Rabb doesn't do a whole lot for me. He isn't strong, he isn't super athletic, not anything special in anything he does. I feel like I'm watching Ed Davis when he was a freshman at UNC about 8 years ago.
2017 NBA Draft Thread
- Thread starter Kliq
- Start date
The Ringer article had this chart comparing FT% and FG% of recent wing draftees. We can copy and paste all of the discussion we had on Jaylen Brown from last year.
yes.yes.yes.
This is why I love this site. I was in shock that Brogdon (#36 pick) was a 2nd rounder, it was an absolute steal. Taking Malachi Richardson #22 (and I'm a Cuse grad) before Brogdon made zero sense to me. I'm very interested in discussing/hearing about the hidden gems (21yr old NCAA VETS) in the '17 draft. Kilpatrick is also a good example. Seems like Josh Hart projected as a 2nd rounder fits that category. Melo Trimble? Dillon Brooks?
I guess the problem for the Celtics is we just don't have the roster space or minutes to let a Brogdon play? But it does make me think that teams like the Nets, Heat, 76ers, bevy of West Coast laggards should value 2nd round picks a little more.
Their shooting numbers may be similar enough- 54.6 TS% for Jackson, 51.8% for Brown- but other than free throw rate, Jackson's numbers in other meaningful categories are better across the board, with a significant advantage in assist, steal and block rates, while turning the ball over less. Defensively he grades out better too, both by metrics and scouts. Unsurprisingly given all this, his BPM so far is 11.2, while Brown's was 3.6. I like what I've seen from Jaylen so far, but Jackson is a better prospect.
Jayson Tatum looked great again last night, and he's nearly a year younger than Jackson. I read someone compare him to Paul Pierce in terms of offensive savvy, and the similarities are there, but I think he's looked pretty good on defense too.
Brogdon's been good, but keep in mind he's 16 months older than Marcus Smart and 6 months older than Bradley Beal. He has room to improve, but not a whole lot. As far as the old man crop goes this year, I think Hart will be able to contribute immediately next year, as will Monte Morris and Luke Kennard. Though like Brogdon, their upsides are limited. Edmond Sumner is older too, but a different case in that he's still raw with great physical tools.
I didn't watch the whole game but Giles got some run last night and looked decent. Only saw him score on open dunks, but rebounded well and on D he made it pretty tough on his man trying to receive an entry pass multiple times. He also defended one PNR at the top of the key by completely vacating the lane for an easy lay-up. I saw enough to be intrigued, but would need to see a lot more before thinking about him in June. He needs reps, but the potential pokes through.
Question for those in tune with this stuff: what is Grayson Allen's likely range in the draft? What is his NBA potential? I see him as a solid bench scorer. He has a role in the NBA, no?
Borderline 1st or early 2nd round pick. Bench gunner. Personally, I think he'll struggle at the next level. If his shot isn't going down, he doesn't have a lot of value. He is the epitome of why prospects should leave college as soon as possible.
Thanks. He has pretty good athleticism and can get to the rack though, no? He's not just a shooter, like say JJ Redick used to be (and he's bigger and much more athletic than Redick)
Yeah, thanks to a good first step, he gets to the line a ton plus he's strong and can finish through contact. He's a very good creator as well. He has a below-average handle though, and the next level, when facing defenders with NBA-level length and quickness, I think he'll struggle to get by his man and to get his pull-up shots off, and will be mostly relegated to a jump shooter coming off of screens. If he can tighten up his handle, I like his prospects as a combo gaurd a lot more. Defensively, it's a bit strange that a guy with a decent bball IQ who's fairly strong and athletic for his position is a poor defender, but he is. Part of that is his lack of length, but from what I've seen from him, he doesn't seem particularly interested in being good on that end. Plus he can't stop intentionally tripping dudes and he looks like Ted Cruz, so he's consigned to a late first rounder.
Brogdon's been good, but keep in mind he's 16 months older than Marcus Smart and 6 months older than Bradley Beal. He has room to improve, but not a whole lot. As far as the old man crop goes this year, I think Hart will be able to contribute immediately next year, as will Monte Morris and Luke Kennard. Though like Brogdon, their upsides are limited. Edmond Sumner is older too, but a different case in that he's still raw with great physical tools.[/QUOTE] -DannyDarwinism
Beal (#3) and Smart (#6) were lottery picks? They are roughly the same age as Brogdon, but not really apt comps. Plus Beal costs $22MM/yr. Brogdon will be super cheap for years to come. But no reason to compare them, i just like Brogdon as a great gamble in the 2nd round.
As far as upside goes, no one here knows how hard Malcolm will work on his game while he is a pro, I would not cap his potential. He does have a triple double this year and that reflects a player capable of tremendous upside.
Beal (#3) and Smart (#6) were lottery picks? They are roughly the same age as Brogdon, but not really apt comps. Plus Beal costs $22MM/yr. Brogdon will be super cheap for years to come. But no reason to compare them, i just like Brogdon as a great gamble in the 2nd round.
As far as upside goes, no one here knows how hard Malcolm will work on his game while he is a pro, I would not cap his potential. He does have a triple double this year and that reflects a player capable of tremendous upside.
Yeah I don't associate age with upside when you are talking about a 22-23 year old kid. Jimmy Butler sat on the end of the bench as a 22-year old rookie only to play garbage time. Upside is all about a player possessing athleticism and length for him to grow his learned ball skills into those physical traits.......those typically don't peak until a players mid to late 20's.
Every time lately that I watch a game with a lottery prospect, I end up liking that prospect more. Ball's floor is "good NBA player", and with the way he controls the game, I think his ceiling is one of the best PGs in the league, on the right team. He's one of the better freshman floor generals I can remember in a a while.
I wasn't a big fan of Rabb going in, but he looked decent tonight and his box score sure looks good.
I want to see Ball matched up with Fultz. There are things I really like about Ball (he sees the game at a different level from most PGs), but I also have some concerns (individual defense, mid-range game). I haven't see Fultz play yet.
I get the thought process on Ball, but if he can't beat guys off the dribble and create separation his floor is at best a 3rd PG, and those guys often end up in Europe after their rookie deals.
I was as big a Ball skeptic as you would likely find here coming in to the season. But the more I watch him the more I see a young Deron Williams. Hopefully without the 'tude. The shooting motion still scares the bejesus out of me, but it works. And he legitimately has the size to defend the SG spot at the next level, which is a giant advantage for Boston.
But writing that his floor is Kendall Marshall would pain me too much.
Admittedly, there aren't a lot of PGs in today's game that don't get to the rim, and his relative struggles against De'Aaron Fox give me some pause as to how he'll fare against NBA talent, but if you see him as a once-in-a-generation type distributor, as I do, I think his outlook falls largely on what you think of his shot. Obviously his release isn't ideal, but it's quick enough off the dribble and (so far) accurate enough to open up his passing lanes with the type of range he's showing. Scheme is going to be important for him, more so than Fultz or Fox or Dennis Smith, so I could see him slip behind them if he struggles in conference play, but I do have some blinders for the dude after seeing what he's done for the UCLA offense after quarterbacking one of the most dominant high school teams in recent memory. I'm really looking forward to watching him down the stretch.
NBADraft.net/HoopsHype mock top 10 (with DraftExpress/ESPN mocks in parentheses):
1. Fultz (1/1) - avg 1.0
2. Ball (2/2) - avg 2.0
3. Smith (3/5) - avg 3.7
4. Ntilikina (11/6) - avg 7.0
5. Jackson (4/3) - avg 4.0
6. Tatum (5/7) - avg 6.0
7. Fox (10/10) - avg 9.0
8. Monk (6/4) - avg 6.0
9. Isaac (7/9) - avg. 8.3
10. Giles (12/8) - avg 10.0
1. Fultz (1/1) - avg 1.0
2. Ball (2/2) - avg 2.0
3. Smith (3/5) - avg 3.7
4. Ntilikina (11/6) - avg 7.0
5. Jackson (4/3) - avg 4.0
6. Tatum (5/7) - avg 6.0
7. Fox (10/10) - avg 9.0
8. Monk (6/4) - avg 6.0
9. Isaac (7/9) - avg. 8.3
10. Giles (12/8) - avg 10.0
Out of the four of these guys that played in the FSU/Duke game last night, I thought Isaac looked the best, mainly because of his defense. He didn't particularly stand out on offense, but he didn't try to do too much and his jumper is there. Tatum was a bit of a mess on offense and Giles was lost on defense. Even with his pedigree, he needs to start showing something soon if he wants to stay in the lottery ahead of guys like Markkanen, Adebayo and Rabb, who looked good again the other night. Kennard was great, again. I'm really starting to think he could be a very solid player in the NBA.
For a guy who played in the shadow of Ulis and Murray last year, and now Monk and Fox this year, Isaiah Briscoe has really come on in that KY back court. I wonder if he's playing himself into the first round. Has there ever been three first rounders from the same back court in the same draft before?
Don't know much about him, but the NYT had a recent write-up on Ntilikina here. 6'5" with 7 foot wingspan. From Randy Travis, who once was a teammate of LBJ: "Frank doesn’t have a ceiling. He has everything: He has height, athleticism, ball-handing; he can shoot. So I’m just trying to give him that push, that confidence that he can be anything he wants to be."
From the article, here's some video of him against Lithunia in the Under-18 European championship. Very very impressive. And in the game prior, he went for 23 & 9 with 5 steals against Italy.
From the article, here's some video of him against Lithunia in the Under-18 European championship. Very very impressive. And in the game prior, he went for 23 & 9 with 5 steals against Italy.
UCLA back in the Wooden days had Gail Goodrich, Walt Hazard, and Keith Erickson but with only 8 teams back then they didn't all sneak into the first round (Erickson went 18th overall in the 3rd round lol). The closest in the modern time I can think of off top of my head was also at UK with Wall, Bledsoe, and DeAndre Liggins (who went in the 2nd round).
Yea, I guess you might be right. To me, he was a perimeter type player (2/3). I hate those distinctions for guys that can play either or, but probably a pointless argument.
Late 90s Arizona almost had 3 in the same draft. Had 3 in 1998 Bibby and Dickerson top 14, but Simon slid to 42 and Jason Terry decided to stay an extra year then went top 10 in 1999.
Borderline case to be made for 2014 UCLA. Adams and Lavine, but I'd consider Anderson a SF.
Borderline case to be made for 2014 UCLA. Adams and Lavine, but I'd consider Anderson a SF.
Somehow the '99 draft completely eluded me. Maggette as a swing man is good enough, I associate more as a 3, but that's mainly from the NBA.
Illinois was the first team that came to mind for me, but while Luther Head and Deron both went in the first in 2005, The Other Dee Brown stayed another year and went in the second In 2006.
Illinois was the first team that came to mind for me, but while Luther Head and Deron both went in the first in 2005, The Other Dee Brown stayed another year and went in the second In 2006.
Probably the best case, given that Anderson played point under Steve Alford at UCLA.
Other than that, there are no cases of three guards being drafted from the same school in the same year.
Relatedly, what's the record for most players drafted from one school in the first round? I'd probably go with Kentucky having five players drafted in 2010 (Wall, Cousins, Patterson, Bledsoe, Orton)
Ainge is at Conte tonight, and with all due respect to Jerome Robinson, he's presumably checking out Dennis Smith Jr.
Meanwhile, Miles Bridges looks to me like one of the non-lottery projected guys who has a chance- albeit a small one- to be a franchise cornerstone. He's crazy athletic and strong, his range looks pretty good so far, even while he struggles from the line, and he's a good distributor. He needs to tighten up his handle and it wouldn't hurt if he grew another inch or two if he wants to play as stretch 4.
Meanwhile, Miles Bridges looks to me like one of the non-lottery projected guys who has a chance- albeit a small one- to be a franchise cornerstone. He's crazy athletic and strong, his range looks pretty good so far, even while he struggles from the line, and he's a good distributor. He needs to tighten up his handle and it wouldn't hurt if he grew another inch or two if he wants to play as stretch 4.
Bridges is only playing stretch 4 because MSU's already thin front line lost 2 guys for the season.
Watching Fultz for the first time vs Cal. Not his best game but can definitely see the court vision, athleticism and speed which has garnered Fultz some John Wall comps. Unfortunately the shooting touch hasn't been there.
Ivan Rabb has been a beast.
Lonzo Ball plays next.
Ivan Rabb has been a beast.
Lonzo Ball plays next.
I watched some of both the Washington/Cal game and the UCLA game. Ball is certainly my favorite college player to watch, such great vision and range. Did seem to struggle attacking the paint, prefers to pass it out. Fultz makes some highlight plays, but just doesn't seem to consistently impact the game the way Ball does. I'm not sold that he's a clear #1. Rabb impressed with his relentless rebounding and looked good defending, but he didn't get many opportunities on offense when I watched.
I haven't seen them much due to west coast games, but it seems weird to say Fultz doesn't have a consistent impact compared to Ball. In a little less time per game, he significantly outscores Ball, rebounds a bit better, gets more steals and blocks, gets to a line a lot more, etc.
What am I missing in watching the 2 of them that I can pay a bit more attention to?
I don't think it's fair to measure Fultz's impact based on last night's game. There's their comparative rate stats, as you point out, but Fultz absolutely looks the part of a future star who'll be able to take over games offensively, from what I've seen from him. With his great first step, he can nearly always get past his man, then he has the athleticism and insane body control to be a great finisher, but he's also a good passer if the lane is too clogged. He's a primary offensive threat who can create shots at will. It's very easy to see his game translating to the NBA.
Lonzo requires a little more faith to believe in his prospects, which I think he's solidly behind Fultz. That said, when you watch him, it's immediately apparent that he's the smartest guy on the court. Keep an eye on him when he's off the ball and see how he works the angles and reads the defense. The Kidd comparisons are obvious enough that they're made incessantly, but I've seen other scouts throw out Stockton as an offensive comparison, which should give some indication of how some view his passing and cerebral style. He's low usage; in the half-court set he's sort of the anti-Rondo pound the rock type, he gets rid of the ball very quickly and moves around to get open. He's excellent as the ball handler in pick-and-rolls. His shot is good enough to stretch the defense, but as noted, he does not penetrate well. He also is pretty poor in stopping penetration from what I've seen, which is troubling. But, as on offense, he's smart off of the ball, knows his passing lanes, and anticipates well, resulting in good steals/blocks numbers.
I think you have to project what Fultz and Ball can do at the next level.
Fultz did not have a good shooting game but his stroke is solid. He plays at a speed that will translate to the pro level and has quick moves, and an explosive first step, which will serve him well in the pros. It looks like he takes off a little at the defensive side, but I can easily see his ceiling as peak John Wall with a better 3-pt game.
Ball is a special point guard. He sees the floor like Kidd/Rubio, et al. He also has the long range game that neither of them do.
I note that Ball is playing with significantly better players than Fultz. Washington's front court is abysmal for a major conference school.
I think the question will be one of choice. I think the game is moving away from the Kidd-type PG and toward the Westbrook-type PG, as you need scoring from your 1-4 and not so much from your 5 (as opposed to 30-years ago, when you were expecting scoring from your 2-5 and no so much from your 1).
At this point, subject to more looks at Fultz, I would be more inclined to go to Fultz 1st, then Ball 2nd. Haven't seen much of Dennis Smith Jr., but at this point he would be behind the other two.
If he could shoot he'd probably be a lock for #1, which is to say yes I think he's in play and seems like an Ainge type of guy. May depend on what the back-channels say about their chances of signing Hayward, but if he's at the top of the board you draft him and figure out the rest over the summer.
With Ball I think he's going to need to function out of the 2 spot, and will look better paired up with someone like Avery Bradley that can defend the hell out of PGs, while acting as the shooting guard on offense. His defense at the PG spot is going to be pretty bad.
That shooting motion of his also scares the bejesus out of me, but Kevin Martin made an NBA career out of a shot that good looking, so Ball probably can too (especially given his shooting range). However, if he can run the offense out of the 2 spot, it opens a lot of room for guys like Rozier to focus on scoring and defense out of the 1 spot.
Right now Fultz reminds me of a poor man's RWB, so I still have him #1 on my board, while Ball's overtaken Jackson for #2. Right now my top five reads:
I love Isaac as a prototypical forward in the new skillball era. With the requisite length/athleticism to defend out on the perimeter from either the 3 or 4, and with (potentially) the makings of being a wing scorer. If Boston didn't end up #1, and couldn't make a deal for a genuine star, I wouldn't be adverse to them trading down a few spots and grabbing Isaac.
That shooting motion of his also scares the bejesus out of me, but Kevin Martin made an NBA career out of a shot that good looking, so Ball probably can too (especially given his shooting range). However, if he can run the offense out of the 2 spot, it opens a lot of room for guys like Rozier to focus on scoring and defense out of the 1 spot.
Right now Fultz reminds me of a poor man's RWB, so I still have him #1 on my board, while Ball's overtaken Jackson for #2. Right now my top five reads:
- Markelle Fultz
- Lonzo Ball
- Josh Jackson
- Malik Monk (with caveats)
- Jonathan Isaac
I love Isaac as a prototypical forward in the new skillball era. With the requisite length/athleticism to defend out on the perimeter from either the 3 or 4, and with (potentially) the makings of being a wing scorer. If Boston didn't end up #1, and couldn't make a deal for a genuine star, I wouldn't be adverse to them trading down a few spots and grabbing Isaac.
Big weekend for the top draftees:
Fultz (vs. Stanford) - 37 min, 34 pts, 4 3-pt, 2 stl, 2 blk, 7 reb
Ball (vs. Utah) - 40 min, 17 pts, 3 3-pt, 5 stl, 8 asst, 6 reb
Smith (vs. Wake) - ?? min, 31 pts, 4 3-pt, 2 stl, 2 blk, 6 asst, 8 reb
Monk (vs. Auburn) - 36 min, 24 pts, 4 3-pt, 6 asst
Jackson (vs. Okla St.) - 34 min, 20 pts, 4 stl, 2 blk, 11 reb
Fultz (vs. Stanford) - 37 min, 34 pts, 4 3-pt, 2 stl, 2 blk, 7 reb
Ball (vs. Utah) - 40 min, 17 pts, 3 3-pt, 5 stl, 8 asst, 6 reb
Smith (vs. Wake) - ?? min, 31 pts, 4 3-pt, 2 stl, 2 blk, 6 asst, 8 reb
Monk (vs. Auburn) - 36 min, 24 pts, 4 3-pt, 6 asst
Jackson (vs. Okla St.) - 34 min, 20 pts, 4 stl, 2 blk, 11 reb
In a positive or negative way? Baron was All-NBA, an Olympian, and avg 19/6/4/3 over 50 playoff games. He also missed chunks of many seasons to injury and was all but finished at the young age of 30.
In a positive way. Smith's style of play and athleticism reminds me of the Baron.
Stevie Francis, for me.
At this point, my Celtics board is:
1. Fultz (the more I see of him, the wider the gap gets between Fultz and everyone else)
2. Smith (he's a complete offensive player at guard, defense a ?)
3. Ball (have lingering questions about footspeed, mid-range game and how it will translate to next level - would be a fantastic backcourt with IT, though. Ball wouldn't have to worry about penetration, only long-range shooting and ball movement)
4. Monk (Eddie Jones vibe - complete player, only question is does he have sufficient length to guard NBA #2s)
5. Jackson (supreme athlete, shooting a major question, Aaron Gordon-part-deux?)
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.
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.
Meanwhile in the Pac-12... Markkanen goes for 23/8 on 12 shots and is now shooting 49% from three. Not bad for a 7 footer with a good frame.
And two nights ago Fultz went berzerk with 37/5/8/3/3 in an OT win. He gets to the paint at will, finishes well, distributes well, and has a great pull-up jumper. And his chase-down blocks are fun as hell. He's separating himself even further from the pack.
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.
Meanwhile in the Pac-12... Markkanen goes for 23/8 on 12 shots and is now shooting 49% from three. Not bad for a 7 footer with a good frame.
And two nights ago Fultz went berzerk with 37/5/8/3/3 in an OT win. He gets to the paint at will, finishes well, distributes well, and has a great pull-up jumper. And his chase-down blocks are fun as hell. He's separating himself even further from the pack.