KC: Bulls Interested in Drafting Kris Dunn

[Shill]

I'm off Dunn.

He's a four year guy that didn't dominate in college and there isn't a track record of those guys doing much in the NBA.

Redick, Fredette, Lillard, McCollum, McDermott... they all put up monster numbers as seniors. Even Buckets put up a 24 PER as a junior, and on a much lower usage% than Dunn.

I just don't see a precedent for someone with his profile becoming a high-level starter let alone a star. This draft is weak enough that I'd give him a look if lucked our way into the top 3, but parting with an asset to trade up seems like a reach to me.

I have these same concerns. He has obvious skills, but are there any examples of non-dominant seniors becoming stars in the NBA?

I honestly can't think of a single one.

Frankly I can't remember the last time a non-dominant senior was taken in the lottery, let alone the top 5. And I'm confused as to why an exception should be made for Dunn. The time he missed due to injury? That's not very convincing.

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

I have these same concerns. He has obvious skills, but are there any examples of non-dominant seniors becoming stars in the NBA?

I honestly can't think of a single one.

Frankly I can't remember the last time a non-dominant senior was taken in the lottery, let alone the top 5. And I'm confused as to why an exception should be made for Dunn. The time he missed due to injury? That's not very convincing.

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

[Lauri_Legend]

First of all, I suck at math. What are the odds Bulls land a top 5 pick or top 10 pick in the draft?

I know it's 0.5% to land top pick and 1.8% chance to land top 3. Bulls have 5 lottery balls out of a total 100. Can't do math. Help. Please. Thanks!

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

First of all, I suck at math. What are the odds Bulls land a top 5 pick or top 10 pick in the draft?

I know it's 0.5% to land top pick and 1.8% chance to land top 3. Bulls have 5 lottery balls out of a total 100. Can't do math. Help. Please. Thanks!

They can't get 4-10. They either stay at 14 or jump into the Top 3.

[Lauri_Legend]

First of all, I suck at math. What are the odds Bulls land a top 5 pick or top 10 pick in the draft?

I know it's 0.5% to land top pick and 1.8% chance to land top 3. Bulls have 5 lottery balls out of a total 100. Can't do math. Help. Please. Thanks!

They can't get 4-10. They either stay at 14 or jump into the Top 3.

So they can't get top 10 unless it's top 3?

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

First of all, I suck at math. What are the odds Bulls land a top 5 pick or top 10 pick in the draft?

I know it's 0.5% to land top pick and 1.8% chance to land top 3. Bulls have 5 lottery balls out of a total 100. Can't do math. Help. Please. Thanks!

They can't get 4-10. They either stay at 14 or jump into the Top 3.

So they can't get top 10 unless it's top 3?

Yep.

[nitetrain8603]

I honestly can't think of a single one.

Frankly I can't remember the last time a non-dominant senior was taken in the lottery, let alone the top 5. And I'm confused as to why an exception should be made for Dunn. The time he missed due to injury? That's not very convincing.

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

OK, tell me who was he supposed to dominate with at Providence. He's a PG who excels defensively and playmaking, but who did he have on his squad who he could consistently count on to help him out.

Mike Beasley dominated his freshman year and he's struggling to stay in the NBA. Drummond and DeAndre, while not seniors, failed to grasp the college game completely. That's why you have to evaluate the player and not just the stats.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

OK, tell me who was he supposed to dominate with at Providence. He's a PG who excels defensively and playmaking, but who did he have on his squad who he could consistently count on to help him out.

Mike Beasley dominated his freshman year and he's struggling to stay in the NBA. Drummond and DeAndre, while not seniors, failed to grasp the college game completely. That's why you have to evaluate the player and not just the stats.

Who was he supposed to dominate WITH? I don't think that's how dominance works. If anything, having bad teammates was an opportunity to put up gaudy stats on high usage.

In Beasley's case, yeah -- you do have guys who bust in the NBA after dominating in college. Stats aren't the end all be all. You have to evaluate the player. But I'm asking for precedent of four-year guys who didn't put up elite stats in college becoming special players in the NBA. You just don't see if often, if ever.

Drummond and DeAndre were freshmen when they came out, so I don't see how they apply here.

[Chi town]

Westbrook wasn't dominant. I know he was younger.

Dunn will be really good. He's worth a trade up if it's only Portis and Sac pick. I think guys will convince themselves Jackson is an awesome PG when everyone else is taken.

[Chi town]

If we can get Dunn with giving up Rose I be all for doing the trade. If we give up assets I don't like it that much.

That's the dream case scenario. Rose and 14 for Sixers 2nd top 5 pick.

[Shill]

I honestly can't think of a single one.

Frankly I can't remember the last time a non-dominant senior was taken in the lottery, let alone the top 5. And I'm confused as to why an exception should be made for Dunn. The time he missed due to injury? That's not very convincing.

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

But Dunn isn't a terrible shooter. That just isn't his strength.

And his college numbers are strong (last two years):

16 pts 8 asts 6 rebs 3 stls
16 pts 6 asts 5 rebs 3 stls

He's a stat stuffer with good size & length and elite athleticism.

BTW what's "killing it" in your book? Seems like he could've jacked 20 shots a game and put up gaudy scoring numbers, but chose not to. He only took about 12 shots a game.




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[realEAST]

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

OK, tell me who was he supposed to dominate with at Providence. He's a PG who excels defensively and playmaking, but who did he have on his squad who he could consistently count on to help him out.

Mike Beasley dominated his freshman year and he's struggling to stay in the NBA. Drummond and DeAndre, while not seniors, failed to grasp the college game completely. That's why you have to evaluate the player and not just the stats.

Who was he supposed to dominate WITH? I don't think that's how dominance works. If anything, having bad teammates was an opportunity to put up gaudy stats on high usage.

In Beasley's case, yeah -- you do have guys who bust in the NBA after dominating in college. Stats aren't the end all be all. You have to evaluate the player. But I'm asking for precedent of four-year guys who didn't put up elite stats in college becoming special players in the NBA. You just don't see if often, if ever.

Drummond and DeAndre were freshmen when they came out, so I don't see how they apply here.

This was what really put me off at first - there is narrative that he hadn't had good teammates, yet he doesn't have much better numbers per40 than Baldwin, while using every third possession (Baldwin's at 25%) on the team.
Then, on the other hand, he at least had Bentil, who is now pushing for 1st round pick, doing very well on combine. Dunn didn't do much during the season obviously to put him in the spotlight. Elite playmaker? Making others better? And yet, he is 22 and senior.

I'd like to compare him to Hield - better shooter, yet not that athletic. He dragged his team to final, and yes some may claim he is better suited for NCAA than Dunn, but if you are that good, you are going to dominate. Dunn didn't, while having almost ideal sidekick. Hied did it basically by himself. That's dominance.

He may have lesser of career due to his lack of elite athleticism, but I'd always be more confident drafting him than Dunn.
Rose, Wall, Westbrook type of players IMO could either be elite or not that good. There isn't 2nd tier to this guys, unless you'd consider Evans something like that, and be happy with it (he had specific career). There's Mudiay too, but he is only 19, and had really nice 2nd part of the season.

EDIT: And that's the thing, they were all 19 when entering the league, while he is 22, having worse season than they had as freshmans. That's potential, that's difference, in my opinion, not just athleticism, where too he is very good, but not at aforementioned players level.

[R3AL1TY]

You don't have to be very dominant in college to turn out to be a good or great NBA player IMO. Westbrook mentioned above is a good example. You also had guys like Bledsoe and Rondo that weren't dominant in college. To me Dunn is a solid two way player that may get even better. He mainly needs to work on not turning over the ball. But I wonder about his injury history a little. It made his numbers not improve by much for his age.

[Benedict Miller]

You don't have to be very dominant in college to turn out to be a good or great NBA player IMO. Westbrook mentioned above is a good example. You also had guys like Bledsoe and Rondo that weren't dominant in college. To me Dunn is a solid two way player that may get even better. He mainly needs to work on not turning over the ball. But I wonder about his injury history a little. It made his numbers not improve by much for his age.

They were also 2-3 years younger than Dunn before they came out.

[R3AL1TY]

You don't have to be very dominant in college to turn out to be a good or great NBA player IMO. Westbrook mentioned above is a good example. You also had guys like Bledsoe and Rondo that weren't dominant in college. To me Dunn is a solid two way player that may get even better. He mainly needs to work on not turning over the ball. But I wonder about his injury history a little. It made his numbers not improve by much for his age.

They were also 2-3 years younger than Dunn before they came out.

True...which made me wonder with him missing time early on due to injuries did his offense remain about the same because of it.

[realEAST]

You don't have to be very dominant in college to turn out to be a good or great NBA player IMO. Westbrook mentioned above is a good example. You also had guys like Bledsoe and Rondo that weren't dominant in college. To me Dunn is a solid two way player that may get even better. He mainly needs to work on not turning over the ball. But I wonder about his injury history a little. It made his numbers not improve by much for his age.

They were also 2-3 years younger than Dunn before they came out.

True...which made me wonder with him missing time early on due to injuries did his offense remain about the same because of it.

Dunn improved greatly last season, and to lesser extent this one. Sure, he'll improve still, but I wouldn't expect any major leaps.

[Axl Rose]

i haven't seen Dunn play but i do really like his measurements and that his athletic ability and defensive potential are positives.

the argument seems to be that Dunn wont be a star, but do the naysayers think he'll be a good NBA player at all?

because i don't value anybody this roster enough (besides Butler) where i wouldn't trade them for a guy that can put up maybe 17-8 give or take and play good d on PG's and SG's...thats the type of players we need

[R3AL1TY]

They were also 2-3 years younger than Dunn before they came out.

True...which made me wonder with him missing time early on due to injuries did his offense remain about the same because of it.

Dunn improved greatly last season, and to lesser extent this one. Sure, he'll improve still, but I wouldn't expect any major leaps.

Last season was a good bounce back year for him since he was coming off an injury. But this season, his numbers look about the same even though it's still decent.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Depends on how you define "dominant."

I'm sure there are plenty of seniors throughout the years that didn't put up video game numbers in college. I think Dunn is partly being dinged for playing at Providence instead of UNC or some other blue blood.

Grant Hill averaged 17-7-5 his Senior year. I think the wide-open NBA game is more suited for Dunn's style.

I'm gonna guess not many players have averaged 17-7-5 in college history (while throwing in 2 stls and 1 blk to boot). Grant Hill wasn't a dominant scorer, but there's no doubt he was 'special.' Any other examples? Asking in earnest.

I don't hold Providence against Dunn. I hold not absolutely killing it at Providence against him.

When people say PLAYER A will do better in the wide-open NBA game, more often than not they mean PLAYER A can't shoot and needs others to create space for them. So yeah, maybe that guy does better in the NBA, but his value is still limited by a lack of shooting.

But Dunn isn't a terrible shooter. That just isn't his strength.

And his college numbers are strong (last two years):

16 pts 8 asts 6 rebs 3 stls
16 pts 6 asts 5 rebs 3 stls

He's a stat stuffer with good size & length and elite athleticism.

BTW what's "killing it" in your book? Seems like he could've jacked 20 shots a game and put up gaudy scoring numbers, but chose not to. He only took about 12 shots a game.

Those raw stats belie his mediocre efficiency (TS% and A/T ratio). When I have more time I'll compare Dunn's stats with those of seniors taken in the lottery. He doesn't come out great.

[qianlong]

You don't have to be very dominant in college to turn out to be a good or great NBA player IMO. Westbrook mentioned above is a good example. You also had guys like Bledsoe and Rondo that weren't dominant in college. To me Dunn is a solid two way player that may get even better. He mainly needs to work on not turning over the ball. But I wonder about his injury history a little. It made his numbers not improve by much for his age.

They were also 2-3 years younger than Dunn before they came out.

Just to highlight, Rose was having his MVP season at the same age.

If he was there at 14 or with low assets you should probably take him, but compare him to Baldwin. He is a lesser athlete, but still a good defender and a much better shooter. He could play well with Jimmy he could play well with Rose, he could play between Rose and Jimmy and spread the floor for both of them.
He also has the ability to get to the line that in general translates well.

Also there has been a trend on high prospect big man that disappoint as freshman and then show good signs in the NBA. Drummond, Jordan, and this year Turner. I would not consider the same trend for PG.