I agree. This Lillard at #6 hype is beyond annoying. Faried went to a school just as small but he had two things going for him: *Rebounding usually translates to the NBA and he was the greatest rebounder in NCAA history *Dominated big school programs The very few times Lillard played outside the Big Sky conference he struggled.
Yes, because unlike rebounding, three point shooting and drawing lots of fouls do not translate well to the NBA.
It's a whole different ball game with an NBA defense on you. Jerryd Bayless forte' at Arizona was drawing fouls (7.4 FTA/per) and shot nearly 41% from three in much, MUCH tougher conference. People talk about Drummond being a huge risk, and he is, but Lillard is just as big of a risk.
In four seasons at Stevens Point, Terry Porter averaged 13.5 points, 3.8 rebounds and 3.8 assists per game, and shot 58.9 percent from the floor. But I agree Lillard looks like a shoot first combo guard.
lol, one guy played for UNC the other for Weber State? What has Weber State ever done with Lillard leading them? Yeah, I thought so.... Barnes gets a bad rap b\c he was a HIGHLY heralded recruit coming out of HS, so people expected him to dominate in college and playing at UNC that just doesn't happen...He put up very good numbers, has outstanding athleticism and is what? 2 years? younger than your man crush, Lillard... Yeah, I don't even think it is a close call...and don't discount his mid range game that is a rare commodity in the NBA there days...He is going to be a good player...the question is whether he will be great and I like his chances\ceiling a hell of a lot more than Lillard's....Most scoring guards in college are unable to transition into effective PG in the NBA...and if Lillard is unable to do that, then congratulations you just added your THIRD undersized shooting guard.....
The scary thing is our scouts could very well rank him as the BPA. Scary to think you could be taking a Jeff Teague (ceiling) at #6. Stupid stupid STUPID.
Look if Lillard turns out ot be an all star PG then fine, but man history doesn't look good for undersized scroing guards trying to transition into NBA caliber PG...I mean his assist\to ratio is not very good, heck Marquis Teague as a freshman has a better assist\to ration than Lillard did as a junor, and he is what 2? 3? years younger? and someone pointed out that Weber State was a perimeter oriented team, lot of jump shots and that Lillard assist totals were inflated by that.... If they reach for Lillard at #6 and by doing that, let a MKG, Beal, Barnes or Drummond drop past them, then unles Lillard is an All Star or top 1/2 of the NBA PG they will have failed in the draft...
Do you? I don't mean that sarcastically either....I cannot believe that they would do that, but after last year's draft...the draft before that with Babbitt (50/40/90!!!), the man crushes by Barrett\Rice\Wheel and crew, dinner with the owner...it makes you nervous....
Lillard, because I like his confidence and demeanor. Nice measurements, underrated passer, solid scorer. BPA.
Out of the choices you have to take Barnes. Selecting Lillard at #6 would be idiotic. But that's not out of line with the Blazers brain trust unfortunately.
The thing about Barnes is people are getting caught up with what his press clippings were out of highschool. Not really what he did in College. Of course I am doing the same in regards to Beal and Rivers too. Bottom line is few of these guys have proven anything yet. Lillard on the other hand has at least wowed everyone in the camps. Now I know that doesn't mean shit either, but in my mind it is just another reason to go with the crap shoot theory.
Yeah that thought crossed my mind as well. But the difference is Webster only impressed the Blazers, while Lillard has impressed almost everyone. I have more faith in multiple opinions than just our brain trust. .
Wow, I leave for awhile and the Lillard love skyrocketed. I don't know, I think 6 is a lil high for him. I would much rather use the 11th pick on him.
Not true....... he was top of the lottery in all mocks back then I thought. He was going early regardless who had the pick.
No, Webster was never in the top of any 2005 mocks, thats why we traded down to 6 because there was zero chance anyone considering him as a top5 pick. The Blazers were only interested in a SG since we had Telfair at PG and Outlaw at SF. The team was debating between Gerald Green and Martell Webster at #3; Green ended up going #18. Would Webster have gone in that range if we hadn't drafted him?