I'm fine with either Chet or Jabari. But Rockets desperately need more rim protection and Chet fits that need to a "T" while also being BPA. And Chet fits like a glove alongside either Sengun or Wood.
FYI - this is much better example of what "locked up 1-5" really means. And you're getting me confused with someone else, I did not disparage the G League. I only made fun of the "grown ass men" comment because that comment was asinine and worthy of ridicule. I am actually a huge fan of G League but because I watch so much of it I also understand it's very clear limitations.
I like Eason alot too, he shows nice promise another Seattle standout player. I missed the part where he switches 5 times on every single opposing player . Eason was "the man" for LSU as his whopping 32% usage indicates. He didnt need to share the floor with 4 other highly touted recruits and make it work and his offensive bag is lightyears behind Paolo, but yes he is a better defender at this stage. I wouldnt be mad if Eason were to replace Tate at all. Playing against grown ass men seems to have worked wonders for Sengun, Luka, Jalen, Scoot Henderson, Victor Wembanyama. Seems there is more resistance than future accountants getting dunked on in the NCAA, but hey thats just like my opinion man.
Comparing G League to Euroleague is hilarious. G League doesn't play nearly the defense that Euroleagues do and talent levels/coaching are a universe apart. Euroleagues are 2nd best pro league in the world. G League is a minor league/farm system and you know it.
Sure in a vaccum that is correct, but for certain players the GLeague provides just the right environment for them to flourish. See Jalen Green.
I think you're going too extreme in one direction and almost purposely ignoring statistical context and the qualitative side of scouting. Chet does stand out statistically, but lets not act like he didn't face weaker competition, with far less pressure to carry his team offensively than the other top guys. He played his role and he was incredibly efficient/productive in it. But there's a reason Rudy Gobert is amongst the best players in the L annually in advanced stats, but isn't considered a guy who can carry a franchise. Banchero stands out in ways that Tatum did as a prospect, but as a PF instead of an SF. His mix of size, skill and fluidity he has gives him the potential to be a fulcrum/go-to guy in the L. Will it happen? Who knows. But those are types that can carry a Franchise, and they don't always put up crazy #s in CBB, because there are so many other factors at play (offensive scheme, role, roster build, competition, packed CBB paint etc).
So you get caught in lie and your recourse is to double down? C'mon man, just own up to it. You were relying on stats without game context and you were caught. Yes, he was both 6th man AND high usage. https://lsutigerswire.usatoday.com/...american-honorable-mention-postseason-awards/
This reminds me a bit of the 1982 draft where you had three in the top tier who were all forwards and who had vastly different skills and styles of play in James Worthy, Terry Cummings, and Dominique Wilkens. All three turned out to be very good NBA players, were All-Stars multiple times, and two had HOF careers. Cummings ended up averaging 23.7/10.6 his first year to win ROY honors, but he would never quite reach those numbers again. He was considered the more complete, less risky pick. He had 10 really good years before tapering off during the latter half of his career. This year, he'd be Chet. Wilkins was they guy with a free-flying image and folks were going out of their way to pick at the holes in his game. Lots of talk about his lack of defense and rebounding--which ultimately weren't exactly holes, they just weren't as overwhelming as his offense. Lowest floor/highest ceiling was the thought, but the ceiling was a gamble and the floor was more likely. (There was also, I think, some cultural biases that lowered his value in some eyes--he was too flashy, didn't come from a great system like UNC, etc.) In his rookie year, Wilkens went for 17.5/5.8, which would be his lowest numbers by far until he reached his 15th season at age 35. He also carried some very mediocre Hawks teams further than they should have been, but just didn't have the horses to hang with the Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, etc. He'd be the very rough equivalent of Banchero this year. Worthy was the star of a championship UNC squad and already way more famous than the other two. (This was before a lot of TV and Georgia just wasn't on national TV that much--Wilkens was a rumor to most of the country--while DePaul had made a few runs with Aguirre and Ray Meyer as coach, so they were on TV some.) He had some flaws in his game, but they weren't talked about as much. He had good D, solid if limited offense, and was enough of a physical presence to affect games with either speed, length, or strength and the Lakers needed all of that after getting swept by the 76ers in the Finals that year. Worthy's rookie year was 13.4/5.2, but he wasn't asked to be the guy like Cummings was for the Clippers. He'd be Smith this year. There were a lot of folks (me included) who wanted the Lakers to draft Wilkens so Showtime would go to the next level. West liked Worthy a little more though there were rumors and later statements that the Lakers tried to get both Worthy and Wilkins that year. Worthy was probably the right choice as he accepted his role as #3 and was even a Finals MVP. Still, it would have been amazing to watch Wilkens catch Magic's passes on the break. Incidentally, the Lakers were able to get Worthy because they traded a 1980 pick (turned out to be Chad Kinch) and Butch Lee to the Ted Stepien-run Cavaliers for the 1982 pick. (Pick protections were not much of a thing back then.) Meanwhile, Dominique was drafted by the Utah Jazz and on draft day everyone who followed the NBA groaned because he did not belong in Utah. After the draft, Utah agreed and sent him to Atlanta for John Drew and Freeman Williams. And the fourth/fifth picks of the draft? Bill Garnett went to the Mavericks followed by LaSalle Thompson (a workmanlike 15 years in the NBA) to the Kansas City Kings. The Ivey comp has to wait until Fat Lever at 11 or Sleepy at 13.
Advanced statistics and qualitative scouting all point to Chet Holmgren as the better overall player in this draft. Do you dispute this?
If Mobley had been the pick then EVERY SINGLE TOP 5 player would have been an option. Ivey, Banchero, Jabari, Sharpe, Chet They all would have been compatible and excellent fit with Mobley. Every.single.one.
I think Wall would have played had Mobley been the pick and the Rockets wouldn’t be in this position. I don’t think Wall/Gordon/KPJ/Mobley/Wood is a top of the lottery team. We are much better off being where we are in my opinion. It was a painful start but the vision is clear. Green was the right pick in hindsight. His steep learning curve allowed the rockets to dig a deep hole and end up with a top 5 pick. He has superstar potential and doesn’t have to be compared to anyone else in his class ever again. He was a great pick. No skipping steps. Get another foundational piece in the top 5 and take it from there.
I don't think Wall plays in any scenario. Rockets FO clearly sat Wall because of KPJ play at PG rather than Green draft pick. If anything, Green was supposed to be NBA ready sooner than Mobley so playing Wall with Green makes more sense. Mobley's impact this soon was a surprise to everyone - fans, experts and GMs included.
