Kadary Richmond

[two3zone]

Kadary is going to need to find another gear to play in the NBA.

He changes speed so well, makes up for the lack of explosiveness.

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

Not saying yes or no, but he needs to be able to keep defenses honest. Yes he has good skills but I don't know who a good comp would be. Most big point guards in the NBA can shoot the ball. I don't think he's Ben Simmons.

MCW is the comp

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Apparently, the coaches of the teams that most SU transfers ended up on.

That’s kinda like saying walk-ons and scrubs should play the same minutes as 5-stars. If the kid doesn’t perform with the next team, every situation has a different reason. That player isn’t entitled to the same treatment as with the previous team, if they don’t earn it in the context of competition vs those other players, that coach naturally favors the players who help that team win. Just like ours.

Playing zone, making wannabe pro 3s play 4, and making small beanpoles into centers served JB’s short term purposes. Not sure how any of that is best for the players’ “success,” as we haven’t really had a great deal of that in quite a while. Every program has transfers out and I wonder what percentage find more success afterward.

 

[Cusefan0307]

MCW is the comp

MCW was better than Richmond. MCW was a lottery pick. I checked Kadary's draft prospects and he's lucky if he will get selected in the 2nd round. Jonathan Givony doesn't even rank him in the top 100 prospects.

 

[NYCorange]

MCW was better than Richmond. MCW was a lottery pick. I checked Kadary and he's lucky if he will get selected in the 2nd round. Jonathan Givony doesn't even rank him in the top 100 prospects.

Yeah, and also MCW got drafted when there was only one season of tape on his shooting, and he made a decent number of 3s (like 1 per game) albeit on poor efficiency. Teams thought that he might learn to shoot.

My best imagination for him at the NBA level without a shot is something like Markelle Fultz but even he's an elite athlete. Honestly I don't see Richmond making it unless he learns to shoot 3s.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Yeah, and also MCW got drafted when there was only one season of tape on his shooting, and he made a decent number of 3s (like 1 per game) albeit on poor efficiency. Teams thought that he might learn to shoot.

My best imagination for him at the NBA level without a shot is something like Markelle Fultz but even he's an elite athlete. Honestly I don't see Richmond making it unless he learns to shoot 3s.

Even having MCW in this discussion is offensive to MCW. He averaged 10ppg and 4 assists in about 400 NBA games.

 

[Wrinkle]

Even having MCW in this discussion is offensive to MCW. He averaged 10ppg and 4 assists in about 400 NBA games.

Bro get over yourself. As if 5 seasons worth of modest production is untouchable

 

[Hopkins16]

A guard can make it in the NBA without being a 3 point shooter as long as he can show that he can consistently make jumpers inside the arc (Booker and DeRozan are good examples).

 

[Cusefan0307]

A guard can make it in the NBA without being a 3 point shooter as long as he can show that he can consistently make jumpers inside the arc (Booker and DeRozan are good examples).

Booker and Derozan smh. Good god. Booker has made at least 100 3's every year in the association outside of his rookie year. This is one of the most ridiculous threads I've ever seen.

 

[Brooky03]

That’s kinda like saying walk-ons and scrubs should play the same minutes as 5-stars. If the kid doesn’t perform with the next team, every situation has a different reason. That player isn’t entitled to the same treatment as with the previous team, if they don’t earn it in the context of competition vs those other players, that coach naturally favors the players who help that team win. Just like ours.

Playing zone, making wannabe pro 3s play 4, and making small beanpoles into centers served JB’s short term purposes. Not sure how any of that is best for the players’ “success,” as we haven’t really had a great deal of that in quite a while. Every program has transfers out and I wonder what percentage find more success afterward.

There isn’t a lot of distinction between 3’s and 4’s in most offenses, imo, including JB’s. Like, the 4 isn’t a strictly post guy and the 3 a perimeter guy. Ballhandling could be the biggest difference but, if you were getting at do-it-all F’s being stuck in a traditional PF role, I can’t think of any ballhandlers we stuck in the paint. They’re more or less interchangeable, which is how the NBA has trended, too. It’s more about getting players to spots that best suit their skills than shoehorning them into a predefined role based on the position listed next to their name in the box score. Jerami Grant wasn’t allowed to shoot 3’s. Is he the one you’re thinking of?

I won’t harp on the zone thing much. But, from a skillset standpoint, it’s only slightly different from a m2m with a lot of switching. The difference is chasing guys around without the ball. Off-ball defense matters but I’d say it doesn’t matter so much that it hinders defensive skill building. A lot of our NBA guys were bad at NBA defense for reasons other than playing zone for a year or two.

The Centers comment is about Lydon exclusively? Jesse is a C through and through; not enough quickness or handle to be a F. Rak was a bit of a tweener but wouldn’t have cut it as an NBA Forward. Marek played F a lot more than C. I’m struggling to think of others.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

Booker and Derozan smh. Good god. Booker has made at least 100 3's every year in the association outside of his rookie year. This is one of the most ridiculous threads I've ever seen.

Since I was the one who brought Kadary up, I thought I would pipe in again. Judah is basically in a similar boat as Kadary as he isn't a volume shooter either. So they need to be really good doing other things. The game has changed dramatically as just about everyone in the NBA is a pretty good long range shooter. But historically guys like Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, Andre Miller were not great shooters but were great doing other things. Would Jason Kidd be a Hall of Famer if he played today? Would Gary Payton have a career like Marcus Smart or would he still Gary Payton HOF. I'm sure NBA GM's today would want either Kidd or Payton on their team.

So Kadary or Judah to be good NBA players, they will need to be solid playmakers, develop an ability to keep defenses honest (not be Ben Simmons) get stronger, play above average defense and be able to raise the play of everyone around them.

I don't think it matters where either of them stand in the draft rankings. Many lottery picks never become stars and other guys who were barely drafted become solid NBA players. Both Juddah and Kadary will get their opportunities.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Since I was the one who brought Kadary up, I thought I would pipe in again. Judah is basically in a similar boat as Kadary as he isn't a volume shooter either. So they need to be really good doing other things. The game has changed dramatically as just about everyone in the NBA is a pretty good long range shooter. But historically guys like Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, Andre Miller were not great shooters but were great doing other things. Would Jason Kidd be a Hall of Famer if he played today? Would Gary Payton have a career like Marcus Smart or would he still Gary Payton HOF. I'm sure NBA GM's today would want either Kidd or Payton on their team.

So Kadary or Judah to be good NBA players, they will need to be solid playmakers, develop an ability to keep defenses honest (not be Ben Simmons) get stronger, play above average defense and be able to raise the play of everyone around them.

I don't think it matters where either of them stand in the draft rankings. Many lottery picks never become stars and other guys who were barely drafted become solid NBA players. Both Juddah and Kadary will get their opportunities.

I'm of the opinion guys who were great in the past would be great now because they would have evolved. Kidd became a much better shooter by the end of his career. He had two seasons his last stint in Dallas where he was above 40%. Payton was at least a threat out there.

And Mintz is a better prospect than Richmond. At least according to today's experts.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

I'm of the opinion guys who were great in the past would be great now because they would have evolved. Kidd became a much better shooter by the end of his career. He had two seasons his last stint in Dallas where he was above 40%. Payton was at least a threat out there.

And Mintz is a better prospect than Richmond. At least according to today's experts.

Here's a thread I started a couple years ago. Judah was ranked 50 spots better than Kadary coming out of HS. Again, rankings don't necessarily mean anything, but these guys, and the NBA draft gurus watch a lot more ball than we do. At least the better ones do.

FWIW: Kadary Richmond 85, Judah Mintz 35

We know that recruiting rankings don't necessarily guarantee success, but you have to be real excited how well regarded Mintz is. Oak Hill has been very good to Syracuse and no reason to think Mintz won't be able to play very meaningful minutes with success. Watching Mintz in a few games it...

syracusefan.com

 

[Hopkins16]

Booker and Derozan smh. Good god. Booker has made at least 100 3's every year in the association outside of his rookie year. This is one of the most ridiculous threads I've ever seen.

I am aware that Booker is a good 3 point shooter, but his inside the arc game is his bread and butter and what I intended to highlight. Chris Paul might be a better example. DeRozan's points primarily comes from his inside the arc shots. No need for dramatics. As Clifton said, as long as the player can bring other attributes to the table, being able to shoot the three isn't going to make a player not be able to make it in the NBA. Geez, Andre Jackson has found a role on the Bucks and he has no inside or outside the arc game (offensively, he's primarily good for dunks and putbacks).

 

[Cusefan0307]

I am aware that Booker is a good 3 point shooter, but his inside the arc game is his bread and butter and what I intended to highlight. Chris Paul might be a better example. DeRozan's points primarily comes from his inside the arc shots. No need for dramatics. As Clifton said, as long as the player can bring other attributes to the table, being able to shoot the three isn't going to make a player not be able to make it in the NBA.

You compared 2 future HOF'ers and another career 21ppg scorer to someone not even guaranteed to be drafted, but I'm the one being dramatic?

We have another thread comparing Benny Williams to Jerami Grant.

 

[alphaorange]

Since I was the one who brought Kadary up, I thought I would pipe in again. Judah is basically in a similar boat as Kadary as he isn't a volume shooter either. So they need to be really good doing other things. The game has changed dramatically as just about everyone in the NBA is a pretty good long range shooter. But historically guys like Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, Andre Miller were not great shooters but were great doing other things. Would Jason Kidd be a Hall of Famer if he played today? Would Gary Payton have a career like Marcus Smart or would he still Gary Payton HOF. I'm sure NBA GM's today would want either Kidd or Payton on their team.

So Kadary or Judah to be good NBA players, they will need to be solid playmakers, develop an ability to keep defenses honest (not be Ben Simmons) get stronger, play above average defense and be able to raise the play of everyone around them.

I don't think it matters where either of them stand in the draft rankings. Many lottery picks never become stars and other guys who were barely drafted become solid NBA players. Both Juddah and Kadary will get their opportunities.

Ridiculous post. Kidd was a career 35% 3 pt shooter and better in the late part of his career. Richmond won't sniff that. Payton was the gold standard for a defensive guard and Richmond is not nearly that, either. I won't go into Miller as you are correct. That was a different time and a different game. Miller was a journeyman, anyway. As far as NBA level, KR is not elite at anything and bad at 3s. Not a good resume' for an NBA career.

 

[Wrinkle]

Kadary is a career 36% shooter from 3 (on low volume). That is certainly good enough, you all are tripping

 

[alphaorange]

Kadary is a career 36% shooter from 3 (on low volume). That is certainly good enough, you all are tripping

From the college line. If you don't think the extra feet make a big difference to a poor shooter, YOU'RE tripping.

 

[Wrinkle]

From the college line. If you don't think the extra feet make a big difference to a poor shooter, YOU'RE tripping.

If we took count of the number of college guards who shot worse than kadary from the college line and became competent shooters in the NBA, it would be a lot

 

[Zelda Zonk]

There isn’t a lot of distinction between 3’s and 4’s in most offenses, imo, including JB’s. Like, the 4 isn’t a strictly post guy and the 3 a perimeter guy. Ballhandling could be the biggest difference but, if you were getting at do-it-all F’s being stuck in a traditional PF role, I can’t think of any ballhandlers we stuck in the paint. They’re more or less interchangeable, which is how the NBA has trended, too. It’s more about getting players to spots that best suit their skills than shoehorning them into a predefined role based on the position listed next to their name in the box score. Jerami Grant wasn’t allowed to shoot 3’s. Is he the one you’re thinking of?

I won’t harp on the zone thing much. But, from a skillset standpoint, it’s only slightly different from a m2m with a lot of switching. The difference is chasing guys around without the ball. Off-ball defense matters but I’d say it doesn’t matter so much that it hinders defensive skill building. A lot of our NBA guys were bad at NBA defense for reasons other than playing zone for a year or two.

The Centers comment is about Lydon exclusively? Jesse is a C through and through; not enough quickness or handle to be a F. Rak was a bit of a tweener but wouldn’t have cut it as an NBA Forward. Marek played F a lot more than C. I’m struggling to think of others.

No, not Grant. Quincy.
Not Lydon. Marek and Malik. [And Ajak and SidI’ve.]

 

[littlereg]

Some of y’all need to stop drinking

 

[Brooky03]

No, not Grant. Quincy.
Not Lydon. Marek and Malik. [And Ajak and SidI’ve.]

Was Quincy limited here? His best college season was with us as a sophomore. He never developed much of an outside shot after leaving; his 2nd year at Oregon was okay behind the arc, which vanished at Illinois the following year. Driving to the basket was always his game and we let him do that, as I recall.

Lydon was playing out of position. Marek mostly played Forward, filling in at Center a little, but he was also highlighted as a big piece of the offense with his passing out of the middle of the defense when he was there. Marek was never an NBA prospect, though.

Maliq playing Center is a Red thing, is it not? I'm a little lost with Ajak and Sidibe. Are we talking development or recruiting? Nobody could/would have made those guys into NBA players.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

Kadary is definitely an NBA guy

I read on here that he'd be a lottery pick after his first or second year.

 

[Wrinkle]

I read on here that he'd be a lottery pick after his first or second year.

I did foresee that kind of trajectory for him when he was a freshman here

 

[djcon57]

MCW was better than Richmond. MCW was a lottery pick. I checked Kadary's draft prospects and he's lucky if he will get selected in the 2nd round. Jonathan Givony doesn't even rank him in the top 100 prospects.

Givony currently has JJ Starling at 49.

While I'm thrilled Starling is on our team, pretty sure that ranking suggests that list doesnt mean squat.

Note: not debating the KR points. Just that the current mock drafts dont really mean much