I find it unlikely you'd look at the 10 guys above Wiggins and say you'd prefer each of them to Wiggins today, with benefit of hindsight. I think that was the point.
2017 NBA Draft Thread
- Thread starter Kliq
- Start date
That's a misreading of Demakis's post. He's ranking 2017 guys relative to what he thought of other draft picks from 2014-2016 at the time. He's not ranking them with the benefit of hindsight (or at least, he's pretending not to). That's why Jokic and Myles Turner aren't on the 2014-2016 board, while Okafor and Exum are.
The point was that by saying Demakis' ranking was correct (since we now do have benefit of hindsight) one is effectively saying they'd put Okafor and Exum above Wiggins now, which is tough to do.
Sure. You're free to misinterpret Demakis's post if you're really determined to.
I suppose I am, but since my point was about your comment on Wiggins, not Demakis' post, that's neither here nor there.
Oh. You are likewise confused about my comment re: Wiggins. I was explaining Demakis's views on Wiggins there, not my own. I was not smart enough to be as bearish on Wiggins as Demakis was at the time.
Not confused at all---I just disagree with your characterization of the accuracy of Demakis' rating ("so far, he's basically been correct") To each their own...
He's at least partially using hindsight. He was low on Porzingis and said it was a huge mistake to take him over Justice Winslow. Winslow is nowhere on his 14-16 side.
Yeah, he explains in the comments that he only listed guys who actually went in the top 5 of the past 3 drafts, as it creates better parallels to guys who are actually going to be drafted high. That's why Winslow is missing there, while Porzingis made it.
Putting aside the rankings, do you really believe that the two lists are equivalent? I know Dean said that the two lists are equivalent but I think that it's pretty clear that Gordon, Ingram, Jabari, Okafor, and Wiggins are better prospects than their counterparts. The only way one can say that Embiid and Ball are similar prospects is if you count in injuries (at which point Giles isn't near the prospect that Okafor is). Can't Simmons do everything Jackson can only he can do it better and he's bigger to boot?Demakis addressed this a bit here, ranking the top 11 prospects from this draft against similar quality prospects from 2014-2016 (in his opinion):
Fultz and Towns are hard to compare because they are so different. DAR and Monk seem reasonably similar. Porzingis and Lauri are comparable only because people didn't know that much about Porzingis. And Exum and Ntilikina both seem comparably speculative - perhaps Ntilikina is a better prospect because he's played against slightly tougher competition.
I think this draft is really good but I wonder if it's going to be historically good as Dean suggests.
I don't have a great read on this year's draft on its own merits. That said, I don't have an issue with saying Isaac ~ Ingram, that Okafor ~ Giles, or Wiggins ~ Dennis Smith. The others may be a bit dicier, but none of them seem obviously nuts to me apart from Embiid/Ball (which is Demakis staking out a very aggressive position on Ball as being a rich man's Stockton).
I don't think the guy has any clue or consideration for defense. Except as a tie breaker. Which makes his rankings and claims silly. Ball > Stockton. I mean stop.
Not sure why I'm carrying so much water for Demakis, but I don't think the bolded is fair. He places a lot of weight on defense in particular - more than any other draft analyst I know. To take example, this is why he was a big Marcus Smart fan, and was a big Okafor skeptic. The reason I pay attention to Demakis is because he gives so much weight to defense, which is rare among draft analysts.
Tatum went off for 28 last night - 21 in the 2nd half - to carry Duke to a road win at stingy Virginia
Lonzo Ball's dad is already rubbing people the wrong way. The latest is that he says that Lonzo will be better than Steph Curry and Jason Kidd. Whatever team drafts Lonzo will be dealing with quite the ongoing headache. I feel bad for those kids - their dad is clearly living his life through them.
Doubt it impacts his draft position but worth watching.
Doubt it impacts his draft position but worth watching.
This is my impression as well. He still stumps for Smart, defense was a big part of his Winslow love, and he had the severely offensively challenged Chinanu Onuaku (taken 37th) as a lottery pick last year. Plus, more than any other draft guys I've seen, he'll ding blue-chippers based on suspect defense, particularly bigs. That's why I'm surprised to see him have Markkanen so high this year.
On the plus side, from the accounts I've read, and certainly from how he conducts himself on the court, Lonzo's demeanor is the complete opposite as Lavar's- the mature and even-keeled oldest brother type. My sense is that, at this stage, his dad's antics just roll off his back and at this stage.
Re: Dennis Smith
I am not concerned at all about his spat with his Coach and, in fact, count it as a positive for him. He's a competitor that is pissed off that his Coach fucking sucks and will be ousted at the end of the season per every local news outlet here. So Smith just kind of has this lost college season. I was watching him last night against UNC and he had a four minute stretch in the first half where he just took over the game. But in the second half he was exhausted. If I have a concern about Smith, it's that. He's got to work on his conditioning to be able to run for a full game.
By working on his conditioning I don't mean he's out of shape, I mean he has to learn when to press the gas, when to sneak in-game rests, that kind of thing. It's clear he has just never been taught any of that and he is not being taught anything right now. It's really sort of a lost year for him developmentally.
I am not concerned at all about his spat with his Coach and, in fact, count it as a positive for him. He's a competitor that is pissed off that his Coach fucking sucks and will be ousted at the end of the season per every local news outlet here. So Smith just kind of has this lost college season. I was watching him last night against UNC and he had a four minute stretch in the first half where he just took over the game. But in the second half he was exhausted. If I have a concern about Smith, it's that. He's got to work on his conditioning to be able to run for a full game.
By working on his conditioning I don't mean he's out of shape, I mean he has to learn when to press the gas, when to sneak in-game rests, that kind of thing. It's clear he has just never been taught any of that and he is not being taught anything right now. It's really sort of a lost year for him developmentally.
But he does have him ahead of Okafor and Hezonja who were top 5 in their drafts when he had him behind them originally.
What is a rich man's John Stockton? A top 10 player of all time and perennial MVP candidate? The best PG to ever play the game? John Stockton in today's game is probably scoring over 20 a game due to the emphasis on 3s. Rich Man's John Stockton would be putting up lines of 25ppg, 16apg while playing lock down defense and shooting 50/40/90 from the field. You'd be talking about one of the best players to ever wear a uniform, wouldn't you?
That's a good point. Not sure how to square this particular circle, as he does still rank Exum and Wiggins, despite calling them "busts".
Right, but there was also that 6'11 Euro playing in Canada in the mid 2000's who was getting that claim. He was projected top 10, decided to goto college and I don't think he was ever even drafted. I'll go see if i can find his name. He made the claim as an 18 year old that the NBA needs him or some such nonsense.
Stockton is before my time; was Stockton really playing lockdown defense? I only know that DBPM rates him below average.
It was a different game and he definitely got pretty hands (and some elbows) but he usually did well with steals (leading the league a couple of times).
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stockjo01.html
Made 2nd team all-defense 5 times, so he definitely had the rep for a being a good defender. Whether that was the truth or not, I don't know. I do recall him being regarded as dirty.
He had the reputation of a bull dog/dirty player and wasn't much a defender during the twilight of his career. It's not so much Stockton was a lock down defender, but a rich man's Stockton probably would be. It's hard to say though because Stockton played in 2 distinct eras. He played in the 80's when teams score more than they do know, but also played in the thugball 90's where 100ppg would lead the league. Without looking at the breakdown, I'm guessing Stockton was above average with Mark Eaton, and below average without.
Kinda like how Gobbert hides a lot of Hood's problems, or how KG hid Ray Allen's. Stockton could gamble on defense because Mark Eaton was there blocking everything in site.
edit: I just looked and going by DBPM, I am correct. Stockton was much better with Eaton, although still slightly below average.
I remember him, the seven footer that wanted to be a point guard, Ivan Cherov maybe?
EDIT: Just googled it, Ivan Chiarev. I remember Gerbil and I cracking up about how he used to talk about himself in the third person as a teenager. The funniest damned thing.
Yeah, thanks for that. I was trying to find him with no avail. I remembered his name being Ivan but couldn't remember the last. He was dominating Canada high schools as an almost 7 footer playing PG. Had he left from HS, NBAdraft.net had him projected 3rd and a few others had him projected in the top 10. Oops. That same year, Pavel Podkolzin was predicted to be top 5 but developed a pituitary disorder and pulled out of the draft. The next year, he was drafted 21st. Scouting for international talent has come such a long way since the early 2000's. Guys like Pavel will always get drafted though because you can't teach 7'5 but wasting a top 5 pick on him? Eww.
http://www.nbadraft.net/forum/bust-i-will-never-forget-ivan-chiriaev
Last edited:
[QUOTE="That same year, Pavel Podkolzin was predicted to be top 5 but developed a pituitary disorder and pulled out of the draft. The next year, he was drafted 21st. Scouting for international talent has come such a long way since the early 2000's. Guys like Pavel will always get drafted though because you can't teach 7'5 but wasting a top 5 pick on him? Eww. [/QUOTE]
I wonder how many 7'5" people don't have acromegaly, which is the pituitary disorder with which he was diagnosed (causes increased growth hormone).
I wonder how many 7'5" people don't have acromegaly, which is the pituitary disorder with which he was diagnosed (causes increased growth hormone).
I wonder how many 7'5" people don't have acromegaly, which is the pituitary disorder with which he was diagnosed (causes increased growth hormone).[/QUOTE]
I think a large percentage of them. Although, in the NBA I don't think Bol, Bradley or Yao had it. Muresan did and I think Boban might.
Here's a list of the tallest NBA players. On that list, Muresan, Bobbitt, Pavel and I think that's it. Sim Bhullar probably not? Foot problems are a reoccurring theme amongst these guys though. They have all played less than 900 games. Shawn Bradley and Eaton were the most durable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_players_in_National_Basketball_Association_history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_players_in_National_Basketball_Association_history
JJ with long 3P here. Note feet and rest of shot look a bit better; admittedly this could be fluke.
There certainly is something intriguing thinking about Smart/Jaylen/Jackson causing complete havoc on the defensive end. And all three are big enough and athletic enough to be the PG/SG/SF in a big lineup, or the SG/SF/PF in a small lineup. With the ability to each switch on just about and pick n roll situations.
Well the hope is that Jaylen and/or Jackson's shot improves enough to be considered a weapon.
Right, unless you expect some serious improvement which isn't totally out of the question. Smart has been better of late and Jaylen Brown is 20. Still, even with some improvement I doubt any of these guys will be hitting more than 35% of their 3's. Smart himself is at 35% over his last 120 or so 3's.
Yeah, I was mostly poking fun. Obviously you don't draft Jackson if you don't think he can improve his shot (and the same is true of Brown). Of course, that's why I wouldn't have drafted Brown, and wouldn't draft Jackson. (Smart I was a huge fan of - I think his shot has more potential than either Brown or Jackson, and he was a pretty sure thing to be good even without being able to shoot).
I don't see Jackson as being any less of a sure thing than Smart though. Maybe you don't want both of them on the same team, but the athleticism of Jackson and his defensive abilities in being able to cover 1-4, will translate to the next level just like Smart.
Smart was the best college defender I've ever seen. I haven't watched much college basketball this year, but I haven't gotten the same sense from Jackson.
Jackson's game outside his shooting is as good or better than smart, imo, and at the wing his defense is potentially more impactful.
Jackson has some great passing for a wing and his rebounding is excellent.
He's an interesting one for Philly. The potential defense of a Simmons, embiid, Jackson front court is extremely good. But of course if one of Simmons or Jackson can't provide spacing.. Ugh. But good lord that team would be fun to watch in transition
Jackson has some great passing for a wing and his rebounding is excellent.
He's an interesting one for Philly. The potential defense of a Simmons, embiid, Jackson front court is extremely good. But of course if one of Simmons or Jackson can't provide spacing.. Ugh. But good lord that team would be fun to watch in transition
I'm starting to love Jackson. He's #2 on my board, and I think he has a chance to make my tier 1 cutoff be after 2 instead of after 1. His 3 point shooting since Christmas has been impressive, and I'm not sure it's just a streak. His FT% is garbage, but you can work around that easier than most flaws, his passing has been really sensational.
Overall I think my top 10 looks like this:
Fultz
-------------------------
Jackson
Smith
Issac
-------------------
Ball
Monk
Tatum
Markkanen
Ntilikina
Fox
Overall I think my top 10 looks like this:
Fultz
-------------------------
Jackson
Smith
Issac
-------------------
Ball
Monk
Tatum
Markkanen
Ntilikina
Fox
Really? Have you looked at Brown's mechanics lately? His improvement/development has been impressive. Far better than I thought as I wasn't a fan of the pick. In hindsight, I think DA nailed this one. His shot now looks clean, tight, and consistent. And for a 20 year old, he gets into the lane pretty well. Smart has a big dip and motion in his shot. It must be hard for him to get a feel for his shot when it needs to be quick.
I'm with you on this. It's hard to pass on Fultz, but getting Jackson would be a good get the more I watch him. He's so good at everything, outside of shooting. And he's an elite NBA athlete. While his shot is gross, it is fixable. His biggest problem is the motion of his shot getting to his release point. It starts out in front and then he has to tug it back to his release point. All that motion makes it hard for a consistent release and muscle memory. Once he works tucking the ball closer to his body as he gets ball to the release point, he will become a good enough shooter.
His follow through is solid as he gets a good snap through the ball. His off hand doesn't influence the shot negatively. So there are good aspects of his shot.
It would be great to see teams trying to match up with the athleticism and size of Brown and Jackson. Not to mention the things you can do defensively with those two.