Moderators: Moonbeam, DeBlazerRiddem
oldfishermen wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/sports/duke-star-cooper-flagg-projected-no-1-pick-nba-draft-makes-surprise-admission-about-future
Not sure if this report is accurate??? BUT...
Cooper Flagg hints he may play for Duke next season.
...during Olympic Qualifiers over the summer. There, he averaged 16.5 PPG on 57.1/38.5/81.2 splits along with 5.5 RPG, 3.8 APG, and 2.0 SPG. Seeing that type of production on a court with NBA peers at his size only heightened the intrigue.
A big part of the reason that I personally kept the faith with Edgecombe during his efficiency slump was because I always bought his shot. During his final AAU season on the Adidas Circuit, he made 36.2% of his threes and 83.8% of his free throws. He also sank 36.5% of his threes and 86% of his free throws during his final high school season at Long Island Lutheran. That’s a good set of priors. So, when Edgecombe only made 26.3% of his threes through the first eight games of the season, it made sense to exercise caution. Since then, he’s drained 42.6% of his attempts from long range. As it stands now, he’s at 38.5% from three on 8.3 attempts per 100 possessions—both good marks for a guard prospect.
Edgecombe is a great spot-up shooter. Per Synergy, he’s drilling 38.6% of his catch-and-shoot looks on the season. He’s decisive and confident, going directly into his motion with consistent mechanics across his attempts. This shot is made even better by his elevation and high release point.
Edgecombe gets way off the floor and has a high apex, making his shot exceedingly difficult to contest. This further bolsters his efficiency. Teams know he’s a shooter, so he draws hard closeouts, but that “bounce + tall swan” combo enables him to shoot over them with the greatest of ease. Per Synergy, 51 of his 83 catch-and-shoot threes have been contested, and he still makes 35.3% of those shots.
The area of Edgecombe’s scoring arsenal that needs the most work, in my opinion, is his pull-up shooting. He’s 4-for-15 on pull-up twos and 4-for-17 on pull-up threes so far this season. Right now, it appears as if it’s not a shot he’s comfortable going to. He’ll resort to these shots when he’s either given heaps of space or if it’s late in the clock. From a shot diet standpoint, that’s good. But when it comes to projecting star outcomes, a certain level of tough shot making off the dribble is desirable.
Edgecombe is an absolute sky-walker. He has real deal bounce and can finish well above the rim. Plus, he has the right tools to get to the rim on a consistent basis. He takes 31.9% of his halfcourt shots at the basket, per Synergy, which grades out well for a guard. Edgecombe’s catch-and-go burst and long strides help get him to the paint in a hurry. Plus, he has a bit of a wiggle to shake defenders in order to create advantages downhill. All of that stuff is good.
Simply put, it’s not uncommon for high-wire athletes to struggle with their touch at the basket when they’re younger. Bruce Brown, Dejounte Murray, Lu Dort, and Josh Green were all poor finishers during their pre-draft seasons. I think getting those overall body mechanics in line is just something that takes time.
Edgecombe’s playmaking is going to be one of the most interesting skills to monitor from this draft class in the coming years. His 20.2 AST% and 1.71 A:TO grade out fairly well relative to others in his archetype. He’s in a pretty good spot as a passer. Edgecombe’s “basic recognition” is strong. He’s quick to read help and hit the open man. He’s capable of staying poised when he draws two on the ball out of a screen before finding the roller. He can place accurate lob passes on the go. Defenses respect his rim gravity, and he’s started to consistently make interior passes to punish rim rotations while getting Baylor’s big men easy buckets.
Still, his assist-to-turnover ratio isn’t anything to get excited about. Edgecombe’s passing turnovers are often the result of going too fast in his process. When he meets an aggressive ball screen coverage (I.E. a blitz), he’ll occasionally try to rush a pass over the top of the defenders, only for it to be tipped. Sometimes, he’ll leave his feet without a plan while driving to the basket and have to force the ball through traffic to no avail. The bigger issue, though, is his handle. Edgecombe doesn’t have great command over the ball, particularly when driving left. His dribble can get wide, which opens him up to digs. But even worse, sometimes he’ll just cough it up without much prompting while driving at top speed. I tend to be optimistic when it comes to players improving as passers, particularly when there are more positive flashes than negative ones. That said, Edgecombe’s handle needs a lot of work. His ability to drive left, his counter bag, and his spatial awareness in traffic will all need to improve in order for him to successfully fill a heavy on-ball role at the NBA level.
Despite having the second highest usage rate on Baylor’s roster among everyday players, V.J. Edgecombe approaches defense like he’s a walk-on thirsty for more minutes. His 4.1 STL% and 2.9 BLK% both grade out exceptionally well relative to long-term NBA players.
I also cannot recall a prospect who picks the pockets of opponents immediately after rebounds as often as Edgecombe, and he manages to do it without getting whistled for needless “frustration fouls.” His speed in the open floor also enables him to pick off looping passes. His shot-blocking is very rare for a guard. When he’s on the ball, he rises to contest really well. In instances where he gets beat off the dribble, he always works to recover, and often manages to turn away his opponent at the basket. Off-ball, he boasts far better rim rotation instincts than most peers his size, getting into position before soaring for rejections.
His 13.6 DRB% is another feather in his cap. It’s not uncommon to see him get a contested board against a traditional big man thanks to his bounce and grit. And though Baylor’s scheme doesn’t force him to navigate screens often, he’s shown an ability to do it.
I’ve mentioned it multiple times now—Edgecombe works his tail off. He’s tough and physical. Still, he faces size limitations. He’s measured in at 6’3” barefoot with a 6’6” wingspan, and he’s listed at 180 pounds. To his credit, he’s done a great job of filling out his frame over the past few years. Still, all of this means that he will enter the NBA small by the league’s standards. And even at the college level, some teams have found success exploiting this issue. Bigger wings can knock him off his line when driving to the basket. When posted up, he’s not able to offer much resistance and he’s easy to shoot over. This is true of many players his size, but it’s still a limiting factor worth noting that NBA teams will seek to take advantage of, particularly in playoff settings.
Projection
Look. 100th percentile outcomes don’t happen very often, so I don’t like to fixate on them very much. But when talking about talent at the top of the draft, I do think it’s important to let your imagination run wild… to a degree. All stats are per 100 possessions. Which prospect would you prefer?
Player A:
-28.6 PTS, 9.8 REB, 6.2 AST, 3.9 TOV, 4.3 STL, 1.4 BLK
-45.6%/38.5%/79.5%
-50.5 2FG% on 13.5 2FGA, 38.5 3FG% on 8.3 3FGA, 79.5 FT% on 6.8 FTA
-24.3 USG%, 56.9 TS%, 53.0 eFG%, .310 FTr
Player B:
-28.1 PTS, 8.8 REB, 4.9 AST, 3.0 TOV, 3.7 STL, 0.9 BLK
-40.8%/35.4%/80.6%
-46.3 2FG% on 11.6 2FGA, 35.4 3FG% on 12.0 3FGA, 80.6 FT% on 5.7 FTA
-24.6 USG%, 53.4 TS%, 49.6 eFG%, .243 FTr
Player A is V.J. Edgecombe. Player B is Donovan Mitchell during his sophomore season at Louisville.
Again, I want to be clear that I am not saying V.J. Edgecombe is going to turn into Donovan Mitchell. What I am saying is that there are similarities, and if everything falls into place, I think that could be an approximate outcome.
Generally, my preference is to look at more reasonable outcomes. There’s still good news, though, because Edgecombe is cut from a valuable piece of cloth. Guards who can be disruptive defensively, punch above their weight on the glass, make good decisions, and knock down threes always have a place in the NBA. Right now, he’s a star who competes like a role player. So if he needs to slide into a role, he’ll be more than up to the task. And there are some really valuable role players who produced similarly to Edgecombe in college—think Alex Caruso, Josh Hart, Keon Ellis, or Gary Payton II. They might not be the biggest dogs in the yard, but their combination of competitiveness, defensive production, rebounding, secondary playmaking, and floor spacing helps them routinely find playing time on winning teams. I feel confident that with Edgecombe’s work ethic, improvement trajectory, and performance, he’s proven that he can be that type of player. But the fact that’s he’s already producing the way those guys were as upperclassmen (even better than them, arguably) does indicate that he could be even more. V.J. Edgecombe has been one of the most exciting prospects to watch in this cycle, but he also projects to be one of the most valuable to an NBA franchise come June.
Walton1one wrote:No ceilings with a nice breakout of VJ Edgecombe. I would not mind at all if POR drafted him. Even if he is more like Simons size, his strengths\style of play are better suited for the current make up of this team IMO, and if the shooting is for real? You are looking at a Dwayne Wade type player IMO...
He is a lock for top 5 IMO, and good chance he could go #3
Walton1one wrote:Probably not at #9/#10. I mean, I hope they find an underrated guy like OKC did with Jalen Wiliams, but with their history\luck, I wouldn't bet my house on it.
Khaman came into this draft cycle with a perceived high ceiling, based on a few factors. For one, he didn’t play basketball until he was 13. That means that it took less than five years of playing organized hoops for Khaman to become the top center in his draft class. On top of the aptitude, Maluach was believed to have some touch that could be tapped into.
A lot has been made of Khaman’s offense—in terms of both what it is now, and what it could become. Despite his low usage percentage of 16.4, he ranks in the 99th percentile in points per possession (1.276 PPP). This is due, in large part, to him spending about 81% of his time in the vicinity of the rim. His offense may seem very rudimentary, but it is effective. I believe this is why scouts—myself included—have ranked players like him lower historically.
This may seem like an easy play, but Khaman has to do a lot of work to make this action a viable one for scoring. Setting an effective screen is a dying art in basketball; there is a difference between standing in the way and carving out space.
Khaman Maluach ranks in the 99th percentile in possessions where he is the roll man. Of all of his credited play types, Khaman spends 22.5% of his time operating as the roller. That grades in the 84th percentile....Another impressive finishing stat for Khaman is that he spends over 55% of his at-rim finishes dunking the ball. That ranks in the 98th percentile. These aren’t just the typical “I’m big” dunks—many times, he catches the ball on the move or catches a lob and converts above the rim.
Being able to be so effective at this skill is immensely valuable for big men in the NBA. To compare him to other bigs, Mark Williams dunked on his at-rim shots 48.4% of his time at Duke. Donovan Clingan dunked on only 22.3% of his interior finishes. Yves Missi was at 36.9%. Walker Kessler was at 44%. Zach Edey, 41.6%. Only Dereck Lively II, who finished over 64% of his inside shots with a dunk, ranked higher within that player group.
Khaman Maluach averages 2.7 offensive rebounds per game, which converts into an offensive rebound percentage of 16.6. Of the names that we have compared him to this point, only Zach Edey had a higher rate at Purdue (18.1). Of course, Maluach’s measurables allow him to crash the boards the way he does, but he shows a high level of feel and anticipation in his rebounding.
Per Synergy Sports, Maluach spends about 24% of his time on putback dunks. That time allotted ranks in the 93rd percentile, but he ranks in the 58th percentile in points per possession on putbacks. That grades out as “Good”.
Shooting Potential
This is what scouts would call the “swing skill” regarding the high-end outcome that Maluach could reach if Khaman could add a jumper to his game. If you recall, Donovan Clingan was getting a lot of the same sort of projection to his ceiling—the potential to add a reliable shot. We won’t really ever know if that went into the Trail Blazers selecting Clingan, but it’s hard to imagine that it wasn’t at least a discussion.
I did some hand-jamming to help illustrate how much the three-point shot has impacted the big men of the NBA. Of 70 players that I determined to be credible for use (lineup data and positional listing—no Jalen Williams used for this one), there were 21 big men that shot 0% from deep. Of those 21 names, nine haven’t attempted a three to this point; 11 of those names have shot under four attempts. That leaves Isaiah Hartenstein, who is the only big shooting 0% from three in double-digit attempts. Only 5 big men on this list are shooting between 1%-19%. Eight bigs are shooting between 20%-29%. Nine big men are shooting between 30%-33%, and another nine are shooting between 34%-36%. Twelve are shooting between 37%-40%, and six are shooting 41% or better.
It’s clear that having a floor-spacing big man can be valuable and that over 38% of the aggregated big men are shooting at least 34% from deep. However, that doesn’t mean that you have to shoot to be valuable. Among the names that haven’t even attempted a three-pointer, you’ll find multi-time Defensive Player of the Year Rudy Gobert, the All-Star Jarrett Allen, and Rookie of the Year Contender Yves Missi.
So even though floor spacing from a big man isn’t a requirement, you’ll have to be elite in other areas if you plan on playing valuable, rotational minutes. Heck, if you’re Rudy Gobert, Jarret Allen, Dereck Lively, Ivica Zubac, Yves Missi, Mark Williams, Jalen Duren, Jakob Poeltl, Trayce Jackson-Davis, Nick Richards, or Clint Capela, you could even start! That’s for about a third of the league, by the way.
There was talk of him shooting coming out of Basketball Without Borders, so there are some remnants of belief from there. He is also shooting over 73% from the free-throw line. Based on the success of other rim-running bigs, Khaman shouldn’t need to shoot to be a reliable weapon on offense.
Defense
The metrics that Maluach has to this point are below the average of the recently drafted big men that he has been compared to in this piece. The defensive rebounding is fine, as he ranks higher than what we saw from Yves Missi and Dereck Lively. What appears to be more concerning is how far behind he ranks as a shot blocker. Of the group excluding Khaman, Zach Edey was the lowest-ranked shot blocker, but even he was better by more than half of a percent. Yves Missi was the second lowest, and he almost topped what we’ve seen from Maluach by almost an entire percentage point.
The biggest thing that shocked me about the film behind the post defense numbers was how many of the misses Maluach was credited with were heavily helped by others. If anything, I came away more impressed with Cooper Flagg watching Khaman Maluach post defense film.
In the recent game against Maxime Raynaud (#42 in black), Maluach had some opportunities to defend the senior Stanford. This clip starts with Raynaud getting the ball on the right block. Maxime gives Maluach a bump on the block to create some separation. Raynaud gives Khaman a quick head fake that our guy bites on, and Maluach goes up to block an attempt. As this is taking place, Cooper Flagg leaves his assignment to help challenge the big man. This was needed, as Maxime would have likely scored on the shot following the up-fake. Instead, Flagg rises up and forces a difficult look that doesn’t drop.
Duke does this often, letting Cooper play the Shai Gilgeous-Alexander roamer role to induce chaos. This allows him to help apply pressure to the opposing big pretty frequently. What takes me off guard on the defensive film is how much less athletic Khaman looks compared to the offensive stuff.
While there are apparent concerns about Khaman’s ability to switch out on the perimeter, there are also glimmers of hope that he can do it—even if just on a few plays per night.
With such an emphasis on the three, offensive positional roles have adapted to make the best use of the math advantage the three-pointer provides. Point guards have leaned away from being the primary initiators to a degree, and have been relied upon to space the floor. Power forwards have turned more into finesse forwards, and typically have a baseline level of ball skill, connective passing, average-or-better defense, and the ability to space the floor. Even the big men of the NBA have seen their positional duties shift to some degree.
This is something that I feel most of the draft community—I’m speaking to myself as much as anyone else—needs to remember when evaluating any draft class. Sure, a 7-footer that can hit a stand-still jumper can be appealing, but how does that 200-ish pound prospect screen? How do they rim-run? Do they have good hands? What does their footwork look like? Can they convert lobs? Sure, maybe they can block shots from the weak side, but can they maintain their positioning when backed down? Do they give second efforts on defense? Can they slide their feet while defending the pick and roll? Do they attack the glass? There are a lot of boxes that must be checked beyond being tall and hitting a jumper.
It is important to remember that for players like Khaman Maluach—who can do so much of the “lunch pail” things that are still required for big men—there is still incredible value in being gigantic. There is still incredible value in being large and mobile. There is a place, still, for prospects that do the “traditional” skills of big men. If teams continue to chase after “unicorns” every time, they will miss out on the incredible talent of players like Khaman Maluach—and likely stay at the top of drafts.
Case2012 wrote:Tre Johnson looks like who we were praying Shaedon would become NOW and has the size that you want from a SG.
BlazersBroncos wrote:I am starting to see Harper as more of a rich mans Malcolm Brogdan - I am just not sure he has the upside in the same tier of Ace / VJ.
When you first take a look at Harper, your eyes start to play tricks on you. He’s listed at an eye-opening 6’6”, 215 pounds. Those measurements alone will get your attention for any jumbo-sized playmaker. If you haven’t watched a second of Dylan Harper, you’d probably imagine a jumbo-sized guard that just overpowers opponents with his size or positional advantage. And technically… you wouldn’t be wrong. Harper understands that, given his size, he’s always got the potential to have the upper hand if the matchup presents itself.
But until you turn on the tape, you won’t realize that this 6’6” combo guard is quick as lightning with a lethal first step and fantastic hesitations. Harper looks like a prospect that was created to star in a horror film. He gives opponents nightmares with the versatility he has on the offensive side of the ball. Pair all of that with a relentless motor and the mentality to be great, and that’s something that gets NBA front offices drooling.
The buzz was cooking around Rutgers’ freshman guard in the basketball world. Many were looking at Harper as a legit candidate to be the first overall selection. But we swiftly found out just how quickly the narrative can shift in the draft world.
Harper would go on to miss a couple of games for Rutgers. He then returned to the court against Wisconsin and didn’t look himself, as he finished with zero points in just 15 minutes of action. It was later revealed that Harper had come down with the flu and was trying to battle through it. Even more shockingly, Harper reportedly lost 15 pounds from the illness.
For a potential floor general at 6’6”, Harper moves like a cobra ready to attack at all times. He can lull defenders to sleep before showcasing outstanding short-window explosion. Before you know it, Harper can get his momentum going in a hurry before finishing with bad intentions.
Harper also understands that while he can weave in and out of hesitations, he has the recognition of the last line of defense, often finishing with either hand on opposite sides of the rim to give himself protection from eager shot blockers.The change of pace is another thing that Harper is fantastic with. Not only can he hit you with a quick live dribble sequence to get you looking foolish, but Dylan can make you play his speed. If you start to get aggressive, he can make you slow down. If you give him too much space, he can make you pay from deep
Even with the NBA seeing a new wave of jumbo-sized guards, Harper has the strength to welcome those challenges. Dylan knows how to set you up as a defender. He can get you dancing to follow him. You might think you have him right where you want him, but Dylan puts his momentum and body into you, bringing you along with him on the way to the basket. Suddenly, you realize you’re right at the hoop and completely out of position with your momentum. That’s when he puts on the brakes and goes up for an easy two.
We like to call this “bully ball,” and Dylan Harper thrives at it.
You’ll see often with young guards that they look for any opportunity to challenge shot blockers at the rim. Harper knows that he can use his body to welcome anyone who gets in his way. But he also has the understanding to use his off hand to finish and make it even more difficult for shot blockers to get to him.
Some guards can beat you with power and strength. They might not have the elite speed, but they can work their way to the basket and be patient enough to exploit you at the perfect time. Other guards might lean on their explosiveness and first step to beat you to the basket with their speed. There are also the handles specialists, who can get you dancing with their counters before finding that window and attacking opponents at their weakest moments.
Dylan Harper can do all three.
Harper can do a bit of everything as a floor general. One of my favorite parts of his abilities as a distributor is his reactionary playmaking. Dylan will do everything in his power to get every possible line of defense to react to him. As you think he’s about to go up for a shot, he can throw a gorgeous dump off at the last second. It’s these type of plays above that can make you even have to rewind the clip to realize what really just happened.
It’s an understanding of realizing what scoring gravity will do not only for yourself, but for setting up teammates for easy looks. Harper can react to what the defense is presenting at the speed of light before altering his decision and ending up with a higher percentage look on offense.
I talked above about his ability to make impressive reads at the last possible second, but Harper also has the understanding of when an opportunity to attack is presenting itself. These couple of clips here showcase Harper keeping his head up and surveying the floor before finding his teammates for a couple of impressive finds.
Again, these are the types of plays and versatility that make him a lethal weapon on the court. It’s these types of showcases as a playmaker that can have Harper taking over a game without even scoring a point. If you try to take away his scoring, he’s completely fine with it. But he’s going to be able to dissect you and pick you apart with his passing arsenal.
There’s still plenty of upside left on this side of the ball, and it’s an area I believe will be fully untapped at the next level. But there’s already a foundation of special—and flat out scary—tools.
Harper’s defensive reaction time is the stuff of freaks. The first clip is one you have to slow down to really appreciate. Harper reads the eyes of the passer before exploding out of a cannon to jump the passing lane. One half a second too slow, and he could be left out to dry.
What I continue to love about Dylan’s defensive potential is his upside off the ball. There’s some calculated wizardry to his game when it comes to his ability to bait the opposition into making mistakes. It’s like a seasoned ball-hawking safety in the NFL who is dangling a carrot in front of a quarterback before jumping a route.
But sometimes…guys are weird. Johni Broome is one of those guys. Auburn’s graduate big man is arguably the best player in all of college basketball. There is no doubt that he is an exceptionally talented and productive player. But his production, paired with his age and body type, is definitely a little funky. Broome stands 6’9” with a 7’0” wingspan, and he’s listed at 240 pounds. He’s a little bit stubby for an NBA center, and he’s not super bouncy. But for a four, he’s not a lights-out shooter, nor is he laterally explosive. He doesn’t fit neatly into one box, nor does an easy player comp come to mind. Yet, when going across the statistical board, his BPM, rebound rates, assist numbers, and incredible shot-blocking resume make him appear like a surefire long-term NBA player.
Between this season and last, Broome has made 33.1% of his threes on 5.2 attempts per 100 possessions.
On paper, that may not sound like anything to write home about. But for a big man prospect, he grades out really well in terms of three-point shooting volume and pretty well in terms of efficiency. In particular, Broome thrives when left alone. During these past two years, he’s made 40.9% of his unguarded catch-and-shoot threes, per Synergy. Far more often than not, defenses end up closing out on Broome. This year, 63.3% of his catch-and-shoot triples have been classified as “guarded” attempts. Given his overall percentage, Broome will need to get better at shooting over contests in order to maximize his value.
But for Broome, being good enough at making the open ones may be all he needs in order to find a place in a rotation, given the well-rounded nature of his skill set. Lastly, I think that it’s worth noting that we’ve only really seen him take threes for the past two seasons. If his career efficiency was what it is and he’d always been shooting, I’d be more concerned. Instead, what we’ve seen is a steady upward trajectory in terms of both shot confidence and difficulty.
Broome is an efficient dive man who shoots 70.6% on his twos as a roller. He’s also comfortable in the dunker spot and acting as a cutter, making 68.8% of his shots on those play types, per Synergy. What makes Broome special, though, is that he is an absolute force on the offensive glass.
His 15.2 ORB% is truly an elite figure. It’s even better when you consider the fact that he often shares the floor with another great offensive rebounder in Dylan Cardwell. For context, Broome’s ORB% tops the marks that glass cleaners like Jalen Duren, Walker Kessler, and Daniel Gafford posted during their pre-draft seasons. Per Synergy, putbacks are Broome’s second most common play type this season. His tenaciousness, feel, and timing enable him to consistently generate second-chance opportunities for his team and easy looks for himself.
When scouting, I always ask myself about the scalability of a prospect’s strength. Given Broome’s lack of traditional big man size, I wondered about how this might translate to the next level. But we’ve seen it work! Above, you’ll see Nets big man Day’Ron Sharpe and Kevon Looney feasting on the offensive glass. These two aren’t always the biggest dudes on the floor. But similar to Broome, their intellect and want-to enable them to punch above their weight on the offensive glass. These two have consistently provided value to their teams due in large part to their ability to add efficient, low-maintenance scoring possessions to the stat sheet.
His biggest room for growth from a scoring standpoint comes from tying those two skills together. Right now, he’s sort of an “either/or” proposition. He’s not much of a threat in the gray area between the two when he has to go from the perimeter to the basket. His driving game has a few issues. The first is that when he’s faced up, he has a lumbering first step. He’s not going to be dusting his fellow NBA big men. Broome’s slow downhill speed doesn’t allow him to slam the door shut on defenders who close out hard on him. Additionally, it gives defenses ample time to recover, and there’s not much polish to his handle. He doesn’t have counters or go-to moves to beat the help that comes his way. Instead, he often settles for difficult looks with a deeper takeoff point than desirable. If Broome can maximize his speed off the line and add in a few dribble moves to get cleaner angles at the rim, it would really round out his scoring arsenal in a meaningful way.
Johni Broome is a phenomenal playmaking prospect for a big man—like, really phenomenal in a way that we’ve yet to truly reckon with. There were always shades of upside in this department....He’s one of the highest usage players his size in the country, ranking fourth overall among players 6’9” and above per BartTorvik, with a seismic 30.8 USG%. Along with that, he’s posting an outstanding 23.5 AST% and a microscopic 7.3 TOV%....His combination of floor mapping, vision, and poise allow him to make deliveries that few his size can while also making him a shockingly low-mistake player.
Most 6’9” big men without ideal length and athleticism tend to be more skill-oriented. These “tweeners” tend to get into muddy waters when it comes to the defensive side of the ball. And to be fair, Broome does have some shortcomings here. His lack of bounce can hinder him as a rim protector. A few players, such as Collin Murray-Boyles, have managed to overpower him en route to clean looks at the basket. Broome’s lateral agility is solid, but he doesn’t have great recovery tools when he’s beaten. Still, in spite of all of this, Broome has been a tremendously impactful defender for Auburn over the past few years.
Broome has a 9.3 BLK% on the year, an excellent number for a big man prospect. Again, I must also remind you that he’s posting that figure while spending a significant amount of time at the four-spot. In drop coverage, Broome uses his hands and feet well to dictate angles that make it difficult for the offense to create advantages. He thrives as a shot blocker deep when teams do manage to get deep in the paint. Broome uses his chest well to stay vertical, and he has the outstanding hand-eye coordination needed to pin-point blocks while avoiding foul troubles (only 3.9 fouls per 100 possessions!). Off the ball, his rim rotation instincts are strong, enabling him to get into position better than most of his peers. Even when he doesn’t nab a block, his ability to stay big and play physically hampers his opponents and their efforts to get clean looks inside. Per Synergy, opponents are shooting a brutal 37.0% at the rim in the halfcourt against Broome. He’s a serious glass eater on this side of the ball, too, posting a 26.8 DRB% on the year.
He’s a solid shooter for a big man, but not an elite one. He thrives on the offensive glass, but he’s a little bit undersized. He’s a great shot blocker, but he’s not toolsy. He is undoubtedly a stellar, high-feel playmaker....Defensively, his blend of timing and toughness has proven itself again and again. I came to the conclusion that while Johni Broome can’t be put neatly into one box, his exceptional production and the NBA functionality of his key traits cannot be ignored. So, who is Johni Broome? Johni Broome is a damn good basketball player, and those guys tend to stick around the NBA for a long time. He’s a Top 20 prospect.
Tim Lehrbach wrote:That No Ceilings report on Harper is even more bullish than I am. Could he be Brandon Roy with greater speed and better defense?
BlazersBroncos wrote:Tim Lehrbach wrote:That No Ceilings report on Harper is even more bullish than I am. Could he be Brandon Roy with greater speed and better defense?
I certainly see Roy as the best comparison for the upper tier outcome of Harper.
Wonder how we would deal w/ Sharpe in a scenario where we jump in the lotto, miss on Cooper but have Harper as BPA. I would try to move Sharpe for a FRP in the 15 or so range and another future FRP. Use that pick on Hugo Gonzalez. Then dump Simons and Ayton for expirings and some future draft capital (Maybe pull the DEN FRP from ORL in a Simons deal)
G - Scoot Henderson / Dylan Harper (PDX FRP) / Dalano Banton (Or another Vet Min)
G - Dylan Harper (PDX FRP) / Hugo Gonzalez (SS FRP) / Matisse Thybulle
F - Toumari Camara / Jerami Grant / Matisse Thybulle / Rayan Rupert
F - Deni Avdija / Jerami Grant / Johni Broome (DEN FRP) / Rayan Rupert
C - Donovan Clingan / Robert Williams III / Duop Reath
Just daydreaming.
Return to Portland Trail Blazers