Jump to content
Bauncey Chillups

2018 NBA Draft Thread

Recommended Posts

Soul Bro    543
2 hours ago, Nyce_1 said:

Trae is a better PG than any of the PGs in last year's draft (Mitchell is combo guard). If he was in the same draft, he would've gone #1. Him not being top 5 this year has less to do about his potential & skill, and more to do about the teams picking at the top. #2, 3, & 5 already have PGs. #1 has Booker and because of his porous defense, they know Young/Booker backcourt would score 80pts and give up 85. #3, is actually considering taking him to replace their PG, 1 year into 4yr deal. So, though not a lock, he can still go top 3. 

I don’t think he would have cracked the top 4 last year. Fultz, Ball, Tatum and Jackson were beloved across the league. I do think he would have been in the discussion for pick five and on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magicfan1987    179
29 minutes ago, Mike1989 said:

The Lakers don't need Lonzo to be a lights out shooter. He's an excellent passer and rebounder, and can score well enough to contribute - 36% from the field and 30% from 3 point range.

De'Aaron Fox can score in a number of ways and his penetration due to his excellent athleticism and quickness helps him significantly - .412 from the field, .307 from 3 point.

Dennis Smith managed to average 15 points as a rookie without being a consistent shooter - .395 from the field, .313 from 3 point.

The thing to remember here before criticizing these guys shooting percentages is that they are all pretty much in the same ballpark as Chris Paul and Jason Kidd's numbers as rookies:

- Kidd shot 38.5 from the field and 27.2 from 3 point

- Paul shot 37.2 from the field and 28.2 from 3 point

As you can see Ball, Fox and Smith all shot the three ball with a higher percentage, and only Ball's field goal percentage was lower. So if Kidd and Paul became good shooters and two of the best at their respective position, then there's no reason why Ball, Smith and Fox cannot develop into reliable shooters as long as they put the work in.

all of that looked like a whole bunch of suck and wasn't very encouraging regardless of traes projection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LaVar    49
2 hours ago, 0rland0fan said:

Exactly.  This team needs talent, regardless of position.  BPA is definitely the way to go.  At the end of the day, the bulk of the minutes will go to the most talented players. The dilemma is that I don't want us to pass on Young and then be wrong and regret it.  

Funny thing is that young, imo, will be best fit and best player available. We pass on him, it will be like the hawks passing on chris paul for m. williams - because someone thought williams had crazy upside. We pick another sf or pf and it will hurt the rookie and/or one of the other players on the team like gordon or isaac. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chosen12    54
3 hours ago, ROCK LEGENDS PHOTOGRAPHERS said:

Personally I totally disagree with the whole BPA idea.
It's like you have 100 pairs of socks but need underwear. You go to the store and find that really good socks are on sale so you buy more socks instead of getting the underwear that you need. So now you have 120 pairs of socks and still need underwear. 
 

With your thinking if the BPAs for all 3 of our picks are all PFs do we take them even if we already have AG and Isaac?

 

Can't disagree with this approach, but BPA should not be discounted in the case that we overlook a future allstar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magicfan1987    179
46 minutes ago, chosen12 said:

Can't disagree with this approach, but BPA should not be discounted in the case that we overlook a future allstar. 

Weltman has said on record team fit would be considered in the tie breaker discussions.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/2/2018 at 9:02 PM, Tank Vogel said:

He watched Oklahoma games after December

Certainly did not watch the URI game in the NCAA tournament or his 40+ point games in January/2018 or either game against West Va. in 2018.  And Trae Young is not my first choice but I do think he deserves and I am glad (if I read correctly) that he is getting an individual workout with us.  Put him against NBA players and find out what he has.  And I hope we do that with Porter, Bamba, and Carter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike1989    48
10 hours ago, LaVar said:

Funny thing is that young, imo, will be best fit and best player available. We pass on him, it will be like the hawks passing on chris paul for m. williams - because someone thought williams had crazy upside. We pick another sf or pf and it will hurt the rookie and/or one of the other players on the team like gordon or isaac. 

I do agree that I think Trae will be a good fit for us and could be the best player available at six.

I also agree that taking a forward could be problematic with Isaac and Gordon, but it all depends on whether we are going to extend Gordon. If there's a belief that so-and-so is a better fit with Isaac we could draft that prospect and look for a sign and trade, or extend Gordon and trade to acquire another prospect to upgrade another starting position. It all depends on who falls and whether the team think they are special.

With that said, I'd say our most likely pick at this point is Trae Young or Mohamed Bamba. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  10 hours ago, HeHateMe said:

There are a bunch of players in college that have the same range Young does. There are not a lot of coaches that allow a player to take as many bad shots as Young does. There’s a reason that team was an absolute joke the second half of the year and got bounced first round of the tournament. Turns out letting a player throw shots up from all over the court inefficiently isn’t a great way to win games. 

I hope we get one of those players with range just like Young and that can quickly pull up off the dribble just like he does.

  3 hours ago, fan for too long 2 said:

I don’t think you have watched him play at all. 

I followed the hype on Young as the season progressed but didn't see him actually play until this year after his numbers were dropping. I watched a few games and in one of them he hit 4 straight 3's and a 2 on consecutive plays in about 3 minutes, 14 very quick points to put his team back in the game. There is a lot more to him than just a short unathletic kid that jacks up bad shots from all over the court and doesn't play D (6th in steals in the big 12).  One of the things that both pro-Young and anti-Young people overlook is that he DOES go to the basket a lot and he makes almost 87% of his free throws. It was amazing to see him go to the hole through the bigs and either score or get fouled.

For those interested here is a great breakdown of everything he did in college. https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/trae-young-1.html

I'm glad to see that our management is at least doing their due diligence and I will put my trust in them as to if he is the BPA when we pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
?4thewin    1,582

Here's Trae against the NCAA best defenses

Texas tech was the best defense he played and he had 28/21/91 shooting splits and 5 turnovers per game. 

Texas was the second best defense he played. 33/20/100 shooting splits. 4 turnovers per game

Alabama was the third best defense he played. 35/44/50 shooting splits. 17 points on 17 shots. 5 turnovers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ?4thewin said:

Here's Trae against the NCAA best defenses

Texas tech was the best defense he played and he had 28/21/91 shooting splits and 5 turnovers per game. 

Texas was the second best defense he played. 33/20/100 shooting splits. 4 turnovers per game

Alabama was the third best defense he played. 35/44/50 shooting splits. 17 points on 17 shots. 5 turnovers

 

So yeah he sucks against tough defenses when he has to carry the offensive load but I wonder how he would have done against them if he was the PG on a stronger team that had others that could reliably score? We'll never know so I guess we have to trust the professionals in our management to determine if he is the BPA when our pick comes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
?4thewin    1,582

So there's a good article on cleaning the glass that breaks down Trae's shooting. 

Basically the interesting part is he shot 27 for 102 on 30 foot threes (26%) which is a stupid amount of unnecessary misses that killed his shooting percentages. 

So, basically I think people who give Trae unlimited range credit are being hit with confirmation bias (remembering the few makes) because 26% isnt high enough to get credit for that range. 

But he's probably closer to a 38% shooter if he didn't take bad shots. 

But is 38% what makes Trae special to his supporters? Or is it the fake threat of 35 foot threes? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×