Jarrett Culver

[TheFuture]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-top-50-nba-draft-prospects-according-to-our-carmelo-projections/

[kekgeek]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-top-50-nba-draft-prospects-according-to-our-carmelo-projections/

So your telling me by an analytic model we drafted the guy with the 3rd highest upside. Not possible if you have read this board

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2019/6/18/18678005/jarrett-culver-nba-draft-minnesota-timberwolves-scouting-report-video-stats-texas-tech

I go back to the Evan Turner comparison since both are slow, but smart, all around players. He was a high-level scorer at OSU, but his shooting and craftiness simply didn't translate at the next level. I can envision similar problems for Culver. Kyle Anderson is also a good comp, although I do see Culver developing into a better scorer.

I was going to ask where you got those names, but I found the article - you pulled the crappiest from the list I guess. Not sure why you didn't pick our Shved as a comp. https://www.thestepien.com/2019/02/06/draft-notes-realistic-jarrett-culver/culver comps

I had not seen this article.....I had seen an Evan Turner comparison by someone else earlier. The Kyle Anderson one I came up with on my own, but I do think Culver's scoring chops are better.

Ultimately it comes down to two things with Culver: Will his outside shot develop? Will his defense translate? If the answer is yes to both, we have a top tier role player and potential borderline all-star. If the answer is yes to one out of two, we have a solid backup wing. If the answer is no to both questions, we have a bust.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2019/6/18/18678005/jarrett-culver-nba-draft-minnesota-timberwolves-scouting-report-video-stats-texas-tech

Good stuff... I like the fact it seems like we have another able/willing passer on the squad. While he showed a lot of craftiness and finishing ability at the college level, we'll see how many of those attempts either come up a bit short or get swatted away at the next level.

I go back to the Evan Turner comparison since both are slow, but smart, all around players. He was a high-level scorer at OSU, but his shooting and craftiness simply didn't translate at the next level. I can envision similar problems for Culver. Kyle Anderson is also a good comp, although I do see Culver developing into a better scorer.

Evan Turner didn't shoot nearly as well from outside.

Craftiness can translate just as much as athleticism can't.

We have a GM who knows three point shooters and who can and can't shoot them. Did he forget that overnight? I'm pretty sure he thinks he can identify someone who can do well on that end.

Heh, it is kind of funny seeing you show this kind of bullish-ness about a Timberwolves move! I believe the last time you were this excited about a draft pick, it was Shabazz Muhammed.....Oops.

[apollotsg [enjin:6592798]]

Ultimately it comes down to two things with Culver: Will his outside shot develop? Will his defense translate? If the answer is yes to both, we have a top tier role player and potential borderline all-star. If the answer is yes to one out of two, we have a solid backup wing. If the answer is no to both questions, we have a bust.

I think that is exactly right

[Porckchop]

I think every Wolves fan has earned the right to be skeptical of any and every move that's made. I tip my cap to any that still remain otherwise.

[Monster]

Listening to the Athletic draft writer Sam V on his game theory podcast break down Culver and other tips guys was interesting.

Brought up lots of concerns about various guys but the finishing around the rim and few times getting there for Coby White was a big negative.

Passing...both guys agreed that Culver was easily a better passer than either White or Garland. Both said Garland was easily the better prospect than White but they weren't buying the Dame comp really even. The other guys said he actually thought Garland May too our as a Luo Williams guy who is good but such a bad defender.

Both agreed Barrett was horrific defensively.

Both guys basically said Culver was a dribble pass shop guy that plays defense. They quibbled between themselves about how good of a defender and passer he was but both liked those aspects of his game compared to other players. They liked Hunter's known ability as a shooter and physical tools and on ball defense but were not sure about his ability to create too much so Culver had the clear advantage there.

It's worth remembering Culver really reworked his shot after his freshman year. If it gets ironed out and he makes shots with that high release. He will be a pretty good player. I get the skepticism but it's also fair to wonder if maybe another few months of work might have some legitimately positive results.

Ultimately I'm not super pumped about Culver. I'd guess I would have had him higher than a few other guys that would could have taken at #11 if I had scouted him. Would I have had him higher enough to move Saric to get him? Probably not but honestly I'll never really know. I'm keeping an open mind. It seems like he has a good floor and again that's isn't a bad thing. Having guys that actually look like they can play basketball and are young matter. For all the shots people are taking at him becoming the next Evan Turner...ET is a valuable player just overpaid. In addition he was intriguing enough an organization like the Blazers paid up to get him. Some team may end up valuing Culver highly and the Wolves could cash in while adding something valuable to the roster. I don't think a lot of people have really wrapped their minds around Covington actually playing as a 4 despite some posters here suggesting it multiple times (I wasn't on board with it partly because I liked Saric).

Also let's remember we are on the same team here. Everyone has a worthwhile opinion and wants the best for the Wolves. I'm here for the shared experience worthwhile perspectives and stuff.

[wolvesfaned [enjin:6602294]]

https://heavy.com/sports/2019/06/jarrett-culver-lakers-vertical-nba-draft/

45 inch vertical leap?! Is that true?!

[Lipoli390]

https://heavy.com/sports/2019/06/jarrett-culver-lakers-vertical-nba-draft/

45 inch vertical leap?! Is that true?!

Wow! The photo seems to support the claim. I had never read anything about Culver having great hops. And I didn't see that sort of vertical explosiveness in any of his video highlights. But that doesn't mean it's not there. This new information is causing me to rethink my view of Culver's potential. I still find his poor 3-point and free throw shooting to be troublesome. And his 8'4.5 overhead reach is underwhelming for an NBA wing. However, I've always looked for at least one elite physical attribute to help predict success at the NBA level. It can be great vertical length like Durant and Kawhi with overhead reaches of 9'0 and 8'10 respectively. Neither one is a great athlete or has great hops. But their elite length helps make them elite NBA players. Elite hops can substitute for a lack of elite length. That's how Spud Webb was able to compete at the NBA level at 5'6.

Seeing Culver's vertical leap (and assuming it's true), I'm starting to think of Brandon Roy. He recorded an 8'5 overhead reach (similar to Culver's) in the combine, but also had a 40.5" max vertical. Historically, there have been other NBA players, including SGs, with a similar blend of modest length and impressive hops. But what brings Brandon Roy to mind is mind is the fact that Brandon rarely looked explosive in games. Yet, his leaping ability, along with his high IQ and high skill level, was part of what made him special. We've seen the comparisons of Culver to Butler. But perhaps a more apt comparison for Culver is Brandon Roy. Both have very high basketball IQs. Both have steady relatively low-key personalities. Both are pretty smooth with the ball and have an ability to both score and distribute. And of course, both have a blend of modest length and elite hops. So continuing with this comparison, I looked at Roy's sophomore stats. Roy's FG percentage was 48% while Culver's was 46%. Neither shot well from behind the arc, although Roy took less than one 3-pointer per game so it's hard to compare. Roy averaged 5.3 rebounds, 3.3 assists and 1.2 steals per game while Culver averaged 6.4 rebounds, 3.7 assists and 1.5 steals. I recall that Brandon Roy was #1 on my draft board that year based on his senior stats, his hops and the excellent ball-handling he displayed in the games and senior season highlight videos I watched of him. I wonder what Culver's stats would be if he stayed in college two more years or even one more year. Would his numbers have closely resembled Roy's senior season stats?

Obviously, it's not all about vertical leap. But Culver's 45" vertical has caused me to take a close second look. Doing so has reminded me of Brandon Roy who became an NBA superstar before his career was cut short by bad knees. In Roy I'm seeing a something in Culver's potential that I didn't initially recognize. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proclaiming Culver the next Brandon Roy. And as I said, I'm still concerned about his poor shooting, which regressed from his freshman year. Moreover, I don't see the same ball-handling prowess from Culver that I recall from Brandon Roy. On the other hand, I never watched Roy play as a sophomore. I saw him play - games and highlights - as a college senior and then as s 23 year old pro. It's amazing how one piece of information, in this case hops, can force a second look at the entire record with a new perspective.

[worldK]

https://heavy.com/sports/2019/06/jarrett-culver-lakers-vertical-nba-draft/

45 inch vertical leap?! Is that true?!

Wow! The photo seems to support the claim. I had never read anything about Culver having great hops. And I didn't see that sort of vertical explosiveness in any of his video highlights. But that doesn't mean it's not there. This new information is causing me to rethink my view of Culver's potential. I still find his poor 3-point and free throw shooting to be troublesome. And his 8'4.5 overhead reach is underwhelming for an NBA wing. However, I've always looked for at least one elite physical attribute to help predict success at the NBA level. It can be great vertical length like Durant and Kawhi with overhead reaches of 9'0 and 8'10 respectively. Neither one is a great athlete or has great hops. But their elite length helps make them elite NBA players. Elite hops can substitute for a lack of elite length. That's how Spud Webb was able to compete at the NBA level at 5'6.

Seeing Culver's vertical leap (and assuming it's true), I'm starting to think of Brandon Roy. He recorded an 8'5 overhead reach (similar to Culver's) in the combine, but also had a 40.5" max vertical. Historically, there have been other NBA players, including SGs, with a similar blend of modest length and impressive hops. But what brings Brandon Roy to mind is mind is the fact that Brandon rarely looked explosive in games. Yet, his leaping ability, along with his high IQ and high skill level, was part of what made him special. We've seen the comparisons of Culver to Butler. But perhaps a more apt comparison for Culver is Brandon Roy. Both have very high basketball IQs. Both have steady relatively low-key personalities. Both are pretty smooth with the ball and have an ability to both score and distribute. And of course, both have a blend of modest length and elite hops. So continuing with this comparison, I looked at Roy's sophomore stats. Roy's FG percentage was 48% while Culver's was 46%. Neither shot well from behind the arc, although Roy took less than one 3-pointer per game so it's hard to compare. Roy averaged 5.3 rebounds, 3.3 assists and 1.2 steals per game while Culver averaged 6.4 rebounds, 3.7 assists and 1.5 steals. I recall that Brandon Roy was #1 on my draft board that year based on his senior stats, his hops and the excellent ball-handling he displayed in the games and senior season highlight videos I watched of him. I wonder what Culver's stats would be if he stayed in college two more years or even one more year. Would his numbers have closely resembled Roy's senior season stats?

Obviously, it's not all about vertical leap. But Culver's 45" vertical has caused me to take a close second look. Doing so has reminded me of Brandon Roy who became an NBA superstar before his career was cut short by bad knees. In Roy I'm seeing a something in Culver's potential that I didn't initially recognize. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proclaiming Culver the next Brandon Roy. And as I said, I'm still concerned about his poor shooting, which regressed from his freshman year. Moreover, I don't see the same ball-handling prowess from Culver that I recall from Brandon Roy. On the other hand, I never watched Roy play as a sophomore. I saw him play - games and highlights - as a college senior and then as s 23 year old pro. It's amazing how one piece of information, in this case hops, can force a second look at the entire record with a new perspective.

Lip, Glad your slowly warming up to culver. Im not surprised at his 45inch vertical because he has a wide and strong hips. Take a look at his lower body, its really well built and that bodes well for him. It gives him very good lower body and core strength and balance.

I like your brandon roy comparison. They both have a steadiness and silent meanstreak to them. If he turns into a healthy and durable brandon roy then we have our 2nd superstar on the team. Its an IF though but the work ethic, passion, basketball IQ and physical tools and skills are there for the kid.