Cooper Flagg

[Special_Puppy]

The disrespect is real. He was the consensus #1 Overall Pick, Naismith NCAA Player of the Year, 3x ACC Player of the Year, 3x National Defensive Player of the Year, 2x Consensus First Team All-American, NCAA Rebounding Leader, etc.

We hadn’t seen such blatant tanking for a prospect since Shaq when Timmy came out in 1998. He was as close to guaranteed thing as there was, and he was 20-21 years old his Senior year since he enrolled early.

And Duncan before the meniscus tear in 2000 was no “average athlete.” He was extremely fluid and mobile and was catching lobs on the reg. And Flagg, while plenty athletic, is no Lebron or Zion himself.

LOL at disrespect. That's your feelings it invoked because your team drafted him.

I just gave reasons that apply to every prospect. If Flagg was a 4th yr senior, instead of a freshman who was a re-classified hs senior, it wouldn't be viewed as impressive. And being in the mid-range of athletes when you reached the pros is another factor.

Duncan's hype wasn't on the same level of Oden & Zion for a combo of these factors. And Flagg's ascended above them, between LeBron & Wemby, who were both 18-19. Listing a guy's age & observing athleticism disadvantages isn't disrespect. Nobody's disputing Duncan was ultimately a great NBA player, like Jokic, an even less athletic 2nd rounder who I was a fan of at the time.

Duncan had nearly every team begging him to come out of college after his sophomore year but he decided to stay so he could graduate.
He was absolutely better than Zion as a prospect and closer to Wemby/LeBron than people think.
He was unquestionably the best NCAA prospect since Shaq.

Is Duncan's basketball reference page wrong or did he not get any awards until his Junior year https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/tim-duncan-1.html

[Castle Black]

The disrespect is real. He was the consensus #1 Overall Pick, Naismith NCAA Player of the Year, 3x ACC Player of the Year, 3x National Defensive Player of the Year, 2x Consensus First Team All-American, NCAA Rebounding Leader, etc.

We hadn’t seen such blatant tanking for a prospect since Shaq when Timmy came out in 1998. He was as close to guaranteed thing as there was, and he was 20-21 years old his Senior year since he enrolled early.

And Duncan before the meniscus tear in 2000 was no “average athlete.” He was extremely fluid and mobile and was catching lobs on the reg. And Flagg, while plenty athletic, is no Lebron or Zion himself.

LOL at disrespect. That's your feelings it invoked because your team drafted him.

I just gave reasons that apply to every prospect. If Flagg was a 4th yr senior, instead of a freshman who was a re-classified hs senior, it wouldn't be viewed as impressive. And being in the mid-range of athletes when you reached the pros is another factor.

Duncan's hype wasn't on the same level of Oden & Zion for a combo of these factors. And Flagg's ascended above them, between LeBron & Wemby, who were both 18-19. Listing a guy's age & observing athleticism disadvantages isn't disrespect. Nobody's disputing Duncan was ultimately a great NBA player, like Jokic, an even less athletic 2nd rounder who I was a fan of at the time.

Duncan had nearly every team begging him to come out of college after his sophomore year but he decided to stay so he could graduate.
He was absolutely better than Zion as a prospect and closer to Wemby/LeBron than people think.
He was unquestionably the best NCAA prospect since Shaq.

Correct. Duncan's mother died from breast cancer the day before he turned 14. On her deathbed, she made he and his sisters all promise her that they would get college degrees. Duncan, despite NBA team's best efforts to persuade him to enter early after his Sophomore and Junior seasons, stayed all 4 years to fulfill that promise.

[Bernman]

The disrespect is real. He was the consensus #1 Overall Pick, Naismith NCAA Player of the Year, 3x ACC Player of the Year, 3x National Defensive Player of the Year, 2x Consensus First Team All-American, NCAA Rebounding Leader, etc.

We hadn’t seen such blatant tanking for a prospect since Shaq when Timmy came out in 1998. He was as close to guaranteed thing as there was, and he was 20-21 years old his Senior year since he enrolled early.

And Duncan before the meniscus tear in 2000 was no “average athlete.” He was extremely fluid and mobile and was catching lobs on the reg. And Flagg, while plenty athletic, is no Lebron or Zion himself.

LOL at disrespect. That's your feelings it invoked because your team drafted him.

I just gave reasons that apply to every prospect. If Flagg was a 4th yr senior, instead of a freshman who was a re-classified hs senior, it wouldn't be viewed as impressive. And being in the mid-range of athletes when you reached the pros is another factor.

Duncan's hype wasn't on the same level of Oden & Zion for a combo of these factors. And Flagg's ascended above them, between LeBron & Wemby, who were both 18-19. Listing a guy's age & observing athleticism disadvantages isn't disrespect. Nobody's disputing Duncan was ultimately a great NBA player, like Jokic, an even less athletic 2nd rounder who I was a fan of at the time.

Duncan had nearly every team begging him to come out of college after his sophomore year but he decided to stay so he could graduate.
He was absolutely better than Zion as a prospect and closer to Wemby/LeBron than people think.
He was unquestionably the best NCAA prospect since Shaq.

As a college frosh center, Duncan averaged less than 10 pts & rebounds a game. Less than an assist per. The only particularly impressive aspect of his game for a ballyhooed big man prospect was the shot-blocking - 3.8 per.

Shaq far out-produced him per minute. Much higher point, rebound, assist rate. Even marginally higher blocks. Relative to position, Flagg's far out-producing Duncan's freshman yr. He's doubling his scoring & quadrupling asts. Both are/were better athletes.

I don't have questions. I have answers. Duncan wasn't as good of a prospect as Flagg nor Shaq. Didn't get near the hype.

[OriAr]

LOL at disrespect. That's your feelings it invoked because your team drafted him.

I just gave reasons that apply to every prospect. If Flagg was a 4th yr senior, instead of a freshman who was a re-classified hs senior, it wouldn't be viewed as impressive. And being in the mid-range of athletes when you reached the pros is another factor.

Duncan's hype wasn't on the same level of Oden & Zion for a combo of these factors. And Flagg's ascended above them, between LeBron & Wemby, who were both 18-19. Listing a guy's age & observing athleticism disadvantages isn't disrespect. Nobody's disputing Duncan was ultimately a great NBA player, like Jokic, an even less athletic 2nd rounder who I was a fan of at the time.

Duncan had nearly every team begging him to come out of college after his sophomore year but he decided to stay so he could graduate.
He was absolutely better than Zion as a prospect and closer to Wemby/LeBron than people think.
He was unquestionably the best NCAA prospect since Shaq.

As a college frosh center, Duncan averaged less than 10 pts & rebounds a game. Less than an assist per. The only particularly impressive aspect of his game for a ballyhooed big man prospect was the shot-blocking - 3.8 per.

Shaq far out-produced him per minute. Much higher point, rebound, assist rate. Even marginally higher blocks. Relative to position, Flagg's far out-producing Duncan's freshman yr. He's doubling his scoring & quadrupling asts. Both are/were better athletes.

I don't have questions. I have answers. Duncan wasn't as good of a prospect as Flagg nor Shaq. Didn't get near the hype.

That's just wrong, Duncan got LOTS of hype when he was in Wake Forest, he would have been very likely the top draft pick had he come out in 1995 (To the point some teams pressured him to come out) and won national DPOY, all of that when he was 19 years old.

Cooper is special, but no need to rewrite history just to big him up.

[Bernman]

That's just wrong, Duncan got LOTS of hype when he was in Wake Forest, he would have been very likely the top draft pick had he come out in 1995 (To the point some teams pressured him to come out) and won national DPOY, all of that when he was 19 years old.

Cooper is special, but no need to rewrite history just to big him up.

You're rewriting history. I cited his stats. 9.8 pts, 9.6 rebs, 3.8 blks, .9 steals isn't hypothetically getting you drafted over a lot of #1 picks, let alone Flagg & Shaq who produced far more while possessing better athleticism.

Flagg's win shares this season are higher per minute than Duncan's his jr yr, when he was twice the man as when he was a freshman like Coop. There is no comparison here.

[Tomtolbert]

That's just wrong, Duncan got LOTS of hype when he was in Wake Forest, he would have been very likely the top draft pick had he come out in 1995 (To the point some teams pressured him to come out) and won national DPOY, all of that when he was 19 years old.

Cooper is special, but no need to rewrite history just to big him up.

You're rewriting history. I cited his stats. 9.8 pts, 9.6 rebs, 3.8 blks, .9 steals isn't hypothetically getting you drafted over a lot of #1 picks, let alone Flagg & Shaq who produced far more while possessing better athleticism.

Flagg's win shares this season are higher per minute than Duncan's his jr yr, when he was twice the man as when he was a freshman like Coop. There is no comparison here.

You are completely off base about Duncan. A few points:

Duncan first started playing basketball at age 14, and was far behind the curve compared to other kids his age in terms of experience.

He was only 17 years old as a college freshman (only 3 years after first playing the sport), and didn't turn 18 till after the season ended.

By his sophomore season, he had already become the consensus #1 pick if he decided to declare for the draft. This despite the fact that the 1995 draft was loaded with talent, especially with big men.

[Bernman]

You are completely off base about Duncan. A few points:

Duncan first started playing basketball at age 14, and was far behind the curve compared to other kids his age in terms of experience.

He was only 17 years old as a college freshman (only 3 years after first playing the sport), and didn't turn 18 till after the season ended.

By his sophomore season, he had already become the consensus #1 pick if he decided to declare for the draft. This despite the fact that the 1995 draft was loaded with talent, especially with big men.

You're the one completely off base, & I already proved it. Flagg was 17-18 this season & is already better than Duncan in his junior yr by some measures, let alone for Duncan's debut season. That should have ended this myth you're perpetrating.

I was around for the Duncan yrs. I know the hype wasn't AS great. Obviously there was some since he went #1.

[Handlez]

A lot depends on the franchise.

The Mavs, if I'm not mistaken, had to trade away basically every starter in Luka's rookie season because they couldn't handle a European white rookie being alpha dog.

The franchise is going to have to give Coop the keys and dismiss anyone not getting in line.

Franchises can ruin careers.

No great player has their career ruined by this, it's not a thing. Now you might delay the inevitable a little bit, but there's no means of ruining these types of players careers because they are sharing playmaking/ball handling. I'm actually curious as to what makes people think this as there are no actual examples of this and tons of examples of the opposite.

Nash/KJ/Kidd, Nash wasn't ruined. Harden was behind Westbrook and Durant, not ruined. Bledsoe (just good not great) was behind CP and Blake, no ruining. SGA played behind Lou Williams, then had CP and Schroder as a sophomore. Haliburton with Fox, etc, etc, etc.

The skills don't somehow erode, they also still get reps for the primary role, they just aren't always fully maximized early.

I think that highly depends on the high usage player you’re talking about.

My Pistons have such a player, but one that’s willing to do whatever it takes to win. If you believe Cade, and I have no reason not to, if the opposing team wants to keep the ball out of his hands and will overcommit to do so, he’s fine with someone else getting the shine.

Of course, we aren’t going to have a shot at Flagg, so it doesn’t really matter. And I agree LaMelo, in his current form, is the wrong kind of teammate. But I do think Cooper isn’t going to be a 20 ppg guy in the beginning, if it all, so having guys that want shots isn’t really a problem. It seems like most successful teams have multiple playmakers anyway, so as long as you aren’t talking about a Beal in Washington scenario, or LaMelo, I think there are plenty of great fits.

I think any high usage player in general will be a bad pairing if you’re trying to reach Flagg’s ceiling. Doesn’t matter if it will be a struggle his first season or two.

The Spurs aren’t going to make the playoffs in the first two years of Wemby, just like the Cavs didn’t make the playoffs the first two years with LeBron. So I don’t think immediate individual or team success really matters here.

But if I’m drafting Flagg, my hope is he is going to be THE franchise cornerstone. At least for 2 years, I’m handing him the ball and a high usage role to see how much he improves in those 2-3 years. If by then he’s not showing potential as your #1 option, okay I might start to rethink it.

Right now I don’t want to pair him with another high usage player. I’m giving him the LeBron/Luka treatment from day 1.

Luka his first year: Harrison Barnes and Tim Hardaway were the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers.
Year 2: they did bring in KP, but KP has always been a very low Time Per Possession guy. So it’s not like he was taking the ball out of Luka’s hands.

Same thing with LeBron. Hell Jeff McInnis was Cleveland’s secondary ball handler and 3rd scoring option during LeBron’s 2nd year.

I think this is the same scenario you build around Flagg early on. Allow him to take his bumps and bruises early on. Then slowly start filling out off ball players that fit around him. Then once he has a really good grasp as the definitive #1 guy, you can bring in another high usage guy to be his #2.

Cleveland got McInnis in LeBron's rookie season at the deadline in order to relieve him of too much on ball duties as a rookie, but yea, there's no need to have another ball dominant guy if that's not the fit. You can also always try it out and see if it works, then if not, you can pivot.

It's a great idea to get him his reps early and get the growing pains out of the way. That said, it's not going to make or break his development or change the level of player he becomes. It can certainly waste your time as a team in terms of roster build, etc though.

You wouldn't know who these players are because you just assume every unsuccessful player is unsuccessful because he can't play.

So how the hell would you know?

Jokic isn't Jokic if Malone didn't give him a real opportunity to run a team. Many other franchises may have just seen him as another slow soft European that is a role player at best.

There's players not in the league that would bust NBA ass if given a real opportunity.

If Reed Sheppard is never given the keys to a team, I'm sure you'll assume it's because he's not talented enough, but Reed Sheppard could average 20 and 8 RIGHT NOW if given a real opportunity.

Happens all the time.

[og15]

A lot depends on the franchise.

The Mavs, if I'm not mistaken, had to trade away basically every starter in Luka's rookie season because they couldn't handle a European white rookie being alpha dog.

The franchise is going to have to give Coop the keys and dismiss anyone not getting in line.

Franchises can ruin careers.

No great player has their career ruined by this, it's not a thing. Now you might delay the inevitable a little bit, but there's no means of ruining these types of players careers because they are sharing playmaking/ball handling. I'm actually curious as to what makes people think this as there are no actual examples of this and tons of examples of the opposite.

Nash/KJ/Kidd, Nash wasn't ruined. Harden was behind Westbrook and Durant, not ruined. Bledsoe (just good not great) was behind CP and Blake, no ruining. SGA played behind Lou Williams, then had CP and Schroder as a sophomore. Haliburton with Fox, etc, etc, etc.

The skills don't somehow erode, they also still get reps for the primary role, they just aren't always fully maximized early.

I think any high usage player in general will be a bad pairing if you’re trying to reach Flagg’s ceiling. Doesn’t matter if it will be a struggle his first season or two.

The Spurs aren’t going to make the playoffs in the first two years of Wemby, just like the Cavs didn’t make the playoffs the first two years with LeBron. So I don’t think immediate individual or team success really matters here.

But if I’m drafting Flagg, my hope is he is going to be THE franchise cornerstone. At least for 2 years, I’m handing him the ball and a high usage role to see how much he improves in those 2-3 years. If by then he’s not showing potential as your #1 option, okay I might start to rethink it.

Right now I don’t want to pair him with another high usage player. I’m giving him the LeBron/Luka treatment from day 1.

Luka his first year: Harrison Barnes and Tim Hardaway were the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers.
Year 2: they did bring in KP, but KP has always been a very low Time Per Possession guy. So it’s not like he was taking the ball out of Luka’s hands.

Same thing with LeBron. Hell Jeff McInnis was Cleveland’s secondary ball handler and 3rd scoring option during LeBron’s 2nd year.

I think this is the same scenario you build around Flagg early on. Allow him to take his bumps and bruises early on. Then slowly start filling out off ball players that fit around him. Then once he has a really good grasp as the definitive #1 guy, you can bring in another high usage guy to be his #2.

Cleveland got McInnis in LeBron's rookie season at the deadline in order to relieve him of too much on ball duties as a rookie, but yea, there's no need to have another ball dominant guy if that's not the fit. You can also always try it out and see if it works, then if not, you can pivot.

It's a great idea to get him his reps early and get the growing pains out of the way. That said, it's not going to make or break his development or change the level of player he becomes. It can certainly waste your time as a team in terms of roster build, etc though.

You wouldn't know who these players are because you just assume every unsuccessful player is unsuccessful because he can't play.

So how the hell would you know?

Jokic isn't Jokic if Malone didn't give him a real opportunity to run a team. Many other franchises may have just seen him as another slow soft European that is a role player at best.

There's players not in the league that would bust NBA ass if given a real opportunity.

If Reed Sheppard is never given the keys to a team, I'm sure you'll assume it's because he's not talented enough, but Reed Sheppard could average 20 and 8 RIGHT NOW if given a real opportunity.

Happens all the time.

So these supposed gems just hiding away never went to a different team, never got other opportunities, they just didn't get the right role from one coach and their skills all eroded away? No other team sees their production in fewer minutes or scouts then and traded for them? They never become free agents?

Players aren't stuck. If the skills to be great are there it will show, this is fairytale stuff where there are all these guys who would just be great if not for the bad franchise.

We see so many players in these situations where their skills are supposed to erode away because of the bad coach or bad organization, but consistently they become good to great players. It might maybe take a little longer for them to be fully maximized, but no great player isn't great because of some coach not unleashing them as a rookie or sophomore.

This is just one of those things that fans like to say when a player doesn't turn out the way they think, because they were so sure.

Yea, a coach would watch Jokic in practice every day for years, see his impact when on the floor, see his work ethic, see him play with Serbia and say, "he's just another soft Euro". It's not like we had Pau Gasol as the second best player on a championship team. Dirk as the best player on two finals teams. Marc Gasol be a DPOY and All-NBA player, Divac way back being a critical part of successful teams, and on and on and on...

[zero rings]

A lot depends on the franchise.

The Mavs, if I'm not mistaken, had to trade away basically every starter in Luka's rookie season because they couldn't handle a European white rookie being alpha dog.

The franchise is going to have to give Coop the keys and dismiss anyone not getting in line.

Franchises can ruin careers.

No great player has their career ruined by this, it's not a thing. Now you might delay the inevitable a little bit, but there's no means of ruining these types of players careers because they are sharing playmaking/ball handling. I'm actually curious as to what makes people think this as there are no actual examples of this and tons of examples of the opposite.

Nash/KJ/Kidd, Nash wasn't ruined. Harden was behind Westbrook and Durant, not ruined. Bledsoe (just good not great) was behind CP and Blake, no ruining. SGA played behind Lou Williams, then had CP and Schroder as a sophomore. Haliburton with Fox, etc, etc, etc.

The skills don't somehow erode, they also still get reps for the primary role, they just aren't always fully maximized early.

I think any high usage player in general will be a bad pairing if you’re trying to reach Flagg’s ceiling. Doesn’t matter if it will be a struggle his first season or two.

The Spurs aren’t going to make the playoffs in the first two years of Wemby, just like the Cavs didn’t make the playoffs the first two years with LeBron. So I don’t think immediate individual or team success really matters here.

But if I’m drafting Flagg, my hope is he is going to be THE franchise cornerstone. At least for 2 years, I’m handing him the ball and a high usage role to see how much he improves in those 2-3 years. If by then he’s not showing potential as your #1 option, okay I might start to rethink it.

Right now I don’t want to pair him with another high usage player. I’m giving him the LeBron/Luka treatment from day 1.

Luka his first year: Harrison Barnes and Tim Hardaway were the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers.
Year 2: they did bring in KP, but KP has always been a very low Time Per Possession guy. So it’s not like he was taking the ball out of Luka’s hands.

Same thing with LeBron. Hell Jeff McInnis was Cleveland’s secondary ball handler and 3rd scoring option during LeBron’s 2nd year.

I think this is the same scenario you build around Flagg early on. Allow him to take his bumps and bruises early on. Then slowly start filling out off ball players that fit around him. Then once he has a really good grasp as the definitive #1 guy, you can bring in another high usage guy to be his #2.

Cleveland got McInnis in LeBron's rookie season at the deadline in order to relieve him of too much on ball duties as a rookie, but yea, there's no need to have another ball dominant guy if that's not the fit. You can also always try it out and see if it works, then if not, you can pivot.

It's a great idea to get him his reps early and get the growing pains out of the way. That said, it's not going to make or break his development or change the level of player he becomes. It can certainly waste your time as a team in terms of roster build, etc though.

You wouldn't know who these players are because you just assume every unsuccessful player is unsuccessful because he can't play.

So how the hell would you know?

Jokic isn't Jokic if Malone didn't give him a real opportunity to run a team. Many other franchises may have just seen him as another slow soft European that is a role player at best.

There's players not in the league that would bust NBA ass if given a real opportunity.

If Reed Sheppard is never given the keys to a team, I'm sure you'll assume it's because he's not talented enough, but Reed Sheppard could average 20 and 8 RIGHT NOW if given a real opportunity.

Happens all the time.

The Nuggets under Malone didn’t see Jokic as a franchise player, either. He forced their hand with his play.

If Reed Sheppard is as good as you think he is, he will eventually get his chance. Either the Rockets will give him that chance, or they’ll trade him to someone else who will. We will know what kind of player he is within a few years.

In a hyper competitive environment like the NBA, talent always finds a way.

[Duke4life831]

I know Flagg's shooting splits since he turned 18 has been a big talking point.

But his facilitating and lack of mistakes has been huge as well. Over the last month he's had a 4:1 assist to turnover ratio while averaging 4 assists per game. And over the last 6 games he has a ridiculous 30 assists to just 3 turnovers.

He's been ridiculously amazing on the offensive end

[sikma42]

That's just wrong, Duncan got LOTS of hype when he was in Wake Forest, he would have been very likely the top draft pick had he come out in 1995 (To the point some teams pressured him to come out) and won national DPOY, all of that when he was 19 years old.

Cooper is special, but no need to rewrite history just to big him up.

You're rewriting history. I cited his stats. 9.8 pts, 9.6 rebs, 3.8 blks, .9 steals isn't hypothetically getting you drafted over a lot of #1 picks, let alone Flagg & Shaq who produced far more while possessing better athleticism.

Flagg's win shares this season are higher per minute than Duncan's his jr yr, when he was twice the man as when he was a freshman like Coop. There is no comparison here.

when did he start playing basketball vs Flagg? It's just like watching Embiid. You saw the progression and you knew he was a monster talent (obviously the injuries were the issue).

Lets also not forget that Duncan at 21 (rookie year) was the best player on a 2nd round team and finished 5th in MVP voting and all-nba first team.

If Embiid had a perfect health history...who would you draft Flagg or Embiid (he averaged just 11/8/1 in college)?

[Ice Man]

OK, we're getting off track here. There are two questions with Flagg -

1) As an 18 year old player, how does he compare to other players of his age?
2) How much will he improve in the future?

The answer to #1 is, he might be the best 17/18 year old ever. I mean, there's no proper comparison to Flagg, because anybody else you mention was in HS at that age. But he is surely a contender for the "best ever" crown.

The answer to #2, in contrast, is wide open. Personally, I think his game/mindset is of the sort that will improve greatly, but if you feel otherwise that's OK. You might be right.

[Bernman]

when did he start playing basketball vs Flagg? It's just like watching Embiid. You saw the progression and you knew he was a monster talent (obviously the injuries were the issue).

Lets also not forget that Duncan at 21 (rookie year) was the best player on a 2nd round team and finished 5th in MVP voting and all-nba first team.

If Embiid had a perfect health history...who would you draft Flagg or Embiid (he averaged just 11/8/1 in college)?

Flagg, & I was a big Embiid fan. It took me 2 significant injuries to come off him as the 1st pick. Still, it wasn't a Flagg-level of proof & trajectory.

For 1 reference, Flagg, at 2 yrs younger, has had .314 WS/40 so far, to Embiid's .213. Both fit clear archetypes - Embiid rim protector, rebounder, post guy w/ touch AND Flagg a creator for himself + teammates while being a high-level positionless defender. The passing puts Flagg over the top because he makes teammates better on the offensive end. It's what has pleasantly surprised me, along w/ his own touch. He also has better intangibles.

[sodmoraes]

That's just wrong, Duncan got LOTS of hype when he was in Wake Forest, he would have been very likely the top draft pick had he come out in 1995 (To the point some teams pressured him to come out) and won national DPOY, all of that when he was 19 years old.

Cooper is special, but no need to rewrite history just to big him up.

You're rewriting history. I cited his stats. 9.8 pts, 9.6 rebs, 3.8 blks, .9 steals isn't hypothetically getting you drafted over a lot of #1 picks, let alone Flagg & Shaq who produced far more while possessing better athleticism.

Flagg's win shares this season are higher per minute than Duncan's his jr yr, when he was twice the man as when he was a freshman like Coop. There is no comparison here.

when did he start playing basketball vs Flagg? It's just like watching Embiid. You saw the progression and you knew he was a monster talent (obviously the injuries were the issue).

Lets also not forget that Duncan at 21 (rookie year) was the best player on a 2nd round team and finished 5th in MVP voting and all-nba first team.

If Embiid had a perfect health history...who would you draft Flagg or Embiid (he averaged just 11/8/1 in college)?

Embiid with zero health problems is a top 30 ever talent. Hes just too talented.

Sent from my SM-G780G using RealGM mobile app

[Bernman]

Embiid with zero health problems is a top 30 ever talent. Hes just too talented.

That's sort of revisionist history. I'm in a minority of people who, even when he was healthy, had Embiid #1. Most people regarded Wiggins as the gem of that class. Embiid was fighting it out 2nd pick w/ Jabari Parker.

[SeattleJazzFan]

I know Flagg's shooting splits since he turned 18 has been a big talking point.

But his facilitating and lack of mistakes has been huge as well. Over the last month he's had a 4:1 assist to turnover ratio while averaging 4 assists per game. And over the last 6 games he has a ridiculous 30 assists to just 3 turnovers.

He's been ridiculously amazing on the offensive end

Flagg is more Luka than he is AK. he gets a lot of praise for his passing/playmaking, but i still think it's underrated and won't be fully unlocked until he's playing with nba spacing.

at the same time i think we're learning he's not going to be terribly impactful as a shot blocker.

[kartexpert]

I know Flagg's shooting splits since he turned 18 has been a big talking point.

But his facilitating and lack of mistakes has been huge as well. Over the last month he's had a 4:1 assist to turnover ratio while averaging 4 assists per game. And over the last 6 games he has a ridiculous 30 assists to just 3 turnovers.

He's been ridiculously amazing on the offensive end

Flagg is more Luka than he is AK. he gets a lot of praise for his passing/playmaking, but i still think it's underrated and won't be fully unlocked until he's playing with nba spacing.

at the same time i think we're learning he's not going to be terribly impactful as a shot blocker.

I don’t watch enough to know this, but is it possible his blocks are lower than one would have expected as college offenses avoid going through him? Or the defensive scheme they run may not be as conducive to him getting blocks than other schemes?

[Ice Man]

Flagg is more Luka than he is AK. he gets a lot of praise for his passing/playmaking, but i still think it's underrated and won't be fully unlocked until he's playing with nba spacing.

at the same time i think we're learning he's not going to be terribly impactful as a shot blocker.

Yes and yes. I had heard about Flagg entering this basketball season but literally knew nothing about his game. All I know is what I have seen at Duke. So frankly I am surprised to hear people talk about him as a shot blocker ... he's not that all. I mean, he gets some because he's an athletic #4, but he won't remotely be known for that in the NBA.

He is an excellent defender -- smart, agile, tough. But the next Mitch Robinson, he surely is not.

[Duke4life831]

I know Flagg's shooting splits since he turned 18 has been a big talking point.

But his facilitating and lack of mistakes has been huge as well. Over the last month he's had a 4:1 assist to turnover ratio while averaging 4 assists per game. And over the last 6 games he has a ridiculous 30 assists to just 3 turnovers.

He's been ridiculously amazing on the offensive end

Flagg is more Luka than he is AK. he gets a lot of praise for his passing/playmaking, but i still think it's underrated and won't be fully unlocked until he's playing with nba spacing.

at the same time i think we're learning he's not going to be terribly impactful as a shot blocker.

I don’t watch enough to know this, but is it possible his blocks are lower than one would have expected as college offenses avoid going through him? Or the defensive scheme they run may not be as conducive to him getting blocks than other schemes?

I think there are a few things to this.

1. He had a pretty long streak of playing pretty conservative on the defensive end. I'd say December-January he wasn't much of a defensive play maker. He wasn't bad on that end, he just wasn't overly aggressive. Id say over the last month he's beginning to play more aggressive on that end again. Even with that said, I think that's showing more in the passing lanes than the shot blocking.

2. The play style. Duke switches 1-5 and they're elite at keeping teams out of the paint. And with that, honestly there really is just a lack of help side block opportunities for Flagg. And his shot blocking in high school, AAU, and international play has come from help side protection.

3. No doubt the size difference from high school to college plays a part as well.

Honestly in the NBA I think where he will stand out defensively is positional versatility and disrupting passing lanes. For comparison, Kawhi as a sophomore averaged 2.7 steals and 1.1 blocks per 100. Flagg is currently at 3.0 steals and 2.3 blocks.

I think he will be a plus shot blocker for his position. But ya probably won't lead the league in blocks, like we saw from AK47 or Josh Smith (Smith never led the NBA, but was 2nd multiple times).

But overall stocks wise, I still think Flagg is close to an elite level when compared to other elite defensive wings as a freshman.