Jarace Walker vs. Taylor Hendricks

[The Moose]

So you have GG way ahead of the other 2 or you have GG way behind them?

I have Hendricks and and Walker at 4 and 5 , GG somewhere in the 20s

Wow, interesting to see such a large gap there.

Do you mind sharing why you have such a large gap?

I'm assuming you are much more risk averse and like players with a higher floor and perhaps rely really heavily on stats for your rankings - and less on upside/potential?

Have you watched the box and one scouting report vid on GG yet? It is very eye opening. I'm having a hard time not putting him top 10 when watching this. Keep in mind, Zaire went 10th, Kuminga went 7th, patrick williams went 4th. Teams aren't shy about taking guys who might not have the best stats but have high upside, are 6'8"+ who are young, have good athleticism and an intriguing skill set.

Somewhat yes to both, though in regards to stats, of course we have to consider the eye test as well. And there are players who have had middling stat profile's in the past that I've been high on, due to the eye test. If GG had even a middling stat profile, I would probably be more willing to place him higher, as it is however, his is absolutely terrible. Generally speaking, if a guy grades horrifically by the numbers, the film flashes really can't sway me into buying stock because I think the odds of him reaching his 'ceiling' are very low. I think the odds of those types of players just simply not sticking in the nba are higher than the odds of reaching that ceiling.

And it's not like I don't see the appeal of GG, he's 6'9, fluid, can create his own shots, young for his class etc, I get it.
But, assuming he goes somewhere in the 15-25 range, I'm not sure what he actually does to get on the court next season. He seems like a guy thats at risk of getting lost in the shuffle.

Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter. The only spot he's efficient from is the restricted area. This coupled with the fact that he is extremely selfish with the ball and lacks vision means it's very unlikely he's given much on ball reps at all.

Then we go to his defense, he seems currently potentially unplayable for a team that isn't tanking, he has a combination of terrible technique, fundamentals and a lack of effort. Now, maybe this is just due to playing in the NCAA on a bad team, but it's a bad sign in any case. He can't protect the rim at all, bad screen navigation, gets lost constantly and I'm not sure he can stay with true wings.

Just throwing numbers at the wall here, but I just think taking him in the top 10, there would be like an 85% chance its a wasted pick, and so I wouldn't do it. If thats being too risk adverse, so be it, but yeah. Like you said Zaire was taken 10th, and was equally as bad in the NCAA, so I'm not going to be overly surprised if someone does take a chance on him

[EvanZ]

enormous gap between GG and the other 2 for me

So you have GG way ahead of the other 2 or you have GG way behind them?

I have Hendricks and and Walker at 4 and 5 , GG somewhere in the 20s

This is the way.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[jezzerinho]

Hendricks' complete absence of a handle is a big limiting factor. I watched a couple of hours or so of UCF game tape and then Hendricks highlights stuff and I think i only once saw him dribble more than twice before he picked it up. He really doesn't trust it and God forbid he went to his offhand.

It's not a deal killer, because if they go over the screen he can hit contested shots and has the height and passing ability to move it on. But I don't really see short to medium term self creation in the NBA that puts him in the top 10 conversation.

As for GG, I wouldn't have him in the first round with that motor/attitude.

[JMAC3]

Would be interesting if we could simulate 5 games of Hendricks on Houston and 5 games of Jarace on UCF.

That wouldn't really prove anything since being a better college player does not mean you'll be a better NBA player.

Guess you had Zach Edey (this year) and Luke Garza (in 2021) ranked #1 on your board?

Really took a leap to get to that Edey and Garza thought process there... more so interested to see how Jarace would look as the #1 option on a bad team and how Hendricks would look playing a smaller role.

Hendricks was the only former top 100 recruit on UCF, of course they featured him. I would assume if Walker the #8 recruit had gone to UCF we would have seen him in a more ball dominate role.

[EvanZ]

Would be interesting if we could simulate 5 games of Hendricks on Houston and 5 games of Jarace on UCF.

That wouldn't really prove anything since being a better college player does not mean you'll be a better NBA player.

Guess you had Zach Edey (this year) and Luke Garza (in 2021) ranked #1 on your board?

Really took a leap to get to that Edey and Garza thought process there... more so interested to see how Jarace would look as the #1 option on a bad team and how Hendricks would look playing a smaller role.

Hendricks was the only former top 100 recruit on UCF, of course they featured him. I would assume if Walker the #8 recruit had gone to UCF we would have seen him in a more ball dominate role.

Weird discussion since Jarace has a higher usg% than Taylor (22 vs 21). TH wasn't "featured" nearly enough imo.

[Hal14]

I have Hendricks and and Walker at 4 and 5 , GG somewhere in the 20s

Wow, interesting to see such a large gap there.

Do you mind sharing why you have such a large gap?

I'm assuming you are much more risk averse and like players with a higher floor and perhaps rely really heavily on stats for your rankings - and less on upside/potential?

Have you watched the box and one scouting report vid on GG yet? It is very eye opening. I'm having a hard time not putting him top 10 when watching this. Keep in mind, Zaire went 10th, Kuminga went 7th, patrick williams went 4th. Teams aren't shy about taking guys who might not have the best stats but have high upside, are 6'8"+ who are young, have good athleticism and an intriguing skill set.

Somewhat yes to both, though in regards to stats, of course we have to consider the eye test as well. And there are players who have had middling stat profile's in the past that I've been high on, due to the eye test. If GG had even a middling stat profile, I would probably be more willing to place him higher, as it is however, his is absolutely terrible. Generally speaking, if a guy grades horrifically by the numbers, the film flashes really can't sway me into buying stock because I think the odds of him reaching his 'ceiling' are very low. I think the odds of those types of players just simply not sticking in the nba are higher than the odds of reaching that ceiling.

And it's not like I don't see the appeal of GG, he's 6'9, fluid, can create his own shots, young for his class etc, I get it.
But, assuming he goes somewhere in the 15-25 range, I'm not sure what he actually does to get on the court next season. He seems like a guy thats at risk of getting lost in the shuffle.

Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter. The only spot he's efficient from is the restricted area. This coupled with the fact that he is extremely selfish with the ball and lacks vision means it's very unlikely he's given much on ball reps at all.

Then we go to his defense, he seems currently potentially unplayable for a team that isn't tanking, he has a combination of terrible technique, fundamentals and a lack of effort. Now, maybe this is just due to playing in the NCAA on a bad team, but it's a bad sign in any case. He can't protect the rim at all, bad screen navigation, gets lost constantly and I'm not sure he can stay with true wings.

Just throwing numbers at the wall here, but I just think taking him in the top 10, there would be like an 85% chance its a wasted pick, and so I wouldn't do it. If thats being too risk adverse, so be it, but yeah. Like you said Zaire was taken 10th, and was equally as bad in the NCAA, so I'm not going to be overly surprised if someone does take a chance on him

I'm not really as concerned with the stats.

-To say he is young for his grade is an understatement. He literally should be in HS still right now. Brandon Miller is over 2 years older than GG. That *has* to be factored in here

-GG played on a terrible team in a REALLY tough league. As a result, he was constantly getting double teamed and hhad no one to pass the ball to

Scottie Barnes didn't put up great stats and he went 4th overall, then won ROY. Dyson Daniels (8th pick), Jeremy Sochan (9th pick), Patrick Williams (4th pick), Ziaire Williams (10th pick), Jonathan Kuminga (7th pick), Ousmane Dieng (11th pick) didn't put up very efficient stats. But all of them showed a tantalizing combination of athleticism + skill + size, at a very young age. In other words, they all had crazy upside.

You say "Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter." All you're doing is looking at the stats. GG made TONS of shots from all over the court - maybe not with great efficiency but you have to factor in his age and team context into it. Pretty much all of his shots were self created, off the dribble shots. Turnarounds, fadeaways, step backs - in other words, high degree of difficulty.

Oh and the Box and One vid points out that GG actually did shoot at an above average level on catch and shoot jumpers.

And as far as his FT%, 68% is really not that bad for a 6'9" dude who should be still in HS. I'm genuinely curious, this season in HS basketball, how many seniors 6'9" or taller shot better than 68% on FT's. I'm guessing it's not very many.

If you watch the Box and One video on GG, you can see some VERY impressive shot making ability. This type of shot making ability, handle and self creation (ability to create his own shot and finish from all 3 levels) from an 18 year old (he's 17 in some of the clips) who's 6'9" is something that is VERY rare.

In the video, we see him running PnR as the ball handler effectively AND operating as the roll man in the PnR effectively. We see impressive shot making ability and handle. We see him used as a lob target. The last freshman who was 6'9" or taller who could do all of that went #1 in the draft (Paolo). Now, I'm not saying he's as good as Paolo. But Paolo was also a year older than GG on draft night - and Paolo got to play for arguably the GOAT coach and played on a stacked roster. Give GG some real coaching, some actual talent that he can play with, and some more time (to refine his game and mature) and he could easily end up being a top 5 player in this class down the road.

Sure, the defense is a little concerning with some of the lack of effort and poor screen navigation. But there's also a lot of clips in the Box and One video where we see some really impressive defensive flashes.

Most teams picking in the 1st round fall into 1 of these 2 buckets:
-Lottery team that's not anywhere close to being a contender so they can afford to take a player who will need more time to develop, they can afford to be patient with his development. Since they're such a bad team, they probably have very little talent, they can take a swing on a player with more upside who has the potential to develop into a star (since chances are, they are lacking in legit star talent - if they had legit star talent, they wouldn't be in the lottery).

-Playoff team that is a contender or close to being a contender. A team that good, they can afford to wait and be patient with a young prospect since they'e trying to win a ring - they know that pretty much all of the minutes for the upcoming season will go to veterans or young guys who are already developed. So they can afford to stash a young guy in the g-league for a year or 2 and who knows, maybe by that time they've got a guy with legit talent who can step in and contribute to a winner. Mine as well take the upside swing and possibly hit a home run on a pick later in the 1st round - as opposed to playing it safe by picking a higher floor prospect who (chances are) won't be good enough to see the floor for a contender

Think about it. If you're the 25th best team in a 30 team league and have a lottery pick. If you pick a guy with a lower ceiling and the pick works out, maybe that player helps your team climb up to the 23rd spot in the league - 22nd if you're lucky. If the pick doesn't work out, oh well, you're still a really bad team. But if you pick a higher ceiling guy - sure, there's perhaps a smaller chance that the pick works out, but if the pick does work out, you could shoot up the standings from 25th in the league to 15th - now all of a sudden, you're 1 move away from being a contender. And if the pick doesn't work out, oh well, you're still a bad team.

Read on Twitter

[JMAC3]

Wow, interesting to see such a large gap there.

Do you mind sharing why you have such a large gap?

I'm assuming you are much more risk averse and like players with a higher floor and perhaps rely really heavily on stats for your rankings - and less on upside/potential?

Have you watched the box and one scouting report vid on GG yet? It is very eye opening. I'm having a hard time not putting him top 10 when watching this. Keep in mind, Zaire went 10th, Kuminga went 7th, patrick williams went 4th. Teams aren't shy about taking guys who might not have the best stats but have high upside, are 6'8"+ who are young, have good athleticism and an intriguing skill set.

Somewhat yes to both, though in regards to stats, of course we have to consider the eye test as well. And there are players who have had middling stat profile's in the past that I've been high on, due to the eye test. If GG had even a middling stat profile, I would probably be more willing to place him higher, as it is however, his is absolutely terrible. Generally speaking, if a guy grades horrifically by the numbers, the film flashes really can't sway me into buying stock because I think the odds of him reaching his 'ceiling' are very low. I think the odds of those types of players just simply not sticking in the nba are higher than the odds of reaching that ceiling.

And it's not like I don't see the appeal of GG, he's 6'9, fluid, can create his own shots, young for his class etc, I get it.
But, assuming he goes somewhere in the 15-25 range, I'm not sure what he actually does to get on the court next season. He seems like a guy thats at risk of getting lost in the shuffle.

Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter. The only spot he's efficient from is the restricted area. This coupled with the fact that he is extremely selfish with the ball and lacks vision means it's very unlikely he's given much on ball reps at all.

Then we go to his defense, he seems currently potentially unplayable for a team that isn't tanking, he has a combination of terrible technique, fundamentals and a lack of effort. Now, maybe this is just due to playing in the NCAA on a bad team, but it's a bad sign in any case. He can't protect the rim at all, bad screen navigation, gets lost constantly and I'm not sure he can stay with true wings.

Just throwing numbers at the wall here, but I just think taking him in the top 10, there would be like an 85% chance its a wasted pick, and so I wouldn't do it. If thats being too risk adverse, so be it, but yeah. Like you said Zaire was taken 10th, and was equally as bad in the NCAA, so I'm not going to be overly surprised if someone does take a chance on him

I'm not really as concerned with the stats.

-To say he is young for his grade is an understatement. He literally should be in HS still right now. Brandon Miller is over 2 years older than GG. That *has* to be factored in here

-GG played on a terrible team in a REALLY tough league. As a result, he was constantly getting double teamed and hhad no one to pass the ball to

Scottie Barnes didn't put up great stats and he went 4th overall, then won ROY. Dyson Daniels (8th pick), Jeremy Sochan (9th pick), Patrick Williams (4th pick), Ziaire Williams (10th pick), Jonathan Kuminga (7th pick), Ousmane Dieng (11th pick) didn't put up very efficient stats. But all of them showed a tantalizing combination of athleticism + skill + size, at a very young age. In other words, they all had crazy upside.

You say "Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter." All you're doing is looking at the stats. GG made TONS of shots from all over the court - maybe not with great efficiency but you have to factor in his age and team context into it. Pretty much all of his shots were self created, off the dribble shots. Turnarounds, fadeaways, step backs - in other words, high degree of difficulty.

Oh and the Box and One vid points out that GG actually did shoot at an above average level on catch and shoot jumpers.

And as far as his FT%, 68% is really not that bad for a 6'9" dude who should be still in HS. I'm genuinely curious, this season in HS basketball, how many seniors 6'9" or taller shot better than 68% on FT's. I'm guessing it's not very many.

If you watch the Box and One video on GG, you can see some VERY impressive shot making ability. This type of shot making ability, handle and self creation (ability to create his own shot and finish from all 3 levels) from an 18 year old (he's 17 in some of the clips) who's 6'9" is something that is VERY rare.

In the video, we see him running PnR as the ball handler effectively AND operating as the roll man in the PnR effectively. We see impressive shot making ability and handle. We see him used as a lob target. The last freshman who was 6'9" or taller who could do all of that went #1 in the draft (Paolo). Now, I'm not saying he's as good as Paolo. But Paolo was also a year older than GG on draft night - and Paolo got to play for arguably the GOAT coach and played on a stacked roster. Give GG some real coaching, some actual talent that he can play with, and some more time (to refine his game and mature) and he could easily end up being a top 5 player in this class down the road.

Sure, the defense is a little concerning with some of the lack of effort and poor screen navigation. But there's also a lot of clips in the Box and One video where we see some really impressive defensive flashes.

Most teams picking in the 1st round fall into 1 of these 2 buckets:
-Lottery team that's not anywhere close to being a contender so they can afford to take a player who will need more time to develop, they can afford to be patient with his development. Since they're such a bad team, they probably have very little talent, they can take a swing on a player with more upside who has the potential to develop into a star (since chances are, they are lacking in legit star talent - if they had legit star talent, they wouldn't be in the lottery).

-Playoff team that is a contender or close to being a contender. A team that good, they can afford to wait and be patient with a young prospect since they'e trying to win a ring - they know that pretty much all of the minutes for the upcoming season will go to veterans or young guys who are already developed. So they can afford to stash a young guy in the g-league for a year or 2 and who knows, maybe by that time they've got a guy with legit talent who can step in and contribute to a winner. Mine as well take the upside swing and possibly hit a home run on a pick later in the 1st round - as opposed to playing it safe by picking a higher floor prospect who (chances are) won't be good enough to see the floor for a contender

Read on Twitter

I think most people are down on him for his immaturity, calling out coaches on social media, pouting on the court, giving bad effort when the game isn't going his way etc etc. You can call it because he is young, but nobody forced him to go to college early or go to a garbage team like South Carolina. Now you want me to pick him in the late lottery where he definitely isn't the center of attention or go to player and expect him to be all peachy about it?

Then add in the inefficiency and that is more than enough to give me pause whether I think his ceiling is there or not. I am sure the right team will take a chance on him and it could work out, but personally he can be someone else's job to babysit and mature him for a few years.

[Hal14]

Somewhat yes to both, though in regards to stats, of course we have to consider the eye test as well. And there are players who have had middling stat profile's in the past that I've been high on, due to the eye test. If GG had even a middling stat profile, I would probably be more willing to place him higher, as it is however, his is absolutely terrible. Generally speaking, if a guy grades horrifically by the numbers, the film flashes really can't sway me into buying stock because I think the odds of him reaching his 'ceiling' are very low. I think the odds of those types of players just simply not sticking in the nba are higher than the odds of reaching that ceiling.

And it's not like I don't see the appeal of GG, he's 6'9, fluid, can create his own shots, young for his class etc, I get it.
But, assuming he goes somewhere in the 15-25 range, I'm not sure what he actually does to get on the court next season. He seems like a guy thats at risk of getting lost in the shuffle.

Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter. The only spot he's efficient from is the restricted area. This coupled with the fact that he is extremely selfish with the ball and lacks vision means it's very unlikely he's given much on ball reps at all.

Then we go to his defense, he seems currently potentially unplayable for a team that isn't tanking, he has a combination of terrible technique, fundamentals and a lack of effort. Now, maybe this is just due to playing in the NCAA on a bad team, but it's a bad sign in any case. He can't protect the rim at all, bad screen navigation, gets lost constantly and I'm not sure he can stay with true wings.

Just throwing numbers at the wall here, but I just think taking him in the top 10, there would be like an 85% chance its a wasted pick, and so I wouldn't do it. If thats being too risk adverse, so be it, but yeah. Like you said Zaire was taken 10th, and was equally as bad in the NCAA, so I'm not going to be overly surprised if someone does take a chance on him

I'm not really as concerned with the stats.

-To say he is young for his grade is an understatement. He literally should be in HS still right now. Brandon Miller is over 2 years older than GG. That *has* to be factored in here

-GG played on a terrible team in a REALLY tough league. As a result, he was constantly getting double teamed and hhad no one to pass the ball to

Scottie Barnes didn't put up great stats and he went 4th overall, then won ROY. Dyson Daniels (8th pick), Jeremy Sochan (9th pick), Patrick Williams (4th pick), Ziaire Williams (10th pick), Jonathan Kuminga (7th pick), Ousmane Dieng (11th pick) didn't put up very efficient stats. But all of them showed a tantalizing combination of athleticism + skill + size, at a very young age. In other words, they all had crazy upside.

You say "Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter." All you're doing is looking at the stats. GG made TONS of shots from all over the court - maybe not with great efficiency but you have to factor in his age and team context into it. Pretty much all of his shots were self created, off the dribble shots. Turnarounds, fadeaways, step backs - in other words, high degree of difficulty.

Oh and the Box and One vid points out that GG actually did shoot at an above average level on catch and shoot jumpers.

And as far as his FT%, 68% is really not that bad for a 6'9" dude who should be still in HS. I'm genuinely curious, this season in HS basketball, how many seniors 6'9" or taller shot better than 68% on FT's. I'm guessing it's not very many.

If you watch the Box and One video on GG, you can see some VERY impressive shot making ability. This type of shot making ability, handle and self creation (ability to create his own shot and finish from all 3 levels) from an 18 year old (he's 17 in some of the clips) who's 6'9" is something that is VERY rare.

In the video, we see him running PnR as the ball handler effectively AND operating as the roll man in the PnR effectively. We see impressive shot making ability and handle. We see him used as a lob target. The last freshman who was 6'9" or taller who could do all of that went #1 in the draft (Paolo). Now, I'm not saying he's as good as Paolo. But Paolo was also a year older than GG on draft night - and Paolo got to play for arguably the GOAT coach and played on a stacked roster. Give GG some real coaching, some actual talent that he can play with, and some more time (to refine his game and mature) and he could easily end up being a top 5 player in this class down the road.

Sure, the defense is a little concerning with some of the lack of effort and poor screen navigation. But there's also a lot of clips in the Box and One video where we see some really impressive defensive flashes.

Most teams picking in the 1st round fall into 1 of these 2 buckets:
-Lottery team that's not anywhere close to being a contender so they can afford to take a player who will need more time to develop, they can afford to be patient with his development. Since they're such a bad team, they probably have very little talent, they can take a swing on a player with more upside who has the potential to develop into a star (since chances are, they are lacking in legit star talent - if they had legit star talent, they wouldn't be in the lottery).

-Playoff team that is a contender or close to being a contender. A team that good, they can afford to wait and be patient with a young prospect since they'e trying to win a ring - they know that pretty much all of the minutes for the upcoming season will go to veterans or young guys who are already developed. So they can afford to stash a young guy in the g-league for a year or 2 and who knows, maybe by that time they've got a guy with legit talent who can step in and contribute to a winner. Mine as well take the upside swing and possibly hit a home run on a pick later in the 1st round - as opposed to playing it safe by picking a higher floor prospect who (chances are) won't be good enough to see the floor for a contender

Read on Twitter

I think most people are down on him for his immaturity, calling out coaches on social media, pouting on the court, giving bad effort when the game isn't going his way etc etc. You can call it because he is young, but nobody forced him to go to college early or go to a garbage team like South Carolina. Now you want me to pick him in the late lottery where he definitely isn't the center of attention or go to player and expect him to be all peachy about it?

Then add in the inefficiency and that is more than enough to give me pause whether I think his ceiling is there or not. I am sure the right team will take a chance on him and it could work out, but personally he can be someone else's job to babysit and mature him for a few years.

Babysit and mature him for a few years? C'mon now. Once he hits age 19, he'll be fine from a maturity standpoint. And he turns 19 early in his rookie season.

Pouting on the court? Jayson Tatum does that all the time and he's a top 5 player on the planet.

GG's effort and body language were fine when he played for Team USA at the FIBA U18 tournament and on the AAU circuit.

[JMAC3]

I'm not really as concerned with the stats.

-To say he is young for his grade is an understatement. He literally should be in HS still right now. Brandon Miller is over 2 years older than GG. That *has* to be factored in here

-GG played on a terrible team in a REALLY tough league. As a result, he was constantly getting double teamed and hhad no one to pass the ball to

Scottie Barnes didn't put up great stats and he went 4th overall, then won ROY. Dyson Daniels (8th pick), Jeremy Sochan (9th pick), Patrick Williams (4th pick), Ziaire Williams (10th pick), Jonathan Kuminga (7th pick), Ousmane Dieng (11th pick) didn't put up very efficient stats. But all of them showed a tantalizing combination of athleticism + skill + size, at a very young age. In other words, they all had crazy upside.

You say "Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter." All you're doing is looking at the stats. GG made TONS of shots from all over the court - maybe not with great efficiency but you have to factor in his age and team context into it. Pretty much all of his shots were self created, off the dribble shots. Turnarounds, fadeaways, step backs - in other words, high degree of difficulty.

Oh and the Box and One vid points out that GG actually did shoot at an above average level on catch and shoot jumpers.

And as far as his FT%, 68% is really not that bad for a 6'9" dude who should be still in HS. I'm genuinely curious, this season in HS basketball, how many seniors 6'9" or taller shot better than 68% on FT's. I'm guessing it's not very many.

If you watch the Box and One video on GG, you can see some VERY impressive shot making ability. This type of shot making ability, handle and self creation (ability to create his own shot and finish from all 3 levels) from an 18 year old (he's 17 in some of the clips) who's 6'9" is something that is VERY rare.

In the video, we see him running PnR as the ball handler effectively AND operating as the roll man in the PnR effectively. We see impressive shot making ability and handle. We see him used as a lob target. The last freshman who was 6'9" or taller who could do all of that went #1 in the draft (Paolo). Now, I'm not saying he's as good as Paolo. But Paolo was also a year older than GG on draft night - and Paolo got to play for arguably the GOAT coach and played on a stacked roster. Give GG some real coaching, some actual talent that he can play with, and some more time (to refine his game and mature) and he could easily end up being a top 5 player in this class down the road.

Sure, the defense is a little concerning with some of the lack of effort and poor screen navigation. But there's also a lot of clips in the Box and One video where we see some really impressive defensive flashes.

Most teams picking in the 1st round fall into 1 of these 2 buckets:
-Lottery team that's not anywhere close to being a contender so they can afford to take a player who will need more time to develop, they can afford to be patient with his development. Since they're such a bad team, they probably have very little talent, they can take a swing on a player with more upside who has the potential to develop into a star (since chances are, they are lacking in legit star talent - if they had legit star talent, they wouldn't be in the lottery).

-Playoff team that is a contender or close to being a contender. A team that good, they can afford to wait and be patient with a young prospect since they'e trying to win a ring - they know that pretty much all of the minutes for the upcoming season will go to veterans or young guys who are already developed. So they can afford to stash a young guy in the g-league for a year or 2 and who knows, maybe by that time they've got a guy with legit talent who can step in and contribute to a winner. Mine as well take the upside swing and possibly hit a home run on a pick later in the 1st round - as opposed to playing it safe by picking a higher floor prospect who (chances are) won't be good enough to see the floor for a contender

Read on Twitter

I think most people are down on him for his immaturity, calling out coaches on social media, pouting on the court, giving bad effort when the game isn't going his way etc etc. You can call it because he is young, but nobody forced him to go to college early or go to a garbage team like South Carolina. Now you want me to pick him in the late lottery where he definitely isn't the center of attention or go to player and expect him to be all peachy about it?

Then add in the inefficiency and that is more than enough to give me pause whether I think his ceiling is there or not. I am sure the right team will take a chance on him and it could work out, but personally he can be someone else's job to babysit and mature him for a few years.

Babysit and mature him for a few years? C'mon now. Once he hits age 19, he'll be fine from a maturity standpoint. And he turns 19 early in his rookie season.

Pouting on the court? Jayson Tatum does that all the time and he's a top 5 player on the planet.

GG's effort and body language were fine when he played for Team USA at the FIBA U18 tournament and on the AAU circuit.

Yeah, that is why you can't just watch highlight tapes on Youtube. His body language sucked in every game I watched him in this year. Throwing his hands in the air when his teammates missed, walking around on offense when he wasn't involved. I didn't see any other kids get benched for calling coaches out on instagram live this year...

Talent wise he can check a lot of boxes, but he has more issues than the average 19 year old NBA prospects.

There are a ton of talented guys that don't pan out and it has to do with mental makeup more than physical makeup.

[basketballRob]

Hendricks looks like he's more capable of playing some three.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[Hal14]

I think most people are down on him for his immaturity, calling out coaches on social media, pouting on the court, giving bad effort when the game isn't going his way etc etc. You can call it because he is young, but nobody forced him to go to college early or go to a garbage team like South Carolina. Now you want me to pick him in the late lottery where he definitely isn't the center of attention or go to player and expect him to be all peachy about it?

Then add in the inefficiency and that is more than enough to give me pause whether I think his ceiling is there or not. I am sure the right team will take a chance on him and it could work out, but personally he can be someone else's job to babysit and mature him for a few years.

Babysit and mature him for a few years? C'mon now. Once he hits age 19, he'll be fine from a maturity standpoint. And he turns 19 early in his rookie season.

Pouting on the court? Jayson Tatum does that all the time and he's a top 5 player on the planet.

GG's effort and body language were fine when he played for Team USA at the FIBA U18 tournament and on the AAU circuit.

Yeah, that is why you can't just watch highlight tapes on Youtube. His body language sucked in every game I watched him in this year. Throwing his hands in the air when his teammates missed, walking around on offense when he wasn't involved. I didn't see any other kids get benched for calling coaches out on instagram live this year...

Talent wise he can check a lot of boxes, but he has more issues than the average 19 year old NBA prospects.

There are a ton of talented guys that don't pan out and it has to do with mental makeup more than physical makeup.

Eh, I don't factor this maturity stuff in much with a kid who was only 17 when the season started.

The Box and One vid on GG actually shows quite a few plays where he is active off the ball offensively, as a cutter and as a lob threat.

Plus, there was plenty of times where he made good passes this season at South Carolina - but dudes just missed open shots or smoked layups. So it's understandable for that to get frustrating for a guy - especially a dude who's only 17/18. It also helps explain why his assist rate was so low.

Seems like a really humble, down to earth, likable kid in this interview:

Watch on YouTube

All smiles in this vid too. Watching these interviews, you'd never think there were any character/maturity issues with him:

Watch on YouTube

Paolo was arrested while at Duke and still got picked #1. Brandon Miller was involved in a murder and is projected to go top 3 this year. Stuff happens with kids who are young and dumb. And GG is a year younger than Paolo (2 yrs younger than miller) on draft night to I think NBA teams are more likely to take any maturity issues GG has with a grain of salt.

Also, GG apologized for the IG live comments:

Watch on YouTube

[EvanZ]

Plus, there was plenty of times where he made good passes this season at South Carolina - but dudes just missed open shots or smoked layups. So it's understandable for that to get frustrating for a guy - especially a dude who's only 17/18. It also helps explain why his assist rate was so low.

I mean 27 ast to 86 tov is not explained away just by guys missing shots. 0.3 A:TOV is just turrrrible.

People have to put aside the facial similarity to Giannis and actually be objective about this kid. Everything about him is overrated.

[Hal14]

Plus, there was plenty of times where he made good passes this season at South Carolina - but dudes just missed open shots or smoked layups. So it's understandable for that to get frustrating for a guy - especially a dude who's only 17/18. It also helps explain why his assist rate was so low.

I mean 27 ast to 86 tov is not explained away just by guys missing shots. 0.3 A:TOV is just turrrrible.

People have to put aside the facial similarity to Giannis and actually be objective about this kid. Everything about him is overrated.

I could care less who he looks like and I'm pretty sure you're the only one who has brought up anything about him looking like Giannis.

I think you're looking at the stats too much. And not looking at the context behind the stats or the potential/upside enough.

Guys who are only 18, are 6'9", can average 15 PPG while playing in the SEC (despite getting double teamed and having the opponents build their gameplan around trying to stop you), can handle the ball, have some wiggle/shiftiness, a bag of moves to create their shot, can operate as the handler or the roll man out of the PnR, have good athleticism, can be a lob threat, shot above average on catch and shoot jumpers and was a 5 star recruit - that sounds like a lottery pick to me.

You're more risk averse with ranking players too - that's cool. Most NBA teams though like to draft guys with high upside/ceiling. They draft a guy not for the player he was last season in college - but for the player he could one day become in the NBA.

I don't think NBA teams are too worried about the assist to turnover ratio for a guy who's not a PG.

Everything about him is overrated? lol ok, buddy - consensus has him in the 17-27 range. How is that overrated? You saying you wouldn't even take him with a late 1st round pick?

[EvanZ]

It’s only the guys who suck who we have to ignore stats and focus only on “context” lol

The truth is guys who suck this bad tend to…suck


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EvanZ]

Plus, there was plenty of times where he made good passes this season at South Carolina - but dudes just missed open shots or smoked layups. So it's understandable for that to get frustrating for a guy - especially a dude who's only 17/18. It also helps explain why his assist rate was so low.

I mean 27 ast to 86 tov is not explained away just by guys missing shots. 0.3 A:TOV is just turrrrible.

People have to put aside the facial similarity to Giannis and actually be objective about this kid. Everything about him is overrated.

I could care less who he looks like and I'm pretty sure you're the only one who has brought up anything about him looking like Giannis.

I think you're looking at the stats too much. And not looking at the context behind the stats or the potential/upside enough.

Guys who are only 18, are 6'9", can average 15 PPG while playing in the SEC (despite getting double teamed and having the opponents build their gameplan around trying to stop you), can handle the ball, have some wiggle/shiftiness, a bag of moves to create their shot, can operate as the handler or the roll man out of the PnR, have good athleticism, can be a lob threat, shot above average on catch and shoot jumpers and was a 5 star recruit - that sounds like a lottery pick to me.

You're more risk averse with ranking players too - that's cool. Most NBA teams though like to draft guys with high upside/ceiling. They draft a guy not for the player he was last season in college - but for the player he could one day become in the NBA.

I don't think NBA teams are too worried about the assist to turnover ratio for a guy who's not a PG.

You think teams don’t care about A:T at every position? Yikes


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Hal14]

It’s only the guys who suck who we have to ignore stats and focus only on “context” lol
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

You're right. Let's just print out a stat sheet and call it a day. No need to even watch the games!

Looking just at stats, while refusing to acknowledge the context behind them makes you a casual.

[EvanZ]

It’s extremely rare for someone whose stats are below a certain threshold to ever become a guy. Pretty sure GG is below that threshold.

Calling someone a casual doesn’t make that go away unfortunately for GG.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Braggins]

GG should have played in the OTE. Hed probably be a top 5 lock.

[clyde21]

It’s extremely rare for someone whose stats are below a certain threshold to ever become a guy. Pretty sure GG is below that threshold.

Calling someone a casual doesn’t make that go away unfortunately for GG.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

which stats? raw or box? because I don't think you'll find any precedent to a 17/18 year old putting up 30pts/11rebs per 100 in the SEC that actually registered real minutes.

i get the red flags for GG, but acting like we have a bunch of precedents for him that signal he's gonna be a bust is untrue.

[The Moose]

Wow, interesting to see such a large gap there.

Do you mind sharing why you have such a large gap?

I'm assuming you are much more risk averse and like players with a higher floor and perhaps rely really heavily on stats for your rankings - and less on upside/potential?

Have you watched the box and one scouting report vid on GG yet? It is very eye opening. I'm having a hard time not putting him top 10 when watching this. Keep in mind, Zaire went 10th, Kuminga went 7th, patrick williams went 4th. Teams aren't shy about taking guys who might not have the best stats but have high upside, are 6'8"+ who are young, have good athleticism and an intriguing skill set.

Somewhat yes to both, though in regards to stats, of course we have to consider the eye test as well. And there are players who have had middling stat profile's in the past that I've been high on, due to the eye test. If GG had even a middling stat profile, I would probably be more willing to place him higher, as it is however, his is absolutely terrible. Generally speaking, if a guy grades horrifically by the numbers, the film flashes really can't sway me into buying stock because I think the odds of him reaching his 'ceiling' are very low. I think the odds of those types of players just simply not sticking in the nba are higher than the odds of reaching that ceiling.

And it's not like I don't see the appeal of GG, he's 6'9, fluid, can create his own shots, young for his class etc, I get it.
But, assuming he goes somewhere in the 15-25 range, I'm not sure what he actually does to get on the court next season. He seems like a guy thats at risk of getting lost in the shuffle.

Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter. The only spot he's efficient from is the restricted area. This coupled with the fact that he is extremely selfish with the ball and lacks vision means it's very unlikely he's given much on ball reps at all.

Then we go to his defense, he seems currently potentially unplayable for a team that isn't tanking, he has a combination of terrible technique, fundamentals and a lack of effort. Now, maybe this is just due to playing in the NCAA on a bad team, but it's a bad sign in any case. He can't protect the rim at all, bad screen navigation, gets lost constantly and I'm not sure he can stay with true wings.

Just throwing numbers at the wall here, but I just think taking him in the top 10, there would be like an 85% chance its a wasted pick, and so I wouldn't do it. If thats being too risk adverse, so be it, but yeah. Like you said Zaire was taken 10th, and was equally as bad in the NCAA, so I'm not going to be overly surprised if someone does take a chance on him

I'm not really as concerned with the stats.

-To say he is young for his grade is an understatement. He literally should be in HS still right now. Brandon Miller is over 2 years older than GG. That *has* to be factored in here

-GG played on a terrible team in a REALLY tough league. As a result, he was constantly getting double teamed and hhad no one to pass the ball to

Scottie Barnes didn't put up great stats and he went 4th overall, then won ROY. Dyson Daniels (8th pick), Jeremy Sochan (9th pick), Patrick Williams (4th pick), Ziaire Williams (10th pick), Jonathan Kuminga (7th pick), Ousmane Dieng (11th pick) didn't put up very efficient stats. But all of them showed a tantalizing combination of athleticism + skill + size, at a very young age. In other words, they all had crazy upside.

You say "Sure he can create his own shots, but he's not a good shooter from anywhere on the court, not a good ft shooter, not a good 3pt shooter, not a good mid range shooter." All you're doing is looking at the stats. GG made TONS of shots from all over the court - maybe not with great efficiency but you have to factor in his age and team context into it. Pretty much all of his shots were self created, off the dribble shots. Turnarounds, fadeaways, step backs - in other words, high degree of difficulty.

Oh and the Box and One vid points out that GG actually did shoot at an above average level on catch and shoot jumpers.

And as far as his FT%, 68% is really not that bad for a 6'9" dude who should be still in HS. I'm genuinely curious, this season in HS basketball, how many seniors 6'9" or taller shot better than 68% on FT's. I'm guessing it's not very many.

If you watch the Box and One video on GG, you can see some VERY impressive shot making ability. This type of shot making ability, handle and self creation (ability to create his own shot and finish from all 3 levels) from an 18 year old (he's 17 in some of the clips) who's 6'9" is something that is VERY rare.

In the video, we see him running PnR as the ball handler effectively AND operating as the roll man in the PnR effectively. We see impressive shot making ability and handle. We see him used as a lob target. The last freshman who was 6'9" or taller who could do all of that went #1 in the draft (Paolo). Now, I'm not saying he's as good as Paolo. But Paolo was also a year older than GG on draft night - and Paolo got to play for arguably the GOAT coach and played on a stacked roster. Give GG some real coaching, some actual talent that he can play with, and some more time (to refine his game and mature) and he could easily end up being a top 5 player in this class down the road.

Sure, the defense is a little concerning with some of the lack of effort and poor screen navigation. But there's also a lot of clips in the Box and One video where we see some really impressive defensive flashes.

Most teams picking in the 1st round fall into 1 of these 2 buckets:
-Lottery team that's not anywhere close to being a contender so they can afford to take a player who will need more time to develop, they can afford to be patient with his development. Since they're such a bad team, they probably have very little talent, they can take a swing on a player with more upside who has the potential to develop into a star (since chances are, they are lacking in legit star talent - if they had legit star talent, they wouldn't be in the lottery).

-Playoff team that is a contender or close to being a contender. A team that good, they can afford to wait and be patient with a young prospect since they'e trying to win a ring - they know that pretty much all of the minutes for the upcoming season will go to veterans or young guys who are already developed. So they can afford to stash a young guy in the g-league for a year or 2 and who knows, maybe by that time they've got a guy with legit talent who can step in and contribute to a winner. Mine as well take the upside swing and possibly hit a home run on a pick later in the 1st round - as opposed to playing it safe by picking a higher floor prospect who (chances are) won't be good enough to see the floor for a contender

Think about it. If you're the 25th best team in a 30 team league and have a lottery pick. If you pick a guy with a lower ceiling and the pick works out, maybe that player helps your team climb up to the 23rd spot in the league - 22nd if you're lucky. If the pick doesn't work out, oh well, you're still a really bad team. But if you pick a higher ceiling guy - sure, there's perhaps a smaller chance that the pick works out, but if the pick does work out, you could shoot up the standings from 25th in the league to 15th - now all of a sudden, you're 1 move away from being a contender. And if the pick doesn't work out, oh well, you're still a bad team.

Read on Twitter

- Miller is old for his class, GG is around 6-12 months younger than most freshman.

- Yes, South Carolina was a terrible team, and he was a major reason why

- Barnes graded out great on most stat based draft projection models, there’s a reason the analytic dudes loved him, Dyson and Kuminga played in the g league and were fine statistically, but we have a lot less data history to project based on G league stats. Sochan graded out pretty well too. Patrick Williams was mediocre and Zaire Williams was terrible, and they were both overdrafted imo. Dieng was pretty terrible and I watch a sizable amount of NBL, I thought he was overdrafted too.

I think you underestimate just how poorly GG will grade out statistically on any decent draft model, like Evan said , he likely falls into the ‘very low chance of success’ range. Of the guys you mentioned , only Zaire Williams was in the same boat.

Does that mean there is no chance he is successful, of course not, but it sticks out enough that I’m not going to go through a full course of mental gymnastics to contextualise his terrible metrics. The numbers are what they are, I’m sure there are other guys with terrible stats that were in sub optimal situations too, doesn’t mean I’m just going to ignore their numbers.

He made a ton of shots because he took more than a ton of shots. Whatever way you slice it, he wasn’t good at shooting from these areas, compare his numbers to a guy like Brice. That’s the levels you need to be at justify his terrible shot selection.

Yes , I’ve watched the box and 1 video, he has plenty of nice flashes on the tape. That’s the reason why he’s in the 20’s for me , if it was based on his numbers , he’d be lower.

We saw him do a lot of things on the film, doesn’t mean he actually good at them. Just because a player shows flashes of things doesn’t mean that’s their path to success.

My opinion is that if he’s going to have success at the NBA level , it’s going to be playing very differently to how he was playing at South Carolina. Much like Zaire Williams transition from Stanford to Memphis. I could see him having success in the Kuminga role , but yeah there is just no way I’m buying the ‘shot creating, 3 level scoring wing’ stock that some are selling based off what we know right now.