What's new
By:

The article Jimmer fans don't want to read

The NBA is the big stage, and nearly every time Jimmer has been on a big stage he has stepped up including his pre draft workouts.

I think his dedication will lead him to success in the league and his professionalism is years ahead of many others. He is 22 after all.

Hope he is there at 12 and the Jazz take him.
 
In my best case senario for Jimmer. He is there at 12. And the Jazz choose somebody else. Then Jimmer ends up being exactly what I expect. A bottom of the rotation guy that rarely plays when a game matter but is in their to score when the team is struggling offensively.
 
or an unproven point guard at the NBA level.
Click to expand...

Who has proven themselves at the NBA level? Did Dwill or Irving play a few games for the Lakers or Heat last year that we didn't know of? Maybe got a few games under their belts before practice or something?

NO ONE has proven a damn thing at the NBA level yet. Duh. If they were already proven at the NBA level, they wouldn't be entering the NBA draft. They would have already been signed on for other teams and would be FAs/or under contract right now.

Morans.
 
cowhide said:
I always laugh when writers say he is a 22 year old senior like he is already to old. In the day, most players came into the NBA after playing four years of college. I am sure no questioned if Jerry West, Chamberlain, Russell would succeed in the league. I think Jimmer is worthy of a top 12 pick in this draft. Perhaps in another draft he would be in the 16-24 range.
Click to expand...
And a lot of the young guys barely play their first year or end up as busts. Does anyone really believe Humphries will have a better pro career than Favors? Yet Mr. Kardashian was getting mins. over Derrick because Favors is barely out of diapers. Look how long it took for Krissy to "get it." Had he played another year or two of college, he would have been a much better player in Year 1. I don't think Jimmer will be a bust. He's not going to be a superstar, but he'll be a solid pro and a great locker room presence.
 
Mongoose said:
You must really hate Jimmer if you are going to try to tell all these Jimmer fans that he isn't going to be the best NBA player of all time. This article is obviously utter nonsense! Rubbish! Bullocks!
Click to expand...

Great refutation bones!

Please, tell us why this article is so valid?

Why in every workout done by Jimmer are the reports impressive?

Why is he climbing the draft boards?

Tell us, why is this point:
or an unproven point guard at the NBA level.
Click to expand...

A valid one?

I'm interested in your obviously superior logic to all the rest of those foolish lemmings who believe that Jimmer will be better than Ronnie Price.
 
The Thriller said:
Who has proven themselves at the NBA level? Did Dwill or Irving play a few games for the Lakers or Heat last year that we didn't know of? Maybe got a few games under their belts before practice or something?

NO ONE has proven a damn thing at the NBA level yet. Duh. If they were already proven at the NBA level, they wouldn't be entering the NBA draft. They would have already been signed on for other teams and would be FAs/or under contract right now.

Morans.
Click to expand...

The statement made was: "he measured at 6-foot-2 ½, which makes him either an undersized shooting guard or an unproven point guard at the NBA level." I admit it's not written well, but you're also not reading well.

In the next two paragraphs they explain that Jimmer's PPR for a point guard is very low. Thus, they believe he's an unproven point guard relative to the statistics by which they evaluate point guards. If he's not doing it at the college level (they theorize), he's going to struggle to do it at the next level.

Which leads them to believe his natural pro position is as an undersized shooting guard.

You don't have to agree with them. But they're not saying what you think they're saying.
 
GlassEater said:
And a lot of the young guys barely play their first year or end up as busts. Does anyone really believe Humphries will have a better pro career than Favors? Yet Mr. Kardashian was getting mins. over Derrick because Favors is barely out of diapers. Look how long it took for Krissy to "get it." Had he played another year or two of college, he would have been a much better player in Year 1. I don't think Jimmer will be a bust. He's not going to be a superstar, but he'll be a solid pro and a great locker room presence.
Click to expand...

Age is one of the most significant factors in determining a player's ability. This argument comes up every year. A guy with 4 years of college under his belt has a significant advantage in the college game. By contrast, a guy coming in as a freshman and putting up big numbers is considered to be a good indicator of talent. He doesn't have the mature body, the experience, or the luxury of playing against younger guys that older guys do.

As a result, young guys who perform well as 18 year olds are considered to have higher ceilings.
 
Who were Jimmer's teammates?

Doesn't talent factor into things? Had Jimmer played alongside Cousins or the Morrises, wouldn't it be logical to assume he would have been able to play the "natural" PG position and assist more? Instead, BYU's already talent-limited team became even worse after a certain starting center was suspended for the most important part of the year after committing something that wouldn't have even been talked about on 99.9 percent of all other college campuses.

To me, many people here have double standards. I remember when people on this board in the past were criticizing Duron for passing the ball to Raja, Brewer, etc to brick shots instead of taking a more "scoring" PG mentality.

Had Jimmer played with a "natural" PG mentality such as Kidd or Stockton, feeding the ball to guys like Noah, Emery, and Anderson, how many games would BYU have won last year? Would they have ever made the tournament had Jimmer only averaged perhaps half the points he did?
 
billyshelby said:
Age is one of the most significant factors in determining a player's ability. This argument comes up every year. A guy with 4 years of college under his belt has a significant advantage in the college game. By contrast, a guy coming in as a freshman and putting up big numbers is considered to be a good indicator of talent. He doesn't have the mature body, the experience, or the luxury of playing against younger guys that older guys do.

As a result, young guys who perform well as 18 year olds are considered to have higher ceilings.
Click to expand...
I agree. There is less of a ceiling for Jimmer, but I also think there is less risk. I don't think he'll be as good as Irving, Knight or even Walker. Of course, those guys have major question marks as well. What Jimmer has is a definable skill: shooting. His range is unbelievable. So even if he does not become a starting PG (and as a Jimmer "homer" even I don't think he will), he could be a very good backup and a valuable asset off the bench as a shooter.
 
Lets look at the history of #12 picks...

I think after seeing the results most of us would be very pleased to have a solid bench contributor/perhaps someone who could one day start.
 
the stat that startled me is the FGA every 1.7 minutes. does everyone realize how ridonk that is? who is the biggest hucker you can think of in the NBA, because i guarantee he doesn't put up a shot every 1.7 unless his name is kobe. monta ellis isn't that bad. arenas isn't that bad. melo isn't that bad. nobody on the current jazz roster shoots more often than once every 2.2.

adjust his minutes to a more reasonable 20-25 mpg and adjust his minutes-per-FGA to something like 2.5, and his scoring numbers change dramatically. even if he maintained his senior year shooting percentages against NBA defenses, he'd be lucky to average double figures with that type of role. since scoring is really his only specialty, i just wonder if that's enough to use a lottery pick on.
 
theNBAnerd said:
the stat that startled me is the FGA every 1.7 minutes. does everyone realize how ridonk that is? who is the biggest hucker you can think of in the NBA, because i guarantee he doesn't put up a shot every 1.7 unless his name is kobe. monta ellis isn't that bad. arenas isn't that bad. melo isn't that bad. nobody on the current jazz roster shoots more often than once every 2.2.

adjust his minutes to a more reasonable 20-25 mpg and adjust his minutes-per-FGA to something like 2.5, and his scoring numbers change dramatically. even if he maintained his senior year shooting percentages against NBA defenses, he'd be lucky to average double figures with that type of role. since scoring is really his only specialty, i just wonder if that's enough to use a lottery pick on.
Click to expand...

Wait. So you're saying he won't score 28 ppg next season? Whoa.
 
i'm saying 8-10 ppg is fine for a role playing bench scorer when he does other things, or when you picked him up with a second round pick or a minimum exception. when all a guy can give you is 8-10 points and very little D, you're not talking about 12th pick material.

8-10 points per game and shoddy defense is essentially what we got from raja bell last season.
 
theNBAnerd said:
i'm saying 8-10 ppg is fine for a role playing bench scorer when he does other things, or when you picked him up with a second round pick or a minimum exception. when all a guy can give you is 8-10 points and very little D, you're not talking about 12th pick material.

8-10 points per game and shoddy defense is essentially what we got from raja bell last season.
Click to expand...

Yeah but Jimmer could do it in a more exciting way and he's white. Obviously these factors are more important than your talk of "little D". Defense is boring, who cares.
 
It's amazing how sensitive the Jimmer fans are. I personally think Jimmer will make it as a backup PG in the league. I don't think he will ever start. I think he'll struggle early adapting. I could be real wrong. What I don't understand is the absolute assurance Jimmer will at least be a solid backup. He absolutely could bust. I like his intangibles, but there are real weaknesses in his game.

Even in this draft, Jimmer is not BPA at 12.
 
billyshelby said:
It's amazing how sensitive the Jimmer fans are. I personally think Jimmer will make it as a backup PG in the league. I don't think he will ever start. I think he'll struggle early adapting. I could be real wrong. What I don't understand is the absolute assurance Jimmer will at least be a solid backup. He absolutely could bust. I like his intangibles, but there are real weaknesses in his game.

Even in this draft, Jimmer is not BPA at 12.
Click to expand...

I just don't see 12 guys who are better than Jimmer in this draft. After a core of Irving, Williams, Knight, Kanter, Jonas, Biyombo, Walker, I don't really see anyone who has has less question marks than Jimmer. And perhaps even some of the 7 top guys I named have more question marks...
 
I really like the idea of having two 40%+ three point shooters in the back court. With Jimmer and Hayward, it would be a reality. If Singleton can hit an NBA three he would be worth the 12th as well. Big if though. He supposedly tweeted he has an upcoming workout with the Jazz, they will have to test him well in that department.
 
billyshelby said:
Even in this draft, Jimmer is not BPA at 12.
Click to expand...

Ok, who do you think will be BPA at 12 then? Let's have good discussion of what will work and instead of what doesn't.

Singleton, Burks, Thompson.......maybe Brooks? Are they better than Jimmer at 12? I want everyone to look at them as you are looking at Jimmer. Break them down and see if any of these guys have "absolute assurance" that they'll even be a solid backup. I don't think you can. Hell, I don't think you can with Dwill2, is he a 3 or a 4?

I gotta be honest, I don't see an argument that says Jimmer should or shouldn't be the guy to take at 12.

You're right, people are sensitive when it comes to Jimmer, but you're not giving any reasons as to why they shouldn't be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top