Who has the most upside in this year's draft?
My Top 5
1. Ricky Rubio - Besides from being only 18 years old Rubio has a high basketball IQ, faced world-class competition and did well. Probably is the most experienced player in the draft. he will only get better.
2. Brandon Jennings - Jennings is in 2nd, because i believe he didn't play up to his potential in Europe. A world class athlete with blazing speed and superior leaping ability, also has a nice shooting stroke and handles the ball well.
3. DeMar DeRozan - Has all the makings of a great shooting guard, nice size at 6'7 and 220, but is still a raw, fragile player with superior leaping ability. Often compared to Kobe and Vince, Can jump out of the gym. Has shown major improvement in his 1 year in USC.
4. BJ Mullens - Big man with guard athleticism, soft hands and quick feet, hasn't showed much during his 1 year in college, but has showed glimpses of being an all-star center. Should have stayed in school for a year to further develop his game. But his upside is hard to ignore.
5. Blake Griffin - The most NBA-ready player in the draft. An athletic specimen, combines speed and power like LeBron. But has yet to reach his potential, his hard work and work-ethic will help him reach the top of his game.
I would take Derozan based on straight up potential, not considering what any of these players did this past year.
yeah i was also thinking of that. Demar could be another Vince Carter or sadly a Gerald Green. I still think Rubio has the most potential of the 5, but definitely Demar has the most raw potential.
im ok with jennings and rubio and derozan ahead ofgriffin but not bj mullens i dont think he has as much upside as griffin, i think hell be a flop
Mullens may be the biggest risk in the draft, he's a lottery pick because he has all-star potential. He should have stayed in school.
Derozan and Mullens have the most upside along with Rubio. Rubio will be an exciting "once a decade playmker" ala Jason Williams, Pete Maravich. Derozen because of his athletic ability and mullens because of size have the most upside. Caution though, Upside often means unmet potential.
with what u said bout rubio(amazing player) but jennings is 3,2,or 1 idk
this is a bad list; sorry.
1. demar's potential = poor man's vince carter.
blake griffin's potential = karl malone.
2. b.j. mullens potential = more athletic chris kaman.
blake griffin's potential = karl malone.
3. brandon jennings potential = kenny anderson
blake griffin's potential = karl malone
see what i'm getting at. malone>A LOT of players in NBA history.
horrible analysis, guess you don't play ball.
This draft has a lot of unproven players who have question marks but also have tremendus upside (derozan, rubio, jennings, evans, etc.)
Evans is also another player with a ton of upside, but i think mullens and griffin have more.
Why is Derozan's potenital a poor man's VC? Why is his potential not simply VC?
I was just throwing a few players out there as examples.
griffin is way quicker and more athletic
doesnt shoot jumpers (might develop it)
seems like a more above the rim player not fundamental
he ot a ton of potential
Speaking of my boy Tyreke, I believe he is best suited for the PG position. Now I know I am in the minority with this but does anyone else see him having more potential at the point versus the 2?
he's better at the point, he's better when the ball is in his hands. And he has nice size at 6'5 and a 6'11 wingspan.
i think basketball iq is something gms use as an excuse to waste picks. i mean understanding of the game comes with time. can you name me 3 players with high "basketball iqs" who are all stars? that being said, rubio's upside, to me, is lower than what people think. griffin's is clearly the highest.
3 stars with high basketball IQ? All-Time Jordan, Johnson, Bird Now Kobe, Kidd, Duncan. Maybe you have a low IQ.hahaha
This is a sad post man.
Just because a prospect is big for his position, runs well, jumps like he has hydraulics in his thighs does not make him someone with great potential. Other than your Rubio pick, all the other ones are ridiculous. You can't just assume that players are going to learn all of the skills that they currently lack. For example, Mullens. So, by your logic, he has more potential than Blake Griffin because... he's bigger? Griffin has more athleticism than Mullens, higher basketball IQ, better rebounder, better defender for his position. I just don't understand how you can throw out the skills a player currently has when talking about which players have more potential. Also, if Brandon Jennings is second because of his leaping ability and quickness, where is Johnny Flynn? Oh wait, he is 2 inches shorter than Jennings, that makes him have much less potential, despite the fact that he is much stronger, has a wider array of offensive moves, and has proven himself in a tough conference.
so, if I showed you to a 7-5 Center who runs well and jumps high, would you assume that he'll develop a jumpshot, learn to stay out of foul trouble, and learn how to box out effectively, hence making him have a higher upside than Griffin?
Not a great post, amigo
Yo Til, it sounds like you just don't know what "upside" means.
It is a measure of how much they can improve. An underdeveloped player has more room for improvement therefor could have better "upside" than a player who actually has a higher "ceiling"
"ceiling" meaning the best case scenario for a prospect to develop into.
It's upside dummy, it doesn't matter what you've shown in play. Upside is what you can possibly do in the next level.
clippers, your comments on these boards are mostly rediculous. Where did you come up with the karl malone comparison? Griffin and Malone have COMPLETELY different styles of play. They're both PF's is that what you're getting at?
As far as BJ Mullens is concerned, everyone loooves to knock on him because he underacheived in his freshman year. But what is undeniable, which most of you blatantly overlook, is his combination of size, athleticism, and upside (upside = potential for improvement). Watching him play at Ohio State, it was apparent this kid has tremendous upside (potential for improvement.)
Deeds, great list. My top 5 would probably be about the same. Other notables for me would be Jeff Teague, Reke Evans, Jrue Holiday, Jordan Hill, and Gani Lawal
Thanks man, nice list too! i'm strong on Lawal and Tyreke.
I don't think a 7'5 guy who can run and jump would need a jump shot. He would just dunk anything within 5 feet of the hoop.
Potential is a measure of how good you can be because of the physical attributes you have, and how well how you play takes advantage of them. It is not the best measure, how good a player can be but they assume that if you have gotten this far, and your a lighting quick, and take anyone off the dribble you will learn how to shoot, and if if you suck at basketball but are kinda coordinated, can jump really high, and are really tall you should learn how to play.
To say that this is a sad post of ridiculous Tli232 i understand what you mean, but how else can you measure potential. Players should be able to expand their game with better coaching and the need to expand your game.
Branden Jennings has a world of potential, and i agree that Johnny Flynn is better not but i two years that will not be the case. Also Rubio does not have a lot of potential, but Jennings does.
I think jennings, griffin, derozan have the most, and can expand on their skill set the best.
I think Harden has a ton of potenial but not for the same reasons, other than a 3 point shot he has everything, but the desire to take over games until he has to or is challenged he is to willing to wait until he has to take over, and if he learns how to do this he could be the next paul pierce.
Demar DeRozan has the most upside in this draft. Blake Griffin is most likely to reach his full potential, BJ Mullens is least likely to reach his full potential.
DeRozan's athletic gifts are rare to say the least, he may have a recorded 38.5 inch vert, but I assure you he can get up higher then that and athleticism isn't just jumping. If he makes the effort to really improve his overall game, he could and should be a player between Vince adn kobe. better then VC and worse then Black Mamba. With a tighter handle, more consistent jumpshot and more aggressiveness he could be something special. I ahve no idea if he wants to work as hard as Kobe did to get as good as he is but if he does watch out.
yeah when it comes to raw potential he's on the top.
If this is potential then it means their highest potential with their natural gifts. I thinks some people are thinking it is where they are at now. There are some things you can teach and some you can't. for Blake Griffin he cant be taught to have longer arms but he is still a high quality players. Mullens has the potential based on what i saw to be a Amare type player. I have seen him shoot and he shoots jumpers better than Griffen at this point. He has all the physical tools and athleticism but he lacks basketball IQ and i dont know if he is the hard worker that Blake is. Amare does not have a high basketball IQ either so he could still do well. I would take mid lottery mainly because of his questionable work ethic. He would have been top 5 out of high school. Look at Dwight Howard who is still raw but because of raw abilities and decent skill is one of the top big man and he is still learning. Basketball IQ is key. It was the reason Lebron who was physically gifted and lacked polished offensive moves and defense was able to play well his rookie year. Basketball IQ is why Kobe has had a greater learning curves than most player his age. Basketball IQ is how Chris Paul who just came off a sophmore year almost led the league in assists and carried his team. Some posistion do now need a player with high basketball IQ if they have good point guard because it doesnt take much smarts on offense to listen to someone. Lack of Basketball IQ is what is hurting Bynum in the playoffs. Some things come with experience and when someone has certain things at a young age it is like you know he will have a less of a learning curve to get on the level of the other NBA players. Rubio should start out the gate making nice plays as if he had 4 years in college and in maybe 4 years he will be putting up Steve Nash type numbers or maybe Jason Williams type numbers which still is not bad playmaking wise for a point guard but I think his IQ is more on the Nash level and not on Jason.
I like Tyreke at the point and lets say you have AI on your team. They would be the perfect match up as long as they have a small forward that could really shoot.
I don't know if Tyreke and AI would be on the same page, but its nice to see if he teams up with a shooter like Ray Allen. Because of his ability to create.
BJ Mullens is nowhere near the athlete Dwight Howard is though. Amare is much more of just an overall beast then Mullens too, the dude is just soft.
Brandon Jennings Period
one thing about the actual thread is that it's about UPSIDE. Blake Griffin, IMO, is good for like 17 & 8 his first season... right now. Kevin Love put up those types of numbers after Jefferson went down, Griffin can get them too.
Jennings isn't ready to be a that effective right away. but seriously, he and john wall are two of the quickest guys off the dribble and they should tear up the league if they ever put their abilities to full use.
Griffin isn't going to be THAT much better than 17 & 8... I can see him maxing out around 23 & 12 if everything goes well.
Jennings? I think right now he's a back-up. but he could definitely turn out to be the best in this draft as well. he has more upside
Rubio.... I donno. great passing ability, but just not on jennings' level as far as i can tell (athetically). rubio could be steve nash, but he'll definitely have to add the jumper. Jennings could be Monta Ellis
good point. But I'm still leaning on Rubio, because of his maturity and he's wise beyond his years. Jennings physically has more tools, But Rubio has all the intangibles.
kphelps: karl malone used to be a griffin like player. when he first entered the league, he was the same player as griffin and equally poor shooter as griffin is. If u knew that, u would not say crap like that and call me out like that when u have only 16 posts on this board. my posts are rediculous? first of all whats "rediculous?" (ridiculous*) Second, just because u don't agree with someone does not mean they're wrong.
I am glad that there are a few people out there that see his potential as a PG. As a Sixers fan I would love for Stefanski to trade up for Jennings or Reke but we just don't have a ton of pieces.
Tyreke would fit nice in Philly. You have the 17th pick Lawson would also be a nice fit with a young athletic group.
Nice list i was also thinking of Thabeet, because he just started playing a few years ago, but i think Jennings should be a top 3. Earl Clark is also another prospect with tons of potential.
Should be included in that list because if he went to the right team he can be a good player.
Teague has good upside, but he surely doesn't belong to the top 5.
Derozan will be another Gerald Green. The only difference is that Derozan has all his fingers. Brandon Jennings will be the next Sebastien Telfair. Mullens=Raef LaFrentz. Earl Clark has the "potential" to be a more athletic Lamar Odom type player.
I think Demar will be better than Gerald Green, with his 1 year experience of college ball under Tim Floyd and late season emergence winning the pac-10 MVP. He'll be a better player than Green. Jennings is a talented player, but can be a flop, Good point Earl Clark really has a lot of potential.
Blake griffin Demar derozan Brandon jennings Tyreke evans Jrue holliday Jeff teague Earl clark
Evans, Holiday, Teague, Clark, and Hill would probably round up the top 10.