OT: 2017 NBA Mock Draft - State of the Game(s)

[AreBee1969]

Looking at Chad Ford's mock draft on ESPN.com today, and to me it seemed indicative of the state of both the NCAA and NBA games. Both are far less interesting to watch than they were even a few years ago. Where I used to watch several college games per week, now I watch only UCONN. Where I used to watch all Celtics games and maybe one or two other games per week, I watch only bits and pieces of the Cs games.

Of the top 16 players in the mock draft, there were 15 Freshman and one international player. Overall, the top 30 consisted of 18 Freshman, 6 sophomores, 5 internationals and one senior. Programs (not just Kentucky) have become NBA factories where kids spend a year, maybe two, rarely get coached up and then head off to the NBA with a ton of athletic ability and high school level fundamentals.

How does it change? I wonder if contraction in the NBA would work, although I don't see that happening. Hypothetically, say four teams are removed from the league. That's 60 of the lesser talented players across the remaining 24 teams, out of the NBA. The level of play in the NBA should improve greatly, and now the college kids are competing for less spots. That would encourage kids to stay in college longer and get better, which would improve the level of play at the college level. Sounds great, but again, I don't see it happening. Too much money to be made. 22 teams sell at least 90% of their seats and only three teams are under 80% capacity for games. Hell, even the Nets sell 85% of their seats.

With both games seemingly watered down, I find myself watching something other than hoops.

 

[CTBasketball]

The idea of "potential" is overused in basketball in my opinion. It's hard to mold quality talent in basketball, so to me it's odd to see so many super athletic kids get drafted in the first round; with such an incomplete game to boot.

If a kid can't play, he can't play. There are far more Anthony Bennett's, Otto Porter's, and Michael Beasley's than Kemba Walker's, Draymond Green's, and Kawhi Leonard's.

 

[DaveHuskiesFan]

The idea of "potential" is overused in basketball in my opinion. It's hard to mold quality talent in basketball, so to me it's odd to see so many super athletic kids get drafted in the first round; with such an incomplete game to boot.

If a kid can't play, he can't play. There are far more Anthony Bennett's, Otto Porter's, and Michael Beasley's than Kemba Walker's, Draymond Green's, and Kawhi Leonard's.

Otto Porter is averaging 15-7-2 on 47%-53%-80% splits. He leads the NBA in 3pt % this year. Probably the wrong example.

 

[JSM1970]

Don't lump Otto Porter into this group, he is a legit player

Shabazz or Lamb are much closer to busts than Porter

The idea of "potential" is overused in basketball in my opinion. It's hard to mold quality talent in basketball, so to me it's odd to see so many super athletic kids get drafted in the first round; with such an incomplete game to boot.

If a kid can't play, he can't play. There are far more Anthony Bennett's, Otto Porter's, and Michael Beasley's than Kemba Walker's, Draymond Green's, and Kawhi Leonard's.

 

[Robertelamin]

Yeah Otto Potter isn't a bust like Kris Bryant or Bryce Harper.

 

[JSM1970]

Yeah, learn to read. My point was for $30m/year they are.

Yeah Otto Potter isn't a bust like Kris Bryant or Bryce Harper.

 

[methodology]

Otto Porter is averaging 15-7-2 on 47%-53%-80% splits. He leads the NBA in 3pt % this year. Probably the wrong example.

Otto is also one of the rare players to not play AAU ball

 

[methodology]

Yeah, learn to read. My point was for $30m/year they are.

You have zero understanding of the economics of baseball and the value of defense along with the decrease in homeruns which make power hitters much more valuable in today's game

 

[Robertelamin]

Yeah, learn to read. My point was for $30m/year they are.

You have no idea about how this works.

 

[gtcam]

The idea of "potential" is overused in basketball in my opinion. It's hard to mold quality talent in basketball, so to me it's odd to see so many super athletic kids get drafted in the first round; with such an incomplete game to boot.

If a kid can't play, he can't play. There are far more Anthony Bennett's, Otto Porter's, and Michael Beasley's than Kemba Walker's, Draymond Green's, and Kawhi Leonard's.

100% correct CTB
And for those who don't want to waste brain cells thinking about it deeply - how many years did Kemba, Draymond and Kewhi play college balls vs the some of the others?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Looking at Chad Ford's mock draft on ESPN.com today, and to me it seemed indicative of the state of both the NCAA and NBA games. Both are far less interesting to watch than they were even a few years ago. Where I used to watch several college games per week, now I watch only UCONN. Where I used to watch all Celtics games and maybe one or two other games per week, I watch only bits and pieces of the Cs games.

Of the top 16 players in the mock draft, there were 15 Freshman and one international player. Overall, the top 30 consisted of 18 Freshman, 6 sophomores, 5 internationals and one senior. Programs (not just Kentucky) have become NBA factories where kids spend a year, maybe two, rarely get coached up and then head off to the NBA with a ton of athletic ability and high school level fundamentals.

How does it change? I wonder if contraction in the NBA would work, although I don't see that happening. Hypothetically, say four teams are removed from the league. That's 60 of the lesser talented players across the remaining 24 teams, out of the NBA. The level of play in the NBA should improve greatly, and now the college kids are competing for less spots. That would encourage kids to stay in college longer and get better, which would improve the level of play at the college level. Sounds great, but again, I don't see it happening. Too much money to be made. 22 teams sell at least 90% of their seats and only three teams are under 80% capacity for games. Hell, even the Nets sell 85% of their seats.

With both games seemingly watered down, I find myself watching something other than hoops.

College is worse, no question. But the NBA? I am finding the NBA is now interesting for the first time in many years. I credit Steve Kerr, who took a team of mismatched, unconventional players, showed them how to play team basketball, and dominated. At the moment, Brad Stevens is doing something similar. You need stars in the NBA, but I think we've seen that you can now win playing unselfish, high ball movement basketball. It's become real basketball again, instead of the endless sequences of one on one match-ups that it has been since Jordan. Now that stuff was unwatchable. I'll give a pass to the Spurs, who were the lone bright spot during that era.

As a Celtics fan, I want Cleveland to lose of course, but I also want them to lose for the good of the game.

 

[JSM1970]

How many did 'Bron, Kyrie, KD and Giannis play?

Hard to say one way or the other

100% correct CTB
And for those who don't want to waste brain cells thinking about it deeply - how many years did Kemba, Draymond and Kewhi play college balls vs the some of the others?

 

[Walker11]

College is worse, no question. But the NBA? I am finding the NBA is now interesting for the first time in many years. I credit Steve Kerr, who took a team of mismatched, unconventional players, showed them how to play team basketball, and dominated. At the moment, Brad Stevens is doing something similar. You need stars in the NBA, but I think we've seen that you can now win playing unselfish, high ball movement basketball. It's become real basketball again, instead of the endless sequences of one on one match-ups that it has been since Jordan. Now that stuff was unwatchable. I'll give a pass to the Spurs, who were the lone bright spot during that era.

As a Celtics fan, I want Cleveland to lose of course, but I also want them to lose for the good of the game.

I wouldn't credit Kerr. He is just taking from those before him like Pop, D'Antoni, Nelson etc. The improved product is also due to rule changes and the analytics movement.

 

[boog204]

I wouldn't credit Kerr. He is just taking from those before him like Pop, D'Antoni, Nelson etc. The improved product is also due to rule changes and the analytics movement.

Also helps that Kerr has arguably the two greatest shooters of all-time, a 7 footer in Durant who is as talented as anyone in history and an absolutely perfect jack-of-all-trades guy for the system in Draymond.

I like how D'Antoni is starting to get some reversed props for his system. Maybe Bill Walton was right when he said D'Antoni was an offensive genius.

 

[QDOG5]

Looking at Chad Ford's mock draft on ESPN.com today, and to me it seemed indicative of the state of both the NCAA and NBA games. Both are far less interesting to watch than they were even a few years ago. Where I used to watch several college games per week, now I watch only UCONN. Where I used to watch all Celtics games and maybe one or two other games per week, I watch only bits and pieces of the Cs games.

Of the top 16 players in the mock draft, there were 15 Freshman and one international player. Overall, the top 30 consisted of 18 Freshman, 6 sophomores, 5 internationals and one senior. Programs (not just Kentucky) have become NBA factories where kids spend a year, maybe two, rarely get coached up and then head off to the NBA with a ton of athletic ability and high school level fundamentals.

How does it change? I wonder if contraction in the NBA would work, although I don't see that happening. Hypothetically, say four teams are removed from the league. That's 60 of the lesser talented players across the remaining 24 teams, out of the NBA. The level of play in the NBA should improve greatly, and now the college kids are competing for less spots. That would encourage kids to stay in college longer and get better, which would improve the level of play at the college level. Sounds great, but again, I don't see it happening. Too much money to be made. 22 teams sell at least 90% of their seats and only three teams are under 80% capacity for games. Hell, even the Nets sell 85% of their seats.

With both games seemingly watered down, I find myself watching something other than hoops.

I'm guessing that you used to watch a number of BE games a week. Because the teams/games were good and UConn was directly affected by the outcomes. Unfortunately we are stuck in a subpar conference. The only other conference game you may have watched would be Cincy. SMU. Overall, I think the college game has improved in the last 2 years because they are allowing freedom of movement. The scores reflect that. I think the pros are fun, too. Just don't watch the Knicks because your corneas will burn. Celts, Wizards, Rockets, GS, Spurs, Nuggets and a number of other teams are playing some fun bball to watch. Also, the NBA is not contracting. Lastly, the NBA should remove the one year clause for HS players. It isn't in place to protect the kid. It's in place because the GM's are stumbling over each other to draft kids who aren't ready for the league yet. Would college ball miss the one and done studs? Yes, but in the end it would good for the college game and the fans. UConn doesn't have much one and done history but the Andre Drummond experience was underwhelming.

 

[auror]

Looking at Chad Ford's mock draft on ESPN.com today, and to me it seemed indicative of the state of both the NCAA and NBA games. Both are far less interesting to watch than they were even a few years ago. Where I used to watch several college games per week, now I watch only UCONN. Where I used to watch all Celtics games and maybe one or two other games per week, I watch only bits and pieces of the Cs games.

How does it change? I wonder if contraction in the NBA would work, although I don't see that happening. Hypothetically, say four teams are removed from the league. That's 60 of the lesser talented players across the remaining 24 teams, out of the NBA. The level of play in the NBA should improve greatly, and now the college kids are competing for less spots. That would encourage kids to stay in college longer and get better, which would improve the level of play at the college level. Sounds great, but again, I don't see it happening. Too much money to be made. 22 teams sell at least 90% of their seats and only three teams are under 80% capacity for games. Hell, even the Nets sell 85% of their seats.

With both games seemingly watered down, I find myself watching something other than hoops.

This is a good example of not relying on anecdotal evidence to make policy.

The NBA is making money hand over fist. TV ratings were UP last year (9-10%) in an era where ESPN/cable/TV in general are getting obliterated. For example, NFL total minutes viewed was down around 7% last year.

The league is discussing expansion, not contraction, because of an influx of talent from developing basketball cultures across the world.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I wouldn't credit Kerr. He is just taking from those before him like Pop, D'Antoni, Nelson etc. The improved product is also due to rule changes and the analytics movement.

I'll still give him some credit. He worked with Jackson, D'Antoni and Pop, so yeah, he's borrowing from them. The turnaround since he took over GS is no accident.

 

[JSM1970]

It's the Splash Bros effect and huge interest with them

I'll still give him some credit. He worked with Jackson, D'Antoni and Pop, so yeah, he's borrowing from them. The turnaround since he took over GS is no accident.

 

[NielsisGood]

I'll still give him some credit. He worked with Jackson, D'Antoni and Pop, so yeah, he's borrowing from them. The turnaround since he took over GS is no accident.

I get what you're saying about Kerr, but the real reasons were because Steph transformed from a borderline all-star into one of the league's 2 or 3 best players, Draymond turned into a top 15-20 guy with the most unique skillset in the game, and because the awful Mark Jackson happened to be the guy Kerr was replacing. I think the team's record under Luke Walton showed that their success isn't very much about Kerr.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I get what you're saying about Kerr, but the real reasons were because Steph transformed from a borderline all-star into one of the league's 2 or 3 best players, Draymond turned into a top 15-20 guy with the most unique skillset in the game, and because the awful Mark Jackson happened to be the guy Kerr was replacing. I think the team's record under Luke Walton showed that their success isn't very much about Kerr.

I've read several articles about the transformation and don't agree. Kerr did some very specific things to make all that happen, including using Green properly, and running and offense designed to get Curry looks that didn't come from one on one shots. Same with the bench players. Kerr preaches that even good NBA players only shoot something like 30% on one on one isolation plays. Their assist ratio went way up, and FG% with it. I do think he uses metrics, like Stevens does at Boston, to maximize the talent he has. Not surprising then...look who leads the league in assist ratio. Hollinger's NBA Team Stats - ESPN Insider - National Basketball Association - ESPN

 

[NielsisGood]

I've read several articles about the transformation and don't agree. Kerr did some very specific things to make all that happen, including using Green properly, and running and offense designed to get Curry looks that didn't come from one on one shots. Same with the bench players. Kerr preaches that even good NBA players only shoot something like 30% on one on one isolation plays. Their assist ratio went way up, and FG% with it. I do think he uses metrics, like Stevens does at Boston, to maximize the talent he has. Not surprising then...look who leads the league in assist ratio. Hollinger's NBA Team Stats - ESPN Insider - National Basketball Association - ESPN

Kerr only had the job for a few months prior to Steph and Draymond's transformations into what they are now, it's unrealistic to think that wasn't going to happen regardless. The best thing you said about Kerr is that he listens to analytics, but even that is just accepting and parroting what other people are telling him. Kerr was a personality/temperament hire, that's why Luke Walton specifically was his top assistant, and why the team didn't miss a beat when Kerr was out for half of last season.

 

[CTBasketball]

Otto Porter is averaging 15-7-2 on 47%-53%-80% splits. He leads the NBA in 3pt % this year. Probably the wrong example.

Shows how much I watch the NBA, should probably do some research.