I wouldn't put too much stock into judging picks <5 years. It's too early to assess Jalen Green's career. To judge an NBA career, you need to give it 10 years or so. For example, if you could redraft 2010, would you take John Wall (1st pick) or Paul George (10th)? Heck, if you looked 5 years into it, you'd be pretty happy taking Gorden Hayward (9th) or Demarcus Cousins (5th) but both of those guys fell off a cliff. Just for fun, Patrick Patterson (14th) was class of 2010. Even he has staying power. I'd take him over Cousins at this point.
I think this is a relatively weak draft and looking at the most important players in the playoffs the last 10 years - very few of them were traditional bigs and this draft happens to be top heavy on bigs. Versatile swingmen who can guard multiple positions are literally the most valuable players in the league right now and the rarest talents in the draft this year....and teams who count bigs who can't defend guards as one of their top 5 players are all at home watching other teams compete for the title right now. Rudy Gobert, KAT, and Ayton are all better players than the Grant Williams and PJ Tuckers of the world but who is still playing? ....my other problem is - we see this all the time with teams who stay in non competitor purgatory for extended periods of time because they dutifully keep extending a player they drafted high who is good enough to earn a max contract, but isn't necessarily a player who can get them to the playoffs or help them advance once there and I feel like that is where we are heading. It's that thing GMs do where they can't cut their losses because it admits they were wrong so the franchise double down on bad timing(bad draft), or poor luck(choose the wrong guy) and the whole city gets dragged into extended periods of mediocrity. Maybe we end up with a guy like Banchero who can legit put up 20/5/5 and becomes a max guy and potentially an all star but come playoff time, he is exactly the kind of big who gets hunted out in switches and destroyed for his defensive liabilities. It's why because Julius Randle is one of the better players on the Knicks, they will never be a legit playoff contender. Maybe we can grow a guy like Banchero to avoid that pitfall, but I think that has to be the message from Day One AND we have to be willing to cut ties when it's clear that he is who he is because getting a guy early in a rebuild who makes you a middle tier team and requires a max contract is the hallmark of teams stuck in the middle - not enough cap money to get better, not bad enough to get a shot at real game changers in the top of the draft. I'm just worried that Jabari is really the only sure thing skills wise to be a useful playoff contributor in this draft and everyone else is going to have to grow a lot(literally in Chet's case) to not be a liability come playoff time.
Not sayin', I'm just sayin'... Spoiler Spoiler I get the upside, but there's significant health risk here. The NBA has never before had a guy like Holmgren dominate the league. Guys that tall just tend to accumulate lower extremity issues that curtail their careers. Exceptions include Gobert and Mutombo, but rules include Yao, Oden, Porzingis, Bill Walton, (...Thabeet). Through it all I still have Chet #2 amongst my favorite picks, but yes it looks like that boom/bust scenario will no longer be our risk to bear.
Yeah, for some reason, the 2nd pick historically has more disappointing players than the 3rd pick. Maybe it's just luck. If you combine all top 3s, it's clear that these picks have produced many star/superstar players, far more than later picks.
I don't disagree with what you say. Just thought your earlier post was kind of puzzling. We at top 3 in this draft whether we like this class or not. So we hope one of those guys will turn out to be great. I have concern about everyone of those top 3 guys. But they look like the best bet we get this year. If I were the scouting people, I would look at character and work ethics very closely. When overall talent is on about the same level, those intangibles are what separate the greats from the rest.
I'd say it's because you always draft for upside and at #2 you're going with the upside guy but not necessarily the surefire guy like they usually are at #1. The Rockets did this just last year and got lucky that it panned out. Also teams tend to consider fit over other things and you end up with Luka and Taytum going at #3.
I was really looking at the all-star level criteria, but I would put Ingram as a no.2 option on a contender more than Ayton, Beal, or Mobley. I really think what we saw from Mobley this year will be pretty consistent from what we see from him long term. It is my concern with Banchero as well. Neither seem to have that “I want to be the greatest” gene. Of course, I could be just being picky. I don’t really want a maxed out Ayton and he is not really great at anything.
I keep seeing Banchero compared to Jason Tatum, I don't see it, would be happy to be wrong if he comes here but I don't see it
Totally agree - another reason I’m skittish on Banchero - for as many Duke players as who go Pro, very few of them turn into true stars and even fewer still end up as HOF type talents. I think that speaks to Duke picking a particular type of player who has always had the gift of size/talent…but few of those guys age well in the NBA because they lack the work ethic and weren’t forced into those work habits early on in their career because they could rely on their god given talents to sustain them.
Maybe Randle is a good point to bring up. Aren't the Knicks always a top 5 defensive team? Their problem is they can't score.
Banchero did show in the NCAA tournament that he could raise his game when needed. Think he’ll be a fine player in the playoffs. Timme was the one who shined for Gonzaga.