Brandin Podziemski - Santa Clara

[EvanZ]

I suppose now I’ll be told nothing matters. And that everyone is randomly good at basketball for reasons we can’t ever understand. LMAO


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[HEZI]

Because he’s slow AF and players can run past him by several feet, let alone inches.

I’m sorry this is so hard for you to understand.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

So you just admitted that wingspan and length doesn’t matter much and contradicted your whole argument. Congratulations you defeated yourself

Lol I didn’t admit anything. Your logic needs some remedial education. Everything matters. Length matters. Speed matters. Athleticism matters. Strength matters.

Why is this so hard for you?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Oh look we’ve made progress

[EvanZ]

I have not changed lol


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[clyde21]

what is happening in this thread

[Nuntius]

what is happening in this thread

Yeah. People in the future are gonna wonder why Brandin Podziemski had a thread thrice as long as Bilal Coulibaly and just as long as Cam Whitmore and then they'll open it and realize that it was mostly due to an inane argument about wingspan. For what is worth, HEZI is on point, imo. Yes, wingspan obviously matters especially if your value is on the defensive end but players with a bad wingspan can succeed in the league while players with good wingspan can fail. Basketball is a game of skill, after all.

[EvanZ]

Nobody literally nobody ever said otherwise. “HEZI” invented a straw man. And you all fell for it.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EvanZ]

The irony lost on all you dummies is that I’m the one who started this thread back in November before you all heard of this kid. I’m probably one of the few on this board who have a notion of his actual value despite having short arms and average tools.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EMG518]

Nobody literally nobody ever said otherwise. “HEZI” invented a straw man. And you all fell for it.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

It hasn't occurred to you that maybe it's you and not every one else, that is out of the realm of possibility in your brain?

[EMG518]

The irony lost on all you dummies is that I’m the one who started this thread back in November before you all heard of this kid. I’m probably one of the few on this board who have a notion of his actual value despite having short arms and average tools.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

The irony is that you are talking about wingspan and you started this thread talking about basketball.

[EvanZ]

The irony lost on all you dummies is that I’m the one who started this thread back in November before you all heard of this kid. I’m probably one of the few on this board who have a notion of his actual value despite having short arms and average tools.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

The irony is that you are talking about wingspan and you started this thread talking about basketball.

It's literally part of basketball.

[Nuntius]

The irony lost on all you dummies is that I’m the one who started this thread back in November before you all heard of this kid. I’m probably one of the few on this board who have a notion of his actual value despite having short arms and average tools.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

The irony is that you are talking about wingspan and you started this thread talking about basketball.

It's literally part of basketball.

It is. No one has denied it. HEZI's argument is simply that wingspan matters less for players that have Brandin Podziemski's skill set.

[EvanZ]

It matters for everyone. If he had a 6’11” wingspan he’d be a better prospect. That’s how this works. You’re simply in some weird state of denial to think otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EMG518]

It matters for everyone. If he had a 6’11” wingspan he’d be a better prospect. That’s how this works. You’re simply in some weird state of denial to think otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

You have a reading comprehension problem clearly.

Every person agrees it would be better if he was longer, the dude literally said it matters less in this scenario for this player and explained why.

Why do you keep arguing things nobody has said.

[EvanZ]

It matters for everyone. If he had a 6’11” wingspan he’d be a better prospect. That’s how this works. You’re simply in some weird state of denial to think otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

You have a reading comprehension problem clearly.

Every person agrees it would be better if he was longer, the dude literally said it matters less in this scenario for this player and explained why.

Why do you keep arguing things nobody has said.

It doesn’t matter less that’s the point. It matters for everyone. You’re just not understanding selection bias. This is not about reading it’s about logic and making sense.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EvanZ]

You don’t get an exemption from having worse tools than someone else. You just have to overcome it. That’s what the selection bias is. If Podz didn’t have anything else to offer he’d just be a guy with below average physical tools. It’s only because he has skill that he can overcome it. A guy with better tools but worse skill could be a similarly situated prospect. And clearly we have plenty of those.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[EvanZ]

Why is this so hard for people to understand?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Nuntius]

It matters for everyone. If he had a 6’11” wingspan he’d be a better prospect. That’s how this works. You’re simply in some weird state of denial to think otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

No one thinks otherwise, though. Everyone agrees that Podziemski would be a better prospect if he had a 6'11 wingspan. What everyone who disagrees with you is arguing is that this lack of wingspan hurts Podziemski less than it would hurt a player with a different skill set and role.

Take someone like Cason Wallace or Anthony Black as an example. Both of them are looked at as potentially great contributors on the defensive end. But let's say that in the Combine they were measured as having the exact same wingspan as Podziemski does (6'5.50"). That would lead to a massive drop in their draft stock, wouldn't it? Why would that happen? It would be because teams would no longer buy their defensive potential at the next level. And why wouldn't they buy it? It is because wingspan matters a ton for players who are projected as elite defenders and rebounders.

Podziemski's draft stock, though, didn't really fall after his measurements came out. He wasn't really hurt by it. If anything, his draft stock started to rise after the Combine (not due to the wingspan thing, to be clear, but due to his overall workout). And he wasn't hurt by it because no one really thought of him as a potentially great contributor on the defensive end at the next level. People knew that if you are drafting Podziemski, you are doing it for what he can provide on the offensive end with his scoring and his playmaking.

Would his draft stock be a lot higher if he had a 6'11 wingspan? Absolutely. He would be a much, much better prospect if he had that kind of length. That's undeniable. No one is saying that wingspan doesn't matter for scorers and playmakers. It does matter for everyone.

The point that people have been making is this:

A mediocre or bad wingspan isn't a deal-breaker for a player whose value is on the offensive end. It's a welcome bonus, of course, and it does matter (no one ever said otherwise) but it's not what will make or break the player.

For a player whose value is on the defensive end or the glass, though, a mediocre or bad wingspan usually IS a deal-breaker.

In other words, no one has ever claimed that wingspan doesn't matter. The claim is that it matters a lot more for defensively-oriented players and rebounders than it does for scorers and playmakers. That's the argument that people have been making.

[BostonCouchGM]

wingspan is very important when it comes to defense but good footwork, instincts and effort can mitigate it. Pritchard falls into this category. Casuals think he gets hunted and he's a massive defensive liability but he's really not. Yes taller players can back him down but there's mismatches all over the floor on every possession and it's up to coaches to devise ways to help guys out when that happens. Brandin is similar to Pritchard defensively but unlike Pritchard he's actually a plus athlete so as long as he puts in the effort he won't be a liability. Conversely, Dick lacks the footwork and instincts and will be hard to keep on the floor for extended minutes due to how badly he'll be attacked. Brandin has starting PG skills but he's white so good luck finding a HC that will trust him to run an offense. He's most likely going to be relegated to being a SG (if he plays at all) playing off ball which isn't his optimal position and he'll have a similar impact as Kennard and Huerter which is a damn shame. But that's still a decent player worth a first rounder in a weak draft.

[Jamaaliver]

Can BP succeed long term even with his lackluster defense?

I think Manu Ginobili is the player he'd likely need to emulate to succeed as a super 6th man...

The Brandin Podziemski question

Brandin Podziemski | 6-5 guard | Santa Clara | No. 45

Watch on YouTube

A draft darling who excited public evaluators throughout the season, Podziemski was a tale of extremes at the combine. On one hand, he tested better than expected with a 39-inch vertical leap that got some attention. On the other hand, he measured with just an 8-0 1/2 standing reach that gave evaluators real pause about his potential to defend. In the first combine game, he produced a near masterpiece, scoring 10 points, dishing out seven assists and grabbing eight rebounds. In the second game, he was completely invisible. Where does this leave him?

Podziemski is polarizing, which is unsurprising given his journey. His counting stats of 19.9 points, 8.8 rebounds and 3.7 assists are outstanding. He’s a great shooter and hit 43.8 percent of his 3s this past season. On the surface, those are high-end numbers, but if you dig deeper, his numbers tanked against quality competition. In his six Tier A games, per KenPom, Podziemski had just a 53.8 true shooting percentage and saw his rebounding rate and assist rate drop by about 25 percent. In the five games he played against top-50 KenPom defenses, he averaged just 13.2 points and 5.2 rebounds.

As you can probably guess, I’m lower on Podziemski than the average evaluator. I really struggle to see how he’s going to defend effectively without much in the way of quickness or height.

The Athletic

Brandin Podziemski, 20, 6-5 So. SG, Santa Clara

Watch on YouTube

A transfer who hardly played his freshman season for Illinois, Podziemski blew up in the WCC for mid-major Santa Clara. He profiles as an all-offense, no-defense guy whose success will likely be determined by whether he can kinda sorta hold his own on defense or whether he’ll just be totally eviscerated.

There are definite shortcomings here, although you won’t find them in the stats — Podziemski’s rates of steals, blocks and rebounds actually compare quite well with players of far greater pedigree. The tape doesn’t lie, however: Blow-bys were common, and Podziemski will be giving up inches to virtually any wing he checks (I think his listing at 6-5 will be proven generous). The shred of good news is that he does have some late closing ability to rise up and contest or block shots from behind.

Offensively, however, Podziemski can shine as a secondary creator. The lefty is a deadly 3-point shooter (43.8 percent this past season); that may be a slight outlier based on his 77.1 percent free-throw mark, but the eye test is that he is a money shooter reminiscent of Luke Kennard. Podziemski also is a good passer off the dribble who can function in secondary pick-and-rolls.

A guy like this won’t make it without at least one magic trick up his sleeve, and Podziemski has it: an unworldly floater game, perhaps the best of any draft prospect since Trae Young. He launches them from different angles and approaches, needing little room to unleash glorious parabolas that softly splash through the net on angel’s wings; if he outperforms, this part of his game will likely be a huge piece.

The Athletic

[EvanZ]

Podz is a lot like Ty Jerome (even down to the floater).