Why the last 4 games matter

[pearljammer10]

I'll admit that I didnt get to watch much college ball throughout the season, but I will say based on what I saw in the tournament the prospects I was least impressed were Gordon and Randle (with Wiggins and Parker close behind them due to their early exits.)

[Tr1boy]

Exum also did great in the u19 tourney. The same tourney usa won with Gordon winning mvp

Btw MKG was a top 3 defender in his class but would fall below gordon if he was coming out in 2014. Comparable to hollis jefferson at 6'7 in that he is excellent covering his man(sg-sf) and providing weakside help. But gordon can guard 4 positions . In the nba guys like rodman, lebron only come to mind that guarded as many positions well

Yeah, it's unfair for people to compare Gordon to MKG.  Gordon is a much more physically imposing / dominant player than MKG.

I think its a lot more fair to compare Gordon to players like Battier, Bowen and MKG than it is to compare him to Lebron and Rodman. The kid was inept as a college scorer and only an okay rebounder. He has defensive role player written all over him.

Offensively you know he is not all about tip ins and dunk right? He is as good as passer as parker and better than wiggins. Also you undervalue his exlosiveness. A big tool for the nba

[nickagneta]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

[Tr1boy]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

Parker has good passing skills. Not sure what your talking about

Also tony allen to gordon comparison offensively. Really? Allen had half the skills at the same age. Still only avg feel for game. Gordon has a high iq and feel for the game. Plus he is much bigger with explosiveness

[nickagneta]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

Parker has good passing skills. Not sure what your talking about

Also tony allen to gordon comparison offensively. Really? Allen had half the skills at the same age. Still only avg feel for game. Gordon has a high iq and high feel for the game. Plus he is much bigger and explosive

You are completely missing the point.

Explosiveness means exactly squat if you don't have offensive skills to utilize with that explosiveness. Tony Allen was an extremely explosive player. If you saw him play at OSU or early for the C's, you would know what I am talking about. But that explosiveness didn't do him enough good at the pro level offensively to make him a complete player and something more than a role player.

Gordon is going to have the same problem. Don't care if he is bigger or if he plays a different position. The similarities are there. Best to temper expectations for Gordon. Elite defense without another elite skill or any offense makes you a role player. Its why bigs that are elite defenders and can rebound are so valuable. It's because they can do 2 things at an elite level, defend and rebound. Guys like Allen, Battier, Bowen, and such aren't as valuable because they bring one thing to the table...defense.

Gordon will be a nice player. Avery Bradley is a nice player, perhaps a bit better than nice because he can defend and shoot, but I want a whole lot more than nice for a top 6 pick.

[Fafnir]

I think Gordon's a better passer than Parker. Its just tough to have him handle the ball a ton because of his lack of shooting or plan of what to do when he has the ball.

[Mr October]

I'll admit that I didnt get to watch much college ball throughout the season, but I will say based on what I saw in the tournament the prospects I was least impressed were Gordon and Randle (with Wiggins and Parker close behind them due to their early exits.)

Dont judge too heavily based on 1 or 2 bad tournament games. Wiggins is the real deal. He will at least be a super athletic 2 way player. If you had seen his conference tournament games you would think he was destined to be the next dominant wing player. But he is an inconsistent 18 year old.

Parker as well has tremendous offensive ability. And wing players like these too should do better in the next level due to more floor spacing. Randle should benefit as well. He was regularly getting doubled and tripled throughout the tournament, because if you didnt he would destroy you.

It is disappointing that the top lottery guys, maybe top 6, didnt stand out in the tournament (or play in the case of Embiid and Vonleh).

[Tr1boy]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

Parker has good passing skills. Not sure what your talking about

Also tony allen to gordon comparison offensively. Really? Allen had half the skills at the same age. Still only avg feel for game. Gordon has a high iq and high feel for the game. Plus he is much bigger and explosive

You are completely missing the point.

Explosiveness means exactly squat if you don't have offensive skills to utilize with that explosiveness. Tony Allen was an extremely explosive player. If you saw him play at OSU or early for the C's, you would know what I am talking about. But that explosiveness didn't do him enough good at the pro level offensively to make him a complete player and something more than a role player.

Gordon is going to have the same problem. Don't care if he is bigger or if he plays a different position. The similarities are there. Best to temper expectations for Gordon. Elite defense without another elite skill or any offense makes you a role player. Its why bigs that are elite defenders and can rebound are so valuable. It's because they can do 2 things at an elite level, defend and rebound. Guys like Allen, Battier, Bowen, and such aren't as valuable because they bring one thing to the table...defense.

Gordon will be a nice player. Avery Bradley is a nice player, perhaps a bit better than nice because he can defend and shoot, but I want a whole lot more than nice for a top 6 pick.

What about griffin or as a side comparison drummond. Are they super role players (with what you have explained so far)?

Griffin has learned to shoot.  His iq and feel for game is mediocre. Drummond has a near non existant offensive game.

So clippers made a mistake choosing him 1st right?

[Mr October]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

Parker has good passing skills. Not sure what your talking about

Also tony allen to gordon comparison offensively. Really? Allen had half the skills at the same age. Still only avg feel for game. Gordon has a high iq and high feel for the game. Plus he is much bigger and explosive

You are completely missing the point.

Explosiveness means exactly squat if you don't have offensive skills to utilize with that explosiveness. Tony Allen was an extremely explosive player. If you saw him play at OSU or early for the C's, you would know what I am talking about. But that explosiveness didn't do him enough good at the pro level offensively to make him a complete player and something more than a role player.

Gordon is going to have the same problem. Don't care if he is bigger or if he plays a different position. The similarities are there. Best to temper expectations for Gordon. Elite defense without another elite skill or any offense makes you a role player. Its why bigs that are elite defenders and can rebound are so valuable. It's because they can do 2 things at an elite level, defend and rebound. Guys like Allen, Battier, Bowen, and such aren't as valuable because they bring one thing to the table...defense.

Gordon will be a nice player. Avery Bradley is a nice player, perhaps a bit better than nice because he can defend and shoot, but I want a whole lot more than nice for a top 6 pick.

I agree on the athletic comp of the Allen / Gordon comparison. They both enter the NBA with equal athleticism and explosiveness. They both can't shoot, or deliver a floater on a drive. Gordon gets the edge with size, passing, more advanced defense at the same age, and feel for the game. The hope for him to reach his potential is very much tied into his team play and IQ.

I like Gordon a lot. And you are right if he doesn't improve dramatically on offense, he will just be a really nice role player.

[Donoghus]

I certainly wouldn't blow a top 5 or top 6 pick on Gordon given other other skill sets out there of guys like Parker/Wiggins/Embiid etc.  and the current needs of the Celtics.

I agree with Nick.  I want more with a top 6 pick than a guy who can be a great role player.

[Mr October]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

Parker has good passing skills. Not sure what your talking about

Also tony allen to gordon comparison offensively. Really? Allen had half the skills at the same age. Still only avg feel for game. Gordon has a high iq and high feel for the game. Plus he is much bigger and explosive

You are completely missing the point.

Explosiveness means exactly squat if you don't have offensive skills to utilize with that explosiveness. Tony Allen was an extremely explosive player. If you saw him play at OSU or early for the C's, you would know what I am talking about. But that explosiveness didn't do him enough good at the pro level offensively to make him a complete player and something more than a role player.

Gordon is going to have the same problem. Don't care if he is bigger or if he plays a different position. The similarities are there. Best to temper expectations for Gordon. Elite defense without another elite skill or any offense makes you a role player. Its why bigs that are elite defenders and can rebound are so valuable. It's because they can do 2 things at an elite level, defend and rebound. Guys like Allen, Battier, Bowen, and such aren't as valuable because they bring one thing to the table...defense.

Gordon will be a nice player. Avery Bradley is a nice player, perhaps a bit better than nice because he can defend and shoot, but I want a whole lot more than nice for a top 6 pick.

What about griffin or as a side comparison drummond. Are they super role players (with what you have explained so far)?

Griffin has learned to shoot.  His iq and feel for game is mediocre. Drummond has a near non existant offensive game.

So clippers made a mistake choosing him 1st right?

Drummond isnt a very good basketball player. I wouldn't trust him to play 36 minutes a night for a contender right now. He is super raw. I would call him the starting center on the all potential team. That's a put down and a compliment for him.

Griffin on the other hand was a 20-10 machine from the get go and just scored over people even in the half court. Gordon is not going to do that (20-10).

[fairweatherfan]

You know it's getting close to draft time when a college freshman is compared to an elite defender with a 10-year career and a key role in multiple playoff runs, and it's considered an insult to the freshman.

[Donoghus]

You know it's getting close to draft time when a college freshman is compared to an elite defender with a 10-year career and a key role in multiple playoff runs, and it's considered an insult to the freshman.

The hyperbole is mind-numbing.

[footey]

Parker's and Wiggins passing abilities aren't all that great. I would think its fair to say that they might be average passers at best. Gordon's passing ability being as good as Parker's or Wiggins' doesn't say a whole lot.

Explosiveness is great at the next level if you have offensive skills. Without the offensive skills, explosiveness means nothing. Tony Allen might have been one of the most explosive players I have seen play in the league over the last ten years. He's got a similar skill set offensively to Gordon. Tony Allen is a glorified role player.

I would be quite satisfied with a 6'9" Tony Allen on my team. 

[D.o.s.]

I, however, would not be one bit surprised if Dante Exum ends up being outside the top ten players from the 2014 draft.

This makes no sense to me. Are you just being contrarian because we didn't nab an 8th seed?

Maybe a little bit, but the Exum hype just doesn't make sense to me.  Nobody has seen him play against top notch competition because he hasn't played against top notch competition. 

Most of the hype seems to be based on a couple of International High School All Star games that he played well in.  It just seems risky to me to put so many eggs into the basket of a kid who is as unknown an entity as Dante Exum.

I think he and his agent have done a fantastic job setting up the mystique of Dante Exum.  He's kind of like the "insiders" pick.  It makes the average fan feel really smart to like Exum, even though there's very little concrete evidence about how he will play against much, much better competition than he has played against.

If he turns out to be an instant star, then, great, it's a cool story.

Pho explained the draft process better than I could (i.e. it's a serious business when you look beyond the Chad Ford Hype Train), but I do think it's interesting how downplayed international ball is compared to the NCAA on this blog, perhaps for obvious reasons.

Consider: in the same thread, we've seen Aaron Gordon compared to everyone from LeBron to Bruce Bowen on the back of his successful March Madness performance (the smallest of small samples, which ended in a loss), while we've had other posters opine that Exum is destined for the Lakers because of his 'flashy' play and one brutally out-of-context quote.