San Antonio Spurs Big Board 1.0 for the 2020 NBA Draft

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/san-antonio-spurs-2020-nba-draft-big-board-1/

Who's too high? Who's too low?

I'll probably end up doing a handful of these as the draft approaches. It sounds like we'll get genuine measurements and some athletic testing at some point, which will cause movement on the Big Board.

[Robz4000]

:lmao Lamelo Ball

[DAF86]

It really sucks that the one time the Spurs get to draft on the lottery there aren't many great wing prospects out there.

Any of these combo guards would need to become all-stars for me to able to stomach their selections. On the other hand, if a guy like, let's say Patrick Williams or Saddiq Bey, becomes nothing more than Robert Covington types, I would be more than happy with them, tbh.

[rankingtear]

I think RJ Hampton at 10 is too high. No pull up game (7th percentile) and advance handle to be a lead guard. The jump from below average to above average in volume C&S jumpers (27th percentile) is too optimistic for him to be an effective off-ball guard.

I think Okoro at 14 is too low. He's a versatile defender and a high level finisher already. Only need to hit open C&S corner threes to be playable.

[ZeusWillJudge]

I think you're pretty dead-on with most of your observations. I also think that a lot of people don't understand a Big Board. You just ranked them by their value to the Spurs, without regard to who may or may not have already been picked. That way they just go down the list to find the Best Player Available (for the Spurs) when their turn comes up. The only problem I have is ranking, when you don't know what the Spurs strategy is going to be. Planning the best fit with the current roster is one thing; if they moved LMA and one of the youngs, for instance, the best fit would be totally different. We don't know any of that, so your list is pretty damn good. But I would really like to see them pick from the perspective of LMA being gone in a year or less.

I really want the Spurs to get a PG, and I was pretty high on Tyrese Halliburton. You said this about him: "My issue with Haliburton is I don’t truly believe he can be a full-time lead point guard." Sadly, I think you're right about that, and I was wrong. You also called Pokusevski "the ultimate gamble", and I think that's a perfect description. "He's got a 5% chance of being really good", which means he has a 95% chance of not being any better than most of the other guys on the list - but with a LOT more risk of never really being NBA-worthy.

The only thing I'd suggest is that I would swap Poku and Nesmith (10 & 11), so that if all of the first 10 players on your Big Board get taken first, the Spurs would pick the guy with an instant impact, (Which tells you how I feel about the level of risk on Poku, because there would always be 11 players above him on the list.) I think Bey will be better than most people here seem to believe, and that he's a pretty sensible pick at 11 - but that also depends on how the Spurs look in a year or two. All in all a pretty damn good list, with the assumption that the Spurs aren't going to make any other major roster moves.

[JuneJive]

All in all a pretty damn good list, with the assumption that the Spurs aren't going to make any other major roster moves.

This is the big question.

I hope they draft a player with a high ceiling.
Forget short term impact.

[ZeusWillJudge]

This is the big question.

I hope they draft a player with a high ceiling.
Forget short term impact.


A lot of people here feel that way. I'm clearly in the minority.

The thing people don't seem to be hearing is that I'm not talking about the "safe" picks because of the impact they will have in Year 1, so that the Spurs make the playoffs next season. I would like to see them go full-on youth movement this upcoming season and let those young guys get floor time, and get used to playing together. I would rather see them take one more year of serious rebuilding, and swing for the fence in a more top-heavy draft. If they played their cards right, they could take a shot in the draft next year, and also have a shot in the trade/FA market to pick up a bigger-impact player. You can't look at the draft in a vacuum.

[spurspl]

too high:
lamelo, rj hampton, hayes, kira lewis

too low:
avdija, smith, achiuwa

[Russ]

Good job timvp.

Of my two favorites, Okongwu and Avdija, you have one higher (Okongwu) and one (Avdija) lower than most mocks.

Hopefully, many GMs agree with you on Avdija.

[rankingtear]

The value of non-shooting, non-passing centers is plummeting. In these playoffs, such centers are finding it difficult to find their way onto the court — and that’s a pattern that is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

I can see one of Okongwu or Wiseman dropping to 11 , nobody in the top 10 except for the Wizards are looking for bigs. Golden State according to the Ringer would prioritize a wing so Lamelo might drop to Charlotte. Vassel and Pat are looking like top 10 picks.

[timvp]

I also think that a lot of people don't understand a Big Board. You just ranked them by their value to the Spurs, without regard to who may or may not have already been picked. That way they just go down the list to find the Best Player Available (for the Spurs) when their turn comes up.Yeah, I should have included this in the write-up. Good explanation of the purpose a Big Board :tu

[timvp]

I think RJ Hampton at 10 is too high. No pull up game (7th percentile) and advance handle to be a lead guard. The jump from below average to above average in volume C&S jumpers (27th percentile) is too optimistic for him to be an effective off-ball guard.

Before I took a deep dive on Hampton, I had him somewhere around ~20. His stats in Australia are really scary, including the numbers you pointed out.

The Spurs are known to be one of the better teams at developing players and if you're looking for a raw prospect to develop, Hampton is pretty high on that list. Extremely fast, great burst, good size at 6-foot-5, good touch, etc. And then when you factor in that he was basically a junior in high school who reclassified to a senior and then went pro all within a couple months -- his struggles in Australia are pretty understandable. Australia isn't a great league but they have a lot of former, old, desperate NBA-ish guys at the guard positions who didn't hesitate to beat him up.

Plus, Hampton only played like 300 minutes in Australia. I don't think it's wise to make any decisions based on a sample size that small. For example, Keldon Johnson played more minutes as a rookie and if we go by his numbers, we'd be counting on him to be a better version of Kawhi and we'd be celebrating his 100th percentile three-point jumper.

[pad300]

I'm fairly certain your percentage assesments of Poku are way off. Guys with his combination of (not-stiffness with size) + (feel for the game) + (skills) + (youth) only end out of the NBA if they get injured /off court stuff (eg. cocaine) or have absolutely no physical development from 18 onwards... IMO, there's a 75% chance of becoming at a minimum a bench big. 50% chance of becoming a started in the long term, and 10% chance he becomes a star.

[timvp]

IMO, there's a 75% chance of becoming at a minimum a bench big. 50% chance of becoming a started in the long term, and 10% chance he becomes a star.

It's possible that I'm selling Poku short but, then again, if you're percentages are accurate, he'd be a consensus top 5 or possibly top 3 pick in the draft. As it stands, Poku has a better chance of dropping to the second round than he does of cracking the top ten.

His tools are pretty amazing for his size -- but to draft him you'd have to be confident his frame can add 20 to 30 pounds and that he'd retain his same agility with the added weight. From there, you have to trust he's capable of improving his decision-making, his ability to absorb contact and his ball-handling when going against physical defenders. And even if all that falls in place, then you have to figure out how to play someone who is a guard on offense and a center on defense.

It's a difficult set of obstacles to overcome but, tbh, it'd be undeniably exciting if the Spurs draft him. Even a 5% chance of getting a star at 11 is pretty tempting. Would the Spurs do it? Probably not ... but then again, Samanic was an all-tools, high ceiling prospect last year and that didn't stop them.

[ZeusWillJudge]

Before I took a deep dive on Hampton, I had him somewhere around ~20. His stats in Australia are really scary, including the numbers you pointed out.

The Spurs are known to be one of the better teams at developing players and if you're looking for a raw prospect to develop, Hampton is pretty high on that list. Extremely fast, great burst, good size at 6-foot-5, good touch, etc. And then when you factor in that he was basically a junior in high school who reclassified to a senior and then went pro all within a couple months -- his struggles in Australia are pretty understandable. Australia isn't a great league but they have a lot of former, old, desperate NBA-ish guys at the guard positions who didn't hesitate to beat him up.

Hampton was a damn good high school player (Little Elm Bygod Texas) - everyone was sure he'd be playing NBA ball in a few years. I think re-classifying and going pro was a mistake. He should have gone to play for a top-tier college program that would have helped him develop. I wish I had watched him play last year, but I read that he had a disaster kind of year. When that happens the first year in college (and it does happen), the player just goes back for another year and establishes those stats.

A lot of hopefuls in the past have lied about their ages to look younger than they are, and get the advantage of playing against younger guys. I think Hampton just hit the perfect storm going the route he did. I'm not saying draft him, but if his confidence isn't shot I think he'll still be NBA-worthy. But it's a good bet that a year in the G-League with good coaching would make that a lot more likely. His plan of lighting it up overseas and coming back as a high lottery pick sort of went south on him. But if I was drafting for a team with a solid roster and a late first round pick, I would have to think about taking a shot.

[Dejounte]

Saw this article posted on reddit and damn... Didnt know they hated this website so much.

Looks like they really hated timvp's takes.

[timvp]

Saw this article posted on reddit and damn... Didnt know they hated this website so much.

Looks like they really hated timvp's takes.

Meh, everyone loves timvp. I don't see where the thread is but I assume it's because they don't know what a Big Board is and what it's for. Admittedly, I should have included ZeusWillJudge's explanation, especially because a Big Board hasn't been relevant to Spurs fans since 1989 when the debate was between Danny Ferry, Sean Elliott and Glen Rice.

[DAF86]

Hey timvp, what do you think the chances are of each of these combo guards, you have in your top 10, of being as good or better than Derrick White?

[Ignazzz]

Switch Ball with Avdija and mock is legit

[Seventyniner]

One possible argument in favor of Poku is that the Spurs might take him and hope that either he or Samanic pans out, and whichever one does becomes the starting 4 for the foreseeable future. If both pan out, that's a high-quality problem to have.

Of course, if Poku busts (independent of whether or not Samanic does) that's still a lot of opportunity cost lost on a #11 pick.

[lmbebo]

Thanks for write up. Just wish the draft would happen already ...

[R. DeMurre]

Poku's future sure looks bright in terms of possibilities. My guess is he'll be deemed too risky by lottery teams, and then wind up with an already talented team like Boston, Dallas, Denver, or Milwaukee, in which case he gets plenty of time to develop. Best case scenario for him.

[Sugus]

A lot of people here feel that way. I'm clearly in the minority.

The thing people don't seem to be hearing is that I'm not talking about the "safe" picks because of the impact they will have in Year 1, so that the Spurs make the playoffs next season. I would like to see them go full-on youth movement this upcoming season and let those young guys get floor time, and get used to playing together. I would rather see them take one more year of serious rebuilding, and swing for the fence in a more top-heavy draft. If they played their cards right, they could take a shot in the draft next year, and also have a shot in the trade/FA market to pick up a bigger-impact player. You can't look at the draft in a vacuum.

Exactly this. I don't necessarily want a low-ceiling prospect, but a ready-to-play one. I don't think any one prospect the Spurs could realistically take at #11 is such a game-changer as to drag them to the POs (especially if one or both of DD/LMA are shipped out, as they should be), so the smart move is to tank next season, take your high-ceiling prospect in next years' loaded class, and then you already have a supporting cast surrounding said prospect, composed of mostly if not all young players that can develop and grow together into a hopefully playoff-level core. Then, you take a swing at a FA star signing, which is the most difficult but also the piece that catapults you back to championship contention. That's a solid rebuild in my eyes.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I don't see where the thread is but I assume it's because they don't know what a Big Board is and what it's for.

Or, to slightly modify an old quote, if idiots were a power source, we could provide electricity for a major city with the posters from this site.

[FutureMan]

Too high: Hampton
too low: Wiseman
way too low: Avdija

[Mr. Body]

Saw this article posted on reddit and damn... Didnt know they hated this website so much.

Looks like they really hated timvp's takes.

Well, this site is extremely toxic and has never been cleaned up. Like, years after it should have been.

[Chinook]

Well, this site is extremely toxic and has never been cleaned up. Like, years after it should have been.

Nah, ST is fine. It's amazing how well folks get along here rather than in other forums that repress hostility so much. A lot of people who are used to heavy moderation have a low tolerance for certain things because when it comes up on their sites, it causes this big stir, with mods running in to ban posters, threads getting closed, warnings getting issued. A thread like that one about MKE protested would've been banned within a day on RGM for being "divisive" or "off-topic". Here it stayed around, folks who wanted to engage in it did so, those who didn't just used different threads, and everyone moved on with their lives.

Plus it feel so much better being able to go at posters here without fear of mods.

[rankingtear]

Before I took a deep dive on Hampton, I had him somewhere around ~20. His stats in Australia are really scary, including the numbers you pointed out.

The Spurs are known to be one of the better teams at developing players and if you're looking for a raw prospect to develop, Hampton is pretty high on that list. Extremely fast, great burst, good size at 6-foot-5, good touch, etc. And then when you factor in that he was basically a junior in high school who reclassified to a senior and then went pro all within a couple months -- his struggles in Australia are pretty understandable. Australia isn't a great league but they have a lot of former, old, desperate NBA-ish guys at the guard positions who didn't hesitate to beat him up.

Plus, Hampton only played like 300 minutes in Australia. I don't think it's wise to make any decisions based on a sample size that small. For example, Keldon Johnson played more minutes as a rookie and if we go by his numbers, we'd be counting on him to be a better version of Kawhi and we'd be celebrating his 100th percentile three-point jumper.

Yeah i see it, looks like a spurs type project pick. Young, skills relative to age, tools for defensive upside ( athleticism, point guard reflexes/instincts ), decision making, projectable shooting, outlier athleticism for his size. He's just been dropping so much lately that the touch might not be there. His NBL shooting percentage is in line with his highschool percentage, except for the FT% which got lower. No in between game, no mid range pull up, no floater. Just don't see how he contributes early on while he works on his shot profile, strength and defense.

[tbdog]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again? Or does the statastics are just too far in favour of shooting 3s?

[SpurPadre]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again? Or does the statastics are just too far in favour of shooting 3s?

In 5 years, we might be seeing 7 footers on the street begging for food or joining the circus.

[Russ]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again?

Depends on the TV ratings for the near term . . .

But over the long haul, it's hard to imagine the game of basketball in which really tall guys are not at the top of the heap.

And as far as ratings go, the slam-dunk contest has always gotten higher ratings than the 3-point contest.

[bluebellmaniac]

I'm fairly certain your percentage assesments of Poku are way off. Guys with his combination of (not-stiffness with size) + (feel for the game) + (skills) + (youth) only end out of the NBA if they get injured /off court stuff (eg. cocaine) or have absolutely no physical development from 18 onwards... IMO, there's a 75% chance of becoming at a minimum a bench big. 50% chance of becoming a started in the long term, and 10% chance he becomes a star.

135%. Sweet.

[DAF86]

135%. Sweet.

I don't think he meant for those % to be added up, tbh.

In his opinion, Poku has a 75% chance of being at least a bench player. 50% chance of being a starter. And 10% of being a star.

[pad300]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again? Or does the statastics are just too far in favour of shooting 3s?

Bigs still are a thing. The 3 of 4 quarter finalists this year - Jokic, Bam, Davis...

If you count KD as a big - he is 6'11" or so... they never went away.

[pad300]

135%. Sweet.

The definitions overlap...

[timvp]

Hey timvp, what do you think the chances are of each of these combo guards, you have in your top 10, of being as good or better than Derrick White?

Ball and Edwards will probably be Better than White. I'd give them both about a 60-70% chance (which is pretty low for the best two players in the draft -- but this is a really weak draft at the top). Haliburton and Vassell are probably both about 40-50%. Hampton is probably only around like 20% -- but his actual ceiling is really high. If we're talking ceilings, I'd say all those guys have a higher ceiling than White other than possibly Vassell.

But, I mean, I don't think having White should stop the Spurs from going after White-like players. How many White clones would you take on this team before you say the Spurs have too many? I'd probably take like five or six, tbh :lol

[timvp]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again? Or does the statastics are just too far in favour of shooting 3s?

That's a tough question. Logically, you'd think that centers becoming perimeter oriented is the future. In a perfect world, your center is big enough and skilled enough in the post to force the other team to put their best interior defender on him -- but then is also skilled enough on the perimeter to drag that aforementioned interior defender out to the three-point line. If you remove the other teams best interior defender, then your offense will find the sledding to be easy.

But, then again, once the next Shaq comes along, that could all go out of the window. In the Shaq era, teams had to carry at least two or three burly seven-footers or else he'd crush them. You drop Shaq into today's NBA and suddenly all the unemployed seven-foot brutes would find work again. And then there was Duncan, who always feasted on undersized bigs. Unskilled mountains like Diop were rosterable back then because they'd at least make Duncan work.

So, yeah, for now when there are literally no bigs in the league who can win a playoff game from the post, it's difficult to justify paying a traditional center even half of the MLE. That will probably change at some point but it's impossible to know if that will be in three years or thirty years.

[Robz4000]

Nah, ST is fine. It's amazing how well folks get along here rather than in other forums that repress hostility so much. A lot of people who are used to heavy moderation have a low tolerance for certain things because when it comes up on their sites, it causes this big stir, with mods running in to ban posters, threads getting closed, warnings getting issued. A thread like that one about MKE protested would've been banned within a day on RGM for being "divisive" or "off-topic". Here it stayed around, folks who wanted to engage in it did so, those who didn't just used different threads, and everyone moved on with their lives.

Plus it feel so much better being able to go at posters here without fear of mods.

It also feels like you get more genuine takes here. Other sites have much more of a mob-homerism mentality where everyone agrees with the same vanilla bullshit.

[Chinook]

It also feels like you get more genuine takes here. Other sites have much more of a mob-homerism mentality where everyone agrees with the same vanilla bullshit.

Yeah, and that's because folks are able to defend their takes and can hold the views publicly without worrying about being labeled a troll by an overly sensitive community. It also helps that the mods here don't flex very often. I've yet to see any of them try to direct conversation from the perspective of a mod, like trying to keep things on topic or whatever. If they want to close a thread or move something, they just do it. That not only makes folks feel freer, but it let's the forum police itself more than a place like RGM, where that's consider side-seat moderating and specifically not allowed.

All in all, so long as the spamming (both of threads and of posts in threads) is kept down and no one breaks the law, ST runs perfectly. Though I guess it would be nice if it didn't cut out so much.

[rjv]

It also feels like you get more genuine takes here. Other sites have much more of a mob-homerism mentality where everyone agrees with the same vanilla bullshit. i agree! go spurs!

[Dejounte]

It also feels like you get more genuine takes here. Other sites have much more of a mob-homerism mentality where everyone agrees with the same vanilla bullshit.

Spurstalk is not so far off ... You have plenty of people here taking timvp's scouting reports/ big board as if it's gospel and as if he's an expert ;)

[Robz4000]

Spurstalk is not so far off ... You have plenty of people here taking timvp's scouting reports/ big board as if it's gospel and as if he's an expert ;)

You also get a lot of people who ride him for his godawful takes when he makes them.

:lol saying the Grizz would beat the Spurs in 2013
:cry it still hurts :cry

[DAF86]

Ball and Edwards will probably be Better than White. I'd give them both about a 60-70% chance (which is pretty low for the best two players in the draft -- but this is a really weak draft at the top). Haliburton and Vassell are probably both about 40-50%. Hampton is probably only around like 20% -- but his actual ceiling is really high. If we're talking ceilings, I'd say all those guys have a higher ceiling than White other than possibly Vassell.

But, I mean, I don't think having White should stop the Spurs from going after White-like players. How many White clones would you take on this team before you say the Spurs have too many? I'd probably take like five or six, tbh :lol

Imho, Vassell is more of a wing (2, 3), than a combo guard (1, 2).

And regarding how many Whites I would be cool with, that's what I'm trying to figure out, tbh. Is it really worth it to draft another White having so many other folks at that position? If you tell me we would be drafting the next Lillard, then I'm all for it, but another very good, not quite all-star, guard? I don't know man.

I would undoubtedly be cool with another White lite player at the forward position though. Another White at guard doesn't move the needle much. A White at Forward? That's a game changer, imho. That's why I'm so against drafting a combo guard. The player would need to be an all-star to make a difference, while a solid role player at forward would be enough to elevate this team's ceiling a couple levels, imho.

[BacktoBasics]

That's a tough question. Logically, you'd think that centers becoming perimeter oriented is the future. In a perfect world, your center is big enough and skilled enough in the post to force the other team to put their best interior defender on him -- but then is also skilled enough on the perimeter to drag that aforementioned interior defender out to the three-point line. If you remove the other teams best interior defender, then your offense will find the sledding to be easy.

But, then again, once the next Shaq comes along, that could all go out of the window. In the Shaq era, teams had to carry at least two or three burly seven-footers or else he'd crush them. You drop Shaq into today's NBA and suddenly all the unemployed seven-foot brutes would find work again. And then there was Duncan, who always feasted on undersized bigs. Unskilled mountains like Diop were rosterable back then because they'd at least make Duncan work.

So, yeah, for now when there are literally no bigs in the league who can win a playoff game from the post, it's difficult to justify paying a traditional center even half of the MLE. That will probably change at some point but it's impossible to know if that will be in three years or thirty years.
It’ll also depend on whether or not the league takes a step back to allowing physicality and defense again. Even just a small step back in that direction would bring a ton of value to bigs.

I wonder if there’s a point of diminishing returns where this game ends up becoming a street ball game that largely consisting of a FT shooting contest in between the fewer and fewer moments of unguarded offense. All this soccer flopping and ticky tack shit gets old. Neutering the physicality of the game is/was a huge contributing factor to the decline of bigs.

[BackHome]

Yeah the full swing to 3 pointers really neutered the game I miss the old days where people could guard people and bigs where still valuable.

[The Truth #6]

Physicality is tricky. It’s super soft on the perimeter with weak fouls for sure. But in the interior...it is basically no blood/no foul, right?

[tbdog]

That's a tough question. Logically, you'd think that centers becoming perimeter oriented is the future. In a perfect world, your center is big enough and skilled enough in the post to force the other team to put their best interior defender on him -- but then is also skilled enough on the perimeter to drag that aforementioned interior defender out to the three-point line. If you remove the other teams best interior defender, then your offense will find the sledding to be easy.

But, then again, once the next Shaq comes along, that could all go out of the window. In the Shaq era, teams had to carry at least two or three burly seven-footers or else he'd crush them. You drop Shaq into today's NBA and suddenly all the unemployed seven-foot brutes would find work again. And then there was Duncan, who always feasted on undersized bigs. Unskilled mountains like Diop were rosterable back then because they'd at least make Duncan work.

So, yeah, for now when there are literally no bigs in the league who can win a playoff game from the post, it's difficult to justify paying a traditional center even half of the MLE. That will probably change at some point but it's impossible to know if that will be in three years or thirty years.

Embid is that big you describe and yet we know what happened there. I'm talking rule changes. Imagine you couldn't arm check a big in the post lol.

[tbdog]

Yeah the full swing to 3 pointers really neutered the game I miss the old days where people could guard people and bigs where still valuable.

I just missed when teams had their own style. The way the Pistons and Spurs played was different to the Kings, Mavs, and Suns. It made coaching in particular more important. A lot of chest being played. Pgs were also important at controlling the pace. That's what I missed the most.

[PhantomDashCam]

https://www.spurstalk.com/san-antonio-spurs-2020-nba-draft-big-board-1/

Who's too high? Who's too low?

I'll probably end up doing a handful of these as the draft approaches. It sounds like we'll get genuine measurements and some athletic testing at some point, which will cause movement on the Big Board.

timvp would love to see your updated Big Board which I’m sure your’e working on.

9 of the top 10 picks seem almost universal now, with in no particular order:
Ball, Wiseman, Edwards, Okungwu, Avdija, Toppin, Okoro, Hayes, Haliburton.

[DPG21920]

I think you have Wiseman too low based on where I believe SA will actually have him.

[R. DeMurre]

Do you think that over time, in the next 5 years, that rules will change again and bigs will become a thing again? Or does the statastics are just too far in favour of shooting 3s?


In 5 years, we might be seeing 7 footers on the street begging for food or joining the circus.


One simple adjustment that could help would be adopting the Euroleague and FIBA rule of letting players touch the ball in the cylinder after it has hit the rim. This would bring more value to both offensive and defensive rebounders.