And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Quote from: kozlodoev on June 24, 2016, 05:00:12 PM

And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Exactly, which is why people should stop whining about the pick. The article goes on to state that Brown was extensively scouted by the Celtics for a long period of time. They know him very well. They got the guy they wanted.

I don't think anyone will dispute valid criticism about the pick.  If you feel that Murray would have been a better selection because of his production in college and his shooting ability, that is a perfectly valid point.

What Finn is saying is that these criticisms are based on the Mel Kiper-ization the draft, where every pick has to have an immediate grade and hot take on it.  How often do these guys go back and look at their rankings and admit their mistakes?  Rarely, because once the draft is over and their grades are out, they immediately start the process again for the next one.

However, I also agree with Finn that it's great to have so many people in tune with the scouting and player evaluation process.  I don't watch that much college basketball and certainly know nothing about the international players.  The mass of information is very helpful for me to understand who is available.

I would just like the writers of these mock drafts to not actually do a real mock draft, or to grade drafts.  I would rather they stick to the detailed scouting reports and give a handful of players that each team might select given projections and team needs/rankings. 

And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

And he shot .408% from three on a high volume.
Wouldn't have been as extensively scouted because he's from Canada, but at 18 was the best player in his Country which is pretty hard to do.  Would have been my pick if we were picking based on ceiling.

http://www.boston.com/sports/boston-celtics/2016/06/24/lets-watch-jaylen-brown-play

I particularly like this excerpt:

"When Dunn was 19, he averaged 5.7 points per game and shot 39.8 percent (28.6 from 3-point range) in 27 games at Providence.

When Buddy Hield was 19, he averaged 7.8 points per game and shot 38.8 percent (including 23.8 from 3-point range) in 27 games at Oklahoma.

When Jaylen Brown was 19, he averaged 14.6 points per game and shot 43.1 percent (29.4 from 3-point range) in 34 games at Cal."

Anyone know what Anthony Bennett did at 19?

Quote from: hpantazo on June 24, 2016, 05:01:44 PM

Quote from: kozlodoev on June 24, 2016, 05:00:12 PM

And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Exactly, which is why people should stop whining about the pick. The article goes on to state that Brown was extensively scouted by the Celtics for a long period of time. They know him very well. They got the guy they wanted.

I don't think anyone will dispute valid criticism about the pick.  If you feel that Murray would have been a better selection because of his production in college and his shooting ability, that is a perfectly valid point.

What Finn is saying is that these criticisms are based on the Mel Kiper-ization the draft, where every pick has to have an immediate grade and hot take on it.  How often do these guys go back and look at their rankings and admit their mistakes?  Rarely, because once the draft is over and their grades are out, they immediately start the process again for the next one.

However, I also agree with Finn that it's great to have so many people in tune with the scouting and player evaluation process.  I don't watch that much college basketball and certainly know nothing about the international players.  The mass of information is very helpful for me to understand who is available.

I would just like the writers of these mock drafts to not actually do a real mock draft, or to grade drafts.  I would rather they stick to the detailed scouting reports and give a handful of players that each team might select given projections and team needs/rankings.

DX draft reports on Steph Curry and James Harden are a fun read.

Mock drafts are a great source of info for fans.I personally use them, esp. DX, very often; but they should be taken with a pinch of salt imo.

Quote from: mctyson on June 24, 2016, 05:50:26 PM

Quote from: hpantazo on June 24, 2016, 05:01:44 PM

Quote from: kozlodoev on June 24, 2016, 05:00:12 PM

And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

Exactly, which is why people should stop whining about the pick. The article goes on to state that Brown was extensively scouted by the Celtics for a long period of time. They know him very well. They got the guy they wanted.

I don't think anyone will dispute valid criticism about the pick.  If you feel that Murray would have been a better selection because of his production in college and his shooting ability, that is a perfectly valid point.

What Finn is saying is that these criticisms are based on the Mel Kiper-ization the draft, where every pick has to have an immediate grade and hot take on it.  How often do these guys go back and look at their rankings and admit their mistakes?  Rarely, because once the draft is over and their grades are out, they immediately start the process again for the next one.

However, I also agree with Finn that it's great to have so many people in tune with the scouting and player evaluation process.  I don't watch that much college basketball and certainly know nothing about the international players.  The mass of information is very helpful for me to understand who is available.

I would just like the writers of these mock drafts to not actually do a real mock draft, or to grade drafts.  I would rather they stick to the detailed scouting reports and give a handful of players that each team might select given projections and team needs/rankings.

DX draft reports on Steph Curry and James Harden are a fun read.

Mock drafts are a great source of info for fans.I personally use them, esp. DX, very often; but they should be taken with a pinch of salt imo.

I also use DX esp their videos
As well as nba draft. Net
They usually give a good analysis for fans that don't have time to watch the hundreds of college and international games but should be taken with a grain of salt for various reasons (mainly it's their own opinion)

Mocks can also give a range
So we generally ons who we are deciding from

Quote from: kozlodoev on June 24, 2016, 05:00:12 PM

And when Jamal Murray was 19, he averaged 20 ppg -- but we didn't pick him and he was available all the way down to #7. This doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things.

And he shot .408% from three on a high volume.
Wouldn't have been as extensively scouted because he's from Canada, but at 18 was the best player in his Country which is pretty hard to do.  Would have been my pick if we were picking based on ceiling.

same. he was my guy when i first started looking at these draft guys, and though i flip flopped a lot between the kids, i ended up right where i started, with murray.