2024 Draft Thread - Part II

[payitforward]

I said it before ... but it's like this draft is missing a top 5. If you look at Sarr as the 6th pick in a normal year or Holland as the 7th, suddenly the draft looks alot better.

Rough draft:

Tier One (Wemby, LeBron tier)
-None

Tier Two (Multiple all-star tier)
-None...

Unless I'm not understanding you, the above would seem to imply that in many/most drafts the top 5 is made up of guys at the Wemby/Lebron & multiple-all-star levels. Yet...

2011 -- 1 (Kyrie)
2012 -- 2 (AD, Brad)
2013 -- none
2014 -- 1 (Embiid)
2015 -- 1 (KAT)
2016 -- 2 (Simmons, Ingram)
2017 -- 1 (Tatum)
2018 -- 2 (Luka, Trae Young)
2019 -- 2 (Zion, Ja)
2020 -- 2 (Edwards, Lamelo)

That's 14 in a decade, & I don't see any "Wemby, Lebron tier" players among them -- though maybe Embiid is close, & I wouldn't want to count Edwards out either (tho it's too early to give him that kind of crown). Of course, that tip-top tier is rare, inevitably.

[NatP4]

What are the facts? Topic went down with a knee injury in January, came back, and tweaked the same knee without any obvious contact during normal play, but all is well? PASS

The fact is that he didn't have surgery after his first injury and won't need it this time. With no surgery and no structural problems it is doubtful it will effect his draft stock at all.

Topic is out for rest of the ABA finals, he will still get drafted obviously, ultimately it will be an organizational call from an FO. I wouldn't take the risk, you would

He really shouldn’t be playing in the ABA finals anyways. That’s two Euroleague clubs going at it. Topic is coming in as a 3rd PG, playing off ball, 12-15ish minutes. Doesn’t even turn 19 until mid August. Vukcevic is 21 years old and wasn’t getting minutes for Partizan, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s an extremely high level of competition.

It was a ballsy move to make the jump to the better club/Euroleague competition and a reduced role. 99% of prospects wouldn’t have done it. Was always better off sticking with Mega, getting bounced in round 1 and coming over to NA for the combine stuff.

[doclinkin]

I said it before ... but it's like this draft is missing a top 5. If you look at Sarr as the 6th pick in a normal year or Holland as the 7th, suddenly the draft looks alot better.

Rough draft:

Tier One (Wemby, LeBron tier)
-None

Tier Two (Multiple all-star tier)
-None...

Unless I'm not understanding you, the above would seem to imply that in many/most drafts the top 5 is made up of guys at the Wemby/Lebron & multiple-all-star levels. Yet...

...

I don't see any "Wemby, Lebron tier" players among them -- though maybe Embiid is close, & I wouldn't want to count Edwards out either (tho it's too early to give him that kind of crown). Of course, that tip-top tier is rare, inevitably.

LeBJ. MJ. Kareem and his skyhook. I'd count Shaq at his healthy peak. Not Embiid. Maybe not even Bird, despite his consistency and influence during his peak. His will to win. Stef I guess. Jury is out for me on Jokic, unless he wins it again. Not even Kobe, in my eyes, he's at the peak of tier 2, like Bird. Not even Tim Duncan, despite being the perhaps the best powerforward in history.

The top tier is for the generational players who are the no-question most dominant guy on the court for the era of their peak. Wilt. Maybe Magic as a 6'9" PG who put his stamp on the game with the showtime fast break uptempo style. Players who change the game or force rules changes or force teams to alter their line-ups to account for them. Why Kobe to me is a tier below. He followed in the wake of MJ, and filled in his shadow. God-tier work ethic, but nobody feared him quite the same way they did MJ. Nobody built a team specifically to stop him. Or mimic him. There were not 'Kobe Rules' the way Detroit had to adjust. MJ revolutionized sport-specific personal training. Culture.

You can see them coming most of the time. There are a few players like Stef and possibly Jokic who put their imprint on an era but who do kinda sneak up on the league. Jokic it remains to be seen, if he ushers in an era of hyper-skilled Bigs and forces teams to go large and stack their rosters up front to counter him. Stef gave new life to tweeners stretch forwards and combo guards, created the small ball era, added range to the game. And even he is a question mark in that top tier. I think he's in it, but can debate it with myself.

Wemby of course has too short a resume to say he is generation-defining. But so far his stats are stratospheric outliers. Hope he has a long healthy career to live up to his potential.

[tontoz]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

Sears is only 5'10 w/o shoes. They didn't measure height with shoes which I like.

Da Silva is big, 6'8 and did well athletically.

Furphy, Edwards and George had only a 32" vertical, not good for a wing.

Antonio Reeves measured and tested well.

[J-Ves]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

Sears is only 5'10 w/o shoes. They didn't measure height with shoes which I like.

Da Silva is big, 6'8 and did well athletically.

Furphy, Edwards and George had only a 32" vertical, not good for a wing.

Antonio Reeves measured and tested well.

So would you say you are not interested in trading up for Sarr if possible

Who do you view as the winners who figure to go in the top 5ish?

[tontoz]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

Sears is only 5'10 w/o shoes. They didn't measure height with shoes which I like.

Da Silva is big, 6'8 and did well athletically.

Furphy, Edwards and George had only a 32" vertical, not good for a wing.

Antonio Reeves measured and tested well.

So would you say you are not interested in trading up for Sarr if possible

Who do you view as the winners who figure to go in the top 5ish?

I have been out on Sarr for months. I don't see him as special at all. Quality bigs can generally be found outside the top 10.

At 2 my board is

Topic
Holland

I can't make a case for anyone else with the info we have now. That could change.

Obviously trading down is a viable option but I don't know how realistic it is.

[doclinkin]

Zack Edey man. Nearly an 8' wingspan. Going back since 2000 only one player has had wider stretch than that. (Tacko and his 8'2" span). Funny, measured last year Edey had a half inch more reach at 9'7.5". LOL he too tanked it this year to look more athletic. (and again only Fall and Mark WIlliams had more reach than him). But damn. He is a zone all by himself. I get the sense there will be a flurry of activity in the late lotto of teams trying to move up to take him.

[nate33]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

You have to ignore standing reach now. Everyone tanks it. Just look at height and wingspan. Sarr is huge. 7-1 in shoes, 7-4.25 wingspan. There are certainly arguments to be against Sarr, but height, length and athleticism aren't among them.

[tontoz]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

You have to ignore standing reach now. Everyone tanks it. Just look at height and wingspan. Sarr is huge. 7-1 in shoes, 7-4.25 wingspan. There are certainly arguments to be against Sarr, but height, length and athleticism aren't among them.

Actually they are. If Sarr tanked his standing reach then why is his vertical only a half inch higher than Gafford?

Filipowski beat Sarr handily in the sprint. The best athlete among the bigs looks like Missi, not Sarr.

[nate33]

Castle's measurements are a big time bonus. I was concerned that he was merely a 3&D player without really the 3 part, and the D part was only against guards, and without true PG potential. That might merely be Chris Dunn or, at best, Alex Caruso. But at a burly 6'-7" in shoes with a 6'-9" wingspan, he is a full-sized SF. At SF, his playmaking is a significant plus enabling a lot of flexibility. He is like another Deni Avdija, or at least a Dyson Daniels.

[tontoz]

I was surprised people bought it when that 6'2.5 number came out on Castle .That was obviously wrong.

[nate33]

Random combine observations.

Sarr's standing reach of 9'2 is fairly pedestrian, exactly the same as Gafford. Sarr's athletic testing was good not great. Shuttle, sprint and vertical almost identical to Gafford.

You have to ignore standing reach now. Everyone tanks it. Just look at height and wingspan. Sarr is huge. 7-1 in shoes, 7-4.25 wingspan. There are certainly arguments to be against Sarr, but height, length and athleticism aren't among them.

Actually they are. If Sarr tanked his standing reach then why is his vertical only a half inch higher than Gafford?

Filipowski beat Sarr handily in the sprint. The best athlete among the bigs looks like Missi, not Sarr.

Gafford is a really athletic dude. If Sarr is as athletic as Gafford but with much better lateral mobility (which is obvious if you watch them play) then that's a really good thing. But it's true that Sarr isn't a great leaper, at least from a standstill. He is a one-footed jumper so his max vert is quite good, but he definitely struggles to leap quickly off of two feet to contest shots and rebound.

Flipowski is also very athletic. He has extremely quick feet and moves more like a PF than a C. Guards can't get around him in isolations. His problem is that he has TRex arms (6-10.5 wingspan).

[tontoz]

You have to ignore standing reach now. Everyone tanks it. Just look at height and wingspan. Sarr is huge. 7-1 in shoes, 7-4.25 wingspan. There are certainly arguments to be against Sarr, but height, length and athleticism aren't among them.

Actually they are. If Sarr tanked his standing reach then why is his vertical only a half inch higher than Gafford?

Filipowski beat Sarr handily in the sprint. The best athlete among the bigs looks like Missi, not Sarr.

Gafford is a really athletic dude. If Sarr is as athletic as Gafford but with much better lateral mobility (which is obvious if you watch them play) then that's a really good thing. But it's true that Sarr isn't a great leaper, at least from a standstill. He is a one-footed jumper so his max vert is quite good, but he definitely struggles to leap quickly off of two feet to contest shots and rebound.

Flipowski is also very athletic. He has extremely quick feet and moves more like a PF than a C. Guards can't get around him in isolations. His problem is that he has TRex arms (6-10.5 wingspan).

We got Gafford for ...what was his name again?

I don't see anything special about Sarr. His size and athleticism are good, but not elite. His skills are mediocre. Motor ok.

I don't think he is capable athletically of doing some of the things that Missi was doing in that vid I posted earlier.

[nate33]

Actually they are. If Sarr tanked his standing reach then why is his vertical only a half inch higher than Gafford?

Filipowski beat Sarr handily in the sprint. The best athlete among the bigs looks like Missi, not Sarr.

Gafford is a really athletic dude. If Sarr is as athletic as Gafford but with much better lateral mobility (which is obvious if you watch them play) then that's a really good thing. But it's true that Sarr isn't a great leaper, at least from a standstill. He is a one-footed jumper so his max vert is quite good, but he definitely struggles to leap quickly off of two feet to contest shots and rebound.

Flipowski is also very athletic. He has extremely quick feet and moves more like a PF than a C. Guards can't get around him in isolations. His problem is that he has TRex arms (6-10.5 wingspan).

We got Gafford for ...what was his name again?

I don't see anything special about Sarr. His size and athleticism are good, but not elite. His skills are mediocre. Motor ok.

I don't think he is capable athletically of doing some of the things that Missi was doing in that vid I posted earlier.

Missi is a full year older than Sarr, and Sarr played against grown men. And yet, Sarr is pretty much better across the board except for shooting efficiency (mostly because Sarr attempted too many 3's.)

[tontoz]

Dup

[tontoz]

Missi has only been playing organized basketball 3 years. He grew up playing soccer in Cameroon.

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

Missi has only been playing organized basketball 3 years. He grew up playing soccer in Cameroon.

Interesting.

With guys like that, you need to know more about their character. If he is maniacally obsessed with basketball, then sure, he might be a steal.

And don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that Sarr has weaknesses. I'm just saying that mobility and length aren't among them.

[tontoz]

Missi has only been playing organized basketball 3 years. He grew up playing soccer in Cameroon.

Interesting.

With guys like that, you need to know more about their character. If he is maniacally obsessed with basketball, then sure, he might be a steal.

And don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that Sarr has weaknesses. I'm just saying that mobility and length aren't among them.

His size and mobility aren't weak, but they are overrated.

[NatP4]

Mogbo had 4 points 6 rebounds 4 assists 1 steal in 18 minutes in his scrimmage. Looked like a NBA player. Still only 22 years old. Measured with a 7’2” wingspan yesterday.

Per 40 this year: 19.7 points 14.1 rebounds 5.1 assists 2.2 steals 1.1 blocks 2.4 turnovers 64.8% TS

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[gambitx777]

https://youtu.be/FmVNmKVE8lc?si=aelml3nYpbQ2GB_1

Sounds like execs are trying to evacuate this draft. Could be a good time to sell Kuz and maybe even poole shammaet for good value.

If those execs are correct on this draft, why would it be good value to trade Kuz to add another pick?

I've read/seen that some teams believe having 1st overall this year is like having as low as #10 in another draft year. That doesn't feel like a draft with a whole lot of value.

There's absolutely no rush in trading Kuz. Dawkins and Winger seem committed to a patient rebuild, and I'm with them. Some team out there will give up a future FRP (or two) for him.

I happen to think there are a few good players in this draft. It's packed full of PGs and it's pretty flush with good center talent.

Is #1 is #10 would you not trade kux for a top ten pick? I would yes. So like if Atlanta offers us #1 for Kuz I'm taking it.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app