How Great is the 2017 draft class?

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I view it like this:

Ball, Fultz
Jackson



Tatum, Smith



Isaac
Markenaan



Michigan state kid, Nklintokiiatya

 

[slinslin]

I think Tatum is better than Jackson.

He is a year younger, and does most of the things Jackson does just as well or almost as well except passing but Tatum has a great shooting touch.

Jackson's shooting% have risen lately but it is a mirage. Even during this hot streak he still has really bad bricks that good shooters simply don't have and couple that with his FT%.

I kind of like the Scottie Pippen comparison for Jackson but eventhough Pippen was a great player he would not be drafted ahead of a more athletic James Harden (fultz), Jason Kidd (ball).. it becomes an argument compared to Carmelo Anthony(Tatum).

I don't think Jackson is a tier above Tatum or Smith certainly. I think Smith could be the #1 pick if he had Fultz size and did not have the injury.
I mean I see Smith as very likely to reach Stephon Marbury level if not more and before the haters come out I mean the Marbury that was an allstar. Some people compare him to Russell Westbrook athletically.

 

[AzStevenCal]

For me, at this moment in time it's:

Ball

Markkanen
Jackson


Fultz
Isaac
Fox
R Williams
Bridges
Monk
D Smith




Tatum

I removed Ntilikina from the list because I still haven't watched him play other than a few highlights.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I have no interest in Tatum. He's a Dukie and he's got yesterday's game and that's two very good reasons to stay away from him.

 

[slinslin]

I have no interest in Tatum. He's a Dukie and he's got yesterday's game and that's two very good reasons to stay away from him.

Um yesterdays game? He as prototypical small forward size and an excellent shooting touch and form.
Of all the top prospects with the exception of Markkannen and Monk ( who I don't view in the top 6 group) I think there is the least doubt that Tatum will be a good 3pt shooter.

Tatum -> 16ppg 7rpg 2apg 1.4spg 1.4bpg 45%FG 37%3s 87%FT 18yrso

Jackson -> 16ppg 7rpg 3apg 1.8spg 1bpg 50%FG 35%3s 56%FT 19yrso

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Tatum -> 16ppg 7rpg 2apg 1.4spg 1.4bpg 45%FG 37%3s 87%FT 18yrso

Jackson -> 16ppg 7rpg 3apg 1.8spg 1bpg 50%FG 35%3s 56%FT 19yrso

So your argument is based on 2% 3fg% and bring an admittedly vastly better FT shooter. Over 1 less assist/game and 5% less overall shooting %?

 

[slinslin]

So your argument is based on 2% 3fg% and bring an admittedly vastly better FT shooter. Over 1 less assist/game and 5% less overall shooting %?

The FT% is colossal and the FG% gap is in part due to Tatum shooting 4 3pters per game.

Also the eye test, Jackson has poor shooting mechanics, Tatum does not. FT% is a big red flag when it comes to shooters. A poor FT% usually means you are not a good shooter even when you shoot 40% from 3 in college which might be based on a sample size <50 attempts.

Thing is Tatum projects extremely well based on everything, there is no red flag on him in anyway except people moaning about the eye test maybe as Tatum also uses isolation plays to score frequently.

Also as stated before Tatum is a full year younger.

And I am not even making an argument that Tatum should definitely be seen as better. I am making an argument against ranking Josh Jackson 2nd or 3rd and Tatum like 10th.

 

[slinslin]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

against one of the best defensive teams in the country

I think he is the better fit and safer pick for the Suns. If Jackson does not learn to shoot he is Michael Kidd-Gilchrist v2. A super role player.

Plus we already have a young small forward who is not a natural shooter.

 

[DWKB]

I think Tatum is better than Jackson.

He is a year younger, and does most of the things Jackson does just as well or almost as well except passing but Tatum has a great shooting touch.

Defense matters...

 

[slinslin]

Defense matters...

Tatum is a good defender.

Tatums defensive box plus minus is on par with Jackson (5.2 vs 5.4).
His defensive rating is several notches better than Jackson (92 vs 96).

For reference as a team Kansas defensive rating is 100, Duke 96. So relatively speaking they both stand out as much defensively on their respective teams but Duke being the better defensive team overall.

Tatum has a bigger impact on Duke defensively than offensively.

 

[slinslin]

For me, at this moment in time it's:

Ball

Markkanen
Jackson


Fultz
Isaac
Fox
R Williams
Bridges
Nitilikina
Monk
D Smith




Tatum

I left Ntilikina off the list because I still haven't watched him play other than a few highlights.

You have Nitlikina on your list ahead of Monk and Smith even who is ridiculously low.

Ntilikina is one of the worst players in the french league, he is terrible offensively and some potential defensively due to his length. But he does not have top level athleticism and is a big project.

If Ntilikina goes top 10 it will be based purely based on the narrative of potential based on some youth competitions and US-driven hype machine.

 

[AzStevenCal]

You have Nitlikina on your list ahead of Monk and Smith even who is ridiculously low.

Ntilikina is one of the worst players in the french league, he is terrible offensively and some potential defensively due to his length. But he does not have top level athleticism and is a big project.

If Ntilikina goes top 10 it will be based purely based on the narrative of potential based on some youth competitions and US-driven hype machine.

I didn't mean to put him there, got carried away. I'll edit him out as I really have no opinion on him.

I have Smith low on purpose, he and Tatum are the two I especially want to stay away from. I have mixed feelings on Monk, he has a good chance of moving up the list come tourny time.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Um yesterdays game? He as prototypical small forward size and an excellent shooting touch and form.

Tatum -> 16ppg 7rpg 2apg 1.4spg 1.4bpg 45%FG 37%3s 87%FT 18yrso

Jackson -> 16ppg 7rpg 3apg 1.8spg 1bpg 50%FG 35%3s 56%FT 19yrso

Far too small of a sample to matter IMO. In fact, he was shooting 31% from 3 prior to that game, that's how small his sample is (pointed out by someone else on RGM).

 

[slinslin]

Far too small of a sample to matter IMO. In fact, he was shooting 31% from 3 prior to that game, that's how small his sample is (pointed out by someone else on RGM).

Stll larger than Jacksons sample size and backed up by a FT% that indicates that it will only go further up.

 

[slinslin]

I have Smith low on purpose, he and Tatum are the two I especially want to stay away from. I have mixed feelings on Monk, he has a good chance of moving up the list come tourny time.

Can you explain why?

Both Smith and Tatum look like two of the safest picks to me along with Fultz where it would be a huge surprise if they dont reach borderline allstar level at least.

Smith is probably the best shooter of the PGs, easily the best slasher and a good passer and elite athlete.

He does basically everything Fultz does but with more power and explosiveness while Fultz is more nimble and agile and 3 inches taller.

 

[BleedRed]

I watched the Duke game last night was actually very impressed with Tatum. He's much more athletic and explosive then I had imagined. I would be happy if he was our pick at whatever spot. Obviously if we keep Bledsoe it will most likely be him or Jackson. Both are impressive kids with big upside.

 

[Russ Smith]

Tatum is a good defender.

Tatums defensive box plus minus is on par with Jackson (5.2 vs 5.4).
His defensive rating is several notches better than Jackson (92 vs 96).

For reference as a team Kansas defensive rating is 100, Duke 96. So relatively speaking they both stand out as much defensively on their respective teams but Duke being the better defensive team overall.

Tatum has a bigger impact on Duke defensively than offensively.

I like them both but Tatum is a ball stopper and while both are often playing out of position at the 4, Jackson IMO is the better defender. jackson can guard 3's and 2's, Tatum can't, so unless you're drafting him as a 4, you have to find out if he can defend at the NBA level as that's likely where he plays unless he grows a bit more.

I like both, I'm a big Jackson fan he's just one of those kids that does all the little things that help you win. Tatum to me is a bit more selfish kid although he seems to be playing better of late so maybe it was getting used to his teammates.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

The FT% is colossal and the FG% gap is in part due to Tatum shooting 4 3pters per game.

Also the eye test, Jackson has poor shooting mechanics, Tatum does not. FT% is a big red flag when it comes to shooters. A poor FT% usually means you are not a good shooter even when you shoot 40% from 3 in college which might be based on a sample size <50 attempts.

Thing is Tatum projects extremely well based on everything, there is no red flag on him in anyway except people moaning about the eye test maybe as Tatum also uses isolation plays to score frequently.

Also as stated before Tatum is a full year younger.

And I am not even making an argument that Tatum should definitely be seen as better. I am making an argument against ranking Josh Jackson 2nd or 3rd and Tatum like 10th.

I'm still looking for these poor shooting mechanics that I keep hearing about. I just don't see anything wrong with his jump shot whatsoever.

 

[GatorAZ]

Jackson is 20 and Tatum is still 18. You have to factor that when comparing their athleticism. Right now JJ looks slightly ahead in that department. Tatum still needs to finish strong to be in the top-3 conversation with Fultz, Ball and JJ (maybe Smith).

 

[AzStevenCal]

I like them both but Tatum is a ball stopper and while both are often playing out of position at the 4, Jackson IMO is the better defender. jackson can guard 3's and 2's, Tatum can't, so unless you're drafting him as a 4, you have to find out if he can defend at the NBA level as that's likely where he plays unless he grows a bit more.

I like both, I'm a big Jackson fan he's just one of those kids that does all the little things that help you win. Tatum to me is a bit more selfish kid although he seems to be playing better of late so maybe it was getting used to his teammates.

Yeah, to all of this and don't forget, he's also a Dukie. When you're trying to project someone's future from college to the NBA, that Duke connection should always be a consideration. Jackson will succeed, I don't know for sure that he'll be great, or maybe just solid or someplace in between but I see little chance that Tatum will be his equal or better no matter how Josh adapts to the next level.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Stll larger than Jacksons sample size and backed up by a FT% that indicates that it will only go further up.

I don't know what you're talking about here? I know FT% provides a slightly better prediction value when you're talking college to pro but I'm unaware of this idea that a decent FT% in and of itself means your 3 point effectiveness will automatically improve in the NBA.

As I said a day or so ago, it can sometimes reveal why a shooter might not be hitting at an expected rate. But it's not like it tells the world "if you shoot well from the charity stripe in college, you will become a good 3 point shooter" as you seem to be implying.

 

[Russ Smith]

I'm still looking for these poor shooting mechanics that I keep hearing about. I just don't see anything wrong with his jump shot whatsoever.

Jackson has a hitch, he "dips" before he shoots so slower release and lower, but his shot is not "Broken".

I also look at Tatum and wonder is he done growing, if he's 6'10" no brainer him over Jackson, if he doesn't grow anymore much closer. I don't know the wingspan on both.

Jackson to me is the closest thing I've seen to Andre Iguodala in years and as a Warriors fan I'm a huge Iggy fan.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Jackson has a hitch, he "dips" before he shoots so slower release and lower, but his shot is not "Broken".

I also look at Tatum and wonder is he done growing, if he's 6'10" no brainer him over Jackson, if he doesn't grow anymore much closer. I don't know the wingspan on both.

Jackson to me is the closest thing I've seen to Andre Iguodala in years and as a Warriors fan I'm a huge Iggy fan.

If you are talking about the dip that he does right after he catches it, than there is nothing wrong with that. Most good shooters dip the ball to around waist level right after the catch.

 

[slinslin]

And now there's rumors Fultz isn't even going to finish the year at UW, he's sat out 2 games recently with a "sore knee", Romar is insisting the doctors are stopping Fultz from playing it's not his decision, but there are rumblings that Fultz is just not that interested in playing out the season with more losses, and is simply choosing to not play.

So all BS that rumor.

 

[slinslin]

If you are talking about the dip that he does right after he catches it, than there is nothing wrong with that. Most good shooters dip the ball to around waist level right after the catch.

No he is not talking about that, Jackson has a hitch in hit shooting motion it is pretty clear and it often looks like he releases the ball when he is already coming down with it.

Last game Jackson did not make a single jumpshot.

It is definitely not a smooth release and you can see on his jumpshots that he often badly bricks them. Good shooters very rarely brick shots. For example when Devin Booker goes 5-20 most of his misses will be in and out or at least be on target.

When bad shooters miss, they go wide, airball, of the front of the rim, of the backboard etc.