TheSuzerain wrote:THT was a good prospect. Didn't develop though.
And yet he's still a better basketball player than most of AK's draft picks.
Hahahaha.
So. True.
Moderators: HomoSapien, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23
TheSuzerain wrote:THT was a good prospect. Didn't develop though.
And yet he's still a better basketball player than most of AK's draft picks.
sco wrote:I like him.
TheSuzerain wrote:Shill wrote:Didn't you like Hayes?
Yes.
Ulm is dead to me.
Andi Obst wrote:He's not the topic of discussion right now, but the Ulm/BBL context is also why I think it's insane that some people see main creator upside in Ben Saraf.
TheSuzerain wrote:Andi Obst wrote:He's not the topic of discussion right now, but the Ulm/BBL context is also why I think it's insane that some people see main creator upside in Ben Saraf.
Yeah how I think of BBL is indeed the main takeaway from the Hayes experience.
And same reaction to Saraf tbh when people mention "Manu vibes".
Andi Obst wrote:TheSuzerain wrote:Shill wrote:Didn't you like Hayes?
Yes.
Ulm is dead to me.
As somone who also loved Hayes (had him top 3...), the main thing I try to keep in mind when I evaluate prospects playing in Germany is how bad of an athlte the average Bundesliga player is compared the average NBA player. The athleticism concerns have always been there with Hayes, but the Bundesliga context made it look like he can survive based on pure talent. In the NBA, he couldn't.
When you watch Essengue playing in Germany, he definitely looks like a very good athlete. At the BBL level, he looks just fine defensively and like an absolute threat in transition. Will that still be true at the NBA level, though? I doubt it. Plus, at any level, Essengue is not much of a shooter (percentage and volume are...not good) and he doesn't really create for himself or others. I'm sure his measurements will look good and he's obviously super young, but I'm pretty confident that you'll be able to find a player who's less of a raw upside bet than Essengue.
TheSuzerain wrote:Andi Obst wrote:He's not the topic of discussion right now, but the Ulm/BBL context is also why I think it's insane that some people see main creator upside in Ben Saraf.
Yeah how I think of BBL is indeed the main takeaway from the Hayes experience.
And same reaction to Saraf tbh when people mention "Manu vibes".
Chi town wrote:TheSuzerain wrote:Andi Obst wrote:He's not the topic of discussion right now, but the Ulm/BBL context is also why I think it's insane that some people see main creator upside in Ben Saraf.
Yeah how I think of BBL is indeed the main takeaway from the Hayes experience.
And same reaction to Saraf tbh when people mention "Manu vibes".
I think Saraf is a bench creator or secondary starter creator. His 3 ball gets to avg and it opens a bunch up for him. He’s already a better defender than Hayes ever was.
Andi Obst wrote:As someone who doesn't watch college basketball: Why didn't Bryant play more and why wasn't his usage higher in college? Was his team that good? I haven't see him play yet, but on the surface it looks absolutely insane to rank him top 10 (which the Ringer did, for example).
Andi Obst wrote:Chi town wrote:TheSuzerain wrote:Yeah how I think of BBL is indeed the main takeaway from the Hayes experience.
And same reaction to Saraf tbh when people mention "Manu vibes".
I think Saraf is a bench creator or secondary starter creator. His 3 ball gets to avg and it opens a bunch up for him. He’s already a better defender than Hayes ever was.
I strongly disagree. Defense is the one thing Hayes is actually good at.