With the 19th Pick, the Raptors select Ja'Kobe Walter!

[Badonkadonk]

He did better in his first SL game than Gradey did in his own last year.

I'm not worried. Pleasantly surprised by his movement on D. Similar to Gradey, I think he'll benefit tremendously from growing into his body, he's still 19 and just needs to be stronger on the ball and fighting for spots. Needs some improvement in his handle too, which I think is doable.

[Scase]

I don’t think he was that bad to be honest. He played hard defence but got blown by once or twice and was late rotating after being screened a few times—that’s just recognition and comfort with athleticism stuff. That’ll get better. What I would have liked to have seen more of was an ability to get downhill or move off ball to get open. The shot will eventually fall. I just worry he will be easy to guard… he needs to be more threatening offensively whether or not he has the ball. I think he did well at the effort, energy, and positioning aspects of the game.

Yeah this is pretty on point. Nothing that screamed "oh this is bad" but also nothing that screamed "oh we definitely got a steal here". Naturally we need to see more, but I would say "whelmed" is an appropriate standpoint.

There is nothing wrong with that as a 19th pick. I see Ja’kobe has a chance to be a borderline starter or high end bench 2 way sg and small sf. It doesn’t sound sexy. However, this is Norman Powell profile. Ja’kobe’s shooting was way ahead of Norm at the same age. When we drafted Pascal, I don’t think anyone would see him getting voted in all nba team back then.

I think it's debatable since he was drafted for potential, but it all depends on what that potential was. You're most likely right though, decent, unremarkable starter, or 6/7th guy off the bench.

[positivetension]

]
No, the most accurate strength of the draft will be determined in years, the overall strength is pretty easy for most scouts to predict. There isn't a single player outside the top 5-7 in the 25 draft that wouldn't have been a consensus #1 pick in 2024.

Yeah and the "experts" were going on about how 2021 was top heavy and there was a steep decline after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs and yet Barnes/Wagner/Sengun/Johnson debunked that really quickly.

Personally, I'm going to wait for games to be played.

[Scase]

]
No, the most accurate strength of the draft will be determined in years, the overall strength is pretty easy for most scouts to predict. There isn't a single player outside the top 5-7 in the 25 draft that wouldn't have been a consensus #1 pick in 2024.

Yeah and the "experts" were going on about how 2021 was top heavy and there was a steep decline after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs and yet Barnes/Wagner/Sengun/Johnson debunked that really quickly.

Personally, I'm going to wait for games to be played.

Except it was top heavy? Outside of Sengun/Johnson, the top 5 players are better than anyone below them. The closest player you could argue would be Wagner, and then I think it comes down to fit.

But no one would pick Wagner over Mobley, Scottie, Cade. Depending on what your team needs you could shuffle around suggs/green/wagner.

But no one is going to look at anyone else from 6-20 (again ignoring Sengun/Johnson) and say they are head and shoulders above the top 5.

Just because there are 2 out of 15 players playing at a solid level, but still below a top 5, doesn't change that.

[positivetension]

]
No, the most accurate strength of the draft will be determined in years, the overall strength is pretty easy for most scouts to predict. There isn't a single player outside the top 5-7 in the 25 draft that wouldn't have been a consensus #1 pick in 2024.

Yeah and the "experts" were going on about how 2021 was top heavy and there was a steep decline after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs and yet Barnes/Wagner/Sengun/Johnson debunked that really quickly.

Personally, I'm going to wait for games to be played.

Except it was top heavy? Outside of Sengun/Johnson, the top 5 players are better than anyone below them. The closest player you could argue would be Wagner, and then I think it comes down to fit.

But no one would pick Wagner over Mobley, Scottie, Cade. Depending on what your team needs you could shuffle around suggs/green/wagner.

But no one is going to look at anyone else from 6-20 (again ignoring Sengun/Johnson) and say they are head and shoulders above the top 5.

Just because there are 2 out of 15 players playing at a solid level, but still below a top 5, doesn't change that.

Moving goalposts. The narrative was that there was a steep drop off after Cade, Mobley, Green and Suggs and that Cade was the prize of the draft. A lot of Raptors fans were disappointed at the Barnes pick because they accepted the narrative as reality but things changed when games were actually played.

[Raps in 4]

That was bad but at least we have an idea of his size on court and his willingness to guard on ball. He looked like he has the ability to move well, just everything needs to be taught to him.

I just don't get these young players coming out early when their skill level is like this. He is a kid who could have used another year in college to get better. He could have got NIL money and put up even better numbers.

I just don't see a way he slips into the guard rotation given his development needs.

Some mocks were projecting he'd go top-10. Why wouldn't he declare? A player could suffer a freak injury the following year and not get drafted at all. If you're virtually guaranteed a spot in the NBA, 99% of players will take it. He can develop skills while on an NBA team. And if there is no room for him on the roster, the G-League exists for a reason.

[Scase]

Yeah and the "experts" were going on about how 2021 was top heavy and there was a steep decline after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs and yet Barnes/Wagner/Sengun/Johnson debunked that really quickly.

Personally, I'm going to wait for games to be played.

Except it was top heavy? Outside of Sengun/Johnson, the top 5 players are better than anyone below them. The closest player you could argue would be Wagner, and then I think it comes down to fit.

But no one would pick Wagner over Mobley, Scottie, Cade. Depending on what your team needs you could shuffle around suggs/green/wagner.

But no one is going to look at anyone else from 6-20 (again ignoring Sengun/Johnson) and say they are head and shoulders above the top 5.

Just because there are 2 out of 15 players playing at a solid level, but still below a top 5, doesn't change that.

Moving goalposts. The narrative was that there was a steep drop off after Cade, Mobley, Green and Suggs and that Cade was the prize of the draft. A lot of Raptors fans were disappointed at the Barnes pick because they accepted the narrative as reality but things changed when games were actually played.

I think it depends on what the definition of top heavy and steep are in this case. If you want to pull up some articles that state how shallow of a draft it was, then I will happily keep discussing it.

But stating that because there were 4-6 players outside the top 5 in a 60 player draft means it was deep and not top heavy, that's a pretty bad argument to make. A deep draft to me is like 10-15 solid players in the first round. In the first round of that draft you've got the consensus top 3 Green/Mobley/Cade, so those 3 don't count. Scottie was routinely slotted at 5-7, Suggs was 4-6. And then you've got the rest of the draft.

Notable players in the first round that have shown themselves to be good are, Wagner, Sengun, Johnson, and Cam Thomas.
Notable players in the second round that have shown themselves to be good are, Herb Jones, and Ayo.

So even being generous and counting Scottie and Suggs among the group outside the top 3. That means in a 60 player draft, out of the 57 remaining players, 8 players are good. Not exactly what I would call deep.

[positivetension]

Except it was top heavy? Outside of Sengun/Johnson, the top 5 players are better than anyone below them. The closest player you could argue would be Wagner, and then I think it comes down to fit.

But no one would pick Wagner over Mobley, Scottie, Cade. Depending on what your team needs you could shuffle around suggs/green/wagner.

But no one is going to look at anyone else from 6-20 (again ignoring Sengun/Johnson) and say they are head and shoulders above the top 5.

Just because there are 2 out of 15 players playing at a solid level, but still below a top 5, doesn't change that.

Moving goalposts. The narrative was that there was a steep drop off after Cade, Mobley, Green and Suggs and that Cade was the prize of the draft. A lot of Raptors fans were disappointed at the Barnes pick because they accepted the narrative as reality but things changed when games were actually played.

I think it depends on what the definition of top heavy and steep are in this case. If you want to pull up some articles that state how shallow of a draft it was, then I will happily keep discussing it.

But stating that because there were 4-6 players outside the top 5 in a 60 player draft means it was deep and not top heavy, that's a pretty bad argument to make. A deep draft to me is like 10-15 solid players in the first round. In the first round of that draft you've got the consensus top 3 Green/Mobley/Cade, so those 3 don't count. Scottie was routinely slotted at 5-7, Suggs was 4-6. And then you've got the rest of the draft.

Notable players in the first round that have shown themselves to be good are, Wagner, Sengun, Johnson, and Cam Thomas.
Notable players in the second round that have shown themselves to be good are, Herb Jones, and Ayo.

So even being generous and counting Scottie and Suggs among the group outside the top 3. That means in a 60 player draft, out of the 57 remaining players, 8 players are good. Not exactly what I would call deep.

I'm not talking about how good the draft was, I'm talking about the draft narrative for that year and how it was wrong.

[everdiso]

pretty sure i like all of Mogbo, Shead, and Chomche more than Ja'Kobe unfortunately.

[Scase]

Moving goalposts. The narrative was that there was a steep drop off after Cade, Mobley, Green and Suggs and that Cade was the prize of the draft. A lot of Raptors fans were disappointed at the Barnes pick because they accepted the narrative as reality but things changed when games were actually played.

I think it depends on what the definition of top heavy and steep are in this case. If you want to pull up some articles that state how shallow of a draft it was, then I will happily keep discussing it.

But stating that because there were 4-6 players outside the top 5 in a 60 player draft means it was deep and not top heavy, that's a pretty bad argument to make. A deep draft to me is like 10-15 solid players in the first round. In the first round of that draft you've got the consensus top 3 Green/Mobley/Cade, so those 3 don't count. Scottie was routinely slotted at 5-7, Suggs was 4-6. And then you've got the rest of the draft.

Notable players in the first round that have shown themselves to be good are, Wagner, Sengun, Johnson, and Cam Thomas.
Notable players in the second round that have shown themselves to be good are, Herb Jones, and Ayo.

So even being generous and counting Scottie and Suggs among the group outside the top 3. That means in a 60 player draft, out of the 57 remaining players, 8 players are good. Not exactly what I would call deep.

I'm not talking about how good the draft was, I'm talking about the draft narrative for that year and how it was wrong.

Again, I was asking for the articles where you said that analysts claimed it was a top heavy draft, and still the fact that it is a top heavy draft.

You say you aren't talking about how good the draft is, yet you also claim how those saying it was top heavy are wrong. Despite it still being top heavy. So how exactly do you argue that the analysts were right/wrong about the strength of the draft, and in the same breath say you aren't talking about the strength of the draft, that was literally your entire argument.

Like my guy, read what you write before clicking that submit button.

[billy_hoyle]

I think it depends on what the definition of top heavy and steep are in this case. If you want to pull up some articles that state how shallow of a draft it was, then I will happily keep discussing it.

But stating that because there were 4-6 players outside the top 5 in a 60 player draft means it was deep and not top heavy, that's a pretty bad argument to make. A deep draft to me is like 10-15 solid players in the first round. In the first round of that draft you've got the consensus top 3 Green/Mobley/Cade, so those 3 don't count. Scottie was routinely slotted at 5-7, Suggs was 4-6. And then you've got the rest of the draft.

Notable players in the first round that have shown themselves to be good are, Wagner, Sengun, Johnson, and Cam Thomas.
Notable players in the second round that have shown themselves to be good are, Herb Jones, and Ayo.

So even being generous and counting Scottie and Suggs among the group outside the top 3. That means in a 60 player draft, out of the 57 remaining players, 8 players are good. Not exactly what I would call deep.

I'm not talking about how good the draft was, I'm talking about the draft narrative for that year and how it was wrong.

Again, I was asking for the articles where you said that analysts claimed it was a top heavy draft, and still the fact that it is a top heavy draft.

You say you aren't talking about how good the draft is, yet you also claim how those saying it was top heavy are wrong. Despite it still being top heavy. So how exactly do you argue that the analysts were right/wrong about the strength of the draft, and in the same breath say you aren't talking about the strength of the draft, that was literally your entire argument.

Like my guy, read what you write before clicking that submit button.

The narrative was that the draft was 4 deep.

The best three players from the draft weren't those 'consensus 4 stars'. It's clearly a strike against the accuracy of draft prognosticators.

If you can't follow his logic, I don't know what else to say.

[Scase]

I'm not talking about how good the draft was, I'm talking about the draft narrative for that year and how it was wrong.

Again, I was asking for the articles where you said that analysts claimed it was a top heavy draft, and still the fact that it is a top heavy draft.

You say you aren't talking about how good the draft is, yet you also claim how those saying it was top heavy are wrong. Despite it still being top heavy. So how exactly do you argue that the analysts were right/wrong about the strength of the draft, and in the same breath say you aren't talking about the strength of the draft, that was literally your entire argument.

Like my guy, read what you write before clicking that submit button.

The narrative was that the draft was 4 deep.

The best three players from the draft weren't those 'consensus 4 stars'. It's clearly a strike against the accuracy of draft prognosticators.

If you can't follow his logic, I don't know what else to say.

Calling a draft "4 deep" doesnt mean the other 56 players are garbage, what kind of brain dead logic is this.

I can't follow his logic, or yours, because what you are saying is devoid of it, not because you have some big brain angle on this.

But I guess because the 2024 one had no consensus top 3, it must be the deepest draft of all time then right? The only logic either of you are bringing to this, is ass backwards.

And again, as I have said for what I think is the fourth time now, where are these magical analysts/scouts that said it was a "steep drop off" after those 4.

[billy_hoyle]

Again, I was asking for the articles where you said that analysts claimed it was a top heavy draft, and still the fact that it is a top heavy draft.

You say you aren't talking about how good the draft is, yet you also claim how those saying it was top heavy are wrong. Despite it still being top heavy. So how exactly do you argue that the analysts were right/wrong about the strength of the draft, and in the same breath say you aren't talking about the strength of the draft, that was literally your entire argument.

Like my guy, read what you write before clicking that submit button.

The narrative was that the draft was 4 deep.

The best three players from the draft weren't those 'consensus 4 stars'. It's clearly a strike against the accuracy of draft prognosticators.

If you can't follow his logic, I don't know what else to say.

Calling a draft "4 deep" doesnt mean the other 56 players are garbage, what kind of brain dead logic is this.

I can't follow his logic, or yours, because what you are saying is devoid of it, not because you have some big brain angle on this.

But I guess because the 2024 one had no consensus top 3, it must be the deepest draft of all time then right? The only logic either of you are bringing to this, is ass backwards.

And again, as I have said for what I think is the fourth time now, where are these magical analysts/scouts that said it was a "steep drop off" after those 4.

Literally everyone said it. You obviously didn't follow that draft. Are you going to ask for receipts if someone claims that Wemby was universally considered a 'generational talent'?

Done with this convo, as I think you must be trolling.

[HumbleRen]

I think people need to remember that he was the 19th pick in a middling draft.

Him being a starting caliber player on a good team would be an absolutely W at that pick.

Bobby Webster said it best, they drafted him to hit 3’s and defend well. I don’t think anyone should expect some high upside with him.

He’s an average athlete with stiff handles that can shoot 3’s. Don’t put unwarranted expectations on him.

[PhilBlackson]

Looks very KCPish to me so far.

Hopefully he can add more off the dribble in time.

[MEDIC]

I think people need to remember that he was the 19th pick in a middling draft.

Him being a starting caliber player on a good team would be an absolutely W at that pick.

Bobby Webster said it best, they drafted him to hit 3’s and defend well. I don’t think anyone should expect some high upside with him.

He’s an average athlete with stiff handles that can shoot 3’s. Don’t put unwarranted expectations on him.

I expect solid role players at that stage in any draft. This kid may even have a little more than that in him because he is so young.

There are things about him that remind me of a young Derozan. As you said "stiff handles" & not an overly quick first step. Obviously Derozan is the better athlete. Walter the better shooter & most likely the better defender.

I think the tools are there. He just needs to figure out "his" game & what is going to work best for him so that he gets the most out of his ability. Derozan did a fantastic job of doing that.

[Duffman100]

The shot looked a little more pure this game.

[WuTang_CMB]

JKW's defense has been solid past 2 games and he's giving high effort on both ends. I always give guys a leash when you aren't the first option and coming into a new level at just 19. He's performed well IMO. Baby steps with him. Glad he knocked down a few shots to get his confidence going. You can see the 2 way talent. Just keep building.

[StopitLeo]

That was bad but at least we have an idea of his size on court and his willingness to guard on ball. He looked like he has the ability to move well, just everything needs to be taught to him.

I just don't get these young players coming out early when their skill level is like this. He is a kid who could have used another year in college to get better. He could have got NIL money and put up even better numbers.

I just don't see a way he slips into the guard rotation given his development needs.

The NIL money would be nowhere near the ~$7M he's guaranteed right now. Assuming his options are picked up, which usually happens with first-round picks, he's looking at $16M over 4 years.

Even with another year of college how much higher might he get drafted? Getting into the lottery is "only" a difference of $5M over 4 years. Top 5 you're looking at $20M but when you consider the risk of injury that probably isn't worth it for many players.

I doubt the possibility of getting into the rotation is much of a factor when deciding to declare for the draft. If you're good enough to be selected in the 1st round you take the money and then "bet on yourself" that you can work your way onto the floor.

[Dalek]

That was bad but at least we have an idea of his size on court and his willingness to guard on ball. He looked like he has the ability to move well, just everything needs to be taught to him.

I just don't get these young players coming out early when their skill level is like this. He is a kid who could have used another year in college to get better. He could have got NIL money and put up even better numbers.

I just don't see a way he slips into the guard rotation given his development needs.

The NIL money would be nowhere near the ~$7M he's guaranteed right now. Assuming his options are picked up, which usually happens with first-round picks, he's looking at $16M over 4 years.

Even with another year of college how much higher might he get drafted? Getting into the lottery is "only" a difference of $5M over 4 years. Top 5 you're looking at $20M but when you consider the risk of injury that probably isn't worth it for many players.

I doubt the possibility of getting into the rotation is much of a factor when deciding to declare for the draft. If you're good enough to be selected in the 1st round you take the money and then "bet on yourself" that you can work your way onto the floor.

I guess cash is king, but he could have had an extra year and still been picked in a similar range, I think. A similar guy in Jordan Hawkins spent an extra year and really refined his game.