2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[cjbulls]

Somebody wanna tell me what makes Cam Reddish not Martell Webster?

There are so many bad Reddish comps. Either someone is comparing him to Paul George (which I have been guilty of, but at least he fits the physical profile) or "Pick a Random Bust" (so far today we've heard Darko, McLemore and Webster). It's just code for how everyone sees that player. What's next: Tell me how Reddish isn't Sebastian Telfair!?!?!??!?!?

Reddish is a shooter with one path as a point forward (based on HS), with another path as a 3&D wing (based on Duke). He is an above average defender with the chance for more. Reddish has elite length for a SF. So start there with a comp. Martell Webster was a spot-up shooter with size that had no playmaking ability. He was a below average defender. He had above average length.

[JimmyJammer]

Well then you aren't very complete in your analysis. You could be sitting on a gold mine, but because it's hard work you just won't try. Or are you saying because his flaws are not going to be available to us outsiders? Because that is fair.

I would take Hunter over Reddish too for whatever it's worth. This whole conversation was started just to say it will be interesting to see what environment Reddish goes to because it could have a big effect on his career. I'm leaning towards him better off in Cleveland where he can have free reign to be aggressive and run offense. Plus, if he goes to Cleveland it increases the chances that Hunter falls!

I'm complete in my analysis. I watched a lot of Reddish during the season and waited for him to breakout. I was a huge fan of his; check the earlier draft threads. I went through the "Maybe Reddish is a potential star; Duke just isn't using him right" phase. It's hard to carry on when the evidence against it continues to mount.

Again, go back and look at the NBA careers of elite prospects who underwhelmed in college. It's not a great list of players. A few of them become useful players, but none of them became stars. Reddish is facing extremely long odds of stardom at the next level.

You can't even call it swinging for the fences; it's a fastball in the dirt.

Your argument is quite solid, so I can really get behind it. However, that still never means there is not at least a minimum chance he'll blow up in the NBA. That minimum chance is what many fans out here are clinging up to, just like the 12.5% chance we had of landing Zion. Based on what I have been witnessing on this board lately, there are some fans who would rather deal with a failed Reddish experience than going for a safe low-ceiling player. It is what it is.

[Chi town]

No Garland or Culver and I’m moving back.

Please don’t stay there and draft Coby White or Hunter. Dont want safe low ceilings picks.

Low ceiling? Do you really know what you are saying? As far as I know, Coby White has overachieved at every level. Coming out of high school as a prolific scoring shooting guard, he was never expected to be the starting point guard for a reputable program like UNC and a demanding coach like Roy Williams, but he did from day one despite the odds. That shows character, upside, skills and IQ. I would not mind having him on board if the organization determines that he fits.

So what's White's ceiling?

I've watched a lot of tape and I don't see anything special. All the lows have been well documented here.

[Red Larrivee]

Your argument is quite solid, so I can really get behind it. However, that still never means there is not at least a minimum chance he'll blow up in the NBA. That minimum chance is what many fans out here are clinging up to, just like the 12.5% chance we had of landing Zion. Based on what I have been witnessing on this board lately, there are some fans who would rather experience a failed Reddish experience than going for safe low-ceiling player. It is what it is.

You can apply a higher minimum chance to players who actually showed more against the same competition. It's why I don't get why Reddish is considered high upside, but others are considered low ceiling.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JimmyJammer]

No Garland or Culver and I’m moving back.

Please don’t stay there and draft Coby White or Hunter. Dont want safe low ceilings picks.

Low ceiling? Do you really know what you are saying? As far as I know, Coby White has overachieved at every level. Coming out of high school as a prolific scoring shooting guard, he was never expected to be the starting point guard for a reputable program like UNC and a demanding coach like Roy Williams, but he did from day one despite the odds. That shows character, upside, skills and IQ. I would not mind having him on board if the organization determines that he fits.

So what's White's ceiling?

I've watched a lot of tape and I don't see anything special. All the lows have been well documented here.

Jamal Murray, Jamal Crawford, DeAron Fox, to name a few.

[bearadonisdna]

They most likely aren't. If you're drafting on the idea of which player has the most star potential, it's not Reddish.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You can't really draft potential. It's like drafting a rainbow.
Draft value has to be objective in context to the team.
Wouldn't be trying to pull your chain with Reddish. Tools and physical profile can go a long way

College Tony Snell topped out at around cams current production but was in his 3rd year and in a bad conference.

It's a matter of how translatable your tools are. Reddish's tools didn't translate to college well; so why would I suddenly believe those same tools are that of a star? There's a very real possibility that Reddish looks the part, but doesn't have the feel, IQ, or intangibles to be a really good player. That's the vibe he presented at Duke.

Looking like Paul George or some other perennial all-star physically isn't what you should run with without context.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

They most likely aren't. If you're drafting on the idea of which player has the most star potential, it's not Reddish.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You can't really draft potential. It's like drafting a rainbow.
Draft value has to be objective in context to the team.
Wouldn't be trying to pull your chain with Reddish. Tools and physical profile can go a long way

College Tony Snell topped out at around cams current production but was in his 3rd year and in a bad conference.

It's a matter of how translatable your tools are. Reddish's tools didn't translate to college well; so why would I suddenly believe those same tools are that of a star? There's a very real possibility that Reddish looks the part, but doesn't have the feel, IQ, or intangibles to be a really good player. That's the vibe he presented at Duke.

Looking like Paul George or some other perennial all-star physically isn't what you should run with without context.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

IT'S about his tools being about to help the bulls. It's not about star projection.
It he can blow past an NBA workout then it should provide value.

IT'S like if he can come in here and ace the proverbial 'Boylen gauntlet ' as good as any of our own NBA players by most accounts than he would be worth drafting and have pretty good value at 7.

[JimmyJammer]

Your argument is quite solid, so I can really get behind it. However, that still never means there is not at least a minimum chance he'll blow up in the NBA. That minimum chance is what many fans out here are clinging up to, just like the 12.5% chance we had of landing Zion. Based on what I have been witnessing on this board lately, there are some fans who would rather experience a failed Reddish experience than going for safe low-ceiling player. It is what it is.

You can apply a higher minimum chance to players who actually showed more against the same competition. It's why I don't get why Reddish is considered high upside, but others are considered low ceiling.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Reddish is still living off equity he built through four years of high school basketball, which many people are having a hard time to let go of. Just imagine what it will be like in two years when young players will be coming straight out of high school.

[cjbulls]

Your argument is quite solid, so I can really get behind it. However, that still never means there is not at least a minimum chance he'll blow up in the NBA. That minimum chance is what many fans out here are clinging up to, just like the 12.5% chance we had of landing Zion. Based on what I have been witnessing on this board lately, there are some fans who would rather experience a failed Reddish experience than going for safe low-ceiling player. It is what it is.

You can apply a higher minimum chance to players who actually showed more against the same competition. It's why I don't get why Reddish is considered high upside, but others are considered low ceiling.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Reddish is still living off equity he built through four years of high school basketball, which many people are having a hard time to let go of. Just imagine what it will be like in two years when young players will be coming straight out of high school.

So why isn't there a bigger cry for Little or Grimes then? Don't they have HS equity?

Or even RJ Barrett, I don't know anyone saying he should go #1 or #2? Or that the Bulls must trade up for him. #1 Prospect! Where is the HS Equity?

Same could be said of Bol, but there's still a few crazies on this board that want him. But just like the Reddish supporters, it's about the physical traits and skills that people like. No one is saying, well he was good in HS, therefore....

[Leslie Forman]

Somebody wanna tell me what makes Cam Reddish not Martell Webster?

There are so many bad Reddish comps. Either someone is comparing him to Paul George (which I have been guilty of, but at least he fits the physical profile) or "Pick a Random Bust" (so far today we've heard Darko, McLemore and Webster). It's just code for how everyone sees that player. What's next: Tell me how Reddish isn't Sebastian Telfair!?!?!??!?!?

Reddish is a shooter with one path as a point forward (based on HS), with another path as a 3&D wing (based on Duke). He is an above average defender with the chance for more. Reddish has elite length for a SF. So start there with a comp. Martell Webster was a spot-up shooter with size that had no playmaking ability. He was a below average defender. He had above average length.

Cam Reddish wingspan: 7'0.5"
Martell Webster wingspan: 6'11"

Wow, what a shame Martell Webster just couldn't have another 1.5 inches of wingspan. That really would have changed everything.

[bearadonisdna]

You can apply a higher minimum chance to players who actually showed more against the same competition. It's why I don't get why Reddish is considered high upside, but others are considered low ceiling.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Reddish is still living off equity he built through four years of high school basketball, which many people are having a hard time to let go of. Just imagine what it will be like in two years when young players will be coming straight out of high school.

So why isn't there a bigger cry for Little or Grimes then? Don't they have HS equity?

Or even RJ Barrett, I don't know anyone saying he should go #1 or #2? Or that the Bulls must trade up for him. #1 Prospect! Where is the HS Equity?

Same could be said of Bol, but there's still a few crazies on this board that want him. But just like the Reddish supporters, it's about the physical traits and skills that people like. No one is saying, well he was good in HS, therefore....

At this point the HS narrative is just a copout.

[cjbulls]

Somebody wanna tell me what makes Cam Reddish not Martell Webster?

There are so many bad Reddish comps. Either someone is comparing him to Paul George (which I have been guilty of, but at least he fits the physical profile) or "Pick a Random Bust" (so far today we've heard Darko, McLemore and Webster). It's just code for how everyone sees that player. What's next: Tell me how Reddish isn't Sebastian Telfair!?!?!??!?!?

Reddish is a shooter with one path as a point forward (based on HS), with another path as a 3&D wing (based on Duke). He is an above average defender with the chance for more. Reddish has elite length for a SF. So start there with a comp. Martell Webster was a spot-up shooter with size that had no playmaking ability. He was a below average defender. He had above average length.

Cam Reddish wingspan: 7'0.5"
Martell Webster wingspan: 6'11"

Wow, what a shame Martell Webster just couldn't have another 1.5 inches of wingspan. That really would have changed everything.

Way to ignore the substance of the post. Ask Kyler Murray where he’d be if he was 1.5 inches shorter. Or every other NBA draft pick for that matter.

[JohnnyKILLroy]

Yeah I'm not into making excuses for a kid that played that bad.

Lack of Production.
Lack of IQ
Lack of Dog
Lack of Heart

But - "He shoots a pretty ball and "looks" the part"

Basically: Ben McLemore without the college production or flashes.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Xavier Henry also shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can’t get behind it at 7.

[cjbulls]

Yeah I'm not into making excuses for a kid that played that bad.

Lack of Production.
Lack of IQ
Lack of Dog
Lack of Heart

But - "He shoots a pretty ball and "looks" the part"

Basically: Ben McLemore without the college production or flashes.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Xavier Henry also shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can’t get behind it at 7.

Tracy McGrady shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can get behind it at #7

[Red Larrivee]

IT'S about his tools being about to help the bulls. It's not about star projection.
It he can blow past an NBA workout then it should provide value.

IT'S like if he can come in here and ace the proverbial 'Boylen gauntlet ' as good as any of our own NBA players by most accounts than he would be worth drafting and have pretty good value at 7.

Workouts don't have any correlation to playing well in NBA games.

[johnnyvann840]

At this point the HS narrative is just a copout.

What does this even mean? Copout for what? It's not a narrative. It's just the truth. Reddish showed nothing at Duke that tells anybody he has star potential. In fact, just the opposite. He showed us that he doesn't have it. The copout is those who want to ignore his most recent year against real competition and defer to him beating up on a bunch of children 99% of which are not playing basketball anymore except at their local gym on the weekends.

It's almost as bad as the MPJ fanboys last year at this time who couldn't see the forest through the trees.

[JohnnyKILLroy]

Basically: Ben McLemore without the college production or flashes.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Xavier Henry also shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can’t get behind it at 7.

Tracy McGrady shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can get behind it at #7

You just don't get it.

Do you even know the Tracy McGrady ABCD story?

He did the exact opposite of what Cam did at Duke.

He was literally the last kid invited, no where near a top prospect.

HE DOMINATED. LEFT A TRAIL OF DEAD IN HIS WAKE. IT WAS LEGENDARY.

[MeloRoseNoah]

There has never been a star NBA player who sucks as much donkey kong as Cam Reddish did in college. That's a fact. I don't care about his tools. He's missing some key ingredients. You can bring up Kawhi Lenaord, Paul George, Donovan Mitchell, etc... here. But, all of those guys at least prove that they were efficient and above average in college basketball from Day 1, as evident by PER about 20+ min as well as TS close to .600.

As a Bulls fan, I hope that this future bust gets picked by the Cleveland or Phoenix of the world instead of my beloved Bulls. Picking Cam Reddish and talking about his tool to be a star is like MPJ fanboys declaring him to be a future star from HS hype instead of looking at the college tape over 12 months.

[kulaz3000]

Can we stop calling Reddish a shooter. He isn't.

[cjbulls]

Xavier Henry also shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can’t get behind it at 7.

Tracy McGrady shot a pretty ball once upon a time.

I can get behind it at #7

You just don't get it.

Do you even know the Tracy McGrady ABCD story?

He did the exact opposite of what Cam did at Duke.

He was literally the last kid invited, no where near a top prospect.

HE DOMINATED. LEFT A TRAIL OF DEAD IN HIS WAKE. IT WAS LEGENDARY.

You just don’t get it. You just picked a random bust and compared him to Cam. So I picked a random success. The goal was to show you your shorthand logic was silly but it clearly flew right past you.

[cjbulls]

Can we stop calling Reddish a shooter. He isn't.

*Guy who hasn’t read a single Cam scouting report