Moderators: DG88, niQ, Duffman100, tsherkin, Reeko, lebron stopper, HiJiNX, 7 Footer, Morris_Shatford
CazOnReal wrote:Godaddycurse wrote:I think CMB's floor is achiuwa with (much) higher IQ.
Achiuwa is significantly more athletic than Collin
ConSarnit wrote:ATLTimekeeper wrote:ConSarnit wrote:
There has to be an almost 100% chance there will be a better player taken after CMB. And another very high chance there will be another player of a similar level but different position taken after CMB. The front office must believe he has enormous potential given his flaws (shooting, not easy to fix) and his ill fit with Barnes (our theoretical franchise player).
They must be extremely confident they can fix CMB’s shooting.
I think you're overthinking this. They used Watson to find players that play the way they want to play, regardless of who is already on the team. They never draft from Europe. This has given them very stable results in the first round over the years. When I look at who followed CMB in the draft, it's a lot of low data and risk players.
Doesn’t this imply a “throw sh*t at the wall approach”? It doesn’t exactly speak to much confidence in the current team when they draft a guy who is extremely similar (and a bad fit) with the current franchise player.
I don’t understand the how they can draft a guy “who plays the way they want” while also being a really bad fit with other players on the roster. How much does play style matter when you’re compromising the end results due to poorly fitting pieces? “I know we’re playing the way we want to but unfortunately we can’t shoot at all and it’s really hurting our offense”. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
ConSarnit wrote:There has to be an almost 100% chance there will be a better player taken after CMB.
Grew wrote:I think he makes Scottie uncomfortable. He's either going to force Scottie to work harder or he will take his spot. Ultimately I think he will push Scottie out and the front office knows that.
The front office acts really chummy with these guys. The open gym stuff tries to potray them as one big happy family. In reality they would pivot off any one of these guys if it means getting just a little bit better.
Someone once told me the difference between an American and a Canadian is an American would risk 100 dollars to make 10 and the Canadian wouldn't. Definitely feels like we have an American front office in that sense.
tsherkin wrote:PushDaRock wrote:Like I said, I have the same concerns. CMB on their board must have been far and away the best prospect and maybe they view his potential as even higher than Scottie's and they couldn't pass that up or they actually think these guys are interchangeable and will be able to play together. I have my doubts.
I mean, if he can set a screen, his potential relative to Barnes has to be higher already, no?
I'd like to think our FO/coaches aren't daft enough to think these guys will play well together, though. If it was 20 or 30 years ago, I'd be more open to the notion but not now. I still remember what those 05 Sonics were doing with Reggie Evans and Danny Fortson, heh.
Parataxis wrote:ConSarnit wrote:There has to be an almost 100% chance there will be a better player taken after CMB.
This is true of basically any lottery pick any year, outside of the top 1-2 in exceptional years.
There's ALWAYS somebody better taken later in the draft - that's not rocket science, that's just the way drafting works out. If you're expecting the FO to always take the player who is going to turn out to have the best career out of everybody taken after them in their draft year... well, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment.
The question is: Did the FO think that CMB was the BPA at the time they drafted him? The evidence points to yes.
People are always screaming 'Take BPA over fit!" until the moment a FO chooses somebody they dislike, and then it suddently becomes "Why didn't they choose for fit!"
Parataxis wrote:ConSarnit wrote:There has to be an almost 100% chance there will be a better player taken after CMB.
This is true of basically any lottery pick any year, outside of the top 1-2 in exceptional years.
There's ALWAYS somebody better taken later in the draft - that's not rocket science, that's just the way drafting works out. If you're expecting the FO to always take the player who is going to turn out to have the best career out of everybody taken after them in their draft year... well, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment.
The question is: Did the FO think that CMB was the BPA at the time they drafted him? The evidence points to yes.
People are always screaming 'Take BPA over fit!" until the moment a FO chooses somebody they dislike, and then it suddently becomes "Why didn't they choose for fit!"
NinjaBro wrote:David Thorpe was on the Truhoop podcast and said he would've taken Cedric Coward 2nd overall after Flagg
ConSarnit wrote:bon wrote:ConSarnit wrote:
The counter to this is that he’s no longer going up against defenders from Radford. We were the 3rd lowest volume 3pt shooting team last year (and the 8th worst in terms of 3pt%).
Barnes/Poeltl/Mogbo/CMB is the worst 4/5 shooting roster in the league. Spacing is going to be an issue.
We were also 25th in 2P% though. Of course we could use more shooting but grabbing an elite finisher was arguably a bigger need. More games played from Gradey, Walter, IQ, Battle and the Ingram addition will already boost our 3pt volume/effciency from last season
I would question how many rim opportunities CMB is going to get if 100% of his minutes are tied to one of Poeltl/Barnes/Mogbo. Getting to the rim becomes a lot harder when there are always 2 zero spacing bigs on the floor. It should work ok-ish with Poeltl as a screener but Barnes is no screener whatsoever. Spacing is going to be an issue for everyone.
PushDaRock wrote:lol I would think the FO is higher on Scottie than we are.
XTC wrote:Scottie is really passive, and CMB is far more aggressive (not in a bad way).
I think people see the stats where he scored majority of his points inside, that he was used as a bigman ,and think he was scoring like a center which couldn't be further from the truth.
CMB has a bag, this guy was creating his way to the rim, he has a super sweet lay up package, a feathery soft touch, he knows how to draw contact and get fouls. He also has a super underrated mid range game, and I do feel like the 3 point comes along with him. He is defense first, but his scoring game is really underrated, and hes going to be a connective passer at the next level.
I like his scoring potential more than Barnes, who is mostly an opportunistic scorer, and can get passive at times. I do like the fit with each other, and I see thr vision Masai is trying to achieve.
ontnut wrote:Boogie! wrote:Idk if this makes sense to anyone but there’s something about cmbs build that looks odd. It’s like a short ed Davis.
No neck.
mdenny wrote:In anycase....Masai is probably gonna make Fred the first active player/head coach in franchise history now that Nurse is out of the way. That's been the plan all along.
ConSarnit wrote:Mattatron wrote:ConSarnit wrote:
Why are we holding onto Barnes? He’s making franchise player money. He’s the guy we decided to keep. Why are we building a team around him if he’s not a franchise guy?
"He’s the guy we decided to keep" you don't decide sh**.
Was he on the trade block? No. Why keeping him ? Because he's a talented player, who can be a cornerstone for a successful future. That's why. Only bums with zero knowledge expected him to be Kawhi Jordan and be the ultimate franchise guy. It's your own fault that you became so grim.
There is zero evidence he can be a cornerstone of a successful future. The guy was maybe the worst volume scorer in the entire league last year. But sure, keep telling yourself that’s cornerstone material.
ArthurVandelay wrote:This pick is bringing back memories of 2012 when Raptors picked TRoss when having DD but passed on arguably the better choice in Andre Drummond because they had JV.
The more I think about it, and given FO draft history, I’m totally fine with the pick. Fair warning though, if Essengue or Maluach blow up, I’ll be marching with the pitchfork.
TGM wrote:OakleyDokely wrote:I think what hurt Maluach for the Raps in the end was his hands / lack of feel. Raps like long, but they want their longs to have some playmaking skills and/or feel for the game. Guys like Barnes, Siakam, OG all had it, CMB has it, but Maluach was kinda clunky in this respect.
They probably also believed that CMB was more matchup proof because he has more flexibility from positional standpoint, whereas Maluach is locked into the 5 spot and could be played off the court in certain lineups.
To be honest, outside of proven bigs that have put up solid stats as freshman's already in college. A lot of mid-to- late lottery bigs have been busts over the years. Esepcially the ones that were putting up mediocre stats and selling the story they will improve. Guys like Wiseman, Bamba, Cauley-Stein. Great physique and size, but putting up micro numbers in college. This is different from guys like Ware, Duren, Mark Williams who were putting up solid numbers already.
So the bust potential I think is quite high, especially how the combine results were for KM.
niQ wrote:ontnut wrote:I watched the CBS draft analysis with Avery Johnson and found this bit funny:
Spurs: Have a ROY PG, trade for an all-star PG, draft another PG with the #2 pick. Avery: "I give it an A, you don't worry about fit, you just draft BPA. You can never have enough quality depth. You need a deep roster like IND and OKC with 6-7-8-9th guys". The Spurs have 3 starting PGs that need minutes - not a problem.
Raptors: Have a ROY F, trade for an all-star F, draft another F with the #9 pick. Avery: "I give it a C-, I don't like the fit, they should've drafted for fit." Doesn't care about quality depth apparently now, depending on the pick and the team lol. Raptors have 3 quality F's to play 2 F positions. That's apparently a problem.
These guys are just talking out of their asses.
I don't even bother with those draft analysis videos anymore. Most times it's a low grade because we didn't draft based on their specific big board.
Parataxis wrote:ConSarnit wrote:There has to be an almost 100% chance there will be a better player taken after CMB.
This is true of basically any lottery pick any year, outside of the top 1-2 in exceptional years.
There's ALWAYS somebody better taken later in the draft - that's not rocket science, that's just the way drafting works out. If you're expecting the FO to always take the player who is going to turn out to have the best career out of everybody taken after them in their draft year... well, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment.
The question is: Did the FO think that CMB was the BPA at the time they drafted him? The evidence points to yes.
People are always screaming 'Take BPA over fit!" until the moment a FO chooses somebody they dislike, and then it suddently becomes "Why didn't they choose for fit!"