn't usually work. I'm not sure, though. The threat of the jumper should always give a good shooter a little more space to drive.


What JJ does better than anyone in college basketball is leverage his outside shooting ability to get his defender off balance; whether the result is driving in the lane, getting around the defender for a pull-up J, stepping back and shooting the 3 (he does this incredibly well), or getting to the line, he is successful more often than not.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

*Re: JJ Reddick*

To further clarify my point, I've always thought he'd be fine in the NBA just coming off screens. I'm sure he could have a solid career doing that. And while he's able to do other things, he can't do them nearly well enough to make him anything more than a pure shooter. I expect him to have a very good, solid career in the NBA as a spot-up shooter, and that's fine. But that's not a franchise player. See what I mean?


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: JJ Reddick*



Darius Miles Davis said:


> I have heard Reddick has dunked two times in a Duke uniform. That translates to never dunking in the NBA. Somebody like Hinrich who dunked relatively often for a guy his size in college has not been able to translate that skill to the NBA, and we've seen how his finishing is often poor. I wish all of our three guards played above the rim a bit more so they A) finished strong in traffic and B) got fouled more often. JJ may have the ability to dunk, but don't expect to see it emerge against superior NBA defenders.


well, i don't expect him to become a slasher anyway, so he'd be fine in the NBA just coming off screens. JJ plays a style similar to jeff hornacek or jeff malone, because he's very good at pulling up of the dribble, he could create a shot by working off screens and his shooting ability should allow him to get by defenders. he also has Rip Hamilton type conditioning.


----------

