Ongoing draft/lottery discussion [OPEN SPOILERS]
- Thread starter hrdboild
- Start date
I'm talking style of play. I appreciate and really enjoy your posts and the thought you put into them, but you're way too heavy on the stats when trying to prove me wrong. I rarely go the stats route because numbers can be manipulated to say what you want and don't always come with context. So when I'm making a point about a player and there are no stats in my post, you can be sure that I'm analyzing his on the court performance with the eye test. When I do use stats, it will be accompanied with context.
Just rolling with stats is setting up oneself for all kinds of wrong conclusions.
But when there's not much footage you go look for stats first: look at his team - ok, he got 3 very good shooters next to him in the starting lineup, and his center looks solid offensively as well (20 points per 40 minutes, good amount of FTs and limited TOs), 6 out of 7 teammates with at least 50 2ptFGs had above .540 in 2ptFG%, so he was in Jerian Grant situation, where he had team, that fitted him very well.
There is still some footage:
I just can't watch that - his opponents are just ridiculously bad. Payne is walking on D. He gets to the cup, when he's not settling, but it's more outsprinting his defender - doesn't have even semblance of NBA game.
Somewhat better level of competition: at least Payne worries about his dribble and is in defensive stance most of the time.
The only truly good team he faced was @Xavier, and they were dealt with in the first 12 minutes, and then home team was in cruise mode for the rest of the game.
Payne has quickness, but he's thin and doesn't have thickness and body control of Lillard. He seems to be a good prospect, who will find his way to the NBA, but no way I think about him at #6. Unless he massively improves his shot, Darren Collison is probably his ceiling.
But when there's not much footage you go look for stats first: look at his team - ok, he got 3 very good shooters next to him in the starting lineup, and his center looks solid offensively as well (20 points per 40 minutes, good amount of FTs and limited TOs), 6 out of 7 teammates with at least 50 2ptFGs had above .540 in 2ptFG%, so he was in Jerian Grant situation, where he had team, that fitted him very well.
There is still some footage:
The only truly good team he faced was @Xavier, and they were dealt with in the first 12 minutes, and then home team was in cruise mode for the rest of the game.
Payne has quickness, but he's thin and doesn't have thickness and body control of Lillard. He seems to be a good prospect, who will find his way to the NBA, but no way I think about him at #6. Unless he massively improves his shot, Darren Collison is probably his ceiling.
A couple things about Payne. You have to factor in what he's asked to do by his coach and what is required in his system.
For example, against Morehead, he shot 45%, had 25pts,3 stls and 2 blocks. His defense was passive and managed those stats, but he was also the main focus of the offense. He was the primary ball handler AND in the course of the offensive set, Payne is being run off screens so that HE can take the shots. He's practically playing SG and PG by offensive design. Although he has some teammates that can shoot, Payne IS that team and he can't expend full energy in all aspects of the game continuously and play the significant minutes he's asked to.
As far as his ability to drive to the basket, he's more crafty than fast. He changes pace and gets opponents off balance.
I've also said that if we draft him, it would be after trading down. If I had to give him a ceiling, which I'm reluctant to do with anyone, I'd lean towards Teague.
I don't know where his NBA career will take him, but I'm not writing him off as a top prospect just because he played at a smaller school. Apparently, neither are NBA scouts.
For example, against Morehead, he shot 45%, had 25pts,3 stls and 2 blocks. His defense was passive and managed those stats, but he was also the main focus of the offense. He was the primary ball handler AND in the course of the offensive set, Payne is being run off screens so that HE can take the shots. He's practically playing SG and PG by offensive design. Although he has some teammates that can shoot, Payne IS that team and he can't expend full energy in all aspects of the game continuously and play the significant minutes he's asked to.
As far as his ability to drive to the basket, he's more crafty than fast. He changes pace and gets opponents off balance.
I've also said that if we draft him, it would be after trading down. If I had to give him a ceiling, which I'm reluctant to do with anyone, I'd lean towards Teague.
I don't know where his NBA career will take him, but I'm not writing him off as a top prospect just because he played at a smaller school. Apparently, neither are NBA scouts.
Ability to draw fouls is one of truly translatable qualities, unless the reason behind it was bulk/brute force, that no one in college could handle. Ability to draw fouls enhances players effectiveness. Teague had a very good 2ptFG/FT rate, so did Lillard. Payne was mediocre. FT rate alone won't determine, whether a player succeeds in NBA or not as PGs need handles, vision, decision-making and a lot more qualities, but towards the top guys are more or less good in all these things, and efficiency matters a lot. Also Teague had sizable advantage in 3pt%s and decent in FT%, in other words he was a better shooter in college. Payne can still get closer to the top by excelling in some area, but I don't see amazing vision or creativity and those are hard-wired qualities, so those areas will have to be either handles or shooting.
I haven't watched Cameron Payne so don't take this as a commentary on him in any way, but what you're saying here is exactly almost word for word what people told me about Jimmer Fredette when I expressed concern over his defensive capabilities. Whether or not he was just doing as he was told, I wouldn't take it for granted that somebody can do something until I've actually seen them do it. That's just a general comment though.
I understand, but the main difference is that Jimmer lacks the physical ability to play D. Lacks lateral quickness AND Jimmer is a SG in a PG body. Payne has physical ability and shows it with his shot blocking and steals. Payne also doesn't have to guard opposing SGs like Jimmer. Although PGs are getting bigger, Payne's size should be comparable to most in the league.
Where does the idea of Payne not being a good defender come from? He has the wingpsan and lateral quickness to guard PGs. In the sample of ful games I've watched, he was actually decent/good in defending. I think the biggest question for him was his defensive effort. When Payne was locked in, he was a very good defender. I think his stance can be corrected, but he's not a PG who can't play defense.
I actually found stats that showed he allowed less than 39% fg. He didn't play any powerhouses, but that's a great stat nonetheless. I was actually very surprised to see it. If I find it, I will edit it here.
I think you can definitely question if the amount of load he had to carry at Murry St. affected his defense. He has the wingspan and quckness to be an above average defender.
Lillard is a very poor defender.. that's even considering the fact that he's 6'3 190 6'8" wing span. Payne has a good anticipation and a knack for picking the ball.
In 104 games career college games, Lillard had a total of 129 steals.
In 69 games career college games, Payne had a total of 125 steals.
I think Darren Collison is his mid-level floor.
I actually found stats that showed he allowed less than 39% fg. He didn't play any powerhouses, but that's a great stat nonetheless. I was actually very surprised to see it. If I find it, I will edit it here.
I think you can definitely question if the amount of load he had to carry at Murry St. affected his defense. He has the wingspan and quckness to be an above average defender.
Lillard is a very poor defender.. that's even considering the fact that he's 6'3 190 6'8" wing span. Payne has a good anticipation and a knack for picking the ball.
In 104 games career college games, Lillard had a total of 129 steals.
In 69 games career college games, Payne had a total of 125 steals.
I think Darren Collison is his mid-level floor.
Here's just my assessment on Payne's offense around the rim.
Attacking and finishing around the rim is a weakness, but it represents very little of his offense. Only 17.9% of his shots came at the rim. Even with that, he finished at a decent clip: 62.8%.
We can compare that to other draft prospects coming into the NBA. I will show the percentage of overall shots that came at the rim, and their FG% there.
Prospect, % of shot at rim, % of shot at rim made.
To be fair, the only good finishers among these PGs are Grant and Wright. As you can see, Grant is a tremendous player around the rim, while Wright heavily depends on the rim for his offense. When you take a look at Payne next to the rest of the top PGs in this draft, his production at the rim is much lower than everyone else, but his % is decent. You also have to factor in how many of those shots were actually floaters. ( I believe floaters count as layups). Payne was not a very aggressive attacker and did not depend on the rim for his offense.
At Murray St, they had had 2 bigs who occupied the paint at all times. Payne played alongside Jarvis Williams who was a very good offensive player. PnR was a huge success for the team. However, since there were always 2 bigs occupying the paint, the spacing was not an ideal scenario for players looking to be in attack mode. Payne took very few shots around the rim which is why he had very few FTs. A lot of FTs do come from aggressive attacks at the rim.
Payne does not have the athleticism nor quickness to ever become a great finisher around the rim, however, he has the craftiness.
Here's the question: Does he need to be a good finisher around the rim to be a good player for the Kings?
My personal verdict:
Cousins spends a dang ton of time around the paint and restricted area.. so does JT and probably whoever will be our starting PF next year. Gay loves to hover in and out, mostly staying around 15ft out( just from the eye test). Payne excels at shooting the ball from deep. Payne is a perimeter player and it would fit perfectly into our offense.
Attacking and finishing around the rim is a weakness, but it represents very little of his offense. Only 17.9% of his shots came at the rim. Even with that, he finished at a decent clip: 62.8%.
We can compare that to other draft prospects coming into the NBA. I will show the percentage of overall shots that came at the rim, and their FG% there.
Prospect, % of shot at rim, % of shot at rim made.
- D'Angelo Russell - 21.9% 62.2%
- Cameron Payne- 17.9% 62.8%
- Jerian Grant - 31.3% 73.1%
- Delon Wright- 48.5% 64.3%
- Tyus Jones - 25% 55.6%
- Terry Rozier- 26.9% 55%
To be fair, the only good finishers among these PGs are Grant and Wright. As you can see, Grant is a tremendous player around the rim, while Wright heavily depends on the rim for his offense. When you take a look at Payne next to the rest of the top PGs in this draft, his production at the rim is much lower than everyone else, but his % is decent. You also have to factor in how many of those shots were actually floaters. ( I believe floaters count as layups). Payne was not a very aggressive attacker and did not depend on the rim for his offense.
At Murray St, they had had 2 bigs who occupied the paint at all times. Payne played alongside Jarvis Williams who was a very good offensive player. PnR was a huge success for the team. However, since there were always 2 bigs occupying the paint, the spacing was not an ideal scenario for players looking to be in attack mode. Payne took very few shots around the rim which is why he had very few FTs. A lot of FTs do come from aggressive attacks at the rim.
Payne does not have the athleticism nor quickness to ever become a great finisher around the rim, however, he has the craftiness.
Here's the question: Does he need to be a good finisher around the rim to be a good player for the Kings?
My personal verdict:
Cousins spends a dang ton of time around the paint and restricted area.. so does JT and probably whoever will be our starting PF next year. Gay loves to hover in and out, mostly staying around 15ft out( just from the eye test). Payne excels at shooting the ball from deep. Payne is a perimeter player and it would fit perfectly into our offense.
Wright's FG% against was in the 20s, while Rozier was under 32%, so Payne's numbers are average, if that. Lillard is a bad defender (part of that is lack of effort though), so comparison to him on that end should be in favor of any serious prospect. And PG defense depends as much on core strength as on length and quickness, another Murray St. alum, Isaiah Canaan being a good example of that or Chris Paul as the ultimate proof of that.
P.S. I'm still waiting to read, what Payne has over Collison, who is apparently his floor.
P.S. I'm still waiting to read, what Payne has over Collison, who is apparently his floor.
This analysis begs a question. Why is Payne considered a lottery pick and moving up draft boards if he can't shoot, can't drivelacki draw fouls, can't play defense, has poor handles, no court vision and hasn't played against any competition?
I'll tell you why I think. He has great court vision and handles. He has the ability to be an above average defender. He hasn't focused on his shot because he's a "pass first" guard who just happened to be his teams best player, so he was pressed into being their scorer. Basically, Payne has the intangibles along with the physical tools to get better in the areas he needs to grow.
To me, a 1st or 2nd year college player who appears to have refined every skill andbis not considered the top pick in the draft is fools gold. If he has no room to grow his game, he won't survive in the NBA.
I'll tell you why I think. He has great court vision and handles. He has the ability to be an above average defender. He hasn't focused on his shot because he's a "pass first" guard who just happened to be his teams best player, so he was pressed into being their scorer. Basically, Payne has the intangibles along with the physical tools to get better in the areas he needs to grow.
To me, a 1st or 2nd year college player who appears to have refined every skill andbis not considered the top pick in the draft is fools gold. If he has no room to grow his game, he won't survive in the NBA.
This is nice but when you are a mediocre athlete who struggles to finish at the rim at a mid major college that is a major problem. I saw a stat in another forum that he took more floaters than layups attempted. This will hinder him from being a star at a loaded position. Winslow has a chance of being a star and I think he will be better. Put Winslow at SG as his shot gets better and he will live at the line bullying his way to the rim. I'm really liking Winslow as long as he can shoot the 3 at an average number he will be good.
Here's a trade I'd love to see happen.
Knicks trade Calderon, Jason Smith and #4 to Denver for Lawson and #7.
A bit lopsided in the Knicks favor but if the Nuggets truly are in a situation where they feel they have to move Lawson then this isn't bad. Especially if they really like Mudiay.
This gives the Nuggets Mudiay (with Calderon as the starter while he gets up to speed and then as the backup) and the Knicks get a PG and move down to get Lyles or Payne who they are said to be high on.
Then Orlando takes Winslow (hopefully) and the Kings get WCS. And don't get Lawson.
Knicks trade Calderon, Jason Smith and #4 to Denver for Lawson and #7.
A bit lopsided in the Knicks favor but if the Nuggets truly are in a situation where they feel they have to move Lawson then this isn't bad. Especially if they really like Mudiay.
This gives the Nuggets Mudiay (with Calderon as the starter while he gets up to speed and then as the backup) and the Knicks get a PG and move down to get Lyles or Payne who they are said to be high on.
Then Orlando takes Winslow (hopefully) and the Kings get WCS. And don't get Lawson.
We have a SG that can shoot the 3 at an average clip. So why start over and hope someone we draft can do it.
There is a write up on the other Kings board that outlines Paynes strengths and weaknesses. Pretty much says what myself and 206 have been saying. Take a look because it's written better than I can do.
There is a write up on the other Kings board that outlines Paynes strengths and weaknesses. Pretty much says what myself and 206 have been saying. Take a look because it's written better than I can do.
I said Collison is Payne's mid floor. He's the inbetween comp. Payne is a better passer and playmaker coming out of college. Payne excels as a scorer. Darren has always been a quiet passive guy who shys away from being THAT guy which has always limited his upside/potential. Payne is a terrific scorer and shooter. People has a quick, but low release. It may or may not be a textbook jumpshot, but neither is Curry's. Even with his funky looking shot, it's always consistent. He's not just a standstill shooter.
I just think Payne has a higher ceiling than Collison because of his ability to score from anywhere on the perimeter. You add that along with his PnR skills and playmaking ability which tops it. Collison/George Hill would be his mid level floor. Most players only reach their mid level floor, so take that for what it's worth.
Payne can be a very good PG in the NBA as long as he adds more strength.
I just think Payne has a higher ceiling than Collison because of his ability to score from anywhere on the perimeter. You add that along with his PnR skills and playmaking ability which tops it. Collison/George Hill would be his mid level floor. Most players only reach their mid level floor, so take that for what it's worth.
Payne can be a very good PG in the NBA as long as he adds more strength.
There's some sudden excitement about Payne, but I'm not really sure it is warranted. His bright spots are his passing/playmaking and his floater. But he has trouble finishing at the rim and his outside scoring actually isn't as good as Collison was in college. You can look at any shooting percentage you want - FG%, 2PT%, 3PT%, FT%, TS%, eFG% and Collison outshined Payne in college. That's despite playing much better competition. And as far as saying that Collison shys away from being "the man", he took the same number of shots per game as teammates Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook. Sure, Payne took 15 shots per game to Collison's 10, but Payne isn't one of four future NBA players on the same team.
Maybe with work Payne can be as good as Collison. But that won't happen for a couple of years at any rate. If we were in the 15-20 range it would make sense for us to give him a good look. But at #6? We will have better options.
Maybe with work Payne can be as good as Collison. But that won't happen for a couple of years at any rate. If we were in the 15-20 range it would make sense for us to give him a good look. But at #6? We will have better options.
With Payne it's really about his combination of playmaking and shooting potential, especially on a team featuring DeMarcus Cousins.
That said, while said very early on that I was a Cameron Payne fan, that was back when I thought he was a mid to late first rounder and represented good value as a guy who could develop into a decent starting PG and bring a lot of things the Kings need. In the top 10 (or certainly at the Kings #6 pick) I'm not nearly as high on him.
That said, while said very early on that I was a Cameron Payne fan, that was back when I thought he was a mid to late first rounder and represented good value as a guy who could develop into a decent starting PG and bring a lot of things the Kings need. In the top 10 (or certainly at the Kings #6 pick) I'm not nearly as high on him.
Collison has higher %s, but he took much less of them and his slow release has always been in question. We can take a look at Collison's 3pt shooting with the Kings and it's something like .376 which is a good number. However, we all know that Collison struggled tremendously with it. The only times he ever shot 3pters were in scenarios where he was completely wide open with 0 defenders closing in on him. Even when he was wide open, he always hesitated and took a few seconds to get his feet set and motion in. This is Collison in his 6th year int he NBA. Payne on the other hand, is almost the opposite of Collison. He pulls the trigger quick and fast with no hesitation. Pull up Js may drive you crazy from Jimmer, but that's just the type of scoring Payne did.
I'm not really advocating for Payne because I believe we should look at the heights of WCS/Winslow here, but he's an interesting option for trading back. There's always guys in the early lottery that disappoint, and there's always guys in the later lottery that surprise.
I'm not really advocating for Payne because I believe we should look at the heights of WCS/Winslow here, but he's an interesting option for trading back. There's always guys in the early lottery that disappoint, and there's always guys in the later lottery that surprise.
Technology seems to contradict you: http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201954/tracking/shots/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular Season
Apparently Darren struggles being wide open.
Apparently Darren struggles being wide open.
Lakers are bringing in Payne on Wednesday. So.....drafting him at 2 is even more of a stretch. Lakers have no reason to pressure anyone or play a game of deception at that spot. So what's going on here? Either they are doing Payton and his agent a HUGE favor or they think he has talent that is worth investigating.
@SpearsNBAYahoo's Tweet: https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/608020352426373120?s=09
@SpearsNBAYahoo's Tweet: https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/608020352426373120?s=09
Those stats also say he takes most of his 3pt shots while open. I didn't say he makes his wide open shots, I said
of course it was exaggeration, but technology proves my point. 2.4/3.5 were open shots where the defenders were at least 4ft away.
1.2 were open 1.2 were wide open. When I said wide open I just meant open in general.
1.2 were open 1.2 were wide open. When I said wide open I just meant open in general.