KO lack of progress - body

[D.o.s.]

Being a weak draft class doesn't mean having no one that can contribute to an NBA team -- typically it means that it lacks players of the caliber of a Kyrie Irving, an Anthony Davis, or a John Wall (or a DeMarcus Cousins).

If you look at the 2013 Draft class*, there are no players that fall under the "their team would be stupid not to give him a max extension" umbrella. That is why it is a weak draft class.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NBA_draft

[slamtheking]

I think it's worth pointing out that his career per36 numbers are 16.1 PP36, 8.5 RP36, and 2.8 AP36.
This goes along with some very good advanced plus/minus stats.

This is what still gives me some hope with him.  His per-36 numbers have always looked pretty good, and the +/- stats suggest he's helped the team a good deal when he's been on the court.

Ryan Anderson's per-36 numbers look even more impressive, though.  How much is his team really helped by playing enough minutes to approach them?

Kelly will never be a great rebounder.  He'll never be a great post-up or isolation scorer.  He will never be a rim protector.

That's OK.

I think the key to success for him is how much he can maximize all of the extra stuff he brings to the table that somebody like Ryan Anderson does not -- positional defense, passing, dribble-drive, setting screens, and so on. 

There's a universe where Kelly completely maxes out all of that stuff and becomes a 30+ mpg regular who is a significant contributor to a good team.  Are we living in that universe, or the one where he settles in as a Pero Antic / Matt Bonner / Spencer Hawes type guy for the rest of his career?  Time will tell.

I think if Kelly can carve a niche role somewhere between Matt Bonner and Ryan Anderson level that would be a success for Boston, especially considering how weak that draft class was. Boston probably made the best choice available given their draft position.

Doesn't seem to me like that draft class was weak at all.  I think it's already proving to be a stronger class than people were expecting. 

it's looking better than expected.  no real studs so far but a number players that serviceable. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see KO drafted at 13 again or higher if a redraft were held 5 years from that draft.  I wanted Dieng and was disappointed they took KO but I've come to grips with the selection.  he's not the stiff I feared but he's not pushing himself on the court to deliver consistantly every game.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Being a weak draft class doesn't mean having no one that can contribute to an NBA team -- typically it means that it lacks players of the caliber of a Kyrie Irving, an Anthony Davis, or a John Wall (or a DeMarcus Cousins).

If you look at the 2013 Draft class*, there are no players that fall under the "their team would be stupid not to give him a max extension" umbrella. That is why it is a weak draft class.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NBA_draft

I was about to post something kinda similar. From the standpoint of any particular team, it doesn't much matter if the draft class is strong, weak, or middling; all that matters is which players that team picked. The 2003 draft class was great, but Detroit took Darko.

[D.o.s.]

Right. Remember that Bilas said early on during the broadcast that "if this draft had started with the 6th or 7th pick (the meaning being if picks 1-5 were actually 6-11) we'd all be raving about how deep it was."

[mainevent]

https://instagram.com/p/5qFjNWgcll/

Recent photo at the Olynyk Klynyk camp.   Does not look like his body has improved at all from last season. 

I'm a fan of KO but this upcoming season will be highly critical of his play.  After 2 seasons, you would think one would learn.  He got pushed around the 1st 2 seasons, and really needs to come to camp at the best shape of his life. Especially in the strength department

He comes to training camp with the body we see from his KO  Klynyk camp, and I will be the 1st one to start a thread to trade him.   

Dumbest. Thread. Ever.

[PhoSita]

Being a weak draft class doesn't mean having no one that can contribute to an NBA team -- typically it means that it lacks players of the caliber of a Kyrie Irving, an Anthony Davis, or a John Wall (or a DeMarcus Cousins).

If you look at the 2013 Draft class*, there are no players that fall under the "their team would be stupid not to give him a max extension" umbrella. That is why it is a weak draft class.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NBA_draft

Well, I think that could easily change this year.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Noel, Gobert, Giannis, Oladipo, and one or two others continue to take steps forward.  This time next year, any or all of those guys could be in line for big money.

[GratefulCs]

Again, you're misunderstanding. But that's ok.

Explain it better, then.  I want to understand.

I am saying he should shore up his biggest offensive weakness (shooting from deep) and focus on his facilitating skills. You are saying that is a call for one-dimensional play.  Hence: misunderstanding.

Regardless, I have no desire to argue with you about the relative merits of your 2015 roster binky.

I'm not trying to argue.

unfortunately some people can't discuss topics without breaking out into argument, haha

[D.o.s.]

Being a weak draft class doesn't mean having no one that can contribute to an NBA team -- typically it means that it lacks players of the caliber of a Kyrie Irving, an Anthony Davis, or a John Wall (or a DeMarcus Cousins).

If you look at the 2013 Draft class*, there are no players that fall under the "their team would be stupid not to give him a max extension" umbrella. That is why it is a weak draft class.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NBA_draft

Well, I think that could easily change this year.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Noel, Gobert, Giannis, Oladipo, and one or two others continue to take steps forward.  This time next year, any or all of those guys could be in line for big money.

'Could' being the operative word here, a far cry from "no-brainer."

[Celtics18]

Being a weak draft class doesn't mean having no one that can contribute to an NBA team -- typically it means that it lacks players of the caliber of a Kyrie Irving, an Anthony Davis, or a John Wall (or a DeMarcus Cousins).

If you look at the 2013 Draft class*, there are no players that fall under the "their team would be stupid not to give him a max extension" umbrella. That is why it is a weak draft class.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NBA_draft

Well, I think that could easily change this year.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Noel, Gobert, Giannis, Oladipo, and one or two others continue to take steps forward.  This time next year, any or all of those guys could be in line for big money.

'Could' being the operative word here, a far cry from "no-brainer."

I think it was far from a given after two years that Boogie or John Wall were "no-brainer" max contract players. 

I'll grant you that Anthony Davis was definitely more advanced at this stage, and to a bit of a lesser degree, so was Kyrie.

[D.o.s.]

You are misremembering if you don't think the Wizards were planning on giving Wall a max extension (edit for clarity: or matching any offer that would pry him away from the team obviously they would pay him less if they could.) from day one. The only thing that could have railroaded that would be injuries -- the same thing for Irving and Davis, actually.

The 2013 NBA Draft did not have a single player of that caliber. That is inarguable for any reason beyond simply being contrarian.

[PhoSita]

'Could' being the operative word here, a far cry from "no-brainer."

Right, but what I'm saying is that a year from now, when it will be time for extensions to be offered, it may be a no brainer.


You're right that none of these guys are so good that from the moment they came into the league it was clear they were going to make tens of millions of dollars.

It's a draft class without any superstars.  Looks like it will end up yielding at least a half dozen really valuable players, though, along with a good number of role players.

[D.o.s.]

... which would make it a weak draft, I think?

[Celtics18]

You are misremembering if you don't think the Wizards were planning on giving Wall a max extension (edit for clarity: or matching any offer that would pry him away from the team obviously they would pay him less if they could.) from day one. The only thing that could have railroaded that would be injuries -- the same thing for Irving and Davis, actually.

The 2013 NBA Draft did not have a single player of that caliber. That is inarguable for any reason beyond simply being contrarian.

Maybe I am misremembering, but what I remember is a lot of folks being down on John Wall after his sophomore season and saying that he hadn't proven himself worthy of a max contract.

Of course the scenario is a bit different between John Wall and someone like Giannis Antetokounmpo.  Wall was a number one pick by Washington, and they had a lot invested in him from day one.  He was absolutely supposed to be the future of the franchise. 

Milwaukee has a bit more leeway with Giannis.  He was picked seventeenth, and now they have added Jabari as their franchise player.  Could Giannis end up better than both Parker and Wall in the long run?
I think so.  But, based on their respective draft positions and the hype coming in, the Bucks don't have quite as much invested in that happening.

Anyway, I don't think the 2013 draft class will end up being a "weak" draft in the long run, and I think it's a bit early to say for sure either way at this stage. 

[D.o.s.]

The presence of players who are "absolutely supposed to be the face of the franchise" is what separates strong drafts from weak ones. That is exactly the point -- and a fairly uncontroversial one at that. This is part of the reason why the "it's too early to tell" card doesn't work here: we're discussing things that have already happened. It is in the past. 2013 was a weak draft. If anyone from the 2013 draft class winds up becoming a superstar, it will be because he exceeded expectations placed on him by being drafted in a weak draft class.

To use your example: there is a reason why Parker was drafted as Milwaukee's franchise player and Giannis was not. There is a reason why no one thought that Anthony Bennett was really going to be the face of Cleveland's team, even after he was drafted first overall. I honestly have no idea why you would desire to think otherwise about this.

[Celtics18]

The presence of players who are "absolutely supposed to be the face of the franchise" is what separates strong drafts from weak ones. That is exactly the point -- and a fairly uncontroversial one at that. This is part of the reason why the "it's too early to tell" card doesn't work here: we're discussing things that have already happened. It is in the past. 2013 was a weak draft. If anyone from the 2013 draft class winds up becoming a superstar, it will be because he exceeded expectations placed on him by being drafted in a weak draft class.

To use your example: there is a reason why Parker was drafted as Milwaukee's franchise player and Giannis was not. There is a reason why no one thought that Anthony Bennett was really going to be the face of Cleveland's team, even after he was drafted first overall. I honestly have no idea why you would desire to think otherwise about this.

I get your point.  But, to me there's a distinction between was considered a weak draft class at the time it occurred and it actually being a weak draft class.

Let's say Giannis and Rudy become superstars.  Definitely not an impossible happenstance.  In my book, that will mean that the 2013 draft class wasn't weak. 

Your way just seems like an insurance policy against "the experts" ever being wrong about anything.