Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:04 am
Better yet why is Barros amazing raw potentialduckyoubeavers wrote:how is barros only B potential with amazing raw potential?
Ducks Attack Message Board Forum
Oregon Ducks Sports Message Board Forum
https://ducksattack.com/forum/
1989 Draft Discussion
Page 2 of 5
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:07 am
Fair. Kemp is only 20 and seems like he could play SF :O so I really like himvincent1469 wrote:Hardaway just seems kinda risky since he is 23 without any stats above B. Still like Hardaway tho, he could easily prove me wrong.offtheheezy wrote:Why Glen Rice? I thought it was between Hardaway and Kemp. Guess that shows this class really could've gone anywherevincent1469 wrote:Ngl was expecting Rice to go number 1
Also Rice and Kemp have pretty similar stats but Pistons got Karl Malone already so I figured Rice would be better
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:22 am
His notes have been fixedofftheheezy wrote:Better yet why is Barros amazing raw potentialduckyoubeavers wrote:how is barros only B potential with amazing raw potential?
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 4:23 am
Our goal of having no clear #1 pick has proven to have worked
This will be interesting to look back on in 3 years
This will be interesting to look back on in 3 years
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:21 am
Hope I picked the right guy, I was between him and 1 other.
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 9:21 am
Mavs are looking to get into the lottery and open to talks
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:02 am
I'm considering my options for a little bit here at 6. Don't want to rush a decision
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:07 am
This draft is tough lol lotta nice looking guys but hard to parse out who's going to be the best of the bunch.
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:39 am
I'm almost certain Mookie will have a better career when it's all said and done, but Pervis is the safe choice for me.
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:49 am
Pervis' writeup and grades look like he should have been in serious #1 consideration. He's already grading out as a good starting C without any improvements, I would have taken him over multiple guys who went before him.
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:03 pm
210 pounds thoughCellar-door wrote:Pervis' writeup and grades look like he should have been in serious #1 consideration. He's already grading out as a good starting C without any improvements, I would have taken him over multiple guys who went before him.
But I’ll look to boost his strength
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:08 pm
Pounds mean nothing, just go off notes in regards to speed and strengthlukeyrid13 wrote:210 pounds thoughCellar-door wrote:Pervis' writeup and grades look like he should have been in serious #1 consideration. He's already grading out as a good starting C without any improvements, I would have taken him over multiple guys who went before him.
But I’ll look to boost his strength
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:24 pm
The restriction to the post tells me he's got at least solid PF strength with above average speed, because that is what would make him a dominant monster at SF.lukeyrid13 wrote:210 pounds thoughCellar-door wrote:Pervis' writeup and grades look like he should have been in serious #1 consideration. He's already grading out as a good starting C without any improvements, I would have taken him over multiple guys who went before him.
But I’ll look to boost his strength
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 2:21 pm
Can ferry play backup at SF or no?
Re: 1989 Draft Discussion
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 2:26 pm
Danny Ferry C+ B- D B- C+ A (restricted to post)lukeyrid13 wrote:Can ferry play backup at SF or no?
No