If the Suns pick #1, who should they select?

[elindholm]

He passes the eye test

We are usually in pretty close agreement on things, but not in this case. To me, Bender doesn't pass the eye test at all. True, I didn't see a lot of him, but when I did see him, he looked clueless. Chriss, by contrast, seemed to "get it" right away, even though of course he made lots of mistakes.

 

[SirStefan32]

Rookies are going to look clueless. He made plenty of mistakes. I remember yelling, "Don't jump", "Do not reach in- you didn't rotate in time", and similar things at Bender (Well, at my TV) many times. Somebody on this board years ago said to watch a particular player. Don't watch the game- just keep an eye on this one guy. I think it was AZSteven talking about Scola. I ended up doing just that, and within ten minutes, I understood exactly what he was talking about. I did this again, and I saw outstanding foot work, excellent defensive instincts, and a solid understanding of the game. I also saw somebody who knew what he needed to do, but was frequently just a couple of moment too late. That's inexperience. He is 18 years old.

I do agree with you that Chriss was much better than anyone expected. He has a good feel for the game, and very good instincts. I would propose that Chriss exceeding our expectations may have affected the way we look at Bender's season. Bender didn't quite look the same after his injury, which is completely normal, so we may be experiencing some recency-bias. I think Bender looks like a high-potential kid should look in the first NBA season. Let's see how he does next year. We should see some progress.

 

[Sunburn]

Chriss, by contrast, seemed to "get it" right away, even though of course he made lots of mistakes.

Chriss seemed to get it right away? I don't agree. He had moments, but he seemed like a fish out of water the first half of the year. The light didn't seem to turn on until after the all-star break.

 

[slinslin]

He was an 18 year-old rookie playing a few minutes here and there before he got hurt and missed half the season. His pre-injury stats are fine for an 18 year-old rookie. He passes the eye test- he moves extremely well, does an excellent job defensively, handles the ball well, and has a very high basketball IQ. I don't understand what the hell anybody expected. We are talking about an 18 year-old 7'1 rookie.

1. Being 18 year old is no excuse for how bad he was. His pre-injury stats were not fine, they were just as bad as his overall stats.

2. Bender is 19 not 18. He is the same age as Brandon Ingram, Marquese Chriss etc Zubac, Murray are also born in the same year.
Yet these other young guys played much better and did not have the benefit of multiple years of pro coaching. If anything Bender should have done better than those guys.

 

[slinslin]

Chriss seemed to get it right away? I don't agree. He had moments, but he seemed like a fish out of water the first half of the year. The light didn't seem to turn on until after the all-star break.

And still he was about twice as productive as Bender, think about that.

 

[Hoop Head]

I liked what Chriss did from about mid-January on but I still have reservations of him being our future PF going forward. He played well considering his age during the 2nd half of the season but he still didn't seem like an above average PF. When he played with Warren it seemed like TJ was playing the 4 and Chriss the 3, defensively and on the boards. Chriss would stay in the corners on offense a lot or cut to the basket for an alley-oop or dunk. Chriss had a lot of highlight dunks and he shot well on his corner 3's but I still question his ability to do more than make some highlight reel blocks and dunks.

Bender on the other hand played inside defensively, challenging shots head on and boxing out. He didn't seem that out of place either when players would try to lure him out to the perimeter either. Offensively Bender stayed out on the perimeter more than Chriss though, which leads me to believe that's more of a design in Watson's offense since Chriss, Bender, and Dudley all played on the perimeter for the most part. I look forward to seeing Chriss and Bender play together more next year because then we should be able to see more of what they bring to the table. Having Len and Chandler camped out in the paint offensively and defensively limited their opportunities inside.

 

[overseascardfan]

I liked what Chriss did from about mid-January on but I still have reservations of him being our future PF going forward. He played well considering his age during the 2nd half of the season but he still didn't seem like an above average PF. When he played with Warren it seemed like TJ was playing the 4 and Chriss the 3, defensively and on the boards. Chriss would stay in the corners on offense a lot or cut to the basket for an alley-oop or dunk. Chriss had a lot of highlight dunks and he shot well on his corner 3's but I still question his ability to do more than make some highlight reel blocks and dunks.

Bender on the other hand played inside defensively, challenging shots head on and boxing out. He didn't seem that out of place either when players would try to lure him out to the perimeter either. Offensively Bender stayed out on the perimeter more than Chriss though, which leads me to believe that's more of a design in Watson's offense since Chriss, Bender, and Dudley all played on the perimeter for the most part. I look forward to seeing Chriss and Bender play together more next year because then we should be able to see more of what they bring to the table. Having Len and Chandler camped out in the paint offensively and defensively limited their opportunities inside.

The good thing is that there is no PF considered among the Top 5 picks so PHX doesn't face the dilemma of passing on a game changing big man in order to develop Chriss. Now if Chriss regresses or fails to show improvement then they can always look towards next year's draft to replace him.

 

[JCSunsfan]

1. Being 18 year old is no excuse for how bad he was. His pre-injury stats were not fine, they were just as bad as his overall stats.

2. Bender is 19 not 18. He is the same age as Brandon Ingram, Marquese Chriss etc Zubac, Murray are also born in the same year.
Yet these other young guys played much better and did not have the benefit of multiple years of pro coaching. If anything Bender should have done better than those guys.

Bender was the youngest player in the draft. So he is younger than all those players, by months at least. He is also a seven footer. His body is still developing. If we want 18 year old draftees to come in and perform at a high level we are fooling ourselves. If we want immediate contributors, then we need to draft 22 year-olds.

Multiple years of pro coaching--he was in junior leagues in Europe. I doubt the level of coaching there is much better than AAU or college leagues here. Top pro level teams in Europe literally ignore their younger more talented players because they know they will likely run to the NBA anyway. That is clearly what happened with Bender.

Bender also had to adjust to a new country and culture. He is on a typical developmental curve for a player of his age and size. I am not worried about him in the least. Just because Marquise Chriss developed faster than expected does not mean that Bender is a disappointment.

Could he bust? Sure. But it is WAY to early to tell.

 

[JCSunsfan]

As far as the Lonzo Ball vs. Markelle Fultz debate for the #1 pick. To me its still a tossup. It would come down to personal interviews. I would want a sense of each young man personally. If I think that Fultz could craft himself into a primary distributor, I probably would take him. But its so close.

 

[slinslin]

Bender was the youngest player in the draft. So he is younger than all those players, by months at least. He is also a seven footer. His body is still developing. If we want 18 year old draftees to come in and perform at a high level we are fooling ourselves. If we want immediate contributors, then we need to draft 22 year-olds.

Multiple years of pro coaching--he was in junior leagues in Europe. I doubt the level of coaching there is much better than AAU or college leagues here. Top pro level teams in Europe literally ignore their younger more talented players because they know they will likely run to the NBA anyway. That is clearly what happened with Bender.

Bender also had to adjust to a new country and culture. He is on a typical developmental curve for a player of his age and size. I am not worried about him in the least. Just because Marquise Chriss developed faster than expected does not mean that Bender is a disappointment.

Could he bust? Sure. But it is WAY to early to tell.

Bender is 2 months younger than Ingram, 3 months younger than Chriss.

That is negilible. Especially considering that Bender already spent years away from home with a pro team, played a pro schedule, practiced every day.

Bender is a disapointment because he has been incredibly unproductive. By PER he had one of the 35 worst individual seasons in the history of the NBA for a player with over 500 minutes and we have seen many players of comparable age.

His rookie season is very comparable to Tsikitsvili.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Bender is 2 months younger than Ingram, 3 months younger than Chriss.

That is negilible. Especially considering that Bender already spent years away from home with a pro team, played a pro schedule, practiced every day.

Bender is a disapointment because he has been incredibly unproductive. By PER he had one of the 35 worst individual seasons in the history of the NBA for a player with over 500 minutes and we have seen many players of comparable age.

His rookie season is very comparable to Tsikitsvili.

Pro schedule: Euroleagues play 30 games. Similar to college schedules here.
Practice every day: What high school, aau, or college team doesn't?

Do you really think that the leagues for 15-17 year olds in Europe are far better than the programs for kids the same age here?

We get it. You don't like Bender. I see a lot to like there. Time will tell, won't it?

 

[Hoop Head]

As far as the Lonzo Ball vs. Markelle Fultz debate for the #1 pick. To me its still a tossup. It would come down to personal interviews. I would want a sense of each young man personally. If I think that Fultz could craft himself into a primary distributor, I probably would take him. But its so close.

I think the absolute best case for Fultz is he ends up like John Wall, who is a very good PG but it's taken him a while to get there and he still hasn't quite balanced his game between scoring and distributing in order to produce wins. I think Wall has always been more competitive than Fultz though, it's just taken him some time to find the right balance to help his team the most. I think Fultz will be more like Kyrie Irving though, someone who is only doing as well as he is because he's playing alongside LeBron and isn't responsible for getting everyone involved. He'll put up flashy numbers but his teammates will be what leads the team to success. He's capable of being a top distributor but he'd rather call his own number. Kyrie doesn't handle the normal load that a starting PG does because he's got LeBron, who is probably the best passing forward in NBA history. Once LeBron returned to Cleveland people have turned around their views on Kyrie because the team is winning but he's playing virtually the same as he did prior to LeBron's return. Fultz is similar to Kyrie in that it doesn't seem that winning is the most important thing to him. Taking a player #1 overall that couldn't lead his team to the NCAA tournament seems like a bad move. I know Simmons was taken #1 overall last year but he still hasn't played a minute in the league and if anyone watched his documentary, "One and Done", he made it clear he was only there because had to be and didn't care much in regards to how the team did. I don't think Fultz is the same, attitude wise, but he didn't come across as competitive as you'd like your franchise player to be. Maybe he ends up as a Reggie Jackson type in the pro's, empty stats that actually made his team worse while he was on the court.

Meanwhile Ball is special with his size, skillset, and play style. Of course he could be a bust but I think his floor is that of MCW when he was in Philly and won Rookie of the Year, in what was a horrible rookie class on a wretched team. Ball should be better than MCW because he can knock down shots on the perimeter, which is something MCW never developed. His ceiling could be really high but it's hard to compare him to anyone who has played in the NBA because players with similar measurements, scouting reports and skillsets have suffered from a lot of injuries like an early Grant Hill, Dante Exum, Penny, and Shaun Livingston. Ball is probably a better shooter than any of them, at least early in their careers. PG's with his size are rare, I tried searching to see other tall PG's and it's been a long time since there has been a healthy PG with that sort of size. He's definitely not Magic Johnson though, which seems to be the most recent large PG who stayed healthy throughout his career.

Here is a list I found of the 19 best "tall point guards"...

http://www.complex.com/sports/2014/08/the-best-tall-point-guards-in-nba-history/

 

[SirStefan32]

Pro schedule: Euroleagues play 30 games. Similar to college schedules here.
Practice every day: What high school, aau, or college team doesn't?

Do you really think that the leagues for 15-17 year olds in Europe are far better than the programs for kids the same age here?

We get it. You don't like Bender. I see a lot to like there. Time will tell, won't it?

I agree with both of your posts, but I do disagree with one part- European junior coaching is very good. Professional teams have programs for different age groups. I started playing when I was seven. You practice a few times every week. You are taught fundamentals from the day you start. You learn to play every position. The reason guys like Sabonis, Divac, etc were such great passers is because they all learned to play point guard before they were over 7 feet tall. By the time you hit your teenage years, the system is pretty intense. I played in high school here, and I can tell you that HS level stuff here is a joke compared to 12-13 year-old age group in Europe. Due to knee injuries and having PG height with a PF weight, I didn't make it to a college team, so I can't speak to that, but I would guess coaching and training is far more intense in a major European professional team.

All that said, the bottom line is that he is a very young kid and it is way too early to call him a bust. Time will tell.

 

[slinslin]

Do you really think that the leagues for 15-17 year olds in Europe are far better than the programs for kids the same age here?

Um yes, spend 15 minutes researching that and you would know.

These kids go to academies that combine school and athletic training. They work out under professional trainers and environments every day, just like pros. Programs that are built to develop talent for the main teams and everything goes hand in hand.

Tell me a highschool program that does that. The top american prospects have their own private trainers.

College programs don't even have any incentive of developing 1-and-done players for the pros. They care more about instant success and revenue.

 

[Chaplin]

Um yes, spend 15 minutes researching that and you would know.

These kids go to academies that combine school and athletic training. They work out under professional trainers and environments every day, just like pros. Programs that are built to develop talent for the main teams and everything goes hand in hand.

Tell me a highschool program that does that. The top american prospects have their own private trainers.

College programs don't even have any incentive of developing 1-and-done players for the pros. They care more about instant success and revenue.

How can you say that? Yes, the academies are well managed and very strict.

But if they were so much better, wouldn't the better players then all be from Europe? You're obviously biased, but come on. Current college players here don't have incentives, sure, but they still produce far better players than the Academies in Europe do, so they must be doing something right.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I agree with both of your posts, but I do disagree with one part- European junior coaching is very good. Professional teams have programs for different age groups. I started playing when I was seven. You practice a few times every week. You are taught fundamentals from the day you start. You learn to play every position. The reason guys like Sabonis, Divac, etc were such great passers is because they all learned to play point guard before they were over 7 feet tall. By the time you hit your teenage years, the system is pretty intense. I played in high school here, and I can tell you that HS level stuff here is a joke compared to 12-13 year-old age group in Europe. Due to knee injuries and having PG height with a PF weight, I didn't make it to a college team, so I can't speak to that, but I would guess coaching and training is far more intense in a major European professional team.

All that said, the bottom line is that he is a very young kid and it is way too early to call him a bust. Time will tell.

But the US has places like this too. Oak Hill Academy has produced 24 NBA players. It's a basketball program that has a school. There are lots of others like it too.

If the European junior "pro" experience was such an advantage, the best players would be coming from there.

 

[sunsfan88]

Chriss seemed to get it right away? I don't agree. He had moments, but he seemed like a fish out of water the first half of the year. The light didn't seem to turn on until after the all-star break.

Yeah wasn't Chriss in foul trouble like the first 10 or 15 games he started?

In the beginning of the season, he looked like Hakim Warrick. But because he got playing time and experience, he learned through it. Bender didn't get the same opportunity due to the injury.

 

[sunsfan88]

The fact we are all in here debating the top 3 picks at all has me excited. It's much more fun than debating how good Lopez, Len or Bender are "hopefuls" and "potential" guys blah blah and arguing hey his one move looks like player X to make us feel better about that stretch of a pick.

I'm sure you remember the days of guys like Earl Clark and Kendall Marshall.

 

[sunsfan88]

When you are picking #1, you pick the better player, not better fit.

Especially for a team so far away from contention like the Suns. Different story if we're in the same position Boston is in right now.

 

[sunsfan88]

I wish we already knew where we were picking so we can argue about players more accurately

 

[sunsfan88]

Nike, Adidas, Under Armour Decline Deal With Lonzo Ball

Nike, Under Armour and Adidas have each passed on an endorsement deal with Lonzo Ball.

The three shoe and apparel companies informed LaVar Ball they were not interested in a deal with his son.

LaVar was representing Lonzo during the process and he insisted that the company license his Big Baller Brand. LaVar also showed the companies a shoe prototype he hoped would become Lonzo's first shoe.

"We've said from the beginning, we aren't looking for an endorsement deal," LaVar told ESPN. "We're looking for co-branding, a true partner. But they're not ready for that because they're not used to that model. But hey, the taxi industry wasn't ready for Uber, either."

Ball would not disclose how big the Big Baller Brand has become.

When asked how long he has been working on the design of Lonzo's shoe, Ball said it was "a long time."

Added Ball: "I've been working on that shoe ever since my boys were born."

I've never seen a family member potentially kill the draft stock and endorsement money from an athlete as much as this guy has for his son.

The fact that Nike, Adidas and Under Armor are all staying from this maniac family means the Suns (and every other team in the top 5) probably should too.

 

[Mainstreet]

Here is some similar information:

Something more to think about if the Suns draft Lonzo Ball.

Even shoe endorsements such as Nike, Under Armour or Adidas are backing off him. The father may prove to be more of a headache than previously imagined.

Never in the history of modern-day shoe endorsements have the big companies all stepped away from a potential top pick nearly two months before the NBA draft. But LaVar, who has been representing Lonzo in the deal, has offered something that has no precedent.

In his meetings with all three companies, LaVar insisted that they license his upstart Big Baller Brand from him, according to the companies. He also showed the companies a shoe prototype that he hoped would be Lonzo's first shoe.

"We've said from the beginning, we aren't looking for an endorsement deal," LaVar told ESPN. "We're looking for co-branding, a true partner. But they're not ready for that because they're not used to that model. But hey, the taxi industry wasn't ready for Uber, either."

Last week, Nike consultant George Raveling, at SportsBusiness Journal's World Congress of Sports, called LaVar "the worst thing to happen to basketball in the last hundred years."

by Darren RovellESPN Senior Writer

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...-armour-adidas-not-interested-deal-lonzo-ball

 

[JCSunsfan]

I wish we already knew where we were picking so we can argue about players more accurately

They should do the lottery in the break between the end of the season and the start of the playoffs. It's silly to wait a month.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I've never seen a family member potentially kill the draft stock and endorsement money from an athlete as much as this guy has for his son.

The fact that Nike, Adidas and Under Armor are all staying from this maniac family means the Suns (and every other team in the top 5) probably should too.

I don't think so. It is good that the shoe companies are staying away. It has to humble LaVar a little and maybe Lonzo now realizes dad is going to cost him alot of endorsement money. It doesn't change the player he is though.

 

[Mainstreet]

I've never seen a family member potentially kill the draft stock and endorsement money from an athlete as much as this guy has for his son.

The fact that Nike, Adidas and Under Armor are all staying from this maniac family means the Suns (and every other team in the top 5) probably should too.

I think it does start to raise some red flags especially since Lonzo has already said he would like to play for the Lakers. This does not bother me so much but I worry the father will push the issue. He is showing he wants to do things his way.