I'm not arguing that Russell will become as good an athlete as Dunn. I'm not talking about Dunn or Russell, but the concept that being an elite shooter is any less rare than being an elite athlete. You can work hard to become decent at both but "eliteness" will never be approximated through work alone.
I think this subject can be a lot more controversial than most think.
It really isn't. There's a reason why one of them is considered a consensus top 5 pick, and the other isn't.
Exposure
Agreed. GMs and Scouts miss all the time. Russell has shown PG court vision and awareness, but what are we afraid of?
Lack of quickness. Body.
Who has it? Dunn.
What about Dunn's passing? 50% Assist rate.
What are we afraid of with Dunn? 3pt. range.
You can add 3pt. range. You can't add quickness/size as easily.
I don't think shooting is that easy to add and it's a bit hand wavy to say that quickness and size aren't as easy to add as shooting range. For a 19 year old to bulk up would not be that difficult, and athleticism can be improved rapidly as well.
I do like Dunn though.
Totally disagree.
It's a lot easier to make someone a 40% shooter behind the arc, than to gain flat out speed/quickness/add 4" of vert.
See Trevor Ariza
See Danny Green
See Blake Griffin...the list goes on
the shooting argument for Dunn is so weak, especially since the mechanics are there unlike Marcus Smart
Not sold on his mechanics, and id be willing to bet his 3pt % his rookie year won't be better than Smart's 33.5
Smart's issue w his mechanics were over stated, and him shooting decently from 3 proves that. They have similar mechanics if anything, they both take the ball too far behind their head, Dunn doing it more egregiously. Don't like Smart's sideways setup?
Look at Kyle Lowry and Nick young - very solid shooters
Dunn is a better prospect than Smart. He has the tools and the motor to be an equal defender. And he also is explosive and has the ball handling to be a much better slasher. All star potential comes down to the jumpshot. If this were the NBA 10 years ago, Dunn would be a top 10 pick no doubt, becuase he can seriously eat with that mid range jumper. But will he have the green light on it to hunt out that shot time after time?
Russell... Adding athleticism does make u more injury prone, probably. MikeLg is right. Jabari Parker played with sooo much more torque his rookie season than in years past, and look what happend. Not a coincidence.
I still am all for Russell adding quickness , and I think he can. Big reason why he's in my top 3. Becuase without some more quickness and leaping ability at the rim, he won't be great at the next level IMO
I've seen you make that argument before. Just curious, have you heard of Kobe Bryant?
I think this subject can be a lot more controversial than most think.
It really isn't. There's a reason why one of them is considered a consensus top 5 pick, and the other isn't.
Exposure
Agreed. GMs and Scouts miss all the time. Russell has shown PG court vision and awareness, but what are we afraid of?
Lack of quickness. Body.
Who has it? Dunn.
What about Dunn's passing? 50% Assist rate.
What are we afraid of with Dunn? 3pt. range.
You can add 3pt. range. You can't add quickness/size as easily.
I don't think shooting is that easy to add and it's a bit hand wavy to say that quickness and size aren't as easy to add as shooting range. For a 19 year old to bulk up would not be that difficult, and athleticism can be improved rapidly as well.
I do like Dunn though.
Totally disagree.
It's a lot easier to make someone a 40% shooter behind the arc, than to gain flat out speed/quickness/add 4" of vert.
See Trevor Ariza
See Danny Green
See Blake Griffin...the list goes on
the shooting argument for Dunn is so weak, especially since the mechanics are there unlike Marcus Smart
Not sold on his mechanics, and id be willing to bet his 3pt % his rookie year won't be better than Smart's 33.5
Smart's issue w his mechanics were over stated, and him shooting decently from 3 proves that. They have similar mechanics if anything, they both take the ball too far behind their head, Dunn doing it more egregiously. Don't like Smart's sideways setup?
Look at Kyle Lowry and Nick young - very solid shooters
Dunn is a better prospect than Smart. He has the tools and the motor to be an equal defender. And he also is explosive and has the ball handling to be a much better slasher. All star potential comes down to the jumpshot. If this were the NBA 10 years ago, Dunn would be a top 10 pick no doubt, becuase he can seriously eat with that mid range jumper. But will he have the green light on it to hunt out that shot time after time?
Russell... Adding athleticism does make u more injury prone, probably. MikeLg is right. Jabari Parker played with sooo much more torque his rookie season than in years past, and look what happend. Not a coincidence.
I still am all for Russell adding quickness , and I think he can. Big reason why he's in my top 3. Becuase without some more quickness and leaping ability at the rim, he won't be great at the next level IMO
I've seen you make that argument before. Just curious, have you heard of Kobe Bryant?
Are you trying to say Kobe wasn't super athletic and quick? Because that is flatout false.. or are you trying to say he didnt get injured even though his athleticism was elite? Because that too is false-- he played in control unlike a Derrick rose who was full throttle _________________
Im just saying. You're biggest argument with regards to dunn is that he pulls the ball to far behind his head. Personally I don't even think that's true. But Kobe does that, and someone who really does do that is Kevin Garnett, and he's a pretty damn good shooter if you ask me.
I just don't think that is a fair criticism. I'm not trying to call you out but others read that and believe it. Not that it matters what we think anyways. We can argue till we're blue in the face, it's not like we're making the picks.
No one is saying he will be. But 5 years from now people will say he should've been.
Over Russell? Or do you think any of the other consensus top 5 are worse prospects than Dunn as well?
Well whats the consensus top 5? I'll give you the consensus top 4:
Okafor
Towns
Russell
Mudiay
I think after that, anyone is fair game at 5. Thats where I'd put Dunn. Wouldn't be surprised one bit if Dunn has a better career than Mudiay. Personally I'd take him before Mudiay, but I just havent seen enough Mudiay to make that decision for sure.
Also haven't taken into account any of the European guys because I haven't seen them really play. That fifth spot for me is a toss up with WCS/Winslow. And I don't see how you can't consider Dunn right up there with those 2. For all the flack Dunn gets for his health, he's not the one with the real medical issue. That would be WCS. This type of hypocrisy drives me crazy. Justice Winslow was overlooked by 98% of the people on this board. After stringing up 3 good games on the tournament, some people are saying they'd take him Second or third!! My point is just because no one is talking about Dunn right now, doesn't mean he can't play. If people watched the big east tournament the same way we're watching the NCAA, then you'll be hearing Dunn's name in the top 5 a lot more, and people wont sound crazy for saying it. He's a lottery pick. If you can't see that, then idk what else to say.
Last edited by Inverse on Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:27 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Posts: 22849 Location: La Jolla, San Diego
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2015 12:25 am Post subject:
Inverse wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Inverse wrote:
PhoenixForce wrote:
Dunn isn't being picked top 5. Stop it guys
No one is saying he will be. But 5 years from now people will say he should've been.
Over Russell? Or do you think any of the other consensus top 5 are worse prospects than Dunn as well?
Well whats the consensus top 5? I'll give you the consensus top 4:
Okafor
Towns
Russell
Mudiay
I think after that, anyone is fair game at 5. Thats where I'd put Dunn. Wouldn't be surprised one bit if Dunn has a better career than Mudiay. Personally I'd take him before Mudiay, but I just havent seen enough Mudiay to make that decision for sure.
When you say consensus, it's what I call consensus SAFE decisions based on what you know now. But if you can see the future, two or 3 of these guys will be regular role players in the NBA. It's very rare that all top 5 picks go on to be studs. The last time that came close was the 2003 Lebron draft. Lebron, Darko, Melo, Bosh, Wade.. Guess who doesn't belong? But that was the closest to perfection I can think of. The GM's pretty much nailed that draft, but this is a rare occasion.
So debate on folks! Truth of the matter is that you're all most likely wrong. There are always, always, always players not in your top 5 that SHOULD HAVE BEEN when looking back.
No one is saying he will be. But 5 years from now people will say he should've been.
Over Russell? Or do you think any of the other consensus top 5 are worse prospects than Dunn as well?
Well whats the consensus top 5? I'll give you the consensus top 4:
Okafor
Towns
Russell
Mudiay
I think after that, anyone is fair game at 5. Thats where I'd put Dunn. Wouldn't be surprised one bit if Dunn has a better career than Mudiay. Personally I'd take him before Mudiay, but I just havent seen enough Mudiay to make that decision for sure.
When you say consensus, it's what I call consensus SAFE decisions based on what you know now. But if you can see the future, two or 3 of these guys will be regular role players in the NBA. It's very rare that all top 5 picks go on to be studs. The last time that came close was the 2003 Lebron draft. Lebron, Darko, Melo, Bosh, Wade.. Guess who doesn't belong? But that was the closest to perfection I can think of. The GM's pretty much nailed that draft, but this is a rare occasion.
So debate on folks! Truth of the matter is that you're all most likely wrong. There are always, always, always players not in your top 5 that SHOULD HAVE BEEN when looking back.
100% agree. And to me that guy is Dunn. But I've said this many times already, and I'm not trying to change anyones mind unless Jim and Mitch are reading this
No one is saying he will be. But 5 years from now people will say he should've been.
Over Russell? Or do you think any of the other consensus top 5 are worse prospects than Dunn as well?
Well whats the consensus top 5? I'll give you the consensus top 4:
Okafor
Towns
Russell
Mudiay
I think after that, anyone is fair game at 5. Thats where I'd put Dunn. Wouldn't be surprised one bit if Dunn has a better career than Mudiay. Personally I'd take him before Mudiay, but I just havent seen enough Mudiay to make that decision for sure.
When you say consensus, it's what I call consensus SAFE decisions based on what you know now. But if you can see the future, two or 3 of these guys will be regular role players in the NBA. It's very rare that all top 5 picks go on to be studs. The last time that came close was the 2003 Lebron draft. Lebron, Darko, Melo, Bosh, Wade.. Guess who doesn't belong? But that was the closest to perfection I can think of. The GM's pretty much nailed that draft, but this is a rare occasion.
So debate on folks! Truth of the matter is that you're all most likely wrong. There are always, always, always players not in your top 5 that SHOULD HAVE BEEN when looking back.
100% agree. And to me that guy is Dunn. But I've said this many times already, and I'm not trying to change anyones mind unless Jim and Mitch are reading this
Dunn is as good a prospect as mudiay. So, if mudiay is a top 5 pick so is Dunn
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:16 am Post subject:
I understand Dunn can be turnover prone, doesn't have consistent 3pt range, and may have a potential issue with his shoulder at the next level.
I also think this is common of great PG rookies.
Mudiay may not have the shoulder issue and has different athletic traits, but he has the same opportunities to work on.
Both have near equal wingspan. I just prefer Dunn's shot selection out of the pick and roll and his assist rate, despite the turnovers. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Do the Lakers really need that top 5 pick? Hear me out please....
If all goes well (wishful thinking) and Clarkson and Randle develop to be at least borderline stars, I figure all the Lakers need is one more star level (in his prime) player. That could be the top 5 pick or a free agent.
I think we've all seen that "too many cooks spoil the soup" situation on many NBA superteams and it seems that often, when there are too many stars they become disenchanted...not getting enough touches, asked to defer when they are used to being "the Man".
Hopefully someday, we have a star PF in Randle, a star PG/Combo Guard in Clarkson.....then with all that cap room after Kobe retires, a star SF or Center.....the rest should be role players.
The Showtime Lakers had Magic and Worthy...Capt was getting old, then they had Byron and Coop as role players.
The Shaq/Kobe Lakers had those two and a bunch of role players...Fox, Horry, Fisher, Grant, etc....
The Celtics had Bird and McHale...then they had good role players in Parish, Ainge, DJ.
76ers - Dr. J and Cheeks...Dawkins, CJones, BJones were all role players.
Trailblazers - Walton, MLucas, Hollins...I don't think any of them except Walton were really superstars.
Look at the current Cavs team, Lebron, Irving and Love...sounds like Love isn't too happy there.
The Heat - Lebron, Bosh and DWade and how many championships did they win?
Lets look at the Spurs, in their prime they had Duncan, Parker and Ginobli.
Has there ever been a championship super team with four superstar players in their prime?
Lakers - Wilt, West, Goodrich....Wilt was basically a role player...
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
