Will Andrew wiggins be a great player in the NBA?

[KennyDuwayne]

A lot of people are still basing his abilities on what his high school career looked like, not what his college career has looked like. As far as I'm concerned he'll go top 2 but for the same reason Michael Kidd Gilchrist went top 2.

[noobcake]

A lot of people are still basing his abilities on what his high school career looked like, not what his college career has looked like. As far as I'm concerned he'll go top 2 but for the same reason Michael Kidd Gilchrist went top 2.

Bolded is true, the untouched part is not. Wiggins is not going 2nd this year. He is going to slip by draft day. MKG went 2 because Bobcats could settle for a 3 and D player and everyone below Davis was not as good as Embiid, Parker, Smart, Exum, Vonleh.

[ComboGuardCity]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

[JB2]

Wiggins will be just fine. He reminds me of Kobe in terms of background and motivation. I do see him becoming a great NBA player meaning top 5 for his position. I see him being unguardable because of his quickness, height, and quick release of his shot. This kid loves to play defense and rarely looks frustrated.

what? If anything Exum is the closest to Kobe based on background on motivation in this draft. Exum seems to really want to learn from the best and from what I've read is incessantly studies game tape. Not to mention he grew up in another country with a Dad who has played professional ball. Much like Kobe, he's going to have no NCAA experience, is still raw, and has that same scrawny build. That's where the comparisons stop.

I don't see any relation between Kobe and Wiggins on or off the court. Also, comparing him to Tmac is a bit premature. What has anyone seen of Andrew that makes you think he can be an offensive juggernaut?

[shangrila]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

But unless Parker decides to take a few years off he'll always be ahead of Wiggins skill-wise.

This is why I tend to lean towards skill over athleticism in the draft. Young guys with skills will develop them further, while you're hoping the athletic guy can develop them at all. Obviously athleticism plays a part but all things considered I'd probably take Parker over Wiggins at this point.

[Bravenewworld]

Wiggins is a big question mark right about now. He's an athletic defender, but how do you fit him into your offense?

Very easily?
I dont get the question as there is not a team in the league who would pass him up as their 2 or 3 with an offense that uses him as 1-3 option. He gets to the rim at will. He can cut through players. He drop steps and fade-away jumpers. He has such a quick first step that the refs are calling it a travel when its not. He has that second quick jump. He has all the makings of a TMac and again, TMac would fit in anyone's offensive scheme.

Have you actually watched Kansas play this year, or have you just watched Dawkins' Wiggins highlights?

He gets to the rim and someone on the other team ends up picking up a stupid foul. In the NBA and the Tourney, that wont happen. Maybe "at will" is a bit of an exaggeration but not by much. The guy can get the first step off his defender. He can slice through defenders. And of course we know his transition game.
When this guy starts getting paid for doing this.... well...... when he starts getting really really paid, he's going to be a beast driving to the basket.

Im actually a bit more interested in that 18 foot fade-away jumper he has been showing he has lately. The faster he can develop that, the better his NBA career will go.

[SlowPaced]

Ben Mclemore and Terrance Ross were both projected to be great defenders at the next level because of their all star level quickness.

This isn't about "projection". Wiggins is already a great defender.

Yes it is. Wiggins hasn't played defense in the NBA but you are projecting him to be a good NBA defender based on what they have done on the college level. This is no different from the evaluations on Mclemore and Ross.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Ross and McLemore weren't good defenders in college. They only had upside. Wiggins is already a great defender who has upside to be one of the premier defenders in the league.

[DanTown8587]

Let's also remember McLemore was a redshirt last year at age 20, Ross was 20 his breakout year, and Wiggins just turned 19 and has been on campus a year. He's miles ahead of where those guys were.

[Damon_3388]

Let's also remember McLemore was a redshirt last year at age 20, Ross was 20 his breakout year, and Wiggins just turned 19 and has been on campus a year. He's miles ahead of where those guys were.

Age on draft day:

Terrence Ross (HS class of 2010) - 21 years, 4 months, 24 days (2012)
Ben McLemore (HS class of 2011) - 20 years, 4 months, 17 days (2013)
Andrew Wiggins (HS class of 2013) - 19 years, 4 months, 4 days (2014)

Ross spent two seasons in college, but did not play basketball in his senior year of high school. McLemore also spent two years in college, but was only eligible to play basketball in one of them.

[Chi]

IMO his defense and athleticism makes him a top pick prospect period. But I wouldn't take him number 1 due to the flaws that have been pointed out and so many amazing athletes before him that have failed miserably.

I need to see more skill from him then fast break dunks and I haven't seen much. Definitely not enough to draft him number 1.

PG is not a bad comparison. But PG was lucky enough to end up on a quality team with quality player development.

R.I.P. the Wiggins legacy if he ends up in the wrong situation. I won't name any names lol...

And as far as the other top picks like Jabari and Embiid etc. I think they have more lee-way to succeed even in those situations because they're already coming into the league with a defined skill set and team role...

Wiggins is a big question mark right about now. He's an athletic defender, but how do you fit him into your offense?

I think staying another year in college would be great for him and his development. But obviously that's extremely unlikely.

So if Waiters or McLemore went to Indiana they would be studs right now, but if George went to Cleveland or Sacramento he'd be a rotation player? IMO if Wiggins is a stud we'll see it no matter where he goes, and if he isn't we won't. IMO players make the environment around them, like George helped do with the Pacers.

There is obviously no way either one of us can prove that argument right or wrong but I'll give my opinion anyway...

As far as PG goes, he seems to have the maturity and work ethic to thrive anywhere, but maybe he's not this good this fast under those circumstances, almost certainly not as good defensively.

If Waiters or B.Mac were on the Pacers instead, yes I do believe they'd be better and further along in their development right now. Why wouldn't I? Indiana has a proven track record recently of developing young talent fast and efficiently...

Sacramento and Cleveland have done the exact opposite! Kyrie was on his way (not to say that he won't still do it) to being the next great PG, everyone was calling it before this season. So what did they do? Fired his coach! But of coarse no one will factor that in, because for some reason that doesn't matter in the least. It's all on Kyrie, right?

I'm not going to sit here and say that none of the blame is on the individual player, because it is. But the organization also deserves their share of the blame as well, sometimes far more than the young player at hand.

Personnel matters. Coaching matters. Systems matter. Teammates, leadership, and maturity all matter when it comes to developing a young player. These are things the organization is responsible for. You can't tell me that coaching and none of that matters in developing a player. Lots of millions of dollars being wasted in sports if so.

Some players are great and strong minded etc. and will thrive no matter what or where you place them, like Michael Jordan. But it is not fair to hold every individual that comes in the league to that standard and some of them need to be conditioned differently.

And some teams frankly just haven't shown the ability to do that for young players...

In my brutally honest opinion. Wiggins is not built to be the new hero or savior/face of the franchise for a team like the Milwaukee Bucks... I think he'd crumble.

Same Andrew Wiggins running with a vet star like Rondo running the show and taking all the pressure off of him and making it easy on him while he develops... Or if he played for a strong coaching system like Indiana or Chicago, I see an entirely different outcome for him. Again Jmo...

[Kingshadaine]

This draft will he better than 2003, if Parker and embiid come out and Wiggins will be the best of this draft class

[Sprewell4Three]

Marcus smart is better

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[diablerouge]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

But unless Parker decides to take a few years off he'll always be ahead of Wiggins skill-wise.

This is why I tend to lean towards skill over athleticism in the draft. Young guys with skills will develop them further, while you're hoping the athletic guy can develop them at all. Obviously athleticism plays a part but all things considered I'd probably take Parker over Wiggins at this point.

jabari parker is derrick williams. not quick enough for the 3, not big enough for the 4. he won't be able to get by his man in the pros and can't guard anybody to save his life at the COLLEGE level.

[BaunceyChillups]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

Wing players with crap handles almost never become stars.

[E-Balla]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

But unless Parker decides to take a few years off he'll always be ahead of Wiggins skill-wise.

This is why I tend to lean towards skill over athleticism in the draft. Young guys with skills will develop them further, while you're hoping the athletic guy can develop them at all. Obviously athleticism plays a part but all things considered I'd probably take Parker over Wiggins at this point.

jabari parker is derrick williams. not quick enough for the 3, not big enough for the 4. he won't be able to get by his man in the pros and can't guard anybody to save his life at the COLLEGE level.

He's just as big as Derrick Williams (7 foot wingspan), he has great handles and a jumpshot (Williams has no handles and is a streaky shooter), and he's pretty gifted as a jumper (his arms are long so he gets well above the rim). Athletically he's gonna surprise people at the combine. Sure he's not quick but at the very least he can dominate at PF.

[diablerouge]

But unless Parker decides to take a few years off he'll always be ahead of Wiggins skill-wise.

This is why I tend to lean towards skill over athleticism in the draft. Young guys with skills will develop them further, while you're hoping the athletic guy can develop them at all. Obviously athleticism plays a part but all things considered I'd probably take Parker over Wiggins at this point.

jabari parker is derrick williams. not quick enough for the 3, not big enough for the 4. he won't be able to get by his man in the pros and can't guard anybody to save his life at the COLLEGE level.

He's just as big as Derrick Williams (7 foot wingspan), he has great handles and a jumpshot (Williams has no handles and is a streaky shooter), and he's pretty gifted as a jumper (his arms are long so he gets well above the rim). Athletically he's gonna surprise people at the combine. Sure he's not quick but at the very least he can dominate at PF.

he's going to get eaten alive at the 4. he can't deal with perry ellis right now. it's almost absurd to picture him defending against blake or klove.

[diablerouge]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

Wing players with crap handles almost never become stars.

it's a myth that you can't improve your handles in the pros. anyone that has watched derozan try to dribble a basketball at usc could confirm that. even kevin durant used to eat his dribble under pressure a lot just a couple of years ago... now he's got defenders on skates when he pushes on the break.

[E-Balla]

he's going to get eaten alive at the 4. he can't deal with perry ellis right now. it's almost absurd to picture him defending against blake or klove.

But who can defend them? Man defense is overrated because great players will be great no matter who's on them. He has good timing on rotations when he tries so all he needs is a coach to get him to play consistently on that end and he'll be at worst a slight liability.

Meanwhile on the other end he's too strong and big for SFs and too skilled for PFs, he's not scared to bang down low, and he has nice touch at the rin unlike Wiggins.

[MiltownHawkeye]

Parker is the skilled one and Wiggins is the athletic one. Wiggins can develop skills. Unfortunately Parker cannot.

But unless Parker decides to take a few years off he'll always be ahead of Wiggins skill-wise.

This is why I tend to lean towards skill over athleticism in the draft. Young guys with skills will develop them further, while you're hoping the athletic guy can develop them at all. And if athletic guy develops them, you have a superstar. Obviously athleticism plays a part but all things considered I'd probably take Parker over Wiggins at this point.

FTFY

[MiltownHawkeye]

Marcus smart is better

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

Ah yes, the 20 year-old stocky 6'4 sophomore that can't shoot and can't play PG and has shown no improvement in either area after almost 2 seasons of college ball.