CelticsStrong
Around the League => The Draft => Topic started by: rondohondo on January 22, 2012, 01:07:12 PM
-
If the C's get a top 5-10 pick and this kid enters the draft, I think the C's definitely need to grab him . He is only 18 years old and I stumbled upon a couple of Tennessee games on TV and you can tell the kid just has it .
He has only played 3 games ( let the mocking begin ;)), but 2 of those games were against other elite college teams and future lottery picks.
vs # 2 Kentucky(NBA Talent - Gilchrist,Davis)
Stokes = 9 pts, 4-5FG's, 4 rebs 1 ast , 17mins
This was his first game as a college player and I believe he hadn't even practiced with the team before Hand . Tennessee was 8-8 at that point and came within 3 of upsetting # 2 ranked Kentucky
vs# 11 UConn (NBA Talent - Drummand, Lamb)
Stokes = 16pts, 6-10FG's, 12 rebs, 2 blks , 29 mins
Drummond is likely the # 1 pick in the draft this year, so Stokes was going up against an athletic freak ( though still raw) and pulled down 12 rebs . He helped them upset #11 UConn after almost nearly doing the same thing against #2 Kentucky two games earlier.
The kid already has great footwork and low post game. He is a very good passer from what I have seen and already has a NBA body and though he seems a bit slow athletically, I think he makes up for it with his footwork . He can score at will against anyone in the low post and seems to have a high bball IQ. He really does remind me of a young Ron Artest or Larry Johnson Grand MAMA
season averages = 3 games , 12PPG, 8RPG, 62%FG's ,1 blk , 42%ft :-\
The FT % is a concern, but it's such a small sample size and he is still so young so that can be developed hopefully)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLBJMwGXDM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeXRBFgS5uU
Has anyone else seen this kid play ? Thoughts ?
-
My guess is in a loaded ddraft withut scouts getting a full eval on him, he'll wait a year and try to be a top 5 pick next year. Talented kid though.
-
he will need to bulk up
-
I really like this kid. STRONG. How tall is he though? I don't see him going top 10 if he leaves this year.
-
We need more young strong kids with talent.
-
My guess is in a loaded ddraft withut scouts getting a full eval on him, he'll wait a year and try to be a top 5 pick next year. Talented kid though.
This
I think he'll declare but then pull out before the deadline. Unless of course he goes on some type of rampage late in the season...
-
Dude its so funny you wrote this cause I think the exact same thing. I saw him play for the first time yesterday and I was like "why isnt he on any of the draft boards?". Then I found out he just arrived at Tennesee. He reminds me of a bigger slightly less athletic Charles Barkley.
-
My guess is in a loaded ddraft withut scouts getting a full eval on him, he'll wait a year and try to be a top 5 pick next year. Talented kid though.
This
I think he'll declare but then pull out before the deadline. Unless of course he goes on some type of rampage late in the season...
He cant declare. He left high school early so he has to play next season before he can declare.
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
I wasn't saying he was going against Gilchrist, I was just saying that Gilchrist is an NBA level talent along with Davis making Kentucky a very strong team, and Tennessee being 8-8 before Jarnell Stokes played came within 3 points of upsetting them, with Stokes being a huge reason they came that close.
I know Stokes is going to be an undersized PF, but he will be stronger than just about any other PF in the league also. Look what Millsap is doing as an undersized PF, I think Stokes could be similar or better if he improves his jump shot from 15- 18 ft .
-
He is stronger in college but he won't have that edge in the pros yet. He will make it in the NBA, I like his effort level more than anything. If a guys gives up his body and plays hard he can make it in this league.
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
Hes not a tweener. Hes most definetly a power foward, just undersized.
-
If the C's get a top 5-10 pick and this kid enters the draft, I think the C's definitely need to grab him . He is only 18 years old and I stumbled upon a couple of Tennessee games on TV and you can tell the kid just has it .
He has only played 3 games ( let the mocking begin ;)), but 2 of those games were against other elite college teams and future lottery picks.
vs # 2 Kentucky(NBA Talent - Gilchrist,Davis)
Stokes = 9 pts, 4-5FG's, 4 rebs 1 ast , 17mins
This was his first game as a college player and I believe he hadn't even practiced with the team before Hand . Tennessee was 8-8 at that point and came within 3 of upsetting # 2 ranked Kentucky
vs# 11 UConn (NBA Talent - Drummand, Lamb)
Stokes = 16pts, 6-10FG's, 12 rebs, 2 blks , 29 mins
Drummond is likely the # 1 pick in the draft this year, so Stokes was going up against an athletic freak ( though still raw) and pulled down 12 rebs . He helped them upset #11 UConn after almost nearly doing the same thing against #2 Kentucky two games earlier.
The kid already has great footwork and a post games. He is a very good passer from what I have seen and already has a NBA body and though he seems a bit slow athletically, I think he makes up for it with his footwork . He can score at will against anyone in the low post and seems to have a high bball IQ. He really does remind me of a young Ron Artest
season averages = 3 games , 12PPG, 8RPG, 62%FG's ,1 blk , 42%ft :-\
The FT % is a concern, but it's such a small sample size and he is still so young so that can be developed hopefully)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLBJMwGXDM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeXRBFgS5uU
Has anyone else seen this kid play ? Thoughts ?
Eurostep at 1:53 in the 2nd video.
Incredibly impressive for a big man. This kid is skilled.
-
i see some very poor defense hes scoring against. hes doesnt have any quickness either dunno i just dont like him
-
C's should draft this kid, he's DEFINITELY gonna be an All-Star. Defense, rebounding, hops, size.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoKejSN5hH4
-
As a Tennessee fan, I've been following Stokes with a lot of interest over the last month or so.
He's a big, strong dude - 6'8" 250 with a size 20 shoe. The thing that has stood out to me through his three games so far is his natural ability. He can score from anywhere, has a smooth jumpshot, very solid post game and will drive if he sees an opening. Great hands, excellent rebounder, surprisingly good passer, puts in the effort on defense (although he doesn't know the defensive system all that well yet).
I expect the free throws to improve. He's a good shooter, and I see a lot of unnecessary movement in his free throw routine - trim that down to a more repeatable motion, and he'll be fine there. As I said, he'll drive when given an opportunity, but his handle is a bit loose at this point - he'll get his pocket picked from time to time if he tries to do too much dribbling.
He'll never be an athletic freak, but I also think he's considerably more athletic than he's showing now - this is a kid who didn't play ball in his senior year in high school, so these have been his first three 'real' games in a long time.
I don't know what his ceiling is. Physically he has his limitations, but his versatility scoring the ball makes me think that he can be more than your typical undersized backup PF. If he grows a couple of inches in his college time, look out.
-
If the C's get a top 5-10 pick and this kid enters the draft, I think the C's definitely need to grab him . He is only 18 years old and I stumbled upon a couple of Tennessee games on TV and you can tell the kid just has it .
He has only played 3 games ( let the mocking begin ;)), but 2 of those games were against other elite college teams and future lottery picks.
vs # 2 Kentucky(NBA Talent - Gilchrist,Davis)
Stokes = 9 pts, 4-5FG's, 4 rebs 1 ast , 17mins
This was his first game as a college player and I believe he hadn't even practiced with the team before Hand . Tennessee was 8-8 at that point and came within 3 of upsetting # 2 ranked Kentucky
vs# 11 UConn (NBA Talent - Drummand, Lamb)
Stokes = 16pts, 6-10FG's, 12 rebs, 2 blks , 29 mins
Drummond is likely the # 1 pick in the draft this year, so Stokes was going up against an athletic freak ( though still raw) and pulled down 12 rebs . He helped them upset #11 UConn after almost nearly doing the same thing against #2 Kentucky two games earlier.
The kid already has great footwork and a post games. He is a very good passer from what I have seen and already has a NBA body and though he seems a bit slow athletically, I think he makes up for it with his footwork . He can score at will against anyone in the low post and seems to have a high bball IQ. He really does remind me of a young Ron Artest
season averages = 3 games , 12PPG, 8RPG, 62%FG's ,1 blk , 42%ft :-\
The FT % is a concern, but it's such a small sample size and he is still so young so that can be developed hopefully)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLBJMwGXDM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeXRBFgS5uU
Has anyone else seen this kid play ? Thoughts ?
Eurostep at 1:53 in the 2nd video.
Incredibly impressive for a big man. This kid is skilled.
Yea that's a pretty sweet move for a man/boy that size. He could grow a few more inches, he's only 18. This kid is a beast with great footwrok and great bball IQ !
-
sorry to hear he isn't coming out this year, but then again the c's will be in the lottery for the next few years so there still a chance!
-
I haven't seen the kid play but my buddy seems to think he's two years away from the NBA.
-
I haven't seen the kid play but at first glance his game kind of reminds me of Roy Hibbert expect athletically smoother. Who do people project him to play like?
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
That's harsh, sir. Please choose your words more thoughtfully.
-
I haven't seen the kid play but at first glance his game kind of reminds me of Roy Hibbert expect athletically smoother. Who do people project him to play like?
I think he looks a lot like Al Jefferson with the low post game, but I think he has the potential to have a pretty good face up game too. Seems like he could be a lot better passer than Big Al though which would make him deadly surrounded by shooters to kick it out to when the double team comes in the low post.
-
Wrong thread lol
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
Hes not a tweener. Hes most definetly a power foward, just undersized.
That's probably worse.
-
to be honest, having just watched those first two clips, he actually somewhat reminds of pierce. not super-quick or super athletic, but picks the lanes well, understands when to pass, has a decent post game, seems to shoot relatively well... obviously ft% seems an issue, but just at face value, that's the best comparison i can come up with i guess :P
-
This kid is such a beast. He's sick and had a 106 temperature last night and is still ballin
10 pts, 13 rebs,5 blocks so far
He won't be in this draft , but would love his toughness on the C's.
Game is on ESPN
-
He is a tweener too, 6-8 is small for a big in the NBA game and he has no real backcourt skills.
He is a PF, Gilchrist is a SF/SG. The comparsion was not a smart one and shows poor understanding of their positions.
Hes not a tweener. Hes most definetly a power foward, just undersized.
That's probably worse.
Well, there are 6'8'' power forwards in the NBA who are very productive -- see Carl Landry, Paul Millsap, Brandon Bass. But doubtful any guy who is a clear PF is going to be an All-Star if they're only 6'8''.
-
He's 6'8" right now, but he also just turned 18 on 1/9/2012. Many guys grow one to three inches after turning 18. Yes, Stokes may end up never being taller than 6'8", but he could also end up at 6'9", 6'10" or 6'11".
-
Saw this kid play against South Carolina a couple of weeks ago with the TV announcers really playing this kid up.
He looked awful. Terrible free throw shooter. No mid range game and he rebounded with bad form looking to use his athleticism more than basic rebounding form. He doesn't have much dribbling ability either.
Maybe it was just that game but the forwards on that really pathetic USC team did what they wanted with him.
He's YEARS away from the NBA if he ever makes it to the NBA based on what I saw.
-
He either plays good or bad but there is plenty of both. I hope we don't draft him. He is inconsistent as all get out. I seen him disappear some games and dominate others.
-
He either plays good or bad but there is plenty of both. I hope we don't draft him. He is inconsistent as all get out. I seen him disappear some games and dominate others.
He should be in high school right now. Give him some time to adjust to the college game before you pass judgment.
-
3 pages full of wishful hoping because this guy just turned 18 nd he's not eligible for the draft til next year since he aint old enough if u guys aint fmiliar wit his story this dude skipped his senior year in high school to enroll wit Tennessee early
-
Stokes is playing tonight in the NIT tournament for anyone who wants to catch him playing. It's on espn right now. He will be in the 2013 draft most likely
-
I just found this:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1024393-tennessee-volunteers-basketball-jarnell-stokes-is-the-real-deal
Not a lot of info on this guy re: Nba draft
-
don't get carried away - i'm here in knoxville and see this kid every game. definitely has potential, but at this point his footwork is slow, his offensive toolbox is limited and he doesn't jump all that well. should be able to tell a lot more next season after a year of conditioning and work on his offensive fundamentals.
do we have any shot at Anthony Davis if he stays one more year at Kentucky - that kid has CELTIC written all over him.
-
do we have any shot at Anthony Davis if he stays one more year at Kentucky - that kid has CELTIC written all over him.
If Anthony Davis stays at Kentucky, he has the world's worst advisers. He's practically guaranteed to be the first overall pick.
-
bump , stokes is a sullinger type without the back issues .
Would love to have this kid on the c's, playing on espn right now.
Obviously not a lottery pick, but he can definitely contribute.
-
im jus sayin
from experience on the C's Blog...
every time someone say "he the chosen one"
i never hear bout dude again
*not sippin*
-
Nothing is guaranteed.
-
and 1, 14 rebounds so far for stokes tonight
-
bump , stokes is a sullinger type without the back issues .
Would love to have this kid on the c's, playing on espn right now.
Obviously not a lottery pick, but he can definitely contribute.
truth
"i dont want no Scrub
a Scrub is a balla and cant get no luv
from me"
-
We need more young strong kids with talent.
hmmmmmm can we have him? he's a great franchise player in the future
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmMbm78sEB4
-
We need more young strong kids with talent.
hmmmmmm can we have him? he's a great franchise player in the future
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmMbm78sEB4
Lol. Don't reach against him, young bloods.
-
Bump
I still like this stokes kid a lot
In the first half againts Kentucky (Randle, WCS), he has put up a double double at halftime
The game is on CBS if anyone wants to catch the 2nd half, followed by Duke, and then OK St vs Kansas, so today is a good day to watch college bball prospects on CBS.
Would be more than happy to grab stokes with our 2nd pick if he enters the draft
-
Just mentioned an interesting stat about stokes...
He has 27 double doubles in the 67 career games he has played, leading the SEC over the past 2 years.
-
Bump
I still like this stokes kid a lot
In the first half againts Kentucky (Randle, WCS), he has put up a double double at halftime
The game is on CBS if anyone wants to catch the 2nd half, followed by Duke, and then OK St vs Kansas, so today is a good day to watch college bball prospects on CBS.
Would be more than happy to grab stokes with our 2nd pick if he enters the draft
The problem is we don't have any 2nd round picks this year and it would be quite a reach if we use our 2nd first rounder for him. Also, we already have a logjam at PF position with Sullinger and Klynyk.
-
Hats off to RondoHondo!! I was thoroughly impressed with this kid today vs. a solid KY frontline!! He is a beast. Grab an early second rounder NOW Danny:-))
Smitty77
-
I'm not sure what I think of Stokes.
He has one sure NBA skill: rebounding. Very good on the glass on both ends. The problem is, I'm not sure what else he does. He doesn't have the tools to be a very good defender, and his offensive game is an enigma. He flashes several things (driving, shoot from 15-18 feet, passing, scoring with either hand in the post) that make you salivate, but these things are fairly rare and I don't know why.
I wonder if his coach is holding him back in that area of his game, He seems to want him to just bully his defender in the paint. That won't always work, and based on his scouting reports in high school (I've followed Stokes for a while) it may not even be what he's best at. So we'll see.
-
Has anyone else been watching this kid in the tourney? He has been a beast in the 2 rounds so far.
Vs Umass 26pts,14 reb,2 ast
Vs Mercer 17pts,18reb,5 ast
He is physically stronger than anyone in college , and has an awesome soft touch around the rim. He is basically Sully without the back concerns and maybe slightly more athletic.
Will he enter the draft this year? If so where do you think he goes?
Would love to grab him with our 2nd pick this year.
-
He's certainly playing very well, as is his rebounding-cohort Jeronne Maymon -- who I might like better, actually.
-
Has anyone else been watching this kid in the tourney? He has been a beast in the 2 rounds so far.
Vs Umass 26pts,14 reb,2 ast
Vs Mercer 17pts,18reb,5 ast
He is physically stronger than anyone in college , and has an awesome soft touch around the rim. He is basically Sully without the back concerns and maybe slightly more athletic.
Will he enter the draft this year? If so where do you think he goes?
Would love to grab him with our 2nd pick this year.
Wait, Sully without the back issues and with more athleticism sounds like a top 5-10 pick in the draft.... I haven't seen Stokes play, yet your comp sounds like it goes against draft projections.
-
Has anyone else been watching this kid in the tourney? He has been a beast in the 2 rounds so far.
Vs Umass 26pts,14 reb,2 ast
Vs Mercer 17pts,18reb,5 ast
He is physically stronger than anyone in college , and has an awesome soft touch around the rim. He is basically Sully without the back concerns and maybe slightly more athletic.
Will he enter the draft this year? If so where do you think he goes?
Would love to grab him with our 2nd pick this year.
Wait, Sully without the back issues and with more athleticism sounds like a top 5-10 pick in the draft.... I haven't seen Stokes play, yet your comp sounds like it goes against draft projections.
Exactly. Draft Express has him going #50 meaning he could very well go undrafted.
-
We already had BBD, I see stokes as the same kid of player in the pros.
-
We already had BBD, I see stokes as the same kid of player in the pros.
Yeah, based on highlights, he looks like a slower version of BBD. Davis was super strong and a force in the paint at LSU. I dont see the same nimble speed in Stokes though.
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
-
If stokes is a second round pick, why draft him in the mid first? Make a deal in the 2nd round for him. Personally I believe there is a TON of quality 2nd round picks.
-
Granted the SEC has eight guys on their All SEC team but he doesn't get much love in this article besides making the team:
http://www.secdigitalnetwork.com/NEWS/tabid/473/Article/249805/2014-sec-mens-basketball-awards-announced.aspx
I like in the SEC, I respect him as a good player. He is a load but he is a tweener. He can't protect the rim and is exactly the kind of big we don't need. A strong guy in college who will be average strength in the NBA because almost everyone is strong.
I would be looking to get back into the Second Round this year as well.
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
-
Really, really good rebounder? We could use that off the bench. Hopefully we can buy a 2nd round pick. If Hump doesn't come back, Stokes for a 2nd rounder would be nice.
-
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
Thanks for confirming your evaluation and expertise applies to only NBA Glen Davis. In college, he played down low most of the time and bulled people with his strength just like Stokes. In the NBA he has had to adapt because he is a tweener. So will Stokes because everyone will be strong and he is not an elite leaper nor tall enough to shoot over people. He can carve out space like Sully does but he is not as adept as Sully at using his body. Hence, he will flame out in the pros or adapt like Davis did as he does not have the footwork of Sullinger.
Sully and Davis were better scorers than Stokes by almost 2 PPG. Stokes is on the same level as Davis on the boards at 10.6 RPG and 10.4 RPG respectively. Sully was the best shot blocker of the three and Sully at second at that one. Davis was the best passer of the three in school with 2.3 APG as at his last year. I would have bet the farm on Sully being the best passer as he is so good in the NBA but I would have been wrong.
A hot tournament doth not a pro maketh....
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
Great rebounder with no offensive game??? off the bench??? Reggie Evans anybody??
sign me up for a second
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
Great rebounder with no offensive game??? off the bench??? Reggie Evans anybody??
sign me up for a second
He's far more talented than Reggie Evans on offense. He can play on offense; against one-on-one defense at this level he'll score, and if he doesn't he has a great chance of getting his own miss. His issue is that he doesn't deal with double-teams very effectively at times and this UT team rarely has the spacing to consistently allow him those one-on-one opportunities. I also believe he has more of a midrange game than he's allowed to use - I've seen him hit 15-footers and utilize straight-line drives very effectively. Not sure why he doesn't do it more often.
I think he's an NBA player, but likely a bench guy for a team that needs a presence on the glass. I agree with CFAN that he doesn't fit Boston's roster well unless a lot of things change over the offseason.
-
I would pass.
Another PF, and undersized at that, dont we have 2 of them already? Add to it a couple more.
He looks like a real good prospect. Physical and willing to board. But 6'8" PF, jeez I dont know... Can we use that pick for someone we need or with more upside instead?
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
Great rebounder with no offensive game??? off the bench??? Reggie Evans anybody??
sign me up for a second
He's far more talented than Reggie Evans on offense. He can play on offense; against one-on-one defense at this level he'll score, and if he doesn't he has a great chance of getting his own miss. His issue is that he doesn't deal with double-teams very effectively at times and this UT team rarely has the spacing to consistently allow him those one-on-one opportunities. I also believe he has more of a midrange game than he's allowed to use - I've seen him hit 15-footers and utilize straight-line drives very effectively. Not sure why he doesn't do it more often.
I think he's an NBA player, but likely a bench guy for a team that needs a presence on the glass. I agree with CFAN that he doesn't fit Boston's roster well unless a lot of things change over the offseason.
that's fine with me...I like Reggie Evans. A great rebounder off the bench with a little offense is just a bonus.
I'm hearing people are saying his jump shot is limited by his coach? So not sure what to think of that, but what are the chances we can convert him to a SF? Or is that just not feasible?
From what I'm hearing, he is a great athlete. Saw his gamelogs, and is impressed that he is stepping up for Tennessee in March Madness. His rebounding numbers are sick.
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
Great rebounder with no offensive game??? off the bench??? Reggie Evans anybody??
sign me up for a second
He's far more talented than Reggie Evans on offense. He can play on offense; against one-on-one defense at this level he'll score, and if he doesn't he has a great chance of getting his own miss. His issue is that he doesn't deal with double-teams very effectively at times and this UT team rarely has the spacing to consistently allow him those one-on-one opportunities. I also believe he has more of a midrange game than he's allowed to use - I've seen him hit 15-footers and utilize straight-line drives very effectively. Not sure why he doesn't do it more often.
I think he's an NBA player, but likely a bench guy for a team that needs a presence on the glass. I agree with CFAN that he doesn't fit Boston's roster well unless a lot of things change over the offseason.
that's fine with me...I like Reggie Evans. A great rebounder off the bench with a little offense is just a bonus.
I'm hearing people are saying his jump shot is limited by his coach? So not sure what to think of that, but what are the chances we can convert him to a SF? Or is that just not feasible?
From what I'm hearing, he is a great athlete. Saw his gamelogs, and is impressed that he is stepping up for Tennessee in March Madness. His rebounding numbers are sick.
Nah, he's not nearly quick enough to play SF.
I say he may have a jumpshot because I've seen him make them... But his coach has a (too limited, in my opinion) role for him that requires him to bang underneath all game except for a precious few possessions.
In terms of athleticism, Sully is a decent comp for him - big body, quicker than he looks and will run the floor but not a leaper and will probably struggle guarding the perimeter.
-
I've watched Stokes a lot. Sully is a decent comp for him in some ways. Stokes is a tad more athletic, but I think Sully is actually a bit longer. Neither is a major defensive presence, though both put in the effort. I think Stokes is actually a better rebounder (which is saying something), but he hasn't displayed the offensive skillset that Sully has. I think he does have a jumpshot that he isn't allowed to use much (his coach limits him in that respect), but he certainly won't be taking threes anytime soon like Sully does.
Aside from size, Glen Davis and Stokes don't play all that similarly. Stokes knows he's a paint presence, while Davis wants to play like a guard. Stokes is an elite rebounder - arguably the best in college this year.
If you accept my evaluation of Stokes as Sullinger with less (apparent) offensive game, then I think an early-to-mid 2nd-round grade makes sense for him. I think he can be a good bench big, and there's some added upside there depending on whether he has a wider offensive game than he has consistently shown (he flashes certain skills occasionally that make me wonder if this is the case, but that's all they are - flashes).
I 100% agree with your evaluation of Stokes.
That being said he is obviously a poor fit with the current Cs roster. I think he would be a perfect fit on the Bulls especially if they amnesty boozer. The Bulls first round pick would be a stretch for Stokes but he seems like a great prospect for them to trading into the early 2nd to grab. His rebounding and inside play would be a nice compliment to Noah and Gibson off the bench.
Great rebounder with no offensive game??? off the bench??? Reggie Evans anybody??
sign me up for a second
He's far more talented than Reggie Evans on offense. He can play on offense; against one-on-one defense at this level he'll score, and if he doesn't he has a great chance of getting his own miss. His issue is that he doesn't deal with double-teams very effectively at times and this UT team rarely has the spacing to consistently allow him those one-on-one opportunities. I also believe he has more of a midrange game than he's allowed to use - I've seen him hit 15-footers and utilize straight-line drives very effectively. Not sure why he doesn't do it more often.
I think he's an NBA player, but likely a bench guy for a team that needs a presence on the glass. I agree with CFAN that he doesn't fit Boston's roster well unless a lot of things change over the offseason.
that's fine with me...I like Reggie Evans. A great rebounder off the bench with a little offense is just a bonus.
I'm hearing people are saying his jump shot is limited by his coach? So not sure what to think of that, but what are the chances we can convert him to a SF? Or is that just not feasible?
From what I'm hearing, he is a great athlete. Saw his gamelogs, and is impressed that he is stepping up for Tennessee in March Madness. His rebounding numbers are sick.
Nah, he's not nearly quick enough to play SF.
I say he may have a jumpshot because I've seen him make them... But his coach has a (too limited, in my opinion) role for him that requires him to bang underneath all game except for a precious few possessions.
In terms of athleticism, Sully is a decent comp for him - big body, quicker than he looks and will run the floor but not a leaper and will probably struggle guarding the perimeter.
in that case, should we still get him? Assuming we do get him, who leaves? Bass? Fav? cuz we are log jammed at PF right now, and with no legit center on the team
-
Nah, he's not nearly quick enough to play SF.
I say he may have a jumpshot because I've seen him make them... But his coach has a (too limited, in my opinion) role for him that requires him to bang underneath all game except for a precious few possessions.
In terms of athleticism, Sully is a decent comp for him - big body, quicker than he looks and will run the floor but not a leaper and will probably struggle guarding the perimeter.
in that case, should we still get him? Assuming we do get him, who leaves? Bass? Fav? cuz we are log jammed at PF right now, and with no legit center on the team
While I do really like Stokes as a player, I don't think he fits on the Celtics right now. We already have Sully, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the Celtics resign Humphries to a more affordable deal as well. No real opportunity for him here. We already have a couple of undersized tweener PF/Cs who rebound and throw their weight around in the paint. Stokes can help somebody, but probably not us.
-
He is not a bad player but all star in the NBA, LOL, please.