All Things 2017 Draft

[SmartWentCrazy]

It seems like Fultz is (more or less) the consensus #1 guy this year.

Based on how each player was viewed at the time they were drafted, how does he stack up against the past ten #1 overall picks?

Greg Oden
Derrick Rose
Blake Griffin
John Wall
Kyrie Irving
Anthony Davis
Anthony Bennett
Andrew Wiggins
Karl-Anthony Towns
Ben Simmons

Not really.

From everything we've heard, execs are split on Fultz and Lonzo for the top pick.

Absolutely. There's even been rumblings about Tatum and Jackson, too. I'd call Fultz the slight favorite as of this moment, but it all depends on the combine and lottery for sure.

[Gomes3PC]

If someone puts Tatum at the top of their draft board, they should probably be fired.

[SmartWentCrazy]

If someone puts Tatum at the top of their draft board, they should probably be fired.

Vecenie and Ford reported it on twitter.

Seems like a ridiculous statement here, to be honest, though I bet half of you thought the same about Jaylen Brown at 3, too.

[Gomes3PC]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

[SmartWentCrazy]

You want your GM taking the guy they're most confident in, not the consensus pick. That's what you pay them for. Doing elsewise leads to making mistakes like taking Okafor over Porzingis.

Edit- or Kelly **** Olynyk over Giannis

[DarkAzcura]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

I don't think there is anything dumb about wanting Tatum at the 1 or 2 spot in this draft. Fultz, Ball, Tatum, and Jackson are all potential #1 picks in a lot of drafts, and you can't go wrong with any of them really when considering their potential. I probably have Ball #4 of those guys actually (a lot of this has to do with his Dad, though..I thought he was pretty harmless/annoying a few months ago, but that guy has been insane the last couple months, imo).

A lot of people would probably hate on the team that actually does it unless a bunch of mock drafts change over the next two months, but most times out of 10, I'm probably preferring to take the wing who can potentially score 20-22 a game over a guard that potentially gets you ~25. I just think it is more valuable having a wing scorer than it is a guard scorer especially in today's landscape.

I think the only thing that would make it dumb is if it becomes clear that 95% of GMs would take Fultz or Ball with the 1 or 2. At that point, if you think Tatum is your guy, just trade down a spot or two to pick up more assets.

[Edug27]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

I don't think Ball or Jackson are special as you may think. Tatum can easily go above either. Not Fultz though.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I guess my final point is that the combine matters. If Tatum checks in above expectations and is 6'10 in shoes with a 9'1 reach, he could easily become the favorite to go 1. If he's 6'7.5, he'll drop. The same applies to Jackson, Fultz and Ball too. We have an incomplete picture right now, and these things matter.

[jfs1000d]

After this playoffs he's the last person I want. What good is an elite passer if he has nobody to pass the ball to? We need guys that can score and make open shots

Elite passers w/elite PG intelligence make the game easier for their teammates (see Rondo's effect on the Bulls).

Ball is also the best spot-up shooter at the PG position in the draft and creates a ton of easy buckets in transition and at the rim in half court.

After seeing this team in the playoffs, I'd seriously consider Zach Collins at #4 (if Lonzo is gone) and would inquire about the availability of a late lottery pick to get Harry Giles. What is really holding this team back is our defense/athleticism at 4/5. I'm still a big believer in Giles.

I don't know about Collins @4 but do really like him. I don't know how else to get him.

This is simple. If we are picking 4, and we feel that Collins is better than anyone else on the board. You take Collins. You have to trust your scouts.



Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[Gomes3PC]

I guess my final point is that the combine matters. If Tatum checks in above expectations and is 6'10 in shoes with a 9'1 reach, he could easily become the favorite to go 1. If he's 6'7.5, he'll drop. The same applies to Jackson, Fultz and Ball too. We have an incomplete picture right now, and these things matter.

I don't care what Tatum's standing reach is, he doesn't play defense and so even if he has a good wingspan he doesn't use it to his advantage. Give me a guy like Miles Bridges with ordinary measurables who actually know how to time a steal/block and play positional D all day. Length matters only if you use it to your advantage. Andrew Wiggins is a great example of that. For a guy with such a good wingspan and vertical leap, he should be able to be a havoc defender along the lines of a young Wade/Kobe, but instead he's at best mediocre.

[Gomes3PC]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

I don't think Ball or Jackson are special as you may think. Tatum can easily go above either. Not Fultz though.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

[Edug27]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

I don't think Ball or Jackson are special as you may think. Tatum can easily go above either. Not Fultz though.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

Transcendent passer? Really?

I'm not here to say Tatum is a better prospect. I'm just saying they are on similar levels. Tatum can score and he has great size. And no way Ball is a #2 on a contender either. Ball will have his own struggles against NBA defense.

[DarkAzcura]

Nope, Brown at 3 was plausible. If someone had put him 1 or 2, that would have been the equivalent of Tatum #1.

It doesn't shock me someone thinks that, there's still plenty of dumb decision makers in the NBA.

I don't think Ball or Jackson are special as you may think. Tatum can easily go above either. Not Fultz though.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

I haven't seen a college freshman as good in isolation as Tatum in years. I'd say he is pretty elite in that category, and that is probably the single most valuable trait you almost need from a wing on a championship contender dating back decades.

Having an elite passer like Ball would be nice, but it's far from necessary. Tatum potentially fills an almost required prerequisite for any team looking to become a championship contender.

[Gomes3PC]

Yes, Ball is a transcendent passer. He is on the level of a Wall, Kidd, Nash, CP3 type of passer.

He will have struggles defensively but he is a smart positional defender, reads defenses well like Rondo does to pick off passes, and has enough size that you can hide him on spot-up SGs or SFs.

[SmartWentCrazy]

I don't care what Tatum's standing reach is, he doesn't play defense and so even if he has a good wingspan he doesn't use it to his advantage. Give me a guy like Miles Bridges with ordinary measurables who actually know how to time a steal/block and play positional D all day. Length matters only if you use it to your advantage. Andrew Wiggins is a great example of that. For a guy with such a good wingspan and vertical leap, he should be able to be a havoc defender along the lines of a young Wade/Kobe, but instead he's at best mediocre.

This is just blatantly false. He wasn't a great defender, but wasn't poor either. He doesn't project as a strong defender at the next level cuz of his athleticism, but he's not going to be a sieve either. He was Dukes best wing defender easily last year.

And length also matters a ton on the other side of the ball. If he's a legitimate PF, his stock rises immensely.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

Tatum was literally the best post player in college last year per Synergy. He was an incredible FT shooter and all signs and metrics indicate his 3 should translate at the next level. Of all the prospects in the draft, he's in the top 3 (with Monk and Fultz) on being able to actually put the ball through the hoop. That matters. Especially in an offense first league.

[Homerclease]

I don't think Ball or Jackson are special as you may think. Tatum can easily go above either. Not Fultz though.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

I haven't seen a college freshman as good in isolation as Tatum in years. I'd say he is pretty elite in that category, and that is probably the single most valuable trait you almost need from a wing on a championship contender dating back decades.

Having an elite passer like Ball would be nice, but it's far from necessary. Tatum potentially fills an almost required prerequisite for any team looking to become a championship contender.

He reminds me of PP actually. Not an elite athlete but extremely crafty and that advanced ISO game you speak of. Paul wasn't an elite 3 point shooter coming into the league but became one as his career progressed.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Yes, Ball is a transcendent passer. He is on the level of a Wall, Kidd, Nash, CP3 type of passer.

He will have struggles defensively but he is a smart positional defender, reads defenses well like Rondo does to pick off passes, and has enough size that you can hide him on spot-up SGs or SFs.

Literally shocked at how you can praise Ball as a defender and degrade Tatum given that they project to make a similar impact at the next level.

[DarkAzcura]

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

I haven't seen a college freshman as good in isolation as Tatum in years. I'd say he is pretty elite in that category, and that is probably the single most valuable trait you almost need from a wing on a championship contender dating back decades.

Having an elite passer like Ball would be nice, but it's far from necessary. Tatum potentially fills an almost required prerequisite for any team looking to become a championship contender.

He reminds me of PP actually. Not an elite athlete but extremely crafty and that advanced ISO game you speak of. Paul wasn't an elite 3 point shooter coming into the league but became one as his career progressed.

That's how I feel also. The biggest difference is that Tatum probably will project to be a 3/4 while Pierce was a 2/3. Pretty minor, though, and I do think their games are fairly similar. If we got Tatum, I would absolutely love for him to be coached up by Pierce. He's pretty much the perfect guy for Pierce to mold and teach because of the similarities in advanced footwork.

Yes, Ball is a transcendent passer. He is on the level of a Wall, Kidd, Nash, CP3 type of passer.

He will have struggles defensively but he is a smart positional defender, reads defenses well like Rondo does to pick off passes, and has enough size that you can hide him on spot-up SGs or SFs.

None of those 4 won a championship as one of the the best players on their team. Kidd came the closest, but he came out of a historically weak East. Those Nets teams would get pummeled by teams like the Cavs, Celtics, Wizards, and Raptors nowadays. Nash could have done it, but his teams were ridiculously stacked with talent. In the end, he never pulled it off. CP3 has never been out of the second round.

I mean when was the last time an elite passing PG won a championship as one of the best players? Magic in the 80s? You could count Curry, but his best trait is scoring and shooting, not passing. I don't think Ball will ever be a 25-30 PPG guy, but who knows. I thought Curry would be great in the league but never a 25-30 PPG guy. Could be wrong about Ball in that respect also one day, but it's tough to see how he will be a 25+ PPG guy.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Honestly, I don't even think he should go 1, and personally wouldn't pick him. But calling for Ainge to be fired if he takes him 1 is one of the more absurd hot takes I've seen on this board.

[Gomes3PC]

I don't care what Tatum's standing reach is, he doesn't play defense and so even if he has a good wingspan he doesn't use it to his advantage. Give me a guy like Miles Bridges with ordinary measurables who actually know how to time a steal/block and play positional D all day. Length matters only if you use it to your advantage. Andrew Wiggins is a great example of that. For a guy with such a good wingspan and vertical leap, he should be able to be a havoc defender along the lines of a young Wade/Kobe, but instead he's at best mediocre.

This is just blatantly false. He wasn't a great defender, but wasn't poor either. He doesn't project as a strong defender at the next level cuz of his athleticism, but he's not going to be a sieve either. He was Dukes best wing defender easily last year.

And length also matters a ton on the other side of the ball. If he's a legitimate PF, his stock rises immensely.

Ball has his flaws, but he is a legitimately transcendent passer and a borderline elite spot up shooter. Those two skills alone guarantee he will have a long NBA career barring injury. Tatum does not possess a single truly elite skill. He's not a superlative athlete, he doesn't defend, his passing leaves a lot to be desired. He has extremely advanced footwork and shows potential to be a good stretch shooter based on his FT% but right now isn't there.

Overall, he's a very good prospect, one who should go top-5 in most drafts, but there's nothing there that shows he is likely to be even a #2 guy for a true contender. Fultz, Ball and Jackson all have that upside with similarly solid downsides to Tatum.

Tatum was literally the best post player in college last year per Synergy. He was an incredible FT shooter and all signs and metrics indicate his 3 should translate at the next level. Of all the prospects in the draft, he's in the top 3 (with Monk and Fultz) on being able to actually put the ball through the hoop. That matters. Especially in an offense first league.

Calling him Duke's best wing defender when the other two were Grayson Allen and Luke Kennard is damning with faint praise. He's an indifferent defender. The poor man's Melo comparisons are apt. If Melo actually tried on D, he could be good. If Tatum really cared about defending, he'll be fine on that end, but too often he took naps defensively and just let inferior athletes in college beat him. If he's doing that in ACC games, I don't expect a light switch to turn on in the NBA.

Like I said, I expect his shooting to translate. I just think he's not gonna do much else at an above average level in the NBA except score. That matters, and that's why I have him top-5, but the three guys ahead of him all do 2-3 things that are elite. Hell, even D'Aaron Fox does more elite things, I just have him lower because I have almost no trust in his ability to learn to shoot at a position which pretty much requires you to be a plus shooter. He's a solid rebounder but nothing special especially since he's most likely gonna have to play PF in the NBA. He has good size but not elite. He's a solid athlete but won't stand out in the NBA. His passing leaves a lot to be desired but he's at least not a black hole.

I don't hate Tatum. He's #4 on my list. It's just to me, there's a material gap between the top 3 and him. Well, really, to me it's Fultz, then a gap, then Ball/Jackson, then Tatum and Fox.