Austin Rivers would love to play in New Orleans {title edit}

taking minutes from gordon hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa yea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

You don't need gurus. I'm a huge Duke fan and I watched at least 10-12 games this year. Rivers doesn't move well off the ball. Demands the ball 30 feet from the basket. Dribbles incessantly when he gets it. Doesn't look up, especially when driving to the rack. Takes innumerable stupid shots. Plays lax D. Does he have a unique and intriguing skill set? Obviously. But when it comes to his mentality and gaping holes in his game, I'll pass on him in the top 10.

---

I'm not a duke fan, so I will admit I'm sure you saw a lot more of him in game time situations than I did, but what I did see during workouts/combines, highlights, etc,... is that the kid has game, and a skillset that can serve him well in the nba... the poor shot selection, and excessive dribbling, as well as the other flaws in his game you mentioned can be corrected with good coaching, and nba experience. what I was questioning was the character issues that keep getting attacked. I just don't think they are valid, I don't understand why the kids sense of proffesionalism and lockerroom presence would be questioned, considering his pedigree.( and comparing him to Ricky Davis like Chad Ford does... does just that)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

But having him with Gordon is redundant and unnecessary. He would take shots and presumably minutes away from Gordon while potentially harming team chemistry (which is vital to a young team). I realize that his skill set is elite and if you gave his skills to a player who was less of a chucker, and who knew how to play in a team construct then I would take him in a second. I'm not questioning his skills, I'm questioning him.

---

Firstly, having 2 scorers on your team doesn't make it redundant. You could argue that Wade and LeBron are redundant because they are both penetrators, but they just won a Championship together.

Secondly, Rivers wouldn't take any minutes away from EJ. If you watch Monty's interview about him, he says he thinks he can play PG because he is such a great ball handler. Monty also said that he wants a guy who can create his own shot playing next to Gordon, and Rivers is the best CHOS guy in this whole draft.

He is labeled a chucker because he has played with scrubs his whole career. He had no help at both Winter Park and Duke, so he was forced to take a lot of shots. Monty is great at putting players in a "box." He forces them to play within that "box," so they can improve their skills with out hurting the team or developing bad habits. Monty wouldn't let him be a chucker on this team, and that is why I think we are the best situation for Rivers - because he respects Monty so much that he'll do anything he says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N.O.Bronco

Apparently both dell and Monty have discussed converting him to point guard and both have apparently seen things in his workouts that suggest he will be able to make that switch.

I'm personally not the biggest rivers fan but that does make me feel a little bit better since I'm pretty sure were going to pick him if he's there.

---

Looks like we kind of have to trust them, sure seems like this is gonna happen.

I hope I'm wrong if we take him. And if I am I'll be happy to admit it. But I just don't see him changing his personality overnight just because he's close to Monty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

But having him with Gordon is redundant and unnecessary. He would take shots and presumably minutes away from Gordon while potentially harming team chemistry (which is vital to a young team). I realize that his skill set is elite and if you gave his skills to a player who was less of a chucker, and who knew how to play in a team construct then I would take him in a second. I'm not questioning his skills, I'm questioning him.

---

I seems that you are questioning his ability to learn to manage a nba game, and your entitled to feel that way based on what you witnessed at Duke, that's where our opinions differ, i think experience, good players/leaders around him, and more importantly GOOD coaching can fix that... I believe he can get all of that here, we will probably be picking in the lottery again next year, so why not take a chance on an elite talent, and let him learn while we take our lumps anyway.

u dont take minutes, u earn them. best man plays, the only person it would affect is henry

I'm not necessarily a Rivers fan at all.......but I am a fan of developing a player that actually WANTS to be here. His stock is up in my book after saying that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Firstly, having 2 scorers on your team doesn't make it redundant. You could argue that Wade and LeBron are redundant because they are both penetrators, but they just won a Championship together.

Secondly, Rivers wouldn't take any minutes away from EJ. If you watch Monty's interview about him, he says he thinks he can play PG because he is such a great ball handler. Monty also said that he wants a guy who can create his own shot playing next to Gordon, and Rivers is the best CHOS guy in this whole draft.

He is labeled a chucker because he has played with scrubs his whole career. He had no help at both Winter Park and Duke, so he was forced to take a lot of shots. Monty is great at putting players in a "box." He forces them to play within that "box," so they can improve their skills with out hurting the team or developing bad habits. Monty wouldn't let him be a chucker on this team, and that is why I think we are the best situation for Rivers - because he respects Monty so much that he'll do anything he says.

---

Wade and James comparison? Kinda reaching. And playing Rivers at point would be like playing Monte at point. He has no court vision and rarely looks to others. And yes he can create his own shot but usually it takes him an entire shot clock to do so. And he did not play with scrubs his whole career. Yes, in high school he was playing with rich white kids, but guess what? He was also playing against them. At Duke his teammates were far from scrubs. He played with the Plumlee brothers who both have decent post games and an array of shooters who, while they may not be able to consistently create offense can knock down 3s like few other teams in the country. Rivers failed to take advantage of those skills and it cost his team dearly.

Look I don't hate Rivers as much as I'm making it seem. He's a good scorer with good potential with holes that hopefully Monty would minimize. But as far as taking him at 10, I think that's way too high for a player with his issues, especially if we want him at point.

I'd feel a lot better if we were picking 9. Davis-MKG-Beal-TRob-Barnes-Drummond-Lillard-Waiters-Rivers-#10??? Leonard? Zeller? Lamb? Henson? None of that excites me too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

He is only 19. Every player his age (even Davis) has gaping holes in his game. The fact is that he has several elite skills/traits.

He is an elite ball handler (compared to his age group). He is an elite scorer. He is an elite closer. Those are 3 major MAJOR qualities in a young player that he can lean on while he develops the rest of his game. It's not like we have a coach who hates rookies *cough* Byron Scott *cough*. Monty is willing to develop him, and Rivers is willing to learn from Monty. It is a great match.

Plus, he has Eric Gordon to take the load off of him. That is invaluable. He can progress at his own rate. Don't forget this kid was the #2 ranked prospect last year behind Davis, and his game is much better suited for the NBA than it is for college.

---

He's an elite ball-handler perhaps. He wasn't an elite scorer at Duke.

I'm not anti-Rivers as he does come with a great pedigree, but if we're judging by his freshman season with the Devils, he wasn't that impressive - aside from, of course, a nuclear performance vs. UNC. Which does show how good he can be when it's clicking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidA

I'd feel a lot better if we were picking 9. Davis-MKG-Beal-TRob-Barnes-Drummond-Lillard-Waiters-Rivers-#10??? Leonard? Zeller? Lamb? Henson? None of that excites me too much.

---

I still think Henson goes at 9- hope so anyway. You're right though, could be a bit deflating if it played out that way.

What an arrogant statement! Already picking teams he wants to play for! Rabblerabblerabble!

If Hornets can't get Rivers I wouldn't mind going after Jeremy Lamb

I don't know what to think about the draft anymore. :hihi:

Can we just trade the Lakers the 10th pick already and get some 2018 second rounders

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinny6420

Can we just trade the Lakers the 10th pick already and get some 2018 second rounders

---

Nah haven't you heard? We're giving them Davis for the rights to Vlade Divac's son.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

Nah haven't you heard? We're giving them Davis for the rights to Vlade Divac's son.

---

I heard he pretty good too, im so excited

I still say we should draft Jeremy Lamb........ think I'm in that boat by myself though. :sadsad::nopity:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigChris504

I still say we should draft Jeremy Lamb........ think I'm in that boat by myself though. :sadsad::nopity:

---

Yahoo thinks we should too.

Quote:

---

10. New Orleans Hornets (via Minnesota)

Jeremy Lamb: SG, 19, 6-5, 179, Connecticut, Soph.
New Orleans will be a little disappointed to see the likes of Lillard and Rivers come off the board earlier, causing them to take the next best guard available. While possibly an odd fit playing the same position as their best incumbent player Eric Gordon, Lamb gives the team shooting and scoring and is supposedly considered the top talent on the board here.

---

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/y-sport...4zzfqwaIS8vLYF

How does Lamb fit? You have to run player specific plays for him. He's kind of a specialized player. You gotta tailor your offense to his skillset to maximize his ability. With Gordon on the team, it's going to be a challenge. He could very well be the best wing on the board at 10 so it's going to be interesting if we were to take him.

I don't think Rivers will be a bad PG. In case most of you did not know, Monty does run a lot of plays. The team isn't just going to use Pick and rolls/isolations the entire game. Rivers isn't going to turn the ball over alot and can make the right passes when needed. If Gordon is struggling, Rivers can start getting his shots up or just drive to the basket. Two guys who can create scoring oppurtunties well? Yeah I like that....

Zeller and Rivers on the possibility of playing in New Orleans.

http://video-embed.nola.com/services...EsITNwjG28SO_r

http://video-embed.nola.com/services...EsITNwjG28SO_r

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoDatMan504

Rivers isn't going to turn the ball over alot and can make the right passes when needed.

---

What about his game makes you say this? He turned the ball over way too much in college.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

Wade and James comparison? Kinda reaching. And playing Rivers at point would be like playing Monte at point. He has no court vision and rarely looks to others. And yes he can create his own shot but usually it takes him an entire shot clock to do so. And he did not play with scrubs his whole career. Yes, in high school he was playing with rich white kids, but guess what? He was also playing against them. At Duke his teammates were far from scrubs. He played with the Plumlee brothers who both have decent post games and an array of shooters who, while they may not be able to consistently create offense can knock down 3s like few other teams in the country. Rivers failed to take advantage of those skills and it cost his team dearly.

Look I don't hate Rivers as much as I'm making it seem. He's a good scorer with good potential with holes that hopefully Monty would minimize. But as far as taking him at 10, I think that's way too high for a player with his issues, especially if we want him at point.

---

I'm not comparing River and Gordon to Wade and James. I was comparing your notion that Rivers and EJ can't co-exist because they are both penetrators. Wade and James are 2 of the best penetrators in the game, and they co-exist perfectly. That was the point I was trying to make.

Who at Duke can give him some help, offensively? Nobody. The Plumlees suck. They are just big athletes who can't do anything but jump and rebound. The opposing defenses focused solely on him, and he could get to the rim whenever he wanted to. That is elite. That is a rare gift.

Also, while at Duke, he played SG - not PG. His job wasn't to get others involved. It was to score.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MonsterMash

He's an elite ball-handler perhaps. He wasn't an elite scorer at Duke.

I'm not anti-Rivers as he does come with a great pedigree, but if we're judging by his freshman season with the Devils, he wasn't that impressive - aside from, of course, a nuclear performance vs. UNC. Which does show how good he can be when it's clicking.

---

I'd say he was an elite scorer for his age. I'll give you 2 stat lines:

Player A - 33 minutes, 15.5 points and 2.1 assists on 43.3% from the field and 36.5% from 3

Player B - 34 minutes, 14.6 points and 2.2 assists on 44.5% from the field and 33.9% from 3



Player A is Rivers, and Player B is Beal. Now, I'm not one for stats. I like to identify tools, so I won't harp on the stats, but Beal is widely considered a top-3 player in the draft. He is considered a "great shooter" and an elite offensive prospect with "Ray Allen" potential, yet Rivers dribbles better, gets to the hole easier, shoots the 3 better, is more clutch, and passes the same.

I'm just saying...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HORNETSFAN

What about his game makes you say this? He turned the ball over way too much in college.

---

Rivers averaged 2.3 TOs per game while Beal averaged 2.1 TOs per game. Just to give you a comparison.

Can't expect freshmen prospects to be perfect, and Rivers had the ball in his hands a lot more than Beal, so I would say he is more careful with the ball than Beal is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HORNETSFAN

What about his game makes you say this? He turned the ball over way too much in college.

---

Not neccesarily his game, more so that he isn't going to be the one bringing the ball up as PG of this team this season if we get him. Gordon isn't going to defer to a rookie PG in Rivers. Rivers will get his field goal attempts. He doesn't get stripped, but he is not a great passer.
When he started the season, Rivers turned it over a lot, but when he began getting serious minutes (30+ mpg beginning Jan.4th), Rivers improved his handling of of the ball.

Here is a stat sheet with charts for you: http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/pla...3=turnover_pct

Austin Rivers, of all guard prospects, is now referring to himself as a PG. I didn't think I'd hear those words come out of his mouth.

yeah we need more help at SF or C, but do yall really think we're trying to build a contender for *next* season? This is a multi-season project.

If we think Rivers is BPA at #10, we wait til next offseason's FAs and draft to find a SF and C, no big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdaniel

Austin Rivers, of all guard prospects, is now referring to himself as a PG. I didn't think I'd hear those words come out of his mouth.

---

There are different types of PGs. He fits the Derrick Rose style, but Rivers is a better shooter, and Rose is a better passer. Passing can be learned, though, especially with a player as young as Rivers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daybreaker

yeah we need more help at SF or C, but do yall really think we're trying to build a contender for *next* season? This is a multi-season project.

If we think Rivers is BPA at #10, we wait til next offseason's FAs and draft to find a SF and C, no big deal.

---

Exactly. If Rivers has All Star potential, then we grab him and develop him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdaniel

Austin Rivers, of all guard prospects, is now referring to himself as a PG. I didn't think I'd hear those words come out of his mouth.

---

Let's not hide behind the bush. Rivers is a total project at PG. He has the tools to play the position but he's going to have to learn to play the position with the mindset. The failure rate will be high but he has tools to play other roles if it doesn't work out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

There are different types of PGs. He fits the Derrick Rose style, but Rivers is a better shooter, and Rose is a better passer. Passing can be learned, though, especially with a player as young as Rivers.

---

I'd prefer my Point not have to learn to pass, but I guess that's just me.

I see the star qualities in Rivers and understand why he's as worthy a pick at ten as the other candidates, but I don't like the idea of forcing a square peg into a round hole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Rivers averaged 2.3 TOs per game while Beal averaged 2.1 TOs per game. Just to give you a comparison.

Can't expect freshmen prospects to be perfect, and Rivers had the ball in his hands a lot more than Beal, so I would say he is more careful with the ball than Beal is.

---

Rivers would be coming here to become a PG. A PG that does not distribute and has more TOs than assists has to raise some concerns. If not, I am not sure why not. I do not recall anyone saying Beal would be a PG.

If he comes to the Hornets, I will hope he pans out at PG. He would not be a bad pick at 10 (there could be much worse). I am just not a huge fan of his style. If he becomes a Hornet, I will expect that Monty can mold him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdaniel

I'd prefer my Point not have to learn to pass, but I guess that's just me.

I see the star qualities in Rivers and understand why he's as worthy a pick at ten as the other candidates, but I don't like the idea of forcing a square peg into a round hole.

---

The point is that he is a young, moldable player. Monty knows what he can do. He has worked him out personally, and he knows his mindset. If we pick him, it is because Monty believes 100% that he can teach Rivers how to run the point, and I trust Monty.

Who played PG for Duke? Rivers or Curry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

I'm not comparing River and Gordon to Wade and James. I was comparing your notion that Rivers and EJ can't co-exist because they are both penetrators. Wade and James are 2 of the best penetrators in the game, and they co-exist perfectly. That was the point I was trying to make.

Who at Duke can give him some help, offensively? Nobody. The Plumlees suck. They are just big athletes who can't do anything but jump and rebound. The opposing defenses focused solely on him, and he could get to the rim whenever he wanted to. That is elite. That is a rare gift.

Also, while at Duke, he played SG - not PG. His job wasn't to get others involved. It was to score.



I'd say he was an elite scorer for his age. I'll give you 2 stat lines:

Player A - 33 minutes, 15.5 points and 2.1 assists on 43.3% from the field and 36.5% from 3

Player B - 34 minutes, 14.6 points and 2.2 assists on 44.5% from the field and 33.9% from 3



Player A is Rivers, and Player B is Beal. Now, I'm not one for stats. I like to identify tools, so I won't harp on the stats, but Beal is widely considered a top-3 player in the draft. He is considered a "great shooter" and an elite offensive prospect with "Ray Allen" potential, yet Rivers dribbles better, gets to the hole easier, shoots the 3 better, is more clutch, and passes the same.

I'm just saying...

---

His job as the best player on the team was to win by making the best play........ Lehigh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HORNETSFAN

Rivers would be coming here to become a PG. A PG that does not distribute and has more TOs than assists has to raise some concerns. If not, I am not sure why not. I do not recall anyone saying Beal would be a PG.

---

I still see Gordon being the guy who runs this offense if we have Rivers and Gordon at Pg/Sg...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HORNETSFAN

Rivers would be coming here to become a PG. A PG that does not distribute and has more TOs than assists has to raise some concerns. If not, I am not sure why not. I do not recall anyone saying Beal would be a PG.

---

You have to understand that we don't need a conventional PG next to Eric Gordon. Monty said he wants a scorer - a guy who can get to the rim and create his own shot. This was tweeted earlier today:

Jeff Duncan ‏@JeffDuncanTP
Monty Williams ID'd 2 qualities he'd like to add to the Hornets roster this offseason: length at the basket (AD) & offensive creativity.

Jeff Duncan ‏@JeffDuncanTP
Williams defined offensive creativity as the ability to create own shot, get to rim and/or get to FT line. Wants to add a compliment to EG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HunnyB

Who played PG for Duke? Rivers or Curry?

---

Neither. I would say neither. They were ball handlers. They didn't have a PG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

Let's not hide behind the bush. Rivers is a total project at PG. He has the tools to play the position but he's going to have to learn to play the position with the mindset. The failure rate will be high but he has tools to play other roles if it doesn't work out.

---

I agree. I think he'll find an NBA role one way or another. The fact that he's actually calling himself a Point Guard in interviews before the draft even happens is what interests me. I suppose his embracing the idea at this juncture makes me more open to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

His job as the best player on the team was to win by making the best play........ Lehigh

---

You could say the same thing about Lillard, who is widely considered a score-first PG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoDatMan504

I still see Gordon being the guy who runs this offense if we have Rivers and Gordon at Pg/Sg...

---

Agreed. That's why we don't need a conventional PG.

Think outside the box people!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

Neither. I would say neither. They were ball handlers. They didn't have a PG.

---

Thanks Nola Hornet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HunnyB

Who played PG for Duke? Rivers or Curry?

---

Curry technically but all he really did was bring the ball up, pass it to the off guard and go spot up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

Curry technically but all he really did was bring the ball up, pass it to the off guard and go spot up

---

Thanks Nola3. I didn't watch a lot of Duke last season so I was wondering why both Rivers and Curry only averaged 2.1 and 2.4 apg. It would make sense if neither of them carried real PG duties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

You could say the same thing about Lillard, who is widely considered a score-first PG.



Agreed. That's why we don't need a conventional PG.

Think outside the box people!!!

---

Lillard has nothing to do with Rivers. He'll be gone by 10 anyway.

And maybe we don't need a conventional point, but we need one guard who is willing to make the right play whether its hitting the open man or driving the lane and finishing.
Look at the best comp to Rivers/Gordon: Curry and Ellis. How did that work out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HunnyB

Thanks Nola3. I didn't watch a lot of Duke last season so I was wondering why both Rivers and Curry only averaged 2.1 and 2.4 apg. It would make sense if neither of them carried real PG duties.

---

Tyler Thornton also ran the point a good bit. Duke's offense wasn't great last year. They had no post game to speak of, and it was a lot of Rivers-iso, which seemed by design.

I'm not one to question Coach K, but their team offense was all over the place. Just not enough talent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

Lillard has nothing to do with Rivers. He'll be gone by 10 anyway.

And maybe we don't need a conventional point, but we need one guard who is willing to make the right play whether its hitting the open man or driving the lane and finishing.
Look at the best comp to Rivers/Gordon: Curry and Ellis. How did that work out?

---

That is a horrible comparison. Curry can't create his own shot, and Gordon is a better offensive (and defensive) player than Ellis. Gordon is a fantastic passer, and we can run the offense through him if need be, which is why we can afford to have a scoring PG like Rivers. Curry is a complimentary PG, not a CHOS guy like Rivers is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

I'm not comparing River and Gordon to Wade and James. I was comparing your notion that Rivers and EJ can't co-exist because they are both penetrators. Wade and James are 2 of the best penetrators in the game, and they co-exist perfectly. That was the point I was trying to make.

Who at Duke can give him some help, offensively? Nobody. The Plumlees suck. They are just big athletes who can't do anything but jump and rebound. The opposing defenses focused solely on him, and he could get to the rim whenever he wanted to. That is elite. That is a rare gift.

Also, while at Duke, he played SG - not PG. His job wasn't to get others involved. It was to score.



I'd say he was an elite scorer for his age. I'll give you 2 stat lines:

Player A - 33 minutes, 15.5 points and 2.1 assists on 43.3% from the field and 36.5% from 3

Player B - 34 minutes, 14.6 points and 2.2 assists on 44.5% from the field and 33.9% from 3



Player A is Rivers, and Player B is Beal. Now, I'm not one for stats. I like to identify tools, so I won't harp on the stats, but Beal is widely considered a top-3 player in the draft. He is considered a "great shooter" and an elite offensive prospect with "Ray Allen" potential, yet Rivers dribbles better, gets to the hole easier, shoots the 3 better, is more clutch, and passes the same.

I'm just saying...

---

Damn... Where's that "Draft Rivers" line again? I'm in it!

Lets not forget that EJ.. as talented as he is... ha snot been the healthiest of players since he's been in the league. I like the idea of having another attacker on the floor. The Wade/LBJ comparisons are legit but there's 1 problem with the comparison... while Wade and LBJ are all-world players neither one of them can hold EJs jock as a shooter. So while Rivers can penetrate and attack the basket he's got a legit 3-point shooter to kick it to.

I'd love for us to take Rivers at 10. We need more scoring... and anybody that doesn't think we could use another scorer only needs to look at one of the many games from last season where we scored in the 80s.... sometimes 70s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

That is a horrible comparison. Curry can't create his own shot, and Gordon is a better offensive (and defensive) player than Ellis. Gordon is a fantastic passer, and we can run the offense through him if need be, which is why we can afford to have a scoring PG like Rivers. Curry is a complimentary PG, not a CHOS guy like Rivers is.

---

Curry might not be able to get to the rim as easily as Rivers (in college), but he is amazing at moving without the ball and getting into space. Gordon is better than both, I agree with that. But starting a ball stopper next to him who waits around for the ball to come to him and has no semblance of court vision or passing ability would kill the offense. Rivers would be great coming off the bench, but at #10 in this draft I would hope we go for more than a 6th man.