Zach Edey Conundrum - Could Edey be the next great Atlanta Hawk or is he the next Cam Reddish

[KB21]

On 6/17/2024 at 5:36 PM, bird_dirt said:

Yes, KB. That is exactly what he is saying. Why do you keep asking folks who suggest drafting Edey to confirm their suggestion of drafting Edey?

I’m just blown away by [] it. 

[Hawkish]

On 6/17/2024 at 6:24 PM, KB21 said:

I’m just blown away by [rudeness deleted] of it. 

I’m blown away by your rudeness towards fellow armchair GMs.  I generally don’t lean towards slow players (as you don’t), but I can envision a circumstance where Edey is a weapon/advantage.

[KB21]

 

[macdaddy]

I'm not seeing how the knocks on Edey don't also apply to Clingan.   I think they can both be decent NBA players.  Not seeing that one is head and shoulders above the other but what do i know. 

[KB21]

2 hours ago, macdaddy said:

I'm not seeing how the knocks on Edey don't also apply to Clingan.   I think they can both be decent NBA players.  Not seeing that one is head and shoulders above the other but what do i know. 

Defense.  Clingan moves better in game.  Reaction time is better.  Far better rim protector.  

[macdaddy]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Defense.  Clingan moves better in game.  Reaction time is better.  Far better rim protector.  

Here's a few clips outside the lane.  it is pretty impressive laterally for his size.  

 

[NBASupes]

@KB21

 

[JayBirdHawk]

5. True or false: Zach Edey will be an NBA starter

Zach Edey

PURDUE • C • #15

7-4, 299 lbs

PPG25.2

RPG12.2

BPG2.2

A historic college player, can Zach Edey's game translate to the NBA?

View Profile

Finkelstein: False. The most likely outcome for Edey is a back-up big, mostly because he can only guard ball-screens in drop coverage, but I don't think it's out of the question if he gets on a team that plays that coverage exclusively and they have an opportunity. He's not a great fit for the NBA game, but his history of continued improvement is something we don't talk enough about. 

Boone: False. Edey has been a top-30 prospect on my Big Board for a year now so to be clear: I believe in his skill set and think he will be a useful NBA player. You can't just ignore his size and production at the highest level of the sport. Some of those skills will translate. But some of his weaknesses will be exacerbated in the NBA, too. He's worth a first-round pick and I'd expect he has a fruitful career as a rotational center who produces for stretches and makes spot-starts from time to time, but is never a full-time starter.

Salerno: False. OK, you have now realized I've said false for all five answers. Edey is the most polarizing player in this class because if you asked 10 people where you think he should/will get drafted, you would get a different answer every time. Some aspects of his game should translate to the next level, but I have a hard time believing he will be anything but a role player at the next level -- and that's OK!

 

 

2024 NBA Draft true or false: Donovan Clingan worthy of No. 1 overall? Bronny James goes to Lakers at No. 17? - CBSSports.com

 

[AHF]

On 6/17/2024 at 12:55 PM, thecampster said:

Who the Hawks take is dependent on who they can trade.  Of their top 8 players right now, no one is safe. not even DJM, Trae or Jalen (though it would take something ridiculous for him to go). 

But scenarios

DJM or Trae is traded, Reed Shepherd is on the table.

The single biggest issue with Trae and DJM playing together is neither is big enough to defend 2's.  Why would we repeat this with Shep especially when Bufkin has this same issue and is already primed to fill the combo guard minutes that are available?

Quote

Hunter is traded, first a haul comes back and either of Holland or Risacher is on the table, depending on where we land pick wise (1 vs 2, etc).

You or your sources are way more optimistic than I am on a Hunter trade.  I do not anticipate anything that I would call a "haul" coming back which is why I'm inclined towards assuming he returns next year.  He is a valuable wing who is a borderline starter or first wing off the bench depending on which team would add him and he is overpaid for that type of role.  That doesn't generally scream "haul" in terms of trade value from my perspective especially when you add in his injury history.

Quote

Clint is traded or OO is traded (yes that's possible right now), multiple bigs are on the table, especially if picks come back to allow for it.  Lets play that one out.  OO is traded, you're either getting a high player or a top 10 pick back.  You're minus 1 big.  Edey, Clingan are now on the table.  Clint/OO stays, you might take Sarr and let him develop at College Park.  But you trade OO/Clint  and expect the new center to produce, it won't be Sarr. He isn't ready.

I personally don't see a scenario where OO needs to go and think it is essential to keep him for scheme versatility if you draft Clingan or Edey.  I agree that if you draft Sarr he is only playing backup minutes at the center spot at best his rookie year.  

Quote

What I'm listing above are the if/then statements of contingency boards. We have a bunch of Contingency boards right now dealing with possible trade backs (there are many on the table right now, discussed, being negotiated and playing teams off each other...you've seen media leaks).  There is not 1 player in this year's draft who would replace one of our starters in the starting lineup without a trade (except maybe Zach Edey).  That's it...no trade...Sarr nor Clingan is not playing over Clint/OO....no trade and Risacher isn't playing over Hunter/Jalen.  No trade and Reed Shepherd isn't starting over Trae or DJM or Kobe or Garrison Matthews or Bogi for that matter.  Without trades, there is almost zero 1st year value from anyone we'd draft with the top pick.  

The first part of this is reasonable - i.e., that without one or multiple trades you would expect our draft pick to come off the bench to start the year.  But that doesn't equate to getting almost zero 1st year value.  It is a common thing to see several players in any draft coming from outside of the lottery who deliver 1st year value.  Why should it be so unlikely for this year's lottery picks?  Example:  Trayce Jackson-Davis put up 4.8 Win Shares last year as a rookie after being taken with the 58th pick.  That would have ranked #3 on last year's Hawks team.  (Plenty of other examples like Jaime Jaquez Jr., Toumani Camara, Brandon Podziemski, Cam Whitemore, Jordan Hawkins, etc. and last year wasn't a particularly great draft for this.)

Quote

The above is a sliver of why you aren't hearing anything in the news.  Teams with the top pick have holes. They got the top pick because they suck. We don't suck. We managed to win 36 games despite most of our player games missed being to our top 8 and having a huge amount of player games missed. We don't suck, none of our starters suck, so in a weak draft, nobody comes in and takes a starting job. Teams with the top pick usually aren't in the luxury tax. Without trades, we are.  We are playing out 2 things right now. Who we draft and who we trade. Both are going to happen but we're keeping 2 secrets at once. If we had holes to fill in the starting lineup, who we draft wouldn't be a mystery. There would be no reason to keep that secret. But because we have players to move and that 1st pick is our golden chip in the game, we can't let anyone know "why" we're soliciting them for trades (picks or players).

I've long said that what happens without trades is more important than our draft pick for next year and so largely agree with this.

Quote

Its nice to say, "take this guy, he has the most upside" but this is a 3d chess scenario, not hungry hungry hippos.  Instead of just responding to everything I say with he can't guard on the perimeter, start thinking about the myriad of scenarios that need to play out this offseason. Don't be so tied to your argument, you lose sight of the big picture. This isn't your normal #1 pick season.

I agree it is definitely not your normal scenario for team drafting #1 and isn't your normal pool of talent at #1.  That said, I still think my general bias is that teams are better taking someone like Jalen Johnson who takes some time to blossom rather than someone like Brandon Clarke who will be much more productive right away but has a notably lower ceiling.  Jalens hitting move the needle for your roster towards contender status.  Getting nice role players like Clarke don't.  

[kg01]

19 hours ago, NBASupes said:

@KB21

 

Man it's gonna be tough losing you to the Jazz or Blazers, hotSupes.  But good luck over on Blazersquawk or Jazzsquawk.  Don't be a stranger. 

[KB21]

10 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Man it's gonna be tough losing you to the Jazz or Blazers, hotSupes.  But good luck over on Blazersquawk or Jazzsquawk.  Don't be a stranger. 

Edey doesn't have a promise.

[NBASupes]

11 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Man it's gonna be tough losing you to the Jazz or Blazers, hotSupes.  But good luck over on Blazersquawk or Jazzsquawk.  Don't be a stranger. 

Seems like most of the Squawk will be Wizards fans next year. 

[kg01]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

Seems like most of the Squawk will be Wizards fans next year. 

Not me.  I'll rationalize whoever the Hawks pick and will absolutely turn against whoever they don't. 

[AHF]

15 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Man it's gonna be tough losing you to the Jazz or Blazers, hotSupes.  But good luck over on Blazersquawk or Jazzsquawk.  Don't be a stranger. 

Nah.  Supes didn't abandon ship when Al left.  Edey going somewhere else isn't changing anything.

[kg01]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Nah.  Supes didn't abandon ship when Al left.  Edey going somewhere else isn't changing anything.

I feel like a piece of him died a little when Al left him. 

[thecampster]

2 hours ago, kg01 said:

I feel like a piece of him died a little when Al left him. 

He's like a liver, a small piece can die but cut it out and it'll regenerate on its own.

[thecampster]

and for the record, once we make our pick, I'll root for the pick. I won't forget who we should have picked (nor do I expect anyone else to forget their stance). If the pick stinks on ice, I'll say so, even if its my guy.

[thecampster]

3 hours ago, AHF said:

The single biggest issue with Trae and DJM playing together is neither is big enough to defend 2's.  Why would we repeat this with Shep especially when Bufkin has this same issue and is already primed to fill the combo guard minutes that are available?

You or your sources are way more optimistic than I am on a Hunter trade.  I do not anticipate anything that I would call a "haul" coming back which is why I'm inclined towards assuming he returns next year.  He is a valuable wing who is a borderline starter or first wing off the bench depending on which team would add him and he is overpaid for that type of role.  That doesn't generally scream "haul" in terms of trade value from my perspective especially when you add in his injury history.

I personally don't see a scenario where OO needs to go and think it is essential to keep him for scheme versatility if you draft Clingan or Edey.  I agree that if you draft Sarr he is only playing backup minutes at the center spot at best his rookie year.  

The first part of this is reasonable - i.e., that without one or multiple trades you would expect our draft pick to come off the bench to start the year.  But that doesn't equate to getting almost zero 1st year value.  It is a common thing to see several players in any draft coming from outside of the lottery who deliver 1st year value.  Why should it be so unlikely for this year's lottery picks?  Example:  Trayce Jackson-Davis put up 4.8 Win Shares last year as a rookie after being taken with the 58th pick.  That would have ranked #3 on last year's Hawks team.  (Plenty of other examples like Jaime Jaquez Jr., Toumani Camara, Brandon Podziemski, Cam Whitemore, Jordan Hawkins, etc. and last year wasn't a particularly great draft for this.)

I've long said that what happens without trades is more important than our draft pick for next year and so largely agree with this.

I agree it is definitely not your normal scenario for team drafting #1 and isn't your normal pool of talent at #1.  That said, I still think my general bias is that teams are better taking someone like Jalen Johnson who takes some time to blossom rather than someone like Brandon Clarke who will be much more productive right away but has a notably lower ceiling.  Jalens hitting move the needle for your roster towards contender status.  Getting nice role players like Clarke don't.  

To be fair, the deals mentioned are part of an already heavily filtered list. If I shared everything I've heard and especially what I've filtered out as BS, the board's head would explode.

Examples of BS filtered to me,

Bufkin and Gueye and #1 out for a big player back.  The lunacy of this one gave me that old man shrunk up face.  There was a $35 millionish salary mismatch + the ridiculousness of it all.

There was a deal that involved all 3 of Clint, DJM and Hunter in a 4 team trade that was so ridiculous and violated so many rules I had to ask my dude (not a legitimate source) where in the hell he heard that.  TBH, he forgot to take it off the list he shared with me. He too had dismissed it but forgot to remove it.

Then there was a semi believable deal involving DJM until I realized they were adding our 2025 1st in with it (that we don't even own).  

The above you referenced was just me pulling off a list where I'd eliminated the impossible, found it plausible given the right circumstances and typed it up in extreme irritation.  Good chance there is something implausible in there.  I'm really tired of silly season and uninformed opinions.

Your post, polite, well thought out. Never even touched on anything I disagreed with what you said because of how it was presented and how well thought out it was.

[kg01]

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

and for the record, once we make our pick, I'll root for the pick. I won't forget who we should have picked (nor do I expect anyone else to forget their stance). If the pick stinks on ice, I'll say so, even if its my guy.

Naw, you're doing it all wrong sir. You're supposed to scour the earth for any insignificant stat that paints your failed pick in a positive light.  Then hammer the board with it as a last gasp at saving face.

I have a name for that practice, but if I reveal it the mods will get showered with complaints and I'll get a well-deserved time out probably. 

[thecampster]

ESPN’s Jonathan Givony on Zach Edey: “Edey, ranked No. 16 in ESPN's Top 100, is drawing interest from teams that are drafting in front and behind Miami, with every team in the back half of the lottery after San Antonio said to be in the market for a center. Utah, Portland and Sacramento were some of his latest stops on the workout circuit, and he might end up visiting the Los Angeles Lakers as well. Edey's combination of size, power and intensity has been difficult to contain in a workout setting, as there simply aren't many players in this draft equipped to slow him down.”

 

Miami is at 15

Utah at 10

Portland at 7/14

Sacramento 13.

So possible landing sports for Edey as of right now are 7/10/13/14/15/17.

 

Edited June 19 by thecampster