Rank BBQ among under 25 cores across NBA

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

Not good enough to sustain a mini tank. BB-minus the Q.

[HKBOY]

OKC, Memphis, San Antonio and Indiana are definitely more promising than us right now. Toronto, Houston, Minny, New Orleans and Orlando are more or less in the same tier. Portland, Charlotte and Detroit are worse.

Atlanta and Chicago are in legit no mans land.

How in the hell are we in the same tier as the Twolves lol?
Houston has a much larger pool of prospects who are all younger than ours, Sengun is comparable to Scottie, with Scottie being better as he plays defence.
NOP I would agree with.
Magic are better off, Scottie and Paolo are comparable with Scottie being better. Franz is better than RJ and he's a a year and a half younger. IQ and Suggs are a wash, Suggs plays incredible defence with not much offence, IQ has much better offence and below average offence. Suggs is 2 full years younger though, so arguably he could be the better prospect.

Core under 25, so Twolves only have Edwards and McDaniels. Edwards is great but I am not sure if he is really a 1A, seems like a Mitchell type of player. McDaniels is comparable to RJ and IQ.

I agree that Houston has a larger pool of prospects and Sengun is comparable to Scottie but Green is bad. Smith is good, he is comparable to RJ and IQ, so I think it's fair to say that Tor and Hou are in the same tier.

Scottie is slightly better than Paolo and Franz is slightly better than RJ, IQ's defense is at least average but I agree IQ and Suggs are comparable, so we are more or less in the same tier.

1. Edwards
2-3. Scottie/Sengun
4. Paolo
5. Franz
6-10. Smith/RJ/IQ/Suggs/McDaniels
11. Green

[Scase]

OKC, Memphis, San Antonio and Indiana are definitely more promising than us right now. Toronto, Houston, Minny, New Orleans and Orlando are more or less in the same tier. Portland, Charlotte and Detroit are worse.

Atlanta and Chicago are in legit no mans land.

How in the hell are we in the same tier as the Twolves lol?
Houston has a much larger pool of prospects who are all younger than ours, Sengun is comparable to Scottie, with Scottie being better as he plays defence.
NOP I would agree with.
Magic are better off, Scottie and Paolo are comparable with Scottie being better. Franz is better than RJ and he's a a year and a half younger. IQ and Suggs are a wash, Suggs plays incredible defence with not much offence, IQ has much better offence and below average offence. Suggs is 2 full years younger though, so arguably he could be the better prospect.

Core under 25, so Twolves only have Edwards and McDaniels. Edwards is great but I am not sure if he is really a 1A, seems like a Mitchell type of player. McDaniels is comparable to RJ and IQ.

I agree that Houston has a larger pool of prospects and Sengun is comparable to Scottie but Green is bad. Smith is good, he is comparable to RJ and IQ, so I think it's fair to say that Tor and Hou are in the same tier.

Scottie is slightly better than Paolo and Franz is slightly better than RJ, IQ's defense is at least average but I agree IQ and Suggs are comparable, so we are more or less in the same tier.

1. Edwards
2-3. Scottie/Sengun
4. Paolo
5. Franz
6-10. Smith/RJ/IQ/Suggs/McDaniels
11. Green

Those are some fair points, I guess I was thinking more about the twolves as a whole and not so much that they only have 2 under 25.

[Boselecta]

We are well outside the top 10 cores and before I get flamed just ask yourself what did you think of Barrett and IQ when they were Knicks? Did the Knicks have a top 10 core? I remember Barrett was a toxic asset and IQ was just a nice up and coming young player.

Also the jury is still out on Scottie I like him and I hope for the best but I just don't see him developing into a true number 1. The box score and fantasy numbers are nice but they are not translating to wins. If we had a top 10 core we should at least be play in bound imo.

[ConSarnit]

We are well outside the top 10 cores and before I get flamed just ask yourself what did you think of Barrett and IQ when they were Knicks? Did the Knicks have a top 10 core? I remember Barrett was a toxic asset and IQ was just a nice up and coming young player.

Also the jury is still out on Scottie I like him and I hope for the best but I just don't see him developing into a true number 1. The box score and fantasy numbers are nice but they are not translating to wins. If we had a top 10 core we should at least be play in bound imo.

This is inline with my feelings as well. Most players generally show a pretty good outline of who they are (and will be) by year 4 (though it's not always the case). Quickley is almost 25. IMO if he ever reaches all-star level it will likely be a FVV 1-and-done situation. Barrett's numbers are already starting to slip (shooting 53/25/57 over the past 10 games). Whiles he's young-ish this is also his 5th year in the league. I'd wager the odds of RJ becoming an all-star are very slim. Doesn't mean those guys aren't/can't become good players but I'd say it's far more likely they end up decent role players than stars (which is sort of what we need). When considering development I generally believe years of experience is a bigger factor than age.

Barnes is tbd but he seems to be on an all-star path. A core with 1 good all-star isn't really all that impressive. If this team is going to get back to title contention it's probably going to need another Barnes level player as I'd have Quickley and Barrett as 3/4 options on a very good team (still not sold on Barrett though).

I don't think it's crazy to say this core has a lot of similarities to the Siakam/OG/FVV core.

Quickley: probably tops out around FVV's peak (impact-wise). Maybe slightly better.

Barrett: probably less impactful than prime OG

Barnes: might be #2 option like Siakam. Barnes does have higher upside given his playmaking and shooting.

Basically a team with no MVP level player and 1.5 all-stars. The ceiling really rests on Barnes which is tbd.

[Tacoma]

We are well outside the top 10 cores and before I get flamed just ask yourself what did you think of Barrett and IQ when they were Knicks? Did the Knicks have a top 10 core? I remember Barrett was a toxic asset and IQ was just a nice up and coming young player.

Also the jury is still out on Scottie I like him and I hope for the best but I just don't see him developing into a true number 1. The box score and fantasy numbers are nice but they are not translating to wins. If we had a top 10 core we should at least be play in bound imo.

Agree. RJ's 6 seasons so far has been fairly flat, seen in NY as a disappointment with every year they hope for improvement that never happens. IQ is also a veteran in his 5th season of largely flat play & couldn't crack the starting lineup of a middling NY team.

So, instead of NY, it's now TOR that's hoping for a breakout from both. But how much improvement should be expected after 5-6 seasons? For Barnes, Wagner & Suggs, they're young but they've played less than 3 seasons so one can reasonably expect improvement with more experience. RJ and IQ are already veterans.

We're certainly better off (on <25 players) today than before the Siakam and OG trades, but still well outside top 10. A lot of our future will lie in how well we pick in this summer's draft or in future trades.

[Boselecta]

We are well outside the top 10 cores and before I get flamed just ask yourself what did you think of Barrett and IQ when they were Knicks? Did the Knicks have a top 10 core? I remember Barrett was a toxic asset and IQ was just a nice up and coming young player.

Also the jury is still out on Scottie I like him and I hope for the best but I just don't see him developing into a true number 1. The box score and fantasy numbers are nice but they are not translating to wins. If we had a top 10 core we should at least be play in bound imo.

This is inline with my feelings as well. Most players generally show a pretty good outline of who they are (and will be) by year 4 (though it's not always the case). Quickley is almost 25. IMO if he ever reaches all-star level it will likely be a FVV 1-and-done situation. Barrett's numbers are already starting to slip (shooting 53/25/57 over the past 10 games). Whiles he's young-ish this is also his 5th year in the league. I'd wager the odds of RJ becoming an all-star are very slim. Doesn't mean those guys aren't/can't become good players but I'd say it's far more likely they end up decent role players than stars (which is sort of what we need). When considering development I generally believe years of experience is a bigger factor than age.

Barnes is tbd but he seems to be on an all-star path. A core with 1 good all-star isn't really all that impressive. If this team is going to get back to title contention it's probably going to need another Barnes level player as I'd have Quickley and Barrett as 3/4 options on a very good team (still not sold on Barrett though).

I don't think it's crazy to say this core has a lot of similarities to the Siakam/OG/FVV core.

Quickley: probably tops out around FVV's peak (impact-wise). Maybe slightly better.

Barrett: probably less impactful than prime OG

Barnes: might be #2 option like Siakam. Barnes does have higher upside given his playmaking and shooting.

Basically a team with no MVP level player and 1.5 all-stars. The ceiling really rests on Barnes which is tbd.

Completely agree though I do believe Barrett has a higher ceiling than Quickley. They will be perfect 3/4th options but in this draft or the next we have to hit and draft a superstar to pair with Barnes or this becomes the Siakam/OG/FVV core again.

[TGM]

People get so caught up with age. A team of guys under 25. Name me one team that won a championship with their 3 core guys under 25. I can name a bunch that underperformed and ended up getting dissembled:

Eddy Curry, Chandler, Crawford Bulls

Baron Davis, J Rich, Biedrins warriors

Antoine Walker, Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce Celtics

Corey Maggette, Darius Miles, Kandi man, QRich and Lamar Odom

I can keep going on that list. What happened with each and every single one of those teams is they got blown up and key guys got traded for vets.

So people can keep dreaming about these under 25 year old line ups that win championships. The reality is they don’t.

The closest thing were the 2015 warriors. Steph at the time was 27 while Draymond and Klay were 25. They also had a super good Center in Bogut who was around 30 and a glue guy in Iguodala.

[ConSarnit]

People get so caught up with age. A team of guys under 25. Name me one team that won a championship with their 3 core guys under 25. I can name a bunch that underperformed and ended up getting dissembled:

Eddy Curry, Chandler, Crawford Bulls

Baron Davis, J Rich, Biedrins warriors

Antoine Walker, Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce Celtics

Corey Maggette, Darius Miles, Kandi man, QRich and Lamar Odom

I can keep going on that list. What happened with each and every single one of those teams is they got blown up and key guys got traded for vets.

So people can keep dreaming about these under 25 year old line ups that win championships. The reality is they don’t.

The closest thing were the 2015 warriors. Steph at the time was 27 while Draymond and Klay were 25. They also had a super good Center in Bogut who was around 30 and a glue guy in Iguodala.

Is anyone in this thread talking about any of these cores winning a title while all the guys are 25 or younger? Everyone here is talking about future potential.

[phanman]

How in the hell are we in the same tier as the Twolves lol?
Houston has a much larger pool of prospects who are all younger than ours, Sengun is comparable to Scottie, with Scottie being better as he plays defence.
NOP I would agree with.
Magic are better off, Scottie and Paolo are comparable with Scottie being better. Franz is better than RJ and he's a a year and a half younger. IQ and Suggs are a wash, Suggs plays incredible defence with not much offence, IQ has much better offence and below average offence. Suggs is 2 full years younger though, so arguably he could be the better prospect.

Core under 25, so Twolves only have Edwards and McDaniels. Edwards is great but I am not sure if he is really a 1A, seems like a Mitchell type of player. McDaniels is comparable to RJ and IQ.

I agree that Houston has a larger pool of prospects and Sengun is comparable to Scottie but Green is bad. Smith is good, he is comparable to RJ and IQ, so I think it's fair to say that Tor and Hou are in the same tier.

Scottie is slightly better than Paolo and Franz is slightly better than RJ, IQ's defense is at least average but I agree IQ and Suggs are comparable, so we are more or less in the same tier.

1. Edwards
2-3. Scottie/Sengun
4. Paolo
5. Franz
6-10. Smith/RJ/IQ/Suggs/McDaniels
11. Green

Those are some fair points, I guess I was thinking more about the twolves as a whole and not so much that they only have 2 under 25.

Naz Reid is still only 24 and doesn't turn 25 until this off season like IQ. That guy is the difference maker if Ant alone was enough to convince you. Building a core around Ant-McDaniels-Reid is a whole lot easier than BBQ and i'd make that swap in a heart beat.

Some of you posters are severely overrating our core. We are right there with Orlando, Houston, New Orleans etc.

[TGM]

People get so caught up with age. A team of guys under 25. Name me one team that won a championship with their 3 core guys under 25. I can name a bunch that underperformed and ended up getting dissembled:

Eddy Curry, Chandler, Crawford Bulls

Baron Davis, J Rich, Biedrins warriors

Antoine Walker, Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce Celtics

Corey Maggette, Darius Miles, Kandi man, QRich and Lamar Odom

I can keep going on that list. What happened with each and every single one of those teams is they got blown up and key guys got traded for vets.

So people can keep dreaming about these under 25 year old line ups that win championships. The reality is they don’t.

The closest thing were the 2015 warriors. Steph at the time was 27 while Draymond and Klay were 25. They also had a super good Center in Bogut who was around 30 and a glue guy in Iguodala.

Is anyone in this thread talking about any of these cores winning a title while all the guys are 25 or younger? Everyone here is talking about future potential.

Exactly my point. The fact is these under 25 cores never stay intact cause they don’t win. So it’s a moot point to be getting all hot and horny over a core that will look totally different when they actually win a championship.

Teams never have that patience. Look at Boston and their moves this year. It’s always the same cycle.

You have so many people wanting to tank or just get young players is cause of this illusion of what if from holding a bunch of lottery tickets and they all hit jackpot. Keep dreaming!

[ConSarnit]

We are well outside the top 10 cores and before I get flamed just ask yourself what did you think of Barrett and IQ when they were Knicks? Did the Knicks have a top 10 core? I remember Barrett was a toxic asset and IQ was just a nice up and coming young player.

Also the jury is still out on Scottie I like him and I hope for the best but I just don't see him developing into a true number 1. The box score and fantasy numbers are nice but they are not translating to wins. If we had a top 10 core we should at least be play in bound imo.

This is inline with my feelings as well. Most players generally show a pretty good outline of who they are (and will be) by year 4 (though it's not always the case). Quickley is almost 25. IMO if he ever reaches all-star level it will likely be a FVV 1-and-done situation. Barrett's numbers are already starting to slip (shooting 53/25/57 over the past 10 games). Whiles he's young-ish this is also his 5th year in the league. I'd wager the odds of RJ becoming an all-star are very slim. Doesn't mean those guys aren't/can't become good players but I'd say it's far more likely they end up decent role players than stars (which is sort of what we need). When considering development I generally believe years of experience is a bigger factor than age.

Barnes is tbd but he seems to be on an all-star path. A core with 1 good all-star isn't really all that impressive. If this team is going to get back to title contention it's probably going to need another Barnes level player as I'd have Quickley and Barrett as 3/4 options on a very good team (still not sold on Barrett though).

I don't think it's crazy to say this core has a lot of similarities to the Siakam/OG/FVV core.

Quickley: probably tops out around FVV's peak (impact-wise). Maybe slightly better.

Barrett: probably less impactful than prime OG

Barnes: might be #2 option like Siakam. Barnes does have higher upside given his playmaking and shooting.

Basically a team with no MVP level player and 1.5 all-stars. The ceiling really rests on Barnes which is tbd.

Completely agree though I do believe Barrett has a higher ceiling than Quickley. They will be perfect 3/4th options but in this draft or the next we have to hit and draft a superstar to pair with Barnes or this becomes the Siakam/OG/FVV core again.

I don't really see it with Barrett. On a good team his role gets diminished because his skillset is that of someone who needs the ball to be effective. His shot (form and fg%) does not look good, which makes me question whether he can ever become a solid 3pt shooter. He's not a good creator in terms of getting others involved. His defense is ok. Consider a team where we find another Barnes level player, someone who can act as a #1/2 on offense either as a scorer or creator. What role does Barrett have on that type of team? His spacing ability isn't reliable enough. His driving game possessions would likely decline (reducing what he is good at). The further down the offensive pecking order Barrett is forced the less effective his game becomes. Quickley has the type of skills that play well off of higher level players: high volume 3pt shooting, can defend his position and run pnr. Good 3rd/4th options need to be able to defend and shoot because they won't get enough opportunities for the tertiary stuff (ie RJ's effectiveness being completely reliant on his drive game).

[ConSarnit]

People get so caught up with age. A team of guys under 25. Name me one team that won a championship with their 3 core guys under 25. I can name a bunch that underperformed and ended up getting dissembled:

Eddy Curry, Chandler, Crawford Bulls

Baron Davis, J Rich, Biedrins warriors

Antoine Walker, Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce Celtics

Corey Maggette, Darius Miles, Kandi man, QRich and Lamar Odom

I can keep going on that list. What happened with each and every single one of those teams is they got blown up and key guys got traded for vets.

So people can keep dreaming about these under 25 year old line ups that win championships. The reality is they don’t.

The closest thing were the 2015 warriors. Steph at the time was 27 while Draymond and Klay were 25. They also had a super good Center in Bogut who was around 30 and a glue guy in Iguodala.

Is anyone in this thread talking about any of these cores winning a title while all the guys are 25 or younger? Everyone here is talking about future potential.

Exactly my point. The fact is these under 25 cores never stay intact cause they don’t win. So it’s a moot point to be getting all hot and horny over a core that will look totally different when they actually win a championship.

Teams never have that patience. Look at Boston and their moves this year. It’s always the same cycle.

You have so many people wanting to tank or just get young players is cause of this illusion of what if from holding a bunch of lottery tickets and they all hit jackpot. Keep dreaming!

A core does not have to be 3 players. It can be 1 (Spurs or Mavs). Or 2 (Celtics). If that's the case, plenty of teams have kept their cores in tact. "Core" is just another term for trying to project the future of teams based on their top players, which is what people are trying to do here. In some cases it's going to be moot, in others it's not.

[billy_hoyle]

This is inline with my feelings as well. Most players generally show a pretty good outline of who they are (and will be) by year 4 (though it's not always the case). Quickley is almost 25. IMO if he ever reaches all-star level it will likely be a FVV 1-and-done situation. Barrett's numbers are already starting to slip (shooting 53/25/57 over the past 10 games). Whiles he's young-ish this is also his 5th year in the league. I'd wager the odds of RJ becoming an all-star are very slim. Doesn't mean those guys aren't/can't become good players but I'd say it's far more likely they end up decent role players than stars (which is sort of what we need). When considering development I generally believe years of experience is a bigger factor than age.

Barnes is tbd but he seems to be on an all-star path. A core with 1 good all-star isn't really all that impressive. If this team is going to get back to title contention it's probably going to need another Barnes level player as I'd have Quickley and Barrett as 3/4 options on a very good team (still not sold on Barrett though).

I don't think it's crazy to say this core has a lot of similarities to the Siakam/OG/FVV core.

Quickley: probably tops out around FVV's peak (impact-wise). Maybe slightly better.

Barrett: probably less impactful than prime OG

Barnes: might be #2 option like Siakam. Barnes does have higher upside given his playmaking and shooting.

Basically a team with no MVP level player and 1.5 all-stars. The ceiling really rests on Barnes which is tbd.

Completely agree though I do believe Barrett has a higher ceiling than Quickley. They will be perfect 3/4th options but in this draft or the next we have to hit and draft a superstar to pair with Barnes or this becomes the Siakam/OG/FVV core again.

I don't really see it with Barrett. On a good team his role gets diminished because his skillset is that of someone who needs the ball to be effective. His shot (form and fg%) does not look good, which makes me question whether he can ever become a solid 3pt shooter. He's not a good creator in terms of getting others involved. His defense is ok. Consider a team where we find another Barnes level player, someone who can act as a #1/2 on offense either as a scorer or creator. What role does Barrett have on that type of team? His spacing ability isn't reliable enough. His driving game possessions would likely decline (reducing what he is good at). The further down the offensive pecking order Barrett is forced the less effective his game becomes. Quickley has the type of skills that play well off of higher level players: high volume 3pt shooting, can defend his position and run pnr. Good 3rd/4th options need to be able to defend and shoot because they won't get enough opportunities for the tertiary stuff (ie RJ's effectiveness being completely reliant on his drive game).

I get your point that RJ is the most difficult skill set to build around. That said, isn't RJ the one eating paint so far?
I'm not really sure why he can't improve his passing (and his shooting). He's had an entire good 3pt% shooting season before. His skill set is slashing and drawing fouls. That seems to be trending up with Barnes and IQ being more pass friendly, less iso driven players than Brunson and Randle.

If we get a star SF, let's hope he's in the Keegan Murray mold. An elite shooter with an all-around game.

We need to think about fit when your building around 3 players. It get more difficult to find the optimal player type to enhance the overall lineup the more players you pencil into the core.

I don't think it's particularly hard to determine the archetype of the player we want next to BBQ.

A Keegan Murray - Danny Granger type SF (Risacher?)
A Marc Gasol - Myles Turner type C (Filopowski/Sarr?)

Because of Barnes' versatility we could also go for a stretchy PF like a Bosh - Dirk (Lauri/Salaun?)

I think these player types will be gettable.