Chimezie Metu should be a nice potential replacement if Lopez and Zubac are gone after this year, it looks like he’s projected to go were the Cavs pick will be.
Who is Dzanan Musa. Mock draft has us picking him at 24
He has an impressive resume playing for Bosnia:
2014: Euro U-16, Top Scorer
2015: Euro U-16, Top Scorer, MVP, Assists Leader and Champion
2016: World U-17: Top Scorer, 1st Team
2017: Euro U-18, Top Scorer
SF, 6'9, prolific scorer from everywhere, but lacks athleticism.
I have no idea if he's a good prospect for #24, but he's worth looking.
Musa is most definitely worth a look.
He lacks athleticism, needs to improve defensively and needs to bulk up for the rigors of the NBA.
But the kid can flat-out shoot & score in a number of ways.
He could become an "instant Offense-type" sixth man.
1. Ayton
2. Doncic
3. JJJ
4. Bagley
5. Bamba
6. WCJ
7. MPJ
8. Sexton
9. Young
10. Mikal Bridges
11. Miles Bridges
12. Lonnie Walker IV
13. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
14. Robert Williams
15. Kevin Knox
16. Aaron Holiday
17. Troy Brown Jr
18. Anfernee Simons
19. Daniel Gafford
20. Dzanan Musa
21. Mitchell Robinson
22. Keita Bates-Diop
23. Jacob Evans
24. Khyri Thomas
25. Bruce Brown
26. Chandler Hutchison
27. De'Anthony Melton
28. Melvin Frazier
29. Devonte Graham
30. Grayson Allen
31. Shake Milton
32. Landry Shamet
33. Jalen Brunson
34. Jerome Robinson
35. Tyus Battle
36. Chimezie Metu
37. Jalen Hudson
38. Tony Carr <--- How in the world!??!?
39. Rodions Kurucs
40. Kevin Hervey
41. Trevon Duval
42. Rawle Alkins
43. Hamidou Diallo
44. Jevon Carter
45. Brandon McCoy
46. Svi Mykhailiuk
47. Elie Okobo
48. Moritz Wagner
49. Ray Spalding
50. Vincent Edwards
51. Arnoldas Kulboka
52. Bonzie Colson
53. MiKyle McIntosh
54. Amine Noua
55. Milik Yarbrough
56. Alize Johnson
57. Allonzo Trier
58. Billy Preston
59. Devon Hall
60. Karim Jallow
Bolded who I like. Shocked by the number of other guys I like in the 2nd round.
I can't wait to see what the Lakers end up doing with the draft. I still really, really like Chandler Hutchison over everyone else though. I don't know why though! Something always brings me back to him when looking at prospects.
I do trust the Lakers scouting team though.. but I want Chandler to absolutely kill it if he gets a tryout. And.. he's a cali kid AND has retweeted a few of Kyle Kuzma and Isaiah Thomas' tweets so...
I think if Liangelo isn't drafted he'll both be on the Lakers Summer League team as well as one of our two-way contracts tbh.
Shooters like him usually find their ways onto NBA teams. If his shot translates at the next level he'll be on an NBA team. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
I can't wait to see what the Lakers end up doing with the draft. I still really, really like Chandler Hutchison over everyone else though. I don't know why though! Something always brings me back to him when looking at prospects.
I do trust the Lakers scouting team though.. but I want Chandler to absolutely kill it if he gets a tryout. And.. he's a cali kid AND has retweeted a few of Kyle Kuzma and Isaiah Thomas' tweets so...
if hutchison is available at our pick that's a strong pick for sure _________________ substance over style
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:53 am Post subject:
Bonzie Colson again suffers broken left foot
Quote:
Bonzie Colson suffered a broken left foot in an NIT loss to Penn State on Saturday. His father told ESPN that the family will get further medical opinions before deciding whether surgery is needed.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 11:46 am Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
in general, Wings that play both sides of the ball, have the ability to shoot, create and rebound have more value than PG's because of less supply.
Thanks for the reply... I'll have to watch film on him... I've seen the other two and I liked them but I haven't seen Hutchison yet.
Top tier players at any position will still have high value, but just look through the mocks at late 1st and 2nd round picks....it is flush with projected fringe starters, 2nd and 3rd string PG's. It is not that they are worse players than Hutchinson maybe....just more in supply.
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
in general, Wings that play both sides of the ball, have the ability to shoot, create and rebound have more value than PG's because of less supply.
Thanks for the reply... I'll have to watch film on him... I've seen the other two and I liked them but I haven't seen Hutchison yet.
Top tier players at any position will still have high value, but just look through the mocks at late 1st and 2nd round picks....it is flush with projected fringe starters, 2nd and 3rd string PG's. It is not that they are worse players than Hutchinson maybe....just more in supply.
I think a lot depends on whether we sign George or KCP... if we do, then no need for Hutchison... and then we'd go for cover for Ball. I don't see the downside of Shamet unless his foot injuries are something chronic. 66% TS with I've heard a 7 foot wingspan... and solid assist numbers.
That kid from Vegas looks good for a rim protector/center too. Got to be better than Zubac. Saw a highlight film where he put up 33 against Arizona.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:05 pm Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
in general, Wings that play both sides of the ball, have the ability to shoot, create and rebound have more value than PG's because of less supply.
Thanks for the reply... I'll have to watch film on him... I've seen the other two and I liked them but I haven't seen Hutchison yet.
Top tier players at any position will still have high value, but just look through the mocks at late 1st and 2nd round picks....it is flush with projected fringe starters, 2nd and 3rd string PG's. It is not that they are worse players than Hutchinson maybe....just more in supply.
I think a lot depends on whether we sign George or KCP... if we do, then no need for Hutchison... and then we'd go for cover for Ball. I don't see the downside of Shamet unless his foot injuries are something chronic. 66% TS with I've heard a 7 foot wingspan... and solid assist numbers.
That kid from Vegas looks good for a rim protector/center too. Got to be better than Zubac. Saw a highlight film where he put up 33 against Arizona.
My theory is it is nearly impossible to have too many wings on a NBA roster....even as future movable assets. Teams are always desperate for athletic wings during the season.
In regards to Shamet, I am simply not big on him. It is just one example, but the way Marshall locked him up in the tournament is very troubling in my opinion. In no specific order, I would prefer Brunson, Carter, Evans, Holiday and Graham over Shamet.
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
in general, Wings that play both sides of the ball, have the ability to shoot, create and rebound have more value than PG's because of less supply.
Thanks for the reply... I'll have to watch film on him... I've seen the other two and I liked them but I haven't seen Hutchison yet.
Top tier players at any position will still have high value, but just look through the mocks at late 1st and 2nd round picks....it is flush with projected fringe starters, 2nd and 3rd string PG's. It is not that they are worse players than Hutchinson maybe....just more in supply.
I think a lot depends on whether we sign George or KCP... if we do, then no need for Hutchison... and then we'd go for cover for Ball. I don't see the downside of Shamet unless his foot injuries are something chronic. 66% TS with I've heard a 7 foot wingspan... and solid assist numbers.
That kid from Vegas looks good for a rim protector/center too. Got to be better than Zubac. Saw a highlight film where he put up 33 against Arizona.
My theory is it is nearly impossible to have too many wings on a NBA roster....even as future movable assets. Teams are always desperate for athletic wings during the season.
In regards to Shamet, I am simply not big on him. It is just one example, but the way Marshall locked him up in the tournament is very troubling in my opinion. In no specific order, I would prefer Brunson, Carter, Evans, Holiday and Graham over Shamet.
If Ball was a reliable shooter I could see going for a defensive bulldog like Carter... but in the same way I wouldn't sign Beverly with Ball... I want the extra shooter. I can see some issue with Shamet in that he might not be as explosive as some of the others but we need a Korver/Redick type shooter and I think Shamet would be fine on an athletic team who could cover his weaknesses. I like what I've seen of those other guards... I'm just real worried about scoring as long as the team is carrying Lonzo.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:11 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Deandre Ayton
Verified account
@DeandreAyton
I’m just a kid from the Bahamas who came to the States when I was 12 years old with a dream. I can’t say anything about this journey other than that it’s God’s Plan 🙏🏾 Next Stop: 2018 NBA Draft #BullySeason #242toTheWorld
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:31 pm Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
If Ball was a reliable shooter I could see going for a defensive bulldog like Carter... but in the same way I wouldn't sign Beverly with Ball... I want the extra shooter.
cannot help but think Carter's reputation for defense causes many to overlook his offensive game. Carter shoots 40% from 3 on over 5 attempts per game, scores 17.4 PPG, and drops almost 7 assists per game, while pulling down 5 rebounds per game.....all of this on top of playing defense for 94' every possession. I am just not sure there is another player in college that could play high intensity defense full court on every possession, and still put up a box score line of 17 PPG / 5 RPG / 7 APG.
Just as a point of reference, during last years draft many claimed Fultz and Ball's defense was so poor because they used so much energy on offense. Not saying that was true, but it was the narrative.....but compare the production,
Ball - 14.6 PPG / 6.0 RPG / 7.6 APG
Carter - 17.4 PPG / 4.7 RPG / 6.6 APG
I am not suggesting the comparison as prospects, obviously Carter is a Senior.....but one was considered this highly productive offensive savant, while the other seems to only get recognition for his defense.
If Ball was a reliable shooter I could see going for a defensive bulldog like Carter... but in the same way I wouldn't sign Beverly with Ball... I want the extra shooter.
cannot help but think Carter's reputation for defense causes many to overlook his offensive game. Carter shoots 40% from 3 on over 5 attempts per game, scores 17.4 PPG, and drops almost 7 assists per game, while pulling down 5 rebounds per game.....all of this on top of playing defense for 94' every possession. I am just not sure there is another player in college that could play high intensity defense full court on every possession, and still put up a box score line of 17 PPG / 5 RPG / 7 APG.
Just as a point of reference, during last years draft many claimed Fultz and Ball's defense was so poor because they used so much energy on offense. Not saying that was true, but it was the narrative.....but compare the production,
Ball - 14.6 PPG / 6.0 RPG / 7.6 APG
Carter - 17.4 PPG / 4.7 RPG / 6.6 APG
I am not suggesting the comparison as prospects, obviously Carter is a Senior.....but one was considered this highly productive offensive savant, while the other seems to only get recognition for his defense.
I wouldn't be disappointed getting Carter in the second round... I'm just worried about ending up with a Fisher when we don't yet have a Kobe.
That's kind of how I see him... maybe a little better. But you've seen a lot more of him than I have so I'd defer to your commentary on that guy.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:12 pm Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
Halfcourt athleticism
Wing ability
Playmaking ability at the wing spot, which is more rare than others
Underrated defensively
Improving 3pt shot with easy mechanics
Shamet or Brunson can shoot. They don't have that athletic ability, limited defensive upside. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:14 pm Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
in general, Wings that play both sides of the ball, have the ability to shoot, create and rebound have more value than PG's because of less supply.
Thanks for the reply... I'll have to watch film on him... I've seen the other two and I liked them but I haven't seen Hutchison yet.
Top tier players at any position will still have high value, but just look through the mocks at late 1st and 2nd round picks....it is flush with projected fringe starters, 2nd and 3rd string PG's. It is not that they are worse players than Hutchinson maybe....just more in supply.
I think a lot depends on whether we sign George or KCP... if we do, then no need for Hutchison... and then we'd go for cover for Ball. I don't see the downside of Shamet unless his foot injuries are something chronic. 66% TS with I've heard a 7 foot wingspan... and solid assist numbers.
That kid from Vegas looks good for a rim protector/center too. Got to be better than Zubac. Saw a highlight film where he put up 33 against Arizona.
Disagree. If Hutch is the BPA, you draft him, period. Worry about the PT later.
It's like skipping on Kuzma because LNJ and Randle were already there. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
Halfcourt athleticism
Wing ability
Playmaking ability at the wing spot, which is more rare than others
Underrated defensively
Improving 3pt shot with easy mechanics
Shamet or Brunson can shoot. They don't have that athletic ability, limited defensive upside.
Thanks for the thorough comments but I'm curious as to what you would do with a Curry... You would've taken DeRozan over Curry in 2009?
I get what you guys mean about favoring athleticism and two way play but it seems there should be exceptions when you take a Nash or Curry type player over the prototypical Paul George size frame. Before GSW, teams would always win with a variety of body types if they had elite skills... whether it was Dirk, or Ginobili, Love, Steve Kerr... Wade and Parker were undersized. Maybe the Pistons were the last to win where everyone had the same body type.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:14 pm Post subject:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
Just curious why Hutchison is rated so much higher than Shamet or Brunson... anyone know?
To me those are the best PG backup options.
Halfcourt athleticism
Wing ability
Playmaking ability at the wing spot, which is more rare than others
Underrated defensively
Improving 3pt shot with easy mechanics
Shamet or Brunson can shoot. They don't have that athletic ability, limited defensive upside.
Thanks for the thorough comments but I'm curious as to what you would do with a Curry... You would've taken DeRozan over Curry in 2009?
I get what you guys mean about favoring athleticism and two way play but it seems there should be exceptions when you take a Nash or Curry type player over the prototypical Paul George size frame. Before GSW, teams would always win with a variety of body types if they had elite skills... whether it was Dirk, or Ginobili, Love, Steve Kerr... Wade and Parker were undersized. Maybe the Pistons were the last to win where everyone had the same body type.
I think I covered the draft back then, but it's just made more public now. I'm awfully sure I had Curry > DeRozan but there's a big difference in all player names involved.
This isn't about athleticism.
DeRozan was an athletic clay player with a wavering motor, barely a hint of a mid-range jumpshot, and a borderline elite athlete at the time. Didn't handle well outside of two dribbles. Definitely didn't see the floor. It felt like I watched 15 made 15' FT elbow jumpers for the entire season.
Curry OTOH, played PG for Davidson only in his last year and showed enhanced court vision to complement his elite level shooting abilities. It wasn't Curry and the 4 refridgerators for Davidson anymore. I didn't believe in his handle, athleticism, or his physique, but I did think he could be an effective guard. I remember saying back then that he was a SG playing PG and if you're going to rank him highly, you have to believe in that PG development continuing.
Now, Hutchison is a 4 year player vs. DeRozan coming out of college, but at least he has basically played point forward for Boise St. It's also why he has a high TO rate as well. The 3pt shot dramatically improved. He showed enough ability in a straight line drive to show shot diversity at the hoop. DeRozan at the same point was a 17/3/2 42%FG shooter at the time by his 4th year. I'd argue his best individual development occured within the past 3 seasons, not his first 3.
Aside from that, Landry Shamet isn't the dynamic shooter that Stephen Curry is. Curry was basically taking Pete Maravich shots with efficiency.
Sure, he's an elite NCAA shooter, but Curry was making shots over 2 closeout defenders during the NCAA tournament. I think he had a better first step over Shamet. I don't think of Shamet as a starting PG necessarily even though he's displayed some skills, but I think of Wichita St as a better basketball program than Davidson. That's a big reason why Shamet is a late 1st round type, while Curry was a projected lottery pick. Curry was the better individual shot creator when he didn't have the screens, had the quicker release, and wasn't always a guy that could get heated up off the dribble.
All of this being said, I'm not favoring athleticism. It's all about who I think is the best player available. Shamet is projected to bring elite shooting, playmaking second. Hutchison is projected to be a very good slasher, playmaking second, streak shooting 3rd, team/individual defense 4th.
Do I think Shamet can bring that kind of defense and slashing? No. Big difference Hutchison's shots at the rim being 23% assisted vs. Shamet being 55% assisted at the rim. Both guys are above 70% finishing at the rim. But whose is more likely to translate?
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 6:17 pm Post subject:
Ha, found it.
Quote:
All of them, their FG% drops when facing taller defenders.
Yes, they can work around them, but it doesn't mean that they're equally as effective regardless of the defender.
Examples. What's the difference between CP3 on Fisher, vs Bryant or Ariza? Or Parker vs. Fisher or Odom?
Not any different from Parker having issues against 6'10" Odom, or CP3 having issues against 6'8" Ariza either.
The fact that Curry is already getting that kind of defensive attention, speaks volumes of his talent level.
Seriously, we're talking about Davidson here. Davidson.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Stephen-Curry-1170/
Just reading the strengths and weaknesses and I can't help but think of Bibby or Nash. Lights out shooters. Bibby was a bonafide PG from the getgo. Nash needed a few years of refinement.
When you can shoot that well against that kind of defensive pressure, you don't need the best ball-handling in the world to be an effective PG. Just enough to change directions on the fly. And he can do that.
He's a triple threat player with NBA level hoop IQ, work ethic, and J. That's all Nash needed.
He'd be the sickest triangle O PG in the L if he was a Laker too. Best off-the-ball movement from a PG you'll ever see.
1:32. Hell youtube is full of clips with 2 defenders and he'll knock down the 3, or fouled and get the 3.\\
Quote:
He'll have to be a PG. I'm not concerned. Nash was more of a deadeye shooter entering the league as well.
Nash was self-made. People forget he didn't enter the league great. It took him several years to develop the handles and passing skills before he became MVP.
How is he only effective with the ball in his hands, and yet, the most proactive off the ball PG at the NCAA level?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
