CptCrunch wrote:Boozer’s NCAA tournament hasn't been great, and my knee-jerk reaction is to drop him on my board. But history tells me to ignore that impulse. Tournament games should be heavily discounted compared to the regular season; March Madness isn't representative of real college basketball, let alone the NBA.
People love to debate 'clutchness' and composure, but the truth is very few players are truly clutch or epic chokers, as most fall somewhere in the middle. The NBA is a grueling 5-to-15-year marathon of 82-game seasons. A single moment in March doesn't define a player, and overvaluing these tournament games is a mistake. Naturally, no player should drastically raise their stock in one tournament.
This of course also applies to other players. I have had Wagler at #2; a lot of people are now knee jerking Wagler into their top 5. If he wins that ship this year. It will be non-stop top 2/3 spam until draft day.
My knee jerk is less drop him like this but also just increase my second tier.
babyjax13 wrote:Utah is "Oops all power forwards." I would still be thrilled to have him if we don't draft first, but we have much more space for a wing.
Lauri has been in trade talks forever. This might finally be the year he leaves, Bailey can be moved to the 3, and Jazz let Kessler walk
Lauri hasn't been moved despite rumors that he could be, our owner loves him, I don't think we will move him. Yes, we could let Kessler walk, but I think there is a lot there that we were going to see this past season and I would rather retain him and then trade whoever out of Lauri/JJJ/Kessler/Boozer doesn't seem like a long-term piece once we've had time with all of them.
Moving Lauri/Kessler is the only logical move for a team that young. Boozer and JJ are the best fit of any non Peterson/AJ prospect.
Marvin Martian wrote:Lauri has been in trade talks forever. This might finally be the year he leaves, Bailey can be moved to the 3, and Jazz let Kessler walk
Lauri hasn't been moved despite rumors that he could be, our owner loves him, I don't think we will move him. Yes, we could let Kessler walk, but I think there is a lot there that we were going to see this past season and I would rather retain him and then trade whoever out of Lauri/JJJ/Kessler/Boozer doesn't seem like a long-term piece once we've had time with all of them.
Moving Lauri/Kessler is the only logical move for a team that young. Boozer and JJ are the best fit of any non Peterson/AJ prospect.
Unless Boozer isn't as good as Lauri or Kessler. IDK, I would wait until I know what I have.
JazzMatt13 wrote:just because I think aliens probably have to do with JFK, doesn't mean my theory that Jazz will never get Wiggins, isn't true.
babyjax13 wrote:Lauri hasn't been moved despite rumors that he could be, our owner loves him, I don't think we will move him. Yes, we could let Kessler walk, but I think there is a lot there that we were going to see this past season and I would rather retain him and then trade whoever out of Lauri/JJJ/Kessler/Boozer doesn't seem like a long-term piece once we've had time with all of them.
Moving Lauri/Kessler is the only logical move for a team that young. Boozer and JJ are the best fit of any non Peterson/AJ prospect.
Unless Boozer isn't as good as Lauri or Kessler. IDK, I would wait until I know what I have.
Thats how you end up with pennies on the dollar in a return.
Upperclass wrote: Moving Lauri/Kessler is the only logical move for a team that young. Boozer and JJ are the best fit of any non Peterson/AJ prospect.
Unless Boozer isn't as good as Lauri or Kessler. IDK, I would wait until I know what I have.
Thats how you end up with pennies on the dollar in a return.
Letting Kessler walk would be nothing on the dollar, and Lauri doesn't seem to have a ton of value, anyway, it might go up if we hold him longer. TBH we are an embarrassment of riches, I'd rather not move anyone until we know who looks to be part of the future.
JazzMatt13 wrote:just because I think aliens probably have to do with JFK, doesn't mean my theory that Jazz will never get Wiggins, isn't true.
Am I wrong for thinking Boozer is more impressive athletically than Tatum was at Duke?
I don't see a discernible difference in speed, quickness/acceleration, agility, and vertical jumping ability. The fact that Cameron is 250 pounds and Jayson was 205 is what makes Booz more athletic to me. He's producing a greater force to overcome his additional 45+ lbs. And he's just functionally stronger in general (strength is an underrated aspect of athleticism, an opinion shared by P3's Eric Leidersdorf).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boozer becomes more of a Combo Forward, PF/SF, SF/PF in the NBA as opposed to a pure PF or PF/undersized C. I think his athleticism/mobility is underrated, and he has the requisite skillset and cognition to play inside or outside.
He looked slower than he is at Duke because he chose to lean into his strength, play off two feet, and seek contact & physicality. He'll get more straight-line drive opportunities where he prioritizes the speed and momentum that a one-foot finish offers in the NBA's spaced-out open floor. And people will say, "Wow! I didn't know he was this athletic."
Many forget that Tatum's athleticism was questioned during the 2017 draft cycle. He was compared to Paul Pierce a lot.
Heading into the 2017 NBA Draft, Jayson Tatum was generally regarded as a good athlete with a highly skilled, polished offensive game, but he was not considered an elite, top-tier athletic specimen on the level of prospects like Josh Jackson.
Concerns regarding his athleticism and physical tools included:
Average First Step: Scouts believed he lacked an explosive first step, raising questions about his ability to consistently blow by NBA-level wings and create space at the next level. Finishing at the Rim: There were doubts about his ability to finish over or through long, athletic NBA defenders. He was considered to have only "average" athleticism for an NBA small forward. Lack of Elite Lateral Agility: Some analysis suggested his lateral agility was only adequate, leading to concerns about his ability to contain faster, smaller players on the defensive end. Reliance on Mid-Range: Because of questions about his speed, critics feared he would rely too heavily on contested, long two-point jumpers rather than getting to the rim. Lower Body Strength: It was noted that he needed to add lower body strength to maximize his potential as a face-up power forward or to hold his ground on defense.
Contrast in Draft Analysis
Despite these concerns, Tatum was often considered the most polished and "NBA-ready" player in the draft, with a high skill level that was expected to compensate for a lack of "freak" athleticism.
Opposing view: Some analysts, such as those at Dean on Draft, were lower on him, suggesting he was a "slightly below-average athlete for an NBA wing" whose reliance on mid-range jumpers would not translate to high efficiency in the pros.
Ultimately, Tatum has far exceeded his draft projections, developing his 3-point range and showing greater athletic ability in the pros than was expected in college.
FrodoBaggins wrote:Am I wrong for thinking Boozer is more impressive athletically than Tatum was at Duke?
I don't see a discernible difference in speed, quickness/acceleration, agility, and vertical jumping ability. The fact that Cameron is 250 pounds and Jayson was 205 is what makes Booz more athletic to me. He's producing a greater force to overcome his additional 45+ lbs. And he's just functionally stronger in general (strength is an underrated aspect of athleticism, an opinion shared by P3's Eric Leidersdorf).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boozer becomes more of a Combo Forward, PF/SF, SF/PF in the NBA as opposed to a pure PF or PF/undersized C. I think his athleticism/mobility is underrated, and he has the requisite skillset and cognition to play inside or outside.
He looked slower than he is at Duke because he chose to lean into his strength, play off two feet, and seek contact & physicality. He'll get more straight-line drive opportunities where he prioritizes the speed and momentum that a one-foot finish offers in the NBA's spaced-out open floor. And people will say, "Wow! I didn't know he was this athletic."
Many forget that Tatum's athleticism was questioned during the 2017 draft cycle. He was compared to Paul Pierce a lot.
Heading into the 2017 NBA Draft, Jayson Tatum was generally regarded as a good athlete with a highly skilled, polished offensive game, but he was not considered an elite, top-tier athletic specimen on the level of prospects like Josh Jackson.
Concerns regarding his athleticism and physical tools included:
Average First Step: Scouts believed he lacked an explosive first step, raising questions about his ability to consistently blow by NBA-level wings and create space at the next level. Finishing at the Rim: There were doubts about his ability to finish over or through long, athletic NBA defenders. He was considered to have only "average" athleticism for an NBA small forward. Lack of Elite Lateral Agility: Some analysis suggested his lateral agility was only adequate, leading to concerns about his ability to contain faster, smaller players on the defensive end. Reliance on Mid-Range: Because of questions about his speed, critics feared he would rely too heavily on contested, long two-point jumpers rather than getting to the rim. Lower Body Strength: It was noted that he needed to add lower body strength to maximize his potential as a face-up power forward or to hold his ground on defense.
Contrast in Draft Analysis
Despite these concerns, Tatum was often considered the most polished and "NBA-ready" player in the draft, with a high skill level that was expected to compensate for a lack of "freak" athleticism.
Opposing view: Some analysts, such as those at Dean on Draft, were lower on him, suggesting he was a "slightly below-average athlete for an NBA wing" whose reliance on mid-range jumpers would not translate to high efficiency in the pros.
Ultimately, Tatum has far exceeded his draft projections, developing his 3-point range and showing greater athletic ability in the pros than was expected in college.
FrodoBaggins wrote:Am I wrong for thinking Boozer is more impressive athletically than Tatum was at Duke?
I don't see a discernible difference in speed, quickness/acceleration, agility, and vertical jumping ability. The fact that Cameron is 250 pounds and Jayson was 205 is what makes Booz more athletic to me. He's producing a greater force to overcome his additional 45+ lbs. And he's just functionally stronger in general (strength is an underrated aspect of athleticism, an opinion shared by P3's Eric Leidersdorf).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boozer becomes more of a Combo Forward, PF/SF, SF/PF in the NBA as opposed to a pure PF or PF/undersized C. I think his athleticism/mobility is underrated, and he has the requisite skillset and cognition to play inside or outside.
He looked slower than he is at Duke because he chose to lean into his strength, play off two feet, and seek contact & physicality. He'll get more straight-line drive opportunities where he prioritizes the speed and momentum that a one-foot finish offers in the NBA's spaced-out open floor. And people will say, "Wow! I didn't know he was this athletic."
Many forget that Tatum's athleticism was questioned during the 2017 draft cycle. He was compared to Paul Pierce a lot.
Heading into the 2017 NBA Draft, Jayson Tatum was generally regarded as a good athlete with a highly skilled, polished offensive game, but he was not considered an elite, top-tier athletic specimen on the level of prospects like Josh Jackson.
Concerns regarding his athleticism and physical tools included:
Average First Step: Scouts believed he lacked an explosive first step, raising questions about his ability to consistently blow by NBA-level wings and create space at the next level. Finishing at the Rim: There were doubts about his ability to finish over or through long, athletic NBA defenders. He was considered to have only "average" athleticism for an NBA small forward. Lack of Elite Lateral Agility: Some analysis suggested his lateral agility was only adequate, leading to concerns about his ability to contain faster, smaller players on the defensive end. Reliance on Mid-Range: Because of questions about his speed, critics feared he would rely too heavily on contested, long two-point jumpers rather than getting to the rim. Lower Body Strength: It was noted that he needed to add lower body strength to maximize his potential as a face-up power forward or to hold his ground on defense.
Contrast in Draft Analysis
Despite these concerns, Tatum was often considered the most polished and "NBA-ready" player in the draft, with a high skill level that was expected to compensate for a lack of "freak" athleticism.
Opposing view: Some analysts, such as those at Dean on Draft, were lower on him, suggesting he was a "slightly below-average athlete for an NBA wing" whose reliance on mid-range jumpers would not translate to high efficiency in the pros.
Ultimately, Tatum has far exceeded his draft projections, developing his 3-point range and showing greater athletic ability in the pros than was expected in college.
A minor sprain that kept him out of a few games to start the season. I don't think it had any lingering influence at all. His Senior high school highlights show more or less the same degree of athleticism and mobility displayed at Duke.
Jayson Tatum suffered a foot sprain (specifically a foot injury) during a Duke Pro Day in October 2016 before his freshman season began. The injury forced him to miss the first eight games of the 2016–17 season and both of Duke’s exhibition games, though it was considered a manageable injury.
I think your point about Wemby on the main board applies here. Tatum might not be like substantially faster or jump through the roof or whatever, but I do think he has more flexibility, mobility, ability to get low, turn, rotate, etc like a small man compared to Boozer. I think Boozer is a better prospect coming out, but Tatum did always look like a guy who could be a full time perimeter offensive player and defender.
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
JMAC3 wrote:There have been plenty of guys dominate college basketball and then struggle in the NBA so I don't think it is all that strong of an argument.
I don't think anyone claimed that it's a perfect Venn diagram of players who dominated college and players who became great NBA players. That doesn't make it a weak argument or irrelevant reference point, though.
JMAC3 wrote:I can list a bunch of guys but I am sure we will get a bunch of 1 sentence disqualifiers why they are obvious they didn't work out and Boozer will.
Hm, with this sentence I get the impression that you're not looking for an honest discussion. I understand that this board can be toxic but I'd appreciate if you actually wait for the answer before complaining in advance. Because I'm not here with an agenda.
So let me be very clear here. I'm not saying that Boozer is going to be a great NBA player. I'm not saying that he can't be a bust relative to expectations. I'm simply saying that a) he is dominating college like few players have, b) this is relevant when discussing him as an NBA prospect (though not the be-all and end-all, to be sure), and c) he has to have some skills and attributes that allow him to be so dominant. That's really it. Do you take issue with any of those three statements?
JMAC3 wrote:It is always the guys in "This Years Draft" that is going to work out.
It's funny you say that because I feel like this applies to both sides. I've seen plenty of doubters be dismissive of any comparison because ‘these guys are different because of [insert elite skills or attributes]’ – not acknowledging that what seems obvious now was certainly not obvious before they were drafted.
JMAC3 wrote:Anyways...
Spoiler:
Johnny Davis averaged 20 ppg, 1st team All American - won Big Ten Obi Toppin 20 ppg, #1 in BPM- top 10 pick. - Player of the Year- #3 team in country. Jaxson Hayes, 2nd best freshman BPM Onyeka Okonwu- 16.2 ppg, Best Freshman BPM Vernon Carey- 17.8 ppg - Also played at Duke - 2nd best freshman BPM Jabari Smith- 17 ppg, 2nd best freshman BPM Kennedy Chandler- 3rd best freshman BPM Marvin Bagley- 21 ppg, also played for Duke, 6th best Freshman BPM Wendell Carter - Also, played at Duke - 2nd best BPM for freshman. Deandre Ayton - 20 ppg, 4th best freshman BPM Jahlil Okafor- 17.3 ppg - Also played at Duke -3rd best freshman BPM Justice Winslow, Also played at Duke- 4th best freshman BPM Stanley Johnson- 6th bst freshman BPM Markelle Fultz - 23 ppg, top 5 freshman BPM Nerlens Noel- best Freshman BPM Cody Zeller- 2nd best Freshman BPM Derrick Williams, 3rd best BPM in college Otto Porter Jr. - 3rd best BPM in college Zach Colins - 2nd best freshman BPM KJ McDaniels- Best BPM in college Frank Kaminsky - Best BPM in college Denzel Valentine- Best BPM in college Sindarius Thornwel - Best BPM in college Brandon Clarke- 2nd best BPM in college Luka Garza- 2nd best BPM in college Trayce Jackson Davis- Best BPM in college Johni Broome- 2nd best BPM in college
I appreciate the list and it shows that not all good or even great college players turn into good NBA players – or even NBA players, period.
An important note, though, is that we are not just talking about a good college player. We're not talking about ‘6th best Freshman BPM’ or ‘Best college BPM’ by a senior. We're not even talking about best Freshman BPM (there has to be one every year, after all).
We are talking about historical levels of domination. We are talking about the second highest BPM on record (since 2010/11). And we are talking about a Freshman. The comparisons for Boozer's college season – in terms of BPM and class – are Zion, AD and Flagg. Not Stanley Johnson, Kennedy Chandler, Jaxson Hayes, Johni Broome, Frank Kaminski and the like. And to be once again clear: that doesn't mean Boozer will be an NBA superstar. But let's at least be honest about his level of domination in college.
JMAC3 wrote:I would say this entire list were awesome college players, how many of them turned into awesome NBA players?
We have already established that not all awesome college players turn into awesome NBA players. If this is the point you were trying to get across, consider it accomplished. I personally have not argued anything to the contrary, but if you just wanted to be sure here or make this point for others – fair enough.
If you are interested in a discussion, let me try to push it into a – hopefully – constructive lane and ask you one question. What elite qualities does Boozer currently have that allows him to dominate in college? Let's leave aside for now the question of how it translates to the NBA level, we can talk about this after we have established what makes Boozer such a successful college player. I assume we can all agree that there has to be something to allow him to be such an awesome college player – and we can then continue from there.
I will do my best to touch on these notes.
1. BPM analytics is being solved. Vecenie/Givony have both recently talked about how the numbers have probably become inflated. Teams understand analytics better than ever, teams are playing by those rules especially the good teams and good coaches like Duke and Scheyer. I don't think it is coincidence that the 2nd, 6th, 7th, 9th,10th, and 11th best seasons ever happened this year. I think all those players are great but I don't think Flemings or Graves or even Wagler are inside the top 10 freshman ever. So there is probably a chance that Boozer is also getting a playstyle bump that Joel Embiid, Gordon Hayward, Anthony Davis, KAT and Lonzo Balls of the world didn't have.
2. I value BPM as a data point, but I often see guys build cases 100% around just the stats. I just listed 25+ examples of guys putting up elite statistical seasons that I am sure if they came out today would have support in droves because the analytics tell them they are an elite prospect. Just as I see daily the Graves, Lendebourg, Tyler Tanner, Aday Mara supporters that run rampant in the streets. So we need to at least come to some middle ground that Analytics doesn't trump all else.
As far as Boozer, I think he is a great college player. Where I draw the line is acting as if he is the best college player in 25 years. He is averaging 22 ppg on the biggest name in basketball surrounded by guys that could star at other schools. I don't think he is necessarily doing anything that any other prospects haven't done... unless you take BPM as the ultimate stat. Boozer scored 30+ 4 times this year vs Indiana St, Stanford, Arkansas and Wake Forrest- 1 of these teams made the tourney.
but if we ignore BPM for a second. Boozer is a good player. He isn't an elite athlete, he doesn't have the most skill with the ball in his hands, he isn't some unseen off the dribble shooter, he isn't even an average defender... He again is still very good. In my honest opinion he might even be a top 20 or 30 freshman of all time- but he isn't the best. The only reason people are saying that is because of recency bias and his BPM number.
What elite qualities does Boozer currently have that allows him to dominate in college? Well roundedness.
He can shoot the ball, he can score in the post vs mismatches, he can make the right pass and he is a very smart player. He also, has a ton of experience and has been a great player on previous levels in big moments. I think all of that plus having great teammates around him make him very hard to stop on the college level. Along with a top 5 coach.
Examples- if you put your big on him- Duke has Ngonba another 7 footer to expose your PF. If you put a college 4 on him, he is likely taller than a good portion at 6-9 and he is almost always going to be stronger at 250 lbs. He also has other 4/5 star guys around him that better athletes then their defenders and some great shooters.
The NBA will even the playing field- Boozer won't be bigger then most guys. He won't have better teammates. He will likely be similar sized, but with lesser athleticism. He may still be stronger than NBA 4s, but he will also be slower than NBA 4s on other side of the floor.
The best players in the NBA win with skill, that is how the league is designed. If you are truly elite physically like a Giannis, Lebron, Wemby you can be great, but there are also a lot of physically awesome players who aren't very good because they lack elite skill.
I just think overall we are overrating him. Anthony Davis was taller, longer, more athletic than Boozer. He wins in the NBA as mostly a finesse/skill player. Kawhi has elite tools but at the end of the day his handle, balance and shot making is what makes him elite not being strong.
Yesterday game vs Uconn is a great example of the advantages that Boozer gets to face on most nights in college basketball. Uconn basically has 2 options defensively.
#1 play Alex Karaban on Cam Boozer- which is an awful matchup for Uconn. #2 play Tarris Reed on Cam Boozer and then have Karaban guard Pat Ngongba.
or they can play 6-7 205lb Jayden Ross on one of the bench.
These matchups are fewer and far between in the NBA. and Even when Boozer will have the size advantage vs smaller 4s like Tatum, Jimmy Butler, Deni Avdija-- he has to chase them around on the other end and guard. Vs in college most of the smaller front court guys aren't dropping 20-30 right back at you.
FrodoBaggins wrote:Average size of active NBA players by position:
PG Height 6'1.96 Wingspan 6'6¼ Diff 4.3
SG Height 6'4.73 Wingspan 6'9.14 Diff 4.41
SF Height 6'6.7 Wingspan 6'11¼ Diff 4.54
PF Height 6'8.15 Wingspan 7'0.68 Diff 4.53
C Height 6'10.19 Wingspan 7'3.15 Diff 4.96
Unclear how many of those players are listed barefoot or in shoes. But at 6'9" in shoes with a reported 7-foot-plus wingspan and 9-foot standing reach, Boozer fits. And the average NBA PF was 230 pounds in 2020-21, so at 18, he's already 20+ lbs heavier. He has NBA size.
Now do it for the top 200 college teams in the country. Having a true 7 footer in college is a massive advantage, having a real 6-10 PF or a real 6-8 SF in college is just overwhelming.
I look at a team like Michigan- who have 3 guys on the floor that might have taller standing reaches than anyone on your entire roster. That is a huge advantage that most teams in the NBA just never worry about.
Aday Mara is not getting to the pros and playing against stock 6-9 centers on the regular like he does in college. Even the smaller centers in the NBA have elite length, quickness, strength that level the playing field.
JMAC3 wrote:I will do my best to touch on these notes.
1. BPM analytics is being solved. Vecenie/Givony have both recently talked about how the numbers have probably become inflated. Teams understand analytics better than ever, teams are playing by those rules especially the good teams and good coaches like Duke and Scheyer. I don't think it is coincidence that the 2nd, 6th, 7th, 9th,10th, and 11th best seasons ever happened this year. I think all those players are great but I don't think Flemings or Graves or even Wagler are inside the top 10 freshman ever. So there is probably a chance that Boozer is also getting a playstyle bump that Joel Embiid, Gordon Hayward, Anthony Davis, KAT and Lonzo Balls of the world didn't have.
2. I value BPM as a data point, but I often see guys build cases 100% around just the stats. I just listed 25+ examples of guys putting up elite statistical seasons that I am sure if they came out today would have support in droves because the analytics tell them they are an elite prospect. Just as I see daily the Graves, Lendebourg, Tyler Tanner, Aday Mara supporters that run rampant in the streets. So we need to at least come to some middle ground that Analytics doesn't trump all else.
As far as Boozer, I think he is a great college player. Where I draw the line is acting as if he is the best college player in 25 years. He is averaging 22 ppg on the biggest name in basketball surrounded by guys that could star at other schools. I don't think he is necessarily doing anything that any other prospects haven't done... unless you take BPM as the ultimate stat. Boozer scored 30+ 4 times this year vs Indiana St, Stanford, Arkansas and Wake Forrest- 1 of these teams made the tourney.
but if we ignore BPM for a second. Boozer is a good player. He isn't an elite athlete, he doesn't have the most skill with the ball in his hands, he isn't some unseen off the dribble shooter, he isn't even an average defender... He again is still very good. In my honest opinion he might even be a top 20 or 30 freshman of all time- but he isn't the best. The only reason people are saying that is because of recency bias and his BPM number.
What elite qualities does Boozer currently have that allows him to dominate in college? Well roundedness.
He can shoot the ball, he can score in the post vs mismatches, he can make the right pass and he is a very smart player. He also, has a ton of experience and has been a great player on previous levels in big moments. I think all of that plus having great teammates around him make him very hard to stop on the college level. Along with a top 5 coach.
Examples- if you put your big on him- Duke has Ngonba another 7 footer to expose your PF. If you put a college 4 on him, he is likely taller than a good portion at 6-9 and he is almost always going to be stronger at 250 lbs. He also has other 4/5 star guys around him that better athletes then their defenders and some great shooters.
The NBA will even the playing field- Boozer won't be bigger then most guys. He won't have better teammates. He will likely be similar sized, but with lesser athleticism. He may still be stronger than NBA 4s, but he will also be slower than NBA 4s on other side of the floor.
The best players in the NBA win with skill, that is how the league is designed. If you are truly elite physically like a Giannis, Lebron, Wemby you can be great, but there are also a lot of physically awesome players who aren't very good because they lack elite skill.
I just think overall we are overrating him. Anthony Davis was taller, longer, more athletic than Boozer. He wins in the NBA as mostly a finesse/skill player. Kawhi has elite tools but at the end of the day his handle, balance and shot making is what makes him elite not being strong.
I appreciate the constructive and elaborate response. Great work!
I won't be able to touch on all the things right now but I think we can find plenty of common ground or respectfully differ in our evaluations (that's part of the fun, too).
1) I'm honestly not going to war for BPM either, so I'm happy to agree with your statement that you ‘value BPM as a data point’ but don't want to see cases built only on that. I also don't think ‘analytics trumps all’ in the sense that you can make a solid case just based on that. I'm in the same boat.
Is Boozer's BPM particularly inflated or is today's BPM inflated? I don't know. Perhaps. I do think Boozer's dominance transcends BPM and just a look at the production numbers suggest that he was having a special season. Where exactly that leaves him in an all-time or modern-ranking, I don't know. I don't think it matters much, though, and I'm certainly not here trying to argue that he's been the 2nd most dominant college player over the past 15 years. He's, however, in the conversation, IMO.
2) You say that he is well-rounded and benefits from being on a good team with a good coach. I can certainly get behind that sentiment, too.
I suppose where we might disagree is on the projection. While I don't think Boozer is going to dominate in the NBA the way he did in college – not ever, but certainly not soon –, I do expect him to develop a fair bit over time just as I do for most prospects. So while I do believe he'll run into challenges such as the ones you described, I also believe he'll continue to grow as he deals with them. Do I know that Boozer will be one of the best passers, ball handlers and shooters for a PF/big man in the NBA? No. But I would not be surprised if he is among the very best at let's say two of those categories during his prime. I also do already know that he'll be one of the stronger players for his position and very likely a plus rebounder. All of this would make him an excellent offensive player and one of the best offensive hubs in the NBA.
In contrast, I also wouldn't be surprised if he's just a good offensive player with clear defensive limitations who is never going to lead a good team as the best or second best player. He could cap out as a solid enough shooter who is up and down as a scorer and offensive initiator depending on the right or wrong kind of match-ups, and leaves enough to be desired on defense for teams to never commit building around him. Also possible.
So I'm not saying people must have Boozer at the top, in the top 3, or even necessarily in the top 5. I'm not trying to proselytize and turn doubters into believers. Just for me personally, his production and all-around skill-set matters – not least because I have been wrong on some players in the past due to not putting enough stock into precisely those two things. So I'm higher on Boozer than I initially thought I'd be – but that's just me, and others can have valid reasons for projecting him differently.
My primary goal was just to establish the fact that he did indeed have a special college season and that there must have been a basketball reason that made it possible – and then freely go from there. I think we've achieved that, and your post was a great contribution to that end. So I want to thank you for that. Cheers.
FrodoBaggins wrote:Am I wrong for thinking Boozer is more impressive athletically than Tatum was at Duke?
I don't see a discernible difference in speed, quickness/acceleration, agility, and vertical jumping ability. The fact that Cameron is 250 pounds and Jayson was 205 is what makes Booz more athletic to me. He's producing a greater force to overcome his additional 45+ lbs. And he's just functionally stronger in general (strength is an underrated aspect of athleticism, an opinion shared by P3's Eric Leidersdorf).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boozer becomes more of a Combo Forward, PF/SF, SF/PF in the NBA as opposed to a pure PF or PF/undersized C. I think his athleticism/mobility is underrated, and he has the requisite skillset and cognition to play inside or outside.
He looked slower than he is at Duke because he chose to lean into his strength, play off two feet, and seek contact & physicality. He'll get more straight-line drive opportunities where he prioritizes the speed and momentum that a one-foot finish offers in the NBA's spaced-out open floor. And people will say, "Wow! I didn't know he was this athletic."
Many forget that Tatum's athleticism was questioned during the 2017 draft cycle. He was compared to Paul Pierce a lot.
Heading into the 2017 NBA Draft, Jayson Tatum was generally regarded as a good athlete with a highly skilled, polished offensive game, but he was not considered an elite, top-tier athletic specimen on the level of prospects like Josh Jackson.
Concerns regarding his athleticism and physical tools included:
Average First Step: Scouts believed he lacked an explosive first step, raising questions about his ability to consistently blow by NBA-level wings and create space at the next level. Finishing at the Rim: There were doubts about his ability to finish over or through long, athletic NBA defenders. He was considered to have only "average" athleticism for an NBA small forward. Lack of Elite Lateral Agility: Some analysis suggested his lateral agility was only adequate, leading to concerns about his ability to contain faster, smaller players on the defensive end. Reliance on Mid-Range: Because of questions about his speed, critics feared he would rely too heavily on contested, long two-point jumpers rather than getting to the rim. Lower Body Strength: It was noted that he needed to add lower body strength to maximize his potential as a face-up power forward or to hold his ground on defense.
Contrast in Draft Analysis
Despite these concerns, Tatum was often considered the most polished and "NBA-ready" player in the draft, with a high skill level that was expected to compensate for a lack of "freak" athleticism.
Opposing view: Some analysts, such as those at Dean on Draft, were lower on him, suggesting he was a "slightly below-average athlete for an NBA wing" whose reliance on mid-range jumpers would not translate to high efficiency in the pros.
Ultimately, Tatum has far exceeded his draft projections, developing his 3-point range and showing greater athletic ability in the pros than was expected in college.
yes. You're dead wrong. Tatum has better vertical, quickness, speed and bend. Boozer is a very stiff PF. Similar to Sabonis really. Seriously, if you're looking for comps then between Love and Sabonis really does work for Boozer. All the positives and all the negatives. You can win with guys like this. They just aren't #1 types
Foes..you DO realize I don't see your posts....right?
Here are some clips showing often Boozer travels. Is this the technique expected of a prospect that is supposed to be an "offensive genius" by some people?
FrodoBaggins wrote:Am I wrong for thinking Boozer is more impressive athletically than Tatum was at Duke?
I don't see a discernible difference in speed, quickness/acceleration, agility, and vertical jumping ability. The fact that Cameron is 250 pounds and Jayson was 205 is what makes Booz more athletic to me. He's producing a greater force to overcome his additional 45+ lbs. And he's just functionally stronger in general (strength is an underrated aspect of athleticism, an opinion shared by P3's Eric Leidersdorf).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boozer becomes more of a Combo Forward, PF/SF, SF/PF in the NBA as opposed to a pure PF or PF/undersized C. I think his athleticism/mobility is underrated, and he has the requisite skillset and cognition to play inside or outside.
He looked slower than he is at Duke because he chose to lean into his strength, play off two feet, and seek contact & physicality. He'll get more straight-line drive opportunities where he prioritizes the speed and momentum that a one-foot finish offers in the NBA's spaced-out open floor. And people will say, "Wow! I didn't know he was this athletic."
Many forget that Tatum's athleticism was questioned during the 2017 draft cycle. He was compared to Paul Pierce a lot.
Heading into the 2017 NBA Draft, Jayson Tatum was generally regarded as a good athlete with a highly skilled, polished offensive game, but he was not considered an elite, top-tier athletic specimen on the level of prospects like Josh Jackson.
Concerns regarding his athleticism and physical tools included:
Average First Step: Scouts believed he lacked an explosive first step, raising questions about his ability to consistently blow by NBA-level wings and create space at the next level. Finishing at the Rim: There were doubts about his ability to finish over or through long, athletic NBA defenders. He was considered to have only "average" athleticism for an NBA small forward. Lack of Elite Lateral Agility: Some analysis suggested his lateral agility was only adequate, leading to concerns about his ability to contain faster, smaller players on the defensive end. Reliance on Mid-Range: Because of questions about his speed, critics feared he would rely too heavily on contested, long two-point jumpers rather than getting to the rim. Lower Body Strength: It was noted that he needed to add lower body strength to maximize his potential as a face-up power forward or to hold his ground on defense.
Contrast in Draft Analysis
Despite these concerns, Tatum was often considered the most polished and "NBA-ready" player in the draft, with a high skill level that was expected to compensate for a lack of "freak" athleticism.
Opposing view: Some analysts, such as those at Dean on Draft, were lower on him, suggesting he was a "slightly below-average athlete for an NBA wing" whose reliance on mid-range jumpers would not translate to high efficiency in the pros.
Ultimately, Tatum has far exceeded his draft projections, developing his 3-point range and showing greater athletic ability in the pros than was expected in college.
yes. You're dead wrong. Tatum has better vertical, quickness, speed and bend. Boozer is a very stiff PF. Similar to Sabonis really. Seriously, if you're looking for comps then between Love and Sabonis really does work for Boozer. All the positives and all the negatives. You can win with guys like this. They just aren't #1 types
I was going to say similar.
This is like some of the people saying Wagler is Brandon Roy-like, and no, not even close.
Boozer might be a better athlete then some of us are giving credit for, and he may certainly become a top tier stud in the NBA, but he’s never going to be SF athletic.
Luka is one of the premier players in the world and it doesn’t mean he suddenly became young Kobe athletic.
Rich Rane wrote:I think we're all missing the point here. vc4pres needs to stop watching games.
