Kyle Anderson

[Onus]

A great way to put the ball in his hands without having to take it away from whoever a team's star/PG is: Sixth Man. I think Anderson can be a perfect 6th man, and that's an extremely valuable thing in the NBA. If you look at all of the best teams in the NBA, one of the things that they all have in common (with the exception of Indiana) is that their benches are among the league leaders in minutes per game (relative to other team's benches).

Anderson is a perfect sixth man because you can sub him in for a PG, SG, SF, or PF, and still be able to put a functional lineup around him. You can give him the ball and let him create for the rest of your bench players, and generally speaking, he'll be going against lesser competition when matched up against bench players, so he'll be able to take better advantage of his skill level. If I were picking in the 12+ range, I would love to add him to my team.

I think he'd be a great fit for pretty much any of the teams picking between Phoenix and Charlotte in this year's draft.

Other than the teams that already have a 6th man that is already ball dominant like Pho, NO, Phi depending on what the FO wants out of Wroten (I would put Kyle ahead of the development before Wroten but who knows), Cle.

[machu46]

A great way to put the ball in his hands without having to take it away from whoever a team's star/PG is: Sixth Man. I think Anderson can be a perfect 6th man, and that's an extremely valuable thing in the NBA. If you look at all of the best teams in the NBA, one of the things that they all have in common (with the exception of Indiana) is that their benches are among the league leaders in minutes per game (relative to other team's benches).

Anderson is a perfect sixth man because you can sub him in for a PG, SG, SF, or PF, and still be able to put a functional lineup around him. You can give him the ball and let him create for the rest of your bench players, and generally speaking, he'll be going against lesser competition when matched up against bench players, so he'll be able to take better advantage of his skill level. If I were picking in the 12+ range, I would love to add him to my team.

I think he'd be a great fit for pretty much any of the teams picking between Phoenix and Charlotte in this year's draft.

Other than the teams that already have a 6th man that is already ball dominant like Pho, NO, Phi depending on what the FO wants out of Wroten (I would put Kyle ahead of the development before Wroten but who knows), Cle.

Who is Phoenix's ball-dominant 6th man? And New Orleans doesn't have a 1st round pick this year unless I'm missing something. Philly and Cleveland don't have picks in that range either, so I'm a little confused by your post lol.

[Onus]

A great way to put the ball in his hands without having to take it away from whoever a team's star/PG is: Sixth Man. I think Anderson can be a perfect 6th man, and that's an extremely valuable thing in the NBA. If you look at all of the best teams in the NBA, one of the things that they all have in common (with the exception of Indiana) is that their benches are among the league leaders in minutes per game (relative to other team's benches).

Anderson is a perfect sixth man because you can sub him in for a PG, SG, SF, or PF, and still be able to put a functional lineup around him. You can give him the ball and let him create for the rest of your bench players, and generally speaking, he'll be going against lesser competition when matched up against bench players, so he'll be able to take better advantage of his skill level. If I were picking in the 12+ range, I would love to add him to my team.

I think he'd be a great fit for pretty much any of the teams picking between Phoenix and Charlotte in this year's draft.

Other than the teams that already have a 6th man that is already ball dominant like Pho, NO, Phi depending on what the FO wants out of Wroten (I would put Kyle ahead of the development before Wroten but who knows), Cle.

Who is Phoenix's ball-dominant 6th man? And New Orleans doesn't have a 1st round pick this year unless I'm missing something. Philly and Cleveland don't have picks in that range either, so I'm a little confused by your post lol.

Pho is Dragic or Bledsoe, take your pick.

I forgot about NO not having a pick. I was just stating teams that wouldn't necessarily put the ball in his hands from the draft.

picks in what range? Phi can go from 2 and 10, Cle is 9.

I guess you're talking about 12+, but if you're following this discussion we're talking about him as a top 10 pick possibly top 5.

[Notanoob]

Pho is Dragic or Bledsoe, take your pick.

Both of them are starters.

[EvanZ]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

[Onus]

Pho is Dragic or Bledsoe, take your pick.

Both of them are starters.

Either one will be running with the 2nd team, as they did last year before injuries.

[Onus]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

Jamal Crawford came into the league as a supposed pg prospect and didn't become a 6th man scorer until later in his career.

I understand it's hard to envision from a rational point of view, but teams do irrational things, like trying to put smoove as a sf, or playing KD as a SG so you can play Jeff Green as a SF, or trying to make Bazemore a pg, or drafting 3 pgs and not winding up with the best one of the draft, or drafting Derrick Williams when you already have Love or drafting CJ McCollum and then signing Mo Williams to take his backup pg minutes. There's plenty of examples of GMs and coaches doing stupid ****.

All these things seem like no-brainers yet they still happen.

[EvanZ]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

Jamal Crawford came into the league as a supposed pg prospect and didn't become a 6th man scorer until later in his career.

I understand it's hard to envision from a rational point of view, but teams do irrational things, like trying to put smoove as a sf, or playing KD as a SG so you can play Jeff Green as a SF, or trying to make Bazemore a pg, or drafting 3 pgs and not winding up with the best one of the draft, or drafting Derrick Williams when you already have Love or drafting CJ McCollum and then signing Mo Williams to take his backup pg minutes. There's plenty of examples of GMs and coaches doing stupid ****.

All these things seem like no-brainers yet they still happen.

Those examples seem like no-brainers *now* with hindsight. I don't know anyone who legitimately thinks Anderson should play off the ball.

Anderson is projected to go high because of what he can do with the ball. My only concern would be that a team gives him the ball too much, and somehow he turns out to be a taller version of Evan Turner. I won't presume he's a "safe" pick, because if he were, he's be a top 3 pick.

[EvanZ]

Pho is Dragic or Bledsoe, take your pick.

Both of them are starters.

Either one will be running with the 2nd team, as they did last year before injuries.

They were starting together before the injuries. To refresh your memory:

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2014/ ... ye-plumlee

The Suns most productive starting lineup will be together for the opening tip for the first time since a December 30 romping of the Los Angeles Clippers. In that game, Eric Bledsoe's meniscus tore in his knee, sidelining him for 10 weeks.

At that point, the Suns starting five of Goran Dragic, Eric Bledsoe, P.J. Tucker, Channing Frye and Miles Plumlee won 12 of 16 games in which no one got hurt. Twice, Dragic left a game in the 4th due to injury and the Suns lost.

[EvanZ]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

Jamal Crawford came into the league as a supposed pg prospect and didn't become a 6th man scorer until later in his career.

I understand it's hard to envision from a rational point of view, but teams do irrational things, like trying to put smoove as a sf, or playing KD as a SG so you can play Jeff Green as a SF, or trying to make Bazemore a pg, or drafting 3 pgs and not winding up with the best one of the draft, or drafting Derrick Williams when you already have Love or drafting CJ McCollum and then signing Mo Williams to take his backup pg minutes. There's plenty of examples of GMs and coaches doing stupid ****.

All these things seem like no-brainers yet they still happen.

Also, OKC tried to make Green a PF, so KD could be the SF.

[Onus]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

Jamal Crawford came into the league as a supposed pg prospect and didn't become a 6th man scorer until later in his career.

I understand it's hard to envision from a rational point of view, but teams do irrational things, like trying to put smoove as a sf, or playing KD as a SG so you can play Jeff Green as a SF, or trying to make Bazemore a pg, or drafting 3 pgs and not winding up with the best one of the draft, or drafting Derrick Williams when you already have Love or drafting CJ McCollum and then signing Mo Williams to take his backup pg minutes. There's plenty of examples of GMs and coaches doing stupid ****.

All these things seem like no-brainers yet they still happen.

Those examples seem like no-brainers *now* with hindsight. I don't know anyone who legitimately thinks Anderson should play off the ball.

Anderson is projected to go high because of what he can do with the ball. My only concern would be that a team gives him the ball too much, and somehow he turns out to be a taller version of Evan Turner. I won't presume he's a "safe" pick, because if he were, he's be a top 3 pick.

I doubt anyone does either, but if you have a pg that's ball dominant or even a recent high draft pick that is ball dominant do you risk taking the ball out of their hands and put it in the hands of someone who may not be as high of a draft pick, say 12+ as the other poster suggested. If he's a high draft pick as he should be I can see him getting the benefit of the doubt, but if he's drafted later there could arise a situation where the team could be more invested.

Anyways I think he should be top 5 but for some teams he shouldn't be top 5. Meaning not everyone's draftboard should be the same even if he's bpa based on skills and projection because of team fit and opportunity.

[Onus]

Both of them are starters.

Either one will be running with the 2nd team, as they did last year before injuries.

They were starting together before the injuries. To refresh your memory:

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2014/ ... ye-plumlee

The Suns most productive starting lineup will be together for the opening tip for the first time since a December 30 romping of the Los Angeles Clippers. In that game, Eric Bledsoe's meniscus tore in his knee, sidelining him for 10 weeks.

At that point, the Suns starting five of Goran Dragic, Eric Bledsoe, P.J. Tucker, Channing Frye and Miles Plumlee won 12 of 16 games in which no one got hurt. Twice, Dragic left a game in the 4th due to injury and the Suns lost.

So are you telling me they really foresaw Ish Smith as the backup pg? Instead of using either Dragic or Bledsoe to run the second unit? I know they started together but I highly doubt Horny didn't stagger their minutes so that one of them was on the court to run the team.

[Onus]

I can't imagine a team drafting Anderson and thinking, hey, this guy's best role is off the ball running around screens and cutting to the basket.

He's a known commodity for 4 or 5 years as a guy who has great court vision and passing ability. There's literally nobody affiliated with American professional basketball that doesn't know that.

It's like saying if Andrew Bogut isn't used as a rim protector he's not being used properly. Or if Jamal Crawford is not used as a volume shooter off the bench he's not being used properly. As sure as the sun rises and sets, some things are just known.

Jamal Crawford came into the league as a supposed pg prospect and didn't become a 6th man scorer until later in his career.

I understand it's hard to envision from a rational point of view, but teams do irrational things, like trying to put smoove as a sf, or playing KD as a SG so you can play Jeff Green as a SF, or trying to make Bazemore a pg, or drafting 3 pgs and not winding up with the best one of the draft, or drafting Derrick Williams when you already have Love or drafting CJ McCollum and then signing Mo Williams to take his backup pg minutes. There's plenty of examples of GMs and coaches doing stupid ****.

All these things seem like no-brainers yet they still happen.

Also, OKC tried to make Green a PF, so KD could be the SF.

That was after the first year. The first year KD and Green was drafted PJ, I think Carlisemo was the coach, tried KD at the 2 and Green at the 3.

The lineup was Earl Watson, KD, Green, Collison, Petro ...

[EvanZ]

So are you telling me they really foresaw Ish Smith as the backup pg? Instead of using either Dragic or Bledsoe to run the second unit? I know they started together but I highly doubt Horny didn't stagger their minutes so that one of them was on the court to run the team.

Did we see Toney Douglas as the backup PG? Or Kent Bazemore?

[EvanZ]

Anyways I think he should be top 5 but for some teams he shouldn't be top 5. Meaning not everyone's draftboard should be the same even if he's bpa based on skills and projection because of team fit and opportunity.

I subscribe to the tier system. If you really think he's in a higher tier than another guy, you take him regardless of fit. If you think he's in the same tier as another guy, then you make the pick based on fit.

[Onus]

So are you telling me they really foresaw Ish Smith as the backup pg? Instead of using either Dragic or Bledsoe to run the second unit? I know they started together but I highly doubt Horny didn't stagger their minutes so that one of them was on the court to run the team.

Did we see Toney Douglas as the backup PG? Or Kent Bazemore?

Both?

[Onus]

Anyways I think he should be top 5 but for some teams he shouldn't be top 5. Meaning not everyone's draftboard should be the same even if he's bpa based on skills and projection because of team fit and opportunity.

I subscribe to the tier system. If you really think he's in a higher tier than another guy, you take him regardless of fit. If you think he's in the same tier as another guy, then you make the pick based on fit.

Ok even if you're using a tier system, he should be in a higher tier for certain teams and in lower tiers for other teams.

Can you really imagine Rondo and Kyle playing together?

[EvanZ]

Anyways I think he should be top 5 but for some teams he shouldn't be top 5. Meaning not everyone's draftboard should be the same even if he's bpa based on skills and projection because of team fit and opportunity.

I subscribe to the tier system. If you really think he's in a higher tier than another guy, you take him regardless of fit. If you think he's in the same tier as another guy, then you make the pick based on fit.

Ok even if you're using a tier system, he should be in a higher tier for certain teams and in lower tiers for other teams.

Can you really imagine Rondo and Kyle playing together?

Apparently you need a real GM lesson, because you don't know what the tier system is.

No, players should not be in different tiers for different teams, not if they're based on talent. That would negate the point. In theory, the tier a player is in represents his potential, let's say according to RAPM or whether he is an All-Star vs. a solid starter.

If you truly believe Anderson is a potential All-Star you draft him no matter what. No matter what.

Example, if Lillard had fallen to the Warriors, clearly, you don't play him with Curry. But (at least with hindsight) you draft him above Barnes, because he is several tiers better. Same logic with Andre Drummond. It should not have stopped the Warriors from drafting him that they already had Bogut, even though we know Drummond and Bogut couldn't play together.

That's how tiers work. You draft the best player and figure out what to do with him later. If nothing else, you have landed an extremely valuable trade chip.

The hard part is identifying the tiers, but the logic is very clear. It's all about talent and trade assets.

[Onus]

I subscribe to the tier system. If you really think he's in a higher tier than another guy, you take him regardless of fit. If you think he's in the same tier as another guy, then you make the pick based on fit.

Ok even if you're using a tier system, he should be in a higher tier for certain teams and in lower tiers for other teams.

Can you really imagine Rondo and Kyle playing together?

Apparently you need a real GM lesson, because you don't know what the tier system is.

No, players should not be in different tiers for different teams. That would negate the point. In theory, the tier a player is in represents his potential, let's say according to RAPM or whether he is an All-Star vs. a solid starter.

If you truly believe Anderson is a potential All-Star you draft him no matter what. No matter what.

Example, if Lillard had fallen to the Warriors, clearly, you don't play him with Curry. But (at least with hindsight) you draft him above Barnes, because he is several tiers better.

That's how tiers work. You draft the best player and figure out what to do with him later. If nothing else, you have landed an extremely valuable trade chip.

That's assuming that Lillard still becomes Lillard playing in a reduced role with much less leeway to freelance and jack up shots. If Curry is playing 33 min a game that leaves 15 for Lillard, will Lillard will be able to get into a flow in 15 min? And even if he does will he continue to play while Steph sits? Can he play with Steph, Lillard's d is terrible.

So let's say he doesn't become Lillard with the Warriors because of the lack of opportunity, do you still think you're going to get full value when you trade him? No you won't, just like Evan Turner didn't get full value back, Derrick Williams didn't get full value, Thomas Robinson didn't get full value. Once a prospect is a known quantity they don't retain the same value they had as a draft pick.

I believe prospects need an opportunity to flourish. CJ McCollum do you think he'll get full value even though he was bpa for Por now that he's playing behind Dame and Mo?

I understand how tiers work, but tiers only work when you account for your current system and team. Some players are unable to achieve their full potential in certain situations because the same opportunities aren't available.

There are plenty of times when a change of scenery allows a prospect's game to truly flourish because new opportunities arise.

[EvanZ]

I believe prospects need an opportunity to flourish. CJ McCollum do you think he'll get full value even though he was bpa for Por now that he's playing behind Dame and Mo?

bull. This is how people make excuses for Harrison Barnes. Players *earn* their opportunities.

Cream rises to the top.

Your example of Evan Turner is exactly the type of player who didn't earn his opportunity and he SUCKS. He still sucks even given as big an opportunity as anyone can be given.

Hell, they traded Andre Iguodala to give that bozo all the opportunity in the world. Draymond gets 13 mpg for much of the season, and had everybody begging to give him more time. Barnes was given a starting job from day 1, and never earned it, then everybody cries when they give his job to Iguodala.

lol, it's a losers mentality. You earn your minutes. Period. Lillard would have earned playing time, just like Bledsoe did even though he was playing with Chris Paul. And his trade value netted them Redick and Jared Dudley.

That's keeping it real GM. BPA. No excuses.