2022 NBA Draft

[jman3134]

tournament performances are almost irrelevant tbh to overall prospect status, like you just said, Mobley and Barnes were bad by their standards in the tourney last yr, it didn't matter.

a team of Zion, Tre Jones, RJ Barrett and Cam Reddish lost in the S16. Deandre Ayton was a 1AD in the tourney and was terrible. guys like Ben Simmons and Antman didn't even make the tournament.

great tournament performances for top prospects barely exist anymore. who were the last ones? Justise Winslow and Anthony Davis?

Don't agree with you here on the NCAA tournament not having significance. Mobley's shot changing ability was extremely evident all tournament long. It was game changing and the reason they destroyed Iowa.

Obviously, the whole of the season is important, but with these freshman guards, the NCAA tournament is most important in gauging their development curve. It isn't a matter of the shooter missing shots and suddenly now he's a bad shooter. It is a look into the progression of the freshman and how ready he is to make that leap.

Jaden Ivey made the jump last year. The knock on Ben Simmons coming in was LSU's team performance and the fact that they were never able to get over the hump - valid or not.

Of course, a major point about this is how the freshman is utilized within their college system. If it is a point guard running the show and his team completely collapses due to inept play, it is more significant than a big (who is guard dependent) having a quiet performance.

Kennedy Chandler was ok against Michigan. The rest of his team did not step up. So context is also important, but the NCAA tournament is the most significant gauge of a freshman prospect (esp guards) with the exception of the combine.

For me, the NCAA tournament is one of the biggest mental gauges moreso than the actual performance. How does a player (and team) respond with his back against the wall? Is he an alpha? Does he have stones like Ben Mathurin?

With Mobley it was already well known prior to the tournament that his defense was elite. I mean he was the PAC 12 DPOY entering the tournament for a reason.

I don't agree that the tournament is the best gauge. The best gauge is seeing how they performed in conference play (if they play in a power conference). There you get see how they react to a normal grind of a season, they consistently go against teams with legit size and athleticism, and against legit coaches that know how to scout and game plan and go up against the same teams multiple times.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the tournament means nothing. I think there is still wiggle room to adjust guys up and down your board during this time.

But I don't think any major adjustments should be based off of the tournament.

Yes, of course we knew that about Mobley. But, USC's surprising team performance was largely a result of that D in action against marquee opponents. And we are human, so that tends to move the needle when comping Mobley vs. a Kuminga or Jalen Green for instance. If I'm evaluating Mobley, I'd rather see him against Gonzaga than UCLA twice. In conference play, you can figure teams out and know what you are going to get from opponents. That is why the NCAA is important - because you often have to adapt to different playstyles. If you are in the Big 10, can you run with an SEC opponent? Style contrasts are important. Also, how does the prospect adjust to being matched up with a new opponent? The evaluation is predominantly psychological, but it clearly has an impact with NBA scouts (seeing how many guys move up and down the draft boards after NCAA performances), and with good reason.

For me, I use the whole season to gauge who a prospect is from a tendencies perspective: strength, weaknesses, etc. The NCAA tournament often tells me how those strengths and weaknesses hold up under intense playing conditions. The two games in two days tournament style format is more indicative of how life will be in the NBA with back to backs etc.

[Big J]

Don't agree with you here on the NCAA tournament not having significance. Mobley's shot changing ability was extremely evident all tournament long. It was game changing and the reason they destroyed Iowa.

Obviously, the whole of the season is important, but with these freshman guards, the NCAA tournament is most important in gauging their development curve. It isn't a matter of the shooter missing shots and suddenly now he's a bad shooter. It is a look into the progression of the freshman and how ready he is to make that leap.

Jaden Ivey made the jump last year. The knock on Ben Simmons coming in was LSU's team performance and the fact that they were never able to get over the hump - valid or not.

Of course, a major point about this is how the freshman is utilized within their college system. If it is a point guard running the show and his team completely collapses due to inept play, it is more significant than a big (who is guard dependent) having a quiet performance.

Kennedy Chandler was ok against Michigan. The rest of his team did not step up. So context is also important, but the NCAA tournament is the most significant gauge of a freshman prospect (esp guards) with the exception of the combine.

For me, the NCAA tournament is one of the biggest mental gauges moreso than the actual performance. How does a player (and team) respond with his back against the wall? Is he an alpha? Does he have stones like Ben Mathurin?

With Mobley it was already well known prior to the tournament that his defense was elite. I mean he was the PAC 12 DPOY entering the tournament for a reason.

I don't agree that the tournament is the best gauge. The best gauge is seeing how they performed in conference play (if they play in a power conference). There you get see how they react to a normal grind of a season, they consistently go against teams with legit size and athleticism, and against legit coaches that know how to scout and game plan and go up against the same teams multiple times.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the tournament means nothing. I think there is still wiggle room to adjust guys up and down your board during this time.

But I don't think any major adjustments should be based off of the tournament.

Yes, of course we knew that about Mobley. But, USC's surprising team performance was largely a result of that D in action against marquee opponents. And we are human, so that tends to move the needle when comping Mobley vs. a Kuminga or Jalen Green for instance. If I'm evaluating Mobley, I'd rather see him against Gonzaga than UCLA twice. In conference play, you can figure teams out and know what you are going to get from opponents. That is why the NCAA is important - because you often have to adapt to different playstyles. If you are in the Big 10, can you run with an SEC opponent? Style contrasts are important. Also, how does the prospect adjust to being matched up with a new opponent? The evaluation is predominantly psychological, but it clearly has an impact with NBA scouts (seeing how many guys move up and down the draft boards after NCAA performances), and with good reason.

For me, I use the whole season to gauge who a prospect is from a tendencies perspective: strength, weaknesses, etc. The NCAA tournament often tells me how those strengths and weaknesses hold up under intense playing conditions. The two games in two days tournament style format is more indicative of how life will be in the NBA with back to backs etc.

Well said sir. Couldn't agree more.

[clyde21]

Don't agree with you here on the NCAA tournament not having significance. Mobley's shot changing ability was extremely evident all tournament long. It was game changing and the reason they destroyed Iowa.

Obviously, the whole of the season is important, but with these freshman guards, the NCAA tournament is most important in gauging their development curve. It isn't a matter of the shooter missing shots and suddenly now he's a bad shooter. It is a look into the progression of the freshman and how ready he is to make that leap.

Jaden Ivey made the jump last year. The knock on Ben Simmons coming in was LSU's team performance and the fact that they were never able to get over the hump - valid or not.

Of course, a major point about this is how the freshman is utilized within their college system. If it is a point guard running the show and his team completely collapses due to inept play, it is more significant than a big (who is guard dependent) having a quiet performance.

Kennedy Chandler was ok against Michigan. The rest of his team did not step up. So context is also important, but the NCAA tournament is the most significant gauge of a freshman prospect (esp guards) with the exception of the combine.

For me, the NCAA tournament is one of the biggest mental gauges moreso than the actual performance. How does a player (and team) respond with his back against the wall? Is he an alpha? Does he have stones like Ben Mathurin?

With Mobley it was already well known prior to the tournament that his defense was elite. I mean he was the PAC 12 DPOY entering the tournament for a reason.

I don't agree that the tournament is the best gauge. The best gauge is seeing how they performed in conference play (if they play in a power conference). There you get see how they react to a normal grind of a season, they consistently go against teams with legit size and athleticism, and against legit coaches that know how to scout and game plan and go up against the same teams multiple times.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the tournament means nothing. I think there is still wiggle room to adjust guys up and down your board during this time.

But I don't think any major adjustments should be based off of the tournament.

For me, I use the whole season to gauge who a prospect is from a tendencies perspective: strength, weaknesses, etc. The NCAA tournament often tells me how those strengths and weaknesses hold up under intense playing conditions. The two games in two days tournament style format is more indicative of how life will be in the NBA with back to backs etc.

again - this doesn't hold up to scrutiny when u look at which prospects performed well or didn't in the tourney.

Cade shot 9-34 in his two games last in the tourney.

Scottie Barnes was virtually nonexistent in his 2 games.

Wagner in his last game against UCLA shot 1-10 for a whopping 4 POINTS.

all 3 rookies are killing it in the NBA right now. we can go on and on, every year, how top prospects **** the bed in the tournament.

it's MUCH more meaningful for older players (juniors/senior) who have been there before than younger players (fs/soph). if you base your scouting on what happens in the tournament and weigh it more than the entire RS you're just doing it wrong.

[clyde21]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

[clyde21]

Devin Booker scored a whopping 6 points in an L against Wisconsin in the tournament

glad he's not doing so well in the league right now.

[Big J]

With Mobley it was already well known prior to the tournament that his defense was elite. I mean he was the PAC 12 DPOY entering the tournament for a reason.

I don't agree that the tournament is the best gauge. The best gauge is seeing how they performed in conference play (if they play in a power conference). There you get see how they react to a normal grind of a season, they consistently go against teams with legit size and athleticism, and against legit coaches that know how to scout and game plan and go up against the same teams multiple times.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the tournament means nothing. I think there is still wiggle room to adjust guys up and down your board during this time.

But I don't think any major adjustments should be based off of the tournament.

For me, I use the whole season to gauge who a prospect is from a tendencies perspective: strength, weaknesses, etc. The NCAA tournament often tells me how those strengths and weaknesses hold up under intense playing conditions. The two games in two days tournament style format is more indicative of how life will be in the NBA with back to backs etc.

again - this doesn't hold up to scrutiny when u look at which prospects performed well or didn't in the tourney.

Cade shot 9-34 in his two games last in the tourney.

Scottie Barnes was virtually nonexistent in his 2 games.

Wagner in his last game against UCLA shot 1-10 for a whopping 4 POINTS.

all 3 rookies are killing it in the NBA right now. we can go on and on, every year, how top prospects **** the bed in the tournament.

it's MUCH more meaningful for older players (juniors/senior) who have been there before than younger players (fs/soph). if you base your scouting on what happens in the tournament and weigh it more than the entire RS you're just doing it wrong.

Guys can overcome a poor showing in the tourney and still be a good pro, but if a guy absoultely dominates in the tourney that tells you he's likely going to be a star like AD, Melo, Zion, Rose, Noah, ect.

[clyde21]

Trae Young took that L against Rhode Island in that tournament, means a lot

[jman3134]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

[jman3134]

Trae Young took that L against Rhode Island in that tournament, means a lot

Yeah, because 28 pts is a bad performance in the NCAA tournament.

[Big J]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Dude, Culver wasn't even good in the tourney. He literally shot 3/12 in the final four & 5/22 in the championship game.

[jman3134]

With Mobley it was already well known prior to the tournament that his defense was elite. I mean he was the PAC 12 DPOY entering the tournament for a reason.

I don't agree that the tournament is the best gauge. The best gauge is seeing how they performed in conference play (if they play in a power conference). There you get see how they react to a normal grind of a season, they consistently go against teams with legit size and athleticism, and against legit coaches that know how to scout and game plan and go up against the same teams multiple times.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the tournament means nothing. I think there is still wiggle room to adjust guys up and down your board during this time.

But I don't think any major adjustments should be based off of the tournament.

For me, I use the whole season to gauge who a prospect is from a tendencies perspective: strength, weaknesses, etc. The NCAA tournament often tells me how those strengths and weaknesses hold up under intense playing conditions. The two games in two days tournament style format is more indicative of how life will be in the NBA with back to backs etc.

again - this doesn't hold up to scrutiny when u look at which prospects performed well or didn't in the tourney.

Cade shot 9-34 in his two games last in the tourney.

Scottie Barnes was virtually nonexistent in his 2 games.

Wagner in his last game against UCLA shot 1-10 for a whopping 4 POINTS.

all 3 rookies are killing it in the NBA right now. we can go on and on, every year, how top prospects **** the bed in the tournament.

it's MUCH more meaningful for older players (juniors/senior) who have been there before than younger players (fs/soph). if you base your scouting on what happens in the tournament and weigh it more than the entire RS you're just doing it wrong.

No one is weighing it more than the entirety of the regular season. I was responding to your assertion that tournament performances are almost "entirely irrelevant". They almost certainly are more relevant than an individual regular season in conference game or a regular season non conference game. But, again, that isn't the argument being made. Predominantly, it speaks to the psychological aspect of valuation moreso than who they are and what they will bring. If you haven't figured that out by the time the tournament starts, you aren't very good at your job. But, when you are deciding among player A, B, and C that are all fine prospects, the NCAA tournament can often elevate one guy over another. Obviously context matters, or you will have your Culvers and everyone from UVA.

We don't have to agree and that is fine.

[clyde21]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Morant shot 38% in an L out of the tournament

Jay-T in that last game had a whopping 15 points (wow) and had FIVE turnovers

Bridges was a 22 yr old junior

and congrats, you had to go all the way back to 2007 to find a good example. i already mentioned two more recent examples in Anthony Davis and Justise Winslow if you were having a tough time coming up with em.

speaking of Winslow, glad he's setting the NBA ablaze after his tournament run.

[clyde21]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Dude, Culver wasn't even good in the tourney. He literally shot 3/12 in the final four & 5/22 in the championship game.

the onus is on both of to prove correlation between these top prospects performing/not performing in the tournament and success in the NBA.

clearly there isn't.

[jman3134]

you know who had a really good tournament? Jarrett Culver.

glad he's setting the league on fire right now.

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Morant shot 38% in an L out of the tournament

Jay-T in that last game had a whopping 15 points (wow) and had FIVE turnovers

Bridges was a 22 yr old junior

and congrats, you had to go all the way back to 2007 to find a good example.

Bridges broke out his redshirt freshman year and helped lead Nova to the title in 2016. Jaden Ivey broke out in the tournament last year.

Come on - I suppose Ja's 17pts 16 assists were nothing against Marquette. Again, I said context matters. Murray St. vs. Florida St length. You can lose in the tournament and still play well ala your boy Trae. We did learn from Florida St that his jumper needs work (but we also knew that from the regular season). And he has improved on this in the NBA.

Derrick Rose was the obvious tournament darling because it pushed him ahead of Michael Beasley and we all know how that went. It is just the most striking example of the Tournament sending someone to the number 1 overall spot.

The only proof that is necessary is to see how draft boards move after the NCAA tournament. And every year there are tournament darlings drafted higher (than they probably should be most of the time). Obviously, the combo is most important for this.

[Big J]

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Dude, Culver wasn't even good in the tourney. He literally shot 3/12 in the final four & 5/22 in the championship game.

the onus is on both of to prove correlation between these top prospects performing/not performing in the tournament and success in the NBA.

clearly there isn't.

I already named a bunch who had great tourneys and became stars: Rose, Noah, Melo, AD, Zion, Steph Curry hell even CJ McCollum. No way CJ McCollum gets drafted as high as he does without that upset of Duke.

[clyde21]

Ja Morant, Derrick Rose, Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson, and Jayson Tatum say hi.

Morant shot 38% in an L out of the tournament

Jay-T in that last game had a whopping 15 points (wow) and had FIVE turnovers

Bridges was a 22 yr old junior

and congrats, you had to go all the way back to 2007 to find a good example.

Bridges broke out his redshirt freshman year and helped lead Nova to the title in 2016. Jaden Ivey broke out in the tournament last year.

Come on - I suppose Ja's 17pts 16 assists were nothing against Marquette. Again, I said context matters. Murray St. vs. Florida St length. You can lose in the tournament and still play well ala your boy Trae. We did learn from Florida St that his jumper needs work (but we also knew that from the regular season). And he has improved on this in the NBA.

Derrick Rose was the obvious tournament darling because it pushed him ahead of Michael Beasley and we all know how that went. It is just the most striking example of the Tournament sending someone to the number 1 overall spot.

The only proof that is necessary is to see how draft boards move after the NCAA tournament. And every year there are tournament darlings drafted higher (than they probably should be most of the time). Obviously, the combo is most important for this.

don't give me one-offs and people that haven't even played in the NBA yet.

your assertion is that there is correlation between tournament play for top prospects and success in the NBA. prove it. i gave you many examples of it clearly not being the case.

[clyde21]

Mobley played worse across the board in the tournament, both his raw numbers and efficiency stats all went down - what did that tell you exactly about him as a prospect?

[jman3134]

Proving a negative is a frivolous pursuit - that the NCAA tournament is NOT weighed when evaluating prospects. To do this, I would have to have every team's draft board pre tournament. Or we can look at ESPN's as a proxy (assuming they actually are doing their jobs and talking to scouts, which I'm not sure about) and see Mathurin move into the top 10 (which to be fair to you should have happened pre tournament anyway). Somehow my argument is being strawmanned as "NBA prospect A became a prospect because of his unblemished NCAA tournament performance and eventual national championship." That is a far different statement than "these games don't matter."

I'll just note that all these NCAA tournament games are irrelevant and Ben Mathurin and Ivey will not jump into your top 5-7.

Don't really have a need to prove any of this to you because players like Davion Mitchell getting drafted #9 overall last year (not 2007) mean this is an obvious part of the process for better or for worse.

[SelfishPlayer]

I don't think that the NCAA tournament has changed much for prospects this year for NBA teams. What the tournament probably did was prevent people from championing certain prospects as top 5 worthy like Johnny Davis and AJ Griffin.

[jman3134]

Mobley played worse across the board in the tournament, both his raw numbers and efficiency stats all went down - what did that tell you exactly about him as a prospect?

It told me that he is an elite defensive prospect with an underrated offensive game - pretty much the same things that I learned from the regular season. But, watching him do it against the number 1 team in college basketball and against Kansas (while also making sound offensive decisions getting his teammates involved) elevated him in my mind relative to Cade.

To be clear, a prospect does not suddenly become a prospect from the NCAA tournament. A prospect can elevate his standing relative to other prospects by performing well. Because 30 games is a pretty small sample size, every game does matter. And games against the best teams/styles, which can expose weaknesses/limitations, are the most relevant.