2021 NBA Draft

[God Squad]

Scottie's defense is as advertised, with really impressive movement and attention to detail. I'm more impressed with his passing which has been amazing so far.

[MemphisX]

Watch on YouTube

[PLO]

^^ I think the Scottie Barnes/Ben Simmons comparisons are way, way off base. Obviously what they do share is excellent game IQ, but almost completely different body types, apart from being close in height.

[No-Man]

Scottie Barnes is a Center, could be a useful one though, with his weirdness, but his offensive limitations are obvious

[The-Power]

Scottie Barnes is a Center

No, he isn't.

[No-Man]

Scottie Barnes is a Center

No, he isn't.

He is, 6'9 in shoes, strong, wide, long, even if I think some of his lower body strength/balance are troublesome, rangy, and can't shoot/score

He is, indeed, a Center

[clyde21]

lol yall just tried to do the same with with Achiuwa, not every 4 that can't shoot is a C

[nolang1]

Barnes is going to be a pretty polarizing player this year. Just like tonight's game, I wont be shocked if by the end of the year he doesnt have the prettiest numbers. So I think we will see a lot of people that will just look at his numbers and laugh at the idea of him being a top 10 pick.

Then you will have the people that actually watch him all saying, the dude is a surefire stud. It doesnt take long to watch him to say to yourself, "not sure the route he is going to take, but ya this dude is going to find ways to impact the game".

Yeah, especially with the big emphasis on shooting. Some fans will not want him to be the guy their team drafts in this draft. Not going to be a sexy prospect but IMO he is so obviously going to be a high level NBA player.

Yeah I’ve been saying since his sophomore year of high school he’s the most Draymond-like prospect since Draymond. He’s going to be a steal if too many teams are stuck in the mindset that the player you pick in the top 5 has to be your leading scorer or close to it.

I take it Barnes looked better than his box score tonight?

Sure his defense was better than 0 blocks or steals, but a rudimentary part of looking at the box score is minutes played. 13/10/10 per 40 for a 6'9 player playing point guard is pretty good on its own.

[The-Power]

Scottie Barnes is a Center

No, he isn't.

He is, 6'9 in shoes, strong, wide, long, even if I think some of his lower body strength/balance are troublesome, rangy, and can't shoot/score

He is, indeed, a Center

Draymond Green fits that description perfectly and he's been a key part of a dynasty at the 4. Are you saying he's been a Center all along and was completely misused while he made it to five Finals in a row? Sometimes I'm with you when you call players 5's that others consider 4's (or even 3's) but you take it to the extreme at times.

Can Barnes, like Green, play small-ball 5 successfully? I suppose so. But he can a) defend multiple positions including both Forward spots and b) he can make plays off the dribble. There's absolutely no reason he can't play the 4. Like Draymond. If you're worried about spacing: there are plenty of shooting 5's out there that can space the floor. So that's not an issue, you still can have four floor-spacers on the court whether you put him at the 4 or 5.

Also, why does ‘can't score’ mean he's a 5? There are plenty of players in the league that can't score well who play positions other than the 5, and 4's don't inherently carry higher scoring-loads than 5's – not sure why you'd suggest otherwise. If it's more about shooting: neither Giannis nor Zion are regular 5's in the NBA (although Giannis could certainly play there, and perhaps should do it more often).

And nothing else you mentioned (size, length, strength) makes him a Center. Guess what, if you're long and strong and still can defend multiple positions and players smaller than you, then that's a positive and speaks to your positional versatility – it's not a limiting factor by any stretch of the imagination. You seem to have that backwards.

[The-Power]

lol yall just tried to do the same with with Achiuwa, not every 4 that can't shoot is a C

With Precious you could at least argue that he lacked perimeter skills and should be surrounded by four more skilled players, which often happen to be smaller players. But Barnes just can't shoot. He does have skills as a ball handler, can make plays off the dribble, is a great passer, clearly surpasses the mobility threshold and defends the perimeter absolutely naturally (i.e. he's not just someone who can switch onto Forwards (or Guards), he can guard Forwards (or (most) Guards) period). Just because he probably can play Center doesn't mean he's primarily – and much less only – a Center.

[clyde21]

using Barnes as a 5 defensively is so dumb, you want his size and versatility on the perimeter which will allow him to rotate inside as a help guy.

this is a lazy analysis same with what we saw with Precious. Just because a player can situationally play center doesn't mean they are one

[MemphisX]

Barnes is a guy. I think the last thing I would want is for him to be the anchor. He is the head of the spear type. Stick him on the best perimeter player when you need stops or the worse when you need disruption.

[Marcus]

Some team with pieces in place will draft Scottie in the teens or late first and that team is going to takeoff based on his addition to the mix. Just put him out there and let him wildcard.

He's also not a guy that doesn't work hard. Wouldn't be surprised if that jumper came around to at least respectable without sacrificing how he benefits the team.

[babyjax13]

using Barnes as a 5 defensively is so dumb, you want his size and versatility on the perimeter which will allow him to rotate inside as a help guy.

this is a lazy analysis same with what we saw with Precious. Just because a player can situationally play center doesn't mean they are one

IDK if you are running a switch everything scheme like Houston used to it could work. I agree he's more natural as a power forward, though. I actually think he can develop a serviceable jumper, too. It's about the only hole in his game and he strikes me as someone who is a hard worker.

[BostonCouchGM]

Barnes really impressed me. I can't wait to see him play against better competition.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Barnes is going to be a pretty polarizing player this year. Just like tonight's game, I wont be shocked if by the end of the year he doesnt have the prettiest numbers. So I think we will see a lot of people that will just look at his numbers and laugh at the idea of him being a top 10 pick.

Then you will have the people that actually watch him all saying, the dude is a surefire stud. It doesnt take long to watch him to say to yourself, "not sure the route he is going to take, but ya this dude is going to find ways to impact the game".

Yeah, especially with the big emphasis on shooting. Some fans will not want him to be the guy their team drafts in this draft. Not going to be a sexy prospect but IMO he is so obviously going to be a high level NBA player.

Yeah I’ve been saying since his sophomore year of high school he’s the most Draymond-like prospect since Draymond. He’s going to be a steal if too many teams are stuck in the mindset that the player you pick in the top 5 has to be your leading scorer or close to it.

I take it Barnes looked better than his box score tonight?

Sure his defense was better than 0 blocks or steals, but a rudimentary part of looking at the box score is minutes played. 13/10/10 per 40 for a 6'9 player playing point guard is pretty good on its own.

Thanks for explaining how to read box scores but the fanfare around his first game exceeds how he did on paper, even when you prorate to 40 minutes (which nobody plays).

[nolang1]

Yeah, especially with the big emphasis on shooting. Some fans will not want him to be the guy their team drafts in this draft. Not going to be a sexy prospect but IMO he is so obviously going to be a high level NBA player.

Yeah I’ve been saying since his sophomore year of high school he’s the most Draymond-like prospect since Draymond. He’s going to be a steal if too many teams are stuck in the mindset that the player you pick in the top 5 has to be your leading scorer or close to it.

I take it Barnes looked better than his box score tonight?

Sure his defense was better than 0 blocks or steals, but a rudimentary part of looking at the box score is minutes played. 13/10/10 per 40 for a 6'9 player playing point guard is pretty good on its own.

Thanks for explaining how to read box scores but the fanfare around his first game exceeds how he did on paper, even when you prorate to 40 minutes (which nobody plays).

Well, if you understand fractions you can prorate it to any number of minutes and see that it was a pretty high rate of assists and rebounds. No need to backtrack and try to make it seem like what you said was anything more thought out than "he didn't score very many points huh."

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Yeah I’ve been saying since his sophomore year of high school he’s the most Draymond-like prospect since Draymond. He’s going to be a steal if too many teams are stuck in the mindset that the player you pick in the top 5 has to be your leading scorer or close to it.



Sure his defense was better than 0 blocks or steals, but a rudimentary part of looking at the box score is minutes played. 13/10/10 per 40 for a 6'9 player playing point guard is pretty good on its own.

Thanks for explaining how to read box scores but the fanfare around his first game exceeds how he did on paper, even when you prorate to 40 minutes (which nobody plays).

Well, if you understand fractions you can prorate it to any number of minutes and see that it was a pretty high rate of assists and rebounds.

I don’t need to prorate it because 24 minutes is context enough, thanks.

Point is, there were a lot of rave reviews for his first game that weren’t matched by his box, no matter what slice of the numbers you take. Which is fine! The box rarely tells the whole story. That’s why I asked for impressions from people who saw the game.

[nolang1]

Thanks for explaining how to read box scores but the fanfare around his first game exceeds how he did on paper, even when you prorate to 40 minutes (which nobody plays).

Well, if you understand fractions you can prorate it to any number of minutes and see that it was a pretty high rate of assists and rebounds.

I don’t need to prorate it because 24 minutes is context enough, thanks.

Point is, there were a lot of rave reviews for his first game that weren’t matched by his box, no matter what slice of the numbers you take. Which is fine! The box rarely tells the whole story. That’s why I asked for impressions from people who saw the game.

We're about 2 weeks past a draft where a lot of people had a tall point guard who didn't score efficiently but rebounded and assisted at a rate that suggested a future triple-double threat as the #1 prospect.

In the year 2010 it's not a novel concept that the box score doesn't capture defense very well (oops, I meant to type 2020 but even 10 years ago it still would apply) so it seems like common sense would dictate that anyone saying Barnes looked good would say his defense was really good. Other than that, what responses were you expecting - "OMG you're right on! I don't know what these other people are talking about. He only scored 8 points and didn't shoot well so he actually had a bad game." lol

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Well, if you understand fractions you can prorate it to any number of minutes and see that it was a pretty high rate of assists and rebounds.

I don’t need to prorate it because 24 minutes is context enough, thanks.

Point is, there were a lot of rave reviews for his first game that weren’t matched by his box, no matter what slice of the numbers you take. Which is fine! The box rarely tells the whole story. That’s why I asked for impressions from people who saw the game.

We're about 2 weeks past a draft where a lot of people had a tall point guard who didn't score efficiently but rebounded and assisted at a rate that suggested a future triple-double threat as the #1 prospect.

In the year 2010 it's not a novel concept that the box score doesn't capture defense very well (oops, I meant to type 2020 but even 10 years ago it still would apply) so it seems like common sense would dictate that anyone saying Barnes looked good would say his defense was really good. Other than that, what responses were you expecting - "OMG you're right on! I don't know what these other people are talking about. He only scored 8 points and didn't shoot well so he actually had a bad game." lol

I was expecting the responses I got: some color about what he looked like on the floor. It was a question without agenda.

If you’re one of these people who assumes every question about their favorite prospect is a sneak attack on their draft stock, you might want to take a beat and emotionally detach. You’ve gone to a weird place with this.