xbilkis posted:

I think Marcus Smart is probably the closest to that so far this year.

Probably Magic posted:

He'll suck. He's not a great shooter, and sure, he can bulldoze into the lane and get his own shots, so that makes him... a slightly better Sherron Collins. For a guard in the NBA, that's not great.

Also, not to make a huge deal of the flopping thing, but generally, if you're getting caught flopping in the NCAA, it's not just a sign you're a flopper, it's a sign you're a bad defender because you sure as hell are going to get called for the blocking foul or what have you in the NBA if you're being that blatant on the collegiate level. Everyone flops, but Smart's problem is that he's not very good at selling it sufficiently.

quote:

Smart makes a living inside the paint, as he relishes contact and gets to the free throw line nearly ten times per-40 minutes, while finishing 57% of his shots around the basket in the half-court. The role he will play in the NBA appears to be well defined, as he's very good in transition and on the pick and roll, and is more than capable of creating shots for himself and others, something he appears to have improved on in his sophomore year. Smart's assist to turnover and pure point ratio both increased notably this past season, particularly his ability to avoid coughing the ball up, as his turnover percentage decreased from an alarming 19% as a freshman to a much more manageable 14%.

Another area Smart is likely to excel in very early in the NBA is on the defensive end. With his size, strength and length, Smart is capable of guarding multiple positions, which gives his coach nice versatility to take advantage of in different schemes. He even proved strong enough to put a body on big men in certain stretches, showing the type of toughness and competitiveness NBA executives love. On top of that, he brings terrific anticipation skills for blocks, steals and rebounds, hauling in seven boards per-40 minutes and over three steals thanks to the intensity level and timing he displays.

On the downside, Smart still sports a very inconsistent jump-shot, something that didn't really improve from his freshman to sophomore seasons. His shooting mechanics leave a lot to be desired, as he dips the ball violently, and fades forward and sometimes sideways on his release. That wouldn't be that big of an issue if Smart didn't take as many jumpers as he does—nearly half of his field goal attempts came from beyond the arc, and he hit just 30% of them, many being contested ones early in the shot clock.

Smart is not a non-shooter by any stretch, but his poor decision making hampers his percentages significantly. He will have some very ugly low-efficiency nights in the NBA against better-organized defenses until he learns how to reel himself in and plays within his limitations.

Other issues, such as his reputation for flopping, and the very short fuse he showed pushing a fan in the stands at Texas Tech, are ones NBA teams will likely want to explore further during the draft process. This reportedly wasn't the first time he put hands on someone according to what we've been told by reliable sources. Additionally, while many are quick to laud his intangibles as a winner, it's important to note that he did not win a NCAA Tournament game in his two years at Oklahoma State.

With that said, it's difficult not to admire the Joakim Noah style competitiveness Smart brings to the table, which can be very valuable in a long 82 game regular season, particularly for organizations trying to improve their “team culture.”

Matchups against the likes of Kansas, Iowa State, Baylor, Gonzaga, Oklahoma, Texas and Memphis have given us ample opportunity to evaluate Smart's very defined strengths and weaknesses as a prospect

Kibner posted:

Why do I get the feeling he'll basically be Rodney Stuckey?

quote:

When the Sixers didn't land the No. 1 pick in the 2014 NBA Draft, any hopes of taking Kansas forward Andrew Wiggins appeared to go out the window.

Well, it sounds like general manager Sam Hinkie is going to kick that window back open.

According to Anthony Gargano of 94WIP, the Sixers are prepared to do "whatever it takes" to get Wiggins on draft night.

"The Sixers are in love with [Andrew] Wiggins and they will do whatever they need to do to land Andrew Wiggins,” Gargano reported on Wednesday. “From what I hear, it’s 90-percent they get Wiggins. They’ll do whatever it takes.”

Just what will it take for the Sixers to guarantee they end the 2014 NBA Draft with Wiggins?

For the Sixers to ensure they get their guy, they would have to move up two spots to No. 1 overall. A move from No. 3 to the top pick would likely take the Sixers' pick at No. 10, and could even cost more depending on how committed the Cleveland Cavaliers were to taking their guy at No. 1.

kiimo posted:

Sherron Collins is 5'10 and a half tops with a huge giant Taco Bell problem. Smart is 6'4 or just under. That's really not a good comparison. You really think he'll suck? C'mon. When I say warrior I'm not using that hyperbole lightly like a superfan or something. He gets after it and that is a real thing not an imaginary homer thing to say, especially considering I hate his loving guts.

euphronius posted:

The 10 pick is worth giving up to ensure you get the guy you want imho.

Lockback posted:

They could also see what happens and offer their #3 and #10 if someone takes Wiggins.

BIZORT posted:

Every year we all, more or less, agree on at least one guy that will bust but I'm not sure we've all come to that consensus yet for this draft. The only one we've been wrong about off the top of my head is Drummond

Lockback posted:

They could also see what happens and offer their #3 and #10 if someone takes Wiggins.

euphronius posted:

The 10 pick is worth giving up to ensure you get the guy you want imho.

Rick posted:

The draft is a lot less fun when your team never has a first round pick, ever.

Doltos posted:

Chris de Sperg posted:

Joakim Noah, the entire 2008 draft basically

DeimosRising posted:

This forum was indeed super, super wrong about a ton of guys in this draft - almost everyone thought Love was an unathletic guy who dominated college competition Shelden Williams style, Westbrook was a no skills athletic freak who belonged in the late lottery, Lopez was a stiff (which is sort of true, I guess, but didn't stop him from being good), OJ Mayo was going to be great.

2008 turned out to be a really good class largely on the strength of a really good late 1st/2nd group of players. Knowing what we know now (i.e. Derrick Rose is dead) a redraft would look crazy. Something like...

Love
Westbrook
Ibaka
Lopez
Hibbert
Dragic
Anderson
Pekovic
Jordan
Batum
Gordon

and where do you take the Rose timebomb?

IcePhoenix posted:

I bet a lot of GMs would draft Westbrook over Love because WINS and LEADERSHIP

Rick posted:

Gordon was apparently a big hit in the Lakers workout today, apparently him and McDermott really went at each other.

IcePhoenix posted:

I bet a lot of GMs would draft Westbrook over Love because WINS and LEADERSHIP

MourningView posted:

I liked Love and Lopez! Hated Westbrook though. gently caress trying to project Ben Howland guards.

Declan MacManus posted:

Do we consider Kyle Anderson a Ben Howland Joint and if so do we consider him to be a guard or a forward

More to the point do we consider him anything other than Royce White but with a Stephen Curry-esque head

mikeraskol posted:

Maybe I was seeing things, but every UCLA game I watched Kyle Anderson just looked so very slow and unathletic.

IcePhoenix posted:

I bet a lot of GMs would draft Westbrook over Love because WINS and LEADERSHIP