This topic contains 5 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by 
- AuthorPosts
- Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 6:26am #65481
hoopscopParticipantI am quite sure Justin Patton will be the highest riser in this draft. There is the consumate attempt by front offices to supress his name in communication with the media. That is why Chad Ford has him not among his top 100 even if some teams have him ranked in their top 10. Watch out.
As for the u 18 before christmas I would warn to get too excited with the potential of some Kids, namely Ntikilina. The level of competition is atrocious, it is a level below EYBL or Gauntlet. Team USA u 17 from last summer would have crushed this competition with ease. Could Ntilikina replicate what Fultz, Ball, Fox of Smith are doing right now on the collegiate level? Absolutely not.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 7:44am #1090336
binetParticipantYou are undervaluing euro-U18 level. Or at least from a scouting perspective.
If you look at the NBA right now, there is a very significant portion of euro guys, and most of them are successful (by that I mean there are fewer deep bench guys from overseas than the ratio) with a lot of the rising stars being european recently: Gobert, Giannis, Porzingis, Jokic…
The level of the euro U-18 competition, at least talent wise is really close to NCAA. Guys have the same age as freshmen and are almost all future pros in the NBA or top pro leagues in europe. Most NCAA div.1 guys are never going to be good enough to go Pro, even overseas. No guy in FIBA U-18 should be evaluated as less than a 4-star freshman, even in the bench, that’s the truth. They are all freshmen though. That’s why the competition is not better and nobody has grown man physique there, what is the case in the NBA. All freshmen team are able to win a lot in NCAA, expect all these teams to be if they were competing there.
On a side note though, teams and players there do not know each other well and play every day without much scouting, tactical coaching etc..It’s similar to NBA summer league in that regard (which also looks like terrible basketball). But from a scout’s perspective it’s even better because performances are less coach-team personnel dependant. As long as the talent is there, that’s enough.
Ntilikina proved a lot there and particularly that he is a winner (second win after U16, 2 years ago, both times with France underdogs), that he is clutch (huge performances when it mattered the most, huge shots in the semis and the finals) and that beyond his very good body (6’5" without shoes, 7’0" wingspan, athletic) and defense he was able to knock down shots with consistency and range. He dominated matchups against every other NBA relevant guard prospect he faced. He was already considered by scouts a better defensive prospect than Fox that almost only delivers on that end, and proved or showed way more on the offensive end. Put it this way, Fox is a very good prospect and legit high lottery guy, debatable to be taken over most NCAA PGs including Ball he crushed in their matchup and there is absolutely no way Ntilikina is taken after Fox, no debate.
0- Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 1:25pm #1090352
Magic JordanParticipantI think Ntilikina is benefiting from not playing in the NCAA. While he does have some nice physical tool, specifically length. His athleticism looks to be greatly overrated in my opinion. In that regard it reminds me very much of the situation with Mudiay, where most casual observers touted him as being a Westbrook or John Wall type athlete when he clearly was not. The same goes with Ntilikina. He looks to be at best an average athlete by NBA standards and I don’t think he will be anywhere close to being an elite on ball defender in the league. Of course I have been wrong about too many things.
0- Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 4:59pm #1090374
binetParticipantI understand your concerns. Though, athletically, from what I have seen, Ntilikina has always been the most athletic player on the court. That does not mean he is Russell Westbrook or MJ. But even at european levels that’s significant. Especially for a guy like him that plays poised and not in overrush speed. He is good enough athletically.
The concern is more, despite his young age, him not having an impact in the Pros. Tony Parker was already terrific at 18 in Pro A (Batum, Fournier, Diaw, Gobert were not and are succesful french guys but Parker is the only one with a career that would justify a top 3 pick.). If he starts putting up numbers in Pro A by the end of the year, that’s the greenlight, and he should start being viewed as a #1 candidate. If not, his stock should remain like right now among the top guys who does not seem complete freaks/instant all stars like Fultz. What in this deep draft is 4-10 range.
0
- Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 1:16pm #1090350
Magic JordanParticipantNo reason why Patton shouldn’t be a mid to late first rounder if names like Bolden and Adebayo are being thrown around in the same type of position. I would take Patton over both of those guys without thinking twice. Great size, nice length, wide shoulders, nice running form, good shooting form, good touch, nice feet. He has a lot of potential to be a starting prototypical big man. Not elite, but no reason that if he maximizes his skills he can’t be a rotational big.
0 - Posted on: Thu, 01/05/2017 - 1:36pm #1090354
hoopscopParticipantYou are talking shit. Look what the USA U 17 players are doing with this sort of competition year in year out and how they come to earth when returning to playing the Peach Jam. Most of the teams out there had none 4 star player out there. Again the level of talent was bad and you have no clue at all.
0 - AuthorPosts
| You must be logged in to reply to this topic. | Login |