nolang1 wrote:clyde21 wrote:it's never been about Hayes or Wiseman's talent, it's always been a question of how high you take their archetype.
i don't think Wiseman is the athlete that Hayes is either tbh.
And the answer is and has been for a while now, definitely higher than players like Hayes, Mitchell Robinson, and Clint Capela actually got taken. Wiseman is bigger and a better rebounder than Hayes and could very well be a better shooter too; other than that it's not really necessary to compare the two as Hayes has already been drafted and his draft slot has no bearing on the player he's been and projects to be.
Duke4life831 wrote:nolang1 wrote:It's weirdly dismissive of both Hayes and Wiseman to act as though preferring Hayes automatically rules out Wiseman as being worthy of a high pick. I had Hayes #2 last year and wouldn't change that based on what I've seen so far. Hayes would be #1 in this year's draft and you've got to take players relative to who else is in that particular draft with them.
I brought up Hayes because of the type of player he is. The freak athletic defensive bigs that accept their roles as a screener and lob target seem to be valuable players, while bigs that aren't great defenders or freak offensive players don't seem to be having the same kind of impact in today's game.
73% of Wiseman's shots came at the rim. He didnt really show any kind of range. His motor has always been questioned and yes while he gets a lot of blocks, he isn't known as a great defender. He kind of seems like an Andre Drummond 2.0 almost.
Again Im not saying Wiseman is a bad prospect, Im just saying his archetype of player hasn't really been all that impactful in today's NBA, especially when considering them at the #1 pick.
In your last post you knocked him for being (in apparent contrast to Hayes) a 'high volume post player' but now you post a stat that shows that Wiseman indeed had accepted a similar offensive role as Hayes (74.5% of his shots at the rim last year and a much lower free throw rate than Wiseman) in order to ding him for a lack of range. This 'archetype' stuff is mostly jargon that relies on 1) a viewpoint of the league that doesn't really adjust to new information too quickly considering that the top two teams in the league this year are the two best at scoring around the basket and stopping opponents from doing so and 2) blindly assuming that every player is equally well-equipped to carry out the duties of the archetype they're arbitrarily assigned to - the 'elite lob finisher/rim runner' archetype has certainly been doing better than the 'lead ballhandler who doesn't shoot or defend particularly well' one lately.
Yeah look at the Mavericks with a 7'3" DPOY candidate w/out Luka vs the Mavericks w/ Luka without that elite post defender.
Wiseman, to me looks like a clear #1 pick in most drafts. The dude is huge, athletic is heck, plays smart, wants to win, and wants to get better.
People say he lacks "motor" but I've never seen him lacking "motor" while games were competitive. Once the garbage time startes to kick in, he'd slow down.
I also wouldn't be surprised if he adds a mid-range turn around or becomes an 80(ish)% free throw shooter. He showed in high school he wants to do those things, but in college he played his "role". Many draft steals have some talents hidden and worked on in secret (Booker 3 or shot, Towns 3pt shot, AD's offense, etc.)
Wiseman is a clear top 3 pick in almost any draft since OAD became a thing.
Nice one liner that did nothing to refute all the actual points I made.
