NBA Draft 2014 Part 3: Will Alston Declares, Alstonmania Sweeps Thread

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > NBA Draft 2014 Part 3: Will Alston Declares, Alstonmania Sweeps Thread

«‹›41 »

uh This poll is closed.
embiid	41	32.28%
wiggins	86	67.72%
Total:	127 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

The B_36: Jul 10, 2012

mynameisjohn posted:

what on Earth are you talking about? it's reasonable for the top 5 teams to think that they'll get a top 5 nba player? that's not reasonable.

Sorry, I didn't explain this well. I meant that each of the teams picking in the top 5 should have a reasonable expectation that there guy will be a top 5 player at some point. Thats reasonabe for most drafts. If the 5th guy picked in a draft doesnt at least have a reasonable expectation of being really good, then either you suck at drafting or its a shallow draft. All of those guys are going to be very talented and have a high upside (including Embiid). They obviously won't all pan out. One of them will be a bust and never be more than a serviceable rotation player, 2 of them will be all stars at some point, and the other 2 will be ok/good but not great. We just don't know which of them they'll be yet.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:34

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 16, 2024 09:34

MourningView: Sep 2, 2006; Is this Heaven?

Do you just not know how many 5 is? It's a really small number. It is only 4 more than 1.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:34

The B_36: Jul 10, 2012

MourningView posted:

Do you just not know how many 5 is? It's a really small number. It is only 4 more than 1.

Do you not know the difference between "reasonable" and "guaranteed"?

# ? May 27, 2014 06:36

straight up brolic: Jan 31, 2007; After all, I was nice in ball,
Came to practice weed scented
Report card like the speed limit

The B_36 posted:

Sorry, I didn't explain this well. I meant that each of the teams picking in the top 5 should have a reasonable expectation that there guy will be a top 5 player at some point. Thats reasonabe for most drafts. If the 5th guy picked in a draft doesnt at least have a reasonable expectation of being really good, then either you suck at drafting or its a shallow draft. All of those guys are going to be very talented and have a high upside (including Embiid). They obviously won't all pan out. One of them will be a bust and never be more than a serviceable rotation player, 2 of them will be all stars at some point, and the other 2 will be ok/good but not great. We just don't know which of them they'll be yet.

you just couldn't be more wrong and there is an overwhelming body of evidence sitting in front of you that completely contradicts what you are saying.

and even within the parameters of your loving idiotic argument you suggest that there is that a 2/5 chance of a player being an all-star (a top 24 player), yet that teams should have a reasonable expectation that they're getting a top 5 player.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:40

The B_36: Jul 10, 2012

mynameisjohn posted:

you just couldn't be more wrong and there is an overwhelming body of evidence sitting in front of you that completely contradicts what you are saying.

and even within the parameters of your loving idiotic argument you suggest that there is that a 2/5 chance of a player being an all-star (a top 24 player), yet that teams should have a reasonable expectation that they're getting a top 5 player.

Maybe 2 in 5 is overly optimistic, but a simple "top 24" player isnt right either. I said an all star at some point, not every year. I'm pretty sure that every draft has had at least a couple all stars from it. Seriously, calm down. 90% of NBA players come thru the draft, and probably 99% of the players who see more than 100 minutes of court time. Since 24 is 6.6% of the approx 360 players on a 12 man NBA roster, and there are 60 players picked each year in the draft, and 99% of NBA players that will ever have a chance of making an all star team were drafted at some point, it stands to reason that approx 4 players from each draft class will make an all star team. Maybe I'm being stupid in thinking that a large majority of them will be picked in the top 5? Tho I did also say one of the later picks would turn out to be really good! So I think I covered my bases there too.

Does your overwhelming body of evidence include "numbers"?

Edit: maybe reasonable is the problem people are having here? Not expected. Like, if a player develops close to the max of his potential, he'll become a top 5 player. That's reasonable to hope for, but not expected. If he works on his jumper, if he can learn defense (Carmelo), if he could shoot a free throw (Dwight), if he could figure out how to use his athleticism effectively and stop being an idiot (Demarcus Cousins) etc. he could be one of the best players in the league.

The B_36 fucked around with this message at 07:13 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 06:55

Spring Break My Heart: Feb 15, 2012

Probably Magic posted:

Didn't Dirk start playing basketball when he was 15?

Duncan got a pretty late start too.

# ? May 27, 2014 07:40

Action George: Apr 13, 2013

The B_36 posted:

Edit: maybe reasonable is the problem people are having here? Not expected. Like, if a player develops close to the max of his potential, he'll become a top 5 player. That's reasonable to hope for, but not expected. If he works on his jumper, if he can learn defense (Carmelo), if he could shoot a free throw (Dwight), if he could figure out how to use his athleticism effectively and stop being an idiot (Demarcus Cousins) etc. he could be one of the best players in the league.

I think your problem is that you have an unreasonably inflated expectation of what a top 5 pick should be. I mean, I'm pretty casual about following the NBA (hurray for being a Cavs fan who works a schedule that doesn't let him actually watch basketball very often) and even I can see that a top 5 pick, or even a top 3 doesn't have a reasonable expectation of being an all star, let alone a top 5 player. Hell, look at the last 15 #2 overall picks.

2013 Victor Oladipo
2012 Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
2011 Derrick Williams
2010 Evan Turner
2009 Hasheem Thabeet
2008 Michael Beasley
2007 Kevin Durant
2006 LaMarcus Aldridge
2005 Marvin Williams
2004 Emeka Okafor
2003 Darko Milicic
2002 Jay Williams
2001 Tyson Chandler
2000 Stromile Swift
1999 Steve Francis

That's a pretty dire list considering the teams who made these picks had their choice of literally all but one player in each draft. I don't see how you can look at that and think that the next three teams to pick have a reasonable expectation for anything but a servicable starter.

# ? May 27, 2014 08:20

EvanTH: Apr 24, 2004; i like to express my inner pain by being really boring on the phone
or just when i'm kickin it
that's me though
i'm kind of oddddddd

There's never been anything unreasonable about saying "Embiid shows flashes, increasingly regular flashes where looks like Olajuwon" without having to guarantee that he is in fact Olajuwon? It just sounds like you're confusing Ceiling for actual expectations.

Larry Sanders would be my guess for the current guy in the NBA who got the latest start in basketball which doesn't make for a great comparison oh well.

# ? May 27, 2014 12:00

Tae: Oct 24, 2010; Hello? Can you hear me? ...Perhaps if I shout? AAAAAAAAAH!

#2 pick only is a bit deceptive since there are all-stars after the first 3 picks, and I don't know if it's because the drop-off between #1 and #2 is that bad or they overthink on the pick and get the wrong 2nd best player.

# ? May 27, 2014 12:53

Action George: Apr 13, 2013

Tae posted:

#2 pick only is a bit deceptive since there are all-stars after the first 3 picks, and I don't know if it's because the drop-off between #1 and #2 is that bad or they overthink on the pick and get the wrong 2nd best player.

Well, how about the #3 overall pick?

2013 Otto Porter
2012 Bradley Beal
2011 Enes Kanter
2010 Derrick Favors
2009 James Harden
2008 O.J. Mayo
2007 Al Horford
2006 Adam Morrison
2005 Deron Williams
2004 Ben Gordon
2003 Carmelo Anthony
2002 Mike Dunleavy
2001 Pau Gasol
2000 Darius Miles
1999 Baron Davis

The #4 and 5 picks aren't producing all stars every year either. The argument was that it was reasonable that teams picking in the top 5 to expect that pick to turn into an all star and that's pretty clearly not the case (nevermind the top 5 player thing). If NBA teams were a lot better at evaluating/developing players then yeah, that'd be about right, but they're not. Your chances of landing a great player are better the higher you pick, but outside of the #1 pick it's more that you hope they're an all star but I wouldn't say that's a reasonable expectation.

# ? May 27, 2014 13:25

Kibner: Oct 21, 2008; #1 Pelican Fan

One of the local Hornet/Pelican sites does a series called Value of a Draft Pick about this exact subject! Here is the article from the Anthony Davis draft: http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/2012/06/22/the-value-of-a-draft-pick-and-the-hornets-picks/

Basically, the number 1 pick is amazing but 2-5 only have ~33% chance of being a star.

Kibner fucked around with this message at 13:55 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 13:50

big boi: Jun 11, 2007

The B_36 posted:

Does your overwhelming body of evidence include "numbers"?

What proportion of top 5 picks have gone on to be top 5 players?

Or, if we want to go for your more backpedally argument, how many top 5 players have been on more than one all-star team?

Edit: The link just posted tells the story.

big boi fucked around with this message at 14:00 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 13:56

EvanTH: Apr 24, 2004; i like to express my inner pain by being really boring on the phone
or just when i'm kickin it
that's me though
i'm kind of oddddddd

Crazy Larry posted:

Well, how about the #3 overall pick?

2013 Otto Porter
2012 Bradley Beal
2011 Enes Kanter
2010 Derrick Favors
2009 James Harden
2008 O.J. Mayo
2007 Al Horford
2006 Adam Morrison
2005 Deron Williams
2004 Ben Gordon
2003 Carmelo Anthony
2002 Mike Dunleavy
2001 Pau Gasol
2000 Darius Miles
1999 Baron Davis

The #4 and 5 picks aren't producing all stars every year either. The argument was that it was reasonable that teams picking in the top 5 to expect that pick to turn into an all star and that's pretty clearly not the case (nevermind the top 5 player thing). If NBA teams were a lot better at evaluating/developing players then yeah, that'd be about right, but they're not. Your chances of landing a great player are better the higher you pick, but outside of the #1 pick it's more that you hope they're an all star but I wouldn't say that's a reasonable expectation.

I don't know what that list of all-stars (I think Favors and Beal will make it eventually which would be more than half the list) is supposed to prove? Parker has a great chance of being good because he's going third? Miles was a picked out of highschool I think, Morrison was Morrison and Porter isn't looking so hot but it almost sounds like you're saying busts are more common than all-stars which isn't supported by that list with 3 < (6 or 8)?

# ? May 27, 2014 14:05

Kibner: Oct 21, 2008; #1 Pelican Fan

Here is the important part of the article so you don't have to click on it:

quote:

To determine the value of a pick, I assigned an overall career ranking based on PER and a bastardized Wages of Wins Win Score and applied it to all the players who have been taken in the draft since 1984. � I also cut off my evaluation of players after 2008 since since it is hard to judge a career trajectory in three seasons. Finally I jammed those numbers into a simple Grade ranking. Below is what each grade means, and I give an example player:

N/A � the player never logged an NBA minute. (Tim Pickett, Andrew Betts)

F � The player never developed and earned only minor garbage time minutes � or was really, really bad. (Hilton Armstrong, Cedric Simmons. Yay 2006 draft!)

D � A substitute � possibly in the rotation, but a 8th or 9th man at best. (Aaron Gray, Julian Wright)

C � A fringe starter, 6th-8th man sort. (JR Smith, Jason Smith)

B � A solid starter (David West, Jamaal Magloire)

A � A star (Pre-fat Baron Davis, Chris Paul)

The picks fell rather logically into groups based on their average rating so I�ve collated those groups in the below table and then determined the % chance of receiving each classification of player.
pre:
Pick(s)	�A� 	�B� 	�C� 	�D� 	�F� 	�N/A�
1	57%	13%	22%	4%	4%	0%
2-5	34%	23%	24%	13%	5%	1%
6-10	17%	17%	22%	28%	16%	0%
11-18	8%	13%	20%	28%	30%	1%
19-27	5%	8%	20%	31%	32%	3%
28-37	2%	5%	10%	28%	40%	15%
38-60	1%	2%	10%	19%	29%	40%

# ? May 27, 2014 14:25

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

I don't even know what the gently caress you guys are arguing about anymore but I hate it and I blame player comps

# ? May 27, 2014 15:02

Inaction Jackson: Feb 28, 2009

The B_36 posted:

I'm bringing up the stats because I think they're important. He was playing against and WITH top level NCAA talent and produced mediocre numbers at a high efficiency. Great. So have a ton of "toolsy" guys with mind blowing measurables who teams used high picks on. They all had scouting tapes where they blew around stationary assistant coaches and dunked a lot. They all could hit a completely unguarded 15 foot jump shot and make it look smooth. They all had an eleven foot wingspan and a 63" vertical leap. They all looked really good in limited usage on their college team. GM's lose their jobs by falling in love with these type of guys.

Please stop saying that his numbers were mediocre. His per-minute numbers were fantastic, but he didn't start the season out as a starter, had injury problems, and had foul trouble issues. Feel free to criticize the reasons why he was only playing about 20 minutes per game, but his production was great in the minutes. He wasn't being hid on offense at all - his 24.4% usage rate was just behind Wiggins at 25.4%.

11.2/8.1 and 2.6 blocks per game is insane for only playing 23 minutes a game. Especially when most teams we played tried to double every post touch he got.

You're also comparing Embiid to a bunch of guys who could jump out of the gym but had no game beyond that. Embiid isn't an interesting prospect just because of measurables - it's because he's got an insanely varied and fluid post game. People call him raw, but he has the best back to the basket game in this draft by a wide margin. He isn't raw in the same way that Andre Drummond was, and I don't think he's the same caliber of explosive athlete that Drummond is. Embiid is raw in that he's still learning how to fit into offensive and defensive schemes, but when you get the ball in his hands with his back to the basket, then he is far more developed than your average big man prospect.

# ? May 27, 2014 15:18

kiimo: Jul 24, 2003

Did someone say he'd "literally be Olajuwon?" I don't remember reading that. He just moves like him and there are similarities. There are plenty of differences, Hakeem improved dramatically between his freshman and sophomore year and Embiid hasn't gotten there yet. Hakeem was 6'9 and beastly strong so they don't even directly compare physically. Instead of people who never watched Embiid conjuring up opinions out of reading box scores why not let professional scouts who know what they're talking about sway your opinion? I mean if you're going to ignore the mountain of evidence right in front of your face countering your arguments you might as well ignore the pros too.

quote:

Scout 1: If healthy, I�m taking him no. 1 and it�s not even close.

This is how it works: We use tiers. There could be five guys in a tier, it doesn�t matter what order. Some would have the first five guys in a tier (Embiid, Parker, Wiggins, Randle, and Exum). Say Vonleh and Gordon are in the second tier.

My top tier is Embiid, by himself.

I think Embiid is the only difference-maker in the group. I like Parker and Wiggins, but if they are your best player, you are going to be in the lottery every year.

Embiid has natural instincts. I doubt he was coached on much of this stuff, considering how quick his stops have been, and that he just started playing basketball. When he takes the ball on the low block, he inside-pivots like Duncan, and he plays from there: Faces, rips through or passes. It�s awesome. I always want bigs that can punish the defense.

His feet are great and he can block shots. Look at his numbers and look at his minutes. He has a chance to be a terrific player.

Scout 2: If he�s healthy and I have a pair of balls I take him no. 1. He has legitimate size. Great hands and feet. He will block shots immediately. He doesn�t understand positioning yet, but he is further along offensively than Olajuwon was at the same stage, and he�s bigger than Hakeem. Hakeem was 6-foot-9. Embiid is 7 feet, maybe bigger, eventually. He has the best upside pick of anyone in the draft.

Scout 3: If the medical staff clears him, he should go no. 1, but people are still freaked out about Oden. Before the concerns about his back � which are real, by the way � I�d be very comfortable taking him one or two. Has all the ingredients: feet, hands, touch. I�ve watched him in practice, and he was automatic from 15 feet, which is something we didn�t see him use a lot at Kansas.

He played with a little chipiness. Some of it was immaturity, but some of it was good, which shows he is competitive. Depending on how it falls with the decision-makers, Milwaukee is the kind of team that will feel pressured to take Parker over Embiid, because of the health risks, but who knows now with new ownership.

At our level, there has to be some motivation to get better. Are you doing it for you, or other people? With his background, you hope he really loves the game. But he seems focused and competitive.

Russillo: Agree with Scout 1. He�s my favorite player in this class. They don�t make guys like this very often. Usually, when you see a guy at 7 feet who has barely played, he is a total project. It sounds like a simple question, but I always ask myself, �Can he play basketball?� Embiid can. His improvement from month to month is unlike anything I�ve ever seen.

He catches in the post, cross-court passes to an open shooter, and is comfortable catching on the roll off a screen. His feet and timing on jumps are special; defensively he will anchor a team. In a league that is going smaller and smaller, a big that can move like he can is an advantage every night.

I realize this all changes if his back is a serious problem, but I don�t want to hear that because Greg Oden got hurt that you can�t draft Embiid. That�s like saying, �I don�t sign Japanese pitchers because Daisuke Matsuzaka was terrible.�

# ? May 27, 2014 16:13

cisneros: Apr 18, 2006

Yeah, one of the things that was lost in time is that Hakeem was never 7 feet tall, they just listed him as that to make Ralph Sampson feel better.

# ? May 27, 2014 16:18

District Selectman: Jan 22, 2012; by Lowtax

In 1974 Bill Walton went Top 5 and is ranked 65 All Time!

In 1984 Hakeem, Jordan and Barkley went in the Top 5 and are ranked 2, 3 and 17 All Time!

In 1994 Jason Kidd, Grant Hill were drafted Top 5 and are ranked 26 and 68 All Time!

In 2004, Dwight Howard was drafted Top 5 and ranks 86 All Time!

Clearly by the rules of the ending in '4 Draft Guide Lines, there will be at least one Top 100 All Time player in this draft.

# ? May 27, 2014 16:27

Probably Magic: Oct 9, 2012; Looking cute, feeling cute.

District Selectman posted:

In 1974 Bill Walton went Top 5 and is ranked 65 All Time!

In 1984 Hakeem, Jordan and Barkley went in the Top 5 and are ranked 2, 3 and 17 All Time!

In 1994 Jason Kidd, Grant Hill were drafted Top 5 and are ranked 26 and 68 All Time!

In 2004, Dwight Howard was drafted Top 5 and ranks 86 All Time!

Clearly by the rules of the ending in '4 Draft Guide Lines, there will be at least one Top 100 All Time player in this draft.

And that player will be Marcus Smart.

# ? May 27, 2014 17:44

kiimo: Jul 24, 2003

Another thing needs to be said here, those saying that Embiid going number one over Wiggins is crazy are ignoring Wiggins' problems. This scout sums it up better than me...

quote:

Scout 3: In general, interesting kid. In fairness to him he played in a very restricted system at Kansas. All interchangeable parts with designated spots, a lot of structure. When he got the ball, there wasn�t a lot of room to create. He didn�t force things, dealt with it well, but sometimes it hurt his rep. Not anywhere near ready, mentally, to take things over, which is unfair to say at this stage. Game isn�t to the level of his athleticism. Humble, coachable, a positive kid, all good things.

Needs go-to moves. He doesn�t have them yet. He has a high dribble. This is normal for a kid his age. Even Kobe and T-Mac struggled out of high school with go-to moves.

He needs to add a whole bunch of other stuff to be the scorer people think he can be. He needs to forget shooting 3s. His shot isn�t great, but it isn�t broken. It�s not as bad as Kidd-Gilchrist where you say, �Where do we start?�

Great natural movement. An NBA coach can still play him right away because he can defend. He defends the wings in isolation, which is extremely valuable. Physically he can do this right away.

Scout 2: I think in the draft, if Embiid is healthy, Wiggins goes no. 3. He will be lost in an NBA half-court offense. He is great in transition, but he has no ball skills. All right hand, no idea what to do without the ball. He struggles with confidence. He actually reminds me more of Gerald Green than any of these studs he�s compared to.

He�s an erratic shooter and has no plan when attacking the rim. He will be easy to coach against with his limited game right now. Needs to find out what playing hard is. He tries hard, but I don�t see that second gear. He would scare me as your franchise�s no. 1 pick, with all the stuff that will go along with being no. 1 in this class. Is he really a face of the franchise?

Defensively he can be a stopper right away. A lot of these coaches want to break down these young guys and limit their minutes because they don�t trust them defensively. With him you can play him the minutes you need to develop him because, defensively, he�s already there.

edit: this scout saying Wiggins should ignore shooting threes is being idiotic btw so take this opinion with a grain of salt. He just has work to do.

# ? May 27, 2014 17:49

euphronius: Feb 18, 2009

quote:

He is great in transition, but he has no ball skills. All right hand, no idea what to do without the ball. He struggles with confidence.

The draftexpress breakdown shows these weaknesses really well.

# ? May 27, 2014 17:53

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

POWER FORWARDS SO POWERFUL

Julius Randle (Fr., Kentucky)

PF, 6'9, 250 lbs.

Pros: The Carlos Boozer of making faces, excellent scorer, already has go-to post moves, excellent rebounder, explosive, skilled at getting to the line, plays within himself, strong

Cons: Can't play a lick of defense. Has no arms. Might be short for position or maybe he's not who knows what's a power forward anyways? Upside could be limited. Weak passer.

Player comp that is a reflection of playstyle and not of overall potential: ~~The platonic ideal of Josh Smith~~ DeJuan Blair

Doug McDermott (Sr., Creighton)

PF, 6'8, 220 lbs.

Pros: Unbelievably efficient, fantastic shooter, not totally unathletic, crafty scorer

Cons: Stuck between the 3 and 4. Can't defend. Will likely never be more than a third option. Pretty much only a scorer.

Player comp that is a reflection of playstyle and not of overall potential: Shorter Dirk Nowitzki I guess? I swear it takes me like three times as long to think of a player comp as it does to write the rest of the stupid profile

Aaron Gordon (Fr., Arizona)

PF/SF, 6'9, 220 lbs.

Pros: Crazy athletic, good at dunking, shows excellent defensive potential, seems to have given up on playing SF full-time, fairly good passer, finishes well at the rim

Cons: Cannot create his own shot. Offensive potential is very unclear at this point. 5.1% body fat means that he is not suited to living in an arctic environment.

Player comp that is a reflection of playstyle and not of overall potential: Hakim Warrick

T.J. Warren (Ju., NC State)

PF/SF, 6'8, 220 lbs.

Pros: Fantastic scorer, great finisher, versatile midrange game, good in transition, excellent assortment of floaters and runners

Cons: Can't create offense for others. Range stops at about 18 feet. Awful mechanics on jumper.

Player comp that is a reflection of playstyle and not of overall potential: Alex English with a busted jumper

Declan MacManus fucked around with this message at 18:36 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 18:10

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

kiimo posted:

Another thing needs to be said here, those saying that Embiid going number one over Wiggins is crazy are ignoring Wiggins' problems. This scout sums it up better than me...

edit: this scout saying Wiggins should ignore shooting threes is being idiotic btw so take this opinion with a grain of salt. He just has work to do.

Most scouts are retarded on an individual level and drafting is done with an aggregate of scout opinions as well as the general manager and scouting director's own observations.

# ? May 27, 2014 18:12

MourningView: Sep 2, 2006; Is this Heaven?

Julius Randle as Josh Smith seems to totally ingore that Josh Smith has at times been really really good on defense, step your dumb comparison game up, son.

# ? May 27, 2014 18:28

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

I'd argue that Josh Smith has been really good on defense for most of his career but on the other hand I couldn't think of any guys who took all of their shots really close to the basket who weren't +defenders or Jeremy Evans

E: Oh wait I thought of one

# ? May 27, 2014 18:35

MourningView: Sep 2, 2006; Is this Heaven?

Jefferson is probably the obvious one although not perfect for a lot of reasons. I like the Blair one though.

# ? May 27, 2014 18:38

morestuff: Aug 2, 2008; You can't stop what's coming

Are the Z-Bo comparisons just because he's a baby-faced doughboy?

# ? May 27, 2014 18:54

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

morestuff posted:

Are the Z-Bo comparisons just because he's a baby-faced doughboy?

More or less, yeah. They're also the same height, roughly.

# ? May 27, 2014 18:58

Kibner: Oct 21, 2008; #1 Pelican Fan

Declan, I appreciate the comparisons.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:02

straight up brolic: Jan 31, 2007; After all, I was nice in ball,
Came to practice weed scented
Report card like the speed limit

andrew wiggins is a one armed t-mac with the vertical of vince carter

# ? May 27, 2014 19:09

Doltos: Dec 28, 2005; 🤌🤌🤌

Could you compare prospects to different types of food instead?

Randle is clearly a happy meal

# ? May 27, 2014 19:09

straight up brolic: Jan 31, 2007; After all, I was nice in ball,
Came to practice weed scented
Report card like the speed limit

randle is more of a salisbury steak in this posters opinion

wiggins is tempura lobster

embiid is white truffles

parker is creme br�l�e

aaron gordon is hot wings

# ? May 27, 2014 19:15

kiimo: Jul 24, 2003

Smart is fried rice covered in sriracha.

Hmmm. I might get chinese for lunch.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:16

Declan MacManus: Sep 1, 2011; damn i'm really in this bitch

you are all the worst

# ? May 27, 2014 19:22

The Glumslinger: Sep 24, 2008; Coach Nagy, you want me to throw to WHAT side of the field?; Hair Elf

mynameisjohn posted:

randle is more of a salisbury steak in this posters opinion

wiggins is tempura lobster

embiid is white truffles

parker is creme br�l�e

aaron gordon is hot wings

I think Embiid is Scallops. If prepared properly, they're amazing. If you gently caress up, they lovely little hockey pucks.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:24

euphronius: Feb 18, 2009

#1- I have no idea who Cleveland is going to take.
#2- I have no idea who Milwaukee is going to take.
#3- I have no idea who Philly is going to take.

Embiid, Wiggins, Parker?

# ? May 27, 2014 19:26

kiimo: Jul 24, 2003

Philly has the easiest draft this year. Take who is left, compliment that person with the 10th pick.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:29

chilihead: Nov 5, 2010; Is this real life, or is this fantasy?

After reading posts on Truebluenation i am convinced the Magic do have an interest in Dante Exum, i'm just not sure how much of it is a smokescreen.
I am convinced that Embiid,Wiggins and Parker are going before pick 4. Now someone here explain to me, is the interest in Exum a smokescreen? If not, why is he a good pick at number 4, i just don't see it.
I still think Smart is the second best guard in the draft and honestly i think they take a big man here.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 16, 2024 09:34

Blinkman987: Jul 10, 2008; Gender roles guilt me into being fat.

I haven't been able to comfortably buy a Bucks jersey after being burnt by Bogut/Jennings purchases, so please be instantly good. Whichever one you pick.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:44

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > NBA Draft 2014 Part 3: Will Alston Declares, Alstonmania Sweeps Thread

«‹›41 »