Is it Hollins or Jermareo?

[ohara]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/292/story/267560.html

If Bonnell still has any contacts in the organization, then it looks like we will eat someone's Contract. My guess is Hollins since I see more potential in Jermareo.

[BigSlam]

Bonnell doesn't have any contacts in the organization.

[W_HAMILTON]

You would figure Hollins would be more important since he's a "center," but Brown had been playing Davidson a lot at center for awhile there. I'm just over Hollins now. He might make it somewhere else, but we need contributors now, and he's just not contributing, and hasn't really ever contributed. He still has a lot of the same problems that he had when he first came into the league. He's not showing much progress.

[fluffernutter]

It has to be Hollins. Dude has nothing except height and athleticism. Nothing. No improvement. No real skills. Nothing. I've seen JD get better in the last year or two; I've never seen Hollins get better. Ever.

[BigSlam]

Considering we used a very early 2nd on Davidson and a very late 2nd on Hollins I would hope that Davidson is better!!

[fluffernutter]

Considering we used a very early 2nd on Davidson and a very late 2nd on Hollins I would hope that Davidson is better!!

I wonder - do you know if this is true?

My impression is that the 2nd round is a complete crapshoot, and if you get anything out of it - a serviceable bench player, for example - you are thrilled to death.

Do early 2nd rounders actually perform better than late 2nd rounders?

[HardER]

I will give Jermareo Davidson a shot cause he has the potential to progress, Ryan Hollins hasn`t.

And I think Hollins doesn`t give the team anything,except the daily top 10

[Walt Cronkite]

Hollins is garbo. At least Davidson has skills.

[e4Nf6]

I've given up on Hollins...

I wash my hands of that man...

He is this generation's Darren Hancock/Bernard Robinson/Kareem Rush

[fatlever]

despite my wife's pleas, i would have to cut hollins and keep brown. hollins just hasnt shown any growth. at least davidson has some offensive skills. i think larry can teach davidson how to rebound and play defense easier than he can teach hollins how to do anything other than jump high.

[GoBobcats]

i think everyone agrees on that. hollins is a wasted roster spot.

[BigSlam]

Considering we used a very early 2nd on Davidson and a very late 2nd on Hollins I would hope that Davidson is better!!

I wonder - do you know if this is true?

My impression is that the 2nd round is a complete crapshoot, and if you get anything out of it - a serviceable bench player, for example - you are thrilled to death.

Do early 2nd rounders actually perform better than late 2nd rounders?

I saw a report/study about 2 years ago that showed the percentage of success rates in different brackets of a draft and the chance of someone picked in the 30's had a lot more of a chance of sticking in the NBA than someone picked in the 50's.

There are obviously exceptions. One being players that weren't scouted well due to their school, supposed attitude or injury concerns and another being your FO having inept scouts.

So, considering Davidson was #36 and Hollins was #50, either our scouts suck/sucked or Davidson is underachieving if he is still being compared to a guy who is 1 dimensional and was the 50th overall pick?

I'll see if I can find the piece. I think it was on nbadraft.net

[BigSlam]

Considering we used a very early 2nd on Davidson and a very late 2nd on Hollins I would hope that Davidson is better!!

I wonder - do you know if this is true?

My impression is that the 2nd round is a complete crapshoot, and if you get anything out of it - a serviceable bench player, for example - you are thrilled to death.

Do early 2nd rounders actually perform better than late 2nd rounders?

I saw a report/study about 2 years ago that showed the percentage of success rates in different brackets of a draft and the chance of someone picked in the 30's had a lot more of a chance of sticking in the NBA than someone picked in the 50's.

There are obviously exceptions. One being players that weren't scouted well due to their school, supposed attitude or injury concerns and another being your FO having inept scouts.

So, considering Davidson was #36 and Hollins was #50, either our scouts suck/sucked or Davidson is underachieving if he is still being compared to a guy who is 1 dimensional and was the 50th overall pick?

I'll see if I can find the piece. I think it was on nbadraft.net

[fluffernutter]

Considering we used a very early 2nd on Davidson and a very late 2nd on Hollins I would hope that Davidson is better!!

I wonder - do you know if this is true?

My impression is that the 2nd round is a complete crapshoot, and if you get anything out of it - a serviceable bench player, for example - you are thrilled to death.

Do early 2nd rounders actually perform better than late 2nd rounders?

I saw a report/study about 2 years ago that showed the percentage of success rates in different brackets of a draft and the chance of someone picked in the 30's had a lot more of a chance of sticking in the NBA than someone picked in the 50's.

There are obviously exceptions. One being players that weren't scouted well due to their school, supposed attitude or injury concerns and another being your FO having inept scouts.

So, considering Davidson was #36 and Hollins was #50, either our scouts suck/sucked or Davidson is underachieving if he is still being compared to a guy who is 1 dimensional and was the 50th overall pick?

I'll see if I can find the piece. I think it was on nbadraft.net

Huh, now that I think about it, that makes sense. Over the long run, like 20 or 30 drafts, higher numbers simply give better results. They are occasional busts, but the superstars make up for it. I guess when you get to the 2nd round and you are looking at the difference between 36 and 50, 14 places, I'm wondering how strong the correlation is, i.e. is it like, on average 6 out of 10 36's will be better than 50's, i.e. relatively weak correlation? I really don't know.

My gut says that I should not be surprised if any SPECIFIC 50 is equal or better than any SPECIFIC 36, despite the long-term trends indicating that 50's are slightly?? worse than 36?