Trae Young

[The-Power]

Steve Nash is kind of the complete opposite spectrum when it comes to PG play. Steve Nash super smart with the ball, had basically a 3:1 assist/TO ratio his entire prime, his shot selection was as elite as it came which led to his multiple 50/40/90 seasons. Young is a chucker that has a horrific assist/TO ratio. Theyre two completely different players.

I fully agree with you that they approach the game very differently. But to be fair, Nash wasn't exactly shy of making risky passes. As a Freshman, Nash barely averaged more AST than TO per 40 (3.6 to 3.3). As a Junior, Nash averaged 7.7 AST to 5.0 TO per 40. As a Senior, he averaged 7.1 AST to 4.2 TO. Young currently sits at 10.6 AST to 6.1 TO.

In fact, Nash had a worse AST/TO ratio than Young every_single_year in college! And it's more appropriate to compare them as college players rather than comparing a Freshman to a player in his NBA prime, I feel. I know you prefer to look at Conference play, but we don't have the splits for Nash to make it a fair comparison – but even Young's CP ratio is better than that of Freshman Nash and comparable to his Sophomore season. Sure, it matters how many turnovers came from passing and how many from scoring attempts or other situations but we don't have the numbers for that, obviously.

It would be irrational to expect Young to be comparable to Nash in the NBA at this point. Nash was one of the greatest offensive players of all time who would certainly make my top 5. But AST/TO ratio isn't the foundation of a convincing argument in this case, imo. If anything, you could argue that Young's relatively poor ratio as the lead guard means that he should have a reduced role with less responsibility – and that's true, but not really a great option with his current team. In the NBA, however, he'll not have that kind of freedom and he'll play with other highly talented players. So let's wait and see how his numbers look then. One thing is for sure, though: the onus is on Young to prove himself valuable in a lesser role, with much less chucking, once he gets to the NBA.

[Duke4life831]

Ive always felt if you take Young in the top 10, you gotta hand the keys over to him and really hope he becomes Curry 2.0. If not he is just another small guard that is a high volume scorer that has a poor assist/TO ratio. Thats really not all that hard to find in todays game. The G League is littered with small guards that are gunners.

Isn't that exactly what I said though? A team that's desperate for an offensive leader will get him. But there's a difference between leading an offense with high volume and just chucking everything.

Ya it is and I and1 that post. I agree hopefully with time and good coaching his chucking can turn into just a high volume shooter. All Im saying and have said from the start, I think he is the ultimate boom or bust player. You give him the ball and hope he can replicate what hes doing in college on the pro level and become a Curry 2.0. I dont think its going to work, but if you take him high in the draft, I think that would be the only way to go about taking him that high.

[Alatan]

This is not just how he has played in college, he has always played like this. All Im saying is youre basically would be drafting blind and what I mean by that is youre drafting a player you havent seen. We are talking about a player that leads the nation in FGAs a game and leads the nation in TOs. That is almost the complete opposite of a Steve Nash type player. So youre basically drafting him high in the draft with hopes of him being the complete opposite of what he has shown all throughout high school, internationally and in college. To me that is even a bigger risk than drafting him hoping he can duplicate his style from college.

I get college and the NBA are 2 different things, but you can usually see a player's playing style. Its not too often you see a player go from one extreme end of the spectrum to the opposite extreme end of the spectrum on playing style going from college to the NBA.

I get what you are saying but i dont think it will be a major adjustment for him as he plays on. He will still be ball dominant and will still try to create 3s and penetrate. The difference is that he will not be able to create enough separation and he will not be able to finish efficiently but will instead of the basket look for open teammates. He is a good enough shooter to be a threat and spread the floor and he is good enough at penetrating to force rotations but i seriously doubt that he is good enough to capitalize on those skills and be a scorer. Since he has the vision and creativity i think he will be able to rework parts of his game and become a great facilitator. How good will he be at this i dont know.

I just think this is where you and I differ. I think it would be one of the biggest adjustments I can recall from a lottery prospect. To me its just going from the complete opposite of the spectrum. And I think he has good vision and is a good passer, but his lack of defense, finishing ability, scoring inside the arc and I think his low shooting form is going to be tough for him to get clean looks as well. I personally think hes going to struggle. I think the only way he is worth a lotto pick is if he can somehow come close to replicating his style from college. I think hes going to have to have the freedom to jack up super deep 3s, so he can get defenders to guard him that far out which will give him a better chance at attacking the basket and finding passing lanes.

I think if you try to tame the way he plays, in my opinion he becomes a worse version of a Tyus Jones. A guy like Tyus has been playing that mature facilitator style his entire life. If Tyus Jones can ever become a 38-40% 3pt shooter, Im not sure what would make Young a better prospect at that same style. Tyus already doesnt make bad basses and has an extremely smart shot selection.

I agree about his scoring inside although i think he does have some tricks up his sleeve like his nice floater game. I also agree about his shooting form but i think that he will be able to be a threat from the 3 pointer and that all you need as a facilitator. He wont be able to make shots when guarded and he will not be able to be a primary scoring option but if he can use his talents as threats to open up the floor and make his vision his main weapon he could become a very good player. Is that a guaranteed scenario? Certainly not but i think he has the skills and the love for the game to adapt. In high school he was a scoring machine from what ive heard and now he is leading college in assists. Is it so far fetched that that part of his game takes over in the NBA?

Young has better vision, creativity and penetration abilities than Jones. You may like that Jones is a "safer" passer but at some point of your career you have to risk it a bit and push the boundaries. It is the ability to make risky passes on regular occasion what separates good from great playmakers.

[RookieStar]

He'll need to be 4 ft away just to get his shot off. And you're right, strip away the shooting n he's mid first rounder.

Sexton is a better pro prospect than Young.

Sexton = Pat Beverly.
Young = Tyus Jones with a better shot n slightly better passing, but poorer decision making.

This is just my opinion BUT in today's NBA you NEED to be a legit 3pt threat if you are a PG.. even a backup PG. I'm not saying Sexton sucks at it or he won't develop it in the future, but is he a legit 3pt threat now?

Shooting is the most overrated skill for a college player. Skill n repetition often turns bad shooters into decent NBA shooters.

We had 4 years of Elf Payton that disagrees with that. But who knows what the next few years might bring.

[Duke4life831]

I think he will be a Steve Nash light edition in the NBA. He is too skilled to bust but he is athletically and physically limited while also having a less than optimal shooting mechanics to base his game as a shooter and become something more than a good starter.

Steve Nash is kind of the complete opposite spectrum when it comes to PG play. Steve Nash super smart with the ball, had basically a 3:1 assist/TO ratio his entire prime, his shot selection was as elite as it came which led to his multiple 50/40/90 seasons. Young is a chucker that has a horrific assist/TO ratio. Theyre two completely different players. And if you want Young to become like Nash, then all of the things that have built his hype the 1st half of the year, basically meant nothing because he would be a completely different player. This is why the Tyus Jones comparisons dont make sense either because Tyus was a super composed PG that didnt make mistakes and was phenomenal at running an offense without making mistakes and without having to be a big time scorer to make an impact. Again 2 completely different players, just similar size and athleticism.

My Tyus Jones comps are based on his athleticism, skill level, n size. IMO, in order for Young to be a legit pro, he's going to have to reign in his game. Like Skip to My Lou n Jason Williams. Once he shaves off the crazy 3 pointers n the volume shooting, he ends playing like Jones with a better shot n facilitation.

I agree on the comparison when it comes to size and athleticism. What Im saying is if you tell Young to knock it off with the crazy 3s and try to play like a Tyus Jones type game. Well Id take Tyus Jones over Young than as a prospect then. Tyus shot 38% from 3 in college and 89% from the FT line. Last year Tyus shot 35% from 3 and take away his slump in January he has been shooting 38% from 3 and 88% from the line this year. So it appears his shooting is coming along and he rarely turns it over. I think then Young loses a ton of his value.

This is why Ive never had Young in my top 10, to me its either a hope and prey he is Curry 2.0 or you gotta drastically change his game. Neither option sounds like a top 10 pick to me.

[The-Power]

Shooting is the most overrated skill for a college player. Skill n repetition often turns bad shooters into decent NBA shooters.

For every player who was an underwhelming shooter in college and turned into a decent NBA shooter there are probably more than a dozen examples of players who fail to do that. The vast majority of players don't just improve as much as you seem to believe. Maybe in an empty gym but not when they are up against NBA players and teams. When a player can't shoot well in college, smart money is on him not suddenly being able to shoot well in the NBA – and this is especially true for Guards (Bigs with a good touch have it easier to at least develop a decent set shot but that's just not going to cut it for Guards).

[Duke4life831]

Steve Nash is kind of the complete opposite spectrum when it comes to PG play. Steve Nash super smart with the ball, had basically a 3:1 assist/TO ratio his entire prime, his shot selection was as elite as it came which led to his multiple 50/40/90 seasons. Young is a chucker that has a horrific assist/TO ratio. Theyre two completely different players.

I fully agree with you that they approach the game very differently. But to be fair, Nash wasn't exactly shy of making risky passes. As a Freshman, Nash barely averaged more AST than TO per 40 (3.6 to 3.3). As a Junior, Nash averaged 7.7 AST to 5.0 TO per 40. As a Senior, he averaged 7.1 AST to 4.2 TO. Young currently sits at 10.6 AST to 6.1 TO.

In fact, Nash had a worse AST/TO ratio than Young every_single_year in college! And it's more appropriate to compare them as college players rather than comparing a Freshman to a player in his NBA prime, I feel. I know you prefer to look at Conference play, but we don't have the splits for Nash to make it a fair comparison – but even Young's CP ratio is better than that of Freshman Nash and comparable to his Sophomore season. Sure, it matters how many turnovers came from passing and how many from scoring attempts or other situations but we don't have the numbers for that, obviously.

It would be irrational to expect Young to be comparable to Nash in the NBA at this point. Nash was one of the greatest offensive players of all time who would certainly make my top 5. But AST/TO ratio isn't the foundation of a convincing argument in this case, imo. If anything, you could argue that Young's relatively poor ratio as the lead guard means that he should have a reduced role with less responsibility – and that's true, but not really a great option with his current team. In the NBA, however, he'll not have that kind of freedom and he'll play with other highly talented players. So let's wait and see how his numbers look then. One thing is for sure, though: the onus is on Young to prove himself valuable in a lesser role, with much less chucking, once he gets to the NBA.

Im very curious on what Nash's conference numbers were like. Again I know I get hounded for always bringing up conference numbers, but there is a drastic change in Young's assist/TO ratio from non conference and conference.

But again Nash never had that gunner mentality that Young has. And we cant make the excuse of well look at Young's teammates, Nash had worse teammates at Santa Clara. Again its one thing talking about progression, I get guys make drastic changes in their progression. The main thing Im talking about is play style, we are talking about 2 polar opposites when it comes to play style.

I agree with a lot of what youre saying, but again if you lessen his role we are no longer talking about a guy leading the nation in assists and scoring. We would be taking away a lot of what has hyped up Young which has made him in talks as a top 10 player. To me if you take Young in the lottery, Im not lessening his role, Im trying to get the same value he is bringing to Oklahoma, that is why I would take him high. You lessen his role his value drops significantly, because he has yet to ever show he can be an impactful player without a high usage and putting up a ton of shots. If that is the plan, then him going in the 20s is a smart pick. But to me it doesnt make sense to take him top 10 then hope to change the type of player he is by lessening his role, especially with how small he is.

[Duke4life831]

I get what you are saying but i dont think it will be a major adjustment for him as he plays on. He will still be ball dominant and will still try to create 3s and penetrate. The difference is that he will not be able to create enough separation and he will not be able to finish efficiently but will instead of the basket look for open teammates. He is a good enough shooter to be a threat and spread the floor and he is good enough at penetrating to force rotations but i seriously doubt that he is good enough to capitalize on those skills and be a scorer. Since he has the vision and creativity i think he will be able to rework parts of his game and become a great facilitator. How good will he be at this i dont know.

I just think this is where you and I differ. I think it would be one of the biggest adjustments I can recall from a lottery prospect. To me its just going from the complete opposite of the spectrum. And I think he has good vision and is a good passer, but his lack of defense, finishing ability, scoring inside the arc and I think his low shooting form is going to be tough for him to get clean looks as well. I personally think hes going to struggle. I think the only way he is worth a lotto pick is if he can somehow come close to replicating his style from college. I think hes going to have to have the freedom to jack up super deep 3s, so he can get defenders to guard him that far out which will give him a better chance at attacking the basket and finding passing lanes.

I think if you try to tame the way he plays, in my opinion he becomes a worse version of a Tyus Jones. A guy like Tyus has been playing that mature facilitator style his entire life. If Tyus Jones can ever become a 38-40% 3pt shooter, Im not sure what would make Young a better prospect at that same style. Tyus already doesnt make bad basses and has an extremely smart shot selection.

I agree about his scoring inside although i think he does have some tricks up his sleeve like his nice floater game. I also agree about his shooting form but i think that he will be able to be a threat from the 3 pointer and that all you need as a facilitator. He wont be able to make shots when guarded and he will not be able to be a primary scoring option but if he can use his talents as threats to open up the floor and make his vision his main weapon he could become a very good player. Is that a guaranteed scenario? Certainly not but i think he has the skills and the love for the game to adapt. In high school he was a scoring machine from what ive heard and now he is leading college in assists. Is it so far fetched that that part of his game takes over in the NBA?

Young has better vision, creativity and penetration abilities than Jones. You may like that Jones is a "safer" passer but at some point of your career you have to risk it a bit and push the boundaries. It is the ability to make risky passes on regular occasion what separates good from great playmakers.

I agree Young is better at penetrating. I also agree Tyus can be too much on the safe side, but how much better of a facilitator is Young going to be? Tyus was dishing out 6.5 assist per 40 in college compared to Young's 9 per 40. Jones while yes had much better talent, the ball wasnt in his hands nearly as much.

My main thing is this, are you saying you want to take Young top 10 and hope he becomes a Nash type playing style? Or are you saying taking Young past lotto say 18-20 and doing this? If youre saying 18-20 than Im all for that in agreement. I just cant see a team drafting a guy top 10 then drastically trying to change his playing style. Thats way too risky for me, and even riskier than drafting Young and keeping his playing style and just hope you can catch lightening in a bottle with him.

[The-Power]

I agree with a lot of what youre saying, but again if you lessen his role we are no longer talking about a guy leading the nation in assists and scoring. We would be taking away a lot of what has hyped up Young which has made him in talks as a top 10 player. To me if you take Young in the lottery, Im not lessening his role, Im trying to get the same value he is bringing to Oklahoma, that is why I would take him high. You lessen his role his value drops significantly, because he has yet to ever show he can be an impactful player without a high usage and putting up a ton of shots. If that is the plan, then him going in the 20s is a smart pick. But to me it doesnt make sense to take him top 10 then hope to change the type of player he is by lessening his role, especially with how small he is.

You can lessen his role and still get a lot of the stuff that makes Young appealing as a prospect. Lessening his role doesn't mean to have him play like Redick. It just means lessening his role compared to his current one, with a crazy usage that few players in history ever had in the NBA. Hell, you could have him play like current Curry and it would be a reduction of his role. I think you're missing a lot of grey areas between ‘playing him like he does at Oklahoma‘ and ‘turning him into a completely different player‘.

edit: I just looked up USG% for players in NBA history (>25 GP, >20 MPG) and there have been four (!) seasons in NBA history in which a player had a higher USG% than Young currently does in college (38.3). 2015 and 2017 Westbrook, 2006 Bryant, 1987 Jordan. That's it. So I do believe you can get a version of Young that plays less excessively and still puts up a big number of shots and handles the ball a lot. The question is only if that version is efficient enough to justify that role (there's no doubt that he can't justify having the same role he currently has at Oklahoma, obviously) and if that version finds other ways to contribute (uncertain but not necessarily unlikely).

[MemphisX]

If college defenses defended Tyis Jones like they do Trae Young, Tyus would be poorer statistically across the board. You can’t dismiss their roles when making the comparison. If Trae was playing with two players who were better, I am sure his assists would go up and his turnovers would go down.

[Alatan]

I just think this is where you and I differ. I think it would be one of the biggest adjustments I can recall from a lottery prospect. To me its just going from the complete opposite of the spectrum. And I think he has good vision and is a good passer, but his lack of defense, finishing ability, scoring inside the arc and I think his low shooting form is going to be tough for him to get clean looks as well. I personally think hes going to struggle. I think the only way he is worth a lotto pick is if he can somehow come close to replicating his style from college. I think hes going to have to have the freedom to jack up super deep 3s, so he can get defenders to guard him that far out which will give him a better chance at attacking the basket and finding passing lanes.

I think if you try to tame the way he plays, in my opinion he becomes a worse version of a Tyus Jones. A guy like Tyus has been playing that mature facilitator style his entire life. If Tyus Jones can ever become a 38-40% 3pt shooter, Im not sure what would make Young a better prospect at that same style. Tyus already doesnt make bad basses and has an extremely smart shot selection.

I agree about his scoring inside although i think he does have some tricks up his sleeve like his nice floater game. I also agree about his shooting form but i think that he will be able to be a threat from the 3 pointer and that all you need as a facilitator. He wont be able to make shots when guarded and he will not be able to be a primary scoring option but if he can use his talents as threats to open up the floor and make his vision his main weapon he could become a very good player. Is that a guaranteed scenario? Certainly not but i think he has the skills and the love for the game to adapt. In high school he was a scoring machine from what ive heard and now he is leading college in assists. Is it so far fetched that that part of his game takes over in the NBA?

Young has better vision, creativity and penetration abilities than Jones. You may like that Jones is a "safer" passer but at some point of your career you have to risk it a bit and push the boundaries. It is the ability to make risky passes on regular occasion what separates good from great playmakers.

I agree Young is better at penetrating. I also agree Tyus can be too much on the safe side, but how much better of a facilitator is Young going to be? Tyus was dishing out 6.5 assist per 40 in college compared to Young's 9 per 40. Jones while yes had much better talent, the ball wasnt in his hands nearly as much.

My main thing is this, are you saying you want to take Young top 10 and hope he becomes a Nash type playing style? Or are you saying taking Young past lotto say 18-20 and doing this? If youre saying 18-20 than Im all for that in agreement. I just cant see a team drafting a guy top 10 then drastically trying to change his playing style. Thats way too risky for me, and even riskier than drafting Young and keeping his playing style and just hope you can catch lightening in a bottle with him.

I would take him top 10 and try to tweak his playing style partly because i dont see more than 10 good players in this or most other drafts. Every draft has around 4-5 allstars, 5-10 starters/good starters and 5 high level bench players. So when im picking in the 5-10 range im perfectly fine with drafting a good starter with the potential to be much more. Of course id pick a better player if one is available but i dont see that many players that could be better than Young.

[Duke4life831]

I agree with a lot of what youre saying, but again if you lessen his role we are no longer talking about a guy leading the nation in assists and scoring. We would be taking away a lot of what has hyped up Young which has made him in talks as a top 10 player. To me if you take Young in the lottery, Im not lessening his role, Im trying to get the same value he is bringing to Oklahoma, that is why I would take him high. You lessen his role his value drops significantly, because he has yet to ever show he can be an impactful player without a high usage and putting up a ton of shots. If that is the plan, then him going in the 20s is a smart pick. But to me it doesnt make sense to take him top 10 then hope to change the type of player he is by lessening his role, especially with how small he is.

You can lessen his role and still get a lot of the stuff that makes Young appealing as a prospect. Lessening his role doesn't mean to have him play like Redick. It just means lessening his role compared to his current one, with a crazy usage that few players in history ever had in the NBA. Hell, you could have him play like current Curry and it would be a reduction of his role. I think you're missing a lot of grey areas between ‘playing him like he does at Oklahoma‘ and ‘turning him into a completely different player‘.

I get the grey area, I just personally dont see the appeal with him with a lesser role, plus Im not sure hes all that versatile of a player. If Im looking at Young as a top 10 pick, the only way I see him making an impact worthy of a top 10 pick is with a high usage role similar to his role with Oklahoma or Harden and Westbrook last year. The big difference between Curry and Young, is Curry played SG his first 2 years at Davidson, he showed he can play on and off the ball, which is a similar role to what he has with GS now. Im not sure how effective Young can be off the ball cause I have never seen it. And again Curry was lightening in a bottle, Im not sure that happens twice.

I would become a much bigger fan of Young if we are talking about him as a mid to late 1st round pick. But as a top 10 pick, I just feel like there are a ton of question marks, a ton of things that need to change about his game and we are dealing with a guy that might really struggle with the size and athleticism of the game as well. Its just hard for me to watch him and think to myself, thats a top 10 pick. Now I understand Im in the vast vast minority on this. So its me probably just being stubborn something, I just personally dont see it.

[Alatan]

I agree with a lot of what youre saying, but again if you lessen his role we are no longer talking about a guy leading the nation in assists and scoring. We would be taking away a lot of what has hyped up Young which has made him in talks as a top 10 player. To me if you take Young in the lottery, Im not lessening his role, Im trying to get the same value he is bringing to Oklahoma, that is why I would take him high. You lessen his role his value drops significantly, because he has yet to ever show he can be an impactful player without a high usage and putting up a ton of shots. If that is the plan, then him going in the 20s is a smart pick. But to me it doesnt make sense to take him top 10 then hope to change the type of player he is by lessening his role, especially with how small he is.

You can lessen his role and still get a lot of the stuff that makes Young appealing as a prospect. Lessening his role doesn't mean to have him play like Redick. It just means lessening his role compared to his current one, with a crazy usage that few players in history ever had in the NBA. Hell, you could have him play like current Curry and it would be a reduction of his role. I think you're missing a lot of grey areas between ‘playing him like he does at Oklahoma‘ and ‘turning him into a completely different player‘.

I get the grey area, I just personally dont see the appeal with him with a lesser role, plus Im not sure hes all that versatile of a player. If Im looking at Young as a top 10 pick, the only way I see him making an impact worthy of a top 10 pick is with a high usage role similar to his role with Oklahoma or Harden and Westbrook last year. The big difference between Curry and Young, is Curry played SG his first 2 years at Davidson, he showed he can play on and off the ball, which is a similar role to what he has with GS now. Im not sure how effective Young can be off the ball cause I have never seen it. And again Curry was lightening in a bottle, Im not sure that happens twice.

I would become a much bigger fan of Young if we are talking about him as a mid to late 1st round pick. But as a top 10 pick, I just feel like there are a ton of question marks, a ton of things that need to change about his game and we are dealing with a guy that might really struggle with the size and athleticism of the game as well. Its just hard for me to watch him and think to myself, thats a top 10 pick. Now I understand Im in the vast vast minority on this. So its me probably just being stubborn something, I just personally dont see it.

Its a reasonable opinion, though im curious on what do you expect from a top 10 pick?

[dred926]

People seem to forget that okafor and grayson allen together with Winslow were 5 stars...
infact okafor was actually rated #1 coming out of highschool, mcneace and lattin isnt even better than amile jefferson.

Jones had great team mates... Young have good but inconsistent guys. that team was all grit last season and Trae young turned them around sure they are losing lately but Guys like fultz and Simmons never had a winning record in college but people didnt use their downfall in college instead they looked at the numbers, numbers wise Young isnt a joke leading the league in points and assists despite having lesser talent around him.

I would even go out on a limb that Derrickson and govan are both better than any of the F/C on that Oklahoma team.

Put Trae Young to Georgetown they might even take the 1 seed over Nova in big east.

I am not saying young should be the first pick but if you pick sexton over this guy then you are looking for second rounder for sexton like what happened to payton in magic. Magic didnt give up payton to draft sexton.... they would stupid to do that.


I checked the recruiting info on the starting 5 of oklahoma
Name Recruiting ranking (247 Sports) Year Position
Christian James 193 Junior Guard
Rashard Odomes 133 Junior Guard
Khadeem Lattin 130 Junior Center
Brady Manek 117 Freshman Forward

to compare him to tyus is a joke to be honest. jones had the best SF/Tweener in college in winslow , okafor and allen and he only had 6 assist ..

Young is the only creator in his team. Jones had winslow and allen that can handle the rock ... Trae young is no steph curry but he isnt tyus jones... SMH

[Duke4life831]

People seem to forget that okafor and grayson allen together with Winslow were 5 stars...
infact okafor was actually rated #1 coming out of highschool, mcneace and lattin isnt even better than amile jefferson.

Jones had great team mates... Young have good but inconsistent guys. that team was all grit last season and Trae young turned them around sure they are losing lately but Guys like fultz and Simmons never had a winning record in college but people didnt use their downfall in college instead they looked at the numbers, numbers wise Young isnt a joke leading the league in points and assists despite having lesser talent around him.

I would even go out on a limb that Derrickson and govan are both better than any of the F/C on that Oklahoma team.

Put Trae Young to Georgetown they might even take the 1 seed over Nova in big east.

I am not saying young should be the first pick but if you pick sexton over this guy then you are looking for second rounder for sexton like what happened to payton in magic. Magic didnt give up payton to draft sexton.... they would stupid to do that.


I checked the recruiting info on the starting 5 of oklahoma
Name Recruiting ranking (247 Sports) Year Position
Christian James 193 Junior Guard
Rashard Odomes 133 Junior Guard
Khadeem Lattin 130 Junior Center
Brady Manek 117 Freshman Forward

to compare him to tyus is a joke to be honest. jones had the best SF/Tweener in college in winslow , okafor and allen and he only had 6 assist ..

Young is the only creator in his team. Jones had winslow and allen that can handle the rock ... Trae young is no steph curry but he isnt tyus jones... SMH

I agree that he and Jones shouldn't be compared, they're two drastically different players. First thing first though, replace Grayson with Cook and your point looks better. Grayson Allen barely played as a Freshman, to act like he was some key contributor to the team prior to late in the tourney just is factually not true. He wasn't handling the rock at all his freshman year.

Also no one is making the argument that Young has as much talent as Jones had. Also you say "only 6 assists", you kind of kill that narrative the very next paragraph talking about the other facilitators Duke had. The fact that Jones had 6 assists a game with his low USG and with how much other guys handled the ball was pretty impressive.

The last thing. People only looked at Fultz and Simmons stats and didn't look and use the downfall of their teams as a negative towards them? That was one of the most brought up talking points for both players, not just on here but on national media as well. People kept bringing up Washington's record left and right as a negative for Fultz last year like it was his fault. Also I'd take this Oklahoma's roster over Fultz's Washington roster everyday of the week. That roster was horrific. I would take Simmons LSU roster over Young's Oklahoma roster easily.

[dred926]

I agree that he and Jones shouldn't be compared, they're two drastically different players. First thing first though, replace Grayson with Cook and your point looks better. Grayson Allen barely played as a Freshman, to act like he was some key contributor to the team prior to late in the tourney just is factually not true. He wasn't handling the rock at all his freshman year.

Also no one is making the argument that Young has as much talent as Jones had. Also you say "only 6 assists", you kind of kill that narrative the very next paragraph talking about the other facilitators Duke had. The fact that Jones had 6 assists a game with his low USG and with how much other guys handled the ball was pretty impressive.

The last thing. People only looked at Fultz and Simmons stats and didn't look and use the downfall of their teams as a negative towards them? That was one of the most brought up talking points for both players, not just on here but on national media as well. People kept bringing up Washington's record left and right as a negative for Fultz last year like it was his fault. Also I'd take this Oklahoma's roster over Fultz's Washington roster everyday of the week. That roster was horrific. I would take Simmons LSU roster over Young's Oklahoma roster easily.

Of course you would but without Trae Young this team would be a total joke, the only reason they were relevant in the first place was because of Young and as much as i hate it in college they let them play thug ball. Nba wont allow that so Young is going to be fine. He isnt going to be Curry but he will be a better passer than Curry. He is leading the nation in assist despite having lesser talent that wont be the case once he gets to the NBA.

[Duke4life831]

I agree that he and Jones shouldn't be compared, they're two drastically different players. First thing first though, replace Grayson with Cook and your point looks better. Grayson Allen barely played as a Freshman, to act like he was some key contributor to the team prior to late in the tourney just is factually not true. He wasn't handling the rock at all his freshman year.

Also no one is making the argument that Young has as much talent as Jones had. Also you say "only 6 assists", you kind of kill that narrative the very next paragraph talking about the other facilitators Duke had. The fact that Jones had 6 assists a game with his low USG and with how much other guys handled the ball was pretty impressive.

The last thing. People only looked at Fultz and Simmons stats and didn't look and use the downfall of their teams as a negative towards them? That was one of the most brought up talking points for both players, not just on here but on national media as well. People kept bringing up Washington's record left and right as a negative for Fultz last year like it was his fault. Also I'd take this Oklahoma's roster over Fultz's Washington roster everyday of the week. That roster was horrific. I would take Simmons LSU roster over Young's Oklahoma roster easily.

Of course you would but without Trae Young this team would be a total joke, the only reason they were relevant in the first place was because of Young and as much as i hate it in college they let them play thug ball. Nba wont allow that so Young is going to be fine. He isnt going to be Curry but he will be a better passer than Curry. He is leading the nation in assist despite having lesser talent that wont be the case once he gets to the NBA.

A big reason he is leading the nation in assists is the fact that he leads the nation in USG%, he also leads the nation in TOs as well. I get that is also a product of the high USG%, but if youre going to bring up his high assists, you gotta mention the nation leading TOs as well. Unless he can fix his TOs, chances are teams arent going to trust him with the ball enough to be a big time facilitator if he continues to turn it over. Look at the leaders in TOs for the NBA, there arent average guards on that lists, it is basically littered with all stars.

I also dont get the thug ball comment either. Are you really saying hes going to have an easier time scoring and getting to where he wants on the court against NBA sized defenders and elite athletes, compared to what hes doing against college level players and athletes? The average NBA PG is going to have such a size and athletic advantage over Young, theyre not going to need to play him physically. Also help defense in the NBA is significantly better than in college, a secondary defender will be on him very quickly if he makes any kind of move. NBA defense is much much better than college defense.

[dred926]

I agree that he and Jones shouldn't be compared, they're two drastically different players. First thing first though, replace Grayson with Cook and your point looks better. Grayson Allen barely played as a Freshman, to act like he was some key contributor to the team prior to late in the tourney just is factually not true. He wasn't handling the rock at all his freshman year.

Also no one is making the argument that Young has as much talent as Jones had. Also you say "only 6 assists", you kind of kill that narrative the very next paragraph talking about the other facilitators Duke had. The fact that Jones had 6 assists a game with his low USG and with how much other guys handled the ball was pretty impressive.

The last thing. People only looked at Fultz and Simmons stats and didn't look and use the downfall of their teams as a negative towards them? That was one of the most brought up talking points for both players, not just on here but on national media as well. People kept bringing up Washington's record left and right as a negative for Fultz last year like it was his fault. Also I'd take this Oklahoma's roster over Fultz's Washington roster everyday of the week. That roster was horrific. I would take Simmons LSU roster over Young's Oklahoma roster easily.

Of course you would but without Trae Young this team would be a total joke, the only reason they were relevant in the first place was because of Young and as much as i hate it in college they let them play thug ball. Nba wont allow that so Young is going to be fine. He isnt going to be Curry but he will be a better passer than Curry. He is leading the nation in assist despite having lesser talent that wont be the case once he gets to the NBA.

A big reason he is leading the nation in assists is the fact that he leads the nation in USG%, he also leads the nation in TOs as well. I get that is also a product of the high USG%, but if youre going to bring up his high assists, you gotta mention the nation leading TOs as well. Unless he can fix his TOs, chances are teams arent going to trust him with the ball enough to be a big time facilitator if he continues to turn it over. Look at the leaders in TOs for the NBA, there arent average guards on that lists, it is basically littered with all stars.

I also dont get the thug ball comment either. Are you really saying hes going to have an easier time scoring and getting to where he wants on the court against NBA sized defenders and elite athletes, compared to what hes doing against college level players and athletes? The average NBA PG is going to have such a size and athletic advantage over Young, theyre not going to need to play him physically. Also help defense in the NBA is significantly better than in college, a secondary defender will be on him very quickly if he makes any kind of move. NBA defense is much much better than college defense.

NBA when there isnt even a trip is called a foul trae young has been tripped many times and wasnt even called for a foul, hacked when hand check is in place isnt even called that is what thug ball is specially if the refs are in the homecourt of the opponent there is a reason why the final four is not played in homecourts of teams to avoid thug basketball. I am very aware of the turnovers, they dont have anyone else that can handle the ball that wont happen in the nba.

when they lost to texas ,

Christian James, Brady Manek and Rashard Odomes went a combined 8-of-32 from the field. Oklahoma's other starter, forward Khadeem Lattin, picked up two fouls before the first media timeout and finished with only one shot attempt.

There just isn’t Final Four-level talent on Oklahoma next to Young. The Sooners do not have another starter who was a top-100 recruit out of high school:

this team was ranked #4 why because of Trae Young.

[Duke4life831]

Of course you would but without Trae Young this team would be a total joke, the only reason they were relevant in the first place was because of Young and as much as i hate it in college they let them play thug ball. Nba wont allow that so Young is going to be fine. He isnt going to be Curry but he will be a better passer than Curry. He is leading the nation in assist despite having lesser talent that wont be the case once he gets to the NBA.

A big reason he is leading the nation in assists is the fact that he leads the nation in USG%, he also leads the nation in TOs as well. I get that is also a product of the high USG%, but if youre going to bring up his high assists, you gotta mention the nation leading TOs as well. Unless he can fix his TOs, chances are teams arent going to trust him with the ball enough to be a big time facilitator if he continues to turn it over. Look at the leaders in TOs for the NBA, there arent average guards on that lists, it is basically littered with all stars.

I also dont get the thug ball comment either. Are you really saying hes going to have an easier time scoring and getting to where he wants on the court against NBA sized defenders and elite athletes, compared to what hes doing against college level players and athletes? The average NBA PG is going to have such a size and athletic advantage over Young, theyre not going to need to play him physically. Also help defense in the NBA is significantly better than in college, a secondary defender will be on him very quickly if he makes any kind of move. NBA defense is much much better than college defense.

NBA when there isnt even a trip is called a foul trae young has been tripped many times and wasnt even called for a foul, hacked when hand check is in place isnt even called that is what thug ball is specially if the refs are in the homecourt of the opponent there is a reason why the final four is not played in homecourts of teams to avoid thug basketball. I am very aware of the turnovers, they dont have anyone else that can handle the ball that wont happen in the nba.

when they lost to texas ,

Christian James, Brady Manek and Rashard Odomes went a combined 8-of-32 from the field. Oklahoma's other starter, forward Khadeem Lattin, picked up two fouls before the first media timeout and finished with only one shot attempt.

There just isn’t Final Four-level talent on Oklahoma next to Young. The Sooners do not have another starter who was a top-100 recruit out of high school:

this team was ranked #4 why because of Trae Young.

Yes there are a lot of no calls in college, he also gets the benefit of the doubt from the refs a good amount as well. The dude has a FTr of .492 in conference play and the dude leads the nation in FTAs a game. I dont think hes going to get an easier whistle in the NBA.

And again Im not arguing the talent he has on Oklahoma, Im also not arguing the impact he has had on the college game as well. Like Ive said from the very start, I think Young is going to be a really great college PG, I just dont think his game translates to the NBA. No doubt he was the reason why Oklahoma was ranked that high, I dont know how anyone could argue that.

[dred926]

I think Young is going to be a really great college PG, I just dont think his game translates to the NBA. No doubt he was the reason why Oklahoma was ranked that high, I dont know how anyone could argue that.

based on what? his turnovers when there is no other ball handler in his club? his passing when the receiving end is lesser talent.

Tyler ullis is 5'9 and has been successful in the NBA. Magic just traded elfriid payton for a second round pick. So we think highly of bagley and other prospects but Young gets disqualified despite having a better winning record than Fultz and Simmons. I'd give the pass to simmons that dude is one generational talent.

We cant say that Young will be ineffective because of taller guys when a guy like mike james and even barrea dominated the game, how can Trae Young not improve despite having better handles and passing ability than every other PG in college right now.