Well, I don't think Russell's value (on-court or in the locker room) is as high as you apparently do, but regardless, you missed my next sentence. I don't think LA or Boston is interested in gutting their respective teams.The point at which Boston can top Russell and Ingram is the point where they've gutted the team, and I'm not sure people like Boogie enough to come play with him.
Maybe I'm parsing too finely but I see him as a Monta Ellis scoring guard-type who is capable of covering ball-handling duties but won't be the maestro of an offense. I don't think the distinction really matters for Ainge and Stevens in the end. I think their ideal offense features two guys on the floor at all times who are "point guard-capable."Rozier is not a PG?
Yes, two players who can initiate the offense off the dribble is a must (or at least, it's the only way to keep other teams from keying their defense on Thomas every single play). Bradley, Smart, Olynyk and Turner were the secondary initiators / playmakers last year. Rozier showed good dribble control, but the game has not slowed down enough yet for him to be a primary point guard.Maybe I'm parsing too finely but I see him as a Monta Ellis scoring guard-type who is capable of covering ball-handling duties but won't be the maestro of an offense. I don't think the distinction really matters for Ainge and Stevens in the end. I think their ideal offense features two guys on the floor at all times who are "point guard-capable."
By the end of the season Russell was playing pretty well, and due to age still has upside as he fills his body out. He clearly has more upside than Boston's young guard. And that's the difference, regardless of what you think of their future prospects, LA's kiddie corps is full of high upside kids while Boston's really isn't. So Boston needs to break into the guys that they'd like to keep in order to outbid the Lakers.Well, I don't think Russell's value (on-court or in the locker room) is as high as you apparently do, but regardless, you missed my next sentence. I don't think LA or Boston is interested in gutting their respective teams.
If they draft Bender I'm not expecting other big man projects. My guess is that you'll see guys like Taurean Prince and high upside guards like Malachi Richardson or Dejounte Murray thereafter. As for ET, I sincerely doubt that they'll pay the toll on him.If the Celtics draft Bender, a big man project (Labissiere? Stone? Zuzic/Zubic/Zhou?) and a Eurostash, Evan Turner may yet be back in town.
Back in 2003 when there were many advocating for Darko over Carmelo at 2 I never understood it. I looked at his tape and his accomplishments on the court in Europe and thought he was a horrible choice at 2. That actually was the correct analysis. To be honest, I have the same thoughts on Bender. Little in the way of actual accomplishment in Europe and the limited vertical bothers me. I think he has bust written all over him personally. My gut more than anything else. He screams Darko 2.0 to me.My dream scenario is that this becomes the sequel of the 2003 draft where Simmons goes #1 just like LeBron, whoever picks #2 takes the 18 year-old sky-is-the-limit Euro big man, and we snatch up the talented scoring wing coming off a successful freshman NCAA campaign for a major D1 program. I guess Dunn would be the DWade in this analogy, a talented upper classmen guard who turns into an elite player.
Can you imagine the hype Simmons would be getting right now had he not had his flaws exposed when rotting at the end of a Euro bench while Bender was at LSU asked to carry a dysfunctional team with mostly awful teammates? I see more Splitter potential than I do Porzingis in Bender.Back in 2003 when there were many advocating for Darko over Carmelo at 2 I never understood it. I looked at his tape and his accomplishments on the court in Europe and thought he was a horrible choice at 2. That actually was the correct analysis. To be honest, I have the same thoughts on Bender. Little in the way of actual accomplishment in Europe and the limited vertical bothers me. I think he has bust written all over him personally. My gut more than anything else. He screams Darko 2.0 to me.
Really? Splitter has never hit a three in an NBA game and has never seemed particularly comfortable facing up. I do agree that the Porzingis comps are overblown- poor man's Dirk or Kukoc is more apt from what little I've seen. It's a good question as to what he would've done as an NCAA freshman. Ellenson or Chriss type numbers as his ceiling, with Skal as his floor? Korkmaz, on the other hand, I'm convinced would've put up good numbers in any conference in the country.Can you imagine the hype Simmons would be getting right now had he not had his flaws exposed when rotting at the end of a Euro bench while Bender was at LSU asked to carry a dysfunctional team with mostly awful teammates? I see more Splitter potential than I do Porzingis in Bender.
Seriously. When people compare him to Splitter (not a lot of range, thick, sub-par passer, not a guy who runs the floor particularly well) I really question whether they've watched any Bender highlights or tape or read more than the most cursory scouting report. I'm hardly an expert on the guy, but it's honestly hard to find two guys over 6'10 who have more dissimilar games than Bender and Splitter.Really? Splitter has never hit a three in an NBA game and has never seemed particularly comfortable facing up. I do agree that the Porzingis comps are overblown- poor man's Dirk or Kukoc is more apt from what little I've seen. It's a good question as to what he would've done as an NCAA freshman. Ellenson or Chriss type numbers as his ceiling, with Skal as his floor? Korkmaz, on the other hand, I'm convinced would've put up good numbers in any conference in the country.
Or Enes KanterJust gotta find some poor man's chair to dominate then:
Ready for one that will drive people insane, a cross-continent, cross-racial comparison:Just remember the cardinal rule - because the player is European, he must be compared only to other European players
Not Korkmaz. He's the next Devin Booker. Unless he's the next Jiri Welsch...Just remember the cardinal rule - because the player is European, he must be compared only to other European players
I wasn't very clear as the two have much different games. I was referring to their overall impact as role players at this level. Bender doesn't appear to have the natural fluidity as Porzingis to have his type of upside. A better actual comp for style would be Ellenson.Seriously. When people compare him to Splitter (not a lot of range, thick, sub-par passer, not a guy who runs the floor particularly well) I really question whether they've watched any Bender highlights or tape or read more than the most cursory scouting report. I'm hardly an expert on the guy, but it's honestly hard to find two guys over 6'10 who have more dissimilar games than Bender and Splitter.
Hield at three... That guy is old and has one skill, a useful one. But taking an old guard who can't defend, rebound or pass seems the thing you regret.I just envision a scenario where the Cs pass on Hield and completely regret it.
I don't agree with it, but the argument is that Hield is an elite shooter while Murray is not.What's the argument for Hield over Murray, who seems to have a similar skill but is three years younger?
The argument is Murray might never become the player Hield already is.What's the argument for Hield over Murray, who seems to have a similar skill but is three years younger?
3 years is a big age gap. It seems exceptionally likely Murray in three years will be better than hield. But of course you know what hield is right now. I'd always take the talent and prospect over the older OK player. What's hield's upside?The argument is Murray might never become the player Hield already is.
I mean, I'm with you on preferring Murray over Hield, but we shouldn't too lightly gloss over the fact that Hield is the better player of the two right now.
I think Murray is the obvious pick if Danny doesn't like Bender and no one makes a compelling offer.
I don't know that I'd say that it seems exceptionally likely that Murray, if he stayed at Kentucky, would have one of the best offensive seasons in college basketball history. But more importantly, due to Hield's significant advantages in length and lateral quickness, he projects as a much better defender than Murray, who I think will always be a liability on D. Unless you de-value guard defense, Murray would need to be significantly better on offense to make up the difference. As far as Hield's upside, I'd say maybe 85% of Klay Thompson- not quite the defender, passer or shooter that Klay is, but not too far off. I also think he has a fairly safe median projection as someone like Reddick, with a good shot at a Michael Redd/Ben Gordon type career as a volume scorer.3 years is a big age gap. It seems exceptionally likely Murray in three years will be better than hield. But of course you know what hield is right now. I'd always take the talent and prospect over the older OK player. What's hield's upside?
It's interesting, Dunn really seems like the type of player Danny would normally prefer. He's essentially Marcus Smart with better ball handling, passing and shooting. Obviously this team has a glut of PGs, but will he really pass up a player like that for Murray, whose lack of lateral quickness probably leads to him being a longterm liability on D? If Danny believes Hield can become even close to Danny Darwinism's "85% of Klay Thompson" ceiling, that may be a good reason to prefer Hield to Murray. Danny has always showed a preference for guards that can perform on both sides of the ball, and its easier to see him believing that Hield - at least more than Murray- can be that type of player. For Danny to choose Murray he'd have to believe that he has far and away more potential as a scorer than Hield. And yet I don't see many people predicting greatness out of Murray. It seems like there are enough questions about both his defense and ability to create own shot that he is more likely the type of player that "because of his lack of athleticism and lateral quickness...is better off as a sixth man that feasts on bench units" (Kevin O'Connor, SB Nation).The argument is Murray might never become the player Hield already is.
I mean, I'm with you on preferring Murray over Hield, but we shouldn't too lightly gloss over the fact that Hield is the better player of the two right now.
I think Murray is the obvious pick if Danny doesn't like Bender and no one makes a compelling offer.
I'll take the under.It's interesting, Dunn really seems like the type of player Danny would normally prefer. He's essentially Marcus Smart with better ball handling, passing and shooting.
Chriss doesn't rebound or pass. It's hard to be a good player if you do neither. He has issues with motor and defensive effort. That's fixable perhaps, but it's also easier said than done. By BPM, he was a decent, but not especially good college player.Btw, I have a question. Is it crazy to be thinking that Marquesse Chriss should be getting more consideration at this spot (or that perhaps the Cs should be trading down to pick him)?
Chriss's primary issues appear to be fundamentals, discipline and consistent effort - particularly on the defensive end- but he is also only 18 years old. He is 6ft 10' and an athletic freak with the type of star-level offensive upside that is exactly what most teams in the lottery most need. Also, unlike Murray, his issues on the defensive end of the floor have nothing to do with unfixable, physical limitations. Honestly, when you look at this draft, Chriss feels like he is on the short list of players that has the talent to eventually become a star..
I see Murray's ceiling as Jeff Teague. Not what you want out of the #3 pick. If they pick there, the 3 options to me right now are Bender, Hield, and Jaylen Brown with Kris Dunn an option if they plan on trading a guard. Right now with Thomas, Smart, Bradley, and Rozier that 1/2 spot is filled up with pretty similar players. I don't see Dunn giving them something that much different at least off the bat. I like Dunn as a player and on the Celtics he'd be a good fit if they ended up trading one of those 3 guards. Bender has the highest upside of anyone outside the top 2 and as you said gives you a tremendously talented stretch 4. That is something they need. Hield would give them something they don't have in a big time shooter. His defense scares me, but he can light it up. Jaylen Brown is a crazy athletic wing who can create his own shot. He is still a bit of a project but has such raw ability the upside is very tough to turn down.Agreed. If Ainge wants to gamble on youth and raw ability, Bender is the guy. If he wants the safe play, Hield or Dunn is the guy. If he wants a little bit of both, then it's probably Murray.
I've probably changed my mind about 1,000 times already on who to go with. Right now, my top 3 is Bender, Dunn, Hield. I could see Bender being a solid new age stretch 4 but the lack of familiarity scares. There just isn't much to go off of. I think Dunn is poised to hit the ground running. Shot may take some time to develop but should improve and will be an impact defensive player from Day 1. Finally, Hield may be a little older but Game 6 of the WCF showed the value of a guy who is lights out from long range. In a league that is becoming more and more 3pt oriented, the Celtics are pretty short on long range bombers. IT/Bradley with Hield/Smart off the bench would be 48 minutes of high intensity defense and shot making for coaches to deal with and would give Ainge some trade options should Rozier develop into something useful (not entirely sold on him doing so but we'll see).
Murray just doesn't do it for me. Nice shooter but I really don't see him as more than a 6th man combo guard on a good team or a starting SG on a bad one. Don't think there's much PG potential there.
Dragan Bender is like Jonathan Bender with more range.Ready for one that will drive people insane, a cross-continent, cross-racial comparison:
Bender is like a taller Draymond Green.
I'm not a Bender guy, but saying his projected ceiling is Mirotic makes it seem like you're cherry picking projections.2. I'm a bit confused why is there so much excitement generated by a guy whose projected as having a Darko (ie. complete flop) floor and a Nikola Mirotic ceiling?
I would imagine he would be an even less impactful player than he was in college. The Euroleague is usually thought to be a much stronger league than the NCAA. This is both from a scouting perspective, as well as from the various statistical translation systems. Yes, you need to take the level of competition into account, but that applies to all the prospects. None of them are playing against anything close to the NBA.More troubling: he is easily thrown off by almost any level of physicality - even by shorter, skinny defenders. I mean, what would a much less heralded prospect like Marquesse Chriss do against that competition?
I feel like this comment warrants an update of TheDeuce222's comment from above: Just remember the cardinal rule - because the player is Eastern European, he must be compared only to other Eastern European players.2. I'm a bit confused why is there so much excitement generated by a guy whose projected as having a Darko (ie. complete flop) floor and a Nikola Mirotic ceiling?
1. How do you gauge college players then, since the NCAA level is below what Bender plays. As an example, Bender played 26 minutes in his last playoff game, the majority of it was against either James Singleton, a former NBA player, or Charles Rhodes, a former All-SEC player who was a borderline NBA guy (had a few summer league runs) and has played in some of the most desirable Euro leagues. As for Marquesse Chriss, if he were on Maccabi he probably wouldn't play at all.Questions about Bender:
1. How the heck can we really gauge his potential from the information available? The videos I've seen appear to be against competition so incomparable to the NBA as to make them feel (at least to my untrained eye) virtually useless. Even worse, what I do get from them is not at all entirely positive. I mean, he's tall, runs the floor pretty well, and can pass well against low level competition. I guess his outside shot looks okay - but he also seems to be poorly defended by much shorter players and inclined towards bringing the ball fairly low before shooting. More troubling: he is easily thrown off by almost any level of physicality - even by shorter, skinny defenders. I mean, what would a much less heralded prospect like Marquesse Chriss do against that competition?
2. I'm a bit confused why is there so much excitement generated by a guy whose projected as having a Darko (ie. complete flop) floor and a Nikola Mirotic ceiling? For such a risky pick (especially if you are taking him with the #3) shouldn't he at least have more upside than that? I don't know, Bender feels more like a scratch ticket than a lottery ticket - and as much as I'd be happy to have him with the #16 pick I'm not sure why you'd take him when players like Dunn, Hield, Murray and Brown are available.
So I appreciate the response. Since my original post I've watched more videos of Bender and ended up figuring out that the original video I had seen (which prompted my last post) was a bit old and not very representative of the type of competition he usually plays against.I would imagine he would be an even less impactful player than he was in college. The Euroleague is usually thought to be a much stronger league than the NCAA. This is both from a scouting perspective, as well as from the various statistical translation systems. Yes, you need to take the level of competition into account, but that applies to all the prospects. None of them are playing against anything close to the NBA.
This still seems surprising to me. The media coverage I've read (which granted is a limited amount of articles from mainstream sources) paint Bender as much more of a high ceiling/ low floor player than that, with most emphasizing the risk that he'll be a total bust (i.e a much lower floor than Mirotic). So I am not saying i agree or disagree with your assessment of him, but am curious to hear more. Do you feel that the whole "could he be the next Darko" meme is entirely unfair? I would assume that young European players - if only because of the differences between the games and their youth- would be riskier and had assumed that Bender was probably the most risky of all the players being discussed for this pick. I'm asking not so much because I disagree with your assessment (I'd be the first to admit that I don't have any idea how to assess a player like Bender) but to generate more discussion about him as I think he has a high chance of being the #3 pick..2. His Ceiling is much much higher than Mirotic, his ceiling is an All-Star player, something like a bigger Kirilenko or a taller Draymond Green. Mirotic is closer to his floor than his ceiling. This is a guy who has been considered a likely top 5 pick in the NBA draft since he was 15.
I think the "next Darko" total bust is a bit of a media crutch. Most of the draft people I trust seem to think that at the very least Bender's passing will translate, and that he's likely to be at least a decent defender (with upside to be more). I also think people make a mistake in assuming a low floor for Euros, if anything I think on average they have higher floors because they already play pro basketball and have had to fit into a role which college players rarely have.This still seems surprising to me. The media coverage I've read (which granted is a limited amount of articles from mainstream sources) paint Bender as much more of a high ceiling/ low floor player than that, with most emphasizing the risk that he'll be a total bust (i.e a much lower floor than Mirotic). So I am not saying i agree or disagree with your assessment of him, but am curious to hear more. Do you feel that the whole "could he be the next Darko" meme is entirely unfair? I would assume that young European players - if only because of the differences between the games and their youth- would be riskier and had assumed that Bender was probably the most risky of all the players being discussed for this pick. I'm asking not so much because I disagree with your assessment (I'd be the first to admit that I don't have any idea how to assess a player like Bender) but to generate more discussion about him as I think he has a high chance of being the #3 pick..
That would be the best case scenario, but I doubt they're getting the sort of player they want, and there's no real sense in trading it for more of what they have (average/above average NBA players). Personally I think their best bet is a trade back into the later lottery range for whatever else they can get to pick off a slider or someone from the Chriss/Labissiere/Ellenson pool.Are there any well-rounded players outside of the top 2, who themselves aren't perfect? We're talking about an OK defense, good passing big man as the #3 pick. Is our best hope that another GM falls in love with someone so badly that we're able to package 3+ for a real NBA player?
GSW's three point ability has teams in fear. All they need is a few stops and they can erase a 10 point deficit in 2 minutes. We saw it in the Thunder series a few times. The big question for the league is can this be replicated? Curry and Klay are pretty outlier with their accuracy but I think a lot of teams are going to go for it (shooting lots of 3's) anyway so the value of Hield is probably going up.Tonight's game once again highlighted the value of 3pt shooting and pick-and-roll defense in today's NBA. Point: Bender and Hield.
There has been a sea change in scouting since Darko was the #2 pick. Joe Dumars admitted that when he picked Darko, he didn't have much tape - in fact, he said that he had maybe "two sources of information," plus the NBA world wasn't scouting overseas like they do now. (See also http://www.mlive.com/pistons/index.ssf/2012/06/darko_milicic_mistake_changed.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+detroit-pistons+(Detroit+Pistons+Impact+-+MLive.com)).Do you feel that the whole "could he be the next Darko" meme is entirely unfair? I would assume that young European players - if only because of the differences between the games and their youth- would be riskier and had assumed that Bender was probably the most risky of all the players being discussed for this pick. I'm asking not so much because I disagree with your assessment (I'd be the first to admit that I don't have any idea how to assess a player like Bender) but to generate more discussion about him as I think he has a high chance of being the #3 pick..
2.Dragan Bender: Maccabi Tel Aviv
7’0.5” 216 (7’2” Wingspan, 9’3” Standing Reach, Max Vertical 27.5”)
Age: 17 (11/17/1997)
Center/Playmaking 4
Positional Size: Bender is all legs and arms right now with a frail frame, but he has insane measurables for a playmaking 4 (and even plus measurables for a 5), especially when you factor in his coordination and skill level.
Athleticism: This category is obviously Bender’s bugaboo as he isn’t an explosive vertical leaper, which caps his finishing upside in traffic. But vertical explosiveness is only one attribute of overall athleticism. 80% of the game is played moving laterally or backward, and for his size Bender is incredibly mobile laterally and recovering. He runs like a deer in transition and beats bigs consistently down the floor.
Feel: Similar to Simmons, Bender has outstanding feel for the game as a passer. In the limited tape I’ve seen, he has a knack for advancing the ball immediately in transition with Love-esque outlet passes and has demonstrated dominant passing instincts from the high post locating cutters and shooters. Patenting his game after idols like Kukoc, Bender might not ever be a go-to scorer, but he brings an unselfishness and passing instincts seldom found in bigs.
Skill Level: It’s hard to find players 7’1” who can take the ball coast to coast through a maze of defenders. His overall skill level for his size is basically unprecedented. He’s reportedly put in a ton of time on his three point shot over the summer, and showed promise as a spot-up threat in Chicago. He has the handle, passing skills and developing shot to be a triple threat making plays/reads attacking closeouts.
Overall: Often unwarrantedly compared to Porzingis, Bender is infinitely more skilled and has far greater wiggle and creativity as a playmaker. Defensively, Bender will obviously struggle some with strong post-players/rebounders until he fills out, but he projects as a fantastic pick and roll defender with his length, mobility and recovery ability. If he puts on more weight as expected he could be a dominant 5 in the league with his mobility, length and skill level, but he is easily skilled enough and enough foot-speed to play the 4 spot. He’s still 17, which is beyond bizarre, and could very well move up to #1 on my board. To say I’m intrigued is an enormous understatement.
I think it's the way the league is going. The Spurs have been an elite 3pt shooting team the past few years. They clearly saw this trend and adjusted. I'm sure part of that was out of necessity as Duncan got older.GSW's three point ability has teams in fear. All they need is a few stops and they can erase a 10 point deficit in 2 minutes. We saw it in the Thunder series a few times. The big question for the league is can this be replicated? Curry and Klay are pretty outlier with their accuracy but I think a lot of teams are going to go for it (shooting lots of 3's) anyway so the value of Hield is probably going up.
Yet they went out and signed Aldridge and shot 4 fewer threes per game this year than last year and won the second most games in the NBA.I think it's the way the league is going. The Spurs have been an elite 3pt shooting team the past few years. They clearly saw this trend and adjusted. I'm sure part of that was out of necessity as Duncan got older..