What's new
By:

2023 NBA Draft Megathread

Bawse Dawg said:
If people sour on Scoot and it becomes a situation like when Luka fell to three, we should definitely have some kind of huge offer ready to go.
Click to expand...
The problem is that we probably need to have a top 6 pick to make someone willing to move down a little bit.
 
At risk of sounding like a complete dumbass....I don't think Scoot is worth breaking the bank for. He could be the next Luka....but I see him more like an average top 3 pick and no longer a generational PG prospect. The lack of development year to year is a worry for me as is his playstyle.
 
KqWIN said:
You can use eye test, just don't be an eye test guy when it suits you and a stats guy when it doesn't suit you. If you're calling Kugel a combo, guess what they are both undersized as well.

The article you linked literally lists his strengths, and all 3 of them were related to getting to the basket. His mid range game was considered a weakness. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't call someone a mid range scorer when it's a weakness and all of their biggest strengths are related to being around the basket. His mid range game is a work in progress. By far his best offensive trait is his slashing. It's obvious on film, it's obvious in the numbers, it's obvious from reading the article you linked. His comfort area is the rim, where he attempts 44% of his shots. So no, he is not mostly a mid range scorer. This is 100% factually incorrect. He has scored double the amount of points at the rim as he has in the mid range, and a lot of these "mid range" buckets are floaters anyways. At minimum, if you're going to call someone a mid range scorer it would at least be a strength or defining aspect of his game. If you're going going to call someone "mostly" a mid rage scorer, than they would have to mostly be a mid range scorer which is objectlivey false with Amari Bailey.

And please do not backpedal on this. If you're going to call Bailey a 6'3, mid range scorer, who is a lackluster athlete, and average defender say it with your chest. Don't go "well he does shoot some mid range jumpers and therefore I am not wrong about him being a mid range player" while also being so adamant that he can't be a PG. The main parts of his game are quite obvious. Defense, mentality/competitiveness, and athleticism/slashing on offense. I don't know why you would choose to call him a mid range scorer, when that is a weakness not a strength, and then go on to shrink his size and also call him a lackluster athlete and average defender. It's like you have it backwards. His mid range scoring is the issue, his athleticism and defense is how he shines the most. Read your own article.

My take is that he shouldn't be 30+ spots ranked lower than the other guards in this draft. I think Bufkin and Bailey are both better investments at the end of the first than JHS at the end of the lottery for example. The article actually gives a pretty good breakdown of why I like him. His defense and competitiveness stand out and as the article states this is "widely known". No one besides you contests this, which is fine, but I hope it's not on the basis of shrinking him and making up what type of player he is. His open court speed is fantastic as well as his athleticism and dexterity to finish around the basket. I think he has all the tools to be a great connector and defensive player in the NBA. His PnR play will never be his bread and butter and he won't be a PG who drives the offense in a large way. This limits his ceiling, but he's still very much worth consideration of UTA's last pick.
Click to expand...
1. What on Earth are you trying to call me out on? I use eye test and stats as I see fit. This isnt a consistent thing, drafting/evaluating is tricky.

2. RIley Kugel is much bigger than Bailey. As a 2-guard Kugel has what I would consider solid size. He has a big frame and long arms. As a combo guard (gun to my head would label him a 2-guard with potential to develop combo skills) he's huge.

3. If you are attempting a third of your shot profile in the mid-range you are a mid-range dominant player by modern standards. This isnt the 90s. And when you watch Bailey you can clearly tell that is what he is most comfortable doing, even if he isnt that great at it. He played on a star loaded team so his volume from mid-range was less and he was able to get easy opportunities in the paint. Like I said, I commended him for fitting into a good team. You're acting like I said he was some trash can. He's just not worthy of being a first rounder until he shows more than being an average 6'3 guard with no standout NBA level ability.

4. He is small. IDK what you are so hard on this point of him not being small when he's clearly small. He's got narrow shoulders and short arms. I think Bailey is probably 6'3.5 at most in shoes w/ a 6'5 to 6'6 wingspan. Kugel will probably measure 6'5.5 in shoes w/ a 6'9 to 6'10 wingspan. Plus Kugel already has 20 lbs+ of frame over Bailey.

5. He isn't anywhere near Bufkin or JHS.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Yeah it might need to be some sort of three team deal where we send 10 and stuff for 4 and the team at #2 gets 4 and stuff. Even then I think the team at #4 would be looking to parlay draft "stuff" into established players.

I think there are too many opportunities for someone to say "no" in that type of deal. We should just win the lottery instead... or the second pick... or the third... cuz the odds of us swinging a deal are less than the odds we will have to win a top 4 pick.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is, if you want to trade up to #2 you might need to offer #4 or #5 in this draft, plus future draft picks in return. The other team's rationale would be that they're already invested in a young, All Star-level lead guard. It could apply to a team like Charlotte, OKC, Indiana or Detroit.
 
KqWIN said:
At risk of sounding like a complete dumbass....I don't think Scoot is worth breaking the bank for. He could be the next Luka....but I see him more like an average top 3 pick and no longer a generational PG prospect. The lack of development year to year is a worry for me as is his playstyle.
Click to expand...
I would not break the bank… but 3 firsts plus our own first this year in the 11-14 range is a worthwhile investment. I’m a believer. Breaking the bank is like 5 firsts imo.

I think I’m general teams are either not sellers at any price… or it would be a few picks. I think going from 10/11 to 2 is likely a non starter even with a few picks… it’s just too big of a jump back. If you landed 4 and sent a couple firsts I could see that happening.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I would not break the bank… but 3 firsts plus our own first this year in the 11-14 range is a worthwhile investment. I’m a believer. Breaking the bank is like 5 firsts imo.

I think I’m general teams are either not sellers at any price… or it would be a few picks. I think going from 10/11 to 2 is likely a non starter even with a few picks… it’s just too big of a jump back. If you landed 4 and sent a couple firsts I could see that happening.
Click to expand...

Jazz do have extra picks to burn. They can trade picks, whiff on picks and still come out great.
 
Ferguson_Mellochill said:
What I'm saying is, if you want to trade up to #2 you might need to offer #4 or #5 in this draft, plus future draft picks in return. The other team's rationale would be that they're already invested in a young, All Star-level lead guard. It could apply to a team like Charlotte, OKC or Detroit.
Click to expand...
I understand… that’s why I said you might need a third team to participate. We will either end up top 4 or more likely 9-13. Even then the team might see an opportunity to go from 4th or 5th to 2nd and just do the deal themselves.

Basically the 6-15% chance we end up top 3 is going to be our best chance to get Scoot or Miller… I think trade up is a more unlikely set of circumstances that we don’t control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top