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

Closer Look: Otto Porter

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

How much would you trade for the draft rights to Otto Porter?

  • Just pick him #1.

    Votes: 5 7.0%
  • Not interested in trading up to get him.

    Votes: 25 35.2%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33 and Kings (201_) pick

    Votes: 24 33.8%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, and Grizz (2015) pick

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, Kings and Grizz pick

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, Kings, Grizz, and Heat (2015) pick

    Votes: 2 2.8%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, and Cavs (2014 top-5 protected) pick

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, Kings, Grizz and Cavs (2014 top-5 protected) pick

    Votes: 2 2.8%
  • Trade #19, #31, #33, Kings, Grizz, Heat, and Cavs (2014) protected pick

    Votes: 2 2.8%
  • Trade every available pick the Cavs can possibly trade over the next 5 years.

    Votes: 2 2.8%

  • Total voters
    71
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dude...you're the one that said he's Paul George with less athleticism. George is largely reliant on his athleticism, which is significantly better than Porter's. It's not a comparison.

I'm not looking for an argument. I'm looking for people to make a more reasonable comparison for a guy I think is being over-rated and compared to someone he has no business being compared to.



Here's a good place to start from...Porter is a similar player to Luol Deng. That way you can subtract George's athleticism from the equation and pick a player that I think would be a best case scenario for Porter.

Porter is a similar player to Luol Deng, except I disagree that is his ceiling. At this stage, it's arguable that Porter is the better passer (can be a point forward) and moves off the ball exceptionally well--better than Deng. Porter also has a high rate of steals (1.8 spg) and blocks (0.9 bpg) for a player at his position. Combine that with a no-nonsense -- almost humble -- approach to the game, I don't think we can be wrong with this guy.
 
Last edited:
Noel going to miss whole season??

Porter it is
Even if that us true, which I think it is completely baseless and false, I would still pick Noel. We are picking him for what he will be for 10+ years, not one season, and Noel will be the much more dominating player in my estimation.
 
I wonder if some of you guys even watch basketball. Who cares that Paul George's vertical is 2 inches bigger than Porter's? When you watch them play, you would think Paul George has a 15 inch bigger vertical. Watch Porter play and it looks like he's attached to the ground. George can slash, has a pretty stroke (he was in the 3 pt competition...), and plays above the rim. Porter can't slash, has an ugly stroke (good mid-range game though), and plays below the rim. The comparisons just about stop after the fact that they both play SF and are good defenders. Maybe a better comparison for Porter is Boris Diaw?
 
That would make him a role player.

And absolutely does not have the tools to be in the same area code as LBJ and Durant. Unbelievable overrating of his ability to score and impact the game.

I'm actually in shock at this point that he is becoming so overvalued.

I'm with you 100% when it comes to Porter. Is he a good player? Yes he is. I think Porter can be a good role player on a championship contender. I wouldn't consider his with the first pick in the draft either there just isn't enough upside to his game. In fact there's only two players I will consider for the first pick and that Noel and Mclemore. Bennett is intriguing because he offers a lot of versatility but his size worries me a tad.
 
Porter is a similar player to Luol Deng, except I disagree that is his ceiling. At this stage, it's arguable that Porter is the better passer (can be a point forward) and moves off the ball exceptionally well--better than Deng. Porter also has a high rate of steals (1.8 spg) and blocks (0.9 bpg) for a player at his position. Combine that with a no-nonsense -- almost humble -- approach to the game, I don't think we can be wrong with this guy.

I could see his career being like a Deng maybe, but I believe Deng is a better athlete and probably prospect when he was coming out than Porter.
 
I wonder if some of you guys even watch basketball. Who cares that Paul George's vertical is 2 inches bigger than Porter's? When you watch them play, you would think Paul George has a 15 inch bigger vertical. Watch Porter play and it looks like he's attached to the ground. George can slash, has a pretty stroke (he was in the 3 pt competition...), and plays above the rim. Porter can't slash, has an ugly stroke (good mid-range game though), and plays below the rim. The comparisons just about stop after the fact that they both play SF and are good defenders. Maybe a better comparison for Porter is Boris Diaw?

Whoa whoa whoa...did you forget the whole reason you guys have been bashing him is because he's supposedly limited by his physical nature and that's something he can't change? If he has the athleticism to be a great player and he just hadn't learned to use it in college, that's all the more reason to take him. Imagine how good he could be if he plays up to his potential athletically, adding a whole new dimension to his game. If Otto Porter is so talented that he was the best two-way forward the NCAA has seen in years while playing "attached to the ground," how good could he be if he does finally uncork his athleticism?

And I can only hope the Boris Diaw comparison was a joke :chuckles:
 
Whoa whoa whoa...did you forget the whole reason you guys have been bashing him is because he's supposedly limited by his physical nature and that's something he can't change? If he has the athleticism to be a great player and he just hadn't learned to use it in college, that's all the more reason to take him. Imagine how good he could be if he plays up to his potential athletically, adding a whole new dimension to his game. If Otto Porter is so talented that he was the best two-way forward the NCAA has seen in years while playing "attached to the ground," how good could he be if he does finally uncork his athleticism?

And I can only hope the Boris Diaw comparison was a joke :chuckles:

Athletic potential is generally evident before you even get to the NBA.

It's not as if Porter was just sitting on untapped athleticism, he was working out at a major collegiate program for the last two years working out everyday preparing to play the sport.

At this stage, you either have that athletic ability or you don't. One term for it is "God-given ability," and while Porter is blessed with length and skill to be a pretty good pro, he lacks the natural athleticism which makes him the elite prospect and player other guys were.

People are really trying to outthink themselves here, Porter is a nice prospect and by most accounts probably not a superstar prospect. Noel is considered far and away the better prospect for a reason, and it's evident.
 
Athletic potential is generally evident before you even get to the NBA.

It's not as if Porter was just sitting on untapped athleticism, he was working out at a major collegiate program for the last two years working out everyday preparing to play the sport.

At this stage, you either have that athletic ability or you don't. One term for it is "God-given ability," and while Porter is blessed with length and skill to be a pretty good pro, he lacks the natural athleticism which makes him the elite prospect and player other guys were.

People are really trying to outthink themselves here, Porter is a nice prospect and by most accounts probably not a superstar prospect. Noel is considered far and away the better prospect for a reason, and it's evident.

Ariza11.633.2929.532.087' 2"8' 11.5"
Deng11.463.3427.531.557' 0.5"9' 0.5"
Durant12.333.4526.033.507' 4.75"9' 2"
Gay11.033.3233.040.597' 3"8' 11.2
Granger10.843.3431.034.0107' 1.25"8' 7"
J. Green12.003.3433.538.0177' 1.25"8' 7"
Iguodola11.173.1830.534.546' 11"8' 9.5"
Porter11.253.4027.036.097' 1.5"8' 9.5"
[td][/td]
[td]Lane Agility[/td]
[td]3/4 Court Sprint[/td]
[td]No Step Vertical[/td]
[td]Max Vertical[/td]
[td]Bench Press[/td]
[td]Wingspan[/td]
[td]Standing Reach[/td]
Source: Draftexpress.com

The evidence doesn't lie. Porter is not an athletic freak, but he's better than advertised. Regardless of these stats, he's a skilled, savvy player, and there have been plenty of highly successful players who fit that mold.
 
Based on those stats I'd definately stay away from that Durant guy.
 
Based on those stats I'd definately stay away from that Durant guy.

That's why I tried to include the stats from a variety of top-flight 3's in case there are anomalies.
 
I feel like all the talk of Otto Porter is smokescreen. I cant see us taking a guy who most experts predict won't be a star with the #1 pick. I think the cavs have their eyes set on noel or Mclemore.
 
I feel like all the talk of Otto Porter is smokescreen. I cant see us taking a guy who most experts predict won't be a star with the #1 pick. I think the cavs have their eyes set on noel or Mclemore.

Porter may not ever be a "star," but it's reasonable to foresee him as a great starter on a contending team that will help win games no doubt. I like when someone said, "I think Porter has the ability to be a very high quality glue guy. Like Gorilla Glue or something."
 
Update the 1st post with all info from the 22nd on that was posted by the lot of you dirty rotten scoundrels
 
Based on those stats I'd definately stay away from that Durant guy.

Durant is so far out on the outlier scale, he shouldn't even be discussed.

You put 1,000 small forwards in the NBA with his raw measurables and he might be the only one to make it.

Rail thin, no strength, below average lateral movement and average athleticism.

For every KD, there are 1,000 Austin Daye's.

It's better to focus on the positional median in assessing combine performance.

The highs and the lows typically don't tell you anything useful, at least as it pertains to trying to assess the likelihood of a player panning out based on athletic markers.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if some of you guys even watch basketball. Who cares that Paul George's vertical is 2 inches bigger than Porter's? When you watch them play, you would think Paul George has a 15 inch bigger vertical. Watch Porter play and it looks like he's attached to the ground. George can slash, has a pretty stroke (he was in the 3 pt competition...), and plays above the rim. Porter can't slash, has an ugly stroke (good mid-range game though), and plays below the rim. The comparisons just about stop after the fact that they both play SF and are good defenders. Maybe a better comparison for Porter is Boris Diaw?

I think Prince is a fair and accurate comparison right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top