RealGM

19. Mikal Bridges

Mikal’s NCAA 3P% (40%) and FT (84.5%) inspire promise for his shooting, while his steals, blocks, team success, and 7’2″ wingspan inspire promise for his defense.

But he was never reputed to be a great shooter, doesn’t have great form, and he lacks great strength, burst, and quickness on defense so it is easy to see him falling short of expectations in both areas. If so, he will provide an awfully disappointing return on a top 10 pick, as he is not much of a creator, rebounder, or passer. And even if he can shoots and defends well, his upside is capped by limits in other areas.

Mikal clearly has a better shooting projection than Kenrich, but Kenrich’s superiority at everything else makes them similarly good prospects.

Is Mikal Ottomatically going to be a good pro?

Everybody loves to compare Mikal Bridges to Otto Porter, Rob Covington, and Danny Green with the hypothesis he is a solid bet to be on a similar level of goodness. The logic is that he mimicked their NBA role to be one of the most effective players in the NCAA, thus he should seamlessly translate to the same role as a pro.

This logic is dubious, as excellent NCAA play should be a pre-requisite for a 21 year old to be considered in round 1 at all. To deserve top 10 consideration, elite NCAA play at that age isn’t enough.

For comparison, he was the same age as a freshman as Otto was as a sophomore. As a quick and simple comparison, let’s see how the players fared in terms of points, rebounds, and assists per 40 minutes at the same age:

Points Rebs Assists
Otto 18.3 8.5 3.1
Mikal 12.5 6.3 1.7
Otto clearly waffle crushes Mikal, which is why stat models and scouts alike rated him as an elite prospect. It’s simply not realistic to comp Mikal to a player who was THAT far ahead of him at the same age. Even if they seem similar stylistically, Otto is flat out better at basketball.

Now let’s shift focus to more realistic comps such as Danny Green and Robert Covington, comparing career per 40 min samples for the trio:

Points Rebs Assists Blocks
Green 18.9 8.2 3.5 2.1
RobCov 19.8 9.9 1.6 1.7
Mikal 16.5 6.5 2.3 1.3
This is closer, but it is still clear that Mikal is behind.

Both Green + RobCov have superior rebounds and blocks to suggest nuanced physical advantages over Mikal. They also scored more, and superior creation may have subtle impact on their NBA success even in low usage roles. RobCov offers Mikal hope as a rare example of a good NBA defensive player with a low assist rate, but overall it’s clear that his natural talent lags behind this duo as well.

Essentially Mikal’s NCAA success came from limiting his mistakes and scoring efficiently playing in an elite offensive system for an elite coach. It is plausible that this translates to a useful NBA player, but it also may not. His weaknesses will be more frequently exposed, and his easy opportunities will dry up, and even if he does succeed it is unlikely to be to the same magnitude as the aforementioned trio.

While Mikal has *some* chance of achieving an Otto/RobCov/Green level of goodness, everybody in the lottery has some chance of reaching a greater upside.

Ultimately Bridges’s hype is based on the notion that he will mimic RobCov and Otto’s production as a pro, as their success in spite of low usage makes their success seem attainable. In reality it is not, as they are special in ways that Mikal and most other 3 +D prospects are not. He’s a solid 3 + D prospect in the back end of round 1, but he isn’t special enough to justify the top 10 hype.

Vanderbilt_Grad wrote:I don't like that he skipped the athletic tests & measurements at the combine. That's a red flag for me.

JMAC3 wrote:Basically none of the top 10 guys did the athletic tests. His size and shooting on the wing is exactly what you want. Basically Mkg is he was a knockdown 3 point shooter.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

BringBackMcBob wrote:I'm torn on this guy. He moves well off the ball and is an above average defender. He's not at the top of my list, but if he slips, I wouldn't be mad if we take him. Only thing I don't like is he doesn't seem ready to jump into the rotation and that's what we need, not another project.

the_process wrote:Mikal Bridges will not be on the board at 11 for you guys. Miles Bridges, on the other hand, very well could be.

DY_nasty wrote:

the_process wrote:Mikal Bridges will not be on the board at 11 for you guys. Miles Bridges, on the other hand, very well could be.

monk wasn't supposed to be there either

the_process wrote:

DY_nasty wrote:

the_process wrote:Mikal Bridges will not be on the board at 11 for you guys. Miles Bridges, on the other hand, very well could be.

monk wasn't supposed to be there either

I strongly disagree with that. There were mocks that had Monk above and below CHA last year.

As far as Mikal goes, 7 through 10 all have interest in him. I don’t believe he gets through all 4 teams. There would have to be a couple Thon Maker-type off the board picks for that to happen.