PDA

View Full Version : Is Austin's stock falling???



AzZag
06-23-2009, 09:01 AM
in no way, shape or form am I trying to slam Austin. He obviously isn't coming back, so I truly want him to be drafted high for his sake and that of the university. However, as the draft is coming up so quickly, it appears that things are slightly changing. Also, on a side note, I truly don't believe a single NBA GM or exec reads this forum, and if by some cosmic chance they did, I doubt it would change their mind on whom they are drafting.

http://www.draftexpress.com/

slipped down quite a few spots


http://www.nbadraft.net/

slipped into the 2nd round


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/ian_thomsen/06/16/mock.draft3.2/index.html

his highest ranking I have seen at 17


http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/11882262
of course the Parrish article

CDC84
06-23-2009, 09:05 AM
Austin was never in the 1st round with nbadraft.net. They had him as a 2010 draft pick until he made it official that he was staying in the 2009 draft.

cjm720
06-23-2009, 09:09 AM
These writers and experts hypothecate. They have no clue, as do I!

I predict Austin will be a top 15 choice.

Go Zags!!

gamagin
06-23-2009, 09:21 AM
on a sports report, on tv or on the radio, unfortunately, is the batting average of all those pundits who have weighed in on someone like AD or something like the draft.

You get all kinds of chat about who picked the series, or the winner of the NCAA, Superbowl, Derby, and so forth, but you never get the pundits' lifetime record, number of seasons (s)he covered sports and how accurate or good of a record THEY have.

Not like you get the stats on the athletes. So here we are.

That said, the answer to your question is fairly simple. It depends on who you read, who you believe and who believe has been right more often than not.

Throw them all into a pool, however, and I believe they'd mostly be batting about .130 and few, if any, would last very long if it weren't for their personalities versus their accuracy.

Even the weathermen, given better science, have improved over the years. Sports writers, imo, have not, when it comes to prognosticating.

The Oregon Spike
06-23-2009, 09:41 AM
GU is in jeopardy of the "produces lousy pros" tag if Austin is a bust.

former1dog
06-23-2009, 09:45 AM
GU is in jeopardy of the "produces lousy pros" tag if Austin is a bust.

Better to have "lousy" pros than no pros at all, don't you think?

zaguarxj
06-23-2009, 09:48 AM
on a sports report, on tv or on the radio, unfortunately, is the batting average of all those pundits who have weighed in on someone like AD or something like the draft.

You get all kinds of chat about who picked the series, or the winner of the NCAA, Superbowl, Derby, and so forth, but you never get the pundits' lifetime record, number of seasons (s)he covered sports and how accurate or good of a record THEY have.

Not like you get the stats on the athletes. So here we are.


I think there's an idea for a profitable web site here.

TimZag
06-23-2009, 09:54 AM
Better to have "lousy" pros than no pros at all, don't you think?
It's better to make the NIT than miss the postseason entirely... what's your point?

bballguy
06-23-2009, 09:56 AM
Of the four highest profile players drafted from GU (Stockton, Turiaf, Morrison, and now Daye) I think of only one would qualify as a bust. Adam may have been a bust for his lofty pick, but he still may catch on with a team that can use him. Obviously the jury is still out on Austin. This is also considered a very weak draft, so there might be several busts. Does that make all of those schools a bad pro school? I think the "pro" lable for Gu in this draft will depend on how Micah, Jeremy and Josh will do next year. If they become the "ten-day" contract type of pro then that bad pro tag might be something to revisit.
We really don't have a long track record of having high profile draft picks. Give us a few years and then see if GU is a bad pro school.

Just A Zag
06-23-2009, 10:09 AM
my advice: wait two days and find out

former1dog
06-23-2009, 10:20 AM
It's better to make the NIT than miss the postseason entirely... what's your point?

Well, for starters quit being so ####ing pessimistic. Is that clear enough? ;)

Some folks like to send out invitations to wallow in their misery, I'm not biting.

CaliforniaZaggin'
06-23-2009, 10:23 AM
GU is in jeopardy of the "produces lousy pros" tag if Austin is a bust.

Duke had that same tag for a while, but it never stopped them from winning and recruiting top talent.

zag944
06-23-2009, 10:32 AM
Of the four highest profile players drafted from GU (Stockton, Turiaf, Morrison, and now Daye) I think of only one would qualify as a bust. Adam may have been a bust for his lofty pick, but he still may catch on with a team that can use him. Obviously the jury is still out on Austin. This is also considered a very weak draft, so there might be several busts. Does that make all of those schools a bad pro school? I think the "pro" lable for Gu in this draft will depend on how Micah, Jeremy and Josh will do next year. If they become the "ten-day" contract type of pro then that bad pro tag might be something to revisit.
We really don't have a long track record of having high profile draft picks. Give us a few years and then see if GU is a bad pro school.



I dont think scouts take into account players drafted in 1984 when evaluating our programs potential to develop NBA talent. Its a feather in our cap as fans, but I dont think it is anything anyone else is considering.

Dickau should be included in your list. I dont think of him as a bust because expectations werent too high, but he never really panned out despite occasional flashes. Could perhaps be considered a "lousy pro" as an earlier post in this topic would indicate.

The jury SHOULD be out on the subject longer, but it probably wont be.

cjm720
06-23-2009, 11:51 AM
Duke had that same tag for a while, but it never stopped them from winning and recruiting top talent.

Beat me to it. The topic is a double edged sword...

hoopster777
06-23-2009, 12:42 PM
Daye was hardly a nationally known player this past season. When people thought of the 2008-09 Zags, it was more about Pargo/Bouldin than it was Daye. He is probably the lowest profile player that will have been drafted out of GU, simply because all the others were well known and identified as GU players.

gamagin
06-23-2009, 01:01 PM
Daye was hardly a nationally known player this past season. When people thought of the 2008-09 Zags, it was more about Pargo/Bouldin than it was Daye. He is probably the lowest profile player that will have been drafted out of GU, simply because all the others were well known and identified as GU players.

and more . . .

http://tinyurl.com/pqjvgh