Okafor article title on front page?

[Duke95]

Just curious if anyone else thinks the title of that article sounds a bit harsh. I understand that some writer somewhere is questioning Okafor's likelihood of success in the NBA, raising some good points in the process, but the title just sounded negative to me. The kid just led us to an incredible season. Just a thought.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

It is very strange

[lotusland]

It is very strange

I'd take Oakafor 1st. He has unbelievable post skill. He will immediately be the best posting big man in the league. Anthony Davis can't guard Okafor in the post and would probably foul out trying. Nobody plays that way because nobody has someone who can post like he can. The article writer is nuts- Okafor has a complete arsenal of post moves going both left and right. He will be unguardable if he is paired with a good PG a and some shooters. Towns will be very good but Okafor has the skills to be great.

[MCFinARL]

Well, the title may be a way to get readers' attention. It doesn't appear that JD King agrees with the writer, who is a student writing in the Springfield College newspaper. Maybe there is not a lot to post on the front page now that it is the off season.

[Duke95]

Yeah, but I don't quite get it. Why is some no-name writer, writing for an obscure paper, worthy of an an article on the front page of DBR questioning whether our top player and NPOY contender will "bomb"?
The author never uses that word, and the author specifically states "I’m not saying he will be a bust in the draft, but I don’t see him averaging more than 13 points a game throughout his career."

Maybe he's right, but I don't think so. I think Okafor has tremendous work ethic. As JD pointed out, he has great footwork. He does have 3 glaring weaknesses: a) no defense, b) can't hit FTs, and c) has no shot outside of maybe 10 feet.

On the other hand, he's a young kid. I'm pretty sure he can develop all 3.

[jdk]

Lack of true post players in the NBA is a chicken-egg scenario. Teams don't play that way because their bigs don't have the skillset to do so. It is a lost art.

Whatever team drafts Okafor will be right up there with Charlotte in terms of feeding the post. Conditioning and strength will come, as will defense. The guy is 10 years away from his physical prime.

I would take Okafor number one. When your team is that terrible, you need to put butts in the seats. Okafor has done some things offensively that I haven't seen in college in a long time. His old school game has that wow factor. His defense is a long-term project, so you keep building around him through the draft for the next 3-4 years while selling the crap out of Okafor jerseys, and maybe your team becomes a destination for an All-Star free agent.

[NashvilleDevil]

I would also take Jah #1. I did not really watch Kentucky so I cannot critique Towns's game. I do know that Jah was the focal point of Duke's offense this year and Towns was in a platoon. Towns did have some big moments, Notre Dame, but he was not doing it all year like Jah. I think if Jah goes 1 at worst you have a poor man's Al Jefferson and a GM probably keeps their job. If you take Towns 1 at worst you have the second coming of Michael Olowakandi and you're out of a job.

[MarkD83]

There are two things in the article that did interest me.

1) In today's climate in the NBA and college there is a huge difference between success in the NBA and success in the draft. Every year the NBA will have a draft and every year the 1st round draft picks will make a lot of guaranteed money. To be successful in the draft you just have to be better than the other people in the year you are being drafted. You don't have to be NBA ready or even D league ready. Before you think this is an insult just look at the MLB draft. There is the extremely rare player that is drafted and then is on a major league roster on opening day the next year. In fact those top MLB draft picks usually spend a significant time in the minors before ending up on a major league roster. So is the NBA going to have to move to an expansion of their minor league. If top drafted players have flaws they can play in the D league to improve until they are more polished. Nothing wrong with this if the minor league is robust.

2) The second is the definition of success (or being a bust) in the NBA. For Jah the quote was he won't average more than 13 points a game. I know that everyone puts huge expectations on players that are drafted high and this is partially due to the money they will receive. However, Robert Parrish averaged "only 14.5 pts a game" and played for 20+ years and is 26th on the all-time scoring list. A few less points a game sounds rather stellar. Players that have a lot less accomplishments than 13 pts per game are very successful and far from being busts.

[dukelifer]

Just curious if anyone else thinks the title of that article sounds a bit harsh. I understand that some writer somewhere is questioning Okafor's likelihood of success in the NBA, raising some good points in the process, but the title just sounded negative to me. The kid just led us to an incredible season. Just a thought.

Jah is not going to come into the league and be an All-Star from day 1. It will take him 2 years or so to adjust to the game. The expectations on these young players is a bit ridiculous. That said - Jah needs to be a much better free throw shooter and he needs to develop some more offensive moves. The kid is good but it will take a lot of work to be great. Time will tell if he has it in him.

[Skitzle]

"I’m not saying he will be a bust in the draft, but I don’t see him averaging more than 13 points a game throughout his career."


I'll take that bet. Derrick Favors is average 10.9 on his career and was not even CLOSE to as polished as Okafor offensively coming out of college.

[Edouble]

I'll take that bet. Derrick Favors is average 10.9 on his career and was not even CLOSE to as polished as Okafor offensively coming out of college.

I took "I’m not saying he will be a bust in the draft, but I don’t see him averaging more than 13 points a game throughout his career." to mean that he wouldn't get his scoring average above 13ppg in any one individual year throughout his career, not that his career average wouldn't be above 13 ppg.

I mention this as Favors averaged 16 ppg this year.

[CDu]

There are two things in the article that did interest me.

1) In today's climate in the NBA and college there is a huge difference between success in the NBA and success in the draft. Every year the NBA will have a draft and every year the 1st round draft picks will make a lot of guaranteed money. To be successful in the draft you just have to be better than the other people in the year you are being drafted. You don't have to be NBA ready or even D league ready. Before you think this is an insult just look at the MLB draft. There is the extremely rare player that is drafted and then is on a major league roster on opening day the next year. In fact those top MLB draft picks usually spend a significant time in the minors before ending up on a major league roster. So is the NBA going to have to move to an expansion of their minor league. If top drafted players have flaws they can play in the D league to improve until they are more polished. Nothing wrong with this if the minor league is robust.

2) The second is the definition of success (or being a bust) in the NBA. For Jah the quote was he won't average more than 13 points a game. I know that everyone puts huge expectations on players that are drafted high and this is partially due to the money they will receive. However, Robert Parrish averaged "only 14.5 pts a game" and played for 20+ years and is 26th on the all-time scoring list. A few less points a game sounds rather stellar. Players that have a lot less accomplishments than 13 pts per game are very successful and far from being busts.

First, I read the quote as never averaging 13 ppg in a season. But even with the meaning you take, Parish's career scoring average was dragged down by playing as a bit player for nearly a decade past his prime. He isn't an NBA legend based on a 14.5 ppg scoring average. He did so by being a 16-20 ppg throughout the Celtics' title runs during the early-to-mid 1980s. When someone says I don't think Okafor will average 13 ppg, they are not intending it as a compliment. Robert Parish (a guy who still averaged comfortably over 13 ppg) is not exactly the right barometer for the quality of a 13 ppg career. He would have been an extreme outlier (like the absolute far right end of the distribution curve) of a <13 ppg career had he qualified as such. But he would have needed a bunch of scoreless games added to his tally to qualify.

[Wander]

Why on Earth does DBR have a front page piece entirely about an article in the student newspaper of Springfield College?

[Duke95]

Why on Earth does DBR have a front page piece entirely about an article in the student newspaper of Springfield College?

Yep, that's exactly what I was asking. And on top of that, a title that's rather insulting to our top player. Can't figure this one out.

[MarkD83]

First, I read the quote as never averaging 13 ppg in a season. But even with the meaning you take, Parish's career scoring average was dragged down by playing as a bit player for nearly a decade past his prime. He isn't an NBA legend based on a 14.5 ppg scoring average. He did so by being a 16-20 ppg throughout the Celtics' title runs during the early-to-mid 1980s. When someone says I don't think Okafor will average 13 ppg, they are not intending it as a compliment. Robert Parish (a guy who still averaged comfortably over 13 ppg) is not exactly the right barometer for the quality of a 13 ppg career. He would have been an extreme outlier (like the absolute far right end of the distribution curve) of a <13 ppg career had he qualified as such. But he would have needed a bunch of scoreless games added to his tally to qualify.

I guess I did take an extreme example, but the major point was success comes in different forms and is deceiving to assess just based on points per game....John Stockton also averaged less than 13 ppg but that is a really bad example because of his assists. Robert Horry averaged 7 pts a game and has 7 championship rings in a 16 year career. Again I don't mean to discuss each player individually but just the general thought of any player's success or failure depends upon what they want to accomplish rather than on a statistic that we assign to them before they even play.

As an aside I always thought that if you wanted to win NBA championships the best thing to do is enter a draft where you are about the 20-25th best player. You will still get an obscene amount of money guaranteed (in 2014-15 that is ~2.7 to 3.7 million over 3 years) and be on a contender right away. If you are good enough the contender will pick you up for the next three years. You still make a lot of money but you are contending for a championship in each of your first 6 years.

I like Tyus' chances of being an NBA champion more than I like Justise's or Jah's.

[MChambers]

First, I read the quote as never averaging 13 ppg in a season. But even with the meaning you take, Parish's career scoring average was dragged down by playing as a bit player for nearly a decade past his prime. He isn't an NBA legend based on a 14.5 ppg scoring average. He did so by being a 16-20 ppg throughout the Celtics' title runs during the early-to-mid 1980s. When someone says I don't think Okafor will average 13 ppg, they are not intending it as a compliment. Robert Parish (a guy who still averaged comfortably over 13 ppg) is not exactly the right barometer for the quality of a 13 ppg career. He would have been an extreme outlier (like the absolute far right end of the distribution curve) of a <13 ppg career had he qualified as such. But he would have needed a bunch of scoreless games added to his tally to qualify.

But Parish also played in a higher scoring era, right?

[CDu]

But Parish also played in a higher scoring era, right?

He did, but playing alongside a few other Hall of Fame scorers (most notably Bird and McHale) has a way of deflating one's numbers a bit. Even in an era of inflated scoring.

[porkpa]

I hope that the Knicks don't get the first pick. That's not because I hate the Knicks. I would very much like for them to improve for the sake of the league.
The main reason is that they would likely pick Jah. I don't believe that Jah is anywhere near ready for the vast amount of pressure and expectations that would befall him if he went to New York.
The player who I would most compare Jah to is a very young Tim Duncan. But when Duncan came into the league, he was a graduating senior. Okafor is only a freshman, only one year removed from high school. He is not ready to carry an NBA team on his shoulders. The anticipation and expectations will be beyond what any kid could do. When that does not come to fruition, the boo birds and destructive elements of the New York press will come out.
Give him the two or three years more in experience, then he MIGHT reach those heights. Hopefully he will develop and improve his shooting with a fifteen footer as Duncan has done. Then he could possibly become a Tim Duncan or a team changing big man. But it won't be next year, nor probably the next beyond that. I just hope that in the transition his emotional state is not caused irreparable harm.

[Ichabod Drain]

If we're asking if Oak is going to bomb in the NBA we should also be asking if Winslow is going to blow up in the NBA (pun intended).

[porkpa]

Most people would think me dumb. They almost would certainly be right. But if I were given the choice between Winslow or Okafor, I'd go with Winslow. I know you can't make big, but I think that at this point Winslow is just a little stream in the ocean that he will eventually become. We ain't seen anything yet.

[tux]

Most people would think me dumb. They almost would certainly be right. But if I were given the choice between Winslow or Okafor, I'd go with Winslow. I know you can't make big, but I think that at this point Winslow is just a little stream in the ocean that he will eventually become. We ain't seen anything yet.

While I agree that Winslow may be undervalued in the 6-10 range, I think there are more guys like Winslow in the league than guys like Okafor. And Okafor is not as nailed to the low post as some are now suggesting. The guy has incredible hands and incredible feet. Before he hurt his ankle, the guy did some things on the floor that I haven't seen a guy his size do. Also, maybe late in the year he started just turning his shoulder and pushing guys to the rim, but that doesn't mean that that is somehow the only way he can score the ball. More like taking the easiest thing available IMO. I didn't read the entire article being discussed, mainly b/c it looked to be written by a teenage blogger. (God, I hate The Bleacher Report and the sites that mimic it...) Anyway, I'm in the Okafor should go #1 camp. And, whoever the Knicks pick is both going to be young (<20) and under a lot of pressure. Okafor doesn't strike me as the kind of kid that would shrink from that challenge.

[Edouble]

If we're asking if Oak is going to bomb in the NBA we should also be asking if Winslow is going to blow up in the NBA (pun intended).

I don't get the pun.

Do you mean he's definitely going to "blow it out", 'cause that's funny!

[SkyBrickey]

For those of us who watched all of Dukes games, we saw flashes of how Jah will expand his game in the NBA. The dribble drive and spin move from the wing. The square up soft bank shot from 10 feet. Unless you were watching Duke closely, some of these critics may have missed these talents. I think he will be an incredible offensive force in the NBA in one on one coverage.

The mystery for me with Jah was always defense and free throw shooting. And related to defense, stamina.

He's got a nice shooting stroke and such soft touch around the rim. How can he not be a 70%+ free throw shooter. Giant hands? Is it that simple? And as agile as he is and with that wingspan, why not a better rim protector?

As his body matures, I've got to believe he can develop into an average defender in the NBA. Couple that with an A+ scoring game and I'd take him #1. Bust? No way!

And with his reach, huge hands and basketball iq, I think he will be an outstanding passer day one as well.

[Lar77]

The player who I would most compare Jah to is a very young Tim Duncan. But when Duncan came into the league, he was a graduating senior. Okafor is only a freshman, only one year removed from high school. He is not ready to carry an NBA team on his shoulders. The anticipation and expectations will be beyond what any kid could do. When that does not come to fruition, the boo birds and destructive elements of the New York press will come out.
Give him the two or three years more in experience, then he MIGHT reach those heights. Hopefully he will develop and improve his shooting with a fifteen footer as Duncan has done. Then he could possibly become a Tim Duncan or a team changing big man. But it won't be next year, nor probably the next beyond that. I just hope that in the transition his emotional state is not caused irreparable harm.


Jah has said in the past that he models his game after Duncan, so the comparison is apt. Duncan had more polish to his game and was older when he came to the pros. He also had David Robinson as a mentor and Pop as a coach.

Who drafts him is as important as when he gets selected. Jah will do well long term if he gets the right environment.

[porkpa]

I completely agree. Where he goes is more important than whether he goes, first, second or even third.

[Steven43]

I'd take Oakafor 1st..

I would take Justise Winslow with the first pick. When healthy in the second half of the season he was not just our best player, he was the best player in the nation. He plays like a somewhat smaller version of Lebron James with a better outside shot. That is the direction the NBA has gone in the last 10-15 years and will likely continue to go.

[porkpa]

Steven, I cannot disagree with you. I don't think we've even come close to seeing the best of Winslow. In terms of where he is and where he is going to be, he is just a babe in the woods.
I remember seeing Len Bias progress from his freshman year until the time he graduated from Maryland.
Winslow reminds me a lot of Bias, only he was a significantly better freshman than Bias was.
If recklessness had not ended his life, I believe that Bias was destined to become one of the all time greats. Of course, we will never know.

[Ichabod Drain]

I would take Justise Winslow with the first pick. When healthy in the second half of the season he was not just our best player, he was the best player in the nation. He plays like a somewhat smaller version of Lebron James with a better outside shot. That is the direction the NBA has gone in the last 10-15 years and will likely continue to go.

The second half of the season Justise was really able to take advantage of mismatches playing PF. He was strong and athletic enough to play the four in college but still had the skill, speed, and range to cause problems for opposing defenders. In the NBA he will play almost exclusively at SF. Those mismatches will be harder to come by and he will really have to work on improving his handle and range in order to be effective in the league.

I think Justise can be a great pro, I just don't want to set the bar too high for him out of the gate.

[COYS]

The second half of the season Justise was really able to take advantage of mismatches playing PF. He was strong and athletic enough to play the four in college but still had the skill, speed, and range to cause problems for opposing defenders. In the NBA he will play almost exclusively at SF. Those mismatches will be harder to come by and he will really have to work on improving his handle and range in order to be effective in the league.

I think Justise can be a great pro, I just don't want to set the bar too high for him out of the gate.

Agree on all points. However, I will add that I think Justise can still exploit mismatches at the pro level, but that will happen in reverse by playing shooting guard and being stronger than his opponent. Justise has a solid handle and good passing ability. His set outside shot seems to be solid. His midrange game could use some work but his three point stroke in combination with (hopefully) improved free throw shooting means he has a lot of potential there, too. I could see him bullying opposing 2's in the post with his strength while also using his quickness and defensive prowess to shut them down on the opposite end. It hard not to take Jahlil or Townes at number 1. But whichever team drafts Justise will be getting a player that has both lots of upside AND has already shown that he can produce. I can't wait to see what he does in the pros.

[Ichabod Drain]

Wasn't sure where to but this but here is a tweet from Jonathan Givony of Draft Express on Jah at BDA Sports workouts.

"Jahlil Okafor has only been here for four days, but he came in phenomenal shape. As lean as I've ever seen him. Hasn't been vacationing..."

Awesome news, Big Jah is going to impress a lot of people in the weeks leading up to the draft.

[NashvilleDevil]

I really believe that if the team picking first takes Towns it will be a decision they regret for a long time.

[Dukeford]

I really believe that if the team picking first takes Towns it will be a decision they regret for a long time.

I've been thinking the same thing myself.
Okafor still has a lot of refining to do, but next year he is going to use those huge hands to average 6-7 offensive rebounds per game.

[-jk]

I've been thinking the same thing myself.
Okafor still has a lot of refining to do, but next year he is going to use those huge hands to average 6-7 offensive rebounds per game.

In retrospect, it's easy to fault Portland for not taking Jordan. But they really didn't need a wing just then. Context matters...

-jk