Official 2016 Draft Thread

[Monster]

I was just wondering, why isn't Hield considered for the #3 pick? And it got me thinking.

I get that he turns it over and isn't known for his defense, but with the way 3 point shooting is going these days, seems like having a sharpshooter like that is really valuable. Kid's supposed to be really high character, a crazy-hard worker, and still improving despite his (relative) age. But then I got to thinking about the track record of NCAA scoring leaders making it in the NBA.

So the broader question is: how can you tell whether these big-time college scorers are going to pan out in the NBA?

This is the real question about guys like Hield I think. Seems like some of them do (Redick, Curry) while others don't (Morrison, Jimmer, Erick Green, Reggie Hamilton, Aubrey Coleman)? Yeah, I had to look up those last couple guys too. They all led the NCAA in scoring.

So how can you tell whether you're drafting a Curry or Redick or an Aubrey Colemen or Jimmer? And any guesses where Hield will land on that spectrum?

I think you sorta answered your own question. :) I'm no Buddy expert but I'll add more.

From what I read and what I've seen of Buddy his ability to handle the ball is a big factor in keeping him from being a higher prospect. of the guys you mention of the 2 that were successful include a freak anomaly in Curry and a guy in Redick who has carved out a nice career as a pretty good 2 way player as a SG. Buddy looks like a guy that could be a Redick type pretty quickly and while that's a nice player I think you have to try for something a little higher than that. Now I'd say it's possible that Buddy is a better/more creative ball handler than Redick was coming out of college but I don't think he is on the same level as even McCollum was but if he became CJ level player that would be pretty good so let's go with that comp a little. Of course Buddy has some things going over CJ coming out of college. He played tougher competition and his size actually looks pretty solid to me. 6'3.75" barefoot and 6'5" in shoes. That's fine for an NBA SG plus he has an over 6'9" wingspan. Plus the guy is built pretty strong. Which guy has an advantage in being able to play both guard spots coming out of college? Idk I might give the edge to CJ but Buddy physically has plenty going for him to be a legit SG prospect and that's something.

The problem with a lot of these guys is projecting how much better they will get at the next level. Some guys much younger than Buddy likely will go before him because they were productive as a freshman. Maybe Buddy keeps making himself into a good player improves his ball handling and becomes a Redick type defender and some of these other guys don't really pan out. On the other hand Buddy may have an attractive floor in that he seems to be a smart guy that can probably play off others and pick his spots. It looks like he is gonna be outside the top 5 from what we know now and that's another reason why I won't be heartbroken if the Wolves stay at 5 or drop a couple spots. This draft gets pretty murky quickly and obviously you want to pick as high as you can I think there are worthwhile players available to the Wolves no matter where they pick.

[Lipoli390]

I was just wondering, why isn't Hield considered for the #3 pick? And it got me thinking.

I get that he turns it over and isn't known for his defense, but with the way 3 point shooting is going these days, seems like having a sharpshooter like that is really valuable. Kid's supposed to be really high character, a crazy-hard worker, and still improving despite his (relative) age. But then I got to thinking about the track record of NCAA scoring leaders making it in the NBA.

So the broader question is: how can you tell whether these big-time college scorers are going to pan out in the NBA?

This is the real question about guys like Hield I think. Seems like some of them do (Redick, Curry) while others don't (Morrison, Jimmer, Erick Green, Reggie Hamilton, Aubrey Coleman)? Yeah, I had to look up those last couple guys too. They all led the NCAA in scoring.

So how can you tell whether you're drafting a Curry or Redick or an Aubrey Colemen or Jimmer? And any guesses where Hield will land on that spectrum?

Great question, Drew.

I can't come up with any obvious answer on how you predict whose perimeter shooting prowess carries over from college to the NBA. There are probably multiple factors.

One factor might be ball-handling and the ability to create your own shot. Curry is a great ball-handler and Redick is a very solid ball-handler (much better than people give him credit for). Morrison was not. On the other hand, Jimmer is a good ball-handler and Redick is primarily a catch-and-shoot player as was another great NBA shooter named Ray Allen. So I don't think that's anything close to a definitive answer. It can't be height given the success of Curry, Redick, I. Thomas and others. Perhaps it's the energy and persistence or tenacity we see in players like Redick, Ray Allen and Steph Curry who continually move off the ball to get open.

But I think the biggest single factor is the ability to get your shot off against bigger more athletic defenders you face in the NBA. For that reason, I see two primary attributes that distinguish those whose shooting prowess in college translates to the NBA: (1) a quick release, and (2) the ability to find or create space either with the ball or off the ball. Curry and Redick, for example, have lightning quick releases as did Ray Allen. Adam Morrison and Jimmer had relatively slower releases. Morrison was not particularly quick moving without the ball and wasn't much of a ball-handler -- both of which inhibited his ability to get open space for his shots. CJ McCollum's release isn't as quick as Redick's or Curry's, but he's a terrific ball-handler and has a knack or instinct for finding seams either with or off the ball that give him room to shoot.

That brings me to Buddy Hield. He has a very quick release with lots of range. I don't think he has Redick's or Allen's non-stop motor and knack for getting open off the ball. And I don't think he has CJ McCollum's ball-handling and great basketball IQ for finding or creating openings with the ball. However, I think his ball-handling, energy and instincts are good enough in combination with his very quick release to ensure that his 3-point shooting will translate to the NBA. I also like what I've read about his work ethic and high character, which means he'll ultimately get the most out of his abilities.

Apparently, Hield's draft stock has dropped a bit lately to the point where he could be available as low as #7. But I have him #3 on my draft board and I still think he might be gone before #5.

[Lipoli390]

Monster -- I just read your response to Drew.

Looks like our thinking aligns. We both thought of CJ McCollum. The part of your post that resonates the most with me is your thought about Buddy having a relatively high floor. I just can't see him not succeeding as a perimeter shooter/scorer in the NBA. My post talks about his quick release and NBA range he's shown in college. You make a nice point about Buddy's good length and strength. Put those together with a terrific worth ethic and consistent improvement year to year in college and you seem to have a guy who should at least be able to succeed in the NBA in the areas where he had success in college. Nothing's certain when predicting NBA success, but predicting Buddy's success as a perimeter scorer in the NBA seems like a good bet.

I'd be interested in your take on Valentine.

[Monster]

Monster -- I just read your response to Drew.

Looks like our thinking aligns. We both thought of CJ McCollum. The part of your post that resonates the most with me is your thought about Buddy having a relatively high floor. I just can't see him not succeeding as a perimeter shooter/scorer in the NBA. My post talks about his quick release and NBA range he's shown in college. You make a nice point about Buddy's good length and strength. Put those together with a terrific worth ethic and consistent improvement year to year in college and you seem to have a guy who should at least be able to succeed in the NBA in the areas where he had success in college. Nothing's certain when predicting NBA success, but predicting Buddy's success as a perimeter scorer in the NBA seems like a good bet.

I'd be interested in your take on Valentine.

I'm conflicted on Valentine. I just looked up his measurables. He isn't that different when it comes to height and length compared to Buddy. That has to be a concern since there are questions about his "athleticism" being able to defend guys. He is a do it all guy it seems like he should be able to be another high floor guys and be something close to what Evan Turner is right now which ain't bad for a floor if you are picking closer to the middle of the first round. It's hard to decipher a reasonable upside range for Valentine. I like him I just feel I would pick a guy with more upside than him. Now if we drop down to 8 or something things get interesting as there are likely going to be low floor guys like a Sabonis you could pick there too.

[Monster]

Lip I've gathered from an earlier post you aren't really in on Bender or maybe you just don't feel you have enough information on him. That's fair we only have so much to go on at this point.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IffAjKkyPBE

A highlight real from the current for Bender.

This isn't a post to convince you Lip but I am curious what your thoughts are on Bender.

I'll state some about my position here. I'm a fan. It is likely going to take a bit and he is a risk but I think there is something there. Yeah he is skinny now but the dude is young. How young? He doesn't turn 19 till the middle of November. To put it in perspective That's a few months younger than Tyus was his rookie year and he had just turned 19 which was pretty unusually young. He is over 2 years younger than Porzingis. I know his lack of vertical limits his upside to some extent but he is a legit 7' PF that moves pretty well and plays really hard. I'll take my chances on that panning out when it comes to what he brings physically.

[Coolbreeze44]

I think the factors in college shooting translating at the NBA level are two-fold:

1) Having a highly repeatable stroke - one that you can groove for the NBA distance

2) The ability to concentrate at a quicker and higher level than your peers. This is what makes it so hard to gauge these prospects. How do you measure one's ability to concentrate when everything speeds up? Until you're put into real action, it's very difficult to scout or simulate this skill.

My best case in point and example for these factors is Matt Bonner.

[Lipoli390]

Thanks for link, Monster. I have no opinion on Bender. I've never seen him play - not even any clips. So I look forward to watching the link you sent. I'll let you know my thoughts after watching it.

[Monster]

I think the factors in college shooting translating at the NBA level are two-fold:

1) Having a highly repeatable stroke - one that you can groove for the NBA distance

2) The ability to concentrate at a quicker and higher level than your peers. This is what makes it so hard to gauge these prospects. How do you measure one's ability to concentrate when everything speeds up? Until you're put into real action, it's very difficult to scout or simulate this skill.

My best case in point and example for these factors is Matt Bonner.

I'd like to have you elaborate on your example of Matt Bonner.

[Lipoli390]

I think the factors in college shooting translating at the NBA level are two-fold:

1) Having a highly repeatable stroke - one that you can groove for the NBA distance

2) The ability to concentrate at a quicker and higher level than your peers. This is what makes it so hard to gauge these prospects. How do you measure one's ability to concentrate when everything speeds up? Until you're put into real action, it's very difficult to scout or simulate this skill.

My best case in point and example for these factors is Matt Bonner.

Two great observations, Cool. Your second point is probably the most telling. Think Larry Bird.

[Lipoli390]

Monster -- I just read your response to Drew.

Looks like our thinking aligns. We both thought of CJ McCollum. The part of your post that resonates the most with me is your thought about Buddy having a relatively high floor. I just can't see him not succeeding as a perimeter shooter/scorer in the NBA. My post talks about his quick release and NBA range he's shown in college. You make a nice point about Buddy's good length and strength. Put those together with a terrific worth ethic and consistent improvement year to year in college and you seem to have a guy who should at least be able to succeed in the NBA in the areas where he had success in college. Nothing's certain when predicting NBA success, but predicting Buddy's success as a perimeter scorer in the NBA seems like a good bet.

I'd be interested in your take on Valentine.

I'm conflicted on Valentine. I just looked up his measurables. He isn't that different when it comes to height and length compared to Buddy. That has to be a concern since there are questions about his "athleticism" being able to defend guys. He is a do it all guy it seems like he should be able to be another high floor guys and be something close to what Evan Turner is right now which ain't bad for a floor if you are picking closer to the middle of the first round. It's hard to decipher a reasonable upside range for Valentine. I like him I just feel I would pick a guy with more upside than him. Now if we drop down to 8 or something things get interesting as there are likely going to be low floor guys like a Sabonis you could pick there too.

Monster - I think you mean high floor/low ceiling guys like Sabonis.