The Enes Kanter Thread

[erudite23]

Enes Kanter is about as athletic as Boozer. He's not really taller than Boozer either.

This is blatantly false. Kanter measured at 6'9 3/4". Boozer measured at 6'7 3/4". Kanter is a full two inches taller. Do you ever actually read what you write?

[HammerDunk]

Enes Kanter is about as athletic as Boozer. He's not really taller than Boozer either.

Wait, are you talking about CARLOS Boozer???

[carrottop12]

Enes Kanter is about as athletic as Boozer. He's not really taller than Boozer either.

This is blatantly false. Kanter measured at 6'9 3/4". Boozer measured at 6'7 3/4". Kanter is a full two inches taller. Do you ever actually read what you write?

Yeah, I was wondering about this too.

Kanter is taller in bare feet than Boozer is in shoes. They have similar vertical leaps, though Kanter has a much higher max vert, and he benched more at a way younger age.

Measurement wise, Kanter slaughters Boozer.

[reapaman]

Do I need to go further here? It is true that Enes has not played for a high level professional club OR for an NCAA club. THE ONLY REASON FOR THIS IS BECAUSE HE SAT OUT A YEAR. If he hadn't made that decision, he WOULD have a year of high level NCAA play to judge from, or he would have gone back and played in Europe for a high level club. The reason why there is no track record for players who have been successful like that, is because this is the first top 5 draft prospect--EVER--who spent the year before being drafted OUT OF BASKETBALL! Its a unique situation, so trying to compare him to others is futile. If he hadn't sat out, again, we would have a year of NCAA or EuroLeague ball to look at. But we don't. That doesn't change who he is as a basketball player. His success or failure will almost exclusively depend on how he can play the game of basketball. And if we decide to pass, we could easily be watching him dominate on another team for the next decade and be left wondering "what if?" At the end of the day, a player is what he is and you have to make the decision with the information you have. Period. And the information we have suggests he has a chance to be special. That is not something you turn your back on lightly.

Well my whole point is about proving that a player has NBA skills and I guess you can tell that versus any level of competition. I'll admit I mabey wrong about the level of competition thing but all i'm saying is can you sit there and put enough evidence together that at least somewhat proves he has nba level skills. I can't because there isn't enough evidence since there isn't enough full video of his youth games (or full video of any games he played), he didn't play that season in college and he didn't decide to play professionally. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with his highlight videos, neither was some guys like Giovonny even before those high school videos. I know you can never be 100% sure of any thing but are you at least somewhat sure he usually give great effort, especially defensively? Are you some what sure he isn't super soft like boozer? Are you somewhat sure that he is somewhat consistent and doesn't waver under pressure? Can he execute his moves on offense with at least decent effeciency? Does he have great worth ethic when it come to basketball or just a workout warrior ala Tyrus Thomas? Does he have a good attitude most of the time on the court? Is he a complainer especially if he doesn't get enough playing time? Most of the questions above are things that become clearer with more video and extending his resume a bit more.

Next thing is how much playin time and patience is gonna be needed to develop him? We have proven that we dont have much patience for our first rounders and wont hesistate to trade them for any reason which is why only one remains. This is a bigger concern than with knight because its gonna be hard to get minutes for him unless we trade a big or two which who knows whats gonna happen with that situation. I'll stop mentioning Koufos after this but he couldn't even get on the court enough to see what he's got and it took a couple injuries and until the end of the season before Hayward got enough minutes.

I dont know about using the #3 pick on someone who you can only make assumptions about no matter how much potential they could have. At least with Knight I have tons of video where I can look at how he plays in many different situations and we can look at how he reacts to different events along with how his interviews are. All I seen of Kanter is some highlight videos. Its like buying a car in the complete dark. With Knight I at least have a flash light.

[Getjazz]

Well he's more of a Love-Nene type of guy. I think that you take a chance on a guy like that when you have a guy like Harris to man the point for 2 yrs and trade Millsap for a 3, put Hayward at 2 and go for it. Give him time to develop as the first big off the bench. It's not like we're making a run at the title for a few yr';s anyway. Then draft a few good players next yr to add to the talent level of the team and grow from there.
This team has some really good players right now and could add some very good guys with this draft. Then with some luck we could hit a home run with next yrs deep draft and be set for 5-9 yrs...

[erudite23]

Do I need to go further here? It is true that Enes has not played for a high level professional club OR for an NCAA club. THE ONLY REASON FOR THIS IS BECAUSE HE SAT OUT A YEAR. If he hadn't made that decision, he WOULD have a year of high level NCAA play to judge from, or he would have gone back and played in Europe for a high level club. The reason why there is no track record for players who have been successful like that, is because this is the first top 5 draft prospect--EVER--who spent the year before being drafted OUT OF BASKETBALL! Its a unique situation, so trying to compare him to others is futile. If he hadn't sat out, again, we would have a year of NCAA or EuroLeague ball to look at. But we don't. That doesn't change who he is as a basketball player. His success or failure will almost exclusively depend on how he can play the game of basketball. And if we decide to pass, we could easily be watching him dominate on another team for the next decade and be left wondering "what if?" At the end of the day, a player is what he is and you have to make the decision with the information you have. Period. And the information we have suggests he has a chance to be special. That is not something you turn your back on lightly.

Well my whole point is about proving that a player has NBA skills and I guess you can tell that versus any level of competition. I'll admit I mabey wrong about the level of competition thing but all i'm saying is can you sit there and put enough evidence together that at least somewhat proves he has nba level skills. I can't because there isn't enough evidence since there isn't enough full video of his youth games (or full video of any games he played), he didn't play that season in college and he didn't decide to play professionally.

You can't ever prove that a player has NBA level skills. Some of the greatest draft prospects of all time have failed in the pros. Why? There are a million reasons why. Just as there are a million potential reasons why a player can succeed. Derrick Coleman was considered a slam dunk All-Time great. Never happened, and he ultimately flamed out. Never Nervous Pervis was supposed to be unbelievable in the NBA. Nope. Kenny Anderson was considered to be possibly the greatest PG prospect ever when he came out. Good player. But that's it. The draft is always about unknowns.

In this day and age, its become about guessing correctly when you don't have all the info you want. Its the reason why Kanter is almost universally regarded as a top 3 prospect right now. Because you can bitch and moan all day about what you don't know, but you will still be judged based upon a) how good the player you draft becomes as well as b) how good the players you pass over become.

The story of the late mid-to-late 90s--and the championship teams of the 2000s by extension--is that of teams that REFUSED to take the risks because it just wasn't worth it. That is why Kevin Garnett went 5th instead of 1st. That is why Kobe Bryant went 13th instead of first. That is why Tracy McGrady went 9th instead of 2nd. That is why Dirk Nowitzki went 9th instead of first....and then subsequently we have the Kwame Browns, Darius Mileses, Eddy Currys, Tyson Chandlers, Pau Gasols, Yao Mings, Tskitishvilis, Darko Milicics, and such as the pendulum swings the other way.

Ultimately, you can't stomp your foot and insist that you know. You can only ask yourself one question: who will be the best player in the draft when we pick? The answer to that question is what it is, regardless of how much information you have to guide you. I know it sucks, but that's just how it is.

Honestly I wasn't that impressed with his highlight videos, neither was some guys like Giovonny even before those high school videos. I know you can never be 100% sure of any thing but are you at least somewhat sure he usually give great effort, especially defensively? Are you some what sure he isn't super soft like boozer? Are you somewhat sure that he is somewhat consistent and doesn't waver under pressure? Can he execute his moves on offense with at least decent effeciency? Does he have great worth ethic when it come to basketball or just a workout warrior ala Tyrus Thomas? Does he have a good attitude most of the time on the court? Is he a complainer especially if he doesn't get enough playing time? Most of the questions above are things that become clearer with more video and extending his resume a bit more.

Sure, and you're welcome to that opinion. So is JG. I respect him and believe him to be the best in the world at what he does. However, there are other things to take into account. First of all, there are 30 NBA GMs who get paid far more to do what they do than he does and have almost all been doing it longer. Their opinions hold more weight, although they aren't exactly published to the web. Chad Ford has an in, though, and his work tells us that those 30 GMs believe Kanter to be the highest upside player in this draft, and even with all the risks involved which are suppressing his draft stock, he's still the consensus #3 on their boards....with a shot at even moving up.

As for your opinion on Boozer...*shrug*. Popular sentiment has turned against him, but I will always love him and be grateful for what he did for my team. If you can't remember him dominating Yao, owning all over the Warriors or being one of just two players on our team who showed up to play versus Duncan and the Spurs, I don't know what to tell you. He had his limitations, but I would never call him soft.......Short? Sure.

As for the other questions, I do know that the youth tournaments are taken very, very seriously overseas. The Hoop Summit is a big, big stage in which many millions of dollars are potentially at stake. This can give me every bit as good of an idea as the NCAA games can. He seems to have performed admirably in those settings and shown as well as possible. Now, does that prove he is going to be "clutch", that he will always come through, that he will never let us down and that he will meet our expectations at every turn? No, but neither does a big run in the NCAAs.

As for his temperament and character, there ARE many ways to verify that. He has gotten nothing but glowing reviews from everyone who have been around him, he come recommended as a very hard worker and a team guy by his college coach, despite being put into a highly difficult situation. He stayed academically eligible all throughout his stay at Kentucky despite being ruled permanently ineligible to play halfway through the year. He kept in great shape and supported his teammates through it all and remained focused and engaged in the welfare of the team. He has never had any "incidents" or issues on or off the court. He maintains great physical fitness and has the type of refined, skilled game that ONLY comes as the result of hard work and dedication. He comes from a very good family background that stresses hard work, education, and sacrifice as a means to achievement. All these things come together to paint a very appealing picture. One you would see if you hadn't already written him off in your mind due to stereotyping.

Next thing is how much playin time and patience is gonna be needed to develop him? We have proven that we dont have much patience for our first rounders and wont hesistate to trade them for any reason which is why only one remains. This is a bigger concern than with knight because its gonna be hard to get minutes for him unless we trade a big or two which who knows whats gonna happen with that situation. I'll stop mentioning Koufos after this but he couldn't even get on the court enough to see what he's got and it took a couple injuries and until the end of the season before Hayward got enough minutes.

This paragraph is nothing but ignorance, misinterpretation and regurgitation of group think from a bunch of casual fans that don't understand the NBA. First of all, Utah has a reputation league wide for player development. Its funny that you distinguish between 1st rounders and 2nd rounders as if we have a different set standards for 1st rounders. I.e., we are very patient with our 2nd round guys, but will jettison 1st rounders with no regard for their welfare. And this makes a ton of sense because, well, 2nd rounders are much more valuable and deserve the patience!

*facepalm*

The reality is that late 1st rounders in the NBA rarely make a dent, and the Jazz have been drafting in the bottom half of round 1 for almost the entirety of your lifetime. Simply look at any redraft article 3 or 4 years after a draft and see how few quality players actually come out of a draft. By the time you get to #10, its usually a border line starter or rotation guy. The fact is that the Jazz haven't had much success pick 20th or later. On the few times we have, (Maynor, Stevenson, AK) we either kept the guy and made him a part of our future (AK), were forced to trade him to provide very very significant financial relief (Maynor) or had to let him go in order for the player to progress (DeShawn). The other players just weren't good, just like almost every other player taken in their range.

Now our late lottery guys are different. Ronnie gave us 4 good years and we flipped him for an asset in order to clear up the glut of wings we had on the roster. Humphries wasn't able to get PT and needed to go out and find his way, just like many players do in the NBA. Snyder was a trainwreck, of course. Believe it or not...that's actually well above average as a track record in the draft. It has nothing to do with our lack of patience or willingness to develop a player. It has everything to do with how HARD it is to find talent that late in the draft.

The funny thing is that we are aces at getting talented 2nd rounders. Millsap and CJ are the best examples, while we also developed 2 2nd round guys from other teams into All Stars and have gotten decent burn out of Fesenko as well. Wes was undrafted and was a major find as well.

Of course, it couldn't just be that we were lucky enough to find excellent talent in the 2nd, its got to be some organizational deficiency in the way we handle the players. So the natural explanation is we say "**** these 1st round guys, they can sink or swim, but these 2nd rounders deserve a lot more patience and devotion." Sigh. Sometimes the human brain is impossible to understand.

All I can say is we're talking about a big time talent here. Not some scrub ass Ukranian who has to make significant development just to get into a rotation. The Jazz developed Deron, and he required FAR more progress to move into a featured role than Kanter will (as evidenced by the major growth he made from his first to 3rd seasons). They also waited patiently while AK progressed and have already shown a massive amount of care and understanding in their early dealings with Gordo and (to a lesser extent) Favors. Kanter will be just fine.

I dont know about using the #3 pick on someone who you can only make assumptions about no matter how much potential they could have. At least with Knight I have tons of video where I can look at how he plays in many different situations and we can look at how he reacts to different events along with how his interviews are. All I seen of Kanter is some highlight videos. Its like buying a car in the complete dark. With Knight I at least have a flash light.

I could sit and poke holes in Knight all day long. Really, I could. But I would be missing the point. Knight's numbers are not impressive at all. For a guy who had the ball that much to only post 4apg is almost unforgivable. He also shot very poorly from the field and turned the ball over a ton. Oh, and his this defensive ability he supposedly has couldn't even translate to one measly steal per game.

So he has plenty of room for criticism too. But that's ignoring the context. He's a 19 year old PG who was ill suited to do what was asked of him. Few freshman PGs post great numbers, and his compare decently to the freshman #s of many of the best PG prospects of the last two decades (I checked). He also has great character and drive, and he came up big in some big moments for his team. Plus he has very, very good measurables.

But all that won't prove that he can run a Jazz team that has always relied on a pass-first PG who could facilitate other players scoring the ball. Which is my biggest concern and one that we simply cannot take any type of comfort in. He's going to have to DEVELOP it.

So the good needs to be taken with the bad. In both cases, Kanter AND Knight, the former significantly outweighs the latter. But I will just say this. You will always regret passing on Tim Duncan in order to draft Chris Paul.

[Bullet]

But all that won't prove that he can run a Jazz team that has always relied on a pass-first PG who could facilitate other players scoring the ball.

My only argument here is that that was Sloan's Jazz. We have Corbin now, and who knows what type of system he's going to run? I'm guessing he'll adapt his system based on his personnel, and if they evaluate either Knight or Kanter as BPA at #3, then they map out a strategy with that guy in mind, moving forward.

Having said that, I think a PG-PF combo does not make Utah's teams, but Jerry's teams. Utah, on the other hand, looks for good quality, character guys.

Finally, I think someone ought to start a Knight vs. Kanter thread.

[StocktonShorts]

But I will just say this. You will always regret passing on Tim Duncan in order to draft Chris Paul.

But you also don't want to pass on Chris Paul and draft Andrew Bogut. Bogut's a great player, but he's not Chris Paul.

I mean, I hear what you're saying: if you think there's an equal chance of the two guys being great then you take the big guy. But there's always that risk when you go down this road of over-valuing size. You think you're drafting Tim Duncan and you end up with Darko or Kwame or Bargnani.

All I can say is it's a decision I'm not sure I'd want to make, but I actually have a lot of faith in KOC and company to make the right call.

[carrottop12]

Erudite is sort of like a prime Barry bonds, if you put it over the plate, he's going to knock it out of the park pretty much every time, couldn't agree with him more on his post, A+ work.

I like knight, if we end up with knight I won't be disappointed, but I really do think if kanter had played all year he'd be the top pick. He would have dominated college basketball with his varied skill set and developed size, I really think he would have had Demarcus cousins like numbers, minus the crazy.

Call callipari a homer, but rarely do his top prospects bust, he knows NBA talent better than anyone in college, he recruits understanding that his guys won't last more than a year in college because they are such special players. Knater is no different.

[erudite23]

But I will just say this. You will always regret passing on Tim Duncan in order to draft Chris Paul.

But you also don't want to pass on Chris Paul and draft Andrew Bogut. Bogut's a great player, but he's not Chris Paul.

I mean, I hear what you're saying: if you think there's an equal chance of the two guys being great then you take the big guy. But there's always that risk when you go down this road of over-valuing size. You think you're drafting Tim Duncan and you end up with Darko or Kwame or Bargnani.

All I can say is it's a decision I'm not sure I'd want to make, but I actually have a lot of faith in KOC and company to make the right call.

Most definitely.

That's where it breaks down. Because, at the end of the day, you, I and everyone else on this board are mostly just regurgitating opinions and taking other people's assessments and filtering them through our own perspectives on what has happened in the past when a player has been labeled "x".

You have to ultimately close your eyes and have faith in the guy that gets paid to do the job. I remember in 2005, as it got closer to D-day and it was becoming increasingly clear that the Jazz really were, in fact, going to pass on CP to take Deron. It was like watching a train wreck in slow motion, from my perspective, helpless to do anything. I had been riding Paul's jock from the day he left HS, hoping the Jazz would just get a chance at him. We went through the misery of getting passed over in the lottery, then the high of trading up to actually maneuver into position to grab him....only to start hearing rumors that this fat **** from Illinois who had never been rated even as much as top 20 until the the previous few months was the guy we were enamored with. I went through the 7 stages of grief, starting with denial. "No way, this is not happening." I just knew we were going to end up regretting it.

Finally, I just said "fine, since I have no choice, I will trust KOC and have faith, because I really can't see how this makes sense." In the end, the decision was a solid one. I have NO idea how KOC saw what he did and came out thinking that Deron was a better pick than CP. But somehow he knew. And that creates trust.

Ultimately I will have faith in that decision because he has proven to me that he knows more than I do. That doesn't mean he will ALWAYS be right (coughEdDaviscough), but it does mean that he deserves the benefit of the doubt.


So, yes, if we are picking between a big time guard talent and a very good big guy talent, you take the guy who is just the better prospect. But if its too close to call, you go big every time. Also, you would hate to end up with Kenny Anderson instead of Dikembe Mutombo.

Erudite is sort of like a prime Barry bonds, if you put it over the plate, he's going to knock it out of the park pretty much every time, couldn't agree with him more on his post, A+ work.

I like knight, if we end up with knight I won't be disappointed, but I really do think if kanter had played all year he'd be the top pick. He would have dominated college basketball with his varied skill set and developed size, I really think he would have had Demarcus cousins like numbers, minus the crazy.

Call callipari a homer, but rarely do his top prospects bust, he knows NBA talent better than anyone in college, he recruits understanding that his guys won't last more than a year in college because they are such special players. Knater is no different.

Thanks, man. And the funny thing is I don't disagree. In fact, the best thing that Knight has going for him, in my book, is the fact that the Jazz have had eyes for him all along. The fact that they are decisive and have never wavered tells me that they have confidence in their evaluation of him and are only considering other options because they are being presented with a better draft position than they anticipated.

But bigs with skills like that are so rare that if you miss the opportunity to take one, you will be kicking yourself for a decade. I would not want to be KOC come draft night. The most important decision in recent franchise history to make and very little of the information needed to make it.