Post#573 » by The Consiglieri » Tue Jan 14, 2025 9:00 pm
Probably the best explanation for their #'s being so "close" to me is probably that Garnett was jumping from playing for a high school team in high school gyms and what not earlier that year, and then playing in NBA arena's with NBA professionals from the jump as a teenager. That's a huge leap, and if memory serves, I think that was the first High School straight to the NBA class in a long, long, long time.
Sarr joined up with the overtime elite when he was what, 15 or 16? Then with Perth in that league (granted its viewed as crap) as an 18 year old, so to some extent Sarr's been playing at a higher level ever since he was the equivalent of like a sophomore in high school or whatever, whereas Garnett was on one of those notorious, recruited catholic school teams if memory serves, but still, basically, a high school team, competing against other high school teams.
So it wouldn't surprise if Sarr has at least a professional's experience advantage versus Garnett, and so some checked boxes that Garnett lacked. Otoh, Garnett was a flat out monster, I still remember the SF Chronicle preview of that draft lol, because the Warriors sucked back then post Wizards trade, and they were talking about all the options: Joe Smith, McDyess, the two UNC guys in Stackhouse and Wallace, Garnett, the smooth NCAA Title contender guys O'Bannon, Corliss 40 minutes of madness and Respert, the hot PG Stoudemire, the "big white stiff/Big Country in Reeves who people were labeling a stiff or a floor guy depending upon who you talked to.
I distinctly remember it, and at the time when people talked about it (and my local warriors fans were obsessed because the team was wrecked following Webber's departure) it was basically this:
Joe Smith: Well, he's gonna be a good pro, you can count on him, but I don't see a star there.
Stackhouse: Well, he's a scorer, but what else?
Wallace: Great Front Court guy, a little crazy, needs to round out his game but pretty good.
McDyess: Rebounding/defensive weapon, but will he be good enough offensively?
Garnett: First High School player I can remember being drafted, they saw him as a physical dominating weapon, but he'd need years to get the NBA body and experience, and if his head wasn't right, he'd flop (there was a little bit of worry about mental make up in terms of seeming "anger" if I remember right)
Reeves/OBannon/Respert: Expectation was that they'd give you that Cal Cheaney type professional floor, but probably wouldn't be quite the same level after the jump to the pros, whereas McDyess, Wallace, and Garnett, had lower floors but higher ceilings.
In the end, it ended up being pretty obvious that Garnett was the right pick within 2 years I think, Joe Smith was making warrior fans cry with frustration immediately, McDyess was a hit, but was limited, Wallace was super exciting and I was monumentally depressed when we traded him, Stackhouse was pretty much exactly what was predicted, just not quite as a crazy scorer if memory serves. Reeves was solid and the floor probably higher than expected, but he was a classic single/double pick, never gonna be a star or a difference maker, but a solid league average+ starter at his position. Obannon and Respert totally flaming out was something I didn't have on my bingo card at all, I just expected them to be Cal Cheaney level decent to averageish, and instead they both sucked.
Interesting to remember past drafts, and as we all know, the lessons never stick long term: if you went high school in '95 and '96, you got the two best players in those drafts, but repeatedly in the years going forward, quite a few top ranked high schoolers were utter disasters, either because it was too big a jump, or the mental make up demands were too big of an ask in the later 90's early 00's NBA which was a total mess in terms of players skidding off the side of the road career wise.
Interesting to think about.
Personally, I don't know the right comp for Sarr, and I know he wasn't compared to Garnett specifically but of course I don't see that, what excites me is simply that as a raw, super young player, he's already playing like he belongs in this league, like he can be useful, that his athleticism, and shot will both potentially be strengths and at least acceptable, respectfully. It's just exciting, because going into that draft, I was really afraid we were going to end up with a 1 contract, whatev's guy with no ceiling, and maybe just a bust, period, and Sarr clearly isn't that. I know some are cool their jets, and its reasonable, but I also think its already obvious this isn't the obvious miss so many picks were 2000-2022. So so so so many of those picks were either obvious busts quick, or Jared Jeffries level disappointments, guys you're just looking to replace from day 1, and Sarr clearly is not either of those things. Feels like a Guggs, Rip Hamilton (a reach I know, but we don't have a lot of picks that haven't either sucked or disappointed the past 20 years), kind of situation where: no this guy isn't a super star, but he's also not a jack of all trades master of none whatevs type like Jeffries, frustrating potential type like Oubre, disaster like Kwame, Vesely or seemingly all the extra firsts we acquired during the Wall build (Seraphim, Singleton etc), feels more like at worst this is a Cal Cheaney+, or Otto Porter+ type selection where "he belongs" and unlike those two, there's a potential higher ceiling too, which is why it excites me. Not only does he belong, but he might turn out "good" or at bare minimum "above average at his position" which is more than I expected w/a draft this bereft, remember better drafts in recent years, much better top of drafts I should say, featured plenty of flat out bust land mines inside the top 5 top 10, and Sarr isn't that, and that is a huge relief to me because 7 months ago, I wasn't sure at all.
