The Jarrett Culver Thread

[Mattya]

Should there be any comparison of the draft prospect Devin Vassel to Culver at least in regard to both being described as more of a sure thing, however some saying higher floor/lower ceiling? I've read one article saying as much about Vassell and I'm wondering if this comes from people seeing them with lower burst or lower extreme athletics and thus thinking their top end might have a cap? I think people were claiming the BPA and most sure thing about Culver at #6 at the time. Correct me if wrong. Obviously they have a difference in college proven shooting levels and possibly even defense. But I wonder about this low ceiling talk.

I don’t remember the talk of Culver’s athleticism limiting his ceiling. That was more so his shooting and if it could translate or be fixed. Vessel’s potential is limited by his lack of a handle and ability to get to the rim with the ball in his hand.

[old school 34]

Should there be any comparison of the draft prospect Devin Vassel to Culver at least in regard to both being described as more of a sure thing, however some saying higher floor/lower ceiling? I've read one article saying as much about Vassell and I'm wondering if this comes from people seeing them with lower burst or lower extreme athletics and thus thinking their top end might have a cap? I think people were claiming the BPA and most sure thing about Culver at #6 at the time. Correct me if wrong. Obviously they have a difference in college proven shooting levels and possibly even defense. But I wonder about this low ceiling talk.

I don’t remember the talk of Culver’s athleticism limiting his ceiling. That was more so his shooting and if it could translate or be fixed. Vessel’s potential is limited by his lack of a handle and ability to get to the rim with the ball in his hand.

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

[Mattya]

Should there be any comparison of the draft prospect Devin Vassel to Culver at least in regard to both being described as more of a sure thing, however some saying higher floor/lower ceiling? I've read one article saying as much about Vassell and I'm wondering if this comes from people seeing them with lower burst or lower extreme athletics and thus thinking their top end might have a cap? I think people were claiming the BPA and most sure thing about Culver at #6 at the time. Correct me if wrong. Obviously they have a difference in college proven shooting levels and possibly even defense. But I wonder about this low ceiling talk.

I don’t remember the talk of Culver’s athleticism limiting his ceiling. That was more so his shooting and if it could translate or be fixed. Vessel’s potential is limited by his lack of a handle and ability to get to the rim with the ball in his hand.

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

[Neeva]

I don’t remember the talk of Culver’s athleticism limiting his ceiling. That was more so his shooting and if it could translate or be fixed. Vessel’s potential is limited by his lack of a handle and ability to get to the rim with the ball in his hand.

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

Huge reason why I am not a fan of the wolves picking him unless they trade down to around 10.

[Jedzz]

I don’t remember the talk of Culver’s athleticism limiting his ceiling. That was more so his shooting and if it could translate or be fixed. Vessel’s potential is limited by his lack of a handle and ability to get to the rim with the ball in his hand.

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

He's actually kind of a downhill mover towards the basket and finishes hard in a moving offense. Not sure I can find much standing still Iso on display.

Watch on YouTube

[Mattya]

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

He's actually kind of a downhill mover towards the basket and finishes hard in a moving offense. Not sure I can find much standing still Iso on display.

Watch on YouTube

On the break he seems fine, but his low FT attempts and drives to the basket are about his only weakness. It’s why he settles for so many fade-away awkward jumpers on his drives.

[Jedzz]

I'd argue though that Vassell's weaknesses are much easier to address....if choosing in vaccum of just the two...I'd pick Vassell, but I continue to hold out hope that Vassell might measure a little longer & might be more 3 than 2.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

Huge reason why I am not a fan of the wolves picking him unless they trade down to around 10.

You are so confident about this. Astounding.

[Jedzz]

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

He's actually kind of a downhill mover towards the basket and finishes hard in a moving offense. Not sure I can find much standing still Iso on display.

Watch on YouTube

On the break he seems fine, but his low FT attempts and drives to the basket are about his only weakness. It’s why he settles for so many fade-away awkward jumpers on his drives.

Do his jumpers look awkward to you?

Maybe his low FT attempts are because he's a really good shooter from all over the court so his team wanted more of that. I see that video and see a confident net finisher going up with two hands. Defenders turning away saying forget it. Someone that could cut for Wolves, collect the pass and throw it down if they need him to. If a lane is open he might drive it in, if not he's going to just shoot it. I don't see James Harden going Iso for a minute each possession, no. I don't see Derrick Rose using amazing handles to skirt around all the big guys, no. I see a larger player saying he's going to the net and get out of my way. And if that never happens at the next level, at least we know he can sit outside and shoot 3s all day for Rosas offense and then get back and defend. But if he is a bigger player and ends up adding a little mass, he could be bullying into that same type of finish like some in the NBA that draw a lot of fouls doing so without Derrick Rose handles and wiggle.

I counter that with the people that are fine with drafting Maxey who absolutely does show a disdain for finishing all the way at or above the rim and even releases layups and floaters really early. Why is that fine for someone that will be onball more? I'm still suspect of his handles and his shortened drives to the far left side of the net.

[Norseman79]

I am confused about folks knocking Vassel. I am on board taking him at 3 if his size checks out. I get he may not be an iso player or have a great handle, who cares. If he is an elite 3 and D wing who runs floor hard, slashes and finishes I might even take him 1 overall if he checks in at 6'7 or 6'8.

[Jedzz]

I am confused about folks knocking Vassel. I am on board taking him at 3 if his size checks out. I get he may not be an iso player or have a great handle, who cares. If he is an elite 3 and D wing who runs floor hard, slashes and finishes I might even take him 1 overall if he checks in at 6'7 or 6'8.

I am a little confused about their choice to do so as well. I'm all for being critical on all of them. But hopefully in some sort of fair unbiased way comparing them all to some sort of equal Pro or Semi Pro or No Pro level. What have they already been showing, and how much is in the imagination?

We are in the jarrett Culver thread so to bring him back into this fold as an example all I kept hearing from people defending his choice was...and now one year later did much of that end up looking true or a bunch of imaginations running wild?

Here's my thoughts on the draft. Don't listen to anyone's positive musings and certainly not mock drafts. If you use that at all use it to find a player that interests you enough to find out more. But do take note of the critical opinions from others and while watching keep those in mind, see if they ring true or not. That's all I'm trying to do. What's hype and nonsense and what is see-able.

When we are talking about the top 10 of the draft I want to see some amount of high level something proven.
If we are talking about the top 5 of the draft, and for example claiming a prospect is going to be a high level creator for his team onball, then I want to see hints or shades of Pistol Pete Maravich in there somewhere. Otherwise stop projecting things that aren't there and find someone that is showing you something is there. When people say "it's a weak draft" year after year after year, you can take half of that and call it a smokescreen and the other half might be because they don't see a Pistol Pete special skill level player yet. If you can't find a special one showing through yet, at least target the ones showing they can already play well. Maybe those players can just play, and maybe they show you that special skill later. The last ten years of Wolves drafts all I've been hearing is negativity for any player that already has shown they can shoot. I want to give up following NBA ball altogether when I see picks of players without shooting ability.

[url]

Watch on YouTube

[/url]

[KGdaBom]

Dribbling and the ability to get to the rim will likely never be apart of Vassell’s game. Handling is one thing that is incredibly difficult to develop this late. It just means he has potential to be an elite role player and not more. He will be a spot up player who will rely on hard close outs to drive an open lane, cutting or offensive rebounding to score at the rim.

Huge reason why I am not a fan of the wolves picking him unless they trade down to around 10.

You are so confident about this. Astounding.

Vassell any earlier than 10 would be too early.

[Norseman79]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

[Baseline81]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

If Edwards is drafted first overall, it would mean one of Okogie and Culver are being dealt, IMO.

[Neeva]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

Why not keep both Ant and Culver. Either can slide to the three.
Definitely trade Okogie. Maybe to move up from 17 and get Vassell or Nesmith? Or trade him for the knicks clippers pick and take Mcdaniels?

Then draft tillman at 33.

[KGdaBom]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

I just have my doubts about Edwards being the choice under any circumstance.

[KGdaBom]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

If Edwards is drafted first overall, it would mean one of Okogie and Culver are being dealt, IMO.

Or Beasley being let go.

[Norseman79]

Back to Culver, if the Wolves have seen what the want from him, and have confidence in him, than Wiseman is the pick if we make it. If the are unsure on Culver, Edwards is the choice.

Why not keep both Ant and Culver. Either can slide to the three.
Definitely trade Okogie. Maybe to move up from 17 and get Vassell or Nesmith? Or trade him for the knicks clippers pick and take Mcdaniels?

Then draft tillman at 33.

They could certainly keep Culver and draft Edwards. I was suggesting if they don't see the "it" factor they want in Culver, Edwards makes sense. Keep Culver if nothing else as depth

[Jedzz]

Huge reason why I am not a fan of the wolves picking him unless they trade down to around 10.

You are so confident about this. Astounding.

Vassell any earlier than 10 would be too early.

Because Tankathon told you?

Top 5 was too early for Curry.

Top 10 was too early for Kobe.

Next year when Vassell and Haliburton have made most the the names some of you throw around vanish completely we can all discuss again. Don't quote again until then please. Much appreciated.

[jpatrick]

Obviously shooting is the swing skill for Culver. His form wasn’t great last year with a slow release; and let’s not forget the disaster he was on the free thrown line. However, I had forgotten That in the last 30 games or so, he had shot 37-38% from three. Not on huge volume, but it’s definitely progress.

[KGdaBom]

Huge reason why I am not a fan of the wolves picking him unless they trade down to around 10.

You are so confident about this. Astounding.

Vassell any earlier than 10 would be too early.

I'm going to revise this. I just don't think Vassell should be our pick at 1. 7 or so would probably be OK.