All those clamouring for Embiid must answer one question

[KCattheStripe]

Caveat Emptor.

Don't bring that foreign jibber-jabber up in here. You'll say " Let the buyer beware" and you'll like it, mister.

[ManUp]

The difference between him and most other big is that he played in the NCAA as opposed to overseas. Your never quite sure about the quality of overseas big (or competition period), but we know Embiid can hang with the top american players of his age. I'm just worried about the back, big men with any type of back or lower body (feet, ankle, knee) issues scare the crap out of me. Especially when your picking in the lotto and you need them to pan out.

[saltlover]

Hakeem played three years in College here we had a chance to see what Hakeem could do. The reason for concern is you do not have enough data on foreign players.

Embiid is more akin to Michael Olowokandi... We have not seen his work product.

Caveat Emptor.

That same Michael Olowokandi who also played 3 years in college just like Hakeem?

And kind of like Embiid who played high school and college ball in the US?

Olowokandi played college in US LOL Of course he did @ Pacific? Great competition there. He had bust written all over him, and he did not disappoint.

Hindsight is 20-20, of course, and you know all.  But he went for 25 and 11, with 4 blocks vs. a Stanford team that went to the Final Four.  Yes, he played at a small school, but he was the most dominant player on the floor when he played against the big schools too.

Was he a bust? Sure.  Is he an example of why I don't want Embiid nearly as much as others here?  Unquestionably.  There is just a lot of risk in centers generally, whether they come from a major college (Oden), small school (Olowakandi), high school (Brown), or overseas (Yao).  That risk can be injury (they're big men jumping around... It's hard on the body) or skill (big people tend to stop growing later, so they have less time to develop skill).  If we pick at 5 and Embiid is there, he's worth the risk.  But he's not top 3 on my board.  Give me a guy with a high ceiling who's got a better chance to reach it, and go get an NBA center who does enough of what you need via trade (Asik).  Let someone else get lucky or unlucky with Embiid.  I highly doubt he's the next Hakeem, and I don't think it's fair to put those expectations on him just because he's 7 feet tall and from Africa.

[nickagneta]

Okay, so the OP is a little....off.....with his suggestion that one should be wary of drafting Embiid #1 because he is foreign. We all get that, well, except maybe him, but he brings up, in a strange way, a good point.

Should the Celtics get the #1 pick, should they be wary of drafting Embiid.

Drafting bigs high in the first round is about the biggest gamble in sports. It was harder when kids just came out of high school but after just a one and done, its not a lot of time to get a great handle on a big, especially if they get injured during that year. people were so leery of Noel's injury and questions they had of him after only seeing him one year, he fell to 6th in a historically bad draft. And Noel is a kid that put up numbers and overall defensive play extremely similar and as impressive as Anthony Davis just one year after Davis did what he did at the very same university.

The draft is always a gamble but has the world really seen enough of Embiid to make him the #1 pick in supposedly a great draft with a back injury that put him out for the end of his year? Where he was born doesn't matter. What matters is the back injury and whether trusting just one year of film on the guy is enough to warrant such a high pick.

Obviously for some, like Anthony Davis, the answer is yes but then again there was film on him going all the way back to his sophomore year in high school. Others, like Thabeet who was drafted 2nd overall, my guess is teams wish they had more film on him, more time to evaluate.

I watched a lot of Kansas this year, saw Wiggins about 10 times and Embiid about 7. Embiid never gave me that "WOW" factor that I got out of Anthony Davis. He also never gave me that "OH [dang] STAY AWAY FROM HIM" factor that I remember seeing in Thabeet. He kind of reminds me of Drummond in that he has more of a giant question mark on him and could go either way. And Drummond never had back issues.

If the C's get the #1 pick I think they need as sure a high ceiling player as they can get. Wiggins and Embiid probably have the two highest ceilings in this draft and both play a position of need for the Celtics. But, I think Wiggins high ceiling is much more of a sure thing than Embiid's is. For that reason I would avoid Embiid at #1.

[loco_91]

I can't really agree that centers are inherently harder to evaluate, skill-wise, than other positions. They might be more injury prone. In Embiid's case, it is true that a large part of his rating is based on perceived room for growth, but the same is also true of Wiggins. Here's why I'm more optimistic for Embiid to reach his "potential" than I am for Wiggins.

Wiggins has shown little besides athleticism and transition scoring on offense. His jumper is merely average. His handle is poor, which keeps him from using his athleticism to get to the rim in traffic. His touch at the rim is poor, as he shies away from contact; how will he handle the physicality of the NBA? All these skills are more learnable than athleticism, which is why Wiggins has "potential". But he strikes me as someone who could plausibly bust, becoming merely a very good roleplayer as a 3rd option on offense who makes his living mostly on D.

Embiid, on the other hand, has shown real skill in the post. He has an array of moves, and he finishes with high efficiency. This is despite the frequent double teams sent at him (no such adjustment was commonly made for Wiggins). Moreover he has shown an aptitude for learning, as he came into the season at square zero. Embiid's one area of weakness on offense is that he is turnover prone, but he also has shown the ability to make great passes so I believe that it is a matter of experience, not aptitude.

Finally, let the stats speak for themselves: Embiid scores 60.8% eFG in the half court (1st on their team) vs just 43.5% for Wiggins (8th), on higher volume (12.6pt/40 vs 9.0). But is it misleading to include only half-court stats? http://www.hickory-high.com/do-transition-points-translate/[This article] suggests otherwise.

[Donoghus]

I just want to know where Embiid stands medically right now more than anything.

[Fafnir]

If you're comparing their college stats with eFG and the like, remember that Bill Self's offense is entirely catered towards the post. This was especially true with this Kansas team.

Wiggins basically had zero plays called for him entire games, depending on the game. I really don't get why he went to Kansas.

[loco_91]

Perhaps the reason that plays weren't being run for Wiggins is that when he did try to score in the half court, he was one of the least efficient scorers on their team...

[McHales Pits]

I watched a lot of Kansas this year, saw Wiggins about 10 times and Embiid about 7. Embiid never gave me that "WOW" factor that I got out of Anthony Davis. He also never gave me that "OH [dang] STAY AWAY FROM HIM" factor that I remember seeing in Thabeet. He kind of reminds me of Drummond in that he has more of a giant question mark on him and could go either way. And Drummond never had back issues.

Drummond had the exact same back condition last season and now everyone is clamoring over him.

As a rabid UConn College BB fan - I recall watching both players extensively. Thabeet should have never gone #2 overall and every Husky fan knew he would be an NBA bust. As much as I hate Syracuse and love hating on their zone defense, that was effectively Thabeet's role. You can't teach 7'3", so he stood by the hoop and blocked shots. He had zero offensive game, he had slow feet, bad hands, and relatively bad instincts. Drummond - although he should have stayed an extra year - occasionally flashed brilliance with his athleticism and strength. He was clearly an unfinished product, but he had more potential to be effective in the NBA more than Thabeet ever did.

Embiid is way more skilled than both of these guys. At this point, the only question I have for Embiid is not his skill or potential, but merely the current condition of his back. If Sullinger and Drummond are any indication of how modern day surgery and rehab can fix this injury, then I would feel comfortable taking him #1.

Going one step further (and into another conversation altogether) - I think if the Cs pick first that their decision will not be Wiggins/Embiid, but Parker/Embiid.

[guava_wrench]

Hakeem played three years in College here we had a chance to see what Hakeem could do. The reason for concern is you do not have enough data on foreign players.

Embiid is more akin to Michael Olowokandi... We have not seen his work product.

Caveat Emptor.

That same Michael Olowokandi who also played 3 years in college just like Hakeem?

And kind of like Embiid who played high school and college ball in the US?

Olowokandi played college in US LOL Of course he did @ Pacific? Great competition there. He had bust written all over him, and he did not disappoint.

Then why the heck are you comparing Embiid to him?

'LOL' tends to be a mark of poor reasoning on an issue.

Your argument is uninformed. You are taking a single player sharing a single trait with Embiid and generalizing. That is a worthless argument. Here are foreign #1 picks that went #1.

Olajuwon, #1 pick foreign center.
Yao Ming, #1 pick foreign center.
Andrew Bogut, #1 pick foreign center.
Mychal Thompson

Then there is:
Olowakandi
Bargnani

Pretty good overall.

[guava_wrench]

2. How many years did Kwame play in league vs. Olowokandi.

Thanks.

Don't be lazy. That info is available online. Olowokandi played a decade and was waaay more productive than Kwame (or Oden, though that is due to injury). In fact, Olowokandi was a decent NBA journeyman. He just wasn't as good as the many all stars drafted after him (nor were Bibby or LeFrentz).

Career stats of worst #1 centers since 70s
Olowokandi: 8.9 PPG, 7.9 RPG, 1.4 BPG
Kwame: 4.5 PPG, 3.5 RPG, 0.6 BPG
Pervis Ellison: 8.0 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 1.6 BPG
Kent Benson: 7.7 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 0.9 BPG
LaRue Martin:  4.4 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 0.5 BPG

Clearly, country of origin isn't a reasonable basis for evaluating #1 picks.

Also, you should read about 'special pleading' so you can avoid it.

[CM0]

I can't really agree that centers are inherently harder to evaluate, skill-wise, than other positions. They might be more injury prone. In Embiid's case, it is true that a large part of his rating is based on perceived room for growth, but the same is also true of Wiggins. Here's why I'm more optimistic for Embiid to reach his "potential" than I am for Wiggins.

Wiggins has shown little besides athleticism and transition scoring on offense. His jumper is merely average. His handle is poor, which keeps him from using his athleticism to get to the rim in traffic. His touch at the rim is poor, as he shies away from contact; how will he handle the physicality of the NBA? All these skills are more learnable than athleticism, which is why Wiggins has "potential". But he strikes me as someone who could plausibly bust, becoming merely a very good roleplayer as a 3rd option on offense who makes his living mostly on D.

Embiid, on the other hand, has shown real skill in the post. He has an array of moves, and he finishes with high efficiency. This is despite the frequent double teams sent at him (no such adjustment was commonly made for Wiggins). Moreover he has shown an aptitude for learning, as he came into the season at square zero. Embiid's one area of weakness on offense is that he is turnover prone, but he also has shown the ability to make great passes so I believe that it is a matter of experience, not aptitude.

Finally, let the stats speak for themselves: Embiid scores 60.8% eFG in the half court (1st on their team) vs just 43.5% for Wiggins (8th), on higher volume (12.6pt/40 vs 9.0). But is it misleading to include only half-court stats? http://www.hickory-high.com/do-transition-points-translate/[This article] suggests otherwise.

Go watch the "weaknesses" segment of Embiid's DraftExpress video. You'll see a guy that looks absolutely lost on defense, not knowing what to do with his superior athleticism. It would be one thing to draft him first overall if his overall game was a bit more polished and he was relatively injury free, but as of now he's a freak athlete that occasionally makes eye-popping plays but has both a low BB IQ AND known injury problems (which are especially bad for bigs). I don't doubt Embiid's ceiling, but his floor is legendary bust. On the other hand, Wiggins's basement is solid NBA starter. I'll gladly take Embiid and his upside on the Celtics, but his bust potential is significant enough that I would take Wiggins if available.

On another note, the reason for so many big men being draft busts is simple: teams have a habit of overvaluing physical measurables and falling in love with huge, freak athletes in spite of their often glaring weaknesses.

[kozlodoev]

The alleged problem with "drafting foreign centers" is really exactly the same as the problem with drafting local centers -- ignoring actual basketball skills because you "can't teach size". Fails more often than not.

[Celtics4ever]

His back is suspect.   He is new to the game.   But this one has a nice dream shake already.  The back concerns me certainly.  It's always a crap shoot he could go either way but more go the bad way than good.  But every once in a while a gamble pays off.

[fitzhickey]

Is this a legit question? You take the most talented guy (barring mental/physical health issues). Race is irrelevant