Raps 2020 Picks (Prospect Watch, Update: Vecenie Mock Released)

[Dalek]

This is how I feel about Paul Reed.

I think FVV has good lateral quicks and probably did well in agility instead of the 3/4 sprint. I think Bane fits this hustle despite negative wingspan. He just is so strong and works hard.

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

[Kevin Willis]

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

What about Jalen Smith and Yves Pons? I prefer those two - Paul Reed and Chris Smith.

[Mark_83]

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I'm not sure if you meant to quote me because I never said he's not toolsy. I specifically say he's athletic and long which is what precludes him from the VanVleet, playing above their raw tools, type.

Reed has the tools to be a phenomenal 4 position defender much like Pascal. In fact, your comparison is the one I've been running over in my mind when watching Reed, especially when he grabs a rebound and goes end to end. He's actually further than where Pascal was pre draft in terms of skills development.

In terms of effort he does have frenetic energy but so did a guy like JYD, who wasn't a good defender because he was over aggressive and gambled too much. He was an ok on ball defender like Reed is, but he was a brutal team defender cause he didn't know when to stay home. Reed has similar tendencies based on what I hear from people who watch DePaul quite a bit.

I agree with you it's improvable given the right makeup and IQ, which you need to determine if you're going to bet on the tools. Masai does a great job evaluating guys who have the mindset to work and improve which hopefully reed does. But it's also hard to teach IQ.

[casual_raps_fan]

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I'm not sure if you meant to quote me because I never said he's not toolsy. I specifically say he's athletic and long which is what precludes him from the VanVleet, playing above their raw tools, type.

In post #1454, you said...

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Now that I read this again, I may have been confused with what you said. If that is the case, my mistake.

[casual_raps_fan]

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

What about Jalen Smith and Yves Pons? I prefer those two - Paul Reed and Chris Smith.

Yves Pons at this point is a monster athlete and not much else going on. There's always a possibility of this type of guy to pan out but based on what has worked for the Raptors, I wouldn't bet on that type of guy. There are safer options we can go with.

Jalen Smith I don't see it with. He doesn't have the motor I like in a Raptors player. He doesn't look big enough to play 5 but not overall skilled enough to be a good 4. If he can get stronger/bigger, refine his jumper and offensive game, become a good defender, he could be an Ibaka but far more likely closer to Boucher. I'd rather select somebody else.

[Mark_83]

I was watching defensive highlights of Vanvleet last night and I got to thinking, how does this thicc, short armed, unathletic guy play such good defense? The only answer I could come up with was effort and IQ.

The guy works his ass off on defense (no pun intended), and he reads plays so well. It shows you don't have to be this long armed, chiseled uber athlete to be a good defender, you can be a good defender with high effort and IQ.

It got me to thinking about Xavier Tillman. He's not a leaper or elite athlete. Not super quick, and doesnt have elite size or length. But he's one of the best interior defenders in the NCAA averaging two blocks and a steal a game.

I really want to see what this guy would look like in our rotation. He's a lot like Vanvleet in that he seems to do more with what he has physically than most players. If you watch him, the number of reflections he gets with his reads and active hands is insane for a big man.

Would be happy with him at 28, or alternatively to acquire an early second to be able to take him.

I like Tillman's game a lot but have mostly been neutral with him because of his limitations (scoring, size) but recently, for the exact reasons you stated, I've been warming up to the idea of drafting him.

When I really think about his limitations, they probably won't negatively impact him THAT much.

Somebody mentioned that he is basically the same size as Al Horford so I compared their measurements and yes, they pretty much are the exact same size (height, wingspan, weight). I am pretty convinced Tillman would be able to bring something similar to Horford's defence to the table.

Offensively, his scoring does bother me a bit but having a bigman with his passing and vision is far more valuable than a center who is marginally better at scoring. He has shown some potential to be able to knock down jumpers as well. His place in the league will hinge on his shooting improvements and the Raptors do a really good job of teaching 3 point shooting. It could be a good match.

My comparison is a smaller Marc Gasol or Al Horford without scoring.

Yeah, he's not sexy as a pick I have to admit. I do like a few others over him at 28, but if we could buy an early second he seems tailor made for our system and culture.

I was the one who compared his measurements to Horford's combine measurements. They're almost exactly the same assuming he's no shorter than 6'8 3/4 (Horford's real height), and his wingspan really is 7'1 (without a combine it's hard to know). Horford does have a 35 inch vertical which I'm sure is way higher than Tillman's is, but he was also extremely slow in his quickness drills, whereas Tillman is supposedly very quick and nimble.

I agree with you about the offense, although I am a bit intrigued by his craftiness and footwork in the post. He will likely be limited by lack of length and lift from finishing inside despite he's crafty moves, but I see him more as a facilitator on offense anyway and a guy who will hopefully spread the floor at the 5 (which is basically Gasol's role right now). But he's gonna earn his money on the defensive end as one of our anchors. Gasol's ability to switch out in space at the 5 position is so valuable. There's no way we win the title last year without him being able to double Giannis and Steph on the peremiter.

[Mark_83]

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I'm not sure if you meant to quote me because I never said he's not toolsy. I specifically say he's athletic and long which is what precludes him from the VanVleet, playing above their raw tools, type.

In post #1454, you said...

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Now that I read this again, I may have been confused with what you said. If that is the case, my mistake.

Yeah, it was an awkward sentence configuration on my part. I meant he doesn't fall into the type who has to play beyond limited tools, because he has better tools than a guy like FVV or Tillman. Those guys have to get the most out of what little they have.

[Steven1562]

Tillman could be a Draymond/Tucker type. You don't know what your gonna get scoring wise but he will do everything else. He also seems like a hard worker and a family man.

[casual_raps_fan]

I'm not sure if you meant to quote me because I never said he's not toolsy. I specifically say he's athletic and long which is what precludes him from the VanVleet, playing above their raw tools, type.

In post #1454, you said...

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Now that I read this again, I may have been confused with what you said. If that is the case, my mistake.

Yeah, it was an awkward sentence configuration on my part. I meant he doesn't fall into the type who has to play beyond limited tools, because he has better tools than a guy like FVV or Tillman. Those guys have to get the most out of what little they have.

Nah. Your sentence is fine. I just suck at reading.

I totally agree with you. These are the reasons why I wouldn't prefer Tillman in the first (just like you said in your other post). He fits the Raptors, has good style, has a position and role in the NBA. The problem is it's hard for a winning team (the Raptors) to come by the opportunity to grab a toolsy high potential type player so when we get the opportunity, we have to jump on it.

If the good high potential forwards are all taken, who would you guys be more interested in? Isaiah Stewart or Tillman? I've been stumped on this one. I like Tillman's style more and his IQ/passing seems to be really unique but I feel like Isaiah Stewarts overall tools have a higher ceiling.

[Psubs]

Tillman could be a Draymond/Tucker type. You don't know what your gonna get scoring wise but he will do everything else. He also seems like a hard worker and a family man.

He seems like Taj Gibson.

[casual_raps_fan]

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

I'd be very happy with either Jaden McDaniels and Patrick Williams. They are the guys I'm hoping to drop. There are question marks but they both have lottery level talent which is why it's unlikely they will drop to us. There is a possibility though since there are so many quality guards in this draft. My guess is that most lottery teams are looking to get good guards since that's the direction the league is going and also in conjunction with the fact that there are far more guards than wings/bigs in this draft, we might have a chance.

I haven't watched Precious Achiuwa. I'll check him out.

edit: spelling

[Psubs]

Other than the defense part I'm not sure if Reed really fits in the same category. He's quite athletic, has very long arms and quickness. I've heard from people who watch DePaul though that his effort off the ball is not really there consistently, and his IQ and reads need work. Not saying he's bad or anything, just that he's not the making the most of limited tools type from what I've heard.

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

Chris Smith makes me think of a poor man's Jeff Green. Do not want.

[Psubs]

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

I'd be very happy with either Jaden McDaniels and Patrick Williams. They are the guys I'm hoping to drop. There are question marks but they both have lottery level talent which is why it's unlikely they will drop to us. There is a possibility though since there are so many quality guards in this draft. My guess is that most lottery teams are looking to get good guards since that's the direction the lead is going and also in conjunction with the fact that there are far more guards than wings/bigs in this draft, we might have a chance.

I haven't watched Precious Achiuwa. I'll check him out.

I'm hoping Vernon Carey drops to #28.

[casual_raps_fan]

In terms of effort he does have frenetic energy but so did a guy like JYD, who wasn't a good defender because he was over aggressive and gambled too much. He was an ok on ball defender like Reed is, but he was a brutal team defender cause he didn't know when to stay home. Reed has similar tendencies based on what I hear from people who watch DePaul quite a bit.

I agree with you it's improvable given the right makeup and IQ, which you need to determine if you're going to bet on the tools. Masai does a great job evaluating guys who have the mindset to work and improve which hopefully reed does. But it's also hard to teach IQ.

I agree it's hard to teach basketball IQ but it's definitely possible. In our case, I felt like Ibaka and Norm were hopeless but the Raptors staff did an amazing job of simplifying their assignments and roles. Under Nurse, they've been making great decisions and reading the game very well.

[Dalek]

Most of those things you're saying are improvable.

Defensive effort is the least of my concerns. If he doesn't show full effort, Nurse won't give him minutes. He has a motor so I'm confident he will improve on that.

From what I've seen, I actually thought he looks like a toolsy player. He handles the ball, shoots, passes, drives, can read the defence. These skills are just at a very primitive stage which makes him look like he's limited kind of like Siakam in his rookie season.

I guess I'm a glass half full type of guy and I'm seeing a guy who has the potential to improve on many things and has the physical attributes tailor made for the NBA.

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

What about Jalen Smith and Yves Pons? I prefer those two - Paul Reed and Chris Smith.

I like Jalen Smith but he slots as a four/five which is good but less in demand during crunch time.

I love Yves Pons but he should be available at 58. He is an undersized 5 but he is a fun project to gamble on late.

Speaking of gamble. I remember that you like Bolmora. I am really digging into his work and I really warmed up to him at 28. He is like Lamelo Ball from a size and passing skill. He also is a decent defender who played pretty well overall on a Euroleague level team. He could easily slot in over McCaw and maybe has upside to start in time.

[casual_raps_fan]

I am coming along to that type of thinking. Let's get the toolsy guys who are around 6-8 and above and aren't stiffs. This is often what the first round is about. You gamble a bit on the size and athleticism and figure you can help to fill out the rest.

The wing players like Paul Reed, Jaden McDaniels, Precious Achiuwa and Patrick Williams all meet that magical 6-8 to 6-9 threshold. All have their flaws.

Achiuwa is a turnover machine who can't shoot
Reed is the same as Achiuwa yet it took him three years to get to this point, but his defensive numbers are otherworldly
McDaniels is too raw and can't shoot efficiently but he has more offensive game than the others, in theory
Williams is probably the best of the bunch but his numbers looked weak

I have my preferences from these guys, and I think at least two of them won't be around by the time Toronto drafts.

The only guy that doesn't get the first round hype but probably deserves it is Chris Smith from UCLA. He has the size, but the difference is he can shoot it and showed growth over his career. To me, he reminds me most of Pascal. The guy who made a huge growth leap across the board.

Pascal jumped from 12 PPG to 20 PPG in a single year at NM State
Chris Smith went from 6 PPG to 13 PPG in a single year with big increases in shooting percentages

What about Jalen Smith and Yves Pons? I prefer those two - Paul Reed and Chris Smith.

I like Jalen Smith but he slots as a four/five which is good but less in demand during crunch time.

I love Yves Pons but he should be available at 58. He is an undersized 5 but he is a fun project to gamble on late.

Speaking of gamble. I remember that you like Bolmora. I am really digging into his work and I really warmed up to him at 28. He is like Lamelo Ball from a size and passing skill. He also is a decent defender who played pretty well overall on a Euroleague level team. He could easily slot in over McCaw and maybe has upside to start in time.

I've mentioned I like Bolmaro quite a bit around here but recently, I had a thought about his jump shot and how it could hurt his NBA career. He's shown he can knock down some shots but has mostly been inconsistent in different leagues and seasons. If he doesn't learn to shoot jumpers, he'd look like a below average role player. When considering that, he starts looking like a bit of a risky pick. Is the upside worth it?

[Psubs]

In terms of effort he does have frenetic energy but so did a guy like JYD, who wasn't a good defender because he was over aggressive and gambled too much. He was an ok on ball defender like Reed is, but he was a brutal team defender cause he didn't know when to stay home. Reed has similar tendencies based on what I hear from people who watch DePaul quite a bit.

I agree with you it's improvable given the right makeup and IQ, which you need to determine if you're going to bet on the tools. Masai does a great job evaluating guys who have the mindset to work and improve which hopefully reed does. But it's also hard to teach IQ.

I agree it's hard to teach basketball IQ but it's definitely possible. In our case, I felt like Ibaka and Norm were hopeless but the Raptors staff did an amazing job of simplifying their assignments and roles. Under Nurse, they've been making great decisions and reading the game very well.

Agreed. Nurse is the best. Would Milwaukee even be a playoff team if they added TD and RHJ but lost Giannis (instead of Kawhi and Danny Green)? Maybe a 7/8 seed.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/kings/2020-nba-mock-draft-80-first-round-draft-pick-predictions-analysis#slide-34

Maryland tied Michigan State for 1st in the Big Ten and aside from Smith, they have no other NBA prospect. I think Tillman may be better than Smith defensively ans passing but Smith has better long-range shooting. I like Smith's 2.4 blocks / 2.4 fouls. Horford didn't shoot the 3 at Florida and only started at age 29. Marc Gasol didn't shoot the 3 in games until he was 32, so maybe Tillman might be okay as he shoots. Though I think Tillman tops out at current Draymond with maybe 4 assists instead of 7 per game.

I'd be fine with either at #28. Really at #28 we're looking for a starting calibre player that can have a 10 year career; anything else is gravy.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/2019-03-31-17-duke.html

Forgot about last March Madness, Michigan State upsetting (2 beating 1) Duke and Zion. Tillman did enough to win. He even went 1 for 1 from 3! Zion played 37 mins and Tillman only played 29 mins because he had fouls, yet still put up 19pts, 9 rebs, 3 stls and 2 blks. It seems like Zion feasted when Tillman sat.

Watch on YouTube

0:35 - clears a path shielding Zion under the bucket.
1:08 - Zion with a beast rebound over the back of Tillman!
2:19 - gets inside position on Zion for the offensive board and layup
3:28 - Zion returns the favour
5:24 - Zion with the push off, Tillman makes him miss once but Zion finishes the 2nd attempt with the foul so Tillman sits
8:37 - Zion finish inside over Zion
9:09 - AND1
9:39 - Shuts down Zion's baseline drive that he was beating others earlier in the game.

Barrett with the FT choke

[Kevin Willis]

What about Jalen Smith and Yves Pons? I prefer those two - Paul Reed and Chris Smith.

I like Jalen Smith but he slots as a four/five which is good but less in demand during crunch time.

I love Yves Pons but he should be available at 58. He is an undersized 5 but he is a fun project to gamble on late.

Speaking of gamble. I remember that you like Bolmora. I am really digging into his work and I really warmed up to him at 28. He is like Lamelo Ball from a size and passing skill. He also is a decent defender who played pretty well overall on a Euroleague level team. He could easily slot in over McCaw and maybe has upside to start in time.

I've mentioned I like Bolmaro quite a bit around here but recently, I had a thought about his jump shot and how it could hurt his NBA career. He's shown he can knock down some shots but has mostly been inconsistent in different leagues and seasons. If he doesn't learn to shoot jumpers, he'd look like a below average role player. When considering that, he starts looking like a bit of a risky pick. Is the upside worth it?

I still like Bolmaro but he hasn't been mentioned in awhile here. His shooting is weak but it's fixable and he's still young. His D and motor are transferable skills. He could be a McCaw replacement very easily. He would be a bit of a risk for sure.

[Mark_83]

In post #1454, you said...
Now that I read this again, I may have been confused with what you said. If that is the case, my mistake.

Yeah, it was an awkward sentence configuration on my part. I meant he doesn't fall into the type who has to play beyond limited tools, because he has better tools than a guy like FVV or Tillman. Those guys have to get the most out of what little they have.

Nah. Your sentence is fine. I just suck at reading.

I totally agree with you. These are the reasons why I wouldn't prefer Tillman in the first (just like you said in your other post). He fits the Raptors, has good style, has a position and role in the NBA. The problem is it's hard for a winning team (the Raptors) to come by the opportunity to grab a toolsy high potential type player so when we get the opportunity, we have to jump on it.

If the good high potential forwards are all taken, who would you guys be more interested in? Isaiah Stewart or Tillman? I've been stumped on this one. I like Tillman's style more and his IQ/passing seems to be really unique but I feel like Isaiah Stewarts overall tools have a higher ceiling.

Tough choice. Stewart is intriguing. Much better length than Tillman. More projectable shooting range. Younger as well. Might have less lift than Tillman if that's possible though (Tillman can at least dunk in space).

This is where workouts and combine would help a lot. I want to see how he moves, how quick he is in defensive coverages. Is he switchsble or strictly a drop coverage big? How is he recovering?

[tdotrep2]

We all know the pick is gonna be straight out of left field on some overlooked guy who we all will go how tf did we not notice him before