The 2022-2023 Season Thread

[Beachcat97]

one thing I was thinking about for next year - this past year’s team ended up being hurt significantly not having a competent backup 4 behind Tubelis. I know Tommy prefers playing big, but I loved our lineups this year with Larsson at the 4. I wonder if we go all in on adding perimeter talent and work to prepare Larsson for that role next year. A “lineup of death” with Kerr, Boswell/GT guard X, Terry, Larsson, & the Euro would be very intriguing to me. We’d likely have Tubelis, Bal, Ballo, & Boswell/GT guard X on the bench too so still plenty of talent available.

Tubelis really hurts us with spacing in the half court because he can't shoot. It really hurt us if we have 3 guards out there of which one is inevitably going to have to play on the wings.

Our grad transfers should only be two positions of need imo. PG/CG if Boswell doesn't reclassify and a 3/4 hybrid or smaller than Tubelis but more athletic 4.

yeah I agree with those needs - what I'm saying is I don't mind going after two guards if it means that we just use Larsson to fill that 3/4 hybrid role, because I think he can do it and also is probably a better fit for that role than he is as a combo-guard type player. He just isn't quick enough to defend those types, but can be very good defensively if he's matched up against the 3/4 hybrid forwards out there (e.g., Jacquez, Guerrier, etc.).

I have to say: Larsson impressed tf out of me this year. I expected him to be good, but he's more versatile and brings more to the table than I realized. So glad he's a Wildcat.

[Spaceman Spiff]

one thing I was thinking about for next year - this past year’s team ended up being hurt significantly not having a competent backup 4 behind Tubelis. I know Tommy prefers playing big, but I loved our lineups this year with Larsson at the 4. I wonder if we go all in on adding perimeter talent and work to prepare Larsson for that role next year. A “lineup of death” with Kerr, Boswell/GT guard X, Terry, Larsson, & the Euro would be very intriguing to me. We’d likely have Tubelis, Bal, Ballo, & Boswell/GT guard X on the bench too so still plenty of talent available.

Tubelis really hurts us with spacing in the half court because he can't shoot. It really hurt us if we have 3 guards out there of which one is inevitably going to have to play on the wings.

Our grad transfers should only be two positions of need imo. PG/CG if Boswell doesn't reclassify and a 3/4 hybrid or smaller than Tubelis but more athletic 4.

It's odd, but I feel like he regressed. He started as a freshman not shooting J's. Then, in January and February of 20-21, he shot 11-31 from 3, which isn't incredible, but legitimate for a freshman 4.

This year, he shot a few and basically quit shooting or even looking at the basket when they didn't go down much. It's weird. I look at his 20-21 performance and think you can see the potential to be solid...this year, it seems like his confidence bottomed out.

[EastCoastCat]

I love Pelle but he has trouble creating his own shot off the bounce. He's deadly when left open for 3 but otherwise he's just OK penetrating and creating a shot and has no pull up jumper to speak of.

Much better defense than I thought and I also liked how he would mix it up inside occasionally.

Count me in on the "better than expected performance" camp.

[Beachcat97]

I love Pelle but he has trouble creating his own shot off the bounce. He's deadly when left open for 3 but otherwise he's just OK penetrating and creating a shot and has no pull up jumper to speak of.

Much better defense than I thought and I also liked how he would mix it up inside occasionally.

Count me in on the "better than expected performance" camp.

Actually, Pelle showed an ability to finish at the rim. Not dunking, obviously, but he's got nice instincts and touch around the basket. He had more than a few and-ones, and he's good finishing on the break. It's true that he's not the fastest player, but he makes up for it in other ways.

I agree that he could certainly add other elements to his game: a pull up jumper, a Euro step, etc. He's still young, and I expect we'll see his game evolve.

[YoDeFoe]

I think very highly of Pelle's defense (Pelle, Terry, and Koloko are three excellent defenders).

That said, I agree that we should be looking for a PG/CG to push and spell Kerr, along with a 6'7" - 6'9" two-way forward who can pass and shoot to fix any small-ball match-up problems. That kind of forward sounds pie-in-the-sky but Aiken was basically that dude coming into the season so hopefully we can find another one. I can think of a guy on our radar who fits that mold but he just won't stop growing...

[RondaeShimmy]

one thing I was thinking about for next year - this past year’s team ended up being hurt significantly not having a competent backup 4 behind Tubelis. I know Tommy prefers playing big, but I loved our lineups this year with Larsson at the 4. I wonder if we go all in on adding perimeter talent and work to prepare Larsson for that role next year. A “lineup of death” with Kerr, Boswell/GT guard X, Terry, Larsson, & the Euro would be very intriguing to me. We’d likely have Tubelis, Bal, Ballo, & Boswell/GT guard X on the bench too so still plenty of talent available.

Tubelis really hurts us with spacing in the half court because he can't shoot. It really hurt us if we have 3 guards out there of which one is inevitably going to have to play on the wings.

Our grad transfers should only be two positions of need imo. PG/CG if Boswell doesn't reclassify and a 3/4 hybrid or smaller than Tubelis but more athletic 4.

yeah I agree with those needs - what I'm saying is I don't mind going after two guards if it means that we just use Larsson to fill that 3/4 hybrid role, because I think he can do it and also is probably a better fit for that role than he is as a combo-guard type player. He just isn't quick enough to defend those types, but can be very good defensively if he's matched up against the 3/4 hybrid forwards out there (e.g., Jacquez, Guerrier, etc.).

I think Larsson is definitely capable of doing it, he was guarding Mobley this year at the 4 and has guarded other 4s.

But I think you need Ballo in there to protect the paint. The euro big wouldn't work imo.

Offensively Pelle is better as a catch and shoot guy, if he has to take a sidestep or something, he's hasn't hit those consistently.

[RondaeShimmy]

https://heatcheckcbb.com/college-basket ... r-2022-23/

First of many way too earlys

N°10 North Carolina
N°9 Arizona

Projected 2022-23 lineup: Kerr Kriisa, Pelle Larsson, Dalen Terry, Azuolas Tubelis, Oumar Ballo

Arizona had a breakout season under first-year head coach Tommy Lloyd and now looks to keep the momentum going in Year 2. Bennedict Mathurin and Christian Koloko are projected first-round draft choices and Justin Kier is out of eligibility, but the rest of the group could be back. Arizona figures to be active in the portal, especially if Dalen Terry turns pro.

N°8 Alabama
N°7 Kentucky
N°6 Creighton
N°5 Kansas
N°4 Duke
N°3 UCLA
N°2 Houston
N°1 Arkansas

[RaisingArizona]

https://heatcheckcbb.com/college-basket ... r-2022-23/

First of many way too earlys

N°10 North Carolina
N°9 Arizona

Projected 2022-23 lineup: Kerr Kriisa, Pelle Larsson, Dalen Terry, Azuolas Tubelis, Oumar Ballo

Arizona had a breakout season under first-year head coach Tommy Lloyd and now looks to keep the momentum going in Year 2. Bennedict Mathurin and Christian Koloko are projected first-round draft choices and Justin Kier is out of eligibility, but the rest of the group could be back. Arizona figures to be active in the portal, especially if Dalen Terry turns pro.

N°8 Alabama
N°7 Kentucky
N°6 Creighton
N°5 Kansas
N°4 Duke
N°3 UCLA
N°2 Houston
N°1 Arkansas

I find Arkansas to be an odd choice at #1OA. Top five for sure but not sure about #1. I get that they have three five stars coming in but if you're going to lean on freshman as a justification how can it not be Duke at number 1. Is it just a distrust of Scheyer as head coach?

I also think leaving Gonzaga out of the top ten is unlikely to age well. Even if they lose Timme. Those guards should take a huge Sophomore leap and Watson sure does look like a real dude on the interior.

[Beachcat97]

https://heatcheckcbb.com/college-basket ... r-2022-23/

First of many way too earlys

N°10 North Carolina
N°9 Arizona

Projected 2022-23 lineup: Kerr Kriisa, Pelle Larsson, Dalen Terry, Azuolas Tubelis, Oumar Ballo

Arizona had a breakout season under first-year head coach Tommy Lloyd and now looks to keep the momentum going in Year 2. Bennedict Mathurin and Christian Koloko are projected first-round draft choices and Justin Kier is out of eligibility, but the rest of the group could be back. Arizona figures to be active in the portal, especially if Dalen Terry turns pro.

N°8 Alabama
N°7 Kentucky
N°6 Creighton
N°5 Kansas
N°4 Duke
N°3 UCLA
N°2 Houston
N°1 Arkansas

ucla at 3 is crazy, given how they underachieved this year. They project both Jaquez and Ju-clang to return. Not likely.

I also don't buy Arkansas and Houston being ranked that high. Duke will be preseason #1, imo.

[Spaceman Spiff]

https://heatcheckcbb.com/college-basket ... r-2022-23/

First of many way too earlys

N°10 North Carolina
N°9 Arizona

Projected 2022-23 lineup: Kerr Kriisa, Pelle Larsson, Dalen Terry, Azuolas Tubelis, Oumar Ballo

Arizona had a breakout season under first-year head coach Tommy Lloyd and now looks to keep the momentum going in Year 2. Bennedict Mathurin and Christian Koloko are projected first-round draft choices and Justin Kier is out of eligibility, but the rest of the group could be back. Arizona figures to be active in the portal, especially if Dalen Terry turns pro.

N°8 Alabama
N°7 Kentucky
N°6 Creighton
N°5 Kansas
N°4 Duke
N°3 UCLA
N°2 Houston
N°1 Arkansas

Who knows at this point. Ballo replaces Koloko. If Terry joined Mathurin, we're hard up at wing with very minimal depth.

But the portal allows for a very full reset. Plus you have youth like Anderson, Bal and Nowell and who knows how close they are?

[Postmaster]

I feel like UCLA is a victim of their success.
They over achieved in the post season last year but they “under achieved “ this year based on last year.

Either way, 3 is too high.

[RaisingArizona]

If UCLA returns everybody that's eligible and the two five stars are as advertised I could see top 3.

[Merkin]

Actually, Pelle showed an ability to finish at the rim. Not dunking, obviously

Larsson is exceptionally athletic.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Actually, Pelle showed an ability to finish at the rim. Not dunking, obviously

Larsson is exceptionally athletic.

He's not like Mathurin level, but certainly a good enough athlete wirh a good build.for a college wing.

[Beachcat97]

Actually, Pelle showed an ability to finish at the rim. Not dunking, obviously

Larsson is exceptionally athletic.

Woah! Hadn't seen that one! I stand corrected.

[TheCat]

We are not top 10 with both C-Lo and Benn gone. Pelle was a much better defender than I thought but turned it over way too much. He is a good shooter if left alone and a good ft shooter.

[Longhorned]

Way too early got waaaaaaaay too early when we got the transfer portal.

[Beachcat97]

So is there any sense whatsoever of Benn and CK's timetable for a decision? The early entry deadline is April 24. Draft combine starts May 16. Draft is June 23. Murray from Iowa declared for the draft today. Seems like there's always a flurry of draft decisions right around and after the Final Four.

[azcat49]

https://heatcheckcbb.com/college-basket ... r-2022-23/

9. Arizona Wildcats

Projected 2022-23 lineup: Kerr Kriisa, Pelle Larsson, Dalen Terry, Azuolas Tubelis, Oumar Ballo

Arizona had a breakout season under first-year head coach Tommy Lloyd and now looks to keep the momentum going in Year 2. Bennedict Mathurin and Christian Koloko are projected first-round draft choices and Justin Kier is out of eligibility, but the rest of the group could be back. Arizona figures to be active in the portal, especially if Dalen Terry turns pro.

[Spaceman Spiff]

So is there any sense whatsoever of Benn and CK's timetable for a decision? The early entry deadline is April 24. Draft combine starts May 16. Draft is June 23. Murray from Iowa declared for the draft today. Seems like there's always a flurry of draft decisions right around and after the Final Four.

Benn's gone. CK would be more of the timetable question and beyond the general deadlines, I don't know enough. I would think Terry may well test the waters too.

[EastCoastCat]

Yeah, I'm not sure C-Lo is 100% gone. He certainly might be but that one is 50/50 it seems right now.

[YoDeFoe]

So is there any sense whatsoever of Benn and CK's timetable for a decision? The early entry deadline is April 24. Draft combine starts May 16. Draft is June 23. Murray from Iowa declared for the draft today. Seems like there's always a flurry of draft decisions right around and after the Final Four.

Benn's gone. CK would be more of the timetable question and beyond the general deadlines, I don't know enough. I would think Terry may well test the waters too.

Terry hopefully tests it, gets feedback that matches what I think we all expect and what our coaches have told him. Takes that as reinforcement to galvanize his focus on what he needs to work on over the summer and spends every day until the season starts being uncomfortable and growing, then shows the goods next season to become a top 20 pick.

[AzCatFan2]

Terry has potential. But how often does the NBA draft someone who averages 8 ppg in the first round? Terry did shoot 36% from 3 last year, which is respectable, but didn't get too many shots because of Benn. Next year, Terry should get the ball a little more, and if he can put on another 10 lbs of muscle, and average 12 ppg, with his D and ability to play both guard positions and small forward, he could work his way into a late lottery pick. With that said, test the waters now, and see if the NBA scouts believe as I do. Nothing to lose.

As for Koloko, I've heard he's a good student, and will likely graduate next year should he stay. It shouldn't factor into a decision, as NBA players have time to finish a degree taking online courses these days, but you never know if being able to graduate will be a factor or not. Just putting it out there. If it were me, and I was a guaranteed first rounder, I'd leave. Can always go back to school. But missing a year of NBA money is hard to make up.

As for next year, I know he didn't a ton of minutes, but I'm excited to see Bal next year. It looked like things finally clicked for him the last few games. He knew his role on offense and played solid D. He's young and has tremendous upside. I can see him playing significant minutes next year, even if Terry stays. Nobody is talking about Bal, but he could an x-factor on the team next year. I remember Michael Dickerson hardly playing his freshman year, and almost transferring because of it. Dickerson averaged 12 ppg the next year, and then lead the team the next two years in scoring, while becoming a solid defender. Bal has the potential to do something similar.

[Beachcat97]

So is there any sense whatsoever of Benn and CK's timetable for a decision? The early entry deadline is April 24. Draft combine starts May 16. Draft is June 23. Murray from Iowa declared for the draft today. Seems like there's always a flurry of draft decisions right around and after the Final Four.

Benn's gone. CK would be more of the timetable question and beyond the general deadlines, I don't know enough. I would think Terry may well test the waters too.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/295 ... final-four

Benn at #8 and CK early second round. I wonder if CK will roll the dice on his draft position, without a first round guarantee.

[YoDeFoe]

As for next year, I know he didn't a ton of minutes, but I'm excited to see Bal next year. It looked like things finally clicked for him the last few games. He knew his role on offense and played solid D. He's young and has tremendous upside. I can see him playing significant minutes next year, even if Terry stays. Nobody is talking about Bal, but he could an x-factor on the team next year. I remember Michael Dickerson hardly playing his freshman year, and almost transferring because of it. Dickerson averaged 12 ppg the next year, and then lead the team the next two years in scoring, while becoming a solid defender. Bal has the potential to do something similar.

Yeah the narrative for Bal has been that we would take a similar path to Joel Ayayi, who Lloyd of course recruited and coached at Gonzaga. Ayayi redshirted his first season and then played minutes similar to Bal's minutes this year in his redshirt freshman season - he then went on to play roughly 30min/g putting up 10/6/3 in his following season.

Bal of course did not redshirt - he's skipped a season of Ayayi's slow development - but I doubt he's ready for 30min/g next season.

I do hope though that Bal can play sixth man minutes, taking on Pelle's late season minutes as Pelle moves into the starting line-up to absorb Benn's departing minutes.

[Spaceman Spiff]

So is there any sense whatsoever of Benn and CK's timetable for a decision? The early entry deadline is April 24. Draft combine starts May 16. Draft is June 23. Murray from Iowa declared for the draft today. Seems like there's always a flurry of draft decisions right around and after the Final Four.

Benn's gone. CK would be more of the timetable question and beyond the general deadlines, I don't know enough. I would think Terry may well test the waters too.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/295 ... final-four

Benn at #8 and CK early second round. I wonder if CK will roll the dice on his draft position, without a first round guarantee.

For me, it's a simple call for Koloko. Declare, get input, decide.

The striking thing about that mock is there's no one after Mark Williams at 12 remotely comparable to Koloko's game before he's slotred at 31. Hence, if you are late first and looking for a rim protecting big, Koloko's your man.

That's where his first round status sits. It's just a matter of if a team in the late 1st wants a rim protector.

[Beachcat97]

That's where his first round status sits. It's just a matter of if a team in the late 1st wants a rim protector.

Every team in the league needs rim protectors, and few are as long and athletic as CK. Think it's more about how he does in workouts and the combine. If he does as well as we know he can, he should be good to go for the first round. Find me another guy with his profile slated for the mid to late first round. CK is special.

[Chicat]

Every team in the league needs rim protectors

Not if they already have one.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Every team in the league needs rim protectors

Not if they already have one.

Obviously, a little is TBD, but of the teams in the 20's, only the Bucks, Heat and maybe the Griz and Nuggets wouldn't need a rim protecting big. Even the Bucks, Brook Lopez has played 8 games this year and is getting old.

Great fit for the Thunder, Spurs and Nets.

[YoDeFoe]

Every team in the league needs rim protectors

Not if they already have one.

Getting a bench big man on a late first round rookie deal is a very very good idea. A team like the Heat could use an upgrade behind Bam where they currently roster Dewayne Dedmon. Or a team like the Hawks could pick up Koloko, trade Capela and his appetizing remaining contract, and play CLo behind Onyeka Okongwu - getting assets and payroll relief while going younger and more mobile in their center depth.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Every team in the league needs rim protectors

Not if they already have one.

Getting a bench big man on a late first round rookie deal is a very very good idea. A team like the Heat could use an upgrade behind Bam where they currently roster Dewayne Dedmon. Or a team like the Hawks could pick up Koloko, trade Capela and his appetizing remaining contract, and play CLo behind Onyeka Okongwu - getting assets and payroll relief while going younger and more mobile in their center depth.

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

[ChooChooCat]

Every team in the league needs rim protectors

Not if they already have one.

Getting a bench big man on a late first round rookie deal is a very very good idea. A team like the Heat could use an upgrade behind Bam where they currently roster Dewayne Dedmon. Or a team like the Hawks could pick up Koloko, trade Capela and his appetizing remaining contract, and play CLo behind Onyeka Okongwu - getting assets and payroll relief while going younger and more mobile in their center depth.

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

I literally hate every thing about this post. If he gets a 1st round guarantee then he needs to go. If he doesn’t then he needs to return. This isn’t complicated. It’s not as if he’s maxed out by any sense of the word and he will be exposed by staying another year. His ceiling only goes higher. Leaving to be a 2nd round pick is absolutely asinine for his particular situation.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

I literally hate every thing about this post. If he gets a 1st round guarantee then he needs to go. If he doesn’t then he needs to return. This isn’t complicated. It’s not as if he’s maxed out by any sense of the word and he will be exposed by staying another year. His ceiling only goes higher. Leaving to be a 2nd round pick is absolutely asinine for his particular situation.

Well, I hate you too.

We just disagree. Being a second rounder doesn't prohibit you from getting a guaranteed deal.

A first rounder is locked into a scaled deal with 2 years guaranteed and a 4 year total. A second rounder can have between a 1 and 4 year deal, but there's no scale and the guranteed amount is negotiable.

In short, I disagree totally that first vs second matters in Koloko's situation. As an early 2nd, he'll get basically the same deal as late first.

As YoDeFoe has sagely (in my estimation) pointed out, Frye was the last big guy to go lottery at Koloko's age if he returns. The likelihood he drives his value higher with a return pales compared to what can go wrong. Maxed out player potential has very little to do with draft stock and I fully disagree there's nowhere to go but up. He has a freak injury and that impairs draft stock dramatically. Player progress is never linear, there's risk beyond what Koloko controls and he's going to get a contract this year similar to what he'll get next year.

[YoDeFoe]

Folks should look up the contracts that the early second round got last draft. If you’re one of the first ten picks of the second round you can negotiate a multi-year deal with guarantees and pay above $1m/yr.

So if Koloko is one of the top 40 draft picks (likely) he’ll get a very nice starting contract and can develop his game in the NBA.

The biggest knock against Koloko right now isn’t his lower body strength or his midrange jumper, it’s his age - dude will be 22 by the start of next season. Want to tell a seven footer he should wait until he’s the first 23 year old center to get drafted since the 90’s?

Edit: I should read the posts above me before posting, basically ditto’ing Spiff at this point lol

[Spaceman Spiff]

Folks should look up the contracts that the early second round got last draft. If you’re one of the first ten picks of the second round you can negotiate a multi-year deal with guarantees and pay above $1m/yr.

So if Koloko is one of the top 40 draft picks (likely) he’ll get a very nice starting contract and can develop his game in the NBA.

The biggest knock against Koloko right now isn’t his lower body strength or his midrange jumper, it’s his age - dude will be 22 by the start of next season. Want to tell a seven footer he should wait until he’s the first 23 year old center to get drafted since the 90’s?

It's arguable it's better to go early 2nd because you have control over your deal in a way you don't late 1st. Your bolded is correct. Early 2nd doesn't lock you in but the end point of negotiations is pretty identical.

[ChooChooCat]

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

I literally hate every thing about this post. If he gets a 1st round guarantee then he needs to go. If he doesn’t then he needs to return. This isn’t complicated. It’s not as if he’s maxed out by any sense of the word and he will be exposed by staying another year. His ceiling only goes higher. Leaving to be a 2nd round pick is absolutely asinine for his particular situation.

Well, I hate you too.

We just disagree. Being a second rounder doesn't prohibit you from getting a guaranteed deal.

A first rounder is locked into a scaled deal with 2 years guaranteed and a 4 year total. A second rounder can have between a 1 and 4 year deal, but there's no scale and the guranteed amount is negotiable.

In short, I disagree totally that first vs second matters in Koloko's situation. As an early 2nd, he'll get basically the same deal as late first.

As YoDeFoe has sagely (in my estimation) pointed out, Frye was the last big guy to go lottery at Koloko's age if he returns. The likelihood he drives his value higher with a return pales compared to what can go wrong. Maxed out player potential has very little to do with draft stock and I fully disagree there's nowhere to go but up. He has a freak injury and that impairs draft stock dramatically. Player progress is never linear, there's risk beyond what Koloko controls and he's going to get a contract this year similar to what he'll get next year.

It doesn’t guarantee you get a guaranteed deal either, which is why Alonzo Trier begged teams not to draft him once he fell out of the 1st round. Look, outside of the risk of permanent serious injury, which couldn’t be more rare in this environment, there’s zero reason for him to leave to be a second rounder. His role and playing time are secure and he’s nowhere near maxed out yet. I love you and your takes bud, but I fricken despise this argument from you. This isn’t Nick Johnson where he’s losing PT to Stanley Johnson and can only further hurt his stock by returning. He can only raise his stock by returning in this instance. This is a stupid argument on your part and I am far from having homer glasses on when I say that.

First round guarantee or stay. Those should be his options. End of story. Get off my lawn Spiff and YDF.

[SabinoDrifter]

Some really good commentary from Bilas.

It's time to get serious about physical on-court play
In the past couple of years, I have identified what I consider to be very real issues of physical play and uncalled illegal contact not only creeping back into the game but becoming embedded in the game. Players are better and more skilled than ever, and the game had more experienced players than ever. Yet scoring is down, field goal percentages are down, fouls called are down and turnovers are up. These are difficult issues for the game to address because of the NCAA bureaucracy and the fact that nobody is really in charge. Still, there is responsibility, and something must be done.

Several years ago, the game underwent a "freedom of movement" initiative where no new rules were implemented but rules would be enforced as written and interpreted. It was successful in the first few years, and there were significant gains in the areas listed above. This season, and perhaps last season, those gains have been given back. For the significant step forward, the game has taken three steps back, and the game has devolved into a far more physical contest where fouling is substituted for defense.

Although not dispositive of the issue, this year's NCAA tournament is instructive. Before the tournament, I believed that tournament games would be called cleaner and closer, but I was incorrect to the point of being naive. The NCAA supervisor of officials has no real authority over the conduct of officiating during the regular season. That is left to the conference supervisors, and while the NCAA supervisor has his bully pulpit, the bureaucracy limits his authority. That needs to change.

What fooled me on the tournament was the ability of the NCAA supervisor to mandate the way games are called, with the disincentive that officials would not advance forward in the tournament if they failed to enforce the rules. Yet what we saw in the NCAA tournament was really no different from what we saw during the regular season: an overtly physical game with clear fouls going uncalled.

This has been pointed out before, but this is not about missing a call here or there. It is about recurring plays and actions going uncalled. Nothing pointed out here makes college basketball "unwatchable" or "ruins the game." That is hyperbole that does not advance the argument. However, what is pointed out hurts the game, hurts the players and provides a diminished product on the floor.

The data backs up these assertions. In this year's Sweet 16, only six teams scored 70 or more points in a game. On average, 66.6 points per game were scored in the Sweet 16, the lowest scoring output since 2015, which coincides with the start of the "freedom of movement" initiative. To find lower scoring outputs, one would have to go back to 2010, 1999 and the 1980s. That is instructive. In this Elite Eight, only two teams scored over 70 points, with four teams at 50 points or fewer. One NBA coach told me privately that the college game looked much like the NBA of the 1990s. Again, not dispositive of the issue, but instructive.

Here is what the game needs to do. Those in charge of officiating and rules need to first admit that the game has a problem. Second, there has to be a will to swiftly address the problem and remedy it, including structural change to allow such issues to be properly addressed. Third, there needs to be accountability for those in charge if such issues are not properly remedied and progress is not made. The game deserves better, and we can do better.

What rules changes must be considered?
There has always been a barrier to change in college basketball, and it goes beyond tradition. It is often stated that "College basketball is unique" and "We don't want to be like the NBA." I have never understood that. What makes college basketball unique is that it is played by young adults who are enrolled in school, not that the game has two halves instead of four quarters. The rules of play need to be addressed in a thoughtful way, and the antiquated thinking of "this has always been the way" needs to go away. The college game should strongly consider several rules changes, including:

Four quarters instead of two halves: Men's college basketball is the only visible form of the game in the world that does not have quarters. It is not a question of remaining unique. Quarters provide more clock plays and allow team fouls to be reset after the first and third quarters. Moving to quarters will reduce the number of free throws on common fouls and will eliminate the one-and-one. A team will reach the bonus upon the fifth foul of a quarter, and two shots will be awarded upon every common foul thereafter. Some argue that the one-and-one is necessary, but I differ. The argument is that a player must "earn" the second foul shot by making the first. That second shot was earned ... by getting fouled. Remember, the foul limited the offensive team's ability to get two or three points on the possession. This rule change, in my view, is necessary.

Charge/block: The charge call the game should value is that of a primary defender in legal guarding position maintaining that position. A secondary defender sliding under a driver who has won a path to the basket should not be as celebrated in the game as it is now, in my view. First, it seems illogical to the reduction in physical play to celebrate a collision. Second, the rule as written allows a help defender to get into position before the offensive player leaves the floor. The standard for a help defender taking a charge should be moved back to when the offensive player begins his upward motion, or "the gather." That would reduce such collisions and bring better results. I am told that most officials agree with this point, although I do not hear such agreement in committee meetings. To me, it is a "must" to change this rule. I believe it will make the game better.

Advance the ball to midcourt late in games: The NBA, FIBA and women's college basketball all have this rule, and it makes for more excitement and late-game plays. Opponents suggest that valuable real estate is given up with this rule, and we would not have the Christian Laettner and Jalen Suggs moments with such a rule change. That is true and a fair point, but the counter is we would have even more exciting, game-changing plays with the rule change. This change is not a must but is one that should be strongly considered and debated, as reasonable minds can differ on it.

Widen the lane: A few years ago, the rules committee moved the 3-point line back but did not widen the lane to NBA and FIBA size. That was a mistake, as those two things should have been done together. A wider lane should help in reducing physicality in the post area, although is it not a magic bullet for that goal.

Bench decorum: Coaches are not going to like this one. Although interaction with officials should not be discouraged, the behavior of coaches toward officials needs to change. What is allowed by officials on the college level would never be allowed in the NBA. Coaches should coach their teams and leave officials alone. If such negative interaction can influence officials, it needs to stop for obvious reasons (I do not believe it influences officials). If such negative interaction does not influence officials, it needs to stop because it is a bad look and affects public perception. Officials should call technical fouls on all such behavior and should be supported in doing so. There are no sacred cows on the sideline. The officials are the law of the court. Nobody is decrying a quick and emotional reaction to a call. But there is a line, and that line is too often crossed by coaches. We can do better, and the officials should not have to deal with such issues.

Monitor review: While we all want to "get it right," there are too many monitor reviews and it simply takes too long on too many occasions. Replay should be used for out-of-bounds calls in the last minute of regulation and overtime only. Review of every call under the two-minute mark is unnecessary. Also, a monitor review for a potential flagrant 2 foul (which carries with it an ejection) should be allowed at any time during play, even if play has resumed. That just makes good sense.

[84Cat]

Fuck, it's not often I agree with Bilas but I do here. Good stuff

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

I literally hate every thing about this post. If he gets a 1st round guarantee then he needs to go. If he doesn’t then he needs to return. This isn’t complicated. It’s not as if he’s maxed out by any sense of the word and he will be exposed by staying another year. His ceiling only goes higher. Leaving to be a 2nd round pick is absolutely asinine for his particular situation.

Well, I hate you too.

We just disagree. Being a second rounder doesn't prohibit you from getting a guaranteed deal.

A first rounder is locked into a scaled deal with 2 years guaranteed and a 4 year total. A second rounder can have between a 1 and 4 year deal, but there's no scale and the guranteed amount is negotiable.

In short, I disagree totally that first vs second matters in Koloko's situation. As an early 2nd, he'll get basically the same deal as late first.

As YoDeFoe has sagely (in my estimation) pointed out, Frye was the last big guy to go lottery at Koloko's age if he returns. The likelihood he drives his value higher with a return pales compared to what can go wrong. Maxed out player potential has very little to do with draft stock and I fully disagree there's nowhere to go but up. He has a freak injury and that impairs draft stock dramatically. Player progress is never linear, there's risk beyond what Koloko controls and he's going to get a contract this year similar to what he'll get next year.

It doesn’t guarantee you get a guaranteed deal either, which is why Alonzo Trier begged teams not to draft him once he fell out of the 1st round. Look, outside of the risk of permanent serious injury, which couldn’t be more rare in this environment, there’s zero reason for him to leave to be a second rounder. His role and playing time are secure and he’s nowhere near maxed out yet. I love you and your takes bud, but I fricken despise this argument from you. This isn’t Nick Johnson where he’s losing PT to Stanley Johnson and can only further hurt his stock by returning. He can only raise his stock by returning in this instance. This is a stupid argument on your part and I am far from having homer glasses on when I say that.

First round guarantee or stay. Those should be his options. End of story. Get off my lawn Spiff and YDF.

I just disagree. Koloko will get an NBA investment because he's had 3 straight seasons with an elite block % at Arizona while making marked improvements to round out his game.

A late first round deal has 1.8 mil in guaranteed money year one with a total of 3.4 mil guranteed. That is less than 1/100th of the total salary cap going forward (like 1/150th if a team is willing to burn into luxury tax).

YDF is right on the beginning of the second round. Look at the numbers and guaranteed years from the latest draft.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2021/08/202 ... nings.html

Livers at #42 got the same # of guaranteed years as first round scale at basically 1.5 million a year. That's within the first round scale range.

Trier is a great way, IMO, to understand why an NBA team will commit to Koloko. There are probably 20 people drafted every year who are scorers in the 6'4 to 6'7 range. There are maybe 1 or 2 with Koloko's size and block % per draft class.

Koloko is a scarcer commodity by a huge margin.

[Jefe]

Good sign

[Beachcat97]

Terry will be in Tucson this fall. Koloko I really doubt.

[ChooChooCat]

I'd go if I was Koloko regardless of 1st round or early 2nd. What you want is a team to invest in a few years of your development.

Koloko is a 7 foot rim protector, and his rim protection is already above average by NBA standards. That's probably the rarest size and skill set in the NBA.

So, whoever drafts him is going to give him a few years to figure out the rest before they consider giving up on him. When you have one thing that's above NBA average, especially a rare thing, a team will give you time to show you can do the rest. It's the guys who don't have any standout thing that had better be ready to show out from day 1.

I mean, Grant Jerrett signed 3 NBA contracts and was around the NBA for 4 years solely because he was 6'11 and could shoot. No way Koloko doesn't get 3 years on an NBA contract unless he absolutely ceases to develop and regresses. And if he ceases to develop and regresses, returning means he may never get a shot.

I literally hate every thing about this post. If he gets a 1st round guarantee then he needs to go. If he doesn’t then he needs to return. This isn’t complicated. It’s not as if he’s maxed out by any sense of the word and he will be exposed by staying another year. His ceiling only goes higher. Leaving to be a 2nd round pick is absolutely asinine for his particular situation.

Well, I hate you too.

We just disagree. Being a second rounder doesn't prohibit you from getting a guaranteed deal.

A first rounder is locked into a scaled deal with 2 years guaranteed and a 4 year total. A second rounder can have between a 1 and 4 year deal, but there's no scale and the guranteed amount is negotiable.

In short, I disagree totally that first vs second matters in Koloko's situation. As an early 2nd, he'll get basically the same deal as late first.

As YoDeFoe has sagely (in my estimation) pointed out, Frye was the last big guy to go lottery at Koloko's age if he returns. The likelihood he drives his value higher with a return pales compared to what can go wrong. Maxed out player potential has very little to do with draft stock and I fully disagree there's nowhere to go but up. He has a freak injury and that impairs draft stock dramatically. Player progress is never linear, there's risk beyond what Koloko controls and he's going to get a contract this year similar to what he'll get next year.

It doesn’t guarantee you get a guaranteed deal either, which is why Alonzo Trier begged teams not to draft him once he fell out of the 1st round. Look, outside of the risk of permanent serious injury, which couldn’t be more rare in this environment, there’s zero reason for him to leave to be a second rounder. His role and playing time are secure and he’s nowhere near maxed out yet. I love you and your takes bud, but I fricken despise this argument from you. This isn’t Nick Johnson where he’s losing PT to Stanley Johnson and can only further hurt his stock by returning. He can only raise his stock by returning in this instance. This is a stupid argument on your part and I am far from having homer glasses on when I say that.

First round guarantee or stay. Those should be his options. End of story. Get off my lawn Spiff and YDF.

I just disagree. Koloko will get an NBA investment because he's had 3 straight seasons with an elite block % at Arizona while making marked improvements to round out his game.

A late first round deal has 1.8 mil in guaranteed money year one with a total of 3.4 mil guranteed. That is less than 1/100th of the total salary cap going forward (like 1/150th if a team is willing to burn into luxury tax).

YDF is right on the beginning of the second round. Look at the numbers and guaranteed years from the latest draft.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2021/08/202 ... nings.html

Livers at #42 got the same # of guaranteed years as first round scale at basically 1.5 million a year. That's within the first round scale range.

Trier is a great way, IMO, to understand why an NBA team will commit to Koloko. There are probably 20 people drafted every year who are scorers in the 6'4 to 6'7 range. There are maybe 1 or 2 with Koloko's size and block % per draft class.

Koloko is a scarcer commodity by a huge margin.

Which is why he’ll get a 1st round guarantee. He’s not going to fall to the 2nd and if for some reason he never gets that guarantee he will be returning to Arizona.

[EVCat]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

[Beachcat97]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

I know this isn't just a style thing, but I don't much see the RJ thing. The aspect of RJ was always his elite athleticism. He wasn't just college elite, but one of the best NBA athletes for a while.

His trajectory was about developing the skills to round out that basic aspect of things. He could put a ton of pressure on the D with athleticism.

Offensively, Terry reminds me so much more of Luke Walton's sutuation. He doesn't have that big time athleticism, so it's about his outside shot creating opportunities for his diverse skill set to shine. To really expand his playmaking into Walton's territory, he has to be able to pose a danger to knock down a J at all times.

[EastCoastCat]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

I know this isn't just a style thing, but I don't much see the RJ thing. The aspect of RJ was always his elite athleticism. He wasn't just college elite, but one of the best NBA athletes for a while.

His trajectory was about developing the skills to round out that basic aspect of things. He could put a ton of pressure on the D with athleticism.

Offensively, Terry reminds me so much more of Luke Walton's sutuation. He doesn't have that big time athleticism, so it's about his outside shot creating opportunities for his diverse skill set to shine. To really expand his playmaking into Walton's territory, he has to be able to pose a danger to knock down a J at all times.

DT does not have big time athleticism? Am I hearing that right Spiff? We must be watching different players to be perfectly honest because I see that as one of his best attributes and why he is good at so many things.

Knock down J I agree with but he's come a long way in that area and will only get better.

[ChooChooCat]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

What kind of offensive player do you think RJ was at Arizona exactly? Either way as far as perimeter shooting goes Terry is already ahead of RJ at the same point.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

I know this isn't just a style thing, but I don't much see the RJ thing. The aspect of RJ was always his elite athleticism. He wasn't just college elite, but one of the best NBA athletes for a while.

His trajectory was about developing the skills to round out that basic aspect of things. He could put a ton of pressure on the D with athleticism.

Offensively, Terry reminds me so much more of Luke Walton's sutuation. He doesn't have that big time athleticism, so it's about his outside shot creating opportunities for his diverse skill set to shine. To really expand his playmaking into Walton's territory, he has to be able to pose a danger to knock down a J at all times.

DT does not have big time athleticism? Am I hearing that right Spiff? We must be watching different players to be perfectly honest because I see that as one of his best attributes and why he is good at so many things.

Knock down J I agree with but he's come a long way in that area and will only get better.

Yeah, I think we'd have to disagree. Terry has great length, but his bounce and speed are not at all what I'd consider big time. He's developed a fair amount physically and he's not a minus athlete, but I don't see him particularly above average, let alone elite.

Pehaps my eyes fail me in my old age, but I don't see Terry's athleticism as exceptional. His best attributes are length and lateral mobility, but RJ was an NBA dunk contest guy and I do not see Terry in that orbit at all.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

What kind of offensive player do you think RJ was at Arizona exactly? Either way as far as perimeter shooting goes Terry is already ahead of RJ at the same point.

Here's the thing about RJ. He took comparable numbers of threes as a freshman and sophomore and actually shot a significantly better % than Terry (36% as a freshman, 42% as a soph vs DT's 32% and 36%).

Why you're saying what you're saying (and I'm not trying to start another Koloko fight with you, I see your point) is RH was such an explosive athlete, he got wide open, standstill 3's by virtue of the defense being scared of his athleticism and giving him the room to simply square and shoot. Dalen's 3's are tougher because the D isn't concerned that if they give him a small lane, they're putting their bigs on a poster.

[Beachcat97]

I see Terry's trajectory as similar, but not exact, to Richard Jefferson's. He has embraced the defense and rebounding piece...it's time to add the offensive development. Almost like Richard, but one year behind his development.

Terry will never be the offensive player that RJ was in his prime, but he *may* actually have it in him to become a better overall player, which is saying a lot. Terry is a special player, and he may be our MVP next season.

What kind of offensive player do you think RJ was at Arizona exactly? Either way as far as perimeter shooting goes Terry is already ahead of RJ at the same point.

Spiff put it nicely: RJ was a dunk contest guy. He probably had a 40" vertical, or higher. Terry is very athletic too, but not as bouncy and explosive as RJ.

As far as shooting, RJ took a little while to get his shot, but once he did, he was off and running. He was a good long and mid range shooter in college and the pros. I haven't seen that kind of shooting versatility from Terry yet, but he's still quite young.

I like the comparisons of DT with Luke, and also with Iggy. These are Swiss army knife players: they can do almost anything.