What's new
By:

Following potential 2017 draftees...

BTP said:
I don't know why I even bothered rephrasing my question even though I basically knew you'd dodge what I was interested in. I guess I'm insane.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I really have no idea what you are asking. They won a ton of games and won all the games in the Tourney. Not sure what "context" you want. They were the best team in what's considered the best conference and won the Championship.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Sorry, I really have no idea what you are asking. They won a ton of games and won all the games in the Tourney. Not sure what "context" you want. They were the best team in what's considered the best conference and won the Championship.
Click to expand...

"Opponents dared them to shoot, resulting in a lot of open looks"
"They played the same sets like the Jayhawks do where they overpass it on the perimeter and end up taking poor shots"
"They wanted to attack the basket, but lacked firepower to create enough space in the paint"

Those are examples of how you'd characterize something. I watched a total of 1 game of the Tar Heels, leaving me in a position, where I'd like to understand the context around Justin Jackson. Just to get my imagination going and to get a feel for how to interpret his development.
 
BTP said:
"Opponents dared them to shoot, resulting in a lot of open looks"
"They played the same sets like the Jayhawks do where they overpass it on the perimeter and end up taking poor shots"
"They wanted to attack the basket, but lacked firepower to create enough space in the paint"

Those are examples of how you'd characterize something. I watched a total of 1 game of the Tar Heels, leaving me in a position, where I'd like to understand the context around Justin Jackson. Just to get my imagination going and to get a feel for how to interpret his development.
Click to expand...

Then go watch some more games.

They were a pretty deep team without much weakness. They had NBA size at every position, besides PG, and had were veteran led and didnt rely on any Freshman besides Tony Bradley, who was just a backup. I'm not a UNC scout, so I can't give you a detailed breakdown of their entire offense. If you want that, get on youtube and look for full games, there are plenty of them.
 
NCJazz said:
Ford has us picking the two Latvians Andzejs Pasecniks and Kurucs. Backup center is still a place of need and Kurucs has definite long term potential. Maybe see him in 3 years.
Click to expand...

I saw this too, I don't think Kurucs is there at 30
 
Looking at Chad Ford's latest mock, he's got some picks that appear more realistic to me than DX ---

** John Collins at 16
** Bam at #20
** Justin Jackson down to #21
Etc.

I just think Ojeleye will eventually find his way into the late first round.
 
Catchall said:
Looking at Chad Ford's latest mock, he's got some picks that appear more realistic to me than DX ---

** John Collins at 16
** Bam at #20
** Justin Jackson down to #21
Etc.

I just think Ojeleye will eventually find his way into the late first round.
Click to expand...

Kennard at 12

Z. Collins at 14


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Catchall said:
The way Kennard has been shooting the ball, he may be this draft's version of Devin Booker. I don't know if he goes quite that high, but he could be close. Collins would be a great pick for the Jazz, but might not be as high a priority to other teams.
Click to expand...

I don't see the athleticism with Kennard, Booker recorded some of the best times in pretty much all lateral drills in the history of the combines. He also measured like 3 inches longer wingspan than Kennard.
 
Catchall said:
Really? That sounds odd. I don't believe it. A private workout with the Lakers, or the pro-day in LA? Seems like he should be around 33 inches at best.

38.5" is practically like Dennis Mitchell
Click to expand...
Dennis Mitchell? The sprinter from back in the day?

Sent from my LG-K540 using Tapatalk
 
dytide said:
I saw this too, I don't think Kurucs is there at 30
Click to expand...

Intl guys dont like getting picked at the end of the first round due to the salary constraints. Always the risk of waiting 3 years before they come over, but of course does give the drafting team more roster freedom while they develop.
 
stitches said:
I don't see the athleticism with Kennard, Booker recorded some of the best times in pretty much all lateral drills in the history of the combines. He also measured like 3 inches longer wingspan than Kennard.
Click to expand...

Ford said the Kennard really surprised the scouts in the workout with his athleticism and was draining 3s at an amazing rate. Teams are dying for shooting so I could see it.
 
NCJazz said:
Intl guys dont like getting picked at the end of the first round due to the salary constraints. Always the risk of waiting 3 years before they come over, but of course does give the drafting team more roster freedom while they develop.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if anyone who draft Kurucs bring him over. Seems like a stash guy.
 
Catchall said:
Really? That sounds odd. I don't believe it. A private workout with the Lakers, or the pro-day in LA? Seems like he should be around 33 inches at best.

38.5" is practically like Dennis Mitchell
Click to expand...

Why? Kennard isnt the type of player who uses vertical athleticism in his game. Can you even recall a Luke Kennard dunk? Googling "Luke Kennard Dunk" pretty much just gives results from his HS/AAU days and none from Duke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83TAxI7wMVs

Not an impressive dunk or anything, but he jumps fairly high.

No one should care about his vertical measurements though, he isnt going to use them in a game unless it's breakaway attempts. He doesnt have a big enough standing reach to even attempt taking off in traffic given the load time he probably needs to reach his peak vertical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top