jope
Well-Known Member
@1:36 ---- paul pierce end of game go-to shot
Game(s) THREAD - UK vs. MichSt @ 5:30mst ESPN and KU vs. Duke @ 7:30mst ESPN
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
@1:36 ---- paul pierce end of game go-to shot
mellow
Well-Known Member
Catch and shoot
Shoot of the dribble
Runs the floor
Finishes in traffic
Pull up mid range shot
Parker could lead the Jazz in scoring today....we'll maybe, the Corbin flex .....
My thoughts on Randle, Wiggins, and Parker.
I think Randle could be a good PF in the NBA as he is physical and is able to finish in traffic and around the basket. I didn't see, or don't remember much of an outside game so he may need to develop a 15 footer to keep people honest. I don't think he will have too much trouble adjusting to the NBA changes in speed, height, length.
Wiggins was listed as a guard, but seemed to play his best ball down low. I loved Wiggins defense and thought he was in the right spots for the most part and was active. Of course he runs well, cuts well, and finishes well. I liked seeing that fade jumper late in the game. He seemed to be missing an outside jumper, maybe he doesn't need one in the NCAA, but he will need one in the NBA whether he plays the 2 or 3. No way he plays the 4.
Parker played well offensively, showed his driving ability, ball handling ability, and shooting ability from the 3, mid range, as well as inside. He did try to do too much with the dribbling in traffic which led to turnovers. I'm deciding if he would go back and forth defensively between trying hard and being lazy. Not sure if he was picking his spots or something because sometimes he looked good and other times he would get beat by a good pass and good positioning by the guy he was trying to defend, and at times he was the last player down the floor on offense so I'm not sure how much he wants to run the floor. Dang his shot looks smooth though and he gets some good elevation. He's a 3 that can do it all.
I was leaning towards Parker before the game and honestly nothing has really moved me either way. I expected to be more in the Parker school of though after, but I'm still only leaning his direction. I think I mainly lean his way because I think he and Wiggins are better than Randle, and we don't need another post player unless that post player is the BPA. If Wiggins can show he can shoot of course I would say to take him. At this point he hasn't shown me that. I see Parker being able to seamlessly transition to the NBA as a SF. Unless things change I see some bumps in the road for Wiggins transition, despite his athletic ability.
I think Randle could be a good PF in the NBA as he is physical and is able to finish in traffic and around the basket. I didn't see, or don't remember much of an outside game so he may need to develop a 15 footer to keep people honest. I don't think he will have too much trouble adjusting to the NBA changes in speed, height, length.
Wiggins was listed as a guard, but seemed to play his best ball down low. I loved Wiggins defense and thought he was in the right spots for the most part and was active. Of course he runs well, cuts well, and finishes well. I liked seeing that fade jumper late in the game. He seemed to be missing an outside jumper, maybe he doesn't need one in the NCAA, but he will need one in the NBA whether he plays the 2 or 3. No way he plays the 4.
Parker played well offensively, showed his driving ability, ball handling ability, and shooting ability from the 3, mid range, as well as inside. He did try to do too much with the dribbling in traffic which led to turnovers. I'm deciding if he would go back and forth defensively between trying hard and being lazy. Not sure if he was picking his spots or something because sometimes he looked good and other times he would get beat by a good pass and good positioning by the guy he was trying to defend, and at times he was the last player down the floor on offense so I'm not sure how much he wants to run the floor. Dang his shot looks smooth though and he gets some good elevation. He's a 3 that can do it all.
I was leaning towards Parker before the game and honestly nothing has really moved me either way. I expected to be more in the Parker school of though after, but I'm still only leaning his direction. I think I mainly lean his way because I think he and Wiggins are better than Randle, and we don't need another post player unless that post player is the BPA. If Wiggins can show he can shoot of course I would say to take him. At this point he hasn't shown me that. I see Parker being able to seamlessly transition to the NBA as a SF. Unless things change I see some bumps in the road for Wiggins transition, despite his athletic ability.
b_line
Well-Known Member
I think when people say "run the floor" they are talking about the fast break. Parker led or was involved in most of Dukes fast breaks last night. When he was last down the floor, he was usually with the PG, or acting as the point forward in a half court set. When you want to play half court ball, and you shoot that many threes in the game, you are almost always last down the court. Parker can run the floor VERY well, and he knows when not to.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Lmao.
The only reliable, informative eval I could ever get from you is from this coming year's potato crops.
The **** do you know about college ball, kid. You don't know ****-- you're barely older than I am. What is your pedigree? Your credentials? Being 'correct' on your over-conservative predictions that rarely deviate from popular opinion-- and then you pine on others when they're wrong (for making going out on limbs-- which is bound to happen)?
Sick 'eval skills', toots. Better off sticking to being an expert on Montana agriculture tbh.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
/inb4 Hantlers backpedals, and says his shtick is to only piss people off, and that we shouldn't get mad, and that we're actually within his self-proclaimed 'inner-circle' of expert college ball evaluators.
Entirely not true.
I make two type of posts;
1) I give credit where credit is earned and always say where I heard what.
2) I say this is 'my opinion' so take it fwiw.
well, then..
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
My age determines how good I am at evaluating basketball?
Well ok then...
Good analysis sir, good analysis.
It took you this long to pick up on that tension?
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
No, but it really is determining your lack of ability to formulate proper, respectable responses to the points of PKM and myself. Your age is constructing this entertaining thought of pseudo-superiority-- instead of actively pursuing new opinions, throwing questionable predictions out there, with no fear, you instead place utmost focus on just being 'correct'. The strength of a person's arguments should never be focused on their past predictions-- it should be on their direct justification on the current point they are arguing at this point in time. PKM predicting that Xavier Henry would be the **** has nothing to do with the accuracy of his evaluations on the flaw of Jabari Parker, for example.
To me, this preoccupation with "always being correct" goes against the very fabric of intellectual discourse-- and it is a thought process for the insecure.
Still waiting on a proper, respectable response to the points that PKM and myself made. I know I'll get something, but Peeks won't.
Where's my apology, Hant? If you're intellectually honest you know your statement was, at best, poorly stated.
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
First off, I've never said that I'm always correct. It's player evaluation, nobody is ever always correct. If you look through my posts, you can find multiple times when I've said I was wrong on guys. Being wrong never bothers me, because if I realize that I was wrong, it means that I've probably found out what the right answer was, and that is far more important.
As for you, you were trying to use my age, my "credentials" and my "pedigree" as a basis on whether I'm qualified to judge players skills or not. I don't think I'm better than you, I just don't care about you. I'm just confident in what I say. I feel like when it comes to basketball, I know what I'm talking about. You don't have to agree with me, it doesn't matter.
And as for my "overly-conservative" predictions that never stray from the popular opinion...well, like you said, what do my previous predictions have to do with anything? You just argued against one of the first points you made. If you still think that they were always overly-conservative, I urge you to go revisit them. I was one of the first to say Damian Lillard would be a star in this league (this was when he was still predicted to go in the late 1st) and I was one of the only ones to stay consistent that Austin Rivers would do very well in the league (which clearly, I was wrong about). I was one of the few to hate on Harrison Barnes, and one of the few on this board at least to hate on Kendall Marshall consistently. If you wanna call me out buddy, you better get your facts straight first.
But you know what the really funny thing is to me? This started out with me joshing with PKM a little on how much he hates Kansas, when he then responded by telling me how much more he knew about HS/College basketball than I did, and I disagreed with him. Then you come running in because heaven forbid somebody disagrees with your precious PKM. This was never about you buddy, but you decided you needed to throw yourself in the ring for an argument that doesn't matter. That's the funny part.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
D
