(06-06-2022, 11:16 PM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone have any insight on what the actual numbers are of projects that work out in the NBA?
I dont know how significant the skills are that these players need to add to their game or how difficult those skills are to acquire to be NBA playable for decent minutes in a playoff game.
My ultimate question is if there is a formula for how or when to choose a project over the BPA or the tallest LEGIT 2way player on the board?
I just assume you should draft tallest LEGIT 2way player available consistently to accumulate a pipeline of playable players that can be used for your team or are/would/should be considered decent assets in trades to other teams. Obviously you draft BPA of team need in certain cases.
To paint a mental picture...Im drafting 6'5 LEGIT 2way over 6'9 potential almost every time. Then...using that pipeline of playable player for my own team or in a trade for a more "star" player.
Im just officially out on "potential" players that are currently one trick ponies.
You seem to be asking for/demanding an easy, fool-proof way to cheat the draft. I think that’s been Cuban’s downfall from the start in thinking there is some way to do that and when he couldn’t find it, he gave up on the draft all together.
(06-07-2022, 08:35 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]You seem to be asking for/demanding an easy, fool-proof way to cheat the draft. I think that’s been Cuban’s downfall from the start in thinking there is some way to do that and when he couldn’t find it, he gave up on the draft all together.
I dont know.
Just seems like there is so much talk about playoff basketball and one trick ponies getting played off the court. It would seem as though drafting the biggest 2way player is a sound game plan if the guys with traits that fit your teams schemes needs that you prefer are not available.
Personally...I think trading for players or trying to lure players in FA seems to be a constant overpay proposition. Just doesnt seem like a great long term plan. Drafting players that are reasonable on both ends that can be used in future trades seems more bulletproof than constant overpaying. Height is important...but 6'10 with very unpolished skills and hoping you can coach them up seems like an end game of having a cupboard full of flawed players....but tall.
Im just saying go after basketball players. Players that look like they were born with a ball in their hands....even if they are a few inches shorter. Go after those guys instead of projects.
I get it...you have to take risks if youre not a lottery team. The NBA gets 10 tall 2way guys a year and the drop off after that is significant. Eventually teams are loaded with tall 2ways and drafting shorter ones doesnt help when the competition has lotto picked tall 2ways.
(06-07-2022, 08:56 AM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: [ -> ]I dont know.
Just seems like there is so much talk about playoff basketball and one trick ponies getting played off the court. It would seem as though drafting the biggest 2way player is a sound game plan if the guys with traits that fit your teams schemes needs that you prefer are not available.
Personally...I think trading for players or trying to lure players in FA seems to be a constant overpay proposition. Just doesnt seem like a great long term plan. Drafting players that are reasonable on both ends that can be used in future trades seems more bulletproof than constant overpaying. Height is important...but 6'10 with very unpolished skills and hoping you can coach them up seems like an end game of having a cupboard full of flawed players....but tall.
Im just saying go after basketball players. Players that look like they were born with a ball in their hands....even if they are a few inches shorter. Go after those guys instead of projects.
I get it...you have to take risks if youre not a lottery team. The NBA gets 10 tall 2way guys a year and the drop off after that is significant. Eventually teams are loaded with tall 2ways and drafting shorter ones doesnt help when the competition has lotto picked tall 2ways.
I think you find talent no matter where it comes from (Draft, FA or Trades). The balanced approach to roster building is the best way to go. We’ve been a team that de-values the drafting aspect to team building and it shows on our roster. Can’t fix the past, only the present and future.
Either way, the “simple” solutions you have been proposing may or may not have been discussed in FOs around the league. Every FO handles the draft the way they believe is the best way for their team after those discussions and I don’t think it’s as cut and dry as what you have been saying.
Pretty sold on Jalen Williams at this point.
(06-07-2022, 10:42 AM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sold on Jalen Williams at this point.
I like him as well. Talk to me about what you see and what you like and also any concerns you have. Interested in your opinion.
(06-06-2022, 11:32 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]A few thoughts on Liddell from me:
1) I have indeed been pushing him as a "small ball center" candidate. When I use that language I am NOT suggesting him in that role full-time. I classify him as a wing as well. I can imagine him in the long run splitting time between those, similar to Draymond Green.
2) He is undersized as a center (hence the nomenclature of "small ball center"). But I do not think Liddell is undersized as a wing at all. He has NBA ready strength and athleticism (ELITE). That alone makes him immediately play "bigger" than he is. If you have length and no strength it often doesn't matter because you get bumped into a position where you can no longer use your length as an advantage. Liddell will not be "displaced" easily and therefore plays "bigger" than he is.
3) I think Liddell is the perfect candidate for a team wanting to play an "all switching" defense. In that scenario who the "center" is doesn't even matter. Liddell in my opinion fits perfectly into that and is very capable of defending 1-5 (though yes he will be undersized against many 5s, but in an "all switching" defense you are already accepting that fate).
Well said. Liddell would function as a match-up SF/PF/C hybrid. You want to punish a stiff big, he can drag him all over the floor on offense and on defense he takes advantage of the #1 NBA rule "bigger dude was mean to me". Body up, handcheck and then flop, when the big guys tries to go through you.
Not sure he has the footspeed and awareness to guard PG/SG or even smaller SF, but bigger SF to C for a 10-15 minute stint should be possible.
If you want to play big by committee Liddell, Koloko and Kleber offer everything you need. Obviously whether the rookies will get there is a different question, but on paper that is exactly the kind of three-headed monster you want in the modern NBA.
It´s the fault of the old MBT that we do not have this steady stream of Pooles, Kumingas, Moodys and Wisemans coming through and they might take two years to develop, but you got to start at some point. Luka will enter his prime in 3-4 years, so it´s the perfect time to load up on young prospects that can develop on the same timeline and not waste rosterspots on guys like Burke, Boban, Pinson, Powell, Brown. It´s also not enough to have just one every year. Realistically you want two picks every year on average, so that in a two year window (four picks), you find one player. 25% seems a fair strike rate.
(06-07-2022, 10:56 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I like him as well. Talk to me about what you see and what you like and also any concerns you have. Interested in your opinion.
I feel that he is a legit two way player. He uses his length really well on defense to create turnovers and has the size and mobility to fit right into our switching scheme. His shot seems solid and despite not being a position to take a lot of catch and shoot threes, he looks confident in the scenarios where that is the case. What stood out the most to me is his playmaking. He makes the big hook skip pass out of the pick and roll on a regular basis and that is a play you absolutely have to be able to make in the nba if you want the ball in your hands. He would easily fill our need for depth at wing and potentially more.
I'm with you that Eason would be perfect for what we're trying to do and I'm also very high on Liddell but in terms of someone I think has a much more legitimate chance of being there at 26, Williams is my guy. Most of the other wings in that area seem more of spot up shooters (Jaden Hardy and such) and we have plenty of that. I need to look at some of the other tapes still but Williams' decision making seemed very high level.
Oh and in terms of Jalen Williams concerns, I think the only one I had was the level of competition he's played against so far and whether or not he can defend against high end athletes night in and night out. All in all though he seemed very impressive, not just his college tape but his combine workouts as well.
Braun has relatively short arms. That’s a knock.
(06-07-2022, 06:57 PM)VintagePejav2 Wrote: [ -> ]Braun has relatively short arms. That’s a knock.
Yep, that's a knock.
But he's averaging one block and one steal per game with those arms. I'm sure wingspan was probably a bigger knock on Brunson when he was drafted. JB never averaged one steal a game during any season at Villanova.
"Highlights...we talkin' bout highlights, man" - A. Iverson
Yo...is it me...or is Braun not a chump on pump fakes? His defense seems sound as far as watching highlights. Love that his highlight I watched didnt have him biting on pump fakes.
That already makes me like him if its not just a highlights pump fake. Ha...see what I did there.
So...can anyone shed light on what Braun's emotional competitiveness can do for our already solid chemistry team? He seems very engaged like an Alex Caruso whom I drool over as far as being a defender and winner. He is taller and considered a guard like Caruso....am I getting ahead of myself here?
Braun is interesting. His highlights were against Big schools for the most part it seemed. He seems like he could be a spark emotionally and moral wise if he makes plays being vocal and all...and seems to be a 2way guy.
Should I find and old sock or not is the question?
Can anyone shed light on if EJ Liddell was asked to do too much offensively? Was he possibly considered a stand out player that felt the need to "make something happen" offensively because his team lacked a star offensively(i know nothing about Ohio States team)?
Because the main EJ Liddell breakdown I watched...I was not impressed with his Midrange or trying to create at all. He seemed to force stuff that ended up looking awful. Of course this was on the "needs work" part of his scout review. I didnt pay attention to shot clock or score or quarter or anything....but some of those clips were not very encouraging.
Im sure he has a very good chance of being a defender and shooter and decent player if not asked to do too much offensively.