Q12543 wrote:SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Q12543 wrote:KG4Ever wrote:LaMelo is a huge question mark. He could bust or become a perennial all-star. I'd rather go Killian Hayes or Haliburton at point guard. I like Wiseman and Deni better too. He isn't my favorite option, but there are plenty of worse options discussed in the top ten like Edwards, Okoro, Williams and Topin.
I struggle with the perennial all-star ceiling. I just don't see it.
If his shot improves significantly and he can sustain it, if his shot selection becomes much more disciplined, and if he actually starts to try on defense for more than a few possessions a game, I could potentially see it. His passing really is special and he's got great length for a PG, but those are some big "ifs."
Exactly. And can't we say that of a lot of players that come into the league? If those "ifs" came to fruition for any given top 30 pick, their ceiling would be "star" also. I believe a "ceiling" should be defined as something that doesn't require three or four things to come together for a player.
If Rubio developed a great outside shot, he really would have been a perennial all-star. If DLO was a more dangerous player at breaking down a defense off the dribble, he'd be a perennial all-star.
Those are just two examples of lotto picks whose ceilings were "star" and rightfully so. In Rubio's case, it wasn't impossible to envision one or two more things coming together for him. In DLO's case, he's even closer.
Ball is currently Rubio without the defense and worse shot selection, so he's starting in a much bigger hole than even Rubio did with his inconsistent shot. He was otherwise a complete player. That's a lot to overcome to become a star some day.
I do think if LaMelo can address those "ifs," his ceiling would be higher than a lot of first rounders generally. People use the word "elite" way too much, but I do think his floor vision and passing might actually qualify. That's a skill that could really make an offense more potent. Plus his length as a ball handler would give his team some lineup flexibility. But there are those big question marks, which is why I think the odds of him panning out are long.
The Rubio comparison is good. I do think LaMelo has better handles and is is a bit more creative and improvisational with the ball. As a bit of a chucker, he's got the opposite problem of Rubio, who was too gun-shy as a shooter. But LaMelo will keep teams on their toes defensively because he's looking for his shot, sometimes in creative ways like those floaters, as well as looking to pass. Still, as you say, Rubio was a much better defender than LaMelo projects to be. And maybe most importantly, Rubio has leadership qualities that Ball seems to lack.
With KAT and Russell on this team, we've got two very good basketball players who have not really demonstrated on-the-court leadership. When we lose games, who is going to step up and set an example as a guy who won't accept losing so he works his ass off without complaining until we start winning again? Frankly, I have all sorts of problems with KAT and Russell defensively, but I actually think leadership is the biggest thing they lack.
In an ideal world, we'd get a star out of this draft who is also a real leader. He'd have to be good enough to earn KAT and Russell's respect, so they'll respond positively to his effort and example. That's the problem. You need a leader, but he also has to really be a great player. And you need a great player, but if he's not really a leader, do you see this team having the mental makeup to be a playoff threat?
Ball, Wiseman, and Edwards all look like they have star potential as players, but I don't really see the kind of leadership you'd like to see. Outside those three, Haliburton is reportedly a really great teammate and leader, and I do like his weird skillset, but I'm not sure how high his ceiling is.
