Please dont draft Stanley Johnson

[Billl]

I don't think there is much question about Johnson having legit size to play the 3. It would help his stock if he was an inch or 2 taller, but the last thing I'm worried about his guys backing him down because he's "undersized".

[zeebneeb]

What is this thread? Some of the names suggested by the op are not #8 picks. You trade down if you want them.

Any of the three sf winslow, mario, johnson (my preference in order) will fit the team fine.

Pistons are not a short team, and drummond is massive, going there to say we are undersized is absurd.

Draft a sf, sign/trade for a pf. Kaminsky would be a disaster, and portis? Cmon already. That guy is going to be a laaaate 1st rounder, early 2nd round pick.

[ImHeisenberg]

U cant teach size

I remember Joe Dumars saying that exact same thing when he took Darko over Carmello, Wade & Bosh.

I'm not a huge Johnson fan. Most of your concerns have a lot of validity. But, where the Pistons are in the draft, Johnson is a reasonable target for them. Whether I agree with you or not doesn't amount to anything. Stan Van Gundy will be making the pick in June, not anyone on this board.

[ImHeisenberg]

I don't think there is much question about Johnson having legit size to play the 3. It would help his stock if he was an inch or 2 taller, but the last thing I'm worried about his guys backing him down because he's "undersized".

An inch of reach can make a difference on a really close play. But, a couple more inches on top of your head won't. At about 6'7, he'll have a fine view of the court. Johnson is just getting picked apart. It's going to be hilarious if Detroit drafts him and everyone will be debating about why he can be great.

[MotownMadness]

I still want Johnson, Defense is what I care about #1 and his potential can be a lockdown defender at multiple positions.

[Notanoob]

I've cooled considerably on Johnson.

Starting with the concerns of this thread, his physical dimensions just aren't those of a future elite defender like Leonard, Butler or Green.

His athleticism was overstated. Based on his poor finishing numbers and low blocks numbers, he does not appear to be a fantastic vertical athlete, and honestly his quickness is nothing special at SF. His only standout characteristic is his strength, but that's probably the worst thing to stand out in, as that advantage is minimized the most in the NBA when you're facing guys who's only job is to be in awesome shape and ball, rather than future car salesmen. Players who rely on strength tend not to transition beautifully to the NBA, like Rodney Stuckey, to give an example we're all familiar with.

His shot is a bit flat, and his release isn't that quick. He projects as only an average jump shooter in the NBA just going by the numbers. Source:
http://nyloncalculus.com/wp-content/upl ... t-Proj.png

His slashing game was not fantastic in college. Despite his strength advantage, he did not actually make his own looks at the rim often, and did not finish well. He should be able to just out-muscle guys to the rim at the college level. Instead, he's near the bottom of this class of wings in terms of unassisted rim field goals per40. Source:
http://deanondraft.com/2015/04/17/which ... /#comments

Passing-wise, I didn't think that he had great instincts, and it turns out he's got a pretty poor A/To ratio, nearly as bad as Kelly Oubre, who has absolutely zero feel for the game.

He does have quick hands and did generate steals, but you want long and fast guys who can stay in front of their man and easily contest their shots, and Johnson's tools limit him in this regard from being a very good defender. Instincts and intensity ensure he'll be solid, but he's not some future lock-down guy.

All in all he's a very uninspiring prospect. I'd rather take Portis with our first round pick.

[Kilo]

I'll be happy with whomever we end up with as long as it's not Frank Kaminsky.

Okafor
Towns
Russell
Mudiay
Cauley Stein
Winslow
Hezonja
Johnson

I don't think Stan will consider Porzingis because he's raw and Stan is on a five year contract, and isn't going to give away years to development. NBA is a young mans league and Dre/Jackson/KCP's window is opening now and it's time to start winning.

[JE1998]

What is this thread? Some of the names suggested by the op are not #8 picks. You trade down if you want them.

Any of the three sf winslow, mario, johnson (my preference in order) will fit the team fine.

Pistons are not a short team, and drummond is massive, going there to say we are undersized is absurd.

Draft a sf, sign/trade for a pf. Kaminsky would be a disaster, and portis? Cmon already. That guy is going to be a laaaate 1st rounder, early 2nd round pick.

Why do u think Portis will be a late1st rounder? Becoz some mock drafts think so?

In fact his stock is going up, maybe in the late lottery range already. He will surprise many of people here because teams know he is less of a question mark compared to many "lottery projected prospects"

Looking at Portis' game, he is more well-rounded and younger than Kaminsky; and isn't an injury-risk like Myles Turner.

U can't trade down for Portis just because the mock drafts think so. Teams in our range should be looking at Portis already and he is a better prospect than Stanley Johnson, Myles Turner and Kaminsky u.... And I don't care what Chad Ford's big board suggest

We need a SF, but the SFs in this draft have major major weakensses and problems. Nothing is guaranteed and picking Stanley Johnson who is small (6'6") , who can't shoot the ball and can't pass well ... Is not something we need. We are desperate for a SF, i understand... but get a SF from FA or via trade...draft isn't the only way

[JE1998]

U cant teach size

I remember Joe Dumars saying that exact same thing when he took Darko over Carmello, Wade & Bosh.

I'm not a huge Johnson fan. Most of your concerns have a lot of validity. But, where the Pistons are in the draft, Johnson is a reasonable target for them. Whether I agree with you or not doesn't amount to anything. Stan Van Gundy will be making the pick in June, not anyone on this board.

Where the Pistons are in the draft, there are many players in the same tier as Stanley Johnson

Take the mock drafts and Chad Ford big board as a grain of salt for a minute. U realize players like Turner, Booker, Kaninsky and Portis are all in the same tier as Stanley Johnson. They all have different strengths and weaknesses but what Stanley Johnson can't bring is length, outside shooting and elite passing.

Other than Stanley is listed as SF, a position where we desperately need addition (not necessarily from Draft tho), there is nothing in his game that suits us. What if his defense can't tranlate in NBA? He basically has nothing

I'd take Portis becoz he is a good fit. I don't care where he is projected becoz he will for sure have a better pro career than Stanley Johnson and isn't that of a question mark. Has elite size, has rebounding and good shooting for a PF, a good complement to Drummond

Sometimes I do wonder why "experts" put Kaminsky and Myles Turner ahead of Portis... Bribed? Lol

[Blkbrd671]

Anyone taking this troll account seriously ? Its obvious, that someone who wants another player and wants to throw salt on johnson,just so they have "another user" that agrees.

You cant argue that johnson has the size and game to fit in here.

Nothing to see here.

i was thinking Kiristen19 or its Bobby Portis

[joedumars1]

LOL, nothing in Stanleys game that is suited for us? His D isn't going to tranlate? Dude you're killing this guy, why would his D not translate he is closer to 6'7" than 6'6", he has a 6'11" Wingspan and weight 240 freaking pounds, who is going to push him around beside bron? He will be able to get better at shooting, driving, and passing in the NBA.

I just watched Portis, I wouldn't mind him, but around 15-20. It seems his Offense can improve in the NBA, has a decent jumper, only took thirty 3's last year at a bad % tho, not sure that will improve, he has to improve his back to the basket game, good O rebounder.

He can probably guard stretch fours, but not sure he will ever be able to guard the back to the Basket 4's who will try to back him down, not that good of D rebounder (we don't really need that with Dre tho, but it wouldn't hurt)

I for sure see more upisde to Stanley, but Portis looks like he will be a good pro.

This draft just seems to be looking better and better.

[kurtis48239]

Anyone taking this troll account seriously ? Its obvious, that someone who wants another player and wants to throw salt on johnson,just so they have "another user" that agrees.

You cant argue that johnson has the size and game to fit in here.

Nothing to see here.

i was thinking Kiristen19 or its Bobby Portis

I swear I was thinking maker,its a nice subtle job of trolling,framed like he would make his arguements,saying things that are so far from the truth and the complete opposite.

But then I relized it probably wasant,maker might be a troll 99% of the time,but he dosent try and cover it up,he wears it proudly.

[zeebneeb]

What is this thread? Some of the names suggested by the op are not #8 picks. You trade down if you want them.

Any of the three sf winslow, mario, johnson (my preference in order) will fit the team fine.

Pistons are not a short team, and drummond is massive, going there to say we are undersized is absurd.

Draft a sf, sign/trade for a pf. Kaminsky would be a disaster, and portis? Cmon already. That guy is going to be a laaaate 1st rounder, early 2nd round pick.

Why do u think Portis will be a late1st rounder? Becoz some mock drafts think so?

In fact his stock is going up, maybe in the late lottery range already. He will surprise many of people here because teams know he is less of a question mark compared to many "lottery projected prospects"

Looking at Portis' game, he is more well-rounded and younger than Kaminsky; and isn't an injury-risk like Myles Turner.

U can't trade down for Portis just because the mock drafts think so. Teams in our range should be looking at Portis already and he is a better prospect than Stanley Johnson, Myles Turner and Kaminsky u.... And I don't care what Chad Ford's big board suggest

We need a SF, but the SFs in this draft have major major weakensses and problems. Nothing is guaranteed and picking Stanley Johnson who is small (6'6") , who can't shoot the ball and can't pass well ... Is not something we need. We are desperate for a SF, i understand... but get a SF from FA or via trade...draft isn't the only way

becoz? It's that much harder to type because?

Portis, no matter what you say about him, ever, is not a lottery pick. In any draft.

This isn't up for debate. It would be, one of the worst 8 picks ever. His skill set is beyond raw, and at best, his skill set is that of a rotation player, but not someone you take a chance at, with the #8 pick. You can say "he is skyrocketing" as many times as you think it will help, but he hasnt "skyrocketed" on anyone's draft board, let alone fords. (Who I haven't even seen until you bring it up in every thread you possibly can) I watched Alot of film on this guy, and nothing, nothing screams even #15 to me. no diamond in the rough vibes from any part of his game, at all.

Could become part of a rotation, maybe even a fringe starter, NOT someone you take a chance on, at #8.

[sc8581]

LOL, nothing in Stanleys game that is suited for us? His D isn't going to tranlate? Dude you're killing this guy, why would his D not translate he is closer to 6'7" than 6'6", he has a 6'11" Wingspan and weight 240 freaking pounds, who is going to push him around beside bron? He will be able to get better at shooting, driving, and passing in the NBA.

I just watched Portis, I wouldn't mind him, but around 15-20. It seems his Offense can improve in the NBA, has a decent jumper, only took thirty 3's last year at a bad % tho, not sure that will improve, he has to improve his back to the basket game, good O rebounder.

He can probably guard stretch fours, but not sure he will ever be able to guard the back to the Basket 4's who will try to back him down, not that good of D rebounder (we don't really need that with Dre tho, but it wouldn't hurt)

I for sure see more upisde to Stanley, but Portis looks like he will be a good pro.

This draft just seems to be looking better and better.

Portis shot 46.7% from 3 last year bruh

[Blkbrd671]

Anyone taking this troll account seriously ? Its obvious, that someone who wants another player and wants to throw salt on johnson,just so they have "another user" that agrees.

You cant argue that johnson has the size and game to fit in here.

Nothing to see here.

i was thinking Kiristen19 or its Bobby Portis

I swear I was thinking maker,its a nice subtle job of trolling,framed like he would make his arguements,saying things that are so far from the truth and the complete opposite.

But then I relized it probably wasant,maker might be a troll 99% of the time,but he dosent try and cover it up,he wears it proudly.

may have been banned

[joedumars1]

LOL, nothing in Stanleys game that is suited for us? His D isn't going to tranlate? Dude you're killing this guy, why would his D not translate he is closer to 6'7" than 6'6", he has a 6'11" Wingspan and weight 240 freaking pounds, who is going to push him around beside bron? He will be able to get better at shooting, driving, and passing in the NBA.

I just watched Portis, I wouldn't mind him, but around 15-20. It seems his Offense can improve in the NBA, has a decent jumper, only took thirty 3's last year at a bad % tho, not sure that will improve, he has to improve his back to the basket game, good O rebounder.

He can probably guard stretch fours, but not sure he will ever be able to guard the back to the Basket 4's who will try to back him down, not that good of D rebounder (we don't really need that with Dre tho, but it wouldn't hurt)

I for sure see more upisde to Stanley, but Portis looks like he will be a good pro.

This draft just seems to be looking better and better.

Portis shot 46.7% from 3 last year bruh

My bad got confused with the year before .273% on 33 attemps, only 30 attempts last year, to small a sample size, 75-100 would be nice. It would probably take him 5 plus years to get a good one, if he ever does, took Millsap 6-7 years.

[sc8581]

LOL, nothing in Stanleys game that is suited for us? His D isn't going to tranlate? Dude you're killing this guy, why would his D not translate he is closer to 6'7" than 6'6", he has a 6'11" Wingspan and weight 240 freaking pounds, who is going to push him around beside bron? He will be able to get better at shooting, driving, and passing in the NBA.

I just watched Portis, I wouldn't mind him, but around 15-20. It seems his Offense can improve in the NBA, has a decent jumper, only took thirty 3's last year at a bad % tho, not sure that will improve, he has to improve his back to the basket game, good O rebounder.

He can probably guard stretch fours, but not sure he will ever be able to guard the back to the Basket 4's who will try to back him down, not that good of D rebounder (we don't really need that with Dre tho, but it wouldn't hurt)

I for sure see more upisde to Stanley, but Portis looks like he will be a good pro.

This draft just seems to be looking better and better.

Portis shot 46.7% from 3 last year bruh

My bad got confused with the year before .273% on 33 attemps, only 30 attempts last year, to small a sample size, 75-100 would be nice. It would probably take him 5 plus years to get a good one, if he ever does, took Millsap 6-7 years.

So Johnson shot below average with awful form and he will be fine but Portis shoots 46.7% from deep and good from mid-range with nice form but it will take him 6-7 years to shoot well? Give it up already. What does Millsap have to do with Portis?

[zeebneeb]

What does portis have to do with anything? If he is picked at 8, people will either wonder if svg saw something special, or if he's insane.

Most will go with insane. Hell, I would pick frank over portis, and I am not a frank fan, AT ALL.

[joedumars1]

Portis shot 46.7% from 3 last year bruh

My bad got confused with the year before .273% on 33 attemps, only 30 attempts last year, to small a sample size, 75-100 would be nice. It would probably take him 5 plus years to get a good one, if he ever does, took Millsap 6-7 years.

So Johnson shot below average with awful form and he will be fine but Portis shoots 46.7% from deep and good from mid-range with nice form but it will take him 6-7 years to shoot well? Give it up already. What does Millsap have to do with Portis?

Were we not talking about 3pt range? I think he will be a good mid-range shooter, probably rite out the gate. Stanley shot 53 more total three's at .371%, at 3.1 per game, a bigger sample size, so I believe he will be able to improve, we don't know that with Portis, he shot 63 total, at .365% not bad, only .9 attempts per game tho. I brought up Millsap because it took him 5-7 years to get a decent 3 point shot. Stanley is 2 years younger than Portis too

[sc8581]

My bad got confused with the year before .273% on 33 attemps, only 30 attempts last year, to small a sample size, 75-100 would be nice. It would probably take him 5 plus years to get a good one, if he ever does, took Millsap 6-7 years.

So Johnson shot below average with awful form and he will be fine but Portis shoots 46.7% from deep and good from mid-range with nice form but it will take him 6-7 years to shoot well? Give it up already. What does Millsap have to do with Portis?

Were we not talking about 3pt range? I think he will be a good mid-range shooter, probably rite out the gate. Stanley shot 53 more total three's at .371%, at 3.1 per game, a bigger sample size, so I believe he will be able to improve, we don't know that with Portis, he shot 63 total, at .365% not bad, only .9 attempts per game tho. I brought up Millsap because it took him 5-7 years to get a decent 3 point shot. Stanley is 2 years younger than Portis too

It took the team Millsap was on that long to give him the opportunity to take those shots, that doesn't mean he couldn't make them. Why are you using Millsap as a comparison anyway?