The (way too early) 2024 Draft thread. Woo! Tanking!

[nate33]

Whereas Deni has shown that he will be a starter, I don't think we have seen that from Bilal quite yet (arguable though).

Given his development so far and what we know about his work ethic, I think it's a pretty sure thing that Bilal will develop into at least a Jaden McDaniels tier 3&D wing who is excellent with the "D" part at at least passable with the "3" part. That's good enough to be a starter.

His ceiling is much higher, depending on how well he learns to shoot and how much off-the-dribble game he develops. I have no idea where that will pan out.

If we end up seeing what I suspect, that that the team has a similar trendline as the previous rebuild (implode in '08, attempt to qualify for playoffs in '13-'14 after botching what should have been year 1 of the rebuild ('09 draft), so basically 4-5 years if its ideal, but we all know we're starting from behind in a tougher lottery environment, though a similar idiotic decision which intiated the wrong footed starting of the rebuild. That's part of what I'm after, Bilal could be relevant, Deni could be relevant, both should be, as either building blocks or trade pieces, but it does have me wondering when people reference Kispert as a complimentary part of the rebuild, what they see happening?

Kispert is a '99, he'll be 27 or 28 when we have our first winning season if literally almost everything goes right (of course, if it doesn't, god knows where and when we'll be relevant)....So how relevant is he really? His contract is up after next season when he's restricted, do we trade him? Do we keep him? Do we just let him walk.

I'm curious what people think of the roster, I agree w/the sentiment that right now, it's really almost completely empty of players who will be around during the '27-'28 season and beyond.

I don't think it's realistic to expect every single player in the team that you build to be just 2-3 years apart in age. There's nothing wrong with having a core of guys born in the 2004-2006 range and then have a few older vets like Deni and Kispert who are 3 to 5 years older. We can contend for a title with Cooper Flagg at age 24 and Kispert at age 29. It helps a lot that we take advantage of our cap flexibility and sign the older guys to descending contracts so that they're affordable when it comes time to pay the younger guys after their rookie contracts expire.

I'm also not opposed to moving Kispert if the right deal falls into place, but I'm not actively shopping him. I like him. He is a good fit in the locker room and as a movement shooter on a team that desperately needs shooting.

[doclinkin]

Comparables: ...Marcus Smart.

I didn't include Jimmy Butler or Kawhi as alot of people have. Why? Because most of Jimmy & Kawhi's development was after they came into the league. It's very hard to assume a prospect will follow the same path post draft as Jimmy & Kawhi have. That development path is in top #1 of NBA players and far outside of norm.

Overall I see Castle as a fringe lottery pick based on him being a ++defender early in his career I think he'd be solid late lottery pick in most years. I would not consider him in the top 5 ... it feels like a reach.

Surprisingly I agree with this.

My assessment is that this year everybody is a reach. Those of us who are high on Castle think there is an outside chance that he develops as Butler and Kawhi have. That is, his swift adjustment to a winning team, his mindset and intangibles, the upside of his building strength, and his usefulness as a plug-in defender, all point to a player that could eventually develop into a really nice piece. His game subsumed swiftly to the very guy that team needed him to be.

His chief flaw is fixable. Shooting. As a high school player he relied on his strength and size, the ability to finish after contact, so he tends to jump then adjust midair, as if expecting contact before committing to the shot. Works well in traffic, not so well as a smooth shooting motion. As you note though his 75%+ at the line suggests his stroke can be smoothed out with practice. This front office seems to have a solid developmental team in place. Our young players showed signs of fixing the exact things they needed to over the course of the season. Can Castle improve? Seems likely. He's going to get stronger, and in all probability begin to shoot better over time. He's not cross-eyed or whatnot. He just needs work. Is he likely to work? All signs point to yes.

So, in most draft years you'd be happy to take him at 10. Castle vs Johnny Davis. Castle vs Corey Kispert. Castle vs Deni Avdija. You could make an argument for and against in any of those draft years. Or Anthony Black, say, whose numbers are equivalent to Castle.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=stephon-castle--anthony-black

(Anthony Black shot 30% from 3, marginally better than Castle's .267, but worse than him from the FT line (70%). Now Black is shooting .394 in the NBA. What says Castle won't be able to keep pace with Black?)

So, in this depleted draft year, if you could pick Marcus Smart with an upside chance he develops into Jimmy Butler, Jr. is that a guy you would risk a high pick on? Me, I say yes. This year.

Especially if you might get him by trading back from a physical hypertalent who lacks the competitive fire/BBIQ/aptitude to develop the tools they were born with. I'm down on Sarr precisely because he has been in the Euro developmental pipeline for so long and has not developed real basketball skills that fit his position. Still plays like he wants to be an oversized guard. Still does not defend below the basket or collect defensive boards. Or finish underneath. He has been tall for a long time. Still plays nervous in traffic, seems to me. In my eyes: Select Sarr then trade him for a pick, plus a guy on the Marcus Smart to Jimmy Butler spectrum. One who has shown NBA level fire, if not quite NBA range and form in his jumper. Why pick a defensive big who plays small in the middle? I'm willing to be loud wrong on this, but I want a defender who intimidates, not one who is Daniel Gafford without the interior finishing skills. I'd rather pick up my elite shutdown perimeter defender now, plus future chances to land a real star. Or an interior big that scares people later on.

We will see in measurements and at the combine. I bet a lot shifts at the top based on those numbers and how players perform in skills testing/workouts.

[Dat2U]

Dat, most of the draft boards have Holland around ten. What do you see in him that makes you so high on him? Thanks!

Athleticism ... he's quick twitch with an elite first step. Probably the best first step in this draft cycle. His motor runs hot as well. He had some really good games in the G-league (along with his fair share of stinkers). Shows some scoring chops just lacks polish. Jump shot is swing skill but I think he's clearly got a higher ceiling than Castle and every other wing available.

[nate33]

Read on Twitter

This was an extremely good breakdown.

The article makes a real good case that Sarr's weak defensive rebounding numbers are mostly scheme-related. He does a lot of switching at the point of attack so he is not in the paint to be the rebounder. And judging from his offensive rebounding numbers, it's not like he lacks the ability to rebound in traffic.

So if his rebounding is actually fine, and we know his ability to contest defensively is going to be quite good, that means he'll project as an exceptional all around defender with the versatility to play multiple defensive styles. That alone is enough for me to be pretty comfortable drafting him. Having a top 10 defensive center is almost a pre-requisite for success in today's game.

The big question is his offense. It's not good. As of now, he lacks the strength and explosion to finish around the rim against center-sized defenders, and he isn't quick enough with the ball to blow past guys in space like Chet does. His 3-point shooting is underwhelming though at least his shot is not broken. His one above-average offensive skill is a nice off-the-dribble pullup game in the midrange - but that's not the bread-and-butter of an efficient offense.

If his 3-point shot improves, then he's a defensively switchable Myles Turner. If his midrange game improves, he may become a high post operator like Bam Adebayo. If neither happens, then he is still Nic Claxton.

[nate33]

Dat, most of the draft boards have Holland around ten. What do you see in him that makes you so high on him? Thanks!

Athleticism ... he's quick twitch with an elite first step. Probably the best first step in this draft cycle. His motor runs hot as well. He had some really good games in the G-league (along with his fair share of stinkers). Shows some scoring chops just lacks polish. Jump shot is swing skill but I think he's clearly got a higher ceiling than Castle and every other wing available.

This is an interesting way to look at it.

In my head, I have an image of Castle as a point guard - maybe just a game managing point guard, but a point guard nevertheless. And I think of Holland is an athletic wing. So I never really think to compare them directly. But if you look at the statistics, they're not that far apart in assists (though Holland is more turnover-prone). If you just categorize both of them as connector wings who would play the same general role in an NBA setting, then if makes sense to compare their production directly. And in that context, why not take Holland who is taller, longer, more athletic, younger, a better scorer and a better rebounder?

[Dat2U]

Comparables: ...Marcus Smart.

I didn't include Jimmy Butler or Kawhi as alot of people have. Why? Because most of Jimmy & Kawhi's development was after they came into the league. It's very hard to assume a prospect will follow the same path post draft as Jimmy & Kawhi have. That development path is in top #1 of NBA players and far outside of norm.

Overall I see Castle as a fringe lottery pick based on him being a ++defender early in his career I think he'd be solid late lottery pick in most years. I would not consider him in the top 5 ... it feels like a reach.

Surprisingly I agree with this.

My assessment is that this year everybody is a reach. Those of us who are high on Castle think there is an outside chance that he develops as Butler and Kawhi have. That is, his swift adjustment to a winning team, his mindset and intangibles, the upside of his building strength, and his usefulness as a plug-in defender, all point to a player that could eventually develop into a really nice piece. His game subsumed swiftly to the very guy that team needed him to be.

His chief flaw is fixable. Shooting. As a high school player he relied on his strength and size, the ability to finish after contact, so he tends to jump then adjust midair, as if expecting contact before committing to the shot. Works well in traffic, not so well as a smooth shooting motion. As you note though his 75%+ at the line suggests his stroke can be smoothed out with practice. This front office seems to have a solid developmental team in place. Our young players showed signs of fixing the exact things they needed to over the course of the season. Can Castle improve? Seems likely. He's going to get stronger, and in all probability begin to shoot better over time. He's not cross-eyed or whatnot. He just needs work. Is he likely to work? All signs point to yes.

So, in most draft years you'd be happy to take him at 10. Castle vs Johnny Davis. Castle vs Corey Kispert. Castle vs Deni Avdija. You could make an argument for and against in any of those draft years. Or Anthony Black, say, whose numbers are equivalent to Castle.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=stephon-castle--anthony-black

(Anthony Black shot 30% from 3, marginally better than Castle's .267, but worse than him from the FT line (70%). Now Black is shooting .394 in the NBA. What says Castle won't be able to keep pace with Black?)

So, in this depleted draft year, if you could pick Marcus Smart with an upside chance he develops into Jimmy Butler, Jr. is that a guy you would risk a high pick on? Me, I say yes. This year.

Especially if you might get him by trading back from a physical hypertalent who lacks the competitive fire/BBIQ/aptitude to develop the tools they were born with. I'm down on Sarr precisely because he has been in the Euro developmental pipeline for so long and has not developed real basketball skills that fit his position. Still plays like he wants to be an oversized guard. Still does not defend below the basket or collect defensive boards. Or finish underneath. He has been tall for a long time. Still plays nervous in traffic, seems to me. In my eyes: Select Sarr then trade him for a pick, plus a guy on the Marcus Smart to Jimmy Butler spectrum. One who has shown NBA level fire, if not quite NBA range and form in his jumper. Why pick a defensive big who plays small in the middle? I'm willing to be loud wrong on this, but I want a defender who intimidates, not one who is Daniel Gafford without the interior finishing skills. I'd rather pick up my elite shutdown perimeter defender now, plus future chances to land a real star. Or an interior big that scares people later on.

We will see in measurements and at the combine. I bet a lot shifts at the top based on those numbers and how players perform in skills testing/workouts.

37 makes in 69 games. That's Delon Wright numbers - a guy I compared him to initially. That means he's not really taking them unless has too - ie. wide open. He still cratered Orlando's offense because no one was viewing him as a real threat from outside.

I simply do not like guards who cannot put constant pressure on the defense off the bounce or don't take 3s in high volume. It's just so hard for guys like that to score on the next level. If a game manager is needed, let's find them at #26 or later because that's where you can usually find one without wasting a high pick.

And pointing to the less than 1% outcome where a guy like Castle turns into Jimmy B or Kawhi seems like wishful thinking. Your getting a low usage role player that your hoping can turn into more. I simply can't assume anything other than what he's shown thus far. I think he'll work his ass off but I thought the same thing of Johnny D but that didn't make him any faster or quicker nor did it improve his handle and if anything his jumper got alot worse.

[Dat2U]

Read on Twitter

This was an extremely good breakdown.

The article makes a real good case that Sarr's weak defensive rebounding numbers are mostly scheme-related. He does a lot of switching at the point of attack so he is not in the paint to be the rebounder. And judging from his offensive rebounding numbers, it's not like he lacks the ability to rebound in traffic.

So if his rebounding is actually fine, and we know his ability to contest defensively is going to be quite good, that means he'll project as an exceptional all around defender with the versatility to play multiple defensive styles. That alone is enough for me to be pretty comfortable drafting him. Having a top 10 defensive center is almost a pre-requisite for success in today's game.

The big question is his offense. It's not good. As of now, he lacks the strength and explosion to finish around the rim against center-sized defenders, and he isn't quick enough with the ball to blow past guys in space like Chet does. His 3-point shooting is underwhelming though at least his shot is not broken. His one above-average offensive skill is a nice off-the-dribble pullup game in the midrange - but that's not the bread-and-butter of an efficient offense.

If his 3-point shot improves, then he's a defensively switchable Myles Turner. If his midrange game improves, he may become a high post operator like Bam Adebayo. If neither happens, then he is still Nic Claxton.

What I like about Sarr is his willingness to take those shots. He's clearly letting them fly which bodes well for his development. Wemby was doing the same thing. The percentages weren't great but he never hesitated about pulling the trigger.

Ibaka is another comparable. A mostly jump shooting big that wrecks havoc defensively.

What was interesting about the report is how Sarr is better at switching than drop coverage which is pretty wild at 7-1. I still don't think he's an ideal #1 pick but he's got a clear pathway to being an impactful NBA player and ++defender along with being a passable shooter.

[DCZards]

Dat, the things that you highlight about Castle are exactly what I like about him and why I would draft Castle in the top 5.

“A guy that goes at his own speed and constantly probes.”

“Excellent in transition. Got a eurostep he loves to pull out on drives. Strong finisher IMO due to craftiness & build.”

“His defense is his calling card and what gets him rotation minutes in the NBA right away. Whether off the ball or on the ball, the awareness and attention to detail is there. He's also disciplined with good lateral quickness. He has the chance to be elite on that end.”

I don't see Castle being timid or lacking in confidence on the offensive end while at UConn. What I saw was a mature, poised 19 year old playing his role on the nation's best college team.

Totally agree that Castle’s shooting is shaky, but, outside of Sarr, and maybe Dillingham, there’s no one in this draft that I’d consider a clearly better prospect than Castle.

I think Castle likely ends up somewhere between Smart and Butler/Kawhi.

[Dat2U]

Dat, the things that you highlight about Castle are exactly what I like about him and why I would draft Castle in the top 5.

“A guy that goes at his own speed and constantly probes.”

“Excellent in transition. Got a eurostep he loves to pull out on drives. Strong finisher IMO due to craftiness & build.”

“His defense is his calling card and what gets him rotation minutes in the NBA right away. Whether off the ball or on the ball, the awareness and attention to detail is there. He's also disciplined with good lateral quickness. He has the chance to be elite on that end.”

I don't see Castle being timid or lacking in confidence on the offensive end while at UConn. What I saw was a mature, poised 19 year old playing his role on the nation's best college team.

Totally agree that Castle’s shooting is shaky, but, outside of Sarr, and maybe Dillingham, there’s no one in this draft that I’d consider a clearly better prospect than Castle.

I think Castle likely ends up somewhere between Smart and Butler/Kawhi.

Matisse Thybulle is an elite defender. One of the best in the league. Would you draft him with a top 5 pick?

If your predicting the 1% percentile development for him where he turns his weaknesses into a strength and becomes an all-star or even franchise player ... then we'll have to agree to disagree. Nothing on his film says he's going to be Butler or Kawhi. It's a projection that doesn't appear realistic.

I

[DCZards]

Dat, the things that you highlight about Castle are exactly what I like about him and why I would draft Castle in the top 5.

“A guy that goes at his own speed and constantly probes.”

“Excellent in transition. Got a eurostep he loves to pull out on drives. Strong finisher IMO due to craftiness & build.”

“His defense is his calling card and what gets him rotation minutes in the NBA right away. Whether off the ball or on the ball, the awareness and attention to detail is there. He's also disciplined with good lateral quickness. He has the chance to be elite on that end.”

I don't see Castle being timid or lacking in confidence on the offensive end while at UConn. What I saw was a mature, poised 19 year old playing his role on the nation's best college team.

Totally agree that Castle’s shooting is shaky, but, outside of Sarr, and maybe Dillingham, there’s no one in this draft that I’d consider a clearly better prospect than Castle.

I think Castle likely ends up somewhere between Smart and Butler/Kawhi.

Matisse Thybulle is an elite defender. One of the best in the league. Would you draft him with a top 5 pick?

If your predicting the 1% percentile development for him where he turns his weaknesses into a strength and becomes an all-star or even franchise player ... then we'll have to agree to disagree. Nothing on his film says he's going to be Butler or Kawhi. It's a projection that doesn't appear realistic.

I

I hate comparisons. If it’s fair to compare Castle to Thybulle is it then also fair to compare Dillingham to Colin Sexton? Would you draft Sexton with a top 5 pick?

Wouldn’t be the first time we agree to disagree.

[nate33]

If your predicting the 1% percentile development for him where he turns his weaknesses into a strength and becomes an all-star or even franchise player ... then we'll have to agree to disagree. Nothing on his film says he's going to be Butler or Kawhi. It's a projection that doesn't appear realistic.

I

Thank you for making this point. It's an argument that bugs me too. You just can't compare any incoming draft pick to guys like Butler, Kawhi, Nash or Brunson who had absolutely insane, top 1% improvement after they entered the league. Improvement arcs like that are massive outliers that should never be baked into an assessment of a draft pick.

[The Consiglieri]

Given his development so far and what we know about his work ethic, I think it's a pretty sure thing that Bilal will develop into at least a Jaden McDaniels tier 3&D wing who is excellent with the "D" part at at least passable with the "3" part. That's good enough to be a starter.

His ceiling is much higher, depending on how well he learns to shoot and how much off-the-dribble game he develops. I have no idea where that will pan out.

If we end up seeing what I suspect, that that the team has a similar trendline as the previous rebuild (implode in '08, attempt to qualify for playoffs in '13-'14 after botching what should have been year 1 of the rebuild ('09 draft), so basically 4-5 years if its ideal, but we all know we're starting from behind in a tougher lottery environment, though a similar idiotic decision which intiated the wrong footed starting of the rebuild. That's part of what I'm after, Bilal could be relevant, Deni could be relevant, both should be, as either building blocks or trade pieces, but it does have me wondering when people reference Kispert as a complimentary part of the rebuild, what they see happening?

Kispert is a '99, he'll be 27 or 28 when we have our first winning season if literally almost everything goes right (of course, if it doesn't, god knows where and when we'll be relevant)....So how relevant is he really? His contract is up after next season when he's restricted, do we trade him? Do we keep him? Do we just let him walk.

I'm curious what people think of the roster, I agree w/the sentiment that right now, it's really almost completely empty of players who will be around during the '27-'28 season and beyond.

I don't think it's realistic to expect every single player in the team that you build to be just 2-3 years apart in age. There's nothing wrong with having a core of guys born in the 2004-2006 range and then have a few older vets like Deni and Kispert who are 3 to 5 years older. We can contend for a title with Cooper Flagg at age 24 and Kispert at age 29. It helps a lot that we take advantage of our cap flexibility and sign the older guys to descending contracts so that they're affordable when it comes time to pay the younger guys after their rookie contracts expire.

I'm also not opposed to moving Kispert if the right deal falls into place, but I'm not actively shopping him. I like him. He is a good fit in the locker room and as a movement shooter on a team that desperately needs shooting.

Thanks for your thoughts and those of others. I'm really curious on this topic as you can probably tell as in looking at the lottery changes, and how bad/barren the roster looks, I definitely think this team is either rock bottom, or in that 25-35 zone for all of the following seasons at minimum:

'24-'25
'25-'26
'26-'27

I think '27-'28 is likely unless we hit on a once a decade/once a half decade caliber talent, and get legit hits in 2 other drafts as well, so to me, the fire year we approach .500 is probably spring '28 at the earliest. As such I'm curious how people think the roster should be handled by '25-'26 and '26-'27 with guys like Kispert and Deni. I think it's more relevant with a Deni because he has more value to us, and more value in trade than Kispert, but it all matters, if you're not going to be close to .500 let alone contending across the next 2-3 seasons minimum, how do you handle guys like those and what's the best use of their value? Beyond who we land w/our own picks, the handling of Deni and Kispert as vets with some degree of value is probably the next most important question.

As we usually see this time of year, we get into fierce debates over which guys are gonna bust, which guys are gonna be floor, which are gonna be worthwhile, and why we're gonna screw this up, and at times I think it can miss on the bigger longer term issue of how to lay out what to do with lottery odds like this, the Sun's swaps etc, and how to build out the future? Whether to trade picks for future picks, or trade down etc, how many youngsters we can afford to take on in any given year, how to use stash in Europe potential etc.

I'm more curious about the team building thing than anything because that's both the whole point, and this draft also seems highly unlikely to move the needle much in terms of the long term build, so hearing how you guys process how to value and use guys like Kispert and Deni is really, what fascinates me even moreso than these particular prospects. Thanks again for your thoughts.

[dckingsfan]

If we end up seeing what I suspect, that that the team has a similar trendline as the previous rebuild (implode in '08, attempt to qualify for playoffs in '13-'14 after botching what should have been year 1 of the rebuild ('09 draft), so basically 4-5 years if its ideal, but we all know we're starting from behind in a tougher lottery environment, though a similar idiotic decision which intiated the wrong footed starting of the rebuild. That's part of what I'm after, Bilal could be relevant, Deni could be relevant, both should be, as either building blocks or trade pieces, but it does have me wondering when people reference Kispert as a complimentary part of the rebuild, what they see happening?

Kispert is a '99, he'll be 27 or 28 when we have our first winning season if literally almost everything goes right (of course, if it doesn't, god knows where and when we'll be relevant)....So how relevant is he really? His contract is up after next season when he's restricted, do we trade him? Do we keep him? Do we just let him walk.

I'm curious what people think of the roster, I agree w/the sentiment that right now, it's really almost completely empty of players who will be around during the '27-'28 season and beyond.

I don't think it's realistic to expect every single player in the team that you build to be just 2-3 years apart in age. There's nothing wrong with having a core of guys born in the 2004-2006 range and then have a few older vets like Deni and Kispert who are 3 to 5 years older. We can contend for a title with Cooper Flagg at age 24 and Kispert at age 29. It helps a lot that we take advantage of our cap flexibility and sign the older guys to descending contracts so that they're affordable when it comes time to pay the younger guys after their rookie contracts expire.

I'm also not opposed to moving Kispert if the right deal falls into place, but I'm not actively shopping him. I like him. He is a good fit in the locker room and as a movement shooter on a team that desperately needs shooting.

Thanks for your thoughts and those of others. I'm really curious on this topic as you can probably tell as in looking at the lottery changes, and how bad/barren the roster looks, I definitely think this team is either rock bottom, or in that 25-35 zone for all of the following seasons at minimum:

'24-'25
'25-'26
'26-'27

I think '27-'28 is likely unless we hit on a once a decade/once a half decade caliber talent, and get legit hits in 2 other drafts as well, so to me, the fire year we approach .500 is probably spring '28 at the earliest. As such I'm curious how people think the roster should be handled by '25-'26 and '26-'27 with guys like Kispert and Deni. I think it's more relevant with a Deni because he has more value to us, and more value in trade than Kispert, but it all matters, if you're not going to be close to .500 let alone contending across the next 2-3 seasons minimum, how do you handle guys like those and what's the best use of their value? Beyond who we land w/our own picks, the handling of Deni and Kispert as vets with some degree of value is probably the next most important question.

As we usually see this time of year, we get into fierce debates over which guys are gonna bust, which guys are gonna be floor, which are gonna be worthwhile, and why we're gonna screw this up, and at times I think it can miss on the bigger longer term issue of how to lay out what to do with lottery odds like this, the Sun's swaps etc, and how to build out the future? Whether to trade picks for future picks, or trade down etc, how many youngsters we can afford to take on in any given year, how to use stash in Europe potential etc.

I'm more curious about the team building thing than anything because that's both the whole point, and this draft also seems highly unlikely to move the needle much in terms of the long term build, so hearing how you guys process how to value and use guys like Kispert and Deni is really, what fascinates me even moreso than these particular prospects. Thanks again for your thoughts.

My 1/2 compared to you two guys... it is that the FO is using declining contracts that is going to make this possible.

Either that asset continues to deliver or (hopefully) becomes a more valuable asset over time. (To do what Doc described earlier in the thread).

[doclinkin]

Matisse Thybulle is an elite defender. One of the best in the league. Would you draft him with a top 5 pick?

If your predicting the 1% percentile development for him where he turns his weaknesses into a strength and becomes an all-star or even franchise player ... then we'll have to agree to disagree. Nothing on his film says he's going to be Butler or Kawhi. It's a projection that doesn't appear realistic.

I don't think I'm saying he'll be Jimmy Butler. I'm saying he has room for improvement in the areas where his game falls short. Yes. But has shown the aptitude, work ethic, frame, and track record to improve in that area, with nothing preventing him from doing so. Like bButler, I expect him to consistently improve over his career. Where that tops out is anyone's guess.

If your thought is that he lacks offensive skills entirely, cannot improve, and will only be a defensive sub his entire career, I'm willing to bet you are way wrong on that. When selecting a player for upside, you want the balance of athleticism, length for position, frame to build strength, AND BBIQ, instincts, competitiveness, to arrive at a conclusion of how likely and possible it is for a player to achieve their upside. When you have a young player with a track record that shows good marks in all of the above, its a good bet they won't stay static, but will continue that growth. So what is the top end of that growth curve and can they reach it?

I think people get too hung up on their opinion of what a draft position is 'worth'. Top pick. 1-5. Whatever. I think it is more a question of when you look back at their career, will people say this guy is one of the top 5 best players in this draft? Is this a player likely to improve. Do they have the foundation to build on. Are they going to max out on their progression or is there something preventing them from doing so.

You can cite Johnny Davis. But Davis measured small, was never going to add strength or length, was an undersized high-usage low-efficiency 2-guard with obvious flaws-- and aside from hustle on defense and hard work, did nothing in particular unless he had the ball. He was never going to be an auxiliary glue guy. Even if he added range he still would need to add playmaking, length, offball skills, etc. pretty much everything. Plus height.

Whereas Castle has everything he would need to succeed as a superior role-player coming into the league, and only needs to show the offensive aggression he displayed in highschool in head to head match-ups against Collier. And a shooting coach. He has shown the aptitude to adjust to what his team needed, on a squad that had high volume attackers, and an outside gunning specialist. His job on UConn was not to put up shots that Spencer and Karaban got off the screens he set. His job was to get them open. Cut to the basket on backdoor attacks. Feed the post and play a 2-man game with Clingan. In short order he fit in with an established team and role, then amplified that role and improved over the season. When stakes were highest he played his best. The only way to tell if a player will improve is if they have shown an ability to improve. Castle did. Peaked when it mattered most. And won. If it's me I bet on him being able to continue that trend. Yes the top end of that trend is Jimmy Butler (not Kawhi, who is a freak of nature with a handspan bigger than most Centers). But if you land a guy who tops out as a longer more athletic Marcus Smart. In this draft. I'm thinking that is probably one of the top 5 best players in this draft. And less likely to flame out as a wasted pick on a guy who will never live up to his potential. I am banking on Castle to realize that potential. Based on his history.

If JaVale McGee showed BBIQ and work ethic and a rage to compete as well as the humility to fit in to a scheme and constantly improve, he could have been a HOF player. A Kareem level of superlatives. He didn't and even in college was noted as kinda flaky. His physical make-up was better than Alex Sarr. We will never again see a guy dunk 3 balls at once in a dunk contest. We will never see a guy dunk on 2 baskets at the same time. His career did not live out to his potential. Few do. I think Castle does. Based on the foundation and trends of what he has shown so far.

Work ethic is one factor on upside. It is not the sole factor.

[payitforward]

Our Gm, Will Dawkins, comes from OKC.

Two seasons ago, in 2021-22, the team won 24 games. Here's how the minutes were spread on their roster that year:

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander played just over 1900 minutes.
Kenrich Williams played just under 1100 minutes.
Both players were in their 4th NBA season. Both are still with the team.

Who else played?

The following guys combined to play 6289 minutes:
Josh Giddey
Tre Mann
Aaron Wiggins
Jeremiah Robinson-Earl
Lindy Waters
Olivier Sarr
All six of them were rookies.

Plus, these 4 players accounted for 3019 minutes:
Vit Krejci
Aleksei Pokusevski
Theo Maledon
Mamadi Diakite
All 4 were in their 2d year.

& the following 4 players got 5438 minutes
Darius Bazley
Luguentz Dort
Isaiah Roby
Ty Jerome
They were all 3d-year players.

Let's see... 6 rookies, 4 2d-year players, & 4 3d-year players -- that makes 14 guys
Plus the 2 "oldsters" in their 4th year brings the total to 16.

Tell me, has there been a "problem" developing "too many" young players at the same time in OKC?

Well... OKC was 2d in the league in wins this year.

OKC just swept their opponent in R1 of the playoffs.
OKC just beat Dallas easily Tuesday evening to kick off R2.

So... overall... so far... maybe not?

Yet, even tho OKC has obviously done extremely well, what about the players themselves? The ones mentioned above?

For starters, let me mention that 5 of those 6 rookies from the 21-22 season are still with the team. They did trade Jeremiah Robinson-Earl.

Not to mention that they added 4 more rookies from the next draft -- Chet Holmgren, Jalen Williams, Ousmane Dieng, & Jaylin Williams. Then they added Cason Wallace & Keyontae Johnson in the 2023 draft. & 1 or 2 undrafted rookies as well.

In all, players taken by OKC in the last 3 drafts played about 12,000 of OKC's regular season minutes this year.

So much for the "problem" of developing too many young players at once.

[doclinkin]

Stephon Castle is reportedly 6'6"+ with a 6'9"+ wingspan. Unknown standing reach, but was regularly rebounding among PFs and centers. Eyeball says it would be in the 8'7"-8'8" range. Equivalent to Amen/Ausar/Klay Thompson in reach.

Johnny Davis: 6'4.25" with a 6'8" wingspan, standing reach at 8'7.5" Interesting...
Marcus Smart: 6'2" with an improbable 6'9.25" wingspan, 8'3" standing reach
Jimmy Butler: 6'6" height, 6'7.5" wingspan, 8'5.5" reach
Anthony Black 6'5.75" height, 6'7" wingspan, 8'6.5" reach

I would not have predicted Johnny D's reach was that long. I know he has a short neck.

[80sballboy]

Here are some mocks and lists pre-lottery.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10119200-2024-nba-draft-big-board-top-50-prospects-ahead-of-combine

https://www.si.com/nba/draft/mock-drafts-big-boards/2024-nba-mock-draft-big-board-lottery-week

https://hoopshype.com/lists/2024-aggregate-mock-draft-donovan-clingan-and-zach-edey-rising-before-combine/

[Dat2U]

Matisse Thybulle is an elite defender. One of the best in the league. Would you draft him with a top 5 pick?

If your predicting the 1% percentile development for him where he turns his weaknesses into a strength and becomes an all-star or even franchise player ... then we'll have to agree to disagree. Nothing on his film says he's going to be Butler or Kawhi. It's a projection that doesn't appear realistic.

I don't think I'm saying he'll be Jimmy Butler. I'm saying he has room for improvement in the areas where his game falls short. Yes. But has shown the aptitude, work ethic, frame, and track record to improve in that area, with nothing preventing him from doing so. Like bButler, I expect him to consistently improve over his career. Where that tops out is anyone's guess.

If your thought is that he lacks offensive skills entirely, cannot improve, and will only be a defensive sub his entire career, I'm willing to bet you are way wrong on that. When selecting a player for upside, you want the balance of athleticism, length for position, frame to build strength, AND BBIQ, instincts, competitiveness, to arrive at a conclusion of how likely and possible it is for a player to achieve their upside. When you have a young player with a track record that shows good marks in all of the above, its a good bet they won't stay static, but will continue that growth. So what is the top end of that growth curve and can they reach it?

I think people get too hung up on their opinion of what a draft position is 'worth'. Top pick. 1-5. Whatever. I think it is more a question of when you look back at their career, will people say this guy is one of the top 5 best players in this draft? Is this a player likely to improve. Do they have the foundation to build on. Are they going to max out on their progression or is there something preventing them from doing so.

You can cite Johnny Davis. But Davis measured small, was never going to add strength or length, was an undersized high-usage low-efficiency 2-guard with obvious flaws-- and aside from hustle on defense and hard work, did nothing in particular unless he had the ball. He was never going to be an auxiliary glue guy. Even if he added range he still would need to add playmaking, length, offball skills, etc. pretty much everything. Plus height.

Whereas Castle has everything he would need to succeed as a superior role-player coming into the league, and only needs to show the offensive aggression he displayed in highschool in head to head match-ups against Collier. And a shooting coach. He has shown the aptitude to adjust to what his team needed, on a squad that had high volume attackers, and an outside gunning specialist. His job on UConn was not to put up shots that Spencer and Karaban got off the screens he set. His job was to get them open. Cut to the basket on backdoor attacks. Feed the post and play a 2-man game with Clingan. In short order he fit in with an established team and role, then amplified that role and improved over the season. When stakes were highest he played his best. The only way to tell if a player will improve is if they have shown an ability to improve. Castle did. Peaked when it mattered most. And won. If it's me I bet on him being able to continue that trend. Yes the top end of that trend is Jimmy Butler (not Kawhi, who is a freak of nature with a handspan bigger than most Centers). But if you land a guy who tops out as a longer more athletic Marcus Smart. In this draft. I'm thinking that is probably one of the top 5 best players in this draft. And less likely to flame out as a wasted pick on a guy who will never live up to his potential. I am banking on Castle to realize that potential. Based on his history.

If JaVale McGee showed BBIQ and work ethic and a rage to compete as well as the humility to fit in to a scheme and constantly improve, he could have been a HOF player. A Kareem level of superlatives. He didn't and even in college was noted as kinda flaky. His physical make-up was better than Alex Sarr. We will never again see a guy dunk 3 balls at once in a dunk contest. We will never see a guy dunk on 2 baskets at the same time. His career did not live out to his potential. Few do. I think Castle does. Based on the foundation and trends of what he has shown so far.

Work ethic is one factor on upside. It is not the sole factor.

Work ethic is one factor. So is shooting skill. How many current non-shooting guards in the league are having an impact? Even Marcus Smart took 4 3s a game as a rookie. He's up to almost 7 3pt fga this season. He's not a great shooter but he let's them fly, which helps keep defenses honest and prevents them from collapsing off him.

The hesitancy in shooting is just as big as poor percentages. Castle averaged 2.2 attempts a game from the college 3. It's a massive jump to assume he'll become a volume shooter from NBA 3. I have no doubt he'll work at it but I have legitimate concerns that he'll crater spacing the moment he steps on an NBA floor as teams will dare him to prove he can make shots.

I frankly don't like guards with poor jumpers and without elite athleticism. I could get down with Wall & Amen Thompson.. .knowing their physical traits put them in an elite class so they were a walking paint touch, limited jumper or not.

With Castle is see a guy that has to improve one element of his game very significantly to be a high value role player. Even then I feel the ceiling is limited to being a good role player because of the limited shot creation and creativity.

[nate33]

Our Gm, Will Dawkins, comes from OKC.

Two seasons ago, in 2021-22, the team won 24 games. Here's how the minutes were spread on their roster that year:

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander played just over 1900 minutes.
Kenrich Williams played just under 1100 minutes.
Both players were in their 4th NBA season. Both are still with the team.

Who else played?

The following guys combined to play 6289 minutes:
Josh Giddey
Tre Mann
Aaron Wiggins
Jeremiah Robinson-Earl
Lindy Waters
Olivier Sarr
All six of them were rookies.

Plus, these 4 players accounted for 3019 minutes:
Vit Krejci
Aleksei Pokusevski
Theo Maledon
Mamadi Diakite
All 4 were in their 2d year.

& the following 4 players got 5438 minutes
Darius Bazley
Luguentz Dort
Isaiah Roby
Ty Jerome
They were all 3d-year players.

Let's see... 6 rookies, 4 2d-year players, & 4 3d-year players -- that makes 14 guys
Plus the 2 "oldsters" in their 4th year brings the total to 16.

Tell me, has there been a "problem" developing "too many" young players at the same time in OKC?

Well... OKC was 2d in the league in wins this year.

OKC just swept their opponent in R1 of the playoffs.
OKC just beat Dallas easily Tuesday evening to kick off R2.

So... overall... so far... maybe not?

Yet, even tho OKC has obviously done extremely well, what about the players themselves? The ones mentioned above?

For starters, let me mention that 5 of those 6 rookies from the 21-22 season are still with the team. They did trade Jeremiah Robinson-Earl.

Not to mention that they added 4 more rookies from the next draft -- Chet Holmgren, Jalen Williams, Ousmane Dieng, & Jaylin Williams. Then they added Cason Wallace & Keyontae Johnson in the 2023 draft. & 1 or 2 undrafted rookies as well.

In all, players taken by OKC in the last 3 drafts played about 12,000 of OKC's regular season minutes this year.

So much for the "problem" of developing too many young players at once.

Josh Giddey, a #6 overall pick, has developed very slowly and has stagnated this year.
Ousmane Dieng, a 11 overall picked, hasn't developed at all.

Sometimes, it's hard to develop too many youngsters at once.

[nate33]

Here's a pretty good draft breakdown from Jonathan Wasserman:

Read on Twitter

His list seems untainted by group think. This is how he would rank them, not how expects the draft to go.

1. Holland
2. Sheppard
3. Topic
4. Sarr
5. Dillingham
6. Buzelis
7. McCain
8. Collier
9. Risacher
10. Castle