2020 NBA Draft prospects

[Dewey]

I believe over time teams will adapt defensively to better address the 3-guard/4-out/5-out type motion offenses ... IMO, I'd like to see more players who can post-up as well as shoot from range. Length is great but many of these young prospects do not have an inside game and can be effectively guarded by a smaller defender. Something has to give over time.

Bottom-line: IMO there's just too much emphasis on prospective players ability to shoot with range. I'd be more interested to see the players who willing and able to also go inside and have the fundamental capability to score off the block + and1 as well as hit a 3-pointer.

[jpatrick]

Watch on YouTube

This is an impressive video for Haliburton. He isn't a PG at the next level to me. He just doesn't have enough creation skill (never gets to the basket) and you can see his funky set shot/weird release doesn't really work off the dribble, which is required for a modern PG. However, he dominates Kira Lewis (a top 15 pick) in this game. He shows the ability to be a spot of shooter, always makes the right pass/play, and shuts down Lewis with his length. I don't see him as more than a role player, but in this draft if we traded down to the 6-10 range, I high end role player at SG might be a pretty good get.

He might also be able to play some backup PG thus creating a nice three guard rotation with Rusell, Beasley, and Haliburton.

[Jedzz]

[quote="Dewey"]I believe over time teams will adapt defensively to better address the 3-guard/4-out/5-out type motion offenses ... IMO, I'd like to see more players who can post-up as well as shoot from range. Length is great but many of these young prospects do not have an inside game and can be effectively guarded by a smaller defender. Something has to give over time.

Bottom-line: IMO there's just too much emphasis on prospective players ability to shoot with range. I'd be more interested to see the players who willing and able to also go inside and have the fundamental capability to score off the block + and1 as well as hit a 3-pointer.[/quote]

There categorically has not been enough emphasis on shooting skills here yet to now double back and start hunting "athletes" again. I like your last about having it all. The team is drafting young players with a year or so experience, these things can be expanded to their game yet as they get bigger and are coached to do so. A Fundamental capability to this game is shooting. We should erase all doubt about that and start there, filter from there. If we have a bunch of inconsistent to poor chuckers we will lose and always have for that reason. Yes it would be nice to find someone capable of all of it already. Which is why it's nice to have the #1 pick. However someone needs to find and point out a complete player in this draft and then if he's not in the hyped precious three then everyone has to get out of the way and allow the team to choose them without condemning them for "reaching". If there isn't one primed and ready, I start by filtering shooters first, then find the ones fromthat set that look capable of adding and strangling net drive capability. Or you could go with a complete unknown high level physical freak like Wiseman and assume he can drive through anything at this level, test his shooting in person, and then roll with the results.

[KGdaBom]

Watch on YouTube

This is an impressive video for Haliburton. He isn't a PG at the next level to me. He just doesn't have enough creation skill (never gets to the basket) and you can see his funky set shot/weird release doesn't really work off the dribble, which is required for a modern PG. However, he dominates Kira Lewis (a top 15 pick) in this game. He shows the ability to be a spot of shooter, always makes the right pass/play, and shuts down Lewis with his length. I don't see him as more than a role player, but in this draft if we traded down to the 6-10 range, I high end role player at SG might be a pretty good get.

He might also be able to play some backup PG thus creating a nice three guard rotation with Rusell, Beasley, and Haliburton.

Good post. One thought and one question. Lewis IMO isn't a top 15 pick in this draft.
I like the three guard rotation of Russell, Beasley and Haliburton, but does that mean Culver and Okogie have to get almost all their minutes at the SF?

[jpatrick]

Watch on YouTube

This is an impressive video for Haliburton. He isn't a PG at the next level to me. He just doesn't have enough creation skill (never gets to the basket) and you can see his funky set shot/weird release doesn't really work off the dribble, which is required for a modern PG. However, he dominates Kira Lewis (a top 15 pick) in this game. He shows the ability to be a spot of shooter, always makes the right pass/play, and shuts down Lewis with his length. I don't see him as more than a role player, but in this draft if we traded down to the 6-10 range, I high end role player at SG might be a pretty good get.

He might also be able to play some backup PG thus creating a nice three guard rotation with Rusell, Beasley, and Haliburton.

Good post. One thought and one question. Lewis IMO isn't a top 15 pick in this draft.
I like the three guard rotation of Russell, Beasley and Haliburton, but does that mean Culver and Okogie have to get almost all their minutes at the SF?

I’ve seen Lewis popping up in some top 10s and I think by draft day he goes at least top 15. He’s getting comps to De’Aron Fox because he will be one of the fastest players with the ball as soon as he enters the NBA. He had very good stats and although a sophomore, was younger than most freshman this year.

And yeah. I think if we take a guard only player (Ball, Haliburton, etc), we almost need to look to get value for Culver because he’s just not a full time SF.

[KGdaBom]

Watch on YouTube

This is an impressive video for Haliburton. He isn't a PG at the next level to me. He just doesn't have enough creation skill (never gets to the basket) and you can see his funky set shot/weird release doesn't really work off the dribble, which is required for a modern PG. However, he dominates Kira Lewis (a top 15 pick) in this game. He shows the ability to be a spot of shooter, always makes the right pass/play, and shuts down Lewis with his length. I don't see him as more than a role player, but in this draft if we traded down to the 6-10 range, I high end role player at SG might be a pretty good get.

He might also be able to play some backup PG thus creating a nice three guard rotation with Rusell, Beasley, and Haliburton.

Good post. One thought and one question. Lewis IMO isn't a top 15 pick in this draft.
I like the three guard rotation of Russell, Beasley and Haliburton, but does that mean Culver and Okogie have to get almost all their minutes at the SF?

I’ve seen Lewis popping up in some top 10s and I think by draft day he goes at least top 15. He’s getting comps to De’Aron Fox because he will be one of the fastest players with the ball as soon as he enters the NBA. He had very good stats and although a sophomore, was younger than most freshman this year.

And yeah. I think if we take a guard only player (Ball, Haliburton, etc), we almost need to look to get value for Culver because he’s just not a full time SF.

He does have nice stats, but he's ridiculously scrawny. Also as you said he was dominated by Haliburton.

[Baseline81]

Think I've reached the point if the pick cannot be traded for a star, likely the case, the Wolves should draft Edwards. Hopefully, he will not be thrust into the starting role, but developed. I would like to see how Russell, Beasley and Towns perform together for more than a game or two.

I do believe in a year from now, Edwards probably holds his value the highest of the discussed three prospects. Knowing Rosas, he may then use him and other assets to land that third star should one become available.

I am not in favor of trading a potential dollar into quarters, dimes and nickels. I understand the team could certainly use help in several places, however, first overall picks do not come along very often. Either draft a prospect to fill a need with the Brooklyn pick or use it in a trade for a veteran that can.

[Jedzz]

My point isn't to say that any prospect in this draft is Player A or Player B. I'm just saying draft prospect evaluation is hard. We can count on players to improve areas, but it doesn't always happen. However, doesn't necessarily doom that player for NBA failure either. We like to focus on 3-point shooting. But there's far more to being an NBA player than that one category.

Obviously there is far more to these players and there is even room for players you never want shooting on some teams.
But we are talking about this team, with the Rosas plan to make this work with Towns and Dlo, with 35-40 threes/g. How can this not be a front burner requirement on this team, now? More than that, historically this is a team that maybe has never had enough or at many times any trustworthy shooters. There are ample reasons for hardly ever winning here but this has got to be near #1.

The last two top draft picks for this team have shown struggles with shooting. One is a high effort defender slowly adding a drive/cut/net game. The other is too young to know yet what he's going to focus on. Both are inconsistent even on warm shooting days so far. Now we are going to pass on shooters again?

I look at Murray and others from past drafts and this guy can shoot, was known as a shooter in college. But he's leading an offense in the playoffs now also taking it to the net with graceful finishing moves. Examples like this are out there if we can stop steering away from players just because they have an ability to shoot from outside. It's up to the team to find them where ever they fall in the draft. They have two frps this time if they want.

[Klomp]

My point isn't to say that any prospect in this draft is Player A or Player B. I'm just saying draft prospect evaluation is hard. We can count on players to improve areas, but it doesn't always happen. However, doesn't necessarily doom that player for NBA failure either. We like to focus on 3-point shooting. But there's far more to being an NBA player than that one category.

Obviously there is far more to these players and there is even room for players you never want shooting on some teams.
But we are talking about this team, with the Rosas plan to make this work with Towns and Dlo, with 35-40 threes/g. How can this not be a front burner requirement on this team, now? More than that, historically this is a team that maybe has never had enough or at many times any trustworthy shooters. There are ample reasons for hardly ever winning here but this has got to be near #1.

The last two top draft picks for this team have shown struggles with shooting. One is a high effort defender slowly adding a drive/cut/net game. The other is too young to know yet what he's going to focus on. Both are inconsistent even on warm shooting days so far. Now we are going to pass on shooters again?

I look at Murray and others from past drafts and this guy can shoot, was known as a shooter in college. But he's leading an offense in the playoffs now also taking it to the net with graceful finishing moves. Examples like this are out there if we can stop steering away from players just because they have an ability to shoot from outside. It's up to the team to find them where ever they fall in the draft. They have two frps this time if they want.

Juan Hernangomez was shooting 25% this season before the trade with an additional season below 30%.
James Johnson at the time of the trade was shooting 35%, his career-high to that point.

I'm not saying that it's not important or that it's suddenly thrown out the window. But there's more to evaluating players than by their shot, whether in this system or not. I do not believe it's a firm requirement, as the trade deadline showed.

[jpatrick]

Wasserman (Bleacher Report's Draft analyst) is clearly not a fan of Wiseman. In this video, he breaks down Wiseman's issues against Oregon. Even though I don't like Wiseman's fit here, I think Wasserman is way too critical of Wiseman.

Watch on YouTube

To get a better picture of Wiseman's play that game, which is truly the only game he has ever played against decent competition above the high school level, this video shows many more plays that he was involved in.

Watch on YouTube

[urinesane]

That guy sounds like Wiseman kicked his dog or something.

Ok, he bit on a pump fake, pretty standard for a young big man. Then he blames him for "clogging up the lane"... but Oregon is playing a zone defense...

Then he complains about missed putback dunks acting like they were easy ones (they weren't).

Basically the guy isn't worth listening to.

Most young big men need to learn discipline around shot blocking and the 2nd clip looks like a more balanced view of a game that wasn't great for Wiseman (but also not really showing a ton of red flags that can't be shored up with some NBA coaching).

[KGdaBom]

Wasserman (Bleacher Report's Draft analyst) is clearly not a fan of Wiseman. In this video, he breaks down Wiseman's issues against Oregon. Even though I don't like Wiseman's fit here, I think Wasserman is way too critical of Wiseman.

Watch on YouTube

To get a better picture of Wiseman's play that game, which is truly the only game he has ever played against decent competition above the high school level, this video shows many more plays that he was involved in.

Watch on YouTube

I like video 2 better than video 1.

[jpatrick]

That guy sounds like Wiseman kicked his dog or something.

Ok, he bit on a pump fake, pretty standard for a young big man. Then he blames him for "clogging up the lane"... but Oregon is playing a zone defense...

Then he complains about missed putback dunks acting like they were easy ones (they weren't).

Basically the guy isn't worth listening to.

Most young big men need to learn discipline around shot blocking and the 2nd clip looks like a more balanced view of a game that wasn't great for Wiseman (but also not really showing a ton of red flags that can't be shored up with some NBA coaching).

I agree Wasserman is way too critical, but your statement that this wasn’t a great game for Wiseman is the problem. It is literally the only game footage we have of him playing anyone above the HS level except for two games against really poor low major competition.

It’ll be interesting. I think there is really high risk, high reward with all three of the top guys.

[Neeva]

Think I've reached the point if the pick cannot be traded for a star, likely the case, the Wolves should draft Edwards. Hopefully, he will not be thrust into the starting role, but developed. I would like to see how Russell, Beasley and Towns perform together for more than a game or two.

I do believe in a year from now, Edwards probably holds his value the highest of the discussed three prospects. Knowing Rosas, he may then use him and other assets to land that third star should one become available.

I am not in favor of trading a potential dollar into quarters, dimes and nickels. I understand the team could certainly use help in several places, however, first overall picks do not come along very often. Either draft a prospect to fill a need with the Brooklyn pick or use it in a trade for a veteran that can.

Agreed but would like rosas to get something from the warriors for the first since they want wiseman so bad, do not just hand him over to them.

[thinktank]

Wade was at the peak of his career about 10-15 years ago. The league has drastically changed since then.

Yep. Wade, in his prime, would be a total liability now.

I didn't come remotely close to saying that.

I don't think I'm the first person to mention it's difficult having conversations with you. Everything is black or white, one extreme or the other with you...

He’s just a pill. Can’t admit I made a good point that prime Wade would not be as valuable in the modern nba. That could very well apply to Edwards as well if he can’t improve his shot / shot selection / etc.

[KGdaBom]

Yep. Wade, in his prime, would be a total liability now.

I didn't come remotely close to saying that.

I don't think I'm the first person to mention it's difficult having conversations with you. Everything is black or white, one extreme or the other with you...

He’s just a pill. Can’t admit I made a good point that prime Wade would not be as valuable in the modern nba. That could very well apply to Edwards as well if he can’t improve his shot / shot selection / etc.

I think I support you in about 9 of your takes out of 10. I was having some fun. I thought it was a good joke. People are way too sensitive.
I don't even remember you making a point denigrating Wade for the Modern game. I was just responding to Prodigy's post with my mild joke which had the after it to indicate it was a joke in case the person didn't realize it was a joke.
Also I'm not in favor of Drafting Edwrds. Give me Wiseman, Okongwu, Avdija first for sure. Then I would consider Edwards I'm intrigued because he has some great skills and athletic ability.

[thinktank]

I didn't come remotely close to saying that.

I don't think I'm the first person to mention it's difficult having conversations with you. Everything is black or white, one extreme or the other with you...

He’s just a pill. Can’t admit I made a good point that prime Wade would not be as valuable in the modern nba. That could very well apply to Edwards as well if he can’t improve his shot / shot selection / etc.

I think I support you in about 9 of your takes out of 10. I was having some fun. I thought it was a good joke. People are way too sensitive.
I don't even remember you making a point denigrating Wade for the Modern game. I was just responding to Prodigy's post with my mild joke which had the after it to indicate it was a joke in case the person didn't realize it was a joke.
Also I'm not in favor of Drafting Edwrds. Give me Wiseman, Okongwu, Avdija first for sure. Then I would consider Edwards I'm intrigued because he has some great skills and athletic ability.

Just stop, man. You’re emoticon is very clearly meant to laugh with yourself and the point you made. You’re saying it’s preposterous that Wade wouldn’t be as valuable in today’s game.

Yep. Wade, in his prime, would be a total liability now.

[KGdaBom]

He’s just a pill. Can’t admit I made a good point that prime Wade would not be as valuable in the modern nba. That could very well apply to Edwards as well if he can’t improve his shot / shot selection / etc.

I think I support you in about 9 of your takes out of 10. I was having some fun. I thought it was a good joke. People are way too sensitive.
I don't even remember you making a point denigrating Wade for the Modern game. I was just responding to Prodigy's post with my mild joke which had the after it to indicate it was a joke in case the person didn't realize it was a joke.
Also I'm not in favor of Drafting Edwrds. Give me Wiseman, Okongwu, Avdija first for sure. Then I would consider Edwards I'm intrigued because he has some great skills and athletic ability.

Just stop, man. You’re emoticon is very clearly meant to laugh with yourself and the point you made. You’re saying it’s preposterous that Wade wouldn’t be as valuable in today’s game.

Yep. Wade, in his prime, would be a total liability now.

Where do you get off thinking you know exactly what I meant. Seriously. My exact thoughts are he would be less valuable in the game today in my estimation due to the ridiculous emphasis on the 3 point shot in the game today. Naismith is rolling over in his grave over this. However, I wasn't laughing with myself. I thought some people would have a sense of humor and enjoy it. I know at least some people did. Wade in his prime would still be a superstar in the game today and he would be a better three point shooter because he would work on it more.
So now I guess I'm in a fight with you. A person I have pretty much always supported and appreciated on this message board because you believe you have some kind of mystical mind reading powers. This will be my last comment regarding this. I don't want to be in any fight or controversy. If you feel the need to attack me any more go ahead.

[thinktank]

I think I support you in about 9 of your takes out of 10. I was having some fun. I thought it was a good joke. People are way too sensitive.
I don't even remember you making a point denigrating Wade for the Modern game. I was just responding to Prodigy's post with my mild joke which had the after it to indicate it was a joke in case the person didn't realize it was a joke.
Also I'm not in favor of Drafting Edwrds. Give me Wiseman, Okongwu, Avdija first for sure. Then I would consider Edwards I'm intrigued because he has some great skills and athletic ability.

Just stop, man. You’re emoticon is very clearly meant to laugh with yourself and the point you made. You’re saying it’s preposterous that Wade wouldn’t be as valuable in today’s game.

Yep. Wade, in his prime, would be a total liability now.

My exact thoughts are he would be less valuable in the game today in my estimation due to the ridiculous emphasis on the 3 point shot in the game today. Naismith is rolling over in his grave over this.

Wade in his prime would still be a superstar in the game today and he would be a better three point shooter because he would work on it more.

Seems like you're in a conflict with yourself.

[Worm Guts]

Just stop, man. You’re emoticon is very clearly meant to laugh with yourself and the point you made. You’re saying it’s preposterous that Wade wouldn’t be as valuable in today’s game.

My exact thoughts are he would be less valuable in the game today in my estimation due to the ridiculous emphasis on the 3 point shot in the game today. Naismith is rolling over in his grave over this.

Wade in his prime would still be a superstar in the game today and he would be a better three point shooter because he would work on it more.

Seems like you're in a conflict with yourself.

Stop.