We didn't draft Mike Conley because he couldn't shoot the ball?

[exodus]

I know Horford's numbers are pedestrian. My point is that Conley's going to have to do a lot better than he has been to make me think we truly made a mistake.

If they turn out as roughly equal players that definitely makes Conley the better pick because we needed a pg and a center. Even with Horford we still need a center because that isn't his natural position.

[AtLaS]

If they turn out as roughly equal players that definitely makes Conley the better pick because we needed a pg and a center. Even with Horford we still need a center because that isn't his natural position.

Well that's just petty honestly. If you get an equal player you really can't complain THAT much. Plus it's not like he can't play center. It would be different if he absolutely couldn't play center. It's not like we routinely get destroyed by centers either.

Also, we were one of the worst shooting teams in the NBA at that point and Conley had never shown any ability to shoot the ball. And, with the seemingly 3 good PGs at #11 and our lack of any big man depth, Horford was IMO easily the best pick at the time, and I was a big Conley fan.

But, I'm of the opinion that if they're equal players, than we made the right pick since we were still able to get a PG at 11, even if he hasn't turned out well. Again, I think the mistake (as it seems so far) was Law over Stuckey, not Horford over Conley unless Conley becomes a very good PG. Horford also has very good trade value and we could get a center or PG if we wanted to take the chance.

Edited April 10, 2009 by AtLaS

[crimedog]

I wonder if playing off the ball so much in his first two years will ultimately help Conley. His J looks phenomenal and becoming a 3pt marksman can only help, the fact that he's turned himself into a good FT shooter after being a comparatively poor one in college is what really impresses me.

[exodus]

Well that's just petty honestly. If you get an equal player you really can't complain THAT much. Plus it's not like he can't play center. It would be different if he absolutely couldn't play center. It's not like we routinely get destroyed by centers either.

Also, we were one of the worst shooting teams in the NBA at that point and Conley had never shown any ability to shoot the ball. And, with the seemingly 3 good PGs at #11 and our lack of any big man depth, Horford was IMO easily the best pick at the time, and I was a big Conley fan.

But, I'm of the opinion that if they're equal players, than we made the right pick since we were still able to get a PG at 11, even if he hasn't turned out well. Again, I think the mistake (as it seems so far) was Law over Stuckey, not Horford over Conley unless Conley becomes a very good PG. Horford also has very good trade value and we could get a center or PG if we wanted to take the chance.

Petty? It won't seem too petty this summer when we look at the roster and see Law and Speedy are the only pgs under contract. That doesn't leave many attractive options.

-we can draft a pg at 19 and hope he becomes a legit starter.

-we can turn over the reins to Acie who hasn't shown much and has been injury prone.

-we can try to trade for a starting calibur pg, never an easy task and probably expensive.

Meanwhile Horford is averaging a whopping 11 ppg and gets frequently overpowered at center, sometimes even by backups. Hibbert dropped 15 pgs on us last game in 28 minutes.

Edited April 10, 2009 by exodus