WaltLongmire wrote:This topic has been hit back and forth in the Stein and Kaminsky threads.

You want a one dimensional who will be an offensive liability and may not even be the answer in the post against bigger bodies, you take Stein.

You want a guy with an all around and versatile offensive game who plays hard and intelligent D, made immense improvement during his college career, and was the best player on the court when he went up against Towns and WCS, you take Kaminsky.

ha! that sounded pretty unbiased?

Do you want the Sh1t head or the the guy who is awesome?

mreinman wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:This topic has been hit back and forth in the Stein and Kaminsky threads.

You want a one dimensional who will be an offensive liability and may not even be the answer in the post against bigger bodies, you take Stein.

You want a guy with an all around and versatile offensive game who plays hard and intelligent D, made immense improvement during his college career, and was the best player on the court when he went up against Towns and WCS, you take Kaminsky.

ha! that sounded pretty unbiased?

Do you want the Sh1t head or the the guy who is awesome?

WCS has the speed, hops and agility close to John Wall but at 7' tall. They know that will translate to the NBA. He's the same size and weight of Tyson Chandler already and he's more athletic and agile. He can put on more muscle as he matures and trains with pros. That's why he's mocked higher.
Scouts just trust that his skills translate much better than Kaminsky. WCS impact on a teams overall defense is greater than Kaminsky's offensive impact at the next level.

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:This topic has been hit back and forth in the Stein and Kaminsky threads.

You want a one dimensional who will be an offensive liability and may not even be the answer in the post against bigger bodies, you take Stein.

You want a guy with an all around and versatile offensive game who plays hard and intelligent D, made immense improvement during his college career, and was the best player on the court when he went up against Towns and WCS, you take Kaminsky.

ha! that sounded pretty unbiased?

Do you want the Sh1t head or the the guy who is awesome?

Yeah lets just ignore the very real differences between the NBA and the NCAA. There's a reason Kaminsky isn't higher in Mock Drafts. There's a very real concern that he's one of those players who can dominate at the college level but his talent doesn't translate as well at the next level. Kaminsky will face much stiffer resistance in the NBA. He's not gonna dominate anyone in the NBA with his athletic ability and he's a bit light in the shorts on defense against NBA teams. He should be fine on offense, but I think there are serious doubts about how his game translates in the NBA.

WCS has the speed, hops and agility close to John Wall but at 7' tall. They know that will translate to the NBA. He's the same size and weight of Tyson Chandler already and he's more athletic and agile. He can put on more muscle as he matures and trains with pros. That's why he's mocked higher.
Scouts just trust that his skills translate much better than Kaminsky. WCS impact on a teams overall defense is greater than Kaminsky's offensive impact at the next level.

I've said this a lot recently- Stein played 3 years and is essentially the same player...Kaminsky was pretty much a scrub when he started, and improved his game to a level where he reached the semis and finals of the NCAAs in his final two seasons, was the college player of the year, outplayed both Kentucky bigs, and is one of the most multi-talented bigs in the draft.

I would not even say he "dominated" at the college level. He played on one of the most disciplined teams in college and earned and played his role on that team. His role on the team changed as he grew as a player.

Stein did not get more play on the offensive end because he did not earn it, despite being able to practice and play against (in practice) some of the best college bigs in recent years.

I see Stein's value, but he is a trade down pick, and if we only come out of this draft with him it will have been a poor draft night.

Maybe he's been hiding a Ralph Sampson offensive game somewhere- we will see if he is a new player come workouts.

WaltLongmire wrote:This topic has been hit back and forth in the Stein and Kaminsky threads.

You want a one dimensional who will be an offensive liability and may not even be the answer in the post against bigger bodies, you take Stein.

You want a guy with an all around and versatile offensive game who plays hard and intelligent D, made immense improvement during his college career, and was the best player on the court when he went up against Towns and WCS, you take Kaminsky.

...or maybe you try to prove how smart you are and take Lyles fourth overall. :shrug:

blkexec wrote:For those into analytics.....Found this on a jazz forum.

The hits on Kaminsky just keep coming!

http://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?18108-Following-potential-2015-draftees/page435

Layne Vashro, who has some respect among analytical types as a draft-pick modeler has his as-of-now forecasts up and available here.

I'm not endorsing or criticizing his modeling. I just thought it might add a bit to the conversation. In my checking of previous years' results, he's had successes and failures, but there seems to be enough there to at least make it a point of consideration.

There's more to his forecasts that you can look at yourself, but one of the things he does is give odds of players reaching various levels in their top NBA season: bust, bench, starter, stud, star (based on win shares). If he turns out to be accurate, it's good we're in the Western Conference. The likelihood of getting a decent contributor drops off a cliff after #13. Here's his odds:

Okafor -- bust 2%, bench 9%, starter 26%, stud 23%, star 40%

Russell -- bust 1%, bench 1%, starter 24%, stud 33%, star 42%

Mudiay -- bust 0%, bench 1%, starter 27%, stud 34%, star 38%

Towns -- bust 1%, bench 6%, starter 31%, stud 34%, star 28%

Johnson -- bust 3%, bench 11%, starter 40%, stud 20%, star 27%

Hezonja -- bust 8%, bench 4%, starter 63%, stud 12%, star 13%

Porzingis -- bust 73%, bench 5%, starter 19%, stud 2%, star 0%

WCS -- bust 3%, bench 9%, starter 29%, stud 46%, star 13%

Oubre -- bust 1%, bench 12%, starter 56%, stud 18%, star 13%

Turner -- bust 20%, bench 18%, starter 38%, stud 15%, star 10%

Looney -- bust 13%, bench 23%, starter 44%, stud 17%, star 3%

Winslow -- bust 35%, bench 18%, starter 35%, stud 8%, star 4%

Kaminsky -- bust 23%, bench 30%, starter 33%, stud 12%, star 2%

Only one other player (Christian Wood) is rated more than a 26% chance to be better than a bust or a bench player in their best year. Here's the probability he has for bust/bench outcomes respectively for some of the players that may be of interest here:

Booker -- 90/4
LeVert -- 65/16
Harrell -- 67/23
Portis -- 65/23
J. Anderson -- 75/12
Grant -- 72/19
Lyles -- 77/15
D. Wright -- 50/25
Dunn -- 49/37

blkexec wrote:For those into analytics.....Found this on a jazz forum.

The hits on Kaminsky just keep coming!

http://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?18108-Following-potential-2015-draftees/page435

Layne Vashro, who has some respect among analytical types as a draft-pick modeler has his as-of-now forecasts up and available here.

I'm not endorsing or criticizing his modeling. I just thought it might add a bit to the conversation. In my checking of previous years' results, he's had successes and failures, but there seems to be enough there to at least make it a point of consideration.

There's more to his forecasts that you can look at yourself, but one of the things he does is give odds of players reaching various levels in their top NBA season: bust, bench, starter, stud, star (based on win shares). If he turns out to be accurate, it's good we're in the Western Conference. The likelihood of getting a decent contributor drops off a cliff after #13. Here's his odds:

Okafor -- bust 2%, bench 9%, starter 26%, stud 23%, star 40%

Russell -- bust 1%, bench 1%, starter 24%, stud 33%, star 42%

Mudiay -- bust 0%, bench 1%, starter 27%, stud 34%, star 38%

Towns -- bust 1%, bench 6%, starter 31%, stud 34%, star 28%

Johnson -- bust 3%, bench 11%, starter 40%, stud 20%, star 27%

Hezonja -- bust 8%, bench 4%, starter 63%, stud 12%, star 13%

Porzingis -- bust 73%, bench 5%, starter 19%, stud 2%, star 0%

WCS -- bust 3%, bench 9%, starter 29%, stud 46%, star 13%

Oubre -- bust 1%, bench 12%, starter 56%, stud 18%, star 13%

Turner -- bust 20%, bench 18%, starter 38%, stud 15%, star 10%

Looney -- bust 13%, bench 23%, starter 44%, stud 17%, star 3%

Winslow -- bust 35%, bench 18%, starter 35%, stud 8%, star 4%

Kaminsky -- bust 23%, bench 30%, starter 33%, stud 12%, star 2%

I'm beginning to believe that with all of the advanced analytics and metrics available they should simply come up with an uber-game using these stats, an advanced graphic interface, and simply play the games on the most powerful computer in the world.

No injuries (Derrick Rose should be happy-he'll be able to play with his kids when he's in his 40s), players can be designed to look exactly the way they want to look (J.R. can change tattoos whenever he wants), and there will be less pollution because teams don't have to take chartered jets around the nation.)

I'm sure Calipari would have liked this system.

CrushAlot wrote:

blkexec wrote:For those into analytics.....Found this on a jazz forum.

The hits on Kaminsky just keep coming!

http://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?18108-Following-potential-2015-draftees/page435

Layne Vashro, who has some respect among analytical types as a draft-pick modeler has his as-of-now forecasts up and available here.

I'm not endorsing or criticizing his modeling. I just thought it might add a bit to the conversation. In my checking of previous years' results, he's had successes and failures, but there seems to be enough there to at least make it a point of consideration.

There's more to his forecasts that you can look at yourself, but one of the things he does is give odds of players reaching various levels in their top NBA season: bust, bench, starter, stud, star (based on win shares). If he turns out to be accurate, it's good we're in the Western Conference. The likelihood of getting a decent contributor drops off a cliff after #13. Here's his odds:

Okafor -- bust 2%, bench 9%, starter 26%, stud 23%, star 40%

Russell -- bust 1%, bench 1%, starter 24%, stud 33%, star 42%

Mudiay -- bust 0%, bench 1%, starter 27%, stud 34%, star 38%

Towns -- bust 1%, bench 6%, starter 31%, stud 34%, star 28%

Johnson -- bust 3%, bench 11%, starter 40%, stud 20%, star 27%

Hezonja -- bust 8%, bench 4%, starter 63%, stud 12%, star 13%

Porzingis -- bust 73%, bench 5%, starter 19%, stud 2%, star 0%

WCS -- bust 3%, bench 9%, starter 29%, stud 46%, star 13%

Oubre -- bust 1%, bench 12%, starter 56%, stud 18%, star 13%

Turner -- bust 20%, bench 18%, starter 38%, stud 15%, star 10%

Looney -- bust 13%, bench 23%, starter 44%, stud 17%, star 3%

Winslow -- bust 35%, bench 18%, starter 35%, stud 8%, star 4%

Kaminsky -- bust 23%, bench 30%, starter 33%, stud 12%, star 2%

Only one other player (Christian Wood) is rated more than a 26% chance to be better than a bust or a bench player in their best year. Here's the probability he has for bust/bench outcomes respectively for some of the players that may be of interest here:

Booker -- 90/4
LeVert -- 65/16
Harrell -- 67/23
Portis -- 65/23
J. Anderson -- 75/12
Grant -- 72/19
Lyles -- 77/15
D. Wright -- 50/25
Dunn -- 49/37

Thanks. I found Vashro's site and he actually has Mudiay as having the highest chance of being a star at 76%. I think the Jazz post has Winslow's projections posted under Mudiay. I tried copying his chart but it didn't look right. Here is the link:http://nyloncalculus.com/stats/layne-vashros-draft-projection-tools/

If Mudiays analytics are that high then i can see philly taking him over Russell.

I just realized Kaminsky has the highest bench percentage. ....gotta keep the Kaminsky vs Stein debate going.

StarksEwing1 wrote:Steins ceiling is tyson chandler so i wouldnt draft him that high. I understand people like kaminsky but im not convinced he will be anything than a role player. Id rather just draft mudiay or winslow because both have much higher ceilings

WCS is an elite defensive piece and Kaminsky is a nice stretch 4/5 but not a 1A or 2 kinda player. I see role players in both and there's nothing wrong with that and hey, I hope I'm wrong and each dude becomes a star. I'm not a hater and always wish everyone the best.

Now if I HAD to choose one, I'd take Kaminsky. WCS's offense worries me as does he seemingly lackadaisical attitude. I want someone who is all about hoops 24/7 who eats sleeps and craps basketball. WCS seems like a nice enough kid but he also seems like someone who plays because he's good and doesn't really
Have the motivation to get better and work hard enough to make his flaws
Not as glaring or get a lot better on offense. Now elite defense is valuable and I think he can be a nice piece as a fixture at C on a good team.

Bottom line however I'd take Kaminsky because his offense is ready made for today's NBA and while he won't be the most athletic guy in the arena he's got good enough moves and deep range on that shot. Yes, he may be a minus on D but you also don't question Kaminsky's will to win. The guy is clearly highly motivated and it's for this reason why he won't hurt you as bad on D as WCS will on O. I think Kaminsky will give enough effort to work Ok within the defense. Like a young Dirk. Never a great defense but he also didn't kill
You a la someone like Bargs.

WaltLongmire wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

blkexec wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

blkexec wrote:For those into analytics.....Found this on a jazz forum.

The hits on Kaminsky just keep coming!

http://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?18108-Following-potential-2015-draftees/page435

Layne Vashro, who has some respect among analytical types as a draft-pick modeler has his as-of-now forecasts up and available here.

I'm not endorsing or criticizing his modeling. I just thought it might add a bit to the conversation. In my checking of previous years' results, he's had successes and failures, but there seems to be enough there to at least make it a point of consideration.

There's more to his forecasts that you can look at yourself, but one of the things he does is give odds of players reaching various levels in their top NBA season: bust, bench, starter, stud, star (based on win shares). If he turns out to be accurate, it's good we're in the Western Conference. The likelihood of getting a decent contributor drops off a cliff after #13. Here's his odds:

Okafor -- bust 2%, bench 9%, starter 26%, stud 23%, star 40%

Russell -- bust 1%, bench 1%, starter 24%, stud 33%, star 42%

Mudiay -- bust 0%, bench 1%, starter 27%, stud 34%, star 38%

Towns -- bust 1%, bench 6%, starter 31%, stud 34%, star 28%

Johnson -- bust 3%, bench 11%, starter 40%, stud 20%, star 27%

Hezonja -- bust 8%, bench 4%, starter 63%, stud 12%, star 13%

Porzingis -- bust 73%, bench 5%, starter 19%, stud 2%, star 0%

WCS -- bust 3%, bench 9%, starter 29%, stud 46%, star 13%

Oubre -- bust 1%, bench 12%, starter 56%, stud 18%, star 13%

Turner -- bust 20%, bench 18%, starter 38%, stud 15%, star 10%

Looney -- bust 13%, bench 23%, starter 44%, stud 17%, star 3%

Winslow -- bust 35%, bench 18%, starter 35%, stud 8%, star 4%

Kaminsky -- bust 23%, bench 30%, starter 33%, stud 12%, star 2%

Only one other player (Christian Wood) is rated more than a 26% chance to be better than a bust or a bench player in their best year. Here's the probability he has for bust/bench outcomes respectively for some of the players that may be of interest here:

Booker -- 90/4
LeVert -- 65/16
Harrell -- 67/23
Portis -- 65/23
J. Anderson -- 75/12
Grant -- 72/19
Lyles -- 77/15
D. Wright -- 50/25
Dunn -- 49/37

Thanks. I found Vashro's site and he actually has Mudiay as having the highest chance of being a star at 76%. I think the Jazz post has Winslow's projections posted under Mudiay. I tried copying his chart but it didn't look right. Here is the link:http://nyloncalculus.com/stats/layne-vashros-draft-projection-tools/

If Mudiays analytics are that high then i can see philly taking him over Russell.

I agree. Also Hinkie went to China and scouted him.

I think Phil scouted him at a pretty nice Chinese Restaurant which had game feed from the Mudiay's games. Phil has this covered without having to travel.

On a more serious note...

Are you saying that the analytics will be the deciding factor over the actual games these guys have played in, and the workouts they perform for him??

And what about that Mudiay article which pointed out all the Americans playing in China who are doing so well. Do the analytics hold up for those expatriates. We have no other numbers for Mudiay other than <20 games played in China. This is enough of a sampling for the analytics?

WaltLongmire wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

I don't know how well analytics translate from the ncaa/international to the nba. I generally use the eye test myself. This was one measure that blkexec cited and I went to the site and they had Mudiay rated very high. Also, Hinkie is probably more familiar with Mudiay than other gms.

Im new to this analytic stuff.....but it seems like a tool that is quickly spreading around the nba. If thats true then Mudiays stock can only go up.....which is good news across the board. Maybe russell or Ok4 drops. Maybe Phil is forced to draft Mudiay. Eitherway its a win....win for the Kaminsky and Stein hatters....or whoever has them both ranked below the 4th pick. It helps Phil to identify the BPA....especially in Mudiay's case since he only has a small sample size. In time we will see if analytics is worth the hype. For now its working in our favor......sitting at pick 4. I actually look at this draft as a top 4 now.....based on the analytic results. I only saw a top 3 originally. ....