Crittenton in draft

[AHF]

My rankings for our team right now would be:

Conley

Law

Crittenon

I would want to work each of them out intensly for the Hawks, though, and get every bit of footage I could. They are not so far apart in my mind as to made one of them a no-brainer over the others. I do really like what I saw from Conley as a pure PG this season and would like to see that brought to the Hawks. Law's shooting without the Lue-like ballhogging would be very nice. Crittenon is intriguing but seems the farthest away from being able to run a pro offense to me. He just strikes me as being so raw that I drop him down to third at this point.

[bfwolf]

Conley really isn't that skinny, and his defense is excellent, nothing deceptive about it. Chris Paul plays good defense, too, by the way.

[Johnnybravo4]

The NBA is all about matchups. Critt is more ready than Conley because he causes mismatches on the offensive end and can switch on most guards and small forwards on the defensive end. He may be turnover prone but it won't be as much a concern in the NBA because he won't run into teams who press 50% of the time like some college teams do. He also be playing with teammates with better hands. (TO aren't always a result of getting your pockets picked)

If we concede that whatever pg we get likely won't start, then I will err on the side of the playmaker with size than the manager who is undersized. Not to mention we would have to deal with the whole daddy-agent thing, which scares me in the future.

[TexasPete]

JC will be better than all of them in the long run. Law will be the best next year but the worst in 3 years.

Pick your poison.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

JC will be better than all of them in the long run. Law will be the best next year but the worst in 3 years.

Pick your poison.

---

I remember UCLA fans talking about how clueless Baron Davis was in college. And certainly he has been an underachiever in the pros. But he is punking Dallas badly right now.

I don't know if JC's talent is quite up to Davis' level, especially in terms of playmaking. But that is who i think about when i consider JC's possible upside.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Chris Paul plays good defense, too, by the way.

---

Does he also have a 79 inch vertical?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Chris Paul plays good defense, too, by the way.

---

Does he also have a 79 inch vertical?

---

79 inches lol.

Actually Paul's vertical was 38" which is very good.

[AtLaS]

Yeah I know, I was making a snide remark in response to his *claim* that Paul plays good defense..

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Yeah I know, I was making a snide remark in response to his *claim* that Paul plays good defense..

---

NOK gave up 6.8 ppg more when Paul was playing.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06NOK1D.HTM

[AtLaS]

I know, BDawg thinks Paul is a good defender.. I don't. Conley is very similar to Paul IMO that he deceives you as a good defender (by picking passes and such) when in fact he really isn't.

[bfwolf]

The Hawks give up 4.6 more PPG when Zaza is off the court than when he is on. Pachulia must be the best defensive center since Russell!

[exodus]

Quote:

---

The Hawks give up 4.6 more PPG when Zaza is off the court than when he is on. Pachulia must be the best defensive center since Russell!

---

Keep in mind that +/- is highly dependent on who is in the game when Zaza is out.

[bfwolf]

As it is for all players.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

As it is for all players.

---

Duh. So who are the defensive stoppers who play behind Paul?

We already know the scrubs who play behind Zaza.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

The Hawks give up 4.6 more PPG when Zaza is off the court than when he is on. Pachulia must be the best defensive center since Russell!

---

Counterexamples can be made for any statistic.. Paul is not a good defender, and frankly I don't see how you could even make the argument that he is.. Your claim of Paul being a good defender makes me seriously question your Chris Paul knowledge..

[bfwolf]

My point is that the whole stat is suspect. It doesn't control for anything, such as what other players on the team tend to be in/out of the game when that player is in/out of the game, what pace the team plays when the player is in/out of the game (of course you're going to give up more points when an uptempo player is in the game), what personnel changes opponents tend to make when the player is in/out of the game, etc.

I'm not the only person who thinks Paul plays good defense.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hol...er?statsId=3930

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

My point is that the whole stat is suspect. It doesn't control for anything, such as what other players on the team tend to be in/out of the game when that player is in/out of the game, what pace the team plays when the player is in/out of the game (of course you're going to give up more points when an uptempo player is in the game), what personnel changes opponents tend to make when the player is in/out of the game, etc.

I'm not the only person who thinks Paul plays good defense.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hol...er?statsId=3930

---

& it's hard to pin this down. I think Paul playes better defense (and was taller than I thought when I bashed him relative to Bogut over at realGM) than I originally thought he would, but I wouldn't call him a "good defender". I realize that when he's off the court likely Chandler leaves also and that would greatly impact the opponent's FG% number, but that number somewhat eliminates the faster paced argument.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06NOK1D.HTM

Paul is better than I thought defensively but opponents shoot significantly better without him on the court. I guess I should have looked up the FG% difference with and without Chandler to be fair here.

Note: I don't see the Conley = Paul defensively comparison however.

W

[exodus]

Quote:

---

My point is that the whole stat is suspect. It doesn't control for anything, such as what other players on the team tend to be in/out of the game when that player is in/out of the game, what pace the team plays when the player is in/out of the game (of course you're going to give up more points when an uptempo player is in the game), what personnel changes opponents tend to make when the player is in/out of the game, etc.

I'm not the only person who thinks Paul plays good defense.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hol...er?statsId=3930

---

Quote:

---

He nearly led the league in steals, with his 2.2 per game just edged by Brevin Knight.

However, the flip side of that is that he must gamble less, or choose his prey more carefully

. Paul has quick feet and good strength,

though at 6-foot and 175 pounds he's always going to have difficulty with bigger guards backing him down.

---

Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Paul does get overpowered easily.

Using this logic iverson would be considered a good defender since he gets a lot of steals. In reality he gambles too much leaving the people behind him exposed and he also doesn't pressure the ball.

If a team gives up 6.8 more ppg when he is playing it is a pretty safe bet he isn't a good defender.

Everyone knows Bruce Bowen is a good defender even though he doesn't get a lot of steals or blocks. However the team gives up 9.5 fewer ppg when he is playing.

[hawk25]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

JC will be better than all of them in the long run. Law will be the best next year but the worst in 3 years.

Pick your poison.

---

I remember UCLA fans talking about how clueless Baron Davis was in college. And certainly he has been an underachiever in the pros. But he is punking Dallas badly right now.

I don't know if JC's talent is quite up to Davis' level, especially in terms of playmaking. But that is who i think about when i consider JC's possible upside.

---

jc is no where near baron davis level i would say he reminds me more of jarrett jack

[Swatguy]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

JC will be better than all of them in the long run. Law will be the best next year but the worst in 3 years.

Pick your poison.

---

I remember UCLA fans talking about how clueless Baron Davis was in college. And certainly he has been an underachiever in the pros. But he is punking Dallas badly right now.

I don't know if JC's talent is quite up to Davis' level, especially in terms of playmaking. But that is who i think about when i consider JC's possible upside.

---

jc is no where near baron davis level i would say he reminds me more of jarrett jack

---

Javaris handles far better than Jack, Shoots better than Jack, is bigger and getsto the rim easier than Jack, passes better than Jack. At this point today jack only has experience over Javaris.

Paul is a very good player but his defense was exposed in the World Games. Unless he improved mightily in the second halfof last season, his defense is questionable.