ImageImageImage

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

Moderators: BullyKing, HartfordWhalers, sixers hoops, Foshan, Sixerscan

User avatar
76ciology
RealGM
Posts: 65,923
And1: 26,891
Joined: Jun 06, 2002

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

Post#841 » by 76ciology » Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:07 am

SelfishPlayer wrote:
76ciology wrote:
SelfishPlayer wrote:
You call it versatility, I call it not shocking for a 20 year old freshman... Now will his 207lb body be able to play PF and center against 240lb grown men, or will his game fall apart like what was detailed in the video? Since you're some kind of fan of Josh Jackson's you will say, "but he's really a wing anyway," but in reality that is not what he displayed at Kansas. He was afforded the ability to be the sidekick of the NCAA men's basketball player of the year while being guarded by less gifted players at the college PF and C positions. You never see Josh Jackson in the triple threat position, and he's rarely guarded by perimeter players. People are operating off of a projection with Josh Jackson. What's going to happen when he has to be a full time perimeter player guarded by guys he has no clear physical/talent advantage against? In High School Josh Jackson had every advantage over his compitition, in college he had "mismatch" advantage, in the NBA what will he have?


At SG, size.
At PF, quickness.
At SF, combination of size, athleticism, skillset and quickness that only few can match.


207 lb PF? Good luck buddy...


Welcome to 2017.
There’s never been a time in history when we look back and say that the people who were censoring free speech were the good guys.
User avatar
SelfishPlayer
General Manager
Posts: 7,549
And1: 3,368
Joined: May 23, 2014

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

Post#842 » by SelfishPlayer » Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:12 am

76ciology wrote:
SelfishPlayer wrote:
76ciology wrote:
At SG, size.
At PF, quickness.
At SF, combination of size, athleticism, skillset and quickness that only few can match.


207 lb PF? Good luck buddy...


Welcome to 2017.


Draymond Green 230lbs, Kevin Love 251lbs, reality...
SelfishPlayer wrote:The Mavs won playoff games without Luka

The Mavs missed the playoffs without Brunson.
User avatar
76ciology
RealGM
Posts: 65,923
And1: 26,891
Joined: Jun 06, 2002

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

Post#843 » by 76ciology » Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:16 am

SelfishPlayer wrote:
76ciology wrote:
SelfishPlayer wrote:
207 lb PF? Good luck buddy...


Welcome to 2017.


Draymond Green 230lbs, Kevin Love 251lbs, reality...


2017, where a player don't play just one position...

Ever occur to you if that match-up happens, it will be Ben Simmons who would match up with them? Once you realized that, you'll see how valuable Josh Jackson is.

And quite frankly, letting them take him at the post is considered good defense nowadays. Teams would just pack the paint. See Gordan Hayward article.
There’s never been a time in history when we look back and say that the people who were censoring free speech were the good guys.
User avatar
SelfishPlayer
General Manager
Posts: 7,549
And1: 3,368
Joined: May 23, 2014

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

Post#844 » by SelfishPlayer » Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:18 am

Great interview with Metta World Peace. He says that a reason that NBA GMs are selecting so many busts is that they are often fooled by the player that has been "held back." The held back player is one that is older and more physically mature than people in his class. These players are intentionally held back a grade by their parents/handlers so that they can dominate their competition in a way that they wouldn't had they never been held back. When that player makes it to the NBA their game falls apart because they are use to operating with this advantage. That advantage doesn't exist amongst the best vets in the world. The 20 year old Josh Jackson's name was brought up by the interviewer... So these older held back players are "ringers."

SelfishPlayer wrote:The Mavs won playoff games without Luka

The Mavs missed the playoffs without Brunson.
LloydFree
RealGM
Posts: 15,839
And1: 11,656
Joined: Aug 20, 2012
Location: Somewhere near the Jersey Turnpike, between exit 4 and 15E

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

Post#845 » by LloydFree » Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:46 am

76ciology wrote:At this point, I have Fultz, Ball and Jackson on the same tier. And this is me after staying like a week off on draft talks. I just don't see a clear cut advantage when everything is considered. The loser here is the team with a number one pick, where he's likely to get an inferior prospect compared to most 1st overall picks.


This 'all on the same tier' cliche is just a cop-out. It's just a way for guys to not look wrong later. For who? For what? It's just a draft board. Just evaluate the players and say who you think is better.

As far as the team with the #1 pick being the loser, that is patently false. There will be at least one star from this draft. Just like there has been a star from 95% of the past drafts. It's up to the #1 team to pick the star, regardless of what the draft boards say.

For me, this draft feels like it's going to turn out just like the '94 draft. Where the 'clear #1' amongst the masses turns into a solid starter and the stars go 2-3, with multiple players picked later that end up better than #1. That is, if the mocks are correct and the draft order holds form.
Fischella wrote:I think none of you guys that are pro-Embiid no how basketball works today.. is way easier to win it all with Omer Asik than Olajuwon.
Actually if you ask me which Center I want for my perfect championship caliber team, I will chose Asik hands down
vtime
Rookie
Posts: 1,224
And1: 297
Joined: May 29, 2006
Location: SAINT LOUIS, MO

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

Post#846 » by vtime » Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:25 pm

The more I think about it, Monk should be our pick. If he were 6'5 he's be in the conversation for the 1st pick. He's the most explosive scorer and best shooter in the draft. With Simmons running pg, Monk's size won't be an issue because he can matchup with opposing pgs.

C Embiid
F Saric
F FA signee or Covington
G Monk
G Simmons.

Love it
LloydFree
RealGM
Posts: 15,839
And1: 11,656
Joined: Aug 20, 2012
Location: Somewhere near the Jersey Turnpike, between exit 4 and 15E

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

Post#847 » by LloydFree » Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:39 pm

vtime wrote:The more I think about it, Monk should be our pick. If he were 6'5 he's be in the conversation for the 1st pick. He's the most explosive scorer and best shooter in the draft. With Simmons running pg, Monk's size won't be an issue because he can matchup with opposing pgs.


But he's not 6'5, that's why he isn't as good as the other prospects. If Jordan Bell was 6'10 he'd be a top 5 pick, but he's not so... If Juwan Evans was 6'3 he'd be a high lottery pick, but he's not so... If Jonathan Isaac was 7'2 he'd be the #1 pick, but he's not so... If Josh Jackson was 6'10...
Fischella wrote:I think none of you guys that are pro-Embiid no how basketball works today.. is way easier to win it all with Omer Asik than Olajuwon.
Actually if you ask me which Center I want for my perfect championship caliber team, I will chose Asik hands down
vtime
Rookie
Posts: 1,224
And1: 297
Joined: May 29, 2006
Location: SAINT LOUIS, MO

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

Post#848 » by vtime » Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:10 pm

2 inches doesn't make that much of a difference, especially if he's paired with a big pg, the effect is gone, hell, Philly fans of all people should know about undersized shooting guards, you had a 6'0 MVP shooting guard. They paired him with big pgs and went to the Finals.
smittybanton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 398
Joined: Jul 30, 2016

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

Post#849 » by smittybanton » Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:35 pm

For the Josh Jackson fans, interesting tidbits. I had doubts BC would draft a player known more for his defense than for his shooting. I went back into his history and found something nice.

Twenty years ago, 1997, BC selected Stephen Jackson with the #42pick. 6'8, sinewy strong, a good ballhandler for the wing position, he was known more for his defense than his shooting. Ultimately had a great four year stretch mid-career when he averaged 20/gm, with five boards and four or five assists. His intensity caused him to be part of the big brawl in Detroit.

A willing three-point shooter, Jackson had good years and bad years, averaging 33% for his career.

For half a second Lance Stephenson was looking like his career might model Jackson's. But now its as if Josh Jackson is his son.

Only problem is, BC didn't fully recognize the potential, Stephen Jackson spent two years in the CBA, then came back to excel in the NBA at 22 before hitting his stride.

I want us to trade down with Sacramento, but the more I look at their situation, the more I doubt they'll make that move without getting more than the #3 back in return. If we stand pat at #3, a Stephen Jackson-esque player would certainly be a nice complement to Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid.

[On the other hand, what that off-hand do? Kyrie!!! Would love to have DSJ.]
User avatar
SelfishPlayer
General Manager
Posts: 7,549
And1: 3,368
Joined: May 23, 2014

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

Post#850 » by SelfishPlayer » Sat Jun 10, 2017 1:37 pm

vtime wrote:2 inches doesn't make that much of a difference, especially if he's paired with a big pg, the effect is gone, hell, Philly fans of all people should know about undersized shooting guards, you had a 6'0 MVP shooting guard. They paired him with big pgs and went to the Finals.


Yeah but Allen Iverson was drafted as a PG and played PG at an All Star level. Monk didn't play PG at all in college and doesn't look capable. PG is a more valuable position than short shooting guard. You do not draft a short shooting guard high in the draft. Besides when you start comparing the former #1 pick in the draft and hall of famer to someone that may not go top 5, you are traveling down the wrong road. Lou Williams, Jamal Murray, Shawn Respert, and Tony Delk are some short shooting guards that deserve to be in conversation with Monk more than Iverson.
SelfishPlayer wrote:The Mavs won playoff games without Luka

The Mavs missed the playoffs without Brunson.
Kobblehead
RealGM
Posts: 40,844
And1: 20,001
Joined: Apr 15, 2010
 

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

Post#851 » by Kobblehead » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:00 pm

Malik Monk can score, but what else does he bring to the table?
Negrodamus
RealGM
Posts: 26,533
And1: 17,092
Joined: Aug 05, 2004

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

Post#852 » by Negrodamus » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:01 pm

smittybanton wrote: His intensity caused him to be part of the big brawl in Detroit.



That's one way to put it.

Another would be he should have been banned from the NBA for actively seeking out fights with fans in the stands and got off easy with a year suspension (IIRC).
Ericb5
RealGM
Posts: 10,303
And1: 3,377
Joined: Jan 08, 2014
       

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

Post#853 » by Ericb5 » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:18 pm

LloydFree wrote:
76ciology wrote:At this point, I have Fultz, Ball and Jackson on the same tier. And this is me after staying like a week off on draft talks. I just don't see a clear cut advantage when everything is considered. The loser here is the team with a number one pick, where he's likely to get an inferior prospect compared to most 1st overall picks.


This 'all on the same tier' cliche is just a cop-out. It's just a way for guys to not look wrong later. For who? For what? It's just a draft board. Just evaluate the players and say who you think is better.

As far as the team with the #1 pick being the loser, that is patently false. There will be at least one star from this draft. Just like there has been a star from 95% of the past drafts. It's up to the #1 team to pick the star, regardless of what the draft boards say.

For me, this draft feels like it's going to turn out just like the '94 draft. Where the 'clear #1' amongst the masses turns into a solid starter and the stars go 2-3, with multiple players picked later that end up better than #1. That is, if the mocks are correct and the draft order holds form.


Saying that they are on the same tier isn't the same as saying they are equal.

I think that they are all on the same tier, but I rank them as Jackson, Ball and Fultz in that order. The tier that they are on is a potential star tier. The guys from 4-8 are potential stars too, but they have smaller chances imo of getting there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LloydFree
RealGM
Posts: 15,839
And1: 11,656
Joined: Aug 20, 2012
Location: Somewhere near the Jersey Turnpike, between exit 4 and 15E

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

Post#854 » by LloydFree » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:32 pm

smittybanton wrote:For the Josh Jackson fans, interesting tidbits. I had doubts BC would draft a player known more for his defense than for his shooting. I went back into his history and found something nice.

Twenty years ago, 1997, BC selected Stephen Jackson with the #42pick. 6'8, sinewy strong, a good ballhandler for the wing position, he was known more for his defense than his shooting. Ultimately had a great four year stretch mid-career when he averaged 20/gm, with five boards and four or five assists. His intensity caused him to be part of the big brawl in Detroit.

A willing three-point shooter, Jackson had good years and bad years, averaging 33% for his career.

For half a second Lance Stephenson was looking like his career might model Jackson's. But now its as if Josh Jackson is his son.

Only problem is, BC didn't fully recognize the potential, Stephen Jackson spent two years in the CBA, then came back to excel in the NBA at 22 before hitting his stride.

I want us to trade down with Sacramento, but the more I look at their situation, the more I doubt they'll make that move without getting more than the #3 back in return. If we stand pat at #3, a Stephen Jackson-esque player would certainly be a nice complement to Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid.

[On the other hand, what that off-hand do? Kyrie!!! Would love to have DSJ.]


I've seen the Stephen Jackson Comp before by someone in previous draft threads. It was meant as a put-down of Josh Jackson (because the guy who said it, doesn't know any better), but I don't see it that way. I saw Stephen Jackson in the McDonald's game with Kobe and Tim Thomas, so I'm familiar with what Stephen Jackson looked like as a 19 year old. I can see a lot of the similarities, but Josh Jackson has much better body control and is a much more fluid athlete. Either way, I'd look at Stephen Jackson as a realistic 'floor' for Josh Jackson. That's well worth a shot at #3 for 'fit' with Simmons, and what he could become, with some improvement.
Fischella wrote:I think none of you guys that are pro-Embiid no how basketball works today.. is way easier to win it all with Omer Asik than Olajuwon.
Actually if you ask me which Center I want for my perfect championship caliber team, I will chose Asik hands down
Eyeamok
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,953
And1: 3,825
Joined: Mar 02, 2006
 

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

Post#855 » by Eyeamok » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:40 pm

SelfishPlayer wrote:Great interview with Metta World Peace. He says that a reason that NBA GMs are selecting so many busts is that they are often fooled by the player that has been "held back." The held back player is one that is older and more physically mature than people in his class. These players are intentionally held back a grade by their parents/handlers so that they can dominate their competition in a way that they wouldn't had they never been held back. When that player makes it to the NBA their game falls apart because they are use to operating with this advantage. That advantage doesn't exist amongst the best vets in the world. The 20 year old Josh Jackson's name was brought up by the interviewer... So these older held back players are "ringers."



Malcolm Gladwell talked about this as it relates to young hockey players. I forget which book it was. Also the whole holding back thing works in education too. But the "bust" thing really comes down to having to do too much speculation and projection on young unproven 1 and done talent. When kids are still growing and are still developing a work ethic it is hard to predict how being thrust into the NBA limelight and money will change them, among other factors. I would say just as many players fail because they are not mentally prepared for the NBA life despite their level of skill.

Also as interesting as trading up or down might seem. BC is going to be conservative in the way he handles this draft. He does not have multiple picks, like next year and the year after. My feeling is, unless someone approaches the 76ers with a great deal, he will just stand pat and make the obvious choice. Whoever is left of the big 3. I just don't seem him manning the phones and sending out feelers for anything other than a basic 2 for 1 trade.

BC will play it safe. Then no matter what he can always say he picked the best guy available.
You want it to be one way....but it's the other way.

Marlo
User avatar
76ciology
RealGM
Posts: 65,923
And1: 26,891
Joined: Jun 06, 2002

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

Post#856 » by 76ciology » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:57 pm

Eyeamok wrote:
SelfishPlayer wrote:Great interview with Metta World Peace. He says that a reason that NBA GMs are selecting so many busts is that they are often fooled by the player that has been "held back." The held back player is one that is older and more physically mature than people in his class. These players are intentionally held back a grade by their parents/handlers so that they can dominate their competition in a way that they wouldn't had they never been held back. When that player makes it to the NBA their game falls apart because they are use to operating with this advantage. That advantage doesn't exist amongst the best vets in the world. The 20 year old Josh Jackson's name was brought up by the interviewer... So these older held back players are "ringers."



Malcolm Gladwell talked about this as it relates to young hockey players. I forget which book it was. Also the whole holding back thing works in education too. But the "bust" thing really comes down to having to do too much speculation and projection on young unproven 1 and done talent. When kids are still growing and are still developing a work ethic it is hard to predict how being thrust into the NBA limelight and money will change them, among other factors. I would say just as many players fail because they are not mentally prepared for the NBA life despite their level of skill.

Also as interesting as trading up or down might seem. BC is going to be conservative in the way he handles this draft. He does not have multiple picks, like next year and the year after. My feeling is, unless someone approaches the 76ers with a great deal, he will just stand pat and make the obvious choice. Whoever is left of the big 3. I just don't seem him manning the phones and sending out feelers for anything other than a basic 2 for 1 trade.

BC will play it safe. Then no matter what he can always say he picked the best guy available.


"Outliers"

Really tough to judge prospects because they're like woman before a relationship that they are just showing the good part and you'll live with the bad part when you get married :lol: . Hell, the top prospects won't even participate at the combine and we're all here guessing what Josh Jackson's wingspan is.

I think BC can take risk at this point. Mainly because he has a largin margin for error with the amount of assets he has, owner's approval and he's far from being on the hot seat.

Here's the thing. BC's value system is different from us. And I know his value system is reliable for he respects the trend of the game and the REAL market value of players now and future.

I don't see BC as a guy who plays it safe. Drafting Bargnani and the Noel trade were risks. And again, long term he might have good foresight. Bargnani fits today's game while I personally think that everything considered Noel trade isn't that bad (contract wise and market value of bigs in general now and future; i won't explain it again) .

If BC thinks Markkanen is the best player available, he will draft him.
There’s never been a time in history when we look back and say that the people who were censoring free speech were the good guys.
User avatar
SelfishPlayer
General Manager
Posts: 7,549
And1: 3,368
Joined: May 23, 2014

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

Post#857 » by SelfishPlayer » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:03 pm

Josh Jackson has so many fans that if he's drafted #3 and his career turns out like Evan Turner's then he will still be talked about as a success. The Sixers will be a winner next year without a single player addition, so if Josh Jackson can hide and be a hustle player on a winning team then his fans will treat him like MGK. People will say "he never was supposed to be a star, we already have Simmons and Embiid for that, we needed a (insert whatever he is best at doing at the time)." LMAO! We need a star! De'aaron Fox will be a star. Lonzo Ball will be a star. Josh Jackson is a 20 year old freshman power forward that shoots 56% from the free throw line and turns the ball over as much as he creates assists. WTF! His fans project him to be a 3 & D and/or a point forward that plays d. Like the Sixers need another point forward non scorer with a broken shot next season. I don't foresee Jackson getting so many easy buckets around the rim in the NBA like he did playing PF in college against scrubs.
SelfishPlayer wrote:The Mavs won playoff games without Luka

The Mavs missed the playoffs without Brunson.
smittybanton
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 398
Joined: Jul 30, 2016

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

Post#858 » by smittybanton » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:22 pm

Tickets to the draft keep going up. $75 for the cheap seats, off angle to the stage. Was about $40 last year. Less before. Vegas Summer League game day tickets going up to $30/day. Sheesh. Still a blast. I encourage everyone to go at a least once.
User avatar
SelfishPlayer
General Manager
Posts: 7,549
And1: 3,368
Joined: May 23, 2014

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

Post#859 » by SelfishPlayer » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 pm

76ciology wrote: Bargnani fits today's game.

:crazy: OMG, the Josh Jackson people have no shame!
SelfishPlayer wrote:The Mavs won playoff games without Luka

The Mavs missed the playoffs without Brunson.
Negrodamus
RealGM
Posts: 26,533
And1: 17,092
Joined: Aug 05, 2004

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

Post#860 » by Negrodamus » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:39 pm

smittybanton wrote:Tickets to the draft keep going up. $75 for the cheap seats, off angle to the stage. Was about $40 last year. Less before. Vegas Summer League game day tickets going up to $30/day. Sheesh. Still a blast. I encourage everyone to go at a least once.

Really? It was only $20 when I went last year. Walked down to more expensive seats by the 10th pick.

Return to Philadelphia 76ers