.
Pelicans Report
 
Page 42 of 54 FirstFirst ... 32 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 52 ... LastLast
Results 1,026 to 1,050 of 1341

Thread: NBA DRAFT 2020 DISCUSSION

  1. #1026
    A Soulful Sports Fan Contributor Eman5805's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    28,696
    My enthusiasm for that was long tempered. I was clowning around.

  2. #1027
    Pistol Pete Would Be Proud!! pelicanchamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,810
    https://youtu.be/kXFjuG5BJvA this guy is interesting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #1028
    Quote Originally Posted by pelicanchamp View Post
    https://youtu.be/kXFjuG5BJvA this guy is interesting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    When he was talked about as a second rounder, I was all in on him and Bolmaro as potential Pelicans picks. Now that it looks like both will go in the first round, I am not as high on them. If either were still on the board as the first round was drawing to a close, I might would consider packaging the two earlier second round picks to move up and take one, but I imagine that there would be other players I would covet more. As you say, Poku is "interesting," but I see a much longer development timeline than I would be willing to invest in him.

  4. #1029
    I'm predicting we go Jalen Smith. Usually I'm all for BPA and it may be a bit if a reach but he is just TOO perfect for this team.

    SVG has always run some iteration of a 1 in 4 out offense with a stretch 4. He even forced it in Detroit unsuccessfully until he traded for Ilyasova to be the stretch. Bet that we will run the same. Zion is a bit of a conundrum in that system, especially with our current (or thinking of last season's) personnel. It's like, Zion's unprecedented skill set and playmaking ability would make him a devilishly good inside big in that system, but if we're taking about bringing back Okafor and Favors to go with Hayes, Zion and Melli would be perimeter guys. Pairing up Zion with a stretch big is the most logical solution. We could bring in an aging stop gap like Baynes......but I'm feeling Jalen Smith. He has upside on defense, is a good shot blocker, shot 37% from 3, and 75% FT.....he would be the absolute perfect pairing alongside Zion and Hayes moving forward in SVG's system. I think it's too good to pass up.
    PSA: Not a single elite poster or pels "insider" predicted the Cousins trade, Jrue to the Bucks, or the Adams trade. They didn't know about the Adams extension before Woj and Shams reported it and no one connected us to Kira Lewis in the draft.

    Because there ARE no elite posters/insiders. We're all equals in Pels Fandom.

    "There is only so much film an amateur can watch before they begin to think they know more than they do."

    - Abraham Lincoln

  5. #1030
    Quote Originally Posted by pelicanchamp View Post
    https://youtu.be/kXFjuG5BJvA this guy is interesting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    If you scroll back a few pages there's tons of Poku discourse in this thread that you might find interesting!
    Cade Cunningham/Usman Garuba/Scottie Barnes/Moses Moody/Brandon Boston Jr endorser.

    Eye test people: analytics people watch more basketball than you do.

  6. #1031
    Quote Originally Posted by msusousaphone View Post
    I'm predicting we go Jalen Smith. Usually I'm all for BPA and it may be a bit if a reach but he is just TOO perfect for this team.

    SVG has always run some iteration of a 1 in 4 out offense with a stretch 4. He even forced it in Detroit unsuccessfully until he traded for Ilyasova to be the stretch. Bet that we will run the same. Zion is a bit of a conundrum in that system, especially with our current (or thinking of last season's) personnel. It's like, Zion's unprecedented skill set and playmaking ability would make him a devilishly good inside big in that system, but if we're taking about bringing back Okafor and Favors to go with Hayes, Zion and Melli would be perimeter guys. Pairing up Zion with a stretch big is the most logical solution. We could bring in an aging stop gap like Baynes......but I'm feeling Jalen Smith. He has upside on defense, is a good shot blocker, shot 37% from 3, and 75% FT.....he would be the absolute perfect pairing alongside Zion and Hayes moving forward in SVG's system. I think it's too good to pass up.
    I think that's a fairly optimistic view on Smith. I do think he has upside, as I mentioned earlier in the thread when asked about possible targets, but there's a lot of reasons that you absolutely wouldn't pick him so highly either. Maybe the league views him more highly internally, but if he's a consensus late first rounder or something I feel that's justified and I would be surprised if anyone had such an outlier view to pick him, ten, fifteen spots higher than consensus.

    You ran through most of the positives for him (seems like a really good shooting prospect for a big, good shot blocking numbers, etc) but let me just run through some of the counter-arguments that paint him differently, because those need to be considered too:

    - Really really poor pick and roll defender. This is partly due to his tight hips which leads to bad lateral mobility, but also his frame: he has high, thin hips which make it hard to imagine his balance ever improving a huge amount.
    - Very slow decision maker and subsequently a sub-par passer for a big, which hinders his ability to play in the PnR on offense. SVG has always run a very PnR heavy offense, as Smith has real problems with it on both ends: that's not to say that we should be drafting based on present day ability or for a specific coach's system, but decision making is always one of the slowest things to improve and Smith is nearly 21 already. Can't really pass on the short roll much at all.
    - Actually a kind of mediocre finisher at the basket for a 5, partly because he has a short wingspan for a big, but also because he's a slow jumper who needs to 'load up' before he can take off which makes his shorter wingspan show up more against length.
    - Relatively low feel player. Doesn't 'react' with defenses, his decisions tend to seem pre-planned and he gets flustered when things happen that he doesn't expect. Misses open passes when help closes in, shoots when he should pass, doesn't swing the ball along the perimeter consistently. Can execute basic reads that the offense has 'built in' but that's about it.

    His positives are clear, especially in today's NBA. For a big, he has a pretty good handle. He's a fairly smart interior defender who defends the rim quite well. He can shoot quite well and for a big, his shot versatility is really impressive (he shoots off screens, for example). All of this pans out.

    But his defense outside of the paint is super shaky, his passing all around is sub-par, and his rim-running/rolling out of the PnR is really mediocre. He isn't a high feel player, he doesn't read the game fluently, and he has frame issues due to his hips and wingspan that exacerbate some of his problems.

    Do I like him? Yes. Would I draft him #13 overall? Nope. He's in that second tier of bigs for me, after guys like Okongwu and Tillman.

  7. #1032
    The hardest guy to quit in this draft for me is Cole Anthony. EVERYTHING says to pass on him. Old for his class, inefficient numbers, bad shot selection. But I watch the kid in interviews and he is mature beyond his years. Great family - dad who was in the league forever and is still around it. And his raw skill set - handle, shooting, athleticism, etc is top tier.

    When we are up at 13, I will say I want Williams or Poku or Vassell, etc....but deep down inside I will kinda be hoping we take Cole Anthony
    @mcnamara247

  8. #1033
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    The hardest guy to quit in this draft for me is Cole Anthony. EVERYTHING says to pass on him. Old for his class, inefficient numbers, bad shot selection. But I watch the kid in interviews and he is mature beyond his years. Great family - dad who was in the league forever and is still around it. And his raw skill set - handle, shooting, athleticism, etc is top tier.

    When we are up at 13, I will say I want Williams or Poku or Vassell, etc....but deep down inside I will kinda be hoping we take Cole Anthony
    Cole is a guy that I think needs to go to the right place, but I'd be high on him in NOLA.

    So much went wrong for him this year, from awful team circumstances to injury, but he's one of the prime candidates for my "pay attention to the pre college" sample. I still have him in the teens because his team defense was elite this year and the pullup shooting was still there. The precollege sample showed me enough to think there's more upside as a finished and passer than UNC let him show.

    He wouldn't be my first choice at #13, but I wouldn't dislike the pick either. Lots of opportunity for him to show out and he's done it before.

  9. #1034
    If they take a guard, they need to take the one with the absolute highest ceiling in the class. The guy we pick won’t be sniffing the rotation this upcoming season due to the logjam at the position so we shouldn’t worry about what a prospect can do for you now but what he can do for you in a season or longer.

  10. #1035
    Quote Originally Posted by Snarly View Post
    If they take a guard, they need to take the one with the absolute highest ceiling in the class. The guy we pick won’t be sniffing the rotation this upcoming season due to the logjam at the position so we shouldn’t worry about what a prospect can do for you now but what he can do for you in a season or longer.
    Even if we had no guards, the priority should be long term. You don't draft a rookie because you think they'll have the best rookie season, you draft them because you hope they'll hit their upside and be great for you by the time their extension comes up, so they're worth it.

    Still, most of the guards on the roster are not long term, and several may not even be on the roster come opening night. Remember that Frank Jackson and E'twaun Moore's contracts are both up: either or both could be gone. Don't worry about the logjam at the guard spots until we actually know what the roster will look like.

  11. #1036
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    I think that's a fairly optimistic view on Smith. I do think he has upside, as I mentioned earlier in the thread when asked about possible targets, but there's a lot of reasons that you absolutely wouldn't pick him so highly either. Maybe the league views him more highly internally, but if he's a consensus late first rounder or something I feel that's justified and I would be surprised if anyone had such an outlier view to pick him, ten, fifteen spots higher than consensus.

    You ran through most of the positives for him (seems like a really good shooting prospect for a big, good shot blocking numbers, etc) but let me just run through some of the counter-arguments that paint him differently, because those need to be considered too:

    - Really really poor pick and roll defender. This is partly due to his tight hips which leads to bad lateral mobility, but also his frame: he has high, thin hips which make it hard to imagine his balance ever improving a huge amount.
    - Very slow decision maker and subsequently a sub-par passer for a big, which hinders his ability to play in the PnR on offense. SVG has always run a very PnR heavy offense, as Smith has real problems with it on both ends: that's not to say that we should be drafting based on present day ability or for a specific coach's system, but decision making is always one of the slowest things to improve and Smith is nearly 21 already. Can't really pass on the short roll much at all.
    - Actually a kind of mediocre finisher at the basket for a 5, partly because he has a short wingspan for a big, but also because he's a slow jumper who needs to 'load up' before he can take off which makes his shorter wingspan show up more against length.
    - Relatively low feel player. Doesn't 'react' with defenses, his decisions tend to seem pre-planned and he gets flustered when things happen that he doesn't expect. Misses open passes when help closes in, shoots when he should pass, doesn't swing the ball along the perimeter consistently. Can execute basic reads that the offense has 'built in' but that's about it.

    His positives are clear, especially in today's NBA. For a big, he has a pretty good handle. He's a fairly smart interior defender who defends the rim quite well. He can shoot quite well and for a big, his shot versatility is really impressive (he shoots off screens, for example). All of this pans out.

    But his defense outside of the paint is super shaky, his passing all around is sub-par, and his rim-running/rolling out of the PnR is really mediocre. He isn't a high feel player, he doesn't read the game fluently, and he has frame issues due to his hips and wingspan that exacerbate some of his problems.

    Do I like him? Yes. Would I draft him #13 overall? Nope. He's in that second tier of bigs for me, after guys like Okongwu and Tillman.
    I think with the way the league is evolving, stretch bigs will be valued higher than other positions. Kinda like how big plodding Cs were valued highest in the previous decades. Omer Asik for example. We rag on that guy's last contract. In hindsight, it was AWFUL. At the time it happened, it was the going rate since Cs were in such short supply and, the way the game was played, they were almost a must to contend. It's like the game evolved the minute he signed that contract and then that injury/infection made it worse. But at that time, an 8.0 plodding C was more coveted than an 8.6 guard.

    That quote from SVG in the press conference thread, that he views "small ball" as really being "perimeter ball". SVG kinda started that. And as the league continues to shift in that direction, stretch bigs are going to keep becoming more and more coveted. My prediction is that the 7.8 stretch big will become more valuable than the 8.2 combo guard or the 8.1 post up/rim protection big.

    The stretch big is even more uniquely valuable to us than to other teams because of Zion. Before SVG, we would debate what players best paired up with Zion. With SVG, I think that debate is over and the answer is "a stretch C". SVG used so many PnRs in Detroit because they didn't have the stretch big, at first. He made it a priority to get Ilyasova. He absolutely will want a starting stretch big. Does he see Zion or Melli as that stretch big moving forward? I don't think so. I think he'll play Zion on the perimeter a little but he mostly sees him as the inside big and Melli as a great 6th or 7th man. And that is the assumption in my line of thinking. Maybe Gundy does see Zion as a perimeter player. I just think that doesn't maximize his ability.

    So I do agree that player vs player Smith is more in the early 20s on a big board. But I think league need moves him up and team need moves him up higher. Then boom. We get him at 13.

    That is my absolute prediction lock.

    For this week.
    Last edited by msusousaphone; 10-28-2020 at 10:28 PM.

  12. #1037
    You cant just stretch, though. You gotta do that AND either be a great passer/playmaker or a great rim defender

    Just stretching makes you Melli or Ryno - neither of which would have tremendous value. Brook Lopez has great numbers protecting the rim. Same with JJJ. Jokic is a fantastic passer. Smith would have to add another component to his game. Otherwise, he is just slightly more athletic Melli

    Also, a great vertical spacer can be just as valuable next to Zion as a 3-pt shooting big. If you have a guy who can finish lobs at the rim, that destorys a defense trying to clog the panint for Zion. Blake and DeAndre did this perfectly in LA. When Blake was the roll man or got the ball at the top of the key and drove, you had to help with your center and it was an easy lob to DeAndre for a dunk. There are different ways to put the defense in impossible situations. Favors couldnt catch and finish a lob in traffic last year. He always had to come down with it or we had to make a wrap around pass when he was still on the ground. A lob threat in the dunker spot makes it impossible to defend a rolling Zion too

  13. #1038
    Unstoppable! GuardianAngel25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    NOLA
    Posts
    8,291
    If we can hit on this draft pick with a stud then our team will have the talent to win an NBA Championship. I believe we need a backup PF to Zion who can either come in for him or in for Hayes as a stretch the floor big with length. I think we need to come away with this draft with someone who could be an everyday starter but here he plays his role like a JJ Reddick for the bigs.

    Aleksej Pokusevski Is the 18 year old 7’ stretch big from Serbia. He has been mentioned here before by others. But this kid could be a true difference maker for this team. Everyone says he’s skinny and doesn’t have the NBA and my response is right now for the minutes we need from him we don’t need an NBA body but I’m fully confident in our staff putting on 30+ lbs and giving him an NBA body. He has a ridiculous skill set and length for days while he is probably still growing. I think for what we need be is the perfect fit for now.

    https://youtu.be/PZRgRZoiQaU
    Highlights if you haven’t seen him watch!
    Last edited by GuardianAngel25; 10-29-2020 at 02:22 AM.

  14. #1039
    Yeah. It's a tight conference but we're not far.

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    You cant just stretch, though. You gotta do that AND either be a great passer/playmaker or a great rim defender

    Just stretching makes you Melli or Ryno - neither of which would have tremendous value. Brook Lopez has great numbers protecting the rim. Same with JJJ. Jokic is a fantastic passer. Smith would have to add another component to his game. Otherwise, he is just slightly more athletic Melli

    Also, a great vertical spacer can be just as valuable next to Zion as a 3-pt shooting big. If you have a guy who can finish lobs at the rim, that destorys a defense trying to clog the panint for Zion. Blake and DeAndre did this perfectly in LA. When Blake was the roll man or got the ball at the top of the key and drove, you had to help with your center and it was an easy lob to DeAndre for a dunk. There are different ways to put the defense in impossible situations. Favors couldnt catch and finish a lob in traffic last year. He always had to come down with it or we had to make a wrap around pass when he was still on the ground. A lob threat in the dunker spot makes it impossible to defend a rolling Zion too
    I think we're underselling Smith's shot blocking ability and rim protection potential, a bit. He doesn't just compliment Zion well offensively but he does so defensively, too. He's also an aggressive rebounder.

    Kinda funny, while researching my defense, I found an article by pelicandebrief making that exact argument. So yeah, he needs to work on his handles and passing.....kinda hard pressed to find someone at 13 without flaws. Getting stretch C who can nail 3s AND be a rim protector/shot blocker......giddy up.

    https://pelicandebrief.com/2020/10/0...elicans/amp/4/

    I mean, pretty much everyone projects him as being a good to great rim protector in the NBA....

    https://advanceprobasketball.com/202...ahb-analytics/

    NBC has him ranked as the 4th best rim protector in the class....

    https://www.nbcsports.com/washington...onyeka-okongwu
    Last edited by msusousaphone; 10-29-2020 at 02:40 AM.

  15. #1040
    Quote Originally Posted by msusousaphone View Post
    Yeah. It's a tight conference but we're not far.



    I think we're underselling Smith's shot blocking ability and rim protection potential, a bit. He doesn't just compliment Zion well offensively but he does so defensively, too. He's also an aggressive rebounder.

    Kinda funny, while researching my defense, I found an article by pelicandebrief making that exact argument. So yeah, he needs to work on his handles and passing.....kinda hard pressed to find someone at 13 without flaws. Getting stretch C who can nail 3s AND be a rim protector/shot blocker......giddy up.

    https://pelicandebrief.com/2020/10/0...elicans/amp/4/

    I mean, pretty much everyone projects him as being a good to great rim protector in the NBA....

    https://advanceprobasketball.com/202...ahb-analytics/

    NBC has him ranked as the 4th best rim protector in the class....

    https://www.nbcsports.com/washington...onyeka-okongwu
    I don't think we're underrating his rim protection. He's a good rim protector. Not the best in the class, but really solid. He'll be kept out of the elite tier by his sub-par length and inability to jump without a long preparation, but he's going to be good. He rotates well on the interior, he has good positioning, and he has good instincts there.

    I wouldn't trust some of these popular draft analyses for a variety of reasons. Take that NBC ''best rim protectors'' thing. They have James Wiseman #1. Not only did Wiseman barely play in college so it's ridiculous to rate him so highly with so little college film, but in his pre-college sample, he was actually a pretty mediocre rim protector given his size. Bad positioning, jumped at every fake. Had high numbers but that's because there was no shot he wouldn't get himself out of position to swing his arm at. Precious at #3 is absurd, for many similar reasons, and having Isaiah Stewart on this list is just absurd: Stewart is a 2nd round talent and there are numerous guys who are better rim protectors if that's all we're measuring. Rim protection isn't just blocks per game, after all.

    You are absolutely right that it's hard to find someone at 13 without flaws (in this draft, you have to accept flaws even at #1) but the question is what kind of flaws are we willing to accept. Not all flaws are made equal.

    My biggest concern is with players who have flaws that are traditionally difficult, or impossible, to fix. For example, if you have a mediocre handle, that can be improved. It's a flaw, but it's a flaw that can be worked on, and if you're 19 or 20 there's time. Similarly, if your shot is inconsistent, that can be worked on by a good shooting coach: they can't make magic happen, you need to have some touch in the first place, but they can make you better if your problem is inconsistency.

    Trainers and coaches cannot fix your skeleton, and they cannot give you a better brain. If your issue is that your wingspan is too short and your hips are too high and your back is too stiff and you have no ankle flexion, then there's very little that can be done about that. Some yoga and stretching exercises can maximise what you have (especially in terms of stiffness and flexion) but your skeleton is what it is. They can't make your arms grow 3 inches, and they can't make your hips drop.

    Similarly, if your problem is that you have zero feel for the game, really slow processing, really slow decision making, the only way to improve that is with more play and experience. But even that isn't fixing the hole where 'feel' should be, it's just patching it up with a backlog of experiences: whenever you run into something new, it will make you trip all over again. Coaches can't fix that, and it rarely improves: players with bad decision making and processing often end up still being poor decision makers years into their career - see Hassan Whiteside, for example.

    This isn't to say that Smith is hopeless, absolutely not. His shooting is really promising for a big and there is value in that. His rim protection does look to be real, and there's value in that. But the flaws are real and they look like they're the kind that's hard to fix: why would I take that at #13 when there are other players who project better in many ways?

  16. #1041
    I read through all 42 pages of this thread and appreciate the breakdowns on players. I'm learning a lot as I read though everything.

    Pelicanidae, I really appreciate your breakdowns and writeups on players even when it goes against the mainstream analysis.

    I don't know if you follow the NFL, but I did something similar evaluating WRs for this past draft class. I found an old article from 2011 that discussed an analytical approach to project what WRs would be productive in the NFL. The article was written by a mathematician using all physical attributes with the only exception being what round they were drafted. It provided a possible 10 points, 8 being physical attributes and the last 2 being round drafted, a player drafted in round 1 got 2 points. The they were compared to the top 25 WRs from the previous year. Most WRs had around a 4 or better with no negatives or very few negatives. If a player had a negative like slow 40, they made up with something else like hand size. Either way, it indicated that Chase Claypool a guy who didn't do much in college projected as the best WR followed by another WR who also had a very pedestrian college career and the guys with all of the hype and top rankings were much lower with the biggest knock on them being their body size which indicated durability. Now we are 7 games into the season and Claypool has ascended to a big threat,the #2 guy just caught a game winning TD in overtime in last week's game and those top guys has missed multiple games or have been limited due to injuries. I have not experience scouting or anything, I just play in really deep fantasy sports leagues and in there I stuck to my rankings and drafted the guys I rated high and didn't go with the main stream analyst rankings.

  17. #1042
    Poku and Pat Williams are my two home run swings at 13. They would be the guys I would be targeting. The other interesting thing about Poku is that you might be able to stash him for a year or two. And when you consider that whoever we take at 13 is very unlikely to play this year, it is appealing to slow the rookie contract clock. Bolmoro is another guy who is appealing to me for that reason if we trade back or if we trade up into the 1st round

  18. #1043
    Quote Originally Posted by harschman View Post
    I read through all 42 pages of this thread and appreciate the breakdowns on players. I'm learning a lot as I read though everything.

    Pelicanidae, I really appreciate your breakdowns and writeups on players even when it goes against the mainstream analysis.

    I don't know if you follow the NFL, but I did something similar evaluating WRs for this past draft class. I found an old article from 2011 that discussed an analytical approach to project what WRs would be productive in the NFL. The article was written by a mathematician using all physical attributes with the only exception being what round they were drafted. It provided a possible 10 points, 8 being physical attributes and the last 2 being round drafted, a player drafted in round 1 got 2 points. The they were compared to the top 25 WRs from the previous year. Most WRs had around a 4 or better with no negatives or very few negatives. If a player had a negative like slow 40, they made up with something else like hand size. Either way, it indicated that Chase Claypool a guy who didn't do much in college projected as the best WR followed by another WR who also had a very pedestrian college career and the guys with all of the hype and top rankings were much lower with the biggest knock on them being their body size which indicated durability. Now we are 7 games into the season and Claypool has ascended to a big threat,the #2 guy just caught a game winning TD in overtime in last week's game and those top guys has missed multiple games or have been limited due to injuries. I have not experience scouting or anything, I just play in really deep fantasy sports leagues and in there I stuck to my rankings and drafted the guys I rated high and didn't go with the main stream analyst rankings.
    Thanks!

    I think the important thing for draft scouting, whatever approach you take, is to be honest with yourself and what your eyes see and what the data shows. If everyone and their mother is hyping up a prospect but you just don't see it and the numbers don't seem to back it up either, you can't lie to yourself and pretend that you do see it. Sometimes that means you'll end up being right when everyone else was wrong, sometimes it will mean you're wrong when everyone else is right, but doing otherwise would be dishonest.

    At the same time, you have to accept that you don't see everything the first, second, or even fifth time and that it's not just okay, but it's good to re-evaluate prospects over time as more data comes up, or as people point out things that you just didn't see before.

    Two examples of this during this year for me would be Nico Mannion and Kira Lewis. I was initially fairly high on Mannion: I didn't have him as a top 5 pick or anything, but I thought he was a good prospect for the teens and maybe even the back end of the lottery if things went well for him. But the reality is that his weaknesses got more and more exposed over time and his strengths (off-ball movement, for example) ended up being more secondary than primary, which dropped him from being around 13-18 on my board to being more like 25-35. That's an adjustment I had to make.

    Similarly, my earlier view on Kira Lewis was that although he was undeniably fast, his shot didn't seem like it would be reliable enough at the next level for me and his really bad frame makes me worry that his finishing concerns would continue into the NBA. The more I watched him though, and the more I read, the more I realised that the shot does actually seem more viable than I had first thought, and he shows enough team defense upside despite his frame for me to add that as a plus to him. Therefore he jumped up from being around 18-25 on my board to being more like 8-15.

    I'm not a data scientist, I don't run algorithms or big simulations, I can't profess to that expertise. All I can do is be honest about what I see, what the data I have available says, trends I see in the NBA, etc, and go with that. Hopefully it helps some people out with their own evaluations (I certainly hope nobody is just taking anyone else's word for gospel) and hopefully I end up being more right than wrong, but that's just how it is.

  19. #1044
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    Poku and Pat Williams are my two home run swings at 13. They would be the guys I would be targeting. The other interesting thing about Poku is that you might be able to stash him for a year or two. And when you consider that whoever we take at 13 is very unlikely to play this year, it is appealing to slow the rookie contract clock. Bolmoro is another guy who is appealing to me for that reason if we trade back or if we trade up into the 1st round
    I'm a big fan of all three, for largely different reasons, Would be happy with any of them, amongst other names. More concerns about Bolmaro than most, but I still think his passing and D upside is pretty phenomenal.

  20. #1045
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    I'm a big fan of all three, for largely different reasons, Would be happy with any of them, amongst other names. More concerns about Bolmaro than most, but I still think his passing and D upside is pretty phenomenal.
    Scenario: You trade back to 17, pick up #33 in the process. Take Poku at 17 and stash. Then, use 33 and 42 to jump into back end of 1st round. Take Bolmoro and stash.

    Use #39 on Tillman, Tillie, or Azubuike -- someone who can be a 4th or 5th big immediately and maybe grow into a 3rd big.

    This would also give you another 4 mil or so in salary to use before you hit luxury tax, allowing you to bring Moore and either Miller or Jah back on those fake type of deals Miller got last season for trade salary matching purposes. Right now, we dont have any disposable guys in the 5-10 mil salary range that we can just throw in a trade if an opportunity arises

    And if an opportunity arises and you throw in a future 1st to upgrade, you still have Poku, Bolmoro, and Didi as future rookies to come in to fill that young talent role in a season you dont have a 1st round pick. And their rookie salary clock is starting at that point, instead of right now when you really cant play them

  21. #1046
    Also, I wanna say that I hate when I see articles that compare Haliburton to Lonzo. Its like people only look at numbers. You watch those two guys play and one is a clear leader who plays with fire and is awesome making plays in the half court. And the other guy is Lonzo Ball.

    Ingram has let it be known that he really wants us to bring Lonzo back, but if I get the chance to move 13 and Lonzo to go get Haliburton or Killian, I do it in a millisecond and tell Ingram to trust me that he will love playing with these guys and then butter him up by telling him this means the ball will be in his hands even more this upcoming season

  22. #1047


    I doubt LaMelo falls out of the top 5, but anyone who watched his interview with Schmitz saw this sort of thing coming.

    Those interviews were hugely underrated as a source of draft material. Getting to sit down with a player, watch through film, talk about decision making, etc, is something we haven't historically had available to us and this year it became a thing.

    LaMelo's was really bad. He has very little interest in breaking down the game, doesn't really seem able to communicate why he does stuff. Sometimes that looks good, like when Schmitz shows him a clip of a great pass and he says that he doesn't look for it he just has the instinct for the pass; that's good. But when Schmitz shows him a multiple clips of really bad gambles and mistimed help and stuff, and LaMelo has essentially no response beyond just shrugging and saying he's working on it. No input, no detail, just doesn't seem interested in even talking about it. Compare that to some of the other Schmitz prospect interviews who are willing to talk at some length about what they're seeing on the court and how they're learning and changing, it's really unpleasant to see.
    Last edited by Pelicanidae; 10-29-2020 at 12:16 PM.

  23. #1048
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    Also, I wanna say that I hate when I see articles that compare Haliburton to Lonzo. Its like people only look at numbers. You watch those two guys play and one is a clear leader who plays with fire and is awesome making plays in the half court. And the other guy is Lonzo Ball.
    I understand the criticism, but part of the issue is that both are players who were/are high level point guards in college who simply do not have the skillset to play that same primary role in the NBA.

    Haliburton is a very good passer, has a shot that looks like it might work out, and is a good team defender. He is also has a very poor handle for a lead guard, very little burst or quick-twitch athleticism, has trouble beating college defenders off the dribble, doesn't really get to the rim with high frequency, doesn't get to the FT line at all, etc. These all spell problems for him as a primary at the NBA level.

    All player comps are bad because players aren't just lines of code where you can compare them one to one and see how many minute differences there are, but as far as comps go, I get why people compare Hali and Lonzo. Both are/were touted as lead point guards and neither of them are/will be.

  24. #1049
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara View Post
    Scenario: You trade back to 17, pick up #33 in the process. Take Poku at 17 and stash. Then, use 33 and 42 to jump into back end of 1st round. Take Bolmoro and stash.

    Use #39 on Tillman, Tillie, or Azubuike -- someone who can be a 4th or 5th big immediately and maybe grow into a 3rd big.

    This would also give you another 4 mil or so in salary to use before you hit luxury tax, allowing you to bring Moore and either Miller or Jah back on those fake type of deals Miller got last season for trade salary matching purposes. Right now, we dont have any disposable guys in the 5-10 mil salary range that we can just throw in a trade if an opportunity arises

    And if an opportunity arises and you throw in a future 1st to upgrade, you still have Poku, Bolmoro, and Didi as future rookies to come in to fill that young talent role in a season you dont have a 1st round pick. And their rookie salary clock is starting at that point, instead of right now when you really cant play them
    Poku won't be there at #17, I think, is the biggest problem with this situation. He's probably going before that, in my mind, if I was committed to Poku I wouldn't feel comfortable moving back.

    Tillman and Tillie could both be rotation bigs immediately (Tillie, health permitting) and I see Azubuike as a very uninteresting prospect.

    I don't hate the formulation, but I just think the numbers are off. If you had good intel that told you Poku would probably still be there at that point, that might be what I'd do, but honestly I would probably rather take Poku at 13, try to finagle a way into the high 2nd round or late 1st to acquire someone like a Malachi Flynn or a Grant Riller if he's still there as an immediate contributor (cause I'm not resigning Frank, not interested in resigning Moore, and am actively searching to move Lonzo) and then trying to pick up either Tillman or Tillie if they're available.

    I'd see Poku, Flynn, Tillman as a really really successful draft.

  25. #1050
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    I understand the criticism, but part of the issue is that both are players who were/are high level point guards in college who simply do not have the skillset to play that same primary role in the NBA.

    Haliburton is a very good passer, has a shot that looks like it might work out, and is a good team defender. He is also has a very poor handle for a lead guard, very little burst or quick-twitch athleticism, has trouble beating college defenders off the dribble, doesn't really get to the rim with high frequency, doesn't get to the FT line at all, etc. These all spell problems for him as a primary at the NBA level.

    All player comps are bad because players aren't just lines of code where you can compare them one to one and see how many minute differences there are, but as far as comps go, I get why people compare Hali and Lonzo. Both are/were touted as lead point guards and neither of them are/will be.
    But there are tons of guys you can say that about. Yet, the comparison is always Lonzo. I believe it is because of their numbers and numbers only. Again, watch the two play. Watch the fire Haliburton plays with. How much he talks to teammates. Lonzo is a dead-eye mute with no fire, no leadership. But yes, they put up similar numbers their final year in college and are 6'5/6'6

    I just think it would be comparing Kevin Garnett and Anthony Davis. One was a leader and the heart of a team. The other is ultra talented but brought nothing in terms of leadership and is clearly a Robin, not a Batman.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •