2014 NBA Draft Discussion Thread

[rondohondo]

It is easy to see the potential of Embid and Parker and Wiggins is a great athlete that just needs to learn how to play in the half-court. However I simply don't grasp the hype for Randle and Smart. Randle is all about his strength which will be negated in the NBA. And Smart with all his talent isn't very quick/fast. Frankly some of the lesser talents have more upside in my humble opinion. I would like to see how Hood, Young etc do the rest of the year. The way to look at great talent is to see how they do when their top moves is taken away by another top player. If they can adjust with secondary moves, they are the real deal. However for example if their game is strength and that doesn't work and they have nothing else to offer, they will fade in the NBA. (same is true for evaluating top NFL prospects. I have been a draftnik for 40 yrs and it is all about seeing how a player doesn't when their main advantage is taken away. If the guy has secondary strengths, he is the real deal).

TP

definitely agree on Randle and Smart. I would trade that pick(5-10) if we can move it for a Kevin Love or Marc Gasol .

Only keep it if we get a top 3 . Embid is a very good passer from what I've seen, Parker has all the shots and secondary moves like you mentioned , and Wiggins has loads of potential .

Really like Hood if by some chance we end up trading down a few picks .

[Tr1boy]

It is easy to see the potential of Embid and Parker and Wiggins is a great athlete that just needs to learn how to play in the half-court. However I simply don't grasp the hype for Randle and Smart. Randle is all about his strength which will be negated in the NBA. And Smart with all his talent isn't very quick/fast. Frankly some of the lesser talents have more upside in my humble opinion. I would like to see how Hood, Young etc do the rest of the year. The way to look at great talent is to see how they do when their top moves is taken away by another top player. If they can adjust with secondary moves, they are the real deal. However for example if their game is strength and that doesn't work and they have nothing else to offer, they will fade in the NBA. (same is true for evaluating top NFL prospects. I have been a draftnik for 40 yrs and it is all about seeing how a player doesn't when their main advantage is taken away. If the guy has secondary strengths, he is the real deal).

TP

definitely agree on Randle and Smart. I would trade that pick(5-10) if we can move it for a Kevin Love or Marc Gasol .

Only keep it if we get a top 3 . Embid is a very good passer from what I've seen, Parker has all the shots and secondary moves like you mentioned , and Wiggins has loads of potential .

Really like Hood if by some chance we end up trading down a few picks .

Randle is an athletic version of zbo. Can flat out play. Just keeps beasting down low, getting his shots block or not and wearing you down.  Downside is lack of great length or able to  jump quick off the ground

Smart is a wide shoulder strong pg. He will wear you down

Both of these guys have a nice motor

I think ppl focus too much on athleticism, quickness, flash sometimes. A good chunk of the nba consist of zbo, david west, klay thompson kind of players also

[Dog_Lover106]

It is easy to see the potential of Embid and Parker and Wiggins is a great athlete that just needs to learn how to play in the half-court. However I simply don't grasp the hype for Randle and Smart. Randle is all about his strength which will be negated in the NBA. And Smart with all his talent isn't very quick/fast. Frankly some of the lesser talents have more upside in my humble opinion. I would like to see how Hood, Young etc do the rest of the year. The way to look at great talent is to see how they do when their top moves is taken away by another top player. If they can adjust with secondary moves, they are the real deal. However for example if their game is strength and that doesn't work and they have nothing else to offer, they will fade in the NBA. (same is true for evaluating top NFL prospects. I have been a draftnik for 40 yrs and it is all about seeing how a player doesn't when their main advantage is taken away. If the guy has secondary strengths, he is the real deal).

TP

definitely agree on Randle and Smart. I would trade that pick(5-10) if we can move it for a Kevin Love or Marc Gasol .

Only keep it if we get a top 3 . Embid is a very good passer from what I've seen, Parker has all the shots and secondary moves like you mentioned , and Wiggins has loads of potential .

Really like Hood if by some chance we end up trading down a few picks .

Randle is an athletic version of zbo. Can flat out play. Just keeps beasting down low, getting his shots block or not and wearing you down.  Downside is lack of great length or able to  jump quick off the ground

Smart is a wide shoulder strong pg. He will wear you down

Both of these guys have a nice motor

I think ppl focus too much on athleticism, quickness, flash sometimes. A good chunk of the nba consist of zbo, david west, klay thompson kind of players also

Agree about Randle. Fantastic player who could suit up tonight in an NBA game and still do his thing. Puts the ball to the floor pretty well, really quick for his size and once the 15 foot jumper improves..... look out. Plays hard, great rebounder and gets to the line.

Really silly to say this guy is going to be a bust because of length. Anthony Davis has length and that equals great player, Kelly Olynyk has length, no thanks.

If Randle's lack of length is such a negative, why isn't the guy with all the length (WCS) getting all the Kentucky rebounds?

I would be thrilled to get Randle.

[mqtcelticsfan]

Really silly to say this guy is going to be a bust because of length. Anthony Davis has length and that equals great player, Kelly Olynyk has length, no thanks.

Olynyk has an absolutely atrocious wingspan. It contributes to how bad he is at playing professional basketball.

If Randle's lack of length is such a negative, why isn't the guy with all the length (WCS) getting all the Kentucky rebounds?

Randle's lack of length doesn't impact his rebounding as much as it does his offense and defense. Players like him with short arms have serious problems scoring over taller defenders, and even more problems stopping others from scoring.

[Fafnir]

Zach Randolph has really long arms.

I don't think he's a good comparison for Randle.

[Dog_Lover106]

Really silly to say this guy is going to be a bust because of length. Anthony Davis has length and that equals great player, Kelly Olynyk has length, no thanks.

Olynyk has an absolutely atrocious wingspan. It contributes to how bad he is at playing professional basketball.

If Randle's lack of length is such a negative, why isn't the guy with all the length (WCS) getting all the Kentucky rebounds?

Randle's lack of length doesn't impact his rebounding as much as it does his offense and defense. Players like him with short arms have serious problems scoring over taller defenders, and even more problems stopping others from scoring.

Totally disagree. Wingspan is way down the list here. By your agruemant Channing Fyre should be a better inside player than David Lee? Strength to get on the box and seal is far more important. Just let me know if you need a list of some of the greatest post players in NBA history who had far less length than Julius Randle.
 
Olynyk problem is strength and lack of quickness, not length of his arms.

Randle is shooting 54% from the field. So looks like his scoring is just fine. Randle has great post moves. Randle also played some three in HS and can put the ball to the floor. He is young and already one of the top players in the country. He will command a double team in the NBA.

Next to Embiid, Randle is the most NBA ready player of the young guys.

[Dog_Lover106]

Zach Randolph has really long arms.

I don't think he's a good comparison for Randle.

He also weighs 275lbs, that helps. Has fantastic scoring touch and great basket instincts.

Randle is quicker can put the ball on the floor. He has a higher motor and shows the same instincts for scoring around the basket. Easily can be as good as Randolph without the psychopath baggage. 

[RebusRankin]

I think McDermott is a role player at best.

[SHAQATTACK]

This thread could be 100 pages

A we pick up draft picks and tank on down to the bottom of the NBA

[Galeto]

Randle makes the game far more difficult for himself than needed.  Somewhere along the line, it must have gotten into his head that creating the best shot meant putting five moves together before attempting an one-handed push shot with his defender hanging all over him.  He just doesn't take simpler, skilled shots like jump hooks or turnaround jumpers.  Since he's not explosive from a standstill position and gives up length, he should be working on making skilled shots rather than trying to grind.  He's going to finish top 5 in shot attempts blocked if he takes the same approach in the NBA.

That said, he should be a devastating scorer on pick and rolls because he's quite explosive with a running start and has the physicality to get to the line.  Unfortunately, Kentucky runs few pick and rolls. 

He reminds me of David Lee.  Both are 6'9 in shoes, with wingspans and standing reaches one inch of each other.  I think Randle has the Lee profile of a double-double guy with limited defensive impact who is a very good finisher as a roll man.  Also, someone who is a good passer.  Lee improved his jumpshot immensely after entering the league and Randle's going to have to as well.

[indeedproceed]

I think McDermott is a role player at best.

I think he's a role player at worst, and whatever exists between a all-star and role player at best , but it's not a huge jump either way. I read a comparison between him and Kyle Korver recently and if you're adding Kyle Korver in the late teens or 20s you're SOOO far ahead of the game.

[Galeto]

I think McDermott is a role player at best.

Me too but he has the potential to be the best spot up shooter in the league.  He could be an extremely valuable weapon in bridging the gap between starters, getting a team back in the game or stretching out a lead even if he gets taken advantage of defensively.

[Galeto]

I think McDermott is a role player at best.

I think he's a role player at worst, and whatever exists between a all-star and role player at best , but it's not a huge jump either way. I read a comparison between him and Kyle Korver recently and if you're adding Kyle Korver in the late teens or 20s you're SOOO far ahead of the game.

He has Korver's spot up shooting ability but he doesn't have the ability to run around screens and hit jumpers like Korver, Ray, Redick and Hamilton.  He's a pretty lumbering 6'8 guy with a body that's not really compact.  It's hard to see him run away from guys, catch a pass, stop on a dime and hit a jumper.  His set shot isn't conducive to that kind of action either.

To be more than a role player, he's going to have to do more than just shoot really really well.  He does that in college but it's hard to see how his post game or dribble drive game will be effective in the NBA or how he's going to defend with poor lateral quickness and hops and short arms. 

[Donoghus]

I know he's struggling from the floor tonight against Syracuse (but who hasn't?), but loving what I see from Jabari Parker. 

His size &  game is just oozing NBA ready.

[BleedGreen1989]

I know he's struggling from the floor tonight against Syracuse (but who hasn't?), but loving what I see from Jabari Parker. 

His size &  game is just oozing NBA ready.

Yup.

That fadeaway and1 he just got shows his skill and power/strength already.