Yeah, I wasn't thinking you have to go off that top 10. I would actually go with Williams at that point.
2024 NBA Draft Mega Thread
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
Yeah, I wasn't thinking you have to go off that top 10. I would actually go with Williams at that point.
What do you like that Williams gives you over the other availables?
He has NBA size and athleticism and looks like he will be a good defender and has some touch which gives me hope for his offense. He's got a long ways to go, but I can see it coming together with him more than Holland or Buzelis for example.
I'm mostly going off length and athleticism, but I could be way off.
Everyone seems to agree that he's kind of switchy....but I'm curious to see if there's more to that. I feel as though people forget that there's way more to defense than on ball defense and it's easy to get tunnel vision on that one aspect. The extremely low rebounds + low stocks gives me concern and I see that as a poor reflection of his functional athleticism. NBA athletes are typically able to put up that production in college by default. He's at the intersection of two really bad indicators. There are almost no good NBA perimeter defenders with that low of stocks and almost no NBA players in general of his size that rebounded so poorly. So if he does end up a good NBA defender, he's an outlier in more than one way.
I think those numbers are red flags, but in this draft almost every prospect has them, so it's more of a question on which red flags you are willing to ignore.
It also brings up the question of.....does it mean more that a guy is visibly long and athletic or that he does the thing that athleticism is supposed to accomplish? Personally, I've always leaned more on the guys who are good at doing the things over guys that look the part.
Biggest reason I didn’t talk about it at all is because it simply doesn’t mean much at all.
This is straight from ESPN. Who’s the panel of experts?
They aren’t team rankings lol. Teams sent in a top-10 composite ranking of prospects but how much is it weighted vs the other stuff like publicly available rankings and the panel of experts?
Also, what incentive do teams have of giving their exact correct rankings of players now?
I get what you are saying, but sometimes the sample size and role and injuries can effect the numbers.
Their incentive is to get access to the information they want.
The original tweet said as voted by teams, so I didn't catch this other aspect. I still think it's interesting and worth discussion.
I would argue that it's biggest flaw is that it is based off of so limited information, i.e. we haven't even had the combine or any team workouts.
He is long AF which is probably his best trait over the other wing prospects. I dont think any of the wings in the draft are particularly long maybe outside of Knecht (maybe Holland but his shoulders are so incredibly narrow it makes his wingspan look small to my eye-test).
I do think that the wing trio (Holland/Buzelis/Williams) is constantly changing my mind. I'm not particularly a fan of any of them, but I can see all 3 panning out. Holland has the explosive athleticism, Buzelis has the offensive craft/fluidity, and Williams has the length/downhill ability. I'm not sure who is more athletic between Williams/Buzelis. I would probably give Buzelis the edge.
I think I just lean Williams being the worst of the 3 due to his lack of tenacity and complete lack of off the dribble shooting. I know shooting can be taught, but off the dribble game is a tougher thing to teach especially when you arent showing any signs of attempting them.
I love Buzelis and Holland. Hopefully one of them drops to us.
There's nothing about the list that is out of the ordinary. Really no need to question it.
I’m not questioning it. I just wouldn’t take it as gospel. I highly doubt both Sheppard and Dillingham go in the 7-10 range. I’ll be surprised if one of them do.