EVERYONE looked, er, scratch that, IS more athletic than we are. We have become small, un-atheletic, and easy to score upon. 2 of the 3 of which would have made Pop's skin crawl a decade ago.
Eason fouled out of one game with 5 fouls in 7 minutes, and another where he picked up 5 fouls in 13 minutes. The impressive impact stats are legit, but the reputation for being foul prone is also real. He fouled out of 6 games total, all against the better SEC opponents. LSU was 22-12 overall, but only 9-9 against other SEC teams.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...-kentucky.html
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...9-florida.html
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb...1/gamelog/2022
So why wouldn't you say don't draft him, if you're so down on his BBIQ? Have the courage of your convictions.
I'm saying, for the record, that if any of these guys available, you take them in something approximating this order: Murray, Mathurian, Dieng, Eason, Jovic, Daniels, Sochan, Procida, you take them when your 9, 20, and 25 spots come up. I'd happily take burn, Procida, Nzosa at 38 to round out a franchise-changing draft.
So tell me why Eason is a bad draft pick and stick to it.
Did you see that interview with DWhite on the biggest change he's had since going to the Celtics?
It was that unlike with Pop, where he'd lose his , Ime Udoka doesn't mind fouls so long as they are in effort of being aggressive. White said he had to reassert his aggression in a different manner than he was allowed to do with SA.
Point being, sometimes, that fouling is a good sign of defensive intensity and effort. And of course that is coachable to an extent.
That's his weakness and he has to learn. You give Sochan a pass on his poor shooting.
I'm not saying it's a deal breaker-- just pointing out that the criticism is understandable, and justified.
Because he's talented and at some point on the x/y axis the talent of remaining undrafted players is overcome by the combination of his talent and lack of BBIQ. Like, I might take him instead of LaRavia, definitely before Houstan. I'm not sure why that's hard to conceptualize. I'd take him in the 20s because he's very productive. You just have to bring him off the bench and hope he's not completely wild that game.
A lot of his turnovers were offensive fouls -- charges. He's basically a bull in the china shop. He barrels into the lane and is prone to plowing over defenders.
Come on. Spurs took Primo at 12, but you wouldn’t take Eason at 20?
All this talk about BBIQ makes me wonder where Keldon ranked on BBIQ coming in as a rookie? Bull in a china shop maybe??? Clueless about the on-court situation of other players??? At any rate, although I'm not a fan of his, I will stipulate that he has improved his BBIQ SOME since becoming a starter, probably due to coaching.
I still believe that there is something to be said for an athletically skilled player who plays mostly on instinct as opposed to a cerebral player who analyzes the game situation and acts. Of course there are some who are a little slow with their analysis and miss the high IQ play. This is a game of inches and split seconds. We have seen a few players who seem to get the idea but are just a split second or two late in executiing while an instinctive player just makes the play instantly.
While it would be great to have a player who could discuss the finer points of Xs and Os and what he would/should do in a certain situation if it came up with a scout or coach off the court, he wouldn't be my top pick over a guy who can simply execute his skill-set without being able to discuss why he thought his opponent was slightly out of position and he could take him. You just "know" that you can make the steal or whatever and do it without thinking, eh?
I watched our Play In loss to New Orleans and one thing that stood out is that we looked short and slow compared to most of there players. It seemed that when Tre was out there he looked like a Hobbit and Primo looked like a Dwarf compared to the players they were trying to guard
Spreaking of Tre Jones. According to Basketball Reference he is only one inch shorter than Tony Parker, but has a lot of trouble getting his shot off against taller players. I don't recall Tony having that much of a problem, even when he went down among the trees. Anyone want to discuss why Tre Jones should remain a Spur or should be replaced as backup PG asap. Aside from his shooting problems he hasn't really sold me on his defensive talents either.
Yeah Tre Jones is not a hall of famer.
To be fair, Tony was an all-time HOF'er when it came to scoring amongst the redwoods for his size.
Very high bar in that regard.
yea his finishing was too notch but he is also quicker then jones
Perhaps I didn't make my point clear. Tony was so superiour in so many ways. You would think that the coaching staff would have been able to read Tre's skill set adaptability to the NBA a little better. Granted they didn't take him with their first pick, but we have a plethora of guards to try and fit into a NBA roster. Just sayin he was a stretch for them to pick IMO.
They're like completely opposite players.Come on. Spurs took Primo at 12, but you wouldn’t take Eason at 20?
The return value of Eason at 20 is so much more than a 3 years project Primo at 12. You draft Eason if he falls at 20.
If you’re discussing cutting a guy who doesn’t measure up to a sure fire hall of famer, we need to dump our entire roster.
Perhaps your standards are a bit unrealistic.
It isn’t even possible to be a stretch at #41. Unpossible.
If we draft a center or guard at #9, I would be thrilled with Eason at #20. But if we pick him at #9, or if we pick him at #20 after already drafting a Sochan at #9, I would be very upset.
Not at 9 too low feel and no pull up. He is similar to Precious and McDaniels athletic defensive events bench guys. Late teens to early twenties. I like Beauchamp more with that archetype.
Spurs are probably the most dull team in the league by the players they target.
Four or five teams tanked the last couple of months of the season and the Spurs passed them. Spurs need to change the unathletic aspect of the team.
Dejounte Murray is only 2 inches shorter than Michael Jordan. Why he can't be Michael Jordan is a mystery to me
that will only happen once we change the headcoach. We are talking about a guy who picked Mason Plumlee over Bam Adebayo
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
