[Grades] Grades v. Pistons 11/15/2013
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
C
Drummond is a freaking beast. Once he corrects his free throws he's gonna be a nightmare to contain.
Too bad both my teams passed on him. At least Barnes shows lots of promises. Robinson was a favorite of mine in college but i did not want the Kings to draft him. Warriors drafted a very similar bust a few years back, Ike Diogu. Very similar game.
Too bad both my teams passed on him. At least Barnes shows lots of promises. Robinson was a favorite of mine in college but i did not want the Kings to draft him. Warriors drafted a very similar bust a few years back, Ike Diogu. Very similar game.
C
The Pistons won't be good. According to Synergy, Drummond/Monroe/Smoove on the floor together is the worst defensive front court in the entire NBA. Dead last.
The pieces don't fit. Smoove is too slow to guard 3s. Monroe is too slow to guard 4s. Drummond does his job.
We looked bad against them becuz we can't shoot a lick from perimeter.
The pieces don't fit. Smoove is too slow to guard 3s. Monroe is too slow to guard 4s. Drummond does his job.
We looked bad against them becuz we can't shoot a lick from perimeter.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not going to defend the pick on its merits, but size has nothing to do with it. Robinson is tall enough and athletic enough to be a good player in the league, and maybe someday, he may yet obtain that status. It has to do with skill level, which is where most of the criticism about Robinson came from. The word RAW, was used many times in discribing him. So it shouldn't have been a shock to anyone that he was going to take some time to develop. As far as Patterson being taller, its hardly a difference that I would brag about.
Patrick Patterson: 6'8" without shoes, 6'9.25" with shoes, 7'1.25" wingspan, and a 8'11" standing reach.
Thomas Robinson: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'8.75" with shoes, 7'3.25" wingspan, and a 8'10" standing reach
Carl Landry: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'8.50" with shoes, 6'11" wingspan
Kevin Love: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9.50" with shoes (you tell me), 6'11.25" wingspan
David Lee: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9" with shoes, 7'0" wingspan
Ersan LLyasova: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9" with shoes, 7'0" wingspan
Carlos Boozer: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9.50" with shoes (again, you tell me), 7'2.25" wingspan
Paul Milsap: 6'6.25" without shoes, 6'7.25" with shoes, 7'1.25" wingspan
Reggie Evans: 6'7.50" without shoes, 6'8.50" with shoes, 7'2.50" wingspan
All these players are undersized by your description, but all are productive, and in some cases, very productive players. So it has nothing to do with their size, but with how skilled they are. I grant you that none have the length to be shotblockers, but that can't be the only criteria for judging a player. Reggie Evans has made a living by playing defense and rebounding.
Patrick Patterson: 6'8" without shoes, 6'9.25" with shoes, 7'1.25" wingspan, and a 8'11" standing reach.
Thomas Robinson: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'8.75" with shoes, 7'3.25" wingspan, and a 8'10" standing reach
Carl Landry: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'8.50" with shoes, 6'11" wingspan
Kevin Love: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9.50" with shoes (you tell me), 6'11.25" wingspan
David Lee: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9" with shoes, 7'0" wingspan
Ersan LLyasova: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9" with shoes, 7'0" wingspan
Carlos Boozer: 6'7.75" without shoes, 6'9.50" with shoes (again, you tell me), 7'2.25" wingspan
Paul Milsap: 6'6.25" without shoes, 6'7.25" with shoes, 7'1.25" wingspan
Reggie Evans: 6'7.50" without shoes, 6'8.50" with shoes, 7'2.50" wingspan
All these players are undersized by your description, but all are productive, and in some cases, very productive players. So it has nothing to do with their size, but with how skilled they are. I grant you that none have the length to be shotblockers, but that can't be the only criteria for judging a player. Reggie Evans has made a living by playing defense and rebounding.
My original post was the correct one. I only saw him play a few times, three if memory serves. That doesn't mean I didn't like him, it just means that most of the players I comment on I've seen play a dozen times or more. I just mis-spoke in my post in this thread. I mixed Lillard in with Barnes and Robinson. Sorry, but it doesn't change my original feelings about Lillard. To be honest I'm now sure of the context of where I might have said something about drafting him to trade him. If memory serves, I think I was saying that if we were to draft him, then a trade might be in the works, but not necessarily to trade Lillard, but maybe Fredette, or IT. To my mind at the time, we didn't have an urgent need for another PG, so if we were to draft one, namely Lillard, then maybe we were planing on trading one.
Look, if your trying to imply that I'm trying to take credit for something I didn't say, then fine, I can't remember what I had for breakfast yesterday. Not sure what the purpose is. I know you have some sort of issue with me, because all you've ever done in the past is attack me whenever you see an opportunity, which Dime Dropper unwittingly gave you. I'm not a perfect person, and I make mistakes. That's the nature of life. I've been wrong about a lot of players, and I've been right about a lot of players. As far as Lillard goes, I'm sure Uncia03 will vouch for me as to liking him, since he and I had conversations about him. Did I think Lillard would be as good as he turned out to be? No! Satisfied? I admit, I've made mistakes!!!!! Are you happy now?
Look, if your trying to imply that I'm trying to take credit for something I didn't say, then fine, I can't remember what I had for breakfast yesterday. Not sure what the purpose is. I know you have some sort of issue with me, because all you've ever done in the past is attack me whenever you see an opportunity, which Dime Dropper unwittingly gave you. I'm not a perfect person, and I make mistakes. That's the nature of life. I've been wrong about a lot of players, and I've been right about a lot of players. As far as Lillard goes, I'm sure Uncia03 will vouch for me as to liking him, since he and I had conversations about him. Did I think Lillard would be as good as he turned out to be? No! Satisfied? I admit, I've made mistakes!!!!! Are you happy now?
Its not just height. All of the undersized guys worth a damn, and no, none of the ones associated with the Kings are worth a damn, make up for lack of height with great strength. They are thick. TRob came in and from the first summer league game it my lord, he looks like a SF. Being short AND trimly built...doom.
And frankly I would not have cared if he wasn't light in the loafers. He was a flat out crap fit next to Cousins on skillset alone. As I said at the time. Repeatedly. Vociferously.
And frankly I would not have cared if he wasn't light in the loafers. He was a flat out crap fit next to Cousins on skillset alone. As I said at the time. Repeatedly. Vociferously.
You'll get no argument from me. Exactly why I said I could see a future for him as a SF if he could improve his handles and his jumpshot. He actually has pretty good form on his jumper. His problem is that he rushes everything, and plays like a bull out of control. I'd say my biggest disappointment was his inability to rebound like he did in college. Its the one skill that usually translates, and I don't think it has anything to do with his size, but more to do with his brain. Faried is a good inch and a half shorter than him and averages 9 boards a game. Robinson would worth having around if he could just play defense and rebound. Maybe someday, but for being drafted as high as he was, he's a giant disappointment.
I watched the game and that is why I had that response. Yes, Cousins had 3 blocks, but that is not the norm for him. He's got freakishly long arms, so when he's aggressive he can smack balls like tennis balls. But, it's not his M.O. as the majority of the time he picks up so many fouls that he doesn't commit to trying to block shots or defend the speedy perimeter opponents.
JT is not that guy either as he is more of a post-defender and gets too aggressive at times leading to cheap fouls (which he never commits in his mind).
What I'm talking about is a guy is volley ball spiker. A guy who opponents see and will think twice as about. We just haven't had that kind of guy in years and its simply not a winning combination to have that gaping hole. Shot blocking is essential in this league. It simply is. Post-defense is one thing, but once you get super talented behemoths in the low block, suddenly your chuck hayes is breaking his neck looking upwards as he tries to figure out who smashed on him.
JT is not that guy either as he is more of a post-defender and gets too aggressive at times leading to cheap fouls (which he never commits in his mind).
What I'm talking about is a guy is volley ball spiker. A guy who opponents see and will think twice as about. We just haven't had that kind of guy in years and its simply not a winning combination to have that gaping hole. Shot blocking is essential in this league. It simply is. Post-defense is one thing, but once you get super talented behemoths in the low block, suddenly your chuck hayes is breaking his neck looking upwards as he tries to figure out who smashed on him.
I find it really sad when the captain hindsight people come back and "I told you so! I was right the whole time!" You're one of the few people who actually have the stones to analyze rookies and make a prediction if they'll be successful in the NBA or not. If it were easy, we'd all be running NBA teams as a GM.
Obviously, if we could go back now, we'd take Drummond. But there's no telling if he'd be the same with the way we "developed" our players. Even if he were, what's to stop the Maloofs from selling him off to pocket the extra $1mil the same way we did Trob?
Speaking of Trob, he's having some success up with Portland. He finally has a team that's given him a role and starting to produce.
Obviously, if we could go back now, we'd take Drummond. But there's no telling if he'd be the same with the way we "developed" our players. Even if he were, what's to stop the Maloofs from selling him off to pocket the extra $1mil the same way we did Trob?
Speaking of Trob, he's having some success up with Portland. He finally has a team that's given him a role and starting to produce.
It's much more about 'girth', strength, and weight. For Robinson's height and length, he's a smaller guy than most of those you listed. Millsap, Boozer, Reggie Evens for examples, all have stronger thicker frames....even Patterson and Landry do as well. Makes a difference when fighting for positioning on both ends of the floor and rebounding.
Nobody bats 1000 in the draft or even comes close, but that one was bad and there were several others that have been listed that were also head scratchers
Nobody bats 1000 in the draft or even comes close, but that one was bad and there were several others that have been listed that were also head scratchers
As someone who's lurked and participated in every draft thread since my arrival here let me just say that Baja has a pretty damn good batting average, which is made all the more impressive by the sheer volume of prospects he breaks down. Go back and read some of those threads and you'll see a myriad of opinions that look flat out foolish these days, many of those opinions coming from former and current knowledgeable posters. If your an ass without any sort of perspective it would be easy to cherry pick and make anyone look foolish, especially with someone who has the guts and dedication to break down the majority of the draft.
Of course. I generally like using per 36 stats when comparing players (except for garbage players who come in during a blowout and put up some numbers because they'll often wind up with ridiculous per 36 statlines) because it allows for a fairly even plain of comparison (how would blank do as opposed to blank if they both played the same amount of time). It's certainly nowhere near a perfect unit of comparison but I like it better than just blindly comparing stats
You forgot to add that Cousins dove into the stands. Ouch!! 
That single act may have won him some votes. Remarkable change in his play. I can't imagine the Boogie of past doing that or being capable of doing that.
That single act may have won him some votes. Remarkable change in his play. I can't imagine the Boogie of past doing that or being capable of doing that.
