|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 8, 2015 12:09:37 GMT
Joel has the potential to be better than AD, he is cast in the mold of Hakeem Olajuwon Potential is like the #1 factor when drafting, of course you draft guys on potential, Russell Westbrook didn't start out too hot but look at him now.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2015 12:36:21 GMT
Joel has the potential to be better than AD, he is cast in the mold of Hakeem Olajuwon Potential is like the #1 factor when drafting, of course you draft guys on potential, Russell Westbrook didn't start out too hot but look at him now. There are two things you draft for, potential and the chance to realize that potential. You think Embiid has the highest potential x % chance to reach that ceiling? His ceiling may be a 10, but his chance of reaching that looks like 10% right now. And to think he would be better than AD... hahaha. Oh, dear gawd Ian. No.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 8, 2015 12:45:44 GMT
Joel has the potential to be better than AD, he is cast in the mold of Hakeem Olajuwon Potential is like the #1 factor when drafting, of course you draft guys on potential, Russell Westbrook didn't start out too hot but look at him now. There are two things you draft for, potential and the chance to realize that potential. You think Embiid has the highest potential x % chance to reach that ceiling? His ceiling may be a 10, but his chance of reaching that looks like 10% right now. And to think he would be better than AD... hahaha. Oh, dear gawd Ian. No. He was better than Wiggins at Kansas.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2015 12:46:27 GMT
There are two things you draft for, potential and the chance to realize that potential. You think Embiid has the highest potential x % chance to reach that ceiling? His ceiling may be a 10, but his chance of reaching that looks like 10% right now. And to think he would be better than AD... hahaha. Oh, dear gawd Ian. No. He was better than Wiggins at Kansas. Yeah, and I'd give Wiggins like a 5% chance of being Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 8, 2015 13:12:56 GMT
Obviously AD is the kind of talent that comes along once every 10 years, but his ceiling and Embiid's ceiling are not far apart, I don't think that's outlandish to say
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2015 13:18:58 GMT
All those Kentucky big guys are limited on offense from what I've seen. Honestly, I would take Colly-Stein over the other two because he brings the most on defense.
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Apr 8, 2015 13:21:23 GMT
Naw, Embiid has a lot of potential for sure, but how do you even measure that? It's all a guessing game. Plus Davis was way better at Kentucky than Embiid was at Kansas. I see AD being one of the best 50 players of all time. I can see Embiid being an all star a couple times. Davis is so much better imo.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2015 13:23:46 GMT
Naw, Embiid has a lot of potential for sure, but how do you even measure that? It's all a guessing game. Plus Davis was way better at Kentucky than Embiid was at Kansas. I see AD being one of the best 50 players of all time. I can see Embiid being an all star a couple times. Davis is so much better imo. I'm a homer, but I think if there are no career derailing injuries... he could be top 10 of all time. He certainly has the brains and the body for it. Now he just needs the luck.
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Apr 8, 2015 13:26:18 GMT
All those Kentucky big guys are limited on offense from what I've seen. Honestly, I would take Colly-Stein over the other two because he brings the most on defense. Trey Lyles has one of the most polished post games in the draft as well as the ability to shoot mid range jumpers. He's not as good defensively or as long and athletic as the other two, but he's got the offense.
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 8, 2015 17:41:05 GMT
Lyles sucks, Towns is the #1 pick, WCS has played 4 years and still can't put the ball in the basket, the Harrison twins both suck
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 8, 2015 21:20:20 GMT
The annoying thing about this draft is that I've so far only managed to ascertain one guy who I think is a sleeper pick. Last year I had Zach LaVine, Jerami Grant and KJ McDaniels and I feel like that's panned out ok.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2015 22:14:43 GMT
All those Kentucky big guys are limited on offense from what I've seen. Honestly, I would take Colly-Stein over the other two because he brings the most on defense. Trey Lyles has one of the most polished post games in the draft as well as the ability to shoot mid range jumpers. He's not as good defensively or as long and athletic as the other two, but he's got the offense. I didn't see much from him vs. Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Apr 8, 2015 23:40:06 GMT
The annoying thing about this draft is that I've so far only managed to ascertain one guy who I think is a sleeper pick. Last year I had Zach LaVine, Jerami Grant and KJ McDaniels and I feel like that's panned out ok. Robert Upshaw. He's one of my sleepers. He's got huge off-court problems right now, but it means he'll be a first round talent available in the second round. He could work out, or he could go up in flames. I'd gamble a 2nd rounder on him though.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Apr 8, 2015 23:57:49 GMT
Mostly I think it's a problem with the depth of this draft actually. 2014 has Wiggins obviously doing very well, Jabari was ROTY before injury, Embiid does look better than Okafor or Towns, LaVine has impressed, Smart is solid and Exum has sucked but that was a gamble anyway, and he needs a few seasons before a proper evaluation can happen. Payton had done really well also. There was depth right down into the second round with guys like McDaniels and Jerami Grant. Napier has been as expected, Payne and Warren too. 2015 has a lot of "gambles" in the Top 10. Russell has the swagger but the athleticism of a brick, Towns benefitted from being at UK, Okafor doesn't play D and isn't consistent, Mudiay looks amazing but plays in China, Winslow has impressed I suppose but will never be James Harden. Anyway I just woke up im rambling. People care way too much about ceilings and less about what someone can actually do on the court. okafur is already better than Embiid and it would take a disaster from okafur or a Anthony Davis type development for Embiid to pass him up. Joel is NOT Anthony Davis. Joel isn't AD, neither is Towns or Okafor. I don't know if you watched Okafor barely defend Kaminsky in the Ship but it was really really bad.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 9, 2015 12:23:42 GMT
The annoying thing about this draft is that I've so far only managed to ascertain one guy who I think is a sleeper pick. Last year I had Zach LaVine, Jerami Grant and KJ McDaniels and I feel like that's panned out ok. Robert Upshaw. He's one of my sleepers. He's got huge off-court problems right now, but it means he'll be a first round talent available in the second round. He could work out, or he could go up in flames. I'd gamble a 2nd rounder on him though. He looks ok, not sure I'd call him a sleeper though. When I mean sleeper I mean like all-star calibre, I think Upshaw could be a decent roleplayer, but not all star.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Apr 14, 2015 20:44:56 GMT
Portis is a solid sleeper, late lotto, mid rounder, he just announced. The thing I like about this draft vs last years is I think the back half has more potential to become good players, better than their lotto counter parts. Take a guy like RJ Hunter, he probably goes somewhere between 18-24, he needs a few years of development, which is good because he will be on a team that can develop him, unlike a guy going to the Knicks or 76ers. I can see him being a Klay Thompson type guy with the right development. All the players in this draft, besides WCS, IMO need development. And I don't trust the lotto teams to properly do so. I mean, in here if a guy plays early on that's great for your team and his ratings. But in real life, and in the long term, I'd rather have a guy that gets polished off on a good team. Also Alex English I think Lyles is a major sleeper. He fits the stretch 4 META of the NBA so well right now offensively and has a good post game, I feel like he is the most polished big offensively for Kentucky and he also can play defense, he just never played interior defense because he was playing the 3 with KAT and WCS on the floor. I also think WCS will have early defensive success but be a Ben Wallace type player, all defense and dunks. Which is DeAndre Jordan right now, but that's if you're on a good team with a great point guard.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Apr 14, 2015 20:51:36 GMT
Another thing that really bothers me is this:
You have teams under .500 in the East making the playoffs, those teams will forever be there, in the 6-8 seed until the lesser teams in the East find a star and develop them. The only team in the bottom half of the East that I feel good about is the Bucks, they are probably making the playoffs a year too early and need another lotto pick to really compete for a tittle, incase Giannis or Parker doesn't develop.
This is why I think the NBA needs to just take the 16 best teams into the playoffs regardless of conference. You have franchises in the East that will forever be fucked until a team like the Knicks, 76ers, or Magic actually produces talent that can usurp the shitty 37-42 record teams.
And even before the Lotto Balls are drawn, it should be interesting to see what a team like the Suns or Pels/Thunder do with their pick. The Suns seem to be in the best position to make big leap, I believe they have a lot of cap room, plus can re-sign Knight.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 14, 2015 21:06:00 GMT
I agree Charles Barkley. I think that perhaps one of the reasons why the draft is seen as so unpredictable is because the best prospects go to worse teams and lower-level prospects go to better teams. Kwame Brown went to Jordan's Wizards where he was bullied to tears every practice.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Apr 14, 2015 21:20:18 GMT
I agree Charles Barkley. I think that perhaps one of the reasons why the draft is seen as so unpredictable is because the best prospects go to worse teams and lower-level prospects go to better teams. Kwame Brown went to Jordan's Wizards where he was bullied to tears every practice. I mean, it is just terrible when you think about it. Like, what if these lotto picks that fail aren't actually bad and they just have terrible developmental teams? Like, there's coaches out there that are known for developing players, and then there's asshole coaches who won't change their system to fit the team (looking at you D'Antoni). Everyone goes crazy, at least some people did, when Jacque Vaughn and Brian Shaw were fired, but really, they were coaches who were suited for teams who want to win now and the Magic and Nuggets weren't in those positions. Then there's coaches like Jason Kidd who is doing a great job developing players at the Bucks and then there's guys like Derek Fisher running the triangle when the team has no business running it because there is not the correct personnel to do so. But what do I know, Im just some 25 year old on the internet. I can sit here for days and talk about how bad some franchises are, in all sports (fuckin Browns and Indians), and talk about things they should do. I mean, maybe some GM's are just afraid to lose their jobs from making a franchise changing trade and would rather just have their 4 year deal expire and then never be hired again.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2015 22:07:09 GMT
I agree Charles Barkley. I think that perhaps one of the reasons why the draft is seen as so unpredictable is because the best prospects go to worse teams and lower-level prospects go to better teams. Kwame Brown went to Jordan's Wizards where he was bullied to tears every practice. I mean, it is just terrible when you think about it. Like, what if these lotto picks that fail aren't actually bad and they just have terrible developmental teams? Like, there's coaches out there that are known for developing players, and then there's asshole coaches who won't change their system to fit the team (looking at you D'Antoni). Everyone goes crazy, at least some people did, when Jacque Vaughn and Brian Shaw were fired, but really, they were coaches who were suited for teams who want to win now and the Magic and Nuggets weren't in those positions. Then there's coaches like Jason Kidd who is doing a great job developing players at the Bucks and then there's guys like Derek Fisher running the triangle when the team has no business running it because there is not the correct personnel to do so. But what do I know, Im just some 25 year old on the internet. I can sit here for days and talk about how bad some franchises are, in all sports (fuckin Browns and Indians), and talk about things they should do. I mean, maybe some GM's are just afraid to lose their jobs from making a franchise changing trade and would rather just have their 4 year deal expire and then never be hired again. The Knicks haven't ran anything that looks like the triangle since the all star break
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Apr 14, 2015 22:43:46 GMT
I mean, it is just terrible when you think about it. Like, what if these lotto picks that fail aren't actually bad and they just have terrible developmental teams? Like, there's coaches out there that are known for developing players, and then there's asshole coaches who won't change their system to fit the team (looking at you D'Antoni). Everyone goes crazy, at least some people did, when Jacque Vaughn and Brian Shaw were fired, but really, they were coaches who were suited for teams who want to win now and the Magic and Nuggets weren't in those positions. Then there's coaches like Jason Kidd who is doing a great job developing players at the Bucks and then there's guys like Derek Fisher running the triangle when the team has no business running it because there is not the correct personnel to do so. But what do I know, Im just some 25 year old on the internet. I can sit here for days and talk about how bad some franchises are, in all sports (fuckin Browns and Indians), and talk about things they should do. I mean, maybe some GM's are just afraid to lose their jobs from making a franchise changing trade and would rather just have their 4 year deal expire and then never be hired again. The Knicks haven't ran anything that looks like the triangle since the all star break The fact that they were using the triangle 5/8ths of the season though, that's a problem. It happens all the time in football, a defensive coordinator is brought in who only runs the 3-4 defense, and he comes to a team that has 4-3 personnel and they have to change everything around, then their defense is bad for 2-3 years, because they haven't developed the personnel yet, and the defensive coordinator is fired. And they bring in a 4-3 D-Coodinator now, and they have to change back. That is what happend to the Browns for 10 years before the last 2-3 coaches came in. That's the best example of a coach not adapting to his players. That or D'Antoni trying to run his offense with Dwight and Pau. It just pisses me off that these coaches have a huge ego and won't change their schemes to fit their team. Like, does Melo really fit the triangle offense? Not really, yet they plan to run it anyways. At least in basketball, it isn't as profound as in football. But still, we are going to see a team with the first pick take Okafor or KAT, and then the team should adapt to a 1-4 offense, where they have a stretch 4 and its just Okafor or Towns in the paint. Yet, I can almost guarantee that will not be the case. Which is why I'd rather have 5 picks in the back of the draft and just take players on teams who know how to develop talent and play around it. Example, Draymond Green. He didn't necessarily fit in with Kerr's "system" yet it was adapted to fit him in there and they developed Green (as did Izzo at MSU). I'd really like to break down the draft over the past 15 years and see how the players are in the back half vs the front half. I'd say towards the end, the last 10 picks is much better than the middle 10 picks, and the top 10 picks varies extremely from the trends as you have busts and booms. But at least at the end of the draft you have a good chance to get a quality role player and if you're lucky, a great player.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 14, 2015 22:58:23 GMT
Case in point: last year I really didn't like Kyle Anderson's game, I thought he had no chance in the pros, but the Spurs took him and I nearly drafted him as a result, cos the Spurs are the best run organisation in the league.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Barkley on Apr 15, 2015 8:43:36 GMT
Case in point: last year I really didn't like Kyle Anderson's game, I thought he had no chance in the pros, but the Spurs took him and I nearly drafted him as a result, cos the Spurs are the best run organisation in the league. Oddly enough, that's why I traded Alex Len for LJC...which saw much criticism. I am quoting your post to bring up a point about real football. When I watch real football, I see the same thing with the coaches in the EPL and their new transfers. I think that is why you see a lot of guys come in for a season and then are out. The opposite sort of happened with Juan Mata and Chelsea and his transfer to United. He fell out of favor with Mourhino, and then he gets sent over to United, for a huge fee, and plays wonderfully in a new system. This doesn't happen all the time though. If you look at Liverpool for example, they went through a bunch of midfielders season after season as the coaches kept changing and now it seems like they have finally got it together. I think this is more prevalent when you see a guy go from like La Liga to the EPL, it's a completely different style of play from Spain to England, you see it in the World Cup all the time, I can't think of any transfers off the top of my head that haven't stuck or took a lot of time to really make it work, but I know there is a lot. Anyways, I think the whole system thing is a huge deal in all sports, even baseball. You have managers that like small ball vs waiting for a home run and then you have some managers that like to work pitch counts and like OBP and others who just prefer plain old batting average. We saw this in Moneyball, the movie, when the great Phillip Seymour Hoffman wouldn't play the great Scotty Hatterberg at first base and Beane traded the ROY that season.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2015 19:56:36 GMT
Case in point: last year I really didn't like Kyle Anderson's game, I thought he had no chance in the pros, but the Spurs took him and I nearly drafted him as a result, cos the Spurs are the best run organisation in the league. Oddly enough, that's why I traded Alex Len for LJC...which saw much criticism. I am quoting your post to bring up a point about real football. When I watch real football, I see the same thing with the coaches in the EPL and their new transfers. I think that is why you see a lot of guys come in for a season and then are out. The opposite sort of happened with Juan Mata and Chelsea and his transfer to United. He fell out of favor with Mourhino, and then he gets sent over to United, for a huge fee, and plays wonderfully in a new system. This doesn't happen all the time though. If you look at Liverpool for example, they went through a bunch of midfielders season after season as the coaches kept changing and now it seems like they have finally got it together. I think this is more prevalent when you see a guy go from like La Liga to the EPL, it's a completely different style of play from Spain to England, you see it in the World Cup all the time, I can't think of any transfers off the top of my head that haven't stuck or took a lot of time to really make it work, but I know there is a lot. Anyways, I think the whole system thing is a huge deal in all sports, even baseball. You have managers that like small ball vs waiting for a home run and then you have some managers that like to work pitch counts and like OBP and others who just prefer plain old batting average. We saw this in Moneyball, the movie, when the great Phillip Seymour Hoffman wouldn't play the great Scotty Hatterberg at first base and Beane traded the ROY that season. Finally got around to reading this post read "real football" expected someone to talk about real football, got excited. >Soccer.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Apr 19, 2015 22:58:19 GMT
Case and point, Joel Embiid is coaching. Told you he was better.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 23:04:43 GMT
Case and point, Joel Embiid is coaching. Told you he was better.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Apr 20, 2015 0:05:23 GMT
Lol uh oh.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 0:23:35 GMT
Anthony Davis would never give less than 110%
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Apr 20, 2015 2:19:23 GMT
Anthony Davis would never give less than 110% Thats great but I wasn't comparing him to AD I was comparing him to the players in this draft.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 3:36:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 2:58:38 GMT
Anthony Davis would never give less than 110% Thats great but I wasn't comparing him to AD I was comparing him to the players in this draft. Ah, my bad. It was Ian that compared him to AD.
|
|