The 2015 KF.com Draft Big Board Part 1: Hit The Lottery

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#1
This year, some of the board's top prospect hounds and I are putting together a new feature - the Draft Big Board. We're going to be writing up the players we find most interesting in the draft, and splitting them up into five general tiers. Our first tier is ready (though I'll be updating it with stats from the draft combine once that happens) and the other tiers will follow when they're finished. While these threads will be useful for draft prospect reference, they're also intended for discussion threads, so chat away! Without further ado, here's the first tier:

Hit The Lottery (approximate draft position 1-4):

Karl-Anthony Towns (PF/C, Freshman, 19 y.o., Kentucky)
21.1 mpg - 10.3 ppg - 56.6% fgp - 57.7% 2pp - 25.0% 3pp - 81.3% ftp - 6.7 rpg - 2.2 bpg

Stats (from Kentucky Pro Day)
Height in shoes: 6'11.25"
Weight: 250 pounds
Wingspan: 7'3.5"
Standing Reach: 9'1"
Maximum Vertical Jump: 36.5"


Analysis: Towns came to Kentucky as a player that played mostly on the perimeter. In high school he was always ready to pull the trigger on a three point shot, hitting 46%. As a result, he was very raw in the post, where John Calipari wanted him to do most of his work. To his credit, he went from a player that looked clumsy at times, to a real threat by seasons end. His footwork still needs a lot of work as do his ball fakes, but he can hook over either shoulder with consistency. He does a good job of establishing position, has a good feel for the double team, and passing to the open man. In general, he's a very good passer. He's also a very good rebounder averaging around 13 boards per 40. He has an excellent midrange jumpshot that should easily convert out to the NBA three. While he only shot 25.0% this season from the three, he took so few that it doesn't qualify as large enough sample. What makes Towns unique for a near seven footer, is his ability to shine on the defensive side of the ball. He averaged 2.2 blocks per game this season and over 4 blocks per 40. He also defended the pick and roll well, sometimes switching onto a smaller player, or switching back in time to cover his man at the basket. I wouldn't call him an explosive leaper, but he has incredible timing when blocking shots. Still, he has a troubling tendency to rack up a lot of fouls. I would say he's more fast than quick, when running the floor, and more instinctive than blessed with lateral quickness when guarding a quicker player on the perimeter. He's an above average but not elite athlete. He needs to strengthen his lower body, and improve his post game. Judging by his improvement this season, I don't see that as a problem. He should be capable of setting up shop in the post as a center, or moving out to the perimeter and playing PF. He's capable, with added strength, of guarding both positions. All of this is why I think he'll get drafted before Okafor. --Bajaden


Jahlil Okafor (PF/C, Freshman, 19 y.o., Duke)
30.1 mpg - 17.3 ppg - 66.4% fgp - 8.6 rpg - 1.4 bpg

Stats (from 2014 Hoop Summit)
Height in shoes: 6'10.75"
Weight: 272 pounds
Wingspan: 7'5"
Standing Reach: 9'2.5"
Maximum Vertical Jump: N/A


Analysis: While the majority on this board prefer Towns, Okafor is still in contention for the #1 overall pick. His main strength is on offense. When he gets the ball in the post he commands an immediate and mandatory double team, or it's basically a score. He's very good at scoring with his back to the basket in the post, and he's willing to kick out to a shooter if he's double teamed. He's also very good playing in the pick and roll, which is a bit of a lost skill in college. He has a good handle and a passable jumper, though his range is limited. He's a good rebounder who uses his height and length to contest from behind and he will box out when he's in position, but he has a tendency to concede rebounds - particularly on free throws by his own team. He doesn't love to mix it up. His real question marks come on the defensive side of the ball. He's actually a very good scheme defender - he knows what he's supposed to be doing and he does it. He's not easy to score on in the post and he can defend a drive one-on-one, but his help D and rotation is basically non-existent. In the same way that Okafor's slow deliberation on the offensive end is an asset, on the defensive end it's a liability. He doesn't react to the play, he thinks - and that's too slow. He's not an explosive player either - while his frame is really great, carrying plenty of weight and with a super solid lower body, he's not going to jump through the roof, and he doesn't have anything resembling a quick first step. He'll need to constantly work on his conditioning, especially since he'll presumably put on a good bit of muscle in the NBA weight rooms. Okafor is a very safe pick, and he will be a great post scorer, but his defensive deficiencies limit his ceiling. -- Capt. Factorial


D'Angelo Russell (PG/SG, Freshman, 19 y.o., Ohio St.)
33.9 mpg - 19.3 ppg - 44.9% fgp - 41.1% 3pp - 5.7 rpg - 5.0 apg - 1.5 spg

Stats (2015 NBA Combine)
Height in shoes: 6'5"
Weight: 193 pounds
Wingspan: 6'9.75"
Standing Reach: 8'6"
Maximum Vertical Jump: N/A


Analysis: Lets get the bad out of the way first. Russell isn't blessed with great lateral quickness, and at times has trouble staying in front of his man. He does play the passing lanes well and gets the occasional steal. To be fair, his defense has improved quite a bit from the beginning of the season. There were times early on, when he appeared to be taking plays off. I saw less and less of that as the season wore on. I think he can be better than he is right now, but he'll likely never be a great defender. He also turns the ball over a bit too much, averaging 2.9 turnovers a game. Most come off of well intended passes, so its very correctable. Now the good! Russell is a very good offensive player who shot 41.1% from the three. He has excellent handles, a quick release on his shot, and is a very good shooter off the dribble. He runs the pick and roll extremely well, either scoring, or setting the table for a teammate. He's an excellent passer with terrific court vision. At times he seems to have eyes in the back of his head. Calm, cool, and collected best describe him. He's never rattled as he fires laser like passes around the floor. He always seems to be thinking two or three plays ahead, and never appears to be out of control. At times, he appears as though he's on a stroll in the park, when suddenly he'll fire a bullet like pass to a cutter going baseline. He makes the game look easy. His basketball IQ and natural instinctive feel for the game is off the charts. He's also a very good rebounder. At times he struggled finishing at the basket against bigger competition, but considering the other teams defense was geared toward stopping Russell, I don't think its much of a concern. I think he'll find it easier with the better spacing in the NBA. He didn't play lead guard at Ohio St.. Shannon Scott did, but they shared the play making responsibility. Russell is capable of playing either guard spot. If he was an elite athlete, which he isn't, he'd probably be in the running for the first pick in the draft. He's definitely future all star material. -- Bajaden


Emmanuel Mudiay (PG, 19 y.o., Guangdong/USA)
31.5 mpg - 18.0 ppg - 48% fgp - 34% 3pp - 6.3 rpg - 5.9 apg - 1.6 spg

Stats (from 2014 Hoop Summit)
Height in shoes: 6'5"
Weight: 200 pounds
Wingspan: 6'8.5"
Standing Reach: 8'4"
Maximum Vertical Jump: N/A


Analysis: A big, strong physical lead guard, Mudiay has more natural instincts at the PG position and will probably play there full time from day one. His size and physical attributes will allow him to play off the ball effectively, though. Mudiay is an excellent athlete and a physical specimen - elite size, length and strength for the PG position. He's quick too, but he doesn't look to be hugely agile due to his size. He's crafty though and a very good ball handler, so he doesn't have much trouble getting into the lane. Keep in mind he played in China, which, although not awful, is not really near the highest standards of international basketball. He has a high IQ and is a very capable passer. Like a lot of young players, he is turnover prone and needs to cut down, and given his style of play, he may always turn the ball over more than you'd like. But I don't think it's going to be a big problem, more likely something you live with given all the positives he can bring. Defensively he has very good potential due to his size, length and strength. His lateral quickness is good and he understands how to play defense. He's also disruptive in the passing lanes due to his big hands and long arms and effort is usually not a problem on this end. He's not a prolific shooter and needs to really improve his long ball. He shot 34% on the year in China (closer three point line) which is acceptable but nothing great. It's only going to get more difficult for him from here on out, but shooting is probably the easiest of the major skills to improve so he will be fine. I'll be honest - it's hard for me to give a definitive opinion on Mudiay given that I was limited in how much I could watch him. But he does have a lot of physical tools and a promising foundation of skills. He was also a big part of Guangdong's team when he wasn't injured, so at least he did all he could do in a new environment. He's very competitive so it's no surprise that he's being rated as high as he is. Will be very interesting to see if he goes top 4 as is being predicted currently. -- Dime Dropper

(I'd like to thank Bajaden and Dime Dropper, as well as Gilles and Uncia03, whose contributions will be forthcoming)
 
Last edited:
#2
Yeah, guys went overboard with Towns and Jah. My only comparison was shortened, since I proposed Detroit version of Stuckey, which was not a very effective player.
D-Lo, if he doesn't put his pull-up shot in top of the league category and improve his handles, might become similar to Brent Barry or Terry Porter.
 
#4
Great post, but I the floor-ceiling parts are a little misleading.

I think it's hard to compare players to Towns, nbadraft.net compared him to Bogut/Divac, and out of high school some people coimpared him to Dirk oddly enough. I think he can be a shot-blocking 4 that can play in the perimeter I'll buy a more defensive oriented Webber as his ceiling and a guy like Favors as his floor.

Okafor is basically a bigger version of Al Jefferson (which is awesome) so I'll put it as his Ceiling. I can't see him turning into a perimeter player like LMA, for his floor I'm gonna violate the "only compare people to people from the same race" unwritten rule and say his floor is Pekovic a 17-9 player with a good post up game, strong frame and a complete lack of defense.

Russell is a far superior shooter than Turner ever were, so I'll put his floor at Brandon Knight maybe (especially the Detroit version of him). I also saw people comparing him to Lilard and I think that is a pretty good comp to explain what he is right now cause he is short of a lot of tools to be like today Harden (but it is still a good comp for his ceiling, cause even Harden was short of a lot of things that make him the player he is today and Russell have some similarities).

I think you are really selling Mudiay short, quite frankly if you really think a guys ceiling is Reke he souldn't be in this tier. I'll say his ceiling is John Wall or a bigger Eric Bledsoe (some people compare him to Westbrook but i don't see it) and for his floor I but the Detroit version for Stuckey with better playmaking.
 
K

KingMilz

Guest
#5
I think you are really selling Mudiay short, quite frankly if you really think a guys ceiling is Reke he souldn't be in this tier. I'll say his ceiling is John Wall or a bigger Eric Bledsoe (some people compare him to Westbrook but i don't see it) and for his floor I but the Detroit version for Stuckey with better playmaking.
Keep in mind that's a good thing since Reke after Cousins on here is considered as close to god as possible..I would say a good % of people on here will say he's better (rightfully or wrongfully) than Wall/Bledsoe or just about any PG you bring up.
 
#6
People still read nbadraft.net? They've been exposed pretty badly in recent years.

Hell, I seem to remember at one point they listed Darren Collison's comparison as Kj! (Maybe they knew they'd both end up in Sac ;)).

Sorry about the derail. Interesting thread, and look forward to the rest.
 
#7
Mudiay plays more in control, is more explosive vertically and a bit more creative than Tyreke.
While Wall is a superior player, Bledsoe is not exactly a better player than Evans.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#8
I'm not a huge fan of floor/ceiling analyses - I think they take too much focus off of the actual player analysis and try to shoehorn too much into one or two names, but the consensus within the Big Board group was that we ought to stick with them. If they become too much of a distraction towards the rest of the write-ups we might need to consider something else.

As far as the Jefferson/Aldridge goes, I get why people think that's a bit goofy. My original ceiling was actually Tim Duncan, because I think that Okafor is a very skilled big man who is able to work both in and out of the post and does so without heavily relying on his athleticism. But comparisons to Duncan always make people get a bit shy - when you're saying someone's ceiling is the post player of the last generation that's high praise - so the consensus changed that one without changing the floor. But here's how I think these comparisons work in a way: Jefferson plays more with his back to basket down in the post and is a more aggressive rebounder. If Okafor is able to play like AlJeff in the league, living in the post, boxing out tooth and nail, he's going to be a better player than if he emulates Aldridge - moving a bit out, taking short and mid-range jumpers and not really putting in consistent effort to rebound outside of his area. Okafor can do both of those things, but he's better suited to the former.

As far as Mudiay/Reke goes, that's actually my favorite comparison so far. I haven't been able to see a lot of Mudiay, but everything I've seen just calls me back to Tyreke constantly. Mudiay is a slightly smaller guy by the measurements, and I think he's a better passer at this stage, but the game just has so much similarity that I think everybody will see it once he comes into the league. Should that put him in the top tier? Well, just about everybody out there thinks that Mudiay is a top-4 pick in this draft. Maybe he won't be, but as of right now it would be a surprise if he were to slip to 6th where the Kings pick, which is not something I can say for any of the prospects who will be in the next tier. The guys in this tier we aren't going to get a chance at unless we move up into the lottery (or trade up, which seems unlikely). The guys in the next tier, however, are going to be in our wheelhouse - with the caveat that at least one of them will be off the board when we pick, it's just not at all clear at this point which one that might be.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#9
People still read nbadraft.net? They've been exposed pretty badly in recent years.
Actually, their news feed does a pretty good job of collating the most important stuff, which is probably the best reason to go there. I'm not a big fan of their mock draft. I think it has too many complete lapses in judgment (both ignoring players and overrating players) though I don't think they're always completely off base - for instance, I think they've done a better job than DraftExpress of ranking Trey Lyles this year. But it's pretty easy to see the glaring faults in their mocks. As for their analyses, I haven't really read any of them in years. Never thought they were very helpful.
 
#10
People still read nbadraft.net? They've been exposed pretty badly in recent years.

Hell, I seem to remember at one point they listed Darren Collison's comparison as Kj! (Maybe they knew they'd both end up in Sac ;)).

Sorry about the derail. Interesting thread, and look forward to the rest.
I brought it up cause they actually write comps, and the fact that before the start of the year he was getting Dirk comps and now he gets Bogut comps- goes to show how much his game changed in college and how hard it is to actually write a comp for him.

Mudiay plays more in control, is more explosive vertically and a bit more creative than Tyreke.
While Wall is a superior player, Bledsoe is not exactly a better player than Evans.
I think Bledsoe is a better player than Evans- but what I said was a bigger version of Bledsoe- and this is quite important. Okafor for example has a spot-on comp with Al but the fact he has a bigger frame than Al gives him a lot more upside. same goes with Mudiay- Bledsoe is 6' 1" and he is 6' 5".
 
Last edited:
#11
I'm not a huge fan of floor/ceiling analyses - I think they take too much focus off of the actual player analysis and try to shoehorn too much into one or two names, but the consensus within the Big Board group was that we ought to stick with them. If they become too much of a distraction towards the rest of the write-ups we might need to consider something else.

As far as the Jefferson/Aldridge goes, I get why people think that's a bit goofy. My original ceiling was actually Tim Duncan, because I think that Okafor is a very skilled big man who is able to work both in and out of the post and does so without heavily relying on his athleticism. But comparisons to Duncan always make people get a bit shy - when you're saying someone's ceiling is the post player of the last generation that's high praise - so the consensus changed that one without changing the floor. But here's how I think these comparisons work in a way: Jefferson plays more with his back to basket down in the post and is a more aggressive rebounder. If Okafor is able to play like AlJeff in the league, living in the post, boxing out tooth and nail, he's going to be a better player than if he emulates Aldridge - moving a bit out, taking short and mid-range jumpers and not really putting in consistent effort to rebound outside of his area. Okafor can do both of those things, but he's better suited to the former.

As far as Mudiay/Reke goes, that's actually my favorite comparison so far. I haven't been able to see a lot of Mudiay, but everything I've seen just calls me back to Tyreke constantly. Mudiay is a slightly smaller guy by the measurements, and I think he's a better passer at this stage, but the game just has so much similarity that I think everybody will see it once he comes into the league. Should that put him in the top tier? Well, just about everybody out there thinks that Mudiay is a top-4 pick in this draft. Maybe he won't be, but as of right now it would be a surprise if he were to slip to 6th where the Kings pick, which is not something I can say for any of the prospects who will be in the next tier. The guys in this tier we aren't going to get a chance at unless we move up into the lottery (or trade up, which seems unlikely). The guys in the next tier, however, are going to be in our wheelhouse - with the caveat that at leasat one of them will be off the board when we pick, it's just not at all clear at this point which one that might be.
I agree with you that floor/ceiling ain't the best why to explain players, but I think it can give people a general idea of what the player is.

I don't see Okafor comp with Duncan at all, he is super skilled but Duncan is one of the best defenders in the NBA for decades- while Okafor is really lacking, Duncan is a good rim protector... I could settle for less athletic Duncan with below-average defense.

About Mudiay- the fact that everybody thinks is a top 4 pick doesn't fit with his best scenario being Reke.
look at the 3 ceiling comps you gave the guys in the same tier: Webber, Duncan and Harden. Reke doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with them.
 
Last edited:
#12
It probably should just be "comparison" rather than "ceiling", and then the "floor" after that. That way you can just put "natural PG version of Tyreke w/ higher upside" as the comparison to stop people getting offended.

Tyreke is a good comparison (I hate comparisons, they're almost never accurate) in terms of style. I think Mudiay is more of a natural PG, better instincts/IQ/passing, and thus has a higher upside. But they're both big, strong, physical lead guards who can get to the rim. It's not a bad comparison at all.

As for the other guys, I don't agree with Okafor's floor being LMA, especially since he's better than Big Al (hence another reason to have the comparison tag rather than ceiling tag). Comparison's should be about style of play, not ceiling, AFAIC.
 

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
#13
About Mudiay- exactly, the fact that everybody thinks is a top 4 pick doesn't fit with his best scenario being Reke.
look at the 3 ceiling comps you gave the guys in the same tier: Webber, Duncan and Harden. Reke doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with them.
Why not? Evans was drafted 4th overall. If that is indeed his ceiling, that might speak more to the quality of the draft than to the comparison itself. The comparisons are based on the players and their style of play, not an "all time greats" list (one in which Harden does not yet belong).
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#14
Like the Capt. I'm not a fan of ceiling/floor comparisons, and for the very reason that's being displayed here. No one see's a player the same way. I would pay more attention to the analysis than the comparisons. In the end, every player is an individual unto himself. What you hope when you draft a player, is that some day, he ends up being the ceiling comparison for a yet to be drafted player in the future.
 

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#15
Overall, a great start and very helpful, objective. And the "ceiling/floor" item is different to everyone as baja says and can be misleading.

Then comes the "upside" and "intangible" aspects of all players that is all but impossible to catalog. These are the very grey areas that hint at a draftee playing above his valuation, playing above what was thought to be his capability. A lot of this "intangible" thing has to do with the players on their new team and how well they mesh and how good is the chemistry early on. Something to look for in their videos.
 
#16
Why not? Evans was drafted 4th overall. If that is indeed his ceiling, that might speak more to the quality of the draft than to the comparison itself. The comparisons are based on the players and their style of play, not an "all time greats" list (one in which Harden does not yet belong).
I don't see how the place Evans were drafted is relevant, Hasheem Thabeet went 2nd in the same draft class and if I say that he is someone's ceiling it won't be a compliment.
Now if you read the original post, this is the drafts top tier- now I didn't made up a list of "all time greats", those names are what was given as the ceiling of the other players in the same tier. now I don't think that is his ceiling, nor do I see a great resemlence between Mudiay and Evans, but if you really think someone's ceiling is Reke and his floor is Stuckey- you can't put him in the same tier as guys you described their ceiling were- Webber, Duncan and Harden.
 

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#17
I've made the Tyreke Evans comparison before with regards to Mudiay, but I wasn't ever that comfortable with it either. It's an easy comparison for a Kings fan to make and physically Mudiay resembles a slightly smaller, quicker Tyreke Evans but he's much more of a true PG than Evans was coming into the league. It's more accurate perhaps to say he resembles the imaginary player that some of us thought Tyreke Evans would grow into. It's a little hard sometimes to separate the actual player from your own projections. Well, it is for me anyway. If pressed for a comparison for Mudiay I guess I would say he's a bigger, stronger John Wall without the extra gear. He's plenty athletic, but he doesn't have turbo jets strapped to his legs like Wall does. He might have trouble getting all the way to the basket against quicker defenders, but he's strong and uses his body well to shield off defenders so he can probably get close enough and finish through contact. The form on his jumpshot is decent, he squares up and follows through nicely, but he shoots on the way down. He projects as an average shooter down the line I think if he can improve that release point.

Overall, he's my favorite prospect in this draft. Taking into account his size and natural feel for the PG position, the skillset he currently has, and what he needs to work on I think he's a strong candidate for the #1 pick. With good coaching, he could develop into one of the elite PGs in the league.
 

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#18
I really don't like the comps for D'Angelo Russell, but I suppose that speaks more to how differently we see him as a prospect. James Harden is a lot more physical than Russell and he got to the line like crazy, even in college. The player who he reminds me of in terms of style of play is Stephen Curry. It's unrealistic to project anyone to come into the league with the once-in-a-generation shooting stroke that Curry has, I'm not saying that, but as a lead guard his ability to shoot from outside is what sets up the rest of his game. Like bajaden wrote in his analysis, he looks like an ideal pick and roll guard because he can shoot or drive and he's very good at finding open defenders and delivering them the ball. Mike Bibby could be another good comparison, the way he played from 2001 to 2004 before we started trading off players and tried to make him into a leading scorer. He's also bigger than both of those guys which helps on the boards and also allows him to get his shot over most defenders. Too much attention has been paid to his defensive weaknesses probably -- he should be average. Most players his age have lapses in concentration at that end of the floor that older players exploit. The main problem for him right now on the defensive end is that he needs to get stronger for the NBA.

I was really high on Russell early in the year and I've cooled off a bit since then. He really struggled against Arizona's physical defenders and more or less shot them out of the tournament. That's one bad game, not a big deal, but it points to where I think he's going to struggle initially -- if defenders are going to play up on you and take away the jumpshot, you need to be able to get to the line as a lead guard. He was up and down in that area his one year at Ohio State. So he's got some things to work on, like all of these guys do. I see him as more of a hybrid guard than a pure PG which means fit becomes an important issue to consider development-wise. He wouldn't be a bad fit for us though since we can run the offense through Cousins or Gay at times and another guard who can shoot from outside doesn't hurt either. He's no. 5 on my board, but of the players listed here, I'd put him third after Mudiay and Towns.
 

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
#20
I don't see how the place Evans were drafted is relevant, Hasheem Thabeet went 2nd in the same draft class and if I say that he is someone's ceiling it won't be a compliment.
Now if you read the original post, this is the drafts top tier- now I didn't made up a list of "all time greats", those names are what was given as the ceiling of the other players in the same tier. now I don't think that is his ceiling, nor do I see a great resemlence between Mudiay and Evans, but if you really think someone's ceiling is Reke and his floor is Stuckey- you can't put him in the same tier as guys you described their ceiling were- Webber, Duncan and Harden.
Again, you're looking at the player comparisons, and not the players themselves. If that's the tier of players at the top of the draft, that's what it is. That Mudiay's "ceiling" is Tyreke Evans isn't his fault. Perhaps your issue should be with the fact that there are 4 players in the top tier. Maybe there are only three.

Here's the "Top Tier" from 2013 (nbadraft.net):

Bennett - Rodgers/Maxiell
Oladipo - Tony Allen
Porter - Tayshaun Prince
Zeller - LaMarcus Aldridge

(FYI McLemore - Ray Allen)

Should we just call them a second tier, even though they are the top tier of 2013?
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#21
...if you really think someone's ceiling is Reke and his floor is Stuckey- you can't put him in the same tier as guys you described their ceiling were- Webber, Duncan and Harden.
I intended to make this clear earlier, but in case it wasn't - the tiering is not being set up around a player's ultimate potential as viewed by us. The tiering is being set up around expected draft position based on everything we know (absolutely including mock drafts, some of which are relatively tied in to front offices). For the purposes of the discussion right now, we are assuming that we will have the #6 pick. The tier being discussed here consists of players who we expect to be gone before the #6 pick - hence this is the "Hit The Lottery" tier. We expect that we won't be able to draft these players at #6. The next tier will be players that both may/should be available at #6, and who would not be a reach to take at that spot. Then there will be some trade-down tiers, etc. I think it's safe to say that the Big Board Committee is not as high on Mudiay and his ceiling as on the other three players in the tier. But he still belongs in the tier because regardless of how we feel about his future, he's very likely to be picked before #6.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#22
I really don't like the comps for D'Angelo Russell, but I suppose that speaks more to how differently we see him as a prospect. James Harden is a lot more physical than Russell and he got to the line like crazy, even in college. The player who he reminds me of in terms of style of play is Stephen Curry. It's unrealistic to project anyone to come into the league with the once-in-a-generation shooting stroke that Curry has, I'm not saying that, but as a lead guard his ability to shoot from outside is what sets up the rest of his game. Like bajaden wrote in his analysis, he looks like an ideal pick and roll guard because he can shoot or drive and he's very good at finding open defenders and delivering them the ball. Mike Bibby could be another good comparison, the way he played from 2001 to 2004 before we started trading off players and tried to make him into a leading scorer. He's also bigger than both of those guys which helps on the boards and also allows him to get his shot over most defenders. Too much attention has been paid to his defensive weaknesses probably -- he should be average. Most players his age have lapses in concentration at that end of the floor that older players exploit. The main problem for him right now on the defensive end is that he needs to get stronger for the NBA.

I was really high on Russell early in the year and I've cooled off a bit since then. He really struggled against Arizona's physical defenders and more or less shot them out of the tournament. That's one bad game, not a big deal, but it points to where I think he's going to struggle initially -- if defenders are going to play up on you and take away the jumpshot, you need to be able to get to the line as a lead guard. He was up and down in that area his one year at Ohio State. So he's got some things to work on, like all of these guys do. I see him as more of a hybrid guard than a pure PG which means fit becomes an important issue to consider development-wise. He wouldn't be a bad fit for us though since we can run the offense through Cousins or Gay at times and another guard who can shoot from outside doesn't hurt either. He's no. 5 on my board, but of the players listed here, I'd put him third after Mudiay and Towns.
If all were going to do is argue about the stupid comps, and this is the last time I'm going to do this. However, since you bring up the comps about Russell, I was merely trying to pick players that were used the same way in college that Russell was. Harden played SG, but shared the ball handling and running of the offense. Turner played a similar role at Ohio St. Both Turner and Harden were considered combo guards, just like Russell, and all three are in the 6'5"range. The projections on all three coming out of college are very similar. That's all it is. Now if were going to start comparing warts and freckles, then I'm done, because that isn't what this is about. Were spending a lot of time doing research, and watching film, and none of it is worth it, if all people are going to do, is argue over the least important part of the analysis.

Now as far as Russell's bad game against Arizona, tell me, who else on the Ohio St. team was he going to defer to? The last third of the season just about every team Ohio St. played set up their entire defense to stop Russell. He didn't have a Booker, a Towns, a Lyles, or anyone else to help take the pressure off of him. This isn't about one game. This is about his skill level, and his is off the charts in many areas. The Arizona game doesn't matter.
 
#24
Yeah, this is another reason why player comparisons aren't useful. People are obsessed with them, despite the fact that they have little to no value in evaluating a player. I'm yet to see any discussion of the actual analysis.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#25
The "Player Comparison" problem has been permanently fixed. Please feel free to discuss that actual paragraph of analysis instead! :D
 

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#26
If all were going to do is argue about the stupid comps, and this is the last time I'm going to do this. However, since you bring up the comps about Russell, I was merely trying to pick players that were used the same way in college that Russell was. Harden played SG, but shared the ball handling and running of the offense. Turner played a similar role at Ohio St. Both Turner and Harden were considered combo guards, just like Russell, and all three are in the 6'5"range. The projections on all three coming out of college are very similar. That's all it is. Now if were going to start comparing warts and freckles, then I'm done, because that isn't what this is about. Were spending a lot of time doing research, and watching film, and none of it is worth it, if all people are going to do, is argue over the least important part of the analysis.

Now as far as Russell's bad game against Arizona, tell me, who else on the Ohio St. team was he going to defer to? The last third of the season just about every team Ohio St. played set up their entire defense to stop Russell. He didn't have a Booker, a Towns, a Lyles, or anyone else to help take the pressure off of him. This isn't about one game. This is about his skill level, and his is off the charts in many areas. The Arizona game doesn't matter.
I can't speak to anyone else's responses -- I didn't have an issue with the comparisons in general and I know it's a very small part of the overall analysis. I didn't agree with the Russell comps mostly because I thought they were a little misleading about what kind of player he is. Evan Turner was a forward who learned how to play PG in his three years at Ohio State, and I thought he was a great player but his big achilles heel is his unreliable outside shot which certainly wouldn't be the case with Russell. James Harden averaged 3.7 3pt attempts per 40 min as a Freshman at Arizona State and 5.2 as a sophomore before entering the draft. He's a good 3pt shooter, but not an elite one. Russell averaged 7.8 3pt attempts per 40 min this year. It's a much bigger part of his game. What I was trying to point out is that D'Angelo Russell wouldn't be used in the NBA the way that either of those guys are used. To me he's going to be closer to a Stephen Curry or Mike Bibby -- a lead guard who plays off the ball a fair amount of the time as well because the 3pt shot is such an effective weapon, but also can handle and pass the ball well enough to excel in a pick and roll based offense.

I also told you why the Arizona game was significant to me -- he's going to face better athletes in the NBA. As a leading scorer, he's going to have to contend with the other team's best wing defender just like he did when Arizona had Rondae Hollis-Jefferson guarding him. You're right it's just one game -- I acknowledged already that his performance in one game is negligible compared to his overall production. But he had a lot of games this year where he didn't get to the line, that one just stands out because it was in the tournament. He needs to work on absorbing contact and drawing fouls, in my opinion, to be successful as a scorer in the NBA. That's not a huge issue -- every young player coming into the league has to make that adjustment. I think he's a really good prospect overall. I'm not intending to downplay in any way the work you put into making these scouting reports. Am I not allowed to give my opinions too?
 
Last edited:

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#27
Yeah, this is another reason why player comparisons aren't useful. People are obsessed with them, despite the fact that they have little to no value in evaluating a player. I'm yet to see any discussion of the actual analysis.
Both of my comments were directed at the comparisons and the analysis. I was using the player comparisons as lead-ins to discuss where I agreed and disagreed with the assessments posted up top. You said yourself that comparisons are more about style of play than Floor/Ceiling and that's what I was addressing. I don't know what exactly you're expecting people to discuss. It's awfully hard to describe how somebody plays to somebody else who hasn't ever seen them play. Either you end up speaking in generalities or you resort to posting stats which can be misleading as well. A comparison is a handy way to give a general picture of the player you are describing and then you supplement that by pointing out the differences. I think anyone with a decent amount of experience in scouting players already knows that players are unique individuals and if they succeed to the extent you hope they will, they're not going to be the "next" anyone else they're merely going to be themselves. What we're really trying to discuss here is what kind of player they will be, and how likely they are to excel in the NBA.
 
#28
I hope we can land in the top 4. NFL draft really disappointed me..I don't think there's any way that the Kings would be able to disappoint me. I like every prospect in this draft.
 
#29
I agree with you that floor/ceiling ain't the best why to explain players, but I think it can give people a general idea of what the player is.

I don't see Okafor comp with Duncan at all, he is super skilled but Duncan is one of the best defenders in the NBA for decades- while Okafor is really lacking, Duncan is a good rim protector... I could settle for less athletic Duncan with below-average defense.

About Mudiay - the fact that everybody thinks is a top 4 pick doesn't fit with his best scenario being Reke.
look at the 3 ceiling comps you gave the guys in the same tier: Webber, Duncan and Harden. Reke doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with them.
Your argument only works, if you believe these comparisons. Mudiay certainly belongs in the top group, not because I like him a lot, but rather 'cause I don't rate others that high.
Jah: defensively you're looking at someone like Pekovic - big/strong and long, but also ground-bound and rather slow. Pekovic is smart and uses his combination of strength and length well enough to be an above average defender, but he was also 25, when he came over with a lot of experience, so Okafor will need 2-3 year, before he stops being a sieve. Offensively he kinda looks like Duncan, but Tim was quicker and more agile. Still Okafor is already amazing at executing moves around the basket and has enough bulk to keep doing the same in the pros. He is likely to be the first to average 20 points from this class. Main problem for Kings - he's completely incompatible with Boogie.

KAT: if you read articles, that compare Okafor and Towns, you get the feeling, that Jah is very polished and experienced player, while KAT is a diamond in the rough, that was uncovered and makes amazing strides every week. Well, this article http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/04/s...nthony-towns-is-one-complete-player.html?_r=0 seems to be disproving this myth, and providing different perspective: Towns is well rounded and skilled guy himself, he just chose to play on the perimeter. Cal put him inside and told never to leave. Well, isn't that like Cousins, right? Certainly not. Boogie was a bull in a china shop, impossible to stop, from getting to the rim (his FTrate above .700 was ridiculous), unless you can get right in front of him at the exact moment to force a charge foul. I vividly remember 3 West Virginia players basically hanging on him like a tree, trying to stop him from moving in any direction. Towns was executing perfect moves, when he was able to establish position inside, and here was his main problem - he rarely got inside against anyone stronger, than NBA SF - just doesn't have decent lower body strength for a fit guy weighing 250 pounds. Shooting from outside? KAT hasn't shown ability to put the ball on the floor, so you just have to put solid NBA PF next to him, and how is he going to score? Still going to contribute defensively, right? Well,
Doesn't look like he's ready to stop quality opposition at the moment, which brings us back to Towns and Karlito being a pretty polished individual, who needs...a lot more polishing.

D-Lo: shooting almost as many 3s as 2-pointers and has under .350 FT rate. Harden had around .600 FT rate, Turner fluctuated between .400 and .578, but Evan never had more than quarter of his FGs from outside. Because D-Lo didn't attack the basket as much, he has much more reasonable Ast/TO rate: close to 2, while Harden's was around 1.5, and for Turner it was closer to 1.0 before junior season. Both statistically, stylistically and body-wise Steph is a much better comp. Obviously that's the absolutely best case, but it's there. Lillard is close as well.
People talk about Arizona game like it was an isolated incident, when in reality top-100 defensive teams were putting a lid on him - Russell has 11 or 12TS% split versus top100/non-top100 defenses. And when you watch all his Vine-worthy plays, you notice, that he's never pressured in those. It's like Russell suddenly turns from Steph to late career Baron Davis under pressure. His physical profile isn't gonna change much, so he will only get so far, where his pull-up jumper takes him. Defensively he's in K-Mart territory, and Kevin was at least really quick. People, who want to make him a distributor with ability to hit outside shot, miss the fact, that his pullup is much better, than set shot.

Someone will value getting these guys and work with them on expanding their games. I believe, that these three guys are already very polished, and their somewhat limited physical profile will force them to perfect their current skill-set rather than add to it. Towns still has the best physical profile, and though he will need a solid face-up game to be an impact player, which will take some time, that makes him #1.
 
Last edited:
#30
Your argument only works, if you believe this comparisons. Mudiay certainly belongs in the top group, not because I like him a lot, but rather 'cause I don't rate others that high.
Jah: defensively you're looking at someone like Pekovic - big/strong and long, but also ground-bound and rather slow. Pekovic is smart and uses his combination of strength and length well enough to be an above average defender, but he was also 25, when he came over with a lot of experience, so Okafor will need 2-3 year, before he stops being a sieve. Offensively he kinda looks like Duncan, but Tim was quicker and more agile. Still Okafor is already amazing at executing moves around the basket and has enough bulk to keep doing the same in the pros. He is likely to be the first to average 20 points from this class. Main problem for Kings - he's completely incompatible with Boogie.

KAT: if you read articles, that compare Okafor and Towns, you get the feeling, that Jah is very polished and experienced player, while KAT is a diamond in the rough, that was uncovered and makes amazing strides every week. Well, this article http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/04/s...nthony-towns-is-one-complete-player.html?_r=0 seems to be disproving this myth, and providing different perspective: Towns is well rounded and skilled guy himself, he just chose to play on the perimeter. Cal put him inside and told never to leave. Well, isn't that like Cousins, right? Certainly not. Boogie was a bull in a china shop, impossible to stop, from getting to the rim (his FTrate above .700 was ridiculous), unless you can get right in front of him at the exact moment to force a charge foul. I vividly remember 3 West Virginia players basically hanging on him like a tree, trying to stop him from moving in any direction. Towns was executing perfect moves, when he was able to establish position inside, and here was his main problem - he rarely got inside against anyone stronger, than NBA SF - just doesn't have decent lower body strength for a fit guy weighing 250 pounds. Shooting from outside? KAT hasn't shown ability to put the ball on the floor, so you just have to put solid NBA PF next to him, and how is he going to score? Still going to contribute defensively, right? Well,
Doesn't look like he's ready to stop quality opposition at the moment, which brings us back to Towns and Karlito being a pretty polished individual, who needs...a lot more polishing.

D-Lo: shooting almost as many 3s as 2-pointers and has under .350 FT rate. Harden had around .600 FT rate, Turner fluctuated between .400 and .578, but Evan never had more than quarter of his FGs from outside. Because D-Lo didn't attack the basket as much, he has much more reasonable Ast/TO rate: close to 2, while Harden's was around 1.5, and for Turner it was closer to 1.0 before junior season. Both statistically, stylistically and body-wise Steph is a much better comp. Obviously that's the absolutely best case, but it's there. Lillard is close as well.
People talk about Arizona game like it was an isolated incident, when in reality top-100 defensive teams were putting a lid on him - Russell has 11 or 12TS% split versus top100/non-top100 defenses. And when you watch all his Vine-worthy plays, you notice, that he's never pressured in those. It's like Russell suddenly turns from Steph to late career Baron Davis under pressure. His physical profile isn't gonna change much, so he will only get so far, where his pull-up jumper takes him. Defensively he's in K-Mart territory, and Kevin was at least really quick. People, who want to make him a distributor with ability to hit outside shot, miss the fact, that his pullup is much better, than set shot.

Someone will value getting these guys and work with them on expanding their games. I believe, that these three guys are already very polished, and their somewhat limited physical profile will force them to perfect their current skill-set rather than add to it. Towns still has the best physical profile, and though he will need a solid face-up game to be an impact player, which will take some time, that makes him #1.
Great post, I agree with most of what you said (mentioned Pekovic as a comp for Okafor's defense and Lilard for Russell before myself) and I think no one make a D-Lo/Curry comp because his shooting level is so unique it's really hard to compare anyone to him without sounding stupid (a little like Ben being "a more athletic Ray Allen").

I get the sense that you are a little skeptic about those players- is it that you think they are over hyped or do you just think that the guys from this tier probably won't be franchise players and it's more likely a tier of good (but not great) polished guys?