Zatzman: Vision 6’9” Dead - but what can we learn from it?

[Indeed]

If the stats backed up the scouting report, he would have been a top 5 pick just as he was projected to go in the first half of the year when he was hitting 3's at a 40% clip.

I have a feeling that the stats not matching isn't the only reason, unless you're suggesting that every team that passed on him just went and looked at his BBRef stats and said "Nah".

So either the scouting reports are inaccurate, or he had a bad year. We'll find out in a couple months.

Or, and just stay with me here for like 2 seconds, you are looking at a total of 220 college attempts

That is not a good shooter, there is no world, where a 34% 3 point shooter, is considered good.

Context my guy. Damian Lillard in 2014-15 shot 34.3% from 3. I am interested if you think this is a world in which a 34% shooter is actually in fact a good shooter?

Watch on YouTube

Like watch two seconds of that video and watch the type of 3's he is taking and maybe it will click for you why a good shooter coudl shoot 34%.

Here is that "context" you love to claim no one ever has.

And clearly didn't listen to the scouting report that I posted, which explained the high volume and difficulty / movement shooting that would not have him compared to a 40% spot up stand still shooter, so I am unsure the video you post would make any difference for him to understand the context.

[AbC?]

The main lesson to be learned is Masai is washed.

[ropjhk]

When the measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure.

Kind of like GDP.

[everdiso]

Longbois

Horford 6'9"
Tatum 6'8"
Brown 6'6"
White 6'4"
Jrue 6'4"


seems like a good plan.

[dTox]

I remember you guys hated me for talking down on the 6'9 experiment.

I knew you guys would eventually see it my way.

I am confident when I say more than half of the posters here didn't believe in the experiment, well, moreso the quality of talent in that experiment.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using RealGM mobile app

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

It wasn't a bad idea, it was just implemented poorly. For example, none of the 6'9" guys could shoot...and we lost shooting. We didn't surround them with spacers, we just shrunk the floor. Like, maybe add somebody similar to Trevor Ariza or Ryan Anderson. You know, guys who can actually shoot. Not just "project" players, who might learn to shoot some day.

[ReggieSlater]

It was an observation more than a movement from management.

[OakleyDokely]

sorry, I had to do it

[Pointgod]

Longbois

Horford 6'9"
Tatum 6'8"
Brown 6'6"
White 6'4"
Jrue 6'4"


seems like a good plan.

Notice that other than Jaylen Brown all of these players had skills before they joined the Celtics? They weren’t all just athletes that the front offices believed could learn to shoot

[Pointgod]

The main lesson to be learned is Masai is washed.

Not washed but I believe our front office truly thought they were smarter than the rest of the league

[canada_dry]

Agreed. I swear we keep rehashing the same things over and over. We didn't have a centre. We didn't have a backup point. We had a shooting guard who didn't pass and didn't develop into the shot creator we had hoped for. We had no young players in the pipeline aside from Precious and he thought he was a guard, not a forward. We still would've been able to run it back given we had the MLE available, but even that didn't work when Fred bounced. FVV + Schroeder (or any other capable backup) would've been huge for our guard lineup and we drafted Gradey that year too. Who knows what the full plan may have been had Fred returned.

Also, I'm observing people focusing on height as opposed to length. Yes, OG is 6'7" but he has a 7'2" wingspan. Pascal has a 7' 3" wingspan. Scottie has a 7' 2.75" wingspan. Even Trent Jr. has a 6'8.5" wingspan. That's 4 players with length that exceeds their height.

We've done the same in drafting Mogbo (6' 7" height, 7'2" wingspan), Jakobe (6'5" height, 6'10" wingspan), Chomche (6'11 height, 7' 4" wingspan). We've also drafted a FVVesque player in Jamal Shead (Winner, ACC DPOY). If nothing else, the FO is rather consistent. Heck, even Gradey has a +2 wingspan being listed at 6'7" and a 6'9" wingspan. We continue to focus on developing shooting and hopefully our current (and future) crop stick around enough to develop the way OG, Fred, Pascal and Norm did. I'm hopeful for a bench mob redux. Oh and RJ has a 6'9" wingspan and IQ just misses the cutoff at 6'8". The difference is that this time around, we're firmly committed to developing - with the opportunity to surprise.

Yeah. We definitely still love and target + wingspan.

Our last 2 first rounders are shooters though. In gradey and jakobe. But shooters with + wingspan. They still got a type it seems.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

What? Gradey is a shooter, Jakobe in no way is a shooter. 37/34/79 splits in college, and 34/20/87 in the SL does not a shooter make. I'm not sure where this concept of him being a shooter came from, I see it all over the draft profiles, but a guy who can't shoot an average % from a college 3, or even 40% from the field, is not what I would classify as a shooter.

Jokobe is known as ashooter. A movement shooter at that if im not mistaken The percentages weren't great because a lot of the attempts were self created, and way too many attempts in that vein, hes a MUCH better shooter than the percentages. At least he should be.

This nuance is lost when all you look at and point to is the percentages. Theres a reason those scouts were calling him a shooter despite the middling percentages.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[canada_dry]

If the stats backed up the scouting report, he would have been a top 5 pick just as he was projected to go in the first half of the year when he was hitting 3's at a 40% clip.

I have a feeling that the stats not matching isn't the only reason, unless you're suggesting that every team that passed on him just went and looked at his BBRef stats and said "Nah".

So either the scouting reports are inaccurate, or he had a bad year. We'll find out in a couple months.

Or, and just stay with me here for like 2 seconds, you are looking at a total of 220 college attempts

That is not a good shooter, there is no world, where a 34% 3 point shooter, is considered good.

Context my guy. Damian Lillard in 2014-15 shot 34.3% from 3. I am interested if you think this is a world in which a 34% shooter is actually in fact a good shooter?

Watch on YouTube

Like watch two seconds of that video and watch the type of 3's he is taking and maybe it will click for you why a good shooter coudl shoot 34%.

Here is that "context" you love to claim no one ever has.

thats correct. The same logic would dictate lillard was not a shooter coming out of college...which would have been a nonsensical statement to make back then.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[Scase]

Yeah. We definitely still love and target + wingspan.

Our last 2 first rounders are shooters though. In gradey and jakobe. But shooters with + wingspan. They still got a type it seems.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

What? Gradey is a shooter, Jakobe in no way is a shooter. 37/34/79 splits in college, and 34/20/87 in the SL does not a shooter make. I'm not sure where this concept of him being a shooter came from, I see it all over the draft profiles, but a guy who can't shoot an average % from a college 3, or even 40% from the field, is not what I would classify as a shooter.

Jokobe is known as ashooter. A movement shooter at that if im not mistaken The percentages weren't great because a lot of the attempts were self created, and way too many attempts in that vein, hes a MUCH better shooter than the percentages. At least he should be.

This nuance is lost when all you look at and point to is the percentages. Theres a reason those scouts were calling him a shooter despite the middling percentages.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

So then the argument is that the entire system in college failed him, rather than him not being a great shooter, I'm fine with that being the reason but it's cherry picking quite a bit to try and ignore every piece of statistical evidence and just claim he's a good shooter.

And using Dame as some sort of "gotcha" example is hilarious. Dame shot 39% in college on 6.1 3PA/g and 41% on 7.2 3PA/g in his last season. Dame shot 37.4, 39.3, and 40.9 the other 3 years, and here you are listening to the genius using a single year of 34.5% as some example. But sure, that's a brilliant argument, lump yourself in with someone who says context, but doesn't have a basic grasp of what the word means

[YogurtProducer]

What? Gradey is a shooter, Jakobe in no way is a shooter. 37/34/79 splits in college, and 34/20/87 in the SL does not a shooter make. I'm not sure where this concept of him being a shooter came from, I see it all over the draft profiles, but a guy who can't shoot an average % from a college 3, or even 40% from the field, is not what I would classify as a shooter.

Jokobe is known as ashooter. A movement shooter at that if im not mistaken The percentages weren't great because a lot of the attempts were self created, and way too many attempts in that vein, hes a MUCH better shooter than the percentages. At least he should be.

This nuance is lost when all you look at and point to is the percentages. Theres a reason those scouts were calling him a shooter despite the middling percentages.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

So then the argument is that the entire system in college failed him, rather than him not being a great shooter, I'm fine with that being the reason but it's cherry picking quite a bit to try and ignore every piece of statistical evidence and just claim he's a good shooter.

And using Dame as some sort of "gotcha" example is hilarious. Dame shot 39% in college on 6.1 3PA/g and 41% on 7.2 3PA/g in his last season. Dame shot 37.4, 39.3, and 40.9 the other 3 years, and here you are listening to the genius using a single year of 34.5% as some example. But sure, that's a brilliant argument, lump yourself in with someone who says context, but doesn't have a basic grasp of what the word means

That is not a good shooter, there is no world, where a 34% 3 point shooter, is considered good.

This you? ^^^

So is there a world, or is there not a world, where someone could shoot 34% and still be a good shooter? You contradict yourself every time you type.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

Never trust Del Abbot.

Btw the greatest longbow of all time is slated to go number 1 in next years draft, though his measurables don't stack up to the greats.