Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

I agree. What makes everyone think that Ceballos was BPA? I personally wouldn't have picked him until much later than he was. But then I'm new to this and really have no clue what I'm doing.

DrBradBuss wrote:I agree. What makes everyone think that Ceballos was BPA? I personally wouldn't have picked him until much later than he was. But then I'm new to this and really have no clue what I'm doing.

What I see: B C+ C- C C+ A

B C+: Good starting spot for a rookie. Even if that only jumps one rank to a B+ B-, that can easily be 16-20ppg.

C- Acceptable handles for SF, would prefer C but C- is acceptable

C Meh defense, would like it to start at C+ but for late lottery that is acceptable.

C+ good rebounding for SF

A pot, no worries where.

What I know is B B can be 18-22 ppg and with C+ rebounding, that will be 4-6 RPG. For me, a player like him, should be starting and be an option. If I had a defensive option I liked more I would put him as the backup SG/SF and be the top scoring option. Either way he would be starting quality, top 6th man at 12 where you usually only see the high pot boom/bust players taken is excellent value.

DrBradBuss wrote:I agree. What makes everyone think that Ceballos was BPA? I personally wouldn't have picked him until much later than he was. But then I'm new to this and really have no clue what I'm doing.

I'm new to, I just guess at my picks.

FlDuckFan wrote:

DrBradBuss wrote:I agree. What makes everyone think that Ceballos was BPA? I personally wouldn't have picked him until much later than he was. But then I'm new to this and really have no clue what I'm doing.

I'm new to, I just guess at my picks.

Also if he look good and he was good historically. Most likely he will b good here.

So picking
Jerrod Mustaf PF 21 6'10'' 245 C+ C- D C C+ A
in the second round isn't to bad of a pick ?

No second rounder is a bad pick. The cost is just so darn low and the possible reward is so darn high.

If he jumps to even C+ def and B- reb he is a rotation to role player in the second round that is fine.

Zyme wrote:

DrBradBuss wrote:I agree. What makes everyone think that Ceballos was BPA? I personally wouldn't have picked him until much later than he was. But then I'm new to this and really have no clue what I'm doing.

What I see: B C+ C- C C+ A

B C+: Good starting spot for a rookie. Even if that only jumps one rank to a B+ B-, that can easily be 16-20ppg.

C- Acceptable handles for SF, would prefer C but C- is acceptable

C Meh defense, would like it to start at C+ but for late lottery that is acceptable.

C+ good rebounding for SF

A pot, no worries where.

What I know is B B can be 18-22 ppg and with C+ rebounding, that will be 4-6 RPG. For me, a player like him, should be starting and be an option. If I had a defensive option I liked more I would put him as the backup SG/SF and be the top scoring option. Either way he would be starting quality, top 6th man at 12 where you usually only see the high pot boom/bust players taken is excellent value.

Exactly B C+ scoring with A potential. Even if that A is low or a high B (75-85 potential), I could easily see him with B+ B- scoring (honestly even B+ B could happen depending on how high is B and C+ are right now). Ideal sixth man type ratings. And that's a middle case scenario.

Of course he could bust, or boom... But on paper, I like what he got.

DrBradBuss wrote:Can I give myself an "A"?
Had to give up Hammonds, but got a future All-Star hopefully in Coleman. That in and of itself was solid, but able to add a top SF (Liberty) at a position of need and 2 C's. While neither probably will be a star, they will hopefully give me future years of depth and solid contributions at that position.

Coleman was a great trade up for you.

UOducksTK1 wrote:

DrBradBuss wrote:Can I give myself an "A"?
Had to give up Hammonds, but got a future All-Star hopefully in Coleman. That in and of itself was solid, but able to add a top SF (Liberty) at a position of need and 2 C's. While neither probably will be a star, they will hopefully give me future years of depth and solid contributions at that position.

Coleman was a great trade up for you.

Agreed! I really wanted that pick, but TK wanted my first born. lol

pudgejeff wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:

DrBradBuss wrote:Can I give myself an "A"?
Had to give up Hammonds, but got a future All-Star hopefully in Coleman. That in and of itself was solid, but able to add a top SF (Liberty) at a position of need and 2 C's. While neither probably will be a star, they will hopefully give me future years of depth and solid contributions at that position.

Coleman was a great trade up for you.

Agreed! I really wanted that pick, but TK wanted my first born. lol

lol, what can I say. I'm greedy at fbb.