Last Garza thread I promise

I still think Garza is rated still as a late 2nd rounder to undrafted guy currently but I could see him working himself into a late 1st to mid 2nd rounder. I do think he could end up surprising people and become like a Nikola Vucevic in the league. who also had mobility concerns heading into the draft.

A lot of it has to do with team fit and who you are willing to gamble on. And yes, I do believe there could be a number of players more worth that than Garza in the current NBA. I get that he was a very successful college player, has good touch, stretches the floor and has really good character. However, I notice you only touched on the “good” of his combine.

The height to wingspan ratio for Garza is fine, he is +3.5, but that still makes him below average for a NBA center at 7’1.5. His standing reach is actually quite a bit below average for a Center, not to much 5 and 4 fewer inches than Queta and Hukporti respectively. So his being 8’11.5 seems small, and judging by how many standing reaches are botched at the combine, it could be. But even add two inches makes it smaller for a center. Not to mention, he still measured with the worst standing and max vertical at the combine, even with the smaller standing reach!

His 3/4 sprint was lowest by .16 seconds and he cracked 12 seconds in the lateral agility, but barely. Even if you think these drills and the combine are overrated, do you think it is at least not somewhat worrisome in terms of his cracking the NBA athleticism threshold? If you look over a lot of the guys who finished at the bottom of vertical, it is not great. And the ones who did succeed doing worse than Garza both had the highest standing reaches in their respective draft classes, Nikola Vucevic and Rudy Gobert.

Now, lets also be real, I do not think teams are clamoring for the services of Queta and Hukporti. But, they are bigger and provide more defensive utility. Lets say Garza does still manage to be a bucket in the NBA, what else does he bring to the table at a high level for a NBA C? His rebounding percentage is fine, not outstanding, certainly not the best rebounder in the draft when you talk about rebound percentage.

My question to you is, what are your expectations for Garza? How long does he last in the league, and do you think he will be sought after or worth a good second contract? Usually there are about 20-25 players who end up being good rotation players from any given draft. It seems obvious you think Garza is one of them, but how good? Where would you rank him among C’s in the draft? Who are some non-athletic centers HIS SIZE (key component) who have been good back-up big men worth play-off minutes?

I mentioned Gobert (9’7 standing reach) and Vucevic (9’4.5 standing reach) as guys who were pretty bad leapers at the combine. The “non-athlete” C many will point to is Jokic, who is also enormous with a measured 7’3 wingspan and 9’3 standing reach. Not to mention his insane quick decision making as a passer and feathery midrange, close range touch (that I do not think Garza is in the same class of, especially in terms of getting those shots like Joker). Still, I have a list of all of the C’s wingspans, standing reaches I could find currently in the NBA, Garza would be on the small side by quite a bit.

Ultimately, am not trying to completely change your mind. Just wanted to give perspective I feel may not have been taken into account. I still think Garza will get drafted or get a chance. Also think his defense and lack of athleticism is concerning. Did you see Oregon light him up. I watched all of Oregon’s games, that was the best one we played and a lot of it was running straight at (or past) Garza.

Lets even say Garza goes to a bad team, gets minutes and puts up numbers. How much is that helping you for the future? Ultimately, I understand the Garza love not being what you might have hoped. He will be an acquired taste and while you and I may hope he can make your team better playing minutes, I think there are a lot of things to be worried about in terms of that happening. I get how badly you want a new Matt Bonner, not sure it is Garza.

combination of Tyler Hansborough/Ryan Anderson to me. He might be a little taller, but I see a hustle player that can occasionally knock down a 3 and rebound. Against other bound to be pros of some sort some day such Cockburn, Jackson-Davis, Dickinson, he didn’t look quite as good as he did punishing smaller schools in the beginning of the college season. He padded as much stats he could against weaker competition and held his own but didn’t out play or win in the bigger games. He has a chance to make the league but doubt he’s going to come in like a boss and push others around. If he had better athletic attributes maybe he would stick. The way he’s working on his bodyfat is great, not sure it’s enough to make a big splash though. Depending on where he’s drafted will depend on his initial opportunity, however he will have to earn it and won’t just simply make a roster because he’s that good or has the upside.

Too much numbers that don’t tell the story. I get it, it’s the NBA these days but basketball (sports in general) isn’t wingspan and body fat %, palm size and how fast you can run 20 yards with one eye closed.

We can argue that a true center position does not exist anymore. Yes, because there is a glaring lack of fundamentals in “centers” nowadays. Is there 1 big (not named Jokic, Vucevic, Sabonis,…) that knows how to do ANYTHING with his back to the basket? Not too many – and here’s the “why” to the dissapearance of true centers. It’s either dunk or nothing.
Are we gonna aruge how a center cloggs the lane for smaller players? Yes, a center like Capella (to name one) has nothing to do down low.. it’s pick & roll hard to the basket for an alley oop. BUT, if you have a guy that can post and play with the back to the basket, then it’s a whole other basketball game. And Garza does it way too well to be ignored.

But as the NBA is more of a “Broadway show” than sports and it is a fact that fundamentals don’t sell hotdogs and crap you don’t get to see Garza on the mock board, not even in the 2nd round… but you get someone called Kai Jones at 12 (1st round mind you) with eye popping averages of 8,8 pts and 4,8 trb in 22 minutes. But he’s got “potential”.

I wonder how many drafted guys with potential ever reached anything? Not too many… Let’s see drafts from 2015 and what was the “potential” there and how it fared?
2015 – Jahlil Okafor, Mario Hezonja, Willie Cauley-Stein, Emmanuel Mudiay, Frank Kaminsky,
2016 – Dragan Bender, Kriss Dunn, Thon Maker, Georgios Papagiannis, Guerschon Yabusele, Ante Zizic, Skal Labissière,
2017 – Josh Jackson, Frank Ntilikina, Dennis Smith Jr., Justin Jackson, Caleb Swanigan,…
2018 – Marvin Bagley III, Mohamed Bamba, Kevin Knox,

These are all 1st round picks based more or less on POTENTIAL. High draft picks also, not end of 1st round… The problem with NBA and drafting POTENTIAL is that noone has the patience and takes time to DEVELOP potential. Who has the patience to do so? Not even tanking teams who should have some incentive in playing guys to develop them, let alone teams who compete for something. If it is not an immediate help then it’s not worth picking…

One clear example would be the Lakers. Because winning IS everything they traded ALL their potential for AD. That got them a championship in their first season. But they traded away ALL THEIR POTENTIAL. And there was some… Randall, Ingram and Ball ARE developing into serious players. Yet the LAL chose results now over potential. I don’t see why – on draft nights – this gets forgotten.

If I were ever to be a GM I’d draft guys who can contribute here and now or trade them picks for guys that can help the team immediately. Guys can go develop in the G-League.

I get not wanting to project “numbers” or “stats:”, it just seems like your argument for Garza is based on them to a very high extreme, especially in calling him the best rebounder. Rebounding is something that translates and while Garza is fine, lets compare the college production to a freshman Kevin Love. A better way to do it than just raw numbers, is rebounding percentage.

This basically takes into account the percentage of missed shots on the floor, pace and other factors raw numbers might miss. Luka Garza as a senior, had a 14.6%, 266th in the nation (among players who played over 300 minutes this season). As a junior he was at 16.9%, better, but 119th in the nation Just for an idea, usually 16% is a very good mark, 20% is exceptional. Kevin Love, as a freshman at UCLA, had a 22.4% rebound percentage. Make sure not to look up Kevin Love’s rebounding rating out of 10 in the 2008 NBA Draft on this site (it, for whatever reason, was a 7).

Now, Kevin Love was smaller than Garza. Not by much, but he had a 6’11.25 wingspan and 8’10 standing reach and had played center in college. Kevin however, was also a fantastic passer and had a better defensive projection, especially considering that he was slotted in as playing, defending PF’s, something I do not think anyone expects of Garza. Kevin was also just straight up stronger, and he had an even worse body fat % than Garza at 12.9 and 255 lbs. Despite this, he jumped as high without a running start as Garza did in his max vert, plus finished with more respectable numbers in other areas in the combine. He was a much better athlete.

Brook Lopez was not known for his defense early on, for sure. But he was also enormous and the almost 6″ difference between them in terms of reach definitely matters. The athleticism threshold can really affect people and it seems the main argument for Garza being a really good NBA player is that he has done really well in college these last few years. Now, Obi Toppin had won NCAA POY the year before, had concerns over his defensive fit to the NBA. Turns out, those concerns were not unfounded. Am not writing him off, but he was incredibly offensively dominant in the NCAA and took a big step back at the next level, while being a really crazy athlete.

The last real center that was the consensus NCAA POY was Frank Kaminsky, who could pass, handle and stretch the floor. Also, has been relegated to back-up minutes in the NBA. He measured with a 9’1.5 standing reach and did not test at the combine, but I am guessing Garza is probably closer to that measurement in a best case scenario. I still would bet Frank was the better athlete and while not as strong, quite skilled and would likely do very well in Europe.

There have been plenty of players who have crushed it in college and then do not necessarily have the same success in the NBA. Despite Luka being a very good perimeter scorer, the fact is he got most of his points off of post-ups which I am doubting would be the same level of effectiveness in the NBA. My guess is his per 36 numbers are going to be less ridiculous than you think and that figuring out a defense with him on the floor could also be tough as well. This could limit his minutes just off of that. Kevin Love ended up being the consensus 2nd pick in a 2008 NBA re-draft, mind you, so I think you are shooting for the absolute stars.

One final thing in this response, is Luka being in better shape. To me, Luka being at 242.8 lbs with a 11.7% body fat is fine. It would be more fine if he still didn’t finish dead last in the sprint and vertical. How much is he really going to be able to improve his body and athleticism? Because while these numbers are not the end all, be all in terms of basketball players, I did point out the track record of having those poor #’s while not being absolutely enormous is not good.

Garza took a 100 threes last year and hit on 44%. That is much more than Love, Vucevic, Towns (only 8), Turner, Olynyk, Brook Lopez, Dean Wade, Dwight Powell, Jalen Smith, Naz Reid, Toppin, and Portis while taking only three fewer than Boucher (who only shot 35%) and one fewer than Kaminsky (41.6%) in their draft years. It isn’t often for a guy of or near Garza’s size comes into the draft process with this much of a track record of being a high level shooter. Luke Kornet and Nikola Jokic both took more than 100, but were both under 33%. It just so happens that Filip Petrusev took 93 across his league competitions and hit 46% this past year, but it is rare for a full sized center who is skilled has assembled his resume behind the arc. He is limited athletically, but I think his ability to be a threat from deep probably makes him more appealing than some believe.

Am aware that Garza does have a good 3PR for a big man and shot really well this year, plus was 36.7% during his college career. So is that his new NBA role? Or the fact he is an inside-out threat is appealing? My big thing is, how far does that take when defense is really not part of the equation, along with his size compared to other centers? Do you think he is going to step in to the NBA and shoot 44% from 3 on volume?

Frank Kaminsky is a 34.8% career three point shooter, shot 76.3% FT over his college career to Garza’s 70.1%, and has played 38 total minutes in 6 games for the Suns, who prefer Dario Saric as their back-up 5. With Garza basically being of very little threat to attack a closeout, how often is he going to have good looks and is he really going to be that level of shooter, scorer to offset his defensive woes?

Finally, where would you take Garza in this draft? You named a lot of players from a time where centers took very few three pointers in college, who became good NBA three-point shooters over time. Do you think Garza is going to be the most dangerous shooting big in the league? He also took 408 two-pointers, and how are those going to come from him to make it an efficient team offense?

I still believe Garza is probably draftable, and he could put up some double digit scoring games. The real question is if his team will win those games and what the differential will be with him on the floor. He defends one position and probably not very. well. To be fair, have those same concerns with Petrusev. Just wondering how appealing either are in terms of where you would be willing to draft them, plus how you may view them in terms of a second contract.

To get in the league, a guy needs something to hang his hat on. Garza’s ability to space the floor will probably allow him an opportunity his athleticism otherwise would not. I don’t think he will ever move well enough to be a starter or play huge minutes, but a lot of teams, like half the league, have high payrolls and need capable cheap rookies to make the owners head not explode. I tend to believe that a high payroll team takes him in the 2nd, or should the hoarders keep their bounty of 2s as a free agent. In 2nd quarters and early 4ths, he can probably do well not only as a shooter but inside as well. Kaminsky spent the early part of his career with a less than ideal situation where he had the burden of a top ten pick. I don’t think he forgot how to shoot, and then it magically remembers when he ends up in better situations. Bobby Portis is the same way where his shooting has been up and down, usually connected to how good the team moves the ball. There are like ten centers in the league capable of taking 100 3s a year and shooting 35%. I don’t see why he can’t do what Naz Reid does where he guards nobody, but offers just enough on offense to have value.

Petrusev is a better prospect than Garza, much better athlete, and certainly a better athlete than you think. If he was afforded the ability to showcase his perimeter game at Gonzaga, he’d be in everybody’s lottery, and only partially because he would have saved us from the Drew Timme mustache touching. He is an all around player, and I have to believe the only reason he gets no buzz is that “out of sight, out of mind.” Then again, he is with the Serbian national team, and probably will be two games in that event by draft night. Today hasn’t been his best game, but 17 points in 16 minutes is never too shabby.

Told you about Petrusev… and yet he’s not on any pre draft radars??? Nonames projected Top10 picks based ONLY on the fact they can jump high… yet you have at least two players that can and WILL contribute right away… and they’re borderline 2nd round???

I do understand that these guys are not known to you because you focus more on NCAA basketball and don’t follow euro basketball. If you would you’d never pick a Garuba before Petrusev. Ever. There’s not one thing (maybe rebounding!) that Garuba is better than Petrusev.

As for Garza – he’d be just fine in a system that features basketball as basketball should be played. I’d say San Antonio would be a good fit and I wish for him to be drafted by a team that prefers to play team basketball.

On a funny note – I hear “athleticism” is something Garza lacks. OK… so does Jokic, so does Doncic… so does Petrusev… fun part? They all have roots in ex-yugoslavia basketball. Fundamentally sound basketball where you can lack superior athleticism if you KNOW how to play to your strenghts.