2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged

[nomorezorro]

people are treating this like it's a straight-up choice between "high upside" and "high floor", which is pretty obviously silly on the face of it. it makes sense as shorthand for fans who are casually following the draft process, but the professional talent evaluators who are actually making the pick should be considering the likelihood of a spectrum of outcomes for each player.

like, it's not just

trey young = possibly great but possibly bad
mikal bridges = probably pretty good but definitely not great and definitely not bad

there's a decent chance trey young doesn't bust but doesn't hit his ceiling. there's a chance mikal bridges busts! a lot of things can happen! this feels like an overly simplistic thing to point out, but i think it's pretty facile to have people repeatedly say "we should pick the guy with the most upside!"

[R3AL1TY]

people are treating this like it's a straight-up choice between "high upside" and "high floor", which is pretty obviously silly on the face of it. it makes sense as shorthand for fans who are casually following the draft process, but the professional talent evaluators who are actually making the pick should be considering the likelihood of a spectrum of outcomes for each player.

like, it's not just

trey young = possibly great but possibly bad
mikal bridges = probably pretty good but definitely not great and definitely not bad

there's a decent chance trey young doesn't bust but doesn't hit his ceiling. there's a chance mikal bridges busts! a lot of things can happen! this feels like an overly simplistic thing to point out, but i think it's pretty facile to have people repeatedly say "we should pick the guy with the most upside!"

Good point...the outcomes of these players aren't simply dualistic and black or white. At best, we assess their current tools and their past success that can contribute to a team.

[nitetrain8603]

Porter Jr or bust. Mikal is Trevor Ariza, best case scenario. Wendell is a serviceable big, but Bulls need really high ceiling players. Porter Jr has the highest. I don’t want to make the same mistake they made before and go with highest floor. I want highest ceiling


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[sco]

Forget which one to pick. How do you see chances of Allstar/Starter/Bench/Bust likelihoods for the 3?

I'll start:

Mikal 2%/70%/20%/8%
Carter 1%/60%/30%/9%
Young 4%/30%/40%/26%

[SHO'NUFF]

Young

[Lauri_Legend]

Forget which one to pick. How do you see chances of Allstar/Starter/Bench/Bust likelihoods for the 3?

I'll start:

Mikal 2%/70%/20%/8%
Carter 1%/60%/30%/9%
Young 4%/30%/40%/26%

Starter for both Carter and Bridges. Both will be serviceable role players.

Trae has Allstar or bench player written all over him. His shooting ability will prevent him from being a bust.

[kodo]

If MPJ & Bamba are off the board, I'll take a gamble at Young.

Mikal I recognize is a great defender, but offensively there were over 480 players with similar statistical seasons in college by their Junior year. By Junior year, you should be destroying everyone else and embarrassing them every night if you have NBA stardom in you. Denzel Valentine averaged close to a triple double in a tough conference, 19 ppg 7.8 apg 7.5 rpg as a SG. He's not an NBA star.

Wing defenders are absolutely valuable, but I believe we can find a great 1 way defender wing by other methods. FA, via trade, mid draft pick, even low draft pick. When GS won their first title, the one guy they didn't have to draft was the wing defender, Andre Iguodala. Jimmy Butler we got at 30. Kawhi was traded for George Hill.

I don't think a gritty, Avery Bradley - Marcus Smart type is the best use of possibly our best pick for many years. Heck, if we want Marcus Smart we can probably get him in FA this summer. Boston didn't extend.

Young has the highest bust potential of the 3, but no need to play so safe this early in our rebuild. It hasn't even been a full year.

[Axolotl]

Young
Carter
Bridges

If star potential is available, you have to go for it. Of these three, only Young has that.

Bridges and Carter I see as pretty equal, although I'm leaning towards Carter.

[Red Larrivee]

If MPJ & Bamba are off the board, I'll take a gamble at Young.

Mikal I recognize is a great defender, but offensively there were over 480 players with similar statistical seasons in college by their Junior year. By Junior year, you should be destroying everyone else and embarrassing them every night if you have NBA stardom in you. Denzel Valentine averaged close to a triple double in a tough conference, 19 ppg 7.8 apg 7.5 rpg as a SG. He's not an NBA star.

How is this quantified? For example, I looked up the amount of juniors in the last 18 years who shot:

50%+ from the field
40%+ from three
60%+ TS%
100+ threes made

And Mikal Bridges is the only qualifier.

Lowered TS% to 55 and Bridges is the only qualifier.

I took TS% out and replaced it with FT% above 80%. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I replaced FT% with 17 points or higher per game. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I took points out and lowered 3's made to 80. Got 11 qualifiers.

So it would seem that the combination of efficiency and volume puts Bridges junior year in more perspective over just basic points/rebounds/assists per game. So, where are you getting 480 similar seasons?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[TheSuzerain]

Trae Young doesn't have a low floor.

Darren Collison is currently starting for a playoff team, people.

[TheSuzerain]

If MPJ & Bamba are off the board, I'll take a gamble at Young.

Mikal I recognize is a great defender, but offensively there were over 480 players with similar statistical seasons in college by their Junior year. By Junior year, you should be destroying everyone else and embarrassing them every night if you have NBA stardom in you. Denzel Valentine averaged close to a triple double in a tough conference, 19 ppg 7.8 apg 7.5 rpg as a SG. He's not an NBA star.

How is this quantified? For example, I looked up the amount of juniors in the last 18 years who shot:

50%+ from the field
40%+ from three
60%+ TS%
100+ threes made

And Mikal Bridges is the only qualifier.

Lowered TS% to 55 and Bridges is the only qualifier.

I took TS% out and replaced it with FT% above 80%. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I replaced FT% with 17 points or higher per game. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I took points out and lowered 3's made to 80. Got 11 qualifiers.

So it would seem that the combination of efficiency and volume puts Bridges junior year in more perspective over just basic points/rebounds/assists per game. So, where are you getting 480 similar seasons?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Half of Villanova's rotation flirted with these thresholds.

[Red Larrivee]

If MPJ & Bamba are off the board, I'll take a gamble at Young.

Mikal I recognize is a great defender, but offensively there were over 480 players with similar statistical seasons in college by their Junior year. By Junior year, you should be destroying everyone else and embarrassing them every night if you have NBA stardom in you. Denzel Valentine averaged close to a triple double in a tough conference, 19 ppg 7.8 apg 7.5 rpg as a SG. He's not an NBA star.

How is this quantified? For example, I looked up the amount of juniors in the last 18 years who shot:

50%+ from the field
40%+ from three
60%+ TS%
100+ threes made

And Mikal Bridges is the only qualifier.

Lowered TS% to 55 and Bridges is the only qualifier.

I took TS% out and replaced it with FT% above 80%. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I replaced FT% with 17 points or higher per game. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I took points out and lowered 3's made to 80. Got 11 qualifiers.

So it would seem that the combination of efficiency and volume puts Bridges junior year in more perspective over just basic points/rebounds/assists per game. So, where are you getting 480 similar seasons?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Half of Villanova's rotation flirted with these thresholds.

And how many of them come with the NBA tools Bridges does?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[TheSuzerain]

How is this quantified? For example, I looked up the amount of juniors in the last 18 years who shot:

50%+ from the field
40%+ from three
60%+ TS%
100+ threes made

And Mikal Bridges is the only qualifier.

Lowered TS% to 55 and Bridges is the only qualifier.

I took TS% out and replaced it with FT% above 80%. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I replaced FT% with 17 points or higher per game. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I took points out and lowered 3's made to 80. Got 11 qualifiers.

So it would seem that the combination of efficiency and volume puts Bridges junior year in more perspective over just basic points/rebounds/assists per game. So, where are you getting 480 similar seasons?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Half of Villanova's rotation flirted with these thresholds.

And how many of them come with the NBA tools Bridges does?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

By NBA tools, do you mean physical/athleticism? Spellman and DiVincenzo are in the same athletic bucket. Paschal too, although he's less skilled.

I don't know why people act like Mikal Bridges is some sort of outlier prospect physically. He's got solid height and great wingspan. Decent athlete. Slight build. That sounds a lot like Justin Holiday.

[MGB8]

Trae Young doesn't have a low floor.

Darren Collison is currently starting for a playoff team, people.

True, the downside is less than what many folks are arguing. Though Collison is significantly more athletic - or was, anyways, coming into the league. Anyways, Young's not going to be a complete bust. He's an NBA player - and he's not Jimmer - though that's the fear. Worst realistic case is that he's a good bench point guard.

At the same time, I don't think Orlando is passing on him.

[Truebiscuit]

How is this quantified? For example, I looked up the amount of juniors in the last 18 years who shot:

50%+ from the field
40%+ from three
60%+ TS%
100+ threes made

And Mikal Bridges is the only qualifier.

Lowered TS% to 55 and Bridges is the only qualifier.

I took TS% out and replaced it with FT% above 80%. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I replaced FT% with 17 points or higher per game. Bridges remained the only qualifier.

I took points out and lowered 3's made to 80. Got 11 qualifiers.

So it would seem that the combination of efficiency and volume puts Bridges junior year in more perspective over just basic points/rebounds/assists per game. So, where are you getting 480 similar seasons?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Half of Villanova's rotation flirted with these thresholds.

And how many of them come with the NBA tools Bridges does?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

What is your ceiling and floor for Bridges? I like the kid quite a bit as a fit on this team... but a lot of posts and buddies I am talking to are arguing that we should be drafting BPA all the way and not necessarily what will fit best with our young core.

[fleet]

Young. And you should include Sexton in the poll.

[DanTown8587]

It's really hard to scout a draft and worry about which player is the best individual talent. Sure sometimes it's really easy to see it at the time (Shaq, LeBron, Duncan, etc) but in most cases, it really is hard to figure out the talent once you get outside that group. The way the game is going, five man lineups and flexibility to play multiple styles is a huge factor to playing winning basketball.

Once you get outside the true All-NBA level players, how guys improve the life of the other four guys on the floor matters far more than their individual talents or abilities. It matters that you cover as many basic things on a basketball team at once (so you need as a team to score, defend, push in transition, run varied sets, defend various styles, generate turnovers, etc) so finding guys who can do multiple things at a high level is far more likely to help you than finding a guy who can do a single thing great.

If I were to compare Bridges and say Porter, here is how I'd rank them solely offensive ability

On-Ball Creation: Advantage Porter
Off-ball movement: Bridges
Transition: Slight edge Porter
Spacing: Even
IQ: Bridges

If you think Porter is capable of being the lead guy on an offense then I won't really argue him over Bridges. I just believe that idea is really stretching the idea of what Porter's game is and how good he is, even pre-injury and just watching him play the few times he's been in games. He's an ok/good scorer but if you're thinking this is the future of the franchise, thats a bridge too far considering his size + athletic ability + passing/dribbling + overall feel for the game.

If you're saying that the team is likely still going to find a different guy to spearhead the offense and you're likely using Lauri as your pick man, now the question is not "who creates better" but who fits as a third option better. To me, this is where Bridges and players like him are vastly superior to players who may have better on-ball creation qualities. Third options, by their definition, aren't guys who eat up a ton of usage so their value to you and what they do is different than what your first option does. You can live with James Harden's defensive tendencies because of what he does offensively; you certainly wouldn't live with that kind of defense from Trevor Ariza or PJ Tucker. I value guys who do a lot of things well and maybe struggle to not be stars because those players are never not valuable to a team. To me, I think Bridges' dribbling ability is questioned too much and I think he's more than capable of attacking secondary wing defenders in this league.

I think Mikal Bridges will be a better pro, if not isolation scorer, than Michael Porter Jr. I have him four on my board (I have Doncic, Ayton, JJJ ahead of him; Bamba and Young directly after) so that's my order of the top six of this draft. Obviously if they go top six and the Bulls are seven you probably roll the dice on Bagley.

The obvious goal is to win, the question is how does the player(s) you draft do that.

[johnnyvann840]

Young - I think he projects to be more like Mahmoud Abdul-rauf than Curry. He struggled in the later half of the season but he was Oklahoma’s only decent player so teams like Rhode Island in the tourney were focused on trying to shut him down and he still managed to put up 28, 7, 5. Dunn is long enough to guard the 2, and in the pace and space offense of hoiball, he’ll put up some great stats. Those stats may not translate to wins as his defense may not be the greatest, but we should tank again next year anyway.

Lol I thought you were talking about Shareef Abdur-Rahim

Should have just said Chris Jackson.

[poolshark52]

None of the above, as I want Porter, but if I have to choose amongst these 3 I guess I'd go with Young. But really, if I have to choose among these three, I'd rather try to trade down slightly, maybe #7 and Felicio for #12, #13, Dekker and Boban or #7 for #10, #26, #33 and Luwawu.

[WindyCityBorn]

Young without question.