2018 NBA Draft

[Derento]

Is there much of a difference between Porter and Tatum?

Porter has legit power forward/center length
He's better at shooting threes.
He's more explosive than Tatum.
I would say Tatum has better handle and vision.

[GimmeDat]

This is from nbadraft.net this week re: Porter -

Most scouts we spoke to this week felt that Porter will not only be the top pick in 2018, but he would be the top pick in this year's draft if he were available. He has the tools to be an eventual franchise cornerstone and what you look for in a top scoring forward, and he displayed them in front of a great deal of NBA decision makers this week.

[nolang1]

Notes from Nike Hoop summit in Real GM, guy claims Porter would go #1 over Fultz and Ball. Thoughts?

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

[CptCrunch]

Notes from Nike Hoop summit in Real GM, guy claims Porter would go #1 over Fultz and Ball. Thoughts?

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

This x100. 1 year is a huge deal in high school. Josh Jackson is another +1 kid.

The real prize next year is Luka Doncic, who in my opinion is the best prospect since LeBron James.

[Brauer]

Agreed on the age thing. The top guys in 2018 are actually all order than expected.

[Marcus]

Notes from Nike Hoop summit in Real GM, guy claims Porter would go #1 over Fultz and Ball. Thoughts?

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

I don't understand the significance of the one month age difference. If scouts are saying he would go number one this year over Fultz I doubt it has anything to do with age. If Porter were in this 17 draft class and coming out as a prospect one month younger than Fultz would that be the selling point for him? The intrigue with Porter is skillset for his size. That doesn't change regardless of age. If we're talking identical prospects in size and skill then yeah you'd want to take the younger model. That's not the conversation being had though.

[Marcus]

Notes from Nike Hoop summit in Real GM, guy claims Porter would go #1 over Fultz and Ball. Thoughts?

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

This x100. 1 year is a huge deal in high school. Josh Jackson is another +1 kid.

The real prize next year is Luka Doncic, who in my opinion is the best prospect since LeBron James.

Do you feel Josh underwhelmed at Kansas playing against more guys his age?

[nolang1]

Notes from Nike Hoop summit in Real GM, guy claims Porter would go #1 over Fultz and Ball. Thoughts?

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

I don't understand the significance of the one month age difference. If scouts are saying he would go number one this year over Fultz I doubt it has anything to do with age. If Porter were in this 17 draft class and coming out as a prospect one month younger than Fultz would that be the selling point for him? The intrigue with Porter is skillset for his size. That doesn't change regardless of age. If we're talking identical prospects in size and skill then yeah you'd want to take the younger model. That's not the conversation being had though.

It's because they're comparing Fultz playing for a losing college team to Porter dominating high schoolers. We don't yet know how Porter will play against NCAA competition as a 19-20 year old, but we could at least safely assume that Fultz would improve upon his averages of 23, 6, and 6 if he stuck around for another year. Porter and Fultz have similarly good size for the position they will play.

The two played for the same team last summer (USA U18) and Fultz was considerably more impressive than Porter then.

[reanimator]

Yeah, I don't see the argument for Porter Jr over Fultz unless you buy into him as a plus defender at the 4 spot or improving as a handler/playmaker but I would slot him above Ball/JJ/DSJ and most definitely Tatum and Isaac.

[Marcus]

This is another piece of evidence that people don't look at age as much as they should. Porter is only younger than Fultz by a month and would need to have a runaway NPOY-caliber season next year to be similarly ahead of the curve for that age.

If Porter's 3-point percentage is in the mid-to-low 30's next year, he probably loses a little of luster as a true 'franchise' type of wing because he doesn't have the playmaking/defensive potential of players like Durant, Kawhi, or Giannis.

I don't understand the significance of the one month age difference. If scouts are saying he would go number one this year over Fultz I doubt it has anything to do with age. If Porter were in this 17 draft class and coming out as a prospect one month younger than Fultz would that be the selling point for him? The intrigue with Porter is skillset for his size. That doesn't change regardless of age. If we're talking identical prospects in size and skill then yeah you'd want to take the younger model. That's not the conversation being had though.

It's because they're comparing Fultz playing for a losing college team to Porter dominating high schoolers. We don't yet know how Porter will play against NCAA competition as a 19-20 year old, but we could at least safely assume that Fultz would improve upon his averages of 23, 6, and 6 if he stuck around for another year. Porter and Fultz have similarly good size for the position they will play.

The two played for the same team last summer (USA U18) and Fultz was considerably more impressive than Porter then.

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

[Brauer]

I don't understand the significance of the one month age difference. If scouts are saying he would go number one this year over Fultz I doubt it has anything to do with age. If Porter were in this 17 draft class and coming out as a prospect one month younger than Fultz would that be the selling point for him? The intrigue with Porter is skillset for his size. That doesn't change regardless of age. If we're talking identical prospects in size and skill then yeah you'd want to take the younger model. That's not the conversation being had though.

It's because they're comparing Fultz playing for a losing college team to Porter dominating high schoolers. We don't yet know how Porter will play against NCAA competition as a 19-20 year old, but we could at least safely assume that Fultz would improve upon his averages of 23, 6, and 6 if he stuck around for another year. Porter and Fultz have similarly good size for the position they will play.

The two played for the same team last summer (USA U18) and Fultz was considerably more impressive than Porter then.

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

The thing is people often forget that they are at about the same point of athletic and skill development. Porter might look more impressive relative to competition because of this, but is less proven than Fultz. It makes his potential look higher than it is and that might incorrectly influence some people's opinions.

[Marcus]

Yeah, I don't see the argument for Porter Jr over Fultz unless you buy into him as a plus defender at the 4 spot or improving as a handler/playmaker but I would slot him above Ball/JJ/DSJ and most definitely Tatum and Isaac.

Size and skill. Gameplay loves little guys but the league still rates size and skill combos higher.

[Marcus]

It's because they're comparing Fultz playing for a losing college team to Porter dominating high schoolers. We don't yet know how Porter will play against NCAA competition as a 19-20 year old, but we could at least safely assume that Fultz would improve upon his averages of 23, 6, and 6 if he stuck around for another year. Porter and Fultz have similarly good size for the position they will play.

The two played for the same team last summer (USA U18) and Fultz was considerably more impressive than Porter then.

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

The thing is people often forget that they are at about the same point of athletic and skill development. Porter might look more impressive relative to competition because of this, but is less proven than Fultz. It makes his potential look higher than it is and that might incorrectly influence some people's opinions.

As true as that is and could very well prove to be, the conversation was/is right now. The appeal with Porter are things that aren't going to sway back in the favor of Fultz unless Kelle grows 5 to 6 inches. Porter still does have to show and prove at the next level regardless but the conversation surrounding his intrigue right now and the statement made in that game has nothing to do with his age. It would be the same if they were in the same class. They love Porter for what he brings to the table period. Not just because it was against high school kids. That's the only point I was making.

[nolang1]

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

How is this so complicated? Fultz would look bigger and more skilled playing against high school players; Porter would look not as big or skilled had he had been a college freshman this year.

[reanimator]

Yeah, I don't see the argument for Porter Jr over Fultz unless you buy into him as a plus defender at the 4 spot or improving as a handler/playmaker but I would slot him above Ball/JJ/DSJ and most definitely Tatum and Isaac.

Size and skill. Gameplay loves little guys but the league still rates size and skill combos higher.

Fultz is a legitimate first option, Porter is not.

[Marcus]

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

How is this so complicated? Fultz would look bigger and more skilled playing against high school players; Porter would look not as big or skilled had he had been a college freshman this year.

lol. so you know that for a fact?

[Marcus]

Yeah, I don't see the argument for Porter Jr over Fultz unless you buy into him as a plus defender at the 4 spot or improving as a handler/playmaker but I would slot him above Ball/JJ/DSJ and most definitely Tatum and Isaac.

Size and skill. Gameplay loves little guys but the league still rates size and skill combos higher.

Fultz is a legitimate first option, Porter is not.

You very well may be right. Not the point I was making though.

[reanimator]

Size and skill. Gameplay loves little guys but the league still rates size and skill combos higher.

Fultz is a legitimate first option, Porter is not.

You very well may be right. Not the point I was making though.

Are teams taking Harrison Barnes over Steph Curry? Paul George over Harden?

[nolang1]

I watched that game I don't remember them saying anything about Washington's or Nathan Hale's records. They were talking about Porter's size and skill in the eyes of NBA scouts.

I'm not advocating for Porter being more talented than Fultz or even saying that I agree he should/would be picked higher. I just don't see where the age argument comes into play in this situation. Seems like age is used as reasoning in situations where it holds no real relevance to the conversation.

How is this so complicated? Fultz would look bigger and more skilled playing against high school players; Porter would look not as big or skilled had he had been a college freshman this year.

lol. so you know that for a fact?

Yes, I know for a fact that college players are bigger and more skilled than high school players, so one will look bigger and more skilled relative to the competition when playing against high schoolers.

To take Porter over Fultz at this point is to assume that Porter will either be some three-point assassin during his one year of college or will show the ability to move up to the 4/5 and protect the rim a la Jonathan Isaac. That to me is going out on a slightly longer limb than to assume that a player would have more flaws in his game exposed by playing against college, rather than high school, competition.

[Marcus]

Fultz is a legitimate first option, Porter is not.

You very well may be right. Not the point I was making though.

Are teams taking Harrison Barnes over Steph Curry? Paul George over Harden?

Dunno depends on the team.

Teams took Darko and Bosh over D-Wade. Definitely took Thabeet over Harden and Curry. Reaches and poor decisions are made in the draft. This is a known thing. Porter presents physical gifts over Fultz that may influence teams and scouts into thinking he's the better prospect. Not a foreign concept.