What's new
By:

Following potential 2013 draftees

Eat this all you Larkin lovers:

"@Probballdraft: Myck Kabongo had a very strong workout against Shane Larkin and Phil Pressey in Boston."
 
Also, there is some chance that Nate Wolters could become a Steve Nash / Jeff Hornacek-caliber player. Not a huge chance, but a chance. It depends on how hard he works on his body and how good he wants to be.

If we got Giannis and Wolters in the first round, I wouldn't cry.
 
Catchall said:
Also, there is some chance that Nate Wolters could become a Steve Nash / Jeff Hornacek-caliber player. Not a huge chance, but a chance. It depends on how hard he works on his body and how good he wants to be.

If we got Giannis and Wolters in the first round, I wouldn't cry.
Click to expand...

welcome aboard the wolters train.
 
Jako said:
welcome aboard the wolters train.
Click to expand...

Saying I wouldn't cry isn't exactly bandwagon, but I see more potential with Wolters than some. I think he's got good size, good body control, pretty good IQ, good instincts, etc. I think the problem with him is that no one's seen him play with better players on his own team. How well will he work with elite bigs and wings, etc.? But I see a lot of potential there. I don't think the athleticism is a big deal. He's not slick like Schroeder, but he can do cross-ups and work off screens. TBH, I think his athleticism is pretty good actually. If he adds strength, he may be able to surprise people with some strong finishes at the rim. He's like the Hayward of PG prospects.
 
Catchall said:
Saying I wouldn't cry isn't exactly bandwagon, but I see more potential with Wolters than some. I think he's got good size, good body control, pretty good IQ, good instincts, etc. I think the problem with him is that no one's seen him play with better players on his own team. How well will he work with elite bigs and wings, etc.? But I see a lot of potential there. I don't think the athleticism is a big deal. He's not slick like Schroeder, but he can do cross-ups and work off screens. TBH, I think his athleticism is pretty good actually. If he adds strength, he may be able to surprise people with some strong finishes at the rim. He's like the Hayward of PG prospects.
Click to expand...

couldn't have said it better myself. I actually want schröder and wolters.
 
Here's my big board by position:

PG: Burke, McCollum, Schroeder, Carter-Williams, Wolters, Larkin/Pressey

SG: McClemore, Oladipo, Rice Jr., Caldwell-Pope, Goodwin/Franklin

SF: Bennett, Porter, Bazz, Giannis, Karasev, Bullock

PF: Noel, Olynyk, Mitchell....

C: crap, I don't know.
 
PKM said:
Wolters is 2nd.. imo.
Click to expand...

This. Watching MCW scouting tape on draft express on the weaknesses portion he jump passed way too much for a 6'6" point guard and turned it over almost every time he did it and the jump passes happened every game almost. MCW decision making is horrible I would much rather take a high bball iq guy then mess with his potential he may never live up to.

And Schröder just scares the hell out of me because everyone bases his game off of one solid showing at the Nike Hoop Summit, and when I was listening to Chad Ford on his Locked on Jazz interview. Ford spoke of Schröder having a life altering event with the death of his father a couple years ago, and these character issues popped up afterwards, so we don't need no Jamarcus Russell or Ricky Williams head case.

So my choice I am sticking with is Nate Wolters his athleticism is enough and will get better like the poster said few posts ago, Wolters is the Hayward version of a point guard, and I will say this again in Nate's interview at the combine on draft express he said he would be more of a facilitator if playing with other high level guys and not rely on his scoring so much.
 
Catchall said:
Just reminding everyone that Archie Goodwin will be a steal at #21. He'll learn to shoot. Bryon Russel couldn't hit the backboard when he first came into the league.
Click to expand...

I'll see your B-Russ raise you a CJ, AK, and Brewer. To say he's going to come in and learn to be a reliable shooter is premature. There's more evidence to suggest he won't get much better at his shot.
 
d@!!0n0rcutt said:
This. Watching MCW scouting tape on draft express on the weaknesses portion he jump passed way too much for a 6'6" point guard and turned it over almost every time he did it and the jump passes happened every game almost. MCW decision making is horrible I would much rather take a high bball iq guy then mess with his potential he may never live up to.

And Schröder just scares the hell out of me because everyone bases his game off of one solid showing at the Nike Hoop Summit, and when I was listening to Chad Ford on his Locked on Jazz interview. Ford spoke of Schröder having a life altering event with the death of his father a couple years ago, and these character issues popped up afterwards, so we don't need no Jamarcus Russell or Ricky Williams head case.

So my choice I am sticking with is Nate Wolters his athleticism is enough and will get better like the poster said few posts ago, Wolters is the Hayward version of a point guard, and I will say this again in Nate's interview at the combine on draft express he said he would be more of a facilitator if playing with other high level guys and not rely on his scoring so much.
Click to expand...


I can't even begin to express just how wrong you are. I sincerely hope you're trolling.
 
PKM said:
It 'translates' on the court. 100% ... John Wall fast end-to-end.. elevates and dunks over people. Gets by on his first-step. Athleticism is no concern.
His shot is a line drive, though.. not overly optimistic on that..
Click to expand...

Too bad John Wall will never lead a winning NBA team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top