Following Potential 2025 Draftees

[NUMBERICA]

ace bailey might be the perfect example of that for me. wildly inconsistent. despite his 17 and 7 averages, he just wasn't very efficient over the course of the season, had extremely low assist numbers, yet he's a top 3 lock for me and it isn't close simply because he's a 6'9" SG who is a plus athlete and with a pure stroke (a pure stroke that didn't go in all that often). he has all the tools - at least on paper for both ends of the floor that the nba values, hence i probably have him higher than he deserves otherwise based on his production.

if he hits, he's a killer on both ends of the floor, but the likelihood that he misses is also pretty high.

the best things that one can say about bailey that are legit positives are that he plays really hard, cares defensively and he's one of the youngest dudes in the class.

Co-signed. I like VJ and Tre, but slightly undersized guards that hustle and play defense aren’t exactly the rarest archetype, nor is a shoot first SG that doesn’t play defense.

You hope Johnson’s defensive issue is one that is mostly of effort and that you can correct it. I might just be wrong on VJ, but I kind of have a hard time seeing him being worthy of the 3rd pick.

Bailey has problems, but ceiling isn’t one of them. Feels like you can shore up his shot selection problem with good old-fashioned coaching and development. The passing might never be good, but I think it can be improved and also shored up by other players.

 

[Elizah Huge]

I don’t know what his numbers ended at but in February, Tre Johnson had only allowed 0.788 points per possession and an opponent field goal percentage of 36.3%.

 

[KqWIN]

I'm curious what people think about the following: Player Type vs Player Grade when setting up a big board.

I think there are some player types that I value and frankly the NBA values more than others and how do you factor that in when the best player grades are for the least valuable player types?

For example, I don't have any question that Tre Johnson and Derik Queen should have a higher grade as a prospect than Kas. They were both more productive and more consistent. They both have elite qualities about them. However, I personally value the type of player that I project Kas to be vs what I project from them. So potentially they are more likely to hit within their player types, but Kas, who might be less likely to hit, if he does would be more valuable. Does that make sense?

I think it could be argued that we are often wrong when assigning a player type, but I would also argue we are often wrong when we assign a player grade.

Thoughts?

I get what you're saying. For me this is apparent when comparing VJ and Tre. I think you could make the argument that Tre's better within his archetype and the very top of his archetype is higher than that of VJ.....but I like VJ's archetype so much more. If you go down the list of players within VJ's archetype of love them all, from Jrue down to someone like Melton. I can't say the same for someone like Tre Johnson. Of course I like the top end outcomes like Booker or Herro, but if he falls short of that you will find a lot of players who I find to be overrated.

 

[homeytennis]

From the Portsmouth Invitational yesterday three guys that did well imho: Mathew Cleveland 6'7" guard from Miami (Fla), RJ Felton 6'3" guard from East Carolina and Tysen Degenhardt 6'8" forward from Boise State. This would be for the second round picks or UDFA signing.

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm curious what people think about the following: Player Type vs Player Grade when setting up a big board.

I think there are some player types that I value and frankly the NBA values more than others and how do you factor that in when the best player grades are for the least valuable player types?

For example, I don't have any question that Tre Johnson and Derik Queen should have a higher grade as a prospect than Kas. They were both more productive and more consistent. They both have elite qualities about them. However, I personally value the type of player that I project Kas to be vs what I project from them. So potentially they are more likely to hit within their player types, but Kas, who might be less likely to hit, if he does would be more valuable. Does that make sense?

I think it could be argued that we are often wrong when assigning a player type, but I would also argue we are often wrong when we assign a player grade.

Thoughts?

I am a sucker for big athletic scoring wings. It's why I liked whitmore so much.

I guess of the guys I know anything about Ace would probably fit that profile best?

Ant is the best current NBA example of the type of player I like best

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk

 

[Elizah Huge]

I am a sucker for big athletic scoring wings. It's why I liked whitmore so much.

I guess of the guys I know anything about Ace would probably fit that profile best?

Ant is the best current NBA example of the type of player I like best

Sent from my OPD2203 using Tapatalk

I think Dylan Harper is a guy you’d really like. He’s a PG but he’s 6’6 (same height as Ant) and can do a ton of stuff offensively. Not as athletic but has better footwork than Ant.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

I think Dylan Harper is a guy you’d really like. He’s a PG but he’s 6’6 (same height as Ant) and can do a ton of stuff offensively. Not as athletic but has better footwork than Ant.

definitely more refined, more skilled and has a more mature game than Ant coming out of college. but yeah, definitely fits that great size for his position mold fish is talking about.

 

[KqWIN]

My enthusiasm for drafting Ace would be come down to his willingness to change. He's kind of like the Deandre Ayton of wing scorers. Everything he does is tilted towards finding his mid range jumper. Ayton could decide to be an all star by playing in a more optimal way, but time and time again he has shown no interest in being a better player and prefers to do things his own way instead. If Ace is moldable, he's a great prospect.

I'm still most interested in looking at the decision at 5 as this is the most likely draft position. Given Ainge's draft history, I'd be pretty certain that he'd take the remaining blue chip (VJ, Ace, Tre), but for me I'm undecided on how to rank Tre/Kas/Fears/Kon. Tre is the default pick and probably deserves to be, but I think you can make arguments for any of those guys over him.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

Ant is the best current NBA example of the type of player I like best

I think Dylan Harper is a guy you’d really like. He’s a PG but he’s 6’6 (same height as Ant) and can do a ton of stuff offensively. Not as athletic but has better footwork than Ant.

Ant is 6-4 not that tall

 

[NUMBERICA]

Ant is 6-4 not that tall

I don’t know how often this needs to be clarified (probably for all of time; thanks, NBA), but that is a without shoes measurement and for almost all of NBA history, they used in-shoes measurements AND rounded up.

Ant is the same size as Michael Jordan.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I don’t know how often this needs to be clarified (probably for all of time; thanks, NBA), but that is a without shoes measurement and for almost all of NBA history, they used in-shoes measurements AND rounded up.

Ant is the same size as Michael Jordan.

Still not tall for nba standards.

 

[idiot]

I don’t know how often this needs to be clarified (probably for all of time; thanks, NBA), but that is a without shoes measurement and for almost all of NBA history, they used in-shoes measurements AND rounded up.

Ant is the same size as Michael Jordan.

The tendency that really irks me is when someone uses without-shoes measurements when they don't like a guy, and with-shoes measurements when they like someone else.

Donovan started out 6-3 (which would be the standard throughout NBA history), then as people tired of him (and to be fair, as the NBA started emphasizing without-shoes measurements more), he became 6-1 and the same as Conley.