Closer Look: Otto Porter

[The Process God]

Maybe statistically. MAYBE.

But as far as helping a team reach it's apex I think Porter is the guy.

Not even statistically. Shabazz's impact on games at the same age isn't even close to Porter's. Combined with Porter's better attitude and an actual position, you have yourself the clear BPA between the two.

 

[EdMonix11]

Not even statistically. Shabazz's impact on games at the same age isn't even close to Porter's. Combined with Porter's better attitude and an actual position, you have yourself the clear BPA between the two.

Shabazz is actually 8 months older than Porter despite their grade levels......

 

[apolo29]

If my Aunt had a dick she would be my Uncle (Drew, lol)

If Oladipo were an inch or two taller they might be talking about him with the 1st overall pick. I could just as easily say if Porter where a bit more athletic....

Those were two separate statements. If oladipo was an inch taller he would be perfect for SF. Regardless, even at his size (solid for SG), [rest of sentence].

I'm very interested in what the measurements say about him. If he has a long wingspan I think people will be surprised and the cavs will take him anyway. Much more potential than really anyone other than Noel.

Porter is like yea he'll be decent and provide a moderate scoring punch for a team that needs that, while providing mediocre defense. That's not us. That's not what we need.

 

[Revenged25]

Ok...

I will lay out my case. I am the anti porter. Last year I was the anti-beal, and now I am the anti-porter.

Ok.. so he can score... and he can distribute... cool...


Why do we want that? Why is that a good fit for us? Kyrie and dion are already scorers/distributers. We don't need another "combo" guy that can take over. We have two, possibly three. The guy is not the long term fit answer unless you think he supplants one of kyrie/dion. The 3 spot needs to be an athletic defensive specialist with a 3 shot that moves well off the ball.

If oladipo was an inch taller.. I'm inclined to take him anyway and solidify our guard rotation for.. ever, and pick up a 3 through FA

By all accounts Porter is supposed to be a very good defender with a lit of upside in that department even with the lack of elite athleticism. Now his 3 pt shooting might not be great/consistent at the next level, but he can work on it much like he's worked on every other aspect of his game since he was little. Also depending on what our other moves are, I wouldn't be opposed to double up on the SF position, Porter at 3, Sergey Karasev at 19 able to back-up both SG and SF positions learning to play defense by Brown and can provide better outside shooting. If we go with a small line-up it could be very explosive with Irving/Waiters/Karasev/Porter/Thompson

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Lumthemad]

I could be wrong here but to me, Otto Porter doesn't seem like the kind of guy Chris Grant drafts. Maybe this is the year he doesn't try and take a risk and takes the safest pick.

Earlier in the process (a few weeks back in fact) i wanted Otto Porter on our team. I am however very concerned as to how he'll finish in the NBA. I do like his floor game and think he is a smart kid with good tools. Shabaaz is far more talented in my eye's BUT the kind of kid you don't want in Cleveland.

 

[AZ_]

I could be wrong here but to me, Otto Porter doesn't seem like the kind of guy Chris Grant drafts. Maybe this is the year he doesn't try and take a risk and takes the safest pick.

Earlier in the process (a few weeks back in fact) i wanted Otto Porter on our team. I am however very concerned as to how he'll finish in the NBA. I do like his floor game and think he is a smart kid with good tools. Shabaaz is far more talented in my eye's BUT the kind of kid you don't want in Cleveland.

Not sure I'd classify Waiters as the safe pick. That would have went to Barnes, IMO.

 

[MVP_Eric_10]

I could be wrong here but to me, Otto Porter doesn't seem like the kind of guy Chris Grant drafts. Maybe this is the year he doesn't try and take a risk and takes the safest pick.

Earlier in the process (a few weeks back in fact) i wanted Otto Porter on our team. I am however very concerned as to how he'll finish in the NBA. I do like his floor game and think he is a smart kid with good tools. Shabaaz is far more talented in my eye's BUT the kind of kid you don't want in Cleveland.

Otto Porter is exactly the type of guy Chris Grants wants. He fits every criteria we're looking for. He's got the size, motor, and shooting ability we lack at the 3. Also we all know character is very important to Grant. Porter is a humble kid, and all of the coaches speak very highly of him. He can contribute in many different ways so he's the total team player.

There are way too many people trying to knock Porter because he's not an elite athlete. Many of you don't realize you don't have to be a high flying pogostick to survive in this league. If you take notice, the trend around the league, is that a lot players who are smart with high basketball IQ tend to have LONGER careers than those who based a lot of their game off of athleticism.

 

[apolo29]

Not sure I'd classify Waiters as the safe pick. That would have went to Barnes, IMO.

That's what he was saying, that grant DOESN'T go for safe picks. Tristan thompson was a big project pick, and waiters came out of nowhere. Porter is not a grant pick.

Otto Porter is exactly the type of guy Chris Grants wants. He fits every criteria we're looking for. He's got the size, motor, and shooting ability we lack at the 3. Also we all know character is very important to Grant. Porter is a humble kid, and all of the coaches speak very highly of him. He can contribute in many different ways so he's the total team player.

There are way too many people trying to knock Porter because he's not an elite athlete. Many of you don't realize you don't have to be a high flying pogostick to survive in this league. If you take notice, the trend around the league, is that a lot players who are smart with high basketball IQ tend to have LONGER careers than those who based a lot of their game off of athleticism.

Disagree. Grant wants potential. He drafts for potential. Tristan was potential. Dion was potential. Porter is not. You can definitely survive without elite athleticism, you're just not going to be a star unless you also happen to be a shooting beast. Even that is extremely rare.

There is a difference between extremely athletic and athletic ENOUGH. Porter might not be athletic ENOUGH. And that limits him in more ways than just offense, it limits him defensively because his lateral quickness and agility will probably never be good enough to guard someone like Lebron.

Regardless, what is porter's potential? What does he become if he fullfills it? A jumpshooter? A good scorer who passes? Is that what we want as the long term answer at the three?

 

[Rich]

Grant did draft potential, but he also drafted needs. If Noel is gone, the biggest potential players are guys who aren't at need spots, like Oladipo. We'll see how this draft goes, because it's the first draft where we don't have an entire starting roster of holes to fill. I suspect he goes Porter, because the time for drafting risky picks is over at this point. They've signaled that they want to win now, and that doesn't jive with taking a high risk player.

 

[Nathan S]

He averaged 7.5 boards, 1.8 steals, and 0.9 blocks. Those are above-average numbers from an SF prospect. Sure he may never be an elite defensive stopper, but I'm not sure how he suddenly got a reputation as "not athletic enough" on that end. He's no Oladipo, and he'll take his rookie lumps like everyone else, but long-term he should be above average there for sure.

 

[Tornicade]

That's what he was saying, that grant DOESN'T go for safe picks. Tristan thompson was a big project pick, and waiters came out of nowhere. Porter is not a grant pick.



Disagree. Grant wants potential. He drafts for potential. Tristan was potential. Dion was potential. Porter is not. You can definitely survive without elite athleticism, you're just not going to be a star unless you also happen to be a shooting beast. Even that is extremely rare.

There is a difference between extremely athletic and athletic ENOUGH. Porter might not be athletic ENOUGH. And that limits him in more ways than just offense, it limits him defensively because his lateral quickness and agility will probably never be good enough to guard someone like Lebron.

Regardless, what is porter's potential? What does he become if he fullfills it? A jumpshooter? A good scorer who passes? Is that what we want as the long term answer at the three?

I think the Cavs drafting has changed how Scouts look at and rate players for the draft.

The question becomes what did the Cavs see that we didnt.

your argument is essentially that grant wont pick the consensus pick because he is the Conventional pick.

Thompson and Dion werent picked because they risky players it was because they fit what the Cavs have determined they want from each position better than the other available picks.

 

[Smooth]

If my Aunt had a dick she would be my Uncle (Drew, lol)

Rep..

A severely underrated and underused line..

 

[Nathan S]

If my Aunt had a dick she would be my Uncle (Drew, lol)

If Oladipo were an inch or two taller they might be talking about him with the 1st overall pick. I could just as easily say if Porter where a bit more athletic....

I mean, would you rather him be 6'7 with a 6'10" wingspan like the average SF? 6'5" with a 6'11.5" wingspan is ideal. If gives him the length of a taller player, coupled with a low center of gravity that makes him quicker changing directions and tougher in the post (see Jason Kidd). Are we going to pass up on him because we're worried SFs will shoot over top of him? Have you seen him play defense? There's a reason he puts up block/rebound numbers that are unusually high even for an SF. I'm not sure even Durant can shoot comfortably over Oladipo. And players better be prepared to settle for that fadeaway often, because they'll have a tough time getting around him.

 

[Tornicade]

I mean, would you rather him be 6'7 with a 6'10" wingspan like the average SF? 6'5" with a 6'11.5" wingspan is ideal. If gives him the length of a taller player, coupled with a low center of gravity that makes him quicker changing directions and tougher in the post (see Jason Kidd). Are we going to pass up on him because we're worried SFs will shoot over top of him? Have you seen him play defense? There's a reason he puts up block/rebound numbers that are unusually high even for an SF. I'm not sure even Durant can shoot comfortably over Oladipo. And players better be prepared to settle for that fadeaway often, because they'll have a tough time getting around him.

the concern is because colege teams have seem to gone the small ball route and it makes it difficult to evaluate sa small forward and how they translate to the NBA because they might not of faced a legitimate sized small forward all year long.

 

[Lee]

I mean, would you rather him be 6'7 with a 6'10" wingspan like the average SF? 6'5" with a 6'11.5" wingspan is ideal. If gives him the length of a taller player, coupled with a low center of gravity that makes him quicker changing directions and tougher in the post (see Jason Kidd). Are we going to pass up on him because we're worried SFs will shoot over top of him? Have you seen him play defense? There's a reason he puts up block/rebound numbers that are unusually high even for an SF. I'm not sure even Durant can shoot comfortably over Oladipo. And players better be prepared to settle for that fadeaway often, because they'll have a tough time getting around him.

Wingspan Is the wrong stat, it is standing reach, which is a combination of height and wingspan and body build. Wingspan is a completely misused measurement by fans.