Thee Jazz Fan
Well-Known Member
Neg me now son!
2013 Chicago Combine May 15-19
- Thread starter mellow
- Start date
LOL good call green.
Tarkanian
Well-Known Member
knee-jerk reply
"each and every one of these means a huge upgrade in our PG department".
in detail;
Judaism has great mind. He has a great court vision and is a natural floor general.
Christianity is a chemistry-maker! Players will gel instantly for Christianity is all heart and compassion.
I have been reading bad reports about Islam. He may be a pain in the youknowwhat.
that said;
what what I have heard makes me believe that Islam is one tuff SOB, i.e. instant D-upgrade.
Self sacrificing players are hard to find, you know!
Mormonism, this dude is an in-state legend, in every level of the game. Draft him already. Will sell tickets. I have heard he has good relations with Jimmer, and he may play a role in acquiring him one day (what a dream OMG, sheds tears).
Ismism, dunno about him. Coming from a lesser-competition-environment might be a problem tho!
There is one under-the-radar dude called freemasonry. He is good, book it!
Zulu
Well-Known Member
Love it!!
BaronDavisIsDonkeyOnShrek
Member
ok so I dvr'd the combine and watched it a couple times over the weekend. Is this realistic and would we be happy with this draft:
14. Michael Carter-Williams - he tested better athletically than I thought he would and I just like his size and passing ability. I think his J can be fixed (hopefully Hornacek sticks around, though). He also gives Utah some flexibility to play both guard positions.
21. Shane Larkin - liked him before, but really liking him now. Tested well athletically, is quick and can shoot. Maybe not a starter, but a quality backup for sure. Could bring some much needed energy off the bench.
46. Reggie Bullock - solid shooter that could be a steal in a couple years. Probably should have stayed at UNC one more year, but I like his potential.
2013/14 lineup:
Carter-Williams / Larkin / Veteran FA
Burks / Bullock / Murphy
Hayward / Williams / Carroll
Favors / Veteran FA / Evans
Kanter / Tomic
14. Michael Carter-Williams - he tested better athletically than I thought he would and I just like his size and passing ability. I think his J can be fixed (hopefully Hornacek sticks around, though). He also gives Utah some flexibility to play both guard positions.
21. Shane Larkin - liked him before, but really liking him now. Tested well athletically, is quick and can shoot. Maybe not a starter, but a quality backup for sure. Could bring some much needed energy off the bench.
46. Reggie Bullock - solid shooter that could be a steal in a couple years. Probably should have stayed at UNC one more year, but I like his potential.
2013/14 lineup:
Carter-Williams / Larkin / Veteran FA
Burks / Bullock / Murphy
Hayward / Williams / Carroll
Favors / Veteran FA / Evans
Kanter / Tomic
mellow
Well-Known Member
Can you neg rep someone multiple times? Or do you get a warning "You must spread some negative reputaiton around......"?
Just wondering.
On topic----
BDIDOS, is MCW really that different from Alec Burks? I kind of see Alec as the one providing the flexibilty to play two guard positions and the Jazz were successful most times he got to play significant minutes. Why would MCW be an improvement, and does that mean that Burks has to go?
BaronDavisIsDonkeyOnShrek
Member
On topic----
BDIDOS, is MCW really that different from Alec Burks? I kind of see Alec as the one providing the flexibilty to play two guard positions and the Jazz were successful most times he got to play significant minutes. Why would MCW be an improvement, and does that mean that Burks has to go?[/QUOTE]
good point, I just wonder if MCW is a better passer? I still see Burks more as a scorer. I could very well be wrong. I like Larkin and Schroeder, too.
BDIDOS, is MCW really that different from Alec Burks? I kind of see Alec as the one providing the flexibilty to play two guard positions and the Jazz were successful most times he got to play significant minutes. Why would MCW be an improvement, and does that mean that Burks has to go?[/QUOTE]
good point, I just wonder if MCW is a better passer? I still see Burks more as a scorer. I could very well be wrong. I like Larkin and Schroeder, too.
Doublea
Well-Known Member
good point, I just wonder if MCW is a better passer? I still see Burks more as a scorer. I could very well be wrong. I like Larkin and Schroeder, too.[/QUOTE]
I don't like the idea of Burks playing point guard even if he can.
Getting Traded
Banned
I don't follow college ball that closely, only saw a few games during the NCAA tournament and then the Final Four. Burke obviously was the standout and I think he's as good or even better than DWill when he came out. But I've been reading the draft reports and watching workouts and am starting to think this might not be such a bad draft and that there are players into the 20s who could be solid NBA players, so the Jazz have two picks -- let's hope they make good ones. I like Schroeder based on where the Jazz are picking. Some sites even have them going to the Jazz at 21, so looks good that we can get him.
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
good point, I just wonder if MCW is a better passer? I still see Burks more as a scorer. I could very well be wrong. I like Larkin and Schroeder, too.[/QUOTE]
MCW is a muuuuch better passer than Burks, they see the game differently, burks is in either attack or no mistakes mode, MCW is actually scanning the floor for passing lanes all the time.
the "red-flags" on MCW maybe legit they worry me, Turnover Prone, T Rex Arms which should be especially troublesome considering hes 6'5 (high dribble, gotta play short quick guys...)
you guys are worried about the defense of the 5'10" pg, lets just cut to the chase with Larkin, his defense is his offense, hes not invisible on D but when you consider who the top 20 pg's are in the league its easy to think any rookie is going to have some trouble (except schroeds, i think theyre gonna have trouble with him... tbh)
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
I can't even begin to describe how wrong you are on your Burke's evaluation.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I could describe your busted grammar, but I won't.