i love teague, but out of those i think i like curry the most for the blazers. im a big fan of all those players
nbadraft.net has him at 12 right now, i could see the blazers being able to still get him unless he goes in top 10(which i believe he will)
No, Fez said it first, and I agree, for two reasons. First, neither of our two current Centers has ever played all 82 games in a season, so insurance isn't a bad thing. Second is the distribution of our talent. I think what we do at PF will determine what else we need. I love Aldridge. I also really like Frye. I think Outlaw also plays much better at PF than SF. Randolph has done a decent job of scoring when put in the game. Then we have LaFrentz and Ruffin. LaFrentz and Ruffin are gone, that still leaves four players at PF. If we don't trade Outlaw, I suppose we can count him at SF to balance the depth. That would give us three SFs as well with Batum and Webster. We also have Freeland waiting overseas to join us at one of the Forward positions. We have Blake, Rodriguez and Bayless at PG, with Koponen waiting overseas. Plenty of depth there. That leaves us with two empty roster spots if we just let LaFrentz and Ruffin go and do nothing else, and two positions with less than three players, SG and C. That's my thinking on wanting to get players at those two positions.
Matt Bouldin is somebody we should seriously look at if he decides to enter the draft, which I doubt he'll do. Guy is a stud, just a player.
I like Curry if were looking for a spot up shooter to come off the bench and hit jumpers. Fortunately, those guys are a dime a dozen in the league. To me, he's an undersized Juan Dixon.
I guess we will have to see, I have not got much information yet that he has had an intention to leave.
wha? I'm big on Batum's potential and all, but how is SF more set then the 2, 4, or 5 spots? Besides that, I'm always a proponent of favoring of acquiring the best talent available over the guy who best fills a perceived current team need. STOMP
I am too. Thats if were drafting in the lottery. Were looking a pick in the 20's, at that point you draft for need.
right because so many real NBA talents are drafted in the 20's [/sarcasm] I'm pretty much always for drafting talent over need... in addition, Portland arguably has no pressing needs. STOMP
The Blazers should either trade up to get a PG/PF(Teague/Blair) or trade out and get more 2nd round picks. As someone said this team doesn't have any pressing needs. After the playoffs we can re-evaluate and go on from there. STOMP when drafting talent over need there is no possible way to tell how a prospect is going to work out. Sometimes drafting talent over need comes back to bite you. Same could be said for passing on talent. Either way it's anybody's guess. If I had to choose what position it would be either PG or SG. The only PG I'd rank higher than Bayless however would be Teague, and it is pretty unlikely we can trade up high enough to get him. I'm also not convinced that Rudy is going to be anything special. I would much rather have a player that plays hardnosed defense with a willingness to scrap for loose balls and rebounds. Someone like Terrence Williams or Tyreke Evans. I know Martell is coming back but I'd rather he either A)backs up Batum at SF next year or B)is the starter.
Could you give me an example of what you're referring to where a team drafted talent over need and was burned? I'm not saying that only size, skills, and what a guy has done on the court matters as bad character traits could disqualify a guy from consideration. I'm of the opinion that some people (ex: KP) can effectively project who's going to be a talent in the league while others take guesses and cross their fingers (ex: John Nash). Projecting prospects certainly isn't a hard science, but I don't think it's just a roll of the dice either. Geez in years I've been familiar with the college prospects (not this one... new girlfriend), I've had a pretty high success rate at projecting the nuggets who'll pan out. Maybe I'm kidding myself, but I don't think it's just been luck STOMP
Atlanta Hawks taking Marvin Williams over Paul and Deron, because they thought Marvin had the most upside in the draft, even though everyone knew Atlanta needed a PG. And it's super early to say on it, but I would throw Toronto drafting Bargs #1, when Roy would have beena much better choice for them, and for their roster.
Roy did have some injury concerns coming out with his knee. He was a late bloomer and like Bargnani, talent evaluators varied a great deal on their opinions of him. Brandon really did bloom his senior year showing a great all around game and clutch play. Then at the combine he measured out to legit 2 guard size with a 40"+ vert... I had him at #2 behind Aldridge. I'm not sure if Bargnani was thought to be the more talented player or the safer pick. Quality size is a need you know... As a Wake fan, I watched a lot of those ACC games. Chris Paul was about as ultra-quick, savvy and all-around skilled as you could hope a PG prospect to be. He dominated in his first two years in the ACC much more-so then Marvin frosh and you'd think at 19 dude might have some upside left. Wouldn't most people rank PG at least equal in importance to either forward spot? I'm not sure what upside they saw in Marvin as a slender tall athlete without a solid J seems like a project to me and I view SF as the easiest position to fill. Just a dumb decision. sorry but neither of these examples really work for me STOMP
My two favorites who I think will be available are Maynor and Evan Turner. I am not sure why Turner isn't getting more attention but I really like what I have seen from him. However, I tend to think we need to draft Europeans or high upside projects at this point. We don't really need anyone who is going to fight for minutes right away. A project Center could be sent to the D league or be the 15th man for a couple of years then graduate to the backup spot once Joel's contract is up.
Yes, people would rank PG as a higher need, which is why he fits what you had asked, for a team that went for perceived upside and talent over a need(PG) and got burned. How does Marvin Williams not fit that criteria? And Brandon was expected to be the most NBA ready player in his class, but possibly without a super high upside. Meanwhile Bargnani was hyped as another Dirk, at least by some, and that was seemingly what Toronto was banking on, the higher perceived upside, even though they had a player at his more natural PF position. I don't really see how neither of these fit what you were talking about. They both are exactly that. A team passing on a position of need because of the upside of another player.
as I stated before, Atlanta's decision as a stupid one from all fronts. They went with the player who had shown less upside who ALSO played the less important position. Stupid is as stupid does and I don't really think there is much to learn from this do you recall who Brandon was compared to? Manu Ginobili and Jason Kidd. If you want to talk upside, those guys don't suck. And as I previously mentioned teams were reportedly shying on Roy because of his previous knee injury that caused him to miss much of his Junior year. Injury concerns fall outside of both upside and talent IMO... I suspect we're at least somewhat arguing semantics STOMP
