Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.

[SuperSavvyNation]

LOL. Walter, I read your posts and I think of a conversation that my wife had with me:

"Just because you are usually the most intelligent person in the room doesn't mean you should prove it constantly at their expense. People resent you for that and sometimes you are a tough pill to swallow."

It took me awhile to truy understand that she was 100% correct, but I'm a better person because of that introspection.

Negativity, cynicism, and skepticism are not attractive attributes and contaminate our environment more than we realize.

Walter, I think that most of what you say has a lot of logic and reason behind it....but I still have to clinch my teeth to get through most of your posts.

Zbo

[BusBoyIsBack]

7th profile (most critical weakness list you can find)

Strengths: Runs extremely well, able to beat most forwards down the court … Is blessed with an NBA ready body and good strength … Defensively Horford is a very strong post defender able to use his body strength to disrupt opposing players from setting up … Solid shot blocker thanks to his timing and great anticipation skills … Attacks the basket with aggression and power … A surprising ball handler and passer for his size … This enables him to pass out of double teams with relative ease … Is physical in the low post and does a good job of drawling fouls from opposing defenders … Usually he is able to use his upper body strength and finish after contact … Really makes a big impact on the glass where he uses his body strength to box out … Has proven to be a very coachable player with a solid work ethic … Possesses a calm presence, doesn’t let his emotions get the best of him … Shows good court awareness, rarely does he try moves that are beyond his skill level … Has shown the ability to hit the 12-15 foot jumper from mid-range … Maintains good body control and balance absorbing contact well from opposing post defenders … Rarely bobbles or fails to catch passes thrown into the post thanks to his soft hands …

Weaknesses: Offensively, Horford lacks consistent shooting from mid-range and the perimeter … Defensively Horford tends to get into foul trouble at times due to his aggressiveness … Although his back to the basket skills are greatly improved, they are still in need of refinement … Post footwork can be choppy. By improving this, Horford will become a lot more effective post player … Has a tendency to defer to his teammates instead of establishing his presence in the game … Still hasn’t played with the consistency that you except with someone of his talent … Can drift at times during games. Will have one dominating game followed by several so-so performances …fails to get rebounds out of his position the way he should … Below average free throw shooting prevents him from taking full advantage of the foul shots he creates …

So if you made a laundry list of Horford's weaknesses it would be

1)Lacks consistent shooting from perimeter

2)Too aggressive defensively

3)Needs to refine his back to the basket skills

4)Needs work on his footwork in the post

5)Defers to his teammates a lot

6)Needs to play with more consistency

7)Should rebound more out of position

8)Below average Free throw shooter

Wow this site could point out 8 weaknesses!

So Horford is exposed as a fraud right?

Well let's examine those weaknesses and see if any of them hint at any physical limitations

1)Lack of consistent midrange and perimeter jump shot? No (Unless you have shown no signs of improving which is not the case)

2)Aggressiveness on defense? Nope

3)Raw back to the basket skills? Nope (Unless you have shown no signs of improving which is not the case)

4)Post footwork? Nope (unless you're talking about an immobile player which it lists as the complete opposite)

5)Deferring to your teammates Nope (Not when you admit you are willing to take on a bigger role if the team NEEDS you too which wasn't the case at Florida)

6)More overall consistency Nope (Unless you have a bad work ethic which is not the case)

7)Better positioning on rebounding Nope (Unless again you don't put in the work to improve)

8)Free Throw shooting Maybe (See: Ben Wallace, Shaq etc)

So the only weakness on a laundry list of weaknesses for Horford that is not definitely something that can always be improved with a greak work ethic is Free Throw shooting.

The reason I say that is because it's not like Shaq and Ben Wallace don't try to improve that area, they just don't have it. And usually if you are a poor FT shooter in college, you can be one in the league.

All the other weaknesses that Horford has are weaknesses that several players have turned into strengths with a great work ethic.

THAT is why I say the sky is the limit for this young fellow. The only real weaknesses that people can list are things that are vastly improved with enough work put into him.

No physical limitations whatsoever to stop Horford from being a great player in this league.

And THAT is why he was a great pick and is a significantly better PRO prospect than Shelden Williams.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Should I compare that to the profiles of Shelden Williams?

Offensively he is a bit robotic in his movements, not being the most fluid player in the world and often looking a bit mechanical in certain things he does. He often relies too much on his strength to score around the paint, not having too much finesse to his game. Most of his points come off layups, dunks, free throws and short jump-hook shots around the basket. It’s unlikely that he will be able to maintain the same scoring production at the NBA level where everyone is bigger, more athletic and often just as strong as he is. The lack of legit size and skill in NCAA is a concern when you try to project him to the NBA, as he is truly a man amongst boys. At times will try to force his way to the hoop using his brute strength, either traveling in the process or being called for an offensive foul.

His face-up game in general is extremely unpolished, being a center in a power forward’s body for the most part, maybe even a tweener. He has shown very little ability to shoot the ball outside of 15 feet, although this is just not his role at Duke so it’s hard to get a very accurate read on this. His ball-skills are just as raw. He dribbles with his head down, looking very stiff. You really don’t want him doing much ball-handling outside of 12 feet, but he has never really had to in his career.

Comparing the player Williams was as a junior to the one we see as a senior, there aren’t really that many noticeable differences. It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that he is fairly close to reaching his maximum potential as a player.

Playoff teams or teams on the cusp of making the playoffs won’t mind that that much, since Williams is a 6-9 warrior that is ready to come in and battle for them immediately, but GMs drafting in the mid-high lottery who are looking to swing for the fences for a homerun pick could decide to shy away in their never-ending search for a player to build a team around. That’s the probably the worst thing you could say about Williams, he’s a role player in every sense of the word.

Yep they sure are close lol

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

Why is this even remotely controversial? Name another top player you had more game film to go on.

---

So what you are saying is the average fan has tapes of all Duke games for the past four years prior to any draft and we go over it? Or are you saying the average fan purchases these films from all schools who have a lottery player and then we go over them. Or the average fan watches more Duke games than his/her favorite school.

Seriously Walter, the scouts have more film on Shelden; but I did not go and buy any. I did not tape every game Shelden was in. And if I had to choose between a Duke game and either a Georgia Tech or Ohio State game; I was not watching the Duke game. Truth is, with the exception of March madness if I could only get a Duke game, I probably played a round of golf or watched a football game instead.

Now maybe you are different and somehow you have managed to watch every game Shelden ever played at Duke. I commend you for this; not everyone is that much of a Duke fan or a Shelden fan. Me personally, I watch at least three times as many Tech and OSU games as I do any other team out there...

[Guest GHook4]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He was actually 1.5 BPG off, which is 300% of .5 BPG. So it's 300%, not 400%.

---

400% of 0.5 (0.5 x 4) is 2.0 BPG. I simply went with that figure but 300% WRONG is correct. Does that make you confident in Busboy's player evaluation skills? I mean SW was the most seen, easiest player to predict IMHO. If you're 300% off on him, how much further are you off on other players?

Quote:

---

I'm sure you're wrong somewhere else in there but I've done my part.

---

Yes, the part of [censored]. Ghook4, you're better than this. You realize a 300% vs 400% player evaluation miscalculation is aggregious either way and your willingness to point out the minor detail but not the major one indicates a personal bias and not a credible, reasonable position.

W

---

I'm just joking around with you Walter. I thought you could tell I wasn't serious, but I guess not.

I've got to give you credit, you're consistent. You were pro-Yi, anti-Horford before the draft and you still are. No one can call you a flip-flopper.

It may not be what you wanted, but Horford is a Hawk now and Yi is a Buck. Horford is a great NBA prospect, you'll learn to love him.

[SmooveTheFuture]

Quote:

---

This is in response to the thread related to who Horford most reminds people of and the individual who wanted to "feel better" about the Horford selection.

Tell me who these quotes are discussing:

KB

Quote:

---

I think he's going to be more productive than a lot of people think. Offensively, he could very well be similar to

Carlos Boozer

. Defensively, he could come close to being

Elton Brand

, though I think

Emeka Okafor

is a more likely comparison. (His) downside may be Brian Grant.

---

link

Traceman

Quote:

---

"I think (he) will actually be a better defending

Carlos Boozer

and that is pretty good if you ask me."

---

Busboyisback

Quote:

---

"(He) is

Carlos Boozer

with defense."

---

link

Sound familiar? Boozer, Brand, Okafor? Familiar? It's some of the same people Horford is compared with. But this isn't Horford. This was SW last year! But, of course, Horford isn't like Shelden Williams AT ALL (the nerve). Horford is only like the players LIKE Shelden Williams. Don't forget that negligable distinction!

Moreover, it's not like these pro-SW people were right about SW. Look at Roy in terms of comparision. Then look at these comparisons. Both were 100% off. Roy won R.O.Y. and SW looked more like Brian Grant NOW than these other guys.

Another example of poor player evaluation as it relates to SW?

Busboyisback

Quote:

---

"He will be a much better defender than Charles Oakley. (His) will average a shade under 2 BPG next year just watch."

---

Now, when you see somebody 400% off in terms of how many BPG a WELL KNOWN player like SW will get in the NBA as a rookie (0.5 BPG), should that instill confidence in their player evaluation skills, particularly regarding players that "aren't like Shelden Williams but are Like players LIKE Shelden Williams"?

Seriously, Busboyisback even contradicts himself about this very topic.

Quote:

---

It's no coincidence that Boozer, Brand, and Hill the three players from Duke who actually made it,...all have athleticism.

---

link

Wait, I thought Shelden Williams was "Carlos Boozer with defense"? You can't say on one hand he's better than Boozer ("with defense") and in the other the reason he's failed to be as good without contradicting yourself. And are you REALLY suggesting that the reason that Boozer "made it" in the NBA was "athleticism"? Boozer's advantage is "athleticism"?!? I mean. Come on!!! Wrong on how good SW would be. Wrong on why SW wasn't as good as you projected (Boozer's athleticism?). ALL wrong about Horford as a great NBA center prospect.

You cannot trust this kind of "repeat-after-me", self-contradictory, proven wrong, player evaluation that relies upon belated negligable distinctions. If you do, then you are the next Jay Bilas. Wait, not the next Jay Bilas. The guy LIKE the guy that is the next Jay Bilas but definitely NOT the next Jay Bilas...that would be wrong.

W

---

You are so right the people saying Shelden Williams was going to be great are the same people saying Al Horford is going to be awesome. The two are pretty much the same exact players and people here cant admit a little bit of athelism woohoo big deal.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

You are so right the people saying Shelden Williams was going to be great are the same people saying Al Horford is going to be awesome.

The two are pretty much the same exact players and people here cant admit a little bit of athelism woohoo big deal.

---

This is so wrong. The maddest I have been since BK became GM was after the Shelden pick. I am happy as hell with this draft. You're generalization applies to about three or four posters.

Even Diesel has a opposite view. He wanted Shelden and did not want Holford. When you make post like this, it appears like you do not read anything out here. You just post a response blindly as long as it agrees with your opinion of the draft...

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

You are so right the people saying Shelden Williams was going to be great are the same people saying Al Horford is going to be awesome. The two are pretty much the same exact players and people here cant admit a little bit of athelism woohoo big deal.

---

You've got to be kidding me.

Read the 7 profiles I listed for Horford

Look at the highlighted weaknesses. All areas that can be improved.

Compare that with the profile of Shelden Williams, they flat out call him nothing but a ROLE PLAYER

THAT is what was overlooked for Shelden.

In the case of Horford, there is nothing to overlook because the guy doesn't have any physical limitations in his game

[bumpyphish1]

Well Walter, at least you have decent taste in music. Stop Making Sense, baby.

[CBAreject]

There is a difference between projection and ceiling. I also believe Horford's ceiling to be something like Boozer. That is a long shot, though, and it would require a tremendous amount of work and a change of personality almost, as he's never had a scorer's mentality that I've seen.

I expect Horford to put up Horace Grant numbers (given that he starts), but his ceiling is a good bit higher. If we expect him to be Boozer, though, we're very likely to be disappointed.

I also expected Shelden Williams to be a 12/10 PF given starter's minutes, and I stick to that even now. But I'm not sure he'll ever get starter's minutes, esp. not here.

Horford is not the same player as Shelden Williams, though. Shelden is a rigid, squatty PF whose only exceptional attribute is strength. Horford has unusual explosiveness for a player his size (which is appropriate for the PF). He is much more agile, and he has far better footwork in the post. For that reason, his ceiling is higher.

Those who compared Shelden to Oakley were probably thinking of Oakley on the downside of his career. I agree with that projection (10/10 guy who gives some hard fouls). They don't remember the Oakley who played with the Bulls who put up eye-popping stats.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Negativity, cynicism, and skepticism are not attractive attributes and contaminate our environment more than we realize.

---

Boy, do I wish this team had given me much of a reason the last 10 years to not be "negative, cynical, and skeptical". Wehn it comes to the Hawks these attributes may not be attractive, but hey d@mn sure apply accurately.

Quote:

---

Walter, I think that most of what you say has a lot of logic and reason behind it....but I still have to clinch my teeth to get through most of your posts.

Zbo

---

Fair enough.

W

[Traceman]

Re: Andrew Bogut

Quote:

---

IMO neither okafor or Brand (good numbers always on a bad team, hmm, like SAR.) are or will be better than Bogut. Also, they, Howard, and Garnett aren't in this draft. We're talking about Chris [censored] Paul! Again, Bogut's floor is Brad Miller. Paul's is Brevin Knight with MUCH worse defense and a better shot.

---

Re: Guillermo Diaz

Quote:

---

This guy was smart to stay in. He'll be a top tier pick next year. It's phenomenal to watch him play. He's wade-like. He'll be picked higher than Brewer IMHO. Top 8, no less.

W

---

Re: Adam Morrison

Quote:

---

Morrison is WAY better than Marvin Williams

---

Quote:

---

While I Think Morrison Will Be Special

---

Re: Saer Sene

Quote:

---

I have little doubt that sene will be better than SW in 3 years.

---

Quote:

---

One cannott learn what sene's got, the raw ability to dominate a game with blocked shots.

---

Re: Chris Paul

Quote:

---

didn't judge paul on his height alone. I judged him on the fact he can't hold anyone below their averages overall or consistently. If you can't do that in college. If you are a defensive liability in college, you will be a HUGE one in the pros. An even bigger one when you factor in the height.

ON the other side of the ball, paul struggles against taller players. He shoots considerably less well against them, scores less than his already meager average, etc. You don't have to like it, but facts are facts. Not only do the statistics say this. So too do the scouting reports and my own eyes having watched at least 10 Wake games this year. Maybe I've seen too much of paul, but the guy's height, his defense, and his diminished against taller Pgs relative to already meager scoring scare the [censored] out of me.

Two years from now, the team that drafts him will like alot about him, but will wonder why they are giving up 105 PPG. Just like too many people somehow don't look first at paul when considering why Wake's defense was some of the worst they've seen, fans of paul's NBA team will ask themselves, "Gee, what is it about our team that makes our defense so poor?" If you can't pressure the ball and lock-down the primary ball-handler, you almost stand no chance. paul can't contest a shot much less do that. All he can do is play the passing lanes, but in the NBA it's more isolation and two man games. paul's one defensive skill is going to get lost as soon as people realize "I can take him any time I want, any way I want". "Post up, dribble drive, lob pass into me, shoot over him". It's simply gonna be too easy for opposing Pgs, yet too hard for the common fan to grasp, one infatuated with the occassional steal and 110-102 loses.

W

---

[kelston827]

But, but Wally's never been wrong about anything regarding anything.....Mine eyes, they deceive me

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Busboyisback

Quote:

---

"(He) is

Carlos Boozer

with defense."

---

Busboyisback

Quote:

---

"He will be a much better defender than Charles Oakley. (His) will average a shade under 2 BPG next year just watch."

---

Quote:

---

It's no coincidence that Boozer, Brand, and Hill the three players from Duke who actually made it,...all have athleticism.

---

---

Yes, I understand that you won't make the same aggregious mistake as you did last year in evaluating players. Apparently it was a hard, painful lesson to learn that SW was not going to be "Boozer with defense" or a "much better defender than Charles Oakley". Yes, the "I shouldn't have counted so much upon this particular stat or that particular stat" is a hard lesson to learn. In SW's case you overlooked his lack of athleticism and length for even the NBA Pf position, not just center position.

However, your desire to correct your mistake in overestimating or not weighing critically enough SW's relative athleticism and length for the NBA Pf position does not seem to have corrected the issue that I believe is at the root of your player evaluation problems. In short, you continue to overlook significant issues about Horford. Perhaps you have swing too far in the opposite direction, choosing to insist that his decent NBA athleticism will carry him and that college production does not matter at all.

While you insist that Horford is more athletic than SW (might as well say a rock) and taller (1") and longer (though not with near the wingspan), you forget that:

1) SW was a considerable reach at 5, this year's draft is SIGNIFICANTLY stronger and deeper, and Horford is the 3rd overall pick. If SW was a bad value at 5 last year, although Horford is better, he isn't a good value at 3 this year.

2) While Horford is more athletic, slightly taller, and longer, we are drafting Horford to PRIMARILY play the CENTER position. In short, Horford is just as short/small relative to the center position as SW is unathletic relative to the Pf position

I also believe you are overlooking issues that relate to the team and this draft pick:

1) We needed a superstar...almost undoubtedly didn't get that potential in Horford.

2) JS further demonstrated that we should consider him at the 4, meaning we cannot afford to play an undersized center since JS is also undersized and we cannot afford to draft a player for the 4 since JS is there as the starter and SW as the BU UNLESS that player could compliment him well or even with some reasonable likelihood be better or than JS (In part this is why I liked Yi. He has the potential to be better than JS and with his skill set being like that of a 3 or 4 and his size being like that of a 4, he and JS could interchangably play the forward positions and do so ideally.).

Frankly, the LAST player we needed was a Pf playing as our undersized C next to JS. We conceed the post having both player play up the vast majority of the time despite the majority of our resources being devoted to it.

I'm not going to post about it anymore. I just think it's important that many in the forum realize how similar the comparisons you and others made about SW are to Horford. We all know how wrong they were. Nobody can calim that Horford and SW aren't alike significantly given even Horford's supporters compare him to the same players they compared SW too. If A is like B and C is like B, A is like C.

I simply think you are wrong and for the same undermining reason you were wrong last year. Not undervaluing athleticism. No, simply a willingness to cling to one aspect (In Horford's case decent NBA athleticism) and overlook many other important factors (Horford is just as short/small relative to the center position as SW is unathletic relative to the Pf position, our need for a Pf is almost nil given the play of JS and the investment in SW at least as a BU Pf, our need for a big center if JS is to be our Pf, need for superstar potential etc.). Nothing has changed here. You are still overlooking things. You've just traded overlooking athleticism for a position for overlooking height/length/size for a position among other things. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see it and I believe within 3 years you'll be disappointed in your position today.

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Re: Andrew Bogut

Quote:

---

IMO neither okafor or Brand (good numbers always on a bad team, hmm, like SAR.) are or will be better than Bogut. Also, they, Howard, and Garnett aren't in this draft. We're talking about Chris [censored] Paul! Again, Bogut's floor is Brad Miller. Paul's is Brevin Knight with MUCH worse defense and a better shot.

---

---

...but I stated before the draft that I would still want him (and Deron) over MW.

I believe while Bogut is near his "floor" he's not unlike Brad Miller currently. I'd LOVE to have Bogut on this team.

Quote:

---

Re: Guillermo Diaz

This guy was smart to stay in. He'll be a top tier pick next year. It's phenomenal to watch him play. He's wade-like. He'll be picked higher than Brewer IMHO. Top 8, no less.

---

Brewer was the guy from Arkansas KB was hyping. Not the guy from Florida. So that wasn't a reach to say. I thought Diaz would return for a year and learn the Pg position since he hadn't been playing ball that long (he was a volleyballer). Didn't happen.

Quote:

---

Re: Adam Morrison

Morrison is WAY better than Marvin Williams

While I Think Morrison Will Be Special

---

I also later qualified the "special" part after watching more film and evaluating his combine numbers. Once I took ALL THINGS into consideration, "special" didn't apply. I did not even put Morrison on my draft board for the Hawks. It was Bargnani, Aldridge, Roy, Foye,...Sene (in a trade down at 10), SW at 5

Quote:

---

Re: Saer Sene

Quote:

---

I have little doubt that sene will be better than SW in 3 years.

---

[/indent]

I may not be as certain, but it would appear my lack of faith in SW was well placed and last I looked it has not been 3 years.

Quote:

---

Chris Paul...Two years from now,

the team that drafts him will like alot about him

, but will wonder why they are giving up 105 PPG.

---

[/indent]

You're right. I

underestimated

how poor of a defender Paul would be in the NBA. LOL! With him on the court opponents average 110 PPG, not 105.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06NOK1D.HTM

Opponents score 7 more PPG with Paul defending than not. What I didn't believe would occur was that he would aid his team on offense by a whopping 8.7 PPG. That makes up for his defensive liabilities and is precisely why I STILL prefered him over MW despite my proven accurate concerns about his ability to defend in the NBA.

Frankly, this seems like a perfectly accurate description of Paul.

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

You look foolish.

Maybe it was the "ass" comment, the "creamed in pants" or the COUNTLESS other times you've made juvenile comments directed SOLELY at me. I haven't responded to one of your posts (that doesn't include me) IN AGES. I still read yours and respect all posters enough to not block them out and read their thoughts on basketball. I give no more or less than what you serve up because it is ALWAYS you who wants to start something with some personal attack. Look back at the posts. YOU ALWAYS start it. ALWAYS. 100% of the time. ALWAYS.

Well today I'm ending it. You even chose to use your dead mother (which I could have no knowledge of) as some additional weapon against me. You didn't have to bring her up again if it was so upsetting that I brought her up in a joke, but you did so in a desperate attempt to embarass me. Even your own mother's death you would use against me! Kelstone, this is far out, strange behavior.

For the life of me I cannot trace back a moment when I truly offended you. At this point, after countless personal attacks by you, I could not care less except to say, get help. You need a valium, an attitude adjustment, a good lay, a puppy, or all of the above. However, I won't bother with you anymore. Waste.

---

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Kelston, You look foolish.

Maybe it was the "ass" comment, the "creamed in pants" or the COUNTLESS other times you've made juvenile comments directed SOLELY at me. I haven't responded to one of your posts (that doesn't include me) IN AGES. I still read yours and respect all posters enough to not block them out and read their thoughts on basketball. I give no more or less than what you serve up because it is ALWAYS you who wants to start something with some personal attack. Look back at the posts. YOU ALWAYS start it. ALWAYS. 100% of the time. ALWAYS.

Well today I'm ending it. You even chose to use your dead mother (which I could have no knowledge of) as some additional weapon against me. You didn't have to bring her up again if it was so upsetting that I brought her up in a joke, but you did so in a desperate attempt to embarass me. Even your own mother's death you would use against me! Kelstone, this is far out, strange behavior.

For the life of me I cannot trace back a moment when I truly offended you. At this point, after countless personal attacks by you, I could not care less except to say, get help. You need a valium, an attitude adjustment, a good lay, a puppy, or all of the above. However, I won't bother with you anymore. Waste.

---

W

[Guest Walter]

GSUteke, get a new gig hack. Your ignorant forum haterade is as tired as a Brittney Spears' fall from grace and comeback. Oops - you - did it again, you hated on somebody. Sir Black Knight of HS picking cat fights again. All for the forum paparazzi. You're a worn out forum diva, GSUteke.

Maybe you can try justifying that SW "pick" over Roy of yours again? Why don't you ever speak about it I wonder?

W

[Buzzard]

I wonder what TENDEX had these guys at. By any chance do you remember Walter?

Quote:

---

Re: Andrew Bogut

Quote:

---

IMO neither okafor or Brand (good numbers always on a bad team, hmm, like SAR.) are or will be better than Bogut. Also, they, Howard, and Garnett aren't in this draft. We're talking about Chris [censored] Paul! Again, Bogut's floor is Brad Miller. Paul's is Brevin Knight with MUCH worse defense and a better shot.

---

Re: Guillermo Diaz

Quote:

---

This guy was smart to stay in. He'll be a top tier pick next year. It's phenomenal to watch him play. He's wade-like. He'll be picked higher than Brewer IMHO. Top 8, no less.

W

---

Re: Adam Morrison

Quote:

---

Morrison is WAY better than Marvin Williams

---

Quote:

---

While I Think Morrison Will Be Special

---

Re: Saer Sene

Quote:

---

I have little doubt that sene will be better than SW in 3 years.

---

Quote:

---

One cannott learn what sene's got, the raw ability to dominate a game with blocked shots.

---

Re: Chris Paul

Quote:

---

didn't judge paul on his height alone. I judged him on the fact he can't hold anyone below their averages overall or consistently. If you can't do that in college. If you are a defensive liability in college, you will be a HUGE one in the pros. An even bigger one when you factor in the height.

ON the other side of the ball, paul struggles against taller players. He shoots considerably less well against them, scores less than his already meager average, etc. You don't have to like it, but facts are facts. Not only do the statistics say this. So too do the scouting reports and my own eyes having watched at least 10 Wake games this year. Maybe I've seen too much of paul, but the guy's height, his defense, and his diminished against taller Pgs relative to already meager scoring scare the [censored] out of me.

Two years from now, the team that drafts him will like alot about him, but will wonder why they are giving up 105 PPG. Just like too many people somehow don't look first at paul when considering why Wake's defense was some of the worst they've seen, fans of paul's NBA team will ask themselves, "Gee, what is it about our team that makes our defense so poor?" If you can't pressure the ball and lock-down the primary ball-handler, you almost stand no chance. paul can't contest a shot much less do that. All he can do is play the passing lanes, but in the NBA it's more isolation and two man games. paul's one defensive skill is going to get lost as soon as people realize "I can take him any time I want, any way I want". "Post up, dribble drive, lob pass into me, shoot over him". It's simply gonna be too easy for opposing Pgs, yet too hard for the common fan to grasp, one infatuated with the occassional steal and 110-102 loses.

W

---

---

[Traceman]

Brand. I thought Bogut might score more than Okafor but he's not even doing that and comparing them defensively is a joke. By the way, I'm not as sold on PER as you apparently are but Zaza's PER was higher than Bogut's last year.

I realize the KB was talking about Ronnie Brewer but what does that matter? Brewer was a lottery pick and Diaz is on a milk carton.

As for Morrison, he couldn't have been further away from being "special." According to your beloved PER, he was arguably the WORST player in the league who played at least 30 mpg.

Shelden is so far ahead of Sene that it is not even worth discussing.

As for Paul, I don't think ANY of his supporters expected him to be a defensive stopper but rather they expected that he would benefit his team offensively ala Steve Nash - which is EXACTLY what happened.

Note - As for the quote where I said that I thought Shelden would be a better defending Carlos Boozer, I meant the Carlos Boozer that was a career 15/9 guy - I certainly didn't think Boozer weas going to blow up like he did this season! : ) Heck, Boozer was an MVP candidate this year and I certainly never anticipated that!

You also took my quote out of context. The full text of my post is below. Note that like you, ROY was my first preference and a healthy Aldridge was my second choice.

Quote:

---

Shelden Compares VERY Favorably With Brand

in college. He is not the offensive talent that Brand is (although he actually scored more than Brand in college), but he is at least Brand's equal as a rebounder and shotblocker (I think a little better actually) and we desperately need both of those skills. I think Shelden will actually be a better defending Carlos Boozer and that is pretty good if you ask me. I still prefer Roy or a HEALTHY Aldridge (his medical concerns scare the hell out of me) but other than that, I'd just as soon take Shelden as anyone else for this team.

---

So there! I can make excuses too! : )