What's new
By:

Following potential 2014 draftees

Bodhi said:
I think you're way overblowing Vonleh's "low bbiq".
Click to expand...
I think at this stage in his BB maturity, it is clear he is low IQ. Also, it means (probably) that it is not natural in him. I think it is correctable, but will never be "high". Fortunately for NV, he will not be called on to have high BBIQ (like a PG is supposed to have.)

DX video showed a number of turn overs and they were pretty much BBIQ issues. They showed him whirling into multiple defenders and losing the ball, probably not a legit opportunity. they showed him standing in no-man's land on D and with minimal (even zero) anticipation of what might be occurring next on D. These were clear indicators he's not a natural to me.
 
Harcher said:
I think at this stage in his BB maturity, it is clear he is low IQ. Also, it means (probably) that it is not natural in him. I think it is correctable, but will never be "high". Fortunately for NV, he will not be called on to have high BBIQ (like a PG is supposed to have.)

DX video showed a number of turn overs and they were pretty much BBIQ issues. They showed him whirling into multiple defenders and losing the ball, probably not a legit opportunity. they showed him standing in no-man's land on D and with minimal (even zero) anticipation of what might be occurring next on D. These were clear indicators he's not a natural to me.
Click to expand...

See that, Vermin? He called Nevada dumb, I think.
 
Bodhi said:
I think you're way overblowing Vonleh's "low bbiq".
Click to expand...

A couple thoughts here:

* Vonleh was asked to play center, which is not his natural position. He's best out on the floor where he has room to operate and let his shooting stroke and long first step help him to initiate plays. Indiana didn't seem to have much size or scoring inside, so Vonleh was pushed into posting up against zone defenses with double or triple teams. He's not the most natural post player, and he'll definitely benefit from NBA spacing.

* Vonleh's rebound rate was the highest in the NCAAs. To me, a player's rebounding ability reflects his ability to anticipate, get position, and time his jump in traffic. I don't think you can be a great rebounder and not have a decent BBIQ. Also, his turnovers weren't terrible at 2.1 per game.
 
Here's an interview by DX with Vonleh from a year ago at the McDonald's All American game. I thought it's interesting that Vonleh describes himself as a point-forward and combo-forward. He says he wants to be a superstar. Good to hear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg2rY1qNB8A#t=199
 
a few things on Harchers post;

ive seen NBA scouts saying Vonleh shows 'great anticipation' on D and he does get some high quality blocks, one of my favorite games was in the upset over #3 Wisconsin, Noah started the game with 2 three pointers in the opening minutes and in the second half he blocked Kaminsky twice and Sam Dekker on a dunk. for all the BBIQ issues you see defensively, you still have his post defense in his strengths so i dont really have much to disagree about.

his discipline is not what you'd like to see but at 18, but its very fixable, i think this was exacerbated a bit by a few things at IU but no doubt their were plenty of lapses, vs 6'11" 255lb SR center Garrick Sherman of Notre Dame he got pushed around for most of the game, he was outmatched in toughness but i liked the way he ended up trying to use his length and quickness advantage.

i really question Crean's ability as a "game" coach after seeing last season, I was often left asking my tv 'is he trying to win the game?', if noah struggled or picked up quick fouls there was very little adjustment, Crean often sent him back in to do the same exact thing.

any defense vs Indiana is going to pay alot of attention to Noah, this was very obvious watching them (he was the one drawing double teams) for that reason alone Crean needed to find better ways ways to keep him on the court.

Once Noah got his 3rd foul, he should have been moved a bit further from the basket, with Hanner Mosquera-Parea at C, instead like idiots IU chose to live and die with his foul troubles, whether it looked like he needed help or not. Im not trying to absolve him of blame, or let him off the hook at all, but i think its worth mentioning the lack of adjustments, there were a few things painfully obvious about IU last year, Crean was directly to blame for alot of them.

the bit on 'he doesnt need the BBIQ of a PG' is great and very true, in the NBA you can have a ****load of BBIQ on defense, but with the footspeed of Al Jefferson your still going to get burned in P+R everytime, Noah has the footspeed, and hes very intelligent off-the court so i hope once basketball is his full time profession some of that translates. I dont think his instincts are bad

here is where i differ from the DX vids though, and ive said this throughout

im not sold that hes always going to be this 'under the rim' player, with that type of vertical at 18 and his body type, if the Jazz were to send him to p3 every summer, you couldnt tell me that he wouldnt be improving yearly. compared to Gordon, sure hes not that type of jumper, but at 247lbs, 37" inches is enough of a jump, thats not BS, he can jump, I always predicted he would best 36"... Burks didnt always show that vertical in-game, but in year 3 we saw more of it, i could see that being the case with Vonleh.

as for the strength/getting pushed around/knocked off balance im also particularly confident this is only a problem at 18 and will end up being a strength more than in issue in a few years, I really like his build, 25lbs added in his first summer lifting weights, and he has a low center of gravity, I think Noah ends up very strong for a PF, i could see him putting on more weight and ending up thicker than people would expect, maybe 260 lbs or more. Also i wouldent rule out Noah growing a bit more, ive still got hope he ends up 6'10 in shoes

https://vinebox.co/u/woOjD4LjLMv/wkLYz9D1JrT - touching 12'1"
 
Last edited:
Harcher said:
I watched 30 mins of DX video. Gordon and Vonleh. many of you might know all this, but because I watched their videos, I thought I'd post what I saw.
.
Short summary:
These two appear similar but are "opposites:" Gordon is 6' 8.75", Vonleh is 6' 9.5" So being only .75" difference they appear the same. But Gordon is the athlete, with short (8' 9") reach, plays above the rim, high BBIQ, but has minimal natural hand-eye coordination. Vonleh is the 9' 2" standing reach guy, who plays below the rim, who has low BBIQ, but has very good hand eye coordination. Going forward this decision is who you bet on to overcome their one key flaw: Gordon's hand-eye problem or Vonleh's BBIQ deficiency. (it wasn't perfectly clear who has more 'intangibles' but DX gave high marks to Gordon in this regard.)
.
.
Long Write up on the DX video scouting reports on AG and NV.
DX outlines some positives, and some on the negatives. Assuming the samples are relevant, here's my two cents.
.
Aaron Gordon 15mins total video, 10 on positives 5 on negs:
Gordon Positives:
- Quick jumping is very effective. Hence the comparisons to AK. He already uses the “quick 2-handed AK” dunk around the rim very well. While we can compare combine numbers (Vonleh, 31” and 37” max jump #’s compared to Gordon 32.5” and 39”) it is clear that Gordon can jump a WHOLE LOT BETTER than Vonleh at this point.
- His ability to reb, drive to the other end of the floor and , then finish with a dunk was quite impressive.
- BBIQ is high. “Almost always in the right position to help on D.” This is correlated to BBIQ and determination. DX claims high marks on “intangibles” and this bears out from their sample of video clips. DX used the term “extremely” unselfish.
- his D is legimately good on "small forward" type players or smaller. He can stay with them and moves laterally very well.
.
Gordon Negs
- Bad low post scorer. His low post game looked “immature” but not horrid to me.
- Bad “touch near rim.” This is true. As a leaper, he was surprisingly very, very clunky in the samples shown. I believe this is a sign of innate hand eye coordination, which is low. (upside is in the clips of his bad touch, he was crashing about getting his own rebounds…)
- Bad on catch and shoots, bad off the dribble shots.
- Bad on free throws. This is horrific. This plus his shooting woes and near-the-rim touch indicates he simply doesn’t have innate hand-eye coordination. It is possible (not being a sports physician) that at 18 and having the ultra athletic ability that hand-eye is will come later – hmmm.
- Poor D rebounding – I’m perplexed by this given his motor on O-rebs. It must come from the him being so young and focused on the offense. But the videos showed him standing and watching a lot...
- Poor Post D. To me, this was clearly a function of strength and his positioning. He holds his hands straight in the air and stands quite upgright. Post D is much about body position for withstanding the pounding by offensive post player… I give him a pass, because strength is much about the quantity of time (he 18). Also, his postion D as a ‘small forward’ is
.
.
Noah Vonleh 15min total 8min positive 7 min negative.
Vonleh Postivies
- His ‘physicality’… this is the center of his attraction. He’s 240lbs, 7-4 wingspan, huge hands. So he must be NBA ready.
- His Post D. I agree with the DX eval, however, he is bigger than his peers. In NBA, D Favors noted that about himself that he’s not big enough to hang with Centers… But Vonleh can handle those his size I believe. (Favors and Vonleh are about the same: DF= 6'10.25", 245, 9'2" reach.... NV 6-9.5, 247, 9'2" reach. But DF is more above the rim guy.)
- His offensive touch is great. 3pt capable, (nice stroke) face up 16 footer looks good, he has a left and right hook at this point that are good. 71% freethrow shooter. It is clear he has the hand eye coordination.
.
Vonleh Negs:
- Low BBIQ seems real. He has "the handles" to do spin moves and dribble between the legs but it has the appearance of being for show or simply rehearsed moves and not for legitimate effect. There were plenty of samples of getting into trouble with multiple defenders, and not looking for a pass or losing the ball. Also, not very endearing is the number of times he fell down in these difficult moments. To me, that is a psychological effect of being defeated or giving up. Not attractive. Most damning is his lack of BBIQ on D... Some of the lapses that were shown would have me gouging my eyes out as a coach. It is reasonable to me that he was limited to ~20ish mins per game.
Click to expand...

I don't know how Gordon lowpost game could be bad since he finishes 72 percent of his shots around the basket while Vonleh only finishes 59 percent. Granted many are dunks but still he has to be average at low post in order to still have 72 percent. The main reason why I like Gordon a tad over Vonleh is Gordon's ability to guard the SF position. My biggest concern with Gordon is his shooting but I don't think his shot is broken and that he can improve his shooting and FTs.
 
Harcher said:
And to compound the "opposites" issue on the Gordon/Vonleh debate, is that NV is a PF who Jazz have plenty of, and AG is really a SF which Jazz don't have.

Also, it seems clear to me why NV stock would rise during the pre-draft activities. His physical skillsets are easier to see and demonstrate: measurements and his hand-eye coordination. They are impressive. Gordon will not impress with his shooting prowess.

So between these two, it boils down to:
Will NV ever have the BBIQ to be a complete player?
Will AG ever obtain the shooting skill to be a complete player.

And do you take BPA or Need-based?

I choose Vonleh. The stuff he's missing can be pounded into him with time. And over time, AG will be as good as AK at shooting. That would be my prediction.
Click to expand...



I think you are forgetting one thing about Gordon, he works his butt off while AK never did. I think it is a toss up and I would be happy with either player, however I think I would go with Gordon. When two players are basically the same level then I look at positional need.
 
cowhide said:
I don't know how Gordon lowpost game could be bad since he finishes 72 percent of his shots around the basket while Vonleh only finishes 59 percent. Granted many are dunks but still he has to be average at low post in order to still have 72 percent. The main reason why I like Gordon a tad over Vonleh is Gordon's ability to guard the SF position. My biggest concern with Gordon is his shooting but I don't think his shot is broken and that he can improve his shooting and FTs.
Click to expand...

I don't remember the exact number, but Gordon only attempted a handful of jump hooks all season. His % is that high cause he dunked. A lot. And all of those dunks came off of cuts, put backs, and in transition. He didn't show a lot of footwork or touch in the low post at Arizona.
 
cowhide said:
I don't know how Gordon lowpost game could be bad since he finishes 72 percent of his shots around the basket while Vonleh only finishes 59 percent. Granted many are dunks but still he has to be average at low post in order to still have 72 percent. The main reason why I like Gordon a tad over Vonleh is Gordon's ability to guard the SF position. My biggest concern with Gordon is his shooting but I don't think his shot is broken and that he can improve his shooting and FTs.
Click to expand...

Lobs, transition, and garbage points. Also if he played in the Big 10 like Vonleh he wouldn't be close to 72%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top