Yea mannion has fallen for me
Real slow, struggles to get by college players and his defense will be terrible. Tre Jones has easily jumped him for me as a better prospect.
As for the pick I'd look to move up for Okoro
Printable View
Yea mannion has fallen for me
Real slow, struggles to get by college players and his defense will be terrible. Tre Jones has easily jumped him for me as a better prospect.
As for the pick I'd look to move up for Okoro
For me, Mannion's issues are a little different. Yes, his defense is never going to be great in the NBA because he's not particularly strong, he's not very tall, he's got a negative wingspan, etc, but I think he's a smart enough player to compensate for that somewhat and he's a solid enough team defender. Similarly, I don't know if I'd describe him as ''slow'', at least not in a straight line, although it's certainly true that he lacks burst in the half-court and when changing direction.
His issues to me are more related to upside, psychology, and physicality. He just doesn't like going to the rim. It was bad even at the beginning of the year, but his really high level touch was bailing him out a little and he was scoring well inside the arc despite his inability to get to the rim (again, poor burst) because of it, but the longer things have gone on that touch has abandoned him against good defenses and it just results in a lot of really unpleasant scoring attempts that go nowhere.
He has dreadful shot selection too. Biggest NBA upside for him as a scorer comes from his pullup shooting, which I still buy as having legitimate upside depending on how he gets used and developed, but he's a master of the frustrating long-2 where the 3 would have been clearly better, and he loves to settle for long floaters. That's just not good enough; if you have a developed, versatile scoring game then adding those things can have value, but he doesn't; for a guy like him, being a premiere shooter is vital, and if you can't just take 3s as a priority then you lose a ton of value in that role.
Playmaking is still an upside for him, he's still a good passer and has good vision and IQ, but he's not some kind of genius level passer like LaMelo is, and he's not just a mindblowingly advanced PnR operator like Killian Hayes is either, so it's harder to forgive his flaws like one might for LaMelo or Hayes due to the lack of outlier skill there.
Mannion's #18 on Brian Schroeder's latest big board, Ben Pfeifer has him #27, just for perspective on where ''draft Twitter'' kind of ranks him at this point in the year. I feel like somewhere between 15 and 25 is about right as well.
Trajan Langdon on the Pelicans draft process heading into this season #PelicansPlayback https://t.co/RMTTtBzCa3 pic.twitter.com/KI1n9t7Fto
— New Orleans Pelicans (@PelicansNBA) March 22, 2020
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...bqocM/htmlview
Ben Pfeifer is currently keeping a running track of the players who have declared for the draft, in the above Google doc. For a bunch of reasons, there may be some players who we might have expected to declare who do not, and other players who may have been expected to return to college who decide to go for it.
Here's the full list of players who have declared thus far, copied out for those who don't want to click the link:
1) Anthony Edwards - Georgia - Freshman
2) Caesar DeJesus - UCF - Junior
3) Cam Mack - Nebraska - Freshman
4) Daniel Oturu - Minnesota - Sophomore
5) Devin Vassell - Florida State - Sophomore
6) Elijah Hughes - Syracuse - Junior
7) Feron Hunt - SMU - Sophomore
8) Isaac Okoro - Auburn - Freshman
9) James Wiseman - Memphis - Freshman
10) Jayvon Graves - Buffalo - Junior
11) John Petty - Alabama - Junior
12) Jordan Bruner - Yale - Senior
13) Kendric Davis - SMU - Sophomore
14) Kira Lewis Jr - Alabama - Sophomore
15) Marreon Jackson - Toledo - Junior
16) McKinley Wright - Colorado - Junior
17) Nico Mannion - Arizona - Freshman
18) Sandro Mamuke - Seton Hall - Junior
19) Tre Jones - Duke - Sophomore
20) Tyler Bey - Colorado - Junior
21) Tyrese Haliburton - Iowa State - Sophomore
22) Xavier Tillman - Michigan State - Junior
Will also note that I'm moving into proper 2021 draft mode now, rather than just my occasional dips into it, since the 2020 draft is pretty solidified*. Super excited for next year. Cade is clearly the number 1 right now, but there's just a bunch of guys behind him like BJ Boston, Jonathan Kuminga (he's not technically in this class yet but he's expected to reclassify), who would all automatically be the top pick in this draft.
Then tons of other really intriguing prospects like Jaden Springer, Usman Garuba, Jalen Suggs, Jalen Green, Jalen Johnson (why are there so many Jalen's in this class :hihi:), Scottie Barnes, Evan Mobley, etc etc.
Obviously we're still really far out, plenty of basketball to see and there are always people who rise or drop during the college year, but just from where we stand right now it's very encouraging.
*I just mean that all the games are played so no new data will be entered and it's all just consideration and evaluation at this point.
To my family, coaches, teammates, fans, and everyone else whose been supporting me on my journey, thank you #21Forever #FightOn pic.twitter.com/OZndkVo3io
— Onyeka Okongwu (@BigO21_) March 25, 2020
Well, I haven't seem a huge amount of his games, so I don't pretend to speak from any position of authority or anything like that. But from what I've seen, here's my take. I'll keep it fairly short and sweet since this is only really a first impressions kind of thing.
Pros:
- Obviously, height is something you can't teach. He's 7'2, and that's cool.
- Seems to have decent touch in the paint, finishes with both hands with layups and hooks. Uses the glass.
- Good rim protector, doesn't seem to leap for wild contests too often.
- Fairly mobile for a guy his size, at least in a straight line
- Solid footwork on offense; he says he takes inspiration from Hakeem and Duncan, which is never a bad thing.
- Has reasonable athleticism, which for a guy of his height is enough. Doesn't need a 40 inch vert.
Cons:
- Rebounding seems to be entirely based on his height so far; fairly little natural instinct or feel to it
- Doesn't fully escape the patented Tall Guy Mobility Issues curse, with some clunky lateral movement
- Desperately needs to put on weight (he's super young, so not a big worry yet, but still)
- Extremely mediocre FT shooter (about 63% for his career, 53% in FIBA U19 play)
- Pretty turnover prone. Averaged more TOs than assists in FIBA U19 play, for example.
- This is weight related, but he's very physically weak. Poor core strength hurts his shooting and finishing, and his paint defense.
All of this is super subject to change as I see more of him. College is going to be huge for him given a relatively small amount of pre-college data (I don't know his high school numbers, for example).
Speaking of super skinny, tall international players, I've seen a few people talking about Aleksej Pokusevski again, so I figured I would give my 2 cents.
I have big fear of missing out on Pokusevski :hihi:
He's very young, he won't be 19 until mid December, so that has to be kept in mind when discussing him. He plays in the Greek 2nd division, which is the same league Giannis played in before coming to the NBA, so while the competition is low, it's not unprecedented low.
There's so much potential there for him. He's 7'1, 200lbs soaking wet, but he's a legitimate ball handler and passer at that height. Can hit live dribble passes, skip passes, pocket passes. He has behind the back dribble moves, he can run the offense in transition, I've seen him operate as the PnR ball handler from time to time. 25%AST for a centre is really good, and that's where he was this last year, with a TOV% of only 15%, which isn't bad at all.
Poku with a behind the back dribble to get into the pnr, then the pocket pass. Pretty freaky skillset for his size pic.twitter.com/WMbeb3CRFz
— Ben Pfeifer (@Ben_Pfeifer_) March 26, 2020
He isn't a shooter right now, even though there are some great clips of him out there hitting them, but he's a 78% FT shooter and has decent enough mechanics to the point where I wouldn't be surprised if he became one within a few years. His willingness to take shots in game, including off movement and with pullups, is encouraging too; it's hard to become a better shooter if you just refuse to ever do it.
3%STL this year to go with 8.3%BLK, which is super encouraging for his defensive projections, and 34.9%DRB is just absurd. That wouldn't translate to the NBA at all, given the complete gap in competition and the fact that Pokusevski weighs so little that NBA bigs would just shove him around right now, but it's a great sign for his instincts and reading the ball off the rim. +19.5 net rating, 21.8 PER, this is all encouraging stuff.
I'm not saying he's a guaranteed star. He absolutely isn't. There is so much that could go wrong for him. Maybe his handle just doesn't translate against NBA defenses. Maybe he just never puts that weight on and it limits him hard. Maybe the shooting never really develops the way it could. Any of these things could happen; damn, all of these things could happen at once, and he could flame out of the NBA. But if all the factors fall into place; he becomes a decent shooter, puts on 25lbs, and the handle/passing translates, then wow. He could be kinda special.
He's not Giannis. But here's the comparison of Giannis' numbers in the same league as Pokusevski, per 36:
Giannis Antetokoumnpo Aleksej Pokusevski 17.1 points 16.7 points 8.5 rebounds 12.2 rebounds 2.5 assists 4.7 assists 1.2 steals 1.9 steals 1.8 blocks 2.8 blocks 46/31/72 shooting splits 40/32/78 shooting splits
I don't even really know what I'm saying. I'm not saying we desperately need to draft him, I'm not saying Langdon should sell the boat to acquire him. Nothing like that at all. I just feel like there's some potential in him that, if it all hits, in a few years we'll be looking back on and saying ''wow, how did he drop to #23'' or wherever he ends up going.
Aside from the catch block, handle in transition and touch finish, my favorite part of this Pokusevski sequence is how earlt his reaction to the drive was to help: pic.twitter.com/T5hwKS2LRl
— Ben Pfeifer (@Ben_Pfeifer_) March 26, 2020
I have really liked what I have seen of him in videos. He seems to have the basic tools to make it in the NBA with projectable upside. But I can't shake that he looks like he could break if he tried to bang with some of the bigger NBA bodies. Hayes is thin, but Pokusevski looks anorexic to me. Just looking at their frames, Pokusevski looks like he might have trouble putting on positive weight, while Sotto's frame appears to be one that would naturally add weight with strength training. I could be wrong though. However, while Sotto seems to be athletic for a super tall guy, he isn't as fluid as Hayes or Pokusevski.
That's my biggest worry with Pokusevski. I feel like the shooting will come, because the form is solid and the FT% is good, which are generally good indicators, but he's so thin that unless he can really pile on a good 20, 25, 30lbs, his ceiling will be fairly low in the NBA. He's skilled beyond his years, so really the question of drafting him or not is basically just if you think your strength and conditioning program can bulk him up somewhat.
I think you're right when you say that Sotto might have a better frame than Pokusevski for adding weight, but I also agree with you that Sotto has a much lower level of fluidity to his movement, and that's the kind of thing where I'm not sure that adding weight would actually help him with. He'd have to make sure to invest a ton of time into flexibility and hip mobility exercises to prevent stiffness coming from more muscle.
I get this huge feeling that someone is going to draft Pokusevski at like, the #24 spot or something, then just have him eating and lifting like a madman for 2 years and then he'll end up being some top 40 player :hihi: and everyone will be running around asking why the hell we didn't draft him. Totally could be wrong because of all the questions that are absolutely valid, but I just have that gut vibe from his pure skillset and abilities.
If the Pelicans keep all of their picks, which I doubt, I can really see TL's international scouting chops coming into play. Assuming they hold the draft without more individual workouts, teams will be making picks based on what they have already seen from these players. I can easily see the lottery pick being made for a depth/development player for the 2020-2021 season, then using the second round picks on draft-and-stash guys.
One other note. If the Pelicans are drafting in the 12/13 spot, there is a decent chance that all of the guys that would be favorites here will have been selected when the Pels are on the clock. Faced with taking a player ranked in that neighborhood, but that isn't a fit or isn't someone they really want, I wouldn't mind at all if they took a player that may not be ranked as high, but can provide what they need. Specifically, I have been thinking Aaron Nesmith or Saddiq Bey could be good backups for Ingram, which I feel is a primary need.
I hate drafting for need. Especially in an era when you are drafting 19 or 20 year olds and they won't reach their peak for 4-6 years.
Why draft for your 2020-21 roster when these guys won't be really good until 2024 at the earliest, and the roster will likely be much different then? And even the players who are the same will be different players in 4-6 years.
Go back and watch any draft and you will be flabbergasted when a team takes X guy over Y guy, and you will just scream WHY??!?? .... and then invariably they will show the current rosters and that X guy fills a need. But, because you know the future, you know that roster looks much different 3 years later.
Seriously, go watch any old draft and that will happen numerous times. Never, ever, ever, ever based on current roster need. Always take the guy you think will be the best player
New additions (as always, the link still goes to the fully updated list of all names)
23) Aaron Nesmith - Vanderbilt - Sophomore
24) Jalen Crutcher - Dayton - Junior
25) Jay Scrubb - John A. Logan - JUCO
26) Kenyon Martin Jr - IMG - High School
27) Malik Fitts - St. Mary's - Junior
28) Naji Marshall - Xavier - Junior
29) Obi Toppin - Dayton - Sophomore
30) Onyeka Okongwu - USC - Freshman
31) Patrick Williams - FSU - Freshman
32) Ryan Daly - St Joseph's - Junior
Just saw this, so I figured I'd post it to justify my appreciation of Riller as a 2nd round prospect.
List of players under 6'6 to have a USG of at least 32%, manage to hit at least 60% TS, and still maintain a STL% of at least 2.5, since 2008:
Stephen Curry
Damian Lillard
James Harden
Grant Riller
That's it.
Grant is not near their level as a prospect, for a couple of reasons. The biggest one is probably shooting. Curry was a 41% career college shooter from 3, Harden 37.5%, and Lillard 39%; Riller is a career 35% shooter from 3. Now, granted, he did shoot 39.8% his second year, and is at 36% this year, and has improved as a FT shooter every year of his college career (he's at about 83% right now, which is very strong), but still, it's something they had at will that Riller really doesn't have down as a secure, guaranteed skill.
Second biggest difference is probably playmaking. Curry, Lillard, and Harden are different levels of playmaker, but I think it's clear that they're all better than Riller is. He doesn't suck, but he's fairly limited and I don't think he has a huge amount of 'invention' in his passing game; he can run set plays, but they're set plays, and his vision isn't great. He's behind all of those guys on that.
And then there's age, Riller is a 4 year college guy. Those guys were multi-year guys as well, but none of them went the full 4 years. Riller also has the lowest BPM out of the 4 players. Now, BPM is obviously not some guaranteed sign of quality, it has a lot of noise in it and it struggles to capture defense cleanly, but it's still worth noting.
So I'm definitely not saying Riller is a Harden/Lillard/Curry level prospect. He clearly is not. Absolutely not. But it's hard not to see him being at least a solid NBA player as long as he can maintain even mediocre shooting, and for a 2nd round prospect I'd love to take a swing on that.
I imagine he means that because the trade took place relatively late, it wasn't possible to organise for a bunch of players to come in and work our for the team before the draft.
Many teams will do that, where they'll invite guys over to do 1v1 workouts and stuff for the teams personnel to evaluate in person before the draft. But I can imagine we didn't, because we got the #1 pick so we knew it was going to be Zion, and then by the time we acquired #4, it was too late to set up and follow through.
I don't think I verbalized my hypothetical very well. I posed a scenario in which (1) the Pels would be drafting 12/13, (2) the players we on Pelicans Report have expressed a desire to draft are gone and (3) the players available at 12/13 are ranked by pundits -- not the Pelicans' braintrust -- as the next best players, but are not as appealing to the Pelicans front office. Using that scenario, I am projecting my personal opinion as to who the next best players may be without any actual knowledge of who Griff/Langdon like for that next tier of players. We won't know who they like, so I am speculating who might be in that next tier who could be a contributor on the team in 2020-2021.
While I quite agree that you always take the guy you think will be the best player, our projections as to who that might be can be quite a bit different than the beliefs of the team. So there is no harm in me, as a fan, looking at the presumed roster, and cherry-picking a player that I believe will be in that next tier and hoping he is a possibility for the team I root for. I trust that the staff knows more than I do and will make their selections accordingly. We agree that you don't pass on the player you believe will be the better player because "Damn, we need a small forward", you also don't look at your board and see one player listed at 13 and another at 14 and just take player 13 without considering all factors. Otherwise you could take point guards with all of your selections, because "that's just how the draft fell."
If I really believed none of my draft picks would be any good for 3-4 years, I would just trade all of my picks for players in their third or fourth year (not really, but you get the point). Rookies can be contributors and that's all I would expect out of a pick in the range the Pels should pick this year. With a roster that has few possible openings for next year, I don't think it's unreasonable for THIS draft only, to think in terms of how their first rounder could get playing time and contribute to a playoff team. If a player's ability and value matches with that "need," then great. I never suggested that the Pelicans reach for a player that they don't have rated in the tier of players for their draft position.
Our projections dont matter. The entire point of my post is that I will want the Pelicans to take the guy they project to be the best player over the next 10 years. Not who you think or who I think, who they think
And many teams dont do that. They draft for current need/current roster fit. We dont have enough data yet on Langdon and Griffin to know what they will do. Although Griffin did push Oladipo down his board because he already had Kyrie and Waiters. Elevated Bennett, he admits, because of need and perceived upside
Personally, I would have several of the bigs projected at 12/13 over the wings and guards projected to be there, so yes I would take a Jalen Smith over a Devin Vessell, for instance
But my board doesnt matter. Nor does anybody on this boards. All I would ask of Langdon and Griffin is to be true to their board and throw out the 2020-21 roster and current need. The great front offices do that and I hope we have a great FO
Hopefully Griffin learned from that mistake. We are in agreement that it doesn’t matter how we have players ranked and only the front office’s opinions matter.
I think there is one limit regarding the "you should always take the BPA" approach : it overlooks the fact that rookies need playing time to develop.
It will not be a problem if most coaches weren't reluctant to send their rookies in g-League and instead of letting their young players play only in the garbage time (Gentry is one of them). You can't blame them neither. When you're head coach, sending one of your player in g-league is losing one of your back-up plan in case of injury or bad night from one of your rotation player.
It's always hard for most people to forfeit present in order to preserve future.
So I think the possibilty of playing time should still be a factor (even if not the major one) for selecting a player in the draft.
You bring up a very significant point; I couldn't agree with you more.
Does anybody here really think that NAW is better today for sitting on the bench for a full year in New Orleans, instead of actually playing in Erie (G-League)? I believe he's lost a full year of development. In the case of Jaxson Hayes, neither his body, nor his grasp of the subtilties of basketball, had him prepared to play at the highest level on the planet. Again, I have to wonder why he wasn't developed in the G-League. The modern NBA player no longer enjoys the benefit of four years of 'seasoning' in college. That's why the G-League will play an increasingly significant role in the development of the 'pups' that are coming into the league in the future.
Further, we've all heard Griffin espouse upon the many benefits that Didi Louzada-Silva enjoyed from the time spent in the NBL in Australia, haven't we?
Though impossible to prove that NAW and Jax would have benefitted more from playing in the G-League; it likewise would be impossible to deny.
Some more draft declarees
33) Devon Daniels - NC State - Junior
34) DJ Funderburk - NC State - Junior
35) Fatts Russell - Rhode Island - Junior
36) Jordan Tucker - Butler - Junior
37) Parker Stewart - UT Martin - Junior
38) Saben Lee - Vanderbilt - Junior
39) Mason Jones - Arkansas - Junior
40) Killian Hayes - Ratiopharm ULM - International
Playing time could also hurt the value of a player. I have studied the last twenty drafts for several pieces I have done and a few things become very clear:
1. Whoever you draft will likely not be on the team for his 2nd contract
2. Good Role players are almost never on the team that drafted them (Marcus Smart and Draymond are outliers)
With that in mind, when drafting around 12 or 13, you have two options history says -- Draft for someone who you think can become a star/quasi star OR draft a guy who could have more trade value in year 2 or 3 of his contract then he has when you draft him, package him with other assets for a star/quasi starter
The fact is that fans love the idea of drafting some guy at 12 who can become a solid 4th or 5th starter/role player, but history says that doesn't happen. There are several reasons why I won't go into in this post, but just look at history and know this is true. So, you either find your Kawhi or Devin Booker, etc -- a guy who has the potential to vastly outperform their draft spot and become a #1 or 2 option for your team....or you draft a guy who is raw and you can show little glimpses of here and there for the next two years and get someone excited as part of a package for a legit star. Think -- what Portland was trying to do with all the mythos around Anfernee Simons
Drafting a guy at 12 or 13 who will be your future 4th, 5th or 6th best player -- history says that won't happen. That guy could become a good role player down the line. A good 4th/5th man for someone else. But it is almost never for the team that drafted him
You've mentioned Killian Hayes. Do you see him as more of option 1 or option 2? And is he even likely to be there at 12ish?
He, along with Edwards, are my favorite guards in this draft. I think he could be a #2 option on a very good team long term if he got taken by the right team. We would have to move on from Jrue for him to do that here. Not necessarily right away, but getting a guy like Hayes and then re-signing Jrue, extending Lonzo - would be pointless.
Besides, I cant see Hayes being there with a late lotto pick. Maybe we move into the top 4 and get lucky that way. Maybe we take our pick and future pick(s) if we love a guy and grab him. Only guys I would do that for in this draft are Hayes and maybe Edwards. But again, I'd have to have a Jrue trade lined up to recap that capital and give that guy real minutes no later than 2022
I agree mostly with MM on this. Very difficult to see him dropping out of the top 10 unless there are some teams really trying to outsmart themselves. He's a 6'5 guard who shows legitimate shooting upside, decent enough team defense, and is a high level PnR operator; in a draft this weak with regards to top tier talent, there's no doubt he's right up among the top 3.
Interesting info. Kind of what I was trying to gather were how good do people think Hayes might be and generally how good is this draft. If a well regarded player still only projects as a key role player, then it doesn't say much for the overall quality of said draft.
It's been said a million times and it's still true; this draft has no real top tier talent in it.
Consensus #1 is tough because there's some disagreement this year, but most people have Anthony Edwards there as of right this moment. The reality is that if we were to skip ahead to the 2021 NBA draft right this second and add Edwards to it, he wouldn't go top 5, even without seeing next year's guys play college ball yet.
This year's draft has its strength in roleplayed depth. There are a bunch of guys in this class who will probably be solid NBA players for a bunch of years. Which is cool, the NBA needs role players too, but it still sucks that there's no high end elite talent here.
I think you may only hurt the trade value of a player by giving him more playing time, not his actual value as basketball player. I may have time to make some study next week to see if there is a correlation between playing time in first 2 or 3 years of career and overall carreer outlook (for example by focusing on PER and carreer length) but I expect to be a strong correlation.
Also regarding the fact that players drafted tends to not stay in long term with the team that drafted them, it doesn't necessarily go against my point. The more you let the player play, the more he's likely to be better so either to stay or to be traded for more value.
There are examples of both cases. But my theory is that there aren't going to be any Donovon Mitchell or Devin Booker or Kawhi or Giannis 'Diamonds in the Rough' in this draft. So, what we would have to do is manufacture one, the way Portland was trying to do with Anfernee Simons. Basically, play a guy only in situations he will succeed, showcase him in his second Summer League, leak out stories that he is tearing it up in practice and scrimmages, etc. Have him have ridiculous per 36 numbers, etc etc
Again, remember when Roddy Beubois was a hot commodity on the trade market before he ever really played? Or there was a time when Jordan Farmar had high trade value. But their teams never moved them at the peak time and then eventually they played real minutes and got exposed.
If you think this is a bad draft (which I do) and there are no gems, then this could be a philosophy to get behind.
Was Kawhi scouted as a potential MVP? Or Giannis?
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
Kawhi was a top 6 pick in every mock draft leading up to that draft and fell inexplicably on draft day. Giannis had no coverage of his games and few GMs had anything to go off of when selecting
But no, not even the most optimistic thought those guys would be future MVPs, so I get your point. However, in retrospect there are shared characteristics of those who vastly outperform their draft slot. Usually exceptional size/measurements and/or athleticism. Sometimes its an ultra elite skill (think Jokic's vision/playmaking or Draymonds bball IQ)
And yes, it is possible that someone in this draft has something that many of us will miss on the surface. It's also possible this is another 2000 draft. Or worse.
Personally, I think its an all time historically bad draft, filled with role players that will become solid role players for their 2nd or 3rd teams or guys that will straight up bust. But history does agree that there will be someone drafted after #12 that will have a significant impact in the league. But 15-20 teams will take that gamble and talk themselves into their guy being the diamond, and almost all of them (if not all) will be wrong. Rather than gamble, I'd play the odds and take the asset I think can have the most false value in a year or two and move them as part of a package for a surer thing
I think that one of the skills or attributes which has historically been the least appreciated as a draft metric is functional strength. More recently, it's gained some prominence and that's good to see, but even just a few years ago it was something people didn't discuss often in the mainstream of the draft; when it did come up, it was usually in reference to people's 'in-gym strength', like their bench press or something.
When you think about top tier NBA players, there aren't many who are notably weak for their position. Of course there are some, but guys like Lebron, Harden, Kawhi, Embiid, Giannis, Lillard, etc, are all notably strong in ways that can be directly leveraged in-game. Even a bunch of high tier roleplayers and secondary stars, like Jrue, Lowry, Iguodala, Draymond, Van Vleet, Tony Allen, and Marcus Smart show that strength as well. Someone like Giannis added it as they gained muscle, but many of the others had it already coming in. Even some players like Curry who aren't outliers in their strength saw significant improvement in their game as they moved from negative to average: in Curry's case, he saw his finishing at the rim and his FTr improve around 2013-14 to career high levels and has held that new baseline consistently since.
So that's another thing I would recommend looking for when trying to diagnose who might actually work out well in the league: who has a high degree of functional strength that can actually be leveraged in-game?
I think thats fair....the issue is you are drafting most of these guys at 19, maybe 20 years old nowadays and projecting that is hard. Which is why teams trip over themselves when a guy comes in the league with an NBA ready body.
Kevin Durant couldnt bench 185 a single time. Giannis had no strength, even AD got pushed around like a little kid by Patric Young in his lone year at Kentucky and that is why he got the comparisons to Marcus Camby coming out. Dwight Howard had broad shoulders bt a lot of people advocated for Emeka over him because he had an NBA body and nobody knew for sure if Dwight would get there.
I just watched Heat-Spurs 2013 Finals and Kawhi was nothing like what he become by 2019 back then. Watched the Davidson Tournament game the other day too and my wife was dying laughing at how tiny Curry looked. And while some of the guys do develop that functional strength, there are far more who dont and I just dont know how you predict that. In addition, if a guy already has the functional strength -- that is where a lot of busts occur. Because those guys had an advantage against kids that they wont have against men.
If I had to bet a guy on developing it in this draft, it would probably be Cole Anthony. The guy is just a dog and has a mentality similar to Donovon Mitchell. If he gets to the right team, he will be the guy taken in the lotto or mid teens that exceeds his draft slot
It's definitely true that a lot of guys are in early stages of their physical development, and that's why you have to evaluate if they have the frame that seems like it could build strength. Giannis, KD, AD, all good examples of guys who built their functional strength through the first several years of their careers. But it does mean that, all other things being equal, having good and obvious positive strength at that young age is a good thing and is a good thing to look for; lacking it doesn't disqualify you, but having it certainly does bump you up a bit.
I agree that Cole Anthony is a fairly good bet in this regard, but a large part of why that is is that he's already got a pretty good physical base; his core strength has issues, but his base is really good and its part of why he's actually had a better defensive season than many people expected from him at the same time as he's disappointed offensively somewhat.
As for what you say regarding busts, I think that's true to some extent but when I say outlier strength for their position, I mean that at the NBA level as well; take someone like Zion (who I am choosing because he is the most obvious possible recent example) who had ridiculous outlier strength in college, and it was clear that it was so much above the competition that it would translate positively to the NBA. Guys who are on quite that level are rare, but there are plenty of guys who are so much stronger than their college competition that it would be surprising if they weren't at least strong positives at the NBA level as well, barring anything strange happening. A good example of that this year would be Okoro, who has plenty of concerns, but his physical development isn't one of them. He's very strong, is a clear 3 position defender, and I'm confident that his strength will continue to be good enough to rank positively even when he takes the step up to the league.
I have never got the Okoro hype. You are correct with his body but he has shown me nothing offensively to make me think he can be anything on that end
Paul George, Kawhi, Jaylen Brown, etc were all fairly raw on that end in college but you saw the skills. They just needed to be refined. Okoro looks like Andre Roberson out there. I would even put his offense behind Thybulle. And he was an all time defensive prospect but still fell to the 20s because of the offense. And I genuinely believe Okoro is worse. He is the perfect example of people trying to elevate a guy in this draft just because they wanna believe there has to be some legit wing prospect
I don't know how much Okoro you've watched, so I don't want to suggest that it's a sample size issue, but from what you're saying it does sound to me like maybe you watched more early season Okoro than late.
It's clear that he is not a shooter, whatsoever, but he's made very impressive strides as a ballhandler, passer, and finisher throughout the season. He ranks in the 97th percentile in isolation efficiency, is in the 84th percentile (iirc) in half-court finishing at the rim, and might be the best wing passer in the class when it comes to functionally reading real defenses and making real plays in the half-court. Of course that does depend on what you consider a 'wing', since Okoro and Ball are the same height and obviously Ball is a superior passer.
There are obvious question marks about his game, that's indisputable. The fact is, he can't shoot and that's a big issue for a wing. He's also not a nuclear athlete (although I do think he's a clearly good athlete). If he gets drafted into the NBA by some team determined to try and use him as a 3&D guy, he will not succeed and he will look bad. But he's a good wing passer, a solid team defender, a very good 1v1 defender, and a legitimately talented finisher.
I don't think it's a case of anyone trying to elevate anyone. If people were speculating that Okoro was some kind of generational prospect, or some guaranteed top 50 player or something then you'd be right because he isn't those things, but this is a weak draft and it seems clear that he's done enough and shown enough to be worthy of a top 15 pick. If he was in the 2021 draft, things would be different because more competition would push him down, but he doesn't have that issue this year.
I was in love with Okeke last year, watched plenty of Auburn both years and Okoro isnt in the same league. Not even close.
And stats--- I did away with those when my eyes got good enough to not have to rely on them. You can throw isolation this and efficiency that out there but I bet I can find bad NBA players who have outlier numbers as well, especially when they are lower usage
You give the ball to Okoro and ask him to create for himself or others against a real defender and he will look goofy as F
You go ahead and bet on him, I wouldn't. And I have been wrong in the past. We all have. But I have learned to not reach when my eyes tell me the truth. I used to love numbers back in the day and all the second half of the season numbers were telling me Kendall Marshall had turned the corner and he was gonna be a good starting PG. When you start with wanting to believe something, you can create whatever narrative you want with numbers. I bet if i offered you 10K to show me why Okoro will bust with numbers, you could do that easily.
Numbers are a short cut the first few years of studying the game. By your use of them, I would guess you are in year 5, maybe 6 or 7 of being a hard core NBA fan. And this is not an insult, not a diss. We all go through the same trajectory. But as you get older you realize the eyes tell the truth and people use the numbers to create the narrative they want to be true. Just my two cents. I expect a defensive reaction, but in 5-10 years, just do your part and tell this to the next up and coming guy who is smart, but relies on the numbers just a little too much
No defensive reaction. I disagree with you, that's all. I think you're relying too much on your eye test, you think I'm relying too much on the numbers. We both probably accept that there are flaws to using raw advanced stats and flaws to using the eye test. Everyone's just trying to find their balance.
The fact is, the eye test is only ever as good as the eyes doing the test and the brain that's doing the evaluation. It's very easy to miss stuff, to misinterpret stuff, or to just not have very good judgement. Similarly, the numbers on their own also miss certain things, they tend to overstate other things, and it's perfectly possible to have great numbers in certain categories that aren't actually that impactful. It's not really useful to throw out one or the other, in my opinion.
I do find the kind of condescending tone you tend to take with stuff like this to be a little pointless and, well, condescending, but hey. That's Michael McNamara. It's part of the brand; if you went a full day without it you'd probably combust.
Actually Beaubois was a hot commodity after his rookie year in which he averaged 7ppg with 59%eFG in 12mpg for 56 games (16 start). It's because he got opportunity to play in his first year that his value was at an all time high.
For Kawhi he was never expected to be this good. Scouts projected him as a 3&D potential player not MVP caliber, there was also plenty of doubt regarding his ability to be good since he never faced high competitive environment that's why he slipped in a weak draft.
That's the exact kind of fake opportunity I an talking about. Very very limited minutes in perfect situations for them to shine. Makes it look like if they got more minutes and opportunities, they would be a beast. That was Portlands plan with Simmons this year but injuries forced them to use him a little more than they wanted to and now the mystique has worn off a bit
I think, in the first two years - yes. Not necessarily his rookie year. Beaubois was probably a little better (or NBA ready) than an avg guy his age because he played with men overseas
But yes, I would take a guy that I could see getting minutes to in the first two years. A guy who can finish in the paint when attention his elsewhere and hit a catch and shoot 3. Thats where you can fudge the numbers. If a guy is a 4th or 5th option on a unit, and attacks when the lane is open and/or is the beneficiary of open 3's, the eFG will be inflated and the per 36 numbers could look insane.
To have immense value, the guy should also probably be a multi positional defender. This is why I would hesitate to take a guy like Maxey. Even if he starts knocking down the 3 ball in his limited minutes, I don't know if teams would see him as a possible future quasi All Star because of his size (yes, I know he hasn't decent length but he cant guard most 2's). Conversely, I think if you take a guy like RJ Hampton and he shows flashes, teams can talk themselves into this former high recruit, who took an odd path to the NBA and is now showing promise, could be a star.
Are there examples of teams actually trading one of these "productive in limited minutes" guys? It seems much easier for a team to convince themselves of the thing they're trying to convince other teams of and wind up never trading him (Beaubois).
So, the all time example is Jermaine O'Neal. Now, we all know the Pacers won the trade, but when it happened the NBA world couldn't believe the Blazers got playoff vet Dale Davis for some kid who barely got playing time over his first 4 years
Davis was a walking double double, had just made his first All Star team and just helped lead the Pacers to the Finals the previous year. Meanwhile, O'Neal had only played a grand total of 2400 minutes in 4 seasons in Portland. This was the first example of this kind of deal I can remember.
Usually, teams don't pull the trigger because they too get excited about the upside of the young guy they have. Almost all NBA GM's are optimists. And/or they are risk adverse. They don't want to be the dummy who sent out the 21 year old kid who becomes a star. But history has shown that teams could have gotten decent hauls for guys if they traded them at the right time instead of holding out for the potential.
For example, I know for a fact we had two very good offers on the table for Julian Wright after his rookie year. He hit more 3's that year than the rest of his career combined. He showed playmaking skills in small bursts, and was long and active. Magic offered Redick, Courtney Lee, and a future pick at one point for Wright and Mo Pete
But, we believed in his potential and upside and settled for Belinelli, who was fine for us but had one foot out the league at that point - to give you an idea of Wrights value when we finally moved him.
TLDR; No it doesn't happen a ton, but that's because teams get attached and optimistic too. My theory is to go into the pick knowing you will trade him in 12-18 months and build a plan around that. Don't get attached and find a way to inflate his productivity. Then, trade at peak value