2020 Draft - Part II

[prime1time]

How efficient Toppin is important but irrelevant.

I am bewildered.

Not that bewildering. He was comparing him to Bertans. Let’s use an example. Thomas Bryant was efficient in freshman year of college should I compare him to Steph Curry? Should I compare Toppin to college Steph? Stats are important but it’s up to the user to construct a narrative to interpret them. Saying we should compare Toppin to Bertans because they are both efficient is a comparison that is completely illogical to me. Bertans is a high volume 3-Point shooter. Toppin is a guy who scores a lot around the rim. Closer to Brandon Clarke than Bertans. In addition, like I said before, in the playoffs against good defenses these players disappear. Because their offense isn’t based on skill. Yes 3-point shooting and layups/dunks are ideal but what do you do when teams take that away? I am not interested in building a poor mans version of the Rockets. I want players who are confident about putting the ball on the floor and attacking their man. I looked at all of Toppin’s scoring played. Rarely if ever did I see anything more than straight line drives, wide open 3’s and alley oops. Is that a great way to be efficient? Yes. But I don’t see it working against a defense like the Heat. Imo, offense in 2020 is predicated on skill.

Maybe if the Rockets has even one skilled offensive player other than Harden and Westbrook/Paul they could have been more successful instead of just shooting 3’s into oblivion and losing...

[payitforward]

...I just don't think college box scores matter when drafting players....

Of course they matter!

But, maybe you mean that great college box scores don't always predict success in the NBA. In that case, you are right. Guys who put up great numbers in college don't always succeed in the NBA.

OTOH, guys who produce crappy numbers in college never succeed in the NBA. I've never found a single example of a guy who was bad in college but good in the NBA. Feel free to try -- I don't think you'll find an example either.

Now, you don't expect a college Freshman to put up numbers that are as good as he would put up as, say, a Junior (if he remained in school). So, the standard for "good" is different. But it's still there.

...As it turns out running fast and jumping high is important in the NBA, and really productive college big men get lost in the wash routinely.

As do lots of guys who can run fast & jump high.

& some guys who can't do either still manage to succeed at a high level in the NBA.

This is irrelevant, but you reminded me of what Lamar Odom once said about Javale early in his career:

"While praising McGee for his incredible athleticism, Odom also provided a rather astute assessment of McGee, noting that he still needs to develop a better feel for the game 'because the game is called basketball, not run and jump.'"

[Ed Wood]

I don’t think it’s revising anything to note that Rui’s college game oriented significantly more on intermediate shooting than has Toppin’s. I agree that Rui does plausibly project to improve as an perimeter shooter and that I wouldn’t assume that Toppin is going to be a strong NBA three point shooter from the outset. Having Rui on the roster does diminish my interest in Toppin, but the framework around that for me is less positive than it is for you.

[DCZards]

Sure - some of the allure attached to Rui coming out of college was his "complete offensive game" which was sort of an elliptical way of saying he took a lot of midrange shots (bad). Toppin feels somewhat reminiscent of Rui in terms of some of the reservations I have about him in the NBA, but I appreciate that he produces more in the ranges that yield the best results - at the rim and beyond the arc.

Jimmy Butler take a lot of midrange shots. Kawhi Leonard takes a lot of midrange shots. Chris Paul takes a lot of midrange shots Demarr Derozan takes a lot of midrange shots.

It's critical that Rui become a better 3pt shooter. But I don't buy this narrative that taking--and making--midrange shots is "bad."

[Shoe]

Like - Jamal Murray had a strong one season of college against strong competition - graded as an effective offensive player and a sound defender. Wouldn't it be better, then, to trade down for the pair of Henry Ellenson, who was a decent college player but evinced some offensive flaws that suggested he wasn't necessarily either going to be an effective perimeter shooter or a strong interior player, and Malachi Richardson, who was kind of just bad in college but was a highly rated recruit and included in various high school showcases.

Why would I trade an explosive leaper like Jamal Murray for a white stiff and a Syracuse stiff.

Why did you chose to make a case for Donovan Mitchell - who was actually a good college player as a sophomore and who notably improved as that year went on and was really excellent in ACC conference play (123.7 ORtg, 100.5 DRtg) - rather than for Dennis Smith - who was peripherally similar to Mitchell in a lot of ways (similarly regarded recruit, same conference)? I assume it's because Mitchell has done well in the NBA and Smith hasn't. Smith was notably less effective in college over that same year - especially as a defender - but I guess he was worse so that makes him better for your metrics (?). It's kind of hard to reframe things when the guiding directive is just that actual performance doesn't bear on things.

Dennis Smith Jr. (6'2 180lb) - 18/6/5, 56TS%, 23 PER
Donovan Mitchell (6'3 210lb) - 16/6/3, 53TS%, 22 PER

So DMitch an inch taller and 30 pounds heavier and worse efficiency. DMitch was a sophomore with a 41fg% compared to freshman DSJ 46fg%. Honestly we can throw in freshman Malik Monk - 20/2/2, 59TS%. Out of these three players if you picked the best athlete you got DMitch, if you picked the best boxscore performer you're not happy.

"Smith was notably less effective in college over that same year - especially as a defender"

So DSJ had a 1.1 DPBM which was 3rd on NC State. That would've made him 14th on Louisville. I would take those metrics with a grain of salt as great defensive systems lift every player.

How about Jaren Jackson - he was a really excellent college player, albeit in limited minutes. He was super efficient offensively, evinced a solid foundation for a perimeter game, and was a really tremendous defender. Kevin Knox wasn't a very good college player en route to being (to date) not a very good NBA player, so I guess we prefer him under this regime (or the two are interchangeable?).

In what world is JJJ, smooth agile 7 footer, a worse physical prospect than Knox.

A better example would be someone like IT being better than Alec Burks. Same conference, worse performer, worse physical measurements.

Or Avery Bradley ending up better than Xavier Henry. Although Bradley is not a slouch laterally.

John Henson over Thomas Robinson. They were both 21 and Henson had a couple inches on him, but Robinson was a better athlete and Henson had a pathetic 50TS%.

[Ed Wood]

This is not doing a great deal to undermine my point about framing. Why is Malik Monk a point against crediting performance and in favor of physical projection when he was a top 10 recruit coming out of high school and a a lot of his pre-draft buzz oriented on his pop as a strength/speed/explosion prospect?

The point is that you're (I think hyperbolically but you aren't copping to it) suggesting that actual performance isn't important, which leaves us with relatively little to go on, but at least suggests that players who are impressive physical prospects should be viewed as essentially equally appealing (which is the point about Knox and Jackson - both drew raves as athletes throughout the pre-draft period that year).

A lot of what you're doing to credit physical potential feels shaded by the benefit of actually seeing whose athleticism has proven manifest at the NBA level. You say that Mitchell is the best athlete in that group buuuuut:





So all three were at least considered to be fairly above average prospects athletically, and Smith particularly was probably the recipient of more plaudits than Mitchell based on his physical ability.

I suppose I could be accused of the same (though you did literally say that performance isn't relevant - unless box score means something else and I'm spinning your meaning in a direction you didn't intend) - but it strikes me that you're assailing a position people aren't really taking - which is that we should prefer players who are considered marginal physical prospects because of their college credentials.

[payitforward]

Sure - some of the allure attached to Rui coming out of college was his "complete offensive game" which was sort of an elliptical way of saying he took a lot of midrange shots (bad). Toppin feels somewhat reminiscent of Rui in terms of some of the reservations I have about him in the NBA, but I appreciate that he produces more in the ranges that yield the best results - at the rim and beyond the arc.

You’re engaging in a lot of revisionist history. Rui shot a higher percentage from college 3 than Toppin did. And while Toppin averaged 1.5 three’s more a game, that’s not nearly enough to just conclude that he can shoot NBA 3’s. Given that Rui shot 82.9% from the ft line, much higher than anything Toppin has shown. I’ll say that I’m much more confident that Rui will develop a 3-point shot in the NBA than Toppin. FT shooting is more correlated to 3 point shooting in the NBA than college 3-point shooting. All of this to say that the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off. Are they similar players? Yes. But If you have any highlights where a Toppin displayed any array of skills to beat defenders one on one I’d love to see it. Skill wise, Toppin is rudimentary at best and I doubt he ever develops go to skill moves to score. Maybe that’s irrelevant but imo in the playoffs we’re defenses lock in and shut down offenses predicated on 3 or layup it is absolutely necessary to have players that have actual skills.

I’ll put it succinctly. In the half court unless Toppin is knocking down shots or the roll man in the pick and roll, good defenses will make him disappear. And there can only be one roll man. I might be unique but I value offensive skill very highly. So if it’s not clear, I’m taking Rui over Toppin. And if Toppin can’t develop a consistent 3-point (much like Rui) I question whether he will stick. The difference being that a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin.

Prime, most of what you write is, as they say, "special pleading."

Rui's 3-pt. shooting skyrocketed his last year at Gonzaga, but he took very few of them -- 1 attempt every 31 minutes. Toppin took 1 every 12 minutes. Rui's figure was not particularly meaningful -- as we can see from his going on to shoot 28.77% as a rookie. So, what does it mean that you are more confident about Rui's ability to do things he clearly can't do right now? It's just a fan's slanted optimism. Thus, when you write that "the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off," you're not writing about "likelihood," you're writing about what you hope will happen.

Rui was not impressive as a rookie. Period. Why don't we wait to see whether he becomes even an average player in the regular season, before we laud his being better than... anyone really... in the playoffs.

"I value offensive skill very highly" ?? 50% on 2pas 28.7% on 3pas. What "offensive skill" are you talking about?

"a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin." Toppin was the "superior offensive player" in college. He shot the 2 better, & he shot the 3 almost as well but on much higher volume.

He was also a better rebounder than Rui, & he got more assists than Rui. He also had more steals than Rui -- & he blocked way more shots. Rui fouled less.

TBH, I don't have a lot of confidence that either of these guys will be anything special in the league. I certainly would not take Toppin where he is mocked & seems likely to go. Just as I wouldn't have taken Rui #9 last year. I'll be surprised if Toppin's rookie year supports how high is likely to be taken. Just as Rui's rookie certainly didn't justify him being the #9 pick in the draft.

Rui may still become terrific -- I hope he does. But all the time people here spend trying to blow up his balloon doesn't do anything for him. He'll have to do it for himself, & he hasn't yet. Rinse & repeat for Obi Toppin.

[payitforward]

Sure - some of the allure attached to Rui coming out of college was his "complete offensive game" which was sort of an elliptical way of saying he took a lot of midrange shots (bad). Toppin feels somewhat reminiscent of Rui in terms of some of the reservations I have about him in the NBA, but I appreciate that he produces more in the ranges that yield the best results - at the rim and beyond the arc.

Jimmy Butler take a lot of midrange shots. Kawhi Leonard takes a lot of midrange shots. Chris Paul takes a lot of midrange shots Demarr Derozan takes a lot of midrange shots.

It's critical that Rui become a better 3pt shooter. But I don't buy this narrative that taking--and making--midrange shots is "bad."

How could "taking -- and making" any shot be bad? Taking them & missing them is bad!

But, Rui is not Kawhi or Butler or DeRozan. He shot his 2pas at 50% as a rookie. Average for a 4 -- average, not good -- is 56%. So he has to become a good shooter of some kind, any kind; right now, he isn't one.

[prime1time]

Sure - some of the allure attached to Rui coming out of college was his "complete offensive game" which was sort of an elliptical way of saying he took a lot of midrange shots (bad). Toppin feels somewhat reminiscent of Rui in terms of some of the reservations I have about him in the NBA, but I appreciate that he produces more in the ranges that yield the best results - at the rim and beyond the arc.

You’re engaging in a lot of revisionist history. Rui shot a higher percentage from college 3 than Toppin did. And while Toppin averaged 1.5 three’s more a game, that’s not nearly enough to just conclude that he can shoot NBA 3’s. Given that Rui shot 82.9% from the ft line, much higher than anything Toppin has shown. I’ll say that I’m much more confident that Rui will develop a 3-point shot in the NBA than Toppin. FT shooting is more correlated to 3 point shooting in the NBA than college 3-point shooting. All of this to say that the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off. Are they similar players? Yes. But If you have any highlights where a Toppin displayed any array of skills to beat defenders one on one I’d love to see it. Skill wise, Toppin is rudimentary at best and I doubt he ever develops go to skill moves to score. Maybe that’s irrelevant but imo in the playoffs we’re defenses lock in and shut down offenses predicated on 3 or layup it is absolutely necessary to have players that have actual skills.

I’ll put it succinctly. In the half court unless Toppin is knocking down shots or the roll man in the pick and roll, good defenses will make him disappear. And there can only be one roll man. I might be unique but I value offensive skill very highly. So if it’s not clear, I’m taking Rui over Toppin. And if Toppin can’t develop a consistent 3-point (much like Rui) I question whether he will stick. The difference being that a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin.

Prime, most of what you write is, as they say, "special pleading."

Rui's 3-pt. shooting skyrocketed his last year at Gonzaga, but he took very few of them -- 1 attempt every 31 minutes. Toppin took 1 every 12 minutes. Rui's figure was not particularly meaningful -- as we can see from his going on to shoot 28.77% as a rookie. So, what does it mean that you are more confident about Rui's ability to do things he clearly can't do right now? It's just a fan's slanted optimism. Thus, when you write that "the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off," you're not writing about "likelihood," you're writing about what you hope will happen.

Rui was not impressive as a rookie. Period. Why don't we wait to see whether he becomes even an average player in the regular season, before we laud his being better than... anyone really... in the playoffs.

"I value offensive skill very highly" ?? 50% on 2pas 28.7% on 3pas. What "offensive skill" are you talking about?

"a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin." Toppin was the "superior offensive player" in college. He shot the 2 better, & he shot the 3 almost as well but on much higher volume.

He was also a better rebounder than Rui, & he got more assists than Rui. He also had more steals than Rui -- & he blocked way more shots. Rui fouled less.

TBH, I don't have a lot of confidence that either of these guys will be anything special in the league. I certainly would not take Toppin where he is mocked & seems likely to go. Just as I wouldn't have taken Rui #9 last year. I'll be surprised if Toppin's rookie year supports how high is likely to be taken. Just as Rui's rookie certainly didn't justify him being the #9 pick in the draft.

Rui may still become terrific -- I hope he does. But all the time people here spend trying to blow up his balloon doesn't do anything for him. He'll have to do it for himself, & he hasn't yet. Rinse & repeat for Obi Toppin.

A long time ago I decided to take with a grain of salt everything you had to say about Rui. Your bias is well known. TBH, it doesn't matter we think, Rui will be what he will be. Objectively speaking he did make the All-Rookie Second team so for you to say he shouldn't have been drafted where he was is perplexing. As for what he'll become who knows. What I do know is that if he gets to the point where teams have to close out hard to the 3-point line, he's going to be a major offensive force. Rebounding and defense need to improve. In addition, he played on a team without a solid pg. It'll be interesting to see his second season.

[Dat2U]

Ok. So, really, it's Okongwu, Haliburton or Hayes. If they're not there, trade down (to 14 by default...). If no trade is possible, then it's one of Nesmith, Achiuwa, Hampton or S. Bey.

If we trade down to 14, pick 1 of the above if available. &, in fact, it's almost impossible to imagine that all 4 would be gone. If, somehow, they all are, then Paul Reed in a fall-back.

That trade down would have brought us (presumably) 2 late-R1 picks. We'd pick 2 of Reed, Flynn, Bane, Carey, Tillman, Stanley.

@ #37, we'd pick whoever was still around from any of the lists above, or...?

A few notable names missing from your lists: Jalen Smith, Isaiah Stewart, Poku, Nnaji, Green, Maxey, T. Bey, Daniel Oturu. Do they fit anywhere?

If that Boston trade happens, it looks to me like we might walk away with Achiuwa, Reed, Flynn & one of the guys left on your list (Tillman, Stanley, T. Bey, Carey)

We don't have a later R2 pick, but if we wind up with one, say by flipping Wagner for it, & we come away with Achiuwa, Reed, Flynn, Tillman & Nate Hinton.... that would be amazing. I would immediately buy out Schofield. Make Hinton a 2-way player & keep Garrison Mathews there as well. Re-sign Bertans if possible, & sign someone for the MLE -- WC-S perhaps?

Jalen Smith is a decent prospect. There are a lot of C prospects. A lot of Cs available in FA. And likely a lot of Cs available in trade. Jalen may make a very solid backup big but I've seen nothing that makes him standout physically or skillwise from the rest. Same goes for guys like Stewart, Nnaji or Oturu.

Five bigs in this draft stand out to me. Okongwu, Wiseman, Achuiwa, Carey Jr. & Tillman. I'd be less inclined to draft a big outside of those 5 although I'm sure more than a few are capable of playing in the league.

Poku is too much of a mystery to me. I worry when agents go out of a way to hide a kid. Also I don't necessarily dislike the prospects of Green, Maxey & T. Bey... I'm just not huge fans of them.

Ideal draft for me:
9. PG Tyrese Haliburton
37. C Xavier Tillman
Trade Wagner for 2nd use it on Jaden McDaniels. I like his raw toolkit as a Brandon Ingram type SF. A couple of years from doing anything but a nice high upside prospect to develop in our system.

[Shoe]

This is not doing a great deal to undermine my point about framing. Why is Malik Monk a point against crediting performance and in favor of physical projection when he was a top 10 recruit coming out of high school and a a lot of his pre-draft buzz oriented on his pop as a strength/speed/explosion prospect?

The point is that you're (I think hyperbolically but you aren't copping to it) suggesting that actual performance isn't important, which leaves us with relatively little to go on, but at least suggests that players who are impressive physical prospects should be viewed as essentially equally appealing (which is the point about Knox and Jackson - both drew raves as athletes throughout the pre-draft period that year).

A lot of what you're doing to credit physical potential feels shaded by the benefit of actually seeing whose athleticism has proven manifest at the NBA level. You say that Mitchell is the best athlete in that group buuuuut:





So all three were at least considered to be fairly above average prospects athletically, and Smith particularly was probably the recipient of more plaudits than Mitchell based on his physical ability.

I suppose I could be accused of the same (though you did literally say that performance isn't relevant - unless box score means something else and I'm spinning your meaning in a direction you didn't intend) - but it strikes me that you're assailing a position people aren't really taking - which is that we should prefer players who are considered marginal physical prospects because of their college credentials.

So DSJ

"Measured 6’2 in shoes, 6’5 wingspan, 190 lbs, and 8’1 standing reach"

Over DMitch

"strong, filled out frame at 211 pounds that allows him to absorb contact well … What particularly stands out about Mitchell is his incredible 6’10” wingspan for a player his height, and has a 8’4 standing reach"

The 5 star freshman overshadowed the 4 star sophomore not surprisingly. Raw measurements tell a different story.

- but it strikes me that you're assailing a position people aren't really taking - which is that we should prefer players who are considered marginal physical prospects because of their college credentials.

Conversation started because of Josh Green VS. a group of Flynn, Tillman, Bey, Oturu. I'm not saying what anyone should prefer I'm just responding to what people do prefer.
I don't know where you're coming from though. The strawman that because I don't invest much weight into boxscores, that I somehow wouldn't like Murray or JJJ because they had good boxscores is a little wild.

The point is that you're (I think hyperbolically but you aren't copping to it) suggesting that actual performance isn't important,

Not hyperbolic. I don't think it is that important. I also don't think it's radical, instead it's probably mainstream among front offices. A good example is Pat Williams skyrocketing up draft boards as being a 3&D wing despite shooting 32% from 3.

[Dat2U]

You’re engaging in a lot of revisionist history. Rui shot a higher percentage from college 3 than Toppin did. And while Toppin averaged 1.5 three’s more a game, that’s not nearly enough to just conclude that he can shoot NBA 3’s. Given that Rui shot 82.9% from the ft line, much higher than anything Toppin has shown. I’ll say that I’m much more confident that Rui will develop a 3-point shot in the NBA than Toppin. FT shooting is more correlated to 3 point shooting in the NBA than college 3-point shooting. All of this to say that the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off. Are they similar players? Yes. But If you have any highlights where a Toppin displayed any array of skills to beat defenders one on one I’d love to see it. Skill wise, Toppin is rudimentary at best and I doubt he ever develops go to skill moves to score. Maybe that’s irrelevant but imo in the playoffs we’re defenses lock in and shut down offenses predicated on 3 or layup it is absolutely necessary to have players that have actual skills.

I’ll put it succinctly. In the half court unless Toppin is knocking down shots or the roll man in the pick and roll, good defenses will make him disappear. And there can only be one roll man. I might be unique but I value offensive skill very highly. So if it’s not clear, I’m taking Rui over Toppin. And if Toppin can’t develop a consistent 3-point (much like Rui) I question whether he will stick. The difference being that a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin.

Prime, most of what you write is, as they say, "special pleading."

Rui's 3-pt. shooting skyrocketed his last year at Gonzaga, but he took very few of them -- 1 attempt every 31 minutes. Toppin took 1 every 12 minutes. Rui's figure was not particularly meaningful -- as we can see from his going on to shoot 28.77% as a rookie. So, what does it mean that you are more confident about Rui's ability to do things he clearly can't do right now? It's just a fan's slanted optimism. Thus, when you write that "the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off," you're not writing about "likelihood," you're writing about what you hope will happen.

Rui was not impressive as a rookie. Period. Why don't we wait to see whether he becomes even an average player in the regular season, before we laud his being better than... anyone really... in the playoffs.

"I value offensive skill very highly" ?? 50% on 2pas 28.7% on 3pas. What "offensive skill" are you talking about?

"a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin." Toppin was the "superior offensive player" in college. He shot the 2 better, & he shot the 3 almost as well but on much higher volume.

He was also a better rebounder than Rui, & he got more assists than Rui. He also had more steals than Rui -- & he blocked way more shots. Rui fouled less.

TBH, I don't have a lot of confidence that either of these guys will be anything special in the league. I certainly would not take Toppin where he is mocked & seems likely to go. Just as I wouldn't have taken Rui #9 last year. I'll be surprised if Toppin's rookie year supports how high is likely to be taken. Just as Rui's rookie certainly didn't justify him being the #9 pick in the draft.

Rui may still become terrific -- I hope he does. But all the time people here spend trying to blow up his balloon doesn't do anything for him. He'll have to do it for himself, & he hasn't yet. Rinse & repeat for Obi Toppin.

What I do know is that if he gets to the point where teams have to close out hard to the 3-point line, he's going to be a major offensive force.

You could say that about a lot of players. Troy Brown Jr too. But unfortunately its no guarantee it ever happens.

[WizarDynasty]

Learn ffrom past. sont draft bugs with skinny legs and poor offensive and defensive deep hip bends while moving. No j smith.

[prime1time]

Prime, most of what you write is, as they say, "special pleading."

Rui's 3-pt. shooting skyrocketed his last year at Gonzaga, but he took very few of them -- 1 attempt every 31 minutes. Toppin took 1 every 12 minutes. Rui's figure was not particularly meaningful -- as we can see from his going on to shoot 28.77% as a rookie. So, what does it mean that you are more confident about Rui's ability to do things he clearly can't do right now? It's just a fan's slanted optimism. Thus, when you write that "the most likely scenario is that Rui develops a 3-point shot AND has a midrange shot and skills to get it off," you're not writing about "likelihood," you're writing about what you hope will happen.

Rui was not impressive as a rookie. Period. Why don't we wait to see whether he becomes even an average player in the regular season, before we laud his being better than... anyone really... in the playoffs.

"I value offensive skill very highly" ?? 50% on 2pas 28.7% on 3pas. What "offensive skill" are you talking about?

"a 3-point shooting Rui will be a vastly superior offensive player than a 3-point shooting Toppin." Toppin was the "superior offensive player" in college. He shot the 2 better, & he shot the 3 almost as well but on much higher volume.

He was also a better rebounder than Rui, & he got more assists than Rui. He also had more steals than Rui -- & he blocked way more shots. Rui fouled less.

TBH, I don't have a lot of confidence that either of these guys will be anything special in the league. I certainly would not take Toppin where he is mocked & seems likely to go. Just as I wouldn't have taken Rui #9 last year. I'll be surprised if Toppin's rookie year supports how high is likely to be taken. Just as Rui's rookie certainly didn't justify him being the #9 pick in the draft.

Rui may still become terrific -- I hope he does. But all the time people here spend trying to blow up his balloon doesn't do anything for him. He'll have to do it for himself, & he hasn't yet. Rinse & repeat for Obi Toppin.

What I do know is that if he gets to the point where teams have to close out hard to the 3-point line, he's going to be a major offensive force.

You could say that about a lot of players. Troy Brown Jr too. But unfortunately its no guarantee it ever happens.

Check out my post in the Rui thread. 38.5% post-injury, 20.5% before. We'll see what he can do this season.

[prime1time]

Ok. So, really, it's Okongwu, Haliburton or Hayes. If they're not there, trade down (to 14 by default...). If no trade is possible, then it's one of Nesmith, Achiuwa, Hampton or S. Bey.

If we trade down to 14, pick 1 of the above if available. &, in fact, it's almost impossible to imagine that all 4 would be gone. If, somehow, they all are, then Paul Reed in a fall-back.

That trade down would have brought us (presumably) 2 late-R1 picks. We'd pick 2 of Reed, Flynn, Bane, Carey, Tillman, Stanley.

@ #37, we'd pick whoever was still around from any of the lists above, or...?

A few notable names missing from your lists: Jalen Smith, Isaiah Stewart, Poku, Nnaji, Green, Maxey, T. Bey, Daniel Oturu. Do they fit anywhere?

If that Boston trade happens, it looks to me like we might walk away with Achiuwa, Reed, Flynn & one of the guys left on your list (Tillman, Stanley, T. Bey, Carey)

We don't have a later R2 pick, but if we wind up with one, say by flipping Wagner for it, & we come away with Achiuwa, Reed, Flynn, Tillman & Nate Hinton.... that would be amazing. I would immediately buy out Schofield. Make Hinton a 2-way player & keep Garrison Mathews there as well. Re-sign Bertans if possible, & sign someone for the MLE -- WC-S perhaps?

Jalen Smith is a decent prospect. There are a lot of C prospects. A lot of Cs available in FA. And likely a lot of Cs available in trade. Jalen may make a very solid backup big but I've seen nothing that makes him standout physically or skillwise from the rest. Same goes for guys like Stewart, Nnaji or Oturu.

Five bigs in this draft stand out to me. Okongwu, Wiseman, Achuiwa, Carey Jr. & Tillman. I'd be less inclined to draft a big outside of those 5 although I'm sure more than a few are capable of playing in the league.

Poku is too much of a mystery to me. I worry when agents go out of a way to hide a kid. Also I don't necessarily dislike the prospects of Green, Maxey & T. Bey... I'm just not huge fans of them.

Ideal draft for me:
9. PG Tyrese Haliburton
37. C Xavier Tillman
Trade Wagner for 2nd use it on Jaden McDaniels. I like his raw toolkit as a Brandon Ingram type SF. A couple of years from doing anything but a nice high upside prospect to develop in our system.

I love Haliburton and Hayes. How do you see the guard rotation if we draft Haliburton? Does that make Brown Jr. expendable?

[Ed Wood]

The comparisons I made were certainly a strawman, but sort of pointedly so - I'm trying to deconstruct your similarly specious set of comparisons by pointing out that your preference for physical protection directs you to players who have proven to be much less impressive NBA players in the same drafts that you're drawing from. Smith was considered an absolutely elite physical prospect. Yes he weighed less than Mitchell and doesn't have the same singular wingspan - but those points were used to allay concerns that Mitchell was undersized as an off guard; Smith was coming into the league as a point guard and wasn't at all undersized. Mitchell just wasn't obviously the physical standout relative to his peers that you're suggesting and really it's only actual NBA success that makes his functional athleticism so apparent in retrospect. To repeat myself again - the same point is essentially evident in Knox vs. JJJ - they were both considered extremely physically intriguing prospects! If we ignore their actual performance prior to the NBA it's difficult to make a case for one over the other!

Anyway, I think we're less opposed than this back-and-forth is suggesting, so I'll just articulate a basic set of premises independent of the dumb examples we're both projecting.

1. NBA teams are better at evaluating talent than they used to be and better at developing players from a more nascent stage, so selecting talented but unproven players is not the wildly hit-or-miss practice that it once was.

2. That said, projecting is still not entirely a science, so no one thing is really any kind of consistent marker of future success (neither statistical markers or physical tools).

3. The most consistently effective approach will incorporate both prior performance (not just boxscore stuff but advanced metrics and the stuff that is specifically considered important in protection more-so than inherently valuable) and physical upside. It follows that serious concerns in either area are appropriate to weigh against a player.

I think Josh Green is a pretty decent prospect and that his college performance doesn't particularly undermine that!

[payitforward]

...Ideal draft for me:
9. PG Tyrese Haliburton
37. C Xavier Tillman
Trade Wagner for 2nd use it on Jaden McDaniels. I like his raw toolkit as a Brandon Ingram type SF. A couple of years from doing anything but a nice high upside prospect to develop in our system.

I don't know that we'd get a R2 pick for Wagner, but we could very likely buy one.

Once again you forget Hinton! &, if I keep on harping on him... you're gonna wish you really could forget about him! Or that I would!



Actually... I think he's a player, I really do.

[payitforward]

...Rui was not impressive as a rookie. Period. ...

A long time ago I decided to take with a grain of salt everything you had to say about Rui. Your bias is well known....

You & a number of others say this, but it's not true. Why would I be biased against Rui -- he seems like an absolutely great kid. What would my reason be? I don't have one.

I'm just kind of blown away by the way he's treated on this board. I've never seen another Wizard rookie get this kind of kid-glove treatment. I mean... people were calling Beal a mistake & a failure within a few months of his being drafted -- & it didn't stop either! Not until 2016-17. I remember a long series of exchanges in which people claimed his neck was too short!

Ditto Otto Porter. Ditto Oubre. Ditto Troy Brown. They all got blasted -- virtually immediately.

Meanwhile, Rui gets stuff like this:

...if he gets to the point where teams have to close out hard to the 3-point line, he's going to be a major offensive force.....

No kidding!

Maybe first he can "get to the point" where he shoots an average 2 pt. %? Would that be ok? & hoists his 3pt % into the 30s somewhere? While taking more than 1.8 a game?

Maybe he can demonstrate some actual success before we fit him for his crown? Was it you -- I'm not sure, but it might have been -- who was announcing he'd be rookie of the year about one week into the season!

Rebounding and defense need to improve.

That's another of the "only Rui" things... nothing he does is ever actually called "bad." Things just have to improve.

In addition, he played on a team without a solid pg.

Another one. Everything can be explained away. I mean... Bonga came in & was a terrific young prospect. Bertans had maybe his best season. Bryant upped his 3pt shooting over 40%. Brad Beal played like a hero.

I'm not ragging on you, Prime -- this was pretty much everybody. All season. With very few exceptions.

It'll be interesting to see his second season.

Agreed -- here's hoping he knocks it out of the park!

[payitforward]

The comparisons I made were certainly a strawman, but sort of pointedly so - I'm trying to deconstruct your similarly specious set of comparisons by pointing out that your preference for physical protection directs you to players who have proven to be much less impressive NBA players in the same drafts that you're drawing from. Smith was considered an absolutely elite physical prospect. Yes he weighed less than Mitchell and doesn't have the same singular wingspan - but those points were used to allay concerns that Mitchell was undersized as an off guard; Smith was coming into the league as a point guard and wasn't at all undersized. Mitchell just wasn't obviously the physical standout relative to his peers that you're suggesting and really it's only actual NBA success that makes his functional athleticism so apparent in retrospect. To repeat myself again - the same point is essentially evident in Knox vs. JJJ - they were both considered extremely physically intriguing prospects! If we ignore their actual performance prior to the NBA it's difficult to make a case for one over the other!

Anyway, I think we're less opposed than this back-and-forth is suggesting, so I'll just articulate a basic set of premises independent of the dumb examples we're both projecting.

1. NBA teams are better at evaluating talent than they used to be and better at developing players from a more nascent stage, so selecting talented but unproven players is not the wildly hit-or-miss practice that it once was.

2. That said, projecting is still not entirely a science, so no one thing is really any kind of consistent marker of future success (neither statistical markers or physical tools).

3. The most consistently effective approach will incorporate both prior performance (not just boxscore stuff but advanced metrics and the stuff that is specifically considered important in protection more-so than inherently valuable) and physical upside. It follows that serious concerns in either area are appropriate to weigh against a player.

I think Josh Green is a pretty decent prospect and that his college performance doesn't particularly undermine that!

Agree on all points.

[Gig18]

Sure - some of the allure attached to Rui coming out of college was his "complete offensive game" which was sort of an elliptical way of saying he took a lot of midrange shots (bad). Toppin feels somewhat reminiscent of Rui in terms of some of the reservations I have about him in the NBA, but I appreciate that he produces more in the ranges that yield the best results - at the rim and beyond the arc.

Jimmy Butler take a lot of midrange shots. Kawhi Leonard takes a lot of midrange shots. Chris Paul takes a lot of midrange shots Demarr Derozan takes a lot of midrange shots.

It's critical that Rui become a better 3pt shooter. But I don't buy this narrative that taking--and making--midrange shots is "bad."

How could "taking -- and making" any shot be bad? Taking them & missing them is bad!

But, Rui is not Kawhi or Butler or DeRozan. He shot his 2pas at 50% as a rookie. Average for a 4 -- average, not good -- is 56%. So he has to become a good shooter of some kind, any kind; right now, he isn't one.

Are you sure about those numbers? I just went to espn for stats on a few players and subtracted out three pointer. According to my admittedly rudimentary calculations Rui's 2 point percentage isn't that bad. Kawhi shot 50.6% on 2's this year; Jimmy butler, 49.4%; Khris Middleton 50.1%; Jayson Tatum 47.9%; and Pascal siam 49.8%.
I think we should be more encouraged by Rui's first year. He had the best wiz rookie season of any recent rook not named Wall or Beal. Obviously his improvement on 3's is key to his future. But the guy was pretty reliable for a bucket.