The Case for Okafor

Any And All Things T-Wolves Related
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 24056
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by Monster »

TRKO wrote:
thedoper wrote:Image

Um...Insane. This pick blows my mind. I guess that explains some of the challenge with FTs.

Phil would always say that MJ had such an advantage because of his huge hands. Those hands Okafor has are insane.


You always heard this was what it looks like (a nerf ball) but damn. lol
User avatar
TRKO [enjin:12664595]
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by TRKO [enjin:12664595] »

Here is the game that I feel shows that Okafor has the potential to develop his offense from just a post offense to a midrange game as well. He also shows great handles beating his man off the dribble. A few solid defensive plays sprinkled in. Like Towns and Russell these kids are only 19, so they are no where near finished products.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3xkQlzzQc50
User avatar
mrhockey89
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by mrhockey89 »

You know what they say about big hands...
User avatar
TRKO [enjin:12664595]
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by TRKO [enjin:12664595] »

mrhockey89 wrote:You know what they say about big hands...

Big gloves?
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 24056
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by Monster »

TRKO wrote:
mrhockey89 wrote:You know what they say about big hands...

Big gloves?


lol lol
User avatar
mrhockey89
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by mrhockey89 »

TRKO wrote:
mrhockey89 wrote:You know what they say about big hands...

Big gloves?


Yep! So you might be wise to tweet him a list of Big & Tall stores in the area
User avatar
thedoper
Posts: 11008
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by thedoper »

mrhockey89 wrote:You know what they say about big hands...


I never should have shown my wife that picture. She's Okafor all the way now.
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 24056
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by Monster »

just for fun I was looking at the DX pages for Okafor and Al Jefferson. I found it a little interesting.

Has anyone heard of Okafor has grown in the last year? If not there isn't a huge diffence in these guys seriously its and inch or 2 at most. If you buy into the standing reach measurment then its pretty much equal.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jahlil-Okafor-6469/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Al-Jefferson-2979/stats/

Al was straight out fo HS so we don't have college stats. We have him playing at the NBA level and putting up some pretty decent stats as a rookie straight out of HS.

Looking at these pages is interesting and I will absolutely give Okafor an advantage over Al in passing from what I have seen, but Al has the edge as a better shotblocker and rebounder. I guess my point here is that the Al comp makes some sense to me more than I was expecting actually. I think Okafor will be better than Al but how much better IDK. if we get another Al Jefferson we could do a heck of alot worse especially if Okafor has a stronger personality to be a leader than Al did and likely does.
User avatar
MikkeMan
Posts: 817
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by MikkeMan »

AbeVigodaLive wrote:
In addition to defense, Duncan and Garnett were much more versatile offensively. It was so startling to go from Garnett passing out of the post to Jefferson. Garnett is one of the best passing big men in NBA history. (Duncan is very good at it, too.)

Jefferson's passes out of the post rarely went anywhere. Most of the time, they were soft passes back out to the wing or PG to reset with less than 10 seconds on the shot clock. Jefferson was/is really a lousy passer. I don't know much about Lopez's passing. But I just checked and see he averaged 0.7 assists per game this season. Yikes. I have to assume it's not a strength of his game either.


Yes, I agree with your point about passing. Neither Lopez or Al is known about their passing game. What is strange is that Lopez averaged 2.3 assists per game in his 2nd year but after that he seem to have forgotten that you are also allowed to pass the ball. So Duncan and especially Garnett were much more versatile in offense and thus better also in that end.

Maybe Kemp and Mourning would be offensively better comparisons to Al and Brook. Neither were as gifted passers than Garnett or Duncan. They were also not as big stars than KG or Timmy but still much more valuable for their teams than Brook or Al because they were better (or in case of Mourning even great) at the defensive end.

Comparing Kemp's and Mourning's offensive stats from their prime years to AL and Brook:
Kemp 18.7-21.2 PTS/per 36 minutes .512-.631 TS%
Mourning 17.3-23.0 PTS/per 36 minutes .558-.596 TS%
Jefferson 18.7-22.7 PTS/per 36 minutes .500-.535 TS%
B. Lopez 20.8-23.0 PTS/per 36 minutes .549-.569 TS%
User avatar
MikkeMan
Posts: 817
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Okafor

Post by MikkeMan »

thedoper wrote:
I wasn't trying to imply that Al and Brooks weren't good offensive players or even at the level of Duncan or Garnett on offense. I was making the point that they weren't superstar offensive bigs who could score at will, like Shaq. Al and Brooks are borderline all-stars because of their offense. As you correctly point out, Garnett and Duncan were superstars because of being able to play both sides of the floor. Shaq not as much, but clearly still a superstar in his own right because of his ability to dominate offensively. The question about Okafor for me is can he take his offense to an even higher level than Brooks or Al and can he become a better defender and rebounder. I say yes on all counts, I think he is too natural of a ball player and so much more fluid and talented that Brooks or Al.


I think that Shaq is quite unfair comparison offensively to anyone. He is basically the single most unstoppable low post force during modern NBA era. Only other big that was remotely close as dominant offensive force is Karl Malone. Both players had 11 seasons with more than 24 pts/per 36 minutes and they did get those with elite efficiency. Only other big that has more than five that kind of seasons is Dirk with six and his offensive game is not at all typical for big.

At least I'm not expecting that Okafor would be offensively even close to Shaq. Kevin McHale was superb skilled low post player that was very good free throw shooter and had some mid range game as well but even McHale did have only one season with more than 24 pts/per 36 minutes and he played in era when teams averaged around 100 possessions per game.

Okafor can be projected to be offensively better post player than Al or Brook Lopez but it doesn't still mean that he would be overall better offensive player than them. Both Al and Brook are pretty good free throw shooters for centers and they have developed mid range game as well. Since zones and doubling post players without ball are allowed nowadays in NBA, scoring only from low post will be much more challenging than during Shaq's era. I'm afraid tha if Okafor won't improve his free trow shooting and/or develop mid range game, he might not be able to have even as high per minute scoring averages than Al and Brook but most probably his scoring efficiency will be higher than theirs.

I still see that Okafor's floor would be Eddy Curry without weight problems and ceiling would be less versatile Cousins without attitude problems.
Post Reply