|
I'm actually working on an article about this right now. I get why Dunn and Murray are ranked above Hield on most boards, and to some extent I agree from a talent evaluation standpoint. But I think Hield has a higher floor and ceiling than those players. Trying to conceptualize the idea of diminishing returns for 'more' at the draft level i.e. why being a good player across the board is not necessarily more valuable than being elite at a few things at the NBA level. Hield played against elite competition and length to the degree of few lottery shooters before him and succeeded time and time again in his senior season. Ability to shoot at the NBA level should not be questioned for me and will look as stupid in hindsight as questioning Curry or Lillard's ability to do the same. To take Murray and Dunn over Hield, I think you have to believe that their shooting will eventually rival Hield's. Not sure either of them will ever get there. Murray certainly has a better chance, but he's much better on spot-ups than he is off the dribble. Question becomes whether he'll be able to develop that at the NBA level. GMs are seduced by potential, but you'll get a better first four out of Hield than you will out of either of those players IMO. straight up brolic fucked around with this message at 21:43 on May 16, 2016 |
#
?
May 16, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
straight up brolic posted:no one shoots ~40% off the dribble from three and makes 45% of ten attempts per game accidentally. So you're saying he missed 60%/55% of those shots on purpose then? :iamafag: e: I don't have an actual argument other than "I'm looking at the numbers and this is how I feel about them" and it would be pointless for me to continue down the thread. I do agree that Hield has the higher floor, but Murray's numbers as a freshman were better than any of Hield's seasons bar this one, which is why I think he's the better prospect. IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 21:42 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
IcePhoenix posted:So you're saying he missed 60%/55% of those shots on purpose then? :iamafag:
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
can someone articulate why Jaylen Brown isn't just a worse Stanley Johnson?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Like Heild seems likely to be a good shooter, but outlier seasons absolutely happen, especially when you have an age and experience advantage over almost everyone you play against and his season screams outlier relative to the rest of his career (and while guys can and do improve in general freshman production tends to be the most predictive). And if you're comparing him to someone like Murray you need to factor in that at the same point in his career Hield couldn't even crack 30% from three
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Where's my Evan Eschemeyer highlight tape at. Eschemeyer owns.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:can someone articulate why Jaylen Brown isn't just a worse Stanley Johnson? He's more athletic than Johnson I think but yeah he looks way less skilled than Johnson did at Arizona. His appeal is almost entirely "looks very much like a person who should be great at sports"
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
There's not really going to be a draft I hate this thread ! I hate it! what's the chance that every player busts
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Hield's season might be an outlier, but it also happened to be an outlier that occurred after he spent the previous summer working out the hitches in his jump shot.EvanTH posted:There's not really going to be a draft I hate this thread ! I hate it! what's the chance that every player busts
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
NICK WANTS HIELD
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JoelEmbiid/status/732677769398788097 draft is rigged???
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:https://twitter.com/JoelEmbiid/status/732677769398788097
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Did no one move up?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
ButtWolf posted:Did no one move up? Correct There was a 1.9% chance of that happening
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Metapod posted:Correct It's also the most likely scenario too. Any configuration of the draft has a Under 2% chance of happening. They are all unlikely.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Metapod posted:Correct Technically, it was the most likely single outcome (ie, more likely than other single ordering), but yeah, the odds are low as hell
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:Hield played against elite competition and length to the degree of few lottery shooters before him and succeeded time and time again in his senior season. Ability to shoot at the NBA level should not be questioned for me and will look as stupid in hindsight as questioning Curry or Lillard's ability to do the same. But questioning them wasn't stupid, and thinking it was is badly over privileging results vs process. Like, it would be a poor conclusion to decide because of them that junior/senior guards from small schools with quick release jumpers and subpar athleticism are a hot commodity.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Now comes the part where I try to have strong opinions on players without posting something that can be made fun of in a year. Oh man the dumb poo poo I wanted to post about Russell last summer before the draft that I stopped myself from doing . . . Marcus Smart hasn't made me eat my words yet, luckily.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Not going to complain about Sacramento since they won the tie breakers and draft at 8 instead of 10. As far as I'm concerned they moved up 2 spots. Now to hope Minnesota or New Orleans falls in love with Ellenson or Skal
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Not going to complain about Sacramento since they won the tie breakers and draft at 8 instead of 10. As far as I'm concerned they moved up 2 spots. Now to hope Minnesota or New Orleans falls in love with Ellenson or Skal This guy grew up less than 2 hours from the twin cities  Thankfully Thibs at the helm might bring a bit more sanity in our drafting, but there will probably be clamoring to get this guy a jersey and a pontoon.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Lockback posted:This guy grew up less than 2 hours from the twin cities Is there a Kirk Hinrich equivalent in the draft
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Is there a Kirk Hinrich equivalent in the draft If we blew our cap signing Deng, Kirk and Noah I would be sooo happy
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Rick posted:Now comes the part where I try to have strong opinions on players without posting something that can be made fun of in a year. Oh man the dumb poo poo I wanted to post about Russell last summer before the draft that I stopped myself from doing . . .  Seriously, this place is less fun when people keep their dumb (sports related) opinions to themselves
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:But questioning them wasn't stupid, and thinking it was is badly over privileging results vs process. Like, it would be a poor conclusion to decide because of them that junior/senior guards from small schools with quick release jumpers and subpar athleticism are a hot commodity. Jimmer is the most recent example I guess
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:
Example: Buddy Hield will be what beal should be
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
e: wrong thread
R.D. Mangles fucked around with this message at 04:02 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:it's very hard to name an excellent off the dribble, high volume, high efficiency college shooter who failed in the nba. Well...arbitrary cutoffs and no way to distinguish shots off the dribble, but not exactly a list of exclusively NBA talent. Douby and Wolters did nothing, Hill and Redick are very nice backups (and I think if Hield becomes Hill or Redick you'd be happy to have taken him in the 5-10 range, to be fair), and the guys in that 11-20 range are pretty dire. It'd hard to think of them because they scrubbed out and you forgot about them. I'll grant you a lot of those guys are from weaker conferences and didn't face the competition Hield did, but then again so were Lillard and Curry.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Yeah I can name a bunch of guys if you include small conference players. For bigger conferences Stauskas and Joseph Young are the first two that leap to mind without spending much time looking back.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
I'm not sure who I want the Wolves to take. It seems like a lot of mocks are project Dunn to the Wolves. He fits Thibodeau's mold of long athletic defenders, but he's had a couple of shoulder injuries and seems to be an inconsistent shooter. It would be nice to have another good PG, since the offense drops off hard when Rubio is off the court, but the Wolves really need to prioritize complementing what they have with shooters. For shooters you have Hield and Murray, who I would be fine with, but I'm less certain if they fit what Thibodeau may be looking for. Finding a PF would be nice, but I don't see Bender sliding to 5 and even if he does, he may be too much of a project. Then there is Ellenson, who could develop into a stretch 4, but I don't see him fitting with Thibodeau emphasizing defense. I am actually wondering if Skal Labissiere is the best fit at PF, since he's a long, athletic defender and having another big who can block shots and defend the perimeter would be really nice.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:Well...arbitrary cutoffs and no way to distinguish shots off the dribble, but not exactly a list of exclusively NBA talent. Douby and Wolters did nothing, Hill and Redick are very nice backups (and I think if Hield becomes Hill or Redick you'd be happy to have taken him in the 5-10 range, to be fair), and the guys in that 11-20 range are pretty dire. It'd hard to think of them because they scrubbed out and you forgot about them. MourningView posted:Yeah I can name a bunch of guys if you include small conference players. For bigger conferences Stauskas and Joseph Young are the first two that leap to mind without spending much time looking back. I'm not allowed to post the data that's not publicly available, but off the dribble shooting is a pretty good predictor of future shooting success %-wise (better than whatever the previous season's normal percentages were).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
The Lakers face no pressure here, right? They'll simply pick the dude Philly did not pick. Or is there a 3rd guy floating around?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
Having not watched a ton of college ball before the tournament, is Malachi Richardson a viable pick for the Sixers at 24/26? Seems he would fill a scoring need, especially if they take Simmons at 1 (they HAVE to take Simmons).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:Hill and Redick are starters. Both are also pretty exclusively a set shooters, not off the dribble. Douby is a good shout. I should have added the caveat of being a first-round selection because most of these guys didn't have the athleticism to be given a true shot in the NBA anyway. I don't believe shooting is the only thing that matters, I just believe that there is a lower failure rate amongst first round picks that are great shooters, if that makes sense. DX tends to post the synergy off the dribble shooting percentage for pretty much everyone with a chance to get drafted in their scouting reports so it's not too hard to find if you google "name draft express off the dribble" or something
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
aBagorn posted:Having not watched a ton of college ball before the tournament, is Malachi Richardson a viable pick for the Sixers at 24/26? Seems he would fill a scoring need, especially if they take Simmons at 1 (they HAVE to take Simmons). I like his game a lot. Very little wasted movement on his shot and off the bounce. I think he can develop an all around scoring game as well. I don't think he'll be there for those picks though.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
If Memphis doesn't trade up for Buddy then I sure do hope we get Baby Sabonis
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
#1 pick and I didn't get arrested or burn anything down. https://twitter.com/SpikeEskin/status/732739809731547137?s=09
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
The Celtics should probably trade pick #3 or take Buddy, to be honest. I have no idea what the sixers are going to do because regardless of who they draft their best 3 players are going to be Centers or Power Forwards, with 2 more possibly coming onto the team. They really have to trade Okafor or Noel. Probably Noel.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:The Celtics should probably trade pick #3 or take Buddy, to be honest. I have no idea what the sixers are going to do because regardless of who they draft their best 3 players are going to be Centers or Power Forwards, with 2 more possibly coming onto the team. They really have to trade Okafor or Noel. Probably Noel. Doesn't Ingram project as more of a 3? Aniki posted:I'm not sure who I want the Wolves to take. It seems like a lot of mocks are project Dunn to the Wolves. He fits Thibodeau's mold of long athletic defenders, but he's had a couple of shoulder injuries and seems to be an inconsistent shooter. It would be nice to have another good PG, since the offense drops off hard when Rubio is off the court, but the Wolves really need to prioritize complementing what they have with shooters. For shooters you have Hield and Murray, who I would be fine with, but I'm less certain if they fit what Thibodeau may be looking for. Finding a PF would be nice, but I don't see Bender sliding to 5 and even if he does, he may be too much of a project. Then there is Ellenson, who could develop into a stretch 4, but I don't see him fitting with Thibodeau emphasizing defense. I am actually wondering if Skal Labissiere is the best fit at PF, since he's a long, athletic defender and having another big who can block shots and defend the perimeter would be really nice. I wouldn't mind Skal if we traded down for him (maybe Buddy is on the board at 5 and someone in the 9-12 range is in love with him) but I still think you take BPA in the top five outside of extreme circumstances (which I don't think the Wolves fall under). IcePhoenix fucked around with this message at 16:18 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Jack's Flow posted:The Lakers face no pressure here, right? They'll simply pick the dude Philly did not pick. Or is there a 3rd guy floating around? It's either Simmons or Ingram. And who goes first and second probably comes down to Embiid's health. If the 76ers think he will be able to come back, they should take Ingram. You can't play 4 PFs/C's, and they already have Okafor, Embiid and Noel.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
I think it's pretty much nailed on that the Sixers take Simmons and trade either Okafor or Noel.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:30
|
|
