jasonxxx102 wrote:If anyone didn't think this was one of the worst drafts of all time just look at this chart. There's 1, yes just 1 player who has had a positive offensive impact so far and it's not that positive.
You've got a handful of guys with slightly positive defensive impact and Clingan.
Here's another way to visualize it. The few players who have had a positive impact so far are barely playing.
yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
jasonxxx102 wrote:If anyone didn't think this was one of the worst drafts of all time just look at this chart. There's 1, yes just 1 player who has had a positive offensive impact so far and it's not that positive.
You've got a handful of guys with slightly positive defensive impact and Clingan.
Here's another way to visualize it. The few players who have had a positive impact so far are barely playing.
yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
76ciology wrote:Wouldn't Edey have a better chance of winning the scoring battle against Tatum in the post after a switch than Tatum shooting over Edey's 9'6" standing reach?
jasonxxx102 wrote:If anyone didn't think this was one of the worst drafts of all time just look at this chart. There's 1, yes just 1 player who has had a positive offensive impact so far and it's not that positive.
You've got a handful of guys with slightly positive defensive impact and Clingan.
Here's another way to visualize it. The few players who have had a positive impact so far are barely playing.
yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
I think we can all agree that this class is bad but is this a fair comparison? The data being used for LEBRON is only from the first 2 months of the season. How did past rookie classes stack up in the first 2 months of the season? It stands to reason that rookies will get better as the year goes on and as such their end of year LEBRON should be higher than their mid-December LEBRON. This is taking data from what is likely the worst 2 months most of these players will ever have. This does not seem like an apples to apples comparison to me.
jasonxxx102 wrote:If anyone didn't think this was one of the worst drafts of all time just look at this chart. There's 1, yes just 1 player who has had a positive offensive impact so far and it's not that positive.
You've got a handful of guys with slightly positive defensive impact and Clingan.
Here's another way to visualize it. The few players who have had a positive impact so far are barely playing.
yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
FarBeyondDriven wrote: yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
Even if there is a star somewhere in here like 2013, it's still really bad. Or more likely, this is similar to the 2000 draft where there's just no top end talent at all. The entire lottery look like role players at best.
If you squint really hard you can maybe see a fringe all-star in a guy like Risacher or Sarr. Buzelis has the build and look of a guy who could be an all-star. Who else?
You can wishcast and talk about 5 years in the future all you want but who's even looking like all-nba talent? There is 0 top end talent in this draft. None. Most drafts have a clear cut all-nba talent sometimes multiple at the top of the draft and
The bottom line is that some draft classes are bad and some are good, that's literally how ranking works. This class is bad. If you're going to argue it's good, where does it rank in the last decade?
Furthermore, what does playing in the g-league or overseas have to do with anything? We've seen them all play 25+ games in the NBA already.
76ciology wrote:Wouldn't Edey have a better chance of winning the scoring battle against Tatum in the post after a switch than Tatum shooting over Edey's 9'6" standing reach?
FarBeyondDriven wrote: yawn. Most kids are blocked or in horrible situations if not injured. The trade deadline might open up some playing time but this draft class, like all classes, won't be proven to be good or bad for several years.
You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
So where do you think it will rank amongst other draft classes? Even if what you say is true and there's a handful of above average players and a slew of role players, it's still going to be a weak class. Give me a draft class you think is worse. Since you don't think it's a terrible class, name 4-5 draft classes worse. It's going to go down as one of the worst ever.
jasonxxx102 wrote: You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
So where do you think it will rank amongst other draft classes? Even if what you say is true and there's a handful of above average players and a slew of role players, it's still going to be a weak class. Give me a draft class you think is worse. Since you don't think it's a terrible class, name 4-5 draft classes worse. It's going to go down as one of the worst ever.
It's too early to tell of course but I think you're just running into this strain of thinking on these boards that holds that every single draft will have a couple of great players, even if you don't know which part of the draft they're coming from. I've tried arguing with it for years, and with respect to those folks I don't think there's any actual logic or chain of reasoning there. I think people are adjusting--in a good way--to seeing how much luck and guesswork the draft involves, and they're also incorporating some of the especially weird years in recent history (like the Giannis/Gobert draft) into their story. But then they're just skipping from 'sometimes the good players come later/anywhere in the draft' to 'every year there must be some good players later/anwyhere in the draft.'
It's just a misunderstanding of distribution IMO. Like, yes, in general we expect droughts or hurricanes or whatever to follow a certain general pattern over the years, but some years the weather lines up in a way that it's especially bad or good. The average # of hurricanes in Louisiana might be like 3.5 per year, but some years there's going to be 7 and some 0.
Castle looked pretty sick in the 2nd half last night against the Sixers, almost brought the Spurs back from like 15pts down a couple times. And he was mostly creating his own stuff. Good body control, good shiftiness, good handle, nice touch.
If he can get his shot in order--which looks really possible--I'd bet on him as the first very good player from this draft.
Mr Peanut wrote:Ron Holland last 5 games in 16.6 mpg:
10.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg on 69% (nice) from the field and 33% from three. His finishing through contact has been impressive and he's a pesky defender.
Seems like he's going to be fine, but he looks smaller than advertised (for a wing) and his shot will determine his ultimate ceiling. If he doesn't it's hard to see him and Ausar coexisting on the same team, and I like Ausar better (much better athlete and defender).
Mr Peanut wrote:Ron Holland last 5 games in 16.6 mpg:
10.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg on 69% (nice) from the field and 33% from three. His finishing through contact has been impressive and he's a pesky defender.
Seems like he's going to be fine, but he looks smaller than advertised (for a wing) and his shot will determine his ultimate ceiling. If he doesn't it's hard to see him and Ausar coexisting on the same team, and I like Ausar better (much better athlete and defender).
I thought Holland was going to be a shooting guard?
Mr Peanut wrote:Ron Holland last 5 games in 16.6 mpg:
10.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg on 69% (nice) from the field and 33% from three. His finishing through contact has been impressive and he's a pesky defender.
Seems like he's going to be fine, but he looks smaller than advertised (for a wing) and his shot will determine his ultimate ceiling. If he doesn't it's hard to see him and Ausar coexisting on the same team, and I like Ausar better (much better athlete and defender).
I thought Holland was going to be a shooting guard?
He's always been advertised as a wing. He's not a good enough ball handler to be a guard and he can't shoot. He's just another athletic wing who doesn't have any standout NBA skills. Ignite was such a waste of a team and they haven't turned out any good talent
He's like a dollar store version of Kuminga
76ciology wrote:Wouldn't Edey have a better chance of winning the scoring battle against Tatum in the post after a switch than Tatum shooting over Edey's 9'6" standing reach?
jasonxxx102 wrote: You seem dead set on ignoring how bad this class is
because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
Even if there is a star somewhere in here like 2013, it's still really bad. Or more likely, this is similar to the 2000 draft where there's just no top end talent at all. The entire lottery look like role players at best.
If you squint really hard you can maybe see a fringe all-star in a guy like Risacher or Sarr. Buzelis has the build and look of a guy who could be an all-star. Who else?
You can wishcast and talk about 5 years in the future all you want but who's even looking like all-nba talent? There is 0 top end talent in this draft. None. Most drafts have a clear cut all-nba talent sometimes multiple at the top of the draft and
The bottom line is that some draft classes are bad and some are good, that's literally how ranking works. This class is bad. If you're going to argue it's good, where does it rank in the last decade?
Furthermore, what does playing in the g-league or overseas have to do with anything? We've seen them all play 25+ games in the NBA already.
I don't understand the logic behind a lot of these posts. Ranking classes based on first year results is a joke, everyone understands that these dudes need at least the first contract to show us what type of players they are. Likewise, injuries play a huge factor as well. And how do you want to quantify this? There are 60 picks in a draft, only 2-3 of those will be homeruns based on your logic, so do we just base a draft off of those 3 guys, or the 58 other dudes picked?
Remember that first year of 2016? Celtics took a gamble and drafted Brown who couldn't even dribble a basketball let alone crack the rotation, and PHI and LA were looking like the next dynasties. Every team in the lottery that year drafted on potential because "This is the weakest draft of all time outside of the Top 2". We saw scrubs like Thon Maker, Bender, and Papagiannis go in the lottery. Fast forward and Simmons is the laughing stock of the NBA, BI a ghost, and Brown the best player from the draft Murray and Pascal also are fighting with Brown and they went in the late 1st, and didn't max out till their 2nd contracts.
I don't need to squint to see the talent. If all you are looking to see is Luka's and LeBron's, year you're going to be dissapointed, this draft doesn't have that type of talent. If you want a comp I'll give you the early 2010 drafts as ones that are similar talent level, but just get a better rep because the Euro suprises.
Most drafts on average since I started watching ball have 4-7 All-Stars in them. That's it. Sure you get some years like 2009 and 2017, but if 5 players make the AST your draft did well. I see many guys that have that potential.
Sarr, Clingan and Castle have all shown without a doubt imo that they will be allstars someday health permitting. All effect both sides of the ball and look to be elite defensive prospects. All have offensive wiggle in their games.
Sarr- JJJ Castle- Jrue Clingan- Rudy
At this point I would be shocked if those 3 didn't get to the level of player I'm comping them too. They might not be the AS that gets you 30 ppg, but having 3 dudes already show ALL-Defensive potential as rookies is crazy. I personally believe in a few other guys, but they aren't as sure as those 3 to me, but we'll see in a few more years how Reed, Zack, and others look.
Likewise, if you are only judging a draft class based on how the Top 3 teams do, assuming stars is all you care about, you are missing what really makes a draft class strong, which is the amount of players who actually make it to the league and get minutes. Go look at the 2nd round picks for this draft. Only 7 dudes haven't played in the league yet, and a bunch of them have already cracked rotations.
Ajay Mitchell Jamal Shead Mogbo Filipawski Wells Oso
At the end of the day you raft players because you hope they will make your team and in time make your team better. Most teams can confidently say they got a player from this draft that can give them minutes and contribute.
It's not always about drafting Giannis at 13, but getting your starting center for the next decade at 21 (Missi) and 6th man at 18 (De Silva), starting 3 at 39 (Wells) and starting sg at 16 and 17 (McCain and Knecht).
That's what determines the actually strength of a draft class, on overage, bot just the 3 best players
FarBeyondDriven wrote: because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
Even if there is a star somewhere in here like 2013, it's still really bad. Or more likely, this is similar to the 2000 draft where there's just no top end talent at all. The entire lottery look like role players at best.
If you squint really hard you can maybe see a fringe all-star in a guy like Risacher or Sarr. Buzelis has the build and look of a guy who could be an all-star. Who else?
You can wishcast and talk about 5 years in the future all you want but who's even looking like all-nba talent? There is 0 top end talent in this draft. None. Most drafts have a clear cut all-nba talent sometimes multiple at the top of the draft and
The bottom line is that some draft classes are bad and some are good, that's literally how ranking works. This class is bad. If you're going to argue it's good, where does it rank in the last decade?
Furthermore, what does playing in the g-league or overseas have to do with anything? We've seen them all play 25+ games in the NBA already.
I don't understand the logic behind a lot of these posts. Ranking classes based on first year results is a joke, everyone understands that these dudes need at least the first contract to show us what type of players they are. Likewise, injuries play a huge factor as well. And how do you want to quantify this? There are 60 picks in a draft, only 2-3 of those will be homeruns based on your logic, so do we just base a draft off of those 3 guys, or the 58 other dudes picked?
Remember that first year of 2016? Celtics took a gamble and drafted Brown who couldn't even dribble a basketball let alone crack the rotation, and PHI and LA were looking like the next dynasties. Every team in the lottery that year drafted on potential because "This is the weakest draft of all time outside of the Top 2". We saw scrubs like Thon Maker, Bender, and Papagiannis go in the lottery. Fast forward and Simmons is the laughing stock of the NBA, BI a ghost, and Brown the best player from the draft Murray and Pascal also are fighting with Brown and they went in the late 1st, and didn't max out till their 2nd contracts.
I don't need to squint to see the talent. If all you are looking to see is Luka's and LeBron's, year you're going to be dissapointed, this draft doesn't have that type of talent. If you want a comp I'll give you the early 2010 drafts as ones that are similar talent level, but just get a better rep because the Euro suprises.
Most drafts on average since I started watching ball have 4-7 All-Stars in them. That's it. Sure you get some years like 2009 and 2017, but if 5 players make the AST your draft did well. I see many guys that have that potential.
Sarr, Clingan and Castle have all shown without a doubt imo that they will be allstars someday health permitting. All effect both sides of the ball and look to be elite defensive prospects. All have offensive wiggle in their games.
Sarr- JJJ Castle- Jrue Clingan- Rudy
At this point I would be shocked if those 3 didn't get to the level of player I'm comping them too. They might not be the AS that gets you 30 ppg, but having 3 dudes already show ALL-Defensive potential as rookies is crazy. I personally believe in a few other guys, but they aren't as sure as those 3 to me, but we'll see in a few more years how Reed, Zack, and others look.
Likewise, if you are only judging a draft class based on how the Top 3 teams do, assuming stars is all you care about, you are missing what really makes a draft class strong, which is the amount of players who actually make it to the league and get minutes. Go look at the 2nd round picks for this draft. Only 7 dudes haven't played in the league yet, and a bunch of them have already cracked rotations.
Ajay Mitchell Jamal Shead Mogbo Filipawski Wells Oso
At the end of the day you raft players because you hope they will make your team and in time make your team better. Most teams can confidently say they got a player from this draft that can give them minutes and contribute.
It's not always about drafting Giannis at 13, but getting your starting center for the next decade at 21 (Missi) and 6th man at 18 (De Silva), starting 3 at 39 (Wells) and starting sg at 16 and 17 (McCain and Knecht).
That's what determines the actually strength of a draft class, on overage, bot just the 3 best players
Questioning the logic of a post and then proceeding to say that Sarr, Castle and Clingan are guaranteed all-stars is not a strong argument in your favor. It’s just as over-reactionary as completely writing off this draft after only 2 months.
FarBeyondDriven wrote: because it's not. People conveniently forget how few great players there are in every draft class. Just go back through the various drafts of the last decade. There's like a handful of above average players and a slew of role players. I'm very confident this will apply to 2024 as well. Casuals think this class is bad because so many of the prospects weren't seen by them because they were in the G-League or overseas. Once the dust settles, you will all look foolish with your "wEakEsT dRafT clAsSes eVeR" takes.
Even if there is a star somewhere in here like 2013, it's still really bad. Or more likely, this is similar to the 2000 draft where there's just no top end talent at all. The entire lottery look like role players at best.
If you squint really hard you can maybe see a fringe all-star in a guy like Risacher or Sarr. Buzelis has the build and look of a guy who could be an all-star. Who else?
You can wishcast and talk about 5 years in the future all you want but who's even looking like all-nba talent? There is 0 top end talent in this draft. None. Most drafts have a clear cut all-nba talent sometimes multiple at the top of the draft and
The bottom line is that some draft classes are bad and some are good, that's literally how ranking works. This class is bad. If you're going to argue it's good, where does it rank in the last decade?
Furthermore, what does playing in the g-league or overseas have to do with anything? We've seen them all play 25+ games in the NBA already.
I don't understand the logic behind a lot of these posts. Ranking classes based on first year results is a joke, everyone understands that these dudes need at least the first contract to show us what type of players they are. Likewise, injuries play a huge factor as well. And how do you want to quantify this? There are 60 picks in a draft, only 2-3 of those will be homeruns based on your logic, so do we just base a draft off of those 3 guys, or the 58 other dudes picked?
Remember that first year of 2016? Celtics took a gamble and drafted Brown who couldn't even dribble a basketball let alone crack the rotation, and PHI and LA were looking like the next dynasties. Every team in the lottery that year drafted on potential because "This is the weakest draft of all time outside of the Top 2". We saw scrubs like Thon Maker, Bender, and Papagiannis go in the lottery. Fast forward and Simmons is the laughing stock of the NBA, BI a ghost, and Brown the best player from the draft Murray and Pascal also are fighting with Brown and they went in the late 1st, and didn't max out till their 2nd contracts.
I don't need to squint to see the talent. If all you are looking to see is Luka's and LeBron's, year you're going to be dissapointed, this draft doesn't have that type of talent. If you want a comp I'll give you the early 2010 drafts as ones that are similar talent level, but just get a better rep because the Euro suprises.
Most drafts on average since I started watching ball have 4-7 All-Stars in them. That's it. Sure you get some years like 2009 and 2017, but if 5 players make the AST your draft did well. I see many guys that have that potential.
Sarr, Clingan and Castle have all shown without a doubt imo that they will be allstars someday health permitting. All effect both sides of the ball and look to be elite defensive prospects. All have offensive wiggle in their games.
Sarr- JJJ Castle- Jrue Clingan- Rudy
At this point I would be shocked if those 3 didn't get to the level of player I'm comping them too. They might not be the AS that gets you 30 ppg, but having 3 dudes already show ALL-Defensive potential as rookies is crazy. I personally believe in a few other guys, but they aren't as sure as those 3 to me, but we'll see in a few more years how Reed, Zack, and others look.
Likewise, if you are only judging a draft class based on how the Top 3 teams do, assuming stars is all you care about, you are missing what really makes a draft class strong, which is the amount of players who actually make it to the league and get minutes. Go look at the 2nd round picks for this draft. Only 7 dudes haven't played in the league yet, and a bunch of them have already cracked rotations.
Ajay Mitchell Jamal Shead Mogbo Filipawski Wells Oso
At the end of the day you raft players because you hope they will make your team and in time make your team better. Most teams can confidently say they got a player from this draft that can give them minutes and contribute.
It's not always about drafting Giannis at 13, but getting your starting center for the next decade at 21 (Missi) and 6th man at 18 (De Silva), starting 3 at 39 (Wells) and starting sg at 16 and 17 (McCain and Knecht).
That's what determines the actually strength of a draft class, on overage, bot just the 3 best players
We are ranking classes based on first year performance. This is one of the weakest rookie classes of all time by performance. Maybe in year 2 or year 3 a lot of these guys take a leap and it ends up being a solid (or even good) draft but that doesn't change the fact this is one of the weakest performing rookie classes of all time. Unless something changes in the next 4 months, the 2025 ROY is going to be the worst ROY the NBA has ever seen if not the worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Rookie_of_the_Year
Murray and Pascal also are fighting with Brown and they went in the late 1st, and didn't max out till their 2nd contracts. 