monsterpile wrote:lipoli390 wrote:Camden wrote:lipoli390 wrote:Camden wrote:Lip, how can you be "convinced" E.J. Liddell's perimeter shot won't translate while in the same post ignore Dalen Terry's weakness as a shooter? Liddell shot nearly twice as many threes as Terry last year and still converted with higher efficiency. Terry also struggles in the mid-range and lacks any semblance of an in-between game as he does not possess a consistent runner at this time-- both of which Liddell is comfortable doing. I don't necessarily expect you to flip how you feel about either prospect this close to the draft, but you can see how there's an inconsistent approach in your process there, no?
I'd also disagree with your claim that Liddell's calling card at Ohio State was shot-blocking. I think that waters down or minimizes the all-around impact he had at the NCAA level and what he was asked to do there. Liddell was the best overall player on a very solid Buckeyes team last year and he did so making plays in every facet of the game. He led the team in scoring at 19.4 PPG on .598 true shooting taking on the role of the first option offensively -- often having to create his own offense -- which won't be expected of him at the next level. He was second on the team in assists per game (2.5). He was first in rebounds (7.9) and blocked shots (2.6). Liddell was an all-around contributor and stood out significantly in terms of box plus-minus metrics while playing the most minutes on the team.
He essentially carried that team on his back to a 20-12 record in the Big Ten and into the second round of the NCAA tournament. That was no fluke either. Liddell plays a winning brand of basketball that stems from a high IQ and a never-ending motor. He is exactly the kind of player that translates regardless of his measurables-- 6'7", 243-pounds with a 7'0" wingspan and an 8'7.5" standing reach. And even those have been overstated given his above average vertical leap and agility marks, both of which indicate that he's an impressive athlete. He's essentially comparable to Draymond Green in physical profile while sacrificing a couple inches of length for superior athleticism. And if you don't like that comparison, Liddell has a bigger and longer physical profile than Brandon Clarke, Grant Williams, Jae Crowder, and P.J. Tucker.
I'm not sold Liddell gets past Chicago at 18, but if he does I think he would be an awesome pick for Minnesota.
My main issue with Liddell is that he's an undersized big who can't put the ball on the floor. Green is a bad comparison because Green came out of college as a decent ball-handler. I like Liddell's athleticism, IQ and motor. But he's limited offensively in my view. Liddell's mid-range scoring comes on post-ups. His face-up game is terrible. Defenders even at the college level force him to turn the ball over. His lack of length without the ability to face up and handle the ball is a troubling combination. His perimeter shot is flat and some analysts have questioned whether he can extend his range to the NBA three-point line. I don't see the same issue with Terry. And Terry also has a high IQ and great motor.
Don't get me wrong. I still like Liddell. But I'd much prefer Terry or Williams at 19. I like long wings who can handle the ball and play-make, which both of those guys do well. I like drafting a player who starts with a physical advantage at his position. That would true of Terry and Williams, but would not be true of Liddell. If we trade down for the two Memphis pick, then my ideal would be Terry or Williams and Liddell.
Lip, forgive me, but that's not exactly the point I was trying to get across. Dalen Terry is an intriguing prospect for a lot of the reasons you've described, however, I don't understand how you can dismiss, or rather overlook, his minuscule sample size from three, but then question if E.J. Liddell's perimeter shot would even translate. This despite Liddell having shot nearly twice as many attempts from three than Terry and on even higher efficiency. I'm just not understanding why there's skepticism on the more proven shooter in this regard, but not the other. I could perhaps understand if Terry had perfect shot mechanics, but that's just not the case at all.
Also, I think there's some confusion here. I was not comparing Liddell's game or skill set to any of the other bigs I mentioned. I was simply comparing their physical profiles because you noted that you were concerned with Liddell's size, or lack thereof. I mentioned that Draymond Green had a slight advantage over Liddell in terms of length, but Liddell is a superior athlete vertically and laterally. I also compared Liddell's physical profile to other proven NBA forwards Brandon Clarke, Grant Williams, P.J. Tucker, and Jae Crowder -- all of whom are more undersized than Liddell.
There are flaws in Liddell's game, no doubt, but that's to be expected when picking in the later half of the first round. He could stand to improve his face-up game and his handle in the half-court could tighten up a bit, but I fail to see how big of an issue that is considering his likely role. Furthermore, the positives or things he can contribute immediately are vast and tangible. He's as NBA-ready as any player in this class and that has value. It's certainly a matter of preference, but I like Liddell's high floor and overall well-rounded game at a position of need more than another project at the wing with what I'd consider to be an unreliable perimeter shot.
Cam -
Again, I'm not ignoring Terry's flaws. I mentioned those flaws. I certainly agree that his small sample size on threes means we can't rely on his 36% 3-point stat when evaluating his potential as a 3-point shooter in the NBA. But I've watched a lot of videos of his three-point shooting. I love his form, high release and his arc, although his release is a bit slow. My concern about Liddell's 3-point shooting stems from (1) his poor 3-point shooting in his first two seasons at Ohio State; and (2) what looks like a very flat shot and seems to come in just over the front of the rim from the college arc. Terry's 3-point shot looks much better to me. But all of that is beside the point because I didn't identify 3-point shooing as one of Terry's strengths; I identified it as a weakness. In contrast, 3-point shooting is a strength often highlighted in support of Liddell as a potential pick. That's why his 3-point shooting is of particular concern. I think three-point shooting will have to be good for him to be the player I'd want him to be if the Wolves drafted him. I'm not saying he won't turn out to be a good three-point shooter in the NBA; since I see him as a 1st round talent, I obviously haven't concluded that he won't. I'm just saying there are reasons for doubt.
I understood your point that there have been successful NBA bigs with length similar to Liddell's. If I didn't understand that I wouldn't give Liddell and first round grade. I like Liddell's physical strength and athleticism. But my point is that Liddell's length (or lack thereof - 6'7.5" standing reach) is a negative. Yes, it's a negative he can overcome based on other attributes, but it's still a negative. When I think about draft prospects, I prefer players who start with a combination of physical attributes and skills that give them an advantage at their position. Terry's combination of PF length and PG skills gives him an advantage at the starting line. Liddell's SG/SF length and poor ball skills saddle him with a disadvantage at the start that he'll have to overcome. I actually think Liddell will over come those negative attributes with his athleticism, savvy and motor. But I'd prefer Terry, who also has terrific athleticism, savvy and motor, because of his combo of physical attributes and skills.
I also put more value on long wings with ball skills than I do bigs without ball skills. Finally, I think the Wolves should focus on free agency to fill their need for another big. We can sign a free agent big with more size than Liddell and with a proven NBA track record.
Often what really makes or breaks the undersized PFs is something that is often pretty difficult to assess coming out of college. Defense. Draymond is a maestro on that end. PJ Tucker plays bigger and does so many things on that end of the floor. If Liddell has that ability to defend at the NBA level I think there is enough other things no s he does well I think it's likely he is effective as an NBA player. I can't say whether he has that part of his game and to be clear I'm not questioning his defense it's that I find it harder to identify that skill especially at that position. It seems easier to see if a guy can defend on the wing. Guys like Liddel have to be able to do things on team defense that not everyone can do.
That's a great take, Monster.
