2018 NBA Draft Thread

[emunney]

Pick anyone that can hit a freaking 3 consistently. Pick the BSA (Best Shooter Available).

That's the type of attitude that gets Luke Kennard drafted ahead of Donovan Mitchell

We should trade for Kennard though.

[bucksfansince88]

Jontay Porter has game! I hope we bring him in for a closer look

[Rockmaninoff]

Pick anyone that can hit a freaking 3 consistently. Pick the BSA (Best Shooter Available).

That's the type of attitude that gets Luke Kennard drafted ahead of Donovan Mitchell

We should trade for Kennard though.

Yep, Kennard looked good, and that feels like an organization that could be had.

[AussieBuck]

Got to draft the Admiral!

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

[Garbs_7]

Pick anyone that can hit a freaking 3 consistently. Pick the BSA (Best Shooter Available).

That's the type of attitude that gets Luke Kennard drafted ahead of Donovan Mitchell

We should trade for Kennard though.

Would have no problem adding Kennard to this team. Would like to try and pry Monk from Charlotte too.

[LuessiT]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

[emunney]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You mean because Bamba is impressive in interviews compared to, say, Mitchell Robinson?

I think it's one piece of many, but it's as much about getting a clear window into the guy's thought processes as anything else. It's not so much about vocabulary = good and simple speech = bad. It's can I have confidence that this guy understands what he's supposed to be doing. And then the next step is, is there evidence that he's making progress toward that. Lots of different ways to put those pieces together imo.

[LuessiT]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You mean because Bamba is impressive in interviews compared to, say, Mitchell Robinson?

Yes. And there has been a track record of smart prospects (not necessarely basketball IQ) doing well. Jaylen Brown, CJ, etc..

[3Diamantidis]

It will be very funny if the celtics win the lottery with that lakers pick.

[xTitan]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You have plenty of evidence what low IQ basketball players get you....it's clear when you watch teams like Boston, intelligence plays a big role

[emunney]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You mean because Bamba is impressive in interviews compared to, say, Mitchell Robinson?

Yes. And there has been a track record of smart prospects (not necessarely basketball IQ) doing well. Jaylen Brown, CJ, etc..

Yeah, it's a bit of a briar patch empirically speaking. My sense is that however you define it, being smart isn't going to hurt unless different pursuits pull them away from the game, which is generally the concern that teams seem to have with obviously smart guys. The thing is that it's not like that doesn't happen to dumb guys. They're just distracted by different things.

[LuessiT]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You have plenty of evidence what low IQ basketball players get you....it's clear when you watch teams like Boston, intelligence plays a big role

That's not what I ment. High IQ doesn't equal high basketball IQ. Those two things are seperate. What I'm asking is how much does one let the IQ of players affect their draft stock.

[xTitan]

How do you let a players intelligence affect your board? E.g. Bamba? Really torn on how much I should value that.

You have plenty of evidence what low IQ basketball players get you....it's clear when you watch teams like Boston, intelligence plays a big role

That's not what I ment. High IQ doesn't equal high basketball IQ. Those two things are seperate. What I'm asking is how much does one let the IQ of players affect their draft stock.

IMO intelligent people are generally high achievers, and not only pick things up quicker but they also process much faster.....personally I put a lot of stock into it.

[LuessiT]

You mean because Bamba is impressive in interviews compared to, say, Mitchell Robinson?

Yes. And there has been a track record of smart prospects (not necessarely basketball IQ) doing well. Jaylen Brown, CJ, etc..

Yeah, it's a bit of a briar patch empirically speaking. My sense is that however you define it, being smart isn't going to hurt unless different pursuits pull them away from the game, which is generally the concern that teams seem to have with obviously smart guys. The thing is that it's not like that doesn't happen to dumb guys. They're just distracted by different things.

Yeah but do you bump up Bamba for being smart? Does him being smart improve his average outcome? I see some corelation between IQ and developement, but is it only corelation or causation?

[emunney]

Yes. And there has been a track record of smart prospects (not necessarely basketball IQ) doing well. Jaylen Brown, CJ, etc..

Yeah, it's a bit of a briar patch empirically speaking. My sense is that however you define it, being smart isn't going to hurt unless different pursuits pull them away from the game, which is generally the concern that teams seem to have with obviously smart guys. The thing is that it's not like that doesn't happen to dumb guys. They're just distracted by different things.

Yeah but do you bump up Bamba for being smart? Does him being smart improve his average outcome? I see some corelation between IQ and developement, but is it only corelation or causation?

I think the theory of it helping is more convincing than the opposite, so I think it gives him a better shot. It wouldn't be one of the top 5 things I'd consider. I think it's more like a threshold skill, really. If you're not too dumb, the marginal improvement of being Andrew Nicholson smart vs. being average is basically nothing. The biggest risk of being too dumb, of course, is that you do something so dumb you're taken off the board completely.

So when I watch Bamba's interviews, it's like, "Ok, one less thing to worry about." And when I watch Mitchell Robinson's interviews, it's like, "Ok."

[Fotis St]

People are forgetting how awful PG was before the Bledsoe trade I see.

Brogdon and the starters was not terrible from what I remember.

I mean everything after Brogdon.

Delly was the only other pg on the team and he was hot garbage.

You don't remember well... it was proven that Brogdon cannot guard starting PGs in this league.

He also doesn't have the handles-speed combo to create for others as a point guard. He is really smart and sometimes goes to the rim with a hesitation move but he can't create for himself or others consistenly. Therefore he should be either a backup PG or a SG.

Our offense sucks cause Giannis only can break the D off the dribble. Delly can't,Brog can't, Bled doesn't have the feel for the game, he can break the D and finish at the rim but when he chooses to pass the ball ... the pass is really off target or ends on fans seats...

Bucks have huge problem on 2 basic fundamentals of basketball, Rebounding and PG with 3pt shot and handles.

Edit: PS Giannis passes are off target lately ... Giannis should be our 2nd ball handler. Truth hurts ... Love you Giannis. Keep getting better.

[LuessiT]

Yeah, it's a bit of a briar patch empirically speaking. My sense is that however you define it, being smart isn't going to hurt unless different pursuits pull them away from the game, which is generally the concern that teams seem to have with obviously smart guys. The thing is that it's not like that doesn't happen to dumb guys. They're just distracted by different things.

Yeah but do you bump up Bamba for being smart? Does him being smart improve his average outcome? I see some corelation between IQ and developement, but is it only corelation or causation?

I think the theory of it helping is more convincing than the opposite, so I think it gives him a better shot. It wouldn't be one of the top 5 things I'd consider. I think it's more like a threshold skill, really. If you're not too dumb, the marginal improvement of being Andrew Nicholson smart vs. being average is basically nothing. The biggest risk of being too dumb, of course, is that you do something so dumb you're taken off the board completely.

So when I watch Bamba's interviews, it's like, "Ok, one less thing to worry about." And when I watch Mitchell Robinson's interviews, it's like, "Ok."

I get that but lets say both players meet the 'threshold'. Is there a point where intelligence puts one prospect above the other? I mean it should have an effect but it's very hard to quantify.

By the way one thing about Ayton that bothers me is that he himself seems to be very self-aware that he's lacking in defense and motor but hasn't shown much improvement in those departments. I feel like it's hard to make the argument that he's going to pick that part of the game up once he gets into an NBA program.

[BroncoBuck]

It will be very funny if the celtics win the lottery with that lakers pick.

Yeah, because Philly would keep it. Celtics only get it if it’s 2-5 I believe.

[emunney]

Yeah but do you bump up Bamba for being smart? Does him being smart improve his average outcome? I see some corelation between IQ and developement, but is it only corelation or causation?

I think the theory of it helping is more convincing than the opposite, so I think it gives him a better shot. It wouldn't be one of the top 5 things I'd consider. I think it's more like a threshold skill, really. If you're not too dumb, the marginal improvement of being Andrew Nicholson smart vs. being average is basically nothing. The biggest risk of being too dumb, of course, is that you do something so dumb you're taken off the board completely.

So when I watch Bamba's interviews, it's like, "Ok, one less thing to worry about." And when I watch Mitchell Robinson's interviews, it's like, "Ok."

I get that but lets say both players meet the 'threshold'. Is there a point where intelligence puts one prospect above the other? I mean it should have an effect but it's very hard to quantify.

By the way one thing about Ayton that bothers me is that he himself seems to be very self-aware that he's lacking in defense and motor but hasn't shown much improvement in those departments. I feel like it's hard to make the argument that he's going to pick that part of the game up once he gets into an NBA program.

Right your point about Ayton is the type of thing I was getting at early in this discussion with saying it can give you a clearer window into their thought process. Then you can take that and what you see and decide whether it's dissonant or consistent or whatever else. I.e. it's generally good for the evaluative process when the guy can talk. You might get better information. But it's not necessarily that important to what that player ultimately becomes.

Between two players who are both 'smart enough', it'd be pretty far down the list. All things being equal, sure, take the smarter guy, but all things are never equal.

[LuessiT]

With that said, I absolutely hate Mitchell Robinsons personality. He might be a top 10 pick ability-whise but damn...