2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread

[Marcus]

Right, wasn't what I said though. .

I never said you said it. I said some of the arguments being made against Ball are illogical, referring to Duke's post. The one you quoted me quoting. So why you would think I was talking to you is beyond me.

You introduced that into our conversation......what I said to you was strictly in response to what you asked about Fultz and usage. It's cool though this circle is ongoing.

For the record I like both kids, love what they both bring to the table, head over heels for this draft, think if there was a draft for fit this is it, started with Josh Jackson as my number 1 and I still have him there, and can't wait to see how this thing plays out.

[Kobblehead]

There are two discussions that are getting tangled up.

Who's the better prospect?

Who's the better fit with the core of players we're trying to move forward with?

IMO, as of right now, Fultz and Ball are each an answer to one of those questions. Fultz the former, Ball the latter.

It's up for debate which answer to what question is more important.

[PhilasFinest]

There are two discussions that are getting tangled up.

Who's the better prospect?

Who's the better fit with the core of players we're trying to move forward with?

IMO, as of right now, Fultz and Ball are each an answer to one of those questions. Fultz the former, Ball the latter.

It's up for debate which answer to what question is more important.

The good thing is, there is a ton of basketball to be played to help try and answer those questions. We also hopefully get to see Simmons soon, and what he does the last half of the season will hopefully better answer the 2nd question.

Either way, I'm pretty damn excited for this draft class. Im even more enamored with the progress of guys like Jackson/Issac who I feel could be big time perimeter players if they can hone in on there skill sets.

[eagereyez]

Yup. If you want to get the most out of Ball you gotta put the ball in his hands and let him run your offense. If we're talking strictly off ball ability, Monk is a much bigger threat off the ball than Ball. Ball is a pretty bad value in the top 5 if you're taking him to play off the ball.

That statement is even more applicable to Fultz.

Fultz is a lead distributor that generates nearly all of his own offense.

83% of Fultz' mid-range jumpers are unassisted.
56.2% of Fultz' threes are pull-ups.
84% of Fultz' finishes at the rim are unassisted drives.

Unless Markelle overtakes ball handling priority from Simmons, are we getting the most out of Fultz? Is Fultz bad value in the Top 5?

Your argument isn't universally applicable. I don't think it's a good one to use.

What I gather from this is that Fultz will be an even more efficient scorer playing next to Simmons.

[PhilasFinest]

Yup. If you want to get the most out of Ball you gotta put the ball in his hands and let him run your offense. If we're talking strictly off ball ability, Monk is a much bigger threat off the ball than Ball. Ball is a pretty bad value in the top 5 if you're taking him to play off the ball.

That statement is even more applicable to Fultz.

Fultz is a lead distributor that generates nearly all of his own offense.

83% of Fultz' mid-range jumpers are unassisted.
56.2% of Fultz' threes are pull-ups.
84% of Fultz' finishes at the rim are unassisted drives.

Unless Markelle overtakes ball handling priority from Simmons, are we getting the most out of Fultz? Is Fultz bad value in the Top 5?

Your argument isn't universally applicable. I don't think it's a good one to use.

What I gather from this is that Fultz will be an even more efficient scorer playing next to Simmons.

That could very well be the case. Don't think anyone debating on some of the Ball comments would deny Fultz as a prospect.

Like mentioned before,The main gripe with SOME of these Ball comments is the fact that people are saying he doesnt fit with Simmons because he needs to Ball in his hands to be effective, which is flat out wrong considering he has the ball in his hands much less than Fultz who has it in his hands nearly 2X a much.

[Negrodamus]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

[LloydFree]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I thought the same thing until I saw his measurements. He is a 6'6 PF, with a 6'8.5 wingspan. That was my answer. I haven't seen the 7'0 wingspan that you have.

[Negrodamus]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I thought the same thing until I saw his measurements. He is a 6'6 PF, with a 6'8.5 wingspan. That was my answer. I haven't seen the 7'0 wingspan that you have.

You're seeing Miles Bridges. I'm talking Mikal from Villanova.

[LloydFree]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I thought the same thing until I saw his measurements. He is a 6'6 PF, with a 6'8.5 wingspan. That was my answer. I haven't seen the 7'0 wingspan that you have.

You're seeing Miles Bridges. I'm talking Mikal from Villanova.

Doh!

[Kobblehead]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I've been singing his praises since last year.

He bulked up to 210 pounds and is hitting threes this year while still being an elite, lockdown defender.

[Kobblehead]

He made Buddy Hield look pathetic last year in the tourney.

[Negrodamus]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I've been singing his praises since last year.

He bulked up to 210 pounds and is hitting threes this year while still being an elite, lockdown defender.

I think his 81% 2FG is shocking. And it's not like it's unsustainable; he shot 71% from 2 last year. He's a less relied upon Otto Porter when he was at Georgetown. I don't understand why no one is talking about him at all. He has the measurements, the advanced stats, a championship, and, like you said, shut down Buddy Hield. If he were scoring 20 a game or even 15, he'd be the number 1 pick. I hope they lean on him more as the season progresses. Then again, it's hard to ignore how good Josh Hart is as the lead guy.

[eagereyez]

Question: Why isn't Mikal Bridges a thing in the top 15, or even top 10.

Sophomore small forward with good size, 7' wingspan, 81% 2FG, 40% 3FG, 15 BPM, 146 ORtg, 90 DRtg.

He's averaging 3 assist per game (16% AST%).

I don't know, maybe it's because he's lower on the scoring pecking order behind Jenkins and Hart, but his stats are pretty ridiculous in this early season.

I've been singing his praises since last year.

He bulked up to 210 pounds and is hitting threes this year while still being an elite, lockdown defender.

I think his 81% 2FG is shocking. And it's not like it's unsustainable; he shot 71% from 2 last year. He's a less relied upon Otto Porter when he was at Georgetown. I don't understand why no one is talking about him at all. He has the measurements, the advanced stats, a championship, and, like you said, shut down Buddy Hield. If he were scoring 20 a game or even 15, he'd be the number 1 pick. I hope they lean on him more as the season progresses. Then again, it's hard to ignore how good Josh Hart is as the lead guy.

Great FT shooter, shooting 40% from 3, 7'0" wingspan, elite defender. He checks all the boxes you'd want in a 3&D role player. Seems like a good fit.

[Kobblehead]

Otto Porter
DeMarre Carrol
James Posey
Trevor Ariza

Mikal Bridges compares very favorably to those guys. I feel he's a lock to be a starter for a contending team. Hell, if he bulks up to the 220 range, he might even be the next Battier.

The bad organizations that pick in the lottery are usually too focused on finding a #1 or #2 scoring option or a big, so Bridges might slide to the late lotto or even the 20s.

I would be ecstatic if we were able to get our hands on him with the Lakers pick.

[76thBearCub]

Otto Porter
DeMarre Carrol
James Posey
Trevor Ariza

Mikal Bridges compares very favorably to those guys. I feel he's a lock to be a starter for a contending team. Hell, if he bulks up to the 220 range, he might even be the next Battier.

The bad organizations that pick in the lottery are usually too focused on finding a #1 or #2 scoring option or a big, so Bridges might slide to the late lotto or even the 20s.

I would be ecstatic if we were able to get our hands on him with the Lakers pick.

If I'm in the lottery, I want to swing for the fences. I wanted Lavine in 2014 just purely on that.

[Kobblehead]

Otto Porter
DeMarre Carrol
James Posey
Trevor Ariza

Mikal Bridges compares very favorably to those guys. I feel he's a lock to be a starter for a contending team. Hell, if he bulks up to the 220 range, he might even be the next Battier.

The bad organizations that pick in the lottery are usually too focused on finding a #1 or #2 scoring option or a big, so Bridges might slide to the late lotto or even the 20s.

I would be ecstatic if we were able to get our hands on him with the Lakers pick.

If I'm in the lottery, I want to swing for the fences. I wanted Lavine in 2014 just purely on that.

All those guys I mentioned were homeruns in their draft.

Based on career VORP amassed:
- Porter has been the 9th best player in the 2013 draft even after a slow start. He's been streaking hard for a couple years now and will pass Plumlee, Dieng and Olynik for sure.
- Carroll has been the 13th best player in the 2009 draft.
- James Posey wound up being the 11th best player in the 1999 draft.
- Trevor Ariza wound up being the 5th best player in the 2004 draft.

Lavine has pretty much lived up to every ounce of the potential people thought he possessed when they saw him as an elite athlete with a great skill level at U.C.L.A. He's also been everything else people thought he was in terms of being a severely undersized SG with no defense. Now, he (along with Andrew Wiggins) is a huge reason why the Minnesota Timberwolves with three defensive apt starters in their line-up (Rubio, Dieng, Towns) and a defensive mastermind at head coach are still somehow the worst defense in the NBA. The allure of offensive talent just isn't worth it. Draft the guys that project as the best players.

[Marcus]

Whole slew of top prospects on ESPN throughout the day today.

Lauri Markennen
Josh Jackson
Jayson Tatum
Frank Jackson
Jarrett Allen
Lonzo Ball

Good day to watch some basketball

[76thBearCub]

All those guys I mentioned were homeruns in their draft.

Based on career VORP amassed:
- Porter has been the 9th best player in the 2013 draft even after a slow start. He's been streaking hard for a couple years now and will pass Plumlee, Dieng and Olynik for sure.
- Carroll has been the 13th best player in the 2009 draft.
- James Posey wound up being the 11th best player in the 1999 draft.
- Trevor Ariza wound up being the 5th best player in the 2004 draft.

Lavine has pretty much lived up to every ounce of the potential people thought he possessed when they saw him as an elite athlete with a great skill level at U.C.L.A. He's also been everything else people thought he was in terms of being a severely undersized SG with no defense. Now, he (along with Andrew Wiggins) is a huge reason why the Minnesota Timberwolves with three defensive apt starters in their line-up (Rubio, Dieng, Towns) and a defensive mastermind at head coach are still somehow the worst defense in the NBA. The allure of offensive talent just isn't worth it. Draft the guys that project as the best players.

I don't consider any of those guys home runs. Lavine was just an example of taking a chance on somebody with the highest upside, which is the only point I was trying to make.

[Kobblehead]

I guess it depends on how one constitutes upside.

Personally, I think Mikal Bridges has way more upside than Zach did back in 2014. Mikal is an athlete with size, a flashing jumpshot and elite defense. Not to mention age-to-excellence as a freshman, something Zach never had.

Even back in 2014, I felt Gary Harris and Jordan Adams had more upside than Zach.

I don't disagree with your point on taking a chance on the guy with the highest upside. I just think we need to re-evaluate how we constitute what upside is. For instance, I think front offices and scouts conjoin "offensive allure" and "upside" too much. Brandon Ingram being in the discussion with Ben Simmons for the #1 pick is a prime example.

[Negrodamus]

All those guys I mentioned were homeruns in their draft.

Based on career VORP amassed:
- Porter has been the 9th best player in the 2013 draft even after a slow start. He's been streaking hard for a couple years now and will pass Plumlee, Dieng and Olynik for sure.
- Carroll has been the 13th best player in the 2009 draft.
- James Posey wound up being the 11th best player in the 1999 draft.
- Trevor Ariza wound up being the 5th best player in the 2004 draft.

Lavine has pretty much lived up to every ounce of the potential people thought he possessed when they saw him as an elite athlete with a great skill level at U.C.L.A. He's also been everything else people thought he was in terms of being a severely undersized SG with no defense. Now, he (along with Andrew Wiggins) is a huge reason why the Minnesota Timberwolves with three defensive apt starters in their line-up (Rubio, Dieng, Towns) and a defensive mastermind at head coach are still somehow the worst defense in the NBA. The allure of offensive talent just isn't worth it. Draft the guys that project as the best players.

I don't consider any of those guys home runs. Lavine was just an example of taking a chance on somebody with the highest upside, which is the only point I was trying to make.

I guess I'm confused about drafting based on potential. All of the aforementioned numbers above shows that he has the potential to be a much better scorer if given the chance. He also has the length and the height to be elite. What makes LaVine have more potential? Because he's fast?