Official 2017 Draft Thread - Something Positive To Look Forward To

[MartyCONLONNN]

Haven't been watching college ball so far so I breezed through this thread to see what you guys think about this draft class. It is just me or does this draft class seem overrated? I'm refering to the fact that some GMs called it the strongest draft class in the last decade or smth like that. You guys have been watching the games so I'm curious to know what you think.

That Jackson kid for example. Just saw the highlights from his last game and he got blocked 4 times. We're talking about highlights here so that certainly doesn't sound good. It doesn't look like he has a great first step, his handle seems basic and his shooting motion looks awful. His shooting %s as well. Judging by the highlights it looks like he's a role player on his college team. That doesn't bode well too.

The only thing he seems to do well on offense moving off the ball but it also looks like he's being guarded by mentally challenged people at times. And he's still somehow a top 3-5 prospect.

What am I missing?

He's a defensive menace who, with his size, projects to be able to guard 1-4. Of ALL wing players drafted top 10 the last 5 years no one comes close to the rate at which he has blocked shots and stole the ball. His strength is obviously that he is a defensive ace. Scouts and writers have praised his motor too. At 6'8 it's actually not all too common to find a guy who's all over the place the way Jackson is. He has obvious shortcomings with the hitch in his shot and percentages that reflect that. That first step that your talking about is not necessarily there because teams are sagging off him so much. Hard for that burst to make a difference when everyone is playing your drive and not respecting your shot. JJ is also a good playmaker at his size but unfortunately doesn't really get to showcase that much in Self's system and Kansas runs their offense through 2 ball dominant guards. Right now his only real weakness is his thin frame and his stroke, which is why people see so much potential.

The problem from the Heat perspective is are they willing to have such a similar prospect as Winslow? It's an interesting thought because a frontcourt of Jackson, Winslow, Hassan would be elite defensively no doubt. But you would really have to hope at least one of them finds their offensive game in the next 2-3 years. With both of them being 20 years old, it might not be a bad bet to make at the end of the day.

[CaliHeat]

To me Ball is not over hyped. His game will translate to the NBA better than most of these PG's in this draft. His BBIQ is top notch. He is a winner. He can shoot, even if his release is ugly, he is hitting from 28 feet out. Great playmaker, can push tempo and he is a great defender from what Ive seen. His FT% is a problem, from what Ive seen, seems like his ugly release hurts him on shots closer to the basket. That guy has the work ethic to change that though and improve on his game.

If anything Josh Jackson is the one being hyped up. I want to love this guy and he has shown flashes of what I thought I was gonna see but he has been disappointing to me. He is still in my top 5 because of the hype and what he could be, plus he is exactly what we need on this team but the jury is still out on him.


Fultz
Ball
DSJ
JJackson
Tatum

[MartyCONLONNN]

I think most would agree ball's best attribute = BBALL IQ / PASSING


ok


ok


ok


now.......


you agree?



right.....




so lets think for a second how many top tier nba players in the league RIGHT NOW best attribute is BALL IQ / PASSING ?


NONE!


people tossing around jason kidd comparisons but what would jason kidd do in todays NBA? Would he be better than Curry? Kyrie? Westbrook? Isiah Thomas? Kemba Walker? John Wall?


I'll be cool accepting being wrong but I can't think of too many guys who's best attribute is just BBALL IQ or Passing.... CP3 is an elite defender, elite scorer, elite mid range shooter, elite clutch. Ball very well could be solid and I expect him to be solid, but at #1 I'd rather try to hit a grand slam then try to hit a double play.

Just because a players best attributes are IQ and passing doesn't mean you have to negate their other strengths? CP3 didn't come into the league being elite at any of those things... so please tell me who in the draft projects to be elite at that many things from the get go ?

Anyways there's a an argument to be made that 17 games into the season and shooting the 3, mostly at NBA range, at a 43% clip is a strength. In fact that's considered elite shooting at the NBA level. Also, his assist to turnover ratio is off the charts and he has a very good handle. I'd argue that his strengths are actually High IQ, Passing, Shooting, and Ball Handling, as well as orchestrating and finishing in transition.

Oh yeah and he's 6'6 and a gym rat. Listen, I'm not even saying he's a sure thing but I can't even really grasp the argument your making when your willing to ignore so many other aspects of his game. BTW who's the grand slam prospect? Because after Fultz they all have pretty obvious weaknesses that need working on.

[walk with me]

i just don't subscribe to the notion that passing or bball IQ is a plus. It's more like a bonus but I'd rather draft on the premise of other "best qualities"

Drose has won MVP
Steph Curry has won MVP
Russell Westbrook is currently an MVP candidate

none of these three had celebrated "passing" or "bball iq" upon draft night. Other attributes were called top notch. BBIQ & passing we learned about later.


Ball will wind up a solid pro. I want an multi year all star quality guy with this upcoming pick.

[Dennis Reynolds]

Haven't been watching college ball so far so I breezed through this thread to see what you guys think about this draft class. It is just me or does this draft class seem overrated? I'm refering to the fact that some GMs called it the strongest draft class in the last decade or smth like that. You guys have been watching the games so I'm curious to know what you think.

That Jackson kid for example. Just saw the highlights from his last game and he got blocked 4 times. We're talking about highlights here so that certainly doesn't sound good. It doesn't look like he has a great first step, his handle seems basic and his shooting motion looks awful. His shooting %s as well. Judging by the highlights it looks like he's a role player on his college team. That doesn't bode well too.

The only thing he seems to do well on offense moving off the ball but it also looks like he's being guarded by mentally challenged people at times. And he's still somehow a top 3-5 prospect.

What am I missing?

He's a defensive menace who, with his size, projects to be able to guard 1-4. Of ALL wing players drafted top 10 the last 5 years no one comes close to the rate at which he has blocked shots and stole the ball. His strength is obviously that he is a defensive ace. Scouts and writers have praised his motor too. At 6'8 it's actually not all too common to find a guy who's all over the place the way Jackson is. He has obvious shortcomings with the hitch in his shot and percentages that reflect that. That first step that your talking about is not necessarily there because teams are sagging off him so much. Hard for that burst to make a difference when everyone is playing your drive and not respecting your shot. JJ is also a good playmaker at his size but unfortunately doesn't really get to showcase that much in Self's system and Kansas runs their offense through 2 ball dominant guards. Right now his only real weakness is his thin frame and his stroke, which is why people see so much potential.

The problem from the Heat perspective is are they willing to have such a similar prospect as Winslow? It's an interesting thought because a frontcourt of Jackson, Winslow, Hassan would be elite defensively no doubt. But you would really have to hope at least one of them finds their offensive game in the next 2-3 years. With both of them being 20 years old, it might not be a bad bet to make at the end of the day.

Thanks for the answer. The part about Jackson not being able to blow by guys because the players guarding him don't have to respect his shot is kinda my point. If he can't do it in college how do you expect him to do it in the NBA? There's a chance Jackson will eventually be able to do it but I think it's a very small one and I know I wouldn't bet on it if I were a GM. At least with a top 5 pick in a supposedly strong draft.

[walk with me]

Just because a players best attributes are IQ and passing doesn't mean you have to negate their other strengths? CP3 didn't come into the league being elite at any of those things... so please tell me who in the draft projects to be elite at that many things from the get go ?

Anyways there's a an argument to be made that 17 games into the season and shooting the 3, mostly at NBA range, at a 43% clip is a strength. In fact that's considered elite shooting at the NBA level. Also, his assist to turnover ratio is off the charts and he has a very good handle. I'd argue that his strengths are actually High IQ, Passing, Shooting, and Ball Handling, as well as orchestrating and finishing in transition.

Oh yeah and he's 6'6 and a gym rat. Listen, I'm not even saying he's a sure thing but I can't even really grasp the argument your making when your willing to ignore so many other aspects of his game. BTW who's the grand slam prospect? Because after Fultz they all have pretty obvious weaknesses that need working on.

I'm comfortable being wrong if I am. I just have an opinion that's not like everyone elses....

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/chris-paul

look at CP3 pre draft profile. Notice what the first touted attributes are... scoring & getting into the paint. I doubt any of these up & comers will be elite out of college immediately. My point is I'd rather draft a guy that eventually can work their way into an MVP or perennial all star discussion and I don't see a jason kidd clone doing that in this era of basketball. Ball shot isn't working in the NBA, sorry to burst your bubble lol. Show me another guy in the league who's an elite 3 point shooter with poor form like balls. Maybe he fixes it but as it is, I don't see that converting.

To me drafting ball would be like drafting Caron Butler. Very solid & respectable player that will last a while. But not someone that makes your franchise.

[MartyCONLONNN]

i just don't subscribe to the notion that passing or bball IQ is a plus. It's more like a bonus but I'd rather draft on the premise of other "best qualities"

Drose has won MVP
Steph Curry has won MVP
Russell Westbrook is currently an MVP candidate

none of these three had celebrated "passing" or "bball iq" upon draft night. Other attributes were called top notch. BBIQ & passing we learned about later.


Ball will wind up a solid pro. I want an multi year all star quality guy with this upcoming pick.

Actually Steph was highly seen as a tweener who was heavily doubted by many. Had an incredible stroke and was praised for his high bball IQ so there was hope for that to help a transition to the PG even though he hadn't gotten many reps at the spot. It took him 4 seasons to actually not be labeled a bust.

Russell was raw athleticism. Hadn't even been playing basketball for that long. No one in this draft or any others recently for that matter compares to him as an athlete. Every team in the league would have taken Rose and Beasley before him. Your examples of Curry and Westbrook are the best examples of hindsight

D Rose was a consensus #1 like a Fultz but I don't really get the argument for him being an MVP as a validation for anything other than he was taken where he was supposed to be ... with the first pick. That's what you hope from winning the lottery, but you have to win the lottery to acquire that chance. He's had a great career, but his lack of shooting and his low playmaking ability have stunted his growth and his career is now in decline. Injuries took his main strength away from him and he hasn't been able to evolve his game as a PG because of a lack of the very strengths (passing and IQ) you claim are overrated.

The closest thing to a multi star guarantee with this pick is Fultz, and even that is no guarantee, which is why he's highly regarded as the consensus number 1. You use hindsight way too much. Is your argument that you just want Fultz? who are the other grand slam prospects?

[QUIZ]

The one thing Ball has going for him is his ability to impact winning. UCLA sucked last year and now they're what? 16-1? The team is pretty meh besides him, Fultz or any of the other prospects for that matter can't claim to impact winning the way that he does.

[leoshes]

people tossing around jason kidd comparisons but what would jason kidd do in todays NBA? Would he be better than Curry? Kyrie? Westbrook? Isiah Thomas? Kemba Walker? John Wall? CP3? Kyle Lowry?.

Yes.

Kid was a great defender, rebounded, passer, & could get to the rim at will. Let alone the fact that he made everyone around him better. Not like some of the guys you have on there who only made themselves better. Kid was a generational player.

[heat4life]

The one thing Ball has going for him is his ability to impact winning. UCLA sucked last year and now they're what? 16-1? The team is pretty meh besides him, Fultz or any of the other prospects for that matter can't claim to impact winning the way that he does.

I was thinking the same thing. He has Jason Kidd written all over him. Kidd turned teams into winners despite the flawed jump shoot for most of his prime. Plus, after watching Chris Paul give us a lesson on "how-to-create-and-elevate-the-game-of-your-teammates-with-your-crisp-passing-and-play-making", yeah I want one of those.

[QUIZ]

The one thing Ball has going for him is his ability to impact winning. UCLA sucked last year and now they're what? 16-1? The team is pretty meh besides him, Fultz or any of the other prospects for that matter can't claim to impact winning the way that he does.

I was thinking the same thing. He has Jason Kidd written all over him. Kidd turned teams into winners despite the flawed jump shoot for most of his prime. Plus, after watching Chris Paul give us a lesson on "how-to-create-and-elevate-the-game-of-your-teammates-with-your-crisp-passing-and-play-making", yeah I want one of those.

Lets assume we get the #2 pick and Fultz goes first, I wonder if we go Ball, DSJ, or Josh Jackson. Honestly in that scenario it probably comes down to DSJ and Ball, tough choice. Given the opportunity does Riles go with the big PG or the mini one?

[cyclix]

I think Lonzo Ball can turn the Heat into a high octane offense. His style of play can turn the Heat into a TOP 10 offensive efficient team in the future. But his FT shooting and shooting form in general is suspect. UCLA is one of the best offensive teams in the NCAA. If Ball's PG skills can translate well to Miami, he becomes the face of a franchise instantly and he would be a very marketable in a mid market city, and he would sellout AAA everytime.

[Bishop45]

Haven't been watching college ball so far so I breezed through this thread to see what you guys think about this draft class. It is just me or does this draft class seem overrated? I'm refering to the fact that some GMs called it the strongest draft class in the last decade or smth like that. You guys have been watching the games so I'm curious to know what you think.

That Jackson kid for example. Just saw the highlights from his last game and he got blocked 4 times. We're talking about highlights here so that certainly doesn't sound good. It doesn't look like he has a great first step, his handle seems basic and his shooting motion looks awful. His shooting %s as well. Judging by the highlights it looks like he's a role player on his college team. That doesn't bode well too.

The only thing he seems to do well on offense moving off the ball but it also looks like he's being guarded by mentally challenged people at times. And he's still somehow a top 3-5 prospect.

What am I missing?

He's just a smart basketball player with great physical tools and a decent head on his shoulders (Not to mention the hair).

I know you want Superstar potential and want to see it on display early, especially offensively but things don't always work that way. A kid like that with at least a floor of a smart role player is a valuable gamble. I wouldn't mind at all having Jackson play as a lengthy 2 or 4 next to Winslow, he's that versatile.

And let's not call player's we don't know mentally challenged, mmhmkay..

[MartyCONLONNN]

Thanks for the answer. The part about Jackson not being able to blow by guys because the players guarding him don't have to respect his shot is kinda my point. If he can't do it in college how do you expect him to do it in the NBA? There's a chance Jackson will eventually be able to do it but I think it's a very small one and I know I wouldn't bet on it if I were a GM. At least with a top 5 pick in a supposedly strong draft.

I like his game but I cringe at the thought watching JJ and Winslow brick jumper after jumper.

In general I think it will be a really good draft. I think a lot of the guys in the top 10 can be starters but the all star potential guys are really hard to predict. Outside of Fultz, it could be a shot in the dark as far as "super star" talent goes. As outsiders we don't see the drive that some of these guys have. With guys like Jimmy Butler, Kawai Leonard, Giannis, their renown work ethic is a big a part of their success as their physical tools.

[Bishop45]

Very few things about Ball do I buy immediately translating to the league

If Fultz goes first and we have the second pick, I'd go Tatum

[heat4life]

The one thing Ball has going for him is his ability to impact winning. UCLA sucked last year and now they're what? 16-1? The team is pretty meh besides him, Fultz or any of the other prospects for that matter can't claim to impact winning the way that he does.

I was thinking the same thing. He has Jason Kidd written all over him. Kidd turned teams into winners despite the flawed jump shoot for most of his prime. Plus, after watching Chris Paul give us a lesson on "how-to-create-and-elevate-the-game-of-your-teammates-with-your-crisp-passing-and-play-making", yeah I want one of those.

Lets assume we get the #2 pick and Fultz goes first, I wonder if we go Ball, DSJ, or Josh Jackson. Honestly in that scenario it probably comes down to DSJ and Ball, tough choice. Given the opportunity does Riles go with the big PG or the mini one?

Funny, the 1994 draft had similar dilemmas as this one with the killer scorer in Glenn Robinson, the magician PG with questionable shot in Jason Kidd and the all around player in Grant Hill. Milwaukee went for the killer scorer over the uncertain one leaving Dallas to pick Kidd. He was a triple double threat from the first few years of his career. Then his scoring got consistent - although never confused as scorer - and he elevated his team to winning with an all-around-game. What was even more impressive was him developing a reliable 3pt shot late in his career.

With Ball we could have ourselves a player who will make Hassan, Justice and J-Rich better just by being on the court. We would still lack that reliable scorer on the roster. The type of scorer that DSJ and/or Fultz can be. It would be a hard choice but a choice that I would be excited to make - if I was Riley because it means we are at the top of the lottery.

I still need to see all of these players ball in the tournament before I make vote.

[greg4012]

Damn DSJ has one lackluster game and he falls out of favor with everyone? He's still my guy. He has seriously elite potential

[Dennis Reynolds]

Haven't been watching college ball so far so I breezed through this thread to see what you guys think about this draft class. It is just me or does this draft class seem overrated? I'm refering to the fact that some GMs called it the strongest draft class in the last decade or smth like that. You guys have been watching the games so I'm curious to know what you think.

That Jackson kid for example. Just saw the highlights from his last game and he got blocked 4 times. We're talking about highlights here so that certainly doesn't sound good. It doesn't look like he has a great first step, his handle seems basic and his shooting motion looks awful. His shooting %s as well. Judging by the highlights it looks like he's a role player on his college team. That doesn't bode well too.

The only thing he seems to do well on offense moving off the ball but it also looks like he's being guarded by mentally challenged people at times. And he's still somehow a top 3-5 prospect.

What am I missing?

He's just a smart basketball player with great physical tools and a decent head on his shoulders (Not to mention the hair).

I know you want Superstar potential and want to see it on display early, especially offensively but things don't always work that way. A kid like that with at least a floor of a smart role player is a valuable gamble. I wouldn't mind at all having Jackson play as a lengthy 2 or 4 next to Winslow, he's that versatile.

And let's not call player's we don't know mentally challenged, mmhmkay..

I was just joking cause those guys kept losing Jackson all the time for no reason, didn't think it would sound offensive.

Anyway, I guess we just like different type of prospects. To me, if a guy can't shoot and can't get to the rim at will and finish consistently, I would never pick him with a top pick. Well, I would in a crappy draft but you get the point.

MartyCONLONNN mentioned Giannis, Bulter and Kawhi and I think that's where most GMs screw things up. You almost never see guys develop like that. It's basically like trying to win the lottery. Not exactly something I would pin my hopes on.
Though I do understand gambling on out of this world athletes even for the NBA standards like Giannis for example. I would just never bet on guys who are just very good or even great athletes with very limited skill sets.

[Bishop45]

Spoiler:

Haven't been watching college ball so far so I breezed through this thread to see what you guys think about this draft class. It is just me or does this draft class seem overrated? I'm refering to the fact that some GMs called it the strongest draft class in the last decade or smth like that. You guys have been watching the games so I'm curious to know what you think.

That Jackson kid for example. Just saw the highlights from his last game and he got blocked 4 times. We're talking about highlights here so that certainly doesn't sound good. It doesn't look like he has a great first step, his handle seems basic and his shooting motion looks awful. His shooting %s as well. Judging by the highlights it looks like he's a role player on his college team. That doesn't bode well too.

The only thing he seems to do well on offense moving off the ball but it also looks like he's being guarded by mentally challenged people at times. And he's still somehow a top 3-5 prospect.

What am I missing?

He's just a smart basketball player with great physical tools and a decent head on his shoulders (Not to mention the hair).

I know you want Superstar potential and want to see it on display early, especially offensively but things don't always work that way. A kid like that with at least a floor of a smart role player is a valuable gamble. I wouldn't mind at all having Jackson play as a lengthy 2 or 4 next to Winslow, he's that versatile.

And let's not call player's we don't know mentally challenged, mmhmkay..

I was just joking cause those guys kept losing Jackson for no reason all the time, didn't think it would sound offensive.

Anyway, I guess we just like different type of prospects. To me, if a guy can't shoot and can't get to the rim at will and finish consistently, I would never pick him with a top pick. Well, I would in a crappy draft but you get the point.

MartyCONLONNN mentioned Giannis, Bulter and Kawhi and I think that's where most of GMs screw things up. You almost never see guys develop like that. It's basically like trying to win the lottery. Not exactly something I would pin my hopes on.
Though I do understand gambling on out of this world athletes even for the NBA standards like Giannis for example. I would just never bet on guys who are just very good or even great athletes with very limited skill sets.

Wouldn't outright call his skill set "Very limited" or limited at all, that's why you scout these guys on intrinsic features, they can always grow into better players or regress to smaller means. Definitely a chance he doesn't get a better shot tho

Damn DSJ has one lackluster game and he falls out of favor with everyone? He's still my guy. He has seriously elite potential

DS train still live and well, 4th best prospect to me imo

Wouldn't mind him either

[walk with me]

Actually Steph was highly seen as a tweener who was heavily doubted by many. Had an incredible stroke and was praised for his high bball IQ so there was hope for that to help a transition to the PG even though he hadn't gotten many reps at the spot. It took him 4 seasons to actually not be labeled a bust.

Russell was raw athleticism. Hadn't even been playing basketball for that long. No one in this draft or any others recently for that matter compares to him as an athlete. Every team in the league would have taken Rose and Beasley before him. Your examples of Curry and Westbrook are the best examples of hindsight

D Rose was a consensus #1 like a Fultz but I don't really get the argument for him being an MVP as a validation for anything other than he was taken where he was supposed to be ... with the first pick. That's what you hope from winning the lottery, but you have to win the lottery to acquire that chance. He's had a great career, but his lack of shooting and his low playmaking ability have stunted his growth and his career is now in decline. Injuries took his main strength away from him and he hasn't been able to evolve his game as a PG because of a lack of the very strengths (passing and IQ) you claim are overrated.

The closest thing to a multi star guarantee with this pick is Fultz, and even that is no guarantee, which is why he's highly regarded as the consensus number 1. You use hindsight way too much. Is your argument that you just want Fultz? who are the other grand slam prospects?

My original post in here is...

"ball is hype... give me fultz or give me death"

edit:

drose was sure fire
steph a lot of people was a tweener but you couldn't question his scoring ability. I thought he wouldn't pan out either but my issue was his size which ended up being irrelevant.
Russ came out in a crowded year. Beasley & Rose were ahead of him, don't think anyone doubted him

my BIGGER point is that the league hasn't boasted a PG who just "makes people better" for quite some time. Point guards like that are usually the result of a great system. Aside from Jason Kidd a lot of guys from that era who were considered talented at the time weren't "make your team" better players

- gilbert arenas
- deron williams
- CP
- Marbury
- Kidd
- Baron Davis
- Nash
- Steve Francis
- Tony Parker
- Chauncey Billups

out of all these guys Kidd, CP, Nash, and Chauncey Billups fit into the "make your team better" box. Kidd, Nash & chauncey really needed the right system around them before they got credit for "making a team better". Before the Nets, Suns & Detroit Pistons Kidd, Nash and Chauncey were great players but they didn't have this "make the team better" shtick that every one throws around. If they did they wouldn't have been thrown around as often as they were.

Kidd = 2 teams before it clicked (phx & dal)
Nash = 1 team before it clicked (dal)
Chauncey = 3 team before it clicked (bos, den, min)


I say all that to say I don't subscribe to what people are selling about ball. It's not about who's sure fire, nobody is for real unless your a Kevin durrant or Carmelo anthony. I'm just saying I'd rather waste a lotto pick on someone who's abilities are more tangible then just "making a team better".


what does that even mean honestly?


besides lebron & CP3 who "makes their team better"?