Jump to content

2021 NBA Draft Thread


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, kyle21121 said:

Honestly I think it’s just simply we’ve known about Cade for 2+ years as a likely top pick and has more or less been the consensus #1 overall pick for 9 months and as you get closer to the draft you like to poke holes and then hype up other guys despite flaws. I more or less agree with you completely on Cade I think he’s a nice mix of safe and upside for the #1 pick a good to very good player as a floor and a Tatum like upside. It’s easy to drift over to Green and be like he could be the best scorer in the NBA at some point in his career even if there is more risk with him as a prospect overall. I think it’s just natural. 

I also think a lot of it comes down to the fact that not very many people saw Jalen Green play this year while Cade was pumped up as a generational talent by the media throughout the college basketball season. That's one of the main reasons that Luka fell to #3 when he came out in the draft, you had guys like Ayton/Bagley on ESPN every night being pumped up by the media while virtually no one had seen Luka play live. 

I was listening to a draft podcast the other day and a former team executive was talking about mock drafts and he said that they actually do have a pretty big impact within NBA front offices. One of the main things he said was that executives will often take players who are projected higher in the media over riskier/higher potential players because if they whiff on a guy everyone loved they'll take less heat from the media and it provides more them with more job security. While if they take a chance on a boom/bust guy and he doesn't pan out it'll be super scrutinized and could end up getting guys fired. He went on to say that was one of the reasons Danny Ainge actually banned all of the Celtics scouts/front office personnel from reading mock drafts or referencing them when discussing potential picks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, kyle21121 said:

That’s sorta what has taken me off of Kuminga at 4. He’s definitely going to be picked in the 5-8 range he’s definitely worth the swing but it’s just too hard at this point to justify at 4. Yes he out of any non Cade or perhaps Green prospect has the highest chance of being the best player in the draft but the downside is tremendous and for every Kawhi or Giannis there might be a happy middle like OG or Bridges but there’s an awful lot of Stanley Johnson’s and MK-G’s. To take a player like that in the 15-25 range is a lot more palatable to take than in the 3-6 range because it could absolutely get you fired. Like you can squint and see it with Kuminga and that’s why it’s so tantalizing but there is a lot of risk you need to be in the right position and really trust and believe in the team culture. 

I think Toronto would actually be a good spot for him because Nurse is there and you guys have some of the best player development in the league. But it doesn't make a ton of sense with your current roster construction since you already have guys like OG, Boucher, and Siakam on the roster who fill a similar role to what Kuminga would play. 

Kuminga's definitely one of the biggest boom/bust prospects in the class. But I think the thing that separates him from guys like Stanley Johnson and MKG is that he's actually an elite athlete. SJ and MKG were both 6'6 and were more so strong than explosive, which is why they were able to bully guys at lower levels of competition but struggled to adjust to the NBA game. Kuminga is a legit 6'8-6'9" with plus level quick twitch athleticism, he explodes off the floor effortlessly. In transition he was yamming like it was All-Star weekend and he was in the dunk contest. 

A guy with Kuminga's tools very rarely falls that fall down the board. He's a risky pick but the draft is all about projection and he has as high of a ceiling as anyone in the class. He reminds me of a more athletic Patrick Williams who had a pretty solid rookie season for the Bulls this year. Wherever he goes they're going to have to be patient with him, we've seen guys like Jaylen Brown, Pascal Siakam, Kawhi Leonard, and Giannis all have pretty minimal production as rookies and develop into All-Star caliber players. I think Kuminga has the ability to do the same thing but as you said he could also flame out, which is why I think somewhere like Orlando would be pretty iffy for him while somewhere like OKC would be a great fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kirill said:

I just don’t like these tweener bigs but if Presti drafts him okay I’ll get behind him. I ain’t seen nothing about us and kuminga tho so I doubt it’s an option. Personally if someone else wants to take that risk on Kuminga’s potential and give us like pick 20 and two future top 4 protected firsts… like ATL for example… then I’d be down. Would risk pissing off Shai but he’s RFA anyways

I wouldn't really call Kuminga a tweener, he's a projects as a modern NBA forward. The league is trending away from guys being pigeon holed into one spot and SF/PF is pretty much interchangeable for most teams. You see it with duos like Kawhi/Morris, Tatum/Brown, OG/Siakam, Crowder/Bridges, etc. Having big athletic forwards that can switch on defense is crucial to winning in playoff basketball and Siakam definitely has the tools to develop into a defensive swiss army knife. Realistically he's a guy that can probably defend 1-4 and even play some small ball 5.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

I think Toronto would actually be a good spot for him because Nurse is there and you guys have some of the best player development in the league. But it doesn't make a ton of sense with your current roster construction since you already have guys like OG, Boucher, and Siakam on the roster who fill a similar role to what Kuminga would play. 

Kuminga's definitely one of the biggest boom/bust prospects in the class. But I think the thing that separates him from guys like Stanley Johnson and MKG is that he's actually an elite athlete. SJ and MKG were both 6'6 and were more so strong than explosive, which is why they were able to bully guys at lower levels of competition but struggled to adjust to the NBA game. Kuminga is a legit 6'8-6'9" with plus level quick twitch athleticism, he explodes off the floor effortlessly. In transition he was yamming like it was All-Star weekend and he was in the dunk contest. 

A guy with Kuminga's tools very rarely falls that fall down the board. He's a risky pick but the draft is all about projection and he has as high of a ceiling as anyone in the class. He reminds me of a more athletic Patrick Williams who had a pretty solid rookie season for the Bulls this year. Wherever he goes they're going to have to be patient with him, we've seen guys like Jaylen Brown, Pascal Siakam, Kawhi Leonard, and Giannis all have pretty minimal production as rookies and develop into All-Star caliber players. I think Kuminga has the ability to do the same thing but as you said he could also flame out, which is why I think somewhere like Orlando would be pretty iffy for him while somewhere like OKC would be a great fit.

Well perhaps I could have used better examples that fit but you get the general point. 
 

While I don’t disagree with you and I don’t see already having Pascal/OG as a huge hinderance in taking someone who could be the best player in the draft and I do think that this is likely the best spot (or one of the best spots) for him to land overall. I think because this will be the only time Toronto will be picking this high in the immediate future I don’t think we can afford a miss. I’m not saying we are going to be immediately back to competing for a title or anything like that but barring a second straight season from hell I imagine we will be pretty solid and if we straight up take the wrong guy at 4 the plateau could hit in a couple of years and we may be in a position of a more serious rebuild where as if we get the right guy (Green, Mobley or Suggs) and they while maybe don’t become the best player in the draft become a fringe all star level player and elevate the team enough to take another swing to add rather than retool the roster completely. I feel a complete whiff at 4 sets the team back on countless levels. 
 

I understand going completely in the opposite direction with this and using the same logic as well you are a pretty good team who won’t be picking this high again you take the player there with the highest upside and if it pans out could accelerate everything I don’t fully believe in Kuminga enough but that’s not really up to me if he is indeed the pick at 4 I have to trust Masai as he’s really proven it overall and I have no reason not to trust him with Bruno being the only other example of the massive swing and miss but he was picked in the 20’s. 
 

Kuminga has all the tools but I’m just not quite there to take him at 4 if Toronto didn’t move up and have this opportunity and we’re picking #7 and he was still there I’d go the other way and say we have to take him if available. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kyle21121 said:

While I don’t disagree with you and I don’t see already having Pascal/OG as a huge hinderance in taking someone who could be the best player in the draft and I do think that this is likely the best spot (or one of the best spots) for him to land overall. I think because this will be the only time Toronto will be picking this high in the immediate future I don’t think we can afford a miss. 

If Kuminga reaches his ceiling I think Pascal Siakam is a pretty reasonable comparison for the type of player that he can be. Since you already have Siakam and with other versatile forwards in OG/Boucher who both took a leap last year, I think it does have a huge impact on the thought process when considering Kuminga at #4. Assuming those guys are healthy, where does he really fit in your rotation early on?

The Raptors are in a good spot because as you said you likely won't be picking this high relatively soon and have enough pieces in place that regardless of who falls to them it will be a good fit. If Green falls to #4 he fits well as FVV can slide to PG, if Suggs falls to #4 he can play the 1 on offense allowing FVV to play off ball while also being big enough to defend two guards, and if Mobley falls to 4 you can instantly pencil him as your starting 5. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scottie Barnes: The Draymond Green comparison fits him to a tee. Pretty limited as a shooter and creating his own offense in the half-court but is an excellent playmaker, especially as the pick-n-roll ball handler. Graded out as one of the best defensive players in the class in every category. 

Offensively

- As the pick-n-roll ball handler he ranked in the 98th percentile when passing and his passes were pretty evenly distributed to the roll man and spot up shooters. 

- In regards to assists he ranked in the 72nd percentile in transition and in the 91st percentile in the half court. 

- He's pretty limited in the half-court as a scorer ranking in the 18th percentile on jump shots overall, 29th percentile on runners, 17th percentile on jumpers inside 17 feet, but finishes well at the rim as he ranked in the 76th percentile.

- In the half court he ranked in the 8th percentile in shots off the dribble and in the 40th percentile in c&s situations. 

- Scored the majority of his points in transition. 

Defensively

- Ranked in the 85th percentile when defending jump shots in the half court. 

- Ranked in the 79th percentile when protecting the rim in the half court.

- Ranked in the 87th percentile when closing out in C&S situations.

- Ranked in the 98th percentile when defending jump shots off the dribble. 

Best fits: Orlando, Cleveland

The Magic have a clutter of guards but none of them are true PG. Adding Barnes would give them a jumbo playmaker that would allow their scoring guards to play off ball a ton. 

If the Cavaliers plan to keep Sexton/Garland I think his defensive versatility paired with Okoro could help to negate some of their defensive deficiencies and he'd take pressure off of Sexton to have to create so he could focus solely on being a scorer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Joshua Christopher: He's a good athlete and a terror in transition but needs to get better in the half court. His pick-n-roll #'s both as a scorer and a passer are both very encouraging for a guy that projects as a secondary ball handler. His isolation numbers are okay and so are his finishing around the rim numbers, those are two things he'll have to improve on. When I watched him he did have a nice in between game and that's reflected in his floater % but he's a streaky shooter off the dribble. His catch and shoot numbers are abysmal though and it's weird that he shot it at a much higher clip when he was guarded then when he was wide open. His defensive numbers look decent. 

Offensively

- Ranked in the 91st percentile in transition. 

- Ranked in the 60th percentile as a p-n-r ball handler when looking to score.

- Ranked in the 100th percentile as a p-n-r ball handler when passing the ball. 

- Ranked in the 55th percentile in isolation. 

- Ranked in the in the 34th percentile in c&s (was 12/29 [80th percentile] when guarded & 1/13 [0th percentile] when unguarded)

- Ranked in the 29th percentile in shots off the dribble. 

- Shot 52% around the rim in the half court.

- Ranked in the 73rd percentile with runners/floaters.

Defensively:

- Ranked in the 72nd percentile in man defense.

- Ranked in the 86th percentile when closing out on spot up shooters.

- Ranked in the 39th percentile when guarding in the pick-n-roll.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

James Bouknight: Numbers pretty much reflect what I saw whenever I've watched him play. Is good at creating off the bounce, drawing fouls, and has the athleticism to finish above the rim. Has a nice floater when he beats guys off the bounce and hits mid-range jumpers off the bounce at a decent clip as well. His pick-n-roll and assist numbers are both a little concerning as a guy that projects as a secondary ball handler. As do his shooting numbers, he shot 54% on floaters and 40% on mid-range jumpers inside 17 feet. But in the half court he shot only 20% on mid-range jumpers 17' < 3P line and 29% on 3's. His catch and shoot numbers are also concerning as he was 8/37 this year. I think he has the tools to be a good scorer because he can create his own offense off the dribble without a screen, has a solid in between game, and finishes strong. But I think his numbers also raise questions about how he projects as a starter because he wasn't good in the pick-n-roll, doesn't shoot the 3 ball well, struggled in C&S, and doesn't offer much as a playmaker when he does have the ball in his hands. Defensively his numbers look fine and if he puts in the effort he should be at least an average defender. 

Offensively:

- Ranked in the 61st percentile in transition.

- Ranked in the 42nd percentile as a p-n-r ball handler when looking to score.

- Ranked in the 25th percentile as a p-n-r hall handler when passing the ball.

- Ranked in the 84th percentile in isolation

- Ranked in the 11th percentile in c&s (was 6/28 when guarded [14th percentile] & 2/9 [0th percentile] when unguarded.)

- Ranked in the 59th percentile in shots off the dribble.

- Ranked in the 28th percentile on jump shots in the half court

- Shot 63% around the rim in the half court.

- Ranked in the 93rd percentile with runners/floaters.

- Had an 0.9 A:TO ratio in transition (43rd percentile), 0.6 A:TO ratio in the half court (46th percentile) 

Defensively:

- Ranked in the 62nd percentile in man defense.

- Ranked in the 68th percentile when closing out on spot up shooters.

- Ranked in the 73rd percentile when defending the pick-n-roll

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2021 at 4:18 AM, NYRaider said:

If Kuminga reaches his ceiling I think Pascal Siakam is a pretty reasonable comparison for the type of player that he can be. Since you already have Siakam and with other versatile forwards in OG/Boucher who both took a leap last year, I think it does have a huge impact on the thought process when considering Kuminga at #4. Assuming those guys are healthy, where does he really fit in your rotation early on?

The Raptors are in a good spot because as you said you likely won't be picking this high relatively soon and have enough pieces in place that regardless of who falls to them it will be a good fit. If Green falls to #4 he fits well as FVV can slide to PG, if Suggs falls to #4 he can play the 1 on offense allowing FVV to play off ball while also being big enough to defend two guards, and if Mobley falls to 4 you can instantly pencil him as your starting 5. 

My thought process is if you think Kuminga can be the best player in the draft and you do pick him you pick him regardless of who you have at that position. That’s the big IF though. 
 

But yes Mobley, Green and Suggs all fit much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kyle21121 said:

My thought process is if you think Kuminga can be the best player in the draft and you do pick him you pick him regardless of who you have at that position. That’s the big IF though. 

But yes Mobley, Green and Suggs all fit much better.

Kuminga could be the best player in the draft but I think Cade, Mobley, Green, and possibly even Suggs could also be the best player from this class. The Raptors are a two years removed from a championship and still have a good portion of that core still intact. You guys were a 50+ win team the previous two years before this season where you were with the injury bug and had to play away from home due to covid. 

Your team is in a position to be right back in the mix in the East if you land a guy that can be an instant impact player. Kuminga could be the best player from the class but it's likely going to take him 2-3 years to figure it out. You have Siakam under contract for 3 years as he enters his prime and FVV under contract for 2 years with a 3rd year player option. 

IMO, you need to target a guy that pencils in as an immediate impact player. Because if you land one you could be in position to be a contender in the East next season. And as I've said, especially with Mobley/Green, they can also end up being the best player from this draft and they have a significantly higher floor than Kuminga. 

Kuminga's realistic upside after a few years is a Siakam type of player who likely won't be a huge impact player as a rookie. Green, Suggs, or Mobley could be key pieces and very good starters as rookies for you next year while also having as much if not more potential than Kuminga long term. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@kyle21121 I really don't foresee any scenario that Cade/Green/Mobley aren't the first 3 picks in the draft in some order. So at #4 the Raptors will likely be deciding between Kuminga and Suggs. Assuming that Lowry leaves in free agency, Suggs seems like the perfect pick at #4. Does he have the ceiling that Kuminga has, probably not. But he also has a much higher floor and should be able to contribute/play big minutes as a rookie for a team that's going to be pushing for a playoff spot. 

I can understand why a boom/bust type of player would be intriguing but the Raptors already have pieces in place and 3 guys that play a similar role to what Kuminga would provide if he pans out. And I just don't think he makes you that much better this season. 

Obviously the Raptors are in a better spot than the Bulls/Knicks were last season but we saw how well swinging on a high potential prospect over a super solid PG in Haliburton worked out for them last year. And neither of those teams was a legitimate contender like the Raptors are aiming to be. If he reaches his ceiling I think Suggs has Deron Williams type of potential but even if he doesn't I think he can be a similar player to guys like Haliburton and Lonzo, which is something your team could really use especially with another small starting guard already there in FVV. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...