Centers - 1997 Usenet Draft

                   G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Wake Forest 33  997 120  220   1   1  82 110  317  82  30  40 124  12  323
94-95 Wake Forest 32 1168 208  352   3   7 118 159  401  78  67  91 135  13  537
95-96 Wake Forest 32 1194 228  411   7  23 149 217  395  74  93 105 120  22  612
96-97 Wake Forest 31 1137 234  385   6  22 171 269  457  69  98  99 102  22  645
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           128 4496 790 1368  17  53 520 755 1570 303 288 335 481  69 2117
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%   RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Wake Forest 30.2  54.5 100.0  74.5  9.6  0.9  1.2  3.8  0.4   9.8
94-95 Wake Forest 36.5  59.1  42.9  74.2 12.5  2.1  2.8  4.2  0.4  16.8
95-96 Wake Forest 37.3  55.5  30.4  68.7 12.3  2.9  3.3  3.8  0.7  19.1
96-97 Wake Forest 36.7  60.8  27.3  63.6 14.7  3.2  3.2  3.3  0.7  20.8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS            35.1  57.7  32.1  68.9 12.3  2.3  2.6  3.8  0.5  16.5

Duncan is the best player available in the draft and a lock to be the 
first overall pick.  He has the ability to become a NBA superstar.

Scouts have mixed opinions on Duncan's NBA position.  He may be a more 
dominant player early on in his career at power forward but has the 
tools to be a dominant center.  His position will depend on the team 
that selects him.

In terms of comparisions I have heard David Robinson and Brad Daughtery. 
I feel Hakeem Olajuwon is a closer comparison because of his mobility 
and size.

In terms of physical skills Duncan has great mobility.  He is capable of 
consistantly beating his man down the court.  He has long arms and 
excellent timing for blocking shots.  His footwork on post moves is 
constantly improving.

In terms of basketball skills, Duncan has the total package. Duncan can 
score is a variety of ways.  He can take his man down low with an 
assortment of post moves.  He uses the glass well on his turn around 
jump shot.  He can also step outside and hit the mid-range jumper.  
Duncan's passing ability is incredible for a player of his size and 
experience.  He led Wake Forest in assists.  Duncan handles the ball 
better than most post players. 

Duncan greatest attribute is his defense.  He averaged double figures in 
rebounds in his final three years of college.  This past season he 
averaged close to fifteen boards a game.  Duncan can swat shots with the 
best of them.  He is the all-time blocked shots leader in the history of 
the NCAA.

Despite his overall game he has a few things to work on.  His biggest 
need is adding strength and weight.  He will need to adjust to the power 
of the NBA.  He needs to continue to develop is offensive game.  One 
concern is his low free throw percentage (64%).  However, his was his 
lowest total of his four years.

As NBA Scouting Director, Marty Blake says "He may be the most complete 
player to enter the NBA in the last ten years".      

     Tim Duncan is not the most talented player in this draft.  However,
he is the best player in it, and he will be a successful NBA player,
both because of his style of play.  For Duncan, it is simple: he plays. 
He plays hard every minute, with confidence and emotion, at both ends of
the floor, and he plays to win.  He has a winning attitude that will
greatly help the team that drafts him, going beyond what he will do that
shows up in the box score.
     Duncan is the type of player who can lift his team with his play,
as he can take over games at either end of the floor, and is the
consummate team player.  He can dominate defensively, as he is an
excellent shot-blocker and rebounder.  At the offensive end, he is
constantly adding to his game, as he has expanded his shooting range
with time.  When double-teamed, he will pass the ball back out to an
open teammate; he involves his teammates as though he were a point
guard, as he realizes that he alone will not win ball games.
     Duncan will be a franchise player because he makes his teammates
better, in addition to being a great individual talent.  He averaged a
double-double in each of his last two seasons in college, in scoring and
rebounding.
     If Tim Duncan is not the first pick in the draft, the GM doing the
selecting will be referred to the best psychologist within a fifty-mile
radius.  This holds even if the team selecting first is set at center,
as Duncan can play power forward as well.

Duncan is one of college's most dominating centers to play the game since 
HAKEEM OLAJUWAN. Duncan makes all the right plays offensively which is 
perhaps his only weakness is that it is raw but still devloping.
He is a HUGE defensive presence in the paint as a rebounder and a 
shot-blocker. He isn't the kind of leader that some coaches would prefer. 
But if you look at wake forest's record you'll see that he did just fine.
If he had desired to go into the past 2 drafts he would have been number 
1 overall. But there is no douting that he is a huge talent that will 
surely devolp into a fine superstar his averages
20.8 PPG, 14.7 RPG, AND 2.9 APG. This is the most complete player i've 
sen in years

Tim Duncan--  An extraordinary college ballplayer;  if you haven't seen
him night in and night out you can't appreciate it.  Needed badly to
stay the extra year to work on his offense, but now has excellent
footwork inside.  Can nail the mid-range J.  Good rebounder, both
athletic and technical;  reasonably good shot-blocker.  Man defense not
really tested in the ACC (no other centers of note).  Starts as a 12/10
guy like Mutombo (fewer blocks) but his work ethic could make him into
an Olajuwon type.  To my mind a very easy #1 pick, the only guaranteed
star and the most probable superstar in the draft.
	Worst he could be:  Otis Thorpe with a few assists thrown in.
	Best he could be:  Olajuwon.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
94-95 Texas Tech 29  368  47   96   0   6  18  27  129  50  17  27  23   8  112
95-96 Texas Tech 30  797 114  221   4  14  60  95  266  88  32  36  68  22  292
96-97 Texas Tech 28  978 206  356   6  16 107 163  329  85  23  77  71  25  525
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           87 2143 367  673  10  36 185 285  724 223  72 140 162  55  929
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
94-95 Texas Tech 12.7  49.0   0.0  66.7  4.4  0.6  0.9  0.8  0.3   3.9
95-96 Texas Tech 26.6  51.6  28.6  63.2  8.9  1.1  1.2  2.3  0.7   9.7
96-97 Texas Tech 34.9  57.9  37.5  65.6 11.8  0.8  2.8  2.5  0.9  18.8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           24.6  54.5  27.8  64.9  8.3  0.8  1.6  1.9  0.6  10.7

     Having lost four starters from last season's 30-2 team, Texas Tech
needed Tony Battie to become a star this season, and Battie responded in
a big way.  Battie was the team's second-leading scorer and leading
rebounder, and was a terror defensively.
     Battie is a good low-post scorer, but his offensive game is
somewhat limited.  He needs to expand his shooting range.  What Battie
lacks at the offensive end, he makes up for defensively.  He is an
excellent rebounder and shot-blocker.  He uses his athleticism to aid
him defensively.
     There are two knocks on Battie. He is undersized to play center in
the NBA, and might be undersized to play power forward as well.  In
spite of this, he performed well against good competition, as Tech
played a tough schedule, and played against teams with good big men
(including a few Big Twelve teams).  The other knock is that he tends to
be a black hole, and not pass the ball back out if he does not have a
shot; instead, he will take a bad shot.
     Tony Battie is a mid-high lottery pick, with a wealth of potential
if he can fill out his frame.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
94-95 Colgate    30 1063 207  370   0   0  95 190  371  76  36  98 147  21  509
95-96 Colgate    29 1060 228  441   0   3 129 264  364  77  44 114 165  21  585
96-97 Colgate    28 1055 277  490   1   7 127 261  368  60  54 117 180  19  682
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           87 3178 712 1301   1  10 351 715 1103 213 134 329 492  61 1776
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
94-95 Colgate    35.4  55.9   0.0  50.0 12.4  1.2  3.3  4.9  0.7  17.0
95-96 Colgate    36.6  51.7   0.0  48.9 12.6  1.5  3.9  5.7  0.7  20.2
96-97 Colgate    37.7  56.5  14.3  48.7 13.1  1.9  4.2  6.4  0.7  24.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           36.5  54.7  10.0  49.1 12.7  1.5  3.8  5.7  0.7  20.4

ADONAL FOYLE has excellent athletic skills which help make him a menace 
inside. Excellent leaping ability and timing allow him to block anything 
that comes near the basket 7.0 BPG. foyle is not cofortable with facing 
the basket as he is with his back to it. His ball handling and passing 
need vast improvement. A medium jump shot would enhance his scoring even 
more. He has tremendous rebouding energy with a awsome work ethic. Foyle 
went to colgate a school that doesn't warrant a great deal of publicity 
it's a small school with no real competion in there conference so it kind 
of remains to be seen if he can play with the big guys. overall carrer as 
a pro should be decent but not spectacular

                   G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
92-93 S Alabama                      Did Not Play - Ineligible
93-94 S Alabama  24  433  49  123   0   0  45  79  138  60  17  32  85  16  143
94-95 Iowa St                     Did Not Play - Transfer Student
95-96 Iowa St    27  697  94  187   0   0  71 111  209  87  17  48  71  25  259
96-97 Iowa St    28  801 128  234   0   1  61 113  235  81  15  48 118  26  317
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           79 1931 271  544   0   1 177 303  582 228  49 128 274  67  719
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
92-93 S Alabama                Did Not Play - Ineligible
93-94 S Alabama  18.0  39.8   0.0  57.0  5.8  0.7  1.3  3.5  0.7   6.0
94-95 Iowa St               Did Not Play - Transfer Student
95-96 Iowa St    25.8  50.3   0.0  64.0  7.7  0.6  1.8  2.6  0.9   9.6
96-97 Iowa St    28.6  54.7   0.0  54.0  8.4  0.5  1.7  4.2  0.9  11.3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           24.4  49.8   0.0  58.4  7.4  0.6  1.6  3.5  0.8   9.1

Kelvin Cato has seen his stock soar in the past month by having very strong
showing at the Potsmith Invitational.  Although he is not a great offensive
threat, his shot blocking and rebounding skills have made him a probable
lottery pick.  Cato never played high school ball and saw his first minutes
at South Alabama where he led his conference in blocked shots before
transfering to Iowa State where he helped in taking the Cyclones to
back-to-back NCAA tounaments. 

No Stats
 

No Stats

Anstey doesn't have a lot of international experience, but
he's considered to be a mobile seven-footer.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
92-93 N Carolina                  Did Not Play - Redshirted
93-94 N Carolina 19   62  11   21   0   0   6   8   13  12   1   1   8   4   28
94-95 N Carolina 34  339  39   80   0   0  21  31  102  40  10  12  14   5   99
95-96 N Carolina 32  945 138  267   0   0  29  47  198  74  23  40  49   3  305
96-97 N Carolina 35 1077 177  360   1   3  47  62  285 102  12  41  61  13  402
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          120 2423 365  728   1   3 103 148  598 228  46  94 132  25  834
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
92-93 N Carolina            Did Not Play - Redshirted
93-94 N Carolina  3.3  52.4   0.0  75.0  0.7  0.1  0.1  0.4  0.2   1.5
94-95 N Carolina 10.0  48.8   0.0  67.7  3.0  0.3  0.4  0.4  0.1   2.9
95-96 N Carolina 29.5  51.7   0.0  61.7  6.2  0.7  1.3  1.5  0.1   9.5
96-97 N Carolina 30.8  49.2  33.3  75.8  8.1  0.3  1.2  1.7  0.4  11.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           20.2  50.1  33.3  69.6  5.0  0.4  0.8  1.1  0.2   7.0

NBA.com Profile

"Zwikk the Quick" will give some team a bit of heartburn before drafting
him.  There's a lot of potential, but Serge has limitations.  Fortunately,
he's bright, works hard, and understands his limitations, and that's a
big plus.

Serge's strengths are his height, his soft shot, and having a good
understanding of how to use his size to rebound.  His weaknesses are
that his hands aren't particularly good, he's not very quick, he doesn't
pass very well and he doesn't get up-and-down the court very quickly.
He's not amazingly slow, but he's not going to be out on the break very
much.  Serge also doesn't block shots well for a guy that's 7'2".

Serge has good potential for the NBA because he can shoot the ball.  I
believe that he has NBA three-point range on his shot and could become
a sort of aircraft carrier, ala Jack Sikma.  A team probably will have
to decide whether they want Serge to slim down to see if he's a bit
quicker (like Rik Smits) or have Serge try to bulk up a little more.
I'd go the route of bulk -- I don't think Serge will ever be like
Smits and it would be a waste of time to attempt the experiment.

In the NBA of today, with its two-man game and clear out offenses, there's
room for Zwikker.  Heck, imagine him playing center for the Lakers with
Shaq at power forward, with the 7'2" Zwikker just another three-point
option when the opposition doubles down on Shaq.  Hey, stranger things
have happened.

Serge Zwikker--  Has some nice 10-12 foot moves and shots for a guy
who's basically a moose.  In fact, I kind of think he's a better athlete
than most of the similar players in the NBA (Will Perdue, Bill
Wennington, Greg Ostertag, etc.).  Not a good rebounder for his height
at all.  Good defender, both man and zone.  Occasionally gets stone
hands disease.

	Worst he can be:  remember Tom Boerwinkle?
	Best he can be:  Luc Longley

Despite what the scouts NBA scouts say, I think it's a disgrace to even
mention Serge Zwikker's name amongst the top 50 players.  He's by far the
slowest player in the draft, and has hands of stone.  His one redeeming
quality is his 15 foot jump shot, however he only hits that when he's wide
open.  His rebounding is terrible for  a guy who is 7'3" and he's a mediocre
shot blocker.  A project is an understatement.  The Utah Jazz will probably
take this waste of a pick in the 2nd round knowing their history of drafing
lousy centers (Mark Eaton, Luther Wright, Greg Ostertag). Need I say less.
Take awy Shawn Bradley's skills and you have Zwikker.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Kansas     35  597  95  175   0   0  74 108  173  89  13  32  27  22  264
94-95 Kansas     31  620 113  203   0   0  89 136  192  79  17  47  34  20  315
95-96 Kansas     34  835 123  218   0   0  96 151  253 103  10  72  84  26  342
96-97 Kansas     28  702  94  178   1   1  99 140  232  68  19  42  73  35  288
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          128 2754 425  774   1   1 358 535  850 339  59 193 218 103 1209
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Kansas     17.1  54.3   0.0  68.5  4.9  0.4  0.9  0.8  0.6   7.5
94-95 Kansas     20.0  55.7   0.0  65.4  6.2  0.5  1.5  1.1  0.6  10.2
95-96 Kansas     24.6  56.4   0.0  63.6  7.4  0.3  2.1  2.5  0.8  10.1
96-97 Kansas     25.1  52.8 100.0  70.7  8.3  0.7  1.5  2.6  1.3  10.3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           21.5  54.9 100.0  66.9  6.6  0.5  1.5  1.7  0.8   9.4

SCOT POLLARD mobilty is his greatest asset in that few college centers 
are caple of beating hiom down the floor. This allows him to contribute 
to kansas's fast break. He has a quality hook shot that he is capable of 
making with either hand which is a plus. Pollard is not a classic 
shot-blocker in the sense that he doesn't own overwelming senses such as 
timing and leaping abilty. He also need to improve his passing once he is 
in the paint. His overall defense this year greatly improved this year 
but still needs much work

I think Scott Pollard is underrated by most people.  He probably is the
third or fourth best poward forward (who could fill in at center but
would be out of position) in the draft.  He has excellent mobility,
often beating the opposition's big men down the court.  He also has a
decent hook shot, but not a lot of offense facing the basket.  I think
he is ranked poorly is that his raw numbers aren't that impressive.
However, he did play in a system in which the minutes and points are
spread around.  Teams looking for a backup big man late in the first
round would do well to consider Pollard.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Villanova  32  889 114  218   0   0  95 163  212 136  39  80  89  14  323
94-95 Villanova  33  952 153  257   0   0 119 163  222 122  50  87  86  24  425
95-96 Villanova  32  920 128  206   0   1 138 199  218 104  39  88  95  21  394
96-97 Villanova  34 1057 139  230   0   0 145 193  258 101  50  81 105  38  423
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          131 3818 534  911   0   1 497 718  910 463 178 336 375  97 1565
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Villanova  27.8  52.3   0.0  58.3  6.6  1.2  2.5  2.8  0.4  10.1
94-95 Villanova  28.8  59.5   0.0  73.0  6.7  1.5  2.6  2.6  0.7  12.9
95-96 Villanova  28.8  62.1   0.0  69.3  6.8  1.2  2.8  3.0  0.7  12.3
96-97 Villanova  31.1  60.4   0.0  75.1  7.6  1.5  2.4  3.1  1.1  12.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           29.1  58.6   0.0  69.2  6.9  1.4  2.6  2.9  0.7  11.9

Coming out of high school, Jason Lawson was an all-american, but has never
really lived up to his full potential.  He's had his moments, however he has
generally been an inconsistent player during his college career.  Despite
this NBA scouts still see a lot of potential in the 6-11 Lawson, who has been
an excellent shot blocker (3.0 bpg).
If he becomes a better rebounder (7.3 rpg) and a more consistent scorer than
he does have a shot to become the center he's been said to be.  He should be
an early-mid second round choice.  

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
95-96 Pittsburgh 27  389  35   85   0   0  26  48   80  81   9  41  27   8   96
96-97 Pittsburgh 29  760 101  207   1   2  61 120  198  94  30  88  78  20  264
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           56 1149 136  292   1   2  87 168  278 175  39 129 105  28  360
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
95-96 Pittsburgh 14.4  41.2   0.0  54.2  3.0  0.3  1.5  1.0  0.3   3.6
96-97 Pittsburgh 26.2  48.8  50.0  50.8  6.8  1.0  3.0  2.7  0.7   9.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           20.5  46.6  50.0  51.8  5.0  0.7  2.3  1.9  0.5   6.4

As usual this draft will be plagued with an unprecidented number of
uderclassmen with dreams of glory who have applied for early entry into this
June's draft.  A record 47 have applied and most will not hear their names
called come June 25th.  Mark Blount will prove, as many have before, that you
should stay in school.  This impatient 7 footer went to six high schools
before giving verbal commitment to Umass, but then decided to go to Pitt.
 His carrer at Pitt has been rather mediocre, not playing ball his freshman
year because of academic problems and last season averaging just 9.1 ppg and
6.8 rpg for a team that was in the basement of the Big East.  Mark Blount may
some day end up in the NBA but it won't be next year.  Like most of the other
fools who applied for early entry he has signed on with an agent and cannot
return to school for his junior year and will most likely not be drafted. 

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Liberty    30  508  90  165   0   0  48  82  124  84   8  41  59  16  228
94-95 Liberty    28  865 164  318   0   1 111 157  163 101  15  65  97  30  439
95-96 Liberty    29  949 194  355   0   2 159 235  185  83  19  75 113  35  547
96-97 Liberty    32  938 184  358   0   1 133 203  210 102  36  86  97  29  501
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          119 3260 632 1196   0   4 451 677  682 370  78 267 366 110 1715
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 URI        18.4  45.7   0.0  59.5  3.7  0.5  0.8  0.5  0.3   4.1
94-95 URI        19.8  60.0   0.0  67.3  6.3  0.4  1.3  1.6  0.3   6.4
95-96 URI        24.9  48.2   0.0  61.0  6.0  0.8  1.5  1.7  0.7   8.9
96-97 URI        23.8  51.7   0.0  66.4  6.2  0.7  1.3  1.2  0.4  10.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           22.0  51.0   0.0  63.8  5.6  0.6  1.3  1.3  0.4   7.7

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Lansing CC                  Statistics Unavailable
94-95 Lansing CC                  Statistics Unavailable
95-96 C Michigan 20  532 113  193   8  15  49  64  147  63  25  43  46  12  283
96-97 C Michigan 26  770 151  261  20  47 124 169  287  81  47  71  46  28  446
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Div I TOTALS     46 1302 264  454  28  62 173 233  434 144  72 114  92  40  729
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Lansing CC            Statistics Unavailable
94-95 Lansing CC            Statistics Unavailable
95-96 C Michigan 26.6  58.5  53.3  76.6  7.4  1.3  2.2  2.3  0.6  14.2
96-97 C Michigan 29.6  57.9  42.6  73.4 11.0  1.8  2.7  1.8  1.1  17.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Div I TOTALS     28.3  58.1  45.2  74.2  9.4  1.6  2.5  2.0  0.9  15.8

Nate had an outstanding senior season, one of the few bright spots for 
Central Michigan.  While he was a decent rebounder, you have to recognize 
thate Huffman towered over all his opponents in the MAC.  His greatest 
asset is his perimeter shooting.  The combination of this skill and size 
has caused some to compare Nate to Brad Lohaus.  Huffman has a tatoo of 
the NBA/Jerry West logo, so you know he's set some goals.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
92-93 Boston Col 30  502  65  130   0   0  21  31  106  76   8  41  16   4  151
93-94 Boston Col 33  370  44   90   0   0  20  34   72  52  10  28  22   3  108
94-95 Boston Col 25  312  46   89   0   1  27  35   66  44   7  27  15   5  119
95-96 Wisconsin                   Did Not Play - Transfer Student
96-97 Wisconsin  28  765 129  261   0   1  92 129  145  82  21  62  34  14  350
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          116 1949 284  570   0   2 160 229  389 254  46 158  87  26  728
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
92-93 Boston Col 16.7  50.0   0.0  67.7  3.5  0.3  1.4  0.5  0.1   5.0
93-94 Boston Col 11.2  48.9   0.0  58.8  2.2  0.3  0.8  0.7  0.1   3.3
94-95 Boston Col 12.5  51.7   0.0  77.1  2.6  0.3  1.1  0.6  0.2   4.8
95-96 Wisconsin             Did Not Play - Transfer Student
96-97 Wisconsin  27.3  49.4   0.0  71.3  5.2  0.8  2.2  1.2  0.5  12.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           16.8  49.8   0.0  69.9  3.4  0.4  1.4  0.8  0.2   6.3

As a Wisconsin fan, I was able to see Paul Grant in action this year. 
I'm not exactly a basketball expert, but I can give my impressions of
him.  Marty Blake can go to hell with his "Paul Grant is at a
disadvantage for having played in a slowdown system" remark; besides,
Mike Fratello is still coaching at Cleveland. :^)

Paul's strengths:  runs the floor well, has a nice 10 to 15-foot jumper,
decent hands, great attitude, intelligent.

Paul's weaknesses:  doesn't use his size to rebound, needs to add
strength, misses a lot of easy shots.

Paul's stock is definitely rising after having played well in some of
the pre-draft exhibitions.  Right now, he has a chance of being drafted
for real, though I wouldn't bet on it.  After having read the report on
Zwikker, I had decided a combination of the two would make a good NBA
center.

This goes back to high school, when Paul was at Redford Catholic Central, 
and judging from his post-season play (I believe he set a record for 
personal fouls at Phoenix), it's still valid:  Paul Grant is one rugged 
dude.  He'll give it up in the trenches, going toe-to-toe with any center, 
playing balls out whether it's Tim Duncan or Todd Lindeman.

No Stats
 

No Stats

Drobnjak is big body with nice offensive moves around the basket. 
Don't expect him to shoot from the outside too often. I have 
seen Predrag live only once and it was more than year ago. He 
was real fat and seemed smaller than 6-11 (6-9 maybe) and older 
than he actually is. Since then he played in Euroleague as the 
part of Yougoslav champion Partizan Belgrade club, which gained 
the group of young talented Yougoslav players lead by Olympic 
silver medalist Miroslav Beric and other draft prospect 
Aleksander Cubrilo. He gained confidence and polished his 
skills playing against the toughest European competition.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Tenn Tech  30  480  54  113   0   0  27  58  185  98   8  36  85  10  135
94-95 Tenn Tech  27  729 168  270   0   0  68 121  275  89   6  83 123  18  404
95-96 Tenn Tech  28  616 138  239   0   0  62 108  208  79  22  75  94   8  338
96-97 Tenn Tech  28  885 198  307   0   0  92 153  333  88  21  96 133  11  488
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          113 2710 558  929   0   0 249 440 1001 354  57 290 435  47 1365
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Tenn Tech  16.0  47.8   0.0  46.6  6.2  0.3  1.2  2.8  0.3   4.5
94-95 Tenn Tech  27.0  62.2   0.0  56.2 10.2  0.2  3.1  4.6  0.7  15.0
95-96 Tenn Tech  22.0  57.7   0.0  57.4  7.4  0.8  2.7  3.4  0.3  12.1
96-97 Tenn Tech  31.6  64.5   0.0  60.1 11.9  0.8  3.4  4.8  0.4  17.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           24.0  60.1   0.0  56.6  8.9  0.5  2.6  3.8  0.4  12.1

Lorenzo Coleman was a very good player in a mediocre conference on a not so
good team.  He has an NBA body, 7-1 295lbs, but has never played against any
competition in his conference where he dominated.  He's an very good
rebounder, 11.9 rpg 3rd in the country, and a very good outstanding shot
blocker, 4.8 bpg 2nd in the country.  He's very much like Adonal Foyle being
the dominant big man playing against not so good big men.  Unlike Foyle,
Coleman is not a great scorer and must improve his offense.  He also wasn't a
high school all american and didn't have Foyle's publicity.  He;s a good
player who is a project for the team who drafts him, if he gets drafted.