NBA Lottery Thread

[steelevt]

I just adopted a puppy. Hopefully she’s a good luck charm.

—

That said, I’m mentally prepared for the 0.4% chance at 11 because the lottery gods hate us for spitting in their face. Anything better is gravy. Lol

I was waiting for you to use your powers to predict what top 4 spot we will jump up to. Unless those powers only work against the kings like us keeping Walton.

 

[kb02]

Giannis and Magic might have had PF size, but they're obviously not PFs.

I don't think Cade is anything like Barnes as a player (or George), and Mobley definitely isn't similar to Aldridge. Have you watched these guys play?

Been tracking them all year. You should visit the prospects section more often. The real question is have you watched them half as much as me?

 

[kb02]

That's his no-shoes combine measurement. Fox's no-shoes combine measurement came in at 6'2.0", so...

My bad. He's 1.25 inch taller than Fox.

 

[hrdboild]

Keon Johnson measured 6'3.25. He's shorter than Fox. Think if anyone drops, it's him.

Players rising or falling every year because of measurements is something else that makes me nauseous. If you've watched him play all year and have him ranked in a particular place, are you really going to drop him because he measured out an inch shorter than expected? Let me put it this way, if you've ever played pickup basketball you get an idea pretty quick about who the best players are. If we stood them all up and measured everybody are you then going to reassess what you saw on the court?

Front offices act like they're drafting a lump of clay and then they're going to sculpt them into a perfect basketball specimen. That's why you hear so much talk about "potential". If I can get this guy who's 6'8" 220 to play like that guy who's 6'5" 180 I'd have a better player right? I think that's stupid. We have 30 NBA teams and right now 7 of them are looking for a new head coach -- and a few more arguably should be. One of the primary reasons so many of these front offices and coaching staffs fail over and over again is that they overestimate their own ability to teach grown men how to play basketball at an elite level. I don't even want to see the measurements anymore. All they do is distract from what actually matters.

 

[kb02]

Players rising or falling every year because of measurements is something else that makes me nauseous. If you've watched him play all year and have him ranked in a particular place, are you really going to drop him because he measured out an inch shorter than expected? Let me put it this way, if you've ever played pickup basketball you get an idea pretty quick about who the best players are. If we stood them all up and measured everybody are you then going to reassess what you saw on the court?

Front offices act like they're drafting a lump of clay and then they're going to sculpt them into a perfect basketball specimen. That's why you hear so much talk about "potential". If I can get this guy who's 6'8" 220 to play like that guy who's 6'5" 180 I'd have a better player right? I think that's stupid. We have 30 NBA teams and right now 7 of them are looking for a new head coach -- and a few more arguably should be. One of the primary reasons so many of these front offices and coaching staffs fail over and over again is that they overestimate their own ability to teach grown men how to play basketball at an elite level. I don't even want to see the measurements anymore. All they do is distract from what actually matters.

His height matters, because of his ability to defend multiple positions--in particular the 3 spot.

And, yes, I've played plenty of hoops. A half an inch matters for most folks. There are exceptions, like Barkley or Draymond, but as I've mentioned a few times about Bagley, he would be a significantly diff player if he was an inch or two taller. He plays small relative to his peers (JJJ and Ayton), who are longer than him. Bagley can no longer out athletic them.

 

[dude12]

I still say Suggs will be the best player from this draft

 

[hrdboild]

His height matters, because of his ability to defend multiple positions--in particular the 3 spot.

And, yes, I've played plenty of hoops. A half an inch matters for most folks. There are exceptions, like Barkley or Draymond, but as I've mentioned a few times about Bagley, he would be a significantly diff player if he was an inch or two taller. He plays small relative to his peers (JJJ and Ayton), who are longer than him. Bagley can no longer out athletic them.

I'm not questioning your basketball knowledge, but in response to your example I would say that even if Bagley were 2 inches taller he would still play small because of his attitude not how long his arms are. In regard to Keon Johnson, a lot of teams are playing 3 guards on the floor together right now or they're playing big men who stand at the three point line to open up the lane for their guards to get in there and create open shots. Size is less of a factor in guarding the three point line than anticipating the passes and knowing how to close out properly. And a player like Johnson can chase guards around screens and prevent them from making those easy kick out passes in the first place.

But more broadly speaking, this is the kind of group-think I'm talking about. How many times are we going to fail in the same way before we admit to ourselves that the decision-making process is flawed? Eliminating a guy from consideration because he fails to fit your mental model of a perfect wing player is one of many ways in which we fail to see the obvious.

 

[kb02]

I'm not questioning your basketball knowledge, but in response to your example I would say that even if Bagley were 2 inches taller he would still play small because of his attitude not how long his arms are. In regard to Keon Johnson, a lot of teams are playing 3 guards on the floor together right now or they're playing big men who stand at the three point line to open up the lane for wing how to close out properly. And a player like Johnson can chase guards around screens and prevent them from making those easy kick out passes in the first place.

But more broadly speaking, this is the kind of group-think I'm talking about. How many times are we going to fail in the same way before we admit to ourselves that the decision-making process is flawed? Eliminating a guy from consideration because he fails to fit your mental model of a perfect wing player is one of many ways in which we fail to see the obvious.

No one is eliminating him. People assumed he would measure taller. He didn't. He'll have to prove and show otherwise.

As for your comments regarding modern NBA defenses, yes, defenses are playing less man. They're switching. A player like Herb Jones can switch 1 to 4 and eventually 1 to 5. Scottie Barnes and Ben Simmons can switch 1 to 5. Keon Johnson, at 6'3.25 can switch 1 to 2. He'll have to prove that he can defend 3s once he's in the league. That is the reason why if anyone is likely to drop, it's him. How hard is that to understand? It's not group think. It's a valid variable.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Been tracking them all year. You should visit the prospects section more often. The real question is have you watched them half as much as me?

I spend most of my time in that forum, I just don't post much. Based on your projections, I would be absolutely certain I have, and/or that your evaluation skills are way off. But I'm not going to get into a pissing match. Bajaden has already slapped you down for the same thing.

 

[kb02]

I spend most of my time in that forum, I just don't post much. Based on your projections, I would be absolutely certain I have, and/or that your evaluation skills are way off. But I'm not going to get into a pissing match. Bajaden has already slapped you down for the same thing.

Funny. As for my eval skills, I'm more than comfortable with them. If you search long and hard enough, you'll see that I was on Haliburton before anyone else on this forum, including Bajaden, that I correctly called Gonzaga being overrated...but hindsight is overrated. Let's revisit this next year when both are in the league.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

This thread: Discussing the lottery

PMs: Discussing who is a better talent evaluator.

Thanks.

 

[hrdboild]

No one is eliminating him. People assumed he would measure taller. He didn't. He'll have to prove and show otherwise.

As for your comments regarding modern NBA defenses, yes, defenses are playing less man. They're switching. A player like Herb Jones can switch 1 to 4 and eventually 1 to 5. Scottie Barnes and Ben Simmons can switch 1 to 5. Keon Johnson, at 6'3.25 can switch 1 to 2. He'll have to prove that he can defend 3s once he's in the league. That is the reason why if anyone is likely to drop, it's him. How hard is that to understand? It's not group think. It's a valid variable.

I'm not attacking you directly. The line of thinking you're describing is something I've subscribed to myself for the last 20 years and I've at last come to believe its complete fallacy. I understand why it seems logical. And I also understand how that pushes "versatile" defenders who are 6'8" or taller and can move their feet and slide with ballhandlers up the draft board. If I had the free time and the inclination I could make a study and analyze whether this perception lines up with the reality. I'm not going to do that but maybe someone else can. But I suspect the results would show that the do-it-all 1-5 wing defender is a rare exception in the NBA. And even for teams that do have those players, are they substantially better because of it or can other teams get the same results with a 5-player coordinated defense where everybody can switch and defend 2 positions individually?

Forget about size, let's just call Johnson a wing defender. He can guard primary ballhandlers and spot-up shooters. Who's even left in the modern NBA? Which guards are going to take him into the post, back him down, and score over him? With zone defenses, how often are smaller guards getting iso'ed in the post off switches anymore? Look at the trends for leading scorers year to year. If I'm drafting a defensive stopper right now I'm much more worried about containing guards off the dribble and three point shooters than any other type of player.

Theoretically speaking, a player who can guard all 5 positions gives you more options with your defensive rotations but when teams are running 4-out offenses and spotting up even on fast breaks right now, you typically only need to contain 1 or 2 ballhandlers and for everyone else on your defense understanding where they need to be on the floor to cut off passes and take away open shots is more important than physical attributes. I'm seeing a lot of drive and kick and a lot of pick and roll from NBA offenses right now. Smaller players can and do dominate defensively by getting close to ballhandlers and disrupting the point of attack or playing the passing lanes with their quickness and anticipation. Long arms might give you a wider radius to disrupt those passes but how many players take full advantage of their wingspan on the perimeter? Conversely, how hard is it going to be for a 6'8" player to get small and go outside a screen to defend a step back? The phrase "jack of all trades, master of none" may apply here. The "versatile" defender may be above average at everything but a more specialized player is probably better within their area of expertise and maybe that ends up being what impacts the game more?

 

[twslam07]

FWIW, Barnes has the same wingspan (and bad shooting stroke) as Kawhi did coming out of college.

I hear this argument but isn't it also true that there's a half dozen players in every draft who fit that description? And yet there's still only one Kawhi Leonard. Do they all need to go to the Gregg Popovich school of tough love to develop properly? Keon Johnson is also an excellent defender with a questionable jumper. Why is he ranked 15 spots lower here? Is it because he's smaller and doesn't do the Draymond scream whenever you make a good play thing? Almost all of these draft "experts" make me nauseous with their analysis. It tends to be in the same genre of hyperbolic group-think.

A bigger point that tends to get overlooked in the pre-draft period is that a lot of these guys are not going to meet expectations. If every player hit their hypothetical ceiling we'd have 20 All-Stars in every draft. In reality you're lucky to have 4 or 5 All-Stars in the same draft. Legit MVPs come along once every 5 years or so. That means there's a lot of players who will not overcome their weaknesses and will instead settle in as role-players, journeymen, or team leaders in some other international league.

It's not fun to pick on people and point out their flaws but of the 23 players listed there, half of them will probably be available for a minimum contract in 5 years. And considering our past history, the question at the forefront of my mind is how do we not pick one of those players? For instance, my preference is always to find two-way players who can excel in different skill areas offensively and defensively but I've observed over the years how elite defenders I've fallen in love with end up on the end of the bench when the coach doesn't trust them on offense. Bricking open jumpers (or worse, refusing to take them) is a quick ticket out of a rotation for most players. So the clock is already ticking for some of these guys.

For what it's worth, Scottie Barnes shot 62.1% from the free throw line on 66 attempts. Leonard shot 72.6% on 117 attempts as a freshman and 75.9% on 145 attempts as a sophomore.

I think there was a case to be made that Leonard's shot had more potential than Barnes' shot. I certainly wouldn't hold my breath on Barnes being as good of a shooter as Leonard.

 

[Dime Dropper]

This thread: Discussing the lottery

PMs: Discussing who is a better talent evaluator.

Thanks.

You're just mad because you thought Jimmer would be an All-Star and I knew he wouldn't be.

 

[Sluggah]

I just adopted a puppy. Hopefully she’s a good luck charm.

—

That said, I’m mentally prepared for the 0.4% chance at 11 because the lottery gods hate us for spitting in their face. Anything better is gravy. Lol

Pics

 

[kb02]

I'm not attacking you directly. The line of thinking you're describing is something I've subscribed to myself for the last 20 years and I've at last come to believe its complete fallacy. I understand why it seems logical. And I also understand how that pushes "versatile" defenders who are 6'8" or taller and can move their feet and slide with ballhandlers up the draft board. If I had the free time and the inclination I could make a study and analyze whether this perception lines up with the reality. I'm not going to do that but maybe someone else can. But I suspect the results would show that the do-it-all 1-5 wing defender is a rare exception in the NBA. And even for teams that do have those players, are they substantially better because of it or can other teams get the same results with a 5-player coordinated defense where everybody can switch and defend 2 positions individually?

Forget about size, let's just call Johnson a wing defender. He can guard primary ballhandlers and spot-up shooters. Who's even left in the modern NBA? Which guards are going to take him into the post, back him down, and score over him? With zone defenses, how often are smaller guards getting iso'ed in the post off switches anymore? Look at the trends for leading scorers year to year. If I'm drafting a defensive stopper right now I'm much more worried about containing guards off the dribble and three point shooters than any other type of player.

Theoretically speaking, a player who can guard all 5 positions gives you more options with your defensive rotations but when teams are running 4-out offenses and spotting up even on fast breaks right now, you typically only need to contain 1 or 2 ballhandlers and for everyone else on your defense understanding where they need to be on the floor to cut off passes and take away open shots is more important than physical attributes. I'm seeing a lot of drive and kick and a lot of pick and roll from NBA offenses right now. Smaller players can and do dominate defensively by getting close to ballhandlers and disrupting the point of attack or playing the passing lanes with their quickness and anticipation. Long arms might give you a wider radius to disrupt those passes but how many players take full advantage of their wingspan on the perimeter? Conversely, how hard is it going to be for a 6'8" player to get small and go outside a screen to defend a step back? The phrase "jack of all trades, master of none" may apply here. The "versatile" defender may be above average at everything but a more specialized player is probably better within their area of expertise and maybe that ends up being what impacts the game more?

I think we're closer than either of us assume. I've gone back and forth on when physical variables matter and when they do not. But tend to overweight weaknesses in evals when the stats say players are more likely to bust than hit.

And, yea, perfect world, the Kings would field a team of 6'8 or taller beasts (hence why a perfect off season for me would be a trade for Simmons, Barnes at #9, and Herb Jones at #28 or 39). I think the NBA is ripe for a team that wins everything with a defense first approach.

 

[Tetsujin]

I hear this argument but isn't it also true that there's a half dozen players in every draft who fit that description? And yet there's still only one Kawhi Leonard. Do they all need to go to the Gregg Popovich school of tough love to develop properly? Keon Johnson is also an excellent defender with a questionable jumper. Why is he ranked 15 spots lower here? Is it because he's smaller and doesn't do the Draymond scream whenever you make a good play thing? Almost all of these draft "experts" make me nauseous with their analysis. It tends to be in the same genre of hyperbolic group-think.

A bigger point that tends to get overlooked in the pre-draft period is that a lot of these guys are not going to meet expectations. If every player hit their hypothetical ceiling we'd have 20 All-Stars in every draft. In reality you're lucky to have 4 or 5 All-Stars in the same draft. Legit MVPs come along once every 5 years or so. That means there's a lot of players who will not overcome their weaknesses and will instead settle in as role-players, journeymen, or team leaders in some other international league.

It's not fun to pick on people and point out their flaws but of the 23 players listed there, half of them will probably be available for a minimum contract in 5 years. And considering our past history, the question at the forefront of my mind is how do we not pick one of those players? For instance, my preference is always to find two-way players who can excel in different skill areas offensively and defensively but I've observed over the years how elite defenders I've fallen in love with end up on the end of the bench when the coach doesn't trust them on offense. Bricking open jumpers (or worse, refusing to take them) is a quick ticket out of a rotation for most players. So the clock is already ticking for some of these guys.

yeah, wasn’t really trying to make that comparison to Kawhi. (The FWIW was supposed be for For whatever it’s worth but it wound up not being that lol)

I think the ultimate horror story scenario for Barnes would be Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, a kid who came into the draft with lofty projections as the next great point forward in spite of his lack of aggression and absolutely broken shot and wound up becoming a journeyman roster filler defensive wing. Does he wind up that disappointing? probably not and I am completely willing to take him if he’s available at 9 but certainly not in lieu of a ridiculously high upside guy like Kuminga or something.

 

[SLAB]

Pics

https://twitter.com/statuses/1407411259503349760

Singular for now and from my Twitter because the board wouldn’t let me just put them straight from my phone.

 

[kb02]

yeah, wasn’t really trying to make that comparison to Kawhi. (The FWIW was supposed be for For whatever it’s worth but it wound up not being that lol)

I think the ultimate horror story scenario for Barnes would be Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, a kid who came into the draft with lofty projections as the next great point forward in spite of his lack of aggression and absolutely broken shot and wound up becoming a journeyman roster filler defensive wing. Does he wind up that disappointing? probably not and I am completely willing to take him if he’s available at 9 but certainly not in lieu of a ridiculously high upside guy like Kuminga or something.

I don't remember MKG as someone, who was projected to be a point forward. His scouting report was something like elite defender, great character/leader, maybe becomes this generations Rodman ( a wing version), who is on a ton of winning teams...

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Michael-Kidd-Gilchrist-5707/

 

[LPKingsFan]

I really hope Houston and Minny lose their picks out of amusement.

I don't know. Houston was in a difficult position once Harden demanded out, and Minnesota, to their credit, actually tried down the stretch. Plus, Houston and Minnesota losing their picks means that OKC and Golden State benefit, right? I don't care for the basketball gods rewarding OKC's blatant tank, nor do the Warriors need any more help! I do root for eastern conference teams to jump, though, if not the Kings.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't know. Houston was in a difficult position once Harden demanded out, and Minnesota, to their credit, actually tried down the stretch. Plus, Houston and Minnesota losing their picks means that OKC and Golden State benefit, right? I don't care for the basketball gods rewarding OKC's blatant tank, nor do the Warriors need any more help! I do root for eastern conference teams to jump, though, if not the Kings.

God the worst thing that could happen would be OKC moving up and knocking Houston out

But Houston did have that pick traded and did everything in their power short of forfeiting games to insure they would be unlikely to lose the pick which ain't right.

 

[SacTownKid]

If Barnes best case scenario is Simmons or Green, it’s hard to imagine him being the best player in a loaded draft.

If he doesn't develop like Simmons he won't be. He will probably be the best defender the moment he steps on the floor though.

 

[SacTownKid]

yeah, wasn’t really trying to make that comparison to Kawhi. (The FWIW was supposed be for For whatever it’s worth but it wound up not being that lol)

I think the ultimate horror story scenario for Barnes would be Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, a kid who came into the draft with lofty projections as the next great point forward in spite of his lack of aggression and absolutely broken shot and wound up becoming a journeyman roster filler defensive wing. Does he wind up that disappointing? probably not and I am completely willing to take him if he’s available at 9 but certainly not in lieu of a ridiculously high upside guy like Kuminga or something.

I've watched those vids of Barnes as a teenager playing against pros in the gyms. Aggressiveness will not be an issue. But yeah, if the skills top out he's going to be a really great upper echelon defensive role player. Not bad but not top 3 worthy for sure.

 

[SacTownKid]

I don't know. Houston was in a difficult position once Harden demanded out, and Minnesota, to their credit, actually tried down the stretch. Plus, Houston and Minnesota losing their picks means that OKC and Golden State benefit, right? I don't care for the basketball gods rewarding OKC's blatant tank, nor do the Warriors need any more help! I do root for eastern conference teams to jump, though, if not the Kings.

Golden State would likely have their package to net a superstar in a trade to give the superteam another go. The salaries would be the issue but Minnesota has completely screwed the other teams trying to make that 8th seed.

 

[whozit]

https://twitter.com/statuses/1407411259503349760

Singular for now and from my Twitter because the board wouldn’t let me just put them straight from my phone.

Beautiful pup.

 

[hrdboild]

I think we're closer than either of us assume. I've gone back and forth on when physical variables matter and when they do not. But tend to overweight weaknesses in evals when the stats say players are more likely to bust than hit.

And, yea, perfect world, the Kings would field a team of 6'8 or taller beasts (hence why a perfect off season for me would be a trade for Simmons, Barnes at #9, and Herb Jones at #28 or 39). I think the NBA is ripe for a team that wins everything with a defense first approach.

If any team is going to try and rewrite the defensive meta for the NBA I'd like to see that happen in Sacramento. As offenses have gotten more predictable I think there's an opportunity for somebody to get ahead of the curve on this one and steal a lot of wins before the league adjusts to what they're doing. Over-helping is problematic in a 3pt focused league and yet that seems to be how most teams are structuring their defensive game plan. Finding players who can deny passing lanes and pressure the ball without fouling could be a good first step. I think Fox and Haliburton both have potential in that area. And I do think you're probably right about Keon Johnson dropping because of his measurables so I wasn't mad at you for making the point it's just one of those tropes which irks me. My general feeling now is that I'm not going to let size bother me if I like how somebody plays and I think those skills will translate to the NBA. Other NBA teams being dumb opens up opportunities for us to nab somebody in the late lotto who should have gone much higher like we did last year though and that's not a bad thing! Certain types of players get undervalued for whatever reasons and that's where the best opportunities are going to be found.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Kings have a 20% chance of jumping into the top 4, a 46% chance of ending up at #9, a 29% chance of ending up at #10, a 4% chance of ending up at #11, and a 0.4% chance of ending up at #12.

Where’s Vlade when we need him?

the way I understand it, isn’t it around 5% chance each for them to get 1, 2, 3 or 4?

 

[hrdboild]

the way I understand it, isn’t it around 5% chance each for them to get 1, 2, 3 or 4?

This is a good place to see all the odds for everyone since they've accounted for trade protections:

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/06/22/2021-nba-draft-lottery-odds-visualized/

Nobody is more boom or bust this year than Minnesota. And here's how the Kings' odds shake out:

 

[Hoovtrain]

This is a good place to see all the odds for everyone since they've accounted for trade protections:

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/06/22/2021-nba-draft-lottery-odds-visualized/

Nobody is more boom or bust this year than Minnesota. And here's how the Kings' odds shake out:

thanks. Knowing the kings luck I hope they at least stay at 9. Also hoping W’s don’t get a high pick.

 

[ESP47]

If any team is going to try and rewrite the defensive meta for the NBA I'd like to see that happen in Sacramento. As offenses have gotten more predictable I think there's an opportunity for somebody to get ahead of the curve on this one and steal a lot of wins before the league adjusts to what they're doing. Over-helping is problematic in a 3pt focused league and yet that seems to be how most teams are structuring their defensive game plan. Finding players who can deny passing lanes and pressure the ball without fouling could be a good first step. I think Fox and Haliburton both have potential in that area. And I do think you're probably right about Keon Johnson dropping because of his measurables so I wasn't mad at you for making the point it's just one of those tropes which irks me. My general feeling now is that I'm not going to let size bother me if I like how somebody plays and I think those skills will translate to the NBA. Other NBA teams being dumb opens up opportunities for us to nab somebody in the late lotto who should have gone much higher like we did last year though and that's not a bad thing! Certain types of players get undervalued for whatever reasons and that's where the best opportunities are going to be found.

I think measurements are very important when it comes to certain aspects of the game. Defense in general is dominated by long wingspans. Rim protection is the most important. Bagley's wingspan is about 4-6 inches shorter than the majority of the good NBA centers and it's a big reason why his rim protection is so poor. Richaun Holmes would probably be a completely different type of defensive player if he had a longer wingspan. On the other hand, Robert Williams is 6'8" with a 7'6" wingspan so it's no wonder he had 8 or 9 blocks in a playoff game.

I wouldn't pick a lesser player due to his measurements but if two players are fairly equal and I need defense and one has a much longer wingspan than the other, I'll pick the wingspan because his odds of becoming a good defender will be higher. Guys like Jimmy Butler who are all world defenders with short wingspans are few and far between.