Stephon Castle - 2024 NBA Draft Prospect

[Ariel]

Instead of treating it like a typical re-build or a better draft, they have to take it for what it is and make sure they get at least one high floor, plug and play type instead of multiple mystery box projects.

I kind of lean this way also. Spurs have more good picks to come in better drafts for upside swings, taking on not one but two projects that don't fit and take a lot of time and investment might put the Spurs in a tough spot next draft when the pressure will be much higher if this year's picks don't look good, resulting in bad decisions like selling low on the picks for immediate help or settling for safer prospect with actual high upside ones available. Point being, not taking fit into account in this draft isn't as harmless as it's being made out to be.

[LeBowen]

The thing is that there aren't many players with superstar upside.

I'd rather have Castle who would be a guaranteed two-way star with a respectable jumpshot than one of those theoretical wings who have nothing going for them.

If we're going the reasonable route, drafting Castle+Carter combo and both of them developing into high quality starters would mean we wouldn't need to look for any guards for the foreseeable future.
Considering how things are changing around the league, I'd say that elite role players like Derrick are worth more than 25ppg that don't offer much else.
If I'm in charge of building a playoff roster, I'm taking Derrick over Lavine or Ingram even their contracts were the same.

[Pauleta14]

It’s interesting in the “big board” world how divisive Castle is. I see a TON of Castle being ranked 14-25+ on boards and equally top 5.

Hes not some can’t miss guy with a safe floor based on this. He’s really either disliked or someone people buy into developing

Who is in this draft? (genuine question)

[baseline bum]

It’s interesting in the “big board” world how divisive Castle is. I see a TON of Castle being ranked 14-25+ on boards and equally top 5.

Hes not some can’t miss guy with a safe floor based on this. He’s really either disliked or someone people buy into developing

Who is ranking him 14-25?

[Ariel]

I mostly agree with this, but I do think Castle has a decently high floor. Even if his jumper doesn’t develop, he seems like the type of guy who would at least be a very solid 2nd unit guy.

A contender nowadays can have what, a single non shooter in the starting line up? Finding non shooters who are good elsewhere isn't hard, Ryan Dunn probably goes in the 2nd round and he projects to be an even better defender than Castle. Think about the stone in Detroit's foot that Ausar Thompson is, where they can't play him even with how good he is all around except shooting.

Also, you can get a solid 2nd unit guy for a few 2nd round picks. Point being, for all intents and purpuses whether he's a 7th or 8th guy if his shot doesn't develop shouldn't factor in our analysis on whether to take Castle or not, because the difference between that floor and a total bust is worth probably 2 to 3 second round picks.

[Pauleta14]

I kind of lean this way also. Spurs have more good picks to come in better drafts for upside swings, taking on not one by two projects that don't fit and take a lot of time and investment might put the Spurs in a tough spot next draft when the pressure will be much higher if this year's picks don't look good, resulting in bad decisions like selling low on the picks for immediate help or settling for safer prospect with actual high upside ones available. Point being, not taking fit into account in this draft isn't as harmless as it's being made out to be.

Totally agree.

I think the long wait made a lot of ppl forget how weak or without "sure" prospect this draft is. Some even ready to give up ATL's future picks

That's why i'm not high on older pospects like Carter and Knetch and want PATFO to focus on highest ceiling players to dev (ZR Castle Reed Dilli Cody Salaun)

[DPG21920]

Who is in this draft? (genuine question)

Reed, Risacher, Sarr and a few others that have at least some things they do really well that can be banked on I would say

[baseline bum]

With each passing day I'm more and more in favour of trading down to get more shots. I'd rather have 2 mid-teens picks and getting Devin Carter and Carlton Carrington, than keep 4 and select Castle. They are similar tier prospects, imho, and I'd prefer to get more chances to get it right. This draft should be treated as an NFL one, imho: get value by trading down.

I don't see it, you can only have five guys on the floor and everyone you draft needs minutes to develop. Would much rather have my choice of two guys than trade down for four and have way less control over who I'm getting. This isn't the NFL where you're trying to fill out a 53 man roster.

[DPG21920]

Who is ranking him 14-25?

Even from Timvps models: “ The analytic models aren’t overly optimistic about Castle; he grades out as a mid-to-late first round pick in most of the models I’ve looked at behind the scenes. What he did at UConn translated to winning but his numbers are much more pedestrian compared to someone like Reed Sheppard. And speaking of winning, it should be noted that UConn also won a championship the year before Castle arrived — so that takes at least a little bit of shine away from the winning part of the evaluation.”

But Im just seeing a ton of big boards posted on Twitter (some from guys I have no idea who they are so they aren’t notable or anything) and Im guessing they are ranking solely based on models without bias?

[DPG21920]

I don't see it, you can only have five guys on the floor and everyone you draft needs minutes to develop. Would much rather have my choice of two guys than trade down for four and have way less control over who I'm getting. This isn't the NFL where you're trying to fill out a 53 man roster.

Ehhh…I somewhat disagree. Spurs have so many holes that I think SA could add 4 rookies and not only have the minutes, but actually improve in wins too. Graham, Cedi, Branham, Blake all are either young or dont add to winning much and replacing those 4 guy (or if you trade Keldon too) means you have plenty of minutes and could simultaneously bring more to winning games even as rookies than those guys did.

[LeBowen]

Even from Timvps models: “ The analytic models aren’t overly optimistic about Castle; he grades out as a mid-to-late first round pick in most of the models I’ve looked at behind the scenes. What he did at UConn translated to winning but his numbers are much more pedestrian compared to someone like Reed Sheppard. And speaking of winning, it should be noted that UConn also won a championship the year before Castle arrived — so that takes at least a little bit of shine away from the winning part of the evaluation.”

But Im just seeing a ton of big boards posted on Twitter (some from guys I have no idea who they are so they aren’t notable or anything) and Im guessing they are ranking solely based on models without bias?

Or you can look at it the other way.
He managed to get into championship team's starting roster right away and was praised for doing all the right things.

I guess we should hype up Holland and Buzelis who are supposedly two top tier prospects who played together and couldn't win any games in G-league.
I'm not convinced Castle will ever develop his jumpshot, but I'm taking him over Holland and Buzelis and it's not even close.

[DPG21920]

Or you can look at it the other way.
He managed to get into championship team's starting roster right away and was praised for doing all the right things.

I guess we should hype up Holland and Buzelis who are supposedly two top tier prospects who played together and couldn't win any games in G-league.
I'm not convinced Castle will ever develop his jumpshot, but I'm taking him over Holland and Buzelis and it's not even close.

Sure - Im just presenting what Im seeing lol. Hence him being divisive. People like you love him. Others think hes not a lottery pick. He’s one of the wider range guys and honestly I would say Risacher is the same way due to analytics not liking him. Risacher is also a guy you see top 5 on a lot of main big boards, but on the non main stream boards hes like a tier 3 prospect.

[LeBowen]

People like you love him.

I don't love him, I just think he's the best choice in this poor draft considering our needs.

Others think hes not a lottery pick. He’s one of the wider range guys and honestly I would say Risacher is the same way due to analytics not liking him. Risacher is also a guy you see top 5 on a lot of main big boards, but on the non main stream boards hes like a tier 3 prospect.

Analytics are often wrong on European guys because it's a completely different environment.
Basically, ever since analytics had Ayton and Bagley over Luka, I've completely disregarded them when it comes to European prospects.

Imo, Dillingham is the only player with superstar upside. He's got the skillset, but not the body. Still, for every few hundred small guards that fail when they get into the league, one becomes a 25ppg scorer.
That's why I wouldn't mind taking a gamble with him on #8.

For #4 I'd be fine with either Castle or Risacher.
I'm just not that high on Sheppard. If he was such an outstanding shooter, why is his volume so low?
I'm not taking a 6'2 shooting guard if he's not a volume scorer or a primary playmaker. Would rather have Dillingham with boom or bust potential.

[DPG21920]

Ya - me saying what im seeing is not some indication that I think he sucks or whatever. I think its seems pretty damn likely SA ends up with Castle and I would be ok with it. He may bust, but I feel like most of these guys may. Feels like it will be the first draft with zero good players in it

[Pauleta14]

Reed, Risacher, Sarr and a few others that have at least some things they do really well that can be banked on I would say

Those 3 also have a lot of interogations about them.

Reed bc of his lack of athleticism and size

Risacher lack of playmaking

Sarr played in a joke of a league without managing to shine

Every prospects in this draft have huge holes. tbh it's all about PATFO's prefered choice, probably imfluenced by infos we don't even have (character, IQ, work ethic etc)

In many aspects Castle offers more garantees than the 3 you named. He's shined in a complex system, on and off ball, best man to man defense of the lot, he's safe the ball in his hand, has great body type and touch (which tells me there's no reason he won't have a good shot with work)

[baseline bum]

Ehhh…I somewhat disagree. Spurs have so many holes that I think SA could add 4 rookies and not only have the minutes, but actually improve in wins too. Graham, Cedi, Branham, Blake all are either young or dont add to winning much and replacing those 4 guy (or if you trade Keldon too) means you have plenty of minutes and could simultaneously bring more to winning games even as rookies than those guys did.

Four more rookies seems like it would stretch the coaching staff out pretty thinly and wouldn't give much chance for playing time. They have two very high priority prospects to develop in Wemby and Sochan, and I expect they're not yet ready to cut the cord on Branham. So that's three young prospects getting heavy minutes. Add in Vassell, Tre Jones, Keldon, and Collins and you're at 7 rotation guys already (they're not going to not play Collins given what they pay him). I expect they'll want to keep Champagnie since he's on a cheap long term contract that's great value for the team. Only gives you two more slots in a 10-man rotation and that's assuming you don't sign anyone this summer. If you trade Keldon it'll probably be for another rotation player since we're talking about a scenario the team is trading down in the draft and not up. So you're still at only two slots.

Also gotta factor in having 2 to 3 firsts next year in a much better draft.

[exstatic]

Reed, Risacher, Sarr and a few others that have at least some things they do really well that can be banked on I would say

Castle has more boxes checked already than any of them.

[Mr. Body]

Even from Timvps models: “ The analytic models aren’t overly optimistic about Castle; he grades out as a mid-to-late first round pick in most of the models I’ve looked at behind the scenes. What he did at UConn translated to winning but his numbers are much more pedestrian compared to someone like Reed Sheppard. And speaking of winning, it should be noted that UConn also won a championship the year before Castle arrived — so that takes at least a little bit of shine away from the winning part of the evaluation.”

But Im just seeing a ton of big boards posted on Twitter (some from guys I have no idea who they are so they aren’t notable or anything) and Im guessing they are ranking solely based on models without bias?

I'm guessing it's a lot of casuals who never watched any of these players and just looked at basketball-reference. The main, number one, and primary reason you get Stephon Castle is defense, and most of these people don't understand that there are two sides of the court.

Timvp is kinda looking at some of the wrong stuff, too. With Clingan and Castle on the floor together, UConn's defense was incredible. When you dropped Clingan, those possessions moved down to very good. Thing is, when you dropped Castle and only had Clingan, the defensive rating went to about the same very good spot. What does this mean? A dominant defensive center in the NCAA is a massive anchor, but UConn was just as good when it was only Castle out there. Obviously the team defense was seriously good, but those were the two anchors.

And when Castle and Clingan played together, they were stifling.

What everyone misses on Castle is that you're getting a potentially elite defender, possibly a Jrue Holiday type who is actually taller and stronger. What's more, Castle has good handles, good vision, rebounds, knows how to play the game, high character, high work ethic, a winning pedigree already.

Obviously you rate this guy high in this draft. He'd go high last year - where Anthony Black went, one or the other. Anyone who has him past the midpoint of the lottery simply doesn't know what they're doing.

[exstatic]

Even from Timvps models: “ The analytic models aren’t overly optimistic about Castle; he grades out as a mid-to-late first round pick in most of the models I’ve looked at behind the scenes. What he did at UConn translated to winning but his numbers are much more pedestrian compared to someone like Reed Sheppard. And speaking of winning, it should be noted that UConn also won a championship the year before Castle arrived — so that takes at least a little bit of shine away from the winning part of the evaluation.”

But Im just seeing a ton of big boards posted on Twitter (some from guys I have no idea who they are so they aren’t notable or anything) and Im guessing they are ranking solely based on models without bias?

If you go by guys like Russillo, their sources are saying this draft starts at a normal #8 or even #10 pick caliber player, then having castle at around 4 is probably right.

[John B]

Castle has more boxes checked already than any of them.

Possibly Risacher, Clingan, Reed, Sarr..

Would you draft Castle if Sarr dropped to 4? I’d take Sarr and draft Carter at 8.

[exstatic]

Possibly Risacher, Clingan, Reed, Sarr..

Would you draft Castle if Sarr dropped to 4? I’d take Sarr and draft Carter at 8.

Sarr has almost no basketball skill boxes checked. Pretty much his whole game is hypothetical, and based off length and athleticism. I’d draft Castle at 4.

[Mr. Body]

Sarr has almost no basketball skill boxes checked. Pretty much his whole game is hypothetical, and based off length and athleticism. I’d draft Castle at 4.

Yeah, I think it's Head Cheerleader syndrome. Sarr has been Head Cheerleader for so long, people think he's the hottest girl in class. But you look around and say, "Hey, wait a minute." While everyone just lusts after what everyone else is lusting after.

Sarr is good, but Castle imm is objectively better and, for our purposes, fills a badly needed role much more. Sarr is a 'kinda maybe fit' while Castle is an immediate, desperate fit.

[DPG21920]

Four more rookies seems like it would stretch the coaching staff out pretty thinly and wouldn't give much chance for playing time. They have two very high priority prospects to develop in Wemby and Sochan, and I expect they're not yet ready to cut the cord on Branham. So that's three young prospects getting heavy minutes. Add in Vassell, Tre Jones, Keldon, and Collins and you're at 7 rotation guys already (they're not going to not play Collins given what they pay him). I expect they'll want to keep Champagnie since he's on a cheap long term contract that's great value for the team. Only gives you two more slots in a 10-man rotation and that's assuming you don't sign anyone this summer. If you trade Keldon it'll probably be for another rotation player since we're talking about a scenario the team is trading down in the draft and not up. So you're still at only two slots.

Also gotta factor in having 2 to 3 firsts next year in a much better draft.

I can see that but I just view this team as in such need of talent and upgrades that it would not be a task too big to overcome *assuming* there’s actually 4 players SA rates highly enough to push Tre/Branham/Blake/Cedi for minutes etc….

Putting Castle in SL over Tre
Risacher in SL over Champagnie
Replacing Branham & Blake mins with Carter and Ja’Kobe

Doesn’t seem like to big of a deal to me with regards to playing time or helping win games. But I agree it seems like a lot and probably not realistic at all

[DPG21920]

I'm guessing it's a lot of casuals who never watched any of these players and just looked at basketball-reference. The main, number one, and primary reason you get Stephon Castle is defense, and most of these people don't understand that there are two sides of the court.

Timvp is kinda looking at some of the wrong stuff, too. With Clingan and Castle on the floor together, UConn's defense was incredible. When you dropped Clingan, those possessions moved down to very good. Thing is, when you dropped Castle and only had Clingan, the defensive rating went to about the same very good spot. What does this mean? A dominant defensive center in the NCAA is a massive anchor, but UConn was just as good when it was only Castle out there. Obviously the team defense was seriously good, but those were the two anchors.

And when Castle and Clingan played together, they were stifling.

What everyone misses on Castle is that you're getting a potentially elite defender, possibly a Jrue Holiday type who is actually taller and stronger. What's more, Castle has good handles, good vision, rebounds, knows how to play the game, high character, high work ethic, a winning pedigree already.

Obviously you rate this guy high in this draft. He'd go high last year - where Anthony Black went, one or the other. Anyone who has him past the midpoint of the lottery simply doesn't know what they're doing.

Ya - I think its more of some people just make their boards off of tiers and not fit/etc…it’s analytical to remove bias and they compare all sorts of data and comps and come up with the highest probable outcomes for their rankings.

Theres that and then theres eye test and usually you get a blend of both to a degree. But some with no bias and no consequence or pressure to make an actual pick just rate guys differently.

[KobesAchilles]

Castle has more boxes checked already than any of them.

Is one of those boxes shooting? Bc that’s kinda important today. This isn’t the 90s