Very rough and quick: 1. Wemby 2. Scoot 3. Cade 4. Banchero 5. Green 6. Mobley 7. Chet 8. Wagner 9. Sengun 10. Amen 11. Ausar 12. Giddey 13. Jabari 14. Murphy III 15. Jalen Williams
The amount of rookies on that list that will be nothing but role players...at best. Some will be out of the league. I always say, look at all rookie teams, you'll find a good number of them do mostly nothing for most of their career. These dudes would have Yogi Ferrell going over Brandon Ingham, Jaylen Brown, and Jamal Murray Like some rookies are asked to carry a much larger role. Dudes like Trey Murhpy gets to come in, take selective shots, team ain't depending on his output. What about Chandler Parsons, yall remember him? Another rookie that outplayed his expectations and the moment you put him in a bigger role it turned out he wasn't built for that. He was an average at best everything, all he was ever going to be, but he shined on a team that fit him and that's about it. Couldn't fit any where else because he wasn't that good. Guys like Paolo, Scottie, Cade should be much higher, at least their team is strongly depending on them. They did this draft purely on production is why its ranked this way. That's not how a draft is done. A draft is based on potential. No way in hell is Jabari or Green or Sengun going to be behind Trey Murphey and Austin Reaves. This is the issue with some people, people don't realize that playing around better players can make you look good. Rui is the perfect example of this. Starting to look useless playing on the Wizards, put him next to Lebron and suddenly he's looking a lot better almost over night. Reaves can come out and score 10ppg per night and get congratulated for it but if Green scored 10ppg we'd all be calling him a bust and would want to trade him while he still has value. Put Reaves on this team and ask him to lead the team in scoring and see how he does.
Potential 25-30pt+ scorers: 1. Wemby (28pt/13reb/3asi/4blk) 2. Paolo (31pt/8.5reb/6.5asi) 3. Scoot (28pt/5reb/8asi/1.6stl) 4. Green (27pt/4.5reb/5asi) 5. Jabari (26pt/8.5reb/2.5asi/1.3blk) All Star Potential 6. Cade (23pt/6.5reb/7.5asi/1.2stl) 7. Chet (22pt/10.5reb/3asi/3.5blk) 8. Sengun (22.5pt/11.5reb/6asi/1.4blk/1.3stl) 9. Amen (21.5pt/6reb/7.5asi/1.6stl/1.2blk) 10. Miller (23.5pt/6.5reb/3.5asi/1.5stl/1.2blk) 11. Ausar (22.5pt/7.5reb/4.5asi/1.8stl/1.3blk) 12. Ivey (22.5pt/5reb/6.5asi) All-NBA Defensive 13. Mobley (19pt/10reb/3.5asi/1.8blk/1.0stl) 14. Kessler (16pt/13.5reb/2asi/3.8blk)
1. Whitmore I'd have to think about the rest. Not sure any of them were summer league MVP, so probably not picking them.
That's a pretty bold list with both Amen & Scoot ahead of all the big men. I hope your list ends up being correct but it's far from my list. I have Jabari as the top Rockets prospect currently but he's a ways down the overall list. 1. Wemby 2. Scoot 3. Banchero 4. Chet 5. Giddey 6. Mobley 7. Wagner 8. Jabari 9. Cade 10. Amen 11. Sengun 12. Miller 13. Green 14. Murphy III
Good job OP, you gave me enough information to know that I don’t ever have to listen to a podcast from these dweebs, ever.
Can't take these folks seriously. Some r ranked based on potential while others are based on production. How chet a dude who came back from a serious injury is rank higher than any of our prospects is quite insane. Sengun not being on the list is all it takes for the credibility of these folks to go down the toilet
Anybody. There were some bad charts there, but if the bad ones were still better than everyone they left off, it would make sense. There’s nothing really telling there without comparing it to some of the people they omitted.
I think they picked a lot of solid players, I think the only areas to disagree are with the order and with some of the guys that have little or no NBA time due to injury or the fact that they were just drafted. Obviously, I would not have Jaden Ivey on the list at all because he has been terrible, Banchero and Murray certainly seem overrated, and Tari is underrated. When it comes to the other Rockets, Jalen and Sengun should have made the list towards the end, but I get why they were snubbed....it's not THAT much of a snub and the national perception will be what they are. Also, I guess it's important that their list was pretty clearly subjective based on not just what we've seen but what they think players will become. That's how you get guys like Chet and Wemby so high on the list. Showing what players objectively were isn't always the best indication of what they might become. There's always room for that "miracle 3rd year leap" that a lot of fanbois are holding their breath wishing for. Any of the really poorly performing players could surprise everyone with a breakout season and some of the guys already performing well could stagnate or even decline.
I know you’re not big on potential but it has to be worth something. For the sake of a hypothetical I’ll use a 1-100 rating system, would you rather have a player that was a 75 as a rookie and 80 in his sophomore year but no potential to ever been an allstar, or a guy who has potential to be a 95+ but was a 65 in his rookie year? Sure it’s not exactly promising and it’s a low percentage but it can be worth it to take a gamble rather than taking the “sure thing” that has very little upside. Even if it doesn’t work out, you gotta take some swings if you want to get superstars. That’s why I’d rather have Jalen green or jaden Ivey over someone like Austin Reaves or maybe Tari. On a rebuilding team you can’t step into the next stage until you find that superstar so stacking up role players (even if they’re very good) doesn’t do much for you.
That's not really true, it's not that I'm not big on potential so much as I'm skeptical of claims about players potential since it's inherently a subjective discussion. I've seen hundreds of players that people were certain would be the next big thing fizzle out. Going with your hypothetical, do you take the guy that is already an 80 in his second season over the box of magic beans that is a 55 after 2 seasons that some think will be a 95+? I think in most cases you take the sure thing over the bag of magic beans....because most of them end up being nothing. The 80 and the 55 are quantifiable, they are things you know for certain, the "potential" is non quantifiable and it's often not even true. The further you get away from the quantifiable, the less certainty you have and the more that bias becomes a larger and larger factor. If you ask Jalen Green fans, he's certain to be basically the test tube baby of Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, and God....but better than all 3. Now, is that "potential" based in fanaticism or is it based in reality? That's a very hard question to answer.
Yeah but what’s the point of taking all those 80s? What are you going to do with a team of Austin Reaves, Clint capela, pj Tucker, Ariza… like what’s the point of having all these solid role players? Winning 40 games? Of course the odds aren’t in your favor taking the Jalen greens or jaden iveys, on average you won’t come out ahead. I get that. But the goal isn’t to make the decision that has the best median outcome. I’d rather try and fail at finding a superstar than collect a bunch of solid hustle role players. At least with the former you can continue drafting in the lottery. I’d prefer that to winning 45 games and having 0 chance at getting anywhere in the playoffs.
2 reasons. 1. A couple of those guys who are 80's as sophomores can turn into 95+ just like your 55 guys that have the hype. 2. A team full of high caliber players that may be "just a superstar away" is a lot better than a team full of 55's where you perpetually keep saying "wait till the 3rd year leap" then "wait till the 4th year leap" then "wait till the 5th year leap"
A lot of good dudes. Let's revisit this after a couple. Even fools get a few years to prove themselves no?
