I understand your angle MM, but do you really feel that Dell would take CJ over Burke, Porter or both?
 |
| . |
|
I understand your angle MM, but do you really feel that Dell would take CJ over Burke, Porter or both?
Wherehappens.
I wish he would.
Kendall Marshall:Originally Posted by Purple Haze
46.7% FG
35.4% 3PT
69.6% FT
Michael carter Williams:
39.3% FG
29.4% 3PT
69.4%FT
I would say Kendall Marshall is like a 5. MCW is more like a 3.
No one is saying he can't play PG simply because a PG has to be a certain way. I believe you're the only one I've seen saying that.
I won't speak for anyone else, but I say he can't play PG because he has shown no signs of being an NBA PG in his life. I say it because he was:
43.9% FG
37.67% 3PT
2.74 assists/game
over his career playing for Lehigh. Against mighty mighty Robert Morris, Fairfield, Penn, Sacred Herat, Quinnipiac(??), Fair Dickinson(??), Fordham, St. Francis, Bryant U, etc etc etc.
I don't expect him to improve on those numbers playing against NBA players. You say he can pass the ball. I've never seen it. You say he can play defense. I've never seen it.
Don't get me wrong. I've said a thousand times, I don't dislike the kid. I think he is capable of playing off the ball as well as creating his own shot. A spark off the bench I could see no doubt, and with him expecting to go around #10 in a crappy draft, I think that would be fantastic value. But let's not try to make him something he is not.
I watched Trey Burke lead his team through the Big ten and to the national championship. I watched CJ play much better off the ball than with it, and be a fairly efficient, high volume scorer on a lower level.
Lillard went #6 in one of the strongest drafts in recent memory and was the top PG in the draft. CJ will go around #10 in one of the worst drafts in recent memory. And there is a reason for that.
Fair enough!
No, but I don't really think they want Burke, either. I think they would consider getting Alex Len a grand slam; Porter or McLemore home runs, and nothing else would really get them that excited.
I said 30% Burke is taken 6th the other day because if Len, Noel, Porter, Oladipo, and McLemore are off the board when they pick, I don't think they really love anybody. Burke probably has the best value on the board, and we really are just drafting stocks, so I think they can take him. Then, if Utah is on the clock at 14 and they don't like anyone, make them give you Kanter and 14 for him. Or use him as a bargaining chip this summer the way Houston did with Lamb. Or keep him and see if it works out.
@mcnamara247
You think if Noel and Burke were on the board still we select Noel?? Just wondering because I think thats what it will be.
I don't buy that they don't want Burke at all. They would not have brought him in for an individual workout if they had no interest in him. Now, if he said or did something that they did not like during the visit, maybe that could change.
This reminds me of 9th grade english class lol (in a good way). i'll break it down.
Here the author goes to break down everyone's analysis and dispell their beliefs and credibility based off of assumption, but uses the word "us" to make the reader a part of a collective and to agree.
Next, he give himself credibility but saying despite "we" haven't watched it, he has; and not only has he, he's done it a ton more than you have. He states his intention (to force that he can play PG) then attempts to dispell the foundation of our beliefs of what a Point guard is and why that foundation doesn't matter.
He then goes on to support his asseration that the foundation of our belief is flawed and compares the player favorably to a player we inherantly like in terms on play and supports it by comparison(emotional response). He then takes your 'flawed' argument of looking at his college assist production and even plays your game by saying he's sure that it'll go up when he plays with more talent those will go up (minimizing impact of your futurue argument).
Lastly, he summerizes his premise to the argument : That your belief on what a point guard is is flawed therefore he can play it. Next he reinforces he can play the position by highlighting his favorable attributes to that flawed theory of a point guard is to make you think, hey maybe he isn't that bad at the position.
Bravo... Bravo
I still dont think he'll be a good 1
"I don't know if people know — I dislocated my pinkie finger. And [Tyreke] told me, 'You wanna go home or you wanna be here?' I want to be here. And he said, 'All right, then go tape it up and let's play. Let's go. We not stoppin' at no stores. Straight gas. That's what we do, just keep going.'"
http://thebasketbawlblog.com/
There is a philosophy around the NBA that I have heard from 3 people now that goes like this:
If you don't think a PG can be a 9 or a 10, don't take him high or pay him big money. There are so many 6,7's, and 8's out there, that you are better served just spending money or picks somewhere else and either waiting for a 9 or a 10 or building your team with other great players so you can get by with a 6 at point guard (Mario Chalmers, George Hill, etc.)
I think this is why you will see Orlando, Phoenix, and Charlotte pass on Burke too. It's not like they have All-Star point guards that they wouldn't move in a second to get a "9 or a 10". Same with us, unless there really isn't any value elsewhere.
Now, I know some on here think Burke can be a 9 or 10, and maybe 1 or 2 GM's agree. I don't think Dell is one of them.
Contributor
Agreed. Not to mention we've heard a number of reporters with "sources" that are local and national come out and say they do like Burke.
I think they would be really happy with Burke. But I agree he's probably not exactly how they would put a player together in a perfect world. I don't think he's the perfect compliment to Eric Gordon which could create some logistical issues in the short term. But Burke is ideal to run the pick and roll offense, which is almost exclusively what we do. He's the leader and has the mentality I think Monty wants from his team.
I also think Len is the grand slam, Porter and Burke the homeruns, and McLemore a homerun simply based on value. Dipo and Noel maybe being singles, but guys they hope they don't have to take.
To be fair, they said they like his ability to set up the offense quicker. That is all, and that is true. Meanwhile, there is one local guy who has been trying to tell people what the Pelicans really think of Burke, but when he does it, people say he is wrong and get defensive. That person talks to the decision makers more than everyone else in the media combined, but people kind of blew him off on here when he posted a few days ago.
Please tell me you're talking in veiled 3rd person.
I am not local and I do not talk to Monty and Dell on a regular basis.
Damn!
And really? I thought you were local.. interesting.
He said things that were off base IMO. Anybody who thinks Chris Paul played defense at a high level coming in wasn't paying much attention.
There was a month where the Burke lovefest was getting out of control on the forums. There are quite a few people on here that truly have been following him since the college season, but a lot just went bandwagon by the tournament.
Some of us (ME!) was pushing Burke last year especially when he was thinking about leaving as a freshman.
Like I said there are people who sincerely like him. I personally like McCollum and MCW.
Contributor
If we draft Burke, I really hope you don't all of a sudden stop posting.
Well, the data says differently. In fact, Chris Paul was the ONLY young point guard in the last 9 years to make a major defensive impact
http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2013...guard-defense/
I know this will be dismissed, and your eyes tell you differently. I can tell that objectivity is out the window with Burke, has been for a while for some reason. But Gerry V's points were valid on CP3 when you look at the cold, hard data. But that shouldn't even matter. Nobody should be compared to CP3. The point is that there are some flaws in his game that people tend to overlook or just give him the benefit of the doubt and assume they will improve. Based on that, why can't every player in the draft just improve their flaws, and then we will have 60 perfect players drafted in 8 days? Why does he get the benefit of the doubt?
Contributor
Eh. You don't get hipster points for being there before others. I hardly knew of him because I normally pay next to no attention to Big 10 basketball, even though there's always a lot of good teams there. So I probably spearheaded the resurgence just before the tournaments. I hide nothing about it.
You can do that with players, realize later on how good they are.
I personally thought he played poorly for most of the tournament, but he made big shots when they mattered. He was brilliant in the regular season though.
I got rid of cable beginning last season so my games were really reduced. Saw a good variety of players through the games I caught. I notice that the board goes through phases and I can only assume that it's ESPN coverage that influences people's individual thoughts.
I just think it's funny when a group of people start talking about a player then someone jumps in saying "Yeah I've been high on him since he committed to so an so."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote