Official Raptors 2011 NBA Draft Thread Part 9

Leolovinliberal · Post #1181 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:15 pm

I'm a computer neanderthal; would someone mind posting ED and TT's combine #'s, I'd be curious to see how they compare. Thanks

Post #1182 » by **gojoorange** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:16 pm

OP, why keep starting these speculative threads? There is nothing to them, why not refer to the draft threads where this question has been answered many times.

bboyskinnylegs · Post #1183 » by **bboyskinnylegs** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:20 pm

Sonrise wrote:I'm a computer neanderthal; would someone mind posting ED and TT's combine #'s, I'd be curious to see how they compare. Thanks

Davis:

TT: 6'7..5" w/o shoes, 6'8.75" w/shoes, 227 lbs (6.7% body fat), 7'1.25" wingspan, 9'0.5" standing reach, 30" no-step vert, 35" max vert, 3.28s 3/4-court sprint

Ed: 6'9" w/o shoes, 6'9.75" w/shoes, 227lbs (10% body fat), 7'0" wingspan, 9'0" standing reach, 31" no-step vert, 36" max vert, 3.21s 3/4-court sprint

Leolovinliberal · Post #1184 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:23 pm

Ed Davis freshman stats at UNC vs TT's freshman stats at Texas:

ED:
19 mpg, 7ppg, 7 rpg, 2bpg, 52% fg, 57%ft

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/pr ... erId=36668

TT:
31 mpg, 13ppg, 8rpg, 2bpg, 55%fg, 49%ft

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/pr ... erId=51446

Leolovinliberal · Post #1185 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:25 pm

bboyskinnylegs wrote:
Sonrise wrote:I'm a computer neanderthal; would someone mind posting ED and TT's combine #'s, I'd be curious to see how they compare. Thanks

Davis:

TT: 6'7..5" w/o shoes, 6'8.75" w/shoes, 227 lbs (6.7% body fat), 7'1.25" wingspan, 9'0.5" standing reach, 30" no-step vert, 35" max vert, 3.28s 3/4-court sprint

Ed: 6'9" w/o shoes, 6'9.75" w/shoes, 227lbs (10% body fat), 7'0" wingspan, 9'0" standing reach, 31" no-step vert, 36" max vert, 3.21s 3/4-court sprint

Thank you for doing that, I appreciate it.

Leolovinliberal · Post #1186 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:28 pm

gojoorange wrote:OP, why keep starting these speculative threads? There is nothing to them, why not refer to the draft threads where this question has been answered many times.

huh? I created a poll to gauge fan opinions. Don't like the thread, don't post in it; simple enough.

gerrit4 · Post #1187 » by **gerrit4** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:32 pm

I like TT and think he'll be a better pro than most in this draft. He's rumored around 13, but I can't see why he won't go top 8.

I wouldn't trade Ed for him though. Ed is taller and is a proven NBA player. I'd consider it as part of a trade - for instance something like Brandon Jennings & Tristan Thompson for Ed & Barbosa, but as a straight up trade it's pretty pointless.

Leolovinliberal · Post #1188 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:32 pm

Indeed wrote:I think TT is gonna drop in the draft due to his measurement, and Davis is the better offensive player (potential wise). So at most Kleiza + Alabi/Ajinca + cash for TT.

He's only an inch shorter than Ed, weighed the exact same, has significantly less body fat and has a longer wingspan and reach that ED.

TT: 6'7..5" w/o shoes, 6'8.75" w/shoes, 227 lbs (6.7% body fat), 7'1.25" wingspan, 9'0.5" standing reach, 30" no-step vert, 35" max vert, 3.28s 3/4-court sprint

Ed: 6'9" w/o shoes, 6'9.75" w/shoes, 227lbs (10% body fat), 7'0" wingspan, 9'0" standing reach, 31" no-step vert, 36" max vert, 3.21s 3/4-court sprint

Consequence · Post #1189 » by **Consequence** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:32 pm

I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract. Not like we can match any offer for him under the current CBA, which is likely to be more open to player movement than the one that Ed will be dealing with when his rookie deal expires. Nope. Not at all. Totally plausible that we should give up a year of development on a more talented player because of that chance.

sanity · Post #1190 » by **sanity** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:34 pm

Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract.

Based on what, him being American? How many Canadian players has this team ever locked up long-term?

Tough Tony D · Post #1191 » by **Tough Tony D** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:34 pm

I really like TT both as a player and person but I like Ed and we know how well he performed this year. So I wouldnt swap. The one Canadian I would love to have is Myck Kabongo, but if we draft Kemba or Knight we probably wont draft him next year.

Slam Dunk! · Post #1192 » by **Slam Dunk!** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:34 pm

No way. Ed is a stud, plain and simple. I'm not worried if he leaves because I'm pretty certain we'd get good value in return. I don't know much about Tristan besides his Ontario roots, but he sounds a bit disadvantaged at 6'8 <230lbs with the skillset of a pure PF. Then again, Ed's only an inch taller and weighed the same coming into the league and performed pretty damn well in the post for us despite his scrawny frame.

In short, it'd be nice to have a home-grown product playing for the Raptors, but it's not a good fit rogjt now. Perhaps when/if Ed leaves down the road, we'll trade him for Tristan.

PowerPhil15 · Post #1193 » by **PowerPhil15** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:35 pm

i would never give away a sure thing for a risk. Ed has been amazing and while tristan also looks great, its not worth it man. i do like the idea of trading amir/calderon for tt and a centre. that would be awesome

Leolovinliberal · Post #1194 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:36 pm

Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract. Not like we can match any offer for him under the current CBA, which is likely to be more open to player movement than the one that Ed will be dealing with when his rookie deal expires. Nope. Not at all. Totally plausible that we should give up a year of development on a more talented player because of that chance.

How do you know that Ed Davis is more talented than Tristan Thompson? I'm not saying that he isn't, he very well may be, but until TT has a full season under his belt we won't know. I love ED, and do not want to trade him at all, but if we could get a Canadian clone of him, who wants to play his entire career in T.O then you have to think long and hard about it.

I still have no clue as to why he's coming in tomorrow for a workout. That part is a mystery.

Consequence · Post #1195 » by **Consequence** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:36 pm

sanity wrote:
Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract.

Based on what, him being American? How many Canadian players has this team ever locked up long-term?

Not my words, originally. And yeah, sarcasm. From me, at least.

Sonrise wrote:Sadly, there's a better than 50/50 chance that ED leaves for an American team once his rookie contract is up

Consequence · Post #1196 » by **Consequence** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:38 pm

Sonrise wrote:
Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract. Not like we can match any offer for him under the current CBA, which is likely to be more open to player movement than the one that Ed will be dealing with when his rookie deal expires. Nope. Not at all. Totally plausible that we should give up a year of development on a more talented player because of that chance.

How do you know that Ed Davis is more talented than Tristan Thompson? I'm not saying that he isn't, he very well may be, but until TT has a full season under his belt we won't know. I love ED, and do not want to trade him at all, but if we could get a Canadian clone of him, who wants to play his entire career in T.O then you have to think long and hard about it.

I still have no clue as to why he's coming in tomorrow for a workout. That part is a mystery.

I don't know. I opined. I believe in that opinion. You may believe in yours. Just don't use garbage like "Davis has a greater than 50/50 chance of leaving' to support your opinion.

Post #1197 » by **Duffman100** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:39 pm

Sonrise wrote:
Indeed wrote:I think TT is gonna drop in the draft due to his measurement, and Davis is the better offensive player (potential wise). So at most Kleiza + Alabi/Ajinca + cash for TT.

He's only an inch shorter than Ed, weighed the exact same, has significantly less body fat and has a longer wingspan and reach that ED.

TT: 6'7..5" w/o shoes, 6'8.75" w/shoes, 227 lbs (6.7% body fat), 7'1.25" wingspan, 9'0.5" standing reach, 30" no-step vert, 35" max vert, 3.28s 3/4-court sprint

Ed: 6'9" w/o shoes, 6'9.75" w/shoes, 227lbs (10% body fat), 7'0" wingspan, 9'0" standing reach, 31" no-step vert, 36" max vert, 3.21s 3/4-court sprint

I don't see the reason in making the trade. The two look very similar but Ed Davis already has a year proven in the league. Why not keep the guy who's shown he can make it?

Leolovinliberal · Post #1198 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:40 pm

[quote="Slam Dunk!"]No way. Ed is a stud, plain and simple. I'm not worried if he leaves because I'm pretty certain we'd get good value in return. I don't know much about Tristan besides his Ontario roots, but he sounds a bit disadvantaged at 6'8 <230lbs with the skillset of a pure PF. Then again, Ed's only an inch taller and weighed the same coming into the league and performed pretty damn well in the post for us despite his scrawny frame.

In short, it'd be nice to have a home-grown product playing for the Raptors, but it's not a good fit rogjt now. Perhaps when/if Ed leaves down the road, we'll trade him for Tristan.[/quote]

But why trade for him when you could theoretically have him now? I know it's a big time crapshoot, but TT was the better player than Ed was in their respective freshman years. I love Ed, so I would be really reluctant to do it, the only reason that i would entertain the idea is that TT wants to be a Raptor and play for his hometown team.

bboyskinnylegs · Post #1199 » by **bboyskinnylegs** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:41 pm

Sonrise wrote:
Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract. Not like we can match any offer for him under the current CBA, which is likely to be more open to player movement than the one that Ed will be dealing with when his rookie deal expires. Nope. Not at all. Totally plausible that we should give up a year of development on a more talented player because of that chance.

How do you know that Ed Davis is more talented than Tristan Thompson? I'm not saying that he isn't, he very well may be, but until TT has a full season under his belt we won't know. I love ED, and do not want to trade him at all, but if we could get a Canadian clone of him, who wants to play his entire career in T.O then you have to think long and hard about it.

I still have no clue as to why he's coming in tomorrow for a workout. That part is a mystery.

he's coming in for a workout because he's a projected lotto pick, and BC has spoken highly of him in a previous interview (although he did mention the fact that there's some duplication with Ed)

Leolovinliberal · Post #1200 » by **Leolovinliberal** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:42 pm

Consequence wrote:
Sonrise wrote:
Consequence wrote:I really like the part where Ed Davis has a greater than 50% chance of leaving after his rookie contract. Not like we can match any offer for him under the current CBA, which is likely to be more open to player movement than the one that Ed will be dealing with when his rookie deal expires. Nope. Not at all. Totally plausible that we should give up a year of development on a more talented player because of that chance.

How do you know that Ed Davis is more talented than Tristan Thompson? I'm not saying that he isn't, he very well may be, but until TT has a full season under his belt we won't know. I love ED, and do not want to trade him at all, but if we could get a Canadian clone of him, who wants to play his entire career in T.O then you have to think long and hard about it.

I still have no clue as to why he's coming in tomorrow for a workout. That part is a mystery.

I don't know. I opined. I believe in that opinion. You may believe in yours. Just don't use garbage like "Davis has a greater than 50/50 chance of leaving' to support your opinion.

Why is my "opinion" garbage and your isn't? I'll stop posting my garbage if you stop posting yours, or at least use a qualifier like "I think." Deal?