2024 Draft Thread - Part II

[tontoz]

Wow, lots of different opinions - this draft strikes me as interesting that way. I wonder if this is going on in the FOs around the league.

Looks like most of the board will be disappointed on draft night no matter who we pick.

Then again if we did draft someone like Reed at 2 i wouldn't be that disappointed even though i wouldn't advocate doing it.

[dckingsfan]

Wow, lots of different opinions - this draft strikes me as interesting that way. I wonder if this is going on in the FOs around the league.

Looks like most of the board will be disappointed on draft night no matter who we pick.

Then again if we did draft someone like Reed at 2 i wouldn't be that disappointed even though i wouldn't advocate doing it.

Yep, no doubt. Not just who we draft but the trades that could have happened. This is a tough year to start as a new FO, my opinion.

I am wondering if this is going on league wide and causes a wild draft night?

[NatP4]

Read on Twitter

[dckingsfan]

Any thoughts on Carlton Carrington?

[Dark Faze]

Wow, lots of different opinions - this draft strikes me as interesting that way. I wonder if this is going on in the FOs around the league.

Looks like most of the board will be disappointed on draft night no matter who we pick.

Then again if we did draft someone like Reed at 2 i wouldn't be that disappointed even though i wouldn't advocate doing it.

Yep, no doubt. Not just who we draft but the trades that could have happened. This is a tough year to start as a new FO, my opinion.

I am wondering if this is going on league wide and causes a wild draft night?

This FO seems locked in and up to date on analytics, pick value, trade possibilities, etc. I'm confident that they'll consider all options appropriately.

If the pick was to be chosen based purely on the best analytics, who might the pick be?

[doclinkin]

Wow, lots of different opinions - this draft strikes me as interesting that way. I wonder if this is going on in the FOs around the league.

Looks like most of the board will be disappointed on draft night no matter who we pick.

Then again if we did draft someone like Reed at 2 i wouldn't be that disappointed even though i wouldn't advocate doing it.

I'm honestly the other way. I don't see strong separation at any position, and see potential in all of them. I know by the day after the draft I will have talked myself into whatever guy is wearing a Wizards hat at the end of the night. (Knowing not to get too happy about the first pick, since we may end up swapping him before the night is done). Like so:

I love how everyone is like "I can't take X,Y, or Z at 2." Unless they trade (and every team is probably also thinking the same thing), you have to take someone at 2. Assuming Sarr goes 1, my three to consider are Holland, Castle, and Clingan. I know a lot of people aren't excited to take any of those guys at 2, but I can make good arguments for each one of them. I feel less enthused about Risacher or Topic at this point.

Right. My deal is, people say this year's 1-5 would go 6-10 in any other year. Other's say "I like x-guy, but I couldn't take him #2". Yeah? What if in another draft year he was sitting there at 5 when you picked. You'd be happy with him then, no?. So might as well not overthink the supposed value of a pick and simply get the guy that helps your team.

This draft has no obvious home-run guys at the top. The best guy may be way lower down and under-appreciated. It happens. Pick the guy you have a feel about and make it work, no regrets. Pick up extra picks if you can to hedge your bets on draft and stash or developmental talents.

Like the front office I'm worried less about who a guy is right now and more about does the guy have room to grow. That means a combination of the body for the position (size, athleticism, switchability, athletics and anthropometrics at the combine) plus the talent set that matches their likely NBA role (how do they score, handle, what position do they defend).

Then cross reference with their mindset to compete and improve. Tough to judge mindset, except if a player got better over time (Edey). In the case of young players that's a question of if they got better over the course of a season (Holland, Sheppard, Castle) vs if they were uneven (Risacher, Topic). Especially if they rose up and played their best when the stakes were highest (Castle, Edey). Did they help their team win? Were they key pieces in that win?

Then you look at youth to gauge if a player has room to continue to grow (Holland is near the top here, being both among the youngest and swiftly improving over a rough season, but most of the freshmen get boosted towards the top here).

So for instance:

A guy like Sheppard may turn out to be the best player in the draft. Or at least best at his position. If he lands with the Spurs I think he will be on the right track. There are reasons for doubts: It is tough to think his stats will translate frankly _because_ they were unprecedented. Also he played for a Coach whose offense warps players stats, for good and bad. He recruits such great talent that they are forced to share the ball and we can't really evaluate them as if they were the alpha wolf star on any other team. But if Sheppard's stats did scale and could translate with increased usage he would be a HOF player. A combination of John Stockton and Mark Price. The most fundamentally sound player we have ever seen in the NBA.

Problem is he measures small. Thought he tested athletically well. And was smart enough to train for and game the measurements.

So: Size? No. A negative unless he is a PG.
Athleticism. Yes if you believe it, but better than doubters thought.

Switchability: two position, 1-2. Though he rebounded well for his size.

Talent set at PG: played well as lead guard when he had a chance. But mostly was not in this role. Did not force FTs or break down defenders off the dribble. Made the smart pass always.

At off guard: catch and shoot sniper. With enough moves to get open. But small for the position. Had the luxury of picking his spots. Low volume while high usage players drew defenders off him.

Competition: seized a role next to more touted and 'talented' players, forced the coach to start him and give him the ball in big games. Fell short on the biggest stage. The team underperformed their talent level and forced the Coach out of his role. Whose fault? Not Sheppard.

Youth? Not a positive, he will be nearly 20 on draft day. Advanced for a freshman.

So. negatives. Small. Two position versatility at best. Older. Low volume. Low FT attempts off his limited ballhandling. Shone when allowed to but not at a champion level, did not carry his team past their own shortcomings. Can his numbers translate without significant drop off as a lead guard and increased volume? Unknown, unlikely in that they are unprecedented and off low usage.

Upsides: will likely be a good floor general when given opportunity and as he grows into his role, great fit for a team that does not need a lead scorer at point. Looks likely to improve as a decision making team captain when given more opportunity. If he matures in this way he profiles as Tyus Jones with better defense, which would be a good player on any team. High efficiency, low mistake, productive if not forcing the action or breaking down defenses with shifty dribble attack mode.

But WHAT IF his numbers do scale on increased volume. What if they are not an anomaly. Every other Kentucky guard seems to only get better when they hit the league. If so then people will be kicking themselves over skipping an obvious HOFer just because his numbers were truly unbelievable. What if this kid is indeed a phenomenon, the way folks skipped over Chris Paul or whomever.

If he does in fact have a real life 42" vert and his numbers do translate and he has just been held back by having to share the ball, well then, Reed is no question the best pick.

====

See? I talked myself into Reed Sheppard as a surefire HOFer.

[DCZards]

I'd take Sheppard at this point. His size bothers me a little, but if he ends up being "super" T.J McConnell as a an average scenario case, then I think you could call that a win in a draft like this. Such a player would likely see one or two all-star games.

Why do people keep saying “a draft like this” when no one, not even the experts, know for sure how good or bad this draft will turn out.

I’m not settling for a “super” McConnell with the second pick. I’m setting my sights higher than that.

[machu46]

I'd take Sheppard at this point. His size bothers me a little, but if he ends up being "super" T.J McConnell as a an average scenario case, then I think you could call that a win in a draft like this. Such a player would likely see one or two all-star games.

Why do people keep saying “a draft like this” when no one, not even the experts, know for sure how good or bad this draft will turn out.

I’m not settling for a “super” McConnell with the second pick. I’m setting my sights higher than that.

It's just the reality of the draft class. Of course we all hope whoever Washington takes ends up developing in an unexpected way and turns out to be a franchise player, but none of these prospects have that as a reasonable projection; they just don't. There's generally always prospects that exceed expectations and also prospects that bust. Sheppard could be one of the ones that exceeds expectations even if we agree that his more reasonable outcome is a Super McConnell (I don't really buy that as the comparison for him anyways given the fact that his shooting is probably his biggest strength while it's one of McConnell's biggest weaknesses.

[MDStar]

Looking at the Bilal news about him continuously increasing in size/stature, one could look at our Forward situation as being locked up from both an investment and potential perspective. So, while i fully understand and support the BPA approach, in a draft such as this, without top-top tier prospects, I don't see the point of picking another another forward that creates even more of a logjam for the team that can only play 2 at a time. ie. Risacher, Buzelis or Holland.

In my opinion, only guards and centers should be in consideration. Personally, if Sarr is gone, I'd go with Castle, with Topic as a conciliation prize in a trade back scenario.

[TGW]

Wow, lots of different opinions - this draft strikes me as interesting that way. I wonder if this is going on in the FOs around the league.

There's no generational talent in this draft, but I do think there are several high floor players (especially the college and G-Leaguers) that have very little bust potential. I agree with Dawkins that the more swings of the bat in this draft, the better.

[Rafael122]

This is where GMs/scouts earn their money. It's easy to have the top pick and select Wemby, it's another thing where you get a draft like this with no clear cut number one. I'd say the last time this happened was probably 2020? Was Edwards even considered a consensus top pick? Before that might have been 2017 where Fultz was taken 1, but Tatum got picked at 3. But I mean, from that draft itself, Mitchell/Bam/Tatum/Fox/Lauri/Allen/OG have either been all stars, made all NBA, etc. I have full faith in Dawkins and his team, this was truly their first offseason. Remember they came in like 10 days before last year's draft.

[tontoz]

This is where GMs/scouts earn their money. It's easy to have the top pick and select Wemby, it's another thing where you get a draft like this with no clear cut number one. I'd say the last time this happened was probably 2020? Was Edwards even considered a consensus top pick? Before that might have been 2017 where Fultz was taken 1, but Tatum got picked at 3. But I mean, from that draft itself, Mitchell/Bam/Tatum/Fox/Lauri/Allen/OG have either been all stars, made all NBA, etc. I have full faith in Dawkins and his team, this was truly their first offseason. Remember they came in like 10 days before last year's draft.

So glad we don't have to rely on Grunfail anymore.

I'll never forget the 2011 draft. We actually had a thread on here with a poll question "Who do you NOT want to draft at 6". The overwhelming winner was Vesely who of course was the pick. Then we picked Singleton at 18. Both guys were out of the league in 3 years.




Apparently Wall wanted us to pick Klay. At least that is what he is saying now.

[Rafael122]

This is where GMs/scouts earn their money. It's easy to have the top pick and select Wemby, it's another thing where you get a draft like this with no clear cut number one. I'd say the last time this happened was probably 2020? Was Edwards even considered a consensus top pick? Before that might have been 2017 where Fultz was taken 1, but Tatum got picked at 3. But I mean, from that draft itself, Mitchell/Bam/Tatum/Fox/Lauri/Allen/OG have either been all stars, made all NBA, etc. I have full faith in Dawkins and his team, this was truly their first offseason. Remember they came in like 10 days before last year's draft.

So glad we don't have to rely on Grunfail anymore.

I'll never forget the 2011 draft. We actually had a thread on here with a poll question "Who do you NOT want to draft at 6". The overwhelming winner was Vesely who of course was the pick. Then we picked Singleton at 18. Both guys were out of the league in 3 years.




Apparently Wall wanted us to pick Klay. At least that is what he is saying now.

I think that was Flip Saunders. Klay crushed a workout and that was Flip's guy but I think the Wizards board had Vesely at the top and that's who they went with.

[tontoz]

I think that was Flip Saunders. Klay crushed a workout and that was Flip's guy but I think the Wizards board had Vesely at the top and that's who they went with.

I don't remember what Flip was saying.

Wall is on a podcast now called Point Game and i came across a clip of him recently saying he wanted Klay.

[AFM]

You can't even say "there's no generational talent in this draft", we really don't know. There could be a Jokic in the 2nd round. What is totally fair to say is that there's no OBVIOUS generational talent, like a Wemby or a Lebron.

[NatP4]

I think Djurisic is my high upside sleeper, like Vukcevic last year

Read on Twitter

[Jay81]

Listening to Dawkins and junkies. Surprised he talked about prospects! I think he is leaning Zaccharie Risacher. He quickly corrected the junkies when they pronounced his name and screwed up his height. Also said Bilal is now 6-9

[NatP4]

Listening to Dawkins and junkies. Surprised he talked about prospects! I think he is leaning Zaccharie Risacher. He quickly corrected the junkies when they pronounced his name and screwed up his height. Also said Bilal is now 6-9

I mean, they specifically asked him about Risacher, Sarr, and Clingan. Gave pretty generic answers on all 3.

[NatP4]

Read on Twitter

[Dat2U]

So Topic & Holland haven't turned 19 yet.

Sarr is a year younger (just turned 19) than Missi, Ware, Clingan & Filipowski who are all 20.

Dilly, Furphy, Cody W, Castle, Buzelis, Collier, Walter & Sheppard were all born within a 6 month time frame - all are 19 and a half or older.

de Silva, Knecht, Kolek, McCullar & Shannon Jr are all projected 1st rd picks - all are over 23!

Ulrich Comche is 18.5, Cam Spencer is over 24. A 5.5 year gap.