2020 2nd Round Draft Pick(s)

[youngWizzy]

Can't seem to see Tyrique Jones (https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/tyrique-jones-1.html) mocked anywhere so I would be willing to take a flier on him as a udfa.

[Ruzious]

Im growing on Desmond Bane https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/desmond-bane-1.html) from TCU. Don't mind at all that he is a senior. He's shown improvement every year and is shooting the ball really well from three. Think he fits the mold of a quality two way shooting guard if we need depth behind Beal. He's one of only a few people shooting over 40% from three with 1.5 steals per game in the country.

Good Call!!!
Bane looks like the prototypical 2-way wing that somehow gets undervalued (Hart, Butler, Crowder, etc.)
He's a Senior, but only 6 months older than Saddiq Bey (A Sophomore).

Tillman, Bane, Tre jones, and Bolmaro are leading my choice at 37... With Flynn, Tillie, Joe, and Sylla also interesting.

Agree about Desmond Bane -- played in a very tough conference & posted outstanding numbers.

Here's some highlights on Bane.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Wow, he makes those long 3's look easy - just a flick of the wrist from 25 feet. I think the metrics folks have shown having the extra range for deep 3's makes a significant difference - even though 3 points is 3 points. That might push Banes' stock up. He's arguably the best deep shooter in the draft.

[pcbothwel]

Im telling you Ruz... its impressive.
I wouldnt hesitate to trade 9 & 37 to Boston for 17, 26, and 30.

Then draft Tyler Bey, Bane, and Tillman.

[Ruzious]

Im telling you Ruz... its impressive.
I wouldnt hesitate to trade 9 & 37 to Boston for 17, 26, and 30.

Then draft Tyler Bey, Bane, and Tillman.

Good strategy. Yeah, Bane's not likely gonna be there at 37. I still take Saddiq over Tyler, because I'm a 3pointshooteraholic - if that's a thing.

And what I like about Bane... he can bail out your offense. Say you're down to 4 seconds on the 24 second clock. Get him the ball 30 feet out, and he'll get off a good shot from 3 point range. That's soul-crushing to defenses.

[payitforward]

I'd love to do that trade, but I don't think Boston would go for it.

I don't understand the trade, however, if the point is to take Bey, Bane & Tillman. It seems overwhelmingly likely that Tillman will be on the board at #37.

I'd much rather trade our #9 for, let's say, Boston's #17 plus their R1 & R2 picks next year -- a deal they should be more willing to go for than the deal described by pcbothwei.

Then I'd buy the #33 or #35 from Philly. That would give us the #17, #33 & #37 this year (plus those 2 Boston picks next year).

I think we'd still get Bane & Bey w/ the 2 high R2 picks, certainly one of them, & if not -- some other guys have to fall: Maybe Paul Reed for one...?

[payitforward]

As far as the assessment of Bane off of his highlights, here is a guy doing the things Bane does plus a whole great big bunch of other stuff:

Watch on YouTube

Not to mention that the highlights don't illustrate him getting to the line 10.7 times per 40 minutes -- & shooting .826 from the stripe. Just as Bane's highlights don't reveal the fact that he averaged 2 FTAs per 40 minutes this season.

Don't get me wrong -- I like Desmond Bane. He has a shot to be an NBA player. I'm not critical of him. Key point is what the highlights show, & what they definitely do not show, about a player.

[payitforward]

Other critical point: I think Mason Jones may turn out to be one of the steals of this draft. He's also a sophomore.

[pcbothwel]

Other critical point: I think Mason Jones may turn out to be one of the steals of this draft. He's also a sophomore.

Another Great find. Though him being a sophomore is a little disingenuous. Hes 30 days younger than Bane, a Senior.
Either way. i think he goes in the top 40 picks. I didnt realize he came out this year.

[youngWizzy]

Does anyone like Christian Vital (https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/christian-vital-1.html) from Uconn? A bit undersized to me but he makes up for it by getting rebounds and steals at a good rate for his position.

[doclinkin]

Other critical point: I think Mason Jones may turn out to be one of the steals of this draft. He's also a sophomore.

He reads like a Jordan Crawford type to me. He can score, sure, but look at his teammates when he gets the ball. They stand around knowing they are not getting it back. He's going to dribble and showboat a bit then attack. At the next level he may get a little more space but his defenders are longer and faster, much of what he did in that video seems too predictable at the next level. To me anyway. It's slow developing, driving into traffic, gunning against a set defense and not using his teammates, even waving them off so he can solo. I dunno. Haven't looked at his stats etc, but I'm unimpressed by that set of highlights.

Bane by contrast has at least one thing that is NBA ready: how quickly he can get his shot off, repeatably, with range, and off the pass. That makes teams better. He just has to stay in motion and teams will track him as a threat. Again, I haven't looked at defense and rebounding etc, but I can see that one skill set translating at the next level.

[Ruzious]

The comp I saw for Mason Jones was Jordan Adams from UCLA - who put up some great stats there. He was a "below the rim" player who could overpower college players. A heckuva college player, but his game didn't work in the NBA, and he didn't develop a good 3 point shot. Jones is going to have to overcome ordinary athleticism and a questionable 3 point shot to make it in the NBA. He also had a lot of to's in college. I'd take Bane over him. Bane's no great athlete himself, but that long shooting ability is gold in the NBA.

[payitforward]

Other critical point: I think Mason Jones may turn out to be one of the steals of this draft. He's also a sophomore.

Another Great find. Though him being a sophomore is a little disingenuous. Hes 30 days younger than Bane, a Senior.
Either way. i think he goes in the top 40 picks. I didnt realize he came out this year.

Good point about him being the same age as Bane. OTOH, he wasn't my find -- I think Ruz brought him up first about 2 months ago.

The big difference between the two guys is that Jones seems to be a lot more active on offense. Per 40 minutes, the 2 guys took virtually the same number of 3-point attempts. Bane had the better %. They also took @ the same # of 2-point attempts. Jones had the better % in this case.

Overall, Bane had the higher efg% -- but Jones had a significantly higher TS% (.614 vs. .573), because he got to the line astonishingly often -- almost five & one half times as often as Bane!

OTOH, if you take into account both offensive rebounds (as a plus in offensive efficiency) & turnovers (a minus in offensive efficiency) things start to converge. Add in the rest of the stuff they do, both good & bad, & the two guys' overall productivity is very very close to equal.

Jones had by far the higher usage -- 30% higher. OTOH, Bane may have played against slightly tougher competition.

A couple of very good prospects, I'd say. Both of them put up better numbers overall than, say, Admiral Schofield. My worry about Bane is that, like Schofield, he didn't show that he can do much offensively with the ball in his hands -- &, in the end, that is what I do like about Jones.

[Ruzious]

Other critical point: I think Mason Jones may turn out to be one of the steals of this draft. He's also a sophomore.

Another Great find. Though him being a sophomore is a little disingenuous. Hes 30 days younger than Bane, a Senior.
Either way. i think he goes in the top 40 picks. I didnt realize he came out this year.

Good point about him being the same age as Bane. OTOH, he wasn't my find -- I think Ruz brought him up first about 2 months ago.

What does Ruz know? He still thinks Grant Riller's going to be the next Lou Williams.

[payitforward]

The comp I saw for Mason Jones was Jordan Adams from UCLA - who put up some great stats there. He was a "below the rim" player who could overpower college players. A heckuva college player, but his game didn't work in the NBA, and he didn't develop a good 3 point shot. Jones is going to have to overcome ordinary athleticism and a questionable 3 point shot to make it in the NBA. He also had a lot of to's in college. I'd take Bane over him. Bane's no great athlete himself, but that long shooting ability is gold in the NBA.

That's a solid comparison on the college numbers.

But, here's what's weird: Jordan Adams played only 248 minutes his first year, but he put up good numbers for a rookie. In particular, he took 4 3-pointers per 40 minutes & posted a 40% 3-point fg%. Then, his 2d year, he only got 15 minutes & was gone.

So.... I don't know whether you are right about where his problems were as a player. Or whether they were even problems with his play -- maybe there was something else involved? I have no idea.... In any case, you may be right anyway about Mason Jones.

As to turnovers -- Bane posted a 13.8% turnover percentage on 24.4% usage. Jones posted a 15.1% turnover % on 31.6% usage. What does this mean? I have no idea! Other than that the % may be more relevant in comparing 2 players with very different usage. Emphasis on "may be."

[Ruzious]

The comp I saw for Mason Jones was Jordan Adams from UCLA - who put up some great stats there. He was a "below the rim" player who could overpower college players. A heckuva college player, but his game didn't work in the NBA, and he didn't develop a good 3 point shot. Jones is going to have to overcome ordinary athleticism and a questionable 3 point shot to make it in the NBA. He also had a lot of to's in college. I'd take Bane over him. Bane's no great athlete himself, but that long shooting ability is gold in the NBA.

That's a solid comparison on the college numbers.

But, here's what's weird: Jordan Adams played only 248 minutes his first year, but he put up good numbers for a rookie. In particular, he took 4 3-pointers per 40 minutes & posted a 40% 3-point fg%. Then, his 2d year, he only got 15 minutes & was gone.

So.... I don't know whether you are right about where his problems were as a player. Or whether they were even problems with his play -- maybe there was something else involved? I have no idea.... In any case, you may be right anyway about Mason Jones.

As to turnovers -- Bane posted a 13.8% turnover percentage on 24.4% usage. Jones posted a 15.1% turnover % on 31.6% usage. What does this mean? I have no idea! Other than that the % may be more relevant in comparing 2 players with very different usage. Emphasis on "may be."

Doesn't the turnover % effectively take usage into consideration? I'm asking - I don't know - just assumed it did.

I do think Jones is interesting, but I think Bane's 3 point shooting makes him help his team win more.

[payitforward]

Well... I'm sure if these two guys were here they'd be wondering why we felt we had to compare them!

I don't think either of them is "a sure thing," obviously -- truth is that almost nobody is!

"Turnover %: an estimate of number of turnovers per 100 plays," says basketball-reference.com. But, what's a "play" in this sentence I wonder? One of the team's plays, or a play by the individual player himself?

As a sophomore, Bane turned the ball over more per 40 minutes than he did as a senior -- on significantly lower usage.

As a freshman, Jones turned the ball over way less than he did as a sophomore -- again on lower usage (tho not all that much lower).

As to "Bane's 3 point shooting... help(ing) his team win more" than Jones, I wonder whether the following is a relevant way to look at it:

1. Bane -- per 40 minutes this year, he used 15.1 shots & 2 FTAs to produce 18.4 points. Figure each FTA as like 1/2 a shot (since it can only produce 1 point), & his 18.4 points were produced by 16.1 overall scoring attempts.

2. Jones -- per 40 minutes, he used 16.1 shots & 10.7 FTAs to produce 26 points. Treat each FTA as like 1/2 a shot again, & Jones's 26 points were produced by 21.45 overall scoring attempts.

Per 40 minutes, IOW, Jones produced 7.6 more points than Bane on 1 more FGA & 8.7 more FTAs -- call it 5.35 more overall scoring attempts -- which is extremely hard to do. Why? Because, obviously, FTAs are incredibly more efficient than FGAs, whether 2 pointers or 3 pointers! & that's how Jones got them.

IOW, why would we not say "Jones's ability to get to the line helps his team win more" than Bane?

OTOH, if we take note of Jones's 1.2 extra turnovers -- treat them as missed FGAs rebounded by the other team -- it definitely narrows the gap in scoring impact: now it's like 7.6 more points on 6.55 more scoring attempts. That's still hard to do.

But, it's not otherworldly. In fact, if Bane took 5.75 more 3-pointers per 40 minutes than he does, & if he made them at his overall .442% on the year, he'd score exactly 7.6 more points.

So, in that sense, we might conclude that (figuring in Jones's extra turnovers) the two players look to be exactly even in the way each one's extremely efficient scoring "helps his team win." Make sense?

With one difference, of course: Bane doesn't take those extra 5.75 3-pointers per 40 minutes (while keeping his outstanding % the same). Jones's efficiency is on significantly higher usage. Ergo, I fear we might have to conclude that Mason Jones's scoring "helps his team win more." No?

Of course, "helps his team win" includes a lot more than offensive efficiency, so I'm not concluding... anything!... but especially not that Jones is a better prospect than Bane. In fact, I don't think he is.

Despite Jones being the better scorer, I think that overall they're just about even. After all, Bane is a bit better rebounder, a bit better on assists & blocks, & he fouls quite a lot less. Jones gets more steals, but overall Bane has been the more solid in that stuff overall.

What's it all mean? They'd both be pretty solid picks at #37 I believe. But... there may be better available!

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Good Call!!!
Bane looks like the prototypical 2-way wing that somehow gets undervalued (Hart, Butler, Crowder, etc.)
He's a Senior, but only 6 months older than Saddiq Bey (A Sophomore).

Tillman, Bane, Tre jones, and Bolmaro are leading my choice at 37... With Flynn, Tillie, Joe, and Sylla also interesting.

Agree about Desmond Bane -- played in a very tough conference & posted outstanding numbers.

Here's some highlights on Bane.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Wow, he makes those long 3's look easy - just a flick of the wrist from 25 feet. I think the metrics folks have shown having the extra range for deep 3's makes a significant difference - even though 3 points is 3 points. That might push Banes' stock up. He's arguably the best deep shooter in the draft.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

As far as the assessment of Bane off of his highlights, here is a guy doing the things Bane does plus a whole great big bunch of other stuff:

Watch on YouTube

Not to mention that the highlights don't illustrate him getting to the line 10.7 times per 40 minutes -- & shooting .826 from the stripe. Just as Bane's highlights don't reveal the fact that he averaged 2 FTAs per 40 minutes this season.

Don't get me wrong -- I like Desmond Bane. He has a shot to be an NBA player. I'm not critical of him. Key point is what the highlights show, & what they definitely do not show, about a player.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Well... I'm sure if these two guys were here they'd be wondering why we felt we had to compare them!

I don't think either of them is "a sure thing," obviously -- truth is that almost nobody is!

"Turnover %: an estimate of number of turnovers per 100 plays," says basketball-reference.com. But, what's a "play" in this sentence I wonder? One of the team's plays, or a play by the individual player himself?

As a sophomore, Bane turned the ball over more per 40 minutes than he did as a senior -- on significantly lower usage.

As a freshman, Jones turned the ball over way less than he did as a sophomore -- again on lower usage (tho not all that much lower).

As to "Bane's 3 point shooting... help(ing) his team win more" than Jones, I wonder whether the following is a relevant way to look at it:

1. Bane -- per 40 minutes this year, he used 15.1 shots & 2 FTAs to produce 18.4 points. Figure each FTA as like 1/2 a shot (since it can only produce 1 point), & his 18.4 points were produced by 16.1 overall scoring attempts.

2. Jones -- per 40 minutes, he used 16.1 shots & 10.7 FTAs to produce 26 points. Treat each FTA as like 1/2 a shot again, & Jones's 26 points were produced by 21.45 overall scoring attempts.

Per 40 minutes, IOW, Jones produced 7.6 more points than Bane on 1 more FGA & 8.7 more FTAs -- call it 5.35 more overall scoring attempts -- which is extremely hard to do. Why? Because, obviously, FTAs are incredibly more efficient than FGAs, whether 2 pointers or 3 pointers! & that's how Jones got them.

IOW, why would we not say "Jones's ability to get to the line helps his team win more" than Bane?

OTOH, if we take note of Jones's 1.2 extra turnovers -- treat them as missed FGAs rebounded by the other team -- it definitely narrows the gap in scoring impact: now it's like 7.6 more points on 6.55 more scoring attempts. That's still hard to do.

But, it's not otherworldly. In fact, if Bane took 5.75 more 3-pointers per 40 minutes than he does, & if he made them at his overall .442% on the year, he'd score exactly 7.6 more points.

So, in that sense, we might conclude that (figuring in Jones's extra turnovers) the two players look to be exactly even in the way each one's extremely efficient scoring "helps his team win." Make sense?

With one difference, of course: Bane doesn't take those extra 5.75 3-pointers per 40 minutes (while keeping his outstanding % the same). Jones's efficiency is on significantly higher usage. Ergo, I fear we might have to conclude that Mason Jones's scoring "helps his team win more." No?

Of course, "helps his team win" includes a lot more than offensive efficiency, so I'm not concluding... anything!... but especially not that Jones is a better prospect than Bane. In fact, I don't think he is.

Despite Jones being the better scorer, I think that overall they're just about even. After all, Bane is a bit better rebounder, a bit better on assists & blocks, & he fouls quite a lot less. Jones gets more steals, but overall Bane has been the more solid in that stuff overall.

What's it all mean? They'd both be pretty solid picks at #37 I believe. But... there may be better available!

This draft the only player I’m interested in is Jalen Smith.

Why because I’m older and I’ve been in a veterans homeless shelter and I really don’t know anything about this draft

Why because I’m older and I’ve been in a veterans homeless shelter and I really don’t know anything about this draft. Also. because I am certain that Jalen Smith is going to be a way better pro than people anticipate at this point. The wizards really need a guy who rebounds and they can use some shot blocking. Smith is better than Rui Hachimura. It should be obvious.

[payitforward]

Hey Ken -- I'm older than you! Probably a lot older. Maybe old enough to be your Father (if I got started early! ). But, I'm not a veteran, & I've never had to spend a night in a homeless shelter.

You seem to be a resilient human being, which is admirable. You've been tested by experience, & you've come through as a whole person. I admire you for that.

On this board, you're thoughtful, fair-minded, & open. Doesn't mean you're always right. No one's always right. Then again, no one's keeping score! As you say in your signature, "RealGM is for fun."

Here's one thing I'm pretty sure you are right about: Jalen Smith is almost certain be be a better pro than Rui Hachimura. Rui is a nice kid, of course. & he looks like he can play in the NBA. But, Smith posted really outstanding numbers at Maryland this year. & took a big jump too -- which is a positive indicator.

If we traded down & got him around where he is projected on most mock drafts, we'd be doing extremely well (all the more in that a trade down would bring us another pick as well).