Probable Lottery picks in the 2021 Draft:
- Thread starter bajaden
- Start date
clearly it depends who is there and what they need but if say the Pels or Detroit are at above us, I could easily see them taking either Green or Suggs. I am assuming Cade and Mobley go 1-2 but it clear there is a lot to like among the top 5.
Here is a recent Detroit mock draft that has Detroit picking Suggs at 2. Remember Detroit has Jerami Grant and a good looking Saddiq Bey (good call by you). I could easily see them talking themselves into Suggs or Green if Cade is gone.
https://pistonpowered.com/2021/02/28/nba-mock-draft-detroit-pistons/amp/3/
A bigger question is if you are sitting at 3 looking at Mobley or Kuminga who do you take. I probably take Mobley.
Here is a recent Detroit mock draft that has Detroit picking Suggs at 2. Remember Detroit has Jerami Grant and a good looking Saddiq Bey (good call by you). I could easily see them talking themselves into Suggs or Green if Cade is gone.
https://pistonpowered.com/2021/02/28/nba-mock-draft-detroit-pistons/amp/3/
A bigger question is if you are sitting at 3 looking at Mobley or Kuminga who do you take. I probably take Mobley.
Last edited:
I think how the Kings will feel about Suggs or Green at draft time will depend on what happens with Buddy. But either of those players are currency that can be useful. Suggs plays off the ball well, so he can play the two as well as the one. If Buddy is traded and we don't get a SG in return, then a Fox, Haliburton, Suggs/Green would no different than what we have now, except hopefully, we would have a smarter more skilled player in place of Buddy. Sorry Buddy!
The ideal choice for the Kings positionally would be Cunningham or Mobley. Draft Mobley and resign Holmes, and you have your center position covered for a while. But who knows what's going to happen? Fun to speculate though..
The ideal choice for the Kings positionally would be Cunningham or Mobley. Draft Mobley and resign Holmes, and you have your center position covered for a while. But who knows what's going to happen? Fun to speculate though..
Yeah he's not very fast but it's easy to forget that he's a 6'8" PG so it's difficult to compare his speed to other more naturally sized PGs. Like for instance, Luka isn't very fast at all either but it's completely unnecessary for his game. I think Cade will be in the same boat but he probably won't hit the ground running as well as Luka because he doesn't have the strength yet.
Barnes has some real questions in terms of what he can do off the ball. I think given we have Fox and Hali the chance of him playing as a point forward is somewhat limited. Assuming we keep Bagley I worry about teams sitting in the paint daring us to shoot.
I’m leaning towards Zaire with Wagner as a mystery player.
I’m leaning towards Zaire with Wagner as a mystery player.
Evan Mobley: Center/PF, 7'0", 215 Lb's, Freshman, USC.
33.7 mpg - 16.4 ppg - 58.7% fgp - 32.1% 3pp - 70.0% ftp - 8.5 rpg - 2.1 apg - 2.8 blocks.
There's not much more that I can say about Mobley that hasn't already been said. He's one of the most coordinated, athletic big men to come along in a while. He's been compared to LaMarcus Aldridge, Chris Bosh etc. Personally, I don't like comps, because it locks a player into an image, which isn't always fair. Someday, someone will likely use Mobley as a comp. Mobley is a high IQ player that's very skilled. He plays above the rim and is lightning quick to the basket in the P&R. He could probably score 25 pts every game if he had a guard that could run the P&R or throw a decent alley opp pass.
Despite his weighing only 215 Lbs, he's a very good rebounder. He has good hands and decent handles for a 7 footer. He's also shown good footwork around the basket where he does most of his scoring. However, he's given glimpses of a nice looking 16 foot mid-range jump shot, as well as an occasional 3 pt shot. His form looks good and with time put in, I can see him being able to stretch the floor. I see him as a center, but I can also see him at the PF position on occasion.
Defensively he's looks like he has the potential to be special. He has excellent shot blocking timing and seldom bites on pump fakes. He's so quick off his feet that he can allow the offensive player to jump first and still block the shot. He's able to cover a lot of ground in help defense. He's also shown good lateral quickness when defending on the perimeter and good court awareness. I think he can be a very special player. He needs to get stronger and improve his 3 pt shot, two things that I think will improve naturally once in the NBA. He would be a great fit on the Kings, finally giving them some size at the Center position.
Hey, I can dream can't I? I think Mobley has just scratched surface of what he can be. He plays with a cool/calm edge, seldom showing emotion. I would love to see what kind of damage he could do next to a Fox or Haliburton.
33.7 mpg - 16.4 ppg - 58.7% fgp - 32.1% 3pp - 70.0% ftp - 8.5 rpg - 2.1 apg - 2.8 blocks.
There's not much more that I can say about Mobley that hasn't already been said. He's one of the most coordinated, athletic big men to come along in a while. He's been compared to LaMarcus Aldridge, Chris Bosh etc. Personally, I don't like comps, because it locks a player into an image, which isn't always fair. Someday, someone will likely use Mobley as a comp. Mobley is a high IQ player that's very skilled. He plays above the rim and is lightning quick to the basket in the P&R. He could probably score 25 pts every game if he had a guard that could run the P&R or throw a decent alley opp pass.
Despite his weighing only 215 Lbs, he's a very good rebounder. He has good hands and decent handles for a 7 footer. He's also shown good footwork around the basket where he does most of his scoring. However, he's given glimpses of a nice looking 16 foot mid-range jump shot, as well as an occasional 3 pt shot. His form looks good and with time put in, I can see him being able to stretch the floor. I see him as a center, but I can also see him at the PF position on occasion.
Defensively he's looks like he has the potential to be special. He has excellent shot blocking timing and seldom bites on pump fakes. He's so quick off his feet that he can allow the offensive player to jump first and still block the shot. He's able to cover a lot of ground in help defense. He's also shown good lateral quickness when defending on the perimeter and good court awareness. I think he can be a very special player. He needs to get stronger and improve his 3 pt shot, two things that I think will improve naturally once in the NBA. He would be a great fit on the Kings, finally giving them some size at the Center position.
Hey, I can dream can't I? I think Mobley has just scratched surface of what he can be. He plays with a cool/calm edge, seldom showing emotion. I would love to see what kind of damage he could do next to a Fox or Haliburton.
Mobley just has great feel for the game. He is almost always in good position on defense which only amplifies his ability to rim protect and his fluid hips which let him switch onto smaller players on the perimeter and hold his own. He's also a great passer.
Mobley isn't super fluid on offense. He moves well for a seven footer and can even handle the ball a bit but he's long and gangly with slightly awkward movement. He's not a guy you want creating his own shot regularly. But he's got good vertical pop and his jumper shows promise.
One thing Mobley HAS to improve (in addition to adding weight/strength) is his screening. It's not just that he lacks bulk, it's technique. A lot like Bagley, he pretty much slips every single screen and I don't think that's a scheme thing.
But if Mobley can get stronger and be consistent with his outside shot he's a real building block that could also completely change the Kings as a defensive team
Mobley isn't super fluid on offense. He moves well for a seven footer and can even handle the ball a bit but he's long and gangly with slightly awkward movement. He's not a guy you want creating his own shot regularly. But he's got good vertical pop and his jumper shows promise.
One thing Mobley HAS to improve (in addition to adding weight/strength) is his screening. It's not just that he lacks bulk, it's technique. A lot like Bagley, he pretty much slips every single screen and I don't think that's a scheme thing.
But if Mobley can get stronger and be consistent with his outside shot he's a real building block that could also completely change the Kings as a defensive team
Last edited:
I like Mobley. He's not my #1 target in this draft(that's Cade), but here's my thoughts on him:
He's extremely talented, but raw. He's got great length, but a narrow frame. He lacks strength that becomes evident when he tries defending the post. Quick timing+length will allow him to be a good shotblocker in the NBA. He has the lateral quickness+IQ to defend the perimeter. Defense is where a lot of his potential is coming from.
On offense, he does a good job of slipping screens and moving off-ball. He really likes to attack the basket and makes a living at the FT line from taking advantage of slower bigs who get hand checked or can't keep up with his dribbles/speed. The shooting potential is there based off his 70% FT, but I don't think he's a 3pt threat at this point yet despite his 1.1 attempts. He's much more comfortable in the mid-range. He favors his falling away shot from the spin. He relies on his length and touch for getting his shot off. He plays a bit out of control sometimes when he forces his offense. He puts up a lot of ugly shots and gets bailed out with calls. I don't see a specific go-to offensive move, but as noted earlier, his bread and butter is probably going to be at the FT line where he can initiate contact.
He looks like who Skal Labissiere was supposed to be in college.
I don't see him as a franchise player the same way others here do. I don't think he's a guy you try to build your team around. However, his 2-way ability on both ends can easily make him the 2nd best player on a contending team. I think he'd fit great next to a dynamic scoring guard. He doesn't challenge Cade at #1 for me, but he's still a good prospect. I haven't finished watching the other guys, but he's a top 10 player in ANY draft, and probably a top 5 in this one.
In regards to fit, I think he'd be a good fit with Fox and Haliburton. The only concern I have is the lack of 3pt shooting. If you throw in Bagley, then it means 3/5 of your starting lineup aren't consistent 3pt threats. Hope we can see more consistency from Fox and Bagley as shooters. It would open the floor up a lot more to plug and play other players and allow us to experiment with different lineups more.
He's extremely talented, but raw. He's got great length, but a narrow frame. He lacks strength that becomes evident when he tries defending the post. Quick timing+length will allow him to be a good shotblocker in the NBA. He has the lateral quickness+IQ to defend the perimeter. Defense is where a lot of his potential is coming from.
On offense, he does a good job of slipping screens and moving off-ball. He really likes to attack the basket and makes a living at the FT line from taking advantage of slower bigs who get hand checked or can't keep up with his dribbles/speed. The shooting potential is there based off his 70% FT, but I don't think he's a 3pt threat at this point yet despite his 1.1 attempts. He's much more comfortable in the mid-range. He favors his falling away shot from the spin. He relies on his length and touch for getting his shot off. He plays a bit out of control sometimes when he forces his offense. He puts up a lot of ugly shots and gets bailed out with calls. I don't see a specific go-to offensive move, but as noted earlier, his bread and butter is probably going to be at the FT line where he can initiate contact.
He looks like who Skal Labissiere was supposed to be in college.
I don't see him as a franchise player the same way others here do. I don't think he's a guy you try to build your team around. However, his 2-way ability on both ends can easily make him the 2nd best player on a contending team. I think he'd fit great next to a dynamic scoring guard. He doesn't challenge Cade at #1 for me, but he's still a good prospect. I haven't finished watching the other guys, but he's a top 10 player in ANY draft, and probably a top 5 in this one.
In regards to fit, I think he'd be a good fit with Fox and Haliburton. The only concern I have is the lack of 3pt shooting. If you throw in Bagley, then it means 3/5 of your starting lineup aren't consistent 3pt threats. Hope we can see more consistency from Fox and Bagley as shooters. It would open the floor up a lot more to plug and play other players and allow us to experiment with different lineups more.
I agree for the most part. My hope going into this season was that Bagley would stay healthy and take a big leap. To me, the only path for Bagley to be a building block is if he either can be a starting center or really develops his outside shot. He simply can't be an old school PF (especially considering how bad his defense is right now) and be a big part of the core going forward.
But I don't think the Kings can give any consideration to Bagley when it comes to who they draft. Not unless he absolutely explodes on the second half of this season.
So if you end up with the 2nd pick you either grab Mobley to anchor the defense and hope his offense and strength continue to develop or maybe you grab a wing like Kuminga and hope his shot comes around.
Either way, outside of Cunningham, none of the top picks are shooting that well/consistently from outside. Well, there's Moody and Kispert if the Kings don't move into the top 4 in the lottery, but of the top few guys (again, excluding Cade) I'd rather have the defensive weapon with promising offensive tools. He may not be a franchise player per se, but he could have a Gobert-like effect on the team's defense and identity. Maybe more so since he won't get abused as much on perimeter switches.
That said, I wouldn't be unhappy with Kuminga. He also has two way potential and the Kings need a physical wing who can create his own shot. If he gets consistent from outside he could be an all-star.
But I don't think the Kings can give any consideration to Bagley when it comes to who they draft. Not unless he absolutely explodes on the second half of this season.
So if you end up with the 2nd pick you either grab Mobley to anchor the defense and hope his offense and strength continue to develop or maybe you grab a wing like Kuminga and hope his shot comes around.
Either way, outside of Cunningham, none of the top picks are shooting that well/consistently from outside. Well, there's Moody and Kispert if the Kings don't move into the top 4 in the lottery, but of the top few guys (again, excluding Cade) I'd rather have the defensive weapon with promising offensive tools. He may not be a franchise player per se, but he could have a Gobert-like effect on the team's defense and identity. Maybe more so since he won't get abused as much on perimeter switches.
That said, I wouldn't be unhappy with Kuminga. He also has two way potential and the Kings need a physical wing who can create his own shot. If he gets consistent from outside he could be an all-star.
I look at Cade and it's hard not to see a rich mans Kyle Anderson. If he goes to a team where he can pound and run the offense it then he'll produce. But he's so light on intangibles and a huge question mark on defense. The scary thing about him is if he can't beast wings at the next level, and can't beat athletic combos on his first step at the next level his best move is going to be face up dribble dribble shooting.
Mobley I like but who is he? KAT hopefully? But a 220 pound KAT is what exactly? He's probably quicker but is he a center or a PF? This is a talented draft but far from perfect.
Mobley I like but who is he? KAT hopefully? But a 220 pound KAT is what exactly? He's probably quicker but is he a center or a PF? This is a talented draft but far from perfect.
He's single-handedly turned Oklahoma State into one of the better teams in the NCAA and is possibly the best defensive ‘star’ prospect to come into the league since at least Ben Simmons. Imagine the instincts of Tyrese Haliburton but in Harrison Barnes’ body and with some added man skills for good measure. He’s a future all-defensive teamer. Whatever questions there are about Cade at this point are purely about how effectively he can really create for himself againt elite NBA athleticism but guys like Harden and Luka have shown how non-elite athletes can remain elite offensive players in the modern league.
I don't even know if these are questions at this point. I can't remember a prospect who's been more polished in every aspect of basketball like Cade will be coming in. I wouldn't call him a bad athlete either, it's just he's not an upper-tier/top 10% athlete.
Is an awesome example of his offensive prowess. Scores in like 10 different ways and his footwork looks like a 10-year NBA vet. He very much gets to his spots whenever he wants and how he wants to do it.
Is an awesome example of his offensive prowess. Scores in like 10 different ways and his footwork looks like a 10-year NBA vet. He very much gets to his spots whenever he wants and how he wants to do it.
This is a classic case of someone comparing a player to someone they physically resemble (which stupidly happens all the time with player comparisons). Anderson and Cade are both a similar size and look like they could be brothers, therefore that's his comparison... I get that Anderson is also a good passer but I just don't see him as being in the same realm of talent as Cade.
In reality, Cade is more similar to someone like Simmons, a big lead guard/wing with excellent playmaking and defensive ability. Cade is obviously a much better shooter but not quite the athlete. He is definitely an above average athlete but he's so smooth, in control and plays at his own pace that you can easily mistake it for a lack of athleticism. Slow is smooth and smooth is fast.
People need to stop believing that not having elite athleticism means you can't be a star. If you have the skills and IQ, especially along with good size, then elite athleticism is not a strict requirement for stardom. People said the same stuff about Luka etc, won't be able to get to the rim, too slow etc.
In reality, Cade is more similar to someone like Simmons, a big lead guard/wing with excellent playmaking and defensive ability. Cade is obviously a much better shooter but not quite the athlete. He is definitely an above average athlete but he's so smooth, in control and plays at his own pace that you can easily mistake it for a lack of athleticism. Slow is smooth and smooth is fast.
People need to stop believing that not having elite athleticism means you can't be a star. If you have the skills and IQ, especially along with good size, then elite athleticism is not a strict requirement for stardom. People said the same stuff about Luka etc, won't be able to get to the rim, too slow etc.
Everyone is making more out of Mobley's lack of muscle than I think is warranted. Here's a video of Wilt Chamberlain at Kansas university weighing around 220 Lb's.
Now here is a video of Wilt toward the end of his career weighing around 300 Lb's
As you can see, he doesn't look like the same player. I'm not saying that Mobley will make the same transformation, but he should easily get his weight up to 250 or so. It would be nice if he develops a consistent 3 pt shot, but the Utah Jazz are currently the best team in the Western Conference and they have a center in Gobert that doesn't shoot the three. With Mobley on the floor with either Fox or Haliburton, the Kings could pick and roll other teams to death. Plus, Mobley has shown the ability to shoot that 15 foot jumper, so his game isn't totally rooted under the basket.
One more thing I'd like to say. A lot of people are looking at a player now, and saying they don't see this or that. Many don't do what you did, and also say what they did see. The positives! No one, including me, can predict, except in rare exceptions, how good a player will eventually be. Even in those rare exceptions, like a Haliburton, you know he's going to be good, but you don't really know how good. I hate locking a player into an identity, like being a career number 2 or 3 option.
Your always going to get those overachievers. The Jimmy Butlers of the world. What I do know is that some players are just special, despite whatever obvious flaws they might originally have. They have this aura about them. Somehow they know their going to be great, and won't settle for anything less. They don't always put up gaudy numbers, but they win. I watched the Oklahoma St. game on monday, and with around 7 minutes left in the game, and Oklahoma St. trailing, Cunningham had yet to make a basket.
At that point he took over the game and carried them to a victory ending up with 15 pt's in the game. He's not as flashy as LeMelo Ball, but he'll likely be a better overall player. I think the top five projected players will all be very good if not great players, and there's a few more that aren't far behind in upside, like Scottie Barnes and Jalen Johnson. I think Jaden Springer is going to surprise a lot of people as will Moses Moody. And if you haven't seen Ayo Dosunmu (Illinios) play, then by all means do so. He's a terrific basketball player and should be a definite lottery pick.
Now here is a video of Wilt toward the end of his career weighing around 300 Lb's
As you can see, he doesn't look like the same player. I'm not saying that Mobley will make the same transformation, but he should easily get his weight up to 250 or so. It would be nice if he develops a consistent 3 pt shot, but the Utah Jazz are currently the best team in the Western Conference and they have a center in Gobert that doesn't shoot the three. With Mobley on the floor with either Fox or Haliburton, the Kings could pick and roll other teams to death. Plus, Mobley has shown the ability to shoot that 15 foot jumper, so his game isn't totally rooted under the basket.
One more thing I'd like to say. A lot of people are looking at a player now, and saying they don't see this or that. Many don't do what you did, and also say what they did see. The positives! No one, including me, can predict, except in rare exceptions, how good a player will eventually be. Even in those rare exceptions, like a Haliburton, you know he's going to be good, but you don't really know how good. I hate locking a player into an identity, like being a career number 2 or 3 option.
Your always going to get those overachievers. The Jimmy Butlers of the world. What I do know is that some players are just special, despite whatever obvious flaws they might originally have. They have this aura about them. Somehow they know their going to be great, and won't settle for anything less. They don't always put up gaudy numbers, but they win. I watched the Oklahoma St. game on monday, and with around 7 minutes left in the game, and Oklahoma St. trailing, Cunningham had yet to make a basket.
At that point he took over the game and carried them to a victory ending up with 15 pt's in the game. He's not as flashy as LeMelo Ball, but he'll likely be a better overall player. I think the top five projected players will all be very good if not great players, and there's a few more that aren't far behind in upside, like Scottie Barnes and Jalen Johnson. I think Jaden Springer is going to surprise a lot of people as will Moses Moody. And if you haven't seen Ayo Dosunmu (Illinios) play, then by all means do so. He's a terrific basketball player and should be a definite lottery pick.
Incredible defender? Nah, not with the feet he has. He recovers well but I'm a bit concerned about the next level when individual man to man becomes more and more important. Is he a SF or a PF? That's a serious question. And the kinds of intangibles I'm talking about relate mostly to the physical side and his ability to impact that game without being featured in the offense. Jumping, fast twitch, etc. And yes, this debate is more important because he's being talked up as a top 5 pick in a really good draft so the value vs. expectation and role matters more.
Last edited:
Again, that footspeed should be a concern. Defensively, that lack of foot speed will matter at the next level more than in college where you can sink in to the paint more and play off. He's not terrible on defense and recovers well but if he's expected to play SF it could be an issue. Tyrese Haliburtons foot speed and reaction timing are totally different than Cade and he plays a different position. Cade at PF vs. SF is the issue. The only other knock is he's also a bit below the rim as a finisher. Combined these things can hinder a player if not put in a role to do what they do well. Ben Simmons is a much better athlete than Cade. Cade is obviously a much better shooter and individual shot creator. Harden and Luka seem to have a bit more coordination on their moves as well. Cade uses his body well and does remind me of Kyle Anderson in the way he operates offensively. I really liked Anderson in college and still do like him and he's looking pretty good in Memphis lately now that he's able to run more offense. When he didn't he was a bit uninspiring. I like Cade and he's certainly someone I wouldn't mind the Kings taking on but I don't see someone fail proof in regards to situational factors.
I haven't seen anyone think of him as a PF. He is is a SF as far as I'm concerned who could also play the point. I have watched him take over games on both offense and defense. And while he can dominate the ball on offense he doesn't seem to feel the need to do unless it is necessary.
Most people rating this draft have him by himself at the top of the list.
Most people rating this draft have him by himself at the top of the list.
He's developed those aspects because he's making up for a clear lack of an elite first step. Which isn't a problem per se, it's a good thing in many ways that he has but these are always the types of players that at the NBA level you have to look at in every aspect. Without the ball, what is he doing? When posting up against bigger, quicker players what is he going to do? When he's being played aggressively in pick and roll what is he doing? He has terrific ball control though and does handle pressure well from what I've seen. That's an aspect Haliburton has to start picking up and that will hopefully come as his body develops.
Then they aren't thinking about the next level transition enough. People had concerns about Tatum coming out but the reason it was unwarranted was his first step. He had it along with a nice pull up jumper. If you are expected to be the hub of an offense or not it's a huge thing for a star wing or go to guy. Turning the corner on pick and roll and getting to the rim efficiently is also huge. He's got a good iso shot but count the times you see him in iso getting stopped and then him grinding his way into a bucket. Great skill for sure but he's taking a big chunk of that offense on and a good chunk of the clock in the process. It's far from something that puts him on the do not touch list but it also makes him someone who you will have to utilize in the right ways as a coach to get him up to the level people expect him to be at.
Jaden Springer: SG/PG, 6'4", 204 Lb's, Freshman, Tennessee.
25.1 mpg - 12.8 ppg - 49.0% fgp - 47.4% 3pp -80.4% ftp - 3.6 rpg - 2.9 apg - 1.1 steals.
To my amazement some mocks have Springer going at the bottom of the 1st round. Not going to happen. He's definitely a lottery pick as far as I'm concerned. If you like Donte DiVincenco then you'll like Springer. Jaden loves to attack the basket, and he's very good at it. He has good, but not elite handles, and he's very strong for an 18 year old, and doesn't shy away from contact. As a result he gets to the line a lot. I believe he's the youngest American player in the draft. He's more than capable of creating his own shot, and has a very good mid-range game.
He's a very good 3 point shooter, but only takes 1.8 a game. He needs to take at least 5 a game. Some have him ranked as a PG, but I think he's a true combo guard. He plays extremely well off the ball as well as on. He's a good passer, but not an elite passer. He does turn the ball over more than I like, but those mistakes are correctable. He's also a very skilled post up player, which he loves to do against smaller players. He has excellent foot work around the basket.
On the defensive side of the ball is where he really shines. He seems to know where the offensive player is going before the player does. You won't get past him without the help of a pick and even that's iffy. He has terrific lateral quickness, and instincts. So far he's the only player I saw this year that gave Cade Cunningham problems. Sometimes he appears to be glued to the offensive player. He's also a good team defender and instinctively knows when and where to help.
Why he takes so few three point shots is a mystery to me, especially when he's shooting just a tick under 50% from there. He also averages around 4 fouls a game, but I attribute that to his aggressiveness on defense. He needs to tighten up his handle a bit more, cut down on the turnovers, and take more three's. As you can tell, I really like this kid, and although I'm hoping for a top three player, I wouldn't cry much if we ended up with Springer. I think he's going to be a stud.
25.1 mpg - 12.8 ppg - 49.0% fgp - 47.4% 3pp -80.4% ftp - 3.6 rpg - 2.9 apg - 1.1 steals.
To my amazement some mocks have Springer going at the bottom of the 1st round. Not going to happen. He's definitely a lottery pick as far as I'm concerned. If you like Donte DiVincenco then you'll like Springer. Jaden loves to attack the basket, and he's very good at it. He has good, but not elite handles, and he's very strong for an 18 year old, and doesn't shy away from contact. As a result he gets to the line a lot. I believe he's the youngest American player in the draft. He's more than capable of creating his own shot, and has a very good mid-range game.
He's a very good 3 point shooter, but only takes 1.8 a game. He needs to take at least 5 a game. Some have him ranked as a PG, but I think he's a true combo guard. He plays extremely well off the ball as well as on. He's a good passer, but not an elite passer. He does turn the ball over more than I like, but those mistakes are correctable. He's also a very skilled post up player, which he loves to do against smaller players. He has excellent foot work around the basket.
On the defensive side of the ball is where he really shines. He seems to know where the offensive player is going before the player does. You won't get past him without the help of a pick and even that's iffy. He has terrific lateral quickness, and instincts. So far he's the only player I saw this year that gave Cade Cunningham problems. Sometimes he appears to be glued to the offensive player. He's also a good team defender and instinctively knows when and where to help.
Why he takes so few three point shots is a mystery to me, especially when he's shooting just a tick under 50% from there. He also averages around 4 fouls a game, but I attribute that to his aggressiveness on defense. He needs to tighten up his handle a bit more, cut down on the turnovers, and take more three's. As you can tell, I really like this kid, and although I'm hoping for a top three player, I wouldn't cry much if we ended up with Springer. I think he's going to be a stud.
Both the advanced stats and the eye test show Cunningham to be a VERY good defender.
And what you're describing as intangibles ("the physical side" and "jumping, fast twitch") aren't intangibles. Those are measurables/athletic ability.
Cunningham is a big playmaker. That's the most important archetype in the current NBA.
He's not nearly the athlete that Ben Simmons is, but he's a much better shooter. (And on the topic of intangibles, he's willed Oklahoma State to a very solid record where one of the questions about Simmons coming out of LSU was why his team didn't win)
He's not nearly the scorer that James Harden is, but he's bigger and doesn't need to dominate the ball to be effective.
He's not nearly as big/strong as Luka, who uses his size to clear space inside. But he's a much better defender.
He's a good athlete but certainly not a great one and he lacks blow by speed and the ability to explode in traffic. But at this point I would think we'd see the success of Jokic, Doncic, and even to a lesser extent Haliburton and realize that feel for the game, instincts, and playmaking very often trump being a high level athlete.
And what you're describing as intangibles ("the physical side" and "jumping, fast twitch") aren't intangibles. Those are measurables/athletic ability.
Cunningham is a big playmaker. That's the most important archetype in the current NBA.
He's not nearly the athlete that Ben Simmons is, but he's a much better shooter. (And on the topic of intangibles, he's willed Oklahoma State to a very solid record where one of the questions about Simmons coming out of LSU was why his team didn't win)
He's not nearly the scorer that James Harden is, but he's bigger and doesn't need to dominate the ball to be effective.
He's not nearly as big/strong as Luka, who uses his size to clear space inside. But he's a much better defender.
He's a good athlete but certainly not a great one and he lacks blow by speed and the ability to explode in traffic. But at this point I would think we'd see the success of Jokic, Doncic, and even to a lesser extent Haliburton and realize that feel for the game, instincts, and playmaking very often trump being a high level athlete.
College. NBA. Not that he won't end up being a solid defender. This reminds me a bit of Otto Porter. Coming into the NBA the talk was about him being a potential all NBA defensive candidate for years and while he was solid for awhile, he battled the eye test and similar foot speed. And those physical aspects of a prospect LEAD to the intangibles you get out of players. Rarely do you see intangibles players that don't have some sort of combination of size or athletic prowess for a particular position. Things like strength, cross matching, switch ability or defensive versatility, keeping possessions alive with 2nd chance opportunities, athletic hustle play, playing above the rim, etc. He uses his hands a lot on help and plays space that in the NBA can tend to be no mans land. And technically everything is measurable, especially today. Jokic has many physical advantages though that Cade won't have. He's a legit bull of a center. That's the question with Cade, he does bully his way around a bit in college and as said above, can Cade get by quicker defenders and beast on similar sized NBA players? Perhaps he can, but it still is a question at this point.
Last edited:
I think you're working from a different definition of intangibles than the rest of us. I use it to refer to things that can't be measured and/or don't directly show up on film but contribute to a winning culture. Things like: leadership, work ethic, attitude, wanting the ball in big moments, feel for the game etc.
That said, it sounds like the guys you'd like most in this draft are Jonathan Kuminga and Jalen Green. I like them too, but I'd take Cade Cunningham over them for sure.
That said, it sounds like the guys you'd like most in this draft are Jonathan Kuminga and Jalen Green. I like them too, but I'd take Cade Cunningham over them for sure.