All Things Luka Doncic

[UcanUwill]

I think a nice comparison for Doncic is Nicolas Batum. Doncic seems a little more crafty and energetic but Batum is a better shooter currently. Thats his floor in my opinion. That being said i dont think Doncic has a very high ceiling. Maybe an allstar a couple of times.

Batum and Dončić have different mindset. Batum has mindset of rolplayer which is shame, he could be superstar. Dončić has mindset of a leader

Some people dont want to accept it but athleticism is really important at the wing position. If a player isn't athletic he must be elite at one or two other things to be an allstar level player. Neither Batum nor Doncic strike me as such players.

Thats a big concern. But I think he can still become Peja Stojakovic type offensive threat with much better rebounding and playmaker skills. That is number one pick material.

[Goon]

Had a chance to talk to the main physio and one of the assistant coaches for the Slovenian national team. They both said that the team (players and coaches) were very pleasantly surprised by Doncic's attitude. They knew he was a huge basketball talent, but it's his persona that really stood out. That he is very humble, hard-working, friendly, down to earth kind of guy and great for team chemistry. Players and coaches love him. Really great to hear, it's never just talent alone that makes a player great, he needs the mindset, the personality to really make it on the top level and it seems he has it.

[pacersGM]

This is so incorrect, I don't know where to start. Lebron was heralded as the best prospect to come out of high school ever.

The only knock on him was his shoot. He had elite passing/court vision. Had the tools to be a great defenders. Good rebounder. Good handles for his age. And yes he was a freak athlete.

Lebron was so touted for his skills that they even televised his HS games on espn on primetime. Something never done before.

Doncic is a nice player but this skill gap is wide with Lebron at the same age.

Your whole statement "Arguably, absolutely. He is by far more skilled than Lebron was at that age. No one can argue otherwise. " is just your opinion as a fan of Doncic. But you have absolutely 0 facts behind it.

Nothing, absolutely nothing I said was incorrect.

Doncic is a far, far, far better shooter NOW than Lebron was at this age. LeBron couldn't buy a bucket his rookie year. You can't possibly believe Doncic will shoot .488 ts% his rookie year in the NBA.

I'm not a fan of Doncic. At all. I don't give 2 craps about euroleague. I'm a huge LeBron fan.

If you honestly think LeBron was a better ballhandler than Doncic at this age you should just quit with the discount act right now. Doncic is the more skilled ballhandler BY FAR.

Dust the cobwebs off, put the sports illustrated for kids posters aside, and go watch film of LeBron at 18. Check out his rookie year numbers in the NBA. Watch the Olympics.

LeBron is the most skilled player ever to gave elite size and athleticism. But Doncic is BY FAR the more skilled player. The shooting splits, the passing, the ball handling... this stuff isn't even close.

And it's laughable to say LeBron has been on television since high school. Doncic games have been televised for YEARS now. Not just 1 or 2 games, ENTIRE SEASONS. He just won a gold medal dude. On Slovenia.

LeBron was busy mucking things up on the USA team at an older age. No Gold medal for a team of NBA stars. Gimme a break here man.



Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

Im sensing another pro doncic uberfan troll taking advantage of being able to say the most absurd stuff (doncic vs lebron james ?!?) and actualy involving other uberfans in actualy discussing the possibility of lebron james beeing inferior as an 18year old phenom who had it all, to doncic? if that isnt trolling at its finest then i dont know but then again lebron wasnt playing against grown men he only played midgets

[HoopsMalone]

In no way am I saying Doncic was a better prospect than Lebron at the same age. You guys are reading things that aren't there.

I'm at LeBron super fan. I don't care about Doncic. At all.

Skillwise, he's significantly more advanced than Lebron at the same age. It's not even close. That's inarguable. Lebron's handle is trash. Watch how much his turnovers are increasing as his athleticism declines. LeBron is a below average shooter. His finishing at the rim is elite. That will go by the wayside as his athleticism declines as well. Hes a good passer, but that will drop off as his athleticism declines and he doesn't force as many defensive shifts and rotations. He's a great rebounder/defender. He's the ultimate Smallball
4. His bb IQ is off the charts. Hes unselfish. Hes dominant. He's the greatest player to ever play the game.

He's a lot of things. But more skilled than Doncic at age is 18? Are you kidding me? Not even close.

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

[pacersGM]

Aamm ok man

[Goon]

Spanoulis said a talent such as Doncic comes along once every 50 years hehe.

Watch on YouTube

[burek3]

Ouch, mirotic12 might be on his way to the hospital after viewing this

[Ryoga Hibiki]

It wasn't clear until his 2nd year that he was a future hall of famer.

Do you not recall his struggles his rookie year? Or the 2004 olympics?!

It wasn't until at least 2007 that anyone realized he was going to be better than Jordan. I'd say it was the pistons obliteration that really marked his world domination.

Are you serious? Bird said he was going to take maybe 4-5 players in the NBA before LeBron after his junior HS season!

[burek3]

So... 1st pick? With all the FBI business and stuff...

[Marcus]

So... 1st pick? With all the FBI business and stuff...

yeah I'm thinking so too.

[GimmeDat]

So... 1st pick? With all the FBI business and stuff...

yeah I'm thinking so too.

I haven't been following the NCAA business - how would this have an impact on the draft?

[Jkam31]

So... 1st pick? With all the FBI business and stuff...

yeah I'm thinking so too.

I haven't been following the NCAA business - how would this have an impact on the draft?

It wouldn't even if the other picks took money why the hell would that matter


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[burek3]

If I understand correctly if they are found guilty, they are ineligible for draft?

[kayath]

Which players would be ineligble for draft exaclty?

[Marcus]

yeah I'm thinking so too.

I haven't been following the NCAA business - how would this have an impact on the draft?

It wouldn't even if the other picks took money why the hell would that matter


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I'm talking about the "what have you done for me lately" approach to scouting. Doncic shot up additional charts with his Euro tourney performance. If the other top prospects can't play this season I would assume they take a little stock hit because of it.

I'm seeing Ayton, Sexton, possibly Porter as names? if they can't play that's less comp for Doncic near the top when his buzz is so high as is at the moment.

[Marcus]

If I understand correctly if they are found guilty, they are ineligible for draft?

Nope, just can't play college basketball. Pro is completely separate.

[blazeyo]

If I understand correctly if they are found guilty, they are ineligible for draft?

Nope, just can't play college basketball. Pro is completely separate.

That would be so unfair to the teams that are about to Tank.

Cavs fans would go on suicide watch.

[Novocaine]

I've been saying this for years. Most busts, from both Europe and the US, happen because scouts mainly look at athletic abilities and expect that since a player is still young, he's going to one day go EUREKA, get it, and suddenly know how to play the game.

That almost never happens. The rare exceptions are the bigs who started playing basketball late in their teens. For everyone else it's true that if you're not a fundamentally sound player with at least a decent bball-IQ in your late-teens, you're never going to become one.

Well, there's this guy from some decades ago who had that reputation even into his 20s - a super-athletic ball-hog who'd get by his athletic ability and had little polish and skill to his game and, above all, didn't know how to win and how to play the right way. A selfish low IQ player who would take almost 30 shots per game, wasn't a team player, coudln't even shoot 20% from distance and would just jump over people to dunk stuff.

He ended up doing alright in the NBA though - he's the consensus best player in the history of the game, or at least was for a couple of decades.

I'm sure one could come up with a few other examples - say, the current MVP.

I understand selective memory phenomenons, but that take it to a whole new level. And of course athletic guys are overrepresented among busts - they're way overrepresented among high draft picks, which means they're overrepresented among guys with high expectations that can fall into the "bust" category. It's a consequence of the fact that Jordan was uber-athletic and Westbrook is uber-athletic and LeBron is uber-athletic and so on.

Wait, how does MJ even fit the argument and/or disprove my notion? Just because people keep saying that he didn't really know how to play the right way and win in his first couple of seasons and only later learned how to ... doesn't really make it so. It was just a very nice story for everyone to write about. He obviously improved with each year, as everyone does, but he also had MUCH better teammates around him later in his career. He really wasn't that much different of a player during his first 3-peat compared to a couple season before that, the only really glaring difference is that he started training 3s more. (2nd 3-peat is a different story, but that's because he needed to adjust his game due to age)

I wonder who has the selective memory here. You only seem to remember what people said and wrote about MJ, not how the situation actually was. That notion of him later learning to win and play the game the right way is highly exaggerated by everyone, mostly because people are too results oriented.

As for Westbrook, he's also the same TYPE of a player he always was and the type of player people expected him to be (just not THIS good). Sure, he had an adjustment period, and obviously his skills got slightly better and better with every season, but he's not that different of a player. He just went through every-year progression to get to this point. It's not like he didn't have a clue and is now a bball genius.

In that case, what you said was a vacuous inanity. Seems like you're always right by definition.

FWIW, I thought Michael Jordan was definitely a low-IQ player in his first year at Chapel Hill. Would take an insane amount of dumb shots, taking them out of better scorers like Worthy and Perkins. I thought the stuff said about him before Chicago won the title was idiotic. But Jordan surely developed his skills and b-ball IQ since his late teens.

Westbrook is the epitome of a guy who was drafted so high because of his athletic profile and was thought to have very poor IQ in his late teens. And, contrary to your claim that guys like that end up busting unless they're bigs, he ended up MVP.

But it seems your theory lacks falsifiability (which makes it completely useless): if a guy improves, its' because he already had it anyway and observers were wrong so it doesn't disprove you. You might as well have said that "guys that are bad players in their late teens and remain bad players in their 20s will bust!!" - which is an obvious truism - you could even phrase it as "busts are gonna bust" and save us the time.

[Derento]

Doncic's main comp in Bagley & Porter are defintely good to go. Duke is teflon & Porter dad has heavy ties to Mizz.
Ayton & Sexton are much more likely to face some problems for eligibility.

[SportsGuy8]

FWIW, I thought Michael Jordan was definitely a low-IQ player in his first year at Chapel Hill. Would take an insane amount of dumb shots, taking them out of better scorers like Worthy and Perkins. I thought the stuff said about him before Chicago won the title was idiotic. But Jordan surely developed his skills and b-ball IQ since his late teens.

Westbrook is the epitome of a guy who was drafted so high because of his athletic profile and was thought to have very poor IQ in his late teens. And, contrary to your claim that guys like that end up busting unless they're bigs, he ended up MVP.

MJs shot selection didn't improve nearly as much as you say/imply, he simply became so good that he started hitting his "bad" shots with a good enough efficiency that they stopped being bad. Usually only a couple percentage points are needed for that.

And OF COURSE he developed his skills and bball IQ since his late teens, EVERYONE does. The question is how much and if it was really as drastic?

As for Westbrook, while I think he's overrated now, you have a better argument there, since he really used to look a lot worse in terms of bball-IQ. However, didn't he say a couple times that he was completely disinterested in watching basketball growing up, something that's extremely rare among prospects? If one only concentrates on his own play, it severely slows down his progress, especially in how he understands the game.

In that case, what you said was a vacuous inanity. Seems like you're always right by definition.
....
But it seems your theory lacks falsifiability (which makes it completely useless): if a guy improves, its' because he already had it anyway and observers were wrong so it doesn't disprove you. You might as well have said that "guys that are bad players in their late teens and remain bad players in their 20s will bust!!" - which is an obvious truism - you could even phrase it as "busts are gonna bust" and save us the time.

Just because I don't necessarily agree with YOUR examples, it doesn't mean that my "theory lacks falsifiability" and that I'm "always right by definition". Maybe you simply need better examples? I'm sure there are a couple actual exceptions to my notion.

P.s.: You're not going to get far with your "I'm smarter" attitude that's written all over your post. Ego issues?