NBA Draft Lottery Thread - 7:05pm CT Tonight! (ESPN)

[emunney]

By the way, the reason Kobe is called a chucker and Duncan isn't is that Kobe takes some horrendous shots every game and Duncan never does.

[bucksbrewers3]

^ What Buckrageous said.

Kobe shot 55%TS on 20 shots.

Duncan shot 55%TS on 14 shots.

Kobe held the same efficiency on more shots. I don't really understand your point.

My whole point on Kobe was never about him being efficient or not my whole thing what I originally said was its easy to score a lot when you shoot a lot. To me he's a chucker. Any player that shoots that much is a chucker IMO regardless of how efficient they may be.

I thought "chucking" was throwing up and missing a lot of shots, not just taking a lot. I thought throwing up and making a lot of shots was not chucking, thats just scoring. How is a player supposed to score a lot of they don't take a lot of shots?

Exactly my point on why he's over rated It's easy to score when you put up 20 shots and you go to the line 7 times a game on average for your career.

Sent from my iPod touch using RealGM Forums

[bucksbrewers3]

Oh and he only mat 7 a game on 20 shots . that's 35%. So yes he's a chucker. At least that's how my math works. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong

[Buck Dweller]

But he makes a lot of those 20 shots is my point. Obviously he took a lot, but he made a lot.

[emunney]

Oh and he only mat 7 a game on 20 shots . that's 35%. So yes he's a chucker. At least that's how my math works. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong

Your numbers are all **** up.

[raferfenix]

Kyler on the Bucks:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stevekylernba/status/602122735947513856[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stevekylernba/status/602122921935556608[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stevekylernba/status/602123088315215872[/tweet]

[mattg]

If you're trading up in this draft IMO it's to get into the top 5, no point otherwise. To me that's the clear drop off in talent this draft.

As for chucking, it's simply shooting bad shots. Stuff that isn't taken in the flow of the offense, or if you want to look at it in terms of game theory, its basically taking a shot when there are clearly superior decisions that could have been made. So yeah, Kobe pulling up for a contested 28 footer with 17 on the shot clock is chucking. But no, I don't think shooting volume has much of anything to do with chucking. It just so happens that many players who shoot high volume also have bad shot selection. The volume itself though isn't an issue really. I mean, if a hypothetical team could run it's offense and every time down the result was getting a dunk for their center the entire game you'd have to be moronic to call that chucking, even if they literally did it 75 times per game.

[SpursNBucks]

If you're trading up in this draft IMO it's to get into the top 5, no point otherwise. To me that's the clear drop off in talent this draft.

I've said that for awhile

Towns
Okafor
Russell
Muiday
Winslow

Then hard to say-draft pretty deep, but mediocre. No one in the top 5 trades a pick to Bucks. #17 too far down and Henson not enough with expiring contract and inconsistent play.

[paulpressey25]

Compare him to, say, Tracy McGrady. McGrady was better than Kobe when looking at their respective peaks. But factor in longevity and there is no comparison who was the greater player over their careers.

It wasn't PPGZ that made Kobe great. It was the defense. He was a lock-down defender. That's why I would put him in that top ten of all time.

[machu46]

If you're trading up in this draft IMO it's to get into the top 5, no point otherwise. To me that's the clear drop off in talent this draft.

As for chucking, it's simply shooting bad shots. Stuff that isn't taken in the flow of the offense, or if you want to look at it in terms of game theory, its basically taking a shot when there are clearly superior decisions that could have been made. So yeah, Kobe pulling up for a contested 28 footer with 17 on the shot clock is chucking. But no, I don't think shooting volume has much of anything to do with chucking. It just so happens that many players who shoot high volume also have bad shot selection. The volume itself though isn't an issue really. I mean, if a hypothetical team could run it's offense and every time down the result was getting a dunk for their center the entire game you'd have to be moronic to call that chucking, even if they literally did it 75 times per game.

For me, it's more like a top 6 (that doesn't include Winslow) and then it drops off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[On_Wisconsin]

I'd trade up for Turner too

[AussieBuck]

Compare him to, say, Tracy McGrady. McGrady was better than Kobe when looking at their respective peaks. But factor in longevity and there is no comparison who was the greater player over their careers.

It wasn't PPGZ that made Kobe great. It was the defense. He was a lock-down defender. That's why I would put him in that top ten of all time.

Finished his run as a notable defender in 2003, held the rep for a decade. Embarrassing off ball defender for at least 6 years.

[Bernman]

Why post the reported Bucks plans in the lotto thread? We weren't even in the lotto. There are multiple threads which are better zoned for that news.

Anyways, my reaction to the report would be that Bobby Portis fits the bill best, Harrell 2nd. Turner won't be available, and we've also been told a trade up is very unlikely. And I'm with those who believe it'd be incredibly foolish in this draft, unless you can somehow get into the top 4 without sacrificing either of the big 2. I'm not even fully convinced the players who go 5-15 will be as good on average as the ones who go 15-25. Where we sit right now, value-wise, is the strength of this draft by far.

Please say no to Christian Wood.

I would hope the Bucks wouldn't let their entire plan leak that much or be so narrow-minded as to target 1-2 types of players at 1-2 positions. Hopefully they're open to others like Grant for a bpa/fit combo angle. Hammond/Kidd don't have an M.O. since this is the first time they've really worked a 1st rd together. We were told Hammond handles the drafting, but you figure Kidd is doing directing on the overall plan to tie his hands somewhat like Kohl/Skiles.

[drew881]

Hammond/Kidd don't have an M.O. since this is the first time they've really worked a 1st rd together. We were told Hammond handles the drafting, but you figure Kidd is doing directing on team needs to tie his hands somewhat like Kohl/Skiles.

I'm not as worried about this because we have our backup positions very much set for next year, especially in the back court and center positions. I don't think any of the rookies are going to steal many minutes for Bayless and Mayo, and I think Kidd is still going to rely heavily on Zaza.

PF however would be wide open in this regard. If we draft Portis, I'm sure he will get big minutes splitting time with Ersan. The only thing that throws the veteran second unit out of whack will be injuries.

So I'm not as worried about the team drafting for need a la Kohl. If we see the Bucks move down and trade for someone like Joe Johnson, then we can start playing the Kohl card.

[Bernman]

I'm not as worried about this because we have our backup positions very much set for next year, especially in the back court and center positions. I don't think any of the rookies are going to steal many minutes for Bayless and Mayo, and I think Kidd is still going to rely heavily on Zaza.

PF however would be wide open in this regard. If we draft Portis, I'm sure he will get big minutes splitting time with Ersan. The only thing that throws the veteran second unit out of whack will be injuries.

So I'm not as worried about the team drafting for need a la Kohl. If we see the Bucks move down and trade for someone like Joe Johnson, then we can start playing the Kohl card.

They could draft to specifically address the near future or even present perceived needs of center or shooting in general. That's what Kyler's Tweet indicates. It doesn't have to be 1:1 to the Kohl era. It was analogy about a higher-up in the pecking order having major influence to tie Hammond's hands. So Hammond is kind of in control of the draft, and kind of not.

[drew881]

I don't think it matters as much in this draft though. There don't seem to be as many boom/bust players like Giannis with our draft position. If we pick a shooter with little upside that may be less indicative of Kidd's influence as it is just the board for this year. I think we could try for the boom/bust type of player even with our second round pick, especially if we can get up to 31/36.

[Bernman]

I agree it doesn't matter as much in this draft because there is depth and a high majority of players are similar in caliber, but if we think like: "shooter with decent length" or "athletic center"; and it leads us to Hunter or Wood within those rather narrow paramaters, ultimately the strategy probably would have contributed to us screwing up the pick somehow. Like the Nuggets when they drafted Gary Harris last year. Hunter is the Gary Harris of this draft, I think. And If we go that route, I'd suspect it was more so due to Kidd, since our 6-7 previous drafts with Hammond in the F.O. didn't resemble that.

[zmanishere11]

The way things are shaking out - I think we stay at 17. There's going to be a bunch of guys with a few elite skills and a few limitations available. Probably not super stars but definitely guys who can make a difference for us next year. Assuming we stay where we're at, I'm hoping for a "bigger" guy, specifically:

Frank Kaminsky
Sam Dekkar
Montrez Harrell
Kevin Looney

[SpursNBucks]

The way things are shaking out - I think we stay at 17. There's going to be a bunch of guys with a few elite skills and a few limitations available. Probably not super stars but definitely guys who can make a difference for us next year. Assuming we stay where we're at, I'm hoping for a "bigger" guy, specifically:

Frank Kaminsky
Sam Dekkar
Montrez Harrell
Kevin Looney

Dekker finished the year well minus Champ game, but don't like his overall game.
Harrell measured 6'6" in shoes and can't shoot FTs- not the shooter they need.
Looney just played too passive.
Kaminski is a guy that wasn't going to test well, but still gets it done.

Probably liking Portis the most out of players that could be there. Followed by Booker and Oubre. Upshaw is the swing for the fences pick, but so much risk.

[German Athens]

The way things are shaking out - I think we stay at 17. There's going to be a bunch of guys with a few elite skills and a few limitations available. Probably not super stars but definitely guys who can make a difference for us next year. Assuming we stay where we're at, I'm hoping for a "bigger" guy, specifically:

Frank Kaminsky
Sam Dekkar
Montrez Harrell
Kevin Looney

Dekker finished the year well minus Champ game, but don't like his overall game.
Harrell measured 6'6" in shoes and can't shoot FTs- not the shooter they need.
Looney just played too passive.
Kaminski is a guy that wasn't going to test well, but still gets it done.

Probably liking Portis the most out of players that could be there. Followed by Booker and Oubre. Upshaw is the swing for the fences pick, but so much risk.

Harrell measured 6'7 without shoes.