Chad Ford says Hickson one of the draft's high risers...could go in the teens. Phoenix very impressed. They're at #15. Hibbert also rising. Also, among those dropping, says Jonathan Givony of Draft Express: Jordan (although he wowed Larry Brown with his athleticism), McGee (everyone agrees), and CDR. Rush won't make it til #21. Arthur may have a guarantee. Heating up.
I originally said that I wouldn't mind taking Speights at 10 since post-scoring is something we need, and if he's the guy you want, then go for it. This was before I knew about Hickson, and saw that he was a much better post-scorer that Speights is (albeit without an as good a jumper). To this end, I say my feelings still stand. Still crossing my fingers for a Westbrook Hickson Hudson draft
How high is Rush rising? He's been projected at the Raps' 17th pick for a while now and it'd suck if he ends up rising past that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 12:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I originally said that I wouldn't mind taking Speights at 10 since post-scoring is something we need, and if he's the guy you want, then go for it. This was before I knew about Hickson, and saw that he was a much better post-scorer that Speights is (albeit without an as good a jumper). To this end, I say my feelings still stand. Still crossing my fingers for a Westbrook Hickson Hudson draft</div> That wouldn't be so bad to me. My feelings are that we could possibly get someone better than Westbrook at 10, but I wouldn't be disappointed at all to pick him up. Hickson seems like a great pickup at 21, and I'd feel great even if we couldn't get him, and picked up someone like CDR instead. As for Hudson, I don't know shit about him, but I'd like it better if we used that pick to stash a Euro. Preferibly a wing, but okay with a big.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I originally said that I wouldn't mind taking Speights at 10 since post-scoring is something we need, and if he's the guy you want, then go for it. This was before I knew about Hickson, and saw that he was a much better post-scorer that Speights is (albeit without an as good a jumper). To this end, I say my feelings still stand. Still crossing my fingers for a Westbrook Hickson Hudson draft</div> Why Westbrook? I don't really know too much about the guy but I saw a few UCLA games and I didn't really think he was a standout player, definately not lottery pick material. I don't get why he's so highly praised.
Westbrook would be so diesel for us. Great defender, scorer, loves to play transition basketball, and a freak athlete. I really don't think he'll last to ten, unfortunately. I really like bringing in Hudson. By the fact that he's a great scoring guard I think he already has the potential to give Marcus a run for his money. If he can learn the offense and not turn the ball over, he'll shoot past him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Westbrook would be so diesel for us. Great defender, scorer, loves to play transition basketball, and a freak athlete. I really don't think he'll last to ten, unfortunately.</div> The defense would be great, especially for a 1-2 who could backup or play alongside Devin OR Carter.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jun 16 2008, 07:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Interesting. So are you implying that perhaps the Nets aren't giving Galanari the guarentee?</div> I personally think the idea of a guarantee is idiotic.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Jun 16 2008, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jun 16 2008, 07:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Interesting. So are you implying that perhaps the Nets aren't giving Galanari the guarentee?</div> I personally think the idea of a guarantee is idiotic. </div> It's true; all it does is makes Thronikipedia's job that much more difficult, and increases the chances that we f*** this up on the 26th. I'd rather have as many options as possible.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Jun 16 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I originally said that I wouldn't mind taking Speights at 10 since post-scoring is something we need, and if he's the guy you want, then go for it. This was before I knew about Hickson, and saw that he was a much better post-scorer that Speights is (albeit without an as good a jumper). To this end, I say my feelings still stand. Still crossing my fingers for a Westbrook Hickson Hudson draft</div> Why Westbrook? I don't really know too much about the guy but I saw a few UCLA games and I didn't really think he was a standout player, definately not lottery pick material. I don't get why he's so highly praised. </div> I like Westbrook because I feel the team needs a combo guard off the bench that plays great defense. Would prefer to get him at #21, but he won't last that long and I don't see any bigs available at #10 that are head and shoulders above the ones available at #21. When you have a PG like Harris and a SG that can handle the ball like VC you don't need a stereotypical PG as a back-up because there aren't enough minutes. A player like Westbrook can come in and get some instant minutes. The guy plays great D and hustles his ass off. He's also off the charts athletically. If we had Westbrook and Rush on our bench last year behind RJ, VC and Harris we would've been solid in 1 through 3 positions. I'm still hoping to unload Marcus and the #40 pick for another 1st rounder. Wonder if Phoenix would want Marcus? Nash is getting a little long in the tooth.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jun 16 2008, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Jun 16 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I originally said that I wouldn't mind taking Speights at 10 since post-scoring is something we need, and if he's the guy you want, then go for it. This was before I knew about Hickson, and saw that he was a much better post-scorer that Speights is (albeit without an as good a jumper). To this end, I say my feelings still stand. Still crossing my fingers for a Westbrook Hickson Hudson draft</div> Why Westbrook? I don't really know too much about the guy but I saw a few UCLA games and I didn't really think he was a standout player, definately not lottery pick material. I don't get why he's so highly praised. </div> I like Westbrook because I feel the team needs a combo guard off the bench that plays great defense. Would prefer to get him at #21, but he won't last that long and I don't see any bigs available at #10 that are head and shoulders above the ones available at #21. When you have a PG like Harris and a SG that can handle the ball like VC you don't need a stereotypical PG as a back-up because there aren't enough minutes. A player like Westbrook can come in and get some instant minutes. The guy plays great D and hustles his ass off. He's also off the charts athletically. If we had Westbrook and Rush on our bench last year behind RJ, VC and Harris we would've been solid in 1 through 3 positions. I'm still hoping to unload Marcus and the #40 pick for another 1st rounder. Wonder if Phoenix would want Marcus? Nash is getting a little long in the tooth.</div> If they want a backup point gaurd they should just take D.J. Augustin.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If they want a backup point gaurd they should just take D.J. Augustin.</div> The point of my entire comment was that they don't need a traditional back-up point. They need a combo with great D and energy. A 5'11" pure pg would be a waste on this team with Harris and Carter. A combo is always what we needed behind Kidd too.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Jun 16 2008, 11:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Jun 16 2008, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jun 16 2008, 07:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Interesting. So are you implying that perhaps the Nets aren't giving Galanari the guarentee?</div> I personally think the idea of a guarantee is idiotic. </div> It's true; all it does is makes Thronikipedia's job that much more difficult, and increases the chances that we f*** this up on the 26th. I'd rather have as many options as possible. </div> Well, the team isn't bound to it (such as if someone unexpected falls); the player isn't bound to sign and not go back to Europe even if the team DOES select him; and any other team could still draft him anyway. If the Nets DO offer a guarrantee, and then select him with #21, then you just have a pissed-off player. I just don't see the point. It's not as if, by agreeing not to work out for other teams, that the player (Gallinari in this case) will remain an "unknown" and that no other team will ever have seen him play. It is just stupid. I can understand that players want to have some sense as to when they might be drafted. If I was the Nets, the farthest I would go would be to say that we like you, and that you are one of about five players we'd consider at #10 depending on what shakes out, but we'd almost certainly take you at #21 if you last that long. If that isn't good enough for Gallinari, let him pull out. I mean, there is essentially no incentive for him to pull out, if we are to believe his "threat" that he will just go back to Europe if he isn't happy. If that's the case, why should he care in advance who selects him or when? Just wait to see what happens and then decide what to do. The answer is obviously that he DOES want to play in the NBA, and just doesn't want to take a financial hit to do so.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jun 16 2008, 12:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If they want a backup point gaurd they should just take D.J. Augustin.</div> The point of my entire comment was that they don't need a traditional back-up point. They need a combo with great D and energy. A 5'11" pure pg would be a waste on this team with Harris and Carter. A combo is always what we needed behind Kidd too. </div> If you're talking about Phoenix (which I thought you were), then dumping Marcus Williams, a point gaurd with no D is not a good idea for them. If you're talking about the Nets, they should definetly take Westbrook over Augustin. I would be very happy if they took Westbrook at 10.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jun 16 2008, 12:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If they want a backup point gaurd they should just take D.J. Augustin.</div> The point of my entire comment was that they don't need a traditional back-up point. They need a combo with great D and energy. A 5'11" pure pg would be a waste on this team with Harris and Carter. A combo is always what we needed behind Kidd too. </div> If you're talking about Phoenix (which I thought you were), then dumping Marcus Williams, a point gaurd with no D is not a good idea for them. If you're talking about the Nets, they should definetly take Westbrook over Augustin. I would be very happy if they took Westbrook at 10. </div> Didn't realize you meant Phoenix taking Augustine. He won't last until #15. Too many teams needing points ahead of them. Knicks, Clips, Bobcats, Pacers, Kings, Blazers, and Warriors all could take him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jun 16 2008, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jun 16 2008, 12:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Jun 16 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If they want a backup point gaurd they should just take D.J. Augustin.</div> The point of my entire comment was that they don't need a traditional back-up point. They need a combo with great D and energy. A 5'11" pure pg would be a waste on this team with Harris and Carter. A combo is always what we needed behind Kidd too. </div> If you're talking about Phoenix (which I thought you were), then dumping Marcus Williams, a point gaurd with no D is not a good idea for them. If you're talking about the Nets, they should definetly take Westbrook over Augustin. I would be very happy if they took Westbrook at 10. </div> Didn't realize you meant Phoenix taking Augustine. He won't last until #15. Too many teams needing points ahead of them. Knicks, Clips, Bobcats, Pacers, Kings, Blazers, and Warriors all could take him. </div> He won't get past Pacers, that's for sure.
