RealGM

trast66 wrote:

nate33 wrote:

dobrojim wrote:Re that Duke was a disappointment in the Tournament
I would say they did well. Their best player had a chance
to put them in the Final game and missed a shot he
probably makes 8/10 times. Nothing to be ashamed of.

They were a loaded team but the tourney is different.
The unexpected happens not infrequently.

Yeah, calling Duke a disappointment is silly. Basketball has a high randomness factor. Sometimes, the worse team just makes more shots than the better team. In a sudden-death tournament format, it's unreasonable to expect the best team to always win.

I think basketball has the lowest randomness factor among the major US team sports. Agree one game result in NCAA tourney is more random than an NBA playoff series, that’s why it’s called March madness.

I remember Jared Jeffries when Indiana defeated Caron Butler and U Conn. That got Jeffries paid.

Around the same time, Chris Wilcox must have looked good in the NCAAs. He went higher than Stoudemire, Boozer, and many better players.

AFM wrote:

doclinkin wrote:
There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

You need to trademark that.

https://youtu.be/_uDFdX27d8U?si=VzLzic1ILja2v-SA

This was very informative.

I hate the Champagnie for Tillman and a 2nd trade idea.

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:https://youtu.be/_uDFdX27d8U?si=VzLzic1ILja2v-SA

This was very informative.

I hate the Champagnie for Tillman and a 2nd trade idea.

"Chaos Inside the Organization"

Can't take the dude seriously after he said that and stopped watching the video.

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

nate33 wrote:

Read on Twitter

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

Agreed. I think Essengue is going to be the pick at 6. I’d be happy with it, potential is through the roof.

(Not picking him over CMB though)

There is a good debate on Essengue in the recent comments here:
viewtopic.php?t=2360689&start=1320

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:

dobrojim wrote:When I was a kid, I rooted Baltimore >> DC

O's, Colts, Bullets.

Jim, those were my teams as well.

My father was a Redskins fan. I liked the Colts. Bert Jones and Lydell Mitchell were great.

I got into football in 1965. Colts lost both Unitas and
Cuozo to injuries that year. Still had a good team QB'd
by Tom Matte.

nate33 wrote:

Read on Twitter

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

His defense is more projection at this point, but I've had him in the top 12 for the last two months. I dont see what others are missing.

The other guy that people are just missing is Danny Wolf. Are people watching the same tape I am? KAT, Dirk, Divac, Jokic... not sure who else can create such a variety of shots and looks for teammates from the perimeter at his size (7'0 250lbs). There are some really good 10+ minute videos that are more in depth, but this just encapsulates what I see:
https://youtube.com/shorts/X_9VFWSsLV0?si=yM4NO_EXyiaNkUQT

https://youtube.com/shorts/Aj-a1qnm4tA?si=k0vo2myjkwAoDpO5

He's like some KAT/Turkey Glue/Olynyk hybrid and just turned 21 a few weeks ago. Sign me up

pcbothwel wrote:The other guy that people are just missing is Danny Wolf. Are people watching the same tape I am? KAT, Dirk, Divac, Jokic... not sure who else can create such a variety of shots and looks for teammates from the perimeter at his size (7'0 250lbs). There are some really good 10+ minute videos that are more in depth, but this just encapsulates what I see:
https://youtube.com/shorts/X_9VFWSsLV0?si=yM4NO_EXyiaNkUQT

https://youtube.com/shorts/Aj-a1qnm4tA?si=k0vo2myjkwAoDpO5

He's like some KAT/Turkey Glue/Olynyk hybrid and just turned 21 a few weeks ago. Sign me up

I'm really hoping we land Wolf at #18, particularly if we draft a non-center at #6. A good coach will find a way to utilize his unique skillset and high energy. And I think he will hold up defensively because he has good feet. He won't be a big time rim protector or anything, but he'll be in the right spot in position to cut off driving lanes, and he'll have the strength and base to contend with the behemoths that Sarr can't match up with.

closg00 wrote:There is a good debate on Essengue in the recent comments here:
viewtopic.php?t=2360689&start=1320

Jhivvan Jackson: NCAA 4 year starter, 3x 1st team all conference
Zac Seljaas: NCAA 5 year rotation player at BYU, 20 MPG
Mike Davis Jr: NCAA 2 year starter at Queens
Davion Mintz: NCAA 5 year starter at Creighton&Kentucky, played 90 games in the G-league
Mike Lewis: NCAA 2 year starter at Duquesne
Calvin Wishart: NCAA 4 year rotation player 26 MPG
Hannes Steinbach: 19 years old, committed to play for Washington next year
Nelson Phillips: NCAA 4 year rotation player, 25 MPG
Tyrese Williams: NCAA 5 year starter at Quinnipiac
Aubrey Dawkins: NCAA starter at Michigan and UCF, played in 62 G-league games

This is the team that Essengue/Saraf are playing in the playoffs. Obviously, it is not the best team in the league. 4th or 5th best maybe. Bayern Munich is a significantly better roster.

None of these guys were really NCAA stars, but they were all at least rotation players that are now grown men/professionals. Pretty confident that Wurzburg would at minimum, be a top seed/go to the elite 8 in the NCAA tournament. A team like Bayern Munich wouldn’t lose a game in NCAA.

nate33 wrote:

doclinkin wrote:Still my guy (*):

His shooting form is very impressive for a big. Very good rotation and backspin on the release. And I was encouraged by his footwork demonstrated in those videos. I was worried that he was nothing more than a roll man on offense, but it really looks like he is capable of much more than what he showed at Duke. Then factor his age and lack of experience, and he has so much improvement ahead of him.

I'm very comfortable with Maluach at #6, and I'm starting to actually be a little excited. I wonder if he might be a better pick than Tre Johnson even if Johnson slides.

For a lot of these guys, there's a clear issue as has been said, and the most ardent boosters generally aren't addressing them:

Tre: Inside issues, lack of defense/effort on that end.
My guy Fears: Man was that 3 ugly, he's still pretty small, for a guy the scouts think can be a great playmaker, he sure didn't produce a lot of assists.
My guy Maluach: He wasn't played a lot, the projection is based on building him up from a real raw materials kind of prospect and we've seen countless guys like that, just not capable. Trump being president/South Sudan issue. Not quite as athletic as most of us had hoped based on the rumors.
Queen: Defense is ugly as hell, athleticism is even worse, tons of signs that he's motivated on offense and a slacker and largely incapable when not slacking on D.
Kon: He's a floor guy, highly unlikely he's ever anything more than a finishing touch to a starting lineup lacking a 3 point/shooter option, but having multiple studs otherwise.

On top of all that is the tried and true: We're talking ourselves into guys after getting our hearts broken.

I wish I knew if they were in a similar place to you, and just figuring out who to take in terms of upside, or if they are really really focused on trying to make a move up happen.

I don't know. I would think they'd want one of the French dudes, Maluach, Fears or Tre, that makes the most sense, but it's a difficult spot, and every single one of the options has a falling off the bridge monty python style issue.

Essengue had a nice game against the TrailBlazers last preseason. I think he was possibly 17 at the time? 20 points, 8 rebounds, 3 three pointers.



You Deni haters might like this...he made a couple of shots in Deni's face.

The Consiglieri wrote:

nate33 wrote:

doclinkin wrote:Still my guy (*):

His shooting form is very impressive for a big. Very good rotation and backspin on the release. And I was encouraged by his footwork demonstrated in those videos. I was worried that he was nothing more than a roll man on offense, but it really looks like he is capable of much more than what he showed at Duke. Then factor his age and lack of experience, and he has so much improvement ahead of him.

I'm very comfortable with Maluach at #6, and I'm starting to actually be a little excited. I wonder if he might be a better pick than Tre Johnson even if Johnson slides.

For a lot of these guys, there's a clear issue as has been said, and the most ardent boosters generally aren't addressing them:

Tre: Inside issues, lack of defense/effort on that end.

People are missing it on Tre. Yes, he needs to improve at finishing inside and having a plan, but his on ball defense isnt bad.
I love the kid. Guy is pure Ball and works his ass off. Supposedly some of his teammates at Texas didnt take the game as seriously and Tre started tuning them out. Very Jimmy Butler-esque, and Im good with that. Get on board or get out of the way mentality.

Go watch him in FIBA and you can see how effortlessly he plays within the team and being much more of a playmaker. Sounds like his teammates at Texas couldnt prove to him that they were capable and he started chucking.
He is somewhere between Rip Hamilton and Devon Booker, and that is well worth it at 6

Highly recommend purchasing. Tons of great content:

nate33 wrote:

Read on Twitter

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

Everything skill wise seems under developed if your considering him a wing.

The ball-handling appears raw... to me he looks like a 2 dribble-max guy which can still make him useful. The jumper needs alot of work. If he starts hitting 3s at 35% clip, then you can see him in a role a switchable defender.

Problem is he's less than 200 lbs with the skill of a C. The length is great and probably his saving grace but I don't see a ton of offensive upside in a guy labeled as a wing when the skills don't measure up.

Skill wise he reminds me alof of Jan Vesely when he came out. Vesely's skill seemed to regress once he got to DC (for probably a number of reasons including Vesely himself), but both are the long, athletic energy guy with good feel types who lack polished skill to standout at any one thing.

The biggest advantage for Noa is that he knows how to use his frame and handle contact which is pretty unique for his age. His body control and ability to contort is also special for his size. Not sure how this translates tho against bigger and quicker competition.

Dat2U wrote:

nate33 wrote:

Read on Twitter

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

Everything skill wise seems under developed if your considering him a wing.

The ball-handling appears raw... to me he looks like a 2 dribble-max guy which can still make him useful. The jumper needs alot of work. If he starts hitting 3s at 35% clip, then you can see him in a role a switchable defender.

Problem is he's less than 200 lbs with the skill of a C. The length is great and probably his saving grace but I don't see a ton of offensive upside in a guy labeled as a wing when the skills don't measure up.

Skill wise he reminds me alof of Jan Vesely when he came out. Vesely's skill seemed to regress once he got to DC (for probably a number of reasons including Vesely himself), but both are the long, athletic energy guy with good feel types who lack polished skill to standout at any one thing.

The biggest advantage for Noa is that he knows how to use his frame and handle contact which is pretty unique for his age. His body control and ability to contort is also special for his size. Not sure how this translates tho against bigger and quicker competition.

One thing I find very encouraging is his FTA rate. Dude averages 8.4 FTA's per 36 minutes on only 10.5 FGA's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a FTA Rate of .800. Also, the 2.1 steals per 36 is very nice for a big man. Numbers like that suggest he plays with a Chet Holmgren type of physicality that belies his slight stature.

On the skills front, he is a 73% FT shooter at age 18 so I think his 3-ball will come around. I don't know if he'll ever be a driver of an offense like Giannis, but I think he can easily develop the skillset to play power forward in a complementary role.

nate33 wrote:

Dat2U wrote:

nate33 wrote:

Read on Twitter

I must say, this guy certainly seems to meet our draft criteria of positional length and multi-tool passer/ball-handler skillset.

Everything skill wise seems under developed if your considering him a wing.

The ball-handling appears raw... to me he looks like a 2 dribble-max guy which can still make him useful. The jumper needs alot of work. If he starts hitting 3s at 35% clip, then you can see him in a role a switchable defender.

Problem is he's less than 200 lbs with the skill of a C. The length is great and probably his saving grace but I don't see a ton of offensive upside in a guy labeled as a wing when the skills don't measure up.

Skill wise he reminds me alof of Jan Vesely when he came out. Vesely's skill seemed to regress once he got to DC (for probably a number of reasons including Vesely himself), but both are the long, athletic energy guy with good feel types who lack polished skill to standout at any one thing.

The biggest advantage for Noa is that he knows how to use his frame and handle contact which is pretty unique for his age. His body control and ability to contort is also special for his size. Not sure how this translates tho against bigger and quicker competition.

One thing I find very encouraging is his FTA rate. Dude averages 8.4 FTA's per 36 minutes on only 10.5 FGA's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a FTA Rate of .800. Also, the 2.1 steals per 36 is very nice for a big man. Numbers like that suggest he plays with a Chet Holmgren type of physicality that belies his slight stature.

On the skills front, he is a 73% FT shooter at age 18 so I think his 3-ball will come around. I don't know if he'll ever be a driver of an offense like Giannis, but I think he can easily develop the skillset to play power forward in a complementary role.

I think it is both. He has a current "skills" problem. He is young and seems to have tremendous upside and positional length.

Another way to say it, he has a very low floor and very high ceiling. If you are taking swings...

Or, how would he look next to our other players and our #1 pick next year.

This is an interesting draft man. I'm split. Part of me wants a Maulauch/Essengue project, and part of me want to get guys who can play now like Queen, Richardson, CMB, Fears or maybe even KK.

I just know I want no parts of Tre Johnson. Not interested.

pcbothwel wrote:

The Consiglieri wrote:

nate33 wrote:
His shooting form is very impressive for a big. Very good rotation and backspin on the release. And I was encouraged by his footwork demonstrated in those videos. I was worried that he was nothing more than a roll man on offense, but it really looks like he is capable of much more than what he showed at Duke. Then factor his age and lack of experience, and he has so much improvement ahead of him.

I'm very comfortable with Maluach at #6, and I'm starting to actually be a little excited. I wonder if he might be a better pick than Tre Johnson even if Johnson slides.

For a lot of these guys, there's a clear issue as has been said, and the most ardent boosters generally aren't addressing them:

Tre: Inside issues, lack of defense/effort on that end.

People are missing it on Tre. Yes, he needs to improve at finishing inside and having a plan, but his on ball defense isnt bad.
I love the kid. Guy is pure Ball and works his ass off. Supposedly some of his teammates at Texas didnt take the game as seriously and Tre started tuning them out. Very Jimmy Butler-esque, and Im good with that. Get on board or get out of the way mentality.

Go watch him in FIBA and you can see how effortlessly he plays within the team and being much more of a playmaker. Sounds like his teammates at Texas couldnt prove to him that they were capable and he started chucking.
He is somewhere between Rip Hamilton and Devon Booker, and that is well worth it at 6

Very poor field goal percentage with volume is a huge red flag.
If i compared his numbers to SGA's on college, i would be satisfied... but he is significantly below SGA at same point in time based on eye ball test.