Scoot Henderson

[reanimator]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

Speaking of history, I seem to remember in 2017 when a small guard with with unquestioned hype got drafted over a 5 tool guy who looked the part.

Yes that happened but not at all relevant to JMAC's statement implying some sort of objective reason smaller guards should never go top 4. Also Fultz is 6'4 so above his threshold and doesn't count

[Jadoogar]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

I mean you could do the reverse too where small guards went too high.
2016 - Kris Dunn went #5
2012 - Dion Waiters went #4
2009 - Johnny Flynn went #6

[reanimator]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

I mean you could do the reverse too where small guards went too high.
2016 - Kris Dunn went #5
2012 - Dion Waiters went #4
2009 - Johnny Flynn went #6

Sure you can but read my reply to Big J and the same holds true. A "small guard" should be judged on his own merit and not some sort of bias for size since the data reflects plenty do just fine in the league.

Dunn and Waiters do not meet his below 6'4 threshold btw.

[clyde21]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

I mean you could do the reverse too where small guards went too high.
2016 - Kris Dunn went #5
2012 - Dion Waiters went #4
2009 - Johnny Flynn went #6

you could do this for every size/archetype/position

that's why JMAC's initial post is so ridiculous and arbitrary.

you know what type of player hasn't been drafted in the top 4 the since 2012? a 7-4 one.

[Big J]

Scoot actually has a lot of parallels with Fultz. Small guard who has been pencilled in as a top 2 pick for a while, but hasn’t really shown why he should still be there above better prospects. Athletic, but not an outlier like Westbrook, Rose, Ja. Poor shot selection. Doesn’t seem to care about winning. Injury issues.

[Jadoogar]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

[reanimator]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

Generational talents aside, I would take the wing too in such a scenario, but that is assuming the wing is as versatile as described. Also, a lot of generational guards were not seen as such until in hindsight or if they were franchises rationalized themselves out of taking them. We don't know that Scoot isn't generational and we don't know that Miller will be the playmaker or defender some hope for. We have no idea if the talent levels are actually close and this debate isn't likely to end until 3-4 years from now where some sort of hindsight will be created (including by initial detractors) to rationalize why the better player was always better.

[Big J]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

Generational talents aside, I would take the wing too in such a scenario, but that is assuming the wing is as versatile as described. Also, a lot of generational guards were not seen as such until in hindsight or if they were franchises rationalized themselves out of taking them. We don't know that Scoot isn't generational and we don't know that Miller will be the playmaker or defender some hope for. We have no idea if the talent levels are actually close and this debate isn't likely to end until 3-4 years from now where some sort of hindsight will be created (including by initial detractors) to rationalize why the better player was always better.

Miller’s floor is so much higher than Scoots even if he never becomes a great defender or passer. You can still count on him to stretch the floor and grab rebounds if nothing else. Scoot could end up being a Jalen Suggs.

[clyde21]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

all things even of course you take the wing over a guard but things are not all even

[babyjax13]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

Generational talents aside, I would take the wing too in such a scenario, but that is assuming the wing is as versatile as described. Also, a lot of generational guards were not seen as such until in hindsight or if they were franchises rationalized themselves out of taking them. We don't know that Scoot isn't generational and we don't know that Miller will be the playmaker or defender some hope for. We have no idea if the talent levels are actually close and this debate isn't likely to end until 3-4 years from now where some sort of hindsight will be created (including by initial detractors) to rationalize why the better player was always better.

Miller’s floor is so much higher than Scoots even if he never becomes a great defender or passer. You can still count on him to stretch the floor and grab rebounds if nothing else. Scoot could end up being a Jalen Suggs.

I think this is a bit hyperbolic. I don't disagree that Miller looks really good and has low bust potential, but plenty of wings come into the NBA with nice hypothetical skillsets and flame out for one reason or another. e.g. Wes Johnson was a fantastic shooter in college with good athleticism + nice defensive stats (but also, Syracuse, and we know how their system affects evaluations of defense). He was tragic in the NBA, and most of it was a lack of on-ball creation. But you go to the other end, Jerome Robinson had nice on-ball creation in college, and was a very good shooter, and has even shot well in the NBA, but he has trouble getting to the rim and finishes terribly in the 3-10 foot range (actually pretty good everywhere else) and overall has been tragic.

I'm not saying Miller is like either of these guys, I fully expect him to - at worst - be a starting-caliber player. But I don't think there is any more risk with a player of Scoot's profile than there is with a player of Miller's profile, and I think Scoot's ceiling is higher because he has almost everything you look for in an elite point guard prospect while Miller is missing some of the top end athleticism you look for in elite wings + has some off-court concerns (that may or may not be reasonable). I'd take Scoot second, if I already had an elite point guard prospect I *might* try to trade down to 3, but alternatively I draft Scoot and see which guy looks better and if they can coexist.

[Jadoogar]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

all things even of course you take the wing over a guard but things are not all even

i guess i should say "if things are close". Of course all things will not be even especially this is all subjective evaluation. If i view 2 prospects as close, i would take the wing. I'm just talking in general, i don't know enough about Scoot or Miller at this point.

[Big J]

Generational talents aside, I would take the wing too in such a scenario, but that is assuming the wing is as versatile as described. Also, a lot of generational guards were not seen as such until in hindsight or if they were franchises rationalized themselves out of taking them. We don't know that Scoot isn't generational and we don't know that Miller will be the playmaker or defender some hope for. We have no idea if the talent levels are actually close and this debate isn't likely to end until 3-4 years from now where some sort of hindsight will be created (including by initial detractors) to rationalize why the better player was always better.

Miller’s floor is so much higher than Scoots even if he never becomes a great defender or passer. You can still count on him to stretch the floor and grab rebounds if nothing else. Scoot could end up being a Jalen Suggs.

I think this is a bit hyperbolic. I don't disagree that Miller looks really good and has low bust potential, but plenty of wings come into the NBA with nice hypothetical skillsets and flame out for one reason or another. e.g. Wes Johnson was a fantastic shooter in college with good athleticism + nice defensive stats (but also, Syracuse, and we know how their system affects evaluations of defense). He was tragic in the NBA, and most of it was a lack of on-ball creation. But you go to the other end, Jerome Robinson had nice on-ball creation in college, and was a very good shooter, and has even shot well in the NBA, but he has trouble getting to the rim and finishes terribly in the 3-10 foot range (actually pretty good everywhere else) and overall has been tragic.

I'm not saying Miller is like either of these guys, I fully expect him to - at worst - be a starting-caliber player. But I don't think there is any more risk with a player of Scoot's profile than there is with a player of Miller's profile, and I think Scoot's ceiling is higher because he has almost everything you look for in an elite point guard prospect while Miller is missing some of the top end athleticism you look for in elite wings + has some off-court concerns (that may or may not be reasonable). I'd take Scoot second, if I already had an elite point guard prospect I *might* try to trade down to 3, but alternatively I draft Scoot and see which guy looks better and if they can coexist.

Millers athleticism is no worse than Tatums was at Duke, and his shooting is much better than where Tatum was. Also, when you are a threat to pass the ball as he is, it opens up a lot of scoring opportunities due to the defense not knowing what you are going to do. You can get away with a weaker handle if you are a willing passer.

[reanimator]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

Generational talents aside, I would take the wing too in such a scenario, but that is assuming the wing is as versatile as described. Also, a lot of generational guards were not seen as such until in hindsight or if they were franchises rationalized themselves out of taking them. We don't know that Scoot isn't generational and we don't know that Miller will be the playmaker or defender some hope for. We have no idea if the talent levels are actually close and this debate isn't likely to end until 3-4 years from now where some sort of hindsight will be created (including by initial detractors) to rationalize why the better player was always better.

Miller’s floor is so much higher than Scoots even if he never becomes a great defender or passer. You can still count on him to stretch the floor and grab rebounds if nothing else. Scoot could end up being a Jalen Suggs.

Sure, I get the logic though its presumptuous even if informed by data, yet if Scoot proves to be an All NBA guard, no one will be talking about their floors. I understand the logic of taking Miller #2 so no need to convince me but I like others who still have Scoot at #2 probably feel he has a great chance at being that caliber of guard. Not absolute but the % is too high to not roll the dice IMO.

[Big J]

I always ask myself what would Masai do in this situation. He’s taking Miller all day long, all day strong.

[Hal14]

Scoot actually has a lot of parallels with Fultz. Small guard who has been pencilled in as a top 2 pick for a while, but hasn’t really shown why he should still be there above better prospects. Athletic, but not an outlier like Westbrook, Rose, Ja. Poor shot selection. Doesn’t seem to care about winning. Injury issues.

This must be a troll post lol.

1) There's zero reason to think Scoot doesn't care about winning.
2) Both Scoot and Fultz absolutely showed why they should be in the conversation for a top 2 pick. Scoot putting up 17 PPG on 58% TS, while playing in a pro league that's a step above the NCAA. A PG giving you a 10% rebounding % and a 32% assist % is awesome. Averaged 18 PPG if you count the game he was healthy vs Wemby's team. That game he had 28 pts, 5 rebs, 9 assists and 2 steals. 11/21 FG, 2/3 from 3. That was in preseason and then the very next game is where he got hurt. If he was healthy all season he would have put up insane numbers
3) Being compared to Fultz isn't a bad thing. He was an awesome prospect and could have been an all-star if it wasn't for injuries
4) Fultz is 6'4". Scoot has a 6'9" wingspan, can jump out of the gym and is built like a linebacker. Calling either of them a "small guard" is a reach

[clyde21]

this entire thread proves how many people in this thread don't even understand NBA sizing concepts, anyone that calls Scoot, or even Fultz a 'small guard' has no fkn idea what they are talking about and should be categorically ignored.

this thread is a disaster and a cesspool of bad takes. it's been all downhill since the Tartleton St is tougher competition than the G League take.

[Hal14]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

I agree with that theory later in the draft.

But in the top 5, you're trying to see if you can find a franchise altering superstar. In the top 5, forget about positions, see if you can land a superstar. The only teams over the past decade who have won or seriously competed for titles have had Steph, LeBron, Kawhi, Giannis, Tatum, AD, KD, CP3 or Booker.

If I'm choosing between Scoot and Miller, sure I'm factoring their floor in as well but the majority of my decision is based on ceiling - which one has the highest chance of making an all-NBA 1st team one day.

[JMAC3]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

Yeah Hindsight you can find examples of anything you want, I am going based on what actually tends to happen in the NBA. NBA teams value size, shooting and 2 way prospects. Maybe Scoot breaks the 10 year drought, just don't be surprised if as we get closer to the draft he starts to slide is my point.

[Big J]

I do think teams are leaning more towards wings now because they are just more versatile. You can generally only play 1 point guard or 1 center at a time, but you can play 3-4 wings at a time. Unless the C/PG is a generational talent (Wemby), if talent levels are close, i would pick the wing

I agree with that theory later in the draft.

But in the top 5, you're trying to see if you can find a franchise altering superstar. In the top 5, forget about positions, see if you can land a superstar. The only teams over the past decade who have won or seriously competed for titles have had Steph, LeBron, Kawhi, Giannis, Tatum, AD, KD or Booker.

If I'm choosing between Scoot and Miller, sure I'm factoring their floor in as well but the majority of my decision is based on ceiling - which one has the highest chance of making an all-NBA 1st team one day.

And all of the guys you listed are wings or forwards except the GOAT shooter, a skill which Scoot currently sucks ass at.

[reanimator]

2012
Brad Beal went 3rd and Dame went 6th but should have went 1st/2nd.

2013
Cj McCollum went 10th but should have went 3rd or 4th

2017
Fox went 6th and Donovan Mitchell went 13th but both go top 4 in a redraft

2018
Trae Young went 5th but goes top 4 in a redraft

2019
Ja went 2nd but Garland joins him in the top 4 in a redraft

Lets see if history repeats itself with a "small guard" being undervalued for guys with more size

Yeah Hindsight you can find examples of anything you want, I am going based on what actually tends to happen in the NBA. NBA teams value size, shooting and 2 way prospects. Maybe Scoot breaks the 10 year drought, just don't be surprised if as we get closer to the draft he starts to slide is my point.

You said there is a reason. There is no reason other than teams wrongly undervaluing "small guards."