2021 Draft Thread

[mos_def]

With a bad 3pt shot he did still put up an OK .546 True Shooting % last year.

My issue with Bouknight is can he be more than an iso chucker? He had a pretty terrible negative assist-to-turnover ratio in his two years at UConn. Even if he's an efficient chucker, I'm not sure that's a great fit as a tweener guard with the Warriors.

54.6% is nowhere close to an "OK" true shooting, and certainly not when it's happening in college.

I personally don't want Bouknight at 7 (or probably even at 14), but I do think his shooting will be better than what he showed last year.

His freshman year where he had a lot more c&s attempts he shot 34.7% from 3 and 56% True Shooting overall, this past year I read that 45% of his 3pt attempts were pull ups, and he did have that elbow injury that derailed him a bit.

I could see Bouknight being a 35% 3pt shooter in the league, which I think would be fine if he showed any kinda of passing ability. However, he hasn't, and I'm not too thrilled about using the #7 pick on a worse passing Jordan Clarkson.

Especially since we already have a combo-guard that can actually pass a bit in Poole.

I decided to tag this one to inform everyone that if TS% is your main criteria for a player, I'm just letting you know donovan mitchell TS was 52 and 53%.

[FNQ]

Bouknight would be a lot more appealing if we didnt have Poole. But more importantly.. where are we putting him? His defense has been bad, so putting him next to Curry makes little sense. Nor does putting him in the 2nd unit with Poole, considering their somewhat matching skillsets and aversion to defense. What exactly is the appeal here?

Are we drafting another project that needs a few years?

Is Bouknight's potential so amazing that it's possible he becomes an all star? Or is Moody's upside so underwhelming, that all he is at best is a great role player. Which of those is truer? If both seem to be the case of the matter, then GS should draft him regardless of fit because the Warriors can try to fill the great role player role either with the other draft pick or hopefully somebody in FA. But I ask you guys since you're all more educated in this topic than I am.

I'd honestly take a great role player over an "average" star. One thing that always drives me crazy is when treadmill teams become convinced that their miscast #1 could definitely be a #2 or #3 somewhere... its really not that simple. I'd much rather have a guy who fits the machine perfectly over a "star potential" player that doesnt jive well at all. And that'd be true whether or not we were a lotto team or a contending team.

I think people misuse the "dont draft for need" trope.. yes, don't take a far lesser player because you have a positional need. But drafting for *fit* is way different. This team is built on unselfishness and effort. Each time we see a player who comes in thats either selfish or lacks effort, they stick out like a sore thumb. So if the question is, do we take a Poole-level clone with shot-selection, passing, and defensive issues (but high upside) vs the best 3&D guy in the draft who slides right into a role we've used for a while.. that's an easy one for me, especially after we just had a disappointing rookie season for another player that needs developing.

Bouknight has the exact profile of Jamal Crawford and people are salivating over potential

[FNQ]

Bouknight reminds me of cross between Monta and Zach Lavine.

Scoring first skinny combo guard that prefers isolation, has incredible wingspan but doesn't play good defense, streaky outside shooter

Overview: A very talented offensive-minded shooting guard. Has solid size for the two at 6-4 ½ without shoes. Possesses a terrific 6-10 wingspan. Adds great quickness and leaping ability as well. Shows good lateral quickness defensively. Not very strong, and could stand to add some muscle to his frame. A very capable shooter with the ability to get to the rim. Will tally some assists, but looks for his shot first. Doesn’t offer much on the defensive end. Scored at an impressive rate for a freshman in the Big Ten. Took a couple of seasons to adjust to the NBA, but became a prolific scorer by his fourth season in the League. Brings a lot to the table on the offensive end, but doesn’t have the efficiency to be relied on to carry the load. Typically a league-leader in minutes and field goal attempts, but struggles with his shooting percentages and defense. Puts up big per-game numbers on bad teams,and has never played on a winning team in his career. Gives back off the court and has matured quite a bit during his career.

Offense: A talented scorer that puts up great numbers with mediocre efficiency. Gets about half of his offense running pick and rolls and going one-on-one. Will also get some touches as a spot up shooter in drive and dish situations and in transition. Has a nice jump shot with good arc and nice lift. Good three point shooter, but can get streaky. Very good in catch and shoot situations, having the ability to create separation coming off screens and shoot with a hand in his face. Shows the ability to drive in either direction and pull up for jumpers. Not a great shooter when forced to pull up going right, opts to go left much more often. Will over-dribble at times when he doesn’t create separation immediately, tending to go right into the heart of the defense and force up some tough running jumpers off-balance. Very good with the ball in his hands, showing great change of direction quickness with his crossover and a lot of nice hesitation moves. Not a great finisher at the rim due to his lack of strength. Still goes to the line at a good rate and isn’t entirely averse to taking contact. Shoots a great percentage from the foul line. Does a good job finding his teammates when he’s pushing the ball or turning the corner on the pick and roll. Turns the ball over at a fairly low rate due to how heavily he relies on his jump-shot. Will put up great numbers, but is better suited as a complimentary scorer than a leading one.

Defense: Has the lateral quickness and length to a factor, but tends to shy away from taking advantage of his tools when he’s not motivated. Comes up with a few steals by virtue of his incredibly quick hands and superb wingspan. Doesn’t make hustle plays, but shows some anticipation and timing. Won’t show a lot of effort playing defense on the ball. Tends to avoid getting in a low stance, allowing slower players to beat him into the lane. Will go under some screens and has a hard time fighting to get through solid picks on the perimeter. Gets a hand up when his man looks to score, but doesn’t get in position to effectively use his length. Usually opts to sag off his man, allowing him to accumulate some mid-to-long rebounds over the course of a game. Isn’t a great weakside defender either. Doesn’t leave his man, which is a good thing, but closes out very high and will sometimes take himself out of the play. Often winds up having to guard taller players, making it hard for him to be effective. Was much more effective defensively when he was coming off the bench and was playing with a sense of urgency.

[killmongrel]

Bouknight would be a lot more appealing if we didnt have Poole. But more importantly.. where are we putting him? His defense has been bad, so putting him next to Curry makes little sense. Nor does putting him in the 2nd unit with Poole, considering their somewhat matching skillsets and aversion to defense. What exactly is the appeal here?

Are we drafting another project that needs a few years?

Is Bouknight's potential so amazing that it's possible he becomes an all star? Or is Moody's upside so underwhelming, that all he is at best is a great role player. Which of those is truer? If both seem to be the case of the matter, then GS should draft him regardless of fit because the Warriors can try to fill the great role player role either with the other draft pick or hopefully somebody in FA. But I ask you guys since you're all more educated in this topic than I am.

I'd honestly take a great role player over an "average" star. One thing that always drives me crazy is when treadmill teams become convinced that their miscast #1 could definitely be a #2 or #3 somewhere... its really not that simple. I'd much rather have a guy who fits the machine perfectly over a "star potential" player that doesnt jive well at all. And that'd be true whether or not we were a lotto team or a contending team.

I think people misuse the "dont draft for need" trope.. yes, don't take a far lesser player because you have a positional need. But drafting for *fit* is way different. This team is built on unselfishness and effort. Each time we see a player who comes in thats either selfish or lacks effort, they stick out like a sore thumb. So if the question is, do we take a Poole-level clone with shot-selection, passing, and defensive issues (but high upside) vs the best 3&D guy in the draft who slides right into a role we've used for a while.. that's an easy one for me, especially after we just had a disappointing rookie season for another player that needs developing.

Bouknight has the exact profile of Jamal Crawford and people are salivating over potential

Thanks. That's what I'm afraid of. People are salivating over potential and not seeing the fit issues and red flags. I think with two picks in this draft, the Warriors can afford to go with a safe choice in Moody at 7 and then a project with potential at 14.

[whatisacenter]

Bouknight reminds me of cross between Monta and Zach Lavine.

Scoring first skinny combo guard that prefers isolation, has incredible wingspan but doesn't play good defense, streaky outside shooter

Overview: A very talented offensive-minded shooting guard. Has solid size for the two at 6-4 ½ without shoes. Possesses a terrific 6-10 wingspan. Adds great quickness and leaping ability as well. Shows good lateral quickness defensively. Not very strong, and could stand to add some muscle to his frame. A very capable shooter with the ability to get to the rim. Will tally some assists, but looks for his shot first. Doesn’t offer much on the defensive end. Scored at an impressive rate for a freshman in the Big Ten. Took a couple of seasons to adjust to the NBA, but became a prolific scorer by his fourth season in the League. Brings a lot to the table on the offensive end, but doesn’t have the efficiency to be relied on to carry the load. Typically a league-leader in minutes and field goal attempts, but struggles with his shooting percentages and defense. Puts up big per-game numbers on bad teams,and has never played on a winning team in his career. Gives back off the court and has matured quite a bit during his career.

Offense: A talented scorer that puts up great numbers with mediocre efficiency. Gets about half of his offense running pick and rolls and going one-on-one. Will also get some touches as a spot up shooter in drive and dish situations and in transition. Has a nice jump shot with good arc and nice lift. Good three point shooter, but can get streaky. Very good in catch and shoot situations, having the ability to create separation coming off screens and shoot with a hand in his face. Shows the ability to drive in either direction and pull up for jumpers. Not a great shooter when forced to pull up going right, opts to go left much more often. Will over-dribble at times when he doesn’t create separation immediately, tending to go right into the heart of the defense and force up some tough running jumpers off-balance. Very good with the ball in his hands, showing great change of direction quickness with his crossover and a lot of nice hesitation moves. Not a great finisher at the rim due to his lack of strength. Still goes to the line at a good rate and isn’t entirely averse to taking contact. Shoots a great percentage from the foul line. Does a good job finding his teammates when he’s pushing the ball or turning the corner on the pick and roll. Turns the ball over at a fairly low rate due to how heavily he relies on his jump-shot. Will put up great numbers, but is better suited as a complimentary scorer than a leading one.

Defense: Has the lateral quickness and length to a factor, but tends to shy away from taking advantage of his tools when he’s not motivated. Comes up with a few steals by virtue of his incredibly quick hands and superb wingspan. Doesn’t make hustle plays, but shows some anticipation and timing. Won’t show a lot of effort playing defense on the ball. Tends to avoid getting in a low stance, allowing slower players to beat him into the lane. Will go under some screens and has a hard time fighting to get through solid picks on the perimeter. Gets a hand up when his man looks to score, but doesn’t get in position to effectively use his length. Usually opts to sag off his man, allowing him to accumulate some mid-to-long rebounds over the course of a game. Isn’t a great weakside defender either. Doesn’t leave his man, which is a good thing, but closes out very high and will sometimes take himself out of the play. Often winds up having to guard taller players, making it hard for him to be effective. Was much more effective defensively when he was coming off the bench and was playing with a sense of urgency.

Who’s that? Poole? My comp wasn’t necessarily a good thing by the way.

[FNQ]

Bouknight reminds me of cross between Monta and Zach Lavine.

Scoring first skinny combo guard that prefers isolation, has incredible wingspan but doesn't play good defense, streaky outside shooter

Overview: A very talented offensive-minded shooting guard. Has solid size for the two at 6-4 ½ without shoes. Possesses a terrific 6-10 wingspan. Adds great quickness and leaping ability as well. Shows good lateral quickness defensively. Not very strong, and could stand to add some muscle to his frame. A very capable shooter with the ability to get to the rim. Will tally some assists, but looks for his shot first. Doesn’t offer much on the defensive end. Scored at an impressive rate for a freshman in the Big Ten. Took a couple of seasons to adjust to the NBA, but became a prolific scorer by his fourth season in the League. Brings a lot to the table on the offensive end, but doesn’t have the efficiency to be relied on to carry the load. Typically a league-leader in minutes and field goal attempts, but struggles with his shooting percentages and defense. Puts up big per-game numbers on bad teams,and has never played on a winning team in his career. Gives back off the court and has matured quite a bit during his career.

Offense: A talented scorer that puts up great numbers with mediocre efficiency. Gets about half of his offense running pick and rolls and going one-on-one. Will also get some touches as a spot up shooter in drive and dish situations and in transition. Has a nice jump shot with good arc and nice lift. Good three point shooter, but can get streaky. Very good in catch and shoot situations, having the ability to create separation coming off screens and shoot with a hand in his face. Shows the ability to drive in either direction and pull up for jumpers. Not a great shooter when forced to pull up going right, opts to go left much more often. Will over-dribble at times when he doesn’t create separation immediately, tending to go right into the heart of the defense and force up some tough running jumpers off-balance. Very good with the ball in his hands, showing great change of direction quickness with his crossover and a lot of nice hesitation moves. Not a great finisher at the rim due to his lack of strength. Still goes to the line at a good rate and isn’t entirely averse to taking contact. Shoots a great percentage from the foul line. Does a good job finding his teammates when he’s pushing the ball or turning the corner on the pick and roll. Turns the ball over at a fairly low rate due to how heavily he relies on his jump-shot. Will put up great numbers, but is better suited as a complimentary scorer than a leading one.

Defense: Has the lateral quickness and length to a factor, but tends to shy away from taking advantage of his tools when he’s not motivated. Comes up with a few steals by virtue of his incredibly quick hands and superb wingspan. Doesn’t make hustle plays, but shows some anticipation and timing. Won’t show a lot of effort playing defense on the ball. Tends to avoid getting in a low stance, allowing slower players to beat him into the lane. Will go under some screens and has a hard time fighting to get through solid picks on the perimeter. Gets a hand up when his man looks to score, but doesn’t get in position to effectively use his length. Usually opts to sag off his man, allowing him to accumulate some mid-to-long rebounds over the course of a game. Isn’t a great weakside defender either. Doesn’t leave his man, which is a good thing, but closes out very high and will sometimes take himself out of the play. Often winds up having to guard taller players, making it hard for him to be effective. Was much more effective defensively when he was coming off the bench and was playing with a sense of urgency.

Who’s that? Poole? My comp wasn’t necessarily a good thing by the way.

That summary was for Jamal Crawford in 2009, and aside from very few points, looks exactly like Bouknight

[mos_def]

I like him as a player but Poole was roasted as much as Wiseman was for a year and a half until his gleague recall. The thought process of not drafting a lottery guard for one that barely cracked the 1st round, who got roasted doesn't make sense. Its like steph and monta all over again. Talent is good. Trade one if need be

[Badly Browned]

This is reminding me of an article I came across on twitter earlier:

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/03/jalen-green-vs-franz-wagner-how-much-should-creation-be-valued/

Basically asking how much should we really value shot creation / volume scoring in terms of a player's potential and value to winning by comparing Jalen Green/Devin Booker to Franz Wagner/Otto Porter.

I thought it was pretty interesting and you should read the whole thing, but here's a clip of the conclusion:

Once you have one undersized, one dimensional isolation scorer, there is no value in having another. Whereas you cannot have enough Otto Porters. You can comfortably play a lineup with 3 Otto Porters or maybe even 4 in certain occasions, as long as there is one star playmaker to facilitate the offense.

...

The narrative that shot creation yields big upside needs to be overhauled into being well rounded and versatile is important for high upside.

While creation is very important, there is only a finite amount that can fit onto any team. At any given moment, 90% of the players on the floor are not touching the ball, and to truly build an overpowered lineup like the Warriors’ death lineup, you need to load up on players who provide value outside of scoring.

Franz Wagner is uniquely good at defense, passing, avoiding turnovers, and is still a passable handler and creator. Jalen Green is the inverse player. This creates all sorts of subtle advantages for Franz.

He sneakily may have more upside than Green, he is easier to fit into a wider range of lineups, he is the more scarce commodity, and you simply have more potential to build an elite team with Franz.

Their overall values are still fairly close, and it is fairly likely that Franz will be the more useful player while casual fans believe that Green is better. Green will always have sexier highlights, and may end up with more all-star selections and jersey sales.

But if you want to build an NBA team that wins, Franz would be my choice and it would not be a particularly difficult one. Green being valued so much higher by consensus as a top 3 pick vs Franz currently at #11 is not just an inefficiency in the draft– it is an inefficiency in the common perception of basketball.

[FNQ]

I like him as a player but Poole was roasted as much as Wiseman was for a year and a half until his gleague recall. The thought process of not drafting a lottery guard for one that barely cracked the 1st round, who got roasted doesn't make sense. Its like steph and monta all over again. Talent is good. Trade one if need be

It makes sense when you're basically hampering someone who showed improvement for someone you hope will maybe improve, despite the fact that they haven't actually shown any signs of that improvement.

The fact that Poole was roasted, here, means absolutely nothing.. people who buried him after a season were made to look foolish, as they should. Frankly its far more of a problematic thought process to look at what Bouknight has done and just arbitrarily say he will improve - where? why? His defense didnt improve. His shot selection didnt improve. His creating didnt improve. But we'll cast aside the young player who actually improved at the NBA level for using a prime asset on a Jamal Crawford clone?

Comparing it to Steph and Monta is jumping all of the sharks

[GSWFan1994]

I personally don't want Bouknight at 7 (or probably even at 14), but I do think his shooting will be better than what he showed last year.

His freshman year where he had a lot more c&s attempts he shot 34.7% from 3 and 56% True Shooting overall, this past year I read that 45% of his 3pt attempts were pull ups, and he did have that elbow injury that derailed him a bit.

I could see Bouknight being a 35% 3pt shooter in the league, which I think would be fine if he showed any kinda of passing ability. However, he hasn't, and I'm not too thrilled about using the #7 pick on a worse passing Jordan Clarkson.

Especially since we already have a combo-guard that can actually pass a bit in Poole.

Hey BB, what are your targets for our picks in this coming draft?

Thanks and cheers.

[GSWFan1994]

Is Bouknight's potential so amazing that it's possible he becomes an all star? Or is Moody's upside so underwhelming, that all he is at best is a great role player. Which of those is truer? If both seem to be the case of the matter, then GS should draft him regardless of fit because the Warriors can try to fill the great role player role either with the other draft pick or hopefully somebody in FA. But I ask you guys since you're all more educated in this topic than I am.

I'd say the 2nd option is more likely to happen, IMHO.

Said that, I like Bouknight to an extent, just not at the 7. Same for Moody. As I also don't see them slipping to 14, I sincerely hope we have other targets to reach for.

And sincerely, as well, I really believe there ARE better targets, too.

I view Bouknight's poor passing stats as a great red flag for him to reach stardom in the NBA. I'm not saying he'll be a bust, just that his upside is more of a medium-level starter for the time being.

Said that, as well, if the team really identified him as a target, they could trade Poole in the future, as having both of them together on the roster would be redundant.

[GSWFan1994]

Some new stuff over at "Dean on Draft":

How good is Jalen Suggs?

Jalen Green vs. Franz Wagner: How much should creation be valued? (posted by BB above as well)

Capture the flag: which prospects are riskiest to draft in 2021 (great read, many overrated and underrated players listed there: Mann, Kispert, etc)

Is Trey Murphy a stretch 4 sleeper? (we were talking about him a few pages ago... and here he is)

[killmongrel]

Is Bouknight's potential so amazing that it's possible he becomes an all star? Or is Moody's upside so underwhelming, that all he is at best is a great role player. Which of those is truer? If both seem to be the case of the matter, then GS should draft him regardless of fit because the Warriors can try to fill the great role player role either with the other draft pick or hopefully somebody in FA. But I ask you guys since you're all more educated in this topic than I am.

I'd say the 2nd option is more likely to happen, IMHO.

Said that, I like Bouknight to an extent, just not at the 7. Same for Moody. As I also don't see them slipping to 14, I sincerely hope we have other targets to reach for.

And sincerely, as well, I really believe there ARE better targets, too.

I view Bouknight's poor passing stats as a great red flag for him to reach stardom in the NBA. I'm not saying he'll be a bust, just that his upside is more of a medium-level starter for the time being.

Said that, as well, if the team really identified him as a target, they could trade Poole in the future, as having both of them together on the roster would be redundant.

Same worries I have about Bouknight. Here's something to think about though when it comes to his and Poole's redundancy. Something you brought up, about Poole. Bouknight would be on contract for 4 years. Poole, if, he takes a leap, will be up for a new contract in two years. So if both these guys become significant players, at least they'd still have Bouknight on what could be a cheaper contract. Whereas Poole can become a valuable trade chip in the near future. But this is a good problem to have later.

[Onus]

This is reminding me of an article I came across on twitter earlier:

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/03/jalen-green-vs-franz-wagner-how-much-should-creation-be-valued/

Basically asking how much should we really value shot creation / volume scoring in terms of a player's potential and value to winning by comparing Jalen Green/Devin Booker to Franz Wagner/Otto Porter.

I thought it was pretty interesting and you should read the whole thing, but here's a clip of the conclusion:

Once you have one undersized, one dimensional isolation scorer, there is no value in having another. Whereas you cannot have enough Otto Porters. You can comfortably play a lineup with 3 Otto Porters or maybe even 4 in certain occasions, as long as there is one star playmaker to facilitate the offense.

...

The narrative that shot creation yields big upside needs to be overhauled into being well rounded and versatile is important for high upside.

While creation is very important, there is only a finite amount that can fit onto any team. At any given moment, 90% of the players on the floor are not touching the ball, and to truly build an overpowered lineup like the Warriors’ death lineup, you need to load up on players who provide value outside of scoring.

Franz Wagner is uniquely good at defense, passing, avoiding turnovers, and is still a passable handler and creator. Jalen Green is the inverse player. This creates all sorts of subtle advantages for Franz.

He sneakily may have more upside than Green, he is easier to fit into a wider range of lineups, he is the more scarce commodity, and you simply have more potential to build an elite team with Franz.

Their overall values are still fairly close, and it is fairly likely that Franz will be the more useful player while casual fans believe that Green is better. Green will always have sexier highlights, and may end up with more all-star selections and jersey sales.

But if you want to build an NBA team that wins, Franz would be my choice and it would not be a particularly difficult one. Green being valued so much higher by consensus as a top 3 pick vs Franz currently at #11 is not just an inefficiency in the draft– it is an inefficiency in the common perception of basketball.

This is an interesting discussion and agree with him for the most part. You don't need shot creation up and down your roster. You probably need 2 on the roster before they start cannibalizing each other's touches a 3rd is a luxury. You need a no 1 option. And really those are the toughest to find, which is why shot creation is so highly valued. You need a 2nd who can capitalize on the attention the no 1 draw. The 3rd is for the bench when the 2 sit for a few minutes, but is really a luxury. But once you have your 2, you need more role players, who can move the ball, hit 3s, play defense and rebound. It's just usually teams in the lottery don't have good 1s or 2s and have players that are just moonlighting at those roles. It's not always easy to then move off them and put them in a different role, as they're honing different skill sets.

We are kind of missing a no 2, Klay is a solid no 2 (not elite) and who knows after his injuries, but he would be fine in a scaled down role if necessary. Wiggins might be able to be a no 2 but he's pretty inconsistent. He's better when he's able to muscle people to the cup rather than out quicking them, so maybe with Klay back his offense gets better with more mismatches. I'd totally be fine with Moody, Franz, Mitchell, Murphy at our 7 and 14 picks.

[Onus]

Some new stuff over at "Dean on Draft":
Jalen Green vs. Franz Wagner: How much should creation be valued? (posted by BB above as well)

Is Trey Murphy a stretch 4 sleeper? (we were talking about him a few pages ago... and here he is)

This guy is all over the place. On one article he says shot creation shouldn't be valued that highly for Green, who has a shot at being a no 1 option. But he values Hurt more than Murphy because he has a slight ability to put the ball on the deck. Crazy. He says how valuable is it if your team gets to play 4v4 and hide their worst defender on Murphy. Yea that's great. The whole point is that Murphy makes you have to guard him at the 3 and you can't leave him, and to create more space for your 1s and 2s. I agree with him that Murphy isn't going to be an elite defender, he's probably just more adequate, but that's what you need out of a role player. Be a threat on offense so that teams can't leave you and not get taken advantage of on the defensive end. I agree 14 is very high for him, but he does have some untapped potential as he grew 5" over the last 3 years so he's still growing into his body.

[TB]

Lets hope Cleveland is a big fan of Deans and will trade us Jalen Green for Wagner and whatever other role player they want at 14.

Now if Green isn't an option, I do agree with Dean in not taking riskier number 1 options (in this argument that would be Bouknight I suppose) over legit all-around players.

[KevinMcreynolds]

Moody gets no respect in these mocks (rarely do I see him in the top 10)

and that’s perfectly fine with me

[shazam_guy]

Re: "Capture the Flag" -- I agree with almost all of this. Corey Kispert makes me nervous as a lottery pick, and I've liked Jaden Springer for a while. And I don't want Davion Mitchell. I think he's Mateen Cleaves 2.0.

[ChuckDurn]

Tho I'm a Bouknight guy, I have yet to see a NBA player miss on these type of clips. I remember a few months ago we were watching Jessups gym shooting clips and the first thing I wondered was it edited

I would draw one distinction between the typical clip we see from YouTube or elsewhere (such as Jessup’s), and Bouknight’s performance.

With the former, you have no idea how many “bad” clips simply weren’t posted. The video is obviously cherry-picked from the best shooting stretch somebody had.

Bouknight’s was done “live”, as part of a Pro day, in front of NBA personnel. I assume he didn’t get any “do-overs”, or a chance to say “ignore those 2 minutes”. And the thing which impressed me about the clip wasn’t just that he made a bunch in a row…… it was the fact that he hit something like 8 or 10 in a row, without even touching rim on any of them. To me, that demonstrates a consistency of form, to be able to have that level of precision.

So yeah, shooting on an empty court isn’t the best proxy for how one will do at game speed, against defenders and with crowd noise, background movement, etc….. but I do think Bouknight’s Pro Day performance does stand a notch above the standard shooting videos, because it wasn’t cherry-picked and was done in a situation where he would potentially have a lot of nerves.

Empty gym my ass. Bouknight hit 19 threes in a row in front of a who's who from all 30 NBA' teams during his pro day. The top brass from the league's 30 teams described Bouknight's pro day workout as he "shot the cover off the ball." If Bouknight continues shoot like he did on his pro day in individual team workouts, there is little doubt he will be shooting their draft boards.

Thanks for reinforcing my point, whether that was your intention or not. I explicitly said he did it under the pressure of being in front of NBA personnel, rather than just an empty gym. And my point of the 8-10 in a row wasn’t that that was all he made, but rather that NONE of those even touched rim. And honestly, that’s as impressive - if not more - than that he strung a few more to it that did catch rim, because it suggests an insane level of repeatability and precision.

Have a good day.

[Old_Blue]

The more I read, the more I get the sense that the gap between the #6 pick and the #7 pick is bigger than the gap between the #5 and #6 picks. So, basically, we got royally screwed by dropping down one slot in the draft.