College/Draft Thread Part 5 - NCAA Tournament Edition - Knicks #1 Baby!!!

[Juco24]

Question

Who was more talented in college, Paul Pierce or RJ?

Pierce was a beast @ Kansas... but didn't really follow him as a Freshman. are you making Pierce a comparison for RJ?

No I was curious because I don't remember Pierce in college. How much his skills got better in the league?

Actually a lot better. His handle got better along with the range on his jumper not to mention post up skills. In college, he was more of a set shooter and would penetrate some. Actually he was fairly athletic at the college level... but his game took a whole different turn in the pros. Looking back at that draft... a lot of experts missed that COMPLETELY! Olowokandi #1?? Pierce should have went top 3

[NoLayupRule]

I agree with this mostly. I do think the eye test shows Culver making the better play more consistently than RJ. RJ has the moments that don't really show up on the stat sheet, of say his teammate getting hot then RJ instead of feeding him the ball, calls for it for himself and chucks up a horrible shot. Or RJ going full tunnel vision on the fast break and not making the simple pass instead he goes for a difficult contested layup.

With that said, I do think Culver has been overrated. I think since he plays better defense than RJ, people see RJ make a dumb play offensively then get beat defensively and they say he's a low IQ player, while you don't see Culver make the dumb defensive play.

I think RJ is the more explosive leaper in space than Culver, but Culver has a much more creative handle which creates space himself. But Culver lacks a good first step which I think will hurt him big time in the NBA.

Honestly I think this draft lacks a true second tier player. I think it has a bunch of 3rd tier players that people are picking 1 or 2 of them and trying to convince themselves that they're a true 2nd tier prospect.

i could see Rj being a lot like DeRozen and being a foul magnet. in that he gets to the line a lot.
the NBA rewards his kind of aggressive play

I'm not saying RJ isn't a talented player and could make several all-star games, but Culver, to me, looks like the winning type of player I'd like for my franchise. The numbers may be comparable, but the eye-test tells a different story. Culver doesn't have the tunnel vision that RJ has and Culver is a plus defender (smart, selfless, etc.). Those intangibles and feel are what put him over RJ for me. I get that RJ might end up being the better raw scorer... but so was 'Melo...

I totally get it

and if we land Kyrie and Durant there is no question that Culver fits better IMO

but if we end up with Barrett I think we should feel good about it

I remain very unconvinced about Ja

[Duke4life831]

RJ Barrett - 23.5% ast%/13.2% tov%/32.2 usage rate
Jarrett Culver - 26.3% ast%/ 13.7% tov%/ 32.0 usage rate

One gets labeled low IQ and only gets by on sheer talent and the other gets labeled as a high IQ guy...

Don't take this as me calling you specifically but rather the entire draft community when looking at these 2.

I agree with this mostly. I do think the eye test shows Culver making the better play more consistently than RJ. RJ has the moments that don't really show up on the stat sheet, of say his teammate getting hot then RJ instead of feeding him the ball, calls for it for himself and chucks up a horrible shot. Or RJ going full tunnel vision on the fast break and not making the simple pass instead he goes for a difficult contested layup.

With that said, I do think Culver has been overrated. I think since he plays better defense than RJ, people see RJ make a dumb play offensively then get beat defensively and they say he's a low IQ player, while you don't see Culver make the dumb defensive play.

I think RJ is the more explosive leaper in space than Culver, but Culver has a much more creative handle which creates space himself. But Culver lacks a good first step which I think will hurt him big time in the NBA.

Honestly I think this draft lacks a true second tier player. I think it has a bunch of 3rd tier players that people are picking 1 or 2 of them and trying to convince themselves that they're a true 2nd tier prospect.

i could see Rj being a lot like DeRozen and being a foul magnet. in that he gets to the line a lot.
the NBA rewards his kind of aggressive play

Its pointless if you can't make them though. Also Demar was far better at creating space in college than RJ was. RJ needs to be able to create some space to get an angle to drive to the rim to get the contact to go to the line. Also RJ's FTr this past year really isn't all that high for a college player. His FTr was just .319. For the amount of shots he was taking per game, he really didn't get to the line all that much. Culver, Hunter, Rui, Zion, actually looking at it. Cam is really the only other guy that is considered a top 10 pick that had a worse FTr than RJ. That doesn't really say much either, since Cam is about as bad as you can get when it comes to attacking the basket.

[taj2133]

Read on Twitter

[god shammgod]

Culvers stock going up to the point of maybe swapping with Barrett.

1.Zion
2.Ja Morant
3. Culver
4. Barrett

Big drop from 4 to 5?

garland might be better than anyone not named zion. people just haven't seen him enough to declare that. offensively he's ahead of all of them.

[SmoothLefty21]

1.Zion
2.Ja Morant
3. Culver
4. Barrett

Big drop from 4 to 5?

Of course. Which is why it'll be a massive kick in the dick when we land the 5th pick.

[2010]

Watch on YouTube

give me Ja Morant if the knicks decide to move on from DSJ

No sh*t. Even WITH DSJ, I'd want Ja.

Me & Illmatic have been on Ja since Day 1. Nig*a is gonna be special.

--Mags

How you gonna leave me out?

[2010]

It's weird how RJ has some serious hops (that reverse dunk last week was filthy) yet he can't seem to elevate at all on his drives. It's something that definitely needs fixing.

His ability to run the pick-and-roll as a 6'7 wing at that age though is impressive.

Cuz he is the type of athlete that needs a head of steam.

[2010]

Read on Twitter

Spoiler:

[2010]

RJ has #2-#4 talent, no doubt, but he's not the type of player I like for the Knicks. I give the slightest of edge to Culver (over Ja) because of his 2-way play, size, IQ, character, etc. Seems like a great all around young player to bring onto any team. So I'm left with Zion, then Culver, then Ja (his weak defense knocks him off here), then RJ (on sheer talent).

I really hope we get into the top 3. It's a coin flip at this point...

RJ Barrett - 23.5% ast%/13.2% tov%/32.2 usage rate
Jarrett Culver - 26.3% ast%/ 13.7% tov%/ 32.0 usage rate

One gets labeled low IQ and only gets by on sheer talent and the other gets labeled as a high IQ guy...

Don't take this as me calling you specifically but rather the entire draft community when looking at these 2.

Culver plays defense. RJ doesn't.

Culver never looks like he is forcing the issue and he plays with pace. RJ constantly looks like he is making boneheaded forays into the paint and being sped up.

Stylistically they are very different. Which is why evaluating talent has to be a combination of the eye test in addition to pure statistical analysis or analytics.

[magnumt]

Read on Twitter

Spoiler:

WING

Not a PG. Keep things in perspective. Still a Top 5 prospect IMO. He had a bum knee and still played well 2-way in his final game IMO.

—Mags

[SmoothLefty21]

Yeah, you should never throw out stats like ast %, tov%, etc and then start talking about it's impact on how a player's IQ is labeled. It's some numbers vs the eye test. It's a huge difference.

[magnumt]

Culvers stock going up to the point of maybe swapping with Barrett.

1.Zion
2.Ja Morant
3. Culver
4. Barrett

Big drop from 4 to 5?

garland might be better than anyone not named zion. people just haven't seen him enough to declare that. offensively he's ahead of all of them.

Garland is not better than Culver offensively.

Right now it’s likely like this:
Zion
Ja
Culver
RJ
Cam/Garland

—Mags

[NoLayupRule]

Culvers stock going up to the point of maybe swapping with Barrett.

1.Zion
2.Ja Morant
3. Culver
4. Barrett

Big drop from 4 to 5?

garland might be better than anyone not named zion. people just haven't seen him enough to declare that. offensively he's ahead of all of them.

Garland is not better than Culver offensively.

Right now it’s likely like this:
Zion
Ja
Culver
RJ
Cam/Garland

—Mags

what a great year to suck

there is a cliff you drop off after pick 1 and then another after pick 4

[awy]

picks 2 to 15 or so are more or less the same. there's only a chasm after 1.

[magnumt]

picks 2 to 15 or so are more or less the same. there's only a chasm after 1.

Thats not true at all. As NLR alluded to above, there’s multiple drop offs in this Draft.

—Mags

[awy]

picks 2 to 15 or so are more or less the same. there's only a chasm after 1.

Thats not true at all. As NLR alluded to above, there’s multiple drop offs in this Draft.

—Mags

not that much.

these guys are all flawed/limited. the best players out of the group may very well come from lower down.

[sol537]

My biggest worry with Ja is that his effort, awareness, and fundamentals on defense, in the games I've watched, were pretty terrible. With his speed and athleticism and heart, he can be very competent, but that's my #1 concern with him right now and why I'd give the slight edge to Culver at #2. I was pretty disgusted watching Ja on defense.

[2010]

Read on Twitter

Spoiler:

WING

Not a PG. Keep things in perspective. Still a Top 5 prospect IMO. He had a bum knee and still played well 2-way in his final game IMO.

—Mags

That is still an abysmal assist/TO rate regardless of him not being a PG. It is even more terrible considering many were attempting to label him a point forward. That is a terrible indicator of his ballhandling/floor game if he is viewed as a playmaker. In fact, he should be pegged as a 3|D wing and not a point forward. Doing the latter is forcing a square peg into a round hole. I project him to ultimately end up being a 7-10 range pick and not a top 5 guy. We'll see how it plays out though. But I doubt he will be a workout warrior considering he is not that type of player. He is not a run/jump athlete. He is not an aggressive mindset guy who will take charge and go alpha in a group workout. Just don't really see him jumping into the top 5. Based on what? Especially considering he tanked his stock with the collegiate season he had. The hype is merely based on high school rankings.

[Knicksfan1992]

With the numbers I provided earlier I simply was giving food for thought. Obviously the eye test is very important and I generally agree with the optic that Culver will translate into a better role player. My main point is that it's unfair to dismiss RJ as a role player because he hasn't had to be one up to this point.

For instance, I thought he showed major progression in the tourney as a guy who was really trying to get his teammates involved instead of looking for his own shot...RJ in November isn't that unselfish IMO. That shows progression and a willingness to accept a role and trust teammates to make shots. Was he ball dominant in the tourney? Absolutely, but he was ball dominant with the intent to distribute. It's not always just playing style that determines player's willingness to accept a role, but simply seeing signs of a mature mentality change as the player grows in age can be very important in determining how a player will progress at the next level.

Some more food for thought here:

RJ in the maui invitational (3 games against quality competition early in season)

19.7 fga/3.3 apg/6.7 rpg

RJ in the NCAA tournament (4 games against quality competition at the end of the season)

16.8 fga/6.0 apg/8.0 rpg

To me that shows a guy who over the course of the year was willing to adapt and adjust his role to get less shots and get his teammates more involved and also focus on other areas like rebounding to help his team win.

WIth a guy like RJ who was so heralded coming out it's kind of hard to sit back and take a macro view of the season and the little improvements made because everyone wants to have their scorching take on the big recruit. It's easy to just highlight Culver's positives because he had improved his draft stock so much and had come from relatively out of nowhere that he's become the "pleasant surprise" of the draft whereas RJ was always going to be more scrutinized as the number 1 guy coming into the season...

Same thing happened with Bagley last year...