NBA draft "big board" top 10 (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Jesus, I was honestly curious what changed for Bones regarding Chet.

Didn’t think it would start this… again…
 
illmatic99 said:
why does every draft thread get derailed by Chet stans? This was a thread on the top 10. Not just Chet.
Click to expand...
Where are the "stans"? Seems to me his haters are the most worked up. I'm on record on saying that none of the top 3 (actually 4) prospects particularly light my fire. Give me Sochan!
 
Top prospects with best case/worst case - try to come up with original ones.
Holmgren: Skinny Pau/short Shawn Bradley
Smith: Michael Porter Jr. with defense/Harvey Grant
Banchero: Bigger Carmelo/Smaller Marvin Bagley
Ivey: Bigger Ja/Smaller Oladipo
Sharpe: Paul George with brains/Qyntel Woods with brains
 
It seems to me there are 3 broad factors to be looking at in the draft. I'm curious how other fans rate these. Are there other factors you would add? (yes, I'm bored)

1) The players ceiling/floor. This one is obvious.

2) What are the odds they actually reach their ceiling? This includes hard to quantify issues like coachability, work ethic, and injury/heath.

3) If the reach their peak, how long will it take? My belief is that the longer the development curve, the higher the ceiling needs to be. Call this the Meyers Leonard rule. He needed to be really good to justify the time and money invested in him, and he was never more than passable.

Thoughts?
 
oldmangrouch said:
It seems to me there are 3 broad factors to be looking at in the draft. I'm curious how other fans rate these. Are there other factors you would add? (yes, I'm bored)

1) The players ceiling/floor. This one is obvious.

2) What are the odds they actually reach their ceiling? This includes hard to quantify issues like coachability, work ethic, and injury/heath.

3) If the reach their peak, how long will it take? My belief is that the longer the development curve, the higher the ceiling needs to be. Call this the Meyers Leonard rule. He needed to be really good to justify the time and money invested in him, and he was never more than passable.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Are they athletic
Do they have length
Are they willing defenders
Do they have a high motor
Are they a WABC
Did they play at Syracuse
 
Last edited:
Idog1976 said:
I think Duren has a high ceiling and a fine floor. I have him as about my 3rd favorite big after Smith and Banchero. I think he has an NBA body and tons of upside. He's the opposite of Holmgren who has lots of upside but is frail to put it lightly by NBA big man standards. Williams is barely on my radar.
Click to expand...
I watch Memphis 5 and 6 times some games he didn't play the ones I seen I question his motor on the floor. Yes he young he can correct that but there a lot questions about his offense and I think he going have trouble on switches. I think Williams is NBA ready right now I Duren to me is not there yet and believe he is hit or miss type of player.
 
James lamphear said:
I watch Memphis 5 and 6 times some games he didn't play the ones I seen I question his motor on the floor. Yes he young he can correct that but there a lot questions about his offense and I think he going have trouble on switches. I think Williams is NBA ready right now I Duren to me is not there yet and believe he is hit or miss type of player.
Click to expand...

The Duren v Williams debate is interesting. It is similar to debating whether a particular vet is worth trading a lotto pick for. How much risk are you willing to tolerate before you opt for a guy who will help quickly and seems to have little chance to flop? For a team in win-now mode, Williams would be a very defensible choice. OTOH, he isn't going to do much to change a team that is a dumpster fire.
 
PCmor7 said:
Seriously, what is your connection to this kid? You've bent yourself over backwards time and time again to act like there is nothing he can't do and no reason to be skeptical of him. This whole line of putting on muscle being easier than other red flags is both preposterous and bizarre.
Click to expand...
That's my opinion on prospects in general. Apply it to Dieng if you want since you can't handle me thinking that Chet can build muscle. I can't remember the last time a top 10 prospect didn't pan out because they were too skinny. Your whole attitude is fucking bizarre.
 
Last edited:
oldmangrouch said:
It seems to me there are 3 broad factors to be looking at in the draft. I'm curious how other fans rate these. Are there other factors you would add? (yes, I'm bored)

1) The players ceiling/floor. This one is obvious.

2) What are the odds they actually reach their ceiling? This includes hard to quantify issues like coachability, work ethic, and injury/heath.

3) If the reach their peak, how long will it take? My belief is that the longer the development curve, the higher the ceiling needs to be. Call this the Meyers Leonard rule. He needed to be really good to justify the time and money invested in him, and he was never more than passable.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Another thing for the team drafting the player, can we give him enough playing time?
This is a real problem, maybe more so if you draft the "best player available" without thinking about playing time. You can definitely end up stunting that players growth, and not even knowing their potential even with your coaching staff being with that player for years in some cases.
Jermaine O'Neal is one example. The very next season after being traded by the Blazers, O'Neal was the top shot blocker in the NBA (by total blocks) and no. 1 in the Eastern Conference in double doubles.
The Blazers were clueless because of playing time for O'Neal. Only 12.3 minutes per game with 8 starts in his fourth season.
His next season he started 80 games and averaged 32.6 minutes per game.
 
James lamphear said:
I watch Memphis 5 and 6 times some games he didn't play the ones I seen I question his motor on the floor. Yes he young he can correct that but there a lot questions about his offense and I think he going have trouble on switches. I think Williams is NBA ready right now I Duren to me is not there yet and believe he is hit or miss type of player.
Click to expand...
I agree that Williams seems NBA now. I wouldn't use a top 6 pick on him unless we move on from Nurk?
He has a 7 1/2 foot reach and moves his feet well a 7'. I was hoping if we had the 11 pick we would give him serious consideration.
 
Hoopguru said:
We need a 5 that can be a rim protector and tenacious shot blocker.
Click to expand...

All respect to your idea about Williams, I don't know if that guy exists in this draft. I certainly don't see a guy who can come in and be that guy quickly.

I'd rather keep our lottery pick and draft Ibou Badji in the second round. Or Kamagate.
 
PCmor7 said:
All respect to your idea about Williams, I don't know if that guy exists in this draft. I certainly don't see a guy who can come in and be that guy quickly.

I'd rather keep our lottery pick and draft Ibou Badji in the second round. Or Kamagate.
Click to expand...
We'll see. Who do you have in the draft big board top 10?
 
Hoopguru said:
We'll see. Who do you have in the draft big board top 10?
Click to expand...

I didn't make one yet. I think there are seven guys and then it gets a little fuzzy.

1. Smith
2. Banchero
3. Sharpe
4. Holmgren
5. Ivey
6. Murray
7. Mathurin
8. Griffin
9. Kendall Brown
10. Ugh ... probably Sochan.

Just a couple of qualifiers ... the more I think about it, the more I think Sharpe is the best prospect in this draft. If I was an expansion team and had a blank slate and was just picking who I thought had the best chance of becoming a star in this draft, it'd be him. I also personally like Ivey better than Holmgren in a vacuum, but, looking at the Blazers' needs, I'd be willing to roll the dice on Chet if Smith and Banchero were already gone.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
He will put on weight naturally as he gets older. How much is the question? My guess is 220-230. So essentially Hassan Whitehead sizewise.
Until that happens I see no reason why he can't be a spread 4. Make the other teams match up with him on the perimeter.
Click to expand...

Whiteside's like 265 pounds.
 
PCmor7 said:
I didn't make one yet. I think there are seven guys and then it gets a little fuzzy.

1. Smith
2. Banchero
3. Sharpe
4. Holmgren
5. Ivey
6. Murray
7. Mathurin
8. Griffin
9. Kendall Brown
10. Ugh ... probably Sochan.

Just a couple of qualifiers ... the more I think about it, the more I think Sharpe is the best prospect in this draft. If I was an expansion team and had a blank slate and was just picking who I thought had the best chance of becoming a star in this draft, it'd be him. I also personally like Ivey better than Holmgren in a vacuum, but, looking at the Blazers' needs, I'd be willing to roll the dice on Chet if Smith and Banchero were already gone.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong but Im thinking Billups is going yo want a two way player with emphasis on defense.
Thats what he’s used too.
 
Hoopguru said:
I may be wrong but Im thinking Billups is going yo want a two way player with emphasis on defense.
Thats what he’s used too.
Click to expand...

I don't think we have enough info to know that, yet. I think a lot of us are presuming that, but I don't think Chauncey is going to be as married to that as a lot of us might think. I think he'll go for the star if he can get him, even if it sacrifices a little on defense.

That said, I don't think any of those guys in the top 10 project as below-average defenders.
 
Hoopguru said:
I may be wrong but Im thinking Billups is going yo want a two way player with emphasis on defense.
Thats what he’s used too.
Click to expand...

PCmor7 said:
I don't think we have enough info to know that, yet. I think a lot of us are presuming that, but I don't think Chauncey is going to be as married to that as a lot of us might think. I think he'll go for the star if he can get him, even if it sacrifices a little on defense.

That said, I don't think any of those guys in the top 10 project as below-average defenders.
Click to expand...

I actually think Chauncey probably thinks he could take someone like Banchero and make him a two way player. The guy is so young and he's definitely athletically gifted (not like a LeBron or Giannis type of freak of nature but still an upper echelon athlete by NBA standards) so I would bet that Chauncey would think he could get a hold of a guy that young and mold him into a two way player but obviously this is just a guess on my part. Maybe I'm wrong though and maybe Chauncey values a guy with an inner drive on both ends and doesn't think a motor is something that can be taught and he would want Jabari who seems like the most tenacious of all of the guys at the top of the draft... that would fit what we need. I'm pretty sure Ivey is the most tenacious guy of the top prospects.
 
blazerkor said:
I actually think Chauncey probably thinks he could take someone like Banchero and make him a two way player. The guy is so young and he's definitely athletically gifted (not like a LeBron or Giannis type of freak of nature but still an upper echelon athlete by NBA standards) so I would bet that Chauncey would think he could get a hold of a guy that young and mold him into a two way player but obviously this is just a guess on my part. Maybe I'm wrong though and maybe Chauncey values a guy with an inner drive on both ends and doesn't think a motor is something that can be taught and he would want Jabari who seems like the most tenacious of all of the guys at the top of the draft... that would fit what we need. I'm pretty sure Ivey is the most tenacious guy of the top prospects.
Click to expand...

That very well might be the case, too. Is Chauncey the type of coach who sees something he can work and make to fit his team's character rather than find someone of a certain character already?
 
PCmor7 said:
That very well might be the case, too. Is Chauncey the type of coach who sees something he can work and make to fit his team's character rather than find someone of a certain character already?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is the question and I think with young guys that Chauncey might believe that he cant fit talent into his team's character but we don't really know at this point.
 
There’s an interesting commentary on the NFL draft in today’s NY Times “The Morning” newsletter. A lot of it translates to the NBA draft and many other human decision-making endeavors:

“Fundamentally, N.F.L. teams tonight will be doing something that every employer does: choosing which workers to hire. A major difference is that the teams will have more information than most employers do. A hospital or manufacturer generally can’t study videotape and statistics documenting the record of job candidates.

Yet even with all this information, teams can do a miserable job of predicting who the best players will be. “The track record is pretty dismal,” Richard Thaler, a Nobel laureate in economics who has studied the draft, told me.

The confident Jets
Consider this chart, which shows the quarterbacks picked in the draft’s first round four years ago, alongside their career touchdown totals:

YNqyRFvGCRtnWwAHu9idEniYT9OZWZhDx8wKwhFeOD-9zT5mKPY0yIcs8aR8vYXUZgKJdInG7y8zas-qCRolDy5meiDxjsuLkUinPCrPouAca6NBc81BEgk1wGA9N659RexG8JKjA48BYaAuLe_mTW0Csm6P3Vr2Baqyfb0AwuYpm4QrZCUowik=s0-d-e1-ft

As you can see, there is little relationship between performance and draft order. Were the 2018 draft held again today, Josh Allen of the Buffalo Bills would almost certainly go first. Besides Allen and Lamar Jackson of the Baltimore Ravens, the other three might not even play much next season.

It’s a common story: Tom Brady, the most successful player in N.F.L. history, was the 199th pick in 2000. Most top quarterbacks today — including Patrick Mahomes, Aaron Rodgers, Justin Herbert, Dak Prescott and Russell Wilson — were drafted after quarterbacks who haven’t done as well.

Predicting performance is unavoidably hard, even in the country’s most popular form of mass entertainment, where executives can devote lavish resources to research. “There’s no crime in that,” Cade Massey, a University of Pennsylvania economist, said. “The crime is thinking you can predict it.”

The real mistake that the executives make is hubris. They believe that they can forecast the future and design draft strategies based on their confidence. In 2018, for example, the New York Jets traded away four picks for the right to move up only three spots in the draft — to the third pick from the sixth. With that third pick, the Jets executives thought that they would draft a quarterback so great that he would be gone by the sixth pick.

The quarterback they chose was Sam Darnold, who (as the chart above also shows) has been a disappointment. Imagine if the Jets had instead kept the sixth pick, taken Allen and also kept their other picks. It could have transformed the team.

The most successful N.F.L. teams have adopted a version of this anti-Jets strategy. They have embraced the power of humility. The Dallas Cowboys of the 1990s and New England Patriots built Super Bowl winners by exchanging high picks for a larger number of lower picks. In recent seasons, the Los Angeles Rams have exchanged early picks — whose value league executives tend to exaggerate, as a 2005 academic paper by Massey and Thaler showed — for established players.

With those players, the Rams won last season’s Super Bowl. The Jets failed to make the playoffs, for the 11th straight season.”
 
blazerkor said:
I actually think Chauncey probably thinks he could take someone like Banchero and make him a two way player. The guy is so young and he's definitely athletically gifted (not like a LeBron or Giannis type of freak of nature but still an upper echelon athlete by NBA standards) so I would bet that Chauncey would think he could get a hold of a guy that young and mold him into a two way player but obviously this is just a guess on my part. Maybe I'm wrong though and maybe Chauncey values a guy with an inner drive on both ends and doesn't think a motor is something that can be taught and he would want Jabari who seems like the most tenacious of all of the guys at the top of the draft... that would fit what we need. I'm pretty sure Ivey is the most tenacious guy of the top prospects.
Click to expand...
Good points! Ive heard him several times during press interviews mention defense was going to be an important trait for his type of players. I doubt he'd have an issue with any of the top 4 players bigs and i agree he could work with a guy like Banchero.
 
blazerfan11 said:
Another thing for the team drafting the player, can we give him enough playing time?
This is a real problem, maybe more so if you draft the "best player available" without thinking about playing time. You can definitely end up stunting that players growth, and not even knowing their potential even with your coaching staff being with that player for years in some cases.
Jermaine O'Neal is one example. The very next season after being traded by the Blazers, O'Neal was the top shot blocker in the NBA (by total blocks) and no. 1 in the Eastern Conference in double doubles.
The Blazers were clueless because of playing time for O'Neal. Only 12.3 minutes per game with 8 starts in his fourth season.
His next season he started 80 games and averaged 32.6 minutes per game.
Click to expand...
This is revisionist history. O'Neal was given time, he just never delivered. He even started for a stretch (injuries), I think.
What this illustrates is that context matters. A player may genuinely look bad in one context, perhaps because of clashes with the coach, or imposter syndrome, and flourish elsewhere. Isiah Thomas did a lot to make Jermaine O'Neal - he completely believed in O'Neal (he had to - he'd bet the farm on him) and the nurturing paid off. Dunleavy was probably a bad coach for him, but also not in a situation to give him minutes when Grant and Rasheed (wasn't Gary Trent also there?) were healthy.

O'Neal supposedly looked great in practice, though.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
This is revisionist history. O'Neal was given time, he just never delivered. He even started for a stretch (injuries), I think.
What this illustrates is that context matters. A player may genuinely look bad in one context, perhaps because of clashes with the coach, or imposter syndrome, and flourish elsewhere. Isiah Thomas did a lot to make Jermaine O'Neal - he completely believed in O'Neal (he had to - he'd bet the farm on him) and the nurturing paid off. Dunleavy was probably a bad coach for him, but also not in a situation to give him minutes when Grant and Rasheed (wasn't Gary Trent also there?) were healthy.

O'Neal supposedly looked great in practice, though.
Click to expand...

There was also the story that he sulked when asked to play center.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top