Getting lost in player comparisons: An NBA Draft roundtable

The NBA Draft is going to be here before you know it and as the hours dwindle down we thought we’d circle up a few of our NBA Draft experts to dive into everyone’s favorite game — player comparisons. 

Jayson Tatum: More Carmelo Anthony or Rudy Gay?

Trevor Magnotti (@Illegalscreens): I think Tatum’s style of play is more like Melo. His level of effectiveness may be closer to Gay, but Gay’s much better at using his strength as a weapon on drives and post-ups than I think Tatum will be. It’s forgotten just how much of a raw athlete Gay was coming out of college, and that was used as an advantage for much of his career. Tatum’s much more of a craft guy, using jabs, ball-fakes, and bursts of speed to clear space rather than power and length. I think that fits closer to Melo’s style.

Chris Stone (@cstonehoops): Trevor phrased this really well. Tatum is likely to end up with Rudy Gay production out of a Carmelo Anthony style. Tatum isn’t much of an athlete, but his skill level is absurd for a player his age. The hope, of course, is that he’ll be more of a distributor than either of these players. Tatum has flashed decent vision as a pick-and-roll ball-handler, for example. If he can build out that repertoire, he could end up as the best wing creator in this draft class.

Cole Zwicker (@colezwicker): Concur with the group here in terms of style and impact. Gay was a far superior athlete to Tatum and could just elevate over defenders. Tatum’s game via footwork and deception to create space is more akin to Anthony. The only thing I will add is Tatum lacks the shooting fluidity that Anthony has, which is largely why he won’t have Anthony’s level of impact. Carmelo’s smooth one-motion release is so mechanically clean, and every time he shot the ball in college you thought it was going in. Tatum doesn’t have those mechanics or that vibe. He’s also a step down in terms of first step, explosion, and hip flexibility, which takes a cumulative effect. But stylistically with some shake and deception out of the triple threat to create space, Tatum is more akin to Anthony’s skill game, even though Anthony has more of a power element.

Lauri Markkanen: More Dirk Nowitzki or Ryan Anderson?

Magnotti: Dirk. Definitely. Markkanen can be far more than a spot-up threat. I like his handle going one-on-one, especially against slower bigs. What separates Dirk (and to a lesser extent Kevin Love) from their peers in the stretch four market is the ability to offer more threats on ball in the offense. Anderson doesn’t have that capability, and it’s very possible Markkanen does, able to attack closeouts and even potentially run some mutant 4/5 pick-and-rolls.

Stone: Markkanen is closer to, but not equal to, Dirk. What separates Markkanen from guys like Anderson or Channing Frye is his ability to get buckets in different ways. Trevor mentioned the potential on-ball actions like attacking close outs, but he also brings more away from the ball. Markkanen did some running off of screens in college and gets out in transition. Plus his ability to legitimately play center as a 7-footer should make his shooting even more valuable.

Zwicker: Unequivocally Anderson for me. Markkanen is more well-rounded as a shooter and ball-handler than Anderson coming out, displaying the ability to shoot off the dribble and quickly set off screens. But Nowitzki was on another level in terms of fluid athleticism and agility, with the ability to grab-and-go in transition at higher speeds and displaying rare quickness and deception for his size in face up or post up situations getting his shot in isolation. Dirk is just one of the all-time awkward shot-makers, armed with unreal fluidity and underrated athleticism in his prime. Markkanen to me is far more stiff and lacks that same flexibility and short area quickness in on-ball settings that makes Dirk an outlier (on top of being the best shooting big man ever). Anderson has some on-ball utility with the ability to post up and get to his one-legged fadeaways in non-special fashion, as well as shoot on the move especially on pick-and-pops. I see Markkanen as far more similar to that both stylistically and outcome wise.

Malik Monk: More Jamal Crawford or J.J. Redick?

Magnotti: I’m going to go Redick, just because I feel that any comparison to Crawford does a disservice to Crawford’s handle, which goes criminally underrated (mostly due to Crawford’s decision-making). I also think this question translates to whether I trust Monk’s spot-up shooting or off-dribble shooting more, and I think at an NBA level he’ll be better coming off screens and catching and shooting.

Stone: I’ll err closer to Jamal Crawford even though his ball-handling ability is significantly worse. Monk has more creation ability than he got to show at Kentucky where De’Aaron Fox dominated the ball in the halfcourt. Monk can run a bit of pick-and-roll and has the vision to toss lobs to dive men. He has the potential to create some secondary offense for teams and that separates him from Redick in my eyes.

Zwicker: Both? This is an impossible question because Monk embodies key attributes of both Crawford and Redick. Monk has Redick’s ability to read screens, sprint off at high speeds, square quickly and elevate with a fast trigger. Odds are he won’t quite as good of a shooter as Redick, who is historically good, but he has far more juice off the bounce via a first step and enough handle to beat switches on floppy sets, an element of the game Redick struggles with. That brings about the Crawford element, with Monk’s insane shot-making prowess off the dribble going either direction. But Crawford’s handle and shake with the ball far exceeds what Monk currently has in the toolbox, where Monk can play off hang dribbles but usually just to get to his one-dribble pull-up. It’s unlikely Monk ever gets to Crawford’s level in terms of tight handle, but I concur with Stone that there is some untapped potential here. Ergo this shameful copout.

Josh Jackson: More Tracy McGrady or Aaron Gordon?

Magnotti: Gordon. I just don’t see Jackson’s scoring profile getting to the point where you’re comfortable putting him in a ton of pick-and-rolls and isolation situations. He can pass, which is great, but you don’t want him on an island 25 feet from the basket.

Stone: This is a battle between Jackson’s scoring acumen and actual position, so let’s say he’s closer to small forward Aaron Gordon, except he can actually create a bit of offense. Jackson doesn’t have the jump shot or explosive first step to be a one-on-one scorer, but he could be a really good second or third option on offense because he’s great attacking moving defenses with relentless drives to the basket and his passing ability.

Zwicker: 100 percent Gordon (which is flawed in itself). I just can’t give Jackson any McGrady equity at all. T-Mac’s on-ball shot creation is one of the most underrated skill-sets ever in my opinion. Jackson doesn’t have near that level of first step, shiftiness or handle in tight spaces, pull-up shooting fluidity or even playmaking for others on the move creativity wise. Jackson is more of a secondary handler type who would really thrive in a big space Gordon-like setting at the four. Unfortunately he doesn’t have the compactly built frame or length to man heavy minutes there. But his skills are definitely more in alignment with Gordon’s playmaking level.

Next: FanSided 2017 NBA Draft Tracker

Lonzo Ball: More Jason Kidd or George Hill?

Magnotti: Mark Jackson if he gave more effort on defense.

Stone: Kidd, I guess. Comparing Lonzo to other players is really difficult. He had a historically low usage rate for a lead guard, but is clearly a scheme-changing kind of guy given the way he moves the ball and involves his teammates. He just lacks some of the initial creation ability that really matters for lead guards I could easily see him ending up as the second-best player on a title team for that reason.

Zwicker: I plead to fifth.