• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2019 NBA Draft

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Who are the guys in the 4-8 range?

Culver had a huge game in an upset loss to West Va: 26 points, 10 boards, 4 dimes and 5 steals. He's a very popular pick to go in the 4-8 range. I don't think anyone else can really be considered a lock to go top-10 at this point (other than Zion/RJ/Morant obviously).

I know you guys touched on it prior but RJ Barrett's efficiency, or lackthereof, is particularly concerning..

His age (19 at draft time), rebounding (7+ for a wing) and ability to be secondary facilitator, all drag you back in...

He's barely shooting +30% from 3, on nearly six attempts per game, and is only shooting 66% from the line, which makes me concerned how good of a shooter he truly is..

May be a weird question, but is his skillset just not prone to being a good shooter?

Look back at wings to average 7+ rebs and 4+ asts per game and it's an interesting result.
You get guys like--Luke Jackson, Ben Simmons, Andre Iguodala, Terrance Williams, Kyle Anderson, Penny Hardaway, Bonzi Wells, Bob Sura, Evan Turner and Deandre Bembry; none of them really went on to be highly efficient shooters, in general or from deep...

Are we hoping RJ Barrett becomes a better shooter but % wise and history wise might suggest otherwise?

I don't have any correlation to back up my claim but just some interesting data to consider...

Interesting thing for RJ that sets him apart from most of those guys is his 3-point volume is enormous. Culver's in a similar boat...he shoots plenty of 3's, but he was off target again today in spite of having a good all-around game. He's down to 32.3% on the season now, and his free throw percentage is hovering just above 70. Projections for both of those guys hinge largely on whether or not you think they'll develop accurate NBA-range jumpshots.
 
Zion looking better than he has all season. He's just not fair :chuckle:
 
Interesting thing for RJ that sets him apart from most of those guys is his 3-point volume is enormous. Culver's in a similar boat...he shoots plenty of 3's, but he was off target again today in spite of having a good all-around game. He's down to 32.3% on the season now, and his free throw percentage is hovering just above 70. Projections for both of those guys hinge largely on whether or not you think they'll develop accurate NBA-range jumpshots.

While not any better of a shooter, Morant is still a waaayy more efficient offensive player (61 TS% / 55 eFG% vs. 53 TS% / 51 eFG%) despite a similar volume (16 FGA / 8 FTA vs. 19 FGA / 6 FTA)...

I know competition will creep into the discussion but efficiency + vision of Morant really makes him the #2 player in my eyes...

We know they're both going to be league average defenders; with Barrett, the main reason you draft him (scoring) is also the same thing you're hoping he improves... With Morant, the vision is there and will continue to be there; similarly the way I thought about Trae, I really think Morant is going to be a destination type player because of his playing style...
 
I know you guys touched on it prior but RJ Barrett's efficiency, or lackthereof, is particularly concerning..

His age (19 at draft time), rebounding (7+ for a wing) and ability to be secondary facilitator, all drag you back in...

He's barely shooting +30% from 3, on nearly six attempts per game, and is only shooting 66% from the line, which makes me concerned how good of a shooter he truly is..

May be a weird question, but is his skillset just not prone to being a good shooter?

Look back at wings to average 7+ rebs and 4+ asts per game and it's an interesting result.
You get guys like--Luke Jackson, Ben Simmons, Andre Iguodala, Terrance Williams, Kyle Anderson, Penny Hardaway, Bonzi Wells, Bob Sura, Evan Turner and Deandre Bembry; none of them really went on to be highly efficient shooters, in general or from deep...

Are we hoping RJ Barrett becomes a better shooter but % wise and history wise might suggest otherwise?

I don't have any correlation to back up my claim but just some interesting data to consider...

As Nathan mentioned, volume is typically a better indicator of shooting potential than percentage. 32% on higher volume is perfectly fine for a player Barrett’s age. Who is adjusting to the added college 3PT distance and also maturing physically.

The FT % is mildly concerning but again, his mechanics look fine, he’s not badly missing, it could be more of a flukey year for him from the FT line.

For a high volume player, a 54% TS doesn’t really give you much pause, especially for a player his age, in a conference like the ACC, on high 3PT volume.

My concerns aren’t on offense with him at all....at this stage, I wonder more if he can grow out of just how terribly unimpactful he is on defense. He just gives you nothing on that end other than defensive rebounding.....and one way wings, even point forwards, just aren’t that valuable on a wins added basis.
 
As Nathan mentioned, volume is typically a better indicator of shooting potential than percentage. 32% on higher volume is perfectly fine for a player Barrett’s age. Who is adjusting to the added college 3PT distance and also maturing physically.

The FT % is mildly concerning but again, his mechanics look fine, he’s not badly missing, it could be more of a flukey year for him from the FT line.

For a high volume player, a 54% TS doesn’t really give you much pause, especially for a player his age, in a conference like the ACC, on high 3PT volume.

My concerns aren’t on offense with him at all....at this stage, I wonder more if he can grow out of just how terribly unimpactful he is on defense. He just gives you nothing on that end other than defensive rebounding.....and one way wings, even point forwards, just aren’t that valuable on a wins added basis.

Well, and that is also a larger concern: if you're going to be a one-way wing, you have to be really good at that one-way--especially if it's one-way offensively...

Right now I would describe Barrett's defense as "not urgent"; there's just not much purpose in the way he plays... You'll see an attempted steal here or there but like you mentioned he doesn't offer much..

So the efficiency concern looms larger imo because if he is a one-way way and the thing you draft him for he's inefficient at, you start to fall into Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parker territory...

This isn't to rain on Barrett's parade, I do like him quite a bit, but there are concerns to be had and questions exist if he's truly a top-level prospect or just a really good starter...
 
While not any better of a shooter, Morant is still a waaayy more efficient offensive player (61 TS% / 55 eFG% vs. 53 TS% / 51 eFG%) despite a similar volume (16 FGA / 8 FTA vs. 19 FGA / 6 FTA)...

I know competition will creep into the discussion but efficiency + vision of Morant really makes him the #2 player in my eyes...

We know they're both going to be league average defenders; with Barrett, the main reason you draft him (scoring) is also the same thing you're hoping he improves... With Morant, the vision is there and will continue to be there; similarly the way I thought about Trae, I really think Morant is going to be a destination type player because of his playing style...

On one hand, I trust Morant's jumpshot a lot more because he's shooting a steady 81% from the line for his college career. Most guys who are 80%+ foul shooters in college go on to be at least decent NBA 3-point shooters, qualitatively.

On the other hand, Morant's 5.2 turnovers per game are the most in NCAA history as far as I'm aware...somehow that gets swept under the rug. If you put him in a high-usage role against NBA defenders right off the bat, he's almost certainly going to be a turnover machine. How good will he be if he's forced to dial back his wild, free-wheeling style of play?
 
Well, and that is also a larger concern: if you're going to be a one-way wing, you have to be really good at that one-way--especially if it's one-way offensively...

Right now I would describe Barrett's defense as "not urgent"; there's just not much purpose in the way he plays... You'll see an attempted steal here or there but like you mentioned he doesn't offer much..

So the efficiency concern looms larger imo because if he is a one-way way and the thing you draft him for he's inefficient at, you start to fall into Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parker territory...

This isn't to rain on Barrett's parade, I do like him quite a bit, but there are concerns to be had and questions exist if he's truly a top-level prospect or just a really good starter...

I’m confident he’s not Wiggins. He profiles almost identically to Tatum. They have slight differences but generally speaking, they are incredibly similar prospects production wise.

Barrett is also really young like Tatum was. He’s only going to be 19.5 on Jan 1 of his rookie year. That is actually 3 months younger than Tatum, at the same point.

I don’t love Barrett but given his age in this calculation, he projects as an incredibly good offensive wing prospect. He’s likely a bit more volatile than someone like Ja, in terms of possible outcomes but 20/7/4 as an 18 year old freshman is very good. None of the wings you mentioned scored, assisted and rebounded anywhere near those levels, at his age.

I probably have a slight preference towards Morant but I still think RJ is in the top 3.....and if you have an organizational preference to build around a wing, I think he’s a good candidate.....he’s just not without flaws.
 
On one hand, I trust Morant's jumpshot a lot more because he's shooting a steady 81% from the line for his college career. Most guys who are 80%+ foul shooters in college go on to be at least decent NBA 3-point shooters, qualitatively.

On the other hand, Morant's 5.2 turnovers per game are the most in NCAA history as far as I'm aware...somehow that gets swept under the rug. If you put him in a high-usage role against NBA defenders right off the bat, he's almost certainly going to be a turnover machine. How good will he be if he's forced to dial back his wild, free-wheeling style of play?

True, that's a flaw in his game that will be brought up and needs to be studied..

In watching, I think it's a two-part answer: a). he can be a bit careless with the ball, not ultra-conservative in his play and, b). the burden Murray State places on him to have the ball, create and be their offense..

More or less, it's a lot like what Trae Young was at Oklahoma... Similarly, he also averaged 5.2 turnovers per game on a slightly lower AST%.. Interestingly enough, he's carried over that 18 TOV% into the NBA this year..

In looking back statistically, there's not a lot of guys at Young or Morant's level of assists + turnovers so it's hard to project how it'll turn out... Only other guy I could find close, that had the assist numbers, was Kris Dunn who had relatively high ast% and tov% numbers his junior and senior year but has been able to reduce his tov% each year in the league thus far..

Some of it I think you'll have to live with Morant as a prospect; it's the age old question do you want to reign a guy in or try to push them to be more?

Even though Tre Jones might be a better caretaker of the ball, Morant's vision and ability to distribute really are very high end and what will get him drafted higher...
 
In addition to Culver, THT looked awesome today too. Was probably his best game of the year, all around. 21, 4, 2, 1 and 3 with 5 3’s.

Thybulle was hilariously good on defense, if anyone caught Washington. 5 steals, 1 Block and only a single foul. He easily could have had 2-3 more steals as well. He would be a nice player to pair with RJ, if that is who we selected with our first pick.
 
Last edited:
If Zion can somehow score 28 a game on 14 shots, at seasons end, I'd pull a Goldhammer and eat shit.

Reading back in this thread is actually a good one. I commend all the regular contributors in here, everyone was really objective and if they made evaluation mistakes, copped to it. Pretty cool to see a lot of opinionated draft heads with open minds.

With that said? I’m afraid to look at what Zion’s PPG/FGA Numbers are. :chuckle:
 
On the other hand, Morant's 5.2 turnovers per game are the most in NCAA history as far as I'm aware...somehow that gets swept under the rug. If you put him in a high-usage role against NBA defenders right off the bat, he's almost certainly going to be a turnover machine. How good will he be if he's forced to dial back his wild, free-wheeling style of play?

One of the more interesting charts I've ever seen is a turnover one.

A scout we had a relationship with, when I was at a previous sports data company did "I know / I think / I know" charts on guys like Morant.......to assess, to what degree, you should be concerned about his TO production.

I never saw Morant's chart but I'll just explain what the exercise is.....

A scout would pull every turnover out of a video database and he'd chart it as:

1. I know an NBA player catches that pass
2. I think an NBA player catches that pass.
3. I know that is a turnover in the NBA.

This exercise, is potentially, especially important for Morant.....if your big hangup is the recklessness with which he plays.....because he's playing with teammates who are a lot less skilled. Less skilled at catching difficult passes, less skilled at expecting difficult passes to be made and less skilled at converting those opportunities. And he's also playing in far greater traffic than he will at the NBA level.

So the above exercise possibly reduces his actual NBA TO number significantly......I don't know that it would but it was one of the more fascinating things I've seen. I wish I had an example of a previous prospect, who's evaluation does not matter anymore. It's my one regret in interfacing with that scout.....I should have just said "this is incredible, do you have one I can keep".....but I thought he would possibly be put off given our professional relationship. Damn professionalism. :chuckle:
 
Last edited:
One of the more interesting charts I've ever seen is a turnover one.

A scout we had a relationship with, when I was at a previous sports data company did "I know / I think / I know" charts on guys like Morant.......to assess, to what degree, you should be concerned about his TO production.

I never saw Morant's chart but I'll just explain what the exercise is.....

A scout would pull every turnover out of a video database and he'd chart it as:

1. I know an NBA player catches that pass
2. I think an NBA player catches that pass.
3. I know that is a turnover in the NBA.

This exercise, is potentially, especially important for Morant.....if your big hangup is the recklessness with which he plays.....because he's playing with teammates who are a lot less skilled. Less skilled at catching difficult passes, less skilled at expecting difficult passes to be made and less skilled at converting those opportunities. And he's also playing in far greater traffic than he will at the NBA level.

So the above exercise possibly reduces his actual NBA TO number significantly......I don't know that it would but it was one of the more fascinating things I've seen. I wish I had an example of a previous prospect, who's evaluation does not matter anymore. It's my one regret in interfacing with that scout.....I should have just said "this is incredible, do you have one I can keep".....but I thought he would possibly be put off given our professional relationship. Damn professionalism. :chuckle:

This is not a bad idea, but there's a problem.

-Broadly speaking, we should always be wary of claims that any player will be better or more efficient in any way when moving to a higher level of competition. Especially when trying to argue for a guy who has an underwhelming impact at the NCAA level (Morant obviously not in this category), people often weave an elaborate story about how better teammates, better spacing, better coaching, a different role, etc, will allow the player to make a much bigger impact at the NBA level. But the story rarely plays out that way in reality...strengths are diminished and weaknesses are magnified when players face tougher competition, and that effect dominates all others.

-In this specific case, the flaw in your scout's reasoning is that he's considering only passes that resulted in turnovers. It's true that not all of those passes would be turnovers at the NBA level, but on the flip side, many more passes that aren't turnovers in the OVC would be turnovers in the NBA, where defenders are much longer, much smarter, and much more athletic. Furthermore, not all passes that are assists in the OVC would be assists in the NBA. Right now, Morant easily draws double and triple teams and OVC defenses have little ability to rotate and recover. As a result, he has plenty of opportunities to pass to teammates for open 3's or layups, and he doesn't get punished if the timing or placement of these passes is marginally off. In the NBA he'll have fewer wide-open teammates to pass to, and he'll have to hit his targets more quickly and more precisely to beat the rotating defender.


This is not to say that Morant isn't a fantastic prospect. He is. But he's mainly fantastic because he's just 19 years old and has tons of room to improve, not because he could go into the NBA with his current abilities and be an impact player.
 
One of the more interesting charts I've ever seen is a turnover one.

A scout we had a relationship with, when I was at a previous sports data company did "I know / I think / I know" charts on guys like Morant.......to assess, to what degree, you should be concerned about his TO production.

I never saw Morant's chart but I'll just explain what the exercise is.....

A scout would pull every turnover out of a video database and he'd chart it as:

1. I know an NBA player catches that pass
2. I think an NBA player catches that pass.
3. I know that is a turnover in the NBA.

This exercise, is potentially, especially important for Morant.....if your big hangup is the recklessness with which he plays.....because he's playing with teammates who are a lot less skilled. Less skilled at catching difficult passes, less skilled at expecting difficult passes to be made and less skilled at converting those opportunities. And he's also playing in far greater traffic than he will at the NBA level.

So the above exercise possibly reduces his actual NBA TO number significantly......I don't know that it would but it was one of the more fascinating things I've seen. I wish I had an example of a previous prospect, who's evaluation does not matter anymore. It's my one regret in interfacing with that scout.....I should have just said "this is incredible, do you have one I can keep".....but I thought he would possibly be put off given our professional relationship. Damn professionalism. :chuckle:

How did Cam Payne rate on your scale? He went to the same school. Maybe that gives us some insight.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top