2011 Draft Prospect: Jeremy Tyler

[Spurtacus]

Really shocked to see he's the Spurs pick in Chad Ford's latest mock. This guy went from late second to late first after the combine.

[xellos88330]

So the Spurs should draft a guy that was a third string PF in a small Israeli League club?

I am just saying that the guy has the physical tools necessary to compete against the bigger stronger centers/pf's out there, along with great athleticism to provide help defense. He has what is needed physically, the only question is whether he has what it takes mentally.

If he isn't prideful and just doesn't want to get better, but actually works to get better, he could amount to a useful cog. I am not saying he is going to be a savior of the franchise right out of the box, but in a few years, he could become quite good.

I mean think about it. You wouldn't use saw to hammer in a nail. Pop has been using Bonner or Blair (the saw) to try to get the job done defensively in the paint. Didn't work too well because they don't have all the necesarry physical abilities to do it. This kid has them. He is the hammer that has yet to be picked up and used. It is just up to the kid, should he be drafted, to learn how to be a hammer. That is all.

[dbestpro]

Pop will never, even in 5 years, give this kid any meaningful minutes. Pop plays players based on their mensa score, not on their talent. RJ and Bonner test quite well off the court. If you want a player that actually get the chance to make a difference, find someone who can discuss political international affairs.

[ChuckD]

Who says Pop will be with the Spurs in 5 years? Draft this kid, sign Ryan Richards, once Duncan retires Manu will likely be right behind him and that leaves the Spurs with 4 or 5 players about to reach their prime or in it. Just fast-forward 3 years and the line up will look like:

Hill(26)
Anderson(25)
RJ(49)
Richards(22)
Tyler(22)

That's a lottery team.

[ChuckD]

Yeah, that Archuleta thing is a fitness program for sale. I'd take any claims with a grain of sand the size of a boulder. If you believe it, I have some ocean-front property for sale in the Phoenix suburbs.

Also, WTF does that have to do with that lineup you posted being a lottery team?

You post like it's a fact and you have nothing to back it. That video of Josh McRoberts was from an angle higher than the rim, and still showed his head at least 6 inches under the rim, which would put the math for your hypothetical 40 inch vertical at 34. Now, in the realm of the height from the floor to the rim, 6 inches is only 1/20th of that length, but 6 inches off his vert puts him into the more human 34 category, and not your claimed 40. If JM had a 40, he'd be ting on everyone and an All Pro, and that's no lie. You're a bull ter, plain and simple.

[objective]

that McRoberts video is not at the rim.

besides

There's plenty of footage of Tyler playing for the Tokyo Apache on youtube, and he plays in the footage available like an earthbound player. Lots of spinning and leaning and traveling but no high flying. During gameplay he often doesn't even look like he's performing better than a 20 inch vertical. He looks closer to Zach Randolph and Jackie Butler than Amare Stoudemire or Blake Griffen.

[objective]

Yeah, that Archuleta thing is a fitness program for sale. I'd take any claims with a grain of sand the size of a boulder. If you believe it, I have some ocean-front property for sale in the Phoenix suburbs.

Archuleta's dvd was quite extreme. And right when it was made the boast was that it's techniques were keeping him injury free; as soon as he got the 2nd contract after it's release his body fell apart.

I don't think I'd want a brutally raw player like Tyler or anyone else working their way to methods like jumping off of boxes 6 feet in the air and landing on their toes in a knees flexed position or some of the other extremes just to get his vertical up a couple of inches. That example may not be exactly what was done but I haven't watched the dvd for a couple of years, but it was uncommon stuff.

Better to spend all those hours working on his actual game.

[yavozerb]

Holy crap, you guys are still talking about vertical jumps..

[JonNOKC]

Holy crap, you guys are still talking about vertical jumps..

No kidding - at the end of the day there is no doubt Tyler has the physical/athletic tools necessary to play in the NBA - if he never succeeds in the NBA it will be due to lack of Basketball IQ, developing skill set, and overall mental toughness/maturity.

[Uriel]

Pop will never, even in 5 years, give this kid any meaningful minutes. Pop plays players based on their mensa score, not on their talent. RJ and Bonner test quite well off the court. If you want a player that actually get the chance to make a difference, find someone who can discuss political international affairs.

That's honestly a big part of the reason why I'm so proud to be a Spurs fan. Anyone can put together a team of talented knuckleheads to fill the roster, but the fact that the Spurs can create a culture that breeds grounded, professional people with positive off-the-court attributes and still be among the winningest franchises in professional sports speaks volumes about the laudability of the Spurs' model.

Speaking of Mensa scores, Matt Bonner has an SAT score of 1350 which when converted to IQ measures out at 139 at a standard deviation of 15. The minimum for admission into Mensa given that standard deviation is 130. That means he's more than smart enough to join a high IQ society that mandates one's IQ be higher than 98% of the world population. 98%.

[Tyrone Jenkins]

Tyler is SEVERELY immature. You can't teach maturity - you can coax it out of guys but ultimately idiots will show their true colors sooner or later.

Unless this kid is projected to be the next Wilt Chamberlain, I wouldn't draft him. If he goes undrafted, I'd take a look at him then.

[JonNOKC]

Tyler is SEVERELY immature. You can't teach maturity - you can coax it out of guys but ultimately idiots will show their true colors sooner or later.

Unless this kid is projected to be the next Wilt Chamberlain, I wouldn't draft him. If he goes undrafted, I'd take a look at him then.

The list of guys who were immature or knuckleheads and later went on to have strong careers is long - if he was 25 or older with a track record I would be worried but he is 19 - you may not be able to teach someone maturity but most people learn to grow up due to the consequences of our actions - the one thing I know you can not teach is size and he is one of the few in this draft that have legitimate size both height and girth

It appears he has matured a a lot from his experience of having to go overseas - maybe it is just an act for the draft - but you have to take a look at this guy because at 19 he already has an NBA body and has shown some ability to be able to learn and mature- if he develops his skillset and BB IQ his potential/upside is much greater vs. most the other bigs that would be available

I have said many times if the Spurs want to get better now the best option is a trade - I like Benson just think there is a chance you could grab him at 58 or with a small trade that moves you into middle of 2nd round

[dbestpro]

I don't think Pop would give him a chance, but what do you expect for the last pick of the first round?

[SenorSpur]

That's honestly a big part of the reason why I'm so proud to be a Spurs fan. Anyone can put together a team of talented knuckleheads to fill the roster, but the fact that the Spurs can create a culture that breeds grounded, professional people with positive off-the-court attributes and still be among the winningest franchises in professional sports speaks volumes about the laudability of the Spurs' model.

Speaking of Mensa scores, Matt Bonner has an SAT score of 1350 which when converted to IQ measures out at 139 at a standard deviation of 15. The minimum for admission into Mensa given that standard deviation is 130. That means he's more than smart enough to join a high IQ society that mandates one's IQ be higher than 98% of the world population. 98%.

That's all well and good regarding Bonner, but none of that statistical IQ jargon means anything when he's getting abused on the low-block by opposing frontcourt players. Nor does it help him get over his well-earned reputation as a perennial playoff choker.

I digress. Let's get back to Tyler.

The way I see it, the kid made a questionable decision by forging his final year of school to play professionally. However, he says himself how that experience helped him to mature. After all, what young player hasn't made some mistakes? The kid may have had some immature moments, but he's certainly not stupid. I've heard his extensive interviews and he comes across quite intelligent. He certainly sounded as though he's learned some lessons. He certainly has something to prove, which is a quality the Spurs cherish.

Another positive for him is that, despite spending time abroad alone, he's got both his parents as major influences in his life. I just think that dual parental influence gives him a much better support system than most.

Furthermore, I totally believe that any reasonably intelligent young kid, that is placed into the protective cocoon of the Spurs organization, cannot help but to conform to the Spurs way. He simply has no other choice.

All that said, if this kid is available @ #29, and assuming he's the best option on the board, and if he truly has "gotten over himself", I'm sure the Spurs would strongly consider him. After all, they've been scouting him and working him out for a reason.

[jjktkk]

That's all well and good regarding Bonner, but none of that statistical IQ jargon means anything when he's getting abused on the low-block by opposing frontcourt players. Nor does it help him get over his well-earned reputation as a perennial playoff choker.

I digress. Let's get back to Tyler.

The way I see it, the kid made a questionable decision by forging his final year of school to play professionally. However, he says himself how that experience helped him to mature. After all, what young player hasn't made some mistakes? The kid may have had some immature moments, but he's certainly not stupid. I've heard his extensive interviews and he comes across quite intelligent. He certainly sounded as though he's learned some lessons. He certainly has something to prove, which is a quality the Spurs cherish.

Another positive for him is that, despite spending time abroad alone, he's got both his parents as major influences in his life. I just think that dual parental influence gives him a much better support system than most.

Furthermore, I totally believe that any reasonably intelligent young kid, that is placed into the protective cocoon of the Spurs organization, cannot help but to conform to the Spurs way. He simply has no other choice.

All that said, if this kid is available @ #29, and assuming he's the best option on the board, and if he truly has "gotten over himself", I'm sure the Spurs would strongly consider him. After all, they've been scouting him and working him out for a reason.

This.

[Bruno]

What has done Tyler for being picked in the first round pick?

[pad300]

What has done Tyler for being picked in the first round pick?

6'11" tall, 260 lbs, 7'5" wingspan, notable athleticism for his size...Nothing more.

At the bottom end of this draft, I suspect that's enough...

[Bruno]

6'11" tall, 260 lbs, 7'5" wingspan, notable athleticism for his size...Nothing more.

Wow, that's thin.

[elemento]

This guy is this year's Hassan Whiteside

He does not deserve a guaranteed contract at all !

[Man In Black]

I've seen him play in his Junior year. San Diego High School is 24 minutes away and he went for like 30 & 20 rebounds or some crazy like that. The team he was playing though, their tallest post player was 6'4" and on the thin side.

Tyler looks more like... say, former HS Legend and Boston Celtic, Thomas Hamilton. In High School, he was 7'2 and 310 lbs. He was awesome as a Chicago prep playing alongside Rashard Griffith. Then he just balloneed up to 360 and that was that.

That sounds eerily like Jackie Butler, who...despite being the in the professional ranks with the Spurs, could never quite get himself to a level where he could contribute. Despite the fact that Larry Brown himself, called Jackie the best post player he had when he was coaching the Knicks.

I would like to see Tyler surprise, but this is the NBA and while guys like Brandon Jennings sucked elsewhere, like Roma, here in the NBA, he's done pretty well. I hope Tyler can follow that track but the allure of the lifestyle is what could set him back.

[yavozerb]

Hopeully the spurs are not desperate enough to gamble on this guy..Does not at all have the mental strength to become a legit professional basketball player.

[JonNOKC]

Hopeully the spurs are not desperate enough to gamble on this guy..Does not at all have the mental strength to become a legit professional basketball player.

again I think it is a reach to say he is immature or lacks mental toughness at 19 - he is a young kid that made one bonehead decision (which at 17 I can hardly think this was his decision), and other than that there is little to go on as a reflection of his maturity/mental toughness - It is safe to say that decision was not a good one but really his mental toughness/maturity is simply an unknown.

The Spurs need to do their research on his work ethic in Europe/Asia - there is no doubt he worker hard at least the weeks before combine as he came in great shape and was well prepared for his interviews.

There is no way of knowing what may happen once he gets paid - but every player available at 29th will have question marks whether it be physical tools or maturity or lack of basketball resume

[Uriel]

If history is any indication, the Spurs will not draft Tyler, simply by virtue of the fact that he's already the most discussed draft prospect on SpursTalk by far.

Kidding aside, given the premium the Spurs put on character, I think it's safe to say that if Tyler had any crippling immaturity issues left in him, the Spurs will not hesitate to pass on drafting him. That said, if they do end up drafting him, I think that will say a lot about how far he has come and how convinced the Spurs are that he has grown up since the bad decisions he made a couple of years back. At the very least, he will, as a point many of you have made, be forced to conform to the Spurs' culture, or he won't last very long (see: Jackie Butler).

[Uriel]

That's all well and good regarding Bonner, but none of that statistical IQ jargon means anything when he's getting abused on the low-block by opposing frontcourt players. Nor does it help him get over his well-earned reputation as a perennial playoff choker.

Maybe so, but I'm partial to intrinsically intelligent people. I wouldn't exactly refer to myself as a Matt Bonner apologist, but I don't think he's being judged as fairly as he could.

His so-called "well-earned reputation as a playoff choker" should be looked at in the proper context, because the reality is, the stagnation that has occurred in 3-point shooting during the playoffs has mostly been team-wide. If I recall correctly, Manu Ginobili in a blog post even went so far as to say one of the primary reasons for their loss to the Grizzlies was the inability of everyone in the team, save for RJ (RJ!), to consistently rely on the weapon that had made them so deadly all regular season long.

As for getting abused by post players, I think perception is key, and I think Matt Bonner is getting victimized somewhat by subtle forms of discrimination as a result of his physical appearance. I'm not saying Bonner is a great or even good post defender, but I think given the physical tools available to him, he's made the most of what he's had to at least be passable on that front. But the fact is, it's fairly easy to think otherwise because he doesn't fit the profile of a conventional big man; that is, he's white and has red hair. I mean, let's be honest here: if Matt Bonner looked like Shaq, he wouldn't be accused of getting "abused" on the post nearly to the same extent. But because he looks soft and unintimidating in every conceivable way, then he becomes an easier target for criticism in that area.

As an aside, if you don't buy the notion that first impressions or physical appearance plays that big of a role in life, then may I recommend Blink by Malcolm Gladwell?

[SenorSpur]

Maybe so, but I'm partial to intrinsically intelligent people. I wouldn't exactly refer to myself as a Matt Bonner apologist, but I don't think he's being judged as fairly as he could.

His so-called "well-earned reputation as a playoff choker" should be looked at in the proper context, because the reality is, the stagnation that has occurred in 3-point shooting during the playoffs has mostly been team-wide. If I recall correctly, Manu Ginobili in a blog post even went so far as to say one of the primary reasons for their loss to the Grizzlies was the inability of everyone in the team, save for RJ (RJ!), to consistently rely on the weapon that had made them so deadly all regular season long.

As for getting abused by post players, I think perception is key, and I think Matt Bonner is getting victimized somewhat by subtle forms of discrimination as a result of his physical appearance. I'm not saying Bonner is a great or even good post defender, but I think given the physical tools available to him, he's made the most of what he's had to at least be passable on that front. But the fact is, it's fairly easy to think otherwise because he doesn't fit the profile of a conventional big man; that is, he's white and has red hair. I mean, let's be honest here: if Matt Bonner looked like Shaq, he wouldn't be accused of getting "abused" on the post nearly to the same extent. But because he looks soft and unintimidating in every conceivable way, then he becomes an easier target for criticism in that area.

As an aside, if you don't buy the notion that first impressions or physical appearance plays that big of a role in life, then may I recommend Blink by Malcolm Gladwell?

I will admit that Bonner's dufus running style and clumsy appearance doesn't do himself any justice. It certainly doesn't help his cause with most. However most reasonable people focus on production - or his case, the lack thereof.

Of course, you are correct on one point. The decline in 3-pt shooting was team wide, but it affect Bonner more because 3-pt shooting is his ONLY skill - which makes him a severe on-court liability, when he's not hitting shots.

As far as Bonner getting abused in the paint, that's not perception - that is cold-hearted reality. All anyone need to do is watch the playoff series versus the Grizzlies. At times, it was very easy to predict where the source of the Grizzlies low-post offense would originate - it was whoever Bonner was guarding, when he was in the game. When you're a one-dimensional, single-skilled player, who is also a defensive liability, in opposing players and coaches will zero in on that weakness.

It's obvious to anyone watching that his playoff contributions have been left wanting. He's a decent role player, but he should not be a major rotation player on any team with championship aspirations. He's just not good enough. Meanwhile, Pop is wasting time and compromising his team's success by constantly rolling Bonner out there in clutch situation and expecting different results. All of which makes Pop an idiot. For such a smart man, Pop is giving in to the definition of idiocracy.

Say whatever you want. It doesn't matter what happens during the regular season. All I know is what I see. It occurs every year about this time. It's an annual event just like the changing of the four seasons or the Swallows invading Capistrano. That is, when playoff time rolls around, when the lights get bright and the playoff pressure turns up, Matt Bonner is nowhere to be found. That, my friend, cannot be disputed.