ESPN article on draft prospects. Good read.

"A different example: Cole Aldrich in that same game. He had been playing with Collins for the past three years. He's a lottery pick. He should have been able to dominate Northern Iowa down low, Samhan-style. But it wasn't in him. Not his style. He finished with typically solid numbers (13 points, 10 rebounds, two blocks, 6-for-8 shooting) and never once made you say, 'This guy REFUSES to let Kansas die!'"

So do you want a draft a "complementary" player in the top 10?
 
"A different example: Cole Aldrich in that same game. He had been playing with Collins for the past three years. He's a lottery pick. He should have been able to dominate Northern Iowa down low, Samhan-style. But it wasn't in him. Not his style. He finished with typically solid numbers (13 points, 10 rebounds, two blocks, 6-for-8 shooting) and never once made you say, 'This guy REFUSES to let Kansas die!'"

So do you want a draft a "complementary" player in the top 10?

This is what im seeing. Sure he looks like he COULD be solid. Never above solid. I dont see what would separate Aldrich from other NBA centers.

Overall I didnt care for the article. A young player either has certain tools or he doesnt. Either has size or he doesnt. Unless a college player is an ex-felon or they have a long history filled with misconduct i wouldnt pay much attention to their attitude. Id certainly notice a good attitude.
 
Back
Top