Nikola Topic

[OriAr]

He projects as a 36% three point shooter according to Tankathon formula.

Maybe he sucks as a shooter, but are there are any NBA shooters who shoot 88% from ft that struggle to shoot 3s? Especially at 18 yrs old. I think the shooting concern is massively overblown considering he is more than willing to take them at nearly 5 per game.

Compare that to Giddey shot 3.5 threes per game and 69% from FT

He also shot 40% from 3 in Serbian League last year at age 17. 21/52 from downtown and 42/49 from FT
https://www.proballers.com/basketball/player/237851/nikola-topic

44% in 7 game tourney here 9/17 from three and 32/33 from FT
https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/ngt/stats/expanded/?size=25&viewType=traditional&seasonCode=JTB22&statisticMode=perGame&seasonMode=Single&sortDirection=descending&statistic=score

There aren't many, but there aren't many who were as bad as he's been at the first place, his career % is 30% which is already very bad, especially with those who shoot in any kind of volume that resembles the modern game.
Topic is already a pretty big outlier with how bad his shooting is, to the point you can't look at this FT% and just say "Oh he'll be fine".

Yeah 30% isn't all that bad for a 17/18 yr old playing professionally. That is better than Buzelis and Holland and his FT% is far better.

There is very little disputing that Buzelis and Holland are *very* bad shooters who'll likely need a miracle to become even passable shooters at NBA level.
Topic's shooting will get somewhat better, it might even become passable, I just don't buy that it'll improve enough, even accounting for his great FT%. Most people who are that good from the line are at least passable from 3 even when they are young, Topic's starting point is that much lower, people don't realize the scale of improvement needed there.

[zzaj]

There aren't many, but there aren't many who were as bad as he's been at the first place, his career % is 30% which is already very bad, especially with those who shoot in any kind of volume that resembles the modern game.
Topic is already a pretty big outlier with how bad his shooting is, to the point you can't look at this FT% and just say "Oh he'll be fine".

Yeah 30% isn't all that bad for a 17/18 yr old playing professionally. That is better than Buzelis and Holland and his FT% is far better.

There is very little disputing that Buzelis and Holland are *very* bad shooters who'll likely need a miracle to become even passable shooters at NBA level.
Topic's shooting will get somewhat better, it might even become passable, I just don't buy that it'll improve enough, even accounting for his great FT%. Most people who are that good from the line are at least passable from 3 even when they are young, Topic's starting point is that much lower, people don't realize the scale of improvement needed there.

Pretty strongly disagree. Topic will be 18 on draft night. C&S is one of the easiest things to improve upon. Given his FT%, there is plenty of time for him to improve the consistency of his shot mechanics in both C&S and OTD 3s. Give Topic a couple summers with a good shooting coach and he's going to be league average.

Amazing what a big deal we make out of 3 out of 10 vs. 4 out of 10.

[JMAC3]

Yeah 30% isn't all that bad for a 17/18 yr old playing professionally. That is better than Buzelis and Holland and his FT% is far better.

There is very little disputing that Buzelis and Holland are *very* bad shooters who'll likely need a miracle to become even passable shooters at NBA level.
Topic's shooting will get somewhat better, it might even become passable, I just don't buy that it'll improve enough, even accounting for his great FT%. Most people who are that good from the line are at least passable from 3 even when they are young, Topic's starting point is that much lower, people don't realize the scale of improvement needed there.

Pretty strongly disagree. Topic will be 18 on draft night. C&S is one of the easiest things to improve upon. Given his FT%, there is plenty of time for him to improve the consistency of his shot mechanics in both C&S and OTD 3s. Give Topic a couple summers with a good shooting coach and he's going to be league average.

Amazing what a big deal we make out of 3 out of 10 vs. 4 out of 10.

Yet someone can shoot 37% on 1.5 attempts per game and we will automatically assume that they are a better shooter than someone like Topic with multiple positive data points. It is very elementary when it comes to the way people judge shooting numbers.

[FarBeyondDriven]

He will play Serbian league too. So there is still some basketball left for him this season.

good. He needs it imo in order to justify all the talk about him being near the top of the draft. I won't know how I really feel about him until I see him on the court with his NBA peers. Any chance this happens at the combine or will he still be playing like Coulibaly last year?

I don't get why he has to prove it compared to a guy like Sarr, who played less, had worse stats in a worse league than what Topic did this year.

Topic was better in the Fiba U18 tourney that what Sarr was in OTE as well playing vs players his own age.

Sarr played in tournaments and showcases against his NBA peers. We got to see how he measured up against other top guys like Yang, Holland, and Buzelis and he's been on the same floor as guys like Almansa, Perrin, Ajinca and Klintman. THAT is the difference between he and Topic. It's easier to project players when they're playing with and against other NBA talents. Topic will remain somewhat of a mystery until he has some recent tape with him going against NBA talent which we'd get if he attends the combine.

[JMAC3]

good. He needs it imo in order to justify all the talk about him being near the top of the draft. I won't know how I really feel about him until I see him on the court with his NBA peers. Any chance this happens at the combine or will he still be playing like Coulibaly last year?

I don't get why he has to prove it compared to a guy like Sarr, who played less, had worse stats in a worse league than what Topic did this year.

Topic was better in the Fiba U18 tourney that what Sarr was in OTE as well playing vs players his own age.

Sarr played in tournaments and showcases against his NBA peers. We got to see how he measured up against other top guys like Yang, Holland, and Buzelis and he's been on the same floor as guys like Almansa, Perrin, Ajinca and Klintman. THAT is the difference between he and Topic. It's easier to project players when they're playing with and against other NBA talents. Topic will remain somewhat of a mystery until he has some recent tape with him going against NBA talent which we'd get if he attends the combine.

Yeah I don't think a top 5 pick is scrimmaging at the combine lol.

Also, Sarr has looked underwhelming when sharing the floor with those guys except for the defensive highlight of him guarding Holland. Pretty sure the NBA is pretty comfortable taking guys out the ABA league at this point as it is not some unknown league.

[zzaj]

There is very little disputing that Buzelis and Holland are *very* bad shooters who'll likely need a miracle to become even passable shooters at NBA level.
Topic's shooting will get somewhat better, it might even become passable, I just don't buy that it'll improve enough, even accounting for his great FT%. Most people who are that good from the line are at least passable from 3 even when they are young, Topic's starting point is that much lower, people don't realize the scale of improvement needed there.

Pretty strongly disagree. Topic will be 18 on draft night. C&S is one of the easiest things to improve upon. Given his FT%, there is plenty of time for him to improve the consistency of his shot mechanics in both C&S and OTD 3s. Give Topic a couple summers with a good shooting coach and he's going to be league average.

Amazing what a big deal we make out of 3 out of 10 vs. 4 out of 10.

Yet someone can shoot 37% on 1.5 attempts per game and we will automatically assume that they are a better shooter than someone like Topic with multiple positive data points. It is very elementary when it comes to the way people judge shooting numbers.

Yeah, no disagreement here. Context is crucial in trying to assess projected shooting at the NBA level.

[Mickey8]

Topic have to improve his three point shooting and I think he can. When he was younger like 14,15 , he always looked like a very good shooter. I think his play making can be translated to NBA easily. Now it depends where he's going to land and how the team who drafts him ,will develop him.

[FarBeyondDriven]

I don't get why he has to prove it compared to a guy like Sarr, who played less, had worse stats in a worse league than what Topic did this year.

Topic was better in the Fiba U18 tourney that what Sarr was in OTE as well playing vs players his own age.

Sarr played in tournaments and showcases against his NBA peers. We got to see how he measured up against other top guys like Yang, Holland, and Buzelis and he's been on the same floor as guys like Almansa, Perrin, Ajinca and Klintman. THAT is the difference between he and Topic. It's easier to project players when they're playing with and against other NBA talents. Topic will remain somewhat of a mystery until he has some recent tape with him going against NBA talent which we'd get if he attends the combine.

Yeah I don't think a top 5 pick is scrimmaging at the combine lol.

Also, Sarr has looked underwhelming when sharing the floor with those guys except for the defensive highlight of him guarding Holland. Pretty sure the NBA is pretty comfortable taking guys out the ABA league at this point as it is not some unknown league.

bro...wut?

Watch on YouTube

[JMAC3]

bro...wut?

Watch on YouTube

Yes, let's ignore all his OTE and NBL film and trust this ONE GAME is the real him vs the worst Gleague team of all time. What could go wrong lol. Production wise Sarr has been very underwhelming for a potential top 3 prospect for the past 2 years.

[Hal14]

He's a far better scorer than Giddey. People think Giddey is just lacking a shot but he lacks an entire scoring game.

Giddey is also about 2-3 inches taller.

[Hal14]

Topic detractors. Are you just unconvinced he's going to be able to get to the rim in the NBA? Think the 3 pointer will stay bad?

He projects as a 36% three point shooter according to Tankathon formula.

Maybe he sucks as a shooter, but are there are any NBA shooters who shoot 88% from ft that struggle to shoot 3s? Especially at 18 yrs old. I think the shooting concern is massively overblown considering he is more than willing to take them at nearly 5 per game.

Compare that to Giddey shot 3.5 threes per game and 69% from FT

He also shot 40% from 3 in Serbian League last year at age 17. 21/52 from downtown and 42/49 from FT
https://www.proballers.com/basketball/player/237851/nikola-topic

44% in 7 game tourney here 9/17 from three and 32/33 from FT
https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/ngt/stats/expanded/?size=25&viewType=traditional&seasonCode=JTB22&statisticMode=perGame&seasonMode=Single&sortDirection=descending&statistic=score

-He also shot 9.5% from 3 last year at the U18 FIBA tournament.

-This season he's taking 4 threes per game - not 5.

-While FT% is often an indicator of future 3 pt shooting performance, it is certainly not the end all, be all. Bottom line is, a guy could make their FTs but not make their 3's because FTs are much easier shots to make. You have no defenders trying to stop you, you have 10 seconds to shoot it and you're much closer to the basket. Yes, FT% of often an indicator but let's not act like Topic is automatically going to be a good 3 pt shooter just because he's a good FT shooter.

This isn't exactly a list of guys who went on to become awesome 3 pt shooters in the NBA, but they're all guys who had really high FT% in college and low 3 pt %..while playing in a high major conference.


If we alter the query to filter for only players who got drafted we get this:


Again, not a list of elite NBA shooters. 

To be fair, Austin Reaves pulls into that second list if we expand it to include undrafted players. But that's what, like 1 guy out of 100 from the list who became a good NBA shooter? And Reaves shot 50% and 42% from 3 during his first 2 years of college ball so that's different..

[JMAC3]

Topic detractors. Are you just unconvinced he's going to be able to get to the rim in the NBA? Think the 3 pointer will stay bad?

He projects as a 36% three point shooter according to Tankathon formula.

Maybe he sucks as a shooter, but are there are any NBA shooters who shoot 88% from ft that struggle to shoot 3s? Especially at 18 yrs old. I think the shooting concern is massively overblown considering he is more than willing to take them at nearly 5 per game.

Compare that to Giddey shot 3.5 threes per game and 69% from FT

He also shot 40% from 3 in Serbian League last year at age 17. 21/52 from downtown and 42/49 from FT
https://www.proballers.com/basketball/player/237851/nikola-topic

44% in 7 game tourney here 9/17 from three and 32/33 from FT
https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/ngt/stats/expanded/?size=25&viewType=traditional&seasonCode=JTB22&statisticMode=perGame&seasonMode=Single&sortDirection=descending&statistic=score

-He also shot 9.5% from 3 last year at the U18 FIBA tournament.

-This season he's taking 4 threes per game - not 5.

-While FT% is often an indicator of future 3 pt shooting performance, it is certainly not the end all, be all. Bottom line is, a guy could make their FTs but not make their 3's because FTs are much easier shots to make. You have no defenders trying to stop you, you have 10 seconds to shoot it and you're much closer to the basket. Yes, FT% of often an indicator but let's not act like Topic is automatically going to be a good 3 pt shooter just because he's a good FT shooter.

This isn't exactly a list of guys who went on to become awesome 3 pt shooters in the NBA, but they're all guys who had really high FT% in college and low 3 pt %..while playing in a high major conference.


If we alter the query to filter for only players who got drafted we get this:


Again, not a list of elite NBA shooters. 

Yeah setting it up to be 87% or better seems like a weird choice and it's punishing Topic for being a great FT shooter

If you do the same thing and put FT% at 82% which is a very good FT% in college

You get Gordon Hayward, McCollum, Maxey, Clarkson, Alec Burks, Myles Turner, Kennard, Patrick Williams

Games Played ≥ 15; 3P FG % ≤ 0.32; 3PA/100 Poss ≥ 4; Free Throw % ≥ 0.82 Draft pick ≤ 60; Since 2000

https://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?link=y&minGP=15&min3P=0.32&mintp100=4&minFT=0.82&minpick=60&year=2024&start=20001101&end=20240501&threeperSelect=-1&pickSelect=-1link=y&minGP=15&min3P=0.32&mintp100=4&minFT=0.82&minpick=60&year=2024&start=20001101&end=20240501&threeperSelect=-1&pickSelect=-1

[FarBeyondDriven]

bro...wut?

Watch on YouTube

Yes, let's ignore all his OTE and NBL film and trust this ONE GAME is the real him vs the worst Gleague team of all time. What could go wrong lol. Production wise Sarr has been very underwhelming for a potential top 3 prospect for the past 2 years.

why would I talk about NBL film or the OTE film for that matter (when he was 17 y/o btw) when he wasn't on the floor with those guys? I'm just refuting your false contention that he has been underwhelming when he was on the floor with those specific guys. He played very well in those two Ignite games and his team won FIBA U19 over a loaded France team that also had many NBA peers. Nobody is ignoring anything or only trusting one game like you're claiming. I'm refuting a specific thing you've claimed. If you're going to say incorrect things expect to be corrected.

[Hal14]

He projects as a 36% three point shooter according to Tankathon formula.

Maybe he sucks as a shooter, but are there are any NBA shooters who shoot 88% from ft that struggle to shoot 3s? Especially at 18 yrs old. I think the shooting concern is massively overblown considering he is more than willing to take them at nearly 5 per game.

Compare that to Giddey shot 3.5 threes per game and 69% from FT

He also shot 40% from 3 in Serbian League last year at age 17. 21/52 from downtown and 42/49 from FT
https://www.proballers.com/basketball/player/237851/nikola-topic

44% in 7 game tourney here 9/17 from three and 32/33 from FT
https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/ngt/stats/expanded/?size=25&viewType=traditional&seasonCode=JTB22&statisticMode=perGame&seasonMode=Single&sortDirection=descending&statistic=score

-He also shot 9.5% from 3 last year at the U18 FIBA tournament.

-This season he's taking 4 threes per game - not 5.

-While FT% is often an indicator of future 3 pt shooting performance, it is certainly not the end all, be all. Bottom line is, a guy could make their FTs but not make their 3's because FTs are much easier shots to make. You have no defenders trying to stop you, you have 10 seconds to shoot it and you're much closer to the basket. Yes, FT% of often an indicator but let's not act like Topic is automatically going to be a good 3 pt shooter just because he's a good FT shooter.

This isn't exactly a list of guys who went on to become awesome 3 pt shooters in the NBA, but they're all guys who had really high FT% in college and low 3 pt %..while playing in a high major conference.


If we alter the query to filter for only players who got drafted we get this:


Again, not a list of elite NBA shooters. 

Yeah setting it up to be 87% or better seems like a weird choice and it's punishing Topic for being a great FT shooter

If you do the same thing and put FT% at 82% which is a very good FT% in college

You get Gordon Hayward, McCollum, Maxey, Clarkson, Alec Burks, Myles Turner, Kennard, Patrick Williams

Games Played ≥ 15; 3P FG % ≤ 0.32; 3PA/100 Poss ≥ 4; Free Throw % ≥ 0.82 Draft pick ≤ 60; Since 2000

https://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?link=y&minGP=15&min3P=0.32&mintp100=4&minFT=0.82&minpick=60&year=2024&start=20001101&end=20240501&threeperSelect=-1&pickSelect=-1link=y&minGP=15&min3P=0.32&mintp100=4&minFT=0.82&minpick=60&year=2024&start=20001101&end=20240501&threeperSelect=-1&pickSelect=-1

It's not a weird choice. It's making the dataset more relevant. Why would we include all these 82% and 83% FT shooters? That makes the data less relevant when comparing it to a guy who shot 88%.

Of course, there might be a few outliers (like Maxey and McCollum) you're able to pull when you make your data set that massive. The initial search I ran (including high major and mid major players) was well over 100 players. When I narrowed it down to only high major players it was around 100 players. That's a huge list. There's no need to expand the list to like 500 players (and increase the 3 pt % threshold to 32%..if we include FIBA U18 tourney, Topic is at 25.7% from 3 so not even close to 32%) just so you're able to pull a few guys who fit the narrative you're trying to present.

[JMAC3]

It's not a weird choice. It's making the dataset more relevant. Why would we include all these 82% and 83% FT shooters? That makes the data less relevant when comparing it to a guy who shot 88%.

Of course, there might be a few outliers (like Maxey and McCollum) you're able to pull when you make your data set that massive. The initial search I ran (including high major and mid major players) was well over 100 players. When I narrowed it down to only high major players it was around 100 players. That's a huge list. There's no need to expand the list to like 500 players (and increase the 3 pt % threshold to 32%..if we include FIBA U18 tourney, Topic is at 25.7% from 3 so not even close to 32%) just so you're able to pull a few guys who fit the narrative you're trying to present.

Are you including him shooting 40% in The Serbian Pro League? Him shooting 44% in the ANGT tourney? That is 19 game sample size so probably should include both of those if you are using U18 Fiba sample.

Again, makes no sense to be like Topic is a better FT shooter than Maxey/McCollum so that disqualifies him makes no sense. You are basically saying if Topic was a worse ft shooter at 80% instead that the sample would say he has a better chance of improving, huh?

If Topic was a 100% free throw shooter the sample size of players would be zero based on your reasoning if that doesn't tell you that you are doing it wrong then idk what does lol

[OriAr]

Topic is 30% from 3 in his career so far, which is really the number that should be used considering it's the only one with a sample size approaching that of an NBA season. (And even that is still a small size!) Long term without any improvements he's probably a 30% shooter, which is simply not good enough for a lead guard in the NBA and for someone as good from the line as Topic is 30% from 3 while shooting the kind of volume he has is historically bad.
His jumper will probably get better, but people don't realize how much better it needs to be in the NBA, he needs to turn from a 2nd percentile shooter (!!!) to at least 40th percentile or so (Around 37% or so), that's far from guaranteed. Can it happen? Yes, Would I bet on it blindly? Not at all.
In the likelier scenario that he improves to around 33-34%, that's still around 8th to 10th percentile shooter and quite frankly not good enough, and that territory starts to include players who shoot it from downtown at nearly 10 attempts per game, which obviously makes them look worse than they actually are.
People underestimate by a lot how bad his shot is and how much it needs to improve if Topic is to be a starting lead guard in the NBA.
(Link to the dataset: https://stathead.com/tiny/tdHqz)

[lambchop]

Topic is 30% from 3 in his career so far, which is really the number that should be used considering it's the only one with a sample size approaching that of an NBA season. (And even that is still a small size!) Long term without any improvements he's probably a 30% shooter, which is simply not good enough for a lead guard in the NBA and for someone as good from the line as Topic is 30% from 3 while shooting the kind of volume he has is historically bad.
His jumper will probably get better, but people don't realize how much better it needs to be in the NBA, he needs to turn from a 2nd percentile shooter (!!!) to at least 40th percentile or so (Around 37% or so), that's far from guaranteed. Can it happen? Yes, Would I bet on it blindly? Not at all.
In the likelier scenario that he improves to around 33-34%, that's still around 8th to 10th percentile shooter and quite frankly not good enough, and that territory starts to include players who shoot it from downtown at nearly 10 attempts per game, which obviously makes them look worse than they actually are.
People underestimate by a lot how bad his shot is and how much it needs to improve if Topic is to be a starting lead guard in the NBA.
(Link to the dataset: https://stathead.com/tiny/tdHqz)

These are fair points imo. However, there have been NBA players who were able to significantly improve their shooting, like Kawhi, Tony Parker, LBJ etc. Lebron still always made the mistake of constantly changing his shooting form, so his progress was seldom sustained. Dennis Schroder also shot 25% his first NBA season and then managed to move up to a career average of 34% with some good shooting seasons in there.

It will take a ton of hours for Topic to get it right, but it definitely CAN happen. It's just not guaranteed. Some teams will pass on him because of it.

[JMAC3]

Topic 4.8 3pt per 36 in ABA
31% (all his 3pt data I could find Angt, U18, KLS, ABA, Euroleague) 61/192
88% Ft

Scoot 3.4 3pt per 36
32% from deep
75% FT

Castle 2.9 3pt attempts 36
27% from deep
75.5%

There are levels to being a good and bad shooter. I promise trying to judge a player on only 3pt% is a really flawed process.

[Hal14]

Topic 4.8 3pt per 36 in ABA
31% (all his 3pt data I could find Angt, U18, KLS, ABA, Euroleague) 61/192
88% Ft

Scoot 3.4 3pt per 36
32% from deep
75% FT

Castle 2.9 3pt attempts 36
27% from deep
75.5%

There are levels to being a good and bad shooter. I promise trying to judge a player on only 3pt% is a really flawed process.

What's your point?

None of those guys have proven to be a good NBA shooter yet. And none of them were good shooting prospects.

[JMAC3]

Topic 4.8 3pt per 36 in ABA
31% (all his 3pt data I could find Angt, U18, KLS, ABA, Euroleague) 61/192
88% Ft

Scoot 3.4 3pt per 36
32% from deep
75% FT

Castle 2.9 3pt attempts 36
27% from deep
75.5%

There are levels to being a good and bad shooter. I promise trying to judge a player on only 3pt% is a really flawed process.

What's your point?

None of those guys have proven to be a good NBA shooter yet.

My point is you just want to judge a guy based on his 3pt % and ignore other telling statistics. I will be sure to tag you after his rookie year when he is a better shooter than both of these guys.