The 2024-25 Rookies

[Dat2U]

Try it. "doc was right".

Sorry, my ego won't allow it just yet

I tried and all I can come up with is "he still can't shoot".

[dckingsfan]

My read is that it is way too early to make a call on any rookie in this draft class.

I kind of disagree with you here and kind of agree.

I think there are two different things:

Will they be/can they be a #1 or #2.

Will they improve to be a solid rotational player.

Are they going to be a bust.

I think our group has shown they aren't going to be a #1 or #2 on a really good team. I don't think it is too early to make that read.

I think that all 4 look like they have the potential to be solid rotational guys.

I don't think any of them look like they are going to be Johnny Davis level busts.

Spoiler:

Geek that I am: I'm reading various studies right now on age and the NBA. This in relation to my central point, that these cats are too young to judge. Across various papers there are a few things that are clear.

1. What quartile of the year were players born? It makes a difference.
In general players who are born earlier in their draft year tend to get more opportunities to grow than players born later in the year. Makes sense: in early grades teams will select stars who are bigger, stronger, better developed than their classmates. The more reps a player gets, especially early, the higher their upside. Growth is exponential early, slows down later. The more reps you get, the quicker you get to those fabled 10,000 hrs that Malcolm Gladwell theorizes are necessary to make a Pro anything. Violinist. Ballerina. Baller.

2. In general 20 and 21 year old entrants to the NBA tend to have better peak production over their careers than players who enter later. And earlier. (*) This is true not just over the length of their careers (obviously the younger a guy turns pro, the more NBA minutes he can earn before age catches up). It is true in terms of how high their peak is, and how long it is sustained. Also makes sense, especially in light of the above. That is: NBA teams are pretty good at identifying 1-and-done talent. If those guys are also more likely to be freshmen who were old for their class, they will be both new to the NCAA, and have more of the benefit of those early reps.

(* except that the sample size of 18 and 19 year olds is significantly smaller, which may skew the data. Still, it also makes sense in view of 1. above, in that these will be players born later in the year. Unless they are from Europe where they often graduate from school earlier and turn pro at 16 if they are good enough.)

3. HOWEVER. In that smaller sample size of teen NBAers, the data suggests that the younger a player shows competence, the higher their upside is and the longer their peak. The taller and longer their gooditude gets. That is, if you have a player who is 19 who is playing as good as a guy that is 20, the peak of that 19 year old is significantly higher than the 20 year old. The early studies on this in baseball suggested it could be as much as a 40-60% higher peak, depending on what study you read. In basketball again the sample size is smaller in the 1-and-done era. But the trend lines are suggestive.

4. NBA Prime age tends to be 26 or 27. BUT, if you correct for seasons played, that prime tends to be after 5-6 years of development. Players who start earlier tend to continue to grow past their age 26 or 27 year. They get the same 5-6 year on ramp to stardom, but stay on it longer before father time catches up. Obviously this data is either skewed by -- or perhaps demonstrated by -- players like Garnett, Kobe, LeBJ, Giannis, etc. Young players who entered the league early, then continued to constantly grow their games and had peaks that sustained for a very long time. Forever in the case of LeBJ.

So. The question is. Of the shortcomings of a player like Bub: how many of those things can or are likely to improve over the course of his career. Or let's say over his first 6 years. We can compare him to other players' first years (as I did with the Stathead link earlier) and see that he's on par or above various other players' first year production. We can knock him for his aggression and his interior scoring and ability to rack fouls. But, in doing so you can miss things that the kid is doing that jump off the page.

Bub is not wrong when he says his mid-range shot is more effective than any lay-up. Check it:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/carrica01/shooting/2025

The kid hits 60% of his pull-up jumpers in that mid-range. Point guards generally hit between 60-70% of their shots at the rim. He is right. For him a pull-up is a dunk. Also notable. 70% of those shots are self-created. He is better creating for himself than he is at catch and shoot. That's rare. Which is because it is new for him to not be the lead guard. Here he has had to share the ball. Effectively he has just added an off-ball game over the course of an NBA season. It is still a work in progress, but he is hitting above average 3FG% for an NBA rookie. NBA average 3FG% for all point guards, veterans included, is 35.3%. Bub is hitting 34.5%. But check this.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/carrica01/splits/

As a starter Bub hits .364 of his 3's. Better than the average point guard. Against starting defenses. The kid can create for himself. He is just picking and choosing his chances since he has been shifted to an unaccustomed role for him: off ball scorer. Of course he is tentative, he is used to being the guy who picks a defense apart. And he is getting stronger. Most players hit a wall after January, when they have already played more games in the year than they ever played in their life. Check out Bub's February numbers. In February, when most rookies hit bottom out, Bub achieved the 180 club: 50/40/91.

To me, you would think that Wiz fans of all NBA watchers would be wary of giving up too early on a player that shows promise. But if you think you have seen the top end of this kid, you are not watching carefully. Yes he plays better with a guy like Valanciunas who set great screens. Yes he plays better when he has finishing threats to dump off to. He plays better when he can dissect and dice up teams with the ball in his hand instead of waiting for Poole or Kuzma to do whatever wild thing they are trying to do. You have a point guard with no one to pass to, no shooters, no interior finishers. But when he gets a chance to create for himself, he does so at an elite level. As he said. His pull-up is a dunk.

Now imagine him 4 years from now. Or 3 years when players get their first breakout. Or 6 years from now and in his prime. Walk his stats forward. When his mistake free ast/TO ratio has elite shot-makers to finish the play. When he has a dominant interior scorer to jam it home. Or he's taken the lead guard role and can pick and choose when to take his own shot. Okay he doesn't finish on the inside right now, and doesn't force fouls.

Can he ever get better at finishing inside and learning wily tricks? Take a look at the rookie seasons of his 2 recent mentors:

https://stathead.com/tiny/U1FLR

19 year old Bub compares well to 20 year old rookie Smart, and 21 year old rookie Middleton. He rebounds better than the 2 bigger older players. Passes better. Shoots better. Midd is the better interior scorer. Smart the better defender. But Bub gets the benefit of them as early mentors. Both have mentioned how Bub corners them after every practice to pick their brains.

And this is the kid we want to kick out early? Because he is not yet as good as the 5th year player we traded away. That posters are complaining we gave up too early on. Nobody on here has a sense of irony?

No. If you think Bub has no upside, you are missing a few pieces of your puzzle here. Kid has a head start on a really good career, and is getting all the reps he can handle, early, to develop super fast.

Love the rest of the post but... I never said any of our youngsters won't improve. Underlining for your reading enjoyment.

Let's go back to the point. If we can take any of these youngsters and package them with our 24th pick to move up materially you do so.

If not, you let them develop. And back to your thesis on strategy way back when - be relentless with packaging the players and moving on... until or unless you are convinced they are going to be #1 or #2 options.

[tontoz]

Sarr's inability to finish isn't just about strength.

Watch on YouTube

[Tyrone Messby]

Legit question, but do yall think there are any future number 1 option franchise players from this draft? Or mostly pan out to be 2nd or 3rd options? For the metric gurus, are there any that are showing a ton of potential? A Reed maybe?

Love reading the write ups in here and see the no one better than a 4th or 5th option arguments at time but think that’s a little sarcasm I hope?

[tontoz]

Legit question, but do yall think there are any future number 1 option franchise players from this draft? Or mostly pan out to be 2nd or 3rd options? For the metric gurus, are there any that are showing a ton of potential? A Reed maybe?

Love reading the write ups in here and see the no one better than a 4th or 5th option arguments at time but think that’s a little sarcasm I hope?

Prior to his injury McCain was averaged 21 pts per 36 with a 59% TS. It is pretty easy to project him as a 1st or 2nd option scorer.

I still think Topic will work out as a primary ball handler, maybe 2nd option scorer. Similarly i think Reed can be a 2nd option scorer but he just hasn't played enough to get a read on his potential.

Risacher hasn't been that bad might work out as a 3rd option scorer.

[payitforward]

Risacher hasn't been that bad?

Risacher has been one of the worst rookies in the '24 class. He's been just awful.

[badinage]

If I’m Will Dawkins, I’m reaching out to teams in the lottery pre-draft and (quietly) dangling Bilal.

I’m not saying I don’t see good things. I do. And I like him. But if we could get another bite in the lottery, in a great draft — and there’s a player with the potential to be a game-changer — I’m doing it.

I don’t know if Maluach is *that* — or if he’s Mo Bamba redux. But if Dawkins sees something in him — something rough but tantalizing, with the potential to explode in two, three years — then he should push for a deal. Or maybe there’s another guy with that kind of elite upside.

Imagine coming away from the draft with Flagg and Maluach, to go with Sarr and Kyshawn and Bub.

[closg00]

If I’m Will Dawkins, I’m reaching out to teams in the lottery pre-draft and (quietly) dangling Bilal.

I’m not saying I don’t see good things. I do. And I like him. But if we could get another bite in the lottery, in a great draft — and there’s a player with the potential to be a game-changer — I’m doing it.

I don’t know if Maluach is *that* — or if he’s Mo Bamba redux. But if Dawkins sees something in him — something rough but tantalizing, with the potential to explode in two, three years — then he should push for a deal. Or maybe there’s another guy with that kind of elite upside.

Imagine coming away from the draft with Flagg and Maluach, to go with Sarr and Kyshawn and Bub.

I would wager that Bilal has low trade value, we certainly could not get a FRP for him.

[smoothSeph]

I don't get it, Bilal's floor with a fixed 3 is OG Anunoby. Why would we sell low on him?

[closg00]

For your consideration, I have nothing invested other than curiosity as to how he will turn out.

Read on Twitter

[badinage]

I don't get it, Bilal's floor with a fixed 3 is OG Anunoby. Why would we sell low on him?

I hear you. I do.

But the point is, is that player (Anunoby) a no. 1 on a championship team? No. A no. 2? Also no. A no. 3 — doubtful, without a better jumper. A no. 4, mayyybe.

We need bites at the lotto apple, if we’re going to build a “generationally great” and not just great or good team.

I like Bilal. I also liked Deni.

But if one can be shipped out to get us an additional bite, so can another.

I’m not saying they *should*, or to do it just to do it. No.

But if there’s a player that’s that tantalizing …

If someone in three years projects to be a guy who will be a star, a legit star …

[smoothSeph]

I don't get it, Bilal's floor with a fixed 3 is OG Anunoby. Why would we sell low on him?

I hear you. I do.

But the point is, is that player (Anunoby) a no. 1 on a championship team? No. A no. 2? Also no. A no. 3 — doubtful, without a better jumper. A no. 4, mayyybe.

We need bites at the lotto apple, if we’re going to build a “generationally great” and not just great or good team.

I like Bilal. I also liked Deni.

But if one can be shipped out to get us an additional bite, so can another.

I’m not saying they *should*, or to do it just to do it. No.

But if there’s a player that’s that tantalizing …

If someone in three years projects to be a guy who will be a star, a legit star …

Bilal isn’t even 21 yet. I get the generational talent take, but if it’s that obvious a player is generational at 18 years old they’re not making it past pick 3.

Giannis didn’t look like Giannis until year 3, imagine trading him because he was coming off a 16% 3 pt shooting year.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

No way I’m trading Bilal for anyone in this draft not named Flagg or Harper. He’s 19, already a stopper and showing signs of dynamic handles and finishing.

[FarBeyondDriven]

what a game from the rookies. "weakest draft in history" crew in shambles

[Jay81]

Among our young guys Kyshawn is the only one that looks like a legit NBA player inside the arc. The problem is that he has been so bad outside of it.

What?

[Jay81]

Johnny Davis signed with G league Knicks

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Johnny plays hella good defense. His shot looked better earlier this year, but his Wizards ship sailed.

[tontoz]

Among our young guys Kyshawn is the only one that looks like a legit NBA player inside the arc. The problem is that he has been so bad outside of it.

What?

Did you even notice the date on that post? That was back in January. Prior to January Kyshawn shot 25.6% from 3.

[closg00]

Perhaps this draft class will be ok

Read on Twitter

[dobrojim]

No way I’m trading Bilal for anyone in this draft not named Flagg or Harper. He’s 19, already a stopper and showing signs of dynamic handles and finishing.

I'm not trading him either but for the record, he was 19 his rookie year and 20 this year.
His birthdate is 7/26/2004. He'll be 21 by the beginning of next season.

His D is promising but his O is still pretty inconsistent.