Murray and Chriss both on latest draft projection
Comments
-
Thybulle has hit some big time 3s in pressure situations.dnc said:
Agree with basically everything you're saying here. I would add that I really like Thybulle. Seems to be a really smart player outside of some dumb fouls. Reminds me a little of Shane Battier in that he's kind of an overlooked part of a much hyped recruiting class who has started out as a willing role player but has the ability to develop into much more by his senior year. I don't think he's going to lead UW to an NC as a senior so don't twist, just saying he's a hard-working, unselfish, high IQ wing in a class full of shinier objects. I love his game.RoadDawg55 said:Murray is the real deal. Everyone gets caught up about who is ready for the draft, but hardly any college players are. Murray would need time in the NBA to develop, but Zach Lavine was a lottery pick. I doubt Murray would get taken that high, but he's better than Lavine.
Chriss is good, but he's raw as fuck. It would suck to lose him because he will wash out in the NBA without more seasoning. He fouls out every game. He's skilled and has a lot f talent, but it's not all there. It's hard not to be excited about him when you do see it though.
I like Dickerson a lot too. He's a 4 year player that has good natural skills. I think he could be a really good college player. -
The good thing about Dickerson, Thybulle, and Crisp is that all three are good core players that will be around for four years. All three have a chance to be really good players as upperclassmen.
-
The false assumption with these stay/go fan analysis is that staying in college another year is better for development than being in the NBA. It's not. Especially not these days.RoadDawg55 said:Murray is the real deal. Everyone gets caught up about who is ready for the draft, but hardly any college players are. Murray would need time in the NBA to develop, but Zach Lavine was a lottery pick. I doubt Murray would get taken that high, but he's better than Lavine.
Chriss is good, but he's raw as fuck. It would suck to lose him because he will wash out in the NBA without more seasoning. He fouls out every game. He's skilled and has a lot f talent, but it's not all there. It's hard not to be excited about him when you do see it though.
I like Dickerson a lot too. He's a 4 year player that has good natural skills. I think he could be a really good college player.
Players are limited by the NCAA on how much they can practice, they have to waste time staying academically eligible, the coaching is worse, the nutrition and S&C is worse, and when they do play/practice it's mostly against dreck (CBB really sucks). If a player has guaranteed money (eg first round) they should probably jump on it. They'll get paid and they'll develop. 2nd round is borderline - those guys are treated like throw aways.
-
^ datruth
-
bananasnblondes said:
In his entire career at UW, I don't think Romar has ever been able to convince a kid to stay at UW instead of declaring early if they had a realistic chance of being drafted (Hawes, Webster, IT, Nate, Wroten, maybe others). Maybe Roy could have gone early but he didn't really blow up until his senior year. Anyways, Will this be the year he convinces one or both of these guys to stay? Adding Fultz and Timmons to this squad might just be enough talent to get back to the SWEET 16!!!
After 5 years off shitty basketball, Romar supporters have argued that UW needs to retain him because he has a monster class coming in and he needs to be the beneficiary of his great recruiting.
The first year with that class they are a bubble tourney team and then the best two guys bail.
Fucking Classic.
-
The only thing holding Murray back is that he can't jump like Lavine or Ross, but his ball skills are so superior that it might not matter.
-
From your lips to REAL God's ears. Cook it.TommySQC said:bananasnblondes said:In his entire career at UW, I don't think Romar has ever been able to convince a kid to stay at UW instead of declaring early if they had a realistic chance of being drafted (Hawes, Webster, IT, Nate, Wroten, maybe others). Maybe Roy could have gone early but he didn't really blow up until his senior year. Anyways, Will this be the year he convinces one or both of these guys to stay? Adding Fultz and Timmons to this squad might just be enough talent to get back to the SWEET 16!!!
After 5 years off shitty basketball, Romar supporters have argued that UW needs to retain him because he has a monster class coming in and he needs to be the beneficiary of his great recruiting.
The first year with that class they are a bubble tourney team and then the best two guys bail.
Fucking Classic. -
There is still a fine line. A lot of first rounders are throwaways too. A guy like B-Roy made millions by staying and getting his chance to shine in college. Blake Griffin made millions by staying for his sophomore year. They still would have developed in the NBA had they left early, but it helped them to stay in college.BallSacked said:
The false assumption with these stay/go fan analysis is that staying in college another year is better for development than being in the NBA. It's not. Especially not these days.RoadDawg55 said:Murray is the real deal. Everyone gets caught up about who is ready for the draft, but hardly any college players are. Murray would need time in the NBA to develop, but Zach Lavine was a lottery pick. I doubt Murray would get taken that high, but he's better than Lavine.
Chriss is good, but he's raw as fuck. It would suck to lose him because he will wash out in the NBA without more seasoning. He fouls out every game. He's skilled and has a lot f talent, but it's not all there. It's hard not to be excited about him when you do see it though.
I like Dickerson a lot too. He's a 4 year player that has good natural skills. I think he could be a really good college player.
Players are limited by the NCAA on how much they can practice, they have to waste time staying academically eligible, the coaching is worse, the nutrition and S&C is worse, and when they do play/practice it's mostly against dreck (CBB really sucks). If a player has guaranteed money (eg first round) they should probably jump on it. They'll get paid and they'll develop. 2nd round is borderline - those guys are treated like throw aways. -
Sure, but first rounders get guaranteed $. Not so with 2nd rounders.RoadDawg55 said:
There is still a fine line. A lot of first rounders are throwaways too. A guy like B-Roy made millions by staying and getting his chance to shine in college. Blake Griffin made millions by staying for his sophomore year. They still would have developed in the NBA had they left early, but it helped them to stay in college.BallSacked said:
The false assumption with these stay/go fan analysis is that staying in college another year is better for development than being in the NBA. It's not. Especially not these days.RoadDawg55 said:Murray is the real deal. Everyone gets caught up about who is ready for the draft, but hardly any college players are. Murray would need time in the NBA to develop, but Zach Lavine was a lottery pick. I doubt Murray would get taken that high, but he's better than Lavine.
Chriss is good, but he's raw as fuck. It would suck to lose him because he will wash out in the NBA without more seasoning. He fouls out every game. He's skilled and has a lot f talent, but it's not all there. It's hard not to be excited about him when you do see it though.
I like Dickerson a lot too. He's a 4 year player that has good natural skills. I think he could be a really good college player.
Players are limited by the NCAA on how much they can practice, they have to waste time staying academically eligible, the coaching is worse, the nutrition and S&C is worse, and when they do play/practice it's mostly against dreck (CBB really sucks). If a player has guaranteed money (eg first round) they should probably jump on it. They'll get paid and they'll develop. 2nd round is borderline - those guys are treated like throw aways.
I don't recall Roy's junior year - wasn't he a first round talent that surprisingly came back? If so, I doubt returning was a meaningful decision for him. Or that he would have developed into a lesser player if he had one less year of speshul coaching by Romar.
He got better draft position as a result of returning (maybe), but if he left he would have been making rookie money sooner and got to the 2nd/3rd contract payday sooner. Given how short his career was...that could have been better for him. -
It really is hard to say with sports psychology. Can a guy get beat up mentally, get discouraged by riding pine, and never develop to his potential as a result?BallSacked said:
Sure, but first rounders get guaranteed $. Not so with 2nd rounders.RoadDawg55 said:
There is still a fine line. A lot of first rounders are throwaways too. A guy like B-Roy made millions by staying and getting his chance to shine in college. Blake Griffin made millions by staying for his sophomore year. They still would have developed in the NBA had they left early, but it helped them to stay in college.BallSacked said:
The false assumption with these stay/go fan analysis is that staying in college another year is better for development than being in the NBA. It's not. Especially not these days.RoadDawg55 said:Murray is the real deal. Everyone gets caught up about who is ready for the draft, but hardly any college players are. Murray would need time in the NBA to develop, but Zach Lavine was a lottery pick. I doubt Murray would get taken that high, but he's better than Lavine.
Chriss is good, but he's raw as fuck. It would suck to lose him because he will wash out in the NBA without more seasoning. He fouls out every game. He's skilled and has a lot f talent, but it's not all there. It's hard not to be excited about him when you do see it though.
I like Dickerson a lot too. He's a 4 year player that has good natural skills. I think he could be a really good college player.
Players are limited by the NCAA on how much they can practice, they have to waste time staying academically eligible, the coaching is worse, the nutrition and S&C is worse, and when they do play/practice it's mostly against dreck (CBB really sucks). If a player has guaranteed money (eg first round) they should probably jump on it. They'll get paid and they'll develop. 2nd round is borderline - those guys are treated like throw aways.
I don't recall Roy's junior year - wasn't he a first round talent that surprisingly came back? If so, I doubt returning was a meaningful decision for him. Or that he would have developed into a lesser player if he had one less year of speshul coaching by Romar.
He got better draft position as a result of returning (maybe), but if he left he would have been making rookie money sooner and got to the 2nd/3rd contract payday sooner. Given how short his career was...that could have been better for him.
Maybe he stays, balls out while getting better, is now prepared to take his lumps at the next level and survive to the second contract.
I agree if you're a lock for round 1 you need to go, but seeing both Ross and Roy become lottery picks when they were fringe 1st rounders shows the benefit.
