Thread Tools

Display Modes

butr · 07-05-2005, 07:52 AM

http://www.courant.com/sports/hc-cha...adlines-sports

GuelphRaptorsFan · 07-05-2005, 08:12 AM

Well, again, I hope I'm wrong, but I'm in no way surprised that he performed well in workouts. The issue with Charlie V, from what I've been given to understand, is that while he's always shown signs of having great talent, he doesn't show up on a consistent basis at game time.

As an aside, you've got to admit, ringing endorsements from Knicks and Lakers management is hardly inspiring. :-)

Porn_Player · 07-05-2005, 08:12 AM

FINALLY some body has given him some credit supposedly the dudes lacks from confidence and am dam sure it didnt help him getting bashed by the media cos he was taken at 7 the guy will be awesome i cant wait to see the sepn dudes eating the words. muhahahaha

Junkyard Dog13 · 07-05-2005, 08:35 AM

I dont think he will be great but defenetely a good player that contributes.

My expextations

year 1 8 PPG 6 RPG 0.5 BPG 1 APG (just secure loose rebounds in crunch time)
year 2 12 PPG 6.8 RPG 1 BPG 3 APG
year 3 15 PPG 7.5 RPG 1.3 BPG 2.3 APG

he will be I think getting up there in the 30-35 MPG range in yr 2 and 3 mostly as the C and some as the SF and about 10 backing up Bosh on at times when Bosh is resting as well as being on together where Bonner is the SF Bosh the PF and CV the C.

I just hope he turns out better than Odom.

-James- · 07-05-2005, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junkyard Dog13

I dont think he will be great but defenetely a good player that contributes.

My expextations

year 1 8 PPG 6 RPG 0.5 BPG 1 APG (just secure loose rebounds in crunch time)
year 2 12 PPG 6.8 RPG 1 BPG 3 APG
year 3 15 PPG 7.5 RPG 1.3 BPG 2.3 APG

he will be I think getting up there in the 30-35 MPG range in yr 2 and 3 mostly as the C and some as the SF and about 10 backing up Bosh on at times when Bosh is resting as well as being on together where Bonner is the SF Bosh the PF and CV the C.

I just hope he turns out better than Odom.

If we get anything close to Odom, especially from last season or the one before, I will soil myself.

spuriousjones · 07-05-2005, 10:04 AM

i'm pumped!

**speedythief** · 07-05-2005, 10:09 AM

McFurious · 07-05-2005, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speedythief

lucky777s · 07-05-2005, 11:34 AM

Look, I'm over the pick and will be rooting hard for Charlie to deliver for us at the 5 spot. I still don't believe it will happen, but I want it to happen. I want to be wrong in this case.

But this article is a pure puff piece written by a UConn writer in a local paper. It just brushes off his past problems as nothing and relies on the success of other UConn grads to pump up the chances of Charlie being great. You could defend taking ANY player at 7 with similar arguments.

Let's just wait and see and judge the pick after a few months of the regular season, at least for initial impact.

Cap_ii · 07-05-2005, 12:40 PM

I have a question for all of you guys who critized RB for picking Villanueva; if it was not villanueva then who should have been picked at #7? I hope your answer is not fry because I don't see any upside with that guy. Green is too hyped but lack of alot of things otherwise he would have been picked with in 1-5 easily. Gragner had back and knee injuries not to mention he played in weak confrence. So who should be picked at #7. some even suggested VC would have been available at pick #16! please be real he would not passed pick #9.

SkywalkerAC · 07-05-2005, 12:57 PM

I'm doubtful that the Knicks would have taken him at 8 but I have little doubt the Lakers would have taken him at 9.

One thing that people overlook is the physical progress he has likely made even since the tournament. As the writer touched upon, he had been working his *** off training for the draft in New York. Anyone have a link to the article that describes his workout regiment?

He isn't some kind of project that isn't going to be able to contribute in his rookie season. He also isn't your typical power forward that has little room to improve. He's good right now and has a world of upside.

lucky777s · 07-05-2005, 02:13 PM

The fact that he worked his butt off getting ready for the draft means nothing to me. Why wasn't he working that hard at UConn and being a dominant player? So what if he got motivated by money and hired a great trainer?

Frye was promised 8 by the Knicks which is why he didn't work out for anyone else. Diogu was promised at 9 by Golden State. Why didn't these teams promise CharlieV if he was their top choice? Answer: he wasn't their top choice.

Lakers went for ultimate impact with Bynum. They already have Odom and likely wouldn't have taken Charlie. Again, no promise to Charlie. Only the Bobcats or Magic may have taken him and their picks were questionable with May and Vazquez so why are they so smart?

Charlie was 13.6 / 8.3 / 1.8 at UConn
Frye was 15.8 / 7.6 / 2.3 at Arizona
Taft was 13.3 / 7.5 / 1.7 at Pitt
Diogu was 22.6 / 9.8 / 2.3 at AZ St.
Granger was 18.8 / 8.9 / 2.0 at New Mexico

All those guys are ready to step in and contribute. So what makes CharlieV such a superior prospect? Versatility? That's a joke. Just means he isn't good enough at any one spot to dominate there. Diogu's rep is that he plays with passion. Charlie doesn't have that - he disappears quite often.

He's still a gamble. So why not gamble with a legit big man or a potential superstar wing player instead?

All the players could potentially flop. Don't rag on everyone else and insiist Charlie is the best choice by default. Nothing in evidence suggests he is clearly the best prospect. Even Babs had to talk about Charlie's 'upside' because what he is today is not worth a 7 pick.

Let's wait and see what happens. I don't want to keep bashing the pick, but people just keep on trying to justify it with BS excuses.

SkywalkerAC · 07-05-2005, 03:42 PM

Lookie lookie...did Charlie average more rebounds than Frye (in less minutes)? And that's sharing rebounds with another great boarder, Boone.

You can't underrate upside and versatility when you have pretty evenly matched prospects. A lot of Charlie's upside comes from his intelligence and feel for the game rather than his physical attributes alone.

butr · 07-05-2005, 04:50 PM

Minutes played:

Frye 31.0 or .509/.245/.074 per min

Diogu 36.4 or .621/.269/.063 per min

Taft 26.5 or .502/.283/.064

Granger 30.0 or .627/.297/.067

Villanueva 25.8 .527/.322/.070

Clearly they were not interested in another wing. They had their shot, twice, got one. Given the premium on bigs, defined position or not, CV has more potential value than the others. I don't see any "legit bigmen" in this draft past Bogut.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes