Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34
  1. #16
    Top 1 Bball Mind.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    12,540

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Cavs should've taken Noel. Oladipo will be better than MCW long term.

  2. #17
    The Wizard ralph_i_el's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Born Under a Bad Sign
    Posts
    10,935

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Hate on the cavs not the magic. Olidipo has that westbrook/wade style

  3. #18
    Local High School Star
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,125

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Dipo's gonna be good, should have went first overall to Cleveland.
    Waiters has regressed badly and looks to grade out to a complete bust, and Anthony Bennett, well I don't need to say anything about how much he sucks.

  4. #19
    13.37 PER ballup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    12,598

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Quote Originally Posted by imdaman99
    Technically it is, but Oladipo is an athletic freak with long arms. Like Wade, he should never be overmatched when he has to cover SGs. He's got that great defense, I am sure he can cover point guards to small forwards.
    Or like Tony Allen who is 6'4", but is athletic enough to play the 2.

  5. #20
    The Magic are a trash HylianNightmare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,552

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    You haven't explained why they should have

  6. #21
    Relax rhowen4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Davis, CA
    Posts
    1,229

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    i want to point out that oladipo doesn't have a neck, so he's missing out on about 1-2 useless inches that would normally contribute to his listed height

  7. #22
    Life goes on. ILLsmak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,306

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    People sleep on good PGs. Lillard was picked low for his talent level. So was Trey Burke.

    -Smak

  8. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,997

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Quote Originally Posted by ILLsmak
    People sleep on good PGs. Lillard was picked low for his talent level. So was Trey Burke.

    -Smak
    CP3 & Deron passed up for Marvin Williams is a good example as well.

  9. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    12,636

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    stupid thread, small sample size, oladipo has looked good as well and I fully expect him to be as good long term or better then MCW. MCW is looking like a really great find but at this stage I'm not sure if it's a Lin effect of him having full reign of the team while opponents don't really know what to expect from him. I do think he's got a much better game then lin though. Oladipo has put up solid stats too but he's playing limited minutes off the bench and trying to learn a new position, he isn't a bust so their pick still looks fine. It's the cavs pick that at this point looks horrible but even that is too early, I expect by his third year bennett will look like he's panning out ok.

  10. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,997

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Quote Originally Posted by outbreak
    I expect by his third year bennett will look like he's panning out ok.
    His donut per minute intake will be the best of his career.

  11. #26
    with God-given ass JimmyMcAdocious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    7,888

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Quote Originally Posted by ballup
    Prototypically, that is undersized.
    Prototypically for what era? SGs coming in lately are 6-3 - 6-5 range for the most part.

    Dipo is 6-4. McLemore is 6-5. KCP is 6-5. McCollum is 6-4 (or is he a PG?).
    Beal is 6-5. Waiters is 6-4. Ross is 6-6. Rivers is a 6-4. Lamb is 6-5.

    Those are you lottery pick SGs in the last two drafts.

    Then you have potentially Exum at 6-6 (probably ends up a PG). Smart at 6-4 (maybe ends up a PG). Selden at 6-6 (I think he's a SF, but whatever). Harris at 6-4. Hairston at 6-5. Sulaimon at 6-4.

    That's Draft Express' first round SGs. Left out the foreign guys because I don't know anything about them, so their position might be incorrectly labeled.

    Just because Jordan and Kobe at 6-6, doesn't mean all SGs are.

  12. #27
    The One CelticBaller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    CT, GOATLAND
    Posts
    20,001

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Cavs took Bennet. who so far has been shit

  13. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    12,636

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyMcAdocious
    Prototypically for what era? SGs coming in lately are 6-3 - 6-5 range for the most part.

    Dipo is 6-4. McLemore is 6-5. KCP is 6-5. McCollum is 6-4 (or is he a PG?).
    Beal is 6-5. Waiters is 6-4. Ross is 6-6. Rivers is a 6-4. Lamb is 6-5.

    Those are you lottery pick SGs in the last two drafts.

    Then you have potentially Exum at 6-6 (probably ends up a PG). Smart at 6-4 (maybe ends up a PG). Selden at 6-6 (I think he's a SF, but whatever). Harris at 6-4. Hairston at 6-5. Sulaimon at 6-4.

    That's Draft Express' first round SGs. Left out the foreign guys because I don't know anything about them, so their position might be incorrectly labeled.

    Just because Jordan and Kobe at 6-6, doesn't mean all SGs are.
    good point in this day I'd say 6'4-6'7 is average SG sizes, undersized sg sized would be like 6'2, oladipo also has a lot of length and athleticism too, i really don't think his size will hinder him at all.

  14. #29
    Paid shill Jameerthefear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Swimming in cash
    Posts
    37,664

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    Oladipo >>>> MCW.

  15. #30
    Local High School Star Cermet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,252

    Default Re: So no talk about how Orlando should've taken Michael Carter-Williams?

    sh1t everyone should have taken Michael Carter williams. I mean what 11 pick? Portland had number 10. And they took McCollum who we knew is over hyped but now we know he is the next Greg Oden, or Roy, or Bowie or every other combustible player. Oladipo looks good enough for Orlando not to cry themselves to sleep over Carter Williams. I mean heck Cleveland took Bennet . And I know it has only been a few games but he doesn't look even near to a top 10 pick . To be honest I don't really see what Cleveland saw in him. I thought maybe he could be SF that Cleveland needs but nobody even dares to put him in a SF talks. So why the hell would you take a PF when you already have Tristan Thompson that is breaking out before you're eyes and when you have a center roatation Verajo , Zeller , Bynum. I mean the rule is if you don't see a high enough pick that would fill the role you need then just pick a player with the most talent. You can trade him you can get assets for him if you can't find a spot for him in your roster.
    They took bennet who doesn't fill a rotation spot they need , neither he is by far the player with the most upside, talent or work ethic. So WTF???

    Carter is the sleeper pick even if he is a high 11 th pick. Nobody really saw it coming.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •