Could this Rookie Class Change Everything?

8305 · Post #1 » by **8305** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 12:33 am

I know its early but,
Lance Stephenson has had moments where he looks like a man playing with boys. Magnum Rolle has argueably been as good as Tyler Hansbrough was last year. Paul George has been up and down but its not hard to see the potential. We may have drafted 3 first round caliber talents. In a couple of years could we be where the Oklahoma City franchise is today? And if we are would it be better to sit out the 2011 free agent season?

Looking at the money thrown at Drew Gooden, Travis Outlaw, Amare Stoudamire, Rudy Gay and Joe Johnson is simply mind boggling. If you can accumulate the young talent I like the Thunder model better.

MUpacersSIC · Post #2 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 1:11 am

8305 wrote:I know its early but,
Lance Stephenson has had moments where he looks like a man playing with boys. Magnum Rolle has argueably been as good as Tyler Hansbrough was last year. Paul George has been up and down but its not hard to see the potential. We may have drafted 3 first round caliber talents. In a couple of years could we be where the Oklahoma City franchise is today? And if we are would it be better to sit out the 2011 free agent season?

Looking at the money thrown at Drew Gooden, Travis Outlaw, Amare Stoudamire, Rudy Gay and Joe Johnson is simply mind boggling. If you can accumulate the young talent I like the Thunder model better.

I think we definitely have a nice young core to build around. Does anyone know who is in the free agent class of 2012??? I just don't see anyone in the 2011 class that I really really want. I like Horford, but I think the Hawks keep him.

Post #3 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 1:24 am

I think Rolle is a guy that complements both Hibbert and Hansbrough quite nicely. Rolle is kind of the rebounder/defender that both guys need next to them.

I think the key is that we're getting to the point where we're thinking about roster fit and character, while taking swings at home run talents in the 2nd round (Stephenson), not in a position where we really need at least a ground rule double (Shawne Williams).

Jackson Jiggle · Post #4 » by **Jackson Jiggle** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 1:44 am

Shwane Williams was a sac fly without our team scoring a run

Post #5 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 2:00 am

I meant that we should've gone for the ground rule double (like Tyler Hansbrough) at that point, instead of swinging for the fences on "potential" (Shawne Williams).

That was about as darn near close to a strikeout as one can get. Maybe an out for stepping on home plate while exiting the batters box?

8305 · Post #6 » by **8305** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 2:24 am

Interesting how this draft appears to have delivered. To those who wanted us to take Eric Bledsoe because we needed a point guard the answer is Stehpenson a guy who might be a freak at the position. There were those who wanted best athlete with biggest upside the answer was George. No agruement there. And for those who wanted the next Dale Davis the asnwer is Magnum.

Couple that with the pedestrian showings of Turner and Favors at the rookie league (guys whose names were thrown around in Danny Granger trades). Today this draft is simply off the charts from any expectations I had.

Post #7 » by **mizzoupacers** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 2:56 am

Shawne Williams was a K. :wink:

On three pitches out of the strike zone, in the bottom of the nineteenth with the bases loaded, with the other team's utility outfielder on the mound because everyone in the bullpen has already been used up.

I'm glad the rooks looked good in Summer League. But, it's Summer League. How you do there is a very poor predictor of how you'll do in real games.

I'm from Missouri, you have to Show Me...when it starts to count.

glasket · Post #8 » by **glasket** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 3:24 am

mizzoupacers wrote:
I'm glad the rooks looked good in Summer League. But, it's Summer League. How you do there is a very poor predictor of how you'll do in real games.

I'm from Missouri, you have to Show Me...when it starts to count.

True but these showings are still better than not showing any signs of potential or game.

Post #9 » by **mizzoupacers** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 3:45 am

glasket wrote:True but these showings are still better than not showing any signs of potential or game.

Absolutely. I don't mean to sound pessimistic--I tracked all the games and enjoyed the reports on Stephenson, George, and Rolle.

I'm looking forward to preseason and hoping all three of them continue to impress.

Pacersike · Post #10 » by **Pacersike** » Fri Jul 9, 2010 5:14 pm

Well, the rookies have definitely made Pacer fans more optimistic about the future.
That's a good start.

Time will tell if Bird hit a homerun on the 24th of june 2010.

Wizop · Post #11 » by **Wizop** » Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:17 pm

8305 wrote:If you can accumulate the young talent I like the Thunder model better.

let's just call it the Colt's model ... draft your key players, let the non-star expiring contracts move on, and use the money to pay the next man up.

chatard5 · Post #12 » by **chatard5** » Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:25 am

Hey, we got 2 2nd rounder for Shawne Williams, so maybe it isn't a whiff. One, last year, was AJ Price, who looked pretty good this past year. And the other we traded with some $ for Magnum Rolle. Maybe we will end up better getting Shawne than any other player.

That was before Tinsley was crazy, too, wasn't it? And we had Sarunas? So we probably weren't going to get a PG, and if we did it would've been Marcus Williams, who is a bust. The only good player is Rajon Rondo, but I don't think we were ever going to get him.

Boneman2 · Post #13 » by **Boneman2** » Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:08 am

Good point Chatard. Shawne Williams = Magnum Rolle