MOCK DRAFT - NBADraft.net

This topic contains 18 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Anton123 13 years, 11 months ago.

Author
Posts
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:11pm #15410

nateoak10
Participant
I usually do it with the lotto machine but I wanted to do a full draft so here you go, some surprises. Want feedback. Comments included
http://www.nbadraft.net/nba_mock_drafts/comments/24346
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:14pm #308632

OhCanada-
Participant
The first round looks good im not too sure about the second round thou
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:14pm #308914

OhCanada-
Participant
The first round looks good im not too sure about the second round thou
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:14pm #308440

OhCanada-
Participant
The first round looks good im not too sure about the second round thou
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:29pm #308502

jazznationpresident
Participant
You are right that Utah needs a a big but they need more size than Patterson. The LA series exposed them. I think udoh or whiteside will be taken if Aldrich and Monroe are gone at this point. They have mill sap and kirlanko at the 4 already.
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:29pm #308693

jazznationpresident
Participant
You are right that Utah needs a a big but they need more size than Patterson. The LA series exposed them. I think udoh or whiteside will be taken if Aldrich and Monroe are gone at this point. They have mill sap and kirlanko at the 4 already.
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:29pm #308978

jazznationpresident
Participant
You are right that Utah needs a a big but they need more size than Patterson. The LA series exposed them. I think udoh or whiteside will be taken if Aldrich and Monroe are gone at this point. They have mill sap and kirlanko at the 4 already.
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:35pm #309008

nateoak10
Participant
You have a great point, I may switch that up in my next mock. +1
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:35pm #308533

nateoak10
Participant
You have a great point, I may switch that up in my next mock. +1
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 1:35pm #308724

nateoak10
Participant
You have a great point, I may switch that up in my next mock. +1
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 6:09pm #309317

Pacers_Fan33
Participant
Boozer is not a Hornet last time I checked, and Luke Walton is not that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 6:09pm #309611

Pacers_Fan33
Participant
Boozer is not a Hornet last time I checked, and Luke Walton is not that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 6:09pm #309123

Pacers_Fan33
Participant
Boozer is not a Hornet last time I checked, and Luke Walton is not that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 7:18pm #309332

nateoak10
Participant
and walton is that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 7:18pm #309626

nateoak10
Participant
and walton is that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 7:18pm #309138

nateoak10
Participant
and walton is that bad
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 8:43pm #309374

Anton123
Participant
If OKC drafts paul George then drafting Bjelika isn’t really logical, they should try and get a big, Orton just might not work out
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 8:43pm #309668

Anton123
Participant
If OKC drafts paul George then drafting Bjelika isn’t really logical, they should try and get a big, Orton just might not work out
0
Posted on: Sun, 05/09/2010 - 8:43pm #309180

Anton123
Participant
If OKC drafts paul George then drafting Bjelika isn’t really logical, they should try and get a big, Orton just might not work out
0
Author
Posts

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.