2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread IV

[Kobblehead]

how high do you guys think jordan bell goes.

Unless some playoff team in the mid-to-late 20s snags him, I think he'll be available in the first 10 picks of the 2nd round.

[PLO]

Ball is fairly athletic but he's not all that agile, it's the reason he'll probably be not good as a defender. Just doesn't have the horizontal quickness needed to be a good POA defender; but he definitely has hops and some straight line speed

[LloydFree]

I disagree if we're talking chance at being exceptional. Analyzing the top prospects, I look for which tool could carry them to being elite. Ball's bbiq, vision and passing are extraordinary. Kidd, Simmons, Bird like. Jackson's athleticism for a 6'8 wing is rare. If his shot continues to improve --like it did second half of the year-- %50 3pt and 63.75% FT-- he'll be a star. I've yet to see any experts recognize his improvement there. Instead, they fidget over his FT%, which is why we might just be lucky enough to get him at 3.

Isaac, you'll get no argument from me, I may take him at 4 despite our obvious need, but he is raw in every way. He likely needs to be a 4, can he put on mass and strength? Does he have the mentality to take over a game?

Fultz, I think he is good at everything, but I'm not certain he'll be a star. Which tool will make Fultz elite? Taytum, same thing. Both have a high floor for me, so in the sense that they're unlikely to bust they are safe picks to me.

Hey man. Are you inside my head? Pretty much sums up my exact feelings on Ball, Jackson, Isaac, Fultz and Tatum.

I think the most controversial thing we agree on-- besides wanting JJ more than most-- is Fultz may be overrated. I would take him 3rd, and I'm not sure, or don't recall if you would... Besides him not flashing an elite level skill, what bothers me is he seems to be slow, or maybe deliberate is a better term. Doesn't have a quick first step. He's not the explosive athlete Jackson, DSJ, and Isaac are. He is a good shooter though, and if his ability to finish translates I could see him being a really good player because I think he'll make his living driving and being crafty with hesitation moves etc.. That and the fact that he is a great positional fit for the Sixers, I wouldn't cry if he slid to 3-- but I'd be pissed if BC traded up for him.

I go back and forth on who I think is 3rd. Fultz is probably 3rd, because he has a variety of skills that should give him the high floor of being a good player. I'm like you, in that I don't see him with any tool that is elite, other than wingspan for a PG. Two of the things he does that are elite at the college level, aren't necessarily predictive of NBA stardom​. Asist to Turnovers ratio and FT rate are his calling​ cards. Most every star in the league had a medium to high turnover rate in college, so assist to turnover rate is meaningless. And Ft rate, while being more important than turnover rate as a predictive stat, doesnt always mean much, otherwise Evan Turner and Julius Randle would be headed to the Hall of Fame.

Bottom line is that don't think he has elite burst or lateral movement and I don't like that he has trouble creating separation from defenders without the help of screens. He takes way too many contested shots, in college, that he won't get off in the NBA. I see that as a potential problem.

[ivysixer2000]

Ball is fairly athletic but he's not all that agile, it's the reason he'll probably be not good as a defender. Just doesn't have the horizontal quickness needed to be a good POA defender; but he definitely has hops and some straight line speed

Yeah he definitely didn't have the lateral quickness to stay in front of Fox. Most, if not all, of these guys need some development, so we will have to be patient with them.

There is a reason our thoughts on the picks are all over the map.

[SelfishPlayer]

I don't have expectations for any prospect with under a 6'10" wingspan to be much of a defensive player.

[sixerswillrule]

So the last draft (not counting the past few) where each of the top 3 picks turned out to be really good (~top 40-50 player in the league) was in 1999 with Brand, Francis, and Baron Davis. Maybe 2004 depending on how you view Emeka Okafor. So almost every year, at least one of the top 3 picks is a semi-bust (i.e. only becoming an average starter), or a total bust.

[timLH]

So the last draft (not counting the past few) where each of the top 3 picks turned out to be really good (~top 40-50 player in the league) was in 1999 with Brand, Francis, and Baron Davis. Maybe 2004 depending on how you view Emeka Okafor. So almost every year, at least one of the top 3 picks is a semi-bust (i.e. only becoming an average starter), or a total bust.

You make me think of Turner and Okafor...

[SelfishPlayer]

So the last draft (not counting the past few) where each of the top 3 picks turned out to be really good (~top 40-50 player in the league) was in 1999 with Brand, Francis, and Baron Davis. Maybe 2004 depending on how you view Emeka Okafor. So almost every year, at least one of the top 3 picks is a semi-bust (i.e. only becoming an average starter), or a total bust.

Great idea, let me one up you, not since 1976 has a PG drafted in the top 3 became a bust on the basketball court. That pick was John Lucas who was drafted #1 overall, played a long career with no recognition for excellence. Seems like I instinctively knew that being that Fox and Ball are my top two prospects with DSJ third by default because I dislike him the least.

[sixers hoops]

Hey man. Are you inside my head? Pretty much sums up my exact feelings on Ball, Jackson, Isaac, Fultz and Tatum.

I think the most controversial thing we agree on-- besides wanting JJ more than most-- is Fultz may be overrated. I would take him 3rd, and I'm not sure, or don't recall if you would... Besides him not flashing an elite level skill, what bothers me is he seems to be slow, or maybe deliberate is a better term. Doesn't have a quick first step. He's not the explosive athlete Jackson, DSJ, and Isaac are. He is a good shooter though, and if his ability to finish translates I could see him being a really good player because I think he'll make his living driving and being crafty with hesitation moves etc.. That and the fact that he is a great positional fit for the Sixers, I wouldn't cry if he slid to 3-- but I'd be pissed if BC traded up for him.

I go back and forth on who I think is 3rd. Fultz is probably 3rd, because he has a variety of skills that should give him the high floor of being a good player. I'm like you, in that I don't see him with any tool that is elite, other than wingspan for a PG. Two of the things he does that are elite at the college level, aren't necessarily predictive of NBA stardom​. Asist to Turnovers ratio and FT rate are his calling​ cards. Most every star in the league had a medium to high turnover rate in college, so assist to turnover rate is meaningless. And Ft rate, while being more important than turnover rate as a predictive stat, doesnt always mean much, otherwise Evan Turner and Julius Randle would be headed to the Hall of Fame.

Bottom line is that don't think he has elite burst or lateral movement and I don't like that he has trouble creating separation from defenders without the help of screens. He takes way too many contested shots in college, that he won't get off in the NBA. I see that as a potential problem.

I usually would have watched a ton of games by now to form an opinion of the prospects, but I feel like we get the best remaining player of Fultz, Ball, or Jackson. While Monk, Fox, Isaac, DSJ, and Tatum are throw out there, it seems like there is a general top 3.

[HankTheTank]

Yep, just take whoever of those 3 falls to you. I hated to hear Jerry Colangelo chiming in on Ball-- "it's going to be a challenge with those around him." I certainly hope the organization wouldn't pass on him because of his dad. That would be a colossal mistake.

[Bum Adebayo]

Yeah always go consensus, if mock drafts are saying Fultz, Ball and Jackson are top 3 then this means they are the best, yeah, NO.

[Eyeamok]

I don't consider a player athletic based on his vertical, a guy can have a 40" vertical but in traffic can't really jump, many players have a good vertical but they can only jump high in space. Also the best athletes IMO are those with the combo of explosiveness+strength, it is not the same if a guy can jump but at 170lbs instead of one who does it at 200lbs. Guys like Deandre Jordan are special because of this.

OK so why didn't you take a position on the Ball Jackson athletic discussion. Would have liked your input.

[snoopdogg88]

despite all the disappointed fans at the lottery (which I never understood ), the Sixers are in an amazing spot. we're getting either Lonzo Ball or Josh Jackson. it's a good place to be.

thrilled with either one. just don't get cute and trade down because of "fit"

[Negrodamus]

Read on Twitter

[Negrodamus]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[MR28]

I reaaaaaaaally like him =/

[freshie2]

It's easy to like both Fox and Mitchell...would be great to get BPA at 3 and get one of them with a slightly later pick,

[HotelVitale]

I don't consider a player athletic based on his vertical, a guy can have a 40" vertical but in traffic can't really jump, many players have a good vertical but they can only jump high in space. Also the best athletes IMO are those with the combo of explosiveness+strength, it is not the same if a guy can jump but at 170lbs instead of one who does it at 200lbs. Guys like Deandre Jordan are special because of this.

OK so why didn't you take a position on the Ball Jackson athletic discussion. Would have liked your input.

Jumping is also consistently overrated as far as NBA athleticism goes. It's pretty important for slashers--who need hangtime to finish in traffic--and can help a lot for perimeter jumpshooters, but things like quickness and body control at high speeds are much more important for the average player. Things like strength, coordination after contact, footwork, and speed are also usually more important/useful than pure hops. (The only thing nice about ups is that it usually comes with good speed, strength, etc.)

[Mik317]

yep. Evan Turner's vert is pretty good iirc but he lacked the first step to get by folks.

Now being able to jump high is useful for sure but a lot of guys only can use that ability when they have space and an open lane. The great finishers have the first step to get by folks, the body control to get a good look in traffic and finish, and a shitton of counter moves (i.e footwork) in case the lane actually closes on em. That however if rather hard to evaluate as the NBA spacing opens up a lot for folks but the speed also closes down a lot for people. Those for Dennis Smith often point to how awful the spacing on his squad was but its often the case for most guys because the college lane is allowed to be so clogged...and yet on the same token how many guys are benefitting from being guarded by future overseas role players? Its fun to internet scout folks but lawd would I hate to have to put my life on the line for it.

[Negrodamus]

https://streamable.com/8ybmh

https://gfycat.com/DeadlyGleefulBettong