The Case for Okafor
Re: The Case for Okafor
I've always felt low post D had a lot more to do with position and body control than actual size. Dieng is ineffective because he bends over at the waist and tries to hold position with his upper body strength rather than his legs. The minute a guy sets that forearm and is leaning in off balance is the same time the offensive guys rotates and shakes his man. You need to get your legs and hips forward undercutting the poster.
The NBA changed the way they called paint when Shaq was continually running over guys taking fouls. Unfortunately it put defenders at an extreme disadvantage.
The NBA changed the way they called paint when Shaq was continually running over guys taking fouls. Unfortunately it put defenders at an extreme disadvantage.
- TRKO [enjin:12664595]
- Posts: 1175
- Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
SameOldDrew wrote:I still lean Towns, but every time I see a video of these guys, I'm reminded of how much bigger Okafor is in his lower body. In addition to his freakishly large hands, he has the legs and ass of an ox. He's not Shaq big (Jesus, Shaq was a BEAST), but he's pretty big. I'm not sure if that makes me have more hope for his rebounding or wonder why he didn't grab more rebounds last year, but it's a marked difference from Towns, who looks like he has kinda skinny hips. Anybody else notice this?
Dieng was supposed to be a defensive ace coming out of Louisville, but he needs to add strength. I feel Towns will struggle too early on defense for a few reasons. One strength, it will take him time, but he is only 19. Two is his overaggresive style. He fouls way too much, he will need to play with a little more control. Third his team won't have the huge size advantage he did at Kentucky. Those guys were trees and played great together. So if we pick him fans are going to have to have patience. It will take a year or two for him to hit his stride.
Okafor's game will benefit greatly if he stays lean while gaining muscle. I feel that most of his troubles defensively are due to positioning. He won't be a shot blocker most likely.
Re: The Case for Okafor
These last few posts show there is more to defense at the rim than the long athletic That can block shots. Pek was always an above average post defender and a couple years ago he was actually more solid away Waldron the basket too but the main thing is Pek won't be backed down by pretty much any player and Okafor does have the size and base for that and you look at him and he is pretty good sized already he will fill out some more hopefully he doesn't get too heavy because then injuries are more of a concern. Some guys with a less solid base have either made it work by learning, being stronger than they look or just filling out more. I do think Towns being able to flat out bang with centers is a legit concern but I think I would take that chance.
- TRKO [enjin:12664595]
- Posts: 1175
- Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
Okafor not wanting to come here is apparently a "load of crap":
http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/7/71/663342/jahlil-okafor-denies-rumor-wont-play-timberwolves-report
http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/7/71/663342/jahlil-okafor-denies-rumor-wont-play-timberwolves-report
Re: The Case for Okafor
I watched some more highlights of Okafor and a couple of things hit me that remind me of things that Al did that were kind of negatives to his game.
1. They look to score not draw contact. It's not that they are being wussy they just look to put the ball in the basket. That's good but they don't seem to be natural at drawing fouls which can be a bad thing.
2. There are times they get the ball and instead of just making a quick decision and attacking and likely scoring easier they go into their post moves when they already had their guy beat sometimes off just the pass. I say again Okafor looks to be a much better passer than Al was for years (he has improved there quite a bit) so that's a real positive.
3. Both guys have a lot of good physical traits but they don't have that lift you would like to see. Okafor looks nimble and looks like he will be stronger than Al but Al might have been a little more quick in his moves.
Again it comes down to Okafor has a great floor it's almost certain he will be a good scoring bigman but will he be able to do more and will he be more of a star scorer and offensive guy that makes your team better by facilitating? Idk there are no perfect prospects although Lebron was about as close as you can get to one.
1. They look to score not draw contact. It's not that they are being wussy they just look to put the ball in the basket. That's good but they don't seem to be natural at drawing fouls which can be a bad thing.
2. There are times they get the ball and instead of just making a quick decision and attacking and likely scoring easier they go into their post moves when they already had their guy beat sometimes off just the pass. I say again Okafor looks to be a much better passer than Al was for years (he has improved there quite a bit) so that's a real positive.
3. Both guys have a lot of good physical traits but they don't have that lift you would like to see. Okafor looks nimble and looks like he will be stronger than Al but Al might have been a little more quick in his moves.
Again it comes down to Okafor has a great floor it's almost certain he will be a good scoring bigman but will he be able to do more and will he be more of a star scorer and offensive guy that makes your team better by facilitating? Idk there are no perfect prospects although Lebron was about as close as you can get to one.
- Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
- Posts: 13844
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
Very good point Monster on the ability (or lack thereof) to draw contact. Sometimes guys are so smooth and good in the post, they don't just make the simple power move. That's definitely Al Jefferson and it could be Okafor too.
Another thing about Al is that his game has drifted further and further out to mid-range as time has gone on. He often gets the ball in the mid-post area and faces up, taking crappy 16-footers. It's really hurt what was already a fairly mediocre efficiency level. I think Okafor has more tools in his arsenal to get to the rim, so hopefully the same thing doesn't happen to him.
(and it does bear repeating, Okafor is heavier, taller, and has a longer wingspan than Jefferson.....not by a lot, but enough to make a bit of a difference in backing guys down and attacking the rim).
Another thing about Al is that his game has drifted further and further out to mid-range as time has gone on. He often gets the ball in the mid-post area and faces up, taking crappy 16-footers. It's really hurt what was already a fairly mediocre efficiency level. I think Okafor has more tools in his arsenal to get to the rim, so hopefully the same thing doesn't happen to him.
(and it does bear repeating, Okafor is heavier, taller, and has a longer wingspan than Jefferson.....not by a lot, but enough to make a bit of a difference in backing guys down and attacking the rim).
Re: The Case for Okafor
Q12543 wrote:Very good point Monster on the ability (or lack thereof) to draw contact. Sometimes guys are so smooth and good in the post, they don't just make the simple power move. That's definitely Al Jefferson and it could be Okafor too.
Another thing about Al is that his game has drifted further and further out to mid-range as time has gone on. He often gets the ball in the mid-post area and faces up, taking crappy 16-footers. It's really hurt what was already a fairly mediocre efficiency level. I think Okafor has more tools in his arsenal to get to the rim, so hopefully the same thing doesn't happen to him.
(and it does bear repeating, Okafor is heavier, taller, and has a longer wingspan than Jefferson.....not by a lot, but enough to make a bit of a difference in backing guys down and attacking the rim).
I've always though the standing reach measurement was weird. These guys are basically equal despite Okafor having more height and wingspan. Anyway I do think Okafor should have more length and his extra 10lbs and build should make him more of a true C than Al. I'd also say his defensive abilities/strengths may be somewhere in between Pek and Al which obviously potential to be better than that. I wonder what kind of a prospect Al would have been if he went to college.
Let's get back to the case for Okafor if his floor is a little bit bigger Al Jefferson that's a better passer and potential to be more well damn that's a good player as a floor. We know Al's flaws but let's be real he is a good player especially if you happen to find the right guy next to him (Wolves suck at that endeavor) but yeah. You put Al on this team right now that would be massive probably even defensively compared to last year.
- Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
- Posts: 13844
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
I can guarantee you Flip was watching the Finals game last night and turning to his younger, more progressive colleagues (assuming they even exist in his front office - I'm thinking of his son, Ryan, perhaps) and saying, "Boy, couldn't Golden State use a low post presence right now? Imagine the breathing room it would give Steph and Klay!". It was a game that will only re-inforce his bias towards Okafor.
He's somewhat right of course. No team is perfect and Golden State doesn't have a consistent low-post presence. Of course, Cleveland doesn't either, although LeBron can pretty much do anything.
What Flip should really be paying attention to is the defense Cleveland played. That was impressive.
He's somewhat right of course. No team is perfect and Golden State doesn't have a consistent low-post presence. Of course, Cleveland doesn't either, although LeBron can pretty much do anything.
What Flip should really be paying attention to is the defense Cleveland played. That was impressive.
- longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
- Posts: 9432
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
Q12543 wrote:I can guarantee you Flip was watching the Finals game last night and turning to his younger, more progressive colleagues (assuming they even exist in his front office - I'm thinking of his son, Ryan, perhaps) and saying, "Boy, couldn't Golden State use a low post presence right now? Imagine the breathing room it would give Steph and Klay!". It was a game that will only re-inforce his bias towards Okafor.
He's somewhat right of course. No team is perfect and Golden State doesn't have a consistent low-post presence. Of course, Cleveland doesn't either, although LeBron can pretty much do anything.
What Flip should really be paying attention to is the defense Cleveland played. That was impressive.
Ouch...good point about how Flip might have perceived last night's game. On the other hand, the Warriors couldn't get a rebound last night, and Towns is the superior rebounder.
Yeah, the Cavs defense was sensational last night. I watched them a lot during the regular season, and never saw that kind of defensive intensity. I'm wracking my brain trying to figure out what's different in this series, and nothing's coming to me...
- Coolbreeze44
- Posts: 13192
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am
Re: The Case for Okafor
The defense has been great and it's all about effort. But the Warriors are making themselves very easy to guard with their outside out approach to offense.