The problem is that we've gotten so good at identifying who the great talents are going to be by the age of 18 (e.g. LeBron, Wemby at #1; Kobe, Giannis late lotto) that it becomes easy to believe that nobody really slips through that freshman net. The game becomes "draft them before they're fully ready or somebody else will". And that in turn leads to the thinking "by age 22 all the good ones are gone". It's not true, but there's a reason that fallacy exists and is compelling. Even though one might specifically acknowledge it isn't true when pressed, that fallacy still has the power to draw you in when you're not guarding against it.Jay Bilas was saying something about that on a pod the other day. When he was playing it was the norm that 22 year olds were still going through the development process and now everyone thinks you have to be 18 to develop
The biggest difference is shooting. If you can shoot you have a role. If you can’t and can’t defend, bye bye.
The three guys you mentioned though are all relic post-only bigs though. Raynaud looks like a wing on the perimeter offensively and he's projected to be an excellent spacer. 3 of the 4 final teams in the playoffs just showed how powerful being able to play 5-out is in the NBA. If Raynaud can access that set for us in 12-15 MPG as a back-up, that's a huge win and a huge boon to our offense.
To me, the guy you're talking about is Johnni Broome more than anything who doesn't have a place in the NBA anymore. Ground-bound post big, doesn't have great size to be a true C so more of a tweener, can't switch on the perimeter, doesn't project to be a shooter.
His coach said that they had him settle more on the defense because they ran everything through him and he couldn’t get into foul trouble. But when they needed him to play defense he could. His first 23 games of the season he had 27 blocks, his final 9 games he had 23 blocks.
Dude has a lot potential, especially since he has only played basketball seriously for the last four years.
The problem is that we've gotten so good at identifying who the great talents are going to be by the age of 18 (e.g. LeBron, Wemby at #1; Kobe, Giannis late lotto) that it becomes easy to believe that nobody really slips through that freshman net. The game becomes "draft them before they're fully ready or somebody else will". And that in turn leads to the thinking "by age 22 all the good ones are gone". It's not true, but there's a reason that fallacy exists and is compelling. Even though one might specifically acknowledge it isn't true when pressed, that fallacy still has the power to draw you in when you're not guarding against it.
That is exactly why there are so many busts in the NBA lottery. They are trying to project instead of believing what their eyes are seeing. Pretty much why players like Steph, Klay, Draymond, Lillard, and Jalen Brunson fell in their drafts.
Luka fell for pretty much the same reason too
“Not athletic enough” “how much better can he get”
I’m not sure why Maxime is considered a non-defensive big. He average 1.4 blocks, one steal and 10 rebounds per game. He may not be Wemby defensive monster, but I would say he should be serviceable on that end. After all, he went to Standford so he is a smart kid, I'm sure he can learn to play better pick and roll defense with proper coaching. To go along with the offensive repertoire, we could have a 2nd round steal.
Unless he puts on more bulk, I think he will be a stretch 4 in the league, reminds me of a young Lauri Marrkaren. If he was a freshman or sophomore coming into the draft, he would had been a lottery pick.
The problem is that we've gotten so good at identifying who the great talents are going to be by the age of 18 (e.g. LeBron, Wemby at #1; Kobe, Giannis late lotto) that it becomes easy to believe that nobody really slips through that freshman net. The game becomes "draft them before they're fully ready or somebody else will". And that in turn leads to the thinking "by age 22 all the good ones are gone". It's not true, but there's a reason that fallacy exists and is compelling. Even though one might specifically acknowledge it isn't true when pressed, that fallacy still has the power to draw you in when you're not guarding against it.
He's going to get used to contact in practice for sure.It's definitely his avoiding contact that sketches people out. On both ends he loses his balance if he's hit. He's a lot like a younger Porzinigis in that way. Tall, narrow, high center of gravity bigs are what they are. He can move laterally though so that's actually more important probably in such a switch heavy leage. Look at the dual big lineup the Thunder played, there were moments the Thunder just couldn't play it and Chet manned the C spot. The difference being is that even in high school you could tell Chet loved contact. He never backed down. Yeah, Lauri is a good comp too.
"He's chunky"
Technically this one was spot on
It's definitely his avoiding contact that sketches people out. On both ends he loses his balance if he's hit. He's a lot like a younger Porzinigis in that way. Tall, narrow, high center of gravity bigs are what they are. He can move laterally though so that's actually more important probably in such a switch heavy leage. Look at the dual big lineup the Thunder played, there were moments the Thunder just couldn't play it and Chet manned the C spot. The difference being is that even in high school you could tell Chet loved contact. He never backed down. Yeah, Lauri is a good comp too.