Event Egor Demin? 2025 nba draft candidate

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
STOMP said:
come on Rasta, why contort such a simple point with nonsense? Yes Denin has plus size which is great, but at this point in his development he has not been a solid shooter (skill) and is a lesser athlete. At least with what he showed on tape last season, I don't think he's ready for NBA playing time.

STOMP
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with that. So Demin is bad. Let's not generalize illegitimately.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
I certainly agree with that. So Demin is bad. Let's not generalize illegitimately.
Click to expand...
Lol, care to elaborate? Has making 3s and defending the 3 point line not changed the physical makeup of the league? I'm very comfortable with the generalization that it absolutely has trended players towards more athletic and better shooting while raw size has become less important. For instance, throughout the league the old school bruising PF has gone away replaced by another agile Wing who can make and defend 3s.

STOMP
 
Sheldon Shape said:
Improving one's three point shooting is one of the easiest skills to improve. I'm not worried about his prospects to improve his shot.
Click to expand...

quick...somebody send that memo to Kris Murray....and Andre Miller.....and Evan Turner....and Justise Winslow....and Jake Layman....and Nic Batum...and Mario Hezonja....and Ben Simmons....and Russell Westbrook

by the way, Kris Murray shot .348 on three's in college. Demin shot .273; and he had a significant sample size of 154 attempts. He also shot under 70% on FT's so there's a real chance he might just be a bad shooter from distance

it's true that a lot of players improve their three over time. But it's also true that a lot don't. A player shooting under 28% on three's and under 70% on FT's should not generate much optimism for his shooting skills. I'd be curious about how many players who shot like that in college actually became decent in the NBA, and how long it took

Rajon Rondo didn't show any improvement on his three till his 10th season. Jason Kidd shot 37% on three's in his 3rd season, but it wasn't till his 13th season that he shot better than that
 
wizenheimer said:
quick...somebody send that memo to Kris Murray....and Andre Miller.....and Evan Turner....and Justise Winslow....and Jake Layman....and Nic Batum...and Mario Hezonja....and Ben Simmons....and Russell Westbrook

by the way, Kris Murray shot .348 on three's in college. Demin shot .273; and he had a significant sample size of 154 attempts. He also shot under 70% on FT's so there's a real chance he might just be a bad shooter from distance

it's true that a lot of players improve their three over time. But it's also true that a lot don't. A player shooting under 28% on three's and under 70% on FT's should not generate much optimism for his shooting skills. I'd be curious about how many players who shot like that in college actually became decent in the NBA, and how long it took

Rajon Rondo didn't show any improvement on his three till his 10th season. Jason Kidd shot 37% on three's in his 3rd season, but it wasn't till his 13th season that he shot better than that
Click to expand...

None of what you posted negates that shooting is the easiest skill to improve. Many of your examples are also of the NBA from yesteryear where it wasn't as much an emphasis as it is now. These anecdotes don't change much of anything.
 
Drafting is a balance of realized production and future potential. Potential is often gauged by age and physical characteristics (such as height, wingspan and leaping ability).

Production:
↑ 7.1 ast36 (1.87 ast/to) strong.
- 5.1 reb36 is decent for 6'9".
↓ 13.9 pts36 is low.
↓ 27.3% 3pt (at 4.7 atm/gm) is low.
↓ PER: 15.6 is low for a 1st round pick.
↓ BPM: 5.3 is low of a 1st round pick.

Physical Characteristics:
↑ Draft age: 19.3 is good.
↑ Height w/o shoes: 6'8.25" is good.
- Wingspan: 6' 10.25" is decent.
↓ Max Vertical Leap: 32.0" is low.

Although Demin is an interesting prospect, I think there are better picks at #11.
 
Sheldon Shape said:
None of what you posted negates that shooting is the easiest skill to improve. Many of your examples are also of the NBA from yesteryear where it wasn't as much an emphasis as it is now. These anecdotes don't change much of anything.
Click to expand...

People say that a lot, but how many players show significant improvement in their first four years? If a guy is like a 26% three point shooter, what's the odds he's gonna get up to 35%?

Scoot is actually one of the few guys that I look at where there was significant shooting improvement.
 
Natebishop3 said:
People say that a lot, but how many players show significant improvement in their first four years? If a guy is like a 26% three point shooter, what's the odds he's gonna get up to 35%?

Scoot is actually one of the few guys that I look at where there was significant shooting improvement.
Click to expand...
You have to really want to improve. If you aren't consistently getting a lot of intentional reps it won't be as effective.

So to me it makes sense that somebody who didn't like shooting enough to be good before becoming an NBA player might not like getting the reps enough to be as intentional as required.

Westbrook and Jordan, for example. Both guys who didn't get better at 3pt shooting until they absolutely had to. They had to want it first.
 
Sheldon Shape said:
None of what you posted negates that shooting is the easiest skill to improve. Many of your examples are also of the NBA from yesteryear where it wasn't as much an emphasis as it is now. These anecdotes don't change much of anything.
Click to expand...

maybe the numbers, or what you call anecdotes, don't change the situation...but they certainly are a concern

I don't know that perimeter shooting is the easiest skill to improve. Maybe. But many players come into the NBA as poor perimeter shooters and don't really improve. Demin is shooting 27% from the college three point line; and 69.5% from the FT line. As I said, those two factors, taken together, don't generate a lot of optimism he can improve enough to be considered an acceptable threat from range.

Maybe his other skills are strong enough to offset the worries about his poor perimeter shooting and warrant using a lottery pick on him. That I don't know
 
Natebishop3 said:
People say that a lot, but how many players show significant improvement in their first four years? If a guy is like a 26% three point shooter, what's the odds he's gonna get up to 35%?

Scoot is actually one of the few guys that I look at where there was significant shooting improvement.
Click to expand...

Scoot was a decent FT shooter in G-league (76.4%) and carried that thru to the NBA. He was also shooting 27% from three, like Denim, but he was doing it from the NBA distance; Denim was shooting that from the college line
 
wizenheimer said:
Scoot was a decent FT shooter in G-league (76.4%) and carried that thru to the NBA. He was also shooting 27% from three, like Denim, but he was doing it from the NBA distance; Denim was shooting that from the college line
Click to expand...

Want to see a crazy career from three?

upload_2025-5-21_12-42-56.png
 
Phatguysrule said:
You have to really want to improve. If you aren't consistently getting a lot of intentional reps it won't be as effective.

So to me it makes sense that somebody who didn't like shooting enough to be good before becoming an NBA player might not like getting the reps enough to be as intentional as required.

Westbrook and Jordan, for example. Both guys who didn't get better at 3pt shooting until they absolutely had to. They had to want it first.
Click to expand...
And they still didnt ....lol
Westbrook carrer 30.5%
Jordan 32%
 
Natebishop3 said:
People say that a lot, but how many players show significant improvement in their first four years? If a guy is like a 26% three point shooter, what's the odds he's gonna get up to 35%?

Scoot is actually one of the few guys that I look at where there was significant shooting improvement.
Click to expand...
It certainly happens. Deni improved a ton in year 4/5. Yes Scoot improved a lot last year. Ant actually struggled his first two years and then became pretty elite. Jabari Walker % has gone way up in year 3. Jeremi Grant was bad his first 4 years then much better.

Thats only guys on the current Blazers roster. So actually seems most players significantly improve in their first four years as opposed to being a final product on day 1.

It's pretty hard for us on our couch to project where a 19 year olds shooting will be 4 years from now though. So thats really where the Blazers scouting need to earn their salaries.
 
Hoopguru said:
And they still didnt ....lol
Westbrook carrer 30.5%
Jordan 32%
Click to expand...
The last championship run Jordan averaged
35.2%
42.7%
37.4%

Westbrooks numbers are up now compared to the rest of his career.

*Edit* Not as much as I remembered on Westbrook: Over the last 3 seasons 31.7% compared to his career average of 30.5%.
 
Last edited:
I think this guy should wear a Canadian tuxedo wherever he goes. He'll get the nickname Egor Demin the denim demon.

Seriously though if this guy ends up being a star he'll have to be called The Demon. If he's a transcendent superstar who has some signature moves, when someone does one of his moves after he has retired the announcer will say, "That was demonic".

This guy is a marketing bonanza if he's really good.
 
Sheldon Shape said:
Improving one's three point shooting is one of the easiest skills to improve. I'm not worried about his prospects to improve his shot.
Click to expand...

Looking at the data:
- I took 281 college players drafted from 2011 to 2020.
- I filtered by players that played a minimum of 164 games in the NBA.

I compared their college 3-pt shooting percentage to their NBA 3-pt shooting percentage.

On average, players only improve their shooting percentage by 0.7% (if they shot 35.0% in college, they shot 35.7% in the NBA).

Also, I looked at their FT% to see if that was a good indicator if they could more easily 'learn' to be a good 3-pt shooter. I found no correlation -

upload_2025-5-21_16-17-46.png

My conclusion: Becoming a good NBA 3-point shooter is not easily learned. What the player is in college is probably what the player will be in the NBA. Sample size is of course a factor. Free-throw shooting is not a good indicator if a player can more easily learn to be a good NBA 3 pt shooter.
 
42N8Bounce said:
Looking at the data:
- I took 281 college players drafted from 2011 to 2020.
- I filtered by players that played a minimum of 164 games in the NBA.

I compared their college 3-pt shooting percentage to their NBA 3-pt shooting percentage.

On average, players only improve their shooting percentage by 0.7% (if they shot 35.0% in college, they shot 35.7% in the NBA).

Also, I looked at their FT% to see if that was a good indicator if they could more easily 'learn' to be a good 3-pt shooter. I found no correlation -

View attachment 73793

My conclusion: Becoming a good NBA 3-point shooter is not easily learned. What the player is in college is probably what the player will be in the NBA. Sample size is of course a factor. Free-throw shooting is not a good indicator if a player can more easily learn to be a good NBA 3 pt shooter.
Click to expand...

This says a lot about Scoot.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Indeed it is.
Click to expand...
Look at the trend in his percentages. His first year with new teams is bad. His second year is much better. Shooting can be as much between the ears as it is in the body. Perhaps moving from Russia to mormon Utah was a bit of an adjustment!? I trust in his mechanics. It might take a year or two, but I think his shooting will be fine.
I'm not sure Portland has a specific shooting coach, but there have been a few guys recently who have shown considerable improvement in their time here.
 
Watching the 8 minutes of Indy/ NY we better draft the best shooter we can.
Indy is the best shooting team in the NBA.
 
42N8Bounce said:
Looking at the data:
- I took 281 college players drafted from 2011 to 2020.
- I filtered by players that played a minimum of 164 games in the NBA.

I compared their college 3-pt shooting percentage to their NBA 3-pt shooting percentage.

On average, players only improve their shooting percentage by 0.7% (if they shot 35.0% in college, they shot 35.7% in the NBA).

Also, I looked at their FT% to see if that was a good indicator if they could more easily 'learn' to be a good 3-pt shooter. I found no correlation -

View attachment 73793

My conclusion: Becoming a good NBA 3-point shooter is not easily learned. What the player is in college is probably what the player will be in the NBA. Sample size is of course a factor. Free-throw shooting is not a good indicator if a player can more easily learn to be a good NBA 3 pt shooter.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with stats lying. Or at least being misleading.

Your filter was for anyone drafted last decade that played basically two years. That probably includes a lot of players that just weren't good enough anyway and were playing out their rookie contracts before being let go. Others were players who were forwards who never were good at shooting 3s and likely never did.

I wonder what percentage of those players in the 2010s played more than a year in college was compared to now when almost everyone coming into the NBA is 19.

It's a great bit of work you did. There still are a lot of variables that are extremely difficult to measure and things that even the filters can't tell you.
 
PCmor7 said:
This is the problem with stats lying. Or at least being misleading.

Your filter was for anyone drafted last decade that played basically two years. That probably includes a lot of players that just weren't good enough anyway and were playing out their rookie contracts before being let go. Others were players who were forwards who never were good at shooting 3s and likely never did.

I wonder what percentage of those players in the 2010s played more than a year in college was compared to now when almost everyone coming into the NBA is 19.

It's a great bit of work you did. There still are a lot of variables that are extremely difficult to measure and things that even the filters can't tell you.
Click to expand...
My data set was players that played a minimum of 164 NBA games. More than 2 seasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top