PDA

View Full Version : Josh



BlueDevilBaby
06-28-2007, 10:03 PM
Goes to Portland. He may do all right with Oden, being a forward with Oden. Best of luck

A-Tex Devil
06-28-2007, 10:06 PM
Front line of Oden, Aldridge and McRoberts. Roy at point. Hell, maybe even Stevie Francis can contribute a bit. That team could be good.

gep
06-28-2007, 10:09 PM
Maybe Josh plays better when he's not the main go-to guy, and the main man on the team... like his freshman year. So, maybe with Oden, he'll work out just fine...

VaDukie
06-28-2007, 10:11 PM
Bilas made the point that he made his reputation as a high school player in part because of his performance on the AAU team with Oden; I think it may be for the best and hopefully like Boozer, Duhon, and Ewing he makes his mark and gets a good contract sooner than others.

WeepingThomasHill
06-28-2007, 10:12 PM
if you think McRoberts is going to start with Oden and Aldridge. McRoberts will need to bring something special to even make the team. He is going to need to beat out the cagey Raef LaFrentz for bench minutes.

crote
06-28-2007, 10:14 PM
Front line of Oden, Aldridge and McRoberts. Roy at point.

They also brought in Channing Frye in the Randolph deal and the Spanish guy Fernandez from the Suns. That's a really potent group of young bigs.

A-Tex Devil
06-28-2007, 10:14 PM
I was half joking. But it looks like he's gonna be a sixer now.

Edited to say -- ESPN is confusing me. There was a "T" by his pick. NOw it's gone. Still a BLazer

Saratoga2
06-28-2007, 10:21 PM
if you think McRoberts is going to start with Oden and Aldridge. McRoberts will need to bring something special to even make the team. He is going to need to beat out the cagey Raef LaFrentz for bench minutes.

I agree, Josh will have his hands full getting playing time for Portland. Dropping to 37 was quite a fall for him, as he would have been taken much earlier had he come out last year. You can see now how NBA scouts and coaches rated him. Many more power forwards were taken ahead of him. He will have to improve significantly to earn playing time at the NBA level. He was an intense player for Duke and for that I thank him and wish him well going forward.

lavell12
06-28-2007, 10:30 PM
Portland will trade either Josh, Fyre, or Aldridge for an experienced Point Guard.

phaedrus
06-28-2007, 10:41 PM
Maybe Josh plays better when he's not the main go-to guy, and the main man on the team... like his freshman year. So, maybe with Oden, he'll work out just fine...

13 points, 7.9 boards, 3.5 assists, 2.5 blocks, 50.2% from the field in 35 minutes sophomore year.

8.7 points, 5.3 boards, 1.5 assists, 1.3 blocks, 60.5% from the field in 25 minutes freshman year.

which year looks better to you?

mjones723
06-28-2007, 10:58 PM
I hate that he fell that far, but perhaps if he had hit a LAYUP AT ANY MOMENT ALL YEAR he would have gone higher. :)

RockyMtDevil
06-28-2007, 10:58 PM
Who was telling Josh he was a first rounder? this could be one of the worst, see Will Avery, Duke draft moves in recent years. Josh simply is not that great of a player and it proved itself out tonight. he's a freakishly crazy athlete, but you actually need to put that round ball in the bucket every once in a while to play in the nba...I'm not surprised at all that a guy who cannot shot, who seems to have an attitude problem, and doesn't have a set position was selected as a dark horse in round two.

What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

gep
06-28-2007, 11:00 PM
phaedrus... thanks a bunch for the stats. I was just going on "gut feel" of what was expected vs what was accomplished between freshman and sophomore years. He wasn't expected much as a freshman, but did well. He was expected to be the man as a sophomore, and by most accounts, was a disappointment... even if his stats were better...

DavidBenAkiva
06-28-2007, 11:00 PM
That's a really young front line!

What is the situation with Darius Miles? Is he still with Portland?

I feel bad for Josh, but I doubt that he'll have trouble contributing. The trailblazers have assembled a team that will have Oden, Aldridge, Channing Frye, Raef Lafrentz, Joel Pryzbila and Josh McRoberts. Except for Lafrentz, those guys are all young and very tall. McRoberts may be the second-best defender of the group and he's certainly going to bring some skills that the others do not. With Oden and Aldridge planted down low, I can see McRoberts racking up the assists, blocks, and offensive rebounds that will make him very useful.

It's amazing to think back to the Goergetown game where McRoberts did an excellent job defending Roy Hibbert and Jeff Green, who was taken #5 overall and now watching him fall all the way to the second round. I think that the lesson about Duke players being good pros hasn't really been "learned" by the NBA, but we can only wait and see... Sean Williams at #17?!?!? That was really stupid...

gep
06-28-2007, 11:02 PM
What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

What about Shav? but I think injuries and "bulk" were also factors...

VaDukie
06-28-2007, 11:04 PM
Who was telling Josh he was a first rounder? this could be one of the worst, see Will Avery, Duke draft moves in recent years. Josh simply is not that great of a player and it proved itself out tonight. he's a freakishly crazy athlete, but you actually need to put that round ball in the bucket every once in a while to play in the nba...I'm not surprised at all that a guy who cannot shot, who seems to have an attitude problem, and doesn't have a set position was selected as a dark horse in round two.

What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

I didn't see a mock draft that had Josh out of the 1st round. This reflects how deep this draft is and how volatile it has become. I'm sad to see him fall this far; I hope he goes and proves all those teams wrong.

crote
06-28-2007, 11:16 PM
What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league.

Say what? I'm pretty sure Elton Brand didn't hit his athletic peak while he was at Duke, nor Lebron while he was at St. Vincent/St. Mary, nor Tony Parker while he was in France, nor pretty much any other NBA player while he was in college/high school/another country. Everyone who belongs in the NBA improves their game while they're there. If they don't, they're probably a very limited and mediocre player and no amount of college prep could have changed that.

Josh showed a lot of raw talent while he was at Duke, he just wasn't ever able to put it all together. It's very presumptuous to assume he won't get any better in the NBA.

bhd28
06-28-2007, 11:30 PM
Who was telling Josh he was a first rounder? this could be one of the worst, see Will Avery, Duke draft moves in recent years. Josh simply is not that great of a player and it proved itself out tonight. he's a freakishly crazy athlete, but you actually need to put that round ball in the bucket every once in a while to play in the nba...I'm not surprised at all that a guy who cannot shot, who seems to have an attitude problem, and doesn't have a set position was selected as a dark horse in round two.

What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

I totally agree. Josh and that guy Boozer will be total busts in the NBA. They were silly to leave Duke so early and will never be successful in the NBA.

delfrio
06-28-2007, 11:38 PM
What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

Wasn't there just an article about Duke players in the NBA linked off the front page that praised K for preparing players for NBA development?

Exiled_Devil
06-28-2007, 11:39 PM
Josh simply is not that great of a player and it proved itself out tonight. ....

What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

Draft position does not determine greatness. In fact, I would argue that it is only marginally tied to how long and how well a player does in the association. I don't have hard numbers to back this up, but I'm going to say that for every superstar picked at #1-#5 story, there is at least 2 stories about someone picked higher who bombed.

There have already been posts about your error in judgment of lack of development in the NBA, but let me add that Boozer has certainly outplayed his draft rank (as has Duhon) and he has improved in his time in the pros as well.

All the draft tells us is what people think of payers today, when thy have never played a pro game. I'd give Josh a decent chance of outlasting a couple of the first rounders in the draft for longevity and performance. I'm certainly unclear how Noah was picked so far in front of him - on the list of 'power forwards better then McBob', Noah was way down there in my book. Thornton will outperform him ( and Josh) for years to come.

The draft is more fun when we have a couple of players in the top 10.

Exiled

JasonEvans
06-28-2007, 11:44 PM
Portland had a ridiculous good draft. Not only did they get Oden, but gettin Josh and Byars in the second round is absurd. Both those guys are first round talent, as indicated by both of them being in virtually every mock first round.

Bringing in Stevie to score from the perimeter too... WOW!!

The team competes for the title in 2 years, I am betting. And when Duncan and Nash both retire in a few, Portland will rule the NBA. We will look back on tonight and wonder how the heck Portland pulled this off. Josh and Byars in the middle of the 2nd round... unreal.

-Jason "Josh has some skills that will translate beautifully to the next level-- and he will excell playing with Oden again" Evans

gep
06-28-2007, 11:49 PM
Jay Bilas just said that Portland is his "winner" all around. The get Greg Oden, and surround him with "character guys"... like Josh. I hope it works out for Josh...

hc5duke
06-28-2007, 11:52 PM
Bringing in Stevie to score from the perimeter too... WOW!!

Maybe I'm just a biased Rockets fan, but I wouldn't want an NBA pg who can't even palm a basketball (not to mention pass it ;)).

HK Dukie
06-29-2007, 12:23 AM
13 points, 7.9 boards, 3.5 assists, 2.5 blocks, 50.2% from the field in 35 minutes sophomore year.

8.7 points, 5.3 boards, 1.5 assists, 1.3 blocks, 60.5% from the field in 25 minutes freshman year.

which year looks better to you?

I don't see much difference in these numbers. When you adjust per minute you get:

.37ppm vs .35
.23rpm vs .21
.10apm vs .06
.07bpm vs .05
50% vs 60% shooting

There is not much statistical improvement here especially as the #1 option vs the #3. 50% shooting vs 60%? That is clearly not as good.

That said, I will root like hell for McRoberts in the NBA. I love the fact that he is going to Portland with his buddy Oden (assuming no trades). Remember Oden wanted Conley? Perhaps this was a hat-tip to Oden to draft his bud especially in the 2nd round where he is a steal. That was an absolute no brainer pick by them. Make your new big guy happy, get him someone to hang with, get someone who is unselfish (sometimes to a fault), with freakish upside if all goes well. I like all of you wish he could have put the pieces together better at Duke, but regardless he is a Dukie for life and I will cheer for him.

pfrduke
06-29-2007, 12:54 AM
What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league.

I'm sorry, but this is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on this board. The list of players whose games have improved since they entered the NBA is probably too long to post here since it includes almost every player in the history of the league. You can't honestly think that people are at their ceiling the day they enter the NBA, and then never progress in their game.

BluBones
06-29-2007, 12:56 AM
I like all of you wish he could have put the pieces together better at Duke, but regardless he is a Dukie for life and I will cheer for him.

Well said.

italiancrazie
06-29-2007, 02:30 AM
Will Portland offer him a contract?

JasonEvans
06-29-2007, 06:49 AM
Portland had a ridiculous good draft. Not only did they get Oden, but gettin Josh and Byars in the second round is absurd. Both those guys are first round talent, as indicated by both of them being in virtually every mock first round.

Bringing in Stevie to score from the perimeter too... WOW!!

The team competes for the title in 2 years, I am betting. And when Duncan and Nash both retire in a few, Portland will rule the NBA. We will look back on tonight and wonder how the heck Portland pulled this off. Josh and Byars in the middle of the 2nd round... unreal.

-Jason "Josh has some skills that will translate beautifully to the next level-- and he will excell playing with Oden again" Evans

My bad, they traded the rights to Byars. Stil, Portland had an amazing draft.

And they will offer Josh a guaranteed contract-- probably 2 years at about $500k per year. That is fairly standard for a 1st round talent that slips into the early-mid 2nd round. No guarantee he will make the team, but the fact that he is an old friend of Oden's will work for him a great deal, I would think.

-Jason "Josh needs to learn that he needs to work to succeed-- if he does, he can be a big success" Evans

dukelifer
06-29-2007, 07:17 AM
In some ways this could prove to be the best thing to happen to Josh. He will need to prove himself- he can play with a bit of a chip on his shoulder and get a little more selfish- a little more focused. He will need to really work at his game- particularly shooting. Josh made the decision to leave Duke- so you cannot feel sorry for him. If he had raised his game as a junior- he would have been an easy first rounder in 2008. But he chose not to and with that decision comes the consequences. Nothing comes easy from here on out - nothing is guaranteed. Only time will tell if he is up to the challenge to work hard.

Highlander
06-29-2007, 07:34 AM
I was just thinking that Coach K's detractors could now point to McRoberts and say "See! Coach K convinced Josh to come back for his sophomore year and it cost Josh $$. K doesn't care about his players, and his selfishness costs them money."

Of course, if Josh had come out last year as a lottery pick and been a bust, they would have said, "See! Coach K can't develop NBA talent," so I guess you have to pick your poison. [Lord Ash - Take Note. This is how your SportingNews guy's logic works]

I do find it interesting that so many people here are bagging on Josh saying they knew he wouldn't be great as a pro. It seems like this time last year I was reading here on these boards that Hansbrough might be better than Josh in college, but Josh's game would translate MUCH better in the NBA.

I wish Josh all the best with his new team. I held my breath when the Knicks picked, and sighed in relief as he didn't go there. It could have been much worse for him. That said, I think that he has a great opportunity here to show (for the third time) that Duke players taken in the second round are a huge bargain. Good luck to him...

Saratoga2
06-29-2007, 08:59 AM
Draft position does not determine greatness. In fact, I would argue that it is only marginally tied to how long and how well a player does in the association. I don't have hard numbers to back this up, but I'm going to say that for every superstar picked at #1-#5 story, there is at least 2 stories about someone picked higher who bombed.

There have already been posts about your error in judgment of lack of development in the NBA, but let me add that Boozer has certainly outplayed his draft rank (as has Duhon) and he has improved in his time in the pros as well.

All the draft tells us is what people think of payers today, when thy have never played a pro game. I'd give Josh a decent chance of outlasting a couple of the first rounders in the draft for longevity and performance. I'm certainly unclear how Noah was picked so far in front of him - on the list of 'power forwards better then McBob', Noah was way down there in my book. Thornton will outperform him ( and Josh) for years to come.

The draft is more fun when we have a couple of players in the top 10.

Exiled

I agree that there are a number of forwards chosen ahead of Josh that have issues and also have suspect games. Josh will, make it or not, on the basis of his continual improvement. People who watched Duke know his strengths and weaknesses as well as the NBA scouts. Perhaps they just felt his weaknesses were more of a problem at the NBA level.

Strengths: Good athleticism, very good ball handling and passing, good defensively and decent rebounding.

Weaknesses: Undeveloped post moves, no real basis to assume he has a short, midrange or longrange jump shot.

I feel it is more difficult to develop someone's offensive game at the NBA level and tend to agree that he was slotted correctly as either a late first round pick or an early second rounder. Anyhow, I am pulling for his development and success at the NBA level.

kexman
06-29-2007, 09:14 AM
Not only McRoberts, but almost all of the college players should have left last year. Since the freshman had to go to college, last years draft was incredibly weak. Without thinking about it I'm sure several people improved their draft status with a strong collegiate year, but last years draft was very weak and would have been a great year to come out. Of course college ball is probably more fun than sitting the pine in the NBA.

TampaDuke
06-29-2007, 09:32 AM
Bringing in Stevie to score from the perimeter too... WOW!!



I agree Portland had a good draft, which would be hard not to do with the first pick this year, but acquiring Steve Francis (unless he has an expiring contract) is a negative IMO. He's not the Steve Francis of old from the Maryland and early Rockets years. He's been an extremely-overpaid cancer on each of the teams he's come into contact with and I doubt the opportunity to play in Portland will change his attitude or game much in the foreseeable future. This one Isaiah got right.

bhd28
06-29-2007, 09:52 AM
I agree Portland had a good draft, which would be hard not to do with the first pick this year, but acquiring Steve Francis (unless he has an expiring contract) is a negative IMO. He's not the Steve Francis of old from the Maryland and early Rockets years. He's been an extremely-overpaid cancer on each of the teams he's come into contact with and I doubt the opportunity to play in Portland will change his attitude or game much in the foreseeable future. This one Isaiah got right.

Steve's contract is this coming year and the next - 2008/9 (vs Randolph's lasting through 2011, I think). Frye has a club option after this year (the team decides if they keep him for an extra 2 years). I agree that Francis is not an ideal option for them... they should have tried to get Richard Jefferson, or some other SF for Randolph, but it does at least give them some cap flexibility sooner. That may give them the flexibility to make a big FA splash before re-upping Roy and Aldridge.

dukeisawesome
06-29-2007, 09:57 AM
My prediction: McRoberts will play less than 1000 minutes and be out of the league within a year.

dukie8
06-29-2007, 09:58 AM
Draft position does not determine greatness. In fact, I would argue that it is only marginally tied to how long and how well a player does in the association. I don't have hard numbers to back this up, but I'm going to say that for every superstar picked at #1-#5 story, there is at least 2 stories about someone picked higher who bombed.

There have already been posts about your error in judgment of lack of development in the NBA, but let me add that Boozer has certainly outplayed his draft rank (as has Duhon) and he has improved in his time in the pros as well.

All the draft tells us is what people think of payers today, when thy have never played a pro game. I'd give Josh a decent chance of outlasting a couple of the first rounders in the draft for longevity and performance. I'm certainly unclear how Noah was picked so far in front of him - on the list of 'power forwards better then McBob', Noah was way down there in my book. Thornton will outperform him ( and Josh) for years to come.

The draft is more fun when we have a couple of players in the top 10.

Exiled

you have to be kidding me. boozer is the extreme exception to the rule. most players who get drafted in the 2nd round do NOT become superstars (many don't even make the team that drafted them). most superstars were drafted in the first round. sliding to the 2nd round, with no guaranteed contract, is a BIG set-back.

willywoody
06-29-2007, 10:07 AM
My prediction: McRoberts will play less than 1000 minutes and be out of the league within a year.

that's only going to happen if his back goes out.

and i'm wondering if his back is part of the reason he fell to the second round?

dukie8
06-29-2007, 10:18 AM
that's only going to happen if his back goes out.

and i'm wondering if his back is part of the reason he fell to the second round?

why is everyone so incredulous about his slippage? you all saw him play this year so it should be obvious that he cannot score unless it is a dunk. there are very very few players in the nba who cannot make a lay-up or a 7-foot jump shot. his leaving after his sophmore year is the most stupid early leaving decision at duke. this is much worse than avery because mcbob knew that this was one of the deepest drafts in history, he wasn't going to be academically ineligible next year (and thereby forced to enter the draft) and his family is much better off than avery's was so money was much less of an issue.

phaedrus
06-29-2007, 10:38 AM
sliding to the 2nd round, with no guaranteed contract, is a BIG set-back.

aside from the guaranteed contract, it means nothing. he's either going to make it in the league or he's not. it doesn't matter if he was picked 3rd overall or if he didn't get picked at all.

i have no issue with posters criticizing mcroberts or paulus or nelson when they don't meet expectations during the season. but it seems like there are at least a few people who are rooting for josh to fail (even if not openly).

jaimedun34
06-29-2007, 10:39 AM
IMO, regarding development in the NBA... I think the NBA does a better job of teaching skills and developing players physically rather than teaching them how to play the game. That is why college is so important, IMO. NBA coaches don't have the time (or the tolerance) to teach a 20 year old the principles of the motion offense or the pick and roll. Josh has the IQ to be a factor in the league. What he doesn't have is the strength or the polish that he needed to be an impact player right now...

An article from dukeupdate.com said that Josh wasn't in the mood to talk right now... He strikes me as a player who had an inflated view of himself and maybe a poor season for the team at Duke wasn't enough of a reality shock to make him wake up. IMO it's better for him to be humbled by being a second round selection. He probably thought he could get by on potential, but the scouts weren't fooled.

I still think he can be a Vlade Divac without the flopping.

phaedrus, I agree. Josh wasn't my favorite player at Duke, but I've gotten over being angry with him for being immature. I wish him well and I'll root for him, but I don't want to hear the "K didn't develop him" BS. K can't lift the weights for you, and he can't put the hours in the gym shooting jumpshots for you, either.

dukie8
06-29-2007, 10:56 AM
aside from the guaranteed contract, it means nothing. he's either going to make it in the league or he's not. it doesn't matter if he was picked 3rd overall or if he didn't get picked at all.

i have no issue with posters criticizing mcroberts or paulus or nelson when they don't meet expectations during the season. but it seems like there are at least a few people who are rooting for josh to fail (even if not openly).

that simply is not true. if you are a first rounder with a guaranteed contract, you have a much much bigger safety net and basically don't have to worry about being cut for 2 years. if you are a second rounder, you can get cut at any time (and many do). if you stink as a second rounder, you summarily get cut and have to go to europe or the development league to try and improve. if you stink as a first rounder, you have 2 years to work things out and improve while still in the nba. having a guaranteed contract is a big deal and i don't understand why you are so dismissive of it.

Clipsfan
06-29-2007, 10:59 AM
Who was telling Josh he was a first rounder? this could be one of the worst, see Will Avery, Duke draft moves in recent years. Josh simply is not that great of a player and it proved itself out tonight. he's a freakishly crazy athlete, but you actually need to put that round ball in the bucket every once in a while to play in the nba...I'm not surprised at all that a guy who cannot shot, who seems to have an attitude problem, and doesn't have a set position was selected as a dark horse in round two.

What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

Given that most of the talking heads put him between 17 and 21, I would guess that many people were telling him that he was a first rounder.

SoCalDukeFan
06-29-2007, 11:07 AM
The NBA draft is about potential and competition. After Josh's high school year he seemed to be regarded as someone with upside and a first rounder, etc. His two years at Duke exposed his weaknesses which are documented elsewhere. So he should have come out before going to Duke or last year when the draft was shallow.

This year the draft is deep and his weaknesses have been exposed, so he went deep in the second round.

Next year's draft will not be as deep. Maybe he could have worked on his scoring and improved his stock. A full season without a back problem would also have helped. I have no real knowledge of his financial situation or grades, but assume that after another school year he would be that much closer to getting a degree.

I will be pleasantly surprised if he has much of a career in the NBA.

SoCal

Clipsfan
06-29-2007, 11:08 AM
that simply is not true. if you are a first rounder with a guaranteed contract, you have a much much bigger safety net and basically don't have to worry about being cut for 2 years. if you are a second rounder, you can get cut at any time (and many do). if you stink as a second rounder, you summarily get cut and have to go to europe or the development league to try and improve. if you stink as a first rounder, you have 2 years to work things out and improve while still in the nba. having a guaranteed contract is a big deal and i don't understand why you are so dismissive of it.

This is probably a good thing in Josh's case, as I think that many of us agree that he has some tremendous abilities but that he needs to work hard on his game in order to become a successful NBA player. Josh hopefully realizes that the only way that he'll stick around will be if he starts to work his butt off and improves his shot etc. I'll take the bet on whether he plays more than one year in the NBA, btw.

thebur
06-29-2007, 11:13 AM
What is scary is, how can he get any better in the nba? Nobody gets better in the league. 3 years and he may be out if he is lucky.

Carlos Boozer

Jr. Year at Duke: 18.2 PPG 8.7 RPG 1.1 APG

Last year for Utah: 20.9 PPG 11.7 RPG 3.0 APG

Now unless you think that Duke's team that year was better than the Jazz, and he didn't get the ball enough, or you think that the competition Duke was playing his junior year was inferior to the NBA, I would say he has gotten better.

In fact, most of the very talented (read: first round) Duke players that we have go to the pros show a fairly steady improvement over the early part of their careers. I think Coach K teaches well the importance of self-evaluation, and we know how much he stresses hard work, especially in the offseason when these guys do much of their improving.

Hector Vector
06-29-2007, 11:14 AM
Personally, I'm astounded Josh dropped as low as he did, and, unless the back was really an issue, I think he must have developed a universal rep. as a bad guy. While he didn't do the star turn we needed this year, he still is 6'11", very good athlete, great ball handler and passer for his size, and was a very good defender; highly coveted attributes in the nba. I'm not saying he should have been a lottery pick, but he basically had the same stats as Joakim Noah. I would have thought good teams like Houston, SA, Utah would jump at the chance to add him as a 15-20 mpg backup as a rookie, with a chance to develop into a good starter. A guy with these attributes falling to mid second round (behind Aaron Brooks Carl Landry, etc.) is a complete upset.

I predict he will succeed in Portland although he will have to work it to get minutes with Aldridge and Frye at PF. Good for both Josh and Portland that Randolph is gone, really clearing the way for a new era embodied by Oden and Roy.

I could see Oden/McRoberts/Aldridge playing together on the front line in stretches.

dukeimac
06-29-2007, 11:25 AM
Josh = Shav

I'm a huge Duke fan but Josh showed me he was meek last year. At times he played great but when push came to shove he ran for the corner. I'm glad he is gone so he doesn't rub off on Zoubek.

Josh resembles Shav so much they could be twins!

phaedrus
06-29-2007, 11:40 AM
that simply is not true. if you are a first rounder with a guaranteed contract, you have a much much bigger safety net and basically don't have to worry about being cut for 2 years. if you are a second rounder, you can get cut at any time (and many do). if you stink as a second rounder, you summarily get cut and have to go to europe or the development league to try and improve. if you stink as a first rounder, you have 2 years to work things out and improve while still in the nba. having a guaranteed contract is a big deal and i don't understand why you are so dismissive of it.

you're right. i shouldn't have said it meant nothing. what i meant was, even with a guaranteed contract, if he stinks he'll be out of the league in 3 years. and without a guaranteed contract, if he doesn't stink he'll still make it in the league.

so what if he stinks at first and gets cut? he can go to the d-league or europe and improve until he gets another chance. i don't see him improving any faster by sitting on an nba bench. either way, if he fails at first, it's up to him to make things work.

the guaranteed contract is important. it's guaranteed money and means he gets three years in the nba. but whether or not josh makes it in the nba is controlled by Josh (and Josh's health), not the terms of his contract or his draft position.

Troublemaker
06-29-2007, 11:55 AM
You have to wonder how much the back issue played into Josh slipping that far. He's an extremely athletic big man with great hands, great passing skills, and can block shots. That almost always gets you into the first round on potential, as the pros will try to develop your poor scoring ability while taking a chance on your natural talents.

ehdg
06-29-2007, 12:31 PM
Wasn't there just an article about Duke players in the NBA linked off the front page that praised K for preparing players for NBA development?

Sadly I think Boozer would have been a better player with better numbers if he'd stayed in Cleveland with Lebron. He's making more money now but won't ever see a Finals being in Utah I believe. Plus the Western Conference is much tougher then the Eastern.

Johnny B
06-29-2007, 12:45 PM
Ok, it was very early this morning on my way to work (perhaps I was not fully awake) when I heard a report on ESPN radion (?Chad Forde) indicating that Josh fell in the draft because Duke were badmouthing him.

I find this hard to believe and probably an example of media guys looking for a way to bash Duke. Agreed?

Johnny B

MrBisonDevil
06-29-2007, 01:13 PM
Josh has a very good all round game. Put him on a team with 2 Star or GoTo Players, and Josh will have a good long career.

According to the website below (analysis of 2nd Round Picks)
http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1529

Those drafted in the top of the 2nd round have a 28% chance of being a solid bench player or better. Though the analysis also stated 66% will be out of the league in 5yrs.

Regardless of those stats, Josh is a solid big man with very good ball handling and passing skills. Those skills will provide Josh a long NBA career as a team contributor. He will have to find the right team chemistry.

Portland is very very young... so we will have to see how it develops.

Edit: I don't know if any of the following guys can be FAs, but Portland looks overloaded with Centers & PFs : Greg Oden, Raef LaFrentz, Josh McRoberts, Channing Frey, LaMarcus Aldridge, Jamaal Magloire, Luke Schenscher & Travis Outlaw (combo F). Eh... like all teams, we need to take a "wait & see" stance. Portland still needs a strong PG...

mehmattski
06-29-2007, 01:41 PM
if you think McRoberts is going to start with Oden and Aldridge. McRoberts will need to bring something special to even make the team. He is going to need to beat out the cagey Raef LaFrentz for bench minutes.

Don't forget the Blazers also have Luke Schenscher!

YmoBeThere
06-29-2007, 06:13 PM
Don't forget the Blazers also have Luke Schenscher!

Do they still have Jamaal Magliore also? He was a 12-10 player just a few years ago.

ACCBBallFan
06-29-2007, 08:18 PM
Josh will fare better playing with a dominant center like Oden, Duncan, Shaq, Yao, etc.

Though people cite Josh as an athlete and a surprisingly good defender, he did not score well on the NBA Athletic tests and he defended centers sophomore year in college but will be asked to defend PFs in NBA.

With Portland needing a program to know its players, a good year for Josh to be paired with Oden.

Josh obviously won't command much trade value this year to get the Blazers the PG they need, but perhaps some of these others would, and at the same time alleviate some of the over supply.

With or without Josh, Portland fared best in the draft thanks to winning the lottery rights to Oden

Portland (5) 1,24.30,37,52 Steve Francis, Channing Frye 1559
Oden, Geg/Ohio St
Fernandez, Rudy/Spain
Koponen, Petteri/Finland
McRoberts, Josh/Duke
Green, Taurean/FL
Zach Randolph, Dan Dickau, Fred Jones)

Philadelphia (4) 12,21,42,55 Young, Thad /GA T 1150
Smith, Jason/Col St
Byars, Derrick/Vandy
Hill, Herbert/Prov

Seattle (2) 2,5 Delonte West, Wally Szczerbiak 920
Durant, Kevin/TX
Green, Jeff/G-town
(Ray Allen)

Golden St (3) 8,18,46 Wright, Brandan/UNC 878
Belinelli, Marco/Italy
Lasme, Steve/UMASS
(Jason Richardson)

Atlanta (2) 3,11 Horford, Al/FL 859
Law, Acie/ A&M

Chicago (3) 9,49,51 Noah, Joakim/FL 754
Gray, Aaron/Pitt
OnCurry, James/Ok St

Detroit (3) 15,27,57 Stuckey, Rodney/ E Wash 623
Afflalo, Arron/UCLA
Meja, Sammy/DePaul

LA Lakers (3) 19,40,48 Crittenden, Javaris/GA T 597
Yue, Sun/China
Gasol, Marc/Spain

Washington (2) 16,47 Young, Nick/USC 584
McGuire, Dominic/Fresno St

San Antonio (2) 28,33, Splitter, Tiago/Brazil 563
Williams, Marcus/AZ

Milwaukee (2) 6,56 Jianlian, Yi/China 562
Sessions, Ramon/Nevada

LA Clippers (2) 14,45 Thornton, Al/FSU 507
Jordan, Jared/Marist

Utah (2) 25,38 Almond, Morris/Rice 497
Fesenko, Kyrylo/Ukraine

Boston (2) 32,35 Ray Allen 477
Pruitt, Gabe/USC
Davis, Glen/LSU
(Delonte West, Wally Szczerbiak)

Memphis (1) 4 Conley Jr, Mike/Ohio St 470

Minnesota (2) 7,41 Brewer, Corey/FL 447
Richard, Chris/FL

Dallas (3) 34,44,50 Fazekas, Nick/Nevada 442
Terry, Reyshawn/UNC
Seibutis, Ranaldas/Lithuania

Sacramento (1) 10 Hawes, Spencer/Wash 435

New York (2) 23,53 Zach Randolph, Dan Dickau, Fred Jones 432
Chandler, Wilson/DePaul
Nichols, Demetris/Syr
(Steve Francis, Channing Frye)

New Orleans (2) 13,43 Wright, Julian/ KS 409
Haluska, Adam/Iowa

Houston (2) 26,31 Brooks, Aaron/Oregon 394
Landry, Carl/Purdue

Phoenix (2) 29,59 Tucker, Alando/Wisc 370
Strawberry, D J /MD

Charlotte (2) 22,36 Jason Richardson 344
Dudley, Jared/BC
Davidson, Jamareo/Alabama

New Jersey (1) 17 Williams, Sean/BC 313

Miami (1) 20 Cook, Dequan/Ohio St 285

Indiana (1) 39 Barac, Stanko/Bosnia 107

Orlando (2) 54,60 Newley, Brad/Australia 63
Rakovic, Milovan/Serbia

Toronto (1) 58 Printezis, Girgos/Greece 18

Buckeye Devil
06-29-2007, 09:06 PM
It seems established that Oden and Josh think pretty highly of each other. That relationship will likely improve with Oden grabbing all of McBob's bricks around the basket and throwing them down.

MrBisonDevil
06-29-2007, 09:31 PM
It seems established that Oden and Josh think pretty highly of each other. That relationship will likely improve with Oden grabbing all of McBob's bricks around the basket and throwing them down.

Bricks? Let’s put this into perspective. (Ya... I know you were joking about the bricks (Ohio State vs. Duke thing... lol), but I just want to make sure we see McBob's shooting in a balanced light). :-)

McBob FG%
DU 05-06: .605
DU 06-07: .502
Granted, his FG% was against college talent

The '07 NBA FG leaders (#ranked) shot:
NBA #1 .609
NBA #25 .502
Heh, if McBob can hit 50%+ FG%, he should be in the top 25 in the league (if he gets the minimum shots needed). Not too shabby...

Note: Total number of NBA players: 442

McBobs FT%: 66% (both years at Duke)
That would put McBob at NBA Rank #128, if he carried it over to the pros (again, if he got the min shots needed)
That’s in the top 29% of the entire NBA... not bad for a big guy.

So, if his college numbers can translate (sometimes they do), then I don't think Josh majored in masonry.

Josh will be a fine pro!

Buckeye Devil
06-30-2007, 07:07 AM
Bricks? Letís put this into perspective. (Ya... I know you were joking about the bricks (Ohio State vs. Duke thing... lol), but I just want to make sure we see McBob's shooting in a balanced light). :-)

McBob FG%
DU 05-06: .605
DU 06-07: .502
Granted, his FG% was against college talent

The '07 NBA FG leaders (#ranked) shot:
NBA #1 .609
NBA #25 .502
Heh, if McBob can hit 50%+ FG%, he should be in the top 25 in the league (if he gets the minimum shots needed). Not too shabby...

Note: Total number of NBA players: 442

McBobs FT%: 66% (both years at Duke)
That would put McBob at NBA Rank #128, if he carried it over to the pros (again, if he got the min shots needed)
Thatís in the top 29% of the entire NBA... not bad for a big guy.

So, if his college numbers can translate (sometimes they do), then I don't think Josh majored in masonry.

Josh will be a fine pro!

Point well taken and your stats are helpful. But it sure seemed like he missed a lot of shots within 5 feet of the basket last season. I hope he does well and gets a lot of PT.

dukie8
06-30-2007, 08:43 AM
Ok, it was very early this morning on my way to work (perhaps I was not fully awake) when I heard a report on ESPN radion (?Chad Forde) indicating that Josh fell in the draft because Duke were badmouthing him.

I find this hard to believe and probably an example of media guys looking for a way to bash Duke. Agreed?

Johnny B

you raise an interesting question. i'm not saying that this is true, but let's assume that mcbob was lazy, never took extra shots before or after practice, didn't follow his offseason weight program and basically did the bare minimum to survive. when the nba teams put their feelers out to the duke coaches about him, do you believe that they have a duty to lie and say that he works hard or do you believe that they should be more honest? i believe that they should be more honest because, if they don't, it hurts guys who really do work their tails off. if a player doesn't want the coaches to say he is lazy, there's one easy way to prevent that -- don't be lazy.

Vincetaylor
06-30-2007, 09:33 AM
He'll probably have a pretty long career because of his height. He'll probably be a good practice player and get about 6-9 minutes a game to spell other bigs. He won't be anything more than that until he learns how to shoot and create his own shot. Most of his baskets were either dunks or lay-ups resulting from defensive breakdowns.

KrimsonKing
06-30-2007, 11:07 AM
In order for Josh to have any career in the NBA, he needs to
totally revamp his jumpshot. Thats kinda hard to do at his age.
Even at close range, Josh just throws up a line drive brick, hoping it rolls in.
have you ever seen a big man miss so many layups in one season??

The whole season, josh's attitude was pisspoor. I am surprized that K
took it in stride the way he did...
His attitude was a major turnoff for me the whole season. the facial expressions,body language: I wanted him to be kicked off the team.

I still maintain addition by subtraction.

dukie8
06-30-2007, 11:33 AM
In order for Josh to have any career in the NBA, he needs to
totally revamp his jumpshot. Thats kinda hard to do at his age.
Even at close range, Josh just throws up a line drive brick, hoping it rolls in.
have you ever seen a big man miss so many layups in one season??

The whole season, josh's attitude was pisspoor. I am surprized that K
took it in stride the way he did...
His attitude was a major turnoff for me the whole season. the facial expressions,body language: I wanted him to be kicked off the team.

I still maintain addition by subtraction.

how can you possibly judge his attitude based on the snippets you saw on tv? how was hurley's attitude his freshman year because he showed much worse facial expressions and and body language on tv than mcbob did this year. should k have benched him? i'm not saying that he had a good attitude (i have no idea) but i also wouldn't judge his attitude based on the little bit you saw of him on tv twice a week this winter.

Oriole Way
06-30-2007, 11:52 AM
He'll probably have a pretty long career because of his height. He'll probably be a good practice player and get about 6-9 minutes a game to spell other bigs. He won't be anything more than that until he learns how to shoot and create his own shot. Most of his baskets were either dunks or lay-ups resulting from defensive breakdowns.

Josh will have a great NBA career, then, considering there is no defense played in the NBA whatsoever.

cspan37421
06-30-2007, 12:17 PM
how can you possibly judge his attitude based on the snippets you saw on tv? how was hurley's attitude his freshman year because he showed much worse facial expressions and and body language on tv than mcbob did this year. should k have benched him? i'm not saying that he had a good attitude (i have no idea) but i also wouldn't judge his attitude based on the little bit you saw of him on tv twice a week this winter.

A couple differences:

Hurley was a freshman vs. McBob Soph
Hurley - IIRC his "worse" facial expressions were displayed primarily at refs. (always thought he was fouled). McBob - displayed at teammates who weren't where he thought they would be.

I admit, I don't know enough hoops to know who was at fault when McBob passed to an empty spot on the floor. But it happened a lot and he seemed to blame the intended recipient - Scheyer got a lot of ugly looks from him, IIRC.

As for attitude, if you can't judge based on a couple games per week, then you can't judge at all unless you're in the locker room with them. And that's an OK point to make. But I think it is a little unrealistic to expect people not to form impressions over time from what they see on TV. Dukie8, do you resist forming an impression of Rasheed Wallace's attitude based on what you see on TV?

dukie8
06-30-2007, 12:36 PM
A couple differences:

Hurley was a freshman vs. McBob Soph
Hurley - IIRC his "worse" facial expressions were displayed primarily at refs. (always thought he was fouled). McBob - displayed at teammates who weren't where he thought they would be.

I admit, I don't know enough hoops to know who was at fault when McBob passed to an empty spot on the floor. But it happened a lot and he seemed to blame the intended recipient - Scheyer got a lot of ugly looks from him, IIRC.

As for attitude, if you can't judge based on a couple games per week, then you can't judge at all unless you're in the locker room with them. And that's an OK point to make. But I think it is a little unrealistic to expect people not to form impressions over time from what they see on TV. Dukie8, do you resist forming an impression of Rasheed Wallace's attitude based on what you see on TV?

hurley definitely had it out with teammates his freshman year. i can remember some of those passes that went sailing into the 5th row of the stands because of some communication breakdown and then the resulting words/stares. was it ideal? no, but i wouldn't say that he had an attitude problem because of it.

regarding rw, there is a lot more that we do know that isn't on tv -- the arrests and what teammates/coaches have said about him come to mind (just last week someone on espn radio said that he refuses to lift weights and that because of that he is nowhere near as good as he could be). moreover, while on tv, he has been ejected from games a ridiculous amount of times. mcbob never was rejected from a game and never has been arrested (that i know of). other than whispers on here, i cannot remember reading or hearing anyone on the duke team complaining about mcbob's attitude. if k or paulus came out and said mcbob's attitude sucked, that would be one thing. like i said before, he very well may have had an attitude problem, it's just that merely pouting at times in games isn't enough for me to conclude so.

duke74
06-30-2007, 04:49 PM
He'll probably have a pretty long career because of his height. He'll probably be a good practice player and get about 6-9 minutes a game to spell other bigs. He won't be anything more than that until he learns how to shoot and create his own shot. Most of his baskets were either dunks or lay-ups resulting from defensive breakdowns.

Hence the good shooting percentage. I'd HATE to see the % with those removed. (See post above with shooting percentages)

cspan37421
06-30-2007, 05:59 PM
What did you all think of Josh's performance against VCU? Until we lost, I thought, hey, this is what we've been waiting for all year from this guy. But then I wondered if he might have been stepping outside of K's system to display his wares for the NBA draft.

Mcluhan
06-30-2007, 08:07 PM
Just two more words on this "no one improves in the NBA" stuff: Josh Howard.

A rookie in the NBA plays more basketball against better competition than they've ever played in their lives. Say what you will about Zach Randolp, but had he stayed with Portland, McRoberts would have been matched up day in and day out in practice with a guy who routinely scores 25 against Western Conference frontlines.

McRoberts is going to have his hands full. His friendship with Oden won't matter much if he's not able to enter games and protect leads with rebounds and defense.

Mcluhan
06-30-2007, 08:14 PM
hurley definitely had it out with teammates his freshman year. i can remember some of those passes that went sailing into the 5th row of the stands because of some communication breakdown and then the resulting words/stares. was it ideal? no, but i wouldn't say that he had an attitude problem because of it.

regarding rw, there is a lot more that we do know that isn't on tv -- the arrests and what teammates/coaches have said about him come to mind (just last week someone on espn radio said that he refuses to lift weights and that because of that he is nowhere near as good as he could be). moreover, while on tv, he has been ejected from games a ridiculous amount of times. mcbob never was rejected from a game and never has been arrested (that i know of). other than whispers on here, i cannot remember reading or hearing anyone on the duke team complaining about mcbob's attitude. if k or paulus came out and said mcbob's attitude sucked, that would be one thing. like i said before, he very well may have had an attitude problem, it's just that merely pouting at times in games isn't enough for me to conclude so.

I don't recall Rasheed Wallace ever getting arrested. And besides an inexcusable tendency to draw technical fouls, I see him as an ideal teammate: unselfish, a good defender, a smart player. Seriously. One of the smartest players in the league. I've never heard another teammate badmouth him. He helped that Pistons team coalesce and win a championship.

jimsumner
06-30-2007, 09:02 PM
"Josh will have a great NBA career, then, considering there is no defense played in the NBA whatsoever."

A common misconception but a misconception nonetheless. Lots of high-quality D played in the league. Look at it this way. The most gifted offensive players on the planet, 48-minute games, 24-second shot clock and teams struggle to put 100 points on the board. Think that happens because there is no defense whatsover?

bhd28
06-30-2007, 09:09 PM
But I think it is a little unrealistic to expect people not to form impressions over time from what they see on TV. Dukie8, do you resist forming an impression of Rasheed Wallace's attitude based on what you see on TV?

Shoot, I have formed a few impressions on people over things they have written on message boards.

dukie8
06-30-2007, 09:23 PM
I don't recall Rasheed Wallace ever getting arrested. And besides an inexcusable tendency to draw technical fouls, I see him as an ideal teammate: unselfish, a good defender, a smart player. Seriously. One of the smartest players in the league. I've never heard another teammate badmouth him. He helped that Pistons team coalesce and win a championship.

you have to be kidding me. he has a serious weed problem. here's a whif of what he is like:

http://biography.jrank.org/pages/2998/Wallace-Rasheed.html

i have absolutely no idea how you can call him an "ideal" teammate. his record number of ejections is about as selfish as you can get -- the team needs him on the court be he doesn't give a damn and continues arguing until he knows he is going to get tossed. he fights with teammates and coaches, pouts a lot more than mcbob, routinely skips practice and, i stated earlier, refuses to lift weights even though he needs to. sounds like an ideal teammate to me...

mgtr
07-01-2007, 05:24 AM
Shoot, I have formed a few impressions on people over things they have written on message boards.

Hah, hah! Excellent post!

BD80
07-01-2007, 08:37 AM
I don't recall Sheed ever testing positive, yet he has a significant "problem"? How about Laetner, who was actually suspended for testing positive? Did he have a problem?

I hate the baby blue as much as the next Dukie, but one should give credit where it is due. Sheed has a penchant for technicals, and has a big racial chip on his shoulder, but he plays great team basketball, offensively and defensively. I do think a new team would help enervate him, I think his comfort level with the Pistons has taken away his "edge", but he is held in high esteem by his teammates and his coaches.

dukie8
07-01-2007, 09:13 AM
I don't recall Sheed ever testing positive, yet he has a significant "problem"? How about Laetner, who was actually suspended for testing positive? Did he have a problem?

I hate the baby blue as much as the next Dukie, but one should give credit where it is due. Sheed has a penchant for technicals, and has a big racial chip on his shoulder, but he plays great team basketball, offensively and defensively. I do think a new team would help enervate him, I think his comfort level with the Pistons has taken away his "edge", but he is held in high esteem by his teammates and his coaches.

i'm not sure the relevance, but from what i understand, yes, laettner had a problem with the blunt too. the fact that he went to duke doesn't mean that he is a saint. the fact that rashweed hasn't tested positive doesn't mean too much either. have bonds, mcgwire, sosa or marion jones tested positive?

i never said that rashweed couldn't ball. he has fantastic abilities and is one of the better players in the nba. however, like webber, he never has come close to his potential and that is largely a function of laziness and complacency. moreover, he is NOT held in high esteem by his teammates and his coaches. someone who is so self-centered and arrogant that he skips practice when he choses, refuses to lift weights despite being told to do so, intentionally violates the dress code, fights with teammates and coaches, and gets ejected at critical junctures in critical games is not someone the players and coaches hold in high esteem.

Mcluhan
07-01-2007, 06:47 PM
i'm not sure the relevance, but from what i understand, yes, laettner had a problem with the blunt too. the fact that he went to duke doesn't mean that he is a saint. the fact that rashweed hasn't tested positive doesn't mean too much either. have bonds, mcgwire, sosa or marion jones tested positive?

i never said that rashweed couldn't ball. he has fantastic abilities and is one of the better players in the nba. however, like webber, he never has come close to his potential and that is largely a function of laziness and complacency. moreover, he is NOT held in high esteem by his teammates and his coaches. someone who is so self-centered and arrogant that he skips practice when he choses, refuses to lift weights despite being told to do so, intentionally violates the dress code, fights with teammates and coaches, and gets ejected at critical junctures in critical games is not someone the players and coaches hold in high esteem.

Yeah, to deduce someone's weed 'problem' based on knowledge that they once possessed it is a bit of an exaggeration. Unless your job drug tests, you have to accept that a few of your co-workers smoke pot and you'll neither ever know nor suspect. This is not an activity that's really outside normal recreational behaviour for Americans in their twenties.

His penchant for technicals is inexcusable.

I have never heard him badmouthed by a coach or player. It may well have happened, but I do not believe the statement that he is not held in high esteem by players and coaches, plural. Players and coaches love playing with fundamentally sound, unselfish players. You might cite his technical-habit (a problem far wose than weed!) as 'selfish', and it is, but his overall laudable efforts mark him as far less selfish player than, say Corey Maggette, who continues to insist that he is of NBA starter quality, while refusing to play NBA starter defense. Only Mike Dunleavy could really compare the two.

Watch him play. He plays the game the right way. He's the kind of player who wins championships, or rather, has played in four conference finals and two finals, winning one and losing the other in 7 games.

thebur
07-02-2007, 09:16 AM
Hence the good shooting percentage. I'd HATE to see the % with those removed. (See post above with shooting percentages)

It is always interesting to hear people say this about "bigs" in basketball. As if somehow the fact that he was taking a lot of layups and dunks he has inferior offensive talent. People used to say it about Shaq all the time "All he does is dunk" and my response to that would be, as his coach, would that not be what you would tell him to do? If you can dunk it every time, then you dunk it, EVERY TIME.

There is a lot of skill to getting layups and dunks, whether it is in positioning for rebounds, playing off of other players for passes, or beating the defense yourself for a close high percentage shot. Those skills play into the number that is field goal percentage, and there is a natural and neccesary reward for getting layups as much as is possible. And size and strength, as much as people would like to downplay them, are HUGE skill assets in the game of basketball.

greybeard
07-02-2007, 09:50 AM
You catch it in the low post, no immediate double in the vacinity, you are "all that" and everyone in the gym, including you and your teammates expect you to score the ball. Don't matter what the defender does, how physical or whatever he gets, you have an answer. You were born for this, you've done this a million times on courts, in your driveway, in your daydreams. Now, only this time there is a disconnect. Your body is giving you "no go" signals, there are no computerlike, trustable inputs to chose from. You look blindly for them, wait in vain for them, they do not come.

So, now you surprise everyone, your defender, yourself, your teammates, you look to get rid of it. But, to save face, you can't just get rid of it, you need to "make something" happen with it, like it was the best of all options. Don't need no stinkin spin move when can hit Scheyer for a three, in the corner where he siddled over based on your eye signal. A three ball wide open will save you, with you having been the cornerback, given the signal.

But, alas, the signal was missed or the defender was in the way, or was particularly attentive, and the ball goes out of bounds.

"Sometimes even the president of the United States must have to stand naked." BZ

duke74
07-02-2007, 09:51 AM
It is always interesting to hear people say this about "bigs" in basketball. As if somehow the fact that he was taking a lot of layups and dunks he has inferior offensive talent. People used to say it about Shaq all the time "All he does is dunk" and my response to that would be, as his coach, would that not be what you would tell him to do? If you can dunk it every time, then you dunk it, EVERY TIME.

There is a lot of skill to getting layups and dunks, whether it is in positioning for rebounds, playing off of other players for passes, or beating the defense yourself for a close high percentage shot. Those skills play into the number that is field goal percentage, and there is a natural and neccesary reward for getting layups as much as is possible. And size and strength, as much as people would like to downplay them, are HUGE skill assets in the game of basketball.


In this case he HAD inferior offensive talent. That was my point here -- that the dunks (albeit a key component of a big's game) did mask other serious flaws in Josh's game. That could not be said for someone like Shaq, who is flat out dominant around the basket.

thebur
07-02-2007, 10:07 AM
In this case he HAD inferior offensive talent. That was my point here -- that the dunks (albeit a key component of a big's game) did mask other serious flaws in Josh's game. That could not be said for someone like Shaq, who is flat out dominant around the basket.


I guess I am one of the few left that didn't think Josh totally underwhlemed me this year. I did not think he was going to be uber-dominant, but good, and I think he was that. While he did not live up to expectations, there were a lot of factors going into that, and not just on Josh's end. I think not having a healthy true point for the first 2/3 of the season affected both his mentality and his ability to dominate games (By the time GP was truly back the team dynamic was far different than it would have been with him playing the whole season) . But he had a decent year, and I think besides his suspect jumper from deep there were not all that many holes in his game. We also have to remember that the reason he was expected to be such a star on last year's team was he was one of the few returners we had and because he had played so well with JJ and Shel. However, the lack of outside shooters on Duke's team hurt him in terms of teams being able to double down a lot more than his own lack of a jumper hurt him.

jaimedun34
07-02-2007, 12:11 PM
It sure would have helped if Paulus had been healthy, but I never got the impression that bringing the ball up the court and distributing were things that Josh was "forced" into. Like, "well Josh would have had a better year if he didn't have to run the point for Paulus".

Well, if Josh wouldn't have been put in the position to bring the ball up the court and initiate the offense, where else would he have been? Posting up on the block? Unlikely. Spotting up for 3 pointers? I hope not.

People speak of Josh's role in the offense as if he had to do the things he did because his teammates were lacking, and that simply isn't true. Josh wanted to be a perimeter player and Coach let him do that. It would have been stupid to waste Josh's passing skills and ball handling by putting the ball in anyone else's hands.

Mcluhan
07-02-2007, 12:25 PM
Josh wanted to be a perimeter player and Coach let him do that. It would have been stupid to waste Josh's passing skills and ball handling by putting the ball in anyone else's hands.

It wouldn't be a waste for Josh to have aggressively pursued high percentage shots. Vlade Divac, Chris Webber, and Brad Miller were (yes, all in the past tense, Miller's game nosedived last season) all great passing big men, but none of them were reluctant or in anyway hesitant to take shots in the paint. There's smart passing in the flow of what the game gives you, and then there's passing the buck when it's your responsibility to take hig percentage shots.

greybeard
07-02-2007, 02:33 PM
It wouldn't be a waste for Josh to have aggressively pursued high percentage shots. Vlade Divac, Chris Webber, and Brad Miller were (yes, all in the past tense, Miller's game nosedived last season) all great passing big men, but none of them were reluctant or in anyway hesitant to take shots in the paint. There's smart passing in the flow of what the game gives you, and then there's passing the buck when it's your responsibility to take hig percentage shots.

Those guys are all great receivers of the ball in and around the paint. Vlade dictated where passes were to go, to a space not yet occupied, before he moved, call it body language. He then positioned himself to get there, always catching his defender on the wrong foot, unable to closely follow.

Webber and Miller had body to keep defenders off and away. Came to the ball well too.

Last year, Josh was way subpar as a receiver in and around the paint, except when going for a lob to the basket. Did a somewhat decent job low on the left side (if you are looking at the basket). But, aside from the lobs, never caught it on the move, and never moved to the ball to catch it. My explanation, he was infirm; the back impeded his mobility in that regard.

Same explanation for the flat shot.

If the back improves so will his offensive game. The more it improves, the better he will become. If it doesn't improve, his time in the league is likely to be short. If it does improve, and he stays with Portland, he could be a very interesting player for them. He could well push Aldridge aside.

Mcluhan
07-02-2007, 02:36 PM
Those guys are all great receivers of the ball in and around the paint. Vlade dictated where passes were to go, to a space not yet occupied, before he moved, call it body language. He then positioned himself to get there, always catching his defender on the wrong foot, unable to closely follow.

Webber and Miller had body to keep defenders off and away. Came to the ball well too.

Last year, Josh was way subpar as a receiver in and around the paint, except when going for a lob to the basket. Did a somewhat decent job low on the left side (if you are looking at the basket). But, aside from the lobs, never caught it on the move, and never moved to the ball to catch it. My explanation, he was infirm; the back impeded his mobility in that regard.

Same explanation for the flat shot.

If the back improves so will his offensive game. The more it improves, the better he will become. If it doesn't improve, his time in the league is likely to be short. If it does improve, and he stays with Portland, he could be a very interesting player for them. He could well push Aldridge aside.

Great analysis of those big men, and I hope you're right.

But pushing aside Aldridge? I don't see it.

greybeard
07-02-2007, 03:30 PM
Great analysis of those big men, and I hope you're right.

But pushing aside Aldridge? I don't see it.

Not sure I can either, but the Portland area is a very unusual place. If McRob plugs into some of the resources out there, and makes some unusual progress with his body, I see several foggy scenarios.

One, he would need to be much easier in his body on the catch and a more effective receiver. If he becomes more comfortable in his body, I see a repeatable 15-17 foot shot a real possibility. Then, on offense, he becomes a very dangerous partner to Oden. You guard him close for the pop and shoot 15 footer, Mr. O has a lot of room to maneuver and a guy who could be pretty effective at getting it to him. The one thing we know that Josh can do is catch it in the air going to the rim, we are talking way, way high in the air and finishing. Can the O man throw it up there?

Do not see him with Aldridge's back-to-the-basket game. However, not sure that that game does not take up too much needed space. 1. For the O man. 2. For Roy. Tough not to see wanting him to post on the side of the lane maybe MJ-like, turning either way and killing people with a no-work J; 3. Frye is going to have smaller guys on him as a big three. You'll want to post him too.

So having Alridge fixed on one side and Oden the other might not make maximum use of your assets.

Also, I think that Josh is underrated as a defender and rebounder. Having Oden as a shot blocker you tend to want to say who needs another one. However, the NBA season is a grind for anyone. Oden is 19. If you make shot blocking by a big a cornerstone of your defense, having another one on the floor, maybe at the same time, allows for less wear and tear on the defensive end for Oden. Oden might well be a more important offensive asset than many expect. If so, another shot blocker might be real helpful.

Perhaps most importantly, if Josh can get it done, then Aldridge might well be moved. Seems to me that, if Oden plays to potential, you want to have a team that can get up and down the floor and get easy baskets in transition. Portland might want a few first rate players of that ilk and get them for Aldridge if they can count on Josh and Frye handling the 4.

All this is off the cuff, not at all thought out. Nevertheless, if Aldridge does not turn into the second coming of Kevin McKale (while that is a tall order, from what little I saw of him in college he could well be that guy), his position in Portand is not fixed in stone, especially if Oden pans out.

Classof06
07-02-2007, 03:36 PM
Josh will be fine because no matter what NBA team he plays for, he will never have to be "the man"...

ice-9
07-02-2007, 08:01 PM
It is always interesting to hear people say this about "bigs" in basketball. As if somehow the fact that he was taking a lot of layups and dunks he has inferior offensive talent. People used to say it about Shaq all the time "All he does is dunk" and my response to that would be, as his coach, would that not be what you would tell him to do? If you can dunk it every time, then you dunk it, EVERY TIME.

There is a lot of skill to getting layups and dunks, whether it is in positioning for rebounds, playing off of other players for passes, or beating the defense yourself for a close high percentage shot. Those skills play into the number that is field goal percentage, and there is a natural and neccesary reward for getting layups as much as is possible. And size and strength, as much as people would like to downplay them, are HUGE skill assets in the game of basketball.


McRoberts' can catch lobs and dunk well -- that is certainly a strength and he should be lauded for it. But what he failed to consistently do was score while being defended, whether facing the basket or having his back against the basket. Those were the shots that kept rimming out or bricking and which caused us TV Duke fans much anguish.

The high shooting percentage IS misleading. Assume that McRoberts scores 1/3 of his points from dunks and 2/3 off other shots, which is quite possible given the number of plays Duke ran last year to get McRoberts the alley hoop. Assume further that McRoberts shoots 100% off dunks. This means that for McRoberts to end up with an overall shooting percentage of 50%, he would have to shoot 25% on non-dunk shot attempts!! As bad as that sounds, that actually feels about right.

The problem is that while the ability to score off alley hoops is nice, when the game is on the line and the opponents' defensive intensity is high, the play that will win the ball game is the offensive team's star player catching the ball and putting the ball into the bucket while being defended (and probably partially fouled). Unfortunately, that is NOT where McRoberts excelled at and why he was never able to carry the Duke team past the narrow margin that we often faced last year separating a loss from a win.

The above aside, I actually think McRoberts will have a solid career in the NBA being a role player. A big man that can run, rebound, pass, and play hard? There's always an opportunity for that kind of player. McRoberts just needs to show he can do those things over the next year while improving his shot. Portland doesn't need a scoring big -- Oden and Aldridge will score plenty of points -- Portland needs guys that can do the other things. While I expected more from McRoberts at Duke, I agree with the assessment that his falling to the second round is a great bargain for a team like Portland.

Richard Berg
07-02-2007, 10:28 PM
A big man that can run, rebound, pass, and play hard? There's always an opportunity for that kind of player.
A perfect example is Oberto on the Spurs. Fantastic passer, gritty offensive rebounder, loves to run with Tony and Manu. Josh can do all of that, plus is a better ballhandler. To step into that role, the only thing he needs to prove is that he can guard an NBA '4.' No reason he needs to out-muscle Oden and Aldridge with low-post moves, any more than Oberto needs to imitate Duncan.

That kind of role won't land him on the All-Star team, but it's enough to be a starter or 6th man, earning a few million bucks while working on your jumpshot and post moves.

dukemath
07-03-2007, 09:39 AM
The following articles say that Josh signed a two year contract with Portland

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070703/SPORTS0403/707030365/1247/SPORTS

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2924136

SilkyJ
07-05-2007, 03:37 PM
I'm not Chad Ford over here, but reports around the league were that the Blazers really liked Aldridge and were very pleased with his improvement over the course of the year....don't be surprised if he emerges next year. The guy has a legit 12-14 foot turnaround fadeaway. He is a little soft though, which Oden can negate. What surprises me is while they are DEEP at the 4 with Aldridge, Frye, and McBob, they have very little depth at the 5, meaning those guys are all apt to get significant minutes rotating in the 4/5 spots. While this would be easy in the East, this will not be very easy in the West where PFs cannot fill in at Center for half the game.

ACCBBallFan
07-05-2007, 05:09 PM
I'm not Chad Ford over here, but reports around the league were that the Blazers really liked Aldridge and were very pleased with his improvement over the course of the year....don't be surprised if he emerges next year. The guy has a legit 12-14 foot turnaround fadeaway. He is a little soft though, which Oden can negate. What surprises me is while they are DEEP at the 4 with Aldridge, Frye, and McBob, they have very little depth at the 5, meaning those guys are all apt to get significant minutes rotating in the 4/5 spots. While this would be easy in the East, this will not be very easy in the West where PFs cannot fill in at Center for half the game.

I donlt recall ever seeing Channing Frye play, but I thought he was a 5 at Zona. I assumed he would be Oden's primary backup and Josh would Duke it out with Aldridge for the 4-spot.

Aldridge has one year of NBA experience over him, which is somewhat offet by Josh having previously been an Oden AAU teammate.

kydevil
07-05-2007, 05:31 PM
I donlt recall ever seeing Channing Frye play, but I thought he was a 5 at Zona. I assumed he would be Oden's primary backup and Josh would Duke it out with Aldridge for the 4-spot.

Aldridge has one year of NBA experience over him, which is somewhat offet by Josh having previously been an Oden AAU teammate.

I can't see Josh "Duking" it out for the 4-spot with Aldridge. As much as I would love to see Josh get a lot of P.T. I just don't see it happening. Aldridge will compliment Oden very nice. He has a nice soft touch and rebounds extremely well. Combine that with above average mobility for a near 7 footer they could be the next Twin Towers. Remember Aldridge had some very solid games before his illness which caused him to miss the rest of the season. In the month of April right before he came down with the rapid hearbeat he was averaging nearly 15 pts and 8 rebounds a game.

However I don't see Frye being able to play down low (he's soft) as Oden's primary backup. I think Aldridge would move to 5 and either Josh or Frye would play the 4.

jimsumner
07-05-2007, 05:47 PM
Przybilla is the backup 5, unless they move him. I don't see enough minutes at the 4/5 for Oden, Aldridge, Frye, McRoberts, and Przybilla. Somebody gets moved or sits.

I agree that Josh isn't competing with Aldridge for the starting 4. I think he's competing with Frye for the backup 4.

ACCBBallFan
07-05-2007, 05:51 PM
I don't follow the NBA and the one time I had a chance to see Aldridge in college on TV, TX was being humiliated by Duke at the Garden.

This scout.com report is old but

Scout.com Player Evaluation:
STRENGTHS
Defensive Presence - not a McRoberts weakness either
Size for Position - same size
Upside/Potential - subjective but Aldridge may have had more when drafted

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Instincts for Position - McRoberts has instinct for teaming with Oden
Passing - strenght for McRoberts
Plays Facing Basket

Not sure what that last phrase means, whether it is a area for improvement because he Plays facing the basket (as opposed to back to the basket) or vice versa.

So I guess it depends on what the Blazers coach wants, twin towers or passing and experienced in a complementary role to Oden.

I don't expect I will be watching the NBA with or without McRoberts anyway. So I will rely on what posters have to say in coming years.

pfrduke
07-05-2007, 06:02 PM
The high shooting percentage IS misleading. Assume that McRoberts scores 1/3 of his points from dunks and 2/3 off other shots, which is quite possible given the number of plays Duke ran last year to get McRoberts the alley hoop. Assume further that McRoberts shoots 100% off dunks. This means that for McRoberts to end up with an overall shooting percentage of 50%, he would have to shoot 25% on non-dunk shot attempts!! As bad as that sounds, that actually feels about right.

(Prefatory note - I have no data from the Gonzaga or St. John's games, so those games have been excluded. Also, the play-by-play of the game at UNC calls every shot a jumper, so that's also excluded).

Josh actually got 19.5% of his points from dunks last season, and shot 88.6% (39-44) dunking the ball. On layups, he shot 73.2% (60-82), and added in another 50% shooting (4-8) on tip-ins. He was also 5-23 (21.7%) from 3. On non layup or dunk 2pt shots, he shot 32.2% (46-143).

Here's the breakdown:
Total: 154-300 = 51.3%
2pt FG: 149-277 = 53.8%
3pt FG: 5-23 = 21.7%
Dunks: 39-44 = 88.6%
Layups: 60-82 = 73.2%
Tip-ins: 4-8 = 50%
Dunks & Layups: 99-126 = 78.6%
Dunks, Layups, Tip-ins combined: 103-134 = 76.9%
All other 2pt FG: 46-143 = 32.2%
All non-dunks: 115-256 = 44.9%
All non-dunks, layups, tip-ins: 51-166 = 30.7%

His finishing around the rim is not spectacular, but it is pretty strong, all things considered, making better than 3 of every 4 layup/dunk attempts. His jumpshooting, however, leaves a whole lot to be desired. Notice also that he took 32 more jumpshots than dunks/layups. This resulted in 65.8% of his scoring from the field coming on just 44.7% of his shots (of course, by contrast, the jumpers accounted for 55.3% of his shots, and only 34.2% of his points from the field). Improving his jumpshot and being smarter about his shot attempts (more layups, less jumpers) will drive up his shooting percentage and improve his efficiency, making him much more of a reliable 3rd or 4th option in the future.

SilkyJ
07-05-2007, 06:19 PM
I donlt recall ever seeing Channing Frye play, but I thought he was a 5 at Zona. I assumed he would be Oden's primary backup and Josh would Duke it out with Aldridge for the 4-spot.

He was a 5 at Zona, much like Sheld, Boozer, and Brand were 5's at Duke. They all now play the 4 in the NBA. This happens quite a bit.


Aldridge has one year of NBA experience over him, which is somewhat offet by Josh having previously been an Oden AAU teammate.

I dont see how that offsets anything. Oden isn't the coach. I know what you're trying to say, but dont be absurd.




I agree that Josh isn't competing with Aldridge for the starting 4. I think he's competing with Frye for the backup 4.

Well put, and probably more accurate.

kramerbr
07-05-2007, 07:26 PM
I think Josh will also play a little 3. I wouldn't be suprised to see Oden, Aldridge, and Josh on the floor together at times. Defensively Josh will match up better against the 3's in the West.

SilkyJ
07-05-2007, 07:49 PM
I think Josh will also play a little 3. I wouldn't be suprised to see Oden, Aldridge, and Josh on the floor together at times. Defensively Josh will match up better against the 3's in the West.

No he doesn't. He's not quick enough to keep up with them.

cspan37421
07-05-2007, 08:29 PM
pfrduke: great stats. You must have lots of pretty good data and perhaps from that you consider 73% dunk/layup to be "pretty strong." To a layperson like myself it doesn't seem that high. Just a gut feeling, you ought to make 85-90% if you're that tall. [I can see lower % if you're AI taking it against Duncan.]

Do you have stats on ACC average dunk/layup % by 4/5 players?

jimsumner
07-05-2007, 09:10 PM
In case you're wondering what Aldridge was up to last winter in Portland.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/lamarcus_aldridge/index.html

dukie8
07-05-2007, 10:04 PM
pfrduke: great stats. You must have lots of pretty good data and perhaps from that you consider 73% dunk/layup to be "pretty strong." To a layperson like myself it doesn't seem that high. Just a gut feeling, you ought to make 85-90% if you're that tall. [I can see lower % if you're AI taking it against Duncan.]

Do you have stats on ACC average dunk/layup % by 4/5 players?


those are some great stats that i had not seen before. however, without knowing the stats of other similar players, it is a little hard to judge what they mean. given that most players shoot less than 50%, i would think that if you removed dunks and layups from most people's shooting numbers, the overall shooting percentage would be in the 30s (except for maybe a pg who doesn't dunk and who shoots most layups in the lane with the bigs collapsing on him). i also think that there is an enormous difference in the difficulty and importance of dunks and layups. for example, a dunk/layup uncontested on a fastbreak probably is the easiest shot in the game. however, a dunk/layup in a halfcourt offense, particularly with double or triple teaming, often is harder to make than a wide-open 3. regardless, mcbob missed a ton of easy dunks/layups that he should have made this year.

pfrduke
07-05-2007, 10:52 PM
pfrduke: great stats. You must have lots of pretty good data and perhaps from that you consider 73% dunk/layup to be "pretty strong." To a layperson like myself it doesn't seem that high. Just a gut feeling, you ought to make 85-90% if you're that tall. [I can see lower % if you're AI taking it against Duncan.]

Do you have stats on ACC average dunk/layup % by 4/5 players?


those are some great stats that i had not seen before. however, without knowing the stats of other similar players, it is a little hard to judge what they mean. given that most players shoot less than 50%, i would think that if you removed dunks and layups from most people's shooting numbers, the overall shooting percentage would be in the 30s (except for maybe a pg who doesn't dunk and who shoots most layups in the lane with the bigs collapsing on him). i also think that there is an enormous difference in the difficulty and importance of dunks and layups. for example, a dunk/layup uncontested on a fastbreak probably is the easiest shot in the game. however, a dunk/layup in a halfcourt offense, particularly with double or triple teaming, often is harder to make than a wide-open 3. regardless, mcbob missed a ton of easy dunks/layups that he should have made this year.

I don't have the information for other ACC players. It's only available for Duke because the play-by-play on GoDuke lists FGAs by type (jumper, layup, dunk, tip-in, etc). However, basketball-reference.com has all the shot information for every NBA game this year. It's not categorized - you have to go through game by game - but I decided to check Dwight Howard's stats. In the first 22 games this year, he took 138 layups/dunks/tip-ins, which is about the same number of those shots Josh had on the season. Howard was 102-138 on those shots, or 73.9%. UPDATED: I also checked out Amare Stoudemire. In his first 23 games this season, he took 134 layups/dunks/tip-ins. Amare was 102-134, or 76.1%.

Now, I would say Howard and Stoudemire are pretty good big men and pretty good finishers around the rim. Obviously, NBA competition is a little different than college competition, but I'm going to stick with saying that making somewhere around 3 of every 4 layups/dunks/tip-ins is a pretty solid rate of conversion.

kydevil
07-05-2007, 10:57 PM
I think Josh will also play a little 3. I wouldn't be suprised to see Oden, Aldridge, and Josh on the floor together at times. Defensively Josh will match up better against the 3's in the West.

I just can't see Josh playing a "3" right now or in the near future.

He is too slow/not quick enough
No outside shot.

With Josh at 3 and Aldridge and Oden playing it would cause Josh to just drift around and really be no offensive threat. On the other end he just can't guard a player such as Josh Howard/Sean Marion/Luol Deng

duke74
07-06-2007, 07:57 AM
I donlt recall ever seeing Channing Frye play, but I thought he was a 5 at Zona. I assumed he would be Oden's primary backup and Josh would Duke it out with Aldridge for the 4-spot.

Aldridge has one year of NBA experience over him, which is somewhat offet by Josh having previously been an Oden AAU teammate.

I may be wrong, but I thought Channing played PF or SF with the Knicks, depending on whether David Lee was in the game. I can't recall him backing up Curry.

SilkyJ
07-06-2007, 09:33 AM
I may be wrong, but I thought Channing played PF or SF with the Knicks, depending on whether David Lee was in the game. I can't recall him backing up Curry.

He NEVER plays the 3. He plays the 4 most of the time and can suffice at the 5 if need be b/c its the east.

thebur
07-06-2007, 10:44 AM
pfrduke: great stats. You must have lots of pretty good data and perhaps from that you consider 73% dunk/layup to be "pretty strong." To a layperson like myself it doesn't seem that high. Just a gut feeling, you ought to make 85-90% if you're that tall. [I can see lower % if you're AI taking it against Duncan.]

Do you have stats on ACC average dunk/layup % by 4/5 players?

I am assuming that this is all layups and not just uncontested layups (that would be very hard to calculate) so the number above 70% seems pretty good.

There are many times where a defender doesn't block a layup, but alters it enough that a player misses.