RealGM

Chuck Everett wrote:The point of attack defense being played in these playoffs might be making the case that Stephon Castle should be going in the top 3. If the Spurs have a chance to grab him, they really should.

I am intrigued by how the new rules have allowed defensive players, especially physical POA ones, to thrive and how it changes the draft pick calculus. Who knows if it holds going forward as well.

Castle is growing for me too for the same reason. Him and NAW play similar style of defense, though I’m unconvinced that Castle is actually that long.

The issue is, and this is a larger point on draft philosophy and fit, regular season play doesn’t favor Castle that much. He’s a 6’5” combo guard who kind of has lead guard ball skills, can’t really shoot, and is not some 1v1 get down hill guy. He really plays a lot like Bruce Brown on offense, and it’s concerning how few guys I’ve seen him beat off the dribble. I think his athleticism in that respect is overhyped, someone like Holland is clearly more explosive and quick. His offense has no clear strengths and what’s more he plays a premium position where shooting and/or ball handling juice is almost a bare minimum. I can’t think of any successful starting 2 guards that don’t have either a nice 3 point jumper or an ability to get to the rim and self create.

The other issue is when will Castle get an opportunity to showcase his strengths if he’s on a bad team? I can almost guarantee someone like Reed Sheppard will be a more additive player than Castle as a rookie in a regular season setting bc of his shooting and off ball gravity. And on a bad team that typically needs offense badly, that’s going to translate easier. But long term upside Castle can do things defensively that Sheppard will never be able to, the question is how long do you wait with him until your crap team actually makes the postseason consistently?

Tough conundrums this time of year. As usual.

EmpireFalls wrote:

Chuck Everett wrote:The point of attack defense being played in these playoffs might be making the case that Stephon Castle should be going in the top 3. If the Spurs have a chance to grab him, they really should.

I am intrigued by how the new rules have allowed defensive players, especially physical POA ones, to thrive and how it changes the draft pick calculus. Who knows if it holds going forward as well.

Castle is growing for me too for the same reason. Him and NAW play similar style of defense, though I’m unconvinced that Castle is actually that long.

The issue is, and this is a larger point on draft philosophy and fit, regular season play doesn’t favor Castle that much. He’s a 6’5” combo guard who kind of has lead guard ball skills, can’t really shoot, and is not some 1v1 get down hill guy. He really plays a lot like Bruce Brown on offense, and it’s concerning how few guys I’ve seen him beat off the dribble. I think his athleticism in that respect is overhyped, someone like Holland is clearly more explosive and quick. His offense has no clear strengths and what’s more he plays a premium position where shooting and/or ball handling juice is almost a bare minimum. I can’t think of any successful starting 2 guards that don’t have either a nice 3 point jumper or an ability to get to the rim and self create.

The other issue is when will Castle get an opportunity to showcase his strengths if he’s on a bad team? I can almost guarantee someone like Reed Sheppard will be a more additive player than Castle as a rookie in a regular season setting bc of his shooting and off ball gravity. And on a bad team that typically needs offense badly, that’s going to translate easier. But long term upside Castle can do things defensively that Sheppard will never be able to, the question is how long do you wait with him until your crap team actually makes the postseason consistently?

Tough conundrums this time of year. As usual.

Some really good points here.

I wonder with the new CBA just how long a crap team will stay crap (2nd apron penalties, etc...). For example, Portland for all the guff people give them. The roster is filled with talented via NBA players (Ayton, Brogdon, Scoot, Simons, Grant, Sharpe, Rob Williams, Jabari Walker, Thybulle, Kris Murray, Camara, Reath). They just had a rash of injuries, no cohesion due to multiple trades and in many respects are too young at the moment. But I feel like Portland is more collectively talented than say the Bulls or the Nets are. And they should have two picks in this draft. They intrigue this draft cycle as well because I actually like the direction of their team if the Scoot I saw after the all-star break is who we're going to get moving forward.

EmpireFalls wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:Pacome Dadiet will probably surprise where he's drafted if he's actually 6'9. See him usually in the 30s on these mock drafts. That's too low for this player prototype.

I read some schizo French Twitter account who swore he is better offensively than Risacher. Only seen maybe one game of his so can’t comment either way but I don’t think there’s some huge gap between him and Zacch.

In the same league, here are how their stats compare:
https://tankathon.com/players/compare?players=pacome-dadiet--zaccharie-risacher

I'd much rather take Dadiet as a second rounder than Risacher as a top 3 pick.

the problem isn't where Dadiet is ranked, it's probably how high RIsacher is ranked, kinda reminds me of the Killian Hayes vs Theo Maledon year, where there was no coherent argument being made why Hayes should've been drafted as high as he was while Maledon was a 2nd rounder, when the issue was Hayes himself being ranked wayyy too high

clyde21 wrote:the problem isn't where Dadiet is ranked, it's probably how high RIsacher is ranked, kinda reminds me of the Killian Hayes vs Theo Maledon year, where there was no coherent argument being made why Hayes should've been drafted as high as he was while Maledon was a 2nd rounder, when the issue was Hayes himself being ranked wayyy too high

I actually like Dadiet quite a bit, he has a nice linking quality with his playmaking and I think his defense will be solid. Reminds me a bit of Josh Green or Kenrich Williams. I do think Risacher has a much higher floor. He is bigger, he played a ton of games and I think that depressed his shooting *a bit* as the season wore on (he is not an excellent shooter, though, he is just fine) and I really think his defense is going to be good. He gets into players a surprising amount and is disruptive with his length and fairly mobile. He does have terrible hands, though, which is what hurts his ball handling and hurts his shooting. I had Dadiet late first until about a month ago, perhaps it is because I have not seen him in a while that I've moved him down, but if he is actually 6-9 (and I don't believe that, but measurements will tell) then he should probably be drafted in the late teens or early 20s.

tester551 wrote:

EmpireFalls wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:Pacome Dadiet will probably surprise where he's drafted if he's actually 6'9. See him usually in the 30s on these mock drafts. That's too low for this player prototype.

I read some schizo French Twitter account who swore he is better offensively than Risacher. Only seen maybe one game of his so can’t comment either way but I don’t think there’s some huge gap between him and Zacch.

In the same league, here are how their stats compare:
https://tankathon.com/players/compare?players=pacome-dadiet--zaccharie-risacher

I'd much rather take Dadiet as a second rounder than Risacher as a top 3 pick.

Unless I’m mistaken, they don’t play in the same league. Dadiet plays in the German league, Risacher plays in the French pro A which is a better level of competition, no?

Risacher has been more than consistent in European cup (Eurocup being a pretty good EC), which is a level ahead. But german league and french league are quite similar imo, the main difference is from roster building : more bosman/american in german league, more athletic profiles here, more tall bigs/wings who can shoot - esp. from pick n pop - in Germany, more tough defenders/smal physical bigs here.
Playstyle might be a bit more offense prone in Germany (or at least i would not be surprised if they play more possessions) but speaking of stats, what would be more interesting to know is when both players get their stats. Risacher had legit playing time (and he played a lot of minutes this year) against supposedly good (and mature players) defenders. No clue for Dadiet, german fans or ppl who followed the bbl could answer.

Not sure Dadiet is already plugable in a nba team (even a tanking one), while Risacher is already 'nba ready' considering his skillset and pro experience. Rest will depends on his development (physical training for the body part, midrange game/floater for the offense, the passing too as this is something he has to improve considering his high basket iq).

Not sure both will be nba players in say, 5 years from now. I would think Risacher still has the highest chance. At the very least, he will be a solid EL player.

I wouldn’t be shocked if Dadiet explodes into the 12ish range similar to Ousmane Dieng a couple years ago. 6’8, athletic, can shoot, doesn’t turn 19 years old until late July, playing pro ball, putting up solid numbers. Checks almost every box.

I like his upside more than Risacher. Looks like a better athlete/slasher, better awareness/motor although still very raw on defense.

NatP4 wrote:I wouldn’t be shocked if Dadiet explodes into the 12ish range similar to Ousmane Dieng a couple years ago. 6’8, athletic, can shoot, doesn’t turn 19 years old until late July, playing pro ball, putting up solid numbers. Checks almost every box.

I like his upside more than Risacher. Looks like a better athlete/slasher, better awareness/motor although still very raw on defense.

While I would likely agree, what is the difference between Pacome Dadiet and Trentyn Flowers who just turned 19 in March and is playing for the Adelaide 36ers in the NBL (Australia)?

Pacome Dadiet (6'8" and 190 lbs) = 6.8 pts, 2.6 reb, 0.8 ast, 0.5 stl, 0.1 blk in 15 minutes per game
Trentyn Flowers (6'8" and 205 lbs) = 5.2 pts, 2.9 reb, 0.4 ast, 0.3 stl, 0.1 blk in 12 minutes per game

dohboy_24 wrote:

NatP4 wrote:I wouldn’t be shocked if Dadiet explodes into the 12ish range similar to Ousmane Dieng a couple years ago. 6’8, athletic, can shoot, doesn’t turn 19 years old until late July, playing pro ball, putting up solid numbers. Checks almost every box.

I like his upside more than Risacher. Looks like a better athlete/slasher, better awareness/motor although still very raw on defense.

While I would likely agree, what is the difference between Pacome Dadiet and Trentyn Flowers who just turned 19 in March and is playing for the Adelaide 36ers in the NBL (Australia)?

Pacome Dadiet (6'8" and 190 lbs) = 6.8 pts, 2.6 reb, 0.8 ast, 0.5 stl, 0.1 blk in 15 minutes per game
Trentyn Flowers (6'8" and 205 lbs) = 5.2 pts, 2.9 reb, 0.4 ast, 0.3 stl, 0.1 blk in 12 minutes per game

not much, Flowers should probably be getting more noise tbh, if not his play just on his RSCI ranking and potential archetype in the league.

I’d say the NBL is better competition, but the per 36 numbers are noticeably different between the two:

Flowers: 13.8 points 7.7 rebounds 1.5 assists 0.2 blocks 0.6 steals 3.7 turnovers 52% TS

Dadiet: 15.1 points 5.1 rebounds 1.3 assists 0.3 blocks 1.3 steals 2.0 turnovers 59.3% TS

Flowers is older, doesn’t get steals or blocks, has a horrendous A/TO ratio and is inefficient. His FT% doesn’t project well at 65%. 89 offensive rating 115 defensive rating is shockingly terrible.

And I like Flowers as a high upside round 2 pick, just really like Dadiet.

seeing DiVincenzo and Hart being elite role players should provide talent evaluators floors for guys like Sheppard and Castle. Both seem at minimum capable of becoming those types of players imo. They're both better prospects than they were by far. Collier is without a doubt a better prospect than Brunson was. Dillingham is a better prospect than Maxey was. See a trend? You are all way too hard on this draft class. I just don't get how you can't see it.

Judging off the top 25 guys for online consensus board

Guys I'm 4 spots off (+/-) compared to consensus currently:

Higher than consensus - Edey, Holmes II, McCain, Filipowski, Clingan, Sheppard

Lower than consensus - Walter, Risacher, Sarr, Holland, Salaun, Collier, Buzelis, C Williams

FarBeyondDriven wrote:seeing DiVincenzo and Hart being elite role players should provide talent evaluators floors for guys like Sheppard and Castle. Both seem at minimum capable of becoming those types of players imo. They're both better prospects than they were by far. Collier is without a doubt a better prospect than Brunson was. Dillingham is a better prospect than Maxey was. See a trend? You are all way too hard on this draft class. I just don't get how you can't see it.

Let's see those measurements. Sheppard and Dillingham concern me, as does Jared McCain. I want to see how tall they really are.

Chuck Everett wrote:The point of attack defense being played in these playoffs might be making the case that Stephon Castle should be going in the top 3. If the Spurs have a chance to grab him, they really should.

I'm not really following the logic behind either sentence here..care to elaborate?

FarBeyondDriven wrote:seeing DiVincenzo and Hart being elite role players should provide talent evaluators floors for guys like Sheppard and Castle. Both seem at minimum capable of becoming those types of players imo. They're both better prospects than they were by far. Collier is without a doubt a better prospect than Brunson was. Dillingham is a better prospect than Maxey was. See a trend? You are all way too hard on this draft class. I just don't get how you can't see it.

Brunson is ridiculously smart and is one of the best shooters in NBA history.

Brunson shot over 40% from three and over 50% from 3 to 16 feet despite having to self create almost everything.

.... Collier shot 67% from the free throw line.

Maxey has elite physical tools, Dillingham has the worst physical tools of any prospect projected in the top 10 in the last decade other than Trae Young.

Tyrese at the draft weighed more than 20 pounds more than Dillingham while being massively more explosive and fast.

These are very weird comparisons. Brunson was disliked in the draft due to his lack of athleticism while Maxey slipped due having questionable PG skills and a questionable jumpshot. These have nothing in common with Collier or Dillingham. Collier doesn't care about winning, lacks the size to score in the paint or defend very well, and is a bad shooter. Dillingham is an awful defender with very bad athletic tools.

clyde21 wrote:

dohboy_24 wrote:

NatP4 wrote:I wouldn’t be shocked if Dadiet explodes into the 12ish range similar to Ousmane Dieng a couple years ago. 6’8, athletic, can shoot, doesn’t turn 19 years old until late July, playing pro ball, putting up solid numbers. Checks almost every box.

I like his upside more than Risacher. Looks like a better athlete/slasher, better awareness/motor although still very raw on defense.

While I would likely agree, what is the difference between Pacome Dadiet and Trentyn Flowers who just turned 19 in March and is playing for the Adelaide 36ers in the NBL (Australia)?

Pacome Dadiet (6'8" and 190 lbs) = 6.8 pts, 2.6 reb, 0.8 ast, 0.5 stl, 0.1 blk in 15 minutes per game
Trentyn Flowers (6'8" and 205 lbs) = 5.2 pts, 2.9 reb, 0.4 ast, 0.3 stl, 0.1 blk in 12 minutes per game

not much, Flowers should probably be getting more noise tbh, if not his play just on his RSCI ranking and potential archetype in the league.

Not only did Flowers only play 12 MPG (on a team that finished 9th place in a 10 team league) but he missed the 2nd half of the season..didn't play in a game since december. Didn't really show any ability to play defense.

I don't really see him as a legit draft prospect.

FarBeyondDriven wrote:seeing DiVincenzo and Hart being elite role players should provide talent evaluators floors for guys like Sheppard and Castle. Both seem at minimum capable of becoming those types of players imo. They're both better prospects than they were by far. Collier is without a doubt a better prospect than Brunson was. Dillingham is a better prospect than Maxey was. See a trend? You are all way too hard on this draft class. I just don't get how you can't see it.

Castle cannot shoot. Not only that, he has a slow, low release. Cannot for the life of me figure out why he's a top 8 pick. He's Fultz with less explosiveness and shot making. A guy that you are like...okay, he's somewhat useful but ultimately trying to replace down the line

The Moose wrote:

Read on Twitter

Judging off the top 25 guys for online consensus board

Guys I'm 4 spots off (+/-) compared to consensus currently:

Higher than consensus - Edey, Holmes II, McCain, Filipowski, Clingan, Sheppard

Lower than consensus - Walter, Risacher, Sarr, Holland, Salaun, Collier, Buzelis, C Williams

Djurisic at 56. Topic at 2.

seems as though either Topic is too high or Djurisic is way too low. just doesn't seem like they are separated by nearly that much.

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

The Moose wrote:

Read on Twitter

Judging off the top 25 guys for online consensus board

Guys I'm 4 spots off (+/-) compared to consensus currently:

Higher than consensus - Edey, Holmes II, McCain, Filipowski, Clingan, Sheppard

Lower than consensus - Walter, Risacher, Sarr, Holland, Salaun, Collier, Buzelis, C Williams

Djurisic at 56. Topic at 2.

seems as though either Topic is too high or Djurisic is way too low. just doesn't seem like they are separated by nearly that much.

Anchoring bias - when a guy is ranked in a certain spot (or range) VERY early in the draft cycle. People just keep him there and don't adjust (or take a super long time to adjust) to new information, such as a player (Djurisic) showing a ton of development over the course of a season...or a player (Topic) not being able to sustain the level of play/production that they showed early in the season on a small sample size of games..or getting injured for 3.5 months..