I’m not even a Chet fan and cmon he didn’t get blown by that often and when he did his length negated it. He got a lot of blocks because ppl underestimated his length and ability to recover
I’m in the same boat as you. I went back and forth with Zagger and BJ all season talking about let’s see what happens in the tourney because during the season whenever he played talent it was much, much different than his in-conference play. i do agree with bones that a few of the calls in the arky game were highly suspect.
We have answered this before. You use him like the Celtics use Robert Williams. Virtually no team has 4-5 legitimate offensive threats. You put him on whoever is worse, aka can’t dribble, between the 3/4 and use him as an insanely talented off ball help defender.
I couldn't argue with that. It's subjective. I just get concerned with us going small at a position again. Our coverage radius is awfully small going 6-2, 6-3, 6-5, 6-8, 7-0. Of course, if you can address that somewhere else ... like I said, I think we're looking at 3-4 new rotation players. If you get size, length and wingspan in your other acquisitions, it could work. I just fear we leave ourselves repeating old mistakes and wind up treading water. I'd probably pick Sharpe and, if I couldn't move 11 in a deal to get someone like Anunoby, go with Sochan or Eason and pick one of the international Cs with one of our second round picks and hope their learning curve is like Batums and they surprise us with how quickly they can contribute.
He fouled out of 3 games all year including the Arkansas game which wasn't his fault at all. Far cry from "fouling out all year" or whatever your first sentence is. He did just fine for a 7 footer when switched onto non WCC guards, so he'll be fine guarding PFs on the NBA. If you're worried about Jae Crowder blowing by him then I don't know what to tell you.
If Williams is available with the second pick, id take him he’s 7’ with 7’7” reach and hes big and strong in the paint. Nurk is injury prone.
he's got size to be an SF. 6'6 with a long wingspan. And only 18 so room to grow height wise as well. I just don't know if any of his HS skills will translate.
@BonesJones Great reference with Crowder, he's got to be one of the less athletic small ball PFs in the league. I wouldn't be worried about a blow by from RoCo either. In fact there are a lot of wings that wouldn't just blow by him but those wings including Crowder and RoCo could definitely post the guy up with their big time strength and low center of gravity. I know he didn't foul out a ton because when he got into foul trouble he played less minutes and more so less aggressively. I was saying that some of the time when an opponent was getting by him a lot he'd reach one of those long arms out and get the opponent. I know you watched the games, so I know you saw it. As far as the trick that he's used to negate his lack of foot speed... @Predator I don't think that works in the NBA. I think NBA scorers will get to the hole too quickly.
Bro, 6'6 Jae Crowder would have ZERO success posting up 7'1 Chet Holmgren. RoCo's gonna post him up?! Cmon now.
When we've gotten to the point that the argument that Chet is a great defender is that he wouldn't get beat off the dribble or posted up by 3-and-D players like Jae Crowder and Robert Covington, I think we've reached the level of desperation or surreality. A better question might be "Could Chet Holmgren post up either Jae Crowder or RoCo or could he take them from the wing on an iso?"
I'm curious, and I ask this in all earnestness, do you have a personal connection with the guy? We don't always agree, but I generally appreciate your opinions on hoops talent. With Chet, though, you seem to have a very deeply embedded interest, almost the kind I'm used to seeing from family, or a trainer, or an AAU coach. You seem to get upset when anyone doesn't put Chet over as the greatest thing and won't acknowledge any criticism of his play or potential, even if it's supported by facts. It just feels like your objectivity got left at the door on any discussion about him.
he's not alone here. the Chet love is rivaling the Ammo/draft the stache nonsense back in 06. While I think he's a decent prospect, I am deathly afraid of drafting him because of his high bust potential. And I certainly don't think he's a HOF caliber prospect as some here like to project.
I think there definitely are posters who want to see every guy with a PNW connection turn into the one that lifts the Blazers out of mediocrity. Collins had a lot more support, IMO, than his play merited. I remember posters that wanted to draft Pritchard and trade for Boucher, who I think are journeymen. I get it. If I had a friend's kid have a chance to play for and help the Blazers, I'd be pulling for him. The Blazers are my team. If Chet Holmgren ends up with them, I hope he's great. I'm just not going to turn off everything I know about basketball because I want the kid to be the savior to the exclusion of all other information or possibilities. If someone has a legit answer for the criticisms, other than "You're wrong. You don't know Chet. You don't know basketball," then it's easy enough to put them out there or to just say "He definitely has things he needs to iron out and he's not a sure thing but I think he'll overcome the question marks became X, Y and Z."
How exactly does a comparison between the WCC and Pac-12 have any bearing on people's questions about the quality of Chet Holmgren's competition?
I'm going to try to head this off before someone takes it into the weeds. -- Since Chet is not a team, the WCC vs Pac-12 has no bearing on where he stands as a prospect. -- Of the 58 players currently projected in this year's draft by NBADraft.net, 35 of them are from four conferences: SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12. That's more than every other conference in the country, early-entry G-Leaguers and international players combined. -- Of the players in NBADraft.net's top 100 big board, more than half of them are from those four conferences. -- Chet's biggest competition to be drafted first overall are from the SEC, the ACC and the Big Ten, not the Pac-12. -- There are only two players from the WCC and Pac-12 combined in the consensus top 25 draft prospects. -- Three Final Four teams came from those four conferences, including the eventual champion and the runner-up. -- The WCC ranked ninth in conference ranking by RPI and Sagarin and 10th by NET ranking. Even with the No. 1 overall seed, its OOC record was ninth among conferences -- in other words, there were a lot of mediocre teams and players in the WCC this year somewhere. Unless someone is going to try to make the argument that there are bigger, faster, stronger, more talented, and more athletic players in the WCC than these other conferences who for whatever reason are getting overlooked en masse by the NBA, then you have to accept that the level of players Chet faced each week in the WCC wasn't nearly as analogous to what he'll see at the next level as Smith, Banchero, and Ivey played against. Of course, none of that has anything to do with whether or not the Pac-12 or WCC was better this season.
