Draft Results: Damian Lillard, Meyers Leonard, Will Barton.

fishnc · Post #321 » by **fishnc** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:41 pm

sabi wrote:
shaolin wrote:
sabi wrote:two bullets dogged so far in Rivers and Drummond. Who's next?

Fancy sig. As to the question, Waiters?

Thanks I just stole from the blazers page. I wouldn't discount Waiters just yet Ill wait for him to play an actual nba game so he can play with irving.

So you won't wait for Rivers and Drummond to play an actual NBA game before judging them but you will for Waiters?

sabi · Post #322 » by **sabi** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:57 pm

fishnc wrote:So you won't wait for Rivers and Drummond to play an actual NBA game before judging them but you will for Waiters?

I know its sounds bad but its just my opinion on these players. I think Drummond has the potential to make us regret not picking him but that is several years ahead and low probability. He is going to be pretty good defensively but wont ever be elite and his offense will always be subpar imo. as for Rivers I think hes bayless 2.0 and I think Waiters has potential.

lukeyrid13 · Post #323 » by **lukeyrid13** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:29 pm

I'm not really concerned about Drummond. It looks as though Lillard is the real deal and no one will question that pick 5 years from now and Drummond was taken 3 picks after us. If anything they'll just say 8 teams passed over Drummond, no reason for the Blazers to be singled out

deanwoof · Post #324 » by **deanwoof** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:03 pm

DusterBuster wrote:
RoyalWun wrote:Rivers isn't a PG.
That's the first mistake.

NOH should've kept it as:

Jack/Vasquez
Gordon/Rivers

Agreed. The Rivers/Gordon starting combo is going to be awful imo.

I think picked Rivers because of the Gordon situation and probably wasn't 100% certain they would match him, unlike Portland ehovknew all along they would match Batum so we passed on barnes. And now that theyvhave both Gordon and barnes they have to say picked rivers as a PG to save face.

I don't see rivers starting when the season begins however, because likenyou said, rivers and Gordon isngoing to be awful

Vega · Post #325 » by **Vega** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:48 am

lukeyrid13 wrote:I'm not really concerned about Drummond. It looks as though Lillard is the real deal and no one will question that pick 5 years from now and Drummond was taken 3 picks after us. If anything they'll just say 8 teams passed over Drummond, no reason for the Blazers to be singled out

I'll have to see Lillard against NBA level defenders to label him as the real deal. He still doesn't appear very explosive and his release point will be a major obstacle.

King d · Post #326 » by **King d** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:28 am

Vega wrote:
lukeyrid13 wrote:I'm not really concerned about Drummond. It looks as though Lillard is the real deal and no one will question that pick 5 years from now and Drummond was taken 3 picks after us. If anything they'll just say 8 teams passed over Drummond, no reason for the Blazers to be singled out

I'll have to see Lillard against NBA level defenders to label him as the real deal. He still doesn't appear very explosive and his release point will be a major obstacle.

I'm not worried about lillard at the offensive end, he will be fine, but as I said before his defense looks weak at the moment, his awareness/effort looks pretty bad.

Clarity · Post #327 » by **Clarity** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:04 am

Shem wrote:
Clarity wrote:people who judge bigs off of box scores should stick to ESPN Top 10 plays.

Drummond was very impressive in SL

I couple of highlight dunks doesn't make a player impressive. Just ask Harold Minor.

haha, im far from a highlight chaser, you can pull up my posts & see me stating that exact fact.

Drummond' didnt have a highlight dunk to my knowledge, I was more referencing his opponents FG % during SL..

DeBlazerRiddem wrote:Lamb and Barnes are always going to the be players our rooks have to measure up to.

this is accurate because they were the BPA at your draft slots.

AnaheimRoyale · Post #328 » by **AnaheimRoyale** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:11 am

Way too early to be ripping Drummond... nice to see Lillard and Meyers looking good though.

DusterBuster · Post #329 » by **DusterBuster** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 4:44 am

The overall NBA twitter feed on Hoopshype was raving about Lillard again tonight. One media member tweeted out the best player comparison for Lillard I've seen yet.... Gilbert Arenas. I see a lot of pre-injury Arenas in Lillard, but with a ton more maturity obviously.

Shem · Post #330 » by **Shem** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 8:13 am

Damian Lillard's workout video for the Kings:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyFJOEjZPFw[/youtube]

Lillard only misses one shot.

DusterBuster · Post #331 » by **DusterBuster** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:01 pm

David Thorpe of ESPN has a nice write-up in the Daily Dime on Lillard from what he's seen from the kid so far in Vegas....

One glance at Lillard tells us he has the perfect body and build to play point guard in the NBA. One long look at his game tells the rest of the story, and it's one that should get Blazers fans excited.

Physically, he bears a strong resemblance to Derrick Rose -- slightly less powerful but still strong and long. And like Rose, he reminds me of a tailback in football when he has the ball, darting through traffic while lowering his hips to help absorb contact without breaking stride. This also enables him to change directions quickly, which is why he has no trouble getting by most of his defenders.

Lillard weighs 190 pounds or so now, but I suspect his weight program in Portland will be better than what he had access to in college, so seeing the 6-foot-3 point guard at 205 in a year or so can be expected. That is a lot of power in a guy who knows how to move with explosiveness.

Lillard also shows a nice shooting stroke and a confidence that he can make the deep 3-pointer with ease, yet I have not seen him hunt for that shot. Instead, he has been running the offense with an eye on both getting his teammates the ball while also being mindful of his role as a scorer. Not an easy concept to grasp for anyone but a pure point guard, which Lillard looks to be.

He may not ever be Rose as a pure scorer, but he has better vision and instiincts as a passer. With the right work ethic and coach, he's fully capable of being an upper-echelon NBA point guard, and possibly an All-Star.

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page ... daily-dime

It's early, but so far, it looks like the worry that Lillard being Bayless 2.0 seems to be fading away.

sabi · Post #332 » by **sabi** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:05 pm

it's only fair if the haters on draft night apologize for their early bitching

Post #333 » by **mojomarc** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:12 pm

sabi wrote:it's only fair if the haters on draft night apologize for their early bitching

I was a fan of the pick, but still--let's not be overconfident in a few summer league games. I completely agree that he looks like a pure PG, and a quite decent one, but the rubber meets the road in November and December. Before then, it's just a tease.

fishnc · Post #334 » by **fishnc** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:19 pm

Agreed, it's way too early to pass judgement on any of Lillard/Leonard/Barnes/Drummond/Lamb, negative or positive. Especially based on Summer League.

Downtown · Post #335 » by **Downtown** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:48 pm

I think most players in summer league are playing mostly on instinct. They come out of highly structured college programs where they have been programmed to go by X and O plays. They come to the pro level and have maybe one or two practices. They barely know their teamates so they don't know each others tendancies. Then they are thrown into games with a coach having no time to drill them or teach them.

Is it any wonder summer league seems more like pick up games where it's about individuals trying to play as a team but end up doing what comes natural regardless if it works or not? Some players excel with individuall efforts and others fail because they don't understand how to get involved because they've been taught to work within a team structure, not because they don't have skills.

And some are looking strictly to showcase themselves so teamates that are waiting for the ball end up looking like they're just standing around waiting for a play to evolve rather than being proactive out there.

While you can get telltale signs of a players abilities you can't determine whether or not they're going to be solid NBA players by these games.

License2Lillard · Post #336 » by **License2Lillard** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:05 pm

While I agree that success in SL is in the end pretty meaningless, if you're awful in SL that has to be a huge red flag. Talent is talent, regardless of the system or lack thereof.

DusterBuster · Post #337 » by **DusterBuster** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:14 pm

License2Lillard wrote:While I agree that success in SL is in the end pretty meaningless, if you're awful in SL that has to be a huge red flag. Talent is talent, regardless of the system or lack thereof.

Batum was amazingly awful in SL the year he was drafted. I remember watching Batum in SL and hoping he stays in France to develop more, he was that bad.

License2Lillard · Post #338 » by **License2Lillard** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:13 pm

DusterBuster wrote:
License2Lillard wrote:While I agree that success in SL is in the end pretty meaningless, if you're awful in SL that has to be a huge red flag. Talent is talent, regardless of the system or lack thereof.

Batum was amazingly awful in SL the year he was drafted. I remember watching Batum in SL and hoping he stays in France to develop more, he was that bad.

And now he has developed into what? An overpaid role player. I like Nic, but his SL was a good indication of his play to begin his career. He is becoming a useful player, but it's taking time and now ~20% of our salary. He's still developing, like he would be in France only he costs us more here. Not sure why he is your example.

lukeyrid13 · Post #339 » by **lukeyrid13** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:22 pm

Yeah i had already written Batum off watching him in SL. Looking back it's just the worst possible place for Nic. SL is all about ISO players who look for themselves and there is no ball movement. There are no role players in SL

Post #340 » by **The Sebastian Express** » Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:23 am

DusterBuster wrote:
License2Lillard wrote:While I agree that success in SL is in the end pretty meaningless, if you're awful in SL that has to be a huge red flag. Talent is talent, regardless of the system or lack thereof.

Batum was amazingly awful in SL the year he was drafted. I remember watching Batum in SL and hoping he stays in France to develop more, he was that bad.

The problem with Batum in summer league is that Batum at that point was even more passive than he was now, and he was entirely a team player in an entirely uh.. un-team setting. He was trying to play defense and no one else was and it was pretty funny. I tried telling people he'd be fine!