Not hate, just don't think he's good.

k

'bout BB: yeah, but fantastic role player! I agree about Jrich handling the "load," but how many players do you need to handle the load? I think as the 4th best player on a team, they are nearly identical in value.
I 100% agree PJ Brown is a more common type of big; he rebounds, defends, and can sometimes score. With Kaman, he is a bone fide post player, who does those other things too... Just not as well as a PJ Brown type. He certainly isn't the norm anymore. (A center you can run offense through from time to time)


Sorry that I'm using Multiquote, after reading through 700 posts, I realized posting 100 times would tilt the hell out of people. I'll go back to non-multi-quote soon. I think your comment re: deep shooting has merit. But... Josh Howard has a sweet mid range game. VERY good. Granger is simply not on that level. Further, Granger is not that good about getting to the basket (yet).
I also agree DG wants to be the face of a franchise and JHow is more of a goofball. But I'd rather have that goofball on my team.


I'd like to see it too, anytime anyone gets sucker punched is worthy of a youtube imo.

this is about Granger....

Bobbo, you and I agree about most things here, but I don't get how you don't like Granger better. His TS% has gone from 54.0 to 57.3 to 57.1 while his scoring has gone from 12.0 to 14.8 to 19.6. There are only a handful of people in the league who can score in bulk efficiently. Hes also a decent rebounder and passer for a SF. I don't watch enough of him to know about his defense, but 1.2 steals and 1.1 blocks look solid to me. Perhaps tell me what you don't like about him.

Absolutely not. In fact, you probably will never believe this, but Billy Paultz was actually one of the big reasons why I made the cutoff date what it was....really don't want the Paultz argument taking over this thread, lol.

one year may be too soon, but overall I agree that it'd be cool to do again later(perhaps with slightly different rules...like maybe we're only playing one season and you can get the player at any age for one year).

Why do you like his form so much and who is your #1?

btw I may play in the $1500 PLHE tomorrrow...or if I oversleep that I may play in the $1000rebuy on tuesday...or maybe the $2000 NLHE on Wednesday...basically what I'm saying is that I may not be around much the next few days so I'm sorry if I make you guys wait on me. I'll try to check in though at least once per day. I know exactly who I want, so if he falls to me I'll have an easy and quick decision

For a long 6'9" guy, his hands and head are very high at release, making it very hard to defend or even bother. I think it's similar to TMac except he gets rid of the ball quicker imo. Both players seem to be able to square up tall quite effectively on their jumpers.

other guy is undrafted, check your PM.

I should have probably qualified that with the fact that I'm not a basketball scout or anything close... just an observation.

Awesome.

Whopper would have been a top 1.5 pick. McHale got pwnd by him.

Also Bobbo, just to be clear that is AC's 5 man lineup we are talking about, not team fanmail as you were saying. Carry on now.

Come on biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigchips/cat, get it together.

A couple things:

1. Jim O'Brien is a player killer. I hope they boot him from Indiana before he makes Granger a camper.

2. Granger at 24 >> Howard at 24. And I think he'll show more improvement as it seems he's already doing. (I also think that Granger at 24 > Howard at 28)

3. Midrange jumpers, according to John Hollinger, are the worst.

4. Calvin Natt is definitely made up.

5. Assani, that's a solid list for best steals of the draft. It pained me to take Kemp over Deron Williams, but it was something I had to do. I almost took DW with my 1st round pick. And Moncreif is awesome.

6. Bobbo, way to include Terrell Brandon on a list of your "best picks of the round" after previously getting on Epipen's case about it.

7. O'Brien is the worst. His teams are good, but unless as a player you can think to yourself "okay, this is a Jim O'Brien team, I have to remember how to play basketball after I'm done here," then you're screwed.

8. Bobbo, you seem to be the only one who doesn't like the Durant pick and I don't understand why. I respect your basketball knowledge, but it seems we go opposite ways on a fair amount of issues, and this one is particularly strange as you are the only one who doesn't like it and you didn't like it enough to put it on your list of "bad picks" this round.

I think Durant would be an awesome fit on teams who peak late.

I don't think Durant is a bad pick, I was looking for picking him late if he fell. He has tremendous upside, his downside is being a solid player and his upside is being ...........a really good Carmelo or maybe a better scorer if that's possible. He's a gamble and why he fell so far, but there are a lot of players who are you who could be great. Durant has a slightly better chance than those guys but he also has a small bust chance although I think it's really small. I don't think it's the steal that Assani is saying b/c I know he's in love with Durant but I think it's very good value. 1 worry is I don't think he'll ever be that good defensively b/c of his body type.

Yeah. I mean, it's hard to think that Rudy Gay or Danny Granger are good picks and think that Durant is a bad one.

Yeah, I asked because he has the first starting 5. Dunno which post 1980 title squad is considered the worst (Detroit 04? idk). I'm wondering if any team will be able to match any of those champions--or if any of them would DEFINITELY be the best team in the NBA now. I think it's an interesting question. There probably will be a few that meet this criteria before it's over. Doesn't help that imo the Jordan team kind of sucks lol.

LDO, this is so so sososossososo much better than the 24yo rule the draft is based on. Doesn't matter now. Too late to change. Something like this would also clear up the whole injury issue better too.


edit: I'm still 100% sure Calvin ****in Natt is not a real person.

Maybe if those were the rules before hand, you can't change it to a 3 year span now b/c some people drafted on careers or potential careers.

I said that in my post.

Who cares? With 3 years spans we can have much more complete teams. Not one team in this league of all 24 year olds could win the championship against a great (actual) title team. If you drafted a young guy you can have him as a young guy on your team (you can even be spotted two years of expected potential)...I mean, if we are going to invest like 4+ Months on this thing, we may as well make it as cool as possible. If you picked D-Will, or CP3, you just can't put them on your team as a veteran. What is wrong with that? What were we going to do when our players got into their 30s anyway? How were we going to deal with it? IMO when the draft is finished we should choose which 3 year span we want from each of our players (this will give owners a chance to further show off basketball knowledge and creativity) and then have both owners and draft spectators rank (seed) the teams and we will then run a playoffs. If the 40th ranked team matches up well against the 1st ranked team, we can vote on who wins the 7 game series or whatever.

Please imagine a team with all 24 year olds...

It would be all young cocky kids with little or no leadership skills fighting to be successful on their teams. No one would be able to realize a role (great teams have great role players) and games would basically play like it was the All-Star Rookie Vs. Sophs game. Games would be sloppy and most of the players we are drafting because of their great potentials OR great careers would not become the players we think they are. By the time our players reach mid-30s our league will be a complete debacle as we will have to argue and guess as to whether Grant Hill or Penny Hardaway definitely would have gotten injured or whether they can continue to play. We would also have to speculate that all the Durant's and D-Will's would definitely have had long, bountiful careers (which we cannot know). Note that its is much less of a stretch to just spot them a couple of years of improvement than it is to spot them entire Hall of Fame careers.

Believe me guys, we can make this work in a way that it will not drastically hurt any of the GMs...

God, SHUT THE **** UP! We've already told you who it would hurt and you don't ****ing listen. All you keep doing is bitch bitch bitching and it's more ****ing annoying than MEb and Epippen.

It would completely screw up the draft though. Take my team. This would instantly increase McGrady's value since instead of being chosen based on potential, I would get his incredible 23 year old season. Bill Cartwright's first two incredible seasons that previously were off limits now are included, that massively increases his value since if you're just looking at a three year period, his foot injuries in the mid to late 20s no longer matter. It completely ruins the integrity of the draft.

Also, Jerry Stackhouse is a ****ing terrible pick. There's absolute no reason to take an inefficient guy who shoots 15 times a game at this point, ESPECIALLY when you already have 3 other guys who take 15 shots a game and one of them is an epic chucker.

It's not a bad idea for another draft in like a year or so though.

Also, GKA has fallen off the face of the earth and we probably won't hear from him for another 5-6 days. So we have that to look forward to.

He left for a week with his pick just a few spots away and didn't leave a list of names? Ridiculous.