Assuming we don't get a top 2 pick, how do you rate these three... Matas Buzelis Cody Williams Ron Holland Matas is super interesting.
Cases can be made for and against all three, more so than most drafts. It seems Williams has climbed the draft board to be mentioned with the other two, while they have fallen to where Williams seems to be peaking at currently. For this reason I would lean Williams, but pre draft workouts will be huge.
After Sarr, I'd be happy with Cody Williams or Matas. I think Matas can be a really great fit actually.
Here’s a better way to look at it: there is no second tier this year, only third tier and lower players. I’ll agree with you, that there is a dropoff after Sarr and Risacher; I would answer this differently tomorrow but if you ask me today it’s Holland, Matas and then Cody in the top of that fourth tier for the Blazers. Matas is nice but is inability to create separation at the GLeague level is a little troubling and he’d be another in Portland’s growing ‘if he could add the jumper’ clump of players. Measurements and workouts and interviews will be big with Holland, but I like buying the motor, athleticism and defensive upside if the shot isn’t there (like it isn’t with others). I think we’re prisoner of the moment a tick with Cody because he was returning from injury at the worst possible time, but like Holland and Matas he will take a lot of patience and seasoning to get into an NBA rotation. He has very little ‘bag’ of go-to moves and is contact averse when he gets into the lane (sound familiar? we have many millions of dollars invested in players like this). he’ll go high because he has genuine upside if you’re patient and have a good development program. The only way he gets into a rotation next year is if the outside shot is there immediately. I really like Cody and wouldn’t hesitate taking him, he just needs a lot of time and handholding like Scoot.
What intrigues me about Williams is that he has an older brother playing in the league. From that he has learned early what it takes to be a pro, how to work on weaknesses and who to work with. I also like the big brother factor in regards to the younger brother usually benefits from parents "learning the ropes" with the older brother. The younger brother usually has more assets available to them because they have learned from the mistakes of the older brother. In this case the older brother is doing outstanding, setting the bar for the younger. Just observations of having two high level athletes in the same sport as well.
There may not even be a first tier. This Draft has what could be a number of solid role players, and maybe a couple of all-stars, but I don't see any generational or franchise types. Of course, there are always surprises and players who come from out of nowhere to be incredible talents. Right now, Schmitz has his work cut out for him.
That’s my point, there is no first tier (wemby), OR second tier (Thompsons); just a third tier (risacher/sarr) and below.
If you go purely on hope/upside: Matas and Clingan are my picks. I consider Sarr and Topic as the most intriguing prospects (IF Topic can return to pre-injury form)
Williams=Risacher>Buzelis>/=Sarr Williams fits the archetype of a player who can be Jimmy Butler 2.0 at his ceiling (all-around slasher wing who can create their own shot, limited rebounder, plays defense), a more dynamic Jerami Grant as his median (he's a far better playmaker than Grant, significantly more advanced at his age, above average defender, limited rebounder), and something like De'Andre Hunter as his floor (already better college player though). He's not as strong willed as Jimmy Butler and his defense doesn't look as good so I anticipate that he's more like the median (Grant) but with All Star talent and will be 2-3 years from actually starting over Grant. Risacher is Glen Rice/Michael Porter Jr but more athletic. Can handle the ball, can attack every now and then, can shoot lights out. Should be a better passer than MPJ. Not dominant at any of these particular traits but useful as a player. Both player comps listed have contributed to championships, mind you. Buzelis is a bit confounding. I likened him to Gordon Hayward/Rashard Lewis as his ceiling but his shooting is not significant enough like it was during his HS Senior year. Very few players are that poor of shooters at his age and then, blossom. It's possible he'll get better but that'd hinge on him becoming more like a Kawhi Leonard where he focuses on becoming all-around elite at other skills before becoming a decent shooter. He's good at rebounding and playmaking while getting blocks but as it stands, he's more like Nic Batum where Batum can notch 5x5 while being inconsistent as a shooter. FT% is a bit concerning Sarr. I know internet people LOVE Sarr but I really feel that he's the Bargnani and Beasley of this draft. Talented and has the physique to match the latest trend just like how Bargs and Beasley were supposed to be Dirk and KD. Like those other two, I think Sarr entrances people because of Wemby and the hopes that you can get a superstar out of him.....but his ball handling/shot creation is tremendously limited and he is inconsistent. Then, he doesn't use his body very well to make contact and create separation. This makes him neither elite as a wing/forward or as a big man. Watching Wemby, Chet, and currently, Ace Bailey...he looks nothing like those guys. I expect him to do well for a young player before hitting a wall....just like Beasley and Bargnani. Should not become a bad player, at all, but see him more like Jonathan Isaac mixed with Emeka Okafor rather than KD/Hakeem that Wemby is or Bill Walton/Tim Duncan that Chet is. I'll also add Holland. Holland. Looks just like Rudy Gay and Luol Deng did. By that, the way they drive it in is just throwing their body at the rim with their athleticism and lanky frame but lacking creativity when doing so. Likewise, they're decent rebounders at their size. Should be a solid to good defender, as well. Has a pull up jumper but it seems rather limited and might be one of those things that comes with comfort and experience.
I'm not as worried about where the tiers in this draft are. I'm curious how many of these guys have legit All-NBA potential. We do not need to load up on role players right now.
Every draft has an All-NBA player, even the worst ones. Most drafts have a few, which I think we'll see a few All-NBA third teams and maybe one All-NBA second team from this draft. Risacher, Williams, Clingan, and Edey are the ones who most likely have the potential. Of course, what you seem to suggest at with "legit All-NBA", I take it to mean someone who regularly gets it (ex. Dame). If that is the case, I think Edey has the highest chance, out of these four, who can do so if he meets his potential. A big if that hinges on how well he adjusts in the NBA which he very likely will adjust in the NBA. It's just a matter of how much he'll adjust. He very likely will be a great Robert Williams III replacement behind Ayton due to his hyper efficiency (highest PER in college history, slightly ahead of Zion). If he can adjust further than that, he'll take over Ayton's spot in Year 2....not even kidding. Then, I think Cody Williams is the second most likely to be that kind of player but I do anticipate he'll realistically end up being on the Jerami Grant tier from an earlier age.
Good post/points... I did mean a semi-consistent All-NBA player that you can feel good about throwing max money at and build around. I haven't seen Edey projected anywhere near the lottery, most don't seem to have him going in the 1st round. I assume that's because he's likely to get attacked in the PnR game. Having said that, I can see the upside of taking him late 1st early 2nd round.
Edey is polarizing but those who believe in him have given him some lottery hype. Givony has him #15 (previously was #14), ESPN has him #14, someone else that I can't recall had him #12 (which is the highest I've seen him), SBNation has him #18. It'll have to depend on how far he makes it during the Tournament, imo. One such reason I'm big on him is due to a certain threshold I've discovered which I've already listed several times but I'll reiterate again. Since the three point line was added, traditional Div I Centers who average 12/8.4 on very good FG% (56ish+%) per 28 minutes as freshmen (was using Shaq as the comparison here) have gone on to do well in the NBA. What this suggests is that you cannot teach height. If a player has some level of efficiency by the time they enter college, they're already so far ahead of their peers and so naturally talented that it guarantees success in the NBA. Who has passed this threshold? HOFers like Shaq, Robinson, Embiid, Hakeem. Oden also passes btw. Perennial All Stars like KAT and Cousins. Good starters like Wendell Carter Jr, Ayton, Robert Williams III. Promising players like Duren, Kessler, and Chet. Edey and Clingan meet this threshold and their games really do look good. Furthermore, they're more efficient than Robert Williams or WCJ since they hovered around the 60% FG mark while those two are closer to 56%, which is what most of these other players hovered around. As much as Ayton hasn't lived up to expectations, he still reliable scores 20 points every now and then, for example, while averaging 20/10 per 36 for much of his career. Then, unlike a Kessler or RW3, they demonstrate more offensive potential and higher PPG in their 2nd seasons, being able to make a significant offensive jump. So, I'd expect them to do well. Obviously, there's more to this than putting up a threshold.....but it's not like they don't pass the eye test.
I wish we needed a guard in this draft. Things would be so much easier. Stephon Castle is looking good.
after 55 games and last night?...with a 3-year/34M contract? Probably would not be valued at a top-10 pick level. Mid-1st? Lower?
