2017 NBA Draft Thread

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,386
After someone posted a link here last year I started following dean on draft on twitter. He's just one guy and has had some misses, but he loves Lonzo Ball. Says he's at worst #2 in this draft and it's not clear he isn't better than Fultz. A few times he's compared him to Steve Nash but with a higher upside.
But can Ball do this?


and this

 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,673
Saint Paul, MN
I am not seeing it with Ball. His ugly shot doesn't bother me, but his handle and lack of elite athleticism does.

Also, I want Fultz so he and Jaylen can have competing sweet fades
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,252
Yes, Demakis loves him some Lonzo. Here's his most recent scouting report: https://deanondraft.com/2017/01/15/lonzo-ball-is-a-basketball-genius/

This is another good in-depth look at him from JZ Malish, a recently converted skeptic. Lots of videos.

He scored 10 points on only 5 shots last night, but dished out 12 assists as UCLA dropped 102 on ASU. With all due respect to TJ Leaf, what Ball has done for that offense is remarkable.
Couldn't sleep last night so I checked out the first 30 or so minutes of this one. He has very good court vision and is always looking to move the ball, but I don't really see any ability to drive to the hoop and score. He exclusively drives for the purpose of quickly kicking it out—not on the level of Rondo passing up layups to kick it out, but only because he was never in position to take a layup. Maybe this changes at the next level with better spacing + the threat of his shot. Ainge loves him a workout warrior so it may come down to how he looks there. As mentioned above, it also doesn't hurt Ball that his entire team can bomb jumpers (based on what I saw last night).

Didn't see anything defensively that's worth mentioning. The size is great of course, so he'll never be an IT-level liability, and if his BBIQ translates to team D he should be fine there.
 

gammoseditor

also had a stroke
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,213
Somerville, MA
I am not seeing it with Ball. His ugly shot doesn't bother me, but his handle and lack of elite athleticism does.

Also, I want Fultz so he and Jaylen can have competing sweet fades
This seems to be the consensus around here. Personally I don't have a clue. A lot of "experts" seem to disagree with this assessment and it looks like he's the favorite to go second.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Demakis with another Ball piece up, concerning the lack of ability to create for himself. Mostly concludes that Ball is an effective enough shooter that he has little downside risk despite his lack of shot creation:

Given the way some people talk about Ball’s scoring flags, you would think that there would be SOME historic comp that offers a scary downside scenario. But there’s nothing there. Scoring is the most easily quantified statistic, and there is no example of a pass first point guard who has busted without having a scoring output that is light years inferior to that of Ball.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,397
Demakis with another Ball piece up, concerning the lack of ability to create for himself. Mostly concludes that Ball is an effective enough shooter that he has little downside risk despite his lack of shot creation:
This is classic Demakis in terms of when he gets on or off a prospect he starts totally ignoring flaws and/or dismissing them with dumb analysis that doesn't address the issue.
The knock on Ball is that he can't beat anyone off the dribble, or score in any way other than open 3s and easy assisted layups. Using EFG% as your only indicator is designed to NOT answer that question, it eliminates FTs, which are really important, and gives an advantage to a guy like Ball who basically only takes wide open shots. This is basically the analysis you make if you start with the idea "how do I make it look like Ball has great offensive upside" rather than... how do Ball's flaws match up with other players.
 

gammoseditor

also had a stroke
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,213
Somerville, MA
This is classic Demakis in terms of when he gets on or off a prospect he starts totally ignoring flaws and/or dismissing them with dumb analysis that doesn't address the issue.
The knock on Ball is that he can't beat anyone off the dribble, or score in any way other than open 3s and easy assisted layups. Using EFG% as your only indicator is designed to NOT answer that question, it eliminates FTs, which are really important, and gives an advantage to a guy like Ball who basically only takes wide open shots. This is basically the analysis you make if you start with the idea "how do I make it look like Ball has great offensive upside" rather than... how do Ball's flaws match up with other players.
Draft Express and Chad Ford also have Ball #2. Is there a reputable site that is down on Ball?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,397
Draft Express and Chad Ford also have Ball #2. Is there a reputable site that is down on Ball?
Just SI who have him at 9. I don't have a problem with people having Ball high. I'd probably have him 6 or 7. I just think Demakis is being ridiculous in handwaving the legitimate concerns about Ball by pretending to address them with a stat that doesn't address it at all.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Ball can't drive or penetrate.
Unless he's in the right situation in the NBA (can play secondary creator and passer and spot up shoot) I think he has a huge downside.

For a lot of teams he's not in my top 6-8
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,880
Just SI who have him at 9. I don't have a problem with people having Ball high. I'd probably have him 6 or 7. I just think Demakis is being ridiculous in handwaving the legitimate concerns about Ball by pretending to address them with a stat that doesn't address it at all.
And FWIW, even Demakis has Fultz rated ahead of Ball.


I am not seeing it with Ball. His ugly shot doesn't bother me, but his handle and lack of elite athleticism does.

Also, I want Fultz so he and Jaylen can have competing sweet fades
I know today's NBA is different, but of the top 15 or so all-time PGs, who would you say had elite athleticism for his era? Oscar Robertson certainly. Kevin Johnson. Gary Payton? Anyone else? High BBIQ certainly seems like more of a prerequisite, along with another elite skill, like great defense (Payton, Kidd, Paul,Stockton) or high scoring efficiency (Nash, Curry, Stockton).

His handle is concern for me, primarily because he plays with a high center of gravity that will always limit his ability to probe a defense like a Stockton or Paul, but then so did Kidd. He'll be best suited for a motion offense where he's the primary initiator who can then become a spot up threat off of the ball, but I do love him in that type of scheme.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Just SI who have him at 9. I don't have a problem with people having Ball high. I'd probably have him 6 or 7. I just think Demakis is being ridiculous in handwaving the legitimate concerns about Ball by pretending to address them with a stat that doesn't address it at all.
I basically agree that this sort of analysis (not just by Demaskis) is usually a tool to reach a predetermined conclusion. By this type of analysis, I mean stuff like "everyone who has done A, B, and C has gone on to success", without any clear justification for why A, B, and C matter, but not D, E, or F. That said, I'm sure I do this stuff too. It's a hard habit to break, as it looks pretty convincing at first blush.

I don't follow college basketball in years when Michigan stinks, so I've never actually seen these guys play. Here's a BPM leaderboard for freshman - Ball ranks 4th.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,028
Ball can't drive or penetrate.
Unless he's in the right situation in the NBA (can play secondary creator and passer and spot up shoot) I think he has a huge downside.

For a lot of teams he's not in my top 6-8
What do you feel his floor is as a player without that ability? I keep going back to Mike Bibby being his floor as Ball seems to have better vision while possessing better size and shooting range. That's a pretty good NBA point guard.

Between there being so many guards at the top of this draft and several teams selecting in this range who are backcourt-heavy I have a feeling we could see more trade activity in the Top 5-10 than we're accustomed to seeing on draft night.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,386
I know today's NBA is different, but of the top 15 or so all-time PGs, who would you say had elite athleticism for his era? Oscar Robertson certainly. Kevin Johnson. Gary Payton? Anyone else? High BBIQ certainly seems like more of a prerequisite, along with another elite skill, like great defense (Payton, Kidd, Paul,Stockton) or high scoring efficiency (Nash, Curry, Stockton).
I would have to disagree with you with respect to Payton and Kidd. Both of them were top of the line elite athletes who showed that by how well they could play defense.

Kidd they called "Roboguard" (or something similar to that) because he was such a great athlete. Basically Kidd was LeBron before Lebron and if Lebron was 6'4" 220 rather than 6'9" 270. He was stronger, faster, and better at everything than everyone else.

As for Payton, while he might not have the measurables, he is the only point guard who has won the DPOY award, so I would say his athleticism is elite.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,397
What do you feel his floor is as a player without that ability? I keep going back to Mike Bibby being his floor as Ball seems to have better vision while possessing better size and shooting range. That's a pretty good NBA point guard.

Between there being so many guards at the top of this draft and several teams selecting in this range who are backcourt-heavy I have a feeling we could see more trade activity in the Top 5-10 than we're accustomed to seeing on draft night.
I mean, his floor is not an NBA player, like just about all prospects.
Bibby is an interesting comp, I think Jose Calderon is a better one, other comps for guys who couldn't get to the rim well (I used low FTr as a stand in here) high AST%, and decent 3 shooting (though whether that holds up for Ball is probably a ?)- Terrell Brandon, Jordan Farmar, High end comp is Mark Jackson.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,880
I mean, his floor is not an NBA player, like just about all prospects.
Bibby is an interesting comp, I think Jose Calderon is a better one, other comps for guys who couldn't get to the rim well (I used low FTr as a stand in here) high AST%, and decent 3 shooting (though whether that holds up for Ball is probably a ?)- Terrell Brandon, Jordan Farmar, High end comp is Mark Jackson.
That's funny, I used Calderon as a comp for similar reasons in a mini Twitter debate earlier today. I think it's a decent one, as far as his floor. A lot of the draft guys I like are closer to your line with your thinking than mine.

And WBCD, I agree on Payton but I actually think Ball profiles pretty closely to Kidd, minus some strength but plus some reach. I think his lack of athleticism is overstated.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,038
I need to watch Ball more but I'm pretty agnostic on him from what I've seen so far. Wouldn't be psyched or pissed if we got him but Fultz is definitely my guy and I'd have zero hesitation picking him over Ball.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
What do you feel his floor is as a player without that ability? I keep going back to Mike Bibby being his floor as Ball seems to have better vision while possessing better size and shooting range. That's a pretty good NBA point guard.

Between there being so many guards at the top of this draft and several teams selecting in this range who are backcourt-heavy I have a feeling we could see more trade activity in the Top 5-10 than we're accustomed to seeing on draft night.
Well his shot is.... Well it's ugly and his ft% is far far from elite. Sub 70%.
I don't consider his shot a given so his floor is trash.

If he can't penetrate and his shot isn't elite he's not even a lottery pick. I think shot MIGHT not be elite. So... I think there a total bust risk to be honest
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,880
I mean, Magic?
I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that the moops was referring to the explosive, fast-twitch "elite athleticism" we see in Westbrook and Wall type guys. Magic was a 6'9 basketball genius, but I don't really associate him with that type of athleticism. I'd argue that all the top PGs were athletic outliers in some respect Isiah, Nash and Paul were all insanely coordinated, for example.

Dennis Smith Jr. is the guy in this draft who's talked about with that sort of athleticism, but I just haven't been particularly impressed from watching him run an offense. Certainly not like Ball who sticks out immediately to me, or even De'Aaron Fox, even with his lack of a jump shot. But Smith's putting up impressive numbers, so I need to watch more. Of course, Ball's putting up more impressive numbers and has completely turned around the offense of a team that's only lost one game. But he doesn't penetrate off of the dribble or shoot mid range jump shots, so he's a polarizing guy.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,417
Somewhere
I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that the moops was referring to the explosive, fast-twitch "elite athleticism" we see in Westbrook and Wall type guys.
Fair enough. I mean, part of it is that players a generation back didn't build up to the NFL-style physicality that you see in today's NBA. Someone like Stockton's athleticism was probably pretty close to par for his position.

You look at charts like these and you can see that (non-guard specific) NBA height pretty much peaked in the eighties, but that player weight continually grew throughout the nineties. Yes, I'm using weight as a proxy for "athleticism" but alongside the eye test, I think it's a pretty good indicator that the average player has a lot more muscle mass than guys a generation ago. This trend has been pretty steady since 2000 -- probably when players were starting to maximize their athletic potential (at least in terms of using the most obvious types of weight and cross-training). I think we're just noticing the athleticism of today's guys more because that run of drafts between the Duncan draft and the James draft was pretty fucking terrible.
 
Last edited:

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,664
If the Celtics draft Fultz, does he run the offense as an off-guard? Does IT4 switch to a starter's minutes 6th man role?
If Boston lands #1, and can't talk the Thunder into a Westbrook trade, I'm guessing that everything is open for business as far as rostered guys go. Meaning that Lil' Zeke would be available in the right deal for a forward. Fultz will obviously require adjustment time, but they have Smart to help out with the PG duties as Fultz adjusts to the new level of play.
 

Marbleheader

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2004
11,726
If the Celtics were to land Westbrook today for the Brooklyn pick, where would the Celtics rank among the top teams?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,397
If Boston lands #1, and can't talk the Thunder into a Westbrook trade, I'm guessing that everything is open for business as far as rostered guys go. Meaning that Lil' Zeke would be available in the right deal for a forward. Fultz will obviously require adjustment time, but they have Smart to help out with the PG duties as Fultz adjusts to the new level of play.
Yeah I've been saying for a while that if they land Fultz they should ship out IT for a forward (or center). The team is very different without IT, but not necissarily worse (Best D in the league, bad O vs. Bad D and good O), add Fultz to be a scorer off the bench and whoever you get in an IT deal plus any FA signing and it's a very good team. Probably a better team than the current Celtics.
 

moly99

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2007
939
Seattle
Assuming that we don't get the #1 or #2 pick, is Jonathan Isaac a possible target? I don't watch much college BB but after watching FSU-ND with a ND alum friend I came away very impressed.

When the only negative draftniks have to say about a player is "too skinny" I can't help but think of Porzingis, Durant, Dwight Howard, etc. An athletic wing who can shoot, drive, pass, rebound and defend seems attractive.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
700
Assuming that we don't get the #1 or #2 pick, is Jonathan Isaac a possible target? I don't watch much college BB but after watching FSU-ND with a ND alum friend I came away very impressed.

When the only negative draftniks have to say about a player is "too skinny" I can't help but think of Porzingis, Durant, Dwight Howard, etc. An athletic wing who can shoot, drive, pass, rebound and defend seems attractive.
Right now he would be seen as a reach at 3, but I love the possibilities he presents. If the worst happened or we swung a trade and ended up further down in the lottery, he would be my guy.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Fultz, Smith, Jackson, Tatum and I think Ntilikina as my top 5 with decent differences between each and the next.

Ball, monk, Issac would be in the next 5.

Fox i don't get why people have him so high
Edit And Giles I'm not sure is right physically
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,495
Fultz, Smith, Jackson, Tatum and I think Ntilikina as my top 5 with decent differences between each and the next.

Ball, monk, Issac would be in the next 5.

Fox i don't get why people have him so high
Edit And Giles I'm not sure is right physically
It worries me a bit that Jackson can't shoot at all. Doesn't that begin to create problems on a roster that also features Jalen and Marcus?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,038
It worries me a bit that Jackson can't shoot at all. Doesn't that begin to create problems on a roster that also features Jalen and Marcus?
Yeah - maybe it's the hair but when I watch Josh Jackson I'm getting a more-athletic Josh Childress vibe. We have enough shooting-challenged guys. I don't want another.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,911
Cultural hub of the universe
Yeah - maybe it's the hair but when I watch Josh Jackson I'm getting a more-athletic Josh Childress vibe. We have enough shooting-challenged guys. I don't want another.
Russell Westbrook averaged 3 points a game as a freshman. It's not what they're doing now, it's how you project them to play in the future, which is a job I'm glad I don't have.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
That's a general view not a team specific

Eg for the Celtics you might put ball ahead of the wings etc
But it's rare for a solid deep team to have such high picks, so you go for talent not fit. I guess, but you obvious prefer to steer clear of a brown clone
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
700
Yeah - maybe it's the hair but when I watch Josh Jackson I'm getting a more-athletic Josh Childress vibe. We have enough shooting-challenged guys. I don't want another.
Regardless of fit, any player (other than a rim protector) who does not project as an average shooter should be a hard pass at the top end of the lottery. As to fit, its relevant if you have your long term answer at point guard and center because a team can have too many of those guys (see Sixers now and the 2014-15 Suns), but no team has ever said "we have too many 3 and D wings".
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,028
.
Well his shot is.... Well it's ugly and his ft% is far far from elite. Sub 70%.
I don't consider his shot a given so his floor is trash.

If he can't penetrate and his shot isn't elite he's not even a lottery pick. I think shot MIGHT not be elite. So... I think there a total bust risk to be honest
I think his lack of penetration ability and athleticism is being way overstated. When Steph Curry was at Davidson he couldn't beat a statue off the dribble. Ball's vision and passing is already special and he's already shooting 44% from 3 with beyond NBA range. His shot is ugly however the mechanics of it are sound and consistent.

I question his upside with his questionable defense although his size will benefit him as he can defend wings in switches, unlike say someone like Isaiah Thomas, and ability to be a threat off the dribble but to me he's as certain of an NBA starting PG as there is.

When the only negative draftniks have to say about a player is "too skinny" I can't help but think of Porzingis, Durant, Dwight Howard, etc. An athletic wing who can shoot, drive, pass, rebound and defend seems attractive.
Yeah, "skinny" can easily be fixed in a couple years of natural maturation nevermind access to NBA-level training staffs. Bad shooting can also be fixed if the mechanics are there for a team to work with. Size, length, athleticism, and tools are what you should really be focusing on when evaluating what a 18-year old will look like at 25.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Was Howard considered skinny? I thought he came in with an NBA body. Your point still stands, though.
 

moly99

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2007
939
Seattle
Howard was drafted out of high school and put on a lot of muscle his senior year. (And might have been roiding.) It was also the height of the Shaq era, so a 240 lb center seemed a lot smaller then.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Love it when I see Demakis stoking the hype for some euro prospect I've never heard of, calling him a "rich man's Larry Bird".





Keep on keeping on.
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,880
Love it when I see Demakis stoking the hype for some euro prospect I've never heard of, calling him a "rich man's Larry Bird".





Keep on keeping on.
"He has a good chance to become the best player ever, no qualifier necessary." Sure he does, Dean. What Doncic is doing is in La Liga is unprecedented at his age, but that's hilarious.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,028
Dennis Smith drops a 32/6/4 line at Cameron vs the Dukies including 11 in the final 4 minutes to lead the comeback. Then makes big steal with 4 seconds to go to secure the win. The only thing he did wrong was miss a bunch of free throws in the second half.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Doncic isn't responsible for the hyperbole. There's quite a bit of film and other info on this kid, and if he continues to develop I believe he will be a top 3 pick in the 2018 draft.
 

Soxfan in Fla

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2001
7,187
Doncic (at age 17) against the OKC Thunder this past October.
Pretty impressive for a 17 year old. Like his handles and court vision. Also has a nice looking shot and seems to rebound well. Looks like he could be a very good player. The overstatements above are a little over the top but this kid looks like he could be a very good to great NBA player.