SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2019-20 Boston Celtics Season
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 12:15:59 GMT -5
I refuse to pay for ESPN insider - i was one of the first to get it and had it for a long time but I don’t even watch ESPN anymore unless i have to to see a certain game. I only pay for it bc of Keith Law and the NBA/NFL draft coverage. Have 0 interest in anything else they produce. Long time ago I chose espn the magazine along with some other mags in some almost free deal. Ended up having ESPN+ for free for years and years, like 8, as they thought I had a subscription. They finally kicked me off, don't miss it much just another persons opinion.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 12:22:30 GMT -5
Didn't see it but heard he said that Williams was like Big Baby but without the 6 personalities. It was funny as hell, Scal was laughing his ass off on that one but their were more that had everyone laughing. Freaking Kendrick Perkins!! So funny that this is his personality when all I remember on the court was a constant scowl. He also says some stuff on espn that I know has got to rub some players the wrong way, he isn't afraid to ruffle feathers. Damien Woody is good also.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 12:24:21 GMT -5
Of the guys who are on at least 3 of the following rankings lists:
ESPN SI.com BleacherReport DraftNet (I'll even through them in but filter out the wild cards with the "at least 3)
Only Wiseman (out of reach) and Okongwu, Carey and Stewart fall in the top 20 consistently (with the latter 2 being closer to the 20 spot than mid-late lottery for most).
McDaniels, Toppin, Achiuwa are more combo forwards who are 6'9" to 6'10". They can give you length but still not bigs really, even in the modern sense (think more along the lines of J Isaac if you're lucky - especially with McDaniels).
Meanwhile, Ball, Edwards (CG), Anthony, Mannion, Maxey (CG), Hayes (CG), Hampton (CG), Maledon, Haliburton (CG) are all ballhandlers that consistently rank in the lottery area. I would assume that's why RJP made the comment (NOT because of need though I think it's not NOT a need).
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 12:28:57 GMT -5
Didn't see it but heard he said that Williams was like Big Baby but without the 6 personalities. It was funny as hell, Scal was laughing his ass off on that one but their were more that had everyone laughing. Freaking Kendrick Perkins!! So funny that this is his personality when all I remember on the court was a constant scowl. He also says some stuff on espn that I know has got to rub some players the wrong way, he isn't afraid to ruffle feathers. Damien Woody is good also. Saw a tweet from Mike Zarren saying how glad he was that Perk was doing this bc so many people only think of the scowl (me included). Zarren suggested it was part of what Perk needed to do on the court. But I had always heard/read that he was actually quite the affable guy.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 12:33:46 GMT -5
Is it me or is the X-Mas day game IN Toronto going to be real interesting? Theis and GWill at the 5 and that's likely it:
Timelord - Hurt Poirier - Hurt Kanter - Travel Restrictions?
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 13:22:44 GMT -5
Is it me or is the X-Mas day game IN Toronto going to be real interesting? Theis and GWill at the 5 and that's likely it: Timelord - Hurt Poirier - Hurt Kanter - Travel Restrictions? Hmmm, interesting, we will have to wait and see. Siakum could go off.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 13:29:21 GMT -5
Of the guys who are on at least 3 of the following rankings lists: ESPN SI.com BleacherReport DraftNet (I'll even through them in but filter out the wild cards with the "at least 3) Only Wiseman (out of reach) and Okongwu, Carey and Stewart fall in the top 20 consistently (with the latter 2 being closer to the 20 spot than mid-late lottery for most). McDaniels, Toppin, Achiuwa are more combo forwards who are 6'9" to 6'10". They can give you length but still not bigs really, even in the modern sense (think more along the lines of J Isaac if you're lucky - especially with McDaniels). Meanwhile, Ball, Edwards (CG), Anthony, Mannion, Maxey (CG), Hayes (CG), Hampton (CG), Maledon, Haliburton (CG) are all ballhandlers that consistently rank in the lottery area. I would assume that's why RJP made the comment (NOT because of need though I think it's not NOT a need). I read the bio's on each of those 3 and came away a little underwhelmed. Okongwu is raw and the other 2 at this point don't stretch the floor. I think in the end Danny trades the pick along with some other assets to get a big that is ready to play. Someone with an Al Horford type game, can contribute on both ends and will be satisfied with 10 shots/gm.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 19, 2019 14:35:56 GMT -5
Of the guys who are on at least 3 of the following rankings lists: ESPN SI.com BleacherReport DraftNet (I'll even through them in but filter out the wild cards with the "at least 3) Only Wiseman (out of reach) and Okongwu, Carey and Stewart fall in the top 20 consistently (with the latter 2 being closer to the 20 spot than mid-late lottery for most). McDaniels, Toppin, Achiuwa are more combo forwards who are 6'9" to 6'10". They can give you length but still not bigs really, even in the modern sense (think more along the lines of J Isaac if you're lucky - especially with McDaniels). Meanwhile, Ball, Edwards (CG), Anthony, Mannion, Maxey (CG), Hayes (CG), Hampton (CG), Maledon, Haliburton (CG) are all ballhandlers that consistently rank in the lottery area. I would assume that's why RJP made the comment (NOT because of need though I think it's not NOT a need). I read the bio's on each of those 3 and came away a little underwhelmed. Okongwu is raw and the other 2 at this point don't stretch the floor. I think in the end Danny trades the pick along with some other assets to get a big that is ready to play. Someone with an Al Horford type game, can contribute on both ends and will be satisfied with 10 shots/gm. I like Carey and think he has a lot of upside just knew it was a high mock for him at this point. This isn’t a great draft. I said expect a PG because it’s a very PG heavy draft.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 14:38:17 GMT -5
What could be interesting next offseason are the FAs. There are really only 7 teams who might have Cap Space (this is based on Keith Smith's projection of what teams would likely do). Of course, more COULD get space if they (or players) made certain decisions. But this really doesn't seem like the year to make drastic moves to push for a meh FA Class.
What that could mean is a number of FAs needing to accept Exceptions or be part of S&Ts. Of course, many could just stay put if they like their situation (where their Bird Rights will be the value play on their part).
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 14:48:05 GMT -5
Charnia reporting that Wiseman is leaving Memphis to prepare for the draft.
|
|
|
Post by philarhody on Dec 19, 2019 15:54:15 GMT -5
N'fante Daly will likely go much higher than he's ranked now. Defensive/Rimrunner starter kit with some touch
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 17:08:33 GMT -5
Their is a long way to go so expect a lot to change.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 17:11:54 GMT -5
What's not likely to change is Danny drafting the best player (in his mind) regardless of need. He definitely seems like a guy who would use the tiering system.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 19, 2019 17:18:52 GMT -5
I've been out on Draftnet for a couple of years now. ESPN's coverage is fantastic since acquiring Draft Express (and we no longer have discussions interrupted by WCPs claims that Chad Ford is actually the Devil). Also think Wasserman has greatly improved Bleacher Reports coverage. Vecenie (now at the Athletic) is another goto for me. I have to go back and look at my old spreadsheets (yeah, it's a little sad) but I was just looking at Drafnet's historical mock drafts and I'm pretty sure he's changed them to make them look better. I say that bc he's almost ALWAYS had some wildcard guys high up in his rankings/mocks (much like Toppin and Carey are in the latest, albeit still very early, mock draft). However, when you look now you see that everyone is either spot on or pretty darn close. No real wildcards. If I have them, I will have entered the last mock he did in each of those years. I just threw NBAdraft.net up there because they do a full mock year round and it has some very detailed scouting reports. He changes his mock a ton right before the draft every year. For 11 plus months he'll have some picks that you scratch your head at. Then when information starts coming in he changes it and the final mocks are rather good year after year. You can go to the message boards and read about it, as guys keep asking what happened. Like Bruno he had him high lottery most of the year and then kept dropping him for weeks before the draft. So I wouldn't pay much attention to the mock draft right now, just wanted to give some scouting reports on all the PGs you were talking about. I loved draft express and then Chad Ford, with Fords tier rankings being the thing he did that one one else did. It really showed you how deep a draft was. I greatly miss that and frankly hate ESPN draft coverage now. It's not close to draft express, you don't get detailed mocks and scouting reports year long. The information is good, but you just get less of it than draft express gave you. The Ringer is likely my favorite source right now, but they only do Mocks close to draft time, not year round. Yet very detailed and all in one place.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 17:22:15 GMT -5
Danny got Tatum and made everybody look stupid at the same time and it keeps looking better all the time. Ball and Fultz will never come close to their draft positions and I love it. To think he got an extra 1st that could have been really valuable and is now R Langford. Pretty sure Tatum was the top guy going in that year but missed some time.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 19, 2019 17:24:51 GMT -5
I only pay for it bc of Keith Law and the NBA/NFL draft coverage. Have 0 interest in anything else they produce. Long time ago I chose espn the magazine along with some other mags in some almost free deal. Ended up having ESPN+ for free for years and years, like 8, as they thought I had a subscription. They finally kicked me off, don't miss it much just another persons opinion. It happens all the time. Like I've had ESPN insider for like 20 years but 2-3 times my subscription ends and I can still get it for a long time untill they finally catch up. I bought a two year subscription over four years ago and still have it. I refuse to buy it again, but don't mind the free service.👏
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 17:27:50 GMT -5
Ringer is great. Wasserman has done Tiers closer to draft time in recent years (I believe). Express has "roles" for the lottery picks which I like.
I'm less concerned about the Mocks throughout the year:
1. You don't know who is going to be in the lottery this early. 2. You certainly don't know who is going to WIN the lottery. 3. Very little sense of needs this early 4. And if you are using the tiering system (or BPA) then the rankings are more useful than the mocks anyways (DraftNet does go 100 deep on that, like ESPN does).
Towards the end, I look at the mocks bc it gives a sense of industry buzz and then it's more useful. To me, that is.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 19, 2019 17:28:41 GMT -5
And ESPN wonders why their losing money and had to downsize.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 19, 2019 18:23:16 GMT -5
ESPN is losing money because they charge more than any other channel, a lot more. When I watched ESPN all the time when I was younger the Internet was just taking off. You can get everything you ever want for nothing now. You can also pick your packages. Like Sling TV $25 a month for every channel you want besides NESN and ESPN, they even include NBC Boston Sports Channel or you pay $40 and only get ESPN added. Is ESPN worth $200 a year? A bunch of people don't think so, not when for $300 you get every other Channel out there basically. They need to lower their cost per month or they will just keep losing people. They cost more than Netflix, Hulu and Amazon, heck you can almost get all three for the price of ESPN.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 19, 2019 22:48:05 GMT -5
Cs getting some breaks. Det will be missing Griffin and Kennaerd and Gasol and Siakam will miss several games (Boston plays them twice in the coming games)
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 20, 2019 7:32:05 GMT -5
Cs getting some breaks. Det will be missing Griffin and Kennaerd and Gasol and Siakam will miss several games (Boston plays them twice in the coming games) Given the C's injury report I would say they are on a more level playing field. In regards to Griffen, he seems to be a shell of his former self.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 20, 2019 7:41:46 GMT -5
ESPN is losing money because they charge more than any other channel, a lot more. When I watched ESPN all the time when I was younger the Internet was just taking off. You can get everything you ever want for nothing now. You can also pick your packages. Like Sling TV $25 a month for every channel you want besides NESN and ESPN, they even include NBC Boston Sports Channel or you pay $40 and only get ESPN added. Is ESPN worth $200 a year? A bunch of people don't think so, not when for $300 you get every other Channel out there basically. They need to lower their cost per month or they will just keep losing people. They cost more than Netflix, Hulu and Amazon, heck you can almost get all three for the price of ESPN. I didn't realize that when broken down it was this costly to have espn in comparison to the rest. Interesting to me considering that when espn started it was a major precedent being the 1st all sports station and 1st real station that wasn't one of the big 3, ABC, CBS and NBC. At the time people questioned the feasibility of an all sports station being successful, now almost 40 years later they get away with charging more than the rest.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 20, 2019 8:25:02 GMT -5
ESPN is losing money because they charge more than any other channel, a lot more. When I watched ESPN all the time when I was younger the Internet was just taking off. You can get everything you ever want for nothing now. You can also pick your packages. Like Sling TV $25 a month for every channel you want besides NESN and ESPN, they even include NBC Boston Sports Channel or you pay $40 and only get ESPN added. Is ESPN worth $200 a year? A bunch of people don't think so, not when for $300 you get every other Channel out there basically. They need to lower their cost per month or they will just keep losing people. They cost more than Netflix, Hulu and Amazon, heck you can almost get all three for the price of ESPN. I didn't realize that when broken down it was this costly to have espn in comparison to the rest. Interesting to me considering that when espn started it was a major precedent being the 1st all sports station and 1st real station that wasn't one of the big 3, ABC, CBS and NBC. At the time people questioned the feasibility of an all sports station being successful, now almost 40 years later they get away with charging more than the rest. Imagine how much it would cost if all the people who don't care about it stopped paying for it. They're heavily subsidizing the people who do want to watch it. I've warned about the cable money bubble popping in sports. It just seems to be a matter of time.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 20, 2019 8:55:52 GMT -5
All cable reliant stations are sitting on a bubble to some degree if you look at the future of streaming and how people get their entertainment. Hard to embrace things getting to bad in the sports world given the revenues that continue to grow at ridiculous rates, companies need to embrace innovation and changing with the times to endure, as usual.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 20, 2019 16:41:35 GMT -5
I didn't realize that when broken down it was this costly to have espn in comparison to the rest. Interesting to me considering that when espn started it was a major precedent being the 1st all sports station and 1st real station that wasn't one of the big 3, ABC, CBS and NBC. At the time people questioned the feasibility of an all sports station being successful, now almost 40 years later they get away with charging more than the rest. Imagine how much it would cost if all the people who don't care about it stopped paying for it. They're heavily subsidizing the people who do want to watch it. I've warned about the cable money bubble popping in sports. It just seems to be a matter of time. Umm it has basically already happened. 60% of the US population has already ditched cable. I don't know what bubble you are waiting for. Disney owning ESPN and making them a package deal kinda protects ESPN. Cable is basically dead, but people still watch a lot of TV and are more than willing to pay for it. Really the only thing still propping up cable is their internet. In Western Mass it's still the best internet available to most people.
|
|
|