2020 NBA Draft: Call Your Shot

[MichaelMcNamara]

I think the thing we always have to keep in the back of our mind with this draft is the intangibles- character, work ethic, leadership, etc.

This team didn't talk last year, on or off the court. It had talented players but only 2 or 3 extremely hungry, blue collar guys.

I would put Precious in the upper tier in those intangibles. Higher than say a Jalen Smith. So, if you look at those two guys in a vacuum, yeah maybe Smiths skill set means he should go higher, but Achiuwa's intangibles might make him a better fit for the Pels

[HornetGuru]

Personally not a fan of precious, don’t think he fits well next to Zion

[MichaelMcNamara]

The "fit next to" thing always becomes too simplistic for me. It basically boils down to "Zion can't shoot well, so anybody else who doesn't shoot well doesn't fit"

But then people spout out how good our starting lineup was with Favors. And a below avg guard shooter.

The point of the game is to score more than the other team. You can do it 124-120 or 104-100. Both are 4 point wins. You can't just look at the offensive side.

You know where Precious would really help next to Zion? On the defensive glass, where Zion was poor for his position. Also will help defend the forwards who are too big for Ingram and too quick for Zion.

It can't all just be -- good shooter, lets get him. Bad shootet...nah, doesn't fit

[AD23forMVP]

I?ve tried to buy into Pat Williams multiple times and I just can?t do it. He?s the definition of a tweener. Undersized as a big, not athletic enough on the perimeter. I see a lot of people talk about his ability to defend wings in the NBA, and I don?t see it. He has heavy feet, tight hips, and is robotic in his movements. He doesn?t offer much switchability. When he was asked to defend more athletic and skilled wings in college he struggled to stay in front.

I think he?s a got a good IQ, good team defender, but he doesn?t defend the PnR all that well, doesn?t defend in space all that well, and while he?s a good rim defender for his size he certainly will never be labeled as one. I think he has work to do on closing out and contesting shots as well.

He definitely has an interesting skill set offensively, but he?s more of a late teens early 20s prospect to me.

[AusPel]

The "fit next to" thing always becomes too simplistic for me. It basically boils down to "Zion can't shoot well, so anybody else who doesn't shoot well doesn't fit"

But then people spout out how good our starting lineup was with Favors. And a below avg guard shooter.

The point of the game is to score more than the other team. You can do it 124-120 or 104-100. Both are 4 point wins. You can't just look at the offensive side.

You know where Precious would really help next to Zion? On the defensive glass, where Zion was poor for his position. Also will help defend the forwards who are too big for Ingram and too quick for Zion.

It can't all just be -- good shooter, lets get him. Bad shootet...nah, doesn't fit

Why would he be a better pick than Jalen Smith, for example

[Pelicanidae]

Why would he be a better pick than Jalen Smith, for example

I personally have them in a similar sort of tier. 20s sort of pick range.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Why would he be a better pick than Jalen Smith, for example

You aren't trying to find fit right now. You go for fit when you are the Lakers and are competing for titles. Right now you are trying to get the best overall player who has the most value for not just you but around the league.

If Precious reaches his potential -- which i think is more athletic and longer Faried combined with Aminu, that might not be the most perfect ideal fit in the entire world but it will help you win games and will have tons of interested teams around the league.

I am not going to pretend to know exactly how everyone of these kids careers will play out, but I know one thing from studying all the NBA Draft history i have.....you DONT draft for fit

[AusPel]

You aren't trying to find fit right now. You go for fit when you are the Lakers and are competing for titles. Right now you are trying to get the best overall player who has the most value for not just you but around the league.

If Precious reaches his potential -- which i think is more athletic and longer Faried combined with Aminu, that might not be the most perfect ideal fit in the entire world but it will help you win games and will have tons of interested teams around the league.

I am not going to pretend to know exactly how everyone of these kids careers will play out, but I know one thing from studying all the NBA Draft history i have.....you DONT draft for fit

Don't draft for fit at any stage of the draft? And if you like a bunch of guys similarly but one fits the best?

[MichaelMcNamara]

At this stage of where the franchise is at? No.

Culture fit, yes. But on court fit? No.

You don't know how these kids will develop skill wise. Heck, you don't know what Zion and Ingram will grow into. You just keep adding talent and guys who fit the culture you want.

I can't say this enough- the data says that it us very unlikely whoever we draft will be on this team for his 2nd contract. So drafting them and thinking about some idealized fit 5 years from now is putting the cart way in front of the horse. Just add talent and guys who have the intangibles that add to your culture

[MichaelMcNamara]

You can never like two or more players exactly the same. That is just an excuse teams use in all sports to draft for need. "They were all in the same tier and so we went with need"

Its BS. You should always draft as if your roster were empty and take who you would take in that scenario. If that happens, you don't have "tiers" you would have clear rankings and would like every guy slightly more than the next

You use FA and trades to fill needs. When taking 19 and 20 yr olds, and with rosters as fluid as they are year to year, you should ALWAYS draft as if your roster was empty, unless you are a contender

[Creative]

Precious is exceedingly raw. He shows some upside as a defender, but mostly as a big man defender: I would not trust him defending wings really at all. Think small-ball 5, energy guy. His shooting doesn't really exist right now. He shot about 32% on very low volume in college, and was a bad FT shooter. Right now on offense, he's best in transition. Some people have referred to him as being a bit like Kenneth Faried, and there's some truth to that, although his ceiling is probably a bit higher.

I wouldn't rule out any shooting at all, but it's years away. I wouldn't bet on it happening on his rookie deal, honestly, unless it was a huge focus for his development staff, and even then I don't really expect it to be much better than average for a big. For me, he's a pick better suited to the 20s than the teens.

Thx Pelicanidae for your update.

[6warddude]

nesmith......draft elijah hughes down the draft....

2 young wings with size that can shoot the 3 and have the ability to play defense...

[Eman5805]

Example I use is do you think any player we draft is gonna come out of college and play meaningful defense against Anthony Davis or Luka Doncic in 2020-21? So why draft for any usable skill based on this upcoming season. The whole roster from today save Zion and Ingram may not even be here in two seasons.

[AusPel]

Example I use is do you think any player we draft is gonna come out of college and play meaningful defense against Anthony Davis or Luka Doncic in 2020-21? So why draft for any usable skill based on this upcoming season. The whole roster from today save Zion and Ingram may not even be here in two seasons.

That's what Mac is saying

So essentially, you shoot for the guy with the biggest upside (or the best intangibles). May as well be Poku IMO

[MichaelMcNamara]

Poku has the skill set, but there is little/no reason to believe he will be a leader, be a down and dirty defender, be the guy who talks a ton on D, etc.

I will be fine if we take him, but this team has a bunch of high skill guys whose intangibles are ordinary or non-existent. Not saying our rookie is gonna be our leader, but I want that mindset. I want another Josh Hart mindset, or even Melli. Why I like Haliburton so much. Nesmith is a leader, according to Stackhouse. Kira has some fire, Maxey is a dog. etc

[Pelicanidae]

Poku has the skill set, but there is little/no reason to believe he will be a leader, be a down and dirty defender, be the guy who talks a ton on D, etc.

I will be fine if we take him, but this team has a bunch of high skill guys whose intangibles are ordinary or non-existent. Not saying our rookie is gonna be our leader, but I want that mindset. I want another Josh Hart mindset, or even Melli. Why I like Haliburton so much. Nesmith is a leader, according to Stackhouse. Kira has some fire, Maxey is a dog. etc

I don't even care if the player can play at all.

No need to see any footage, no need to look at any stats. All I care about is yells per minute and vigorous bench clap percentage.

[tdcreator]

You should draft for upside early. Position versatility is nice too but I like players that can play in any system. I like Okongwu and Vassell if we move up. They have some defensive chops that we need badly. I’d much rather trade down from 13 unless one of the top wings fall (Okoro, Williams, Vassell)

[boardtown]

I still recall an interview AD gave in the first season he made the playoffs. He pointed out QPon as someone who was giving the team advice on winning. Killer instinct is something you want on your team, and that dude sacrificed his career just to make the playoffs. No doubt it was a bad move for him in the long run, but that mindset has been generally lacking on this team for a while now.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I don't even care if the player can play at all.

No need to see any footage, no need to look at any stats. All I care about is yells per minute and vigorous bench clap percentage.

Its obviously a balance. The issue is we have access to all of one part of what is important (stats, video, game tape, etc) but no access to the other part that I argue is equally important. Which is why I wouldnt pretend to be some expert - just because I can watch games and look up stats. To REALLY be confident in a pick, I would have to interview these kids, get psychological and brain mapping data, talk to former coaches of theirs, guys who competed with and against them, etc. And I know Griff will do that and hopefully he does it well. But since I dont have access to any of those things, I wont pretend to know how any of these guys careers will play out. All I know is draft history, and draft history and draft philosophies tell very clear stories

[Pelicanidae]

Its obviously a balance. The issue is we have access to all of one part of what is important (stats, video, game tape, etc) but no access to the other part that I argue is equally important. Which is why I wouldnt pretend to be some expert - just because I can watch games and look up stats. To REALLY be confident in a pick, I would have to interview these kids, get psychological and brain mapping data, talk to former coaches of theirs, guys who competed with and against them, etc. And I know Griff will do that and hopefully he does it well. But since I dont have access to any of those things, I wont pretend to know how any of these guys careers will play out. All I know is draft history, and draft history and draft philosophies tell very clear stories

The problem is that you're sort of assuming that people who talk about drafts are presuming that they know all of these things without interviews/backstory research/etc. I, and many others, do not. We've been over this about a million times where we've discussed how those are parts of the picture that we don't have access to, and that we're just making the best judgments we can off the data that we have, which we necessarily accept is limited in certain ways. The problem is that you seem to swing hard the other direction: this is about the fifth or sixth time you've essentially gone ''I don't really care about the player other than the intangibles.''

The problem with intangibles is that they're intangible. You're essentially saying ''I draft based on vibes.''. Unlike, say, TS% or ast:TO ratio, which are based purely on what a player does on the floor, the intangible element is all about your subjective perspectives on things. For example, I've seen people say that Duncan can't be as good as Garnett because Garnett had more ''drive'' and ''fire'' and ''leadership''. Now, of course KG is an all time great, there's no doubt about that, but I think the reality is fairly clear that that evaluation, which is based entirely on a superficial understanding of the idea of ''intangibles'' is deficient in a fairly obvious way.

Now, again, this is not to say that you shouldn't take into account some element of personality and approach and whatnot if you have that data available: you obviously should. If someone is late to every practice and rude to the equipment staff and surly in the locker room, then that's obviously a problem even if they're skilled. By contrast, you yourself say it's a balance: it doesn't matter if someone is the nicest guy, has the most drive, hates losing, motivates his teammates, etc, if they just flat out cannot play.

That's why I find it odd that you would look at something like the Smith/Achiuwa comparison and come down so firmly on the side of Achiuwa based on intangibles, when their abilities as players are so far apart. This isn't using intangibles as the fine line divider over two similar prospects, this looks a lot like just making a decision almost purely on the vibe.

[msusousaphone]

It's a fan forum for an up and coming team. People of all years of expertise should feel comfortable giving an opinion on a thread where you call your shot without having it over analyzed. I don't recall anyone predicting Hayes or NAW last season, so it's not like us older people are swamis.

This thread should be fun.

Also. None of you know anything and the pick is clearly Jalen Smith.

[Mount Zion]

I don't pretend to know enough about the players in this draft and wouldn't have the expertise to know how all of the information on players should be whittled down to make determinations on their projections into the NBA. As a fan of the Pelicans, I have to hope that the team's braintrust does have the ability to take in all of the factors of roster construction and will do what is best for the franchise. I won't be mad with any pick, but I certainly have my preferences, as ill-informed or simplistic as they may be. If this thing was an exact science, 12 teams wouldn't pass on Kobe and Sam Bowie wouldn't be picked before Jordan. Even the pros make bad calls for justifiable reasons with their jobs on the line.

[MichaelMcNamara]

The problem is that you're sort of assuming that people who talk about drafts are presuming that they know all of these things without interviews/backstory research/etc. I, and many others, do not. We've been over this about a million times where we've discussed how those are parts of the picture that we don't have access to, and that we're just making the best judgments we can off the data that we have, which we necessarily accept is limited in certain ways. The problem is that you seem to swing hard the other direction: this is about the fifth or sixth time you've essentially gone ''I don't really care about the player other than the intangibles.''

The problem with intangibles is that they're intangible. You're essentially saying ''I draft based on vibes.''. Unlike, say, TS% or ast:TO ratio, which are based purely on what a player does on the floor, the intangible element is all about your subjective perspectives on things. For example, I've seen people say that Duncan can't be as good as Garnett because Garnett had more ''drive'' and ''fire'' and ''leadership''. Now, of course KG is an all time great, there's no doubt about that, but I think the reality is fairly clear that that evaluation, which is based entirely on a superficial understanding of the idea of ''intangibles'' is deficient in a fairly obvious way.

Now, again, this is not to say that you shouldn't take into account some element of personality and approach and whatnot if you have that data available: you obviously should. If someone is late to every practice and rude to the equipment staff and surly in the locker room, then that's obviously a problem even if they're skilled. By contrast, you yourself say it's a balance: it doesn't matter if someone is the nicest guy, has the most drive, hates losing, motivates his teammates, etc, if they just flat out cannot play.

That's why I find it odd that you would look at something like the Smith/Achiuwa comparison and come down so firmly on the side of Achiuwa based on intangibles, when their abilities as players are so far apart. This isn't using intangibles as the fine line divider over two similar prospects, this looks a lot like just making a decision almost purely on the vibe.

I think you misread what I type a lot and put in your own conclusions. You have strong takes, so it is hard for you to assume someone says in their conclusion, "I dont know, and I am fine saying I dont know"

I said Precious "might" be a better fit for Pels". From their point of view, based on the knowledge THEY have that I dont.

Again, the lone thing that I have a firm, strong belief on is that you dont draft for on court need. I can rank guys based on the skills and the little I know about the intangibles. but unlike my younger self, I wont pretend to know how these guys careers will play out anymore. And I dont judge others for doing it. All I am saying is that I wont pretend to

[Pelicanidae]

I think you misread what I type a lot and put in your own conclusions. You have strong takes, so it is hard for you to assume someone says in their conclusion, "I dont know, and I am fine saying I dont know"

I said Precious "might" be a better fit for Pels". From their point of view, based on the knowledge THEY have that I dont.

Again, the lone thing that I have a firm, strong belief on is that you dont draft for on court need. I can rank guys based on the skills and the little I know about the intangibles. but unlike my younger self, I wont pretend to know how these guys careers will play out anymore. And I dont judge others for doing it. All I am saying is that I wont pretend to

Edit: Okay sure. I was going to take argue with this a bit but it's ultimately a minor issue and I don't wanna derail the thread with a debate over minutiae. I'll take your word for it that it's not meant as a judgmental thing.

[DOMINION]

Saddiq Bey is my First choice at 13. He has size we need. He can shoot it and he defends multiple positions. Sometimes you can't go for the homerun, but what is wrong with a double with 2 RBI's.
Aleksej Pokusevski is my choice 2, upside upside upside!!! love the size hate the weight.

Those the only 2 I really want at 13