I've been watching the 2024 NBA Draft class and it's been... weaker than usual

[marco102]

54 minutes ago, benhillboy said:

Damn he’s listed on college reference at 6’4”, they let that man rock some strength shoes or some shit.

His three point frequency and percentage screams as much just needed confirmation.  Let’s go Bryce!

Is this in reference to Bronny?  If so, in college they list them with shoes at the combine they do not.  I believe his height was overstated by an inch.

Not saying he's any good, but wanted to clarify why there was such a big discrepancy. 

[bird_dirt]

1 hour ago, benhillboy said:

Damn he’s listed on college reference at 6’4”, they let that man rock some strength shoes or some shit.

His three point frequency and percentage screams as much just needed confirmation.  Let’s go Bryce!

I think he’s sponsored by Converse

[marco102]

Quote

ROUND 1

1. Atlanta Hawks

 

Alex Sarr, PF/C, Perth (Australia) | Age: 19.0

The Hawks jumped all way from No. 10 to 1 in the draft lottery, a rare stroke of luck that gives the team a chance to select a different caliber of prospect than the one their front office was preparing to pick all season. In an interview at the combine, general manager Landry Fields said he plans to "cast a wide net" in evaluating the Hawks' options at No. 1, which makes sense in a class with no consensus top prospect. Fields flew to France at the conclusion of the combine to watch potential No. 1 pick candidate Zaccharie Risacher drop 14 points with 6 rebounds in a playoff game but was not in attendance for Risacher's breakout game two days later when he had a career-high 28 points.

At this stage, NBA executives don't have a firm grasp of what the Hawks might ultimately do, as word coming out of their front office is they are still at a very early stage of decision-making and have plenty of work to do in gathering information and finding alignment. Many around the league expect the Hawks to select Sarr with the top pick, as there are compelling reasons to consider him the best prospect in this class with his elite physical tools, mobility, defensive versatility, finishing ability and potential as a perimeter shooter. He'd fit in nicely in a frontcourt alongside the likes of Jalen Johnson and Onyeka Okongwu, and should develop into a formidable rim-protector who can also cover ground on the perimeter, which is attractive in minimizing the defensive shortcomings of Trae Young.

We'd expect Fields and the Hawks front office to consider other options here as well, including Risacher, Donovan Clingan and trade opportunities. -- Givony

 

Quote

14. Portland Trail Blazers (via Warriors)

Zach Edey, C, Purdue | Age: 22.0

Edey's incredible productivity and size profile makes him a unique option for teams looking to develop a big in this part of the draft. While it's probable he winds up as more of a situational role player in an NBA context due to his defensive limitations, it's also hard to totally rule out the type of impact he could still have as a play-finisher and screener. With two lottery picks and a collection of young perimeter players on the roster, Portland could stand to experiment here and shore up its depth behind DeAndre Ayton, considering Robert Williams III' struggles to stay healthy. -- Woo

Quote

4. San Antonio Spurs

Rob Dillingham, PG, Kentucky | Age: 19.3

As the only team holding two picks in the top 10, the Spurs have an intriguing opportunity to take multiple big swings as they work to build a competitive roster out around Victor Wembanyama. Considering their glaring need in the backcourt, expect San Antonio to target a guard, with players like Sheppard, Dillingham, Stephon Castle and Nikola Topic profiling as top candidates. In addition to order of preference, the other strategic question San Antonio has to answer is how to make these two picks work in conjunction: It could feasibly target a different position at No. 4, and still wind up with a guard it's comfortable with at No. 8.

Dillingham has been one of the most polarizing prospects in the draft, with some scouts projecting him as more of a microwave bench scorer due to his defensive shortcomings, and others seeing a Darius Garland-like upside if he can refine his game enough to handle a starting role. His shot-creation ability and offensive upside -- as well as the level of defensive cover he'd have with Wembanyama behind him -- makes him an intriguing upside bet for the Spurs specifically. -- Woo

 

Quote

8. San Antonio Spurs

Tidjane Salaun, PF, Cholet (France) | Age: 18.7

Salaun turned in an excellent performance last week in the French LNB playoffs and has closed the season on a more productive stretch offensively, showcasing his tools, energy, and flashes of talent as a stretch forward. Yet to turn 19, Salaun offers plenty of untapped upside, making him an intriguing lottery name in an uncertain draft where long-view organizations will want to swing big on potential.

San Antonio looks like a viable top-end landing spot for Salaun, particularly if it opts for a guard at No. 4; he might offer more optimal spacing and athleticism from the four spot than Jeremy Sochan in the long run, and as a potential complementary player alongside star countryman Wembanyama. -- Woo

Other prospects and who they think the Spurs will take.

Edited May 22 by marco102

[AHF]

17 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The lumbering slow bigs will absolutely be obsolete in the next five years.  There are more and more mobile bigs coming into the league, and the ones they will be replacing are your slow traditional bigs.  

I am extremely skeptical of this given that one of those low mobility bigs won a ring last year and another non-modern big is the favorite of the remaining starting centers to win a ring this year.  The idea that they would go from being the leading WS contributors on NBA championship rosters to obsolete and out of the league in 5 years is implausible to me.

There simply isn't a time in NBA history where you don't have a diversity of archetypes among the successful players at a given position.  

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

I am extremely skeptical of this given that one of those low mobility bigs won a ring last year and another non-modern big is the favorite of the remaining starting centers to win a ring this year.  The idea that they would go from being the leading WS contributors on NBA championship rosters to obsolete and out of the league in 5 years is implausible to me.

There simply isn't a time in NBA history where you don't have a diversity of archetypes among the successful players at a given position.  

We have already seen the throw it into the post and let the big back someone down for 5 seconds style of offense go the way of the dodo bird.  Why would anyone think that the nonmobile traditional center who isn't a shot creation hub like Joker has a snowball's chance in hell of having a future in the NBA?  Guys like Andre Drummond have been relegated to playing 10 mpg as it is.  With more mobile bigs on the horizon, these are the types that will get pushed out.  

[KB21]

To add to this, Joker is elite because he's one of the three best shot creators in the NBA along with Luka and Trae.  Guys like Boban Marjanovich and Andre Drummond are not shot creation hubs.  They are just big, lumbering bigs who get played off the floor.  When I talk about the traditional big, that's the style I'm talking about.  I think guys like Zubac and Valanciunas will ultimately get played off the floor as well.  Stephen Adams is at the end.  

So, if I were going to make a case for Clingan at #1, I would base it around his passing ability and his potential to be a creation hub on the short roll with his passing and not his traditional center traits.  The fact that he can only play one style of defense is a negative, but if he becomes an offensive hub with his passing, that would put more value on him than his defense will ultimately give him.  

[NBASupes]

44 minutes ago, AHF said:

I am extremely skeptical of this given that one of those low mobility bigs won a ring last year and another non-modern big is the favorite of the remaining starting centers to win a ring this year.  The idea that they would go from being the leading WS contributors on NBA championship rosters to obsolete and out of the league in 5 years is implausible to me.

There simply isn't a time in NBA history where you don't have a diversity of archetypes among the successful players at a given position.  

Some people are gonna die on prototypes without realizing there are always outliers and those outliers tend to defy odds and they tend to hit peaks that weren't close to being seen. 

35 minutes ago, KB21 said:

To add to this, Joker is elite because he's one of the three best shot creators in the NBA along with Luka and Trae.  Guys like Boban Marjanovich and Andre Drummond are not shot creation hubs.  They are just big, lumbering bigs who get played off the floor.  When I talk about the traditional big, that's the style I'm talking about.  I think guys like Zubac and Valanciunas will ultimately get played off the floor as well.  Stephen Adams is at the end.  

So, if I were going to make a case for Clingan at #1, I would base it around his passing ability and his potential to be a creation hub on the short roll with his passing and not his traditional center traits.  The fact that he can only play one style of defense is a negative, but if he becomes an offensive hub with his passing, that would put more value on him than his defense will ultimately give him.  

You got every excuse and refuse to accept any truth.

Joker wasn't close to being known as a shot creator as a prospect. He developed into this. What he was known for was his PnR ability and his dominating Capela at Hoop Summit practices which is why Denver said they drafted him for. 

Edited May 22 by NBASupes

[NBASupes]

You got every excuse why Gobert or Jokic was an outlier but refuse to accept that Edey and Clingan are doing outlier stuff too. I just don't understand how you can take such a heavy handed approach in a NBA that's more about mental acuity than anytime in history.

[NBASupes]

Look at the 4 teams left. 

All 4 teams got the some of the highest mental acuity players in the NBA. 

Make it make sense is all I ask

[benhillboy]

1 hour ago, marco102 said:

Is this in reference to Bronny?  If so, in college they list them with shoes at the combine they do not.  I believe his height was overstated by an inch.

Not saying he's any good, but wanted to clarify why there was such a big discrepancy. 

Yeah in reference to him, preciate it.  I don’t know why all levels don’t follow barefoot practice, who knows.   It’s like weighing with their wallet, phone, keys, necklace, & hat.  Or Omari Spelman clutching a box of iced honey buns.

Edited May 22 by benhillboy

[JeffS17]

53 minutes ago, AHF said:

I am extremely skeptical of this given that one of those low mobility bigs won a ring last year and another non-modern big is the favorite of the remaining starting centers to win a ring this year.  The idea that they would go from being the leading WS contributors on NBA championship rosters to obsolete and out of the league in 5 years is implausible to me.

There simply isn't a time in NBA history where you don't have a diversity of archetypes among the successful players at a given position.  

There will always be a place for outliers, but I do think @KB21 is correct on the offensive end.  Jokic is an elite facilitator and has other-worldly efficiency and touch around the rim.  There's no one else like him.  There's not much of a place for that type of game outside of him and he's 1of1.  You need to be mobile to be an elite defender and defense is likely where most of your impact is coming from as a big or at least what we need the most.

I would say the same thing for PGs, the small ones are getting slowly phased out because ball handling skills are more ubiquitous across all positions and heights.  It just makes sense to have more size on the court.  Trae is an exception to that because he's an elite ball handlers and elite facilitator.  Like Jokics offense makes up for his defensive weaknesses, so does Trae.  But picking a 6'0" guard that isn't absolutely generational wouldn't be prudent.

[theheroatl]

Quote

... which makes sense in a class with no consensus top prospect. 

Quote

 Many around the league expect the Hawks to select Sarr with the top pick. -- Givony

 

Sigh...

 

Everyone wants to say there is no consensus top pick but like 99% of the mocks have Sarr #1 with Risacher the only alternative. EITHER SAY ITS A CONSENSUS OR NOT.. WHICH IS IT DAMMIT

Edited May 22 by theheroatl

[AHF]

22 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

There will always be a place for outliers, but I do think @KB21 is correct on the offensive end.  Jokic is an elite facilitator and has other-worldly efficiency and touch around the rim.  There's no one else like him.  There's not much of a place for that type of game outside of him and he's 1of1.  You need to be mobile to be an elite defender and defense is likely where most of your impact is coming from as a big or at least what we need the most.

I would say the same thing for PGs, the small ones are getting slowly phased out because ball handling skills are more ubiquitous across all positions and heights.  It just makes sense to have more size on the court.  Trae is an exception to that because he's an elite ball handlers and elite facilitator.  Like Jokics offense makes up for his defensive weaknesses, so does Trae.  But picking a 6'0" guard that isn't absolutely generational wouldn't be prudent.

A couple points:

(1) The last 4 MVPs all have the traditional big skills and none of those MVPs belongs to a switchable big who can defend 4 positions.  On the DPOY, 4 of the last 5 won by big men have been won by an "obsolete" player and 1 has been won by a switchable big.  These "obsolete" players show they can hold their own against any large body, they can back down people in the post, and have varied added additional elements to their games to complement that.  More big bodies who don't fit the "modern" switchable, mobile big model will come that do the same.  I would expect to see more "switchable" bigs with big success because this is actually a truly dominant period for success for traditional bigs at the top of the center pecking order whether you are talking MVP or DPOY.  The idea that Rudy Gobert or Nikola Jokic are the last big that won't be able to switch onto three other positions that still manages to generate big numbers in the history of the game seems utterly implausible.  We had perimeter shooting bigs in the 80s.  We'll have Clint Capela, Shaq, Gobert, Wallace, etc. types in the future and they will have success.

(2)  We are talking about the current state of the game (where a low mobility big was MVP and NBA champion and another non-"modern" big is likely to win a ring this year) as if the game doesn't change.  And this can all change again with a single rule change.  Does anyone think the change to allow zone defenses and implementation of hand checking isn't a huge driver on both of these developments?  It isn't just that people got smart and figured out that 3's are better than post-ups.  It is also that 3's have become much easier to get and post-ups much harder due to rule changes and changes in how the game is called.  If the NBA decides to tweek things to make it easier to score inside and/or more difficult to score from 3pt range then things will adapt again.  If the NBA has shown anything over the years, it is that they aren't afraid to change the game and anyone betting on the game being static is betting against 50 years of history.  In fact I would say that it is even more likely a rule change would come if we found that "traditional" bigs could no longer succeed in the game (something that is absolutely not born out when you look at the success of Gobert, Jokic and Embiid let alone others who not notably mobile like Sabonis).  

The game will not be all bigs like Wemby and Sarr.  You will continue to find a diversity of styles at the position just like you found in the 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, and today.  What typically changes over time is the ratio of certain types of players in different eras but you still find diversity.

[NBASupes]

19 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

There will always be a place for outliers, but I do think @KB21 is correct on the offensive end.  Jokic is an elite facilitator and has other-worldly efficiency and touch around the rim.  There's no one else like him.  There's not much of a place for that type of game outside of him and he's 1of1.  You need to be mobile to be an elite defender and defense is likely where most of your impact is coming from as a big or at least what we need the most.

I would say the same thing for PGs, the small ones are getting slowly phased out because ball handling skills are more ubiquitous across all positions and heights.  It just makes sense to have more size on the court.  Trae is an exception to that because he's an elite ball handlers and elite facilitator.  Like Jokics offense makes up for his defensive weaknesses, so does Trae.  But picking a 6'0" guard that isn't absolutely generational wouldn't be prudent.

Let's discuss outliers and their commonalities. 

[JeffS17]

6 minutes ago, AHF said:

A couple points:

(1) The last 4 MVPs all have the traditional big skills and none of those MVPs belongs to a switchable big who can defend 4 positions.  On the DPOY, 4 of the last 5 won by big men have been won by an "obsolete" player and 1 has been won by a switchable big.  These "obsolete" players show they can hold their own against any large body, they can back down people in the post, and have varied added additional elements to their games to complement that.  More big bodies who don't fit the "modern" switchable, mobile big model will come that do the same.  The idea that Rudy Gobert is the last traditional big without a 3pt shot that will generate big numbers in the history of the game seems utterly implausible.  We had perimeter shooting bigs in the 80s.  We'll have Clint Capela, Shaq, Gobert, Wallace, etc. types in the future and they will have success.

(2)  We are talking about the current state of the game (where a low mobility big was MVP and NBA champion and another non-"modern" big is likely to win a ring this year) as if the game doesn't change.  And this can all change again with a single rule change.  Does anyone think the change to allow zone defenses and implementation of hand checking isn't a huge driver on both of these developments?  It isn't just that people got smart and figured out that 3's are better than post-ups.  It is also that 3's have become much easier to get and post-ups much harder due to rule changes and changes in how the game is called.  If the NBA decides to tweek things to make it easier to score inside and/or more difficult to score from 3pt range then things will adapt again.  If the NBA has shown anything over the years, it is that they aren't afraid to change the game and anyone betting on the game being static is betting against 50 years of history.  In fact I would say that it is even more likely a rule change would come if we found that "traditional" bigs could no longer succeed in the game (something that is absolutely not born out when you look at the success of Gobert, Jokic and Embiid let alone others who not notably mobile like Sabonis).  

The game will not be all bigs like Wemby and Sarr.  You will continue to find a diversity of styles at the position just like you found in the 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, and today.  What typically changes over time is the ratio of certain types of players in different eras but you still find diversity.

Agree with most of this, but calling Giannis, Embiid, Jokic traditional is not really in line with how I think of a traditional center or big.  Those guys have a lot of depth to their games.  They all take threes, they can all dribble and pass well... those are not traditional big skills.  No one is arguing traditional big skillsets are irrelevant, obviously things like rebounding and paint protection are essential, just that to be successful you need to also have more to your game. 

For Edey, he can't move and defend well, can't switch, can't space the floor, which are the primary things I want for us to find in this draft.  Scoring from the post is great but would completely stagnate our offense.  He is simply antithetical to what Quin is trying to do with our roster on offense and defense.  He doesn't fit with us at all.

[theheroatl]

28 minutes ago, AHF said:

(2)  We are talking about the current state of the game (where a low mobility big was MVP and NBA champion and another non-"modern" big is likely to win a ring this year) as if the game doesn't change.  

Um what.. I wouldn't call Jokic or Embiid low mobility... I would actually say the opposite

 

These guys are like Al Horford on steroids

 

Valanciunas and Clint Capela  are low mobility bigs.

Edited May 22 by theheroatl

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

Agree with most of this, but calling Giannis, Embiid, Jokic traditional is not really in line with how I think of a traditional center or big. 

Giannis isn't in this group for me.  You can feel free to include him but I don't see him as someone who primarily lines up against opposing centers.  He has been more of a combo forward for his career.

Jokic and Embiid are perfect "80's center" type players in the mold of low mobility big men or guys like David Robinson, Hakeem, etc. who have always been a part of the game and were not switchable players like the "modern" type.  It is impossible for me not to look at them when they left college and see them fitting in very well with many of the 80's centers.

If you are saying that centers will no longer be able to only rebound and post up then sure I would agree that nearly every big is asked to expand their skillset beyond that point (although I'm not sure that DPOY and leading WS producer for the championship favorite Minnesota T-Wolves Rudy Gobert really has this type of depth).  

Quote

Those guys have a lot of depth to their games.  They all take threes, they can all dribble and pass well... those are not traditional big skills. 

I think that is a little simplistic.  Wilt led the league in assists and we've seen plenty of other big men who could pass out of the post.  We've had a wide variety of big men who could shoot perimeter jumpers over the years even if they were mostly 2's rather than 3's so saying their range has expanded some is kind of a duh thing for me.  It isn't a sign that Ewing, Smits, Hakeem, Robinson, etc. would have been unable to take 3's if they had been developed in an era with an emphasis on 3's like today's game.  You can even look back at guys like Arvydas Sabonis who were well known for both their perimeter shooting and playmaking while also and obviously not "mobile" in the sense the word is being used here.  Just saying that these skills have been seen in the game even 50+ years ago among bigs and that it is hardly surprising that they get more developmental emphasis in an era where you can't iso another guy in the post the way you could back then.

 

As far as Edey, I'm not talking about him.  I'm talking about the future Shaq 2.0.  The future Gobert 2.0.  The future Arvydas Sabonis 2.0.  The future Hakeem 2.0.  The future Ewing 2.0.  The future Jokic 2.0.

These guys are not the kind of mobile Wemby / JJJ / Sarr types of bigs.  They will have their place in the game going forward even if the emphasis on skills development means they shoot more 3's than their counterparts did 40 years ago.

 

[theheroatl]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10121859-how-the-2024-nba-combine-changed-our-latest-mock-draft

Alex Sarr had been our projected No. 1 overall pick for the few months prior to the NBA combine. But he'd been a soft No. 1. Even today, there is still no consensus answer for who's the top prospect. Sarr fits with a lot of lineups. His archetype—a 7-foot switchable defender with some ball-handling and shotmaking skill—remains highly coveted. And theoretically, no other prospect offers the same type of upside at both ends.

But talking with scouts and executives in Chicago, the level of confidence in Sarr's No. 1 overall potential didn't feel overly strong. Questions about his offensive impact for the first pick were brought up.

And then there is Zaccharie Risacher, who's currently playing in the LNB Pro A playoffs. General manager Landry Fields, assistant GM Kyle Korver and coach Quin Snyder made it to France for JL Bourg's first game against Nanterre, with Risacher scoring 14 points in 23 minutes.

The 19-year-old followed up by exploding for a season-high 28 points in 29 minutes. Despite the loss, he was able to showcase his signature shotmaking, improving perimeter self-creation and athleticism around the basket.

Scouts ultimately seem to have a comfort level with Risacher's game, which feels highly translatable based on his positional wing size (6'8"), 38.8 percent three-point shooting, the eye test on his mechanics, the fluidity of his movement and leaping, his foot speed to defend the point of attack and his tools to guard multiple positions and contest jump shots.

And in a draft that's lacking surefire stars, the Hawks could be more inclined to play it safer with a high-floor, three-and-D prospect who's still extremely young and has room to grow as a shot-creator.

Risacher may look even more appealing to Atlanta after AJ Griffin played just 20 games and Saddiq Bey tore his ACL. For now before workouts, the French wing has been moved to the No. 1 spot in our updated mock draft board.

 

-----

 

I agree with the sentiment above.... I think Risacher has some real star power. I definitely implore you guys to watch the way he plays (with aggressiveness) 

 

 

 

More specifically look at this drive:

 

 

Edited May 22 by theheroatl

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

Um what.. I wouldn't call Jokic or Embiid low mobility... I would actually say the opposite

 

These guys are like Al Horford on steroids

 

Valanciunas and Clint Capela  are low mobility bigs.

I think you are visiting an alternative land of revisionist history if you think this is how Jokic looked as a prospect.  This is the kind of view that scouts had about him:

Quote

An average athlete lacking great speed and leaping ability … Foot speed is a big liability. He may struggle to stay in front of NBA athletes at the center position"

As for Embiid, he doesn't not switch onto forwards on a regular basis.  He guards the opposing center and helps on rim protection.  That is NOT what is being talked about with "switchable, modern" centers like JJJ and Wemby.  So I would apply whatever label to Embiid that you apply to David Robinson.  Robinson is one of the flagship 1980's centers.  Those guys are not going to disappear from the game just because they are not the switch forward archetype that Sarr is looking to deliver.

And I say that as someone who is very excited about Sarr as a potential picks for the Hawks in large part exactly because of that switchable profile defensively.  My only point is that this is not the only path to success at the center position or for the NBA.  You can have guys who are "centers", who are less mobile/agile, who are not as good from the perimeter, who aren't great playmakers, etc. etc. but who carve out a role for success and perhaps even win a DPOY on their way to an NBA title even in this ancient year of 2024.

[marco102]

SSS alert, but didn't realize he hit his final 19 free throws.  That's pretty impressive. 

 

Edited May 22 by marco102