Wise1 wrote:mlloyd10 wrote:So Prime Pippen(wiggins) or Prime Melo/Pierce(parker)?
No way. Wiggins can't handle it or create like Pip could.
What to say he cant get better - Was pippen's handle good coming out of college?
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25
Wise1 wrote:mlloyd10 wrote:So Prime Pippen(wiggins) or Prime Melo/Pierce(parker)?
No way. Wiggins can't handle it or create like Pip could.
Baddy Chuck wrote:Yeah the point forward and his vision being one of the main reasons why you won't compare George to Wiggins is weird. He barely cracked 3 assists a game in his best year in college to go with much higher turnovers.
I also think the three point shooting is blown out of proportion. Great he had a high percentage one season playing mostly off the ball, he's never come near matching that. He's been around 35-38% most of his career, though on more attempts then you'd like for Wiggins to have. George is hardly some consistent sharpshooter from long range.
Jez2983 wrote:sidney lanier wrote:
Thanks for an expert's view. It's interesting. As a layman, the two questions that give me pause about Embiid's back as it relates to his durability in the NBA:
1. Is it a repetitive stress injury that was triggered by use that is only a fraction of the use that will be required playing an 82-game season?
2. Does his great height, combined with his body type, make him structurally unsound?
There will always be stress fractures in the NBA:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm
Extremely tall men will always have structural issues, partly because they stretch (no pun intended) the limits of the human skeletal system. It's true that being proportioned somewhat like a person of normal height (Wilt, Hakeem, Dwight) seems to limit risk, but those who are not so proportioned (Bill Walton, Sam Bowie, Embiid) may well be doomed to unending problems.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htmAdds Gowriharan Thaiyananthan, co--medical director of the Chapman Neurosurgical and Spine Institute in Orange, Calif., and a neurosurgeon who's operated on four 7-footers himself, "Our bodies were not designed to be 7 feet tall. That's like turning a car into a stretch limo: Things work, but it's not what nature decided is our optimal state. You're pushing every organ system to its limit."
1. Honestly, your point 1) is what has me the most worried. It's that sort of threat that makes me wonder if we limit his minutes in his first season or so. People may break out the pitchforks to that, but it will have the secondary consequences that will keep tankers happy if he really is as good as he seems to be. Again, I look at Bogut - he was what 23 when he had stress issues. The data collected tends to show that between 25-30 injury rates are down (this is from cricket again) and the theory is the bones have 'hardened'.
In summary to that point, I feel it could be managed if some thought was put into it.
2. Undoubtably. PP was holding up the examples of Hibbert, Howard, Lopez next to 'Glass Bogut'. As we've seen, those guys have all suffered significant injuries. This is why I wouldn't be so worried to have so Sanders and Embiid on the same roster, at least initially. I basically feel every roster needs 'Centre Insurance' as they're all massive injury risks and the most difficult player to replace.
MiltownHawkeye wrote:Jez2983 wrote:sidney lanier wrote:
Thanks for an expert's view. It's interesting. As a layman, the two questions that give me pause about Embiid's back as it relates to his durability in the NBA:
1. Is it a repetitive stress injury that was triggered by use that is only a fraction of the use that will be required playing an 82-game season?
2. Does his great height, combined with his body type, make him structurally unsound?
There will always be stress fractures in the NBA:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm
Extremely tall men will always have structural issues, partly because they stretch (no pun intended) the limits of the human skeletal system. It's true that being proportioned somewhat like a person of normal height (Wilt, Hakeem, Dwight) seems to limit risk, but those who are not so proportioned (Bill Walton, Sam Bowie, Embiid) may well be doomed to unending problems.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm
1. Honestly, your point 1) is what has me the most worried. It's that sort of threat that makes me wonder if we limit his minutes in his first season or so. People may break out the pitchforks to that, but it will have the secondary consequences that will keep tankers happy if he really is as good as he seems to be. Again, I look at Bogut - he was what 23 when he had stress issues. The data collected tends to show that between 25-30 injury rates are down (this is from cricket again) and the theory is the bones have 'hardened'.
In summary to that point, I feel it could be managed if some thought was put into it.
2. Undoubtably. PP was holding up the examples of Hibbert, Howard, Lopez next to 'Glass Bogut'. As we've seen, those guys have all suffered significant injuries. This is why I wouldn't be so worried to have so Sanders and Embiid on the same roster, at least initially. I basically feel every roster needs 'Centre Insurance' as they're all massive injury risks and the most difficult player to replace.
Yeah, I don't see any reason to not have Sanders and Embiid on the same roster until our hand is forced. Embiid will be on a rookie contract the entire time Sanders is under contract. When both are healthy that will be an excellent C rotation, and you might be able to play them together situationally.
Newz wrote:Wiggins is a lot more James Worthy than he is Scottie Pippen, IMO.
driese0824 wrote:MiltownHawkeye wrote:Jez2983 wrote:
1. Honestly, your point 1) is what has me the most worried. It's that sort of threat that makes me wonder if we limit his minutes in his first season or so. People may break out the pitchforks to that, but it will have the secondary consequences that will keep tankers happy if he really is as good as he seems to be. Again, I look at Bogut - he was what 23 when he had stress issues. The data collected tends to show that between 25-30 injury rates are down (this is from cricket again) and the theory is the bones have 'hardened'.
In summary to that point, I feel it could be managed if some thought was put into it.
2. Undoubtably. PP was holding up the examples of Hibbert, Howard, Lopez next to 'Glass Bogut'. As we've seen, those guys have all suffered significant injuries. This is why I wouldn't be so worried to have so Sanders and Embiid on the same roster, at least initially. I basically feel every roster needs 'Centre Insurance' as they're all massive injury risks and the most difficult player to replace.
Yeah, I don't see any reason to not have Sanders and Embiid on the same roster until our hand is forced. Embiid will be on a rookie contract the entire time Sanders is under contract. When both are healthy that will be an excellent C rotation, and you might be able to play them together situationally.
I don't know I understand the love for embiid hes a great prospect but damn if im picking 1 or 2nd or 3rd I want a guy starting right away a 30 mpg guy not one who is going to share minutes with another center and be lucky if both are healthy to get only 20 -25 minutes a game if that.
If they draft embiid sanders has to be traded,to me you don't draft that high draft a guy that high and make him only a par time player plus sanders has to start albeit cause you are paying him 11 million a season.Just my opinion,
driese0824 wrote:MiltownHawkeye wrote:Jez2983 wrote:
1. Honestly, your point 1) is what has me the most worried. It's that sort of threat that makes me wonder if we limit his minutes in his first season or so. People may break out the pitchforks to that, but it will have the secondary consequences that will keep tankers happy if he really is as good as he seems to be. Again, I look at Bogut - he was what 23 when he had stress issues. The data collected tends to show that between 25-30 injury rates are down (this is from cricket again) and the theory is the bones have 'hardened'.
In summary to that point, I feel it could be managed if some thought was put into it.
2. Undoubtably. PP was holding up the examples of Hibbert, Howard, Lopez next to 'Glass Bogut'. As we've seen, those guys have all suffered significant injuries. This is why I wouldn't be so worried to have so Sanders and Embiid on the same roster, at least initially. I basically feel every roster needs 'Centre Insurance' as they're all massive injury risks and the most difficult player to replace.
Yeah, I don't see any reason to not have Sanders and Embiid on the same roster until our hand is forced. Embiid will be on a rookie contract the entire time Sanders is under contract. When both are healthy that will be an excellent C rotation, and you might be able to play them together situationally.
I don't know I understand the love for embiid hes a great prospect but damn if im picking 1 or 2nd or 3rd I want a guy starting right away a 30 mpg guy not one who is going to share minutes with another center and be lucky if both are healthy to get only 20 -25 minutes a game if that.
If they draft embiid sanders has to be traded,to me you don't draft that high draft a guy that high and make him only a par time player plus sanders has to start albeit cause you are paying him 11 million a season.Just my opinion,
DocHoliday wrote:
breakchains wrote:Fort Minor wrote:breakchains wrote:Comparing "ceilings where we assign another player as the ceiling" is about the most pointless exercise you can do in prospect evaluation.
The thing with Parker that I think a lot of people are off on is that they sort of downgrade him in a sense because of his advanced skillset, but to me, a guy who has his array of skills at that young of an age indicates a special talent in and of itself. There are many, many players who were superb athletes who never were able to turn that into being great basketball players. For a player to flash all of the skills Parker has at the age of 18 indicates that he has a special trait in that regard - not necessarily something that is "learned."
Personally, I downgrade him because of what he doesn't have (defense) versus what he does have (very good offensive skill set).
That's fine. I'm talking specifically about his offensive game.
BuckPack wrote:People still listen to Gery?