Convince me Sullinger is a top 5 pick

[Eoghan]

I don't think Sullinger has the fraction of the BB IQ that Scola does. We're talking about a guy that came into the league already a grizzled Euroleague vet.

[vincecarter4pres]

I don't think Sullinger has the fraction of the BB IQ that Scola does. We're talking about a guy that came into the league already a grizzled Euroleague vet.

Scola is probably smarter as a rookie then Jarred will be as a rookie, but you say it as if Sullinger is a dumb player.

He'll surely go through his growing pains as a young player if he does indeed pan out, but he's pretty heady for a 20 year old right now.

I mean if that's the reasoning we're going to discount prospects with now, we might as well can the draft completely, or make all rookies play in Europe for a 2 year minimum before they come into the league.

[crazybranman360]

If he can't translate into what the did in college to the NBA... fringe rotation player

If he can translate what he did in college to the NBA... Paul Milsap

If he develops into a much better player than he was in college... Zach Randolph

No reason to think he can't translate what he did into the NBA but you never know. I personally believe that he'll get better and thats why I think he's worth a top 5 pick but i guess i understand if you don't think that

[Jazzfan12]

Ehh, Millsap is way quicker than Sullinger and has a much better game without the ball.

[clevceltics]

Based on his present game, I think 17 and 9 projections are absurd. His biggest issue is his conditioning. He is the last one up the floor on many possessions eliminating the early buckets that he might get. His conditioning and foot speed are big problems within the team D concept. His slow rotations allow for many easy baskets. Without more of a face up game and better conditioning I cant see him being more than an average scorer 11 - 14 points and 6 boards.

[vincecarter4pres]

Ehh, Millsap is way quicker than Sullinger and has a much better game without the ball.

Yeah I think that comparison is pretty awful myself.

Millsap is way shorter but an asston more athletic and like you said his off ball game is a lot better, while Sullinger is a better in the post when you dump the ball down to him and let him go to work.

[vincecarter4pres]

Based on his present game, I think 17 and 9 projections are absurd. His biggest issue is his conditioning. He is the last one up the floor on many possessions eliminating the early buckets that he might get. His conditioning and foot speed are big problems within the team D concept. His slow rotations allow for many easy baskets. Without more of a face up game and better conditioning I cant see him being more than an average scorer 11 - 14 points and 6 boards.

If Al Jefferson can be statistically successful in the NBA, I don't see it as a problem for Sullinger in regards to conditioning and especially foot speed.

I think Sullinger is as close to a lock as possible to put up big stats, but you're drafting him knowing he's going to have some nearly uncorrectable glaring flaws that means how his stats impact to wins and losses remains to be seen.

[clevceltics]

Based on his present game, I think 17 and 9 projections are absurd. His biggest issue is his conditioning. He is the last one up the floor on many possessions eliminating the early buckets that he might get. His conditioning and foot speed are big problems within the team D concept. His slow rotations allow for many easy baskets. Without more of a face up game and better conditioning I cant see him being more than an average scorer 11 - 14 points and 6 boards.

If Al Jefferson can be statistically successful in the NBA, I don't see it as a problem for Sullinger in regards to conditioning and especially foot speed.

I think Sullinger is as close to a lock as possible to put up big stats, but you're drafting him knowing he's going to have some nearly uncorrectable glaring flaws that means how his stats impact to wins and losses remains to be seen.

Im sorry. Im not seeing the Jefferson comparison. Jefferson has a turn and face game that allows him to get points. Jefferson has much better pick and roll instincts than Sully.

[crazybranman360]

Ehh, Millsap is way quicker than Sullinger and has a much better game without the ball.

Yeah I think that comparison is pretty awful myself.

Millsap is way shorter but an asston more athletic and like you said his off ball game is a lot better, while Sullinger is a better in the post when you dump the ball down to him and let him go to work.

2 things...

1) Milsap is 6'8 253 vs. Sullinger who is 6'9 265 so size there very close although, yes Milsap is probably quicker

2) Milsap is better off the ball because he has a better shot but Sullinger's shot is developing. Went from 3-12 3 pointers to 16-40 and also improved his FT% from 70% to 77%. No reason to think that his shooting won't improve as a lot of NBA players developed there shot in the NBA

[vincecarter4pres]

Ehh, Millsap is way quicker than Sullinger and has a much better game without the ball.

Yeah I think that comparison is pretty awful myself.

Millsap is way shorter but an asston more athletic and like you said his off ball game is a lot better, while Sullinger is a better in the post when you dump the ball down to him and let him go to work.

2 things...

1) Milsap is 6'8 253 vs. Sullinger who is 6'9 265 so size there very close although, yes Milsap is probably quicker

2) Milsap is better off the ball because he has a better shot but Sullinger's shot is developing. Went from 3-12 3 pointers to 16-40 and also improved his FT% from 70% to 77%. No reason to think that his shooting won't improve as a lot of NBA players developed there shot in the NBA

1) Millsap is 6'7 and change. We don't know what Sully is yet.

2) Millsap just isn't an iso type player for the most part.

[vincecarter4pres]

Based on his present game, I think 17 and 9 projections are absurd. His biggest issue is his conditioning. He is the last one up the floor on many possessions eliminating the early buckets that he might get. His conditioning and foot speed are big problems within the team D concept. His slow rotations allow for many easy baskets. Without more of a face up game and better conditioning I cant see him being more than an average scorer 11 - 14 points and 6 boards.

If Al Jefferson can be statistically successful in the NBA, I don't see it as a problem for Sullinger in regards to conditioning and especially foot speed.

I think Sullinger is as close to a lock as possible to put up big stats, but you're drafting him knowing he's going to have some nearly uncorrectable glaring flaws that means how his stats impact to wins and losses remains to be seen.

Im sorry. Im not seeing the Jefferson comparison. Jefferson has a turn and face game that allows him to get points. Jefferson has much better pick and roll instincts than Sully.

Jefferson is suspect as hell in the pick and roll and his face up game is bleck

And I wasn't comparing them in style anyway, was just saying if a fat ass who's a suspect athlete can put up huge stats, then a semi-fat ass who's a slightly better athlete can as well since he's so skilled.

[Eoghan]

I don't think Sullinger has the fraction of the BB IQ that Scola does. We're talking about a guy that came into the league already a grizzled Euroleague vet.

Scola is probably smarter as a rookie then Jarred will be as a rookie, but you say it as if Sullinger is a dumb player.

He'll surely go through his growing pains as a young player if he does indeed pan out, but he's pretty heady for a 20 year old right now.

I mean if that's the reasoning we're going to discount prospects with now, we might as well can the draft completely, or make all rookies play in Europe for a 2 year minimum before they come into the league.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I just think it's weird to compare college sophomore/NBA rookie to a guy that played International ball for years and came into the league at like 25. There is no way Sully, smart or not, is not going to step onto an NBA court and instantly reach a level of savvy that took Scola many years to achieve.

Sully might be a basketball genius for all I know but I doubt it from what I've seen. (though playing for Thad Matta doesn't help his case).

[vincecarter4pres]

Who here is talking about instantly though?

We were talking about ceiling, level and style of play comparison.

[Eoghan]

So, it's okay for you to project Sullinger to grow into a Luis Scola but I can't project Harrison Barnes into growing into a Glen Rice?

[8305]

The comparable I see is David West. I think that's his floor. If he's able to figure out how to deal with length I see alot of what I remember from Kevin Love as a college player.

[old rem]

Based on his present game, I think 17 and 9 projections are absurd. His biggest issue is his conditioning. He is the last one up the floor on many possessions eliminating the early buckets that he might get. His conditioning and foot speed are big problems within the team D concept. His slow rotations allow for many easy baskets. Without more of a face up game and better conditioning I cant see him being more than an average scorer 11 - 14 points and 6 boards.

If Al Jefferson can be statistically successful in the NBA, I don't see it as a problem for Sullinger in regards to conditioning and especially foot speed.

I think Sullinger is as close to a lock as possible to put up big stats, but you're drafting him knowing he's going to have some nearly uncorrectable glaring flaws that means how his stats impact to wins and losses remains to be seen.

Sullinger is the "last up the floor" because at 280 he's the size of an NFL DE while the other guys weigh about the same as an NFL DB. Why ya think they don't play guys who are 205 lb at DE in the NFL? Because POWER is part of ATHLETIC.

I'd have some doubts about John Henson as a 210 lb Power F. Sullinger? His "glaring Flaws" seem to have been missed by a lot of opponents. The guy could (and likely will) drop 10-15 lb as a pro. but his skillset is quite well rounded and impressive. Flaws or not...seemed he was double teamed much of the time,yet still tended to be near 20/10,and solid on D. I'd LOVE for GSW to get Sullinger.

[old rem]

So, it's okay for you to project Sullinger to grow into a Luis Scola but I can't project Harrison Barnes into growing into a Glen Rice?

i frankly don't see lots of Sullinger -Scola similarity,nor do I see Barnes and Rice very similar.

I've seen Sullinger,Drummond,P Jones play,and at this point Sullinger is by far the best player of the 3.

Th one question I'd have about Sullinger is whether he's best as C or PF.

[vincecarter4pres]

So, it's okay for you to project Sullinger to grow into a Luis Scola but I can't project Harrison Barnes into growing into a Glen Rice?

i frankly don't see lots of Sullinger -Scola similarity,nor do I see Barnes and Rice very similar.

I've seen Sullinger,Drummond,P Jones play,and at this point Sullinger is by far the best player of the 3.

Th one question I'd have about Sullinger is whether he's best as C or PF.

So Rem, who would you compare him to?

Also, there's bo way he's. 280 anymore. Maybe 260. Maybe.

[ManualRam]

The comparable I see is David West. I think that's his floor. If he's able to figure out how to deal with length I see alot of what I remember from Kevin Love as a college player.

there seems to be a lot of david west comparisons, especially for PFs who lack elite physical ability. people gloss over the fact that david west has very long arms which helps him get his shots off under duress. sullinger does not have good length. he'll have to rely on his ability to create space with his body, which is why i dont think he should lose much weight at all. he already lost weight this yr and his movement didnt noticeably improve.

[ManualRam]

also, im convinced sullinger was more injured this yr than he let on.
a number of games this yr, especially during conference play, he looked really stiff.