Brandon Miller - Alabama

[3toheadmelo]

If Tatum was seen as such a great prospect he wouldn't have gone 3rd behind Fultz & Lonzo.

Boston had the #1 pick and traded down for Tatum.

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller?

There wasn't a freaking Wemby in Tatums draft.

guess Miller isn’t so amazing then.

[Big J]

Boston had the #1 pick and traded down for Tatum.

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller?

There wasn't a freaking Wemby in Tatums draft.

guess Miller isn’t so amazing then.

Okay bro, Spurs wouldn't even trade Wemby for current Tatum.

[3toheadmelo]

There wasn't a freaking Wemby in Tatums draft.

guess Miller isn’t so amazing then.

Okay bro, Spurs wouldn't even trade Wemby for current Tatum.

I don’t live in a hypothetical world my friend. I live in reality. You said if Tatum was so great he would’ve went #1. Yet ignoring the fact the team with the #1 pick traded down for him.

[Skhraeurpl]

Tatum was a significantly better prospect than Miller. I don’t really see the comparison

If Tatum was seen as such a great prospect he wouldn't have gone 3rd behind Fultz & Lonzo.

Just because the nba world was caught up in “find the next steph” and rejecting the iso heavy style of the Melo archetype doesn’t mean Tatum wasn’t the better prospect.

teams making bone headed moves on draft night isn’t proof positive of who the better prospect is.

[Big J]

guess Miller isn’t so amazing then.

Okay bro, Spurs wouldn't even trade Wemby for current Tatum.

I don’t live in a hypothetical world my friend. I live in reality. You said if Tatum was so great he would’ve went #1. Yet ignoring the fact the team with the #1 pick traded down for him.

That has nothing to do with where he was selected. Are the Spurs going to trade away the #1 pick in hopes that Wemby drops to 3?

[3toheadmelo]

Okay bro, Spurs wouldn't even trade Wemby for current Tatum.

I don’t live in a hypothetical world my friend. I live in reality. You said if Tatum was so great he would’ve went #1. Yet ignoring the fact the team with the #1 pick traded down for him.

That has nothing to do with where he was selected. Are the Spurs going to trade away the #1 pick in hopes that Wemby drops to 3?

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller since he’s so amazing?

[3toheadmelo]

Tatum was a significantly better prospect than Miller. I don’t really see the comparison

If Tatum was seen as such a great prospect he wouldn't have gone 3rd behind Fultz & Lonzo.

Just because the nba world was caught up in “find the next steph” and rejecting the iso heavy style of the Melo archetype doesn’t mean Tatum wasn’t the better prospect.

teams making bone headed moves on draft night isn’t proof positive of who the better prospect is.

He must’ve been arguing Sam Bowie was better than Jordan back then

[Big J]

I don’t live in a hypothetical world my friend. I live in reality. You said if Tatum was so great he would’ve went #1. Yet ignoring the fact the team with the #1 pick traded down for him.

That has nothing to do with where he was selected. Are the Spurs going to trade away the #1 pick in hopes that Wemby drops to 3?

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller since he’s so amazing?

The entire NBA besides Boston valued Tatum at 3 in a much weaker draft. They never would have traded down 2 spots if he was projected to go 1st or 2nd. Miller is valued at 2 or 3 in a much stronger draft.

[3toheadmelo]

That has nothing to do with where he was selected. Are the Spurs going to trade away the #1 pick in hopes that Wemby drops to 3?

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller since he’s so amazing?

The entire NBA besides Boston valued Tatum at 3 in a much weaker draft. They never would have traded down 2 spots if he was projected to go 1st or 2nd. Miller is valued at 2 or 3 in a much stronger draft.

So where players go in the draft means they're automatically better? Like Sam Bowie going before Jordan? Darko before Melo? Frank Ntilikina before Donovan mitchell? Your argument is ridiculous.

[Big J]

Are the spurs going to trade down for Miller since he’s so amazing?

The entire NBA besides Boston valued Tatum at 3 in a much weaker draft. They never would have traded down 2 spots if he was projected to go 1st or 2nd. Miller is valued at 2 or 3 in a much stronger draft.

So where players go in the draft means they're automatically better? Like Sam Bowie going before Jordan? Darko before Melo? Frank Ntilikina before Donovan mitchell? Your argument is ridiculous.

No, it doesn't mean they were better, but it shows how the entire NBA values them as prospects. Tatum was valued as a 3 in a weak draft and Miller is valued as a top 2/3 in a draft with a strong top. Tatum wasn't valued higher as a prospect than Miller is heading into their respective drafts. That has been my whole point this entire time.

[3toheadmelo]

The entire NBA besides Boston valued Tatum at 3 in a much weaker draft. They never would have traded down 2 spots if he was projected to go 1st or 2nd. Miller is valued at 2 or 3 in a much stronger draft.

So where players go in the draft means they're automatically better? Like Sam Bowie going before Jordan? Darko before Melo? Frank Ntilikina before Donovan mitchell? Your argument is ridiculous.

No, it doesn't mean they were better, but it shows how the entire NBA values them as prospects. Tatum was valued as a 3 in a weak draft and Miller is valued as a top 2/3 in a draft with a strong top. Tatum wasn't valued higher as a prospect than Miller is heading into their respective drafts. That has been my whole point this entire time.

You don't know that the "entire NBA" valued Tatum that way unless you personally knew all of their draft boards.

Either way, I can care less about how teams value players anyways. We've seen many teams make mistakes like I stated above. I had Tatum as the #1 player in his draft class.

My post was mainly about the comparisons from a basketball standpoint. Tatum is a much better prospect than Miller and I don't see the comparison since they're pretty much different players. Tatum out of Duke was a very polished 3 level scorer. Miller is a below average isolation scorer.

[mattao313]

People are really underating Tatum's athleticism here. He's actually a good athlete. Sure, he isn't LeBron or Anthony Edwards, but he's quite athletic compared to the genuine NBA average for a player of his size.

No he isn't he's pretty average he's just really skilled and is a huge oversized perimeter player.

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

But isn't his size a big consideration when you compare athleticism on a relative basis?

I.e. you compare Tatum's athleticism to the average 6'9" SF/PF combo forward.

You don't compare Nate Robinson's athleticism (first step, vertical jump etc) against Westbrook's, without taking into consideration Westbrook's size....

I guess but he just isn't a great athlete he's like a kawhi leonard type really skilled and great size but neither him or kawhi are standout athletes.

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

[HotelVitale]

Tatum was a significantly better prospect than Miller. I don’t really see the comparison

If Tatum was seen as such a great prospect he wouldn't have gone 3rd behind Fultz & Lonzo.

Just because the nba world was caught up in “find the next steph” and rejecting the iso heavy style of the Melo archetype doesn’t mean Tatum wasn’t the better prospect.

teams making bone headed moves on draft night isn’t proof positive of who the better prospect is.

I agree Tatum was a better prospect than Miller (since I’m relatively low on him) but the entire nba world wasn’t caught up in some dumb narrative and no one was boneheaded to not see Tatum as clearly the best prospect of that class.

You’re talking at the level of player ‘type,’ and you’re probably right that Tatum got dinged a little bit for being seen as an iso perimeter specialist. But played don’t succeed or fail because they’re a certain type, and their draft stock rarely relies much on that too. The reason Tatum wasn’t a clear cut #1 wasn’t his type but that he also wasn’t an awesome prospect for his type— a tall iso specialist. He didn’t destroy the NCAA like Carmelo or score 100% at will like KD, and he didn’t even do that well at shooting pretty open shots. He was good enough at his role, and he also did play pretty good defense and show some solid passing skills, and that all kept people intrigued enough to place him in the top tier of that draft class.

But honestly no one would’ve been able to predict that he’d definitely become elite at his strengths in the pros based on college tape. Why assume he’d become one of the world’s best at shooting step backs 3s at volume, and also drawing fouls off drives, and also pass and create beautifully in the flow? It’s not that you couldn’t see potential for that, but was there any reason to think he’d reach full potential with all of it? (While Fultz would actually regress and Ball sort of flatline.) Tatum deserves huge credit and respect for achieving potential but always think it’s the quickest way to bad draft/prospect talk to judge draft time decisions based on who develops well in the nba. That’s why this whole thing is so hard.

And why someone like me who doesn’t quite get the Brandon Miller hype is still prepared to be wrong. I can definitely see how he’d be killer if the shot translates right away and he’s able to add things around it and make his dribble game pop. I just don’t see any reason to think that’s more likely than that someone else in his range does that.

[Skhraeurpl]

If Tatum was seen as such a great prospect he wouldn't have gone 3rd behind Fultz & Lonzo.

Just because the nba world was caught up in “find the next steph” and rejecting the iso heavy style of the Melo archetype doesn’t mean Tatum wasn’t the better prospect.

teams making bone headed moves on draft night isn’t proof positive of who the better prospect is.

I agree Tatum was a better prospect than Miller (since I’m relatively low on him) but the entire nba world wasn’t caught up in some dumb narrative and no one was boneheaded to not see Tatum as clearly the best prospect of that class.

You’re talking at the level of player ‘type,’ and you’re probably right that Tatum got dinged a little bit for being seen as an iso perimeter specialist. But played don’t succeed or fail because they’re a certain type, and their draft stock rarely relies much on that too. The reason Tatum wasn’t a clear cut #1 wasn’t his type but that he also wasn’t an awesome prospect for his type— a tall iso specialist. He didn’t destroy the NCAA like Carmelo or score 100% at will like KD, and he didn’t even do that well at shooting pretty open shots. He was good enough at his role, and he also did play pretty good defense and show some solid passing skills, and that all kept people intrigued enough to place him in the top tier of that draft class.

But honestly no one would’ve been able to predict that he’d definitely become elite at his strengths in the pros based on college tape. Why assume he’d become one of the world’s best at shooting step backs 3s at volume, and also drawing fouls off drives, and also pass and create beautifully in the flow? It’s not that you couldn’t see potential for that, but was there any reason to think he’d reach full potential with all of it? (While Fultz would actually regress and Ball sort of flatline.) Tatum deserves huge credit and respect for achieving potential but always think it’s the quickest way to bad draft/prospect talk to judge draft time decisions based on who develops well in the nba. That’s why this whole thing is so hard.

And why someone like me who doesn’t quite get the Brandon Miller hype is still prepared to be wrong. I can definitely see how he’d be killer if the shot translates right away and he’s able to add things around it and make his dribble game pop. I just don’t see any reason to think that’s more likely than that someone else in his range does that.

It was pretty bone headed to take the guy who shot sideways over Tatum.

[HotelVitale]

Just because the nba world was caught up in “find the next steph” and rejecting the iso heavy style of the Melo archetype doesn’t mean Tatum wasn’t the better prospect.

teams making bone headed moves on draft night isn’t proof positive of who the better prospect is.

I agree Tatum was a better prospect than Miller (since I’m relatively low on him) but the entire nba world wasn’t caught up in some dumb narrative and no one was boneheaded to not see Tatum as clearly the best prospect of that class.

You’re talking at the level of player ‘type,’ and you’re probably right that Tatum got dinged a little bit for being seen as an iso perimeter specialist. But played don’t succeed or fail because they’re a certain type, and their draft stock rarely relies much on that too. The reason Tatum wasn’t a clear cut #1 wasn’t his type but that he also wasn’t an awesome prospect for his type— a tall iso specialist. He didn’t destroy the NCAA like Carmelo or score 100% at will like KD, and he didn’t even do that well at shooting pretty open shots. He was good enough at his role, and he also did play pretty good defense and show some solid passing skills, and that all kept people intrigued enough to place him in the top tier of that draft class.

But honestly no one would’ve been able to predict that he’d definitely become elite at his strengths in the pros based on college tape. Why assume he’d become one of the world’s best at shooting step backs 3s at volume, and also drawing fouls off drives, and also pass and create beautifully in the flow? It’s not that you couldn’t see potential for that, but was there any reason to think he’d reach full potential with all of it? (While Fultz would actually regress and Ball sort of flatline.) Tatum deserves huge credit and respect for achieving potential but always think it’s the quickest way to bad draft/prospect talk to judge draft time decisions based on who develops well in the nba. That’s why this whole thing is so hard.

And why someone like me who doesn’t quite get the Brandon Miller hype is still prepared to be wrong. I can definitely see how he’d be killer if the shot translates right away and he’s able to add things around it and make his dribble game pop. I just don’t see any reason to think that’s more likely than that someone else in his range does that.

It was pretty bone headed to take the guy who shot sideways over Tatum.

Just like it would’ve been boneheaded for the Warriors to take his brother—who shot like trash his year before the draft—in 2020 over an athletic and extremely coordinated huge guy who’d looked great in limited minutes at lower levels.

[HotelVitale]

^Also, call it petty but I did just throw 3headtomelo’s name into the search bar above—he defended Tatum’s overlooked potential in one post and was definitely right on that, but here’s what he actually committed to at the end of the day: “fultz, smith, tatum will be the best players out of this draft IMO.” I’m not trying to knock it cuz none of us guess any better than that when everything shakes out, but can’t really tout yourself for calling out Tatum’s clear superiority—when you also couldn’t decide if two total busts were better than him at the time.

Not trying to take cheap shots, and I actually think you’re right about Tatum vs Miller as prospects—Miller has weaker tools and I worry about him if his shot doesn’t translate beautifully. My point is the same as always: respect the unknowns and guesswork of all this stuff, and don’t pretend there’s any hack or strategy you have that others don’t that’s going to allow you to see who can perform and improve at the next level. We’re all wrong about this a lot more than we’re right, and when we’re super right or super wrong it’s usually not even for the reasons we think at draft time.

[Big J]

I knew that dude was full of ****.

[GSWFan1994]

Brandon Miller got mononucleosis, lost 13 lbs, affecting his recent workouts.

Link.

[SeattleJazzFan]

And…boom

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=NAvwQvsF5iVBLrA17Lx5eA

[clyde21]

shut the franchise down