The Ringer NBA Show - 'High Upside' — Top Forward Prospects (Ep. 107)

Episode Date: May 8, 2017

The Ringer's Kevin O'Connor and Jonathan Tjarks discuss the changing landscape of big men in the NBA (4:00), Jonathan Isaac's ability to play center (8:00), Jayson Tatum's NBA comparison (14:00), Josh Jackson's jump shot (18:00), OG Anunoby’s high ceiling (25:00), and potential fits for each top forward in the 2017 NBA draft (32:00). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey, welcome to High Upside, the Ringer's new NBA draft podcast, where we'll be talking about the ins and outs of the 2017 NBA draft. My name is Kevin O'Connor, and I'll be your host this draft season, and I'll be joined weekly by my friend and fellow Ringer staff writer Jonathan Sharks. And today we're going to be discussing the changing, evolving NBA, which is getting quicker and smaller with more shooting and spacing. Today we're also going to debate how the modern league impacts top forwards like Jonathan Isaac and Jason Tatum. But before we do that, or intro music is courtesy of the band Oso Oso Oso. The title track is called The Plant Mouth, and Oso Oso's album is called the Unihon Mix Tate, which is out now through Seal Mountain Records. You could find Oso Oso on Spotify, Apple Music, Band Camp, anywhere you listen to music. Thank you to Oso Oso for their music

and for being listeners of the Ringer NBA show. Anyway, on to the first edition of High Upside. Let's do this. Jonathan, what's going on, man? Nothing much, man. I'm excited for this podcast. I'm going to be like Joe Johnson. going to hold the ball, get a lot of takes,

maybe it makes it to bars. Hey man, take all those takes. He's been hitting some good ones this playoffs. Speaking about the playoffs, but before we discuss the forward prospects of this draft, I think we really need to provide some context of what's happening in the league right now and we're seeing it in the NBA playoffs

that may influence, I think, team decision making in the drafts and going forward. Teams are going smaller, playing five out offenses, five shooters on the floor, switching on defense. The league looks totally different today than it did just a first. few years ago. John, what are you seeing in the playoffs? And is this what the future of the NBA

looks like? It sure seems like it. It feels like in every series, it's just every team is getting smaller and smaller. Like that Rocket Spurr series, a great example of that. It started out two bigs for San Antonio, two bigs for Houston. And now we're at game four, Ryan Anderson's playing five and Jonathan Simmons is playing four. So in your article on Friday, you kind of alluded to that with Jonathan Isaac and O.G. Annanobie that they're going to be kind of centers of the future. Right now, they're viewed as forward prospects. With the way teams are playing in the playoffs, why do you think that that style has been more effective in the NBA? Why that will be the style going forward? Well, I think the start of it, I mean, it's hard to know exactly where

probably it's just this. I mean, it's a spread pick and roll and it's guards shooting three is off the dribble. It's like Isaiah, Steph, Dame to an extent. If you don't have guys who can switch just screen and guard like 25, 26 feet from the basket. They're going to score like every time. So it really doesn't matter how big and strong you are if you can't guard on the perimeter. So I think we're, you know, the Warriors are obviously, you know, the team that does that more than anybody else. You wrote last year on the ringer, one of the first articles I think you wrote, you know, the Warriors are setting the coordinates for the NBA's future. That's something I've always remembered reading because, you know, it's true. And we're seeing that now. The Celtics do that a little

bit when they put Al Horford at the five. The Cavaliers do it when they put love at the five and LeBron's at the four and other teams are doing that too. So in this year's draft, you know, there's a lot of prospects that I think teams are going to look at and try to build that way because in the next five years, I think we're going to see those slower-footed big men not really disappear. They're not going to go extinct, but they'll have a much lesser role. So I think the emphasis more so than anything else, like you said, is on guards that can shoot off the dribble. Big men who can switch, forwards two can switch or play up a position. And that's the way the league is going to change.

And that undoubtedly has affected our ranking. So to set the table, you know, with our podcast here, can you go briefly through your top 10 prospects, Jonathan? And then I'll do the line as well. Yeah. Well, I guess I think a good example of this, before we get into the top 10, it's just like the Raptors last year.

And they drafted Pertil and Seacum in the first round. They're not bad players, but they couldn't find minutes for Jonas. So they have like four or fives in the roster and you can't play in a playoff series. So like what's the value in that, really? And that's kind of kind of I look at it. Unless you're a really, really special five, to me you're going to fall a little bit.

So I've got, I go Markell 1, Lonzo to the top two point guards. And I've got three forwards, Isaac, OG. That's probably the biggest kind of surprise there at him at four, Josh Jackson. And I've got Dennis Smith and Darren Fox, 6 and 7. And then Tatum, Zach Collins from Gonzaga, and Laurie Markner from Arizona. So I have Fultz at number one as well. He's kind of the clearer number one for me. And I have Jason Tatum at two.

of Lonzo Ball at three and De Aaron Fox at four. I have Josh Jackson at five and then to round off the top 10 I have Malik Monk at six, Jonathan Isaac at seven, Dennis Smith at eight, Larry Markin at nine and then O.G. Nodby at 10. From our rankings and our personal discussions that we've had, the guys we kind of disagree on the most are Isaac and Tatum. So let's start with Isaac because he was really the key focus of your article on Friday on the ringer. You kind of compare him to, I don't want to say you compare it on the Draymond Green, but you use Draymond Green as the standard for the new big man in today's NBA. And you've seen Isaac as kind of one of those guys. So, but I, so just to define who Isaac is, he's a 6'10 freshman forward from Florida State,

average 12 points, 8 rebounds, 57 effective field goal percentage. Charks, besides the fact that you and Isaac share the first name, what's good about Isaac and what makes him your number three overall prospects? I mean, Jonathan does mean, gift, God, just pointing that out. So like, I look at him, like, he plug him into like, let's say the Spurs Rocket Series. You could play him at five against Ryan Anderson or David Lee. And then that gives you all the versatility of a guy who can guard out in the perimeter, plus a five who can shoot threes

and take you off the trouble a bit. So you can play, I feel like he's probably the most versatile player in this draft possibly, where it's like he can play small or big as the biggest. He's the biggest small, basically. I think the league is going towards big, small players.

I'm getting confused myself, but he's the biggest small on this board. It makes sense, though. In a weird way, it makes sense. So what's your take on it? What's your take on Jonathan Isaac? What do you have him at? I have him at, what was it?

Six, seven, right behind Monk. So with Isaac, look, I agree with really, you know, totally your assessment in terms of he does fit that profile, that versatile player in the NBA. I do have questions maybe if he can handle some of those bigger big men, like the Carl Anthony Towns of the futures of Joe Allen Bid stays healthy. But I don't think you're going to play him in those matchups anyway. I think there's situations you can put him in those.

floor and he can play that small ball role for you, whether it's at the four and maybe occasionally at the five. And I think there's going to be tremendous value in that type of player at the next level in the NBA, because that's the way the league is going. I think more and more players are taking on that role, especially when you consider the fact that on the offensive end, he can spot up and shoot. So he's not a zero on that end, like some, I think, versatile defensive players might be. He's not a zero on the end. What's your take on his offensive upside? Well, to me, that's where I really feel like you have to move him up position, playing him up to four, maybe five.

Because as a wing, he's pretty average. I don't think he's ever going to be a guy who's going to dominate the ball, take you off, take smogging off the dribble. Like if you can bring him a Tatum, Tatum is way more skilled than him. So if I just play with two other big man and a cramped floor, he's not going to do all that much. So he has to be in more space.

You want to put him against guys who are bigger and smaller than him as much as possible. Whereas I think Tateen is going smaller, though. So if all teams start going smaller and there are fewer and fewer teams that are playing with big players, is he actually going against those big players that would as a result make him more effective offensively? I mean, I guess that's like the ultimate question, right, is how far are we going to go with this? Like in that Rocket Spurs series, what if Kauai plays five eventually? I don't know. I mean, that's a good question. How would that change your evaluation?

Let's pretend that that's what the league looks like in five years. Kauai Leonard is a starting five. Okay, that's a little, why not, right? Let's go wild. What if that's what the league looks like? When Isaac's about to hit his prime, 24, 25 years old, five, six years from now, what if that's what the league looks like? Does that change, like, what you think of him?

Or are you really basing enough the fact that traditionally teams are probably going to be conservative and it will take them more and more time to really adapt to that if they ever do? Well, I think that. And also, if Isaac, if you're actually going to like super, small ball. He can block shots and rebound really well for a card. So I think he'll be okay in that role. To me, I mean, I'm okay with that. I think as he puts on more weight, he can even he'd be a great role man, which I don't think he ever got to do it at Florida State. That's the other thing too. There's so many guys in this draft, like a big wing like Isaac or Ananovi,

like let him roll the basket and spread floor, which you never see do at the college level. I think there's ways to use him beyond just I saw at the midpost, Carmelo Anthony style, Jason Tatum style. So speaking of Tatum, kind of to pivot to him right here. He's the forward I have number one of my board of the top four.

And he's number two overall behind Markell Fultz for people who don't know who Jason Tatum is. He's a freshman forward who went to Duke. Six foot eight has good length. Average 17.7 rebounds to assist.

Silky smooth score, super smooth. Excellent ball handler gets where he wants. He reminds me a lot of Danny Granger, maybe even a little bit of Paul Paris in him. He has that go-to-scorer type of mentality and game. You have him eighth, though. Okay, Kevin, I want to ask you first. So I want to like Tatum, but I feel like I just see so much Rudy Gay and talk me out of that in Paris right now. So I think, well, my question first to you is,

why do you see Rudy Gay in him? When I see Danny Granger and I see Paul Pierce, what makes you see Rudy Gay? Well, to me, Tatum doesn't look to pass very much. I wouldn't say he's selfish. He's just a one, I feel like he's a very one-dimensional, like, score. He wants to get, I saw the ball 18 feet, go at the rim. He's not really a passer. He doesn't move the ball very much. And to me, he's a good athlete and I feel like he's kind of trap in the middle there of this new, like, positionless league.

So to me, he just, I look out of my worry, is this guy going to be an inefficient isolation score at the next level? So, look, I think with Jason Tatum, Paul Pierce wasn't a great athlete either. I just see Tatum and I see somebody. who is a teenager and his footwork and his fluidity, his ability to handle the ball and create space despite not being a great athlete, despite the fact that he does certainly have some limitations.

That's worth acknowledging. I just think those guys, with that level of feel, see, his feel isn't that high compared to like a Paul Pierce. Like, I don't see him pass in the ball too much, but maybe that's just...

He can pass, though. I don't know if he's a non-passer. It's not like he's a complete ball-stopping ball hog who only wants to play ISO. So, like, so it's, this isn't really like a player to player comparison, but in terms of ball stopping, Julius Randall is the guy that comes to mind to me in college, at least. I thought he was more of a ball stopper. And that's more of a post. Yeah, more, yeah, I mean, you could say Tatum's a post player too.

I think that's one of the knocks on him is that his game is more mid-range oriented in a league that's going towards. Okay, here's my question. So, like compare them to these other Duke guys, like Jabari and Rodman Hood. How would you stack up Tatum to those guys? They all kind of play the same spot at Duke. I love Jabari Parker. And I still think he has a chance to be a super, super great player if he managed to stay healthy. I think, you know, with Parker, he's with his size and his fluidity, his ability to handle the ball for his size.

He could be a matchup nightmare, especially in the current NBA and the future NBA, as we said with Isaac. So they're like, could Tatum guard Javari Parker or he's too skinny to do that? I think Tatum can guard. I think with Tatum, his defense, it's not great. I think, you know, his mentality needs to change a lot on that end. I think he needs to certainly stay more engaged. He's long and he can move his feet. I'm not really worried about him.

And then with his jumper, look, he's not a knockdown guy. He's not like a natural shooter. But with Tatum, I've seen comparisons to DeMar Rosen. And I think it's silly. It's silly. Tatum is a better shooter today, 19 years old than DeRosen is yesterday at 27 in the NBA playoffs. DeRoson as a freshman at USC shot like 5 for 40 or something like that from three. Tatum isn't a natural shooter by any means, but he's not a non-degrader.

shooter. 85% from the free throw line, 34% from 3. I think that's projectable for him. And my big thing, though, is like, this is why I have Tatum number two. In today's league, as much as ball movement matters, as much as playing small matters,

as much as three-point shooting matters, sometimes one of the most important skills and the hardest skill to find is fourth quarter scoring, a guy who can get you a bucket at the end of games when the game slows down. It's a half-court game, and you're calling a play out of a timeout. Sometimes your best play.

it can be that isolation. I see Tatum as that guy a really good team can lean on. See, I keep going back. So I went to the McDonald's game two years ago when it was like Tatum, Josh, all those guys were in high school.

When I first look at Tatum, he was going up against Josh Jackson for like 15 minutes, like the scrimmages. And then Josh just got right in his face, pressed him up at the three point line, and he couldn't do anything. Like the level of athleticism was so,

that stuck in my head the last year and a half. It's like, when he goes up against his practice. It's a scrimmage. I mean, that's more important than the McDonald's. I go a lot by that. Like, to me, those strimages are, those just one-to-one play. I don't think many scouts value McDonald's a whole lot.

No, not the game. The practices are pretty valuable. Like, to me, when I saw Miles eat up Jalil two years ago, was like, this two can't play in the NBA anymore. Like, when you go in the practice for an hour, it's me on you, one-on-one, let's go, check ball. And Josh Jackson, God, and Tate, face and Tatum couldn't get around them.

That's what I'm worried about. Tedin doesn't bring an ISO score, but against your elite, elite NBA athletes, like a Josh Jackson, or like an Igwadala or a Duran or a Kauai. I'm not sure he can really, I feel like he has to kind of be the second or the third guy.

He has to be like in the Rodney Hood role about the Gordon Hayward role. That makes sense. So what keeps him in eight? If like, let's say you don't think he'll be a go-to score. What keeps him in eight for you and not dropping him to 15 or 20? Okay.

Because I mean, Because I think he can be that second or third way. And like to me, the guys ahead of them are your primary ball handlers. I have four primary ball handlers ahead of them. And then my two like freaky small ball five guys and then Josh Jackson. So I mean, it's really about team building philosophy. Yeah. Yeah.

Definitely. So with Jackson, the thing I really like about him is. So we talked about versatility with Isaac. We talked about scoring with Tatum. Jackson kind of blends that in some ways. He might not, he's not quite as good of a defense. under as Isaac. He's not quite as good of a score. I don't think as Tatum. But he does both of those things quite well, I think. And so for him, he also brings the element of being able to pass the

ball, handle the ball. I think he could play that point forward role. I think he has the best feel of those three guys. If I was like, just play basketball for an hour, I feel like he could integrate to the team really easily. It's just that jump shot with Josh. It's always a question. It's been a question for years. Do you buy that jump shot? You're more of a shot doctor than me. What do you think of that jump on? Man, I wish I could buy it, dude. I really do. I really wish I could buy it because he had a stretch this season for people.

So kind of lay some background for Josh Jackson. So entering the season, I think everybody probably expecting him to have a poor three point percentage. He ended up shooting around 35%, which isn't great, but it's not bad either. And he had a stretch midseason where he was shooting lights out from like 45% for like two straight months, just ridiculous, hitting everything. The thing is that he doesn't have good jumper mechanics, and he still had some pretty horrible misses where he misses to the left or the right, clanking it off the backboard, airballs. And sometimes, you know, the quality of a shot can be more indicative of the quality of a shooter more so than the actual percentage. For sure, the process, man. All about that process.

Absolutely. Process matters. What were straight to percentages? There was like 55% I think. It was in the 50s. And there's been studies done by 9. nylon calculus.com. Shout out Nilele calculus.

Shout out to Nileon Calculus. That have looked at Jackson, not Jackson, but have looked at historically what's more indicative of a good three-point shooter from college to NBA. And free throw percentage has a stronger correlation from the college game to the program more so than three-point percentage does. That could be for a myriad of reasons. I think one of them is sample size. And even if Jackson or, you know, another player took 150 three-point attempts in college,

that isn't really a large sample in the grand scheme of things. And so with Jackson, that's one of the keys for him. We talked about, you know, with versatility and how much that matters in today's NBA, but you still need to be an impactful player in the half court. Do you, well, how do you view his game if the jumper isn't for real? And if for his entire career, let's just say he maxes out at a 30% three-point shooter, how does that change your evaluation of him? Because we both have him at five.

Does he have to be a small four then, kind of like MKG, but a little better shooter if he's not shooting dumpers. So that's the tough thing with him is, you know, that brings the question back to how much can he play that? I think it depends, again, like on how the future of the league looks. He's versatile and he can certainly defend multiple positions.

He's a badass on defense, but he's thin. He's got a thin frame, average range. Yeah, he lacks length and bulk, you know, I would argue. And that certainly can be a limitation. He might look big on the college floor, especially when he's got that big fro out there, but put him on the NBA floor and suddenly he might look more like a two guard, right?

No, question about it, yeah. I mean, he's Charles against Deontay Burton. That burden was like a, I mean, he's a freak, but no, you're like, 230, 240-pound guy, he might have, he might need to get bigger. And he's a little older too, which I guess is a huge deal,

what 20, not 19, which I guess it doesn't matter. They've done studies on that too. With Jackson long-term, I think one of the things that's really important to focus on with him is, you know, more so than with any of the other guys we're going to talk about from the draft today is his ability to really play some point forward. I think in today's offenses in the NBA, more teams are playing multi-ball handlers, being able to attack you from

different angles, give you different looks. And I think that's one of the things I really, really like about Jackson, even if his shot isn't great, even if he just maxes out as an average shooter, I think his ability to bring the ball up the floor, he's a good rebounder, can bring it coast to coast, he can really finish well at the rim, you know, when he has a full head of steam. I see him as, you know, bring immense value in the transition game or in the half court when if a team is willing to put the ball in his hands as really a point forward playmaking role. How do you view that, John? Yeah, I can see it. I mean, here's a question for you.

How would you compare him to like Justice Winslow and Aaron Gordon? They all kind of fit that same general molds of athletic combo forwards who maybe can't shoot but can handle and pass a bit. We talked about this before and I have a type and my type is those. forwards that can do everything, everything on the floor, except for shoot. And Josh Jackson really fits that mold, as you said with Winslow and Gordon, guys like that, who I loved in the draft, and still like today for that matter, those guys that, you know, their ultimate success level largely depends on their jumper. And that's the fear with Jackson. That's why this draft season, I've kind of moved him around my board a little bit. I had him at three at one point. I had

I'm down at six or seven at another time. And right now he's at five. It's really fluid there. I mean, like, you know, when you ask for my top ten, like, it sometimes changes. I mean, by the end of this podcast, I might have Jackson at six or seven behind Smith or Fox. Because it's fluid. And evaluations are still changing, I think, at this point, especially with the combine coming up later this week. So with him, look, man, I think you're really banking on the three-pointer.

But I still think his pay. Passing ability really doesn't add an extra wrinkle that does him a different dimension on the floor. I mean, maybe it's fair to say with Isaac Tatum Jackson, he probably has the highest ceiling and the lowest floor of that jumper. Like that jumper becomes really good. He's going to be awesome. And that jumper doesn't come. Tatum and Isaac, I think I have higher fours because you have more faith in those jump shots than Jackson's. So you think he has higher upside than the guy we're saving to talk about last, OG and Adobe. Well, OG's my, that's my type. That's my boy right there. I got a multiple higher Jackson's. I think his upside could he be even higher than I'm giving him credit for.

I don't know. He's played so little basketball comparatively the rest of these guys, at least high-level basketball. He's kind of the dark horse prospect in this draft. No question. He tore his ACL to finish his college his career after two years in Indiana, multi-positional defender, but he's raw offensively. So when I think about OG, right, I think about something Mike Lombardi said on the GM Street podcast with Tate Frazier. He said there's four

types of scouts in sports and they all begin with the letter P. Poor scouts who can't recognize talent. Picker scouts who pick on one thing a player can't do right and overlook all his strengths. Projection scouts who simply grade the projection, then grade the production rather.

Then there are projection scouts who see the talent and project the player forward. And I think that's what you really, really need to do with OG and and Obey more than anybody else. So John, when you look to hear a crystal ball. What do you see in OG Ananoi's future? Well, to me, I think he could be, he's not, it's not the playmaking ability, but I think he really fits that Draymond type where he can legitimately guard bigger centers. I remember someone was saying in my article, I wrote an article,

but I would talk about I actually can know he and Obe. And they're like, what's he going to do against Carl Towns? Well, the best guy saw guard Carl Towns this year was, the guy from Miami, James Johnson. I feel like he has a lot of James Johnson. I feel like he has a lot of James Johnson. than his gain athletically. He's got that crazy body, super long arms, elite athlete, very fast, strong hands. He can probably guard one to five. I mean, I think that is like the selling point, Ananobe. He can legit guard one to five.

He's one of the best athletes I've seen in a long time coming in the NBA. Assuming the knee's okay, which who knows, right? Yeah, and that's why I have him 10 right now. I think, you know, we disagree most on Isaac and Tatum. And Ananobe, I have him 10th, you have him fourth. But the only reason I have him 10th is because we don't know how he'll look after the torn ACL. I think as a player, you and I were super high on him before a lot of people were before last year's draft. When I thought, you know, maybe he could be a mid first round draft pick even after just his freshman season.

And maybe could have even slipped into the lottery. And this year we're talking about him as a top 10 guy. And that's after with, you know, something that I wish he showed more during a sophomore season in Indiana. His jumper didn't improve that much. he wasn't necessarily better defensively than he already was, but that was a high bar anyway. Would you have liked to see more improvement from him, freshman and the sophomore year?

Well, I mean, it was just tough because he got hurt right when the team, you know, I started a Big Ten play. I think it was tough too. They didn't have Yogi Farrell this year. They didn't really have a point guard. It was very unsettled. Obviously, Tom Crean got fired in the season. So it's hard.

It's just hard to say when he got injured shortly in the year that he didn't improve enough. I mean, to me, the thing with OG, he'll show flashes or like he'll do a euro step move or a sidestep through traffic and you know like there's no way a guy that big and that fast should be able to move that nimbly and that like coordinated.

But he'll just do every once in a while he'll do something. It'll make you like, man, if it ever comes all together for this guy. Like I went back and watched the game where they played Kansas opening night and he was just like, him versus Josh Jackson was like,

oh my gosh, this is just a bigger, faster version of Josh Jackson. Jackson had nothing he could do on him, no, but he couldn't get around them. I think my concerns with OG are come on the offensive end of the floor. As much as you can project forward with him and see him shoring up all of his weaknesses, but the list of weaknesses is kind of long. And that's where I'm a little bit concerned with him because, look, he's got his sloppy footwork. He has a quick first step, but he has a sloppy footwork, not a good ball handler,

doesn't use his left hand really at all, gets called for a ton of travels, can't really pass the ball well, has a slow shooting release off the keats, and off the dribble. I just don't know what he brings offensively if he's not really, if he doesn't become a good spot-up shooter, that's like the baseline you want from him. He can sit in a corner and hit spot-up threes.

But if he doesn't do that, then is he a zero on offense? Well, to me, that's where the projection comes in. Because to me, his floor is as a roll man. Like, just time I'm rolling right to the basket, Clint Capella. That's his floor. Worst case, he can do that.

They're totally different players. No, he can roll the rim. He didn't do it in Indiana, but why couldn't you do that? He's big enough to do. I feel like he's big enough to be that rim rolling five in the modern NBA. So that's where I have projections coming in. Capella, when he jumps, it's like he's bouncing off a trampoline. OG can get to a high point, but he's not like explosive when he gets them.

I don't know. He's shooting 70% from the floor this year. Like that fool was dunk in everything. Like, I'll show you some. He had some big dunks. He's very athletic. I highly recommend people search on YouTube for OG Ananobie dunks. dunks. I mean, he's taking bubbles in the legs

in Dunkin's when 360s. I mean, this fool can get up. I'm not worried about that at all. It's still, though. It's different when you can jump out of the gym and like your vertical is fast and quick. You're right? I think people would describe it as like a fast Twitch athlete. I'm not so sure OG is a fast Twitch athlete.

He's got great dimension, great physical dimensions and he can get to a high point. But I think to be a roll man, you might need to get there a little bit quicker. Well, I mean, it's just tough because he didn't roll much. I think he rolled like twice all season. He's playing with Thomas Bryant, no point guard. Probably fairly at all.

College offenses aren't exactly the most creative. They don't ever. That's one of the hardest things about right now is because so many college teams so post, post, post, constantly. And nobody gets those pick and roll plays. There's not enough pick and roll. It's just a different game. It's becoming like college football in the NFL somewhat.

But to me, you get OG in space, it'll look better and more space with the real guard. That's the thing to me. So basically, you see him as that one through five defender, guy who can spot up, shoot threes, and then drive closeouts, throw down dunks on fools, and show up on, on tie light reels. That's what we want to see from as a baseline. Yeah, like, just like a smaller DeAndre you can dribble a bit. Like you compare a skill set to like,

you know, a Jason Tatum, that it's like worlds apart. But you compare it to like an Ike Anagbogu, who I like a lot, UCLA's freshman big. They're about the same size. Oh, geez, huge. Compared to one of those rimrolling bigs, he's very, very skilled. So when you, when you, let's kind of pivot here. When you evaluate those kind of more traditional big men, right? I think Bam Atabio from Kentucky, another guy, Jared Allen from Texas is another. How do you view them, you know, in context, you know, with your feeling that Annobe and Isaac are really those future of the five position of the NBA, does it devalue those guys in some ways for you? Yeah, a little bit. Definitely. I mean, I like out. What if the league doesn't change, though? I think

that's what I always come back to. What if the league kind of stays where it is now and it doesn't become super, super progressive, like everybody playing like the Warriors or the Cavs with a shooting five. Well, I mean, I think you just look at these playoffs. It's like evolution. It's like if you don't progress, you're going to get killed. I feel like Spurs Rockets perfect example. Pop did not want to go small. And the rockets blew them off the floor. And it's like, well, I better adapt then. Like just to me, given the way the rules are currently, I don't see how people don't change, if that makes sense. I just don't see how it's going to go back the old way with the rise of spread pick and roll with the rise to off the double string three point shooter. I don't see how

I can go back. So these these players are probably all going to go to teams that don't that aren't a playoff team unless they go to the Celtics they're not going they're going to a non-playoff team. Which organization do you think would be a great for it for a guy like Isaac? Well I mean I was going to say like terms of progressive the mavs my boys the maves are going to do all kinds of cool stuff. They got pretty spread of floor offense. How about the wolves for Isaac? Gosh, I like the fit, but Tibbs doesn't seem like he wants to do that kind of stuff.

Tibbs wants to play two bigs. He gave Gorgi, what, $65 million? I felt they're going to try to pick first off. That's what I think Minnesota is going to do. Tibbs ain't got time for this. I mean, they tried last year. So I definitely think there's a possibility they would try again. I mean, you're more plugged in with front offices than me.

like I wonder if Tibbs is like man my scouts kind of burned than Chris Dunn I'm not going to trust him again I think it's too early to say that though Chris Dunn might be an older prospect but he had a really unique college career that's true point cards often take a while I think I think maybe he did get burned maybe that's possibility but I think Chris Dunn still deserves more time I just think if you plug Isaac into the Minnesota Timberwolves roster if Tibbs has an awakening and he decides to play a little bit progressively. You can put Tons of the 5. Isaac of the 4.

That's really, really hard to defend. If those guys really come into their own like towns already is and they have two bigs like a space. I mean, that's the ideal spot for him for sure. I think the Knicks are another team that would be interesting for those guys. I know a lot of Knicks fans want a point guard,

but I think it would be intriguing to have one of those versatile forwards. Oh, next to the Porzengis. It'd be super interesting. Are they going to play the triangle? Right. How long is that going to last? How many more years?

Well, Phil's got, what, three years off those? contract? I mean, I guess not to get digression, but I feel like... Can I'll try and all die already? Tillakina is to be the perfect triangle point guard. I feel like that might happen. Phil likes international players, I guess, now. He's a very triangular point guard, right?

I just want the triangle to die. I don't know. I don't mind diversity. It hasn't worked. I don't mind different things. I know. It's fine. I can live with it for three more years.

However long Phil Jackson stays there, What about Tatum? What do you think about Tatum in terms of fit for lottery teams? I'm curious here because I feel like you feel, I think, appropriately, that he might be a harder guy to plug in, whereas Isaac Ananoi and Jackson, you can just plug and play into a lot of different situations. Well, because like Tatum, for example,

Minnesota would be a bad fit because he'd be so low on the depth chart and the peccan order. He has to go somewhere he can get his shots. I mean, Sacramento, he doesn't really a point card because he gets his own shot anyways. Tatum kind of exists in his own little world. He's going to come in there. He's going to get his shots.

Like, that's just going to happen. He's someone with their space where there's defense around him. I mean, Sacramento, I don't know. I'm thinking higher, man. What are you? Phoenix?

I'm looking at Boston if they don't get the number one pick. Oh, so Tatum and Tateam and J. 3,4. Tatum and Jalen Brown. That's pretty interesting. Because they need that second scorer, man. We see it now in the playoffs. Isaiah Thomas is incredible as he is.

And the system in which he's in that it really helps enable him to do what he does, especially with Horford playing the five, they still need a second go-to-scorer for half-court situations. I mean, you look at this game four yesterday. The Wizards were like tripling Isaiah at times. No one can make a shot. And it would help Isaiah's sake of Hal Horford took more open threes, but that doesn't change.

That's just not Al-Horford's game, really. Exactly. He's really that third guy. He's definitely a third real. And Jalen Brown for them could be that. And perhaps to be a little bit of overlap with those two. But I think Tatum is a better offensive prospect than Jalen Brown. And so for that matter, I think a lot of the forwards in this draft are better prospects on Jalen Brown as much as I liked him last year.

I'm curious, I guess, are we going to, if you don't sidetrack too much, what's your Jalen Brown take after one season? You watch more than I have a boss. I like it more than I did in the draft. And I love them in the draft. I believe I had him ranked third. I thought he was the right pick for the Celtics. I thought he would have been my choice as well. I still think he could become a very good player, the thing with him.

and this is kind of the opposite of Tatum and why I like Tatum so much, is for Brown, feel for the game isn't really there as much. And that kind of relates to why I'm not super there with Isaac either. I just, I prefer the guys who have great feel for the game where the game looks like it comes super, super easy to them. And the other part with Brown is,

you know, he's developed quite well as a defensive player. And I think, you know, the upside is there for him to be a great. defensive player and you know tie this back to this year's players i think one of my drawbacks you know i think isaic will be a really good defensive player i think annanobi will be a great defensive player but you know when i think about those small ball fives i think about dream on green green is an ass kicker man he plays with such fire and i think that's the special ingredient with every defensive

player especially if you're playing that small ball five spot and i don't really see that as much with Isaac Brown to relate it to last year. Brown a little bit more than I think Isaac and Ananoby. I think OG that's one of the things that I worry about. Isaac is, I can see with Isaac, but OG, he'll get in your business.

He's a, I mean, he's a pretty competitive player. I interviewed him before the season. I like that. He really reminded me of like Hawaii because he would give you nothing, but he was like super professional. I was like, this guy who knows up. He's a very mature 19 year old. He was giving me like straight five word answers. But you could tell he was smart.

He was just like, I don't care about this guy or his article. I'm doing me, I'm going to do my thing Whatever, bro Like get out of, I gotta get the gym He was about to go to the gym Like he could hit his weights He's like man, I gotta go I gotta go my bicep curls

To get this interview over with I think he's got the right attitude He doesn't read the ringer.com No, I asked him like four times about that Like his recruiting around He was like bro like I don't care I was like when you play Jamal Murray And he's running plays like dude

I don't even know if these people are Like I'm just out of basketball He just goes out on balls Yeah he's got a whole time for that. I think that's an encouraging sign for a player who, you know, when I look at him offensively seems kind of passive sometimes, but if

he's got that badass deep down inside and he's just waiting to be unleashed, I think that's one of those things that really comes up for teams and interviews, and that's why this is really an important week for teams. Yeah, for sure. Combine happening in Chicago. Those interviews can be really, really important for not just determining

who you like as a person, but creating separation between those prospects that you might have ranked closely. If you bring in two guys that your scouts kind of evaluate as equals, and one of them is a dud, boring, doesn't really portray that he cares a whole lot about getting better. And the other guy's like, I want to be the best player I can be. I want to, you know, raise my game to the next level. And he has evidence with his own development that backs it up. That's where I think a lot of steals are found, not just in, you know, in the second round, like the Dremont Greens of the

world, but in the deep lottery too. Because every year, you mentioned Kauai earlier, there's a lot of guys in that range. Devin Booker, who just pan out into great players and they immediately exceed expectations. And when you, when you look back even two months ago, you're thinking, man, why did this guy go 13 and not three? Yeah, I mean, it's something to come by. It's just your background. Where you go and talk to this program, talk to the teachers, talk to the coaches, talk to the trainers. That's a huge part. And that's the part we in our position really can't do. But that's a huge part of the process is just, yeah, how much you want to work? How much will money affect you? Are you a team player? Are you selfish? And yeah, that stuff can be huge.

Once you get up how, I can make a huge at any point in draft. They literally dig up everything. It's remarkable how much research they do. And it's, and it doesn't just happen in the last few months or the last year once these kids commit to college. It's happening when they're sophomores and juniors in high schools. All this information is tracked, accumulated. And not only that, it's not just for the draft. It's for four years from now when they hit free agency. It's for eight years from now. when they hit restricted for agency. It's for any time at all during trade negotiations. That's when the information sometimes can be most valuable is during pro-personnel decisions,

not draft night decisions. No, it's pretty much how when we had you at the ringer, I went back to your Facebook and LinkedIn. I was asking around, Kevin. We can't have any fool come to our site. We were really digging into your stuff, man. It was good, though. You're here, so.

You got me the thumbs up, so that's all good. I appreciate it. Thank you to Jonathan Charks for joining me on the first edition of High upside and thank you so much for listening. We'll be back next week with another show. In the meantime, please leave a rating on iTunes or wherever you listen to podcast, and be sure to read our draft coverage and NBA playoff coverage on the ringer.com. Thank you again. Peace out.