Snapbacks and Handshakes: The 2017 Draft (Raps pick #23)

[Anatomize]

These are probably the concerns around Jok: age, strength, defense, ability to get to/finish at the rim. The lack of inside play is the biggest thing GM's would be hesitant about imo, but he definitely has 2nd round sleeper potential.

For the people saying "it's better to draft players who could have room to improve their jump shooting but are already solid everywhere else" - again this is a general statement I see get thrown around all the time without solid evidence to support it.

Middleton, Booker, Thompson, Kemba Walker beg to differ. Who the hell in their right mind would pick MKG over Thompson let alone Middleton? I watched both of their college highlights and during the draft thread I was telling everyone here MKG is crap - one guy was picked 2nd and the other 11th.. MKG has been a complete injury-prone bust defensive specialist up to this point.

That jumper CANNOT be fixed and molded - it looks like his arm is breaking when he shoots - it's an impossible life long hitch that should've been fixed when he was a child, not now.

For every Kawhi Leonard there is a dozen players who never developed a jumper despite having all-world tools (Terrence Williams for example).

On the other hand you have guys like Marvin Williams - who could shoot and stretch the floor, post up a little bit, but has no ball handling or creating skills of his own - so he plateaued. At least he's still in the league and contributing as a 3 + D small ball 4.

Each case is unique. We can't make sweeping generalizations such as - "Masai chose a bunch of guys who didn't have a jumper but could develop it like Wright or Powell or Siakam" as someone said above. If they look like they have room to fix or improve their form, I can understand drafting them, but some forms are broken beyond repair - some work ethic not up to par..but we shouldn't just avoid shooters ala Peter Jok.

One thing is for sure, pure shooters have a role long into their NBA career even as role players even if they don't have as high a ceiling, and those safe picks don't hurt as opposed to trying to hit homeruns and the guy never even enters the league. Guys like Anthony Morrow are still serviceable today - and could step into a larger role and score in the teens if needed (as he did for the Warriors early on in his career).

Right, every case should be treated differently, in which case, you shouldn't bring up MKG who probably has the biggest hitch and worse shooting form in NBA history. Worse than Chuck Haye's FT's and Barkley's golf swing. You can find tons of shooters who didn't pan out or tons of all-round players with poor shooting who didn't work out.

I think the bigger question is do you go safe in the draft or do you go for higher potential? How easy is it to sign or trade for your Anthony Morrows, Alan Andersons, Terrence Ross's, etc. of the league? Those players aren't that hard to obtain compared to solid starters, borderline stars, etc.

Do you go for a player who has 90% chance of being a 7-8th man or a player with a 50% chance of being a 5-6th man or 25% chance of being a #3 guy..etc.

I'm with you, I'm the same guy who said draft Wilson a few pages ago, I do not want Leaf whatsoever.

I'm equally a fan of upside, but a shooter having extra upside and a non shooter having extra upside are not mutually exclusive, that is what I was getting at. The poster I alluded to tried to claim that it's far better to go for one than the other, can you imagine if people passed on Curry in that regard? Just saying there isn't enough evidence to sway one way or the other it's all variable.

In terms of using MKG as an example, well clearly someone in the Hornets organization believed Mark Price could fix that monstrosity, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him 2nd.

The funny thing is that I'm not even insinuating we should draft Jok, I'm simply despelling a myth.

[Northface82]

Raptors should have fired Casey and started the reconstruction of this core.

[CoachJReturns]

These are probably the concerns around Jok: age, strength, defense, ability to get to/finish at the rim. The lack of inside play is the biggest thing GM's would be hesitant about imo, but he definitely has 2nd round sleeper potential.

For the people saying "it's better to draft players who could have room to improve their jump shooting but are already solid everywhere else" - again this is a general statement I see get thrown around all the time without solid evidence to support it.

Middleton, Booker, Thompson, Kemba Walker beg to differ. Who the hell in their right mind would pick MKG over Thompson let alone Middleton? I watched both of their college highlights and during the draft thread I was telling everyone here MKG is crap - one guy was picked 2nd and the other 11th.. MKG has been a complete injury-prone bust defensive specialist up to this point.

That jumper CANNOT be fixed and molded - it looks like his arm is breaking when he shoots - it's an impossible life long hitch that should've been fixed when he was a child, not now.

For every Kawhi Leonard there is a dozen players who never developed a jumper despite having all-world tools (Terrence Williams for example).

On the other hand you have guys like Marvin Williams - who could shoot and stretch the floor, post up a little bit, but has no ball handling or creating skills of his own - so he plateaued. At least he's still in the league and contributing as a 3 + D small ball 4.

Each case is unique. We can't make sweeping generalizations such as - "Masai chose a bunch of guys who didn't have a jumper but could develop it like Wright or Powell or Siakam" as someone said above. If they look like they have room to fix or improve their form, I can understand drafting them, but some forms are broken beyond repair - some work ethic not up to par..but we shouldn't just avoid shooters ala Peter Jok.

One thing is for sure, pure shooters have a role long into their NBA career even as role players even if they don't have as high a ceiling, and those safe picks don't hurt as opposed to trying to hit homeruns and the guy never even enters the league. Guys like Anthony Morrow are still serviceable today - and could step into a larger role and score in the teens if needed (as he did for the Warriors early on in his career).

Right, every case should be treated differently, in which case, you shouldn't bring up MKG who probably has the biggest hitch and worse shooting form in NBA history. Worse than Chuck Haye's FT's and Barkley's golf swing. You can find tons of shooters who didn't pan out or tons of all-round players with poor shooting who didn't work out.

I think the bigger question is do you go safe in the draft or do you go for higher potential? How easy is it to sign or trade for your Anthony Morrows, Alan Andersons, Terrence Ross's, etc. of the league? Those players aren't that hard to obtain compared to solid starters, borderline stars, etc.

Do you go for a player who has 90% chance of being a 7-8th man or a player with a 50% chance of being a 5-6th man or 25% chance of being a #3 guy..etc.

I'm with you, I'm the same guy who said draft Wilson a few pages ago, I do not want Leaf whatsoever.

I'm equally a fan of upside, but a shooter having extra upside and a non shooter having extra upside are not mutually exclusive, that is what I was getting at. The poster I alluded to tried to claim that it's far better to go for one than the other, can you imagine if people passed on Curry in that regard? Just saying there isn't enough evidence to sway one way or the other it's all variable.

In terms of using MKG as an example, well clearly someone in the Hornets organization believed Mark Price could fix that monstrosity, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him 2nd.

The funny thing is that I'm not even insinuating we should draft Jok, I'm simply despelling a myth.

You're right that it's too often we hear how shooting can be improved. I mean of course it can. It's arguably the most improvable skill in the game for someone willing to put in the work. I suppose if you're drafting someone with the hope their shot improves, you are looking at what signs of improvement they have shown already, their general work ethic and if their shot is fundamentally broken or not. Someone like Kawhi didn't have an entirely ugly shot, but it still required some adjustments and it's a time consuming and likely not enjoyable endeavor to alter shooting form that's been developed over years of playing time.
I'm definitely in favor of drafting upside, but as has been mentioned multiple times and I said myself a few pages back, you take every one on a case by case basis.

[CoachJReturns]

Yo, Swanigan's working out with the Raps tomorrow? That's dope. I'm telling y'all, the team needs a player of his skill as a big.

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

[DG88]

Yo, Swanigan's working out with the Raps tomorrow? That's dope. I'm telling y'all, the team needs a player of his skill as a big.

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

Sounds a lot like Greg Monroe.

[CoachJReturns]

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

Sounds a lot like Greg Monroe.

That's another one. Greg Monroe with a jump shot.

[vanhill]

Yo, Swanigan's working out with the Raps tomorrow? That's dope. I'm telling y'all, the team needs a player of his skill as a big.

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

there is a documentary video about swanigan on YouTube. Basically，he had problems with his family in his childhood and he was adopted by his brother frds who is also a coach. Since then, his whole life has changed and I have great faith in him that his weight issue is not a problem at all.

[Kevin Willis]

Yo, Swanigan's working out with the Raps tomorrow? That's dope. I'm telling y'all, the team needs a player of his skill as a big.

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

He's a poor man's Sully. Sully was dominating in Ohio and a legitimate lottery pick. If he could control his weight he's a starting PF.

[RaptorsLife]

I still think we're choosing Jonathan motley. Which would be a great pick

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

He's a poor man's Sully. Sully was dominating in Ohio and a legitimate lottery pick. If he could control his weight he's a starting PF.

I think Swanigan has a better feel for the game than Sullinger.

[Rapcity_11]

Another average skills player with a history of carrying so much weight so young. Sully II. Pass.

Sully is probably his closest comparison. To be fair though, a healthy and productive Sully is not bad value in our range. The main thing will be if Swanigan can continue to shoot the 3 ball well at the next level. Not saying I really want us to draft someone that slow, but he's fairly skilled for a big man. Shoot, post up, pass, rebound. His defense will be truly awful though.

He's a poor man's Sully. Sully was dominating in Ohio and a legitimate lottery pick. If he could control his weight he's a starting PF.

There’s a lot more than weight holding Sullinger back. His only real positive and useful skill is rebounding (his passing isn’t that useful given how he’s used offensively). Inefficient bigs who play poor defense aren’t exactly valuable.

[CoachJReturns]

I still think we're choosing Jonathan motley. Which would be a great pick

Of the guys we've brought in that are in the projected 20-30ish range, I'd say he is one of the least likely to be chosen with our pick.
Why draft Siakam part 2, when we have the original who has already shown signs of an improved 3 point shot(from NBA range) with the 905?
We'll likely draft someone who is at least an okay 3 point shooter already. No need for another hustle big with limited offensive skills.

[raptor jesus]

From what I saw watching Purdue, I have a hard time seeing Swanigan becoming even a passable defender. NBA guards will eat him alive imo.

[RaptorsLife]

I still think we're choosing Jonathan motley. Which would be a great pick

Of the guys we've brought in that are in the projected 20-30ish range, I'd say he is one of the least likely to be chosen with our pick.
Why draft Siakam part 2, when we have the original who has already shown signs of an improved 3 point shot(from NBA range) with the 905?
We'll likely draft someone who is at least an okay 3 point shooter already. No need for another hustle big with limited offensive skills.

He has the freakish length
He has the good college stats
He has the good character and experience
He is older

Powell
Poeltl
Wright
Siakam
Hell even Daniels
Wasn't chosen for the offense but there length and defense. Character and work ethic

This is exactly a Masai pic. If nailed the shooting in the workout then increase chances more

[HeadtopChunes]

Okay I watched 3 SMU games between yesterday and today here's what I think about Semi.

What to like:
3pt shooting his form is good and reliable (release might need to be quickened) but it will translate fine. Looks good on the catch and shoot and the pick and pop.

Mid range shooting: he can stroke it from midrange usually off a pick and pop.

He was never afraid to shoot and stayed within the offense even when getting blown out.

Sets good hard picks.

Good at driving hard to the basket and getting contact. Gets lots of FTs.

Definitely a Lob threat.

Low turnovers.

Passes to the open man and plays within the offense most of the time.

Offensive rebounding is good gets 1-2 putbacks a game.

Could score well in ISO situations.

Defense: I feel alot better about Semis defense after watching the games. He is fundamentally sound and rarely makes mistakes.
Excellent job at Ball/Lane denial.
Looks elite at closing out on 3pt shooters. Moves very fast but very controlled.
Does well on switches can keep up with PGs or deny penetration.

SMU plays heavy zone and Semi was playing center for certain time periods. I don't think I ever saw him reach in once and does a good job of avoiding fouls.

Intangible: Semi really shines here. In fact he fits Popovichs "over himself" type well. Semi works hard, plays within himself, doesn't get too high or low. He doesn't take heat check shots or get flashy he also doesn't get frustrated when being blown out. He's like PJ in that he's always encouraging his teammates. Semi is also an honor roll student and volunteers at homeless shelter.



What needs is improvement

Doesn't use his athleticism as much as he should. He plays similar to Ibaka. This might be a consequence of SMUs Offense. Semi was never or rarely used as a roll man or cutter. In fact he spent most of his time in post, setting screens or making a play.

SMU is like the Raptors in which they walk the ball upcourt and play a very slow pace. Semi didn't run out in transition for easy buckets either. So I can't tell if its the system or semi here.

Needs to work on defensive rebounding. Semi is usually content to just box out instead of going for the board. He needs to grab them as sometimes this leads to offensive boards.

Can't protect the rim. Semi tries but is often too short to protect the rim properly. His timing on blocks is usually off by a small amount. Idk if you can fix that.

His handle needs to get tighter. Drives need diversifying.

Has trouble finishing against length and size. Semi needs to adapt to a more controlled finishes. Floater game would be nice.

Sometimes slow to recognize off screen switches. While this did happen 2-3 times a game I think it was kinda overblown.




To sum up,

Ojeleye is a versatile player who plays within himself and demonstrates high character and work ethic. He has some problems but not really any major holes. Great teammate and good leader. I can see a good 3nD forward one day. I think he can play SF just fine but he needs some adjustments. His intangibles are great and I don't think he's done developing even though he played 4 years at college he only got minutes this last one. He certainly has the work ethic to improve.

Would I take him at 23? I would only if I was confident he could play SF. He's not number 1 on my board but he's there.

[CoachJReturns]

I still think we're choosing Jonathan motley. Which would be a great pick

Of the guys we've brought in that are in the projected 20-30ish range, I'd say he is one of the least likely to be chosen with our pick.
Why draft Siakam part 2, when we have the original who has already shown signs of an improved 3 point shot(from NBA range) with the 905?
We'll likely draft someone who is at least an okay 3 point shooter already. No need for another hustle big with limited offensive skills.

He has the freakish length
He has the good college stats
He has the good character and experience
He is older

Powell
Poeltl
Wright
Siakam
Hell even Daniels
Wasn't chosen for the offense but there length and defense. Character and work ethic

This is exactly a Masai pic. If nailed the shooting in the workout then increase chances more

Should we take some sort of And 1 bets or something on the matter? I really can't see him being the choice here, but I've been wrong before. I mean I never thought anyone would be stupid enough to pass on Iggy and Josh Smith for a fat center like Hoffa but...
You're right that his odds would increase if he looked great shooting in his workout. Of course, any guy who's brought in for a workout and shows improvement in an area that was previously not a strength will improve their chances. That's just common sense.

[Volcano]

These are probably the concerns around Jok: age, strength, defense, ability to get to/finish at the rim. The lack of inside play is the biggest thing GM's would be hesitant about imo, but he definitely has 2nd round sleeper potential.



Right, every case should be treated differently, in which case, you shouldn't bring up MKG who probably has the biggest hitch and worse shooting form in NBA history. Worse than Chuck Haye's FT's and Barkley's golf swing. You can find tons of shooters who didn't pan out or tons of all-round players with poor shooting who didn't work out.

I think the bigger question is do you go safe in the draft or do you go for higher potential? How easy is it to sign or trade for your Anthony Morrows, Alan Andersons, Terrence Ross's, etc. of the league? Those players aren't that hard to obtain compared to solid starters, borderline stars, etc.

Do you go for a player who has 90% chance of being a 7-8th man or a player with a 50% chance of being a 5-6th man or 25% chance of being a #3 guy..etc.

I'm with you, I'm the same guy who said draft Wilson a few pages ago, I do not want Leaf whatsoever.

I'm equally a fan of upside, but a shooter having extra upside and a non shooter having extra upside are not mutually exclusive, that is what I was getting at. The poster I alluded to tried to claim that it's far better to go for one than the other, can you imagine if people passed on Curry in that regard? Just saying there isn't enough evidence to sway one way or the other it's all variable.

In terms of using MKG as an example, well clearly someone in the Hornets organization believed Mark Price could fix that monstrosity, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him 2nd.

The funny thing is that I'm not even insinuating we should draft Jok, I'm simply despelling a myth.

You're right that it's too often we hear how shooting can be improved. I mean of course it can. It's arguably the most improvable skill in the game for someone willing to put in the work. I suppose if you're drafting someone with the hope their shot improves, you are looking at what signs of improvement they have shown already, their general work ethic and if their shot is fundamentally broken or not. Someone like Kawhi didn't have an entirely ugly shot, but it still required some adjustments and it's a time consuming and likely not enjoyable endeavor to alter shooting form that's been developed over years of playing time.
I'm definitely in favor of drafting upside, but as has been mentioned multiple times and I said myself a few pages back, you take every one on a case by case basis.

Another question is if big men have more room to grow in terms of shooting. Now we see a number of big men in the NBA that have added a 3 point shot - Horford, Cousins, Griffin, Millsap, Gasols, Bosh, Anthony Davis, etc.

For guards/wings..it's expected that they can shoot from the outside and should have been developing that part of their game in college, but it's not necessarily a requirement for bigs. Strategically, is it better to draft a Siakam over someone like Leaf? Maybe two years down the line Siakam builds a solid shooting game while it might be much tougher for Leaf to build a defensive game.

[CoachJReturns]

Okay I watched 3 SMU games between yesterday and today here's what I think about Semi.

What to like:
3pt shooting his form is good and reliable (release might need to be quickened) but it will translate fine. Looks good on the catch and shoot and the pick and pop.

Mid range shooting: he can stroke it from midrange usually off a pick and pop.

He was never afraid to shoot and stayed within the offense even when getting blown out.

Sets good hard picks.

Good at driving hard to the basket and getting contact. Gets lots of FTs.

Definitely a Lob threat.

Low turnovers.

Passes to the open man and plays within the offense most of the time.

Offensive rebounding is good gets 1-2 putbacks a game.

Could score well in ISO situations.

Defense: I feel alot better about Semis defense after watching the games. He is fundamentally sound and rarely makes mistakes.
Excellent job at Ball/Lane denial.
Looks elite at closing out on 3pt shooters. Moves very fast but very controlled.
Does well on switches can keep up with PGs or deny penetration.

SMU plays heavy zone and Semi was playing center for certain time periods. I don't think I ever saw him reach in once and does a good job of avoiding fouls.

Intangible: Semi really shines here. In fact he fits Popovichs "over himself" type well. Semi works hard, plays within himself, doesn't get too high or low. He doesn't take heat check shots or get flashy he also doesn't get frustrated when being blown out. He's like PJ in that he's always encouraging his teammates. Semi is also an honor role student and volunteers at homeless shelter.



What needs is improvement

Doesn't use his athleticism as much as he should. He plays similar to Ibaka. This might be a consequence of SMUs Offense. Semi was never or rarely used as a roll man or cutter. In fact he spent most of his time in post, setting screens or making a play.

SMU is like the Raptors in which they walk the ball upcourt and play a very slow pace. Semi didn't run out in transition for easy buckets either. So I can't tell if its the system or semi here.

Needs to work on defensive rebounding. Semi is usually content to just box out instead of going for the board. He needs to grab them as sometimes this leads to offensive boards.

Can't protect the rim. Semi tries but is often too short to protect the rim properly. His timing on blocks is usually off by a small amount. Idk if you can fix that.

His handle needs to get tighter. Drives need diversifying.

Has trouble finishing against length and size. Semi needs to adapt to a more controlled finishes. Floater game would be nice.

Sometimes slow to recognize off screen switches. While this did happen 2-3 times a game I think it was kinda overblown.




To sum up,

Ojeleye is a versatile player who plays within himself and demonstrates high character and work ethic. He has some problems but not really any major holes. Great teammate and good leader. I can see a good 3nD forward one day. I think he can play SF just fine but he needs some adjustments. His intangibles are great and I don't think he's done developing even though he played 4 years at college he only got minutes this last one. He certainly has the work ethic to improve.

Would I take him at 23? I would only if I was confident he could play SF. He's not number 1 on my board but he's there.

Nice post. This is one of the more balanced and fair reviews of a prospect I've come across and easily one of the better ones on our forum. Glad you saw good things defensively. Sounds like you watched a guy who will be a solid cog in a defense and be a very playable role player. Not necessarily a defensive juggernaut, but a good team defender.
I agree that his shot looks good from what I've seen. You're probably right that it's not terribly quick, but he would be shooting more open 3s so he should be at least okay.
I don't know what the track record is of mediocre collegiate rebounders becoming good NBA rebounders. That seems like something that would be apparent by now, but if he improved in that area it would be a big plus.

Again, good write up overall. If you have time to do any more please do so. This board doesn't get enough balanced opinions on prospects. Mostly we get guys pushing their selections by exaggerating their strengths and completely minimizing their weaknesses.

[RaptorsLife]

Of the guys we've brought in that are in the projected 20-30ish range, I'd say he is one of the least likely to be chosen with our pick.
Why draft Siakam part 2, when we have the original who has already shown signs of an improved 3 point shot(from NBA range) with the 905?
We'll likely draft someone who is at least an okay 3 point shooter already. No need for another hustle big with limited offensive skills.

He has the freakish length
He has the good college stats
He has the good character and experience
He is older

Powell
Poeltl
Wright
Siakam
Hell even Daniels
Wasn't chosen for the offense but there length and defense. Character and work ethic

This is exactly a Masai pic. If nailed the shooting in the workout then increase chances more

Should we take some sort of And 1 bets or something on the matter? I really can't see him being the choice here, but I've been wrong before. I mean I never thought anyone would be stupid enough to pass on Iggy and Josh Smith for a fat center like Hoffa but...
You're right that his odds would increase if he looked great shooting in his workout. Of course, any guy who's brought in for a workout and shows improvement in an area that was previously not a strength will improve their chances. That's just common sense.

Let's do a header bet i know you wanna rebuild. I'll put a fire Masai and Casey header lol

But I feel too confident about.

[CoachJReturns]

I'm with you, I'm the same guy who said draft Wilson a few pages ago, I do not want Leaf whatsoever.

I'm equally a fan of upside, but a shooter having extra upside and a non shooter having extra upside are not mutually exclusive, that is what I was getting at. The poster I alluded to tried to claim that it's far better to go for one than the other, can you imagine if people passed on Curry in that regard? Just saying there isn't enough evidence to sway one way or the other it's all variable.

In terms of using MKG as an example, well clearly someone in the Hornets organization believed Mark Price could fix that monstrosity, otherwise they wouldn't have drafted him 2nd.

The funny thing is that I'm not even insinuating we should draft Jok, I'm simply despelling a myth.

You're right that it's too often we hear how shooting can be improved. I mean of course it can. It's arguably the most improvable skill in the game for someone willing to put in the work. I suppose if you're drafting someone with the hope their shot improves, you are looking at what signs of improvement they have shown already, their general work ethic and if their shot is fundamentally broken or not. Someone like Kawhi didn't have an entirely ugly shot, but it still required some adjustments and it's a time consuming and likely not enjoyable endeavor to alter shooting form that's been developed over years of playing time.
I'm definitely in favor of drafting upside, but as has been mentioned multiple times and I said myself a few pages back, you take every one on a case by case basis.

Another question is if big men have more room to grow in terms of shooting. Now we see a number of big men in the NBA that have added a 3 point shot - Horford, Cousins, Griffin, Millsap, Gasols, Bosh, Anthony Davis, etc.

For guards/wings..it's expected that they can shoot from the outside and should have been developing that part of their game in college, but it's not necessarily a requirement for bigs. Strategically, is it better to draft a Siakam over someone like Leaf? Maybe two years down the line Siakam builds a solid shooting game while it might be much tougher for Leaf to build a defensive game.

You could even say that guards should have been developing a perimeter game since high school. It's inexcusable how high school and youth coaches often spend little time on developing players skills and physical abilities/conditioning. Too much time used on just running plays. While some taller kids may be more inclined to simply use their size because before college that's often enough, there is no reason for a guard to not have a jumpshot by the time they start playing for a division 1 team.
It may make more sense to take a guy like Siakam/Motley over Leaf(though I don't really want Leaf either), but if shooting is really the focus then guys like Lydon get more consideration. Shooting can be improved, but the best shooters in the league are guys who were also top 3 point shooters in college.