Any chance of a change of mind?

[Jimmy Serrano]

At least he hasn't been called out by name on TV for being a doochebag.

Eh, I owned it, manned up and apologized. You're not exactly the kind of guy I'd like to have a beer with either. So no offense taken.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Wow. Hasheem Thabeet was the second overall pick. He wasn't going to improve his draft status.

Thabeet got $4.7 million, $6.47 million, and $8.45 million, then signed a 3 year $3.65 million contract with $2.4 million guaranteed.

He's made around $22 million dollars.

I don't care if he never plays another minute, or plays the next 10 years, there is no logical argument to be made that he should have returned for another season at UConn.

Wow! Only in America . . . and professional sports.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

It's hard to imagine why not. This would be a really nice board if the idiots who post nothing but inane drivel would find somewhere else to post.

It was mostly tongue in cheek. TDH and I disagree on almost everything on the football board. I'd still crack a beer with him and argue about stuff.

If you've decided after 69 posts that this board sucks so much with so many idiots posting inane drivel, you can always find somewhere else to go. You haven't exactly set this board on fire with brilliance.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

It was mostly tongue in cheek. TDH and I disagree on almost everything on the football board. I'd still crack a beer with him and argue about stuff.

If you've decided after 69 posts that this board sucks so much with so many idiots posting inane drivel, you can always find somewhere else to go. You haven't exactly set this board on fire with brilliance.

Back at you, Partner. The beer and football sports talk.

 

[Waquoit]

Eh, I owned it, manned up and apologized. You're not exactly the kind of guy I'd like to have a beer with either. So no offense taken.

I'll walk that back. I took it as an uncalled for dump on another poster. Ironically, I was on the receiving end of similar earlier today so I should have known better.

 

[Uconn93]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...-most-real-nba-prospects-the-way-some-suggest

Wow, what agent paid this schmo to write this piece of cr@p?

 

[Uconn93]

Any chance that Daniels comes to his senses and withdraws name from draft? Why leave early to become a second round draft choice? Stay and become the player we saw on occasion (Michigan State & Florida) but on a more consistent basis. Become a legit 1st round pick (maybe lottery) next year. Why? Why? Why, throw it away for the second round?

I've been checking back here every 20 minutes ever since DeAndre's announcement in hopes that he might change his mind, but, thus far.........

 

[johnhuskies95]

Wow, what agent paid this schmo to write this piece of cr@p?

I dislike Parrish as much as the next UConn fan, but he's just going off of facts, and he's absolutely correct in this case.

 

[boba]

I dislike Parrish as much as the next UConn fan, but he's just going off of facts, and he's absolutely correct in this case.

I disagree that Parrish is right, I will repeat what I said before, he's not even wrong. Parrish uses selected data points and imaginary data points to reach a conclusion that cannot be justified except in his volatile hydrocarbon addled head. It does not matter what an athlete was "projected" in any given draft, there is no way to quantify that projection unless the athlete stays in the draft - then the projection and actual position can be determined. Very often projections are simply the result of vague impressions and campaigns by unknown entities. There are numerous confounding data that need to be accounted for in any given conclusion - number of competitors at position, needs of particular teams, experience of the GM's, NDBL depth, etc.. Parrish uses a couple of vague "statistics" (which are not anywhere close to Stats 101 level analysis) and draws dubious conclusions because they agree with the vapors seeping out of his neocortex. If he is right, it is by accident and happenstance, not by careful analysis. However, no one has produced that analysis yet, or if they have, it hasn't been published.

 

[Husky25]

I've been checking back here every 20 minutes ever since DeAndre's announcement in hopes that he might change his mind, but, thus far....

As soon as he declared and notified the NCAA, he forfeited his eligibility. The NCAA deadline for underclassmen to return to school was 12 days prior to the NBA early entry date. Whether Daniels changes his mind and withdraws from the draft has no bearing on the possibility of him wearing a UCONN 2 uniform next season. It cannot happen.

 

[CallMeBruce]

I disagree that Parrish is right, I will repeat what I said before, he's not even wrong. Parrish uses selected data points and imaginary data points to reach a conclusion that cannot be justified except in his volatile hydrocarbon addled head. It does not matter what an athlete was "projected" in any given draft, there is no way to quantify that projection unless the athlete stays in the draft - then the projection and actual position can be determined. Very often projections are simply the result of vague impressions and campaigns by unknown entities. There are numerous confounding data that need to be accounted for in any given conclusion - number of competitors at position, needs of particular teams, experience of the GM's, NDBL depth, etc.. Parrish uses a couple of vague "statistics" (which are not anywhere close to Stats 101 level analysis) and draws dubious conclusions because they agree with the vapors seeping out of his neocortex. If he is right, it is by accident and happenstance, not by careful analysis. However, no one has produced that analysis yet, or if they have, it hasn't been published.

I'm with you. There are no "facts" anywhere in that article. Any statistics he cites don't actually address the question he's purporting to answer. The fact that most seniors being drafted are picked late in the first doesn't mean what he thinks it means. In order to do this, you'd need to actually get real, verifiable data from NBA front offices about their respective draft boards, which he doesn't have, unless I'm missing something.

 

[johnhuskies95]

I disagree that Parrish is right, I will repeat what I said before, he's not even wrong. Parrish uses selected data points and imaginary data points to reach a conclusion that cannot be justified except in his volatile hydrocarbon addled head. It does not matter what an athlete was "projected" in any given draft, there is no way to quantify that projection unless the athlete stays in the draft - then the projection and actual position can be determined. Very often projections are simply the result of vague impressions and campaigns by unknown entities. There are numerous confounding data that need to be accounted for in any given conclusion - number of competitors at position, needs of particular teams, experience of the GM's, NDBL depth, etc.. Parrish uses a couple of vague "statistics" (which are not anywhere close to Stats 101 level analysis) and draws dubious conclusions because they agree with the vapors seeping out of his neocortex. If he is right, it is by accident and happenstance, not by careful analysis. However, no one has produced that analysis yet, or if they have, it hasn't been published.

So do you disagree with his conclusion? I think it's pretty clear that it's a lot harder for Seniors to get drafted, especially early, than Juniors and other underclassmen.

You have to be really good in order to be a lottery pick as a senior. Especially a 23 year old senior like Daniels.

 

[johnhuskies95]

I'm with you. There are no "facts" anywhere in that article. Any statistics he cites don't actually address the question he's purporting to answer. The fact that most seniors being drafted are picked late in the first doesn't mean what he thinks it means. In order to do this, you'd need to actually get real, verifiable data from NBA front offices about their respective draft boards, which he doesn't have, unless I'm missing something.

Sites like DraftExpress and ESPN get their information from GM's and scouts.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Sites like DraftExpress and ESPN get their information from GM's and scouts.

Then why don't they agree? If they're both looking at the same accurate data, shouldn't their projections match? 6-10 on ESPN right now is Gordon, Vonleh, Smart, Harris, Ennis, while DE has Smart, Vonleh, McDermott, Nurkic, and Saric.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Then why don't they agree? If they're both looking at the same accurate data, shouldn't their projections match? 6-10 on ESPN right now is Gordon, Vonleh, Smart, Harris, Ennis, while DE has Smart, Vonleh, McDermott, Nurkic, and Saric.

Do you really think that GM's have the same exact draft boards? Hasn't years of empirical data proven otherwise?

Guys like Givony take the information that they hear from GM's and then compile their mock draft. They may have a few discrepancies with other sites, but the general gist is similar. Also, one might be taking into account team needs while the other may not.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Do you really think that GM's have the same exact draft boards? Hasn't years of empirical data proven otherwise?

Guys like Givony take the information that they hear from GM's and then compile their mock draft. They may have a few discrepancies with other sites, but the general gist is similar. Also, one might be taking into account team needs while the other may not.

If they're trying to project when guys are drafted, and they can't come up with consistent answers, then it's not verifiable when a guy would have been drafted, which puts the lie to the Parrish article. He may be correct, but he can't be proven right or wrong.

I'm not saying that Daniels should have stayed for his senior year, mind you. I'm saying that Parrish's article is mostly guesswork, not science.

 

[johnhuskies95]

If they're trying to project when guys are drafted, and they can't come up with consistent answers, then it's not verifiable when a guy would have been drafted, which puts the lie to the Parrish article. He may be correct, but he can't be proven right or wrong.

I'm not saying that Daniels should have stayed for his senior year, mind you. I'm saying that Parrish's article is mostly guesswork, not science.

If you're looking for perfectly streamlined mock drafts, you're not going to get it. There are at least 30 different opinions out there.

 

[Leebo]

As soon as he declared and notified the NCAA, he forfeited his eligibility. The NCAA deadline for underclassmen to return to school was 12 days prior to the NBA early entry date. Whether Daniels changes his mind and withdraws from the draft has no bearing on the possibility of him wearing a UCONN 2 uniform next season. It cannot happen.

Don't listen to this guy. Check again in 20 minutes.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

The two posters taking issue with the article are looking for some degree of scientific rigor that you're never going to find. Beyond that, they seem to be arguing just for the sake of arguing. The basic premise of Parrish's article seems pretty basic and noncontroversial.

 

[Huskybass]

It's hard to imagine why not. This would be a really nice board if the idiots who post nothing but inane drivel would find somewhere else to post.

Oh the irony...