Stake you claim on White

[Russ]

Factors in White's favor:

1. He wasn't offered a big-time division one scholarship (like Steph Curry);

2. He's a late-bloomer (like Steph Curry);

3. He shoots from way past the college three-point line (like Steph Curry);

4. His shooting motion is (like Steph Curry);

5. He doesn't look like he should be playing in the NBA (like Steph Curry).

That's the best I can do.

[MaNu4Tres]

After watching the vid of Kadeem Allen shutting him down and watching his weaknesses vid on DraftExpress, I never gave this guy a chance, but I have since warmed to him and here's why:

1. He doesn't rely on elite tools physically. He plays old school fundamental ball and you guys know Duncan was like that too. He should age well, but that's a little far ahead. This dude can just flat out play and he probably won't have the best defender of the other team on him and should benefit from having better players around him.

You can't compare a post and a guard in this aspect. A guard absolutely needs above average athleticism to succeed as a lead guard. White didn't rely on elite tools physically in college. The NBA is a different animal for play-makers on the perimeter though. Duncan was a phenomenal athlete coming into the league and created significant separation in the post -- which allowed him to display wonderful footwork and high efficiency in ISOs down on block or 15 feet from the basket. Duncan later on got ankle and foot problems which slowed him down, but since he's a post with great hands, length, fundamentals, he was able to maintain effectiveness as he physically regressed. Length and fundamentals can take you a long way as a post in the 00's. It's a different story with perimeter players. If you're worth any amount of significance, you will have an athletic good defender checking you. You have to have above average athletic ability to succeed in those situations. I don't think White has this. I think his ceiling is very limited ( unlike Murray). I see him as a back up PG at the very best. He'll never be a good solid starter in this league imo. A solid shooter/back up lead guard off the bench is what I'm expecting at the very best.

[Dex]

With 29, you gotta go with a high-risk, high-reward player.

If the Spurs got a guy who is just ho-hum and floated around the team for 3-5 years, that doesn't really move the needle. We already have Kyle Anderson.

If the guy doesn't make it, no big deal, he's a 29th pick

If he can live up to det potential, though...Spurs walk away looking like geniuses yet again.

[TheGreatYacht]

I predict Buford drafted this dude so ESPN can repeat the struggle story White had as a journeymen (just like they did with Simmons, Green, Dedmon and Neal) every damn national TV game over and over and over again. Every time the story is told, Buford's ego inflates.

I can already hear it.....

Mike Breen: Jeff, did you know that Derrick White had a late growth spurt and didn't get a DI offer in college until his Senior year? Then one year later he was a 1st round pick.

Jeff Van Gundy: That RC Buford, how does he do it?

Buford at home:

[emanueldavidginobili]

For some reason I have this feeling that this kid is going to be like a CJ McCollum. Probably not as good because that kid is a stud but similar playing style. Like people have said this kid has been through it all and knows how to play through adversity and has a pair of nuts unlike most of the Spurs.

[TD 21]

I am more optimistic after reading his scouting reports. He's 23, but he has upside still. I'm not in the prediction game, but this is far from the worst I've felt about a pick. Still really wanted a big more, though.

Had him on my hope list, but under the other guys I wanted like Bell and Bolden.

More angry about the Warriors buying good gamble picks than the Spurs picking White.

You can't compare a post and a guard in this aspect. A guard absolutely needs above average athleticism to succeed as a lead guard. White didn't rely on elite tools physically in college. The NBA is a different animal for play-makers on the perimeter though. Duncan was a phenomenal athlete coming into the league and created significant separation in the post -- which allowed him to display wonderful footwork and high efficiency in ISOs down on block or 15 feet from the basket. Duncan later on got ankle and foot problems which slowed him down, but since he's a post with great hands, length, fundamentals, he was able to maintain effectiveness as he physically regressed. Length and fundamentals can take you a long way as a post in the 00's. It's a different story with perimeter players. If you're worth any amount of significance, you will have an athletic good defender checking you. You have to have above average athletic ability to succeed in those situations. I don't think White has this. I think his ceiling is very limited ( unlike Murray). I see him as a back up PG at the very best. He'll never be a good solid starter in this league imo. A solid shooter/back up lead guard off the bench is what I'm expecting at the very best.

[raybies]

You can't compare a post and a guard in this aspect. A guard absolutely needs above average athleticism to succeed as a lead guard. White didn't rely on elite tools physically in college. The NBA is a different animal for play-makers on the perimeter though. Duncan was a phenomenal athlete coming into the league and created significant separation in the post -- which allowed him to display wonderful footwork and high efficiency in ISOs down on block or 15 feet from the basket. Duncan later on got ankle and foot problems which slowed him down, but since he's a post with great hands, length, fundamentals, he was able to maintain effectiveness as he physically regressed. Length and fundamentals can take you a long way as a post in the 00's. It's a different story with perimeter players. If you're worth any amount of significance, you will have an athletic good defender checking you. You have to have above average athletic ability to succeed in those situations. I don't think White has this. I think his ceiling is very limited ( unlike Murray). I see him as a back up PG at the very best. He'll never be a good solid starter in this league imo. A solid shooter/back up lead guard off the bench is what I'm expecting at the very best.

I'm not sure about that. Good fundamentals in BBall is like knowing truth in life man, your going to be successful imo. And it's because he can play the pick and roll so effectively. I hate to bring my sorry self into the equation as a base for defense, but here we go. I'm not athletic or have any physical tools but I can shoot the three. I'm often guarded by the other teams best defender. I know the only way i can get past him realistically is a pick and roll. So if they don't switch I go around the screen and hit the open man. If my man goes under I shoot the three, and if they do switch I drive and kick or shoot the pull up, all things he shows he can do. My point is that even though I'm not an NBA player basketball is basketball. It's not a complicated game. I'm sure Pop has said something to the effect, if I remember correctly. If he didn't play the pick like another player I thought of when i thought of him, Marco Bellineli, then I'd agree he'd be in trouble and relegated to spot ups, catch and shoot opportunities and cuts, all of which he can do any ways, but the fact is he can pass out the pick too so that's where his ceiling gets higher and he has a shot as a playmaker. So his ceiling is like a lite CJ McCollum or a floor of like Marco Belinelli imo.

We'll see how he does in Summer League.

[Capt Bringdown]

He's not going to be an impact player, and even if he were, Pop won't give him the necessary PT to make a difference in the post season.

[MaNu4Tres]

He's not going to be an impact player, and even if he were, Pop won't give him the necessary PT to make a difference in the post season.

Jordan Bell will be the Warriors back up 5 next yr and their starting center by 18/19. Hes the kind of player that will be in the game late in 4th quarters because of how hes able to defend.

Bell was the type of defensive impact player Spurs desperately needed.

[duncan2150]

You can't compare a post and a guard in this aspect. A guard absolutely needs above average athleticism to succeed as a lead guard. White didn't rely on elite tools physically in college. The NBA is a different animal for play-makers on the perimeter though. Duncan was a phenomenal athlete coming into the league and created significant separation in the post -- which allowed him to display wonderful footwork and high efficiency in ISOs down on block or 15 feet from the basket. Duncan later on got ankle and foot problems which slowed him down, but since he's a post with great hands, length, fundamentals, he was able to maintain effectiveness as he physically regressed. Length and fundamentals can take you a long way as a post in the 00's. It's a different story with perimeter players. If you're worth any amount of significance, you will have an athletic good defender checking you. You have to have above average athletic ability to succeed in those situations. I don't think White has this. I think his ceiling is very limited ( unlike Murray). I see him as a back up PG at the very best. He'll never be a good solid starter in this league imo. A solid shooter/back up lead guard off the bench is what I'm expecting at the very best.

what's interesting Is that His Athletic results during the combine Were good, he just lacks some explosiveness.
Ds

[GSH]

More importantly, that's the only reason this thread will exist. The insistence on people trying to pull up old quotes to laugh a people is by far the lamest aspects of this board (other than doing this but skipping the whole "evidence" thing).

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. "Stake your claim", so that you can either pretend you knew it all along, or so that someone else can screw with you for being wrong. And the real problem is that even when you were right, about half of them say you were wrong. That's the Fathead experience.

[south side spur]

A guard absolutely needs above average athleticism to succeed as a lead guard. White didn't rely on elite tools physically in college. The NBA is a different animal for play-makers on the perimeter though. You have to have above average athletic ability to succeed in those situations. I don't think White has this. I think his ceiling is very limited ( unlike Murray). I see him as a back up PG at the very best. He'll never be a good solid starter in this league imo. A solid shooter/back up lead guard off the bench is what I'm expecting at the very best.

So with speed in the 97th percentile historically at the combine as well as standing vertical in the 99th percentile historically, he doesn't possess above average athleticism? You're being hypercritical.

I agree with your "back up" assessment for his ceiling but he's a back up at both guard spots. He can play off the ball and his offensive game is easily more polished than Murray's, this coming from a Murray fan who wanted him to get more minutes this season.

Going into this season without Parker, possibly without Ginobili or Mills, I'll say he gets more minutes than Murray. Murray might have a higher ceiling, but currently White is just better offensively there's no denying that. He's looking to create, the ball doesn't stick, he can score anyway and he gets to the line. It's not really saying much but he's easily more gifted offensively than Danny.

Defensively, we'll see this summer but it's not like Murray is a lockdown defender...at least not yet.

[Mr. Body]

Seriously. Even on the same college team, guys were drafted based on upside and not production. Swinging for fences vs. grabbing the more sure thing without the crazy upside.

The Gonzaga kid Zach Collins has the tools to be great but is raw and won't contribute much if at all on the first years of his rookie deal. Meanwhile, Williams-Goss goes late in the second and could be a very solid backup PG. Collins has a lot more upside obviously but may never tap it.

Someone brought up Marvin Williams who didn't even start for his UNC team that produced multiple other NBAers.

Well, I brought up Marvin Williams in the post you're replying to.

[GSH]

With 29, you gotta go with a high-risk, high-reward player.

If the Spurs got a guy who is just ho-hum and floated around the team for 3-5 years, that doesn't really move the needle. We already have Kyle Anderson.

If the guy doesn't make it, no big deal, he's a 29th pick

If he can live up to det potential, though...Spurs walk away looking like geniuses yet again.

Exactly. If he had no chance, the Spurs wouldn't have picked him - period. No matter what some of the trolls like to say, the Spurs FO doesn't make random, crappy picks. They look at things that aren't in the highlight videos we get to see. They talk to coaches and people who know their prospects. There's no way in we can know about a lot of that.

The fact that the Spurs took him says that he's got a good shot, for a 29 pick. The fact that he's older doesn't scare me a bit - hopefully it means he's more mature and more ready to be part of the Spurs culture. I was one of the majority of people here who freaked out when the Spurs picked George Hill - never again. I remember how terrible Murray looked in his first summer league games. Never again.

White is fine. I'm looking forward to seeing him on the court.

[SAGirl]

He's only had one year at that level. Only other guard in the draft to accomplish that in the same conference went #1.


Age has more to do with health, than ability. I know you were on the wrong side of the simmons argument quite a few times over age.There were quite a few young guys spurfan wanted that no one remembers from the past couple drafts.

Brogdan was probably the biggest miss. And hes the oldest of his draft.. age is just a number homie.

I was on the wrong side of Jsimms bc I believed he'd played long enough to be really close to as good as he could be. He's improved, but pretty much is also the same guy he's been, he just has had a lot more opportunities, minutes to play and a longer leash, but I know you will disagree.

the age issue is not in terms of ceiling... what I am saying is, in the NCAA he's competing depending on what team against guys with a lot less experience. it just doesn't impress me. His stats made him stand out from the pack but him being 23 competing against guys 18-20, there is definitely a difference in the maturity and experience in guys games. take it as you will. I am not saying anything about him in the NBA.. I haven't watched him really and stated that each time (JSimms I had watched plenty so it was different for me)... I am just saying by stats alone (since I don't have anything else to go by), it doesn't tell me anything of how he will do in the NBA.

[Russ]

The more I look at this guy, the more I see the elephant in the room.

He actually does have upside for only one reason -- he's an elite shooter.

Everyone is so used to seeing this guy as a plugger, a likeable story, that they've lost the real story. I know I did -- I thought he was the classic Spurs major-conference unathletic "high basketball IQ" failure, like Chris Carawell.

He's not. He's an elite shooter like Monk and Kennard, just without the acknowledgement of the draft gurus.

I really do think this guy has the same shooting motion as Steph Curry (and its not a common stroke).

He hit 40% of his threes and 50% overall from the floor. That's upside.

And I'm pretty sure that's what the Spurs saw -- RC's comments reciting his shooting percentages kind of confirm that.

[cjw]

Well, I brought up Marvin Williams in the post you're replying to.

I'm on a roll of not paying attention in posts. Happens when doing these on phone because forum is still blocked as su ious website on the PC.

The more I look at this guy, the more I see the elephant in the room.

He actually does have upside for only one reason -- he's an elite shooter.

Everyone is so used to seeing this guy as a plugger, a likeable story, that they've lost the real story. I know I did -- I thought he was the classic Spurs major-conference unathletic "high basketball IQ" failure, like Chris Carawell.

He's not. He's an elite shooter like Monk and Kennard, just without the acknowledgement of the draft gurus.

I really do think this guy has the same shooting motion as Steph Curry (and its not a common stroke).

He hit 40% of his threes and 50% overall from the floor. That's upside.

And I'm pretty sure that's what the Spurs saw -- RC's comments reciting his shooting percentages kind of confirm that.

The Ringer did an interesting comparison between him and Kennard - basically saying he wasn't much worse as a shooter than Kennard but had much more of the defense keyed in on him.

Also, 12 guys with 100 attempts from both 2 and 3 shot as well as he did from both ranges last year (56%+ and 39%+) but the list is populated with guys in lesser leagues and stacked teams. He's second among the players listed in assists behind Lonzo, had the most blocks by far, and didn't turn the ball over much considering usage. Josh Hart from Nova seems most similar who coincidentally went one pick later.

Very well rounded and low bust potential. Think downside is a 10 minute a night guy you can rely on for spot playoff minutes, with upside being a key rotation piece - maybe fourth best player on a good team.

Link: https://theringer.com/2017-nba-draft...s-4ae112d5adec

[SAGirl]

Old? I am always amazed at people's perception of age. It wasn't THAT long ago that the NBA banned players who were not old enough to have graduated from college. Drafting college seniors was the norm. Nowadays Sophmores are too old. So everybod thinks NBA teams need to draft these freshmen who barely know the game; then the same people complain about the quality of play in the league. You can't have it both ways. If you draft raw freshmen and have to coach them on fundamentals as college coaches formerly did while throwing them into the NBA fray against men like Kawhi or LeBron, then it will take most of those guys a few years to perform at a professional level - if they ever do. Ageism also seems like a strange prejudice in the modern NBA when it seems like players are generally enjoying longer careers - especially with the Spurs.

I responded to someone else about this issue.
I think its easier when guys are still learning how to play to evaluate them at the same age range. It may not tell me much about the NBA bc I am not a scout but stats alone don't tell me much in an NBA context when taking account age, bc guys who work on their games are indeed expected to get better. so at 23 he's already been playing longer and is more mature than Dijon who played 1 season in college and scored 15 per game for example his rook year. I would expect at 23 Dijon to have added to his game, have filled out his body etc... it doesn't tell me if he will, it doesn't tell me if he will improve etc... but it's not the same for me to look and evaluate Dijon at 20 and White at 23 by stats alone (its a hypothetical bc I didn't watch him play..) Mkny was coming at me with stats to convince me he'd be good and just on stats I can't. I have to account for how much more mature he is supposed to be than others he's competing against in his league.

and again.. maybe I am in deep water bc I know nothing else about him.

[TheDoctor]

HAHAHAHAHA

[GSH]

I agree with your "back up" assessment for his ceiling but he's a back up at both guard spots.

I don't know why. I said early on that KA had a ceiling, because of his clear lack of athleticism. I still think that's true, just because that is so important in the NBA now. But this kid seems to have a pretty good motor. , if you look at Kawhi's combine metrics, I think he only had a 26" no-step vertical? Look how far he has elevated his game since his rookie year. Look at how far Simmons elevated his game, after being nowhere.

Cagey NBA veterans are going to pick his pocket for a while. They are going to suck out charges on him, and make him look stupid. What he learns will make all the difference, and that's why the Spurs always look for smart, character guys. He's pretty articulate in an interview - that should be a clue.

[SAGirl]

Agreed. During the Chris Paul draft Atlanta raised a lot of eyebrows by selecting an unproven freshman named Marvin Williams in front of CP and Deron Williams. He turned out... blah. Now every team is scrambling to draft Marvin Williams. Everyone in this draft was Marvin Williams.

I wish I knew what you meant. that's way back of a reference for me...

[TheDoctor]

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. "Stake your claim", so that you can either pretend you knew it all along, or so that someone else can screw with you for being wrong. And the real problem is that even when you were right, about half of them say you were wrong. That's the Fathead experience.

Story of my Spurstalked life tbh

[SAGirl]

I think unless you have a guy with two or three elite metrics and what you feel are some correctable metrics, e.g. Murray with elite size, quickness and handles but issues with strength, shooting and decision making, late in the draft you're better off going after a solid, established college player with 3 or 4 years experience. Those guys are more developed and you have a better feel for their floor is, more likely to be an NBA player

This is a good opinion. makes sense.

[SAGirl]

We all know how you want'em big Chinook.

this is very weird lol creepy?

[SAGirl]

Had him on my hope list, but under the other guys I wanted like Bell and Bolden.

Watched his game against Oregon last night. Good game stat-wise, but the most impressive showing. Good shooting, decent passing. Issues with athleticism getting to the rim and converting it seemed all game long. He does play a lot like Anderson without the refusal to shoot open threes.

Hope Murray gets stronger, because they might be more suited to be together than one backing up the other. Schmitz had said on pre-draft podcasts things about how he might be best on the ball but with a bigger athlete who can get to the rim next to him, and that is more in line with Murray.

More angry about the Warriors buying good gamble picks than the Spurs picking White.

Thanks for this opinion
seems like a good complementary player with a potentially very useful niche.
I will probably like him based on what you said. looking forward to watching him in summer league.