What's new

Following potential 2015 draftees

Dang it…you guys beat me to it. Oh well, here goes my long-winded (as usual) post.

If we're picking where we're slotted to be at, or maybe even a little earlier, and the players are who they are right now (they won't be), the guy I'm taking if Johnson and Russell are off the board is Booker. Hell, maybe even if Russell is on the board, I'd consider it. If it wasn't for the Harrison brothers being bitchy if they get benched, Booker would be starting (don't be surprised to see him starting come tournament time). He's better than they are, by a lot.

Now we have to realize he's not getting asked to do a lot, but you can tell he can. He can drive, I saw a play in the Texas A&M game where his defender respected his drive game enough that as he was in triple threat he threatened to drive, his defender bit and he stepped back and nailed a deep three. That's impressive, because everybody thinks he's just a shooter. His defense can look a little lackadaisical at times, but he has the skills and potential to be a plus defender…as of now, he's just average, but he's a freshman on a team with a loaded front court, he can adjust (Klay Thompson certainly did). As has been mentioned, he has a very high bball IQ. I don't think we need to go over it again.

On a team full of players who lack a lot of offensive skills, he stands out. Even though he could (and sometimes should be), he's not much of a ball-stopper. He just makes the right play. I figure if he was on a team like Ohio State, Indiana or something else where he was one of the only offensive options, he would be putting up some damn good numbers. Unfortunately he's not, so it's almost kind of like gambling on a European player…we don't know what he could be doing, we can just project. He's not as good of a passer/creator as Russell, but he's certainly a better shooter, and I would argue he has better athleticism and defensive tools. Russell will most likely (and probably should) go earlier though. I'm all aboard on the Booker to Utah train. His ceiling is most definitely Klay, and even if (and he probably won't) he doesn't reach that, he'll still be a good player. I would easily take him over Porz, WCS, Oubre, Turner and maybe even Mudiay (but probably not).
 
This supposed "Laker fan" wants his team to tank.

lol

"I hope the Lakers lose every game, because if you're going to lose, lose. I'm serious."

"If you're going to lose, you have to lose, because you can't be in the middle of the pack. You either have to be great or you have to be bad, to get a good [draft] pick."

-Some dude named Magic Johnson
 
This supposed "Laker fan" wants his team to tank.

lol



-Some dude named Magic Johnson

Magic-Johnson-Son1.jpg


He created this…can't take the dude seriously now.
 
Dang it…you guys beat me to it. Oh well, here goes my long-winded (as usual) post.

If we're picking where we're slotted to be at, or maybe even a little earlier, and the players are who they are right now (they won't be), the guy I'm taking if Johnson and Russell are off the board is Booker. Hell, maybe even if Russell is on the board, I'd consider it. If it wasn't for the Harrison brothers being bitchy if they get benched, Booker would be starting (don't be surprised to see him starting come tournament time). He's better than they are, by a lot.

Now we have to realize he's not getting asked to do a lot, but you can tell he can. He can drive, I saw a play in the Texas A&M game where his defender respected his drive game enough that as he was in triple threat he threatened to drive, his defender bit and he stepped back and nailed a deep three. That's impressive, because everybody thinks he's just a shooter. His defense can look a little lackadaisical at times, but he has the skills and potential to be a plus defender…as of now, he's just average, but he's a freshman on a team with a loaded front court, he can adjust (Klay Thompson certainly did). As has been mentioned, he has a very high bball IQ. I don't think we need to go over it again.

On a team full of players who lack a lot of offensive skills, he stands out. Even though he could (and sometimes should be), he's not much of a ball-stopper. He just makes the right play. I figure if he was on a team like Ohio State, Indiana or something else where he was one of the only offensive options, he would be putting up some damn good numbers. Unfortunately he's not, so it's almost kind of like gambling on a European player…we don't know what he could be doing, we can just project. He's not as good of a passer/creator as Russell, but he's certainly a better shooter, and I would argue he has better athleticism and defensive tools. Russell will most likely (and probably should) go earlier though. I'm all aboard on the Booker to Utah train. His ceiling is most definitely Klay, and even if (and he probably won't) he doesn't reach that, he'll still be a good player. I would easily take him over Porz, WCS, Oubre, Turner and maybe even Mudiay (but probably not).

I don't think it'd be a terrible pick either because I'd feel confident in banking on his work ethic. That's what's gonna make or break 99% of prospects anyway. He just seems like one of those guys that will be eager to improve year after year. I probably wouldn't take him as high as you doe, I'd probably go for a higher risk/reward pick.
 
Dang it…you guys beat me to it. Oh well, here goes my long-winded (as usual) post.

If we're picking where we're slotted to be at, or maybe even a little earlier, and the players are who they are right now (they won't be), the guy I'm taking if Johnson and Russell are off the board is Booker. Hell, maybe even if Russell is on the board, I'd consider it. If it wasn't for the Harrison brothers being bitchy if they get benched, Booker would be starting (don't be surprised to see him starting come tournament time). He's better than they are, by a lot.

Now we have to realize he's not getting asked to do a lot, but you can tell he can. He can drive, I saw a play in the Texas A&M game where his defender respected his drive game enough that as he was in triple threat he threatened to drive, his defender bit and he stepped back and nailed a deep three. That's impressive, because everybody thinks he's just a shooter. His defense can look a little lackadaisical at times, but he has the skills and potential to be a plus defender…as of now, he's just average, but he's a freshman on a team with a loaded front court, he can adjust (Klay Thompson certainly did). As has been mentioned, he has a very high bball IQ. I don't think we need to go over it again.

On a team full of players who lack a lot of offensive skills, he stands out. Even though he could (and sometimes should be), he's not much of a ball-stopper. He just makes the right play. I figure if he was on a team like Ohio State, Indiana or something else where he was one of the only offensive options, he would be putting up some damn good numbers. Unfortunately he's not, so it's almost kind of like gambling on a European player…we don't know what he could be doing, we can just project. He's not as good of a passer/creator as Russell, but he's certainly a better shooter, and I would argue he has better athleticism and defensive tools. Russell will most likely (and probably should) go earlier though. I'm all aboard on the Booker to Utah train. His ceiling is most definitely Klay, and even if (and he probably won't) he doesn't reach that, he'll still be a good player. I would easily take him over Porz, WCS, Oubre, Turner and maybe even Mudiay (but probably not).

I am not sure it's justifiable to get him at the 5-8 range, but I'd be down with it if we get 9-12 and everybody we like is taken. The thing with him is - his mesurables are not great. His wingspan is 6'6.25'' and his standing reach is 8'4'' which is on the short end for SGs. For example, Klay had wingspan of 6'9'' and standing reach 8'7.5'' coming into the draft, which is great for the position. But yah... in general I really like him and his play... I think I've been one of the people harping the most about him here.
 
I am not sure it's justifiable to get him at the 5-8 range, but I'd be down with it if we get 9-12 and everybody we like is taken. The thing with him is - his mesurables are not great. His wingspan is 6'6.25'' and his standing reach is 8'4'' which is on the short end for SGs. For example, Klay had wingspan of 6'9'' and standing reach 8'7.5'' coming into the draft, which is great for the position. But yah... in general I really like him and his play... I think I've been one of the people harping the most about him here.

All valid points…he's just one of those guys I believe in. He's smart enough to know what he can do and what he can't, I truly believe if he enters, he'll be one of the best players from this draft. I'll keep on believing that until he proves me wrong.
 
I don't think it'd be a terrible pick either because I'd feel confident in banking on his work ethic. That's what's gonna make or break 99% of prospects anyway. He just seems like one of those guys that will be eager to improve year after year. I probably wouldn't take him as high as you doe, I'd probably go for a higher risk/reward pick.

I understand why you'd wanna do that, but that's how teams end up taking guys like Jan Vesely and Bismack Biyombo over Klay Thompson. I like to take guys that I know will produce.


/probably a bad comparison cause that was kind of a sucky draft, and Klay really did some out of nowhere to be as good as he is.
 
I understand why you'd wanna do that, but that's how teams end up taking guys like Jan Vesely and Bismack Biyombo over Klay Thompson. I like to take guys that I know will produce.


/probably a bad comparison cause that was kind of a sucky draft, and Klay really did some out of nowhere to be as good as he is.

There are also examples of taking the safer pick that didn't pan out either... For instance taking Terrance Ross instead of Drummond. There are so many variables that make the draft a crap shoot. There really aren't many safe picks here.

I like booker but wouldn't draft him that high. I'd slide down and pick up assets on the way if we really liked him.
 
There are also examples of taking the safer pick that didn't pan out either... For instance taking Terrance Ross instead of Drummond. There are so many variables that make the draft a crap shoot. There really aren't many safe picks here.

I like booker but wouldn't draft him that high. I'd slide down and pick up assets on the way if we really liked him.

Idk man…I would argue that taking a true freshman who averaged 10/8/3 in 28 mpg with a pretty insane combination of size/athleticism was a pretty safe pick. I'm a big Drummond fan though.
 
How about Trey Burke over either Goannis Antetokounmpo or Dennis Schroeder? Is that a better example?

Trey's measurables sucked, but his production in college was electric. Shooting, clutch, leadership, etc. Turns out that he can't shoot or defend at the next level and his upside stinks because of his limited athleticism. IF he somehow fixes his shooting, great. He's a spotty starter or a solid backup. I said at the time of the draft that it's better to swing and miss on the homerun, than it is to bunt and get safely on to first base.

I still believe that. Okafor, Towns, Russell, Porzingis, Johnson, Hezonja or Mudiay. Anything less than those guys and I start looking at possibly trading the pick for a veteran.
 
How about Trey Burke over either Goannis Antetokounmpo or Dennis Schroeder? Is that a better example?

Trey's measurables sucked, but his production in college was electric. Shooting, clutch, leadership, etc. Turns out that he can't shoot or defend at the next level and his upside stinks because of his limited athleticism. IF he somehow fixes his shooting, great. He's a spotty starter or a solid backup. I said at the time of the draft that it's better to swing and miss on the homerun, than it is to bunt and get safely on to first base.

I still believe that. Okafor, Towns, Russell, Porzingis, Johnson, Hezonja or Mudiay. Anything less than those guys and I start looking at possibly trading the pick for a veteran.

Right. All I was trying to say was that you can't always assume that its a safer/better pick to pick a player who's produced more... There are likely hundreds of examples of drafting misses with both strategies. I don't think it's ever a good strategy to reach for a guy who's projected much later. We could likely move to pick 14-17 and still get booker if we wanted. Get a vet or another asset on the way.
 
I agree with and understand your points, but I'm tellin ya, Booker is gonna be looked at as a top 10 pick by the end of the year.
 
I agree with some of Hantler's points. Championship contender teams have great shooters. It doesn't matter what system you run to get open looks--guys have to knock down those shots. The Mavs, Heat and Spurs won because they made shots. Period. Ray Allen and Danny Green were alternating setting records for 3-pt shooting in the Finals.

That said, I don't think I would take Booker in the top 7 of this draft. Guys like Porzingis, Russell, and Oubre will also make shots. They are prototypical for their positions and have the ability to get themselves an open look. I also still see superstar potential in Hezonja. I couldn't pass on that for Booker at this stage. You might talk me into taking Booker over Winslow though. Turner for sure.

Booker is being hidden a bit in UKs deep line-ups, but I also think he's getting open looks by being the 3rd option when he's on the floor. If he's a wing in the NBA and he's being guarded by guys like Ariza, Leonard, Butler, etc., I think he'll be forced to try to make difficult, contested looks. He can make some of those shots, but they're not high percentage. Also, both Klay and Steph Curry are guys who can shoot off the bounce and on the move even when their feet aren't set. Can Booker really do that? D'Angelo Russell can, and I think Hezonja and Oubre can too.

More importantly, one of the reasons that I'm so high on Andrew Wiggins is that his set of tools enables him to get easy open looks. Wiggins gets so much space from a defender, that he can raise up for an open 15-foot shot just about anytime he wants. This has been bread and butter for Michael Jordan and Kobe. And if Wiggins' defender tries to crowd him, he can get in the lane with one or two strides. I'd rather have an athlete like Wiggins get easy looks than a dead-eye shooter like Curry or Klay get difficult contested jumpers on the move. Over time, the odds are that the dead-eye shooter won't hold up.

Obviously what Klay Thompson did last night was legendary, but it's not something that can be replicated or relied upon in the playoffs. Curry shot 3/11 last night. Some nights you've got it. Some nights you don't. If Booker is a spot-up shooter and floor spacer, that's great, but I'm not sure you draft that above a potential 2-way superstar.
 
Last edited:
I agree with and understand your points, but I'm tellin ya, Booker is gonna be looked at as a top 10 pick by the end of the year.

Alright then. I get ya. If he's that good and projected to go in that range then I'd go for it... Lord knows we need some shooters.

And I will say this... Kentucky players are likely under valued because they don't have all the playing time and opportunities other prospects might because the team is so loaded. Think Bledsoe when he was playing behind/with Wall.
 
FWIW, D'Angelo Russell looks like a better prospect as a freshman to me than Brad Beal did. I'd have to go look up their numbers to really compare them.
 
FWIW, D'Angelo Russell looks like a better prospect as a freshman to me than Brad Beal did. I'd have to go look up their numbers to really compare them.

He's much better! He's better than Harden and Curry too... purely offensive stats-wise... Beal probably was better defensively.

E-Balla said:
Also Russell is the most statistically impressive freshman guard in years. Here's the top freshmen guards with over 28% usage ranked by offensive rating over the last 10 years:

Russell - 120.1 ORTG
McCollum - 118.8 ORTG
Curry - 116.9 ORTG
Harden - 115.7 ORTG
 
He's much better! He's better than Harden and Curry too... purely offensive stats-wise... Beal probably was better defensively.

How do D'Angelo's steals and rebounds compare to Beal?

Edit: D'Angelo averages 5 rebs. and 1.7 stls. Beal averaged 3.8 rebs. and 1.3 stls.
 
Back
Top