Prospect watch 2011
- Thread starter asakkings
- Start date
Do you think it's wise to go over the cap with big extensions for Tyreke and and DeMarcus coming up in the near future? Beno and Cisco's contracts will be over by then which opens up some money, but they're both going to be getting large deals. I think most likely one of Greene/Casspi gets traded with one of our second round picks for a veteran and then you can add our first round pick and someone making the minimum to complete the roster. Aside from there not being any free agents worth paying for this summer, where would we even play them? Considering the recent success of the team, it looks to me like re-signing Dalembert and Thornton has basically become the free agency plan for the summer.
Can I have a discussion on the wisdom of picking a starting quality guard? We have Reke who I think has proven that he can start. We have Marcus who is a cross between Mitch Richmond and Bobby Jackson. No matter what his parentage, he will average 20 points and is the kind of guy who can explode. Reke is not. I think Mitch/Bobby is a starter. If a draft pick is satisfied with being an eternal bench player and a reserve in case of injury, I have no problem with drafting a point guard except that all of the three guards I have mentioned need court time to adjust to the NBA. This is a problem.
We have Beno.
If we are in the top of the pick, I have no problem in picking the best player available even if it is a guard but I doubt if we will be in that position. Given the quality of this draft, even at the the top, I'm not sure if it is absolutely necessary to draft the BPA because after the top two picks, that is not known unless bajaden has some info for me. It is not beyond the realms of possibility to pick for need and that could be Barnes, SF. As to a PF, well, maybe especially if he can catch a basketball but it's not crucial in my mind.
So back to this idea of picking a PG. Really?
We have Beno.
If we are in the top of the pick, I have no problem in picking the best player available even if it is a guard but I doubt if we will be in that position. Given the quality of this draft, even at the the top, I'm not sure if it is absolutely necessary to draft the BPA because after the top two picks, that is not known unless bajaden has some info for me. It is not beyond the realms of possibility to pick for need and that could be Barnes, SF. As to a PF, well, maybe especially if he can catch a basketball but it's not crucial in my mind.
So back to this idea of picking a PG. Really?
Many moons ago, the Kings had the sixth pick in the draft, and they needed a center. So when their turn came, they had Karl Malone and Joe Kleine sitting there. They took Kleine because they wanted to fill a need. Kleine won't be in the HOF, and Malone will. You always, always, take the BPA, and the only time you go for need, is when the talent level appears to be equal.
I liked the game of Tyshawn Taylor of Kansas. Was the only game I watched of him all year, and it was not great. However, when KU was unraveling, felt that he steadied them some. Wonder if we would consider him with one of our second round picks.
ESPN has ranked him very low, and also cited some issues at Kansas with him. Plus, we already are talking of a back court glut, and if we do pick Irving/Kemba, this might make little sense. However, he was ranked higher earlier. As bad as it is to judge a player by one game, felt that he was a low risk (second round pick), high reward potential pick.
ESPN has ranked him very low, and also cited some issues at Kansas with him. Plus, we already are talking of a back court glut, and if we do pick Irving/Kemba, this might make little sense. However, he was ranked higher earlier. As bad as it is to judge a player by one game, felt that he was a low risk (second round pick), high reward potential pick.
First off, I don't care about Dalembert being insulted. The team has to make an offer on what his value to the team is, and if that insults him, then he can sign with someone else if he wants. But that aside, since we don't know what the rules are, its hard to speculate what kind of offer will intice him back to the Kings. Now we do retain his Bird rights, but once the current CBA expires, there are no Bird rights or rules of any kind until a new CBA is put in place. So its my belief that only current contracts that are still active, will be all that remains once the dust settles.
So lets establish just where the team will stand financially on july 1st. The current salary cap is $58,044,000.00. Since we have no system in place to establish what the salary cap for 2011/12 season will be, if there is a season, we'll use it as our point of reference.
If you add up all the players under contract on july 1st, you have a total of $29,325,937.00. Subject that number from the current salary cap and you end up with $28,719,936.00 available for freeagency. Resigning Dalembert or Thornton would have to be subtracted from that number. There are two contracts included in that figure that are either not guaranteed or a team option. Those are the contracts of Jeter and Taylor.
Both their contracts add up to $1,673,165.00. Subtract them from the total amount, and now you have $30,393,102.00 to work with. I'm not saying that will happen, but its a possiblility. So lets assume that we have the 30 mil plus to work with. And, in order to speculate futher, a lot of assumptions have to be made. The salary cap could be reduced, or increase, depending on what the other rules are. There could be salary restrictions on the amount allowed, and on the length of contracts, as well as the years guaranteed. So we're shooting a lot of arrows into the air and hoping that some hit their target.
If the idea is to add significant talent to the team, then paying Dalembert 13 or 14 mil is out of the question. Especially since I believe the team has a large interest in resigning Thornton, who is making just chump change at the moment. So if the team wants to have enough money to make a splash in the free agent market, they have to get the best deal they can in regards to both Dalembert and Thornton. If they can get both back into the fold for around 14 mil, divided up at 8 mil to Dalembert and 6 mil to Thornton, that would give them around 16 mil to sign freeagents with.
Thats enough to sign one top freeagent and one good support player, or perhaps two very good support players. Who knows, under the new CBA it might be enough to sign two top freeagents. But I doubt it.
As to Dalemberts worth, Perkins just agreed to a 4 year extension with the Thunder for an average of 8.7 mil a year. If you go by 2009/10 stats, both players were almost identical with Dalembert having a slight edge in rebounds. Their blocked shots were almost identical and both averaged around 10 ppg. Of course Perkins is coming off knee surgery, but he's also three years younger. So I believe that the two players are very comparable, and if so, then something around 7 to 8 mil a year as a starting point for the first year would appear reasonable.
What it will take to bring Thornton back is anyone's guess. He's certainly proved to be a very valuable player so far, and his type of player is hard to come by. The other side of the coin of course, is that he's not yet a proven commodity. So I'm guessing that somewhere between 3 to 6 mil a year as a starting point in the first year is reasonable. I guess we'll find out somewhere out there in the future.
So lets establish just where the team will stand financially on july 1st. The current salary cap is $58,044,000.00. Since we have no system in place to establish what the salary cap for 2011/12 season will be, if there is a season, we'll use it as our point of reference.
If you add up all the players under contract on july 1st, you have a total of $29,325,937.00. Subject that number from the current salary cap and you end up with $28,719,936.00 available for freeagency. Resigning Dalembert or Thornton would have to be subtracted from that number. There are two contracts included in that figure that are either not guaranteed or a team option. Those are the contracts of Jeter and Taylor.
Both their contracts add up to $1,673,165.00. Subtract them from the total amount, and now you have $30,393,102.00 to work with. I'm not saying that will happen, but its a possiblility. So lets assume that we have the 30 mil plus to work with. And, in order to speculate futher, a lot of assumptions have to be made. The salary cap could be reduced, or increase, depending on what the other rules are. There could be salary restrictions on the amount allowed, and on the length of contracts, as well as the years guaranteed. So we're shooting a lot of arrows into the air and hoping that some hit their target.
If the idea is to add significant talent to the team, then paying Dalembert 13 or 14 mil is out of the question. Especially since I believe the team has a large interest in resigning Thornton, who is making just chump change at the moment. So if the team wants to have enough money to make a splash in the free agent market, they have to get the best deal they can in regards to both Dalembert and Thornton. If they can get both back into the fold for around 14 mil, divided up at 8 mil to Dalembert and 6 mil to Thornton, that would give them around 16 mil to sign freeagents with.
Thats enough to sign one top freeagent and one good support player, or perhaps two very good support players. Who knows, under the new CBA it might be enough to sign two top freeagents. But I doubt it.
As to Dalemberts worth, Perkins just agreed to a 4 year extension with the Thunder for an average of 8.7 mil a year. If you go by 2009/10 stats, both players were almost identical with Dalembert having a slight edge in rebounds. Their blocked shots were almost identical and both averaged around 10 ppg. Of course Perkins is coming off knee surgery, but he's also three years younger. So I believe that the two players are very comparable, and if so, then something around 7 to 8 mil a year as a starting point for the first year would appear reasonable.
What it will take to bring Thornton back is anyone's guess. He's certainly proved to be a very valuable player so far, and his type of player is hard to come by. The other side of the coin of course, is that he's not yet a proven commodity. So I'm guessing that somewhere between 3 to 6 mil a year as a starting point in the first year is reasonable. I guess we'll find out somewhere out there in the future.
There are a lot of things that T. Jones brings to the game that I like. He almost always manages to impact the game in some way. He's a good passer and a good ballhandler for a big man. He's a very good athlete with good hops. He's a great weakside shotblocker and defender. He has good basketball IQ and knows how to rotate on defense. So for starters, I see him as a very good defender in the NBA. He's also a good rebounder and a very intense player.
Offensively he's forced to play around the basket for Kentucky since they have a lack of height on their team. So most of his scoring comes from putbacks and out quicking his defender. He does have a little jump hook in the key, and he also likes to take a mid-range jumper from the foul line, and he's very accurate with it. He has the quickness and the ballhandling ability to take his man off the dribble from the perimiter, but doesn't play enough out there to have those opportunities. His perimiter jumpshot has been the most highly criticized part of his game. Oddly enough, he's fairly accurate from there. However its a shot he can only take when he's wide open, since his shot almost appears to be in slow motion, and would get blocked in the NBA unless he has at least 5 to 6 feet of room.
So in short, he has a lot of potential, but his offensive game will need some revision. I see him as a SF in the NBA, and if he can develop a good offensive game, he could end up being one of the better SF's in the league since he's capable of playing at both ends of the floor. He's quick enough to guard most SF's and strong enough to guard a lot of the PF's. He has some warts, but most of the players in this draft do to some extent.
Offensively he's forced to play around the basket for Kentucky since they have a lack of height on their team. So most of his scoring comes from putbacks and out quicking his defender. He does have a little jump hook in the key, and he also likes to take a mid-range jumper from the foul line, and he's very accurate with it. He has the quickness and the ballhandling ability to take his man off the dribble from the perimiter, but doesn't play enough out there to have those opportunities. His perimiter jumpshot has been the most highly criticized part of his game. Oddly enough, he's fairly accurate from there. However its a shot he can only take when he's wide open, since his shot almost appears to be in slow motion, and would get blocked in the NBA unless he has at least 5 to 6 feet of room.
So in short, he has a lot of potential, but his offensive game will need some revision. I see him as a SF in the NBA, and if he can develop a good offensive game, he could end up being one of the better SF's in the league since he's capable of playing at both ends of the floor. He's quick enough to guard most SF's and strong enough to guard a lot of the PF's. He has some warts, but most of the players in this draft do to some extent.
Yeah, I think Kentucky stifles his game a bit. His perimeter game is more of his bread and butter. I do agree with you that his shot is accurate, but he does need space to get it off. If he can improve his release, that can go a long way for him. I think he's being a bit overlooked because of his shooting %'s and Kentucky's system.
Yeah, I agree. He does have a bit of a temper, and when things don't go his way, he tends to pout a little, and as a result looses focus. Not something I'm that concerned about, but it should be mentioned. He's not as ready a perimiter player as Williams is right now, but he's a better defender than Williams is right now.
I just wanted to mention, that after watching the Ohio St./Kentucky game, and seeing Harrellson out play Sullinger, about a million red flags popped up. Lets be clear! Harrellson is not god's gift to basketball. He's a 6'10" 270 pound center with limited athleticism but who is fundamentally sound and has great basketball IQ. Sullinger managed to score on him one on one, a single time during the game. Harrellson actually got Sullinger in foul trouble, and had him befuddled for most of the game.
When the game started and I saw that Calapari had Harrellson playing Sullinger one on one, thought wow, this could end up being a disastor for Kentucky. But it turned out to be the other way around. Ohio St. ended up having to give Sullinger help against Harrellson, thereby leaving Kentucky's three pt shooters open.
I think Sullinger made a wise choice returning to school. If he had a tough time against Harrellson, who might be a third string center at best in the NBA, I can't imagine how he would fare against some of the better PF's in the league.
When the game started and I saw that Calapari had Harrellson playing Sullinger one on one, thought wow, this could end up being a disastor for Kentucky. But it turned out to be the other way around. Ohio St. ended up having to give Sullinger help against Harrellson, thereby leaving Kentucky's three pt shooters open.
I think Sullinger made a wise choice returning to school. If he had a tough time against Harrellson, who might be a third string center at best in the NBA, I can't imagine how he would fare against some of the better PF's in the league.
Definitely noticed that Sullinger-Harrellson matchup. Just didn't want to rub it in...
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?
). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
Definitely noticed that Sullinger-Harrellson matchup. Just didn't want to rub it in...
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?
). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
Last edited:
Taylor has good quickness and size for a point guard, however, his point guard skills are still a work in progress, as is his offense. He's a good ballhandler, and has the ability to get to the basket, but at times has trouble finishing. To me, despite looking like an above average athlete, he doesn't seem to have great hops, and gets his shot blocked more than he should. He has a decent looking jumpshot, but isn't a particularly good perimiter shooter. I believe he only takes between 1 to 2, 3 pt shots a game, and tends to shoot in the mid to low 30's percentage wise.
Its on the defeinsive side of the ball that he shines. He's a very good on the ball defender. And Its his defense that will attract interest. He's been suspended at least twice while at Kansas. Once for getting into a brawl with someone on the Kansas football team. It was a bad idea that landed him in the hospital as well as getting him a suspension. And he was suspended this year for being caught under the bleachers having sex with a female student.
So what you have with Taylor is a player, with a somewhat checkered off the field reputation, who is an average offensive player to go along with being an average playmaker, but is an outstanding defensive player. As to where that puts him in the draft, is anyone's guess. My guess is bottom of the second round to being not drafted. My advice is for him to stay in school another year since he's a junior.
Its on the defeinsive side of the ball that he shines. He's a very good on the ball defender. And Its his defense that will attract interest. He's been suspended at least twice while at Kansas. Once for getting into a brawl with someone on the Kansas football team. It was a bad idea that landed him in the hospital as well as getting him a suspension. And he was suspended this year for being caught under the bleachers having sex with a female student.
So what you have with Taylor is a player, with a somewhat checkered off the field reputation, who is an average offensive player to go along with being an average playmaker, but is an outstanding defensive player. As to where that puts him in the draft, is anyone's guess. My guess is bottom of the second round to being not drafted. My advice is for him to stay in school another year since he's a junior.
Definitely noticed that Sullinger-Harrellson matchup. Just didn't want to rub it in...
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
I think Harrellson can be very good backup center. (Is that an oxymoron?
). I like the guy. He reminds me of a bigger Brockman. If we had to give up Dally for money reasons, I'd definitely think about taking him in the latter 1st round or 2nd round area.
Well I think Kingster was talking about a pick in the second round. If you can aquire a good backup center in the second round, you do it. Even if you don't have a great need for one at the time. You never know what the future holds for your team, not to mention that there are always teams in need of big men. So he would have trade value down the line.
Its hard to say who I would draft until I know where we pick, and whose left when we pick. However, I'm a huge believer in taking the best player available regardless of position. If that happens to be a point guard, so be it. I only draft for need when the player that fits that description is equal in ability to anyone else I could draft.
As for Kemba, it would be up to him to prove that he's the better player. If he were to come off the bench for us behind Tyreke and Thornton, who has to be resigned first, it would be up to him to prove that he's a better option than Beno. Which personally, I have no doubt that he can have a bigger impact on the game than Beno can. Maybe not immediately, but certainly in a year or so. Kemba's true height will play a part in how high he's drafted. If he's close to six feet, I don't think teams will have any reservations about taking him. But if he come's in at 5'8" to 5'9", then I think he'll drop a little bit.
To me, improving the team means that you draft or trade for someone that moves a starter to the bench, or, moves a bench player futher down the bench, or perhaps completely off the bench. So if Kemba were to come here and move Beno futher down the bench, thats a good thing. Because you just bumped someone off the end of the bench and the whole team just improved. In the ideal world, you want players on your bench that might start for other teams, and can start for your team if an injury occurs to one of your starters. The smaller the dropoff, the better.
As for Kemba, it would be up to him to prove that he's the better player. If he were to come off the bench for us behind Tyreke and Thornton, who has to be resigned first, it would be up to him to prove that he's a better option than Beno. Which personally, I have no doubt that he can have a bigger impact on the game than Beno can. Maybe not immediately, but certainly in a year or so. Kemba's true height will play a part in how high he's drafted. If he's close to six feet, I don't think teams will have any reservations about taking him. But if he come's in at 5'8" to 5'9", then I think he'll drop a little bit.
To me, improving the team means that you draft or trade for someone that moves a starter to the bench, or, moves a bench player futher down the bench, or perhaps completely off the bench. So if Kemba were to come here and move Beno futher down the bench, thats a good thing. Because you just bumped someone off the end of the bench and the whole team just improved. In the ideal world, you want players on your bench that might start for other teams, and can start for your team if an injury occurs to one of your starters. The smaller the dropoff, the better.
Yep I've seen him play. Reminds me somewhat of his brother, except he's taller. He might be a slightly better outside shooter than his brother at this stage of his career, But then he's played 4 years of college. A lot of people don't realize that Justin is the older brother, and at 6'6" has legit SG size. He's a very good defender, and playing at Washington you have to be.
His problem is that doesn't stand out at any one thing enough for people to get excited. He's one of those guys that will end up on an NBA team, but maybe not right away. I would expect to see him in summerleague as a draftee, or as an invitee by some team.
His problem is that doesn't stand out at any one thing enough for people to get excited. He's one of those guys that will end up on an NBA team, but maybe not right away. I would expect to see him in summerleague as a draftee, or as an invitee by some team.
Whereas I mention Harrellson outplaying Sullinger, I thought this article was interesting.
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20110329/SPORTS03/303290083/
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20110329/SPORTS03/303290083/
baja,
this is an extension of the hook shot conversation from the thread in the first forum because I didn't want to cloud up that thread with delving into college basketball...
Have you seen Deniz Kilicli from WVU play at all? I know WVU wasn't a prized team this year given that their best players from last year are gone, but I think you might have caught a game or two this year. I don't know if his hook is considered a full hook. He isn't very tall (listed at 6'9"). I love watching his hook shot though. He has some range with it and can do it with both hands, even though he uses it a lot with his left as a righty. It is unblockable and he is pretty accurate with it. I've been trying to find a youtube of it, but there isn't much out there. Just wondering if you have caught any of WVUs game and noticed. I just moved here 8 months ago and am really enjoying college basketball alot. Thanks again for your writeups (and all the others that write on college too!)
Here is a picture that captures his hook pretty well:
this is an extension of the hook shot conversation from the thread in the first forum because I didn't want to cloud up that thread with delving into college basketball...
Have you seen Deniz Kilicli from WVU play at all? I know WVU wasn't a prized team this year given that their best players from last year are gone, but I think you might have caught a game or two this year. I don't know if his hook is considered a full hook. He isn't very tall (listed at 6'9"). I love watching his hook shot though. He has some range with it and can do it with both hands, even though he uses it a lot with his left as a righty. It is unblockable and he is pretty accurate with it. I've been trying to find a youtube of it, but there isn't much out there. Just wondering if you have caught any of WVUs game and noticed. I just moved here 8 months ago and am really enjoying college basketball alot. Thanks again for your writeups (and all the others that write on college too!)
Here is a picture that captures his hook pretty well:
As a matter of fact, I saw him play several times. But to be honest, he wasn't the reason I was watching. I was tuning in to watch Vanderbilt, St. Johns, Cinncinatti, Etc. I do however remember him. I don't think he played more than 15 to 18 minutes a game, but he was noticable, and that in itself, is enough. The whole point of the hook shot, is that its hard to block. The trick is to be accurate with it. I'd say the player with the biggest hookshot, that comes the closest to being a skyhook, is Ty Zeller of North Carolina.
I have to be honest here. He wasn't the reason I was watching the games, therefore, he was outside my focus. But as I said I did notice him. But to give an appraisal of his abilities wouldn't be fair to him, based on what little I saw. I doubt he'll enter the draft this year, so its a moot point as far as that goes. But if we were to do a couple of comparisons with a couple of the top players at the same position, it might be inciteful. Kilicli averages a rebound every 4.4 minutes he's on the floor. That would average out to around 9 rebounds per 40 minutes of playing time. His game is mostly around the basket if my memory serves and he shoots 48.6% from the floor. In his limited minutes, thats not terrible, and its not great.
As a comparison Sullinger shoots 54.1% from the floor, and averages 13 rebounds per 40 minutes of playing time. I would say that Sullingers rebound totals for a college player are right on the edge of being above average. I say that, because those totals almost always go down in the NBA. I do think that rebounding is one of the things that most easily translates to the NBA. But I believe that its the rebounders that are above average that seem to have the most success.
Kenneth Faried is an example of an above average rebounder. He shoots 62.3% from the floor, and averages 17 rebounds per 40 minutes of playing time. Almost double the rebounding figures of Kilicli. And Faried will probably be a low first round pick. And while Kilicili has a little better offensive game than Faried, the rest of his game pales by comparison, especially when you consider Faried's shotblocking capabilities and all around defensive game.
This is by no mean meant to disparage Kilicli. He's just a sophmore, and he still has time to improve his game. Sometimes players really blossom in their third and fourth years. Two years ago no one knew who Kemba Walker was. Last year Jordon Hamilton was an afterthought, and this year he might be a low lottery pick. So I'll sum it up by saying that the jury is still out on Kilicli. But I will be paying more attention to him next year.
As a comparison Sullinger shoots 54.1% from the floor, and averages 13 rebounds per 40 minutes of playing time. I would say that Sullingers rebound totals for a college player are right on the edge of being above average. I say that, because those totals almost always go down in the NBA. I do think that rebounding is one of the things that most easily translates to the NBA. But I believe that its the rebounders that are above average that seem to have the most success.
Kenneth Faried is an example of an above average rebounder. He shoots 62.3% from the floor, and averages 17 rebounds per 40 minutes of playing time. Almost double the rebounding figures of Kilicli. And Faried will probably be a low first round pick. And while Kilicili has a little better offensive game than Faried, the rest of his game pales by comparison, especially when you consider Faried's shotblocking capabilities and all around defensive game.
This is by no mean meant to disparage Kilicli. He's just a sophmore, and he still has time to improve his game. Sometimes players really blossom in their third and fourth years. Two years ago no one knew who Kemba Walker was. Last year Jordon Hamilton was an afterthought, and this year he might be a low lottery pick. So I'll sum it up by saying that the jury is still out on Kilicli. But I will be paying more attention to him next year.
baja, I really apologize about this misunderstanding.. but my last post was in reference to Zeller. I do agree with your assessment about Kilicli though. I picture him as a Brockman type player with lesser rebounding skills and a better offensive game.
I am curious about Zeller though because I really liked watching him play, but I have no idea about how his game would translate to the NBA. Was hoping that you could elaborate a little about him. (Or anyone else that has thoughts too).
Sorry about the misunderstanding. As the season has gone on, I've come to like Zeller. He's sort of a blue collar guy. Not flashy and more athletic than he appears. He needs to add some muscle, but he's by no means a weakling. He has very good size for the center position, but I think he's quick enough of foot to play some PF. He has a nice little mid-range jumper, and of course he has his hook shot, which he's seems to be more accurate with from the right baseline.
He's an average rebounder, and does have the ability to block shots. He has improved his game every year, so there may be more left in the tank. I suspect he'll stay in school another year and graduate, as he's a junior. If he were to throw his hat into the ring, I think he would go in the high second round somewhere. But you never know. with the lack of good bigs in the draft he might slide into the bottom of the first round.
Long term I see him as a journeyman backup center/PF. He does have good basketball IQ, and that alone could take him a long way. One thing I like about him is that he's not afraid to mix it up under the basket a little. He appears to be a tough kid.
He's an average rebounder, and does have the ability to block shots. He has improved his game every year, so there may be more left in the tank. I suspect he'll stay in school another year and graduate, as he's a junior. If he were to throw his hat into the ring, I think he would go in the high second round somewhere. But you never know. with the lack of good bigs in the draft he might slide into the bottom of the first round.
Long term I see him as a journeyman backup center/PF. He does have good basketball IQ, and that alone could take him a long way. One thing I like about him is that he's not afraid to mix it up under the basket a little. He appears to be a tough kid.
Is there any way of looking up a kid's parents? About 35 years ago in a suburb of Minneapolis there was a 6'7" intelligeent phenom named Zeller who I don't think panned out well but this Zeller sure reminds me of him, especially the build. It would almost surprise me if this wasn't his son.
This Zeller should have a nice career as a backup. You can't teacjh height (who said that?) and all the other good things said about him. Heck, with my familiarity with college play, any guy who catches my attention must be good enough.
Time passes ...................
Never mind, it was Bob Zender, 6'8" who led his team to 69 wins in a row, still a state record. Better than original King Mark Olberding who was a small town star in Minnesota. Zender was All Big Eight at Kansas State but who cares, huh? It's just unusual to have a good basket ball player come from Minnesota. McHale started as a hockey goalie but got too big. He's from northern Minnesota where they have more hockey rinks than basketball courts. Well, maybe.
This Zeller should have a nice career as a backup. You can't teacjh height (who said that?) and all the other good things said about him. Heck, with my familiarity with college play, any guy who catches my attention must be good enough.
Time passes ...................
Never mind, it was Bob Zender, 6'8" who led his team to 69 wins in a row, still a state record. Better than original King Mark Olberding who was a small town star in Minnesota. Zender was All Big Eight at Kansas State but who cares, huh? It's just unusual to have a good basket ball player come from Minnesota. McHale started as a hockey goalie but got too big.
He's from northern Minnesota where they have more hockey rinks than basketball courts. Well, maybe.
Last edited:
Just a reminder for today. Kentucky/UCONN, and VCU/Butler. I'm really looking forward to the Kentucky/UCONN game in particular. Not the first time they played, so both teams know one another. should be a good game. I'm leaning toward Kentucky because they have more weapons, but UCONN keeps knocking off teams that are better than them on paper.