Jonathan Kuminga...Beast or Bust?

[Brofessor24]

I would definitely take him before Scottie Barnes (who is becoming pretty overrated lately).

Barnes is better at virtually everything on a basketball court and is listed behind Kuminga in most mocks yet he’s the overrated one?

No he isn't.

Barnes is definitely overrated.

[Brofessor24]

I would definitely take him before Scottie Barnes (who is becoming pretty overrated lately).

It seems like the shift between he and Barnes has become much greater since both guys quit playing for the season, which makes me question it a bit.

Perception is not reality.

[ItsDanger]

Kuminga has all the talent but he is raw. Big factor will be which team he goes to and how patient they are in developing him slowly. Going to the G league was a mistake for him. That option is not for players who really need to work on fundamentals.

[Nazrmohamed]

I dont really see any nba skills. I see a solid run/jump athlete. Hes got a little midrange game, nothing consistent though where you know what his bread and butter is. To me the team that drafts him has to be ready to really develop and in 4 yrs he could be an absolute stud but to me there's alot to work on compared to his peers and tbh I don't understand why he's ranked so high besides that he has raw tools that can end up higher down the line than more ready prospects. To me he's similar to a guy like Paskal Siakum or Michael Kidd Gilchrist. Now I purposely used those two players cuz I wanted the range of actual performance. But at the start of thier careers this is what Kuminga reminds me of. What he does after that will come down to his drive and having that right coach and team culture.

The best way for me to describe it is that there are others I see who I percieve as having more control over thier own destiny. If I have a team and run a certain system, you know what my system is after drafting Cade Cunningham? Whatever makes sense for Cade Cunningham. Same probably with Green. Suggs is a PG so it's more that he can do both. But with Kuminga I think system will matter. I think he'll be a high level complimentary starter who MAY evolve further. I don't want to ever liit ones potential, that's not what I'm trying to do here. But early on I think one can predict he'll have more of a Jimmie Butler or Kuwai route IF he does become a star player.

[Nazrmohamed]

Kuminga is the type of prospect who continues to trick GMs into overdrafting him year after year. Raw athlete who you’re just hoping develops all of the basketball abilities later. I wouldn’t take him in the top 10 personally.

I dont dissagree with the narrative but my lowest draft spot might be 8 for me. I'd have to see how other things play out but those things that you said might trick a GM aren't total fantasy. He is indeed one of the most athletic players in this draft, he does have some skill where you can see them dominating if he can pit it together. I mean, if we wanted 100% nba ready then there'd be more upperclassmen in the lottery. So we do have to take longterm potential into account but yeah, you're right as a GM you could get burned.....or you do a great job developing him and he fulfills what you projected. Its a gamble.

[yoyoboy]

Kuminga is the type of prospect who continues to trick GMs into overdrafting him year after year. Raw athlete who you’re just hoping develops all of the basketball abilities later. I wouldn’t take him in the top 10 personally.

I dont dissagree with the narrative but my lowest draft spot might be 8 for me. I'd have to see how other things play out but those things that you said might trick a GM aren't total fantasy. He is indeed one of the most athletic players in this draft, he does have some skill where you can see them dominating if he can pit it together. I mean, if we wanted 100% nba ready then there'd be more upperclassmen in the lottery. So we do have to take longterm potential into account but yeah, you're right as a GM you could get burned.....or you do a great job developing him and he fulfills what you projected. Its a gamble.

Yeah, I mean I understand the appeal of taking a player with a lot of physical tools who's still raw in other aspects. But how often do guys who are this raw pan out?

From what I can tell, Kuminga would be one of the most inefficent wings ever to be taken as high in the lottery as he's probably going to go. At least in recent history. Below 50% TS (-7.5 rTS), 43% eFG, 62.5% FT, 24.6% 3P, 14.1% TOV, 90 ORTG, -0.03 WS/48. Jaylen Brown was pretty rough, too, but he wasn't this raw, and he's a rare case of development.

I understand he's playing with bigger boys in the G-League, but that also means he has better teammates and spacing. I don't think we know for sure yet whether it's easier to put up numbers in college versus the G-League.

[Stillwater]

Kuminga is the type of prospect who continues to trick GMs into overdrafting him year after year. Raw athlete who you’re just hoping develops all of the basketball abilities later. I wouldn’t take him in the top 10 personally.

I dont dissagree with the narrative but my lowest draft spot might be 8 for me. I'd have to see how other things play out but those things that you said might trick a GM aren't total fantasy. He is indeed one of the most athletic players in this draft, he does have some skill where you can see them dominating if he can pit it together. I mean, if we wanted 100% nba ready then there'd be more upperclassmen in the lottery. So we do have to take longterm potential into account but yeah, you're right as a GM you could get burned.....or you do a great job developing him and he fulfills what you projected. Its a gamble.

Yeah, I mean I understand the appeal of taking a player with a lot of physical tools who's still raw in other aspects. But how often do guys who are this raw pan out?

From what I can tell, Kuminga would be one of the most inefficent wings ever to be taken as high in the lottery as he's probably going to go. At least in recent history. Below 50% TS (-7.5 rTS), 43% eFG, 62.5% FT, 24.6% 3P, 14.1% TOV, 90 ORTG, -0.03 WS/48. Jaylen Brown was pretty rough, too, but he wasn't this raw, and he's a rare case of development.

I understand he's playing with bigger boys in the G-League, but that also means he has better teammates and spacing. I don't think we know for sure yet whether it's easier to put up numbers in college versus the G-League.

With an actual team around him instead of next level hungry kids going yolo all the time on the same roster, I see a much better looking prospect than the watered down version I saw in the Gleague.
Kuminga might be overrated slightly because his bbiq needs to play catch up but the physical specimen is Finals MVP upside archtype that cannot be ignored imo

[basketballRob]

Kuminga reminds me of Oladipo, but 3 inches bigger.

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

[The-Power]

From what I can tell, Kuminga would be one of the most inefficent wings ever to be taken as high in the lottery as he's probably going to go. At least in recent history. Below 50% TS (-7.5 rTS), 43% eFG, 62.5% FT, 24.6% 3P, 14.1% TOV, 90 ORTG, -0.03 WS/48. Jaylen Brown was pretty rough, too, but he wasn't this raw, and he's a rare case of development.

I agree that if you evaluate Kuminga by the standards of a go-to scorer, he's unlikely to succeed. I'd just argue that if you draft him in the 4-7 range, you can't expect miracles. So if he becomes a scorer with average efficiency on decent volume who can be a tertiary creator and defend both forward positions at a solid to good level, you'd get a coveted player of the quality you can expect in that range.

Also, it is not actually so rare for good NBA wings to have struggled with their scoring efficiency early on. Just last year, Anthony Edwards was drafted 3rd and had a 52% TS. Kawhi Leonard was a 51% TS guy in both of his college years. Khris Middleton posted a miserable 49% TS in his third (!) year in college. Jerami Grant in his first year in college had a 51% TS. Iguodala started out at 46% TS in college. And, as you mentioned, Jaylen Brown scored at 52% TS for his Freshman year. I'm probably missing others but this goes to show that significantly increasing your TS% as a wing compared to your teenage years is not actually that uncommon.

[azcatz11]

Kuminga reminds me of Oladipo, but 3 inches bigger.

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

that's a good thing, right?

[yoyoboy]

From what I can tell, Kuminga would be one of the most inefficent wings ever to be taken as high in the lottery as he's probably going to go. At least in recent history. Below 50% TS (-7.5 rTS), 43% eFG, 62.5% FT, 24.6% 3P, 14.1% TOV, 90 ORTG, -0.03 WS/48. Jaylen Brown was pretty rough, too, but he wasn't this raw, and he's a rare case of development.

I agree that if you evaluate Kuminga by the standards of a go-to scorer, he's unlikely to succeed. I'd just argue that if you draft him in the 4-7 range, you can't expect miracles. So if he becomes a scorer with average efficiency on decent volume who can be a tertiary creator and defend both forward positions at a solid to good level, you'd get a coveted player of the quality you can expect in that range.

Also, it is not actually so rare for good NBA wings to have struggled with their scoring efficiency early on. Just last year, Anthony Edwards was drafted 3rd and had a 52% TS. Kawhi Leonard was a 51% TS guy in both of his college years. Khris Middleton posted a miserable 49% TS in his third (!) year in college. Jerami Grant in his first year in college had a 51% TS. Iguodala started out at 46% TS in college. And, as you mentioned, Jaylen Brown scored at 52% TS for his Freshman year. I'm probably missing others but this goes to show that significantly increasing your TS% as a wing compared to your teenage years is not actually that uncommon.

I think if you work under the assumption that the G-League is harder to produce in for a first-year player players than college, it makes sense. But I'm not sure that's the case, and we definitely don't have the sample of data to draw that conclusion yet, and I'm honestly leaning towards the idea that the spacing/better teammate quality makes it easier.

In terms of efficiency, I was taking into account relative scoring efficiency rather than the percentage at face value. The rest of Kuminga's team collectively shot at 58.1% TS while the league shot at 57.2% TS. Kawhi for instance shot on 1.8% better efficiency than Kuminga while the rest of his team shot at 55.7% TS (2.4% worse than Kuminga's and the league would be harder to gauge). 4.2% worse efficiency compared to his team for Kawhi isn't great, but Kuminga at 8.4% worse is another level of bad. Kawhi also grabbed offensive boards at 3.5 times the rate of Kuminga, which really helped his overall offensive efficiency.

I guess I'm not so much worried that Kuminga didn't score efficiently, as I am that he really didn't do anything that well on the offensive end. Scored poorly overall, shot the ball dreadfully from both three and the line, didn't grab offensive boards at a great rate, didn't generate that many steals... really the things he has going for him in terms of quantitative measurables are a solid AST/TO rate, youth, and height. And then comes the issue that we probably can't verify his age for sure. People take offense to this concern because there's no evidence he's not 18, but it's really just part of conducting proper risk management when you're about to invest $20-25 million into a player to be a major part of your franchise going forward. Kuminga was born in the Democratic Republic of the Congo where roughly 75% of kids are born without birth certificates. It's not out of the question that he could actually be even just a year or two older than his listed age, because if he was, around the time he came over to the US a few years ago, he would've been heavily advised to lie about his age to maximize his odds of being drafted. When you're talking about an opportunity as special as the NBA, it's just the smart thing to do. And even though in the NBA there haven't been any officially proven false age incidents as far as I'm aware (though Shabazz Muhammad was able to get by being a year younger until the NCAA tournament and he was born in California), guys have been exposed for it many times in the MLB and other leagues around the world. For a guy who's as raw in development right now as he is, a year or two makes an enormous difference in terms of his potential. I'm talking a disparity of like 15-20 spots in the draft.

If he is indeed 18, then the discussion about his age sucks and it's a little unfair to him, but that's the thing. We just can't know for sure and I don't think in the case of putting millions behind a draft pick, you can afford to be kind enough to give someone the benefit of the doubt and assume the most optimistic scenario. But for the sake of argument, let's say he is that young. I still can't understand why anybody would pick him ahead of Barnes, who is just as much of a freak of nature and has shown much more on a basketball court. Sengun might not be as athletic, but he's only 2 months younger, and his production completely blows Kuminga's out of the water, to the point where it seems kind of crazy to take the bet on the raw potential. It's basically unheard of that dudes as young and productive as Sengun don't become very good NBA players, while the track record of raw athletes like Kuminga is very spotty to say the least. Wagner's path to being the kind of player you described where he can score on at least average efficiency, defend the forward positions, and be a tertiary creator seems almost like a lock, and I'd take him over Kuminga in a heartbeat. I'm assuming most people aren't taking him ahead of Cade, Green, Mobley, or Suggs. So maybe you can take him 8th in that scenario? But I think Cooper and Giddey are better gambles tbh if you're swinging for the fences.

[The-Power]

Always appreciate your thoughts and insights, so I'm happy to engage more!

In terms of efficiency, I was taking into account relative scoring efficiency rather than the percentage at face value.

I get the idea behind it, and perhaps it should be factored in in some way, but I have a few concerns.

For starters, you yourself acknowledge that we do not know yet what the difference between college and G-League really is in terms of production. Hence, I wouldn't focus so much on exact numbers and relative efficiency – instead, I'd just focus on the fact that there are a number of good wings in today's league who struggled with efficiency in their early non-NBA years. Is Kuminga going to improve as the examples as mentioned? That's impossible to say, and I understand your concerns. I simply wanted to highlight that his inefficiency is not necessarily something that is going to follow him throughout his career.

Second, while your opinion that it might be easier to score in G-League than in college (at least in some instances – I doubt it would be true for players on last year's Gonzanga team, for instance) is something to consider, it also follows that a) it's easier to score for teammates and b) G-League players are, on average, simply better than college players (you pointed out the advantages of spacing, for instance, which are due to superior shooting ability on teams) and it would be unfair to look at Kuminga's relative TS% when the level of offensive play in particular is just naturally higher because the players are better.

Lastly, it bears mentioning that Kuminga has played only 13 games. That's an awfully small sample size. Perhaps it accurately reflects his efficiency, but maybe he was also only on a bad stretch (I'm sure you find inefficient stretches of 13 games for many players). In fact, you'd imagine that a player being thrown into a new league with professional players is going to take some time to adapt and, over time, improves his efficiency rather than have it drop. College players have the advantage not only of playing against non-professional athletes but – in most cases – also of starting out versus non-conference weaker competition. I'm sure Freshmen would struggle more if they started out playing conference games without any notable preparation outside of practice.

I still can't understand why anybody would pick him ahead of Barnes, who is just as much of a freak of nature and has shown much more on a basketball court. Sengun might not be as athletic, but he's only 2 months younger, and his production completely blows Kuminga's out of the water, to the point where it seems kind of crazy to take the bet on the raw potential. It's basically unheard of that dudes as young and productive as Sengun don't become very good NBA players, while the track record of raw athletes like Kuminga is very spotty to say the least. Wagner's path to being the kind of player you described where he can score on at least average efficiency, defend the forward positions, and be a tertiary creator seems almost like a lock, and I'd take him over Kuminga in a heartbeat. I'm assuming most people aren't taking him ahead of Cade, Green, Mobley, or Suggs. So maybe you can take him 8th in that scenario? But I think Cooper and Giddey are better gambles tbh if you're swinging for the fences.

Re: Barnes. I have him and Barnes in the same tier. I understand if you have Barnes (comfortably) ahead but I wasn't as impressed with Barnes as I had hoped. Just like Kuminga, Barnes' shot is a big question mark and – perhaps unjustified – I have more confidence in Kuminga's shot than Barnes'. Barnes is clearly a better passer, but I believe Kuminga has more upside as a scorer and shot-creator (for himself). If Barnes cannot score well enough, then his playmaking skills are less useful and he is limited to creation on the break and as the roll man – something I believe Kuminga can do as well, albeit differently. Defense is Barnes' calling card and while he's good, I've been a bit disappointed in some parts of his defense. Kuminga is more of a wildcard – the tools are there to be really good, but he has a lot to learn.

Re: Sengün. His production is indeed insane. But if you take it at face value, you would have to have him #1 because nobody compares in this draft in his age range. I wouldn't take him #1, though, because production is only part of the assessment. To your point about someone with Sengün's production not becoming a very good NBA player is basically unheard of: well, how many players were there with his kind of production? The number of extremely small, and I wouldn't draw too much from that. What I do believe is that Sengün will be able to produce numbers in the NBA as well, I see no reason to doubt that. How much will this help his team, though, is a different question. After all, there are many Cs who stuff the boxscore sheet but aren't really all that valuable to their teams; especially when they have defensive shortcomings that can be exploited by modern offenses (see, for example, Kanter with his 24 PER only playing 24 MPG).

Re: Wagner. I have him in the same tier as Kuminga and Barnes, so I also don't see anyone preferring him to Kuminga as particularly odd. I agree that Wagner has a higher floor. With Kuminga, you draft him based on his potential due to superior athletic ability. If you want to play it safer, by all means, you should take Wagner. I believe teams in that range of the draft are more likely to swing for the fences in hopes that they can get a cornerstone and thus I'll probably end up having Kuminga ranked a bit higher – but this is not to say that he's necessarily better as a prospect if we only look at the median outcome instead of weighting higher-end outcome (more than lower-end outcomes).

Re: Giddey. I love his passing ability but everything else is a concern for me. I don't think he has the handles nor the scoring ability to be a lead Guard in the NBA, so that limits his passing impact a bit. I see him more as a great utility guy on offense if his shot becomes at least serviceable. Maybe that's a better outcome on offense than the average outcome for Kuminga, I'm not sure, but with Giddey there are also defensive concerns that Kuminga doesn't have unless you think he's a headcase (which is something teams can figure out more easily).

Re: Cooper. I just don't see it. He's a very undersized PG with a suspect shot. He might be heavily targeted by teams on defense, and is his offense really going to make up for it if he can't shoot it well? Not to mention issues of scalability with a ball-dominant PG who doesn't project to be a good off-ball player and doesn't force defenses to come up high to defend him. Right now, I think he'll be someone you'd want to bring off the bench on a good team. I could be wrong, though – maybe I have to watch him a bit more closely.I guess his FT% provides some reason for hope.

On the matter of age, I'll just say this: I don't factor it in, because I have no particular reason to doubt his age. I expect, however, that teams will do their due diligence and if there are any concerns, I understand and expect to see him drop. But this isn't a topic I want to focus on from my keyboard when it's entirely speculative.

[tidho]

a lot of assumptions being made a guy based on a 13 game sample size. folks aren't willing to say Jalen Johnson is a legit 40% 3pt shooter based on his 13 games... but Kuminga is bad based on his 13 games? its an interesting view point.

one minor note, makes sense to bump his 62.5% FT% up to 65% given G-League only shoots 1 free throw. NBA disparity between 1st and 2nd shots is about 5%. of course, its still only a 13 game sample size.

i think there is valid concern because of how inconsistently he missed. dude is still a prototype SF, not a point-forward, but a traditional SF.

[Stillwater]

Kuminga reminds me of Oladipo, but 3 inches bigger.

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

that's a good thing, right?

Sooo he will be in Orlando to start his career suck badly then Indiana will get him in his prime?
This is the kind of prospect that you gamble on around 8th and no later than 10th imo based on baseline skill but easily in consideration at 3-7 imo with Wiggins hops and Aaron Gordon motor...at worse you get a high energy player I bet he is easily as athletic and long as Scottie Lewis tested out to be

[Stillwater]

a lot of assumptions being made a guy based on a 13 game sample size. folks aren't willing to say Jalen Johnson is a legit 40% 3pt shooter based on his 13 games... but Kuminga is bad based on his 13 games? its an interesting view point.

one minor note, makes sense to bump his 62.5% FT% up to 65% given G-League only shoots 1 free throw. NBA disparity between 1st and 2nd shots is about 5%. of course, its still only a 13 game sample size.

i think there is valid concern because of how inconsistently he missed. dude is still a prototype SF, not a point-forward, but a traditional SF.

Kumingas pro day calmed the concerns about shot selection bricks etc imo

[tidho]

a lot of assumptions being made a guy based on a 13 game sample size. folks aren't willing to say Jalen Johnson is a legit 40% 3pt shooter based on his 13 games... but Kuminga is bad based on his 13 games? its an interesting view point.

one minor note, makes sense to bump his 62.5% FT% up to 65% given G-League only shoots 1 free throw. NBA disparity between 1st and 2nd shots is about 5%. of course, its still only a 13 game sample size.

i think there is valid concern because of how inconsistently he missed. dude is still a prototype SF, not a point-forward, but a traditional SF.

Kumingas pro day calmed the concerns about shot selection bricks etc imo

i did here that his form was really good and that he was hitting at a high rate and not missing badly. that does help counter the concern i mentioned.

[yoyoboy]

Always appreciate your thoughts and insights, so I'm happy to engage more!

Likewise! I know we've been high and low on similar prospects in the past, but so it's interesting we feel very differently on a few this year. I don't know if I've seen anyone on this board who has Cade lower - 7th or 8th - than I do lol.

I get the idea behind it, and perhaps it should be factored in in some way, but I have a few concerns.

For starters, you yourself acknowledge that we do not know yet what the difference between college and G-League really is in terms of production. Hence, I wouldn't focus so much on exact numbers and relative efficiency – instead, I'd just focus on the fact that there are a number of good wings in today's league who struggled with efficiency in their early non-NBA years. Is Kuminga going to improve as the examples as mentioned? That's impossible to say, and I understand your concerns. I simply wanted to highlight that his inefficiency is not necessarily something that is going to follow him throughout his career.

There are definitely examples of wings who struggled to score efficiently and went on to become great players but I'm wondering what the percentage is of raw wings are who did everything across the board so poorly and went on to be worth a top 5 pick. Usually it feels like they at least show something - high ORB rate, high FTA rate, decent FT%, good steal rate... It just seems like with Kuminga, it's all hope. I'm definitely not discounting that he could turn out to be a superstar if things go very right for him, because he's long, athletic, fairly physical, and he has decent court vision. But for me personally, the risk just really outweighs the reward when you're talking high lottery where some high upside prospects who have shown a lot more thus far are available. If I'm in that 9-12 range and the prospects left don't have that exciting of upside, and I've done the due diligence to determine his age is legit, then yeah I can see taking a swing at him.

Second, while your opinion that it might be easier to score in G-League than in college (at least in some instances – I doubt it would be true for players on last year's Gonzanga team, for instance) is something to consider, it also follows that a) it's easier to score for teammates and b) G-League players are, on average, simply better than college players (you pointed out the advantages of spacing, for instance, which are due to superior shooting ability on teams) and it would be unfair to look at Kuminga's relative TS% when the level of offensive play in particular is just naturally higher because the players are better.

I actually just figured something out that makes a difference. I completely forgot to account for the new G-League rules, which actually means Kuminga's scoring efficiency is even LOWER than I thought because most of his free throws are worth 2 points and not 1. I'm too lazy to do look into the exact numbers but if we take the TS formula and assume 44% of his FTA were and-ones, that would make his TS% actually 45.7% which is terrifying to me. As far as the G-League being harder to score in than college, I guess we'll just have to wait and see until more prospects start following this path. Seeing raw guys in the past like a 19-20 year old Sekou score around 23 points per 36 on 62% TS in the G-League while struggling to get over 12 points per 36 on 47% TS in the NBA makes me wonder if it's way closer to college scoring difficulty than it is to NBA scoring difficulty because of the improved spacing and teammates, regardless of going up against more equipped NBA-style defenders. But we'll see.

Lastly, it bears mentioning that Kuminga has played only 13 games. That's an awfully small sample size. Perhaps it accurately reflects his efficiency, but maybe he was also only on a bad stretch (I'm sure you find inefficient stretches of 13 games for many players). In fact, you'd imagine that a player being thrown into a new league with professional players is going to take some time to adapt and, over time, improves his efficiency rather than have it drop. College players have the advantage not only of playing against non-professional athletes but – in most cases – also of starting out versus non-conference weaker competition. I'm sure Freshmen would struggle more if they started out playing conference games without any notable preparation outside of practice.

You're right about that, and admittedly I didn't really think about it as much as I probably should have. If it was indeed a bad stretch then that could help Kuminga's case. I'll also say though that because of the G-League's function as a means to show off talent, Kuminga was on a way shorter leash than college players are and was allowed to chuck away despite being massively inefficient. Maybe this is a good thing because he took a lot of shots that bogged down his efficiency, and in college he might have put up a better statistical profile not being allowed to do whatever he wants out there. But it's also possible we got a much better glimpse of what Kuminga's performance could look like in the NBA because he wasn't as restricted as college players.

Re: Barnes. I have him and Barnes in the same tier. I understand if you have Barnes (comfortably) ahead but I wasn't as impressed with Barnes as I had hoped. Just like Kuminga, Barnes' shot is a big question mark and – perhaps unjustified – I have more confidence in Kuminga's shot than Barnes'. Barnes is clearly a better passer, but I believe Kuminga has more upside as a scorer and shot-creator (for himself). If Barnes cannot score well enough, then his playmaking skills are less useful and he is limited to creation on the break and as the roll man – something I believe Kuminga can do as well, albeit differently. Defense is Barnes' calling card and while he's good, I've been a bit disappointed in some parts of his defense. Kuminga is more of a wildcard – the tools are there to be really good, but he has a lot to learn.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kuminga develops into a better shot creator for himself, but for me, as long as Barnes is able to develop a decent shot, I really like his potential to be a huge impact player. I find it way more likely Barnes can do that than Kuminga improves virtually everything on a basketball court. With Kuminga all his strengths come with the tags "potential," "upside," or "tools to be..." but Barnes has shown me he has fantastic vision and accuracy, and I like how he makes decisions quickly. I personally wasn't disappointed by Barnes defensively, but even if you think that, I'm sure you agree Barnes is still a much better defender at this point and I don't see why Kuminga would have any more upside in that area compared to the guy who's stronger, 3 inches longer in wingspan, better in terms of lateral movement, and has shown better instincts and IQ so far.

Re: Sengün. His production is indeed insane. But if you take it at face value, you would have to have him #1 because nobody compares in this draft in his age range. I wouldn't take him #1, though, because production is only part of the assessment. To your point about someone with Sengün's production not becoming a very good NBA player is basically unheard of: well, how many players were there with his kind of production? The number of extremely small, and I wouldn't draw too much from that. What I do believe is that Sengün will be able to produce numbers in the NBA as well, I see no reason to doubt that. How much will this help his team, though, is a different question. After all, there are many Cs who stuff the boxscore sheet but aren't really all that valuable to their teams; especially when they have defensive shortcomings that can be exploited by modern offenses (see, for example, Kanter with his 24 PER only playing 24 MPG).

You're right about that, but it's interesting to note that Sengun's defensive indicators are pretty good compared to recently drafted bigs.



AST/TO also tends to correlate well with defensive ability in the NBA and Sengun is awesome there, as well. I think people tend to overstate the idea that he has no chance against the PnR in the NBA. I think he's more athletic and mobile than he gets credit for, and his IQ and instincts really bring a lot to the table. It's also common for bigs as young as he is to look incapable laterally early on, but then look much better as their footwork and experience improves. I fully expect Sabonis to turn into an excellent shooter as well based on his FT%, the touch on his shot he's shown, and his form, so I don't think it's unreasonable to think of Sabonis with a better shot and better defensive instincts kind of upside for Sengun. If I were to place all my value on the statistical production and age interaction, he would be my far away number one in this draft because he blows everyone else away in the draft models. So I think having him in the lower half of the lottery is just crazy, considering other prospects have their fair share of question marks as well.

Re: Wagner. I have him in the same tier as Kuminga and Barnes, so I also don't see anyone preferring him to Kuminga as particularly odd. I agree that Wagner has a higher floor. With Kuminga, you draft him based on his potential due to superior athletic ability. If you want to play it safer, by all means, you should take Wagner. I believe teams in that range of the draft are more likely to swing for the fences in hopes that they can get a cornerstone and thus I'll probably end up having Kuminga ranked a bit higher – but this is not to say that he's necessarily better as a prospect if we only look at the median outcome instead of weighting higher-end outcome (more than lower-end outcomes).

Yeah I agree with that. Kuminga's absolute ceiling is for sure higher just because of the athleticism advantage. I just feel that in probably over 80% of outcomes, Wagner becomes the better player, and teams in general draft based on most optimistic possibility too often. But I get the logic.

Re: Giddey. I love his passing ability but everything else is a concern for me. I don't think he has the handles nor the scoring ability to be a lead Guard in the NBA, so that limits his passing impact a bit. I see him more as a great utility guy on offense if his shot becomes at least serviceable. Maybe that's a better outcome on offense than the average outcome for Kuminga, I'm not sure, but with Giddey there are also defensive concerns that Kuminga doesn't have unless you think he's a headcase (which is something teams can figure out more easily).

Yeah, Giddey just smashes so many variables that correlate well with NBA success, but I agree with you, he has a ton of red flags. I'm basically placing all my stock in a guy that tall who's that young and already maybe the 2nd best passing prospect of all time at that height or above behind Magic will basically just figure the rest out. I can see this looking really stupid in a couple years, too, so we'll see.

Re: Cooper. I just don't see it. He's a very undersized PG with a suspect shot. He might be heavily targeted by teams on defense, and is his offense really going to make up for it if he can't shoot it well? Not to mention issues of scalability with a ball-dominant PG who doesn't project to be a good off-ball player and doesn't force defenses to come up high to defend him. Right now, I think he'll be someone you'd want to bring off the bench on a good team. I could be wrong, though – maybe I have to watch him a bit more closely.I guess his FT% provides some reason for hope.

He's really boom or bust for me. The form is just awful but his FT% gives me hope he has the touch to be able to improve once he fixes that. I like his intangibles and he had an insane level of shot creation as a freshman and a great ability to get to the line despite his size, which are hard to ignore.

On the matter of age, I'll just say this: I don't factor it in, because I have no particular reason to doubt his age. I expect, however, that teams will do their due diligence and if there are any concerns, I understand and expect to see him drop. But this isn't a topic I want to focus on from my keyboard when it's entirely speculative.

That's fair.

[Sea2003]

He's just so raw I'd be terrified to take him in the top 5

[Stillwater]

He's just so raw I'd be terrified to take him in the top 5

Thor is raw, Keon is raw... Kuminga just takes a lot of bad shots that are great shots when they go in for anyone else but as is he missed so many trying to extend his range once the GLeague season meant nothing, he must have just seen it as nothing more than a practice game to get his reps in not giving a good damn if it hurt his stock since it is no secret he cant shoot the 3 consistently at all yet. However to call him raw like no iq is a bad take. He makes the reads and makes good passes when he isnt the best player on the floor and sometimes when he is. Maybe he needs some more coaching up than a typical top 5 prospect...but everyone knows players with his physical attributes are maybe 1 in 100

[Hal14]

He's just so raw I'd be terrified to take him in the top 5

Who's 5th on your big board, then? Barnes can't shoot, can't rebound well at all for a 6'8" guy and is average at best at ball handling/self creation..

Sure, his defense/passing/athleticism are all awesome but is he worth a top 5 pick?