What's new
By:
Filters

2023 NBA Draft Megathread

Jingled said:
There is no way we move up to 3rd without giving up Lauri, but I wish we could find a way to move up to 4th or 5th.


View: https://twitter.com/JazzNationNews/status/1662160525369933824
Click to expand...

of course you'd rather have the 4th or 5th pick over the 9th, simply due to having more options, but honestly, i'm not convinced you get a better player at 4 or 5 than 9. top 3 is the prize and i'd give up a lot (though not Lauri and i think you're right that's what it would take) to get that, but i wouldn't give up much to go to 4 or 5.
 
KqWIN said:
OTE is great for their draft stock because you can imagine them becoming any player you want. You can’t really prove that they will be that player, but also can’t prove that they won’t be that player. If I was an elite recruit, I would go this route to solidify my status. I bet guys like GG and Dillon Mitchell would have really benefitted from OTE draft stock wise. Mystery is almost always good for draft stock.
Click to expand...
well said. i'd do the same. if i were a HS kid being discussed as a top 6 or 7 pick, no chance i'd go to college. i'd go OTE, just sit out entirely (like Sharpe and Exum) or go G league. you go OTE or don't play at all, you have nothing to lose (unless you suck in the OTE which would be hard to do if you are any good). G league > college IMO simply because it's a more open game, with more spacing and faster pace and even if you struggle you have the excuse that you're only 18 playing against grown men. college, oth, will expose you due to the lack of spacing, lack of scoring overall, slower pace and general sloppiness of play.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
well said. i'd do the same. if i were a HS kid being discussed as a top 6 or 7 pick, no chance i'd go to college. i'd go OTE, just sit out entirely (like Sharpe and Exum) or go G league. you go OTE or don't play at all, you have nothing to lose (unless you suck in the OTE which would be hard to do if you are any good). G league > college IMO simply because it's a more open game, with more spacing and faster pace and even if you struggle you have the excuse that you're only 18 playing against grown men. college, oth, will expose you due to the lack of spacing, lack of scoring overall, slower pace and general sloppiness of play.
Click to expand...

Yeah, tbf I bet the college experience as an athlete is freaking awesome and you can get NIL money now....but for draft stock reasons it's probably better to not play at all or play in a setting like OTE that makes you look good. It's like having a pro day 24/7.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
well said. i'd do the same. if i were a HS kid being discussed as a top 6 or 7 pick, no chance i'd go to college. i'd go OTE, just sit out entirely (like Sharpe and Exum) or go G league. you go OTE or don't play at all, you have nothing to lose (unless you suck in the OTE which would be hard to do if you are any good). G league > college IMO simply because it's a more open game, with more spacing and faster pace and even if you struggle you have the excuse that you're only 18 playing against grown men. college, oth, will expose you due to the lack of spacing, lack of scoring overall, slower pace and general sloppiness of play.
Click to expand...

There is really no basis for that opinion as of now. OTE has never had a player drafted and the Thompson twins would have been viewed just as highly if they went to college. Also I think if Sharpe actually played at Kentucky he would have been firmly in that top 3 pick conversation.
 
sip said:
There is really no basis for that opinion as of now. OTE has never had a player drafted and the Thompson twins would have been viewed just as highly if they went to college. Also I think if Sharpe actually played at Kentucky he would have been firmly in that top 3 pick conversation.
Click to expand...
the thompson twins are the first top 10 guys to play in the ote. so OTE is 2-2. sure it's a small sample, but the points KqWIN made are valid. and seriously, lol - you have no idea (none of us do) how they would be viewed had they played college ball. for all we know they would be the 2nd and 3rd overall picks or they would be 27 and 28. or yes, they could be about where they are now. but to pretend you know is laughable.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
the thompson twins are the first top 10 guys to play in the ote. so OTE is 2-2. sure it's a small sample, but the points KqWIN made are valid. and seriously, lol - you have no idea (none of us do) how they would be viewed had they played college ball. for all we know they would be the 2nd and 3rd overall picks or they would be 27 and 28. or yes, they could be about where they are now. but to pretend you know is laughable.
Click to expand...
Yeah only chiming in cuz it could have literally been any of the above. Maybe they'd be awesome in college and raise their stock like Miller... maybe they suck and drop like Nick Smith... it could go anyway. Preseason Amen was like 5-8ish and Ausar a bit lower. Beginning of the season I though Amen would end up consensus #3. Ended up being off cuz Miller was awesome.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Yeah only chiming in cuz it could have literally been any of the above. Maybe they'd be awesome in college and raise their stock like Miller... maybe they suck and drop like Nick Smith... it could go anyway. Preseason Amen was like 5-8ish and Ausar a bit lower. Beginning of the season I though Amen would end up consensus #3. Ended up being off cuz Miller was awesome.
Click to expand...
yep, Miller (Trae Young is another that comes to mind) is a great example of how going to college can help a guy if they are mid to late first, McD's AA and you go play college ball and dominate (granted that is really hard for a frosh to do), you will be top 5-7 at the very least assuming you aren't 5'8".
 
Last edited:
seattlejazzfan said:
Biancardi is mostly a HS prospect evaluator, so take his thoughts with a grain of salt, but it's fun to think about - if the draft were to shake out like that, imagine getting Whitmore at 9, again - he only did his top 14, but Cason wasn't in it - so you get CW at 9 and Cason at 16. freaking dream draft right there. though i would try like hell to trade up to take Leonard Miller too.
Click to expand...
If our draft was Cam, Cason, and Miller I would need to be hosed down.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Russillo said he talked to a team at the combine and they said a player from this years class said his player comp is KD lol. The team that asked him what his player comp was didn’t like that answer. I wonder who it was. Miller or GG are the first two that came to mind.
Click to expand...

I don't think GG is confident enough to say KD is a comp for him. He's been pretty humble in interviews and saying that he expects to start in the G-league. He might say that he watches Paul George or that he watches Tatum, but I don't think he's actually ballsy enough to compare himself to them yet.

If people are telling Brandon Miller that he's the next Paul George, it wouldn't surprise me if he'd say something that bold. Maybe that's why there was some rumor that Miller didn't interview well.

It could also be someone completely out of left field, like a Maxwell Lewis or something. Hendricks maybe? Someone who thinks they're a long wing and clutch shooter.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Lots of assumptions that just aren’t true. Had we lost 4 more games and assumed Portlands spot then we are drafting 3rd. Just a couple more losses and we are drafting 6th. None of that would require trading Lauri or having a miserable season. To drop into the bottoms 4 sure… but there were many super close wins that could have flipped and we’d be in a much better spot.

It still may work out and be fine of course but the difference between us and Portland, Orlando, Indiana and Washington isn’t huge… to trade into those spots it costs at least one future first imo… to get top 3 way more.
Click to expand...
I think you're too smart answer to the question from @framer (what would we need to have done to get those extra losses?) in any way that really nails you down. So I'm guessing you're content to throw out vague answers like this that don't directly say, but can easily be interpreted to mean, that the Jazz's record exceeded their quality of play this year; that if the Jazz weren't such try-hards, we'd have finished with a (worse) record more befitting the actual quality of our team.

Here's why I don't agree with this implication (again, it may not be your implication, but you're certainly not discouraging it). Here's why I think the Jazz got what they deserved for the type of team they had:
  • Jazz had 27 games within 5 points, winning 13 and losing 14. To nail down 6th draft position (pre-lottery, or tie for 5th) they would have had to go 9-18 in these games (which is pretty hard to do).
  • According to B-Ref's pythagorean calculation, the Jazz already lost two more games than they should have this year. So your argument is that we could have easily done a -6 on actual vs. pythagorean wins? Only one team this year had a discrepancy of 6 or more (and none in the minus column). As much as the Jazz were terrible under Snyder for actual vs. pythagorean wins, I don't know if they were ever a -6.
  • As far as actual team quality: all the teams that finished with better draft choices than us were actually worse teams, in terms of total net (own vs. opponent) points. Wizards were 22 points worse (I guess a little shaving could have gotten us to their level, although Cleaning the Glass's non-garbage-time stats show the gap to be considerably wider), but Magic were 133 points worse and Pacers were 184 points worse.
So my point is that we finished where we deserved based on the relative quality of the teams and the quality of our play. Do you disagree?

To get us to a record that would have ensured the 6th or 5th best pre-lottery odds would have meant some combination of: a) even more shenanigans than we already did; b) much earlier trades to get rid of decent players; c) being extremely unlucky (or fortunate draft-wise) with the wins vs. quality of play ratio. (For me, I don't care if you want to say that we should have done either a or b more; I just want us to recognize that we got what we deserved draft-wise for the quality of team we were. We were neither lucky nor unlucky.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top