I think about tiers differently every year, so either I'm evolving, or there's no right way to think about it, lol.hmmmm, Kon does have some deficiencies in those areas. I don't know how bad but if the numbers are that bad then there might be cause to worry. I can see that.
But we are talking about tiers of players, implying you won't consider those players of a lower tier until everyone from the current tier is taken.
Kon has some warts but so do Ace/VJ/Tre. Is it a matter of solvable warts vs unsolvable warts? Or is it just athleticism puts you in a higher tier no matter what? I am unclear how everyone else defines tiers. Is it not effectiveness and quality that defines tiers? Or perhaps its projecting the effectiveness and quality into the NBA that defines tiers.
The reason I have Ace/VJ/Tre in a higher tier is:
- Ace is capable of making shots that you only see from star players and the things he needs to work on should/could improve with coaching/maturity.
- Tre had the 2nd/3rd best production in the class for a Freshman. He would be in Harper's tier if he was a little more well rounded.
- VJ had similar production to the lower tier, but his athleticism/defensive play making puts him the higher tier.
All 3 have the size and athleticism to feel confident that they will fit in the NBA
I think it's clear those are the 3-5 guys, and then I think it's perfectly fine if you have personal preferences for anyone else. Like I said, I have Kas in that tier, not because his production/etc. would justify it, but because I like him and his player archetype better than Ace/Tre for example. If you like the stuff that Kon brings more than the others then I don't see a problem with having him in the same tier. This is all subjective.
Last edited: