Hoosierhoopster

Yep, he has many of the traits / characteristics the teams look for in the lottery. It's certainly possible he drops due to concerns about his shot and how much that was affected by injury and just because he didn't play in the NCAA tourney or NIT. I'd be surprised if he does fall much, beyond the end of the lottery, and that post above highlights why. We'll see though.

^^ Teams can get cautious and a player can fall because of injury etc. (see Myles Turner), but here's a recent projection that actually looks at what the scouts and NBA teams are looking for -- did you guys realize Romeo was #2 overall in pick and roll effectiveness? That's big for the NBA. 13. MIAMI HEAT – ROMEO LANGFORD (INDIANA, G) One of the best fluid athletes in the draft, he won’t overpower anyone, but rather lull them to sleep. As quiet and emotionless as a superstar there was in college, Langford has a mixed bag of tricks on the offensive end. Something that went unnoticed was his exceptional pick-and-roll game. Ranked second in pick-and-roll effectiveness last season, Langford’s length as a two guard is something scouts love. Though he only shot 27 percent from three last season, he came on strong late, shooting 35 percent over the last month and a half. Replacing Dwayne Wade is no easy task, but Langford seems like a perfect fit. View image on Twitter

Gleas, you didn't just say "WITHOUT" Oladipo. What you said was: "I would say the rosters too, certainly without Vic the Celtics clearly have the better roster/team as well." I was responding to the "rosters too" comment. BTW I wasn't taking some kind of jab at you, the capitalized WITHOUT isn't necessary. What I'm saying is that the rosters aren't the end all. Yes, with Vic it's a totally different series -- we agree on that -- but my point is not that Vic is MJ and he'll just own the series, my point is that with him the Pacers' roster is very competitive. Any time a team loses its best player it's obviously going to be worse. That's clearly the case with the Pacers. Just saying the "rosters too" overlooks that the Pacers roster, with Vic, is pretty good, and good enough to compete very well with the top teams in the East. That's why they were in the 2nd-3rd spot in the East with Vic. And yes I saw that you said "certainly without Vic," obviously, but again I'm saying the roster is pretty solid (though as I've repeatedly said including in this thread, they need a top flight point guard).

It would have been a hell of a series with Vic. This is a whole is greater than the sum of the parts discussion. The C’s have obviously had a lot of issues this season, I don’t think those are all resolved.it’s not a player vs. player across the roster comparison it’s a team comparison and the Pacers were easily a top 3 team with Vic, they are much better with Vic. And he would’ve opened and spread the floor against the C’s. I know you’re a C’s fan, but I think you’re being kind a little dismissive here G.

I don’t know how good he can’t become, that’s hurting my mind. 😀 He could become the most dominant player in the game. But he’d need to develop a legit jumper / outside shot to do so. That’s a sizesble hole in his game. He’s already a top 5-10 player, and he’s still young and improving.

Calipari left 2 programs behind with vacated FF’s and there has been all kinds of smoke around him and UK as to eligibility issues (but not paying players), see Bledsoe et al. No, not the same in any way. You say shady, but again you come forward with no evidence at all of paying players, which is what this is about. i wouldn’t doubt that K has pushed the envelope in recruiting and there have been a few instances over the years where there have been some issues there - but again this discussion is about playing players. No evidence. Now back to self - policing myself, please start a new thread if you guys want to continue the paying players discussion thx

Yes, that's true my bad for the over-simplification. But there's been testimony all over the place along with media reporting about coaches involved and being investigated and prosecuted. Duke, to the point, has not been implicated by anyone. Neither has IU.

Cool. Guys, I've jumped on the OT run in this thread. If you guys want to talk more about Duke or other programs paying or supposedly paying players, etc., please start a new thread, thanks.

Lol. The prosecution put on witnesses that implicated programs and coaches. Duke was not implicated. I think it's obvious that if the prosecutors found anything on Duke that would've come out in the testimony. Not saying it's not possible that Nike was involved with Duke players / agents, that's always possible, but it's not Duke paying players.

What's the information? I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I do not buy into conspiracy theories and speculation that a program like Duke is paying players. I think that is, at best, an incredible stretch of the imagination. Again, I am FAR from a Duke fan, can't stand Duke and the jackamole that Coach K has become, but they flat out do not need to pay players and there is just no evidence of any sort that I've seen that Duke actually pays players. Really, that's an incredible stretch. Now the Nike thing is a different animal. Duke, of course, has not been caught up in that scandal, and rest assured the prosecutors would have put on testimony that implicated Duke if they had found any, but that's always possible, imo, given the number high level Nike officers who were involved, and prosecuted, and that number of schools that were implicated, KU being right there. But that's not Duke paying players.

You're speculating. There is ZERO evidence of Duke / Coach K etc. paying players. Zero. Your speculation is just speculation. I have no idea about how Zion's family pays for a home. Do you? No, you don't. It's of course possible we find out Duke players benefited from Nike under-the-table stuff, but even that wouldn't make Duke guilty of paying players. What's the point in calling a program dirty with zero evidence?

No I really don't think Duke is paying players, through anyone. That's a real, real stretch of credibility. I'm no Duke fan, but that's not a dirty program. KU I can see for sure, especially with what is swirling around that program right now. Duke, no. There's zero evidence there.

I think it's less of a stigma as the conversation of college players getting paid has grown, but I don't think there's any kind of wide-spread perception that you're "stupid" for not going to a school that's breaking the rules to pay you. Programs like Duke etc. are not hurting for recruits, and it's still the exception that a genuinely good (next-level type) player is caught actually getting paid, that's a very small number of players in the grand scheme of things. However, more to your point, agree that programs that are caught breaking NCAA rules do not seem to be losing out on recruits going forward. The stigma has been lessened, and probably just as important if not more so, that NCAA is so ridiculously incompetent and uncaring, that programs like UNC that break a much bigger rule -- fake academics that undermines the entire idea of the "student athlete" -- go completely unpunished and win NCs.

He's done a better job this year playing more of a facilitator role, a part of how and why PG has had such a great year. However, just look at his shots and selection from Game 4, a major reason for the Thunder's loss, at home, now down 3-1 and headed back to Portland. Looks like Portland takes this series, after the Thunder swept them 4-0 in the regular season. Lillard and Portland have been playing really good ball. Westbrook's decision-making still an issue for the Thunder, who frankly are the best team to challenge the Warriors. Matchups are always key, and while the Rockets are playing really well, and just might get past GS this year, they're always one game from CPIII injuring himself again and I'd still bet on GS over the Rockets. Thunder-GS would be a a great series. Now Portland will probably win this series only to get smoked in its next series.

With Vic they were contending for the top 2-3 in the East. With Vic they took the Cavs to 7 in the playoffs last year and this season’s squad was better. They would’ve had a better seed with Vic, and would’ve done better for sure