Draft, Perkins

[Kim Malo]

At 02:46 PM 6/2/2006, Ryan, Patrick S Maj RES USAFR 439 MSG wrote:
>Seriously though, I'm in the "BPA" camp of drafting regardless of sport. If
>you give up drafting a player you think might be a better player just
>because you need "X" what exactly do you gain? Talent is ALWAYS marketable
>at ANY position.

Yeah, but making your reason for "buying" things just so that you 
know you can sell them isn't really an approach I care much for in 
anything. Shades of buying season tickets just so I can play scalper 
and re-sell them. Ugh, why bother. Put the money into something you 
want or need and so will enjoy, unless your sole goal in life is to 
be a successful salesperson. That being said, I agree on BPA. But in 
a draft like this, where there are no clear guaranteed winner picks 
and so many questions about all of them, if it comes down to a choice 
between players you rate fairly evenly, then sure, factoring in need 
makes sense too.

>Orien needs touch. That's why he blows so many bunnies because he's not
>"soft" around the bucket. Touch can't be taught unfortunately. Repetition
>may mitigate it somewhat, but from my experience it's like stone hands
>(Hellllloooo Mark Blount) once you have em, you ALWAYS have them.

Yeah, obviously touch is the issue. Sorry, didn't say so because I 
didn't think it needed stating. And Mark Blount does have touch on 
his shot - his hands of stone are something else, which is harder to fix.

We have the living, breathing example that you can work miracles with 
touch in one off-season with Perk. Yes he still clangs a few (I think 
part of the issue with him is getting used to controlling his new, 
stronger body), but compare his shooting first two seasons to last 
season and he clearly added major touch to his shot over the summer. 
It's a jaw dropping difference.

Kim