2022 NBA Draft

[Kedsy]

I’ve read that free throw and 3 pt percentage are closely linked. Meaning if a guy shoots well from the stripe he can develop into a good three point shooter.

Yeah, I've read the same thing. So is that what you meant by "more promise as a shooter"?

[kshepinthehouse]

Yeah, I've read the same thing. So is that what you meant by "more promise as a shooter"?

More promise as a three point shooter.

[CDu]

It will be really interesting to see how Banchero does. Banchero was the better college player and bigger. Tatum's only edge was that he was a much better FT shooter.

The question will be can Banchero stay at the PF spot in the NBA and adequately defend "down" on switches? Tatum's questions coming were whether he was a 3 or a 4, but Banchero's questions are whether he's a 4 or a 5. Banchero probably has the size and strength to handle some smallball 5, minus the length. If he can handle that AND play well at PF without being a defensive weakness on the perimeter, then his skill set is such an advantage. Tatum is a bit smaller and thus perhaps has an edge in perimeter defense. But if Banchero can play the same basic game as Tatum but one position bigger, that's a massive edge for him.

The question is whether Banchero's shot will support high-volume shooting. His FT% doesn't suggest it, whereas Tatum's did suggest there was room for him to grow into a perimeter shooter. But Banchero does so much else better that he could make up for being just an okay shooter.

Should be fun to watch both continue to grow though. Tatum is just beginning to reach the upper stratosphere now, and should hopefully continue to get better. And obviously Banchero's career is entirely ahead of him.

[HayYou]

The mocks don’t take into account all the foreign players drafted at end of round one so if Wendell or Trevor aren’t mocked in top 25 I doubt they go round one

That doesn't happen as much any more. If you are a team that is set to contend for a title, then you can stash players overseas. This year, there is 1 of those, and it is GSW. Everyone else needs to add pieces that can contribute. that is why a guy like Moore will rise. He can help off the bench from day 1. Without needing the ball a ton. Take the team that lost to GSW. They need a little more depth in the post, as Horford is getting old, and the time lord might get too expensive in a few years.

Memphis, who barely lost to the GSW, are likely to need a solid backup PG. And more 3nD guys.

Ditto the 3nD at Milwaukee. Ditto Philly. The Nets need post help.

Look, none of the teams above have a glaring need. All are really good. Some, like the Nets and Bucks, really need to get healthy, which they weren't last year (which is why the Celts need to improve, even if only slightly). But each of the teams I mentioned need to improve, even if only in the depth area.

Teams aren't likely to find stars this late in the first round. But they are likely to find solid role players off the bench, and that is invaluable today. Fans aren't as open to their team stashing late first round picks anymore. Most of the really good foreign players want to get to the NBA PDQ, so the players aren't as willing to do that.

No, picks at the end of the first round are more about Floors than ceilings. Which is why a guy like Moore will rise, and I feel that Keels will as well.

Duke guys have been stellar role players in recent years. That comes from guys having to find out how to contribute at Duke alongside future NBA superstars. Our role playing guys have reps for being hard workers who are great in the locker room and take to coaching like a tick to an overweight short-haired dog. Cook, Lance, and Trent are great reasons why our supporting type guys are likely to be picked up late. Lower downside, not going to be problems, and they are fine with not being the focal point of the O.

[HayYou]

It will be really interesting to see how Banchero does. Banchero was the better college player and bigger. Tatum's only edge was that he was a much better FT shooter.

The question will be can Banchero stay at the PF spot in the NBA and adequately defend "down" on switches? Tatum's questions coming were whether he was a 3 or a 4, but Banchero's questions are whether he's a 4 or a 5. Banchero probably has the size and strength to handle some smallball 5, minus the length. If he can handle that AND play well at PF without being a defensive weakness on the perimeter, then his skill set is such an advantage. Tatum is a bit smaller and thus perhaps has an edge in perimeter defense. But if Banchero can play the same basic game as Tatum but one position bigger, that's a massive edge for him.

The question is whether Banchero's shot will support high-volume shooting. His FT% doesn't suggest it, whereas Tatum's did suggest there was room for him to grow into a perimeter shooter. But Banchero does so much else better that he could make up for being just an okay shooter.

Should be fun to watch both continue to grow though. Tatum is just beginning to reach the upper stratosphere now, and should hopefully continue to get better. And obviously Banchero's career is entirely ahead of him.

I think the biggest criticism of Banchero is sort of a mirror of OUR biggest criticism of Tatum. Tatum was all too eager to be in attack mode and hunt his own shot. Ruthlessly. Often, in our opinion, to a negative degree. After the NCSU loss, Tatum was basically branded a ball hog and there were plenty of folks who wanted him to come off the bench for a while.

If PB had more of Tatum's attitude, PB would be the number 1 recruit. PB's motor is the one consistent negative that has followed him since the middle of his Jr year of HS. It isn't that he doesn't play hard. It is just that he disappears at times. He just doesn't dominate to the degree, nor does he do it as consistently, as he should.

Starting the year, Chet and PB were seen as the clear cut top 2 choices. By January, it was a top 3 with Smith joining the top 2. But by the end of the conf regular season, it was sort of back to a top 2, only it was Smith and Chet. Paolo was still number 3, clearly, but he was no longer talked about as being in contention for number 1. But PB's play in the NCAAT changed that. That was the guy that we, and the NBA had longed to see. Dominant. Engaged. CONSISTENT. Plus, he played better on D.

PB's still likely to go 3, still, but that is down to the vagaries of the draft lottery. I think Orlando would take him if Smith were off the board, and Houston would take him number 1. But Smith is a better fit on Orlando, and OKC is just in love with Chet and has been all year. Detroit, a team I hoped would "win" in the lottery, would have jumped all over Banchero wherever they picked. PB's great NCAAT, combined with lackluster performances by the other 2, vaulted him back into the top tier of the lottery. The ping pong balls dropped him to 3, but could just as easily have vaulted him to 1 (and still might). All because of his March play.

Will he do that consistently in the NBA? That is the real question. That aggression on O, and that willingness to play D, will have him contesting for All NBA sooner rather than later. But consistent effort and aggression are the big question marks.

Side note, he was sort of a disaster at Duke as a small ball 5, but I'm not sure how much of that was his fault. Success in small ball depends on the SF/PF. AKA the 6-7ish wing who plays great defense at either SF or PF, while being a tough and opportunistic rebounder. And Griffin failed miserably at that. Bad on D, worse on Rebounding. So I'd guess the jury is still out wrt PB as a 5 in small ball situations.

[cbarry]

I’ll bet anyone a pie Trevor doesn’t go round one.

Not gonna take that bet! I will honestly be surprised if Trevor gets drafted period. If he does, I think it's way at the end of the second round.
He had a few really good (and excellent- hello Kentucky!) games, but that shot has to improve dramatically for him to be able to play in the NBA. I know I am in the minority, but I think he is heading for the G league or overseas.

[brevity]

I’ll bet anyone a pie Trevor doesn’t go round one.

The consensus, for now, is that both Trevor Keels and Wendell Moore Jr go early in the second round. Things get a bit nutty by that point, when itchy owners of no draft picks (hello, Lakers, Nets, and Jazz) get FOMO all of a sudden and want to trade their way back into the action.

Kevin O'Connor of The Ringer has finally put up his analysis of Team Needs this evening, and... it's really bad. Each team gets a paragraph description that mostly covers the contract status of existing players and says little to nothing about improving through the draft. There are three draftees pictured as Friendly Suggestions, and they often make no sense.

The Atlanta Hawks, for example, have picks at #16 and #44. Two of the players suggested are Malaki Branham and Tari Eason, who are plausibly available at #16. The third is Jaden Ivey, who figures to go 4th overall. Why is he there? O'Connor writes, "In an ideal world, the Hawks are able to trade the 16th pick in a deal for a proven piece." That sounds like a veteran, not a high lottery pick, and nothing is said about who ATL might trade and what veteran they should pursue.

Keels and Moore are Friendly Suggestions for both the Warriors (#28, 51, 55) and Lakers (no picks). Just thrown in there, I guess? I don't know what this means.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I'll be quite sad if Trevor slips that far, as it'll be all the more evidence that he could've benefitted from another year at Duke. Here's hoping his team knows more than Mr. Woo.

On Wendell, I get the sense from synthesizing various mock drafts and take that his stock could be rising. I have to think teams in the second half of the first round who are looking more for a "role player" that can see the floor immediately, rather than a longer term prospect with a higher ceiling, will look hard at Wendell. What you see if probably what you get with him, but a 3-and-D wing that can potentially guard 1-4 is something a lot of contenders would love coming off their bench next year.

Wendell Moore seems like a guy that has limited upside, but he's still so damn young that I think there's untapped potential. He took a big leap as a shooter this season AND he's younger than some sophomores and almost as young as some freshmen in this draft. Moore showed that he can be a primary ball handler at times at Duke. I think that's an area where he can improve. His on-ball scoring is another area where he could take a step. Adding one or two skills to his game and he could be a lot more than just a rotational wing on a good team.

[kshepinthehouse]

Wendell Moore seems like a guy that has limited upside, but he's still so damn young that I think there's untapped potential. He took a big leap as a shooter this season AND he's younger than some sophomores and almost as young as some freshmen in this draft. Moore showed that he can be a primary ball handler at times at Duke. I think that's an area where he can improve. His on-ball scoring is another area where he could take a step. Adding one or two skills to his game and he could be a lot more than just a rotational wing on a good team.

I really think Wendell ends up overseas or in the G league.

[scottdude8]

FWIW, Vegas has slowly but surely changed its thinking on Paolo going #1: https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/nb...ng-drastically

Personally, I find it ridiculous that you can bet on things like this where there is no "chance" involved... the outcome of a sporting event inherently has some randomness, but you can know with certainty (or a high probability without noise) who a given team is going to draft or where a player will go in free agency if you know the right people. It just seems ripe for corruption.

That said, Vegas tends to want to protect its money, and odds don't move this drastically unless someone knows something (or, in odd cases, when a ton of unexpected money has come in on a longer-shot bet). Something similar happened in the weeks leading up the NFL draft as Travon Walker's odds to go No. 1 overall shifted very suddenly.

This could be a lot of smoke... perhaps the NBA gave the Magic a nudge to create some more drama atop the draft to draw more eyes. But perhaps the Magic are wising up to the fact that Paolo is the best player in the draft

[tommy]

FWIW, Vegas has slowly but surely changed its thinking on Paolo going #1: https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/nb...ng-drastically

Personally, I find it ridiculous that you can bet on things like this where there is no "chance" involved... the outcome of a sporting event inherently has some randomness, but you can know with certainty (or a high probability without noise) who a given team is going to draft or where a player will go in free agency if you know the right people. It just seems ripe for corruption.

That said, Vegas tends to want to protect its money, and odds don't move this drastically unless someone knows something (or, in odd cases, when a ton of unexpected money has come in on a longer-shot bet). Something similar happened in the weeks leading up the NFL draft as Travon Walker's odds to go No. 1 overall shifted very suddenly.

This could be a lot of smoke... perhaps the NBA gave the Magic a nudge to create some more drama atop the draft to draw more eyes. But perhaps the Magic are wising up to the fact that Paolo is the best player in the draft

Yeah wouldn't the GM of the Magic, who knows for certain who they're drafting, have every incentive to have someone he knows place a big bet for him in Vegas and collect it with zero risk of losing?

[kshepinthehouse]

Yeah wouldn't the GM of the Magic, who knows for certain who they're drafting, have every incentive to have someone he knows place a big bet for him in Vegas and collect it with zero risk of losing?

A bet such as this would surely draw some red flags in Vegas wouldn’t it?

[-jk]

A bet such as this would surely draw some red flags in Vegas wouldn’t it?

Isn't that what proxies/bagmen are for?

-jk

[scottdude8]

Yeah wouldn't the GM of the Magic, who knows for certain who they're drafting, have every incentive to have someone he knows place a big bet for him in Vegas and collect it with zero risk of losing?

A bet such as this would surely draw some red flags in Vegas wouldn’t it?

Isn't that what proxies/bagmen are for?

-jk

Exactly my point! I think that the proliferation of sports gambling is a net positive (eliminates the need for doing things under the table while also increasing fan interest; that said, I acknowledge many are against it given issues with gambling addiction, and with good reason), but the proliferation of prop betting is getting out of hand. Even going beyond the obvious of a "friend of the GM" making such bets, what about friends of reporters who hear things through the grapevine that aren't public knowledge? What about friends of the agents of the players? The list goes on and on.

I feel like we shouldn't be betting on anything that is 100% within human control. There is one person, the GM of the Magic, who will choose the No. 1 pick (in all likelihood) on Thursday without any noise or randomness. Yes, players might be tempted to fix games, but it's certainly a lot more difficult to do when you've got 10 players on the court, plus refs, plus coaches, plus the inherent randomness of athletic competition. It's just weird.

Plus, unless Vegas is making money on lots of stupid people placing bets on their favorite players for fun and/or there's some sort of "cap" on the size of the bet that can be made, I feel like this is a potential big looser for Vegas too. Sometime in the not too distant future there's gonna be a big loss at the sports books because an unexpected pick comes in that a handful of people knew about and placed big bets on, and then this'll all be over.

[kshepinthehouse]

Exactly my point! I think that the proliferation of sports gambling is a net positive (eliminates the need for doing things under the table while also increasing fan interest; that said, I acknowledge many are against it given issues with gambling addiction, and with good reason), but the proliferation of prop betting is getting out of hand. Even going beyond the obvious of a "friend of the GM" making such bets, what about friends of reporters who hear things through the grapevine that aren't public knowledge? What about friends of the agents of the players? The list goes on and on.

I feel like we shouldn't be betting on anything that is 100% within human control. There is one person, the GM of the Magic, who will choose the No. 1 pick (in all likelihood) on Thursday without any noise or randomness. Yes, players might be tempted to fix games, but it's certainly a lot more difficult to do when you've got 10 players on the court, plus refs, plus coaches, plus the inherent randomness of athletic competition. It's just weird.

Plus, unless Vegas is making money on lots of stupid people placing bets on their favorite players for fun and/or there's some sort of "cap" on the size of the bet that can be made, I feel like this is a potential big looser for Vegas too. Sometime in the not too distant future there's gonna be a big loss at the sports books because an unexpected pick comes in that a handful of people knew about and placed big bets on, and then this'll all be over.

Well that’s what odds are for, right?

[DavidBenAkiva]

A bet such as this would surely draw some red flags in Vegas wouldn’t it?

Delete

[DavidBenAkiva]

I really think Wendell ends up overseas or in the G league.

On what basis? Have you seen the roster of most NBA teams? There are a ton of guys that look and play a lot like Wendell Moore. On one hand, that means lots of competition. On the other, that means that his skillset and archetype is in demand. If you want to see what I mean, check out Andre Iguodala's stats as a sophomore at Arizona or Jordan Poole as a sophomore at Michigan. Then compare that to what Wendell Moore just did this past year. It turns out you can be a productive NBA player even if you don't score more than 13 points a game in college. Happens all the time.

[kshepinthehouse]

On what basis? Have you seen the roster of most NBA teams? There are a ton of guys that look and play a lot like Wendell Moore. On one hand, that means lots of competition. On the other, that means that his skillset and archetype is in demand. If you want to see what I mean, check out Andre Iguodala's stats as a sophomore at Arizona or Jordan Poole as a sophomore at Michigan. Then compare that to what Wendell Moore just did this past year. It turns out you can be a productive NBA player even if you don't score more than 13 points a game in college. Happens all the time.

There’s a ton of guys who look and play like him overseas too.

[DavidBenAkiva]

New mock draft from ESPN this morning: https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/ins...intel-scouting

3. Rockets: Paolo Banchero
11. Knicks: AJ Griffin
15. Hornets: Mark Williams
23. 76ers: Wendell Moore, Jr.
32. Magic: Trevor Keels

[DavidBenAkiva]

There’s a ton of guys who look and play like him overseas too.

Just out of curiosity, do you regularly watch NBA games?