http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/features/rumorsUConn center Andre Drummond worked out for the Portland Trail Blazers on Saturday. He also has had a session with the Sacramento Kings and is slated to work out for the Charlotte Bobcats, Washington Wizards and Cleveland Cavaliers prior to the draft, according to Ben Golliver of BlazersEdge.com.
Golliver said the Blazers were predictably tight-lipped about the session, but Drummond rapped with reporters afterward and had some interesting tidbits of information. Despite the general assumption that he's a seven-footer, Drummond admitted that he is "6-foot-11 with shoes on. Elevated shoes. WIthout shoes I'm about 6-foot-10 or 6-foot-9." He also said he has shed 22 pounds since he left UConn. At 270 pounds, he feels he is "quicker on his feet."
Not such a physical specimen at all to me...I guess I like his long term potential but he is no home run to me at all. Unless he fell to 7-10 range, I would stay away.
In Cho I Trust!
He's still 6'11.25 in normal shoes. That's more than fine for a modern Center and, paired with Bismack, is above average for a front court unit as far as height goes. Not to mention that they both have the athleticism and strength to guard any 4 or 5 in the league. They would also have two of the top 21 wingspans in DX's database at over a 7'6'' average.
Simply put, even if Drummond became nothing more than an athlete, we'd have the biggest, longest, most athletic duo in the league.
Drummond's athleticism is one thing that makes me believe he is higher on our draft list than a lot of sources may state. When you look at last year's draft and our trade up to make sure we got Bismack right before Detroit could then I'm wondering if Cho is just as interested in Drummond. Bismack was very raw offensively but obviously very gifted athletically. If these are the players that Cho finds to be good additions to the team then I'm wondering if Drummond is a much bigger target on his radar than we may know?
I think he's always been a target, but there are guys that other people like better. I expected the Bobcats to give serious analysis to Drummond, ThoR (love that nickname), MKG, Beal, and Barnes, even if there are other guys that might be worthy.Originally Posted by JMo
SOMEONE will pay for THIS!
this is true. but bismack also displayed a terrific work ethic and an incredibly self-aware disposition. he also took full advantage of his one main opportunity (nike hoops summit), while drummond was a total flop in his (March Madness). http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=320750066
so i would argue bismack was less of a risk than drummond.
You're not very good at reading apparently. I said luck played a part in about 1/4 of rebounds, not all of them or even most of them.
And yes, you can be lazy and still be a good rebounder, any big fat kid can camp out in the lane and pull down boards all day as long as the ref isn't blowing the whistle for 3 seconds.
Talking about reading, you should see that my response was to the previous poster who is very well respected on this site. I am not looking to get into a discussion with you about great rebounders being able to be lazy. That is one of the craziest premises I have ever heard. I disagree with basically everything you have said so I figured the discussion with you wasn't worth it but if you insist.
You talk about the fat, lazy guy getting rebounds...what age/level are you talking about. I understand you are probably pretty young and learning the game but as you progress levels, not only will fat/lazy not get you a rebound, it won't get you a roster spot.
To say that luck plays a 25% part in rebounding is an incredibly naive statement. I am not trying to be rude but again, to say that, lets me know 100% that you don't understand the nuances of rebounding.
Read my post you quoted again, since you now know it wasn't directed towards you, and let me know what you think.
In Cho I Trust!
I wouldn't look at one game a piece if you're going to compare Drummond to Bismack. Bismack's season avg in Spain and Drummond's at UCONN were almost identical. Bottom line is Drummond is huge, freakishly fast for his size, and can help us defend the paint which is one of the many things we were very bad at last year. In addition, we now have a new coach who's apparently well known for player development.
Nice personal attacks and assumption making, is that how you become a respected member of this site? Luck has nothing to do with it huh? Everything is predestined. Are you the John Calvin of basketball? Lol. Eddy Curry still draws a paycheck in the NBA despite being the fattest, laziest center in the league. Diop is fat, brutally slow and also has an awful work ethic but he was sadly one of if not our best rebounder last year.
Sorry BrotherDave if I have offended you. You responded to my quote back comment to another member by saying "you're not very good at reading" and then you take issue with my response to you? This is exactly why I didn't want to get into this discussion with you in the first place. Clearly, anyone who thinks that rebounding is based on luck, is going to be offended by me saying that you just don't get the nuances of rebounding. Not sure of how else to say it though. Predestined? What in the world are you talking about. Nothing about rebounding is "predestined" either.
Also, bring some better examples if you want respect. Using Curry as a rebounding example is crazy. The dude averaged .9 rebounds last season. That's point 9, not 9. Yeah, it has really worked out for him. Boris Diaw? He is a career 5 rebounds a game guy. Also, he might not take care of his body but he does understand positioning incredibly well and has a very high basketball IQ. He could be better if he applied himself but...
...are we really using Boris Diaw and Eddy Curry as examples of great rebounders...good grief.
We will just have to agree to disagree.
Last edited by WAM9; 06-20-2012 at 11:13 AM.
In Cho I Trust!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks