2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread IV

[broseph13]

95% chance Josh Jackson will NOT be the pick at #3 based upon what Colangelo said in a recent interview regarding how important character is when making a draft selection.

[oddwolfhooligan]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

I brought these rumors up to a West Coast scout who's in the know, and this is what he had to say--

"It's a fake story which was presented to several media outlets until one finally bit.

My guess is Lakers are gauging if Philly is serious enough about someone besides Lonzo that they're willing to trade up one spot for them."

[LloydFree]

Read on Twitter

Spoiler:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

I brought these rumors up to a West Coast scout who's in the know, and this is what he had to say--

"It's a fake story which was presented to several media outlets until one finally bit.

My guess is Lakers are gauging if Philly is serious enough about someone besides Lonzo that they're willing to trade up one spot for them."

Exactly. Pure nonsense, leaked from the Lakers camp as subterfuge for the 76ers and Celtics. Nothing like basketball "leaks" 2-3 weeks before the draft.

[Sixerscan]

I do think it's true that Ball is not a great fit for the rest of their personnel. They have plenty of shooting and need someone that can play defense.

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

I still think Ball will end up in LA.

[Unbreakable99]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

I brought these rumors up to a West Coast scout who's in the know, and this is what he had to say--

"It's a fake story which was presented to several media outlets until one finally bit.

My guess is Lakers are gauging if Philly is serious enough about someone besides Lonzo that they're willing to trade up one spot for them."

So you know a scout? Do you have any inside info? Who is he a scout for? Do you know anything of Sixers interest? How long has this guy been a about and how much do you trust him?

[oddwolfhooligan]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

I brought these rumors up to a West Coast scout who's in the know, and this is what he had to say--

"It's a fake story which was presented to several media outlets until one finally bit.

My guess is Lakers are gauging if Philly is serious enough about someone besides Lonzo that they're willing to trade up one spot for them."

So you know a scout? Do you have any inside info? Who is he a scout for? Do you know anything of Sixers interest? How long has this guy been a about and how much do you trust him?

He's not a scout who works for an NBA franchise or anything like that. However, he does get paid to scout and evaluate kids at the high school level and he's very respected over here on the west coast. I absolutely trust his takes as he's not one to express an opinion if he can't give an informed one. That being said, he's not someone who's gonna have a ton of information that's relevant to the Sixers. He's a regional scout and therefore most of his connections are central to the West Coast.

[Unbreakable99]

Read on Twitter

[AdotSmoove]

i think i've watched fultz more than anyone on this board, and i believe he's the top prospect in this draft. i saw how bad the huskies were, night in night out, especially on the defensive side. no real second option on that team. what impressed me was that he was still able to attack the basket with very little spacing. he created for himself, scored against 2-3 defenders. what he did as a freshman was very impressive especially with what he had to work with out there.

I can respect that. I even recall you posting during the games. I don't agree with your assessment, but at least it's​ an informed opinion.

I bet there isn't 10 guys on this board that watched even half of a Huskies game this year. This, especially for the guys that live on the East coast, yet so many are sure that Fultz is the top player.

I watched more than I care to remember. What resonates with me in regard to Fultz upside is how skilled he is currently. Skills galore for sure but watching him have to work that hard to get to the basket in the PAC 10 was disappointing. I understand he had the entire D's attention all the time but it's not like he blew by his man then split the help defenders to finish. It was more like he'd try to blow by see his man still on his hip with the d closing in then he'd pull his nice spin move and hit a tough lay up. If he isnt blowing by his primary defender in the pac 10 I don't know if he even gets the opportunity for the spin move layup against NBA defenders.

Now if his athleticism continues to improve (dude just grew like two years ago) or catches up to his current body size, he'll be what everyone is cracking him out to be. If it never comes around, you're relying on him consistently hitting tough mid range jumpers against defenders that won't be woefully outmatched.

Maybe I'm wrong and he has jets but prefers to play the game like he is wearing ankle weights. Maybe he just needs an NBA strength staff working with him. Either way skills are much easier to improve with practice than is athleticism. My questions are how much better can his skill set get and why isn't he blowing by dudes when it appears he is more than capable.

I still think he is number one but I don't get all this "he's a generational player" talk.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[smittybanton]

Reviewing my post from August 6, 2016. Some say that you can't tell anything about prospects from high school and AAU. But I firmly believe skills translate. I wanted Ben Simmons to be our point guard since he junior year in high school. Always need to go back and evaluate:

1. Giles (DX #4), 2. DSJ (DX #2), 3. DeAaron Fox (DX #11), 4. Markelle Fultz (DX #1), 5. Josh Jackson (DX #5), 6. Jayson Tatum (DX #4), 7. Edrice Adebayo (DX #9), 8. Lonzo Ball (DX #14), 9. Jonathan Isaac (DX #12), 10. Terrance Ferguson (DX #24).

Besides Harry Giles, who Draft Express had 4th, and Edrice Adebayo, who Draft Express had #9, I'm okay with my evaluations. Edrice Adebayo and Harry Giles are still in my top fifteen. This draft falls off a cliff after the top ten. So I have Adebayo, Giles and TJ Leaf over the rest of the field.

It was hard ranking Lonzo Ball because of the way Chino Hills plays, as well as the funky jumper. Needless to say, he showed and proved.

Draft Express had Malik Monk ranked #22. I agreed with them then. He's moved up for me as Adebayo, Ferguson, Anunoby, Giles, Miles Bridges have moved down. But he's still right outside my top ten. I would take him at #10 for need.

By comparison, I feel I didn't have misses on the level of Rabb (DX #8) and Bolden (DX #7). Rabb was in my top 15-20. Bolden was not.They also have in the mid-first round this year John Collins, Thomas Bryant, Tony Bradley and a bunch of other dudes with good measurables who can't play. David Harrison all over again. I often see bigs differently than DX. Omar Yutswhatever was in there top 20, and I don't think he can play a lick.

I don't have Frank Ntilikina in my top ten (DX #6) and I'm holding on to that.

All that is to say:

ZION WILLIAMSON IS A FREAK OF NATURE!!!!!

[JojoSlimbiid]

Yeah I just don't see what the Lakers gain by drumming up this Ball thing. Who is giving up assets to trade up to #2 and not take Ball? If for whatever reason a team trades up for Jackson than Philly will just take Ball making the gambit completely meaningless. Not to mention by trading out it pretty much confirms the report that they aren't high enough on him to begin with. Just doesn't make sense for it to be a smokescreen.

[Mik317]

it has multiple uses actually.

Prevents Boston from strongarming them.
Makes sure Ball comes correct for the workout (will be a great test to see what type of guy he is and if pressure gets to him or not).
Shuts LaVar up for a bit as many of the leaks basically say its his fault.
Attempts to get others shook that their guy could go there.

If its a smokescreen its rather smart because now no one can dictate what they do. Any misdirection helps.

OR they could legit be thinking of other options. If they truly want to move Russell to the 2, then Fox does make a lot of sense...and a lot of folks (including Jerry West...the Lakers still have Ryan West) think Jackson is the best player in the draft.

and at the end of the day the team is asscheeks...they should be doing their due diligence. That being said tho, Ball does have some advantage buisness wise. Fultz may go number one but Ball is going to get a large majority of the press and the Lakers could use some...good or bad.

[sixerswillrule]

That makes sense on paper. Not a fan of playing guys out of position tho

It's not out of position though. And by position, I mean role on the court. What was Covington asked to do last season? And what would be different about what he would be asked to do in a lineup with Simmons, another guard, and a SF?

I could begin to buy this concern about Covington if someone could actually explain to me the difference in his offensive role between playing the 3 with 2 traditional guards out there versus playing the 2 with a traditional guard and Simmons out there. In both scenarios he's being asked to be the 3rd ball handler/stand on the 3 point line and stretch the floor.

It's not like he's a 2nd baseman and you're switching him to shortstop. Obviously there he is playing at a different spot on the field. But this is like saying his is switching to shortstop but still playing him where you would normally play a 2nd baseman. If he's doing the same thing regardless, does the position you are calling him really matter?

Yup, it's the opposite. Out of position on paper, same position in reality. Unless of course you just put Simmons as the "PG" on paper (not that it matters). Then Covington would be playing the same position (SF) both on paper and in reality.

[GabeCerebro]

95% chance Josh Jackson will NOT be the pick at #3 based upon what Colangelo said in a recent interview regarding how important character is when making a draft selection.

lol. The entire portion of him discussing wanting players that play multiple positions, the part about him wanting players that can get out and run and finish in transition... And of course his part about players improving their shooting in the league, and looking at if they simply made their threes or not clearly are all in favor of Jackson being the pick..........

[Cadillaceazy]

With Josh Jackson, I see him becoming another Michael Kidd-Gilchrist who also had a broken jumpshot with horrible mechanics, who is not a bad player, but horrible fit for the Sixers. People had the same opinions about him when he was in the draft that he could play defense (not just athletic tools needed), had good character on and off court, was versatile on offense to score in a variety of ways, and his shot could be reinvented.

But unlike Kidd-Gilchrist, Jackson has a shorter wingspan, had some off the court issues, and even though has a better handle; is not much better in transition because of turnovers. I wouldn't mind drafting Jackson at #3 because it means the Sixers must have an extensive plan for him, but Jackson wouldn't be my first choice like some people are thinking.

[Unbreakable99]

Ok after Bryan Colangelo's presser today I'm narrowing it down to a few things. I think first and foremost BC wants to trade the pick. He wants to move back to 4 or 5 or 6 and get another pick. His second best thing he wants to do is just stay at 3 and if he stays at 3 then I think his top choice is Issac with VERY STRONG consideration to Tatum with Jackson and Ball close 3rds. I think BC is very high on Isaac. BC keeps talking about shooting is a priority. Tatum could fit that bill as well if he stays at 3. I think He has Isaac and Tatum ahead of Jackson and Ball. That's just how I'm reading his words.

[LloydFree]

With Josh Jackson, I see him becoming another Michael Kidd-Gilchrist who also had a broken jumpshot with horrible mechanics, who is not a bad player, but horrible fit for the Sixers. People had the same opinions about him when he was in the draft that he could play defense (not just athletic tools needed), had good character on and off court, was versatile on offense to score in a variety of ways, and his shot could be reinvented.

But unlike Kidd-Gilchrist, Jackson has a shorter wingspan, had some off the court issues, and even though has a better handle; is not much better in transition because of turnovers. I wouldn't mind drafting Jackson at #3 because it means the Sixers must have an extensive plan for him, but Jackson wouldn't be my first choice like some people are thinking.

Sometimes I think guys get caught reading cursory scouting reports of players without really watching the players. I really would like to understand the mind that could watch Michael Kidd-Gilcrest and Josh Jackson and come to the conclusion they are similar players. They aren't at all similar, but somehow more than one person has said this...

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[broseph13]

With Josh Jackson, I see him becoming another Michael Kidd-Gilchrist who also had a broken jumpshot with horrible mechanics, who is not a bad player, but horrible fit for the Sixers. People had the same opinions about him when he was in the draft that he could play defense (not just athletic tools needed), had good character on and off court, was versatile on offense to score in a variety of ways, and his shot could be reinvented.

But unlike Kidd-Gilchrist, Jackson has a shorter wingspan, had some off the court issues, and even though has a better handle; is not much better in transition because of turnovers. I wouldn't mind drafting Jackson at #3 because it means the Sixers must have an extensive plan for him, but Jackson wouldn't be my first choice like some people are thinking.

Sometimes I think guys get caught reading cursory scouting reports of players without really watching the players. I really would like to understand the mind that could watch Michael Kidd-Gilcrest and Josh Jackson and come to the conclusion they are similar players. They aren't at all similar, but somehow more than one person has said this...

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

They're similar in that they are both athletic wing "jack of all trades, master of none" players who are very good defenders but can't shoot, have shaky ball handling skills and mediocre bball IQ. Unless Jackson figures out what to do about his shooting, I don't envision him being anything more than a very good defender who can also get you 13-15 ppg. Definitely a positive, but not as a top 3 pick.

That said, if I'm Colangelo, I'd rather roll the dice on Fox or DSJ or Fultz (if he's still available).

[LongLiveHinkie]

Jackson's ball handling is actually pretty good. Underrated part of his game. He's not gonna be James Harden, but it's plenty good. His basketball IQ is good also.

[GabeCerebro]

Ok after Bryan Colangelo's presser today I'm narrowing it down to a few things. I think first and foremost BC wants to trade the pick. He wants to move back to 4 or 5 or 6 and get another pick. His second best thing he wants to do is just stay at 3 and if he stays at 3 then I think his top choice is Issac with VERY STRONG consideration to Tatum with Jackson and Ball close 3rds. I think BC is very high on Isaac. BC keeps talking about shooting is a priority. Tatum could fit that bill as well if he stays at 3. I think He has Isaac and Tatum ahead of Jackson and Ball. That's just how I'm reading his words.

I take it as Dennis-Tatum-Issac-Jackson-Monk in that order now