2020 NBA Draft Thread: Bulls pick 4th!

[Bulls Fan 23]

If Haliburton actually has a 6'11" - 7' wingspan I really think this board should be more excited about him.

He has a very reasonable path to be a plus player physically at the NBA level. All he has to do is bulk up a bit, and he's there. I think that separates him from someone like Deni or Hayes who seem average.

He's been absolutely dominant in transition in college which to me bodes well for the spread-it-out style of play that most NBA teams are trying to achieve. He'd immediately be by far our best passer and he should be a nice defender as well. His spot up shooting is already there (FT% strong too).

I understand his shooting off the dribble is not there, but this guy would be no doubt #1 overall pick if he could shoot off the dribble.

He's my pick at 4 hands down.

[JohnnyTapwater]

Lamelo ball is not a high iq player

Flashy passes don't make one high IQ

I think the higher the vision, the higher the BBIQ.

You have to have some awareness to execute those passes. It's talented latent BBIQ.

It's certainly more than we have now.



Someone will trade up to get him anyway, so it's whatever.

[KCFITTED]

For what it’s worth, GSW beat guys and twitter draftniks insist that the Warriors have little interest in Wiseman and are instead targeting Deni with the 2nd pick.

Wrote the other day, It's very possible Ball will be there at #4.

Deni to Warriors makes sense.

Yeah I agree. I hear that Mitch Kupchak likes Deni and he would fit well with that Hornets roster. Ball falling to #4 is my dream case scenario. I think the Bulls need another playmaker Ball has potential to be elite in that category.

My top 3 for Bulls

Ball
Deni
Hayes

[MrSparkle]

Lamelo ball is not a high iq player

Flashy passes don't make one high IQ

I think the higher the vision, the higher the BBIQ.

You have to have some awareness to execute those passes. It's talented latent BBIQ.

It's certainly more than we have now.



Someone will trade up to get him anyway, so it's whatever.

I think what he’s got would be great if he could shoot the ball, but since he can’t... I wouldn’t call it low IQ, but it’s a very individualistic style of distribution. Pre-ACL Rondo for example, he’d do so much without the ball as a defender, screener, hockey assists. And he also had that palming ability for some crazy 2-step moves.

[BahamaBull]

Vassel
Hayes
Okoro

I will let Arturas decide any of these 3 at #4

[Dresden]

Lamelo ball is not a high iq player

Flashy passes don't make one high IQ

I think the higher the vision, the higher the BBIQ.

You have to have some awareness to execute those passes. It's talented latent BBIQ.

It's certainly more than we have now.



Someone will trade up to get him anyway, so it's whatever.

I think what he’s got would be great if he could shoot the ball, but since he can’t... I wouldn’t call it low IQ, but it’s a very individualistic style of distribution. Pre-ACL Rondo for example, he’d do so much without the ball as a defender, screener, hockey assists. And he also had that palming ability for some crazy 2-step moves.

Plus Rondo was a dynamite defender. I'm just not convinced that LaMelo is a net overall plus to his team. You get the nice passing and court vision, but you subtract a terrible shooting % and factor in poor defense, and then what are you left with?

[MrSparkle]

I think the higher the vision, the higher the BBIQ.

You have to have some awareness to execute those passes. It's talented latent BBIQ.

It's certainly more than we have now.



Someone will trade up to get him anyway, so it's whatever.

I think what he’s got would be great if he could shoot the ball, but since he can’t... I wouldn’t call it low IQ, but it’s a very individualistic style of distribution. Pre-ACL Rondo for example, he’d do so much without the ball as a defender, screener, hockey assists. And he also had that palming ability for some crazy 2-step moves.

Plus Rondo was a dynamite defender. I'm just not convinced that LaMelo is a net overall plus to his team. You get the nice passing and court vision, but you subtract a terrible shooting % and factor in poor defense, and then what are you left with?

Lonzo Ball without the defense?

[Dresden]

Gotta agree on Hali. It’s weird to see a guy with his statistical profile - who played in arguably the toughest conference - dismissed so easily.

I guess the one negative you could say about him is that he just had one year of high level production. His freshman year was pretty unimpressive. But he shot well both years, just on much lower volume.

On the plus side, he also snagged almost 6 boards a game last year, so he should be a good rebounder for his position in the NBA, too.

[PlayerUp]

I actually disagree, strongly.

I think the definition of safe needs to be revisited:

Safe:
- Good shooting form
- Good defensive floor
- Good size or wingspan
- Atleast moderately athletic
- Fast
- Good ball handling
- High IQ
- Multi positional

Unsafe:
- Slow or unathletic
- Bad shooting form
- Terrible FG%
- Bad IQ
- Lack of fundamentals
- Bad handling
- Weak
- Injury prone
- Bad defensive awareness

X-Factors that only translate if you have fantastic handles and scoring ability:
- Hyper athleticism
- Elite vision

Doesn’t really matter but some people continue making a big deal about it:
- Age

With late bloomers like Curry, Butler, Draymond... I don’t why people give a crap. If a player is dominating at 18, then that means they’re ready and must be snagged early (Lebron, Luka). Kawhi had 2 college years and didn’t end up like Cody Zeller.

Somehow we associate McDermott and WCJ with “safe”, but Doug was a classic example of a guy I considered a very risky NBA translation, and WCJ was basically the rawest project guy in the top-7 besides Bamba - he was basically a smart defender with a very strong frame, solid fundamentals, good wing-span and a hint of a jumpshot, ability to handle, etc. He was also the youngest player in the draft. But on the other hand, he really didn’t project any particular scoring ability besides the low post (with an undersized length for NBA Cs).

But anyway, I’d say if your pick has atleast 5 unsafe flags, then you are really just gambling against yourself.

My point, is there was nothing risky about Giannis, Kawhi, Jimmy, George, Westbrook, Rose, Luka. Granted, they were later picks... But if a guy has like 2 or 3 faults, but a whole mess of a great skills and attributes, you can’t highlight those faults and pigeon them a roleplayer. They were safe picks with star ceilings. Even had they not become stars with elite scoring, Kawhi or Jimmy would’ve had long NBA careers.

A starting recipe for a star IMO is elite handles, strong scoring ability (either inside or out, or even just getting to the FT line), and a good court awareness. If they don’t have that, then you might as well skip the potential star conversation.

There is a difference between high risk medium reward picks and medium risk high reward picks.

You miss out on Trae Young because he's small and not a defensive stand-out.
You miss out on Michael Porter Jr. because of his injury concern
You let Mitchell Robinson slide because of no freshman year.
You don't go after Donovan Mitchell because of size.
Or Bam Adebayo because you think he's just a rim runner with no other skill set.
Same with Pascal Siakam.

All of these players were not considered high risk medium reward picks and they didn't have most of these issues.

Unsafe:
- Slow or unathletic
- Bad shooting form
- Terrible FG%
- Bad IQ
- Lack of fundamentals
- Bad handling
- Weak
- Injury prone
- Bad defensive awareness

You go for high risk picks that you think can heavily develop at the next level.

I think you're focusing on the Unsafe list and not looking at the Safe list.

I'd go for Trae because he checked almost every safe box besides good defensive floor.

I still think MPJ was worth skipping at #7. I wasn't against taking him cause I saw he's an agile 6'10 handler and shooter, but I still don't think he was worth the risk with that high a pick.

Bam could handle the ball well for his position. His fundamentals were solid - he didn't display bad IQ. His college shooting stats and percentages were all very solid (besides for not having a 3P ball in college at all, which in many ways is still a long-shot expectation for defensive centers). Certainly large and athletic with a good defensive floor. Not injury prone or weak.

Mitchell's wing-span was rated very good. But yeah- certainly an outlier. I have trouble thinking of undersized star SGs in the last 20 years. I've got 2: Iverson and Mitchell... then there's McCollum, FVV, Avery Bradley, maybe Marcus Smart if we don't consider him a PG, neither of whom ever made an ASG or All-NBA team (but very good players no doubt). But regardless, I could say with confidence (in hindsight ) that Donovan had exactly zero of the 'Unsafe' flags I listed.

I guess what it boils down to here is sometimes you may have to take a chance. MPJ for example was a high risk pick. AK took a gamble on him at #14 and it looks like it will pan out. Now with AK on the Bulls, I'm expecting that we no longer go the safe route on all picks and we see AK take some high risk picks.

This draft for example has a bunch of high risk picks. LaMelo Ball is a classic "high risk" player. He has many bad flaws in his game. Would you pass on LaMelo Ball at #4? I'm guessing most here would not. Sometimes you have to take a gamble.

The safe picks to me at #4 are Deni, Okongwu and Vassell. Toppin, LaMelo, Wiseman would be the higher risk picks.

[Dresden]

Also, about Hali's weight- he's listed as 6/5", 185 on draftnet. Shai was listed at 6-6", 175.

I see a lot of similarities between the two, and that type of player seems to do really well in the nba right now- guys who are tall for their position, who can shoot, and who can also be a playmaker.

[kodo]

Also, about Hali's weight- he's listed as 6/5", 185 on draftnet. Shai was listed at 6-6", 175.

I see a lot of similarities between the two, and that type of player seems to do really well in the nba right now- guys who are tall for their position, who can shoot, and who can also be a playmaker.

Maybe in physical dimensions, but they are opposite in playing style.

SGA is all about shooting off the dribble, hesi jumpers, sidesteps, stepbacks.
Haliburton is allergic to shooting off the dribble, even as a PG he only shot 28% of his shots off the dribble. He was mainly a catch & shoot shooter, and he was one of the best at it. This is clearly his talent.

The only guy at the top who currently has some semblence of SGA's footwork is Hayes. Not to say Haliburton couldn't develop this way.

A NYK article also had some concerns about Haliburton's weak hand and finishing, relative to Hayes.

The fact that Hayes is a threat going right because of the jumper is important – someone like Haliburton, who I don’t mean to pick on, also had major issues going to his weak hand in the paint (I don’t believe he had a single left-handed finish this year besides two tip-ins), and has no in-between game.

https://dailyknicks.com/2020/08/24/knicks-draft-killian-hayes-scout-non-believer/2/

[chitowndish]

I'm still staying with Haliburton. Weight as a negative is a problem that takes care of itself because everyone puts on weight in their 20's. Also the fact that he doesn't spend a lot of time creating his shot I actually think is a positive for a PG. He seems to create shots off the dribble plenty but he seems to create them for others which is good for me. It isn't like he has a bad handle or can't attack a defense he's getting other people involved.

I feel like all of these guys have negatives but Haliburton's negatives are either inconsequential or in line with the way I prefer a PG to play. The guy can clearly knock down open shots so if anyone leaves him he can make them pay and his vision and discipline passing seem exceptional and he seems like he can be a good defender as well at 6'5" for a PG. There really isn't anything I don't like about this kid. I really want to trade down for Haliburton and Vassell and I know that's difficult but that is my dream draft I think.

[PaKii94]

Lamelo ball is not a high iq player

Flashy passes don't make one high IQ

I think the higher the vision, the higher the BBIQ.

You have to have some awareness to execute those passes. It's talented latent BBIQ.

It's certainly more than we have now.



Someone will trade up to get him anyway, so it's whatever.

Sure usually I agree but then you also gotta factor in volume. He was extremely high usage. Sure he can make a WOW pass but if it's 1 of every 10 possessions and the others are lost with WOW turnovers and bad shot selections and then piss poor defense on the other end.... That team won't be winning much which was the case for most of his play time.

Also those type of passes can be learned with repetition but WHEN to use them is a lot harder to learn which I don't see in ball

It's another matter if he's making the wow pass 1 of 5 but also making the right reads on the other end, scoring efficiently on his shots, playing average defense. Then the tantalizing potential is a lot more appetizing.

[holv03]

Devin Vassell is a sleeper pick. I believe this kid could actually become a very good player at the next level. He is 6'7 and he has a 6'10 wingspan. A good shooter, good defense and he is very athletic.

[PaKii94]

General question: why haliburton over vassell? I like Hali a lot too but vassell has the same strengths but at a higher level (length/shot/defense). I guess you can say vassell doesn't have the "playmaking" but he also isn't an idiot and can play the team concept.

I also think a vet playmaker is a lot more necessary if we are trying to maximize the talent we already have instead of also trying to groom a playmaker

[PaKii94]

Devin Vassell is a sleeper pick. I believe this kid could actually become a very good player at the next level. He is 6'7 and he has a 6'10 wingspan. A good shooter, good defense and he is very athletic.

He's the only one on film that I've watched just stand out from the others. Especially with his length and frame I think he'll be a stud in the league if he works in it which he seems to have the underdog mentality of the recent two way wing stars (kawhi/Giannis/Jimmy)

Also all-defense caliber ability. Not just "good"

[PlayerUp]

[If Ball is there at # 4 it would be best case scenario for us , I have no problem selecting him or trading him to NY for # 8 and a future 1st.

Pax

This is only a good trade because it's the Knicks. You know that trade will backfire on them and that future 1st will likely be good. If the Knicks are willing to offer this for LaMelo, you do it no hesitation.

[PlayerUp]

Devin Vassell is a sleeper pick. I believe this kid could actually become a very good player at the next level. He is 6'7 and he has a 6'10 wingspan. A good shooter, good defense and he is very athletic.

He isn't really a sleeper pick. He's mocked in the mid lottery in many mocks. People know his skillset will fit well as a good complimentary piece in the NBA. AK has picked a FSU guard before in the past as well and they turned out to be a pretty nice complimentary piece.

[JohnnyTapwater]

I almost forgot the collegiate 3 point line was moved back this year so those numbers should translate even more.

[PaKii94]

I almost forgot the collegiate 3 point line was moved back this year so those numbers should translate even more.

Does it match nba now?