What's new
By:

Following potential 2015 draftees

Catchall said:
My issue with Dekker is that he's not that compelling as a 3 and he's not really compelling as a 4 either. He's kind of a Schrempf or a middle-class Rudy Gay.
Click to expand...

If he was Schrempf I'd draft him in a second.
 
davidbenoit said:
Completely agree.

I think the Jazz want somebody in that second tier (picks 5-10). Moving up 2-4 spots to get one of the Euros or Johnson is my desired outcome. I'm guessing we would have to give up Burks or Hood.

Best case scenario imo is Turner falling to us. No assets given up and we're in the situation where we can afford to take a risk.
Click to expand...
Unpopular option alert:

I'd trade Hood for the likes of Super Mario and it wouldn't take much to talk me into trading Hood for Johnson.
 
I may be in the minority, but I would trade 12 + Hood + even a future pick to get up to #7 if Hezonja or Porzingis is there.

Detroit is reportedly open to moving #8. They want help right away to make the POs next year. Not sure if we'd be able to deal with them. They will be asking a lot.
 
Assuming the Jazz are going to be patient with the PG situation, they need someone who:

* plays bigger than Hayward
* can defend 4s as well as perimeter players on switches
* can shoot out to the 3-pt line
* can drive all the way to the rim with a good handle and speed
* will crash the boards on both ends
* can move the ball on the perimeter
* does at least some of these things better than Trevor Booker

It's that multi-talented PF that Zach Lowe was writing about. In our range of the draft, I think that probably points to Stanley Johnson, Bobby Portis or *maybe* Dekker or Looney. This would be considering need as well as draft tier. I have to believe the Jazz like Johnson more than people are saying, and they're probably doing deep analysis on Looney.
 
Catchall said:
I think he'd be meh in today's NBA.
Click to expand...

I think he might be even better in today's nba, but I'm not interested in discussing a player who hadn't played in 15 or so years. Looking at the history of picks 10-14... If dekker was schrempf I'd be all over that.
 
Catchall said:
I think he'd be meh in today's NBA.
Click to expand...

How come? He was one of the first deadly 3/4 shooters when 3p shooting wasn't fashionable... he was athletic, long, fast and extremely skillful. I think he'd be great in today's game.
 
stitches said:
How come? He was one of the first deadly 3/4 shooters when 3p shooting wasn't fashionable... he was athletic, long, fast and extremely skillful. I think he'd be great in today's game.
Click to expand...

He couldn't defend 4s and couldn't keep up with athletic 3s. He had enough ball skills, shooting and mobility to be a tough cover for post-oriented 4s though. He was kind of slow otherwise. Not a great rebounder. A role player really, imo.

It was a different era.

Maybe I'm bringing it up in part because it's fun to say Schrempf.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I'm officially bugged by him too... Again he rails on about Kaminsky being risky based on guys not succeeding in their first two years of college. Gives the same two examples (udoh and Wesley Johnson) and ignores hosts of other examples.

Also didn't even look at Frank's birthday to find out if he was an 18 year old freshman or a 19 year old freshman (he was 18 btw)

Since 2009 guys that were not great until senior or junior years or that didn't show NBA promise until 20 years old (or ever) that are now decent NBA players many of which who have out performed their draft position:

Draymond Green
Festus Ezeli
Kelly Olynyk
Jimmy Butler
Tyler Zeller
Mason Plumlee (was always an NBA prospect but statistically didn't show until he was "beating up on children")
Markieff Morris
Nikola Vucevic
John Henson (similar to Plumlee)
Demarre Carroll
Taj Gibson (he was a 20 year old freshmen so not sure how this compares)
Iman Shumpert
Larry Sanders
Chandler Parsons (never really dominant ever)

There are others that outperformed draft position. I agree with Layne Vashro that this actually might be the new draft inefficiency and I hope that other NBA folks still see it the way Locke does.

The narrative is so tired... just wish he'd actually look at the player.
Click to expand...
Nice work, HH.
 
After hearing David Locke's latest Tip-off, it sounds to me like he's dropping some hints:

- The Jazz really really want a stretch 4
- David Locke really really doesn't think Kaminsky is the guy; like he's trying to talk people out of wanting Kaminsky
- The Jazz might be willing to trade Rodney Hood -- reference to trading for Harrison Barnes anecdote
- Locke says Lyles is a nice player, but says it in a way that doesn't make Lyles sound like a draft target; calls him a non-athlete and compares him to Patrick Patterson who took years to shoot NBA 3s
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I'm officially bugged by him too... Again he rails on about Kaminsky being risky based on guys not succeeding in their first two years of college. Gives the same two examples (udoh and Wesley Johnson) and ignores hosts of other examples.

Also didn't even look at Frank's birthday to find out if he was an 18 year old freshman or a 19 year old freshman (he was 18 btw)

Since 2009 guys that were not great until senior or junior years or that didn't show NBA promise until 20 years old (or ever) that are now decent NBA players many of which who have out performed their draft position:

Draymond Green (9 points 8 rebounds and 3 assist per game his SO year. That is very good production. Not comparable to Frank being a complete non-factor his SO year
Festus Ezeli (Much better example, but Ezeli also never played competitive basketball before going to Vanderbilt, so a lot different than Kaminsky)
Kelly Olynyk (Best example thus far, but Olynyk was still an efficient player every year )
Jimmy Butler (14 ppg his SO year)
Tyler Zeller (Very efficient 9 ppg on a stacked NC team his SO year)
Mason Plumlee (was always an NBA prospect but statistically didn't show until he was "beating up on children") (Very efficient 7 ppg and 8 rpg on stacked Duke team)
Markieff Morris (See Plumlee and Zeller, he was playing behind Thomas Robinson)
Nikola Vucevic (Very efficient 11 and 10 his SO year)
John Henson (similar to Plumlee) (11,10, and 3 his SO year)
Demarre Carroll (Efficient 11 and 6 his SO year)
Taj Gibson (he was a 20 year old freshmen so not sure how this compares) (12,9, and 2 his FR year)
Iman Shumpert (His stats are bad, but he was drafted as a defensive specialist, which he did all 3 years at GT)
Larry Sanders (11, 9, and 3 his SO year)
Chandler Parsons (never really dominant ever) (Extremely unique situation. He was a very good glue guy all 4 years at Florida, never put up mind-blowing stats, but he always competed at a very high level all 4 years and contributed a huge role to very good Florida teams)

There are others that outperformed draft position. I agree with Layne Vashro that this actually might be the new draft inefficiency and I hope that other NBA folks still see it the way Locke does.

The narrative is so tired... just wish he'd actually look at the player.
Click to expand...

So yeah, I quickly proved your whole point wrong.

Also don't think Udoh or Johnson are good statistical comps either, even they were better than Frank their FR/SO years.

Locke has a valid point. Kaminsky is a pretty rare case of a guy being really bad his FR and SO years. Nearly no one in the NBA has done that. So in that sense, he is a weird prospect and there is risk in something that doesn't have much precedence.

He averaged 4 ppg on 43% shooting his SO year, and did even worse his FR year. None of those guys you listed above did nearly that bad and all of them have good SO years.

*I'm a fan of Kaminsky and would like to draft him, but I acknowledge there is risk in drafting him.*
 
Last edited:
Catchall said:
I may be in the minority, but I would trade 12 + Hood + even a future pick to get up to #7 if Hezonja or Porzingis is there.

Detroit is reportedly open to moving #8. They want help right away to make the POs next year. Not sure if we'd be able to deal with them. They will be asking a lot.
Click to expand...
That is a huge risk not worth taking. If those two guys pan out I really think they are no better then Hood, but there is a better chance they aren't as good. U only trade an asset like hood for a sure fire prospect.
 
Catchall said:
He couldn't defend 4s and couldn't keep up with athletic 3s. He had enough ball skills, shooting and mobility to be a tough cover for post-oriented 4s though. He was kind of slow otherwise. Not a great rebounder. A role player really, imo.

It was a different era.

Maybe I'm bringing it up in part because it's fun to say Schrempf.
Click to expand...

lol. It was still basketball. Schrempf would still be a beast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top