2024 NBA Draft Thread

[FarBeyondDriven]

Edey wouldn't have been drafted last year, and now he's being talked about by some people as a lottery pick. This year is absolute dog bleep. As a scout I'm advising teams to offload their pics.

nobody worth listening to is talking about Edey as a lottery "pick". If it is such a weak draft class why are so many teams tanking? The Spurs and Wizards tanked from jump. It's not like they didn't have all the information about who was going to be in the draft once the season started. Several teams have started tanking in earnest in the 2nd half to make sure they have a chance at getting lottery picks. If it's such a weak draft class, why would they do that?

No idea why teams are tanking. Maybe they think they can trick a dumb team into trading for their pick if it lands top 3.

but why would a team trade up for a top 3 pick in a supposed weak draft? Makes zero sense. No team is that dumb

[FarBeyondDriven]

Yeah, Matas' entire upside is based on triple threat stuff and back to the basket stuff. He has to be an extremely high usage guy to make up for how bad his defense is and that's clearly what he wants to do. The "plug and play" and "secondary playmaker" stuff feels like pure fantasy. He's an iso scorer only who is currently bad at iso scoring because his tools are bad and his jumpshot is bad.

Have you even watched him play? He's almost exclusively an off-ball 3 and D wing with the ability to drive on closeouts and on occasion ISO against mismatches. I've also seen plenty of evidence that he has promise as a defender with a knack for blocking shots. His issue at Ignite is that he is likely a 3/4 like Keegan Murray, Harrison Barnes, Tatum and had trouble (like they do) staying in front of quicker wings which happened a lot since he almost exclusively played the 3. If he plays the 4 this won't be as much of an issue. He'll need to put on muscle to be able to defend the 4 but it's doable. The point is, he has enough promise on defense as a switchable 3/4 it could lead to him becoming a starter which is why he's in the lottery mix. Worrying about defense from a 20 y/o 6'2" guard with a weak wingspan is one thing, worrying about it from a 19 y/o 6'9" wing with good wingspan is another. The draft is all about tools and potential for half the prospects. The others it's about filling specific needs as role players.

?

One of Matas' main issues is that... his arms are not long?

https://eurospects.com/player/matas-buzelis/

Clearly the guy with 6'10" wingspan stands a better chance of being a good defender than someone with a 6'2" wingspan. Seriously, what point are you remotely going for? Are we pretending 6'10" wingspan is bad now? It's not great, it's not elite, but it's longer than his height which means it's not negative. The opposite of negative is positive. Positive is good.

[FarBeyondDriven]

Edey wouldn't have been drafted last year, and now he's being talked about by some people as a lottery pick. This year is absolute dog bleep. As a scout I'm advising teams to offload their pics.

nobody worth listening to is talking about Edey as a lottery "pick". If it is such a weak draft class why are so many teams tanking? The Spurs and Wizards tanked from jump. It's not like they didn't have all the information about who was going to be in the draft once the season started. Several teams have started tanking in earnest in the 2nd half to make sure they have a chance at getting lottery picks. If it's such a weak draft class, why would they do that?

Because high picks have more trade value and have higher chance of producing good players than low picks do, no matter the draft? Is this a real question? Lol.

you can't be serious. If this is as bad a draft class as all of you are claiming then it stands to reason the high picks in it hold very little value and the difference between high picks and lower picks should be negligible. In GOOD drafts you can make that claim that higher picks have more trade value but you've all been quite clear that this is one of the weakest draft classes ever, like the 2013 draft class in fact, so that doesn't hold true. They couldn't give away the top picks in the 2013 class despite desperately trying. Because the consensus was, there was no elite talents at the top and you'd get a similar talent by just using your later pick Turns out the best players from that class were taken outside the top 10 (McCollum, Giannis, Gobert, Adams)

Since the 2024 class is as weak as 2013 narrative is prevalent on here and in draft guru circles, it'd stand to reason that teams would be thinking the same thing. Which should suggest a) teams wouldn't be tanking b) teams with higher picks should not expect teams with lower picks to trade up with them since there's no elite talent worth doing it for. In 2013 there were only three teams with less than 25 wins. Teams KNEW the draft class was garbage and thus, didn't tank. There are currently FIVE teams likely to end the season with less than 25 wins this season!! They're tanking for a reason folks. Open your eyes.

They don't think it's weak like you and the "experts" think. They either DO think there's talent worth drafting at the top or they know there are teams behind them that feel there's talent worth drafting at the top that will trade up for said talent. This many teams don't throw away a whole season to try and move up in a weak draft in the hopes they can trade the pick. It's just absolute nonsense. I feel embarrassed even needing to point this out. The "weak class" narrative doesn't hold up to even a tiny bit of scrutiny.

[The-Power]

but why would a team trade up for a top 3 pick in a supposed weak draft? Makes zero sense. No team is that dumb

Tanking is probably at an all-time low right now. Some teams suck, some teams are struck by injuries, and some teams without playoff aspirations cashed in on mediocre veterans at the trade deadline. But the non-playoff teams as well as the fringe play-in teams are not in a race to the bottom and instead are still winning games (more often than not at a winning pace above their season average) and playing their best players. We'd expect different behavior if the top of this draft was generally considered strong.

[NO-KG-AI]

nobody worth listening to is talking about Edey as a lottery "pick". If it is such a weak draft class why are so many teams tanking? The Spurs and Wizards tanked from jump. It's not like they didn't have all the information about who was going to be in the draft once the season started. Several teams have started tanking in earnest in the 2nd half to make sure they have a chance at getting lottery picks. If it's such a weak draft class, why would they do that?

Because high picks have more trade value and have higher chance of producing good players than low picks do, no matter the draft? Is this a real question? Lol.

you can't be serious. If this is as bad a draft class as all of you are claiming then it stands to reason the high picks in it hold very little value and the difference between high picks and lower picks should be negligible. In GOOD drafts you can make that claim that higher picks have more trade value but you've all been quite clear that this is one of the weakest draft classes ever, like the 2013 draft class in fact, so that doesn't hold true. They couldn't give away the top picks in the 2013 class despite desperately trying. Because the consensus was, there was no elite talents at the top and you'd get a similar talent by just using your later pick Turns out the best players from that class were taken outside the top 10 (McCollum, Giannis, Gobert, Adams)

Since the 2024 class is as weak as 2013 narrative is prevalent on here and in draft guru circles, it'd stand to reason that teams would be thinking the same thing. Which should suggest a) teams wouldn't be tanking b) teams with higher picks should not expect teams with lower picks to trade up with them since there's no elite talent worth doing it for. In 2013 there were only three teams with less than 25 wins. Teams KNEW the draft class was garbage and thus, didn't tank. There are currently FIVE teams likely to end the season with less than 25 wins this season!! They're tanking for a reason folks. Open your eyes.

They don't think it's weak like you and the "experts" think. They either DO think there's talent worth drafting at the top or they know there are teams behind them that feel there's talent worth drafting at the top that will trade up for said talent. This many teams don't throw away a whole season to try and move up in a weak draft in the hopes they can trade the pick. It's just absolute nonsense. I feel embarrassed even needing to point this out. The "weak class" narrative doesn't hold up to even a tiny bit of scrutiny.

I think you're trying to make a case that it's a good draft with awful logic, to fight an argument you've been on for months.

The better a draft is, the better chance you have of getting a good player deeper into it, and the less you'd need a top pick.

I don't really care if this draft is great or not(it isn't), but teams that are stockpiling assets want higher picks in every draft. They still have a lot of value, even in weaker drafts.

[JMAC3]

Yeah, Matas' entire upside is based on triple threat stuff and back to the basket stuff. He has to be an extremely high usage guy to make up for how bad his defense is and that's clearly what he wants to do. The "plug and play" and "secondary playmaker" stuff feels like pure fantasy. He's an iso scorer only who is currently bad at iso scoring because his tools are bad and his jumpshot is bad.

Have you even watched him play? He's almost exclusively an off-ball 3 and D wing with the ability to drive on closeouts and on occasion ISO against mismatches. I've also seen plenty of evidence that he has promise as a defender with a knack for blocking shots. His issue at Ignite is that he is likely a 3/4 like Keegan Murray, Harrison Barnes, Tatum and had trouble (like they do) staying in front of quicker wings which happened a lot since he almost exclusively played the 3. If he plays the 4 this won't be as much of an issue. He'll need to put on muscle to be able to defend the 4 but it's doable. The point is, he has enough promise on defense as a switchable 3/4 it could lead to him becoming a starter which is why he's in the lottery mix. Worrying about defense from a 20 y/o 6'2" guard with a weak wingspan is one thing, worrying about it from a 19 y/o 6'9" wing with good wingspan is another. The draft is all about tools and potential for half the prospects. The others it's about filling specific needs as role players.

Yes, I have watched 5-6 full games highlights. Just for instance, he has 3 isolation plays inside the first 4 clips.

Watch on YouTube

He isn't a very good shooter right now, so I think trying to play him like a Harrison Barnes, PJ Washington type is setting him up for failure. His best case scenario in my opinion is a team puts the ball in his hands like a Gordon Hayward type of role and let him develop on ball skills in PnR, posting mismatches, and playing more in the mid range game. None of that is really screaming off-ball 3D type.

Obviously the Ignite are 2-31 so this style hasn't really worked but that would be the move if taking him in the top 5 is to give him a larger role to see if he can become more efficient. Because again he is a meh athlete, meh shooter, meh defender so you are probably getting a meh player if that is the role you want him to play.

If I want a true off the ball type of guy I would rather take Cody Williams, Risacher, Walter or Saluan

[babyjax13]

Kyshawn George is growing on me a lot. I had hin as a 2025 1st when I saw him for the first time, but I think he should go top 10 this year having watched a few more games. If his body doesn't develop much he should fill a Joe Ingles role, if it does develop he can be something more.

[TheSuzerain]

Am I the only one who thinks Cam Spencer should go late 1st?

Not an exciting archetype and an older dude, but he's got game.

[babyjax13]

Am I the only one who thinks Cam Spencer should go late 1st?

Not an exciting archetype and an older dude, but he's got game.

I think there will be a few of these 5th year seniors who end up being fairly decent 2nd and 3rd stringers, but they also have a pretty big advantage over a lot of college basketball players with that much experience and more physical development. This is part of the reason why BYU tends to have decent teams - they aren't more skilled than other teams who are similarly ranked, but they have older players.

[Catchall]

Yeah, Matas' entire upside is based on triple threat stuff and back to the basket stuff. He has to be an extremely high usage guy to make up for how bad his defense is and that's clearly what he wants to do. The "plug and play" and "secondary playmaker" stuff feels like pure fantasy. He's an iso scorer only who is currently bad at iso scoring because his tools are bad and his jumpshot is bad.

Have you even watched him play? He's almost exclusively an off-ball 3 and D wing with the ability to drive on closeouts and on occasion ISO against mismatches. I've also seen plenty of evidence that he has promise as a defender with a knack for blocking shots. His issue at Ignite is that he is likely a 3/4 like Keegan Murray, Harrison Barnes, Tatum and had trouble (like they do) staying in front of quicker wings which happened a lot since he almost exclusively played the 3. If he plays the 4 this won't be as much of an issue. He'll need to put on muscle to be able to defend the 4 but it's doable. The point is, he has enough promise on defense as a switchable 3/4 it could lead to him becoming a starter which is why he's in the lottery mix. Worrying about defense from a 20 y/o 6'2" guard with a weak wingspan is one thing, worrying about it from a 19 y/o 6'9" wing with good wingspan is another. The draft is all about tools and potential for half the prospects. The others it's about filling specific needs as role players.

Yes, I have watched 5-6 full games highlights. Just for instance, he has 3 isolation plays inside the first 4 clips.

Watch on YouTube

He isn't a very good shooter right now, so I think trying to play him like a Harrison Barnes, PJ Washington type is setting him up for failure. His best case scenario in my opinion is a team puts the ball in his hands like a Gordon Hayward type of role and let him develop on ball skills in PnR, posting mismatches, and playing more in the mid range game. None of that is really screaming off-ball 3D type.

Obviously the Ignite are 2-31 so this style hasn't really worked but that would be the move if taking him in the top 5 is to give him a larger role to see if he can become more efficient. Because again he is a meh athlete, meh shooter, meh defender so you are probably getting a meh player if that is the role you want him to play.

If I want a true off the ball type of guy I would rather take Cody Williams, Risacher, Walter or Saluan

Buzelis' best attribute is probably his IQ. He makes quick, clean decisions and can secondary playmake, even if he's not finishing plays well at this stage. His ability to play on the ball at his size is appealing. I think he's a 3.

[FarBeyondDriven]

Because high picks have more trade value and have higher chance of producing good players than low picks do, no matter the draft? Is this a real question? Lol.

you can't be serious. If this is as bad a draft class as all of you are claiming then it stands to reason the high picks in it hold very little value and the difference between high picks and lower picks should be negligible. In GOOD drafts you can make that claim that higher picks have more trade value but you've all been quite clear that this is one of the weakest draft classes ever, like the 2013 draft class in fact, so that doesn't hold true. They couldn't give away the top picks in the 2013 class despite desperately trying. Because the consensus was, there was no elite talents at the top and you'd get a similar talent by just using your later pick Turns out the best players from that class were taken outside the top 10 (McCollum, Giannis, Gobert, Adams)

Since the 2024 class is as weak as 2013 narrative is prevalent on here and in draft guru circles, it'd stand to reason that teams would be thinking the same thing. Which should suggest a) teams wouldn't be tanking b) teams with higher picks should not expect teams with lower picks to trade up with them since there's no elite talent worth doing it for. In 2013 there were only three teams with less than 25 wins. Teams KNEW the draft class was garbage and thus, didn't tank. There are currently FIVE teams likely to end the season with less than 25 wins this season!! They're tanking for a reason folks. Open your eyes.

They don't think it's weak like you and the "experts" think. They either DO think there's talent worth drafting at the top or they know there are teams behind them that feel there's talent worth drafting at the top that will trade up for said talent. This many teams don't throw away a whole season to try and move up in a weak draft in the hopes they can trade the pick. It's just absolute nonsense. I feel embarrassed even needing to point this out. The "weak class" narrative doesn't hold up to even a tiny bit of scrutiny.

I think you're trying to make a case that it's a good draft with awful logic, to fight an argument you've been on for months.

The better a draft is, the better chance you have of getting a good player deeper into it, and the less you'd need a top pick.

I don't really care if this draft is great or not(it isn't), but teams that are stockpiling assets want higher picks in every draft. They still have a lot of value, even in weaker drafts.

lol right. You clearly care enough to rush to judgement before all the information is in. You and anyone else that declared this a bad draft months ago, before the tournament, before the combine and workouts, is clearly invested in that take. You responding to me fighting against the narrative that it's the weakest draft class ever is further proof of that. I'm not even saying it's necessarily good (though I'm def leaning that way) my pushback is against it being the weakest ever.

No, high picks in supposed weaker drafts DON'T have a lot of value

[FarBeyondDriven]

Have you even watched him play? He's almost exclusively an off-ball 3 and D wing with the ability to drive on closeouts and on occasion ISO against mismatches. I've also seen plenty of evidence that he has promise as a defender with a knack for blocking shots. His issue at Ignite is that he is likely a 3/4 like Keegan Murray, Harrison Barnes, Tatum and had trouble (like they do) staying in front of quicker wings which happened a lot since he almost exclusively played the 3. If he plays the 4 this won't be as much of an issue. He'll need to put on muscle to be able to defend the 4 but it's doable. The point is, he has enough promise on defense as a switchable 3/4 it could lead to him becoming a starter which is why he's in the lottery mix. Worrying about defense from a 20 y/o 6'2" guard with a weak wingspan is one thing, worrying about it from a 19 y/o 6'9" wing with good wingspan is another. The draft is all about tools and potential for half the prospects. The others it's about filling specific needs as role players.

Yes, I have watched 5-6 full games highlights. Just for instance, he has 3 isolation plays inside the first 4 clips.

Watch on YouTube

He isn't a very good shooter right now, so I think trying to play him like a Harrison Barnes, PJ Washington type is setting him up for failure. His best case scenario in my opinion is a team puts the ball in his hands like a Gordon Hayward type of role and let him develop on ball skills in PnR, posting mismatches, and playing more in the mid range game. None of that is really screaming off-ball 3D type.

Obviously the Ignite are 2-31 so this style hasn't really worked but that would be the move if taking him in the top 5 is to give him a larger role to see if he can become more efficient. Because again he is a meh athlete, meh shooter, meh defender so you are probably getting a meh player if that is the role you want him to play.

If I want a true off the ball type of guy I would rather take Cody Williams, Risacher, Walter or Saluan

Buzelis' best attribute is probably his IQ. He makes quick, clean decisions and can secondary playmake, even if he's not finishing plays well at this stage. His ability to play on the ball at his size is appealing. I think he's a 3.

well, I've watched dozens of his games half of which I watched in full live. I saw him coming off injury, with Holland, without Holland, with the ball in his hands, without, etc. etc. His shooting results weren't great. But his form looks solid. He's definitely not a "meh" athlete btw. There's enough flashes with his shooting and defense combined with his size that makes him worth drafting in the lottery. There are people that have him near the top of the draft but I'm not one of them.

[FarBeyondDriven]

Am I the only one who thinks Cam Spencer should go late 1st?

Not an exciting archetype and an older dude, but he's got game.

one of my favorite players. I wish there was a way 6'2" guys like him could be allowed to play in the NBA but it just doesn't happen. If he was 6'5" I think he could have a Grayson Allen type impact. He and Sheppard both have such incredibly high BBIQ and can shoot but simply lack the size and athleticism necessary. More so that they won't be given a chance rather than being incapable.

[babyjax13]

you can't be serious. If this is as bad a draft class as all of you are claiming then it stands to reason the high picks in it hold very little value and the difference between high picks and lower picks should be negligible. In GOOD drafts you can make that claim that higher picks have more trade value but you've all been quite clear that this is one of the weakest draft classes ever, like the 2013 draft class in fact, so that doesn't hold true. They couldn't give away the top picks in the 2013 class despite desperately trying. Because the consensus was, there was no elite talents at the top and you'd get a similar talent by just using your later pick Turns out the best players from that class were taken outside the top 10 (McCollum, Giannis, Gobert, Adams)

Since the 2024 class is as weak as 2013 narrative is prevalent on here and in draft guru circles, it'd stand to reason that teams would be thinking the same thing. Which should suggest a) teams wouldn't be tanking b) teams with higher picks should not expect teams with lower picks to trade up with them since there's no elite talent worth doing it for. In 2013 there were only three teams with less than 25 wins. Teams KNEW the draft class was garbage and thus, didn't tank. There are currently FIVE teams likely to end the season with less than 25 wins this season!! They're tanking for a reason folks. Open your eyes.

They don't think it's weak like you and the "experts" think. They either DO think there's talent worth drafting at the top or they know there are teams behind them that feel there's talent worth drafting at the top that will trade up for said talent. This many teams don't throw away a whole season to try and move up in a weak draft in the hopes they can trade the pick. It's just absolute nonsense. I feel embarrassed even needing to point this out. The "weak class" narrative doesn't hold up to even a tiny bit of scrutiny.

I think you're trying to make a case that it's a good draft with awful logic, to fight an argument you've been on for months.

The better a draft is, the better chance you have of getting a good player deeper into it, and the less you'd need a top pick.

I don't really care if this draft is great or not(it isn't), but teams that are stockpiling assets want higher picks in every draft. They still have a lot of value, even in weaker drafts.

lol right. You clearly care enough to rush to judgement before all the information is in. You and anyone else that declared this a bad draft months ago, before the tournament, before the combine and workouts, is clearly invested in that take. You responding to me fighting against the narrative that it's the weakest draft class ever is further proof of that. I'm not even saying it's necessarily good (though I'm def leaning that way) my pushback is against it being the weakest ever.

No, high picks in supposed weaker drafts DON'T have a lot of value

It's been a strawman the entire time, though. Most of us have compared it to 2013, a very bad draft that still had good players. I've seen nothing to convince me this is even an average draft, though I was hoping a player would become a clear #1 caliber prospect in this draft. You've been on this all year and it's been really bizarre because you spout this way more than talking about individual prospects. I don't think I've ever seen this forum with a lower level of discourse because a quarter of every thread is this...over and over and over and over again. The hope is that like in 2013 a guy or two (probably really raw) surprise with huge outlier development like Gobert or Giannis. I would not bet on that as the most likely scenario, but it's possible.

[TheSuzerain]

Am I the only one who thinks Cam Spencer should go late 1st?

Not an exciting archetype and an older dude, but he's got game.

one of my favorite players. I wish there was a way 6'2" guys like him could be allowed to play in the NBA but it just doesn't happen. If he was 6'5" I think he could have a Grayson Allen type impact. He and Sheppard both have such incredibly high BBIQ and can shoot but simply lack the size and athleticism necessary. More so that they won't be given a chance rather than being incapable.

He's listed at 6'4" which gave me hope he could play the 2. We not buying that?

[FarBeyondDriven]

Am I the only one who thinks Cam Spencer should go late 1st?

Not an exciting archetype and an older dude, but he's got game.

one of my favorite players. I wish there was a way 6'2" guys like him could be allowed to play in the NBA but it just doesn't happen. If he was 6'5" I think he could have a Grayson Allen type impact. He and Sheppard both have such incredibly high BBIQ and can shoot but simply lack the size and athleticism necessary. More so that they won't be given a chance rather than being incapable.

He's listed at 6'4" which gave me hope he could play the 2. We not buying that?

My guess is Spencer is 6'2" and change, Newton is 6'4", Castle is 6'5" and Karaban is 6'6" Like Sheppard, I think Spencer could run a 2nd unit as a combo guard with some spot starts. He's an excellent all-around player with an adequate handle, passing, shot and elite BBIQ. He's excellent on or off-ball. He's actually a very solid defender in college. But defense, like is the case with Sheppard, would get exposed badly in the pros. The reason why Allen has made it work is because he's pushing 6'4" plus and has size, length and athleticism to stay on the floor alongside starters. I just can't see that happening much with either Spencer (or Sheppard) but I'm hoping for it

[FarBeyondDriven]

I think you're trying to make a case that it's a good draft with awful logic, to fight an argument you've been on for months.

The better a draft is, the better chance you have of getting a good player deeper into it, and the less you'd need a top pick.

I don't really care if this draft is great or not(it isn't), but teams that are stockpiling assets want higher picks in every draft. They still have a lot of value, even in weaker drafts.

lol right. You clearly care enough to rush to judgement before all the information is in. You and anyone else that declared this a bad draft months ago, before the tournament, before the combine and workouts, is clearly invested in that take. You responding to me fighting against the narrative that it's the weakest draft class ever is further proof of that. I'm not even saying it's necessarily good (though I'm def leaning that way) my pushback is against it being the weakest ever.

No, high picks in supposed weaker drafts DON'T have a lot of value

It's been a strawman the entire time, though. Most of us have compared it to 2013, a very bad draft that still had good players. I've seen nothing to convince me this is even an average draft, though I was hoping a player would become a clear #1 caliber prospect in this draft. You've been on this all year and it's been really bizarre because you spout this way more than talking about individual prospects. I don't think I've ever seen this forum with a lower level of discourse because a quarter of every thread is this...over and over and over and over again. The hope is that like in 2013 a guy or two (probably really raw) surprise with huge outlier development like Gobert or Giannis. I would not bet on that as the most likely scenario, but it's possible.

I've been "on this all year" because you all collectively decided months before the season started that it was a terrible draft class. Before anybody stepped foot on a college campus. Before any of you considered or knew about guys like Yang, Sheppard, George, Furphy, Missi, Ndongo, Watkins, Carrington and Knecht. Someone needs to point out how ridiculous this is. If you don't wish for this "lower level of discourse" then stop adding to it incessantly with your ill-informed negativity especially when the lot of you throw in the "weakest draft class ever" in so many of your posts.

It could very well end up being as bad as you all declared months ago if enough guys return to school or get exposed at the combine. The difference between me and the rest of you, is that I'm going to wait to have as much information before offering declarations either way. Annoying, I know. I wish I had it in me to read a Vecenie or Givony Big Board in Summer of 2023 about the 2024 NBA draft class and come to a conclusion and regurgitate their opinions but alas, I don't.

[babyjax13]

lol right. You clearly care enough to rush to judgement before all the information is in. You and anyone else that declared this a bad draft months ago, before the tournament, before the combine and workouts, is clearly invested in that take. You responding to me fighting against the narrative that it's the weakest draft class ever is further proof of that. I'm not even saying it's necessarily good (though I'm def leaning that way) my pushback is against it being the weakest ever.

No, high picks in supposed weaker drafts DON'T have a lot of value

It's been a strawman the entire time, though. Most of us have compared it to 2013, a very bad draft that still had good players. I've seen nothing to convince me this is even an average draft, though I was hoping a player would become a clear #1 caliber prospect in this draft. You've been on this all year and it's been really bizarre because you spout this way more than talking about individual prospects. I don't think I've ever seen this forum with a lower level of discourse because a quarter of every thread is this...over and over and over and over again. The hope is that like in 2013 a guy or two (probably really raw) surprise with huge outlier development like Gobert or Giannis. I would not bet on that as the most likely scenario, but it's possible.

I've been "on this all year" because you all collectively decided months before the season started that it was a terrible draft class. Before anybody stepped foot on a college campus. Before any of you considered or knew about guys like Yang, Sheppard, George, Furphy, Missi, Ndongo, Watkins, Carrington and Knecht. Someone needs to point out how ridiculous this is. If you don't wish for this "lower level of discourse" then stop adding to it incessantly with your ill-informed negativity especially when the lot of you throw in the "weakest draft class ever" in so many of your posts.

It could very well end up being as bad as you all declared months ago if enough guys return to school or get exposed at the combine. The difference between me and the rest of you, is that I'm going to wait to have as much information before offering declarations either way. Annoying, I know. I wish I had it in me to read a Vecenie or Givony Big Board in Summer of 2023 about the 2024 NBA draft class and come to a conclusion and regurgitate their opinions but alas, I don't.

Quote where I've said it is the weakest ever. You have such certainty that you are amazing at this but you are just as **** as the rest of us. At least post in good faith instead of this. Jesus.

[clyde21]

1) combine is not gonna change much, we have game tape

2) no one was saying this was a bad class before the college season, what we were saying (at least me) was that it was a historically terrible HS class, and 1ADs are the bread and butter of the lotto...and if the 1ADs are underwhelming (which is exactly what ended up happening) then the lotto is gonna suck

3) no one here wants this to be bad class...great classes are more fun and it means more talent goes to the league...you keep acting like people WANT this to be a bad class and are overlooking all the evidence that its not?

4) not sure why you keep arguing with people about this. realize you're in the minority on this on move on. maybe you're right and everyone else is wrong and you see things that most people don't. you don't have to fkn bring this up every time someone says they don't like the talent in the draft, it's getting boring af.

[NO-KG-AI]

Even if it's the worst class ever, there will still be quality players on rookie contracts and potentially stars. Draft picks are still valuable tickets.

Fight the good fight though bro. lmao.