Agree completely. The narrative people keep trying to use of "he was an MVP in one of the top leagues in the world" is massively off base. Sengun's team don't even qualify for Euroleague and play in the Eurocup which is an entire tier of basketball lower than Euroleague. No european domestic league is "high competition," the only reason the Euroleague is is because it's all the best teams from the domestic leagues (of which Sengun's is not one.) Doncic being Euroleague MVP, that's a big deal. Sengun being Turkish MVP is a nothingburger, any top college player would win it just as easily.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5496155/2024/05/16/zach-edey-nba-draft-combine/ No testing drill gets more attention at the combine than the vertical leap. It’s also the one that might invite the most shenanigans. Now, this isn’t an accusation about anyone at this year’s combine and no one is saying there was any tomfoolery this week. But among basketball officials, there’s a well-known way to try to hack the vert jump that seems interesting to note. A player’s vertical is tested by first measuring their standing reach. That sets a baseline, and the height a player reaches on their vert is based off that reach. But one way to try to grab a few more inches is to short arm the standing reach, which sets the baseline lower and would make the vert jump pop. It’s a commonly known tactic among both team officials and agents. Another way to try to add an inch or two, one scout pointed out, might be showing up lighter to the combine, which could help the player jump higher since he’s trying to carry less weight. That doesn’t mean it always works and fools the NBA. Teams have a good feel for the standard standing reaches for a player based on their height, and if someone’s reach comes up a little short based on that then the vert might get a little fishy. Teams also do their own individual testing when they bring a prospect in for a visit to their own facility. There is some downside to this, too. While the vertical might be the more eye-raising stat, a player’s standing reach could be more important. A player is more likely to have to reach as high as they can on a shot contest or rebound than they are to have the opportunity to jump as high as they can.
Sengun has proven himself in the NBA already and shown that his prior performance was indeed a good indicator of future potential. John Hollinger is not an idiot. Turkish league is much better than Australian league.
I’ve seen Steve Nash, Steph Curry & now CP3 over a kid that didn’t start at Kentucky. He looks like a could be a good NBA player but at what level I don’t know. But the guys you’re talking about are HOF guards. Some of us need to pump the brakes man.
Pnr doesn't require a great shooter from the passer, other players besides the pnr executioners need to be the good shooters. What you need is the passer to have a strong gravity from the defense to keep the defender on them, which Amen does. Amen and Clingan's height and Amen's passing ability along with Clingan's cutting speed, big hands and strong finishing at the rim would be ruthlessly effective against opposing defenses. Go watch Clingan finishing PNR plays. It's powerful.
Take Dillingham at 3 , add the 44th if needed, for 5 and Stewart, select Sheppard with the 5th. No to Boban, Tate, Bullock and even Landale. NT- MLE can be utilized for another FA.
Im not sure you understand how this works lol... When one is making comparisons, or at least me, im not saying he's going to be CP3 lol. I am saying there are lots of shades of similarities in their games. That's how draft comparisons work - you're trying to figure out, relative to great NBA players, how they resemble them
The pnr is going to be more effective when at least one of the players involved can shoot. This is not even a real argument. If neither player involved can shoot the defensive player being picked is just going to go under the screen and the big is going to play drop coverage. An Amen/Clingan pnr would be a joke and Ime would not waste time running anything like that. Amen can barely get on the floor as a main ballhandler period because his shot is so bad. Also, last year Amen was awful as the ball handler in the pnr (because he was no threat to shoot)...He was in the 35th percentile below guys like Tre Mann and Markelle Fultz. Thinking that him and Clingan (or anyone at this point) are going to be some dynamic PNR duo is nonsensical.
Clingan writeup: https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/donovan-clingan-the-colossus-of-the?utm_source=publication-search
Sheppard looks better with a 40 inch vertical and two more inches on his standing reach than the other way around.
I still don’t understand how you can fake standing reach. I mean if you don’t extend your arm fully, wouldn’t the tester notice that? But whatever
As of now, the odds for the third pick (per BetOnline): Castle +375 Risacher +400 Dillingham +425 Sheppard / Clingan +450 Sarr / Topic +750 Not sure how I feel. More flat than the draft lottery odds lmao.
No way the Rockets take Dillingham at 3. Even smaller, a worse defender, with a very questionable shot selection.
Yeah, I've seen some mention those flaws about his passing. I personally don't know what to make of them, and I've seen other experts seem unfazed by it (and even mention he's actually good at those things). I've definitely seen him make some left handed skip passes on drives at times. Maybe it would be better if he did it more (and I do agree about his pocket passing specifically, which is especially important on this team), but given that he *did* flash it at times (in limited usage), it doesn't seem unreasonable that he can pick up these things over time (like you said). FVV is definitely better as a passer (now), but I think they might be similar in their overall passing ability. I definitely don't think Reed will be a flashy, super creative assist machine. Given the PG role and adequate usage, he'd probably be like a 6-8 APG guy I'm guessing vs some 10+ APG monster. But I think that's probably fine, especially if he keeps the TOs low too. I *do* think the ballhandling (especially under pressure) is probably more of a concern for his PG role than his passing skills directly. FWIW, assuming Reed is the guy and groomed as a PG, I'm not opposed to dipping into the MLE money and bringing back someone like Aaron Holiday for those backup/3rd PG minutes to start. Let Reed develop some of these skills (with *high* usage) at RGV for a bit then bring him up. If he's as smart and as skilled as I think, that probably shouldn't take too long. Could maybe move Holiday at the deadline for a 2nd or something along those lines. Just to be clear since Nook was responding to something I said, we're talking about stuff Sam Vecenie said...and he was not necessarily talking about the type of players you mention (though maybe not excluding them either). His examples were Jalen Brunson, Austin Reaves, Desmond Bane, etc. I think Reed definitely fits in that group (maybe even better since he excelled as a freshman?). I don't know if it is fair to compare him to some of those other names, but I think the point is less about comparing these guys directly and more about how elite IQ, feel, skill (especially at young-ish age) generally means a high ceiling regardless of other attributes. This goes against some of the evaluations of Reed (including in this thread) where people might call him a high floor but low ceiling guy. I'd argue he's a high floor, high ceiling guy (like Brunson, Sengun, Luka, etc.). I think that's just the point I'd like to get across. With a certain POV, I don't hate some of this. But I'm going to pick on you (since you mentioned Clingan), and I'll bring back up some of the things I said previously as a thought experiment. Let's say you draft Clingan, love Sengun (want to keep him long term), and Clingan + Sengun don't work together. I assume Sengun gets something like 34-36MPG. I assume you might try Jabari (or Amen/Tari?) at small ball center. Steven Adams is likely your backup center. If you keep Jock, Clingan would have to do better than him...and BTW apparently Jock was 89 percentile on rim defense. And he's a good screener. OK, well Adams might not be back next season (and maybe Jock eventually gets moved if not right away). Well would it then make more sense to draft a big next year (or later)? Could someone like a Rocco Zikarsky accomplish 80% of what a Clingan might offer in a limited backup role? That could allow the 2024 pick to be used on Reed, Risacher, Topic, Castle, Holland, etc., and would that be better than Clingan this year + <other player> next year? Well if that non-big man is Cooper Flagg or Ace Bailey, I guess I'd take that, but I'm not sure if it is someone else. Maybe you could even move Jock and end up with Edey somehow (since I assume he's *probably* a 15-25 guy in the draft). Oh and just to repeat (for 100th time), I think Clingan will be great. Just don't know if I love him in a back-up role (especially since we probably have better back-ups now, and we'll also want to play small-ball). To be clear, I don't like the comps to HOF folks either, though as I mentioned earlier, it is certainly fair to compare their college numbers. I do want to say that Kentucky not starting Reed is not a knock on Reed but more a knock on John Calipari IMO. I'm not a Kentucky or college basketball guy (I only semi-follow for prospects), but I got the impression folks were very confused by what he was doing. Kentucky is going to end up with potentially 2 top 10 guards in this draft, and yet he went with another freshman to start (DJ Wagner). And never switched things up when it was clear Reed and Rob were better (or at least that's the impression I got). I also recall Vecenie kinda blasting him for their gameplan in the tournament game against Oakland. Reed (and I think Rob IIRC) sucked that game regardless, but Kentucky seemed very unprepared for some reason. I kinda got the impression that John Calipari felt some of that heat and decided to get a new deal elsewhere ASAP as perhaps the Kentucky base might not accept more of this in future years. I'll give him props for being a great recruiter, probably a great developer of talent, etc., but he also seem to make some odd decisions. I think Reed would normally have started in many other situations.
