RealGM

paulbball wrote:

pantalones wrote:I am utterly perplexed how NWG isn't getting any love. He just dominated the WCC tournament putting up 20/6/4 against Pacific, 25/8/5 against Santa Clara and 22/6/6/6 in last nights championship victory over St. Mary's. The guy won WCC POY, put up 17ppg, 6 rebs and 5 assists for the season. Apparently there were over 22 scouts at the WCC tourney and the Spurs appear to be very high on him. The only reason that I can think of why he doesn't get more buzz is because he isn't a high flyer, or flashy, he's just great at everything, literally everything. If he does last until the Spurs at the end of the 1st round, he'll be a steal.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/67814/nigel-williams-goss

Difficult to statistically scout. Went from 2 years of non-improvement (other than getting older and getting marginally better) in a mid-high tier conference to a breakout season in a non-competitive low tier conference.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/nigel-williams-goss-1.html

man, you really know nothing about cbb. Washington is and was a complete dumpster fire of a program and NWG was the only player with an IQ above the ball that he bounced. Plus the WCC isn't a 'low tier" league, it's one of the better mid majors, The Zags and St. Mary's will both be single seeds in MM, Zags most likely a #1. The MEAC is a "low tier" league. SMH.

pantalones wrote:

paulbball wrote:

pantalones wrote:I am utterly perplexed how NWG isn't getting any love. He just dominated the WCC tournament putting up 20/6/4 against Pacific, 25/8/5 against Santa Clara and 22/6/6/6 in last nights championship victory over St. Mary's. The guy won WCC POY, put up 17ppg, 6 rebs and 5 assists for the season. Apparently there were over 22 scouts at the WCC tourney and the Spurs appear to be very high on him. The only reason that I can think of why he doesn't get more buzz is because he isn't a high flyer, or flashy, he's just great at everything, literally everything. If he does last until the Spurs at the end of the 1st round, he'll be a steal.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/67814/nigel-williams-goss

Difficult to statistically scout. Went from 2 years of non-improvement (other than getting older and getting marginally better) in a mid-high tier conference to a breakout season in a non-competitive low tier conference.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/nigel-williams-goss-1.html

man, you really know nothing about cbb. Washington is and was a complete dumpster fire of a program and NWG was the only player with an IQ above the ball that he bounced. Plus the WCC isn't a 'low tier" league, it's one of the better mid majors, The Zags and St. Mary's will both be single seeds in MM, Zags most likely a #1. The MEAC is a "low tier" league. SMH.

WCC is very low tier. Zags are perpetually year after year through their weak SOS. Their SOS right now is $130 in terms of Kenpom. Washington being a dumpster fire program doesn't matter. It is rather his lack of improvement that is alarming.

And you may not realize this but producing better numbers in a better system doesn't exactly cast this dude in a positive light.

paulbball wrote:

pantalones wrote:

paulbball wrote:
Difficult to statistically scout. Went from 2 years of non-improvement (other than getting older and getting marginally better) in a mid-high tier conference to a breakout season in a non-competitive low tier conference.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/nigel-williams-goss-1.html

man, you really know nothing about cbb. Washington is and was a complete dumpster fire of a program and NWG was the only player with an IQ above the ball that he bounced. Plus the WCC isn't a 'low tier" league, it's one of the better mid majors, The Zags and St. Mary's will both be single seeds in MM, Zags most likely a #1. The MEAC is a "low tier" league. SMH.

WCC is very low tier. Zags are perpetually year after year through their weak SOS. Their SOS right now is $130 in terms of Kenpom. Washington being a dumpster fire program doesn't matter. It is rather his lack of improvement that is alarming.

And you may not realize this but producing better numbers in a better system doesn't exactly cast this dude in a positive light.

Again, a "low tier", conference does not routinely get two teams in March Madness. The MEAC is "low tier", the WCC is a mid major, but Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference; they beat Arizona, Florida, Iowa State, Tennesse, SMC 3x's, etc. But you keep living in the late 90's where stupid sports cliche's and low information was the norm. P.S. The Zags don't get in year after year due "weak sos" they get in year after year because they win the conference and get the auto bid, and when they don't, once every 10 years, they play a tough enough ooc to get an at large bid. Again, you know nothing about cbb.

Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

shawn_hemp wrote:Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

this is just a dumb take, sorry to say so, Gonzaga has amazing depth and talent and that's easy to see regardless of their schedule.

shawn_hemp wrote:Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

Define "for real" because they've played at or above their tournament seed almost every year but two.

pantalones wrote:

shawn_hemp wrote:Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

Define "for real" because they've played at or above their tournament seed almost every year but two.

I'd consider "for real" to mean they could conceivably beat any team and at least make the final four

Not make the Sweet 16 and then promptly lose to the first actual "for real" team they play

shawn_hemp wrote:

RipCity71252 wrote:Hot Take (I think): Jordan Bell (Pac-12 DPOY) is a terrible defender and shouldn't be drafted.

Creates events, but is a low IQ, and dare I say low motor defender on the whole. I honestly don't think I've seen a prospect give up position to hunt steals and blocks as much as he does. It's disgusting to watch.

You could say that about most of the Oregon players tbh. Not sure if it's something he does naturally or if Dana Altman encourages that style of play

Dylan Ennis is probably their most reliable defender. Like when Lonzo Ball hit that deep 3 against Oregon to basically seal the game, Ennis actually played him about as well as someone could. Ball just made a shot I don't think he hits more than 3/10 times

And on the possession before that, Ennis made Ball drive to the basket and got zero help from Brooks or Bell who both just kind of watched Ball knowing full well he was about to go for a layup

At least foul him and send him to the line.

Low IQ and low motor might not be the most inaccurate description of Jordan Bell tbh. And those 2 things are a potentially disastrous combination.

The motor can change pretty easily, idk about the IQ part though

We are on the same page here and actually noted Altman's philosophy playing a part in a blazers-related forum. When I watch Bell I don't see a guy the reads the game defensively at a very high level, and isn't even overly competitive on that end. Adding to the examples you gave, I've seen multiple lazy closeouts w/ no contest... no contest on a bunch of perimeter drives where he'll instead focus on grabbing a potential miss. Just troubling stuff for a guy that's already an undersized/offensively limited prospect.

Sure he'll fly around and make plays, but there's something missing there that I quickly picked up on once I started keying in on him the last few days.

I've tried my hardest to try and get into Josh Hart, but I just can't do it. I think his skill level is overrated on offense, and I don't trust his J at the nba line. He has a chance to be a pretty good defender, but I don't think it's a guarantee when you consider that his defensive awareness/positioning isn't always there plus the below avg. physical tools.

RipCity71252 wrote:

shawn_hemp wrote:

RipCity71252 wrote:Hot Take (I think): Jordan Bell (Pac-12 DPOY) is a terrible defender and shouldn't be drafted.

Creates events, but is a low IQ, and dare I say low motor defender on the whole. I honestly don't think I've seen a prospect give up position to hunt steals and blocks as much as he does. It's disgusting to watch.

You could say that about most of the Oregon players tbh. Not sure if it's something he does naturally or if Dana Altman encourages that style of play

Dylan Ennis is probably their most reliable defender. Like when Lonzo Ball hit that deep 3 against Oregon to basically seal the game, Ennis actually played him about as well as someone could. Ball just made a shot I don't think he hits more than 3/10 times

And on the possession before that, Ennis made Ball drive to the basket and got zero help from Brooks or Bell who both just kind of watched Ball knowing full well he was about to go for a layup

At least foul him and send him to the line.

Low IQ and low motor might not be the most inaccurate description of Jordan Bell tbh. And those 2 things are a potentially disastrous combination.

The motor can change pretty easily, idk about the IQ part though

We are on the same page here and actually noted Altman's philosophy playing a part in a blazers-related forum. When I watch Bell I don't see a guy the reads the game defensively at a very high level, and isn't even overly competitive on that end. Adding to the examples you gave, I've seen multiple lazy closeouts w/ no contest... no contest on a bunch of perimeter drives where he'll instead focus on grabbing a potential miss. Just troubling stuff for a guy that's already an undersized/offensively limited prospect.

Sure he'll fly around and make plays, but there's something missing there that I quickly picked up on once I started keying in on him the last few days.

To say he shouldn't be drafted is kind of harsh though.

shawn_hemp wrote:

pantalones wrote:

shawn_hemp wrote:Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

Define "for real" because they've played at or above their tournament seed almost every year but two.

I'd consider "for real" to mean they could conceivably beat any team and at least make the final four

Not make the Sweet 16 and then promptly lose to the first actual "for real" team they play

So only a team that makes the FF is "for real" in your eyes? Absurd expectations.

shawn_hemp wrote:

RipCity71252 wrote:

shawn_hemp wrote:
You could say that about most of the Oregon players tbh. Not sure if it's something he does naturally or if Dana Altman encourages that style of play

Dylan Ennis is probably their most reliable defender. Like when Lonzo Ball hit that deep 3 against Oregon to basically seal the game, Ennis actually played him about as well as someone could. Ball just made a shot I don't think he hits more than 3/10 times

And on the possession before that, Ennis made Ball drive to the basket and got zero help from Brooks or Bell who both just kind of watched Ball knowing full well he was about to go for a layup

At least foul him and send him to the line.

Low IQ and low motor might not be the most inaccurate description of Jordan Bell tbh. And those 2 things are a potentially disastrous combination.

The motor can change pretty easily, idk about the IQ part though

We are on the same page here and actually noted Altman's philosophy playing a part in a blazers-related forum. When I watch Bell I don't see a guy the reads the game defensively at a very high level, and isn't even overly competitive on that end. Adding to the examples you gave, I've seen multiple lazy closeouts w/ no contest... no contest on a bunch of perimeter drives where he'll instead focus on grabbing a potential miss. Just troubling stuff for a guy that's already an undersized/offensively limited prospect.

Sure he'll fly around and make plays, but there's something missing there that I quickly picked up on once I started keying in on him the last few days.

To say he shouldn't be drafted is kind of harsh though.

Might be, but I just don't see the value he brings unless he shoots 3's and all indications show he'll have a small % chance of developing that skill.

Guys with his current skillset at his size just don't exist anymore with Dante Cunningham probably being the closest comp you'll find. Bell is clearly the better vertical athlete, but Dante was roughly his equal laterally and had better stretch indicators plus a higher defensive IQ coming out of Villanova.

shawn_hemp wrote:

pantalones wrote:

shawn_hemp wrote:Every year the same people say "Gonzaga is for real this time" and every year it turns out they aren't for real

I'm not saying that can't change this year, but they do have a pretty easy schedule

Define "for real" because they've played at or above their tournament seed almost every year but two.

I'd consider "for real" to mean they could conceivably beat any team and at least make the final four

Not make the Sweet 16 and then promptly lose to the first actual "for real" team they play

Two years ago was our best team ever when we lost to Duke in the Elite 8 who ended up winning the title. Our team this year is better than that mainly because all of our guards are above 6'1.

Does Justin Patton count as a sleeper?

Mr.Raptorsingh wrote:Does Justin Patton count as a sleeper?

At the very beginning of the season he did, but not since then. He's a lotto pick, imo.

But Bonzi Colson could. Even though everyone's seen him for 3 seasons and realizes he's a rock solid college player, he's one of those guys that you right off because he's oddly sized - a 6'5 center - actually 6'4.5. But I hold out hope for him based on the success of Jae Crowder. Yes, Crowder is 2 inches taller, but Colson's longer - 6'11.5 wingspan vs 6'9.25. Granted, Crowder is bulkier and stronger and had more experience playing on the wing than Colson. He also had a lot more steals in college - an indication of his superior defensive ability. Still, most of their stats are remarkable similar. These are guys who fit the description "basketball player". I'm not saying Colson has the same potential than Crowder - he doesn't - I don't see him having the defensive impact that Crowder has - but I do think he finds a way to show he can play forward in the NBA.

Doubt Colson declares, he is gonna get undrafted reviews from the NBA committee and has one year left of elegibility.
PJ Tucker was long and bouncier I think but Colson's statistical profile is better, better shooter, although I doubt Tucker got the green light to do that, better rebounding numbers per40, although Notre Dame plays faster than that Texas team so that could be similar, and better overall stocks.

Not sure he can be PJ Tucker, because he has to have that nitty-gritty personality and in general but he is interesting at least.

By the way, Bonzie Colson is destroying Duke. Incredible to think this guy is 6'4.

Talking about undersized forwards, what about Iowa State's Deonte Burton? He's just 6'5 but has a 6'11 wingspan and big hands, very strong frame. I think he could play some SF or PF at professional level despite his height, he plays a lot bigger than his size. Has some handles (nothing spetacular, but can handle enought to create his shots), nice mid and long range shot. Reminds me a little bit of a small Trevor Booker, even in the bad part of the game (decision making).

Look this dunk of Burton against West Virginia today, this guy is so strong!

Didn't read all pages and didn't see him mentioned but what about Iowa states monte Morris. Senior good size at PG moves well laterally on defense and shows good leadership.

Ptownsblazin wrote:Didn't read all pages and didn't see him mentioned but what about Iowa states monte Morris. Senior good size at PG moves well laterally on defense and shows good leadership.

If Golden State buys a 2nd round pick again: yes, please!

Jonah Bolden had 7/7 three's the other day, seems like leaving UCLA was the right move for him -