Jarrett Culver

[Funcrusher]

What are you guys reasons for preferring Ingram? The main thing I see separating them is his pedigree as a scorer coming into the league is undeniably higher than what Jarrett has done. And BI probably has a slightly tighter handle

Was thinking about this last night. It's common to knock Culver for not having a "superstar wing" first step ala Paul George etc, but Ingram is an example of how he could succeed at the NBA level without blowby speed. The advantage BI has is he's so long , he is able to stride to the basket and get the ball up on the rim even if the defender is on his hip.

Culver has those same looong strides and the ability to extend his arms and finish with english. Plus his upper body is like twice Ingram's size so he can take contact and finish strong. If you believe he will develop his jumpshot at the next level, there's an argument to be made that he can be a much better version of Ingram.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Length, Ingram can’t only handle the ball, he’s extremely long with huge hands, can easily draw fouls and finish through contact. His defense can be a game changer with his length, like the kind of player that effects an entire team’s defense. Ingram can literally have an unstoppable shot like Durant and he already has been developing a turnaround fadeaway that can be lethal with more practice. He can never be Ingram, physically they’re completely different with completely different skills. I actually think it’s hilarious you think that because it’s so far from reality. It’s like declaring you’re actually a penguin.

Ingram isn't going to ever be more than he is now.

wrong

[doordoor123]

Length, Ingram can’t only handle the ball, he’s extremely long with huge hands, can easily draw fouls and finish through contact. His defense can be a game changer with his length, like the kind of player that effects an entire team’s defense. Ingram can literally have an unstoppable shot like Durant and he already has been developing a turnaround fadeaway that can be lethal with more practice. He can never be Ingram, physically they’re completely different with completely different skills. I actually think it’s hilarious you think that because it’s so far from reality. It’s like declaring you’re actually a penguin.

Ingram isn't going to ever be more than he is now.

wrong

As someone who watches every Lakers game (even games I don’t want to watch), it’s clear Stillwater doesn’t watch many Laker games. Ingram has improved a lot this year, but the end of the year he looked like he was starting to figure out how to be dominant, hitting clutch shots and making clutch plays. Ingram still has a huge upside even if his number don’t say so.

[Capn'O]

You're picking between Culver and Barrett - which do you choose and what's the main deciding factor?

Culver because of his all around game. I.e. I don't see Barrett as a ball dominant player that you want to build around, whereas Culver's secondary playmaking skills make him more valuable across the board, imo. Any team can build _with_ a guy like Culver.

R.J. is a better playmaker than Culver tho

I think that Culver will be a better secondary creator/off the ball player than Barrett will be as a primary and it will be problematic because Barrett likely won't work as well as an off the ball player.

[Stillwater]

Ingram isn't going to ever be more than he is now.

wrong

As someone who watches every Lakers game (even games I don’t want to watch), it’s clear Stillwater doesn’t watch many Laker games. Ingram has improved a lot this year, but the end of the year he looked like he was starting to figure out how to be dominant, hitting clutch shots and making clutch plays. Ingram still has a huge upside even if his number don’t say so.

fair enough, and no I don't watch the Lakers much.
Surprised anyone as disappointing as Ingram compared to his projections at the time of the draft would still be considered an high upside prospect at the end of their 3rd season but maybe he's a slow learner, so be it.

[doordoor123]

wrong

As someone who watches every Lakers game (even games I don’t want to watch), it’s clear Stillwater doesn’t watch many Laker games. Ingram has improved a lot this year, but the end of the year he looked like he was starting to figure out how to be dominant, hitting clutch shots and making clutch plays. Ingram still has a huge upside even if his number don’t say so.

fair enough, and no I don't watch the Lakers much.
Surprised anyone as disappointing as Ingram compared to his projections at the time of the draft would still be considered an high upside prospect at the end of their 3rd season but maybe he's a slow learner, so be it.

If I wasn’t surrounded by Laker fans I probably also wouldn’t watch many Lakers games. It’s honestly terrible basketball. Sometimes I want to scratch my eyes out.

[King Ken]

Culver because of his all around game. I.e. I don't see Barrett as a ball dominant player that you want to build around, whereas Culver's secondary playmaking skills make him more valuable across the board, imo. Any team can build _with_ a guy like Culver.

R.J. is a better playmaker than Culver tho

I think that Culver will be a better secondary creator/off the ball player than Barrett will be as a primary and it will be problematic because Barrett likely won't work as well as an off the ball player.

You sure? I don't see Culver being as good as R.J. at most parts of the game at the next level. Maybe off the ball

[drosereturn]

You're picking between Culver and Barrett - which do you choose and what's the main deciding factor?

I think we’re all underrating Barrett, so Barrett is my answer. Look, Barrett might not be a good defender right now, but it’s not a foregone conclusion. He’s 19. I’m watching D’Angelo Russell the other day remembering how terrible a defender he was when he was drafted and he’s actually pretty good now. It’s all about wanting to be good on that end and having the coaching staff supporting that kind of development. And I believe he can become a better shooter. Plus what he can do on offense and on the boards very few guards can do. I would much rather bet on Barrett.

I do still really like Culver and honestly I don’t see much downside to him, I just believe in the guy who wants to be great, is the godson of Steve Nash, and the guy who has been highly recruited for a while. I also just like his tools more.

If Culver shot like 50-40-90, I might consider taking him but his shooting percentages makes me question people how do you pick him over RJ? I guess the casual fans can have their hot takes but if a real GM made the other choice and turned out to be Fultz/Ball, hes gonna get fired I guarantee. I dare those ballsy GMs to take Culver and lets see what happens.

[Ice Trae]

Reminds me of LeVert

[pelifan]

You're picking between Culver and Barrett - which do you choose and what's the main deciding factor?

I think we’re all underrating Barrett, so Barrett is my answer. Look, Barrett might not be a good defender right now, but it’s not a foregone conclusion. He’s 19. I’m watching D’Angelo Russell the other day remembering how terrible a defender he was when he was drafted and he’s actually pretty good now. It’s all about wanting to be good on that end and having the coaching staff supporting that kind of development. And I believe he can become a better shooter. Plus what he can do on offense and on the boards very few guards can do. I would much rather bet on Barrett.

I do still really like Culver and honestly I don’t see much downside to him, I just believe in the guy who wants to be great, is the godson of Steve Nash, and the guy who has been highly recruited for a while. I also just like his tools more.

If Culver shot like 50-40-90, I might consider taking him but his shooting percentages makes me question people how do you pick him over RJ? I guess the casual fans can have their hot takes but if a real GM made the other choice and turned out to be Fultz/Ball, hes gonna get fired I guarantee. I dare those ballsy GMs to take Culver and lets see what happens.

Fultz and Ball were consensus 1 and 2. Really the casual fan thing to do is discredit Culver for his shooting splits and not Barrett. Really the problem is GMs are too afraid of being fired, you gotta trust you and your team's talent evaluation for better or worse because draft hype doesnt equal player value.

[awkwardlycool]

Seeing Jarrett Culver guard Hachimura and Clarke...Definitely 6'7 at the very least

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[kobyz]

Can't see him last past the Hawks, after Hawks pass on Duncic last draft, they would like same type of player as consolation prize

[doordoor123]

Culver is getting way overrated and it’s probably because of how weak the top of this draft is. First off, he’s not a great passer, he’s an okay passer who plays in a system where guys are always moving on offense and the team runs in transition. He always has the ball in his hands as the best player on the team and gets assists just based on the system. Yes, he has good floor vision, but he’s not a good passer. Second, he’s a roleplayer who can’t create his own shot and doesn’t have a strong enough first step to beat defenders. He’s also only a 70% free throw shooter, which isn’t a great indication he’ll be a knockdown shooter at the next level. On top of that, he’s overrated as a defender. He can defend the wing well with his light feet and quick hands, but he gets killed in the post or by players that are bigger than him. Partly because he needs better technique and partly because he’s not strong. Don’t get me wrong, he has potential and he’s still a good top 10 pick, but being projected to be drafted 2-5 is only an indicator of how weak the top of this draft is. I’m not super high on Barrett, but I don’t see how anyone takes him over Barrett. The hype around him got around to me, but reality struck me after seeing his disabilities exposed and my original assessment seems to me like the correct one.

[pelifan]

Seeing Jarrett Culver guard Hachimura and Clarke...Definitely 6'7 at the very least

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

yea and Rui looks taller than Clarke to me.

[Stillwater]

He's a top 10 lock in the draft I'll leave it at that for now as I do think some have higher ceilings despite being farther away from contributing as rookies. Teams playing the long game could pass on Culver for the likes of Langford or even a Herro. But I also believe teams are getting away from using faulty historical upside projections from HS scouting reports that would have somebody like Reddish or Little still top 5 picks after meh seasons. So Culver along with others like Hunter who are coming off productive seasons are getting a little more attention than they probably deserve , but both are legit NBA role players and both are probably starters so taking one of them is a better value 4-10 in this draft than gambling on a prospect with huge bust potential that showed next to nothing to back up HS scouting reports. I'd bet it will come down to who is picking if he goes 4th or 10th more so than actual prospect value stamping.

[doordoor123]

He's a top 10 lock in the draft I'll leave it at that for now as I do think some have higher ceilings despite being farther away from contributing as rookies. Teams playing the long game could pass on Culver for the likes of Langford or even a Herro. But I also believe teams are getting away from using faulty historical upside projections from HS scouting reports that would have somebody like Reddish or Little still top 5 picks after meh seasons. So Culver along with others like Hunter who are coming off productive seasons are getting a little more attention than they probably deserve , but both are legit NBA role players and both are probably starters so taking one of them is a better value 4-10 in this draft than gambling on a prospect with huge bust potential that showed next to nothing to back up HS scouting reports. I'd bet it will come down to who is picking if he goes 4th or 10th more so than actual prospect value stamping.

Yeah, I think that’s what it comes down to. Safe pick vs Boom/Bust pick. But I also think there are a lot of boom/bust prospects that have a high floor. Like Cameron Reddish has been terrible, but he’s still a good defender with great size and great instangibles. If he can just shoot spot up threes he’s already a huge asset. But he can also do it in transition and off the dribble. I still really like his potential and would be willing go gamble on someone like him. So I would rather gamble on Barrett’s upside (and I think high floor) vs Culver’s current roleplayer skills.

[Stillwater]

He's a top 10 lock in the draft I'll leave it at that for now as I do think some have higher ceilings despite being farther away from contributing as rookies. Teams playing the long game could pass on Culver for the likes of Langford or even a Herro. But I also believe teams are getting away from using faulty historical upside projections from HS scouting reports that would have somebody like Reddish or Little still top 5 picks after meh seasons. So Culver along with others like Hunter who are coming off productive seasons are getting a little more attention than they probably deserve , but both are legit NBA role players and both are probably starters so taking one of them is a better value 4-10 in this draft than gambling on a prospect with huge bust potential that showed next to nothing to back up HS scouting reports. I'd bet it will come down to who is picking if he goes 4th or 10th more so than actual prospect value stamping.

Yeah, I think that’s what it comes down to. Safe pick vs Boom/Bust pick. But I also think there are a lot of boom/bust prospects that have a high floor. Like Cameron Reddish has been terrible, but he’s still a good defender with great size and great instangibles. If he can just shoot spot up threes he’s already a huge asset. But he can also do it in transition and off the dribble. I still really like his potential and would be willing go gamble on someone like him. So I would rather gamble on Barrett’s upside (and I think high floor) vs Culver’s current roleplayer skills.

Right, it's just the way the draft is unfortunately. Hopefully bad teams have scouted well because I get the feeling a lot of solid prospects will be there for the taking,and instead are passed on for boom bust high hype train freshman who have done next to nothing to back up their rankings.

[doordoor123]

He's a top 10 lock in the draft I'll leave it at that for now as I do think some have higher ceilings despite being farther away from contributing as rookies. Teams playing the long game could pass on Culver for the likes of Langford or even a Herro. But I also believe teams are getting away from using faulty historical upside projections from HS scouting reports that would have somebody like Reddish or Little still top 5 picks after meh seasons. So Culver along with others like Hunter who are coming off productive seasons are getting a little more attention than they probably deserve , but both are legit NBA role players and both are probably starters so taking one of them is a better value 4-10 in this draft than gambling on a prospect with huge bust potential that showed next to nothing to back up HS scouting reports. I'd bet it will come down to who is picking if he goes 4th or 10th more so than actual prospect value stamping.

Yeah, I think that’s what it comes down to. Safe pick vs Boom/Bust pick. But I also think there are a lot of boom/bust prospects that have a high floor. Like Cameron Reddish has been terrible, but he’s still a good defender with great size and great instangibles. If he can just shoot spot up threes he’s already a huge asset. But he can also do it in transition and off the dribble. I still really like his potential and would be willing go gamble on someone like him. So I would rather gamble on Barrett’s upside (and I think high floor) vs Culver’s current roleplayer skills.

Right, it's just the way the draft is unfortunately. Hopefully bad teams have scouted well because I get the feeling a lot of solid prospects will be there for the taking,and instead are passed on for boom bust high hype train freshman who have done next to nothing to back up their rankings.

Which means GMs will get fired after this draft, for this draft. I actually think this draft is great for teams with good scouts/GMs and for ones that don’t are going to be in trouble. A team like Spurs will find a hidden gem and teams like the Jazz, the Celtics, Nuggets, Nets will make the right gambles.

[Stillwater]

Yeah, I think that’s what it comes down to. Safe pick vs Boom/Bust pick. But I also think there are a lot of boom/bust prospects that have a high floor. Like Cameron Reddish has been terrible, but he’s still a good defender with great size and great instangibles. If he can just shoot spot up threes he’s already a huge asset. But he can also do it in transition and off the dribble. I still really like his potential and would be willing go gamble on someone like him. So I would rather gamble on Barrett’s upside (and I think high floor) vs Culver’s current roleplayer skills.

Right, it's just the way the draft is unfortunately. Hopefully bad teams have scouted well because I get the feeling a lot of solid prospects will be there for the taking,and instead are passed on for boom bust high hype train freshman who have done next to nothing to back up their rankings.

Which means GMs will get fired after this draft, for this draft. I actually think this draft is great for teams with good scouts/GMs and for ones that don’t are going to be in trouble. A team like Spurs will find a hidden gem and teams like the Jazz, the Celtics, Nuggets, Nets will make the right gambles.

I think most teams should be much more cautious about say taking a guy like Reddish in the top 10 just simply based on his terrible numbers this season,even if they feel like he has some of the highest upside available when they are picking.I think a lot of these teams are much more interested when it comes to one and done's in positive results proof at the college level with solid upside like a Coby White or Bol before the injury vs. negative results proof at the college level w/ pre-collegiate 5 star upside like Reddish and to some extent Barrett the latter having a much better season but still having a long way to go to be a in rhythm outside shooter etc.
But that being said there are always teams enamoured with a highly impressive freshman and overvalue them ignoring their deficiencies (Barret) just like their are always teams who would rather gamble they are getting a Giannis (Reddish)that hasn't shown anything pre draft than settle for a Culver; who has been rock solid all season.

[Coeur]

Yeah, I think that’s what it comes down to. Safe pick vs Boom/Bust pick. But I also think there are a lot of boom/bust prospects that have a high floor. Like Cameron Reddish has been terrible, but he’s still a good defender with great size and great instangibles. If he can just shoot spot up threes he’s already a huge asset. But he can also do it in transition and off the dribble. I still really like his potential and would be willing go gamble on someone like him. So I would rather gamble on Barrett’s upside (and I think high floor) vs Culver’s current roleplayer skills.

Right, it's just the way the draft is unfortunately. Hopefully bad teams have scouted well because I get the feeling a lot of solid prospects will be there for the taking,and instead are passed on for boom bust high hype train freshman who have done next to nothing to back up their rankings.

Which means GMs will get fired after this draft, for this draft. I actually think this draft is great for teams with good scouts/GMs and for ones that don’t are going to be in trouble. A team like Spurs will find a hidden gem and teams like the Jazz, the Celtics, Nuggets, Nets will make the right gambles.

Yeah it’s going to be awesome. Really tough draft. So many sg/sf’s bunched right together and then also so many combo forwards/new age pf’s all grouped together. You’d think that means some complete flops and some big hits.

Maybe the only cop outs are drafting Ja, Coby white, garland, bolbol, or goga. Then at least it looks like you went position of need and way less chance to screw up

[916fan]

Are people convinced that he can become a shooter in the NBA? His % are not promising.

Freshman year: 38.2% 3pt on 3.9 attempts. 64.8% FT on 2.9 attempts.
Sophomore year: 31.6% 3pt on 4.2 attempts. 70.9% FT on 5.4 attempts.

That shooting is so damn suspect.