What's new
By:

Following Potential 2020 draftees

SCS said:
I don't think we could differ more on prospects lmao. We agree on Smith, Reed and Green to degree but everyone else we're like on complete opposite ends lol. Ramsey is another one I wouldn't touch in the first round. Like Maledon he's atrocious on defense. And offensively I don't see one skill he brings to the table that will help him see the floor (I don't buy the shot, his indicators aren't good and to the eye he just doesn't have very good touch. It's kind of a line drive)

I think where we fundamentally differ is that I like prospects with at least one bankable NBA level skill. One skill that will open the door to playing time which will open the door to more opportunity. You seem to like prospects with a good base of size/raw skill, etc even if they don't have a bankable NBA skill yet. Not saying either is wrong. We just look at things in a polar opposite way. It's interesting to me actually.
Click to expand...

I do believe in Jahmius Ramsey's shooting, and in his athleticism. I think he could start right now for the Rockets ahead of McLemore and Daniel House and fit right in. As for his defense, I cut him some slack since he was an 18 year-old freshman this season. He has the tools to defend, and I think he'll pick that up.

I look for guys whom I think have starter potential, understanding that other rotation players aren't hard to pick up in free agency or through small trades.
 
Catchall said:
I do believe in Jahmius Ramsey's shooting, and in his athleticism. I think he could start right now for the Rockets ahead of McLemore and Daniel House and fit right in. As for his defense, I cut him some slack since he was an 18 year-old freshman this season. He has the tools to defend, and I think he'll pick that up.

I look for guys whom I think have starter potential, understanding that other rotation players aren't hard to pick up in free agency or through small trades.
Click to expand...

I think Ramsey is a good athlete but the athleticism doesn't really show up in game situations very much. In all the games I've seen he hasn't popped except when he comes over for the occasional weakside block. He's more explosive than fluid and he needs room to load up.

I think that the approach of trying to find the guys with starter potential is a risky approach. You can talk yourself into 40 or 50 guys in a class who theoretically could eventually start (maybe more) if they develop this or that. And only what... 10-12 from this whole class will actually be consistent starters. And only a fraction of that will actually even make the NBA at all. You can also talk yourself out of guys for reasons that might not be accurate.

That's why I've started to subscribe somewhat to the John Hollinger approach. Historically only around 20 guys in a class really make it in the NBA. Some will be all star level, some will be starters, some will be simple rotation players. But the goal really is to find who those guys are. That's why I'm not afraid to look at guys who may just be role players. I think that the approach of swinging on theoretical upside due to age/size/raw ability is where a lot of teams fundamentally fail the draft process. The draft IS about upside. It is. But I think that the hunger to hit on a star has kind of made the idea of getting a role player a bad thing when getting one is actually a win. If you're consistently just getting actual NBA players from the draft year after year you are gonna be really good. And I think that the guys who have instantly translatable NBA skills have a leg up. The more standout the skill the better. So that's kinda what I look for.
 
Last edited:
SCS said:
I think Ramsey is a good athlete but the athleticism doesn't really show up in game situations very much. In all the games I've seen he hasn't popped except when he comes over for the occasional weakside block. He's more explosive than fluid and he needs room to load up.

I think that the approach of trying to find the guys with starter potential is a risky approach. You can talk yourself into 40 or 50 guys in a class who theoretically could eventually start (maybe more) if they develop this or that. And only a fraction of that will actually even make the NBA. You can also talk yourself out of guys for reasons that might not be accurate.

That's why I've started to subscribe somewhat to the John Hollinger approach. Historically only around 20 guys in a class really make it in the NBA. Some will be all star level, some will be starters, some will be simple rotation players. But the goal really is to find who those guys are. That's why I'm not afraid to look at guys who may just be role players. I think that the approach of swinging on theoretical upside due to age/size/raw ability is where a lot of teams fundamentally fail the draft process. The draft IS about upside. It is. But I think that the hunger to hit on a star has kind of made the idea of getting a role player a bad thing when getting one is actually a win. If you're consistently just getting actual NBA players from the draft year after year you are gonna be really good. And I think that the guys who have instantly translatable NBA skills have a leg up. The more standout the skill the better. So that's kinda what I look for.
Click to expand...

There are so many rotation-caliber player floating around the league, and the Jazz have enough rotation players on their roster at this point, that I'm really only interested in swinging for upside. That is, trying to draft someone who can lift the ceiling of the team if they pan out. If they fail, then so be it, but I'm looking for star or near-star potential.

If you want rotation-caliber players, there are a dozen of them in the 2nd round this year.
 
Catchall said:
There are so many rotation-caliber player floating around the league, and the Jazz have enough rotation players on their roster at this point, that I'm really only interested in swinging for upside. That is, trying to draft someone who can lift the ceiling of the team if they pan out. If they fail, then so be it, but I'm looking for star or near-star potential.

If you want rotation-caliber players, there are a dozen of them in the 2nd round this year.
Click to expand...

If you're looking for stars then total projects that don't possess a standout NBA skill/trait isn't the place to look.

Also history says there's only 5 all stars on average per draft. Usually most of them go near the top of the draft.

Oh and I'd like to point out that several players who were pegged as "just role players" ended up becoming all stars. Rudy Gobert, Kyle Lowry, Paul Millsap, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis. Wanna know why? They had standout skills/traits that allowed them to get on the floor for a team in a specific role. And once they had their foot in the door they were able to expand their games.
 
SCS said:
If you're looking for stars then total projects that don't possess a standout NBA skill/trait isn't the place to look.

Also history says there's only 5 all stars on average per draft. Usually most of them go near the top of the draft.

Oh and I'd like to point out that several players who were pegged as "just role players" ended up becoming all stars. Rudy Gobert, Kyle Lowry, Paul Millsap, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis. Wanna know why? They had standout skills/traits that allowed them to get on the floor for a team in a specific role. And once they had their foot in the door they were able to expand their games.
Click to expand...

Really like your approach to the process. One more advantage of what you propose would be that a player who has one NBA level skill is immediately an asset in hypothetical trade contrary to the promising project. And we lack in those right now after we gutted ourselves with the trade for Conley.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SCS
You guys keep bringing up wings that arent gonna get drafted like their being overlooked.. John Petty is a much better prospect than LAmine Diane,Sam Merrill, Nate Hinton, Mason Jones, JAlen Harris, Jessup... I'm sure of it...

That list of guys i just ran thru other than Petty, they arent really that much better than the players at 98,99 and 100 on ESPN's board -- Anthony Lamb, Kristian Doolittle, and Trevelin Queen IMO.
 
SCS said:
If you're looking for stars then total projects that don't possess a standout NBA skill/trait isn't the place to look.

Also history says there's only 5 all stars on average per draft. Usually most of them go near the top of the draft.

Oh and I'd like to point out that several players who were pegged as "just role players" ended up becoming all stars. Rudy Gobert, Kyle Lowry, Paul Millsap, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis. Wanna know why? They had standout skills/traits that allowed them to get on the floor for a team in a specific role. And once they had their foot in the door they were able to expand their games.
Click to expand...

Who said the guys I'm looking at don't have a bankable NBA skill? Everyone I'm pointing to has prototypical NBA size and multiple NBA-level skills.

The best draft picks the Jazz have made have been high-ceiling prospects, even if they have a low floor. Guys who were drafted in the 20s especially, like Gobert and Kirilenko, were players with a high ceiling and a low floor. They were guys who could become special players if they developed into their best-case scenario, though it took them a few years to get there. Guys like Giannis and Siakam were the same.

Drafting young, under-scouted players with high upside, even if they're physically underdeveloped or polarizing in some way, has been a formula for success

I personally don't see what drafting Devon Dotson is going to do for the Jazz. Mitchell is going to have the ball in his hands, and when he doesn't, likely multiple guys are going to share the ball and initiate. If Dotson plays at all, he's going to have to be a 2nd or 3rd string backup PG, or he's going to have to play off the ball. He's going to be undersized to guard more than one position. I don't see the point in drafting a guard who isn't suited to play next to Donovan. If you want to draft a backup PG, there are several in the 2nd round that can work.
 
Lord Bullingdon said:
You guys keep bringing up wings that arent gonna get drafted like their being overlooked.. John Petty is a much better prospect than LAmine Diane,Sam Merrill, Nate Hinton, Mason Jones, JAlen Harris, Jessup... I'm sure of it...

That list of guys i just ran thru other than Petty, they arent really that much better than the players at 98,99 and 100 on ESPN's board -- Anthony Lamb, Kristian Doolittle, and Trevelin Queen IMO.
Click to expand...

Hinton and Jones are a tier better than the other guys.
 
This guy for a 2nd round pick or UDFA? "Nathan Knight William & Mary: 20.7 points, 10.5 rebounds, 1.7 assists, and 1.5 blocks on 52% from the field and 30% from 3 on 3 attempts per game
6’10 forward Nathan Knight might stand as the most accomplished NBA Draft prospect that you probably haven’t heard about. After the forward’s time with William & Mary, he collected enough awards and accolades that his family would probably have to purchase another trophy case to hold them.

Just in his senior year, the CAA (Colonial Athletic Association) named him as their Player of the Year, Defensive Player of the Year, All-Conference First Team, All-Defensive First Team, and the Lou Henson award which is given out to the mid-major Player of the Year. Knight was no stranger to being praised by the CAA as part of the All-Conference First team during the 2018-19 campaign while being on the All-Defensive squads in the two previous seasons.".
 
Catchall said:
Hinton and Jones are a tier better than the other guys.
Click to expand...
what makes you so sure? Mason Jones to me looks like a classic player who's pretty good in college but just doesnt have the juice to make any sort of impact at the NBA level..

To me Mason Jones lacks discipline for his age too, on both sides of the ball, i think he loses focus and disengages at times.... He should be further along... You might go to look at his stats and see 2 seasons but he is a 22 year old..
 
Last edited:


6.6 rebounds per game this year! He's still skinny but thats why his stock isnt higher... Really has a solid handle, he's a decent passer capable of making some really nice drop-off bounce pass type deals during drives, and of course he hit 45% of his 3's on high volume, and demonstrates the capacity to really heat up..
 
Bol Bol had 16 points 10 rebounds and 6 blocks in his debut yesterday.... Still dont understand why so many teams would pass on him, some twice.
 
Eminence said:
Bol's injuries explain him dropping out of the lottery, him dropping to the mid 2nd was still just dumb.
Click to expand...

He also can barely dribble, he doesn't move well laterally, and he was playing a terrible Washington team yesterday who couldn't make a shot without Beal and Bertans. He'll probably be an interesting backup. He protects the rim well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top