The Case for Russell

Any And All Things T-Wolves Related
User avatar
TRKO [enjin:12664595]
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by TRKO [enjin:12664595] »

TeamRicky wrote:
TRKO wrote:
TeamRicky wrote:Russell is not Roy and he's certainly not Harden or Curry. He's probably closer to Waiters or Turner. Roy shot over 50% in college and Russell shot less than 45% with a soft schedule and shoots less than 36% against ranked teams. He doesn't play great defense, not a good finisher near the basket, not that athletic or strong or tall.

Have you seen Russell play or are you basing everything solely on numbers? Russell plays a lot like Roy.


I'd rather have Anthony Davis (Towns) or Duncan (Okafor) than Brandon Roy.

We all would, but Davis and Duncan aren't in this draft. We have a guy in Towns that doesn't have many weaknesses, but is he a superstar type. I have my doubts. I see him as a more athletic 2009/2010 version of Bogut. Will get you 16 points, 10 boards, and 2.5 blocks. Okafor could be great, but he really has a long way to go to improve defensively. There isn't a sure fire superstar in this draft. I see some all stars and some very good players, but I don't see Davis or Duncan. Russell needs to improve defensively, but his game looks very much like Roy's.
User avatar
bleedspeed
Posts: 8173
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by bleedspeed »

TeamRicky wrote:Russell is not Roy and he's certainly not Harden or Curry. He's probably closer to Waiters or Turner. Roy shot over 50% in college and Russell shot less than 45% with a soft schedule and shoots less than 36% against ranked teams. He doesn't play great defense, not a good finisher near the basket, not that athletic or strong or tall.


You make him sound like a better shooting Rubio.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Stephen-Curry-1170/stats/
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/D-Angelo-Russell-7175/

Comparing Freshman years to Curry.

Stat - Curry vs Russell
FG% 46.3% vs 44.9%
FT% 85.5% vs 75.6%
3P% 40.8% vs 41.1%
Rpg 4.6 vs 5.7
Apg 2.8 vs 5.0
spg 1.8 vs 1.6

Russell is much bigger then Curry - 6.25" on wingspan and 5 inches on overhead reach.

He stakes up for sure. Area of concern for me would be FT%. I sure would have loved to see him play better against better competition, but his team was really awful. I don't see Towns or Okafor getting that team in the tourney.

I wish Russell would have done the testing at the combine. I think he could have suprised some people.
User avatar
TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by TeamRicky [enjin:6648771] »

TRKO wrote:
TeamRicky wrote:
TRKO wrote:
TeamRicky wrote:Russell is not Roy and he's certainly not Harden or Curry. He's probably closer to Waiters or Turner. Roy shot over 50% in college and Russell shot less than 45% with a soft schedule and shoots less than 36% against ranked teams. He doesn't play great defense, not a good finisher near the basket, not that athletic or strong or tall.

Have you seen Russell play or are you basing everything solely on numbers? Russell plays a lot like Roy.


I'd rather have Anthony Davis (Towns) or Duncan (Okafor) than Brandon Roy.

We all would, but Davis and Duncan aren't in this draft. We have a guy in Towns that doesn't have many weaknesses, but is he a superstar type. I have my doubts. I see him as a more athletic 2009/2010 version of Bogut. Will get you 16 points, 10 boards, and 2.5 blocks. Okafor could be great, but he really has a long way to go to improve defensively. There isn't a sure fire superstar in this draft. I see some all stars and some very good players, but I don't see Davis or Duncan. Russell needs to improve defensively, but his game looks very much like Roy's.


We don't have Brandon Roy in the draft either yet you keep bringing him up, but I'd take Towns or Okafor any day over Russell. Stud big men like Towns and Okafor don't grow on trees. I don't even think Russell will end up being the best guard in this draft.
User avatar
bleedspeed
Posts: 8173
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by bleedspeed »

TeamRubio - Who are your top guards? Do you see Russell as PG or SG? I see him as the PG and upgrade over Rubio.
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

Just to note: I haven't jumped in this particular debate because I disagree with everyone. I don't see Towns being a "near All-Star" or just some role-playing big man. I also don't see Russell being Waiters or Turner. I actually like Russell a lot, but I like Towns more.

I think you have to ask yourself this: which player has the potential to have the greatest impact on your team in three to five years? For me, that's Towns. He's the only game-changer on both ends of the floor. If he needs to be a scorer, he can fill it up. If he needs to just be the defensive, rebounding gritty guy, he can do that too. Russell very well could be a do-it-all perimeter player, but I still think Towns could do more for this team in the future.
User avatar
TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by TeamRicky [enjin:6648771] »

A year ago he was compared to Jeremy Lamb. This is from Rivals "Slender shooting guard is similar to former UConn star Jeremy Lamb. A confident jump shooter who can handle and pass it a bit allowing him to serve as a secondary ball handler. Sometimes can be overwhelmed by physical wings."
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

And some have compared Towns to Andrew Bogut. Neither are good comparisons. I just think you have to look at all three players as their own talents instead of trying to think of who they'll be in the NBA, in terms of comparisons. Frankly, I never saw a player like Curry before. I never saw a player like Davis before. I've also never seen a player like Towns or Okafor before at age 19.
User avatar
TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by TeamRicky [enjin:6648771] »

Camden wrote:Just to note: I haven't jumped in this particular debate because I disagree with everyone. I don't see Towns being a "near All-Star" or just some role-playing big man. I also don't see Russell being Waiters or Turner. I actually like Russell a lot, but I like Towns more.

I think you have to ask yourself this: which player has the potential to have the greatest impact on your team in three to five years? For me, that's Towns. He's the only game-changer on both ends of the floor. If he needs to be a scorer, he can fill it up. If he needs to just be the defensive, rebounding gritty guy, he can do that too. Russell very well could be a do-it-all perimeter player, but I still think Towns could do more for this team in the future.


I agree with you on Towns and initially I liked Russell third overall. However, the more I researched on Russell, the less I liked him. The way I view things now is Towns should be #1, Okafor #2 and I honestly think there are several guys in the next tier including Russell but that he should be just in the mix for #3 with guys like Mudiay, Porzingas, WCS, Winslow. Turner, Johnson, Booker, Kaminsky, Hezonja would be in the next tier but might end up as good as those I put in my third tier as I don't see much separation there.
User avatar
Tactical unit
Posts: 803
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by Tactical unit »

bleedspeed177 wrote:
Tactical unit wrote:There is no case for Russell, he's a better version of C.J. Mccollum nothing to get excited over. Not enough athleticism, great in game smarts = limited upside. MN paid an above average backup PG a good sum of money though so what do I know.


Exactly!!!

Except Russell played in a better conference. Has a 6 inch higher reach and 4 inch longer wingspan. Better court vision and passer. Is younger and doesn't have injury history. He's the 10th one-and-done player with a WARP projection higher than 3.0. Of the previous nine, six developed into All-Stars. Nerlens Noel is too young to evaluate. Greg Oden was unable to live up to his potential because of injuries. The only non-injury disappointment in this group was Michael Beasley.

Looks like good company to me.


Some good statistical points and like I said he has great in game smarts. He changes gears to keep defenders off balance and has that no fear to shoot right in your face instinct. For me I watched some tape on him and worry quite a bit about how he will play against NBA competition. The athleticism is not there for me and his skill set might (not sold on that yet) be an upgrade over Rubio but that's more of a knock against Rubio isn't it.
User avatar
TRKO [enjin:12664595]
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Case for Russell

Post by TRKO [enjin:12664595] »

Tactical unit wrote:
bleedspeed177 wrote:
Tactical unit wrote:There is no case for Russell, he's a better version of C.J. Mccollum nothing to get excited over. Not enough athleticism, great in game smarts = limited upside. MN paid an above average backup PG a good sum of money though so what do I know.


Exactly!!!

Except Russell played in a better conference. Has a 6 inch higher reach and 4 inch longer wingspan. Better court vision and passer. Is younger and doesn't have injury history. He's the 10th one-and-done player with a WARP projection higher than 3.0. Of the previous nine, six developed into All-Stars. Nerlens Noel is too young to evaluate. Greg Oden was unable to live up to his potential because of injuries. The only non-injury disappointment in this group was Michael Beasley.

Looks like good company to me.


Some good statistical points and like I said he has great in game smarts. He changes gears to keep defenders off balance and has that no fear to shoot right in your face instinct. For me I watched some tape on him and worry quite a bit about how he will play against NBA competition. The athleticism is not there for me and his skill set might (not sold on that yet) be an upgrade over Rubio but that's more of a knock against Rubio isn't it.

Now Chad Ford tweeted that Russell had a max vertical of 39" which is pretty impressive and surprising. Now that hasn't shown up on tape as much as I would like. Maybe he is a underrated athlete.
Post Reply