Jarrett Culver

[B-Ball Freak]

Hes going to have to really work on that shot because he's not gonna be able to just get to the rim like that in the NBA.

[Roddy B for 3]

I think he'll go top 10 for sure top 5 even in this weak draft class Im not so sure, this game was not a good look for him (he did NOT have an "incredible game"). Hunter had his way with him all game long, while he was taking some really dumb shots.

Culver accounted for 33% of his teams points (points + assists) teammates got open threes because UVA over helped on Culver. Culver put his team up with 20 seconds left to win the NCAA title.

Hunter did not have his way with him all game long. Hunter had 5 points as an off ball player through the first half. In the second half Hunter went insane and moved up many people's draft boards(including mine) I'm sure.

He accounted for that many points because he had the ball for so long, Hunter locked him down and made him take ill advised shots. The only reason TT kept coming back was because of their bench + Moretti. Culver was AWFUL in the first half but props to him for being better in the second half. I get you liking Culver as a prospect but don't spin it like he carried the team on his back or something, he played decent AT BEST.

In my eyes he played decent by a top 5 pick in a bad draft standards.

He had a bad game by his standards, but VERY few players can be the hub of an offense that scores 77 against UVA.

[Stillwater]

Culver had an elite defender on him but he was settling too much. Nothing in his past two games negates his already known upside.
But it does show he isn't dynamic enough to be a top 5 pick in most drafts, in this one it won't matter because he has excellent defensive ability and his offense will come in the NBA more easily

[eminence]

It wasn't a good game for Culver, but it's not really a game that worries me about his spot in the NBA either. Don't ever think he had a serious chance as a primary creator and that's all this game really showed us.

Dunno what game people are watching who have problems with his athleticism. He's strong and fluid, not overly explosive, but he's certainly not unathletic.

[Roddy B for 3]

Hes going to have to really work on that shot because he's not gonna be able to just get to the rim like that in the NBA.

Instead of having elite college defenderS (yes defenderS) in his face in the NBA on every play, he may occasionally have someone creating an open shot for him instead of vice versa)

[Roddy B for 3]

It wasn't a good game for Culver, but it's not really a game that worries me about his spot in the NBA either. Don't ever think he had a serious chance as a primary creator and that's all this game really showed us.

Dunno what game people are watching who have problems with his athleticism. He's strong and fluid, not overly explosive, but he's certainly not unathletic.

I think you are right if by "wasn't a good game for Culver" means by his own standards, not by the standards just about anyone else.

Their is no way a guy like Ty Jerome could have had the impact Culver had if they were switched teams.

So, not a good game by CULVERS standards. But he still contributed 33% of the offense to a team that scored 125% of what Vegas expected.

[B-Ball Freak]

Hes going to have to really work on that shot because he's not gonna be able to just get to the rim like that in the NBA.

Instead of having elite college defenderS (yes defenderS) in his face in the NBA on every play, he may occasionally have someone creating an open shot for him instead of vice versa)

Okay cool, the thing is he needs to hit those shots, that jumper doesn't look so good to me.

[King Ken]

Hes going to have to really work on that shot because he's not gonna be able to just get to the rim like that in the NBA.

Instead of having elite college defenderS (yes defenderS) in his face in the NBA on every play, he may occasionally have someone creating an open shot for him instead of vice versa)

Okay cool, the thing is he needs to hit those shots, that jumper doesn't look so good to me.

His jumper is not good at all.

[Roddy B for 3]

Culver had an elite defender on him but he was settling too much. Nothing in his past two games negates his already known upside.
But it does show he isn't dynamic enough to be a top 5 pick in most drafts, in this one it won't matter because he has excellent defensive ability and his offense will come in the NBA more easily

I agree with you I think in a standard draft Culver is more of a 5-10 guy instead of where I have him now (clear #4).

For instance I think he will be better than Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson from '17 who all went top 5.

But I would have him at 7-9 in the rediculously deep '18 draft.

[Roddy B for 3]

Instead of having elite college defenderS (yes defenderS) in his face in the NBA on every play, he may occasionally have someone creating an open shot for him instead of vice versa)

Okay cool, the thing is he needs to hit those shots, that jumper doesn't look so good to me.

His jumper is not good at all.

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

[B-Ball Freak]

Culver had an elite defender on him but he was settling too much. Nothing in his past two games negates his already known upside.
But it does show he isn't dynamic enough to be a top 5 pick in most drafts, in this one it won't matter because he has excellent defensive ability and his offense will come in the NBA more easily

I agree with you I think in a standard draft Culver is more of a 5-10 guy instead of where I have him now (clear #4).

For instance I think he will be better than Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson from '17 who all went top 5.

But I would have him at 7-9 in the rediculously deep '18 draft.

Hindsight is 20/20 though Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson looked ALOT better coming out of college plus all three were freshmen. I dont even think Culver would be a lottery pick in the 18 draft.

[King Ken]

Okay cool, the thing is he needs to hit those shots, that jumper doesn't look so good to me.

His jumper is not good at all.

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

A number of guys in today's college game shoots 3s at a higher volume than he does. It's not even close. He is far more Evan Turner than Kobe Bryant. You got guys like Malik Monk who did. Jamal Murray and did it MUCH MUCH better. Heck KCP at UGA.

[King Ken]

Culver had an elite defender on him but he was settling too much. Nothing in his past two games negates his already known upside.
But it does show he isn't dynamic enough to be a top 5 pick in most drafts, in this one it won't matter because he has excellent defensive ability and his offense will come in the NBA more easily

I agree with you I think in a standard draft Culver is more of a 5-10 guy instead of where I have him now (clear #4).

For instance I think he will be better than Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson from '17 who all went top 5.

But I would have him at 7-9 in the rediculously deep '18 draft.

Hindsight is 20/20 though Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson looked ALOT better coming out of college plus all three were freshmen. I dont even think Culver would be a lottery pick in the 18 draft.

Outside of Jackson, the other two were much better talents out of college. It's not even close. Ball right now will likely be better than the best of Culver in the NBA if he's drafted to be a 2/3.

[B-Ball Freak]

Okay cool, the thing is he needs to hit those shots, that jumper doesn't look so good to me.

His jumper is not good at all.

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

All I see is you making excuses.

[B-Ball Freak]

I agree with you I think in a standard draft Culver is more of a 5-10 guy instead of where I have him now (clear #4).

For instance I think he will be better than Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson from '17 who all went top 5.

But I would have him at 7-9 in the rediculously deep '18 draft.

Hindsight is 20/20 though Fultz/Ball/Josh Jackson looked ALOT better coming out of college plus all three were freshmen. I dont even think Culver would be a lottery pick in the 18 draft.

Outside of Jackson, the other two were much better talents out of college. It's not even close. Ball right now will likely be better than the best of Culver in the NBA if he's drafted to be a 2/3.

The thing is Josh Jackson was oozing potential along with elite athleticism and showed some flashes in college of being an NBA All Star, but yeah he wasn't as polished.

[Roddy B for 3]

His jumper is not good at all.

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

A number of guys in today's college game shoots 3s at a higher volume than he does. It's not even close. He is far more Evan Turner than Kobe Bryant. You got guys like Malik Monk who did. Jamal Murray and did it MUCH MUCH better. Heck KCP at UGA.

Idk if either KCP (who I liked) or Murray (I didn't scout that year) had he ball in the "PG" role as much as Culver did. I'm sure neither played that role on a team as successful as Tech. Monk was the #2 ball handler behind a PG I had #5 in his draft.

Regardless, what players in the NCAA THIS YEAR are primary ball handlers on successful teams who nominally play the SG position and shoot 3's on a volume near Culver and a % meaningfully better.

Not Reddit, not THT, not Langford, not Porter Jr. It's a really really difficult role and Culver filled it for a team that was the title runner up.

Texas Tech has had more success with Culver in his freshman and sophomore seasons than they have had in their entire existence (at least more peak success)

Tech had never been an elite 8 team. His freshman year they were. Then his Sophmore year they go to the national title game.

[Roddy B for 3]

His jumper is not good at all.

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

All I see is you making excuses.

Kobe was a better 3pt shooter than Deshawn Stevenson but Stevenson sometimes had a better 3point% than Kobe. Do you know what that means??

Role matters.

[B-Ball Freak]

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

A number of guys in today's college game shoots 3s at a higher volume than he does. It's not even close. He is far more Evan Turner than Kobe Bryant. You got guys like Malik Monk who did. Jamal Murray and did it MUCH MUCH better. Heck KCP at UGA.

Idk if either KCP (who I liked) or Murray (I didn't scout that year) had he ball in the "PG" role as much as Culver did. I'm sure neither played that role on a team as successful as Tech. Monk was the #2 ball handler behind a PG I had #5 in his draft.

Regardless, what players in the NCAA THIS YEAR are primary ball handlers on successful teams who nominally play the SG position and shoot 3's on a volume near Culver and a % meaningfully better.

Not Reddit, not THT, not Langford, not Porter Jr. It's a really really difficult role and Culver filled it for a team that was the title runner up.

Texas Tech has had more success with Culver in his freshman and sophomore seasons than they have had in their entire existence (at least more peak success)

Tech had never been an elite 8 team. His freshman year they were. Then his Sophmore year they go to the national title game.

Here you go again making it seem like Texas Tech is just Culver + scrubs, and hes the only reason for their success. I'm half expecting you to say that you'd take Culver over Zion lol.

[B-Ball Freak]

He had fine 3% #' as a high minute, high volume freshman for a team that made it's first ever elite 8 as a freshman and he had great 3pt% #'s until he lit Duke up as an off ball shooter in MSG on national TV. Then all of the sudden he starts getting double and tripple teamed and becomes the focus of the other teams game plan. And his 3pt% #'s drop.

What other college player Culver's age or younger is a primary scorer/creator who shoots threes at the volume Culver does and hits more than 33%?

I'll tell you 0 SG's who are first round picks (this year) fit that bill.

All I see is you making excuses.

Kobe was a better 3pt shooter than Deshawn Stevenson but Stevenson sometimes had a better 3point% than Kobe. Do you know what that means??

Role matters.

You just trollin now , you got me bro

[VanWest82]

Let's be honest, he's not THAT much different from Jeremy Lamb. Maybe at little better ball handler at that stage.