What's new

2022 NBA Draft Thread: We Going to Have a Pick! (lmao jk)


Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
I have a hard time believing that an athletically challenged player who has no pull-up or spot-up game to speak of, and a questionable handle (no shake) can be a NBA PG.

Can he be a player who gets a good volume of PNR in the half-court? Yes, but that doesnt make you a PG.

At this point I would put him closer to being the next Jarret Culver than becoming a legitimate NBA PG.
 


Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
I have a hard time believing that an athletically challenged player who has no pull-up or spot-up game to speak of, and a questionable handle (no shake) can be a NBA PG.

Can he be a player who gets a good volume of PNR in the half-court? Yes, but that doesnt make you a PG.

At this point I would put him closer to being the next Jarret Culver than becoming a legitimate NBA PG.
PG, playmaking wing call him whatever you want… he’s a perfect pairing in the backcourt for a high volume scorer type…. And there are lots of those types these days. Any projection of him being awesome is reliant on the 3 shot coming around.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
I think this draft will have a lot of guys that have success on a Wagner, Haliburton, Vassell, Bane, McDaniels types of levels. Has a lot of guys that have great size for the position. I think there are really good building block players from 7-20ish... The top isn't as sexy as you'd like but its not ugly by any means.
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
Best thing about Daniels is that I think his defense is translatable. He will be a better defender than the guys I would comp him to from recent drafts(Troy Brown Jr/Jarret Culver) (though those guys arent failing in the NBA due to their defense).

The idea that Dyson is some kind of Gordon Hayward though.... he doesnt not have that kind of baseline offensive scoring or shooting talent.

To me he is more of a 15-20 guy because of his age gives him reason to talk yourself into some kind of large jump in his skillset. This draft kind of sucks tho like I said for top end talent, so teams may reach and fool themselves into thinking Dyson is more based off workouts.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
With regard to Dyson... he had the fastest shuttle time of the last two years... so while he may not be a good vertical athlete... he isn't Ingles either. His length makes him a menace on defense and means his vertical athleticism isn't as important.

Good passer, can hit some mid range shots, has been declared the best perimeter defender in the draft by some of the experts, he's about all the right things and winning... the question is the jumper. If it comes around he could be one of those borderline all-stars that just wins everywhere he goes. If it doesn't he may lock more like a caffeinated Kyle Anderson.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
Best thing about Daniels is that I think his defense is translatable. He will be a better defender than the guys I would comp him to from recent drafts(Troy Brown Jr/Jarret Culver) (though those guys arent failing in the NBA due to their defense).

The idea that Dyson is some kind of Gordon Hayward though.... he doesnt not have that kind of baseline offensive scoring talent.
I'd buy low on Troy Brown this summer. Has been in some ****** environments imo... still young. I think he's a minimum guy and we could offer a role.

Dyson isn't Gordon... I think he has elements of Tyrese and Lonzo.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
Best thing about Daniels is that I think his defense is translatable. He will be a better defender than the guys I would comp him to from recent drafts(Troy Brown Jr/Jarret Culver) (though those guys arent failing in the NBA due to their defense).

The idea that Dyson is some kind of Gordon Hayward though.... he doesnt not have that kind of baseline offensive scoring or shooting talent.

To me he is more of a 15-20 guy because of his age gives him reason to talk yourself into some kind of large jump in his skillset. This draft kind of sucks tho like I said for top end talent, so teams may reach and fool themselves into thinking Dyson is more based off workouts.
I think its the off court reports and the kind of winning attitude he seems to have that has me talking myself into him. To go to the G League and not just gun for stats... when you are headed into the draft with a lot at stake just says a lot to me. The sample is small. The shot looks okay but the 3p% with the FT shooting % are scary. He has enough there that if he works I think the shot gets good enough.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
I think I'd have Dyson ranked 8th. Mathurin is pretty intriguing and has some upside. I think AJ Griffin slips to 12 or further because of medicals. Regardless I am not a big believer.
 

Ferguson_Mellochill

Well-Known Member
2019 Prediction Contest Winner
Dyson is a lead guard who plays on the ball and leads his team in assists. He's a good creator in pick-and-roll, he leads in transition, he can finish at the rim or use floaters out to 8 feet. He can also play off the ball, mostly spotting up and cutting to the basket. If you want to call him a combo-guard, fine. He'll defend 1 - 3.

I wouldn't compare him to Tyrese Haliburton because Dyson's game is predicated on driving rather than shooting, and he's not nearly the shooter that Tyrese is.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM9lXPGHoXQ&t=303s
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
I think I'd have Dyson ranked 8th. Mathurin is pretty intriguing and has some upside. I think AJ Griffin slips to 12 or further because of medicals. Regardless I am not a big believer.
Yeah, IDK how to rank that mid lottery to 20's. A lot of guys like Griffin/Mathurin/Davis/Ivey/Sharpe/Murray/(EVEN SMITH) who are just kind of meh to me.

At this point Holmgren/Banchero are the clear top 2 to me.

Smith is probably 3 by default. Then it's a lot of meh of dudes who are questionable. Jaden Ivey probably has to be 4 just because the talent level to be a lead scorer, but he isnt the kind of player I value highly.

I might put Sochan as high at 6th tbh. I just value what he brings over the other prospects.
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
Dyson is a lead guard who plays on the ball and leads his team in assists. He's a good creator in pick-and-roll, he leads in transition, he can finish at the rim or use floaters out to 8 feet. He can also play off the ball, mostly spotting up and cutting to the basket. If you want to call him a combo-guard, fine. He'll defend 1 - 3.

I wouldn't compare him to Tyrese Haliburton because Dyson's game is predicated on driving rather than shooting, and he's not nearly the shooter that Tyrese is.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM9lXPGHoXQ&t=303s

Name one team that is in position to draft him that would develop him with lead guard in mind lmao.

And IDK, I guess him having a good floater is a positive, but it's also a sign he's completely adverse to contact and is going to struggle in the NBA. He's going to struggle to finish in a league that has actual rim protectors. The G-League is a joke when it comes to rim defense. I have no idea how Dyson scores in the NBA outside of transition. His complete lack of scoring ability or shooting ability is going to hurt his best skill, passing/court awareness. I could easily see it becoming a Jarret Culver/Troy Brown situation.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
Yeah, IDK how to rank that mid lottery to 20's. A lot of guys like Griffin/Mathurin/Davis/Ivey/Sharpe/Murray/(EVEN SMITH) who are just kind of meh to me.

At this point Holmgren/Banchero are the clear top 2 to me.

Smith is probably 3 by default. Then it's a lot of meh of dudes who are questionable. Jaden Ivey probably has to be 4 just because the talent level to be a lead scorer, but he isnt the kind of player I value highly.

I might put Sochan as high at 6th tbh. I just value what he brings over the other prospects.
Even though I don't love some of those guys (I think Duren and Griffin are the only ones I'd be a lot lower on) I think those guys are all great bets. Last year I didn't care much for Mitchell or Bouknight really much at all... outside of Moody and Duarte there weren't guys I really liked in that range... just didn't seem like there were a lot of guys I thought were surefire rotation players. I'd feel pretty good that if I had two picks in the teens I could come out with at least one average starter quality player and a rotation piece... and think both would have upside for more.
 


Top