Zaccharie Risacher - 2024 NBA Draft Prospect

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/zaccharie-risacher-spurs-draft-deep-dive/

[Uriel]

I'd still take him at #4. Even if he never becomes an all-star, he fits this team like a glove. He has the skillset as a 3-and-D wing that this team desperately needs and fits our other pieces perfectly.

[JPB]

https://www.spurstalk.com/zaccharie-risacher-spurs-draft-deep-dive/


"First of all, according to all of the analytic models I’ve seen behind the scenes, Risacher grades out as a second round pick"

This one is not gonna age well.

What those "analytics models behind the scenes" don't factor in, and that's their limits, is context.

Risacher wasn't the top dog in a College team, he was a 19 old kid in a pro, competitive team playing for a ship and Eurocup title, filled with higher paid american guys asked to justify their salary. This is not wemby and the Mets build to showcase him.

It's is notable than when asked to take more resposabilites in the PO, Risacher stepped up his game, became more agrressive and in 7 games posted 15.1pt, 7.4 rebounds, 52% (38% on 3). He defintely cleared, or let say made scouts less worried about some issues you could have with him, notably rebounding.

Now he's still not a playmaker and will have to work on his FT routine and mechanics that's for sure. But he wouldn't be asked to be a playmaker with the spurs.

[Pauleta14]

He fits but his ceiling is as a role player which makes it weird for a lottery pick

He'll be gone at 4 anyway so it'll be aother team's headache

[Ariel]

He's not 6'10", he's a hair under 6'8" (2.03m) according to the official site of the French league (https://www.lnb.fr/elite/joueur/?id=6612)and the FIBA site (https://www.fiba.basketball/en/player/300463/Zaccharie-Risacher)

As for the concerns about his ceiling, it's true that there isn't any aspect of him that screams star and he struggles handling the ball in traffic, but this is an especially rough class at the top where nobody is without huge question marks, at least in his case he checks a few key boxes (can shoot, can defend, can pass a bit, has positional size, good sample of competitive games) and that's more than enough to get him in the lottery. How high he is projected is more of a reflection on everyone else, but even if he's a French Cam Johnson that is both better than most lottery prospects and better than the Spurs currently have, so it'd be hard to pass on him if he's available at 4. But yes, he isn't the kind of guy you overpay to go get.

PS: anyone who complains about Risacher's risks, go take a look at Salaun's tape and then get back to me... :oops

[Pauleta14]

This one is not gonna age well.

What those "analytics models behind the scenes" don't factor in, and that's their limits, is context.

Risacher wasn't the top dog in a College team, he was a 19 old kid in a pro, competitive team playing for a ship and Eurocup title, filled with higher paid american guys asked to justify their salary. This is not wemby and the Mets build to showcase him.

It's is notable than when asked to take more resposabilites in the PO, Risacher stepped up his game, became more agrressive and in 7 games posted 15.1pt, 7.4 rebounds, 52% (38% on 3). He defintely cleared, or let say made scouts less worried about some issues you could have with him, notably rebounding.

Now he's still not a playmaker and will have to work on his FT routine and mechanics that's for sure. But he wouldn't be asked to be a playmaker with the spurs.

That's a very good point espacially considering players like Topic who's the extrem opp case

What I'm wondering tho is how would you showcase his game considering he's not a go to guy?

I think his ceiling is a (very good) role player and will need to have expectations managed by whatever team who drafts him.

[JPB]

And to sum up the article:

- "Risacher might be a multi-positional, multi-skilled players."

- "he’s a really good perimeter defender and looks like he could step into the league and be a plus defender from Day 1."

- "Offensively, Risacher was a knockdown shooter for a majority of the season"

- "The 19-year-old is outstanding in transition"

- "Even though he was young, Risacher exhibited a lot of maturity this season.
-
"in the French league. He played a winning role and rarely tried to do too much."

"In the playoffs, he stepped up in a big way and it was clear that he’s a tall, talented prospect who may one day be a very good player in the NBA."

But...

analytics behind the screens, say he's a second rouncer...

[spursparker9]

So he is a walmart Michael Porter Jr

[Vienna]

He's not 6'10", he's a hair under 6'8" (2.03m) according to the official site of the French league (https://www.lnb.fr/elite/joueur/?id=6612)and the FIBA site (https://www.fiba.basketball/en/player/300463/Zaccharie-Risacher)

As for the concerns about his ceiling, it's true that there isn't any aspect of him that screams star and he struggles handling the ball in traffic, but this is an especially rough class at the top where nobody is without huge question marks, at least in his case he checks a few key boxes (can shoot, can defend, can pass a bit, has positional size, good sample of competitive games) and that's more than enough to get him in the lottery. How high he is projected is more of a reflection on everyone else, but even if he's a French Cam Johnson that is both better than most lottery prospects and better than the Spurs currently have, so it'd be hard to pass on him if he's available at 4. But yes, he isn't the kind of guy you overpay to go get.

PS: anyone who complains about Risacher's risks, go take a look at Salaun's tape and then get back to me... :oops

where does this come from, that you think Risacher is smaller than the latest listings? I mean, just look at him now and you see he is meanwhile taller than 6'8". might have been numbers from last year or whatever.
the Euroleague site this season had him at 6'9".
look at the team picture from the euroleague site and tell me this kid is under 6'8"...
(guy next to him is listed 6'6.5", the number 34 is listed 6'8" and the number 11 is listed 6'11")
Mincidelice JL Bourg en Bresse Roster | EuroCup (euroleaguebasketball.net) (https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/de/eurocup/teams/mincidelice-jl-bourg-en-bresse/roster/bou/)

[BatManu20]

He's a Wizard I fear.

1796649532731650307

[Bruno]

Youth basketball doesn't work like in France like in the USA. When a young player is really good, he plays against older players instead of dominating player of his age. When Risacher was 15/16 years old, he was playing in an U21 team. At 17 years, old, he started to play with adults. He was never asked to carry offensively these teams unlike most American prospects in high school.

Doubts are legit about Risacher end up as a role player in the NBA. His self creation is quite poor. My point is that a reason why his development is late in that area is how French youth basketball is structured.

[CorrectCrusader]

Zach is a 100x better Julian Champagnie

[Extra Stout]

There is some burying the lede in these articles. Risacher, slated to go around #2, grades out in some analytical model as a second-round pick. Stephon Castle, slated to go around #4, grades out as a mid- to late-first round pick.

Are there ANY players that grade out as lottery picks? Does Reed Sheppard, whose analytics are supposedly off the charts? And if he does, what the fuck is wrong with the Spurs if they don’t like him because he isn’t big enough? Doesn’t that suggest they are are inflexible front office in love with some archetype of player that may not actually be available, and willing to ignore elite talent to shoot craps to get it?

[mo7888]

There is some burying the lede in these articles. Risacher, slated to go around #2, grades out in some analytical model as a second-round pick. Stephon Castle, slated to go around #4, grades out as a mid- to late-first round pick.

Are there ANY players that grade out as lottery picks? Does Reed Sheppard, whose analytics are supposedly off the charts? And if he does, what the fuck is wrong with the Spurs if they don’t like him because he isn’t big enough? Doesn’t that suggest they are are inflexible front office in love with some archetype of player that may not actually be available, and willing to ignore elite talent to shoot craps to get it?

Sheppard grades out high... and we have no idea if the Spurs like him or not... he could be at the top of their board or not.... nobody here knows how the Spurs view this draft.

[Extra Stout]

Sheppard grades out high... and we have no idea if the Spurs like him or not... he could be at the top of their board or not.... nobody here knows how the Spurs view this draft.
That the Spurs prioritize “positionless” basketball with taller, multi-skilled players is not a mystery. They want a defense where they can switch on every screen. We’ve heard it directly from the horse’s mouth for years. It’s why they draft guys like Sochan and take flyers on guys like Primo. It’s why they would lean towards a guy like Castle and cross their fingers his shooting would come around.

Every team has an analytics department. The difference among teams is how much influence they have on decision-making.

I’m not saying the Spurs definitely think this way, because ultimately I don’t know. But if Sheppard grades out that high, and he and Castle are both on the board at 4, and the Spurs select the guy who grades out much lower because he fits their model, then I think we’d have definitive evidence that the Spurs have a bad front office. And so would Wemby.

[Extra Stout]

The Rockets may bail the Spurs out of being exposed in their decision-making by taking Sheppard at 3. I hear they view him hyperbolically.

[baseline bum]

Funny reading these scouting reports that make everyone but Sarr sound like shitty picks. Tanked the season with Point Sochan and Point Bran Ham for this bullshit. :lol

[Mr. Body]

Zach is a 100x better Julian Champagnie

Doubt.

[Mr. Body]

This is a player whose fit will matter a lot. If he goes to Atlanta, he'll get shots from deep. If he goes to Washington, we'll never hear from him again.

Bust potential is probably similar to anyone else in this draft. His top end is very unlikely and I'm not even sure how good that is. Klay Thompson? I doubt it. By far most likely we'll see a bang average player.

Pathways to success involve vastly improving his ball-handling under any duress, processing, shake, ability to attack close-outs. You also want him to rebound much more. Hopefully improve the defense, where he's good on-ball but not great elsewhere.

Some of those items he'll improve. The rest... I'm not sure. The poor rebounding, the awful inability to pass or read the floor, the uselessness when he has to do anything with the ball and the basket isn't right in front of him. Scary is how he's not really knock-down as a shooter, although maybe he becomes one.

I hope he goes to Atlanta or Washington. Definitely don't want to trade up for him. I would take him around 8, expect that we would take him at 4, but expect we're all going to be extremely frustrated with him before long.

[The Truth #6]

We still need self creation on offense from somewhere, hopefully sooner than later. If we get Risacher next year and don't fix that deficiency, could be a lot of frustration next year. So, Risacher could work in context I suppose. But he probably won't be much better than Champagne next year.

[Extra Stout]

We still need self creation on offense from somewhere, hopefully sooner than later. If we get Risacher next year and don't fix that deficiency, could be a lot of frustration next year. So, Risacher could work in context I suppose. But he probably won't be much better than Champagne next year.
The Spurs need (1) self-creation, (2) shooting, and (3) defense. Risacher provides some of 2 and 3, but not 1. Sheppard provides 2, some of 1, and maybe some of 3, except that he’s small and might get hunted. Castle provides 3, some of 1, but not 2. Dillingham provides 1 and 2, but is really bad at 3. Holland, Salaun, Buzelis, and Williams are all projects. Carter provides some of all 3, but has a low ceiling.

It’s a shaky draft.

[Ariel]

where does this come from, that you think Risacher is smaller than the latest listings? I mean, just look at him now and you see he is meanwhile taller than 6'8". might have been numbers from last year or whatever.
the Euroleague site this season had him at 6'9".
look at the team picture from the euroleague site and tell me this kid is under 6'8"...
(guy next to him is listed 6'6.5", the number 34 is listed 6'8" and the number 11 is listed 6'11")
Mincidelice JL Bourg en Bresse Roster | EuroCup (euroleaguebasketball.net) (https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/de/eurocup/teams/mincidelice-jl-bourg-en-bresse/roster/bou/)
That is the picture you mention:
https://i.postimg.cc/MZ5wm2M2/bourg.jpg
and these are their listed heights (at team's site first, then LNB site)
#: PLAYER, Bourg site / LNB site
20: Jeremy Morgan, 2.00m / 1.96m
34: Kevin Kokila, 2.04m / 2.04m
11: Bodian Massa, 2.10m / 2.08m
3: Maksim Salash, 2.07m / 2.06m

So yeah, it seems you're right... growth spurt?

[Pauleta14]

That the Spurs prioritize “positionless” basketball with taller, multi-skilled players is not a mystery. They want a defense where they can switch on every screen. We’ve heard it directly from the horse’s mouth for years. It’s why they draft guys like Sochan and take flyers on guys like Primo. It’s why they would lean towards a guy like Castle and cross their fingers his shooting would come around.

Every team has an analytics department. The difference among teams is how much influence they have on decision-making.

I’m not saying the Spurs definitely think this way, because ultimately I don’t know. But if Sheppard grades out that high, and he and Castle are both on the board at 4, and the Spurs select the guy who grades out much lower because he fits their model, then I think we’d have definitive evidence that the Spurs have a bad front office. And so would Wemby.

What if the guy who grades out much lower ends up having a better career?

It's not as if it doesn't happen evey year...

(point is there are too many factors others than analytics that influence a career that we or any FO don't know yet)

[Ariel]

This is a player whose fit will matter a lot. If he goes to Atlanta, he'll get shots from deep. If he goes to Washington, we'll never hear from him again.

Bust potential is probably similar to anyone else in this draft. His top end is very unlikely and I'm not even sure how good that is. Klay Thompson? I doubt it. By far most likely we'll see a bang average player.

Pathways to success involve vastly improving his ball-handling under any duress, processing, shake, ability to attack close-outs. You also want him to rebound much more. Hopefully improve the defense, where he's good on-ball but not great elsewhere.

Some of those items he'll improve. The rest... I'm not sure. The poor rebounding, the awful inability to pass or read the floor, the uselessness when he has to do anything with the ball and the basket isn't right in front of him. Scary is how he's not really knock-down as a shooter, although maybe he becomes one.

I hope he goes to Atlanta or Washington. Definitely don't want to trade up for him. I would take him around 8, expect that we would take him at 4, but expect we're all going to be extremely frustrated with him before long.
That's too rough a description, I do think he can attack close outs, pass and make good reads, also put the ball on the floor a bit especially in transition. If the defense is set, then yes, you cannot give him the ball and expect him to create, his handle isn't tight and probably it ends in a turnover. But it should be noted that the spacing is worse than he'll find in the NBA and that won't be his role either, I'm more concerned with how his defense translates and just how good his shot actually is. If I buy these 2, then I'm not so worried about the present self creation issues, you need guys who will be efficient off ball and he seems like a very good fit there. Honestly, I find it kind of ironic that so much fuss is made about the lack of self creation for a 6'9" wing, but not for a 6'2" point guard (not you specifically).

[Mr. Body]

We still need self creation on offense from somewhere, hopefully sooner than later. If we get Risacher next year and don't fix that deficiency, could be a lot of frustration next year. So, Risacher could work in context I suppose. But he probably won't be much better than Champagne next year.

I don't think he's ever much better than Champagnie, that's how awkward I think Risacher is as a fit. If we get frustrated with Keldon for not being able to make reads other than barreling into the lane, that's Risacher, but with even less self-creation. Keldon can actually attack close-outs, Risacher doesn't really. If there's a second defender around him, he's toast. Forget about kicking the ball out to a shooter.

[Mr. Body]

That's too rough a description, I do think he can attack close outs, pass and make good reads, also put the ball on the floor a bit especially in transition. If the defense is set, then yes, you cannot give him the ball and expect him to create, his handle isn't tight and probably it ends in a turnover. But it should be noted that the spacing is worse than he'll find in the NBA and that won't be his role either, I'm more concerned with how his defense translates and just how good his shot actually is. If I buy these 2, then I'm not so worried about the present self creation issues, you need guys who will be efficient off ball and he seems like a very good fit there. Honestly, I find it kind of ironic that so much fuss is made about the lack of self creation for a 6'9" wing, but not for a 6'2" point guard (not you specifically).

He's actually terrible attacking close-outs. If he gets a straight-line to the hoop, then he's great. He can get over defenders. If he has to do moves of any more complexity, it's (so far) a lost cause. There's a reason he has around a .500 assist/turnover ratio. He doesn't see anything when he has to make these moves, doesn't see help defenders, doesn't see his outlets.

He really is a guy you stick in the corner and he's great at relocating along the perimeter. He's good at cutting. But he's going to be a mess in the Spurs' motion offense, which is trying to get back to the beautiful game. He can't do that stuff. Maybe down the line, but there's not much rudimentary ability at this point. Maybe he works if you're just going to run the equivalent of 4 down for Wemby over and over where everyone's just watching him do his stuff and kicks out if he's in trouble.

[DAF86]

He's actually terrible attacking close-outs. If he gets a straight-line to the hoop, then he's great. He can get over defenders. If he has to do moves of any more complexity, it's (so far) a lost cause. There's a reason he has around a .500 assist/turnover ratio. He doesn't see anything when he has to make these moves, doesn't see help defenders, doesn't see his outlets.

He really is a guy you stick in the corner and he's great at relocating along the perimeter. He's good at cutting. But he's going to be a mess in the Spurs' motion offense, which is trying to get back to the beautiful game. He can't do that stuff. Maybe down the line, but there's not much rudimentary ability at this point. Maybe he works if you're just going to run the equivalent of 4 down for Wemby over and over where everyone's just watching him do his stuff and kicks out if he's in trouble.

Danny Green did just fine in that offense, tbh.

[mo7888]

That the Spurs prioritize “positionless” basketball with taller, multi-skilled players is not a mystery. They want a defense where they can switch on every screen. We’ve heard it directly from the horse’s mouth for years. It’s why they draft guys like Sochan and take flyers on guys like Primo. It’s why they would lean towards a guy like Castle and cross their fingers his shooting would come around.

Every team has an analytics department. The difference among teams is how much influence they have on decision-making.

I’m not saying the Spurs definitely think this way, because ultimately I don’t know. But if Sheppard grades out that high, and he and Castle are both on the board at 4, and the Spurs select the guy who grades out much lower because he fits their model, then I think we’d have definitive evidence that the Spurs have a bad front office. And so would Wemby.

That would be pretty strong evidence. I have Sheppard slightly higher on my board, but I don't expect them both to be there at #4.

[DPG21920]

My main take away isnt about Risacher specifically but this point: It’s a scary draft with a lot of flawed players.

I’m not trading up using 4+8 in this draft but I am fine moving up if cost is low elsewhere (maybe using 4+CHA pick+2nd type deal). But bigger point is I think Im landing on Castle+Reed or Reed+Holland as my favorite combos.

Reed because in a draft with dudes with a lot of flaws and limited star power, his shooting is something you know for sure is maybe the highest end skill in this draft. His shooting numbers are truly next level and there’s something to that. Plus he seems like a guy who processed the game well which is harder to teach.

Castle is obvious as to why SA would like him too but same as Risacher I think Castle has more bust *potential* than meets the eye. But I still really like him overall in this draft.

Holland to me is the risk/reward guy to where if you are in a draft with guys with tons of flaws anyways, and you have two picks, why not take the guy with greater upside if you are getting a flawed player anyways.


Would be happy if Risacher fell to 4 and completely fine with that pick, but I hope SA doesnt move up aggressively for him unless they really really love him obviously

[mo7888]

My main take away isnt about Risacher specifically but this point: It’s a scary draft with a lot of flawed players.

I’m not trading up using 4+8 in this draft but I am fine moving up if cost is low elsewhere (maybe using 4+CHA pick+2nd type deal). But bigger point is I think Im landing on Castle+Reed or Reed+Holland as my favorite combos.

Reed because in a draft with dudes with a lot of flaws and limited star power, his shooting is something you know for sure is maybe the highest end skill in this draft. His shooting numbers are truly next level and there’s something to that. Plus he seems like a guy who processed the game well which is harder to teach.

Castle is obvious as to why SA would like him too but same as Risacher I think Castle has more bust *potential* than meets the eye. But I still really like him overall in this draft.

Holland to me is the risk/reward guy to where if you are in a draft with guys with tons of flaws anyways, and you have two picks, why not take the guy with greater upside if you are getting a flawed player anyways.


Would be happy if Risacher fell to 4 and completely fine with that pick, but I hope SA doesnt move up aggressively for him unless they really really love him obviously

I'm pretty much leaning the same way with the exception of Holland. I'd only move up with cha or 2nds, but I might be willing to move back in certain scenarios though. More shots at having something hit in a flat and flawed draft.

[The Truth #6]

The Spurs need (1) self-creation, (2) shooting, and (3) defense. Risacher provides some of 2 and 3, but not 1. Sheppard provides 2, some of 1, and maybe some of 3, except that he’s small and might get hunted. Castle provides 3, some of 1, but not 2. Dillingham provides 1 and 2, but is really bad at 3. Holland, Salaun, Buzelis, and Williams are all projects. Carter provides some of all 3, but has a low ceiling.

It’s a shaky draft.

For sure. I agree. I'd take Dillingham over Risacher but there's problems all around with these guys. Dill on offense could make other players better so I am intrigued by that, and it could make my viewing experience somewhat better. But total projects seem like a bad idea if they've never shown anything. Just rambling...

[spurraider21]

sprint to the podium if he's there at 4

or send 5 second round picks to move up 2 spots

[Mr. Body]

Danny Green did just fine in that offense, tbh.

Point taken, but Green became a superior defender and shooter and we got him for free. It's hard to get excited about this guy at #4.

[Extra Stout]

Point taken, but Green became a superior defender and shooter and we got him for free. It's hard to get excited about this guy at #4.
It’s hard to get excited about any of these guys at #4.

[Mr. Body]

It’s hard to get excited about any of these guys at #4.

I'd be pumped to get Castle or Dillingham. My fear is bad franchises are going to wise up.

[DAF86]

Point taken, but Green became a superior defender and shooter and we got him for free. It's hard to get excited about this guy at #4.

If I was assured to get a Danny Green type player, I would select him at #4 without thinking twice in this draft, tbh.

[BatManu20]

I'd be pumped to get Castle or Dillingham. My fear is bad franchises are going to wise up.

Same. I'd be happy with either or, or really excited to get both. Starting to think we'll be lucky to get one of them though. Seen some chatter on twitter the past couple days about Castle going 3 to HOU (doesn't make sense given their current roster, but if they seem as BPA then who knows) or the Rockets trading that pick to a team that wants Castle. I also don't think Dillingham will still be there at 8, personally.

[exstatic]

The Spurs need (1) self-creation, (2) shooting, and (3) defense. Risacher provides some of 2 and 3, but not 1. Sheppard provides 2, some of 1, and maybe some of 3, except that he’s small and might get hunted. Castle provides 3, some of 1, but not 2. Dillingham provides 1 and 2, but is really bad at 3. Holland, Salaun, Buzelis, and Williams are all projects. Carter provides some of all 3, but has a low ceiling.

It’s a shaky draft.

That’s a really good assessment. It also the reason I don’t want to trade up. In a draft with a flat top, we have a better shot at hitting something with two pulls on the slot machine.

[exstatic]

I'd be pumped to get Castle or Dillingham. My fear is bad franchises are going to wise up.

I think teams are running scared of and reacting to Victor, and that Sarr, Clingan and Risacher in some order, will be the first 3 picks.

I also think at LEAST one PG will be picked 5-7, although it may not be the original owner of the pick.

[mo7888]

I think teams are running scared of and reacting to Victor, and that Sarr, Clingan and Risacher in some order, will be the first 3 picks.

I'd LOVE that. If Clingan goes top 3 it really enhances our picks.

[Mr. Body]

Same. I'd be happy with either or, or really excited to get both. Starting to think we'll be lucky to get one of them though. Seen some chatter on twitter the past couple days about Castle going 3 to HOU (doesn't make sense given their current roster, but if they seem as BPA then who knows) or the Rockets trading that pick to a team that wants Castle. I also don't think Dillingham will still be there at 8, personally.

I'm a bit scared of Castle to the Rockets. Their defense is already so good with these mismatched parts. To me, that's their best move, after trading the pick. They can figure things out as they go and they still get Brooklyn's picks the next three years, which is nasty. (Two of them swaps.) I still think we're ahead of them because of Wemby, but they are a bit filthy with options. Need to make larger decisions on who to move and when, but they're up there.

I do think players get kind of sticky on draft boards. The 'consensus' is pretty solid right now for Sarr/Risacher as the top two. No owner or fanbase is going to let a GM stray too far from conventional wisdom. Right now Dillingham has dropped and will stay down there, but all it takes is Detroit to realize, "Hey, we need a guy who can fill up the basket, period," and he's gone. As you say, Castle could be grabbed high.

[SouthernFryd]

Please God...hurry up with that f'ing draft.

Amen.

[exstatic]

I'd LOVE that. If Clingan goes top 3 it really enhances our picks.

Sarr, while more athletic, is far less developed and would take a couple of seasons to be as good as Clingan is now, if he develops at all. People are sleeping on Clingan. He played extremely well in a motion offense system. Will he be a star? Probably not, but he’ll likely be a very solid 10-12 year starter. His bust potential is low, and there are teams that are afraid of busts more than they want stars. Sarr has some more upside, but higher bust potential.

[exstatic]

I'm a bit scared of Castle to the Rockets. Their defense is already so good with these mismatched parts. To me, that's their best move, after trading the pick. They can figure things out as they go and they still get Brooklyn's picks the next three years, which is nasty. (Two of them swaps.) I still think we're ahead of them because of Wemby, but they are a bit filthy with options. Need to make larger decisions on who to move and when, but they're up there.

I do think players get kind of sticky on draft boards. The 'consensus' is pretty solid right now for Sarr/Risacher as the top two. No owner or fanbase is going to let a GM stray too far from conventional wisdom. Right now Dillingham has dropped and will stay down there, but all it takes is Detroit to realize, "Hey, we need a guy who can fill up the basket, period," and he's gone. As you say, Castle could be grabbed high.

Their defense drastically improved when Sengün was injured, Smith moved to center, and Amen basically played wing or maybe PF. If Sengün plugs back in, you’re back to Amen at point, which is non-optimal, and where do you play Castle?

[spurraider21]

I'm a bit scared of Castle to the Rockets. Their defense is already so good with these mismatched parts. To me, that's their best move, after trading the pick. They can figure things out as they go and they still get Brooklyn's picks the next three years, which is nasty. (Two of them swaps.) I still think we're ahead of them because of Wemby, but they are a bit filthy with options. Need to make larger decisions on who to move and when, but they're up there.

I do think players get kind of sticky on draft boards. The 'consensus' is pretty solid right now for Sarr/Risacher as the top two. No owner or fanbase is going to let a GM stray too far from conventional wisdom. Right now Dillingham has dropped and will stay down there, but all it takes is Detroit to realize, "Hey, we need a guy who can fill up the basket, period," and he's gone. As you say, Castle could be grabbed high.
Rockets are in a pretty good position in this draft tbh. they already have a pretty good outline of a team even if all the parts dont quite fit yet. Thompson/Smith/Green all looked better without Sengun, since despite Sengun's playmaking, he's not a floor spacer. removing Sengun and starting Jabari at center opened up space to allow Thompson to thrive as a forward. so some parts they are clunky, but they are probably in the market for more connector types who can contribute on defense... Castle/Sheppard both fit the bill. and if risacher falls, thats just another athletic floor spacer for them who could eventually take Brooks' spot in the lineup.

i think the only foreseeable way they botch this would be to take Clingan or Topic or somethin

[LeBowen]

I'm a bit scared of Castle to the Rockets. Their defense is already so good with these mismatched parts. To me, that's their best move, after trading the pick. They can figure things out as they go and they still get Brooklyn's picks the next three years, which is nasty. (Two of them swaps.) I still think we're ahead of them because of Wemby, but they are a bit filthy with options. Need to make larger decisions on who to move and when, but they're up there.

I do think players get kind of sticky on draft boards. The 'consensus' is pretty solid right now for Sarr/Risacher as the top two. No owner or fanbase is going to let a GM stray too far from conventional wisdom. Right now Dillingham has dropped and will stay down there, but all it takes is Detroit to realize, "Hey, we need a guy who can fill up the basket, period," and he's gone. As you say, Castle could be grabbed high.

If Dillingham is the real deal, I'd be more scared of Rockets drafting him than adding even more defense with Castle.
They got all the defense they need on the wings with Jabari, Whitmore, Tari and Amen. Brooks is also there for the foreseeable future.
Castle would be redundant unless they move some of those guys in a trade for a star.
Dillingham would be a perfect fit to take over from FVV and he wouldn't have the pressure to deliver right away.

Dillingham looks ridiculously skilled and I wouldn't mind PATFO picking him, but I don't think he'd be a positive contributor as a starter right away and I also don't think Tre is good enough to start.
Hence my Keldon, Tre, FRP for DJ proposal in that other topic.
Would work both short and long term.

[DPG21920]

I'm pretty much leaning the same way with the exception of Holland. I'd only move up with cha or 2nds, but I might be willing to move back in certain scenarios though. More shots at having something hit in a flat and flawed draft.

I get that Holland is divisive but I will ask; if people are so confident of Risacher in top 4, what’s the risk of Holland? I mean, Risacher has flaws and it’s not like you are passing up on an all world talent on paper (of course things happen post draft and you get all stars out of no where too). If Risacher is a good rotation player but not a star, is missing out on that some death blow?

Nope. Holland at least pops in so many areas. He has a ton of scary questions (processing speed on team defense, shooting etc..) but it’s hard to deny how he looks when things are going well and what he does well too.

To me it’s less scary due to opportunity cost; taking a swing on Holland is not at the expense of some can’t miss safer all star type.

[LeBowen]

I get that Holland is divisive but I will ask; if people are so confident of Risacher in top 4, what’s the risk of Holland? I mean, Risacher has flaws and it’s not like you are passing up on an all world talent on paper (of course things happen post draft and you get all stars out of no where too). If Risacher is a good rotation player but not a star, is missing out on that some death blow?

Nope. Holland at least pops in so many areas. He has a ton of scary questions (processing speed on team defense, shooting etc..) but it’s hard to deny how he looks when things are going well and what he does well too.

To me it’s less scary due to opportunity cost; taking a swing on Holland is not at the expense of some can’t miss safer all star type.

It's always about 3pt shooting.
Risacher is more or less guaranteed to stay in the league if he's a decent shooter and a solid defender, Holland could be just another one in long line of Stanley Johnsons who couldn't shoot at all and found themselves out of the league in no time.

We also have to look at the fact that Spurs are one of the worst rosters in the league and that you have to start somewhere.
Can't draft two rookies that are two years away from being two years away and won't contribute early on.

Then there's Sochan situation.
Drafting another wing non-shooter means their minutes are tied to Sochan's. Can't have both on the floor together.
Or even worse, Pop will still do it and lose games because of it.

[AFBlue]

Does Risacher have any upside as a creator/playmaker, or is he locked in as a dependent role player?

[AFBlue]

How much better is Risacher than Salaun? Is the "safe bet" worth a potential trade up, or should we stick at 4/8 and take Salaun with the latter pick?

[exstatic]

How much better is Risacher than Salaun? Is the "safe bet" worth a potential trade up, or should we stick at 4/8 and take Salaun with the latter pick?

There’s no player, not Sarr or Risacher worth trading two top 8 picks for in this flat draft. Take two pulls of the lever,not one.

[mo7888]

Sarr, while more athletic, is far less developed and would take a couple of seasons to be as good as Clingan is now, if he develops at all. People are sleeping on Clingan. He played extremely well in a motion offense system. Will he be a star? Probably not, but he’ll likely be a very solid 10-12 year starter. His bust potential is low, and there are teams that are afraid of busts more than they want stars. Sarr has some more upside, but higher bust potential.

I'm not knocking him at all. I just don't expect him to be on our radar at 4, so if he goes before that it let's someone slide to us.

[DPG21920]

It's always about 3pt shooting.
Risacher is more or less guaranteed to stay in the league if he's a decent shooter and a solid defender, Holland could be just another one in long line of Stanley Johnsons who couldn't shoot at all and found themselves out of the league in no time.

We also have to look at the fact that Spurs are one of the worst rosters in the league and that you have to start somewhere.
Can't draft two rookies that are two years away from being two years away and won't contribute early on.

Then there's Sochan situation.
Drafting another wing non-shooter means their minutes are tied to Sochan's. Can't have both on the floor together.
Or even worse, Pop will still do it and lose games because of it.

We aren’t a title team and need talent. Theres plenty of minutes and even if it doesnt happen year one, we dont need it to. Spurs have two picks and lots of guys who spurs are linked to have shooting question (Castle and even Risacher to some degree)

[mo7888]

I get that Holland is divisive but I will ask; if people are so confident of Risacher in top 4, what’s the risk of Holland? I mean, Risacher has flaws and it’s not like you are passing up on an all world talent on paper (of course things happen post draft and you get all stars out of no where too). If Risacher is a good rotation player but not a star, is missing out on that some death blow?

Nope. Holland at least pops in so many areas. He has a ton of scary questions (processing speed on team defense, shooting etc..) but it’s hard to deny how he looks when things are going well and what he does well too.

To me it’s less scary due to opportunity cost; taking a swing on Holland is not at the expense of some can’t miss safer all star type.

They both are flawed, but I don't think Holland's flaw (his shot) is fixable. It's that simple of a calculation for me. I don't even want him at 8 because I don't believe he'll ever be able to be an average shooter. Risacher's flaws I believe can be fixed.

[DPG21920]

They both are flawed, but I don't think Holland's flaw (his shot) is fixable. It's that simple of a calculation for me. I don't even want him at because I don't believe he'll ever be able to be an average shooter. Risacher's flaws I believe can be fixed.

But he does a lot of other things a lot better than Risacher and even if Risacher shot is solid, does he truly project to be more than a good role player which can be had with free agency, trade or the extra picks SA has?

One has a better chance at being a star and that’s harder to get via trade and FA IMO and having 2 picks to me means you can afford to take that swing if you land Castle/Dillingham/Reed with the other pick…

[exstatic]

We aren’t a title team and need talent. Theres plenty of minutes and even if it doesnt happen year one, we dont need it to. Spurs have two picks and lots of guys who spurs are linked to have shooting question (Castle and even Risacher to some degree)

The poster that started the Risacher can’t shoot trope was using a 5 game sample. For the year, he shot 38%.

[mo7888]

But he does a lot of other things a lot better than Risacher and even if Risacher shot is solid, does he truly project to be more than a good role player which can be had with free agency, trade or the extra picks SA has?

One has a better chance at being a star and that’s harder to get via trade and FA IMO and having 2 picks to me means you can afford to take that swing if you land Castle/Dillingham/Reed with the other pick…

If Risacher develops handles where he can dribble drive, then yes, he can be more. He's got a much better chance to do that than Holland does to be able to shoot.

[spurraider21]

Does Risacher have any upside as a creator/playmaker, or is he locked in as a dependent role player?
no obvious path to playmaking ability, really. other than just saying he's still young and just turned 19. i do think he flashes passing ability but rarely does enough with the ball in his hands to create situations to take advantage of it.

[LeBowen]

no obvious path to playmaking ability, really. other than just saying he's still young and just turned 19. i do think he flashes passing ability but rarely does enough with the ball in his hands to create situations to take advantage of it.

I'm more interested in what's the ceiling of his shooting ability.
Nowdays everyone wants complete forwards that can do a bit of everything, but if you ask me finding someone who can be a high volume shooter, good rebounder and defender would be as just as good.

Finding a MPJ type forward who can shoot around 40% on 8 attempts per game would be invaluable.
There's a huge difference between that level of shooting and someone who will take 3 per game.
There's levels to 3-D players even if they don't offer anything else.

[spurraider21]

I'm more interested in what's the ceiling of his shooting ability.
Nowdays everyone wants complete forwards that can do a bit of everything, but if you ask me finding someone who can be a high volume shooter, good rebounder and defender would be as just as good.

Finding a MPJ type forward who can shoot around 40% on 8 attempts per game would be invaluable.
There's a huge difference between that level of shooting and someone who will take 3 per game.
There's levels to 3-D players even if they don't offer anything else.
MPJ shooting is pretty elite but it looks attainable. he's tall, has a very high release, and has gotten a lot better at not having to dip the ball back down in catch and shoot spots. very interesting stuff at his age

[DPG21920]

The poster that started the Risacher can’t shoot trope was using a 5 game sample. For the year, he shot 38%.

Oh I know - I think overall Risacher shot is solid; but it’s not a “lock” and I dont think hes a varied shooter. But it’s not near the same issue as Holland I agree.

[DPG21920]

If Risacher develops handles where he can dribble drive, then yes, he can be more. He's got a much better chance to do that than Holland does to be able to shoot.

I disagree that it’s so black and white. It’s not just as simple as only those two skills and likelihood of each getting them. Theres a lot more to their games and what they do well/dont do etc….yes of course those two are big things, but that’s not only path for Holland to be a star. DeRozan has no 3 ball and is a star.

Imagine like a Josh Howard/DeRozan type from Holland with actual defense and very good secondary playmaking (like DeRozan)

[DPG21920]

no obvious path to playmaking ability, really. other than just saying he's still young and just turned 19. i do think he flashes passing ability but rarely does enough with the ball in his hands to create situations to take advantage of it.

And Holland has already shown much more there IMO, similar to a Sochan.

[exstatic]

Oh I know - I think overall Risacher shot is solid; but it’s not a “lock” and I dont think hes a varied shooter. But it’s not near the same issue as Holland I agree.

Nothing is a lock in this draft, or most drafts, tbh. Once you accept that, peace follows.

[Pauleta14]

Does Risacher have any upside as a creator/playmaker, or is he locked in as a dependent role player?

High BBIQ (His Dad is a former pro), great work ethic, great body( size and length) and fundamentals

He's just 19 and has upside at everything

[DPG21920]

Nothing is a lock in this draft, or most drafts, tbh. Once you accept that, peace follows.

I do - I hate drafts :lol

It’s really hard to draft well consistently

[DAF86]

I get that Holland is divisive but I will ask; if people are so confident of Risacher in top 4, what’s the risk of Holland? I mean, Risacher has flaws and it’s not like you are passing up on an all world talent on paper (of course things happen post draft and you get all stars out of no where too). If Risacher is a good rotation player but not a star, is missing out on that some death blow?

Nope. Holland at least pops in so many areas. He has a ton of scary questions (processing speed on team defense, shooting etc..) but it’s hard to deny how he looks when things are going well and what he does well too.

To me it’s less scary due to opportunity cost; taking a swing on Holland is not at the expense of some can’t miss safer all star type.

Holland sucks and will keep on sucking, imho.

[LeBowen]

I do - I hate drafts :lol

It’s really hard to draft well consistently

Tbh, we didn't have to really care about drafts for 20 years.
It's actually fun when you watch random players that are projected to go in 20-40 range, trying to find someone who could be a steal.
If you miss, not a big deal.

But when it's about franchise altering lottery picks, frustration and pressure build up because every bust sets you back.
Hopefully 2025 will be the last draft we'll care about for the foreseeable future.

And idk why are we even talking about Risacher, I'd say that chances of him being available at #4 are less than 10%.

[DPG21920]

Tbh, we didn't have to really care about drafts for 20 years.
It's actually fun when you watch random players that are projected to go in 20-40 range, trying to find someone who could be a steal.
If you miss, not a big deal.

But when it's about franchise altering lottery picks, frustration and pressure build up because every bust sets you back.
Hopefully 2025 will be the last draft we'll care about for the foreseeable future.

And idk why are we even talking about Risacher, I'd say that chances of him being available at #4 are less than 10%.

Seems that way - but Im not sure GMs are as in love with him as you normally get with top 3 prospects so you never know..

[mo7888]

I disagree that it’s so black and white. It’s not just as simple as only those two skills and likelihood of each getting them. Theres a lot more to their games and what they do well/dont do etc….yes of course those two are big things, but that’s not only path for Holland to be a star. DeRozan has no 3 ball and is a star.

Imagine like a Josh Howard/DeRozan type from Holland with actual defense and very good secondary playmaking (like DeRozan)

Yes there are more skills, but if you can't shoot, and your shot is unfixable, then, at best, you're a bit player deep off the bench in today's game. I think that much is black and white..

[DPG21920]

Yes there are more skills, but if you can't shoot, and your shot is unfixable, then, at best, you're a bit player deep off the bench in today's game. I think that much is black and white..

DeRozan isnt a bit player….theres still mid-range guys and Holland is a pretty damn interesting finisher at the rim too alongside some solid secondary playmaking (hes not CP, but in a spurs system where its moving and his not a primary guy but using his tools as an advantage to move off of Wemby and ball movement?)

[poopbox]

Zach is a 100x better Julian Champagnie

Only reason I would be ok picking him at 4. He's already better than Julian and he should keep Keldon coming off the bench.

[jesterbobman]

I'm kind of fine with him at 4, but I get why models are low on him, and those are the reasons I don't think he really seems like he has star upside.

Models are trying to adjust quality for role, knowing how historically usage and efficiency translates into NBA play from a league, how passing success indicates feel, etc. Generally, models are better going from NCAA -> NBA than from varying European leagues, but they do attempt to adjust.

Risacher had an assist to turnover ratio below 1, and some incredibly high turnover games in the playoffs (e.g, 5 in his 28 point game). On top of that, he generated few defensive events (Some of this can be scheme dependant and players opting to not gamble (I think this is the case with Castle, for instance), but it's still low).

Turnovers, avoiding them and creating them are massive in total player impact, and that's why he shows up badly in analytics models. Entirely possible that even as mostly a play finisher, that limits his impact unless everyone else is a plus passer and he plays a role like Danny Green / Klay as an almost entirely off ball player.
The lack of creative dribbling, and poor passing really limit his star upside.

Fine role player, you need guys who'll be effective in low usage roles, and I get he's been in a much higher level of competition than NCAA.

[mo7888]

DeRozan isnt a bit player….theres still mid-range guys and Holland is a pretty damn interesting finisher at the rim too.

DDR can shoot though, he has excellent touch that just doesn't extend to the 3 pt line. Holland, fundamentally, can not shoot. My opinion is he will never have a mid range game. Those two aren't comparable. MkG is his floor and Stanley Johnson is his ceiling imo..

[LeBowen]

DDR can shoot though, he has excellent touch that just doesn't extend to the 3 pt line. Holland, fundamentally, can not shoot. My opinion is he will never have a mid range game. Those two aren't comparable. MkG is his floor and Stanley Johnson is his ceiling imo..

Agreed.
I'd avoid Holland unless Sochan gets traded. (won't happen)
Two of them wouldn't be able to co-exist.

As time goes on and I watch/read more stuff about these prospects, I honestly don't want any of these forwards if Risacher isn't there at #4.
Either get Castle who looks like he's got everything except shooting on the right track or get Dillingham and hope for the best with his scoring potential.
These forwards with so many fundamental flaws just won't work out. We got enough of them on the roster already.

[spurraider21]

And Holland has already shown much more there IMO, similar to a Sochan.
oh, yeah. i like holland quite a bit and there are definitely thins he's much better at than risacher

[poopbox]

Tbh, we didn't have to really care about drafts for 20 years.
It's actually fun when you watch random players that are projected to go in 20-40 range, trying to find someone who could be a steal.
If you miss, not a big deal.

But when it's about franchise altering lottery picks, frustration and pressure build up because every bust sets you back.
Hopefully 2025 will be the last draft we'll care about for the foreseeable future.

And idk why are we even talking about Risacher, I'd say that chances of him being available at #4 are less than 10%.

Meh. If he doesn't go 2 to the Wizards then I think he will be there at 4, as I don't see the rockets drafting another wing hybrid power forward player, they already got to many. If the Rockets did take him at 3 that would mean they are out on either Whitmore or Jabari, in which I would instantly be on the phone with Houston trying to get Whitmore or Jabari.

[exstatic]

Meh. If he doesn't go 2 to the Wizards then I think he will be there at 4, as I don't see the rockets drafting another wing hybrid power forward player, they already got to many. If the Rockets did take him at 3 that would mean they are out on either Whitmore or Jabari, in which I would instantly be on the phone with Houston trying to get Whitmore or Jabari.
Don’t want anything to do with Whitmore, but I’d be on the phone offering the CHI pick, the CHA non pick, and the 27 ATL pick for Smith. He’d be fucking perfect here.

[TD 21]

I disagree that it’s so black and white. It’s not just as simple as only those two skills and likelihood of each getting them. Theres a lot more to their games and what they do well/dont do etc….yes of course those two are big things, but that’s not only path for Holland to be a star. DeRozan has no 3 ball and is a star.

Imagine like a Josh Howard/DeRozan type from Holland with actual defense and very good secondary playmaking (like DeRozan)


DeRozan isnt a bit player….theres still mid-range guys and Holland is a pretty damn interesting finisher at the rim too alongside some solid secondary playmaking (hes not CP, but in a spurs system where its moving and his not a primary guy but using his tools as an advantage to move off of Wemby and ball movement?)


You mean the guy who shady Ujiri was shopping for 1-2 years before he found a sucker because he couldn't get value for? The same guy who's teams are almost always better (save 1-2 seasons and even then, it was barely), often significantly so, with him off the floor?

He, like others over time, made it (All-Star, All-NBA) due to circumstances benefitting him more than impact befitting of. His old school persona appealed to coaches and his counting stats and their being mediocre enough in a weak conference paved the way.

DeRozan, with his limitations that make it so he has to have the offense built around him, is a relic who got lucky that Westbrook got traded to the Lakers and the Bulls jumped in at the last moment and gave him star type money/role otherwise he'd have been relegated 6th man status for the mini MLE on one of the L.A. teams.

That said, any p-n-r ball handler needs to be able to score from all three levels to punish various coverages.

Holland isn't going to have that role and teams (not named Spurs) don't want non rim running role players who can't space the floor, so if he can't eventually do so he'll be a bit player.

[exstatic]

Agreed.
I'd avoid Holland unless Sochan gets traded. (won't happen)
Two of them wouldn't be able to co-exist.

As time goes on and I watch/read more stuff about these prospects, I honestly don't want any of these forwards if Risacher isn't there at #4.
Either get Castle who looks like he's got everything except shooting on the right track or get Dillingham and hope for the best with his scoring potential.
These forwards with so many fundamental flaws just won't work out. We got enough of them on the roster already.

I’m actually warming to the 2 guards draft myself, as long as they’re not both small.

[SpursBills]

wrong thread

[mo7888]

I’m actually warming to the 2 guards draft myself, as long as they’re not both small.

Castle + Sheppard is a best case scenario for a 2 guard draft, probably followed by Castle + Dilly

[CGD]

Castle + Sheppard is a best case scenario for a 2 guard draft, probably followed by Castle + Dilly

I concur. Assuming they don’t trade away 8, I wonder if their preferred combos ranked in order is:

Castle + Sheppard
Castle + Topic
Castle + Salaun
Castle + Dillingham

[Kurgan]

Castle + Sheppard is impossible. If you take one at 4, the other will be gone before 8.

[mo7888]

I concur. Assuming they don’t trade away 8, I wonder if their preferred combos ranked in order is:

Castle + Sheppard
Castle + Topic
Castle + Salaun
Castle + Dillingham

Could be. I'd be hesitant on the Castle + Topic pairing simply because you've got two guys who have to improve from the outside. Full disclosure- I think both guys will, but I'm not sure they should gamble on that.

[Uriel]

I concur. Assuming they don’t trade away 8, I wonder if their preferred combos ranked in order is:

Castle + Sheppard
Castle + Topic
Castle + Salaun
Castle + Dillingham

Notice the order in which those names are mentioned. I think that’s the Spurs’ internal ranking of them as well.

Assuming Castle is the pick at 4, the Spurs’ big board for #8 is most likely:

1. Rob Dillingham
2. Tidjane Salaun
3. Nikola Topic
4. Cody Williams
5. Dalton Knecht

That means Brian Wright’s dream draft is Castle at 4 and Dillingham at 8, which incidentally, is also the outcome of timvp’s mock draft.

[DPG21920]

DeRozan, with his limitations that make it so he has to have the offense built around him, is a relic who got lucky that Westbrook got traded to the Lakers and the Bulls jumped in at the last moment and gave him star type money/role otherwise he'd have been relegated 6th man status for the mini MLE on one of the L.A. teams.

That said, any p-n-r ball handler needs to be able to score from all three levels to punish various coverages.

Holland isn't going to have that role and teams (not named Spurs) don't want non rim running role players who can't space the floor, so if he can't eventually do so he'll be a bit player.

I think it will be opposite - holland won’t be drafted as a player to build offense around. His offense will be bonus and will replace Keldon essentially as a nice size wing but that comes with defensive potential and secondary passing skills.

[Mr. Body]

Castle + Sheppard is impossible. If you take one at 4, the other will be gone before 8.

I don't think Detroit or Portland takes Castle. A team might trade up to get him, though.

[DPG21920]

Castle + Sheppard is impossible. If you take one at 4, the other will be gone before 8.

Maybe true you never know. But if draft falls their way I wouldn’t mind spurs trading up for 5 or 6 using 8 + CHA or something like that to get their guy.

[DPG21920]

I don't think Detroit or Portland takes Castle. A team might trade up to get him, though.

Still wonder if my trade I came up with for DET would work:

Keldon + 8 for Ivey + 5

[CGD]

Could be. I'd be hesitant on the Castle + Topic pairing simply because you've got two guys who have to improve from the outside. Full disclosure- I think both guys will, but I'm not sure they should gamble on that.

100% — I simply think the Spurs won’t be able to help themselves if Topic is there at 8.

[mo7888]

Still wonder if my trade I came up with for DET would work:

Keldon + 8 for Ivey + 5

I think Detroit would consider that strongly. I'd be interested in how adding Ivey would impact our draft plans.

[CGD]

I didn’t read too much into the order Timvp listed those guys, but maybe I missed the nuance. My personal feeling aside, I still have a hard time seeing the Spurs taking Dillingham with either pick.

[exstatic]

Could be. I'd be hesitant on the Castle + Topic pairing simply because you've got two guys who have to improve from the outside. Full disclosure- I think both guys will, but I'm not sure they should gamble on that.

With the free pick, you could gamble that one of them does. If they both eventually shoot well, it’s a huge bonus.

I’m not sure you should expect both players in any drafted pairing to hit this year.

[CGD]

Still wonder if my trade I came up with for DET would work:

Keldon + 8 for Ivey + 5

I like it personally, though, I wonder if it’d take 4 instead of 8? I would still do it since I don’t see them taking Castle if they move up.

[CGD]

I think Detroit would consider that strongly. I'd be interested in how adding Ivey would impact our draft plans.

I think they still take Castle with 5

[mo7888]

I think they still take Castle with 5

Who would they take at 4 then? Castle, Ivey, and who? Buzelis to replace Keldon? Knecht for the same reason?

[DPG21920]

I think Detroit would consider that strongly. I'd be interested in how adding Ivey would impact our draft plans.

I would love to see SA do that, take Reed at 4, have Ivey instead of Castle and use 5 on Holland now or their favorite wing left (Buzelis) or even take Dillingham


Replace Graham, Branham and Blake with Ivey, Reed and Keldon with Holland/Buzelis

[DPG21920]

I like it personally, though, I wonder if it’d take 4 instead of 8? I would still do it since I don’t see them taking Castle if they move up.

I’d prob still do it but Keldon is better than Ivey so det should pay us (we move up 3 spots imo). I’d rather toss det some extra 2nds (2-3) and keep 4 tho

[SpursBills]

I must be one of the few people on this board who really really doesn't like Jaden Ivey

[DPG21920]

Not to get thread off track though sorry - was just saying i agree with timvp that it’s not clear cut even with Risacher and it’s that logic which will shape what teams do including Sa and shapes strategy (the Holland upside swing example)

[exstatic]

I must be one of the few people on this board who really really doesn't like Jaden Ivey

I don’t, either.

[mo7888]

I would love to see SA do that, take Reed at 4, have Ivey instead of Castle and use 5 on Holland now or their favorite wing left (Buzelis) or even take Dillingham


Replace Graham, Branham and Blake with Ivey, Reed and Keldon with Holland/Buzelis

I haven't watched Ivey enough since college to know how he fits exactly, bit it's an intriguing idea. If we went Reed at 4, I'd probably go Buzelis, Knecht, Williams, or Dilly in that order at 5. I'd focus on replacing KJ.

[DPG21920]

I must be one of the few people on this board who really really doesn't like Jaden Ivey

There’s quite a few but my logic: you don’t have to love him in context of taking calculated low downside risks. If you’re good with castle or topic or other the guards Ivey is no more flawed than them but in this scenario Sa gets a guard to balance out roster before draft and still gets 2 top 5 picks to work with. All they have to give up is Keldon to do it and it resets Keldons money (which isn’t necessary but it does mean he can be replaced in FA or trade now easier)

[CGD]

Who would they take at 4 then? Castle, Ivey, and who? Buzelis to replace Keldon? Knecht for the same reason?

I’m wondering if the original trade works with 8, and if the Spurs need to send 4 over instead? May not be enough for DET if they also have to cough up 5?

I like Castle (so im biased), and think he will be there at 4 or 5, so swapping 4 and 5 ends up being a distinction without much difference for us. But, for DET that difference might matter more.

Then the Spurs have 8 to take a huge swing on someone like Salaun etc.

[mo7888]

I’m wondering if the original trade works with 8, and if the Spurs need to send 4 over instead? May not be enough for DET if they also have to cough up 5?

I like Castle (so im biased), and think he will be there at 4 or 5, so swapping 4 and 5 ends up being a distinction without much difference for us. But, for DET that difference might matter more.

Then the Spurs have 8 to take a huge swing on someone like Salaun etc.

I think Keldon is worth more than Ivey, so it wouldn't take 4. On Castle, I would take him if I traded for ivey. I'd just take Castle and call it a day if I preferred him over Ivey.

[DPG21920]

I think Keldon is worth more than Ivey, so it wouldn't take 4. On Castle, I would take him if I traded for ivey. I'd just take Castle and call it a day if I preferred him over Ivey.

Agree. I’d rather keep Keldon if plan is to take castle. Ivey only makes sense so that you don’t have to take a flawed guard like castle and can take other risks or go shooting (Reed and Dill)

[SpursBills]

There’s quite a few but my logic: you don’t have to love him in context of taking calculated low downside risks. If you’re good with castle or topic or other the guards Ivey is no more flawed than them but in this scenario Sa gets a guard to balance out roster before draft and still gets 2 top 5 picks to work with. All they have to give up is Keldon to do it and it resets Keldons money (which isn’t necessary but it does mean he can be replaced in FA or trade now easier)

I don't know man, Ivey's basically a salary dump to me, so that's like paying Keldon to move up from 8 to 5 - seems like a pretty high price to pay. I totally see your point of view if you value someone like Holland or Buzelis a lot more than anyone you'd get at 8 and think that they're not going to last that long, but the difference between 5 and 8 isn't an entire tier to me at least, which is is what the difference would need to be for me to get rid of Keldon.

[exstatic]

Agree. I’d rather keep Keldon if plan is to take castle. Ivey only makes sense so that you don’t have to take a flawed guard like castle and can take other risks or go shooting (Reed and Dill)

:rollin. Calling a player who needs to hit on ONE skill to be really good ‘flawed’ while thirsting over a player who lacks many skills, including said ‘flawed’ guard’s shooting shortcoming is a take, I guess.

[DPG21920]

:rollin. Calling a player who needs to hit on ONE skill to be really good ‘flawed’ while thirsting over a player who lacks many skills, including said ‘flawed’ guard’s shooting shortcoming is a take, I guess.

I called Ivey flawed as well. Are you ok mentally?

[exstatic]

I called Ivey flawed as well. Are you ok mentally?

Castle >>> Ivey.
Dilly >>> Ivey
Reed >>> Ivey

[SpursBills]

I called Ivey flawed as well. Are you ok mentally?

I think also that if you're really sold on Sheppard at 4, Castle is going to pair with him way better than Ivey. Defensively there's no question that Castle's the better fit next to Sheppard as Ivey is and always has been a very poor defender (in fact Purdue's defense in spite of having Ivey 2 years ago is one of the reasons why I'm optimistic about Edey as a defender at the next level), but even offensively I'm not sure that Ivey would be a better fit.

To be completely fair, Castle's downside offensively is a zero level scorer - currently he can't (and sometimes looks afraid to) shoot the 3, he's poor from midrange, and his rim percentages in the half court this year crumble against top 50 competition, which basically makes him Andre Jackson Jr. That being said, he has enough craft and his success in Hurley's system makes me think he has enough sense to find the gaps to get open and continue to move the ball. Ivey's someone who always struck me offensively as a guy who succeeded best as a primary initiator, but didn't quite have the requisite bball IQ and playmaking chops to really be one (consistently <1.5 AST:TO dating back to college until this year where he's at 1.6). He's also shooting < 50% from 2 right now and continues to shoot poorly from 3, so I think the drop-off is probably not as big as we might think between his median outcome and Castle's.

Maybe we're seeing different things, why do you think that Ivey can succeed as a small guard next to Sheppard?

[poopbox]

Castle + Sheppard is a best case scenario for a 2 guard draft, probably followed by Castle + Dilly

I think Castle and Dilly would be the optimum draft. Dynamic offensive point guard who could juice our offense day 1 and a large guard who could defend up to 3 positions who could be a great secondary ball handler and is a broken jumper away from being a really good player.

I would prioritize Dilly at 4 though.

[DPG21920]

Castle >>> Ivey.
Dilly >>> Ivey
Reed >>> Ivey

Ok

[DPG21920]

I think also that if you're really sold on Sheppard at 4, Castle is going to pair with him way better than Ivey. Defensively there's no question that Castle's the better fit next to Sheppard as Ivey is and always has been a very poor defender (in fact Purdue's defense in spite of having Ivey 2 years ago is one of the reasons why I'm optimistic about Edey as a defender at the next level), but even offensively I'm not sure that Ivey would be a better fit.

To be completely fair, Castle's downside offensively is a zero level scorer - currently he can't (and sometimes looks afraid to) shoot the 3, he's poor from midrange, and his rim percentages in the half court this year crumble against top 50 competition. That being said, he has enough craft and his success in Hurley's system makes me think he has enough sense to find the gaps to get open and continue to move the ball. Ivey's someone who always struck me offensively as a guy who succeeded best as a primary initiator, but didn't quite have the requisite IQ to really be one. He's also shooting < 50% from 2 right now and continues to shoot poorly from 3, so I think the drop-off is probably not as big as we might think between his median outcome and Castle's.

Maybe we're seeing different things, why do you think that Ivey can succeed as a small guard next to Sheppard?

Because our system isn’t a Steve Nash PG system and I view Ivey and Reed as just guards overall and Ivey ability to handle ball well enough and get downhill fits well next to Reed.

There’s nothing stopping Sa from going Reed + Castle still and Sa cleaning house on Graham, Cedi, Branham and Blake. It’s not either or im just talking optimal.

Beyond that the point of my deal is that Ivey isn’t being traded for as a has to work guy or you’re in deep trouble. You still get your two picks this draft no different. Ivey simply shifts money and talent to Ivey from Keldon

In that context is low risk because at a min you reset Keldon money some and opens up plenty of cap space to help offset Ivey being cut for example. If Keldon busts (In theory) Sa would be totally fine right? And that’s with Keldon being a very good player on a very good deal

[SpursBills]

Because our system isn’t a Steve Nash PG system and I view Ivey and Reed as just guards overall and Ivey ability to handle ball well enough and get downhill fits well next to Reed.

There’s nothing stopping Sa from going Reed + Castle still and Sa cleaning house on Graham, Cedi, Branham and Blake. It’s not either or im just talking optimal.

Beyond that the point of my deal is that Ivey isn’t being traded for as a has to work guy or you’re in deep trouble. You still get your two picks this draft no different. Ivey simply shifts money and talent to Ivey from Keldon

In that context is low risk because at a min you reset Keldon money some and opens up plenty of cap space to help offset Ivey being cut for example. If Keldon busts (In theory) Sa would be totally fine right? And that’s with Keldon being a very good player on a very good deal

I see what you're saying, thanks for explaining. Ivey's interesting as a flyer for rim pressure, but personally I think that Keldon's value on his current contract can probably be used better in a larger trade down the road. I see the reasoning behind your trade though.

[DPG21920]

I see what you're saying, thanks for explaining. Ivey's interesting as a flyer for rim pressure, but personally I think that Keldon's value on his current contract can probably be used better in a larger trade down the road. I see the reasoning behind your trade though.

Absolutely. It’s not some home run and Im not clamoring over Ivey or dying on that hill; its just one scenario where I see a fit and possible realistic deal IF SA wanted to go that route (meaning get an upside/flawed guard, but do it via trade so they can free up the two picks elsewhere (and if they were for whatever reason looking for a reset on Keldon money which is not at all a given)

[TD 21]

I think it will be opposite - holland won’t be drafted as a player to build offense around. His offense will be bonus and will replace Keldon essentially as a nice size wing but that comes with defensive potential and secondary passing skills.

No such thing as a bonus. He doesn't have to average volume ppg (and won't have the usage/mpg to do so anyway), but he has to be able to space the floor adequately enough, like Jones Jr. is now doing for the Mavericks.

Notice he went from a bit player to a starter on a contender the second he made that transformation (unless this season proves an aberration).

[DPG21920]

No such thing as a bonus. He doesn't have to average volume ppg (and won't have the usage/mpg to do so anyway), but he has to be able to space the floor adequately enough, like Jones Jr. is now doing for the Mavericks.

Notice he went from a bit player to a starter on a contender the second he made that transformation (unless this season proves an aberration).

Of course and I think he will provide scoring (at least in Keldon mode but you at least get defense plus better play making from Holland), but you dont need it to happen next year is kind of my point. It’s not a rush in that regard.

[sfernald]

Comps for this #1 prospect: Middleton, Murphy
https://i.postimg.cc/D0QK9GX2/IMG-1098.jpg


Eeeeeeewwwwwww

[spurraider21]

Ok
ivey is a young player not on the spurs. of course ex hates him :lol

[exstatic]

ivey is a young player not on the spurs. of course ex hates him :lol

He’s not as good offensively as Dilly or Reed, but probably worse defensively. I don’t hate him, but he’s a year away from his extension. If you want that archetype, just draft Dilly or Reed. They’ll be cheaper longer for you to evaluate.

[DPG21920]

He’s not as good offensively as Dilly or Reed, but probably worse defensively. I don’t hate him, but he’s a year away from his extension. If you want that archetype, just draft Dilly or Reed. They’ll be cheaper longer for you to evaluate.

It’s not that much of a difference on price and you get 2 years of still “cheap” Ivey before you are really forced on a decision. Point is, if Ivey was in this draft he would absolutely be in the same range as Castle, Reed etc….Hes not worse defensively than Dilly at all either.

But none of that matters. Point is, even if you hate Ivey, theres still reason to do the deal from a risk/reward perspective in a way that both allows maybe some more roster balance and allows you to approach draft in a position of strength. That doesnt preclude you from still going 2 guards either, but you dont have to now.

[exstatic]

It’s not that much of a difference on price and you get 2 years of still “cheap” Ivey before you are really forced on a decision. Point is, if Ivey was in this draft he would absolutely be in the same range as Castle, Reed etc….Hes not worse defensively than Dilly at all either.

But none of that matters. Point is, even if you hate Ivey, theres still reason to do the deal from a risk/reward perspective in a way that both allows maybe some more roster balance and allows you to approach draft in a position of strength. That doesnt preclude you from still going 2 guards either, but you dont have to now.

He’s really bad defensively. It’s the reason Monte cut his minutes his past season. And roster balance? We have a glut of guards, not very many forwards, and you want to trade a forward for a guard? Doesn’t seem like balancing the roster to me.

[DPG21920]

He’s really bad defensively. It’s the reason Monte cut his minutes his past season. And roster balance? We have a glut of guards, not very many forwards, and you want to trade a forward for a guard? Doesn’t seem like balancing the roster to me.

We have no guards that matter my friend….thats the point. I would trade Branham + Tre + Blake for Ivey right now without question.

[exstatic]

We have no guards that matter my friend….thats the point. I would trade Branham + Tre + Blake for Ivey right now without question.

And that would be roster balance. Trading our only forward who has had a 20 ppg season isn’t.

[DPG21920]

And that would be roster balance. Trading our only forward who has had a 20 ppg season isn’t.

Well, that would free up even more significant cap space to trade for or sign in FA that person that maybe fits better long term (defense, passing, 3PT shooting)

[rankingtear]

During an interview with NBA on ESPN, Givony stated there are rumblings San Antonio is possibly exploring trading (https://twitter.com/ESPNNBA) up to the No. 1 spot in exchange for their two first-round picks.

"You hear teams like San Antonio possibly exploring the idea of packaging the fourth and eighth pick. Maybe to move up to No. 1," he said.

Givony bomb. Does FO make the move now if they get Zacch with a Garland trade. I feel securing a starting wing comes first before a guard.

[LeBowen]

During an interview with NBA on ESPN, Givony stated there are rumblings San Antonio is possibly exploring trading (https://twitter.com/ESPNNBA) up to the No. 1 spot in exchange for their two first-round picks.

"You hear teams like San Antonio possibly exploring the idea of packaging the fourth and eighth pick. Maybe to move up to No. 1," he said.

Givony bomb. Does FO make the move now if they get Zacch with a Garland trade. I feel securing a starting wing comes first before a guard.

Did Givony ever actually break a relevant story?
If there's any truth to this, PATFO thinks Sarr has all-star potential. No way they'd trade both picks for Risacher.

[rankingtear]

Did Givony ever actually break a relevant story?
If there's any truth to this, PATFO thinks Sarr has all-star potential. No way they'd trade both picks for Risacher.

I don't know. But Sarr fit is going to be clunky for a while until it isn't. If his earlier report about an expected Garland trade is true then I think it would be a snug fit like Zacch with that first selection.

[exstatic]

During an interview with NBA on ESPN, Givony stated there are rumblings San Antonio is possibly exploring trading (https://twitter.com/ESPNNBA) up to the No. 1 spot in exchange for their two first-round picks.

"You hear teams like San Antonio possibly exploring the idea of packaging the fourth and eighth pick. Maybe to move up to No. 1," he said.

Givony bomb. Does FO make the move now if they get Zacch with a Garland trade. I feel securing a starting wing comes first before a guard.

Givoney is tight with Euro scouts, and has a pretty good eye for talent. Haven’t really seen his rumors come to fruition, though. He reminds me of Sean Deveney, who tanked his career when he tried to be Woj, switching from analysis to conjecture.

[rascal]

Did Givony ever actually break a relevant story?
If there's any truth to this, PATFO thinks Sarr has all-star potential. No way they'd trade both picks for Risacher.

Both picks for Risacher would be a bad move. I don't believe the Spurs are that bad to consider doing that.

[rankingtear]

KOC also collaborating the report to move up.

[Bruno]

For a not young anymore French basketball fan, the Risacher name brings a lot of good memories. Zaccharie's dad is Stéphane Risacher who was one of the best french player in the 90s and early 00s.
There was the 1997 preseason tournament against Jordan's Bulls, the unexpected olympic silver medal in 2000, french leagues games with team like Limoges, Pau-Orthez, Villeurbanne, PSG...

https://trashtalk.co/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredac.trashtalk.co%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2024%2F01%2Fstephane-risacher-michael-jordan.jpg&w=1920&q=75


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d63wls_d0Z8

It would be kinda cool for me to have on Spurs the son of a player I've enjoyed watching when I was a teenager.

[mo7888]

We have no guards that matter my friend….thats the point. I would trade Branham + Tre + Blake for Ivey right now without question.

Detroit might do that actually...

[spurs10]

Too bad he won't be around at 4. Wonder if the Spurs will trade up for him?

[Pauleta14]

For a not young anymore French basketball fan, the Risacher name brings a lot of good memories. Zaccharie's dad is Stéphane Risacher who was one of the best french player in the 90s and early 00s.
There was the 1997 preseason tournament against Jordan's Bulls, the unexpected olympic silver medal in 2000, french leagues games with team like Limoges, Pau-Orthez, Villeurbanne, PSG...

https://trashtalk.co/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredac.trashtalk.co%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2024%2F01%2Fstephane-risacher-michael-jordan.jpg&w=1920&q=75


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d63wls_d0Z8

It would be kinda cool for me to have on Spurs the son of a player I've enjoyed watching when I was a teenager.

PSG vs MJ and the Bulls in the McDonald's tournament is one of my best childhood memory in bb

[Pauleta14]

Too bad he won't be around at 4. Wonder if the Spurs will trade up for him?

That's the rumour of the day, initiated by Givony and confirmed by Kevin O'Connor

Why not if he's their guy tbh. Adding only one rookie (salary + to develop) would make sense if they do other moves via trades

[Mr. Body]

Trading up for Tha Rizz would be the worst asset management imaginable. ESPN makes shit up. That's what they do. KOC is full on clown.

[mo7888]

Trading up for Tha Rizz would be the worst asset management imaginable. ESPN makes shit up. That's what they do. KOC is full on clown.

I'll give you that espn makes things up and I'll give you that trading 4 + 8 for 1 isn't something I'd be in favor of. I'm not gonna say it's the worst asset management imaginable though. Risacher is the top guy in this draft and he's the best fit here, so it can make sense if they're doing something else via trade to round out a starting lineup.

[Vienna]

For a not young anymore French basketball fan, the Risacher name brings a lot of good memories. Zaccharie's dad is Stéphane Risacher who was one of the best french player in the 90s and early 00s.


for some here you just delivered one more reason, why Risacher should not be drafted……
did his dad make it to the NBA? NO! HE DID NOT!
what more proof do you need that the son will fail.
Instead of NBA his dad preferred to become an actor and try to kill Tom Cruise in a tunnel. (or was it the other way around. However.)

[mo7888]

for some here you just delivered one more reason, why Risacher should not be drafted……
did his dad make it to the NBA? NO! HE DID NOT!
what more proof do you need that the son will fail.
Instead of NBA his dad preferred to become an actor and try to kill Tom Cruise in a tunnel. (or was it the other way around. However.)

This site has been so upside down lately I have to read things a few times to decide whether it's sarcastic or not lol...

[Pauleta14]

for some here you just delivered one more reason, why Risacher should not be drafted……
did his dad make it to the NBA? NO! HE DID NOT!
what more proof do you need that the son will fail.
Instead of NBA his dad preferred to become an actor and try to kill Tom Cruise in a tunnel. (or was it the other way around. However.)

:lol

[TD 21]

In a draft that appears this relatively poor at and near the top and with an organization as rigid as the Spurs, I don't care so much about going from "two bites at the apple" to one as I do making sure they get one positive impact player and despite all of his limitations, he has a much cleaner path to being that than Castle, Salaun, etc.

Snyder (has personnel say) is supposedly a fan of Clingan. Johnson, 4, 8, Hornets 1st, Hawks '26 1st for Murray and 1.

[Mr. Body]

I'll give you that espn makes things up and I'll give you that trading 4 + 8 for 1 isn't something I'd be in favor of. I'm not gonna say it's the worst asset management imaginable though. Risacher is the top guy in this draft and he's the best fit here, so it can make sense if they're doing something else via trade to round out a starting lineup.

Risacher is not the top guy in this draft. He's just generous recipient of circumstances that put him that high. He really should be mocked around eight to ten. Burning two picks for him would be ludicrous.

[mo7888]

Risacher is not the top guy in this draft. He's just generous recipient of circumstances that put him that high. He really should be mocked around eight to ten. Burning two picks for him would be ludicrous.

I know you believe that and he is a generous recipient of circumstances, but the circumstances that benefit him are that he's the top guy in the worst draft in a generation. He'd be barely top 15 next year.

[rascal]

I know you believe that and he is a generous recipient of circumstances, but the circumstances that benefit him are that he's the top guy in the worst draft in a generation. He'd be barely top 15 next year.

Sarr is the top guy

[mo7888]

Sarr is the top guy

Could be, but it's not trending that way now... we'll get that answered in a few weeks though .

[The Truth #6]

Trading up for Tha Rizz would be the worst asset management imaginable. ESPN makes shit up. That's what they do. KOC is full on clown.
Or things are leaked on purpose and they report it. To me KOC is half clown, so to speak. And he's in a short attention span business, so it's fairly typical. I think he's gotten slightly better.

[T Park]

If RC believes in him that much to trade up for him, then I gotta go with him.

History is on his side and his talent evaluation

[mo7888]

With the Garland talk and Spurs moving to #1 rumors, I wonder if instead of 4 + 8 for #1 if it wouldn't be 4 + Atl 27 for #1? That leaves 8 to be included in a Cleveland trade for Garland.

[CGD]

With the Garland talk and Spurs moving to #1 rumors, I wonder if instead of 4 + 8 for #1 if it wouldn't be 4 + Atl 27 for #1? That leaves 8 to be included in a Cleveland trade for Garland.

Think I’d rather just keep 4 tbh. Maybe if it was formulated as “worst of SAS/ATL 27”?

[Darkwaters]

I concur. Assuming they don’t trade away 8, I wonder if their preferred combos ranked in order is:

Castle + Sheppard
Castle + Topic
Castle + Salaun
Castle + Dillingham

What would you think of Castle + Devin Carter?

[CGD]

What would you think of Castle + Devin Carter?

I'm only recently learning about Carter, but he seems like a Spurs type of guy. I have no sense if picking him at 8 is too high though.

[exstatic]

I'm only recently learning about Carter, but he seems like a Spurs type of guy. I have no sense if picking him at 8 is too high though.

Small SG who does almost everything but create, noted by his. 3.5/2.7 asst/TOs. And before you start taking about training him up as a PG, I’m going to share a basketball truism: only God makes PGs. It’s not about being a certain size or having quickness or shooting well. It’s something that’s either in your head, or it’s not, and if it’s not there, you’re not a PG and never will be. I’ve been following drafts for 25 years, and can tell you all of the hundreds of 6’1” to 6’3” SGs drafted that were going to be made into PGs and fell flat on their faces.

[playblair]

If RC believes in him that much to trade up for him, then I gotta go with him.

History is on his side and his talent evaluation
rc is not the gm brian wrong is..........brian wrong has made every pick since he has taken over.......plz look at the archetype of all brian wrongs draft picks.......they r the same philosophy he used in detroit........brian wrong is going to make the wrong picks history does not favor brian wrong.......

[Uriel]

If RC believes in him that much to trade up for him, then I gotta go with him.

History is on his side and his talent evaluation
IIRC, the last time the Spurs actively tried to trade up in the draft was for Lonnie Walker, who unexpectedly and fortuitously fell into their laps.

[SpursBills]

6'8.5" height, 6'9.5" wingspan, standing reach 8'11

Shoots the 3 well, good defense, minimal passing chops or self creation

Jaden McDaniels is probably not a bad 50-75th percentile outcome for him

[mystargtr34]

6'8.5" height, 6'9.5" wingspan, standing reach 8'11

Shoots the 3 well, good defense, minimal passing chops or self creation

Jaden McDaniels is probably not a bad 50-75th percentile outcome for him

I think Cody Williams is more Jalen McDaniels. I see some similarities with Risacher too though. Especially the similar 6’9 size. Williams is a couple inches shorter in height and standing reach.

[heyheymymy]

someone said Risacher was French Keegan Murray and I kinda can see that. The shooting form is similar.

[BatManu20]

1798745620255293639

[BatManu20]

1799063608204419475

[CGD]

In my view, if the Garland interest is real, then the trading up for ZR rumors are probably also real

[K...]

There's a real risk a trade up for the spurs would cause ATL to take ZR. Its not clear who ATL would pick. For that reason I don't like trading up.

[T Park]

rc is not the gm brian wrong is..........brian wrong has made every pick since he has taken over.......plz look at the archetype of all brian wrongs draft picks.......they r the same philosophy he used in detroit........brian wrong is going to make the wrong picks history does not favor brian wrong.......



I’m afraid to tell you chief, Buford runs the ENTIRE operation, AND he’s scouted, himself, Risacher

[T Park]

IIRC, the last time the Spurs actively tried to trade up in the draft was for Lonnie Walker, who unexpectedly and fortuitously fell into their laps.

They’ve tried to with Avdija, Hachimura.

[Mugen]

I honestly don't know what the Hawks will do. I'd probably put the chances of them drafting the following guys at #1 tbh:
-Risacher 40%
-Sarr 30%
-Clingan 30%

[KingKev]

They’ve tried to with Avdija, Hachimura.

If that doesn’t make you uncomfortable I don’t know what will. Incoming 4 + 8 for 3 just to draft Topic.

[CGD]

I honestly don't know what the Hawks will do. I'd probably put the chances of them drafting the following guys at #1 tbh:
-Risacher 40%
-Sarr 30%
-Clingan 30%

Apparently Coach Snider really likes Clingon, per reports

[spurraider21]

There's a real risk a trade up for the spurs would cause ATL to take ZR. Its not clear who ATL would pick. For that reason I don't like trading up.
if the rumored trade-up is to #2, its not like they would execute that trade days before the draft. it would be made while washington is on the clock, most likely with washington making the selection for the spurs, and the trade being finalized later

if ATL takes the spurs target, the trade would be dead and wouldnt be made

[SpursBills]

Projecting guys with Risacher's body type and skills is really fun. More than any other archetype, his is one of the two most valuable and definitely the lowest friction in all of basketball. Everybody needs long skilled jumbo wings and you can never have enough of them. There's not a whole lot that needs to go right for these guys who have any amount of shooting and defense to provide significant value in the league. And if you turn up the shooting, defense, and playmaking sliders in any combination to different degrees, you can see dramatic increases in value.

(Age 19 season stats for everyone)

Worst case:
Cam Reddish - 33% 3PT, 39% 2PT, 0.67 AST:TO
Complete and utter disaster in college, couldn't really dribble, couldn't shoot, couldn't score, couldn't pass, basically just a long wing who couldn't do anything. Now a fringe rotation player the Lakers tried to turn into a stopper. This is basically Risacher's floor if everything, and I mean everything goes poorly for him as he crushes freshman Cam in pretty much every metric.

Replacement level:
Harrison Barnes - 36% 3PT, 73% FT, 0.7 AST:TO
Just ok at everything. Can't really create, average shooting, ok defense, can't pass much. He's basically the base case slightly above average replacement level long forward, still a decent player, but nothing to write home about. Boring. Let's turn up some attribute sliders:


++Shooting: MPJ - MPJ really illustrates the synergy between height has on shooting. Especially when paired with a quick release, becoming a 40% 3 pt shooter at that height opens up a significant amount of gravity and at baseline makes you a good starter. Sam Hauser is a lesser version of this.

+Shooting/++ defense: Jaden McDaniels - This is probably Risacher's 60-70th percentile outcome I think; McDaniels shot 34% from 3 and 76% from the line - Risacher probably ends up a better shooter but is probably an underdog to be as good defensively, as McDaniels is currently one of the 5 best perimeter defenders in the NBA; both of them with AST:TO < 0.7 indicates lack of passing/creation upside; they both have very similar physical measurements with regards to height and wingspan

+++Shooting/+ defense: Klay Thompson - This is the ceiling for wing shooters with little to no self-creation. Klay was 41% 3pt, 90% FT, 0.9 AST:TO; since I consider Klay the greatest 3 and D player in NBA history (sorry Danny), a 6'9" version of Klay with movement shooting would obviously be one of the best if not the best role player in NBA history. For Risacher to get here, it requires outlier development in 3 point shooting and movement shooting, although his defense can certainly get to Klay-levels

Notice that the above wings have very low AST:TO, generally a marker of less passing / playmaking. Let's turn up some playmaking sliders for fun:

+shooting/+defense/+playmaking: Nicolas Batum - 34% 3pt, 73% FT, 1.5 AST:TO, 21 AST%: probably the most popular Risacher comp, the biggest difference being the playmaking potential. Batum showed it early and his numbers reflect that, while Risacher at the same age has not shown anything similar yet

++shooting/++playmaking/+0.5 defense: Gordon Hayward - 45% 3pt, 82% FT, 1.2 AST:TO, 14 AST%: a lot of well-rounded goodness with passing, and playmaking that you could see early, ended up translating into a well rounded borderline all-star.

++shooting/++playmaking/++defense: Paul George - 35% 3 pt, 91% FT, 0.94 AST:TO, 22 AST%: pretty low AST:TO, but PG13 showed pretty significant playmaking potential early on. Of course, it didn't hurt that he also grew 1-2 inches after he entered the NBA which probably played a pretty significant role in his rise to stardom

++shooting/++playmaking/++defense: Jayson Tatum - 34% 3 pt, 85% FT, 0.81 AST:TO, 12.4 AST%: at first glance, the numbers don't look great and by the numbers Tatum wasn't an elite prospect. But he showed a ton of self-creation potential and also benefited from growing 2 inches after he entered the NBA, which undoubtedly assisted him in being generating his own shot


You can really see how progressively increasing the above skills create different tiers of players within the jumbo forward mold. As of right now, I don't think Risacher has shown me anything with regards to either playmaking or being able to generate his own shot, and his numbers back this up as well (0.57 AST:TO, 7 AST%). Comparing international competition, role, and context with college is always a little tricky, but the I think both the numbers and the tape corroborate to give us a pretty good picture. Getting into the Batum/Hayward/George/Tatum level of forwards is not impossible, but would require significant outlier development on that front.

That being said, a Jaden McDaniels type player is a 25 million/year player in today's NBA and a valuable piece to a championship team. With just some reasonable development, Risacher's low friction archetype could allow him to develop into an excellent player. He's not at the top of my draft board, but he should definitely be in consideration for a high pick.

[Mr. Body]

Serious doubt we have a Jaden McDaniel here. Rizz would have to be rolling some natural twenties to get his defense close to that level. His defense will probably be adequate in man to man and above that in team defense.

I see sort of a Harrison Barnes. Really I see a Klay Thompson with worse defense and inability to score at volume and vastly lower efficiency. He really feels like a Ryan Anderson or somebody like that. Stick him in the corner. Hope for some good defense.

[ismael-robert]

I honestly don't know what the Hawks will do. I'd probably put the chances of them drafting the following guys at #1 tbh:
-Risacher 40%
-Sarr 30%
-Clingan 30%

Lol really u "honestly" don't know...gee we all thought u did...darn. Nobody on this board knows. Gee u got risacher, sarr then clingan...so u basically got what the majority of mocks and posts on this board have as 1,2,3 thanks for playing

[buttsR4rebounding]

Spurs bill, great post! Very well thought out. I was on the fence about Risarcher, but you have I would now really like that outcome. I knew Mr. Body would respond like he did, but your analysis leads me to think he would likely become a useful part of a contending team. I appreciate the effort.

[Uriel]

Projecting guys with Risacher's body type and skills is really fun. More than any other archetype, his is one of the two most valuable and definitely the lowest friction in all of basketball. Everybody needs long skilled jumbo wings and you can never have enough of them. There's not a whole lot that needs to go right for these guys who have any amount of shooting and defense to provide significant value in the league. And if you turn up the shooting, defense, and playmaking sliders in any combination to different degrees, you can see dramatic increases in value.

(Age 19 season stats for everyone)

Worst case:
Cam Reddish - 33% 3PT, 39% 2PT, 0.67 AST:TO
Complete and utter disaster in college, couldn't really dribble, couldn't shoot, couldn't score, couldn't pass, basically just a long wing who couldn't do anything. Now a fringe rotation player the Lakers tried to turn into a stopper. This is basically Risacher's floor if everything, and I mean everything goes poorly for him as he crushes freshman Cam in pretty much every metric.

Replacement level:
Harrison Barnes - 36% 3PT, 73% FT, 0.7 AST:TO
Just ok at everything. Can't really create, average shooting, ok defense, can't pass much. He's basically the base case slightly above average replacement level long forward, still a decent player, but nothing to write home about. Boring. Let's turn up some attribute sliders:


++Shooting: MPJ - MPJ really illustrates the synergy between height has on shooting. Especially when paired with a quick release, becoming a 40% 3 pt shooter at that height opens up a significant amount of gravity and at baseline makes you a good starter. Sam Hauser is a lesser version of this.

+Shooting/++ defense: Jaden McDaniels - This is probably Risacher's 60-70th percentile outcome I think; McDaniels shot 34% from 3 and 76% from the line - Risacher probably ends up a better shooter but is probably an underdog to be as good defensively, as McDaniels is currently one of the 5 best perimeter defenders in the NBA; both of them with AST:TO < 0.7 indicates lack of passing/creation upside; they both have very similar physical measurements with regards to height and wingspan

+++Shooting/+ defense: Klay Thompson - This is the ceiling for wing shooters with little to no self-creation. Klay was 41% 3pt, 90% FT, 0.9 AST:TO; since I consider Klay the greatest 3 and D player in NBA history (sorry Danny), a 6'9" version of Klay with movement shooting would obviously be one of the best if not the best role player in NBA history. For Risacher to get here, it requires outlier development in 3 point shooting and movement shooting, although his defense can certainly get to Klay-levels

Notice that the above wings have very low AST:TO, generally a marker of less passing / playmaking. Let's turn up some playmaking sliders for fun:

+shooting/+defense/+playmaking: Nicolas Batum - 34% 3pt, 73% FT, 1.5 AST:TO, 21 AST%: probably the most popular Risacher comp, the biggest difference being the playmaking potential. Batum showed it early and his numbers reflect that, while Risacher at the same age has not shown anything similar yet

++shooting/++playmaking/+0.5 defense: Gordon Hayward - 45% 3pt, 82% FT, 1.2 AST:TO, 14 AST%: a lot of well-rounded goodness with passing, and playmaking that you could see early, ended up translating into a well rounded borderline all-star.

++shooting/++playmaking/++defense: Paul George - 35% 3 pt, 91% FT, 0.94 AST:TO, 22 AST%: pretty low AST:TO, but PG13 showed pretty significant playmaking potential early on. Of course, it didn't hurt that he also grew 1-2 inches after he entered the NBA which probably played a pretty significant role in his rise to stardom

++shooting/++playmaking/++defense: Jayson Tatum - 34% 3 pt, 85% FT, 0.81 AST:TO, 12.4 AST%: at first glance, the numbers don't look great and by the numbers Tatum wasn't an elite prospect. But he showed a ton of self-creation potential and also benefited from growing 2 inches after he entered the NBA, which undoubtedly assisted him in being generating his own shot


You can really see how progressively increasing the above skills create different tiers of players within the jumbo forward mold. As of right now, I don't think Risacher has shown me anything with regards to either playmaking or being able to generate his own shot, and his numbers back this up as well (0.57 AST:TO, 7 AST%). Comparing international competition, role, and context with college is always a little tricky, but the I think both the numbers and the tape corroborate to give us a pretty good picture. Getting into the Batum/Hayward/George/Tatum level of forwards is not impossible, but would require significant outlier development on that front.

That being said, a Jaden McDaniels type player is a 25 million/year player in today's NBA and a valuable piece to a championship team. With just some reasonable development, Risacher's low friction archetype could allow him to develop into an excellent player. He's not at the top of my draft board, but he should definitely be in consideration for a high pick.
So who is at the top of your draft board?

[Mr. Body]

Spurs bill, great post! Very well thought out. I was on the fence about Risarcher, but you have I would now really like that outcome. I knew Mr. Body would respond like he did, but your analysis leads me to think he would likely become a useful part of a contending team. I appreciate the effort.

I mean, someone listing the names of good players doesn't make someone those players. You get this, right? Bill is listing out the best outcomes possible. It's very unlikely he hits any of those.

This is the problem with comparisons, it leads the unwary to assume that when someone says Reed Sheppard reminds them of a great shooting John Stockton, then he's going to be John Stockton. Be better.

[Mr. Body]

This is Zaccharie Risacher:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/anderry01.html

[Mr. Body]

This is Risacher, really:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsca02.html

Cam Johnson. Drafted 11 in 2019

[Mr. Body]

Cam Johnson is really close to top outcome for Risacher. That's not a horrible player. It's not top of a draft player, even this draft.

This is what you get if Risacher's pretty shaky long-term shooting doesn't work:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/baldwpa01.html

Patrick Baldwin Jr. Doesn't do anything.

[mo7888]

This is Risacher, really:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsca02.html

Cam Johnson. Drafted 11 in 2019

I actually think Cam is one of the better comps for Zacharie. I expect his D to be better than Cam, but the rest of his game is fairly similar. I do think that's 'top pf the draft' in this particular draft though.

[SpursBills]

So who is at the top of your draft board?

1. Sheppard

2. Castle

3. Sarr
4. Dillingham

5. Risacher
6. McCain
7. Carter


For now

Prospects I'm higher on than consensus: McCain, Tyler Smith, Zach Edey
Prospects I'm lower on than consensus: Buzelis, Knecht, Salaun, Cody Williams

Priorities: production per age > feel/decision-makig > competitiveness/toughness, don't care as much about mold unless clear elite physical characteristics

[R. DeMurre]

1. Sheppard

2. Castle

3. Sarr
4. Dillingham

5. Risacher
6. McCain
7. Carter


For now

Prospects I'm higher on than consensus: McCain, Tyler Smith, Zach Edey
Prospects I'm lower on than consensus: Buzelis, Knecht, Salaun, Cody Williams

Priorities: production per age > feel/decision-makig > competitiveness/toughness, don't care as much about mold unless clear elite physical characteristics


Where do you have Topic now?

[SpursBills]

Where do you have Topic now?

probably back of lottery to mid first. The entire injury thing and his false wingspan is concerning enough that I wonder what else his agent has been fabricating behind the scenes to try and manipulate his draft stock.

[R. DeMurre]

probably back of lottery to mid first. The entire injury thing and his false wingspan is concerning enough that I wonder what else his agent has been fabricating behind the scenes to try and manipulate his draft stock.

The wingspan thing is funny, being so ridiculously off, but I'm still debating myself about it. I mean, it's more of a story because of being the unusual case of a net negative compared to his height, but in the big picture he's still taller and longer than Jalen Brunson, Trae Young, Darius Garland, Reed Sheppard, and Dillingham, all of whom do or would have advocates around here. I think if he was 6'4" with a 6'5.5" wingspan, it probably wouldn't be nearly as much of a discussion, and most people would just say he had fine size for a PG prospect.

[LeBowen]

The wingspan thing is funny, being so ridiculously off, but I'm still debating myself about it. I mean, it's more of a story because of being the unusual case of a net negative compared to his height, but in the big picture he's still taller and longer than Jalen Brunson, Trae Young, Darius Garland, Reed Sheppard, and Dillingham, all of whom do or would have advocates around here. I think if he was 6'4" with a 6'5.5" wingspan, it probably wouldn't be nearly as much of a discussion, and most people would just say he had fine size for a PG prospect.

If he had average neck, he'd be 6'4 and his wingspan is fine compared to his body, it's just that his neck is out of proportions.
I guess it helps with court vision. ;)

[R. DeMurre]

If he had average neck, he'd be 6'4 and his wingspan is fine compared to his body, it's just that his neck is out of proportions.
I guess it helps with court vision. ;)


yeah, it'd be pretty funny if the long neck was the physical rarity that gave him a 5%-10% advantage-- and then neck measuring becomes a thing with some draftniks :lol

[SpursBills]

The wingspan thing is funny, being so ridiculously off, but I'm still debating myself about it. I mean, it's more of a story because of being the unusual case of a net negative compared to his height, but in the big picture he's still taller and longer than Jalen Brunson, Trae Young, Darius Garland, Reed Sheppard, and Dillingham, all of whom do or would have advocates around here. I think if he was 6'4" with a 6'5.5" wingspan, it probably wouldn't be nearly as much of a discussion, and most people would just say he had fine size for a PG prospect.

The primary reason why I'm a little iffy about his wingspan is because his defensive projection relies so heavily on it. I think he's still a good prospect and I may still be too negative for him for the time being - his performances at ANGT and in international competition against his peers really speak for themselves. I do think the 3 point shooting will translate. My issue is this - first, as much as you can hand wave the ACL injury, but if he gets surgery, data says that his return to pre-injury probability is about 80%. Whether that's due to quad atrophy, graft rerupture, contralateral ACL re-rupture, etc. etc., doesn't matter (and I'll add that young age is a huge risk factor for re-rupture after ACL reconstruction). So you price in an automatic 20% reduction in his value. Then you look at his defensive projection - given his lack of lateral quickness and what I saw during ABA, I've a hard time believing he's going to be anything above a -2 defender - I could hand wave that away in the past because "7 foot wingspan" or at least 6'8-6'9, but I can't really do that anymore with these new measurements. So if you're going to be a -2 defender, and be a relatively high friction mold because you have a hard time playing off-ball, you probably need to be at least a +3/+4 on offense to be a good player - that's like an all star on offense. He might be able to get there because I believe in his youth, height, IQ, passing, but there's a lot of stuff now that needs to get priced in. Then there's the question of his agent, who seems shady as hell - what else is he doing to manipulate his appearance? Did Red Star play down to the competition when they played against Topic/Mega to make him look good? It's just a lot more uncertainty now and I'm not sure how to price all of that into his evaluation.

[exstatic]

Serious doubt we have a Jaden McDaniel here. Rizz would have to be rolling some natural twenties to get his defense close to that level. His defense will probably be adequate in man to man and above that in team defense.

I see sort of a Harrison Barnes. Really I see a Klay Thompson with worse defense and inability to score at volume and vastly lower efficiency. He really feels like a Ryan Anderson or somebody like that. Stick him in the corner. Hope for some good defense.

I think the NBA doubted even Jaden McDaniels would be a Jaden McDaniels type, since he was drafted #28 overall.

[Bruno]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.

[Mr. Body]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.

Really don't think teams are obsessed with measurements as much as casual fans are.

Like, did anyone really think Topic had seven foot monkey arms? Even if Topic didn't have seven foot monkey arms, which he doesn't, he's not some mythic creature only read about in story books. We've all seen him play.

We all have seen Risacher play. The exact length of his arms or hands or if he can jump another couple inches in a sterile workout gym doesn't change anything.

And if it does change anything for a team, they're e probably one of those poverty franchises who is always making the wrong decisions.

[Uriel]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.
Would be a dream come true. Risacher at #4 and Dillingham at #8 (or even, if the heavens are truly smiling upon us) Castle, would be concrete proof of the existence of God.

[AFBlue]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.

Is there an official site with the results? Haven't seen anything on social media about it, other than a clip of him shooting.

[onechance87]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.

how did salumdo or juan nunez do

[Bruno]

Is there an official site with the results? Haven't seen anything on social media about it, other than a clip of him shooting.

Yes, there is.
Measurements:
https://www.nba.com/stats/draft/combine-anthro
Agility:
https://www.nba.com/stats/draft/combine-strength-agility

[Vienna]

Yes, there is.
Measurements:
https://www.nba.com/stats/draft/combine-anthro
Agility:
https://www.nba.com/stats/draft/combine-strength-agility

that‘s a bit confusing. Risacher, Salaun, Ajinca all come in with athletic test numbers worse than the most 280+lbs center usually display…..

[Bruno]

that‘s a bit confusing. Risacher, Salaun, Ajinca all come in with athletic test numbers worse than the most 280+lbs center usually display…..

My guess is that players didn't put at all the same intensity in these athletic testing done in Europe for two reasons:
First, it's a cultural thing. Draft combine is a big event in the US mostly with NFL combine. There are no such thing in Europe.
Second, the setup wasn't the same. In Chicago they were about 100 doing the drills and there were leaderboard on big screens. In Treviso, they were 6 in a gym.

[JPB]

Risacher's combine results were between average and bad depending on what was tested. While Sarr looks like a lock to be drafted in the top2, I think it's still possible that Risacher slides to #4.

Not comparing but Kevin Durant, Gobert, Nephew, Klay, LaMarcus or Deandre Jordan, among other stars, had very average to bad combine results. Gobert was "historically bad" (see article below). Risacher is still a lock at top 2 imo. Or if he slides, that won't necessarily be because of the combine. (but I sure hope he does).

And let's not overestimate the combine. Every year, there are combine darlings who will never do anything in the NBA, and vice and versa. BB is more than just metrics, jumping or running without a ball in your hands and a floor to analyse. Combine can be an element, but sometimes it's not, live games is what matters at the end... and I'm sure a lot of stars who didn't participate in the combine would have had pretty bad results. Some sure did:

the worst-performing stars at the NBA combine:

https://hoopshype.com/lists/worst-performing-stars-draft-combine-kawhi-durant/

[JPB]

My guess is that players didn't put at all the same intensity in these athletic testing done in Europe for two reasons:
First, it's a cultural thing. Draft combine is a big event in the US mostly with NFL combine. There are no such thing in Europe.
Second, the setup wasn't the same. In Chicago they were about 100 doing the drills and there were leaderboard on big screens. In Treviso, they were 6 in a gym.

True, euro guys are not used to that and may not take it with the same mindset. but NBA teams will make their own tests during workouts.

[Dejounte]

Just thought up of a couple more comps for this guy… Trevor Ariza and Rashard Lewis. Maybe he’ll end up somewhere in between…

[Dejounte]

In before the “oh but having an Ariza or a Rashard Lewis would help this team so much!!”… bruh, not really.

[LeBowen]

In before the “oh but having an Ariza or a Rashard Lewis would help this team so much!!”… bruh, not really.

More like in before how are you going to compare Ariza with Lewis who was at least one tier above in his prime, if not two.

[Dejounte]

More like in before how are you going to compare Ariza with Lewis who was at least one tier above in his prime, if not two.

I think I acknowledged that in my initial post when I said Risacher can end up somewhere in between the two.

[Bruno]

Not comparing but Kevin Durant, Gobert, Nephew, Klay, LaMarcus or Deandre Jordan, among other stars, had very average to bad combine results. Gobert was "historically bad" (see article below). Risacher is still a lock at top 2 imo. Or if he slides, that won't necessarily be because of the combine. (but I sure hope he does).

And let's not overestimate the combine. Every year, there are combine darlings who will never do anything in the NBA, and vice and versa. BB is more than just metrics, jumping or running without a ball in your hands and a floor to analyse. Combine can be an element, but sometimes it's not, live games is what matters at the end... and I'm sure a lot of stars who didn't participate in the combine would have had pretty bad results. Some sure did:

the worst-performing stars at the NBA combine:

https://hoopshype.com/lists/worst-performing-stars-draft-combine-kawhi-durant/

I'm not saying he might slide because of a poor combine but it might be a factor. The main reason why he could slide is that he isn't a that great fit with the top3 teams and that they view him as a player with a limited ceiling.

I agree with you on the combine having little value most of the time but NBA teams will look at it. They have statistic people with analytic models that try to link combine results with NBA impact of prospects. These people will be one of the voice, that the GM, or whoever has the final say, will listen to.

[Mr. Body]

My guess is that players didn't put at all the same intensity in these athletic testing done in Europe for two reasons:
First, it's a cultural thing. Draft combine is a big event in the US mostly with NFL combine. There are no such thing in Europe.
Second, the setup wasn't the same. In Chicago they were about 100 doing the drills and there were leaderboard on big screens. In Treviso, they were 6 in a gym.

Europe still values basketball, just being able to play. Meanwhile an industry has built up around the combines and measurements in American sports. Football might be more specialized as a game, but it's still ridiculous. I'm the NBA those measurements are still obsessed over. Like, you'll hear someone say a player will drop because their arms are slightly shorter. Bruh, no. They're still the same player. Are they good at basketball?

[LeBowen]

I think I acknowledged that in my initial post when I said Risacher can end up somewhere in between the two.

Eh, I'd be disappointed with Ariza at #4, but Lewis would be perfect.

[z0sa]

In a dream scenario, he's definitely my pick at #4 if he's on the board. No question, even over Sarr I'd say now. He makes this team loads better, even if he spends the season bounce passing to nobody and dribbling off his foot on his drives post-kickout+hard close out. He WILL improve. Durant? I doubt it, but he's just the kind of "project" who will only get better at making defenses pay for collapsing on Wemby or Vassell.

[TD 21]

In before the “oh but having an Ariza or a Rashard Lewis would help this team so much!!”… bruh, not really.

:lmao In this draft or most of them, if you told me the 4th pick was going to yield a Lewis or even Ariza caliber player, I'd take it and run.

[Dejounte]

:lmao In this draft or most of them, if you told me the 4th pick was going to yield a Lewis or even Ariza caliber player, I'd take it and run.

Like I said before, each of us have our own philosophies when it comes to drafting. To me, it’s a waste.

[LeBowen]

Like I said before, each of us have our own philosophies when it comes to drafting. To me, it’s a waste.

So you expect to draft superstars with every top10 pick or what?
If we were to trade for a 20ppg, 40% high volume 3pt, long wing, we'd be looking at trading like 3 FRPs.

For me the only wasted picks are the ones that made no sense, like Samanic and Primo.
Reasonable drafting always wins out long term over taking random swings just for the sake of it.

[Dejounte]

So you expect to draft superstars with every top10 pick or what?


I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt because you’re not normally like this but today you’ve been taking my posts wildly out of context and responding with hyperbole.

No, not even close. I want the Spurs to try to put a star next to Wemby. People want the Spurs to be active when it comes to trades and free agency all for the sake of appeasing him and ensuring he doesn’t get tired of losing and leave in three years… I say that line of thinking shouldn’t be limited to trades and free agency, but their approach to drafting the sort of player that has an upside to be more than a freaking Ariza or Rashard Lewis. That’s aiming very low, and the kind of strategy that would continue the trend of losing.

[Dejounte]

If we were to trade for a 20ppg, 40% high volume 3pt, long wing, we'd be looking at trading like 3 FRPs.



And this would get any GM fired. The closest All Star that meets this archetype in recent years is Lauri Markkanen (and that’s giving too much credit to Risacher), and any team that gives up three first round picks for Lauri is going to be a treadmill team and deserves to be one for such a stupid move.

There’s a reason why players of this archetype rarely stay as All Stars past a year or two.

[LeBowen]

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt because you’re not normally like this but today you’ve been taking my posts wildly out of context and responding with hyperbole.

No, not even close. I want the Spurs to try to put a star next to Wemby. People want the Spurs to be active when it comes to trades and free agency all for the sake of appeasing him and ensuring he doesn’t get tired of losing and leave in three years… I say that line of thinking shouldn’t be limited to trades and free agency, but their approach to drafting the sort of player that has an upside to be more than a freaking Ariza or Rashard Lewis. That’s aiming very low, and the kind of strategy that would continue the trend of losing.

It was out of context because your takes about this specific draft class are out of context.
We'd all love to draft the next generational playmaker and the next superstar wing, but you got to work with what you have in this draft.

For most drafts my take is that NBA media space gets way too doomer about it.
But this class looks really poor if we talk players with star potential.
Not just star potential, but solid starter potential.
Shooters can't defend, defenders can't shoot, guards are undersized and can't playmake.

The only player with actual superstar skillset that would just have to translate to the NBA is Dillingham.
But he's really undersized and even with his skillset it's a question mark if he'll actually stay in the league beyond his rookie contract.
For every superstar with his size, a thousand of them don't make it.

Risacher might not have star potential, but as I said many times, Spurs need at least one high volume wing shooter.
Getting a great defender who can shoot 40% on 8 attempts would be a jackpot. Invaluable in today's league.
(I'm not saying I think Risacher can get there, I just think that getting such player is almost mandatory.)

And he's the only wing who's not a theoretical player, but actually has a skillset and isn't two years away.
Holland, Buzelis, Salaun are theoretical players. They need to develop a skillset and then translate it.

Topic has no NBA skills except great passing vision.
Sheppard is undersized SG.
Castle doesn't have star potential.
Even taking a wild swing seems impossible in this draft.

As we get closer to the draft day, my personal opinion is that one of these picks needs to be packaged for a proven player.
Whether it be DJ, Garland, Markkanen or someone else, I don't really care.

If PATFO does make both selections, I really hope Risacher is there at #4.
As for #8, just take a swing with Dillingham.

[Dejounte]

It was out of context because your takes about this specific draft class are out of context.
We'd all love to draft the next generational playmaker and the next superstar wing, but you got to work with what you have in this draft.

For most drafts my take is that NBA media space gets way too doomer about it.
But this class looks really poor if we talk players with star potential.
Not just star potential, but solid starter potential.
Shooters can't defend, defenders can't shoot, guards are undersized and can't playmake.

The only player with actual superstar skillset that would just have to translate to the NBA is Dillingham.
But he's really undersized and even with his skillset it's a question mark if he'll actually stay in the league beyond his rookie contract.
For every superstar with his size, a thousand of them don't make it.

Risacher might not have star potential, but as I said many times, Spurs need at least one high volume wing shooter.
Getting a great defender who can shoot 40% on 8 attempts would be a jackpot. Invaluable in today's league.
(I'm not saying I think Risacher can get there, I just think that getting such player is almost mandatory.)

And he's the only wing who's not a theoretical player, but actually has a skillset and isn't two years away.
Holland, Buzelis, Salaun are theoretical players. They need to develop a skillset and then translate it.

Topic has no NBA skills except great passing vision.
Sheppard is undersized SG.
Castle doesn't have star potential.
Even taking a wild swing seems impossible in this draft.

As we get closer to the draft day, my personal opinion is that one of these picks needs to be packaged for a proven player.
Whether it be DJ, Garland, Markkanen or someone else, I don't really care.

If PATFO does make both selections, I really hope Risacher is there at #4.
As for #8, just take a swing with Dillingham.

I’m not going to go in-depth about this right now, but maybe if I’m motivated enough later. It’s not hard to look down the list of current and past All Stars and see that a lot of them consist of “theoretical players” at the time that they were drafted. I’d even go as far as to say that each year All Stars are comprised of 50% “sure thing prospects at the time of the draft like Doncic, Durant, Davis” and 50% “theoretical types” like:

Haliburton - if only he could shoot and had a more explosive first step
Barnes - if only he could shoot
Adebayo - if only he was good at offense
SGA scouting report had this to say about him:
Gilgeous-Alexander can't be counted on for offensive firepower as a rookie. Just like he needed time in college, it could take his whole rookie season to adjust to a faster NBA, particularly if he can't consistently make outside shots. He'll come off the bench, handle the ball, pass and take what the defense gives him, but Gilgeous-Alexander shouldn't be projected to finish on either of the All-Rookie Teams.

So as you can see, the perception of players can be incredibly wrong and the way that these players don’t have anything going for them as far as upside goes is way overstated.

The list of All Stars barely consist of play-it-safe types and like I said, going after a mid ceiling player like Risacher is lazy and would be a sign the Spurs aren’t really trying.

[Dejounte]

I meant to post this snippet about SGA:
Projected role: Low-end starter
Without the speed, athleticism or reliable three-ball, Gilgeous-Alexander projects as more of a role player than a star. He could start one day if given enough support, but low-end starter, like Payton, is his likeliest ceiling. Gilgeous-Alexander checks boxes for a guard—he just doesn't own any.

[exstatic]

So you expect to draft superstars with every top10 pick or what?
If we were to trade for a 20ppg, 40% high volume 3pt, long wing, we'd be looking at trading like 3 FRPs.

For me the only wasted picks are the ones that made no sense, like Samanic and Primo.
Reasonable drafting always wins out long term over taking random swings just for the sake of it.

Taking a swing at#19 is not senseless in my book, especially not with two firsts.

[LeBowen]

Taking a swing at#19 is not senseless in my book, especially not with two firsts.

It was senseless because RC went to Slovenia a handful of times and didn't evaluate him properly.
Samanic was an unknown to everyone and noone expected him to be picked that high.
Both those swings were players noone else was actually going to pick in that range, just Spurs attempting masterstrokes.



I’m not going to go in-depth about this right now, but maybe if I’m motivated enough later. It’s not hard to look down the list of current and past All Stars and see that a lot of them consist of “theoretical players” at the time that they were drafted. I’d even go as far as to say that each year All Stars are comprised of 50% “sure thing prospects at the time of the draft like Doncic, Durant, Davis” and 50% “theoretical types” like:

Haliburton - if only he could shoot and had a more explosive first step
Barnes - if only he could shoot
Adebayo - if only he was good at offense
SGA scouting report had this to say about him:
Gilgeous-Alexander can't be counted on for offensive firepower as a rookie. Just like he needed time in college, it could take his whole rookie season to adjust to a faster NBA, particularly if he can't consistently make outside shots. He'll come off the bench, handle the ball, pass and take what the defense gives him, but Gilgeous-Alexander shouldn't be projected to finish on either of the All-Rookie Teams.

So as you can see, the perception of players can be incredibly wrong and the way that these players don’t have anything going for them as far as upside goes is way overstated.

The list of All Stars barely consist of play-it-safe types and like I said, going after a mid ceiling player like Risacher is lazy and would be a sign the Spurs aren’t really trying.

Obviously the list of bad talent evaluation is very long, but trying to go for masterstrokes for the sake of it is something I don't like.
Just look at those players you listed.
They had a guaranteed skill going for them and then it was about developing another one.

In this draft, that would be something like Castle developing a jumpshot.
Or Risacher developing self-creation skills.

It's not something like hoping Buzelis will exponentially improve every aspect of the game.
Topic is already written off because of bad wingspan, but Buzelis also has neutral wingspan in a position where it matters way more.

Buzelis is projected as an all-round wing that does everything well, but he has negative assist:turnover ratio and was really inefficent while playing against way worse opposition than Risacher.
Same goes for Holland who's completely useless in half-court. Not just because of his lack of shot.

Obviously if someone blows them away in workouts and they see something we don't, then take him.
But let's not pretend that for example Buzelis can be a Lamar Odom or even SlowMo level playmaker just because he dribbled around a bit. So did Jeremy and look how that turned out.
Who's to say Risacher wouldn't have handled the ball in G-league?

[exstatic]

It was senseless because RC went to Slovenia a handful of times and didn't evaluate him properly.
Samanic was an unknown to everyone and noone expected him to be picked that high.
Both those swings were players noone else was actually going to pick in that range, just Spurs attempting masterstrokes.

We’re kind of talking past each other here. You’re focusing on who was picked, and I don’t care who it wound up being,just that they took a swing at 19. I want them to rake swings where there aren’t any blatantly obvious picks.

[Dejounte]

It was senseless because RC went to Slovenia a handful of times and didn't evaluate him properly.
Samanic was an unknown to everyone and noone expected him to be picked that high.
Both those swings were players noone else was actually going to pick in that range, just Spurs attempting masterstrokes.




Obviously the list of bad talent evaluation is very long, but trying to go for masterstrokes for the sake of it is something I don't like.
Just look at those players you listed.
They had a guaranteed skill going for them and then it was about developing another one.

In this draft, that would be something like Castle developing a jumpshot.
Or Risacher developing self-creation skills.

It's not something like hoping Buzelis will exponentially improve every aspect of the game.
Topic is already written off because of bad wingspan, but Buzelis also has neutral wingspan in a position where it matters way more.

Buzelis is projected as an all-round wing that does everything well, but he has negative assist:turnover ratio and was really inefficent while playing against way worse opposition than Risacher.
Same goes for Holland who's completely useless in half-court. Not just because of his lack of shot.

Obviously if someone blows them away in workouts and they see something we don't, then take him.
But let's not pretend that for example Buzelis can be a Lamar Odom or even SlowMo level playmaker just because he dribbled around a bit. So did Jeremy and look how that turned out.
Who's to say Risacher wouldn't have handled the ball in G-league?

I’m not sure why you’re going on about Matas having a neutral wingspan when Risacher graded worse.

It is my belief that having no self-creation skills puts a player at a much larger deficit than a player being weak at something else, like shooting or passing. The way Risacher handles the ball so poorly right now it would take a monumental leap/ miracle for him to be even average at it.

I know a lot of you are traumatized by the team having poor shooting overall, but using a top 10 pick to fix that with a player who does nothing but that is overcompensating for something that could be solved through other means.

Investing in shooter only types will only make the need for a star stand out even more. And if the Spurs invest in a type like that to only increase the win total by a few wins, the Spurs will miss out on a chance to add a talented player. The Spurs need to swing for a player they believe in (and the key thing here is seeing it in workouts like you mentioned) every chance they get.

[SouthernFryd]

Not impressed. Prefer Knecht.

[exstatic]

Not impressed. Prefer Knecht.

He white.

[LeBowen]

We’re kind of talking past each other here. You’re focusing on who was picked, and I don’t care who it wound up being,just that they took a swing at 19. I want them to rake swings where there aren’t any blatantly obvious picks.

Fair point.


It is my belief that having no self-creation skills puts a player at a much larger deficit than a player being weak at something else, like shooting or passing. The way Risacher handles the ball so poorly right now it would take a monumental leap/ miracle for him to be even average at it.

I know a lot of you are traumatized by the team having poor shooting overall, but using a top 10 pick to fix that with a player who does nothing but that is overcompensating for something that could be solved through other means.

Investing in shooter only types will only make the need for a star stand out even more. And if the Spurs invest in a type like that to only increase the win total by a few wins, the Spurs will miss out on a chance to add a talented player. The Spurs need to swing for a player they believe in (and the key thing here is seeing it in workouts like you mentioned) every chance they get.

I'm not traumatized by the lack of shooting as much as by the lack of players on our roster who actually excel at something, let alone excel at multiple things.
This roster is horrible in every possible way. Playmaking, shooting and defense. We need everything and not just on average level.

As I said, for me Risacher isn't a shooter only type.
Combination of elite shooting, good defense and size is really hard to find in today's league and that's why I rate him.

I'll admit that I'm heavily biased against G-league Ignite players, but that failed experiment has given us every reason to not take it seriously.

Maybe you're right and I'm wrong, maybe it's the other way. We won't know until the draft and then a couple of years down the road.
I just hope PATFO gets the picks right, even if they draft players I'm not a fan of.
I get your logic, I hope you get mine.

[Ariel]

6'9" 3&D wing lacking self creation skills -> screw it, he's doomed
6'2" point guard lacking self creation skills -> omg let's take him
color me confused.

[Dejounte]

6'9" 3&D wing lacking self creation skills -> screw it, he's doomed
6'2" point guard lacking self creation skills -> omg let's take him
color me confused.

I think the difference here is that I can easily point out tape where Reed shows ability to gets to his spots with more than adequate ball handling skills whereas Zaccharie’s tape consists of poor offensive awareness when he has the ball in his hands leading to possessions where he’s unsure of himself and throws up a discombobulated shot because he’s run out of options. Combine that with a poor first step that can’t get by anybody and poor ballhandling skills where opponents can easily poke out of his hands… and you have an bleak outlook of ever being anything more than a 3rd option on offense. But I acknowledge that me showing that tape is meaningless to people who are already convinced who Reed is. Meanwhile, I’ve watched nearly everything on the web on Zaccharie and have tried to keep an open mind but all roads lead to the same conclusion. It’s not purposeless for me to watch Zaccharie’s tape as I’ve shown that I can change my mind on a prospect: see Castle.

[Mr. Body]

6'9" 3&D wing lacking self creation skills -> screw it, he's doomed
6'2" point guard lacking self creation skills -> omg let's take him
color me confused.

Are we talking about Sheppard? He does have self-creation skills.

He can move the ball around, he can make good passes. Maybe won't be a primary ball-handler or initiator, but he has those skills.

Risacher has none. None skills.

[mo7888]

Are we talking about Sheppard? He does have self-creation skills.

He can move the ball around, he can make good passes. Maybe won't be a primary ball-handler or initiator, but he has those skills.

Risacher has none. None skills.

I could be totally wrong, but I think Ariel was referring to Carter..

[DAF86]

Taking a swing at#19 is not senseless in my book, especially not with two firsts.

Any time you reach for a player that can be had way later by trading down, it is senless, tbh.

[exstatic]

Any time you reach for a player that can be had way later by trading down, it is senless, tbh.

Very few teams ever trade down from a position like that. They tend to trade out, like OKC with Sengün.

The back half of the first round is a desert, for the most part. The NBA half life of the players is short. I didn’t even hate his skill set, just his attitude. If you were to take 2019 Samanic, rename him Goran Ianovic and drop him into this draft, he’d be top 5 mocked. He was unceremoniously cut in training camp by Pop, and is still sniffing around the edges of the NBA. Not surprising, as 6’10 guys with perimeter skills don’t grown on trees.

[Extra Stout]

How in a scouting report does one distinguish between one 19-year-old that can progress in his skill set and another one that cannot? Is there anything more than guesswork involved?

[SouthernFryd]

He white.

Now I remember why I have you on ignore. You're a racist piece of shit.

[exstatic]

Now I remember why I have you on ignore. You're a racist piece of shit.

I’m on ignore? You must not take that function very seriously, then.

I’m not really a racist, it’s just that almost every player you like or advocate for is a white American dude. Someone else actually pointed that out in another thread. Maybe that makes you the racist.

[Extra Stout]

I’m on ignore? You must not take that function very seriously, then.

I’m not really a racist, it’s just that almost every player you like or advocate for is a white American dude. Someone else actually pointed that out in another thread. Maybe that makes you the racist.
If you aren’t drafting white SEC players, that means you’re woke and probably tanking.

[SouthernFryd]

I’m on ignore? You must not take that function very seriously, then.

I’m not really a racist, it’s just that almost every player you like or advocate for is a white American dude. Someone else actually pointed that out in another thread. Maybe that makes you the racist.

I only see your posts when you quote me, otherwise I don't see shit from you. Stop quoting me.

I don't pay attention to the skin color of the people I like. I pay attention to their game. YOU, on the other hand...bring up skin color. To the absurd point of even bringing up the skin color of the players OTHER people like. That's not only the definition of being a racist piece of shit...it's a fucking sickness. WTF is wrong with you?

[Bruno]

Risacher will travel to the US tomorrow and start working out for teams including Hawks and Spurs.

https://x.com/skweektv/status/1800451525644624082

[JPB]

Interesting take by Givony on Zach's defense:

Best off-ball defender: Zaccharie Risacher, SF, Bourg (France)

Off-ball defense is a skill that takes most players years to learn because of the intricacies of simultaneously tracking the ball as well as their man, being aware of low-man rotation responsibilities, knowing when to deny, when to fill gaps, when to gamble for steals and how to best effectively communicate with teammates on the fly, etc. In Risacher, ESPN's Top 100 No. 1 prospect, an NBA team will be getting a player who is well ahead of his years on the defensive end, particularly regarding his ability to navigate screens.

Bourg, the No. 1-ranked defense in both the French League and EuroCup, often tasked Risacher with guarding the other team's best scorer, even diminutive point guards, which you rarely see from a 6-10 teenager at this level. Risacher's activity staying connected to opponents off the ball, fluidity "getting skinny" fighting through or over the top of screens, and quickness covering ground to get back into plays to contest shots with his 8-11 standing reach (on par with most NBA power forwards) made him uniquely effective with his high-level awareness, instincts and intensity level. As he fills out his 195-pound frame, he should continue to improve. -- Givony

[Uriel]

Risacher will travel to the US tomorrow and start working out for teams including Hawks and Spurs.

https://x.com/skweektv/status/1800451525644624082
His workout with the Spurs is being publicized. That means they’re not really interested.

[buttsR4rebounding]

that‘s a bit confusing. Risacher, Salaun, Ajinca all come in with athletic test numbers worse than the most 280+lbs center usually display…..

Americans were practicing the combine drills for over a month before the combine started as part of their draft prep. The Europeans were playing basketball. You should get better at anything you repeatedly practice at. So these players will have an advantage during the pre-game drill competition, oh wait.....

[JPB]

"Woke" has become the new, compulsive way for conservative, reactionary people feeling they have no grip on things, and no argument whatsoever, to say "I disagree with you" (and eventually "do you think being more open-minded and tolerant than me makes you a better person?").

Then somehow convince themselves it is some kind of ultimate term that will devastate its recipient who couldn't actually give less fuck and just roll their eyes.

Woke, woke, woke, woke, woke...

[Extra Stout]

"Woke" has become the new, compulsive way for conservative, reactionary people feeling they have no grip on things, and no argument whatsoever, to say "I disagree with you" (and eventually "do you think being more open-minded and tolerant than me makes you a better person?").

Then somehow convince themselves it is some kind of ultimate term that will devastate its recipient who couldn't actually give less fuck and just roll their eyes.

Woke, woke, woke, woke, woke...
If Spurstalk weren’t so woke, would it allow all these furriner commielibs to come in and shat all over the forum with their American-player-hating takes? Woke just ruins everything. I hope Trump has enough space in his second-term agenda to purge the woke out of basketball.

[DAF86]

Just trade #4 and #8 to the Wizards for #2 and #26. Get Risacher at 2, and an interesting prospect would be there at 26. Some likely better than whoever gets picked at 4 or 8.

[Extra Stout]

Just trade #4 and #8 to the Wizards for #2 and #26. Get Risacher at 2, and an interesting prospect would be there at 26. Some likely better than whoever gets picked at 4 or 8.
Then trade 26 and 35 to Cleveland for 20. Hat tip to TD 21.

[LeBowen]

What about moving up to #1 by returning '26 swap rights?

There were some reports Hawks want Clingan, I think they'd be interested.

[baseline bum]

Just thought up of a couple more comps for this guy… Trevor Ariza and Rashard Lewis. Maybe he’ll end up somewhere in between…

I mean in a redo of a very good 1998 draft Rashard Lewis would have gone #5, behind Dirk, Pierce, Carter, and Bibby. Might even be able to argue he should go #4.

[Mr. Body]

Just trade #4 and #8 to the Wizards for #2 and #26. Get Risacher at 2, and an interesting prospect would be there at 26. Some likely better than whoever gets picked at 4 or 8.

Fuck no.

Guys. Seriously. It took only one future FRP, protected 1-5, to move up two spots in the Trae Young and Luka Doncic trade. Last year, Washington and Indiana swapped spots and it cost two SRPs.

The idea of using an 8 combined with a 4 to move up two spots in this draft is fucking horrendously stupid. I get that Givony said it, but he has agendas and/or is just another ESPN idiot spewing out garbage.

It's massive, massive overpay. Just stop.

[Mr. Body]

What about moving up to #1 by returning '26 swap rights?

There were some reports Hawks want Clingan, I think they'd be interested.

Also fuck no.

[baseline bum]

What about moving up to #1 by returning '26 swap rights?

There were some reports Hawks want Clingan, I think they'd be interested.

Nah I'd want no part of that with AJ Dybantsa and Cameron Boozer in the 26 class, especially considering they might have to dump Trae for pennies on the dollar next summer (if they don't do it this summer).

[Frenchfred]

"Woke" has become the new, compulsive way for conservative, reactionary people feeling they have no grip on things, and no argument whatsoever, to say "I disagree with you" (and eventually "do you think being more open-minded and tolerant than me makes you a better person?").

Then somehow convince themselves it is some kind of ultimate term that will devastate its recipient who couldn't actually give less fuck and just roll their eyes.

Woke, woke, woke, woke, woke...

Exactly but don’t forget that magas tend to be cognitively more challenged.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550618800494?journalCode=sppa

[DAF86]

Then trade 26 and 35 to Cleveland for 20. Hat tip to TD 21.

I think I prefer 26 and 35 to just 20. 26 and 35 may get you Carlington and Chomche, two players I'm really high on.

[LeBowen]

My logic is that Hawks won't get much worse as long as they don't own their picks.
And what are the odds of them moving into top4 again from 10-15 range?

Can this draft already be over with, it's a completely uncharted territory for us. :lol
Talking about all the potential draftees with worse picks is fun because noone expects them to be franchise altering, but when it's two top10 picks in a draft full of uncertainty, it gets stressful.
One of these picks absolutely must develop into at least a Devin level player.

[DAF86]

Fuck no.

Guys. Seriously. It took only one future FRP, protected 1-5, to move up two spots in the Trae Young and Luka Doncic trade. Last year, Washington and Indiana swapped spots and it cost two SRPs.

The idea of using an 8 combined with a 4 to move up two spots in this draft is fucking horrendously stupid. I get that Givony said it, but he has agendas and/or is just another ESPN idiot spewing out garbage.

It's massive, massive overpay. Just stop.

How's that better than trading two first round picks for two first round picks in a draft where every prospect looks mediocre? :lol

[DAF86]

Anyways, the point is that with each passing day I'm more and more convinced with trading up for this guy (as long as we don't get robbed. #4 and #8 for #2 straight up is a no).

This guy seems like the most sure thing to be a contributor on both sides of the floor.