Too early to write Okafor off, I mean the guy missed months of basketball and is a 2nd year big men. Big guys always take awhile to develop, especially when coming back from injury and on a terrible team. He still shows those flashes, like he did tonight against the Cavs. 7 of 11 for 14 points and 9 rebounds in 23 minutes.
I don't think it is too early to project that his defense will never be good as prime Al Jefferson. How good does his offense have to be to justify a future max contract if his defense is that bad?
still have to laugh at the bizarre curve okafor is graded on. All our young players continue to get a pass despite significant flaws at age 22/23. And yet okafor still hasn't turned 21 years old and this is probably as good as he will ever be. Yeah... ok....
I watched al Jefferson when he was 22. He wasn't a good defender. He wasn't a very good defender in his prime either. Okafor is comparable. Okafor can get much better though.
Bottom line is that Marcus smart is in the midst of his 3rd season proving he will never been a mediocre shooter in this league and yet myself and many other Celtic fans still think there's a chance he will figure it out. Meanwhile okafor is like 60 games into NBA career and can't even legally drink and yet people think the kid is incapable of ever finding a role on defense.
There's a big difference though. Smart is very good at many different things (Defense, court vision, rebounding, versatility, leadership) and struggles with one thing (Scoring) of which his shooting contributes to. It's fairly reasonable to believe that if he improved his shooting (something fairly common in the NBA) it would improve his scoring and you'd be looking at a pretty dang good player with all the other things he does well.
With By contrast, Okafor is very good at one thing (Low Post offense) and struggles with many others (Defense, rebounding, passing, shooting, switching, leadership). His one skill is very, very good and it's reasonable to believe that he could improve in one of those deficiencies, but even if he does (Say, rebounding) your still left with a 7 footer who needs the ball constantly to be effective on offense, is a poor defender who can't switch to save his life or protect the rim well, doesn't pass well out of double teams and is a p--- poor teammate.
See, that's the difference. People believe Smart can improve on his one big weakness and you'll have a great player. With Okafor, you have to hope he can improve on a bunch of his big weaknesses (Including things like switching, which you don't just improve at with time) just to have a net positive player. He has potential, but the odds of stardom are pretty dang low.
Odds of stardom? James Harden, Carmelo Anthony, etc. are stars and not known for their defense. Your criticisms of him mostly exist on the defensive side of the ball. He's 20- there's time for him to improve.
Poor teammate? Where are you getting that? Coach K loves the dude. He plays on a bad team. Bad teams often have chemistry issues.
Not really. I'm plenty critical of his offensive game. I complain about his inability to consistently draw double teams and pass out for open shots, which he needs to do considering his low post style. His offensive rebounding which is not very good for a guy who is glued to the blocks, his ineffective mid-range game, his lack of moving the ball and the need to design your offense around utilizing his low post skills because otherwise he's a black hole out there and the effect that has on your other offensive players.
Some of those things can be improved though, (though improving them all is unlikely, at best) so I'm a little higher on his offensive capabilities than he's defensive ones. And I certainly don't think Carmelo and Harden are trash, though they're not exactly the kind of guys I like the most.
But those guys aren't really comparable to Okafor. As I said before, Okafor's problem is that he has one elite level skill, and is poor in almost all the other areas. Carmelo and Harden aren't good defenders, sure. But they both do a whole lot more than just score buckets. Harden is one of the best passers in the NBA right now, he's a very good 3 point shooter who can get to the rim at will and draws a ton of contact. He's versatile enough to play 1-3 and has the ability to make his teammates better (though he doesn't always do it). Carmelo's the same way. He can play on/off the ball, he can play the 3 or the 4 at a very high level, he's a plus rebounder on both sides of the ball, he can shoot the mid range, the 3 and can drive in isolation. He can post up, pass out of double teams and isn't a terrible defender when it matters.
Okafor is a very good low post scorer, and does little else well on both offense and defense. It's not like he's some kind of offensive Dynamo that is so good you just put up with his bad defense. All his supporters may not like to hear it, but he's never reaching a Carmelo or James Harden level of play, he just doesn't have the ability to do so.
I'm not saying the kid doesn't have potential, he does. One day he might be as good as Greg Monroe or Al Jefferson. But to me, that's not good enough to justify playing him over Amir, Horford, Crowder or Kelly when you consider all the negatives he brings onto the court, and it certainly doesn't justify trading anything of actual value for him like the Brooklyn picks, Jaylen Brown or Marcus Smart. And he may have been a fine teammate when he was winning chips at Duke, but he's been a pretty poor teammate in Philly. That probably has something to do with how bad they've been, but if Cousins is a poor teammate, so is Okafor no matter what the reason is.
I get that the post game is elite and the ability to put up raw counting stats is attractive but once you dig into it, he's just not that good. I don't think it's being unfair, it's just being honest about his large amount of weaknesses and how much he would really have to improve on them to become the kind of player so many people think he can be.