Taylor Hendricks

[EvanZ]

Think the lowest I get on TH is 4.

As in lock to go top 4 or that would be the soonest you take him?

The former. My only debate going forward is if he could get to 2 or 3.

[JMAC3]

Think the lowest I get on TH is 4.

As in lock to go top 4 or that would be the soonest you take him?

The former. My only debate going forward is if he could get to 2 or 3.

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

[NYPiston]

I think he would be a great pick in the 10-15 range as day 1 stretch 4 with some ability to play small ball center. I just don't understand the upside of taking him in the 4-7 range that he is now appearing at in some mocks. Awesome catch and shoot guy, but he doesn't really create his own offense or offense for others at all right now. He will occasionally attack a closeout and get to the rim, but UCF used him as a center and he posted up a lot.

I just don't see him translating to some awesome 3/4 like a Tatum or even less so a Patrick Williams. He just hasn't really shown me enough in his bag for my mind to get him there. Feels like you are really blind projecting with him to get him to more than a PJ Washington/John Collins level guy with maybe more defense. That would be a great player, but top 5? IDK

That goes for pretty much all the guys in the 3-10 range. All of them have question marks with creation and playmaking.
The only ones that don't are Amen Thompson (who has major shooting question marks) and some of the guards that are inefficient scorers.

I'm not banging the table for Hendricks necessarily as a clear cut top 5 pick but this draft is absolutely wide open after #2 especially now that Miller completely bombed in the tournament and has weak numbers against good competition in general although I still like him at 3
Lots of interesting NBA archetypes with tantalizing upside but so much unknown with a lot of these guys, scouts are going to really earn their money with this draft and all the projection that will come into play.

[JMAC3]

I think he would be a great pick in the 10-15 range as day 1 stretch 4 with some ability to play small ball center. I just don't understand the upside of taking him in the 4-7 range that he is now appearing at in some mocks. Awesome catch and shoot guy, but he doesn't really create his own offense or offense for others at all right now. He will occasionally attack a closeout and get to the rim, but UCF used him as a center and he posted up a lot.

I just don't see him translating to some awesome 3/4 like a Tatum or even less so a Patrick Williams. He just hasn't really shown me enough in his bag for my mind to get him there. Feels like you are really blind projecting with him to get him to more than a PJ Washington/John Collins level guy with maybe more defense. That would be a great player, but top 5? IDK

That goes for pretty much all the guys in the 3-10 range. All of them have question marks with creation and playmaking.
The only ones that don't are Amen Thompson (who has major shooting question marks) and some of the guards that are inefficient scorers.

I'm not banging the table for Hendricks necessarily as a clear cut top 5 pick but this draft is absolutely wide open after #2 especially now that Miller completely bombed in the tournament and has weak numbers against good competition in general although I still like him at 3
Lots of interesting NBA archetypes with tantalizing upside but so much unknown with a lot of these guys, scouts are going to really earn their money with this draft and all the projection that will come into play.

Amen, Ausar, Walker and Black all have shown the ability to create for others.

Whitmore probably has more self-creation than Hendricks right now and profiles as a guy that will have more ball handling opportunities in the future compared to Hendricks.

[EvanZ]

As in lock to go top 4 or that would be the soonest you take him?

The former. My only debate going forward is if he could get to 2 or 3.

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

[God Squad]

The former. My only debate going forward is if he could get to 2 or 3.

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

I keep thinking a John Isaac/Jerami Grant type, but closer to Isaac than Grant.

[JMAC3]

The former. My only debate going forward is if he could get to 2 or 3.

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

Put Hendricks on the Spurs and I am not really sure he is changing all that much for that team's future for example. A great complimentary piece sure.

[mattao313]

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

Put Hendricks on the Spurs and I am not really sure he is changing all that much for that team's future for example. A great complimentary piece sure.

And what's wrong with complimentary? The others in the lottery have a lot of red flags like being chuckers or really bad shooters. I can see the path of him becoming a super role player akin to Draymond, bridges, OG then either Thompson becoming respectable shooters who don't negatively affect you offense.

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

[EvanZ]

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

You do your thing. I don't really see higher ceiling guys going ahead of TH. But if you do, that's great for you.

[clyde21]

in terms of ceiling there are plenty, Scoot, Wemby, twins, Black, Jarace, etc.

but ceiling is not everything, and Hendricks has enough of it + versatility, physical profile and production already

personally don't see him climbing up beyond 4 at most for me (Wemby/Scoot/Black are pretty entrenched top 3 for me), but that's plenty high enough

i'd easily take Hendricks at 4 over Keeg at 4 last year for comparison

[tester551]

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

I keep thinking a John Isaac/Jerami Grant type, but closer to Isaac than Grant.

I would say more Grant, but with a little less D.

[JMAC3]

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

You do your thing. I don't really see higher ceiling guys going ahead of TH. But if you do, that's great for you.

So if you're Spurs you are snagging him 4th overall without thinking about it? I get wanting to take the floor he presents, but top 4 is pushing it for me. I think 7th is the soonest I could consider him and even that would have to be a perfect scenario like the Pacers.

[clyde21]

Al Horford is the ceiling comp for Hendricks

[BlazersBroncos]

I think his middle tier outlook is Bobby Portis. High end, I see some Rasheed in him.

Am I crazy?

[Braggins]

Hes up to 5th for me.

[Hal14]

Chet had better defensive upside and I also have seen him do more off the bounce in terms of creating shots for himself and others.

Fair enough (also Chet was a much better passer) - but Chet also had question marks around being ultra skinny and would that could lead to in terms of durability and being pushed around in the paint. And Hendricks is about 6 months younger on draft night. Still, Chet went #2 overall so even if we say he's better, that still is no reason why Hendricks couldn't go top 5.

Jabari was actually 5th for me. For a lot of the same reasons as I am knocking Hendricks. I had it Paolo- Chet- Ivey- Murray and then Jabari.

Am I reading this correctly? You're making post after post after post on here critiquing Hendricks, going on all of these anti-Hendricks rants, going on and on about how you would never take Hendricks in the top 5, yet right here you tell us that you see Hendricks essentially the same as you saw Jabari Smith Jr, who you ranked...5th?

Keegan seemed like he could also do more off the bounce and getting his own buckets, he had 14 games with 26 or more pts as sophomore playing in a bigger conference. He was playing more as 3/4 hybrid in college like we see in NBA.

Hendricks career high was 25 in the AAC. I get Hendricks is younger, but it is just tough for me to completely profile him as something he hasn't shown yet. He was playing mostly the 5 spot, so he spent very limited time on the perimeter unless he was catching and shooting a three.

Ok, that's cool that Keegan was a more prolific scorer but that's because he was 2 yrs older than Hendricks and because the entire offense was built around him getting shots.

Also, look at the role Keegan has on the Kings. He's just a spot up shooter who occasionally attacks closeouts and holds his own on D. So I'd argue, Hendricks could have an easier time adjusting to the pros, since he's likely to be playing a role that's much closer to the one he was just playing in college.

Even if we say Keegan was a slightly better prospect, you're saying you had Keegan at 4 so is it really that crazy for someone to have Hendricks at 5?

As far as what you said about positions, I'm not sure how that matters. Hendricks played some at the 4 and some at the 5. Even when he was at the 5, his team played a lot of 5 out stuff with him out on the perimeter. As for Keegan, Iowa really had Keegan, Kris and Rebraca all basically interchangeable at the 4 and the 5, with Keegan/Kris sometimes being interchangeable at the 3 and the 4. Keegan led the team in rebounding and blocks by a wide margin, and got a ton of points in the paint that were assisted so clearly he was inside a lot - but also played quite a bit outside - he was a hybrid, which is what you look for in a modern 4. Sure, Keegan handled the ball more away from the basket than hendricks but again, he went 4th overall and he was also 2 yrs older..

If anything, Hendricks playing at the 5 in college more give shim more value since there's lots of 3's/4's who can shoot from deep. Finding 5's who can shoot from deep are more rare and arguably, more valuable.

Lastly, you use "his career high is only 25 points in the AAC" as a criticism for Hendricks. Yet that's also Jarace Walker's career high in the same conference and many people have him going top 5 - saw one analyst today who said they have him ranked no. 4.

[BostonCouchGM]

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

You do your thing. I don't really see higher ceiling guys going ahead of TH. But if you do, that's great for you.

So if you're Spurs you are snagging him 4th overall without thinking about it? I get wanting to take the floor he presents, but top 4 is pushing it for me. I think 7th is the soonest I could consider him and even that would have to be a perfect scenario like the Pacers.

I think they just took a guy who plays his position in Sochan so that would be overkill though they and every team always needs more size, length and shooting and since Sochan can't shoot they might go that direction. Spurs need a dynamic PG imho. I expect them to take Scoot or one of the twins and run their offense through them.

[EvanZ]

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

You do your thing. I don't really see higher ceiling guys going ahead of TH. But if you do, that's great for you.

So if you're Spurs you are snagging him 4th overall without thinking about it? I get wanting to take the floor he presents, but top 4 is pushing it for me. I think 7th is the soonest I could consider him and even that would have to be a perfect scenario like the Pacers.

He’d kill on the Spurs. Him and Sochan together…now that’s interesting. Sign me up.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[165bows]

Wow. What is his ceiling NBA comp?

I don't have a good one. But in theory he has no real glaring weakness and fits with any team, any scheme, any game situation there is. That's a guy I want to have.

You can say the same thing about John Collins or Wendell Carter Jr. they are super solid pieces, but typically teams drafting top 5 need more than that to improve.

Put Hendricks on the Spurs and I am not really sure he is changing all that much for that team's future for example. A great complimentary piece sure.

That’s the double edged sword there imo. Once in a great while you get the KG/DWade/Lillard guys at those spots but way more often it’s just a nice Shane Battier kind of guy if that. But a perfectly nice player gets these outsized expectations and does go through that sort of bust and boom cycle.

[JMAC3]

Am I reading this correctly? You're making post after post after post on here critiquing Hendricks, going on all of these anti-Hendricks rants, going on and on about how you would never take Hendricks in the top 5, yet right here you tell us that you see Hendricks essentially the same as you saw Jabari Smith Jr, who you ranked...5th?

Yeah Jabari also came in with a higher pedigree of being a top 5 recruit and not a top 50. Not saying that is everything, but that usually factors into evaluations for freshman.

Jabari averaged 2 more ppg in a tougher conference, shot more fta per game and showed a little more shot creation even if they were tough midrange jumpers.

Also, not every draft class is the same, so where I rank a guy last year doesn't really factor that heavily into the following year. But if it did I would probably see how Jabari has struggled and be even more inclined to rank his archetypes lower in the future so maybe a little bit of that is happening.

I think Hendricks will be a solid pick, but just don't want to settle with a top 5 pick for someone that probably lacks all-star potential.