RealGM

How do we not have a thread for a top 5 pick? Maybe top 3.

You're on fire with your takes, I'll give you that. Pettiford an obvious lottery pick, Fland a clear top 10 pick with top 5 potential, seems like you have Sorber at least top 10, and now Newell might be a top 3 pick according to you. It's getting quite crowded at the top of your board. Do you mind sharing your big board? Even if it's just a rough draft. I'm genuinely curious on whom you're much lower considering that you have a lot of guys higher than most.

On topic: I suppose the reason we do not have a thread for him is that the vast majority of people do not think of Newell as a top 5 or top 3 prospect. Normally when you open threads like this one, it would be your job to make the case for the player. Or else what's the point? To later yell ‘I was first!’ (while ignoring the threads that do not age well)?

So what makes you think of Newell that highly? Just the boxscore production? I personally have him somewhere in the 20s right now. Can certainly see an argument to have him in the teens, maybe late lottery if you really like him. Tough for me to consider him higher than that at the moment.

The-Power wrote:You're on fire with your takes, I'll give you that. Pettiford an obvious lottery pick, Fland a clear top 10 pick with top 5 potential, seems like you have Sorber at least top 10, and now Newell might be a top 3 pick according to you. It's getting quite crowded at the top of your board. Do you mind sharing your big board? Even if it's just a rough draft. I'm genuinely curious on whom you're much lower considering that you have a lot of guys higher than most.

On topic: I suppose the reason we do not have a thread for him is that the vast majority of people do not think of Newell as a top 5 or top 3 prospect. Normally when you open threads like this one, it would be your job to make the case for the player. Or else what's the point? To later yell ‘I was first!’ (while ignoring the threads that do not age well)?

So what makes you think of Newell that highly? Just the boxscore production? I personally have him somewhere in the 20s right now. Can certainly see an argument to have him in the teens, maybe late lottery if you really like him. Tough for me to consider him higher than that at the moment.

It seems like you listed most of my big board so far. Job well done.

EvanZ wrote:It seems like you listed most of my big board so far. Job well done.

It seems like you continue to be more interested in opening threads without much substance than to actually talk about the prospects and share your opinions. So again – what's the point? Why not elaborate?

And if your point is to say that you have not yet had the time to look at other prospects (hence a very short big board), I'm curious how you could even justify declaring someone an ‘obvious lottery pick’ or a ‘clear top 5 pick’.

I'm genuinely curious what you see in Newell that I don't. I'm happy to listen and open to arguments. But alas, I don't expect an actual substantive response at this point.

The-Power wrote:

EvanZ wrote:It seems like you listed most of my big board so far. Job well done.

It seems like you continue to be more interested in opening threads without much substance than to actually talk about the prospects and share your opinions. So again – what's the point? Why not elaborate?

And if your point is to say that you have not yet had the time to look at other prospects (hence a very short big board), I'm curious how you could even justify declaring someone an ‘obvious lottery pick’ or a ‘clear top 5 pick’.

I'm genuinely curious what you see in Newell that I don't. I'm happy to listen and open to arguments. But alas, I don't expect an actual substantive response at this point.

Have you watched him play? He’s easily the best athlete in this class. He moves extremely well. He looks projectable as a shooter. He can pass and reads the floor. He’s been top 5-10 in my stat rankings all season.

Honestly if you don’t see it thats a you thing. He’s obviously top 10 and although it’s not obvious yet he could be top 3. He’s definitely ahead of Bailey for me.

As for the other guys I started threads on (Kasparas, Fears, Sorber, etc) I’m not moving off any of them. I start threads because there aren’t threads and most of you wait for Givony to green light prospects instead of making your own analysis.

we've discussed him in the catch all thread, he's the top offensive rebounder in the entire freshmen class, i like him better in his combo big capacity potentially than I do as a jumbo wing

EvanZ wrote:Have you watched him play?

Great start to the conversation, dude! Impeccable social skills.

EvanZ wrote:He’s easily the best athlete in this class.

Debatable. He has the best second jump (like Bagley did) and is of course a good athlete overall but best in the class? I see an argument but it depends on how you weigh the different attributes of athleticism. I don't see a strong argument at all to declare him the obviously and easily best athlete all things considered (like you could with someone like Zion).

EvanZ wrote:He looks projectable as a shooter.

If you mean that he projects as someone capable of hitting open shots – sure, I can see that. But I would not expect anything more than that. He is a low volume 3pt shooter (including in HS) with mediocre efficiency to boot and currently shoots in the mid-60s on FTs (mid-50s in HS). That's not the profile of a shooter. Being able to make open shots at decent efficiency at his size and position makes him playable in the NBA but it's not something that sells him as a top 3-5 pick.

EvanZ wrote:He can pass and reads the floor.

He's... fine in that regard? But he's never been much of a playmaker from what I can track and he's certainly behind a ton of other players in this draft, including at least some at his position (Queen, Wolf, Flagg (if you view him as a PF), Murray-Boyles to name a few).

EvanZ wrote:He’s been top 5-10 in my stat rankings all season.

That's cool. PER loves him, too, and BPM is also high on him. That doesn't always mean a ton, though.

EvanZ wrote:Honestly if you don’t see it thats a you thing.

And the EvanZ experience continues. Opens a thread with no elaboration, is asked questions, and turns immediately to arrogance.

EvanZ wrote:I start threads because there aren’t threads and most of you wait for Givony to green light prospects instead of making your own analysis.

Your obsession with Givony is weird. You're bringing him up so much that it strongly feels like projection. Perhaps this is what you did up until recently and now you moved away from him and accuse everyone else of doing what you used to do. I personally don't even know where to get information from Givony or know about his rankings – but there's also nothing wrong with taking into account the analyses and arguments of other people. What I do know is that this board really doesn't need more of this ‘I know better than y'all and you can't even think for yourself anyway’ attitude (especially now that this has finally improved a little bit of late after months of toxicity).

It's also beyond funny when you call out others for not doing their own analysis. Your analysis consists of what... looking at boxscores? Because all you ever reference is your ominous ‘model’ which I can only suppose is based on boxscore stats considering that you want others to subscribe to a newsletter that apparently just lists boxscore numbers from individual games. And when anyone dares to ask questions about what you actually like about a prospect, you write posts like these. That's not conducting analysis, EvanZ, though I would genuinely appreciate reading your analyses if ever you decide to conduct and post them again.

I'm genuinely wondering why you are on this board if you are – as it clearly seems – unwilling or at the very least resistant to elaborate on your opinion (not even to mention offering any actual analysis that others could benefit from) and you obviously do not care about other people's opinions (since most of them are just sheep in your eyes). So you don't want to inform, you don't want to learn, you do not even want to converse. So what's left? Is it validation from the online community, or perhaps you just want a public space that you can turn back to or reference to seemingly prove how awesome you are at evaluating draft prospects? I honestly don't get it but you do you and I'll just leave it at that.

clyde21 wrote:we've discussed him in the catch all thread, he's the top offensive rebounder in the entire freshmen class, i like him better in his combo big capacity potentially than I do as a jumbo wing

Not only have we discussed him in that thread, but several people have him top 5, and I've had him top 10 since before the season started b/c I've watched him quite a bit before college. I know I'm not the only one.

Just because we have lives and jobs and do this for fun doesn't mean that everyone on the board is stupid or that we aren't watching as much as we can (enjoy) and updating our opinions based on that information ... many times in ways that run counter to consensus. And yes, when people mention prospects they've watched that I haven't seen yet (as EvanZ did w/Sorber) I try to catch a game to see if I see the same thing. Other times people are early on guys that start to do well later in the season since they see something in them (e.g., clyde was early on Carter Bryant --- and I still haven't caught him since he started getting minutes, so I haven't developed a strong opinion on where he should be).

The-Power wrote:

EvanZ wrote:Have you watched him play?

Great start to the conversation, dude! Impeccable social skills.

EvanZ wrote:He’s easily the best athlete in this class.

Debatable. He has the best second jump (like Bagley did) and is of course a good athlete overall but best in the class? I see an argument but it depends on how you weigh the different attributes of athleticism. I don't see a strong argument at all to declare him the obviously and easily best athlete all things considered (like you could with someone like Zion).

EvanZ wrote:He looks projectable as a shooter.

If you mean that he projects as someone capable of hitting open shots – sure, I can see that. But I would not expect anything more than that. He is a low volume 3pt shooter (including in HS) with mediocre efficiency to boot and currently shoots in the mid-60s on FTs (mid-50s in HS). That's not the profile of a shooter. Being able to make open shots at decent efficiency at his size and position makes him playable in the NBA but it's not something that sells him as a top 3-5 pick.

EvanZ wrote:He can pass and reads the floor.

He's... fine in that regard? But he's never been much of a playmaker from what I can track and he's certainly behind a ton of other players in this draft, including at least some at his position (Queen, Wolf, Flagg (if you view him as a PF), Murray-Boyles to name a few).

EvanZ wrote:He’s been top 5-10 in my stat rankings all season.

That's cool. PER loves him, too, and BPM is also high on him. That doesn't always mean a ton, though.

EvanZ wrote:Honestly if you don’t see it thats a you thing.

And the EvanZ experience continues. Opens a thread with no elaboration, is asked questions, and turns immediately to arrogance.

EvanZ wrote:I start threads because there aren’t threads and most of you wait for Givony to green light prospects instead of making your own analysis.

Your obsession with Givony is weird. You're bringing him up so much that it strongly feels like projection. Perhaps this is what you did up until recently and now you moved away from him and accuse everyone else of doing what you used to do. I personally don't even know where to get information from Givony or know about his rankings – but there's also nothing wrong with taking into account the analyses and arguments of other people. What I do know is that this board really doesn't need more of this ‘I know better than y'all and you can't even think for yourself anyway’ attitude (especially now that this has finally improved a little bit of late after months of toxicity).

It's also beyond funny when you call out others for not doing their own analysis. Your analysis consists of what... looking at boxscores? Because all you ever reference is your ominous ‘model’ which I can only suppose is based on boxscore stats considering that you want others to subscribe to a newsletter that apparently just lists boxscore numbers from individual games. And when anyone dares to ask questions about what you actually like about a prospect, you write posts like these. That's not conducting analysis, EvanZ, though I would genuinely appreciate reading your analyses if ever you decide to conduct and post them again.

I'm genuinely wondering why you are on this board if you are – as it clearly seems – unwilling or at the very least resistant to elaborate on your opinion (not even to mention offering any actual analysis that others could benefit from) and you obviously do not care about other people's opinions (since most of them are just sheep in your eyes). So you don't want to inform, you don't want to learn, you do not even want to converse. So what's left? Is it validation from the online community, or perhaps you just want a public space that you can turn back to or reference to seemingly prove how awesome you are at evaluating draft prospects? I honestly don't get it but you do you and I'll just leave it at that.

That was a long meandering post. I don’t know why you’re obsessed with me but I’ll continue to post here as I wish. You can choose to read what I have to say or simply block me as I have blocked many others before.

he's productive and efficient scorer as a frosh. very few of them are both. given the size and athleticism, hard to keep him outside the top 10 and yeah, maybe not a stretch to have him as high as 5.

I really like his game, he's an interesting prospect for sure. The kid has athleticism in bundles, but it's all going to come down to his jumper. He's a 4 who has a relentless motor and switchability, but if he can't shoot he's going to cause spacing problems at the next level.

Rising up my board from late lottery to top 10. I sometimes see a poor man's 6'10" Mobley/Sarr and believe that's what he wants to play like but he isn't allowed to. Sometimes I see him as a guy capable of putting on more size and being like Allen. Similar to Castle last season, his choice of school isn't necessarily helping his draft stock but he's probably being coached the right way and it'll help him develop good habits. I could see him getting as high as #4 on my board but he'll probably fall somewhere between 5-10. He'll be 20 y/o before his rookie season. Not a huge deal but isn't a positive.

FarBeyondDriven wrote:Rising up my board from late lottery to top 10. I sometimes see a poor man's 6'10" Mobley/Sarr and believe that's what he wants to play like but he isn't allowed to. Sometimes I see him as a guy capable of putting on more size and being like Allen. Similar to Castle last season, his choice of school isn't necessarily helping his draft stock but he's probably being coached the right way and it'll help him develop good habits. I could see him getting as high as #4 on my board but he'll probably fall somewhere between 5-10. He'll be 20 y/o before his rookie season. Not a huge deal but isn't a positive.

He's another kid who plays the right way. Tries to do things that help the team win games. Takes/makes efficient shots. Plays hard on both ends. For some reason, these traits get overlooked. I was hoping over the summer that the word wouldn't get out and San Antonio could nab him like they nabbed Castle, but I think he's going top 7 for sure, because there will probably be lineups where he could play some small ball 5 for teams.

And Georgia is 13-2 so far. So his choice in program has elevated them (along with some others like Somto, Lawrence, Cain).

I think he goes Top-8 when all is said and done. Some team will hope his development curve can be like a poor mans JJJ or Mobley IMO.

To think of anyone taking the archetype that Queen brings over the archetype that Asa brings is nuts IMO. I strongly would bet that end of day, Asa is a top pick and Queen drops to the late R1.

Its cherry picking, but Asa started 0-7 from 3 in his first 2 games - take those out and he is 9 / 25 and sitting at 36%.

The-Power wrote:You're on fire with your takes, I'll give you that. Pettiford an obvious lottery pick, Fland a clear top 10 pick with top 5 potential, seems like you have Sorber at least top 10, and now Newell might be a top 3 pick according to you. It's getting quite crowded at the top of your board. Do you mind sharing your big board? Even if it's just a rough draft. I'm genuinely curious on whom you're much lower considering that you have a lot of guys higher than most.

On topic: I suppose the reason we do not have a thread for him is that the vast majority of people do not think of Newell as a top 5 or top 3 prospect. Normally when you open threads like this one, it would be your job to make the case for the player. Or else what's the point? To later yell ‘I was first!’ (while ignoring the threads that do not age well)?

So what makes you think of Newell that highly? Just the boxscore production? I personally have him somewhere in the 20s right now. Can certainly see an argument to have him in the teens, maybe late lottery if you really like him. Tough for me to consider him higher than that at the moment.

I’m curious how one could have him so low tbh. I think that is the wild take, not mine.

I haven't spent much time on or developed a set opinion on Newell yet.

I did notice a few things today though.

Georgia offense is way better on average without him and defense without is slightly better than with him. And consistent with that, a large majority of players rate better on RAPM without him than with him.

Will looker closer.

Looks like better shooting from every distance and more assists without him. Opponents shoot better from almost every distance with a way higher assist rate. Rebounding is better opponentsand somewhat offsetting.

Average quality of opponents varies by SOS with and without by about 5 pts. So that is part of it but only about 1/3rd of the total swing.

On / off data is similar against top 60 opponents.

On / off data has some value for understanding players but obviously it isn't simple or purely about that player.

Interesting case worthy of more consideration and discussion.

EvanZ wrote:I’m curious how one could have him so low tbh. I think that is the wild take, not mine.

He's very productive but what's his role in the NBA? On offense, he currently thrives off being an elite offensive rebounder and having a good paint touch, including little hook shots out of the post. That has value but that is not usually what NBA teams are looking for first and foremost in their starting bigs. At other key aspects of the game – shooting, passing, physicality – he's not terrible but clearly doesn't stand out either. It's similar on defense. He does a lot of things at a decent level but nothing that stands out to me.

Is he a PF or C? What makes him better than someone like Bagley? What are the odds that he ends up better than, say, Hartenstein (perhaps with a somewhat respectable 3pt shot but without the same level of rim protection)? And Hartenstein – if he reaches that level – is a really nice player who in a re-draft goes in the top 10; but it's not tantalizing upside in that range.

I'm open to arguments for why he should be drafted much higher than I have him and if he continues to be as productive as he has been now that the schedule becomes really tough, I'll certainly bump him up to the teens. But right now, I'm not convinced enough that he's more than a bench big or lower-level starter to put him higher than that (but to be clear: I'm not insisting that I'm 100% right here).

This might sound like blasphemy to some but I am genuinely curious when I ask this: what makes Newell a much better prospect than JT Toppin? I'm not saying he isn't a better prospect and I definitely need to watch more of him, but I'm curious to know why the consensus seems to be much higher on Newell compared to Toppin. What am I missing?

The-Power wrote:This might sound like blasphemy to some but I am genuinely curious when I ask this: what makes Newell a much better prospect than JT Toppin? I'm not saying he isn't a better prospect and I definitely need to watch more of him, but I'm curious to know why the consensus seems to be much higher on Newell compared to Toppin. What am I missing?

it's a fair question. toppin is a better player and they are the same age. newell looks quite a bit longer to me. but if they measure similarly, it would be hard to argue newell over toppin.

The-Power wrote:This might sound like blasphemy to some but I am genuinely curious when I ask this: what makes Newell a much better prospect than JT Toppin? I'm not saying he isn't a better prospect and I definitely need to watch more of him, but I'm curious to know why the consensus seems to be much higher on Newell compared to Toppin. What am I missing?

I have Toppin as the better prospect based on my limited evaluations.