Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: L'Equipe Claims He's Coming To Chelsea On Five Year Deal

Tyler Honeycutt, Malcolm Lee Both Slip Into Second Round of NBA Draft

Last night, I wondered in the draft open thread whether or not Tyler Honeycutt would have gone pro if he knew … he wasn’t a Top 20 pick … he wasn’t a first round pick … knew he was going to be the 35th pick in the draft.

I honestly don’t have an answer. There’s too much I don’t know.
 
I don’t know whether or not Honeycutt liked or didn’t like school, whether or not he could afford another year without an NBA paycheck, whether or not he enjoyed playing basketball at UCLA. But I have to think that he was planning on being drafted higher than the 35th pick to Sacramento.
 
I never begrudge guys who want to get paid to play. A guy like Brian Price was so great for us for three years that I was nothing but happy for him when he got picked in the 2nd round by the Buccaneers.
 
But Honeycutt’s decision to go pro after his sophomore season just never added up for me. It just seemed like what he needed was one more good season playing for a potentially very good UCLA team to really cement him as an NBA prospect. His talent is obvious. He has the ability to become a very good professional player. But there always was a bit more to him than his talent. His effort, his demeanor … I dunno … his aura always seemed just a little bit off in an I-can’t-quite-put-my-finger-on-it sort of way.
 
Maybe it was the absence of what he didn’t do. He never managed to be the best player on a really good team. He was a pretty good player on two forgettable squads. First round picks are supposed to take their teams to the tournament, to be clutch down the stretch, to take over games in crunch time. Honeycutt was just inconsistent in those areas and for every plus on the talent side there was a minus in the intangibles.
 
The final equation was becoming the fifth pick in the second round and in what seems like a karmic joke he ends up on the dysfunctional and fiscally insolvent Sacramento Kings, joining the also talented-but-enigmatic DaMarcus Cousins and Tyreke Evans. Maybe it’s the Bruin in me, but something tells me that – all things considered – being the best player on a Final Four UCLA team seems like a better way to spend next season than waiting out a lockout during a summer without Summer League and spending what’s left of the season in Sacramento on a two-year deal with only the first year guaranteed.

Star-divide

The Chicago Bulls chose Malcolm Lee with the 43rd pick with the intention of sending him to the Minnesota Timberwolves. The T-Wolves, the worst team in the NBA last year, just signed Rickey Rubio to a multi-year deal, which is going to seriously set a pick in Lee’s attempt to become an NBA point guard. Minnesota made so many deals I can’t figure out who they have left, but last year they needed a shooting guard who could shoot – too bad Malcolm can’t all that well.
 
The cautionary tale I want told to me about Lee is who advised him to go pro. Someone gave the kid some bad advice and we’ve heard some of the advice givers could possibly be "in the camps" of some former Bruins – both in and out of the league. I’d also like to know who on the staff presented Lee (and Honeycutt) with the "here are the benefits of staying" speech. Or who on the staff builds those close personal relations with the kids so that when they give those fatherly stay in school words of wisdom they know it comes sincerely from the heart. (Given the number of UCLA players who go pro early, I’ve got a fantasy that Coach McCray plays that part and plays it well.)

I can't conclude this post without saying something about the UCLA Factor that has been mentioned on the boards the last week or so. The Factor suggests that UCLA players play better in the pros than their college stats might otherwise suggest and that Ben Howland's defense and fundamentals approach was becoming a positive tangible/intangible that NBA scouts and GMS were starting to consider. I still believe that it is -- a positive. But it's just one positive on a list that must be weighed against a list of negatives. In the end, Honeycutt and Lee had a few too many negatives each to justify becoming a first round selection in a supposedly weak draft.  In the end, I respect their decisions to go pro early, but simply can't agree with them. 

Comment 59 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

he reminds me of...

Tyler Honeycutt always reminded me of J.R. Henderson. He had so much talent but there was always something missing. Passion? Not sure.

I feel bad for both these guys dropping so far, but maybe it’ll help convince others to stay in school a little longer?

c/o '98 Go Bruins!

by Romo785 on Jun 24, 2011 7:55 AM PDT reply actions  

JR Henderson was a champion

A national champion and 3 times Pac-10 champion. You seem to have forgotten about the clutch FTs JR sank to beat Kentucky with game on the line and how he made contributions throughout his frosh year during that 1994-95 seaon. JR never lacked passion for UCLA hoops (even though his facial expression may not have shown it).

Never ever insult JR Henderson on this blog. Thanks.

by Nestor on Jun 24, 2011 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly

JR was a great Bruin, but very stoic.

Bruin 1986

by Crummies on Jun 24, 2011 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

You're right ...

also, they were really different players.

J.R. Henderson never had Honeycutt’s raw talent. Henderson had some definite skills and was a very good player for us, but he didn’t have TH’s natural ability.

That’s why Honeycutt is so frustrating. J.R. Henderson maxed out his talents, played to his strengths and was a very effective college basketball player. He just wasn’t the right type of player for the NBA. Honeycutt is a prototype NBA small forward. He’s a very good shooter (his step back three is really a weapon), he can handle the ball and slash, he’s a good passer and while he was not a great one on one defender, he was actually a really good shot blocker. The problem Honeycutt had was that half the time he acted like he was on a two month long NBA tryout instead of figuring out what he could do to make his teammates better and help the team win.

by Achilles on Jun 24, 2011 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

JR Henderson

I know JR’s high school coach, talked about him in great detail, only had to say very positive things about him. Watching him play for the Bruins and comparing him to Honeycutt is a joke. JR made an impact even during his freshman year off the bench, to help us win a title. Romo785, really?

I agree JR was a little slow, but the kid works hard, and continued to do so even in Japan. From what I hear he’s loving it there. Sounds like he’s doing great…

by Bruin'96 on Jun 24, 2011 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

These guys must have hated playing for Howland

Second Round Picks don’t have guaranteed contracts. These guys could very easily end up playing in the D league or Europe next year. Dropping out of the first round was devastating for Tyler. As for Malcolm, he could not have possibly believed he ever had a chance at being a first round pick. At no point during his Bruin career was he considered a first round talent.

by 110 South on Jun 24, 2011 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Many sources considered him in the first round

for this year’s draft after his camp performances and combine. Even beyond that, he had an excellent reputation in scouted games for being excellent in transition. He fell in the draft, but that doesn’t deserve the absolue, “never was he considered a first round talent”.

"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden

by OswegoBruin on Jun 24, 2011 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

He was definitely able to contend with first rounders

I thought it was interesting the Utah Jazz chose to work him out (against the likes of Jimmer Freddette and Kemba Walker) when the Jazz had ONLY the two lottery picks. According to scouts at that workout, he played like he belonged in the first round.

by Alanamaslama on Jun 24, 2011 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah

and Minnesota were allegedly considering him with a first round pick and were psyched to get him in the second round. Weird draft all round – lots of teams seemed surprised at players falling to them, and lots of teams seemed to take players way higher than most expected (e.g. the Cavs’ massive reach at #4)

by VeniceBruin on Jun 24, 2011 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Only likeness is on-court demeanor

They both were not emotional guys, but that doesn’t tell the whole story about how underrated and under-appreciated JR was. Henderson maxed out his potential and then some for the Bruins his entire career. He was a key bench player for the Bruins during the title run. He played out of position at center for McCoy and didn’t complain… even when Jelani quit the team prior to the tournament. And most importantly… “it’s just ’sc”.

Sakuragi is awesome.

by UCLA4Life on Jun 25, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is maybe a good thing

Perhaps we were starting to garner the reputation that all UCLA players will go high(er) in the draft than expected… a few flops will serve as a cautionary note to those other players who may be thinking of prematurely jumping to the league.

Regardless, I hope Honeycutt and Lee do pan out and eventually have a long, successful career in the NBA.

by bruinbunz on Jun 24, 2011 7:58 AM PDT reply actions  

"Flop" is not defined on draft night

It is defined by what you do after that. It does mean, however, that more credibility should be given to CBH in his evaluation of NBA readiness, which translates to draft position.

by Tydides on Jun 24, 2011 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

notably

Howland was much more critical of these decisions than he was of previous early departures.

by VeniceBruin on Jun 24, 2011 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with your point on the "UCLA factor"

While some may say that the lower than anticipated spots which TH and ML went signify that the UCLA factor isn’t really a factor at all, the thing to look at is the overall picture of a player. Having played for UCLA may be a positive, however GM’s are looking at ALL the characteristics of a player: their speed, their height, their shooting, their intangibles, etc. etc. and it is because both players did not have enough positives on their lists to warrant a pick higher than those above them.

by kevdude on Jun 24, 2011 8:00 AM PDT reply actions  

also...

teams are beholden to their fan bases, especially with first-round picks. It’s probably tougher to sell “hustler,” “hard-worker,” and “great defender” to a fan base than it is to sell “averaged 23 points and 9 rebounds in college.”

The NBA is very much an “image” league.

by palafox on Jun 24, 2011 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Key point:

Tyler Honeycutt, and Malcolm Lee, were, at best, pretty good players on bad teams. This is contrary to prior early Bruin NBA entrants who were either the best players or really good players on really good teams. Bottomline, no matter how much these kids may be hearing about how good they are in workouts, how much potential they have, and how much they wow scouts with their measurables, if there is plenty of live game tape around for GMs to mull over their deficiencies, their draft stock will likely fall accordingly.

by Blue Me on Jun 24, 2011 8:52 AM PDT reply actions  

The Legacies of Tyler and Malcolm

1. Honeycutt played the game of his life against #1 Kansas on national TV. He led the Pac-10 in blocked shots. UCLA won 1 tournament game with him. He averaged under 13 points a game in 35 minutes a game on a slightly-above-average team. He’s a 6’8" skinny “tweener” which, except for few exceptions like TayShaun Prince, is the death knell for the NBA.


2. Malcolm Lee did very little in his first two years at UCLA. UCLA’s tourney record with him was 2-2, and no Pac-10 championships. His defense was stellar in year three, and he made some big free throws down the stretch, he’s a poor shooter outside the paint. Like Tyler, he averaged about 13 points a game in about 33 minutes.


Both guys are athletic, but they arent superfreaks like Russ Westbrook.


Both guys were 5-star recruits, but they weren’t winners like KLove.


They are still just kids, but they were poorly-advised and/or failed to impress in their workouts. Either way, I wish them both the best of luck in their future endeavors, whatever they may be.

by charnaw on Jun 24, 2011 9:26 AM PDT reply actions  

Malcolm Lee impressed

in many of his workouts. Indeed he got glowing reviews. Kinda makes me wonder where he’d have been drafted if he hadn’t.

"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden

by OswegoBruin on Jun 24, 2011 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

This is from The Sporting News, Draft Disasters

Tyler Honeycutt, Draft Disaster

Tyler Honeycutt, SF, UCLA. It was obvious Honeycutt made progress from his freshman to sophomore year, but equally obvious there still was so much work to be done. He’s not strong enough, tough enough, developed enough. When a developing player with first-round talent and multiple years of NCAA eligibility remaining winds up as a second-round pick—somebody has some explaining to do.

I think that’s basically what we’re saying. (HT: some random poster on a message board)

by Achilles on Jun 24, 2011 9:35 AM PDT reply actions  

At this point "disaster" is spot on.

Howeveer, falling out of the first round sometimes works in the players favor because he can become an unrestricted free agent in 2 years. Gilbert Arenas is a prime example of someone who got a huge deal real early in his career becuase he was not drafted in the first round.

by 110 South on Jun 24, 2011 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Gilbert Arenas is a very rare case

maybe unique in having benefited by not being under the team control of a 1st round contract. I raised Gilbert’s situation in a Sports Law class during law school – the prof was, and still is an NBA player agent – and the ensuing discussion led to the conclusion that the circumstances needed for a player to have the advantage from having been picked in the 2nd round is so rare that no player in their right mind, or at least competent advisers, would find that to be a benefit.

formerly bruinhoo

by Patroclus on Jun 24, 2011 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

was there any discussion of 2nd round vs undrafted?

I’ve heard it argued that a player may be better off being undrafted rather than being the 60th pick of the draft for a team that almost certainly can’t use you for the next year or two before your contract expires.

by VeniceBruin on Jun 24, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not in class that I recall

Once you are looking at the final few picks, you could certainly argue that going undrafted is advantageous simply due to the flexibility in being able to choose a team to try out for – be it summer league and preseason camp compared to the lack of real investment that a team is putting in by picking someone with the 58th or 60th pick.

formerly bruinhoo

by Patroclus on Jun 24, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Honeycutt makes the top five!

He’s making plenty of news now. He ranked among Yahoo! Sports’ list of Five Players Who in Hindsight Made Poor Decisions Leaving School.

In a post-draft conference call with reporters on Thursday, a defiant Honeycutt had the gall to declare himself “the most athletic player in this draft.” That’s obviously hyperbole, yet it’s also proof of why his decision to leave UCLA after his sophomore season was so unwise. The 6-foot-8 Honeycutt has all the physical tools to be a successful pro, but he slid to Sacramento at No. 35 because he left school before either putting on the muscle or displaying the consistency teams want from a first-round pick.

by bryanucla on Jun 24, 2011 10:02 AM PDT reply actions  

That's too bad

He still hasn’t been humbled by reality. This gives me a sense of personality issues beyond the court… Arrogance may well be the top reason for him leaving. That being said, I wish him a successful career in whatever league he plays for.

by MathBruin on Jun 24, 2011 10:18 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Oh my.

Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.

by KSBruin on Jun 24, 2011 9:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sad on two counts...

I know they made the decisions to go pro but you can’t help but feel bad for both of them…each stuck in terrible situations basketball-wise. And I feel bad for us as UCLA fans robbed of a what could have been a very special season. Disappointment all around.

He's not retired...THANK YOU!

by baybruin415 on Jun 24, 2011 10:26 AM PDT reply actions  

Hindsight is 20/20, but they still have a chance to exemplify the "UCLA factor".

In all honesty, TH and ML went about where I thought they would go. Had the draft been held the night after the Kansas game, TH would have been a lottery pick. Unfortunately, it wasn’t, and from that point on TH was in coast mode.

ML played hard, but he looked like a second rounder to me. Nobody in the NBA gives a shit about his scout ranking coming out of high school. He doesn’t have the athletic explosion to make up for his lack of offensive skills. He’s a plus defensively, which is why he was picked.

Negatives aside, I think TH and ML can both be good pros. TH has a lot of skill, and ML is a consistent jump shot away from being a very good player. They were both drafted low enough to make any substantial contribution make their respective GM’s look very good. TH is a good weakside defender, and really doesn’t have much standing in his way at the 3 spot in SAC. ML is in a pretty exciting position with himself, Rubio, and Derrick Williams joining KLove and Beasley. ML has always been at his best in the open court, and they will definitely run. His on ball D will be very useful with Rubio in the backcourt, so I think he should also have a great shot at early PT.

At the end of the day, if you are not a lottery pick, your destination matters much more than your slot. Yes, they will both have to earn their money the hard way, but they should be very well versed in hard work. The UCLA Factor does not simply consist of a good fundamental skillset, but also familiarity with hard work and game improvement. If these two continue to utilize the skills that CBH has been teaching, they will enjoy long careers.

by AllHailMightyBruins on Jun 24, 2011 10:34 AM PDT reply actions  

to add...

ML and Honeycutt (he doesn’t deserve colloquial initials) could very well reinforce the UCLA Factor because they really have nowhere to go from here but up. Just making their respective teams would be progress.

by ishXdavid on Jun 24, 2011 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Neither does Lee

I loved Lee’s effort at UCLA but initials are only reserved for Ben Ball Warriors who either stayed at UCLA for all four years or at least won one conference title.

by Nestor on Jun 24, 2011 10:50 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Yeah Malcolm is a good Bruin,

but not a great one deserving of initials.

"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden

by OswegoBruin on Jun 24, 2011 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

You should add one more thing:

Displayed those Ben Ball warrior characteristics his whole time there. Only last season did Lee really look like the kind of ball player Howland wanted to see.

by UCLA4Life on Jun 25, 2011 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

gotta say on your last point

that Lee seems to exemplify the hard work ethic much more than Honeycutt. I see Lee as a solid bench guy. Honeycutt may end up being a successful starting SF, or may end up out of the league in 2 years, it’s up to him…

by VeniceBruin on Jun 24, 2011 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

A--if I can emphasize one of your many good points

A’s post restates the following in different ways;

There’s too much I don’t know.

One thing we do not know, and I mean do not know, is how Malcom or Tyler were doing in school. We do not know what there grades were or whether they were comfortable being college students. One thing every member of this community will agree on (other than an unrelenting disgust with the letters usc)—its tough to graduate from UCLA. Tough in terms of classroom work and the everyday social pressures of schleping to class and finding meaning in what the profs have to say.

Whether they were finding satisfaction in being students—we do not know. Whether either kid could have continued to meet the academic rigors of UCLA, we do not know.

Kareem, when he was senior, was interviewed on the teevee about classroom work. Kareem (then Lewis, as Coach called him) spoke about a history class and a a paper he was writing. IIRC, it was an American history class. Anyway, he spoke about the paper and his interaction with the professor. (He said the same thing in a UCLA fundraising TV spot shot in the last couple of years.) But in either 1968 or 1969, while still a student, he spoke with enthusiasm about the paper and the process of writing it. I have never heard Malcolm or Tyler make similar comments. Kareem was enthused by the academic experience. We do not know whether the same applies to Malcolm or Tyler.

I hope they turned pro because they got, what this morning, looks like bad advice; not because they couldn’t cut it academically or they were awash in unhappiness at the UCLA experience.

Last add. And I hope they have great NBA careers and return to get their degrees.

Go Bruins!

by peggysue69 on Jun 24, 2011 11:15 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I'm pretty sure that Lee, at least was doing well academically

He was the only scholarship BBall player to make the Athletics honor roll last year, at least.

formerly bruinhoo

by Patroclus on Jun 24, 2011 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

These are really tough times for millions of families...

Also, great point about not knowing if Honeycutt could afford another year without an NBA paycheck…if this was u$c, probably not a possibility. However, we respect the rules, and who knows what his family’s financial situation is. Millions of formerly middle class families now face prolonged unemployment, many formerly comfortable families now receive federal assistance for food and health care. Millions of families have lost, or are in danger of losing their homes. Families struggling in these tough times might encourage their NBA-worthy son to make a go of it, and come back and finish school later.

In a vacuum, I believe both players should have stayed in school. But we don’t live in a vacuum, and I’m going to reserve judgment on their decisions.

I wish both Bruins success.

by Idaho87 on Jun 24, 2011 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Honeycutt clearly a disastrous fall from grace; Lee maybe not

I think it is clear that Honeycutt, with 2 years of eligibility remaining and plenty of upside, could have made himself into a first round pick by sticking around.

In Lee’s case: this is regarded as one of the most talent-poor drafts in recent memory, with so many kids choosing to go back to school (in large part due to the uncertain labor situation); next year’s draft will be loaded. It is entirely possible that Malcolm could have come back, become a better scorer and leader, and still been a second round pick after his senior year. So, while we were hoping he might sneak into the first round in this weak draft based on his workouts, his draft position in the middle of the second round doesn’t necessarily show he made a mistake in coming out. Being a fundamentally sound senior leader on a high quality program doesn’t guarantee much (see Kyle Singler, who was at the top of the 2nd round as a senior but might have snuck in to the bottom of the 1st round as a junior….)

by VeniceBruin on Jun 24, 2011 11:36 AM PDT reply actions  

I wonder how much the knee injury figured in for Lee

and made him think about getting the money now.

As for Honeycutt vs Lee, just look at their profile out of HS and pre-draft and and you see all you need. Both were thin as seniors, Lee was 6’5" and 165 out of HS and put on 35 pounds, all of it muscle. That is determination. Honeycutt put on maybe 10 pounds, when he needed at least 25.

I think Lee is a good pick for the Timberwolves. I don’t believe the hype with Rubio; he can’t shoot, can’t defend with his feet (he is all hands) and hasn’t played a very grueling schedule in Europe. Lee will have little pressure and many chances to come in as a stopper when Rubio is getting taken off the dribble by quicker, stronger NBA guards.

by JimmyBurke on Jun 24, 2011 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Immaturity & bad advice = misplaced reality

I agree with A, there is / was something in Honeycutt, an aura that doesn’t play out in what you “think” you should be seeing from a young man with his obvious physical skills. It seems to me that he has an inflated opinion of himself and thus a inability to recognize his needed areas of improvement. One, or even better two more years in the program would have more than likely insured him as a first round pick, maybe even low lottery. Unfortunately the inability to recognize areas of needed improvement and accurately judge against strengths, with an eye toward your placement in the worldwide backdrop of players available is a skill that would be beyond many 19-20 year olds. (I have firsthand knowledge of this type of mentality in my own 19 year old son who always thinks he is better than he actually is.) That is where good counsel comes in, and either it was not given from CBH and staff (we don’t and cannot know) or it was ignored. I wish the best to Tyler, but I feel that he has an uphill battle on a very steep hill in front of him. The price of maturity is very often painful.

by 612landfair on Jun 24, 2011 11:48 AM PDT reply actions  

The thing about having a UCLA factor

is that it means the earlier you leave, the less time you spend learning under Howland, and the less it factors in.

Honeycutt’s proclaimation about himself being the “most athletic” player in the draft and comaprable to (insert various NBA all-stars) means that he doesn’t have the humility to succeed as an NBA player. He needs to learn that fast.

Even the most talented players—Kobe, Durant, Nowitzki—are humble relative to the game (they might be arrogant otherwise, but they don’t take their physical gifts for granted). Perhaps only LeBron isn’t humble, but when you’re 6’8" and 270 lb, lightning fast, and have a good handle, you actually are the most athletic person on the court instead of just imagining it (and even then he’s eaten a few slices of humble pie).

by dokein on Jun 24, 2011 12:45 PM PDT reply actions  

Will this impact how players listen to Coach Howland's opinion in the future?

I believe Coach Howland made it clear to them and their families that he thought they would both benefit from an extra year at UCLA. I believe he was right. The odds of a 2nd round pick staying in the NBA for any meaningful is honestly not that great.

While I sincerely hope they are both able to stay and have long careers in the league, I also hope this serves as a warning sign to our student-athletes who aren’t sure whether or not to listen to Coach Howland or jump into the draft earlier than necessary.

by BruinDrums on Jun 24, 2011 12:59 PM PDT reply actions  

It never does.

There are too many hangers-on and biased interests surrounding every player that has even a chance of sniffing the NBA draft. Whether its “long lost” family, agents, prospective agents, “posse” members, or even immediate family, they all see dollar signs. Some just have a more level-headed approach, e.g. Josh Smith’s father.

"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden

by OswegoBruin on Jun 24, 2011 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hopefully, it reflects poorly on those who pushed them to go pro

There may be certain people with access to the Bruins basketball program who can get in these kids’ ears and read and reread them their clippings and show them their highlight reels and promise them the world. The ulterior motive is to get the players to declare as soon as possible, regardless if it is really the best decision for the players in the long run. Once those people are outed and discredited – and blackballed – the kids will get better advice, and be able to make better decisions for themselves.

greg in denver, UCLA guy for life - BruinsNation.com

by gbruin on Jun 24, 2011 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Slightly OT

The photographer who took the above photo of Tyler is a Bruin…Way to go Richard!

by Idaho87 on Jun 24, 2011 10:58 PM PDT reply actions  

Draftexpress.com

For most of last season, they had Honeycutt going in the lottery in 2012 and Lee going in the top 20-25 in 2012. It’s easy to see why, and has been touched on by pretty much everyone in this comments thread: both are extremely talented, athletic guys who seriously lack the polish, experience, instincts, and hoops IQ required of NBA players. Playing another year of college, in one of the best basketball schools in the country, surrounded by a much-improved supporting cast (considering the huge step that Josh Smith is likely to take, as well as the impact the incoming Wear twins are likely to have), would have cemented their NBA resumes and earned them those high 2012 draft spots. Instead…they took the easy way out, and might not play any basketball at all this next year with the likely NBA lockout. I’m not trying to say, “Haha, told you so!”, but at the same time…

by ucla139 on Jun 25, 2011 11:11 AM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. Established June 16, 2005. GO BRUINS.

Managers

Uclabear1_small Nestor

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

377011_2642084725867_1068030137_32302525_1166539782_n_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Licenseplate_small gbruin

2761_small tasser10

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Img_0052_2_small Patroclus

Small DCBruins

Of Counsels

094_small Ajax

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Small Meriones

Small Odysseus

Associates

Eee_small freesia39

Uclabruins_small AHMB