Houstan to Thunder at 30 on NBAdraft.net updated mock draft
I wonder if this is information that has leaked or if this is just a best guess?
Same on the newest ESPN mock draft. Starting to look like a pattern.
There is also an updated SI mock having the Thunder drafting him early 2nd round. Seems like a pattern to me too. The Thunder have 3 firsts and have loaded up on draft picks over the next several years. I can see them taking a gamble on this potential.
Sam Vecenie of The Athletic has Houstan going #36 (early 2nd round) to Portland. No sign of Moussa in Veceine's mock.
I don't get it. What do these people see that I haven't? There's no way he's even one of the top 100 players coming into the draft.
They see a tall very young man with a very nice shooting stroke that needs development but has the natural abilities and size that can succeed in the NBA.
Unlike the NFL where basically anyone picked in the first three rounds is almost assured of making the team in the NBA anyone selected outside the lottery is a crapshoot. So when you're drafting deep in round one you are definitely drafting on projected outcomes (potential) versus actual to date.
What do they see that you dont? Short answer - his future. All you can see is his past.
He's freshman Sam Hauser at Marquette except Hauser was a better shooter his freshman year. If Caleb wasn't a top recruit out of high school he'd be so far under the radar he's be living underground.
Yep and Hauser sure is lighting it up in the NBA and he's 3 yrs older. Is an NBA team going to wait for 4 or 5 years?
Do you really think Houstan will improve to a 46% 3pt shooter in the NBA with a longer line and much better defense?
That's an easy statement to make, but it doesn't make sense for how things work in the basketball world. Caleb already has natural tools to be a successful player in the NBA. That is something most basketball players don't have, and thus his recruit ranking (and now draft prospects) were and are as high as they are. What he doesn't have can be very reasonably taught or improved to the point of necessary effectiveness.
The NBA is all about upside for prospects because the high bar of talent, athleticism, and size are INCREDIBLY hard to reach, and Caleb already meets a lower threshold for potential success than 99.999% of players can. Doesn't mean he'll pan out, but his prospects actually look better than mediocre box score stats.
Caleb is going to be in the bottom 25th percentile as and athlete as a rotation wing player in the NBA. There's not a single person in a wing rotation left in the playoffs with his low level of athleticism. Robinson would be the only one close - and he's worked his way to being better athlete - and he's out of the rotation. 6'8' players on the NBA periphery with a beautiful shot but are slow and can't defend are a dime a dozen.
If you are betting on him you are betting on Caleb learning to shoot off balance and on the move, learning to dribble and be a secondary play maker, learning to defend NBA wings, learning to finish, and improving his athleticism overall. I'd much rather draft Bufkin in this draft as his speed, handle, craftiness, and finishing potential is much more projectable.
Completely disagree with you. He has ideal size and frame for an NBA wing, and he moves pretty well with better handles than most similar players at his age. He has capacity to grow into the physical strength and speed needed in the league, and he already has the shot mechanics and high-level understanding of the game to be a very attractive prospect for a team that has the runway to put him in a development program.
I think Joey Hauser would be the better comparison. I get the point though. Im sure there are a number of athetes with his physical profile that are not on draft boards because of their HS ranking.
I don't think he does have the natural abilities that can succeed in the NBA but neither did / does Duncan Robinson and he made it work for a couple seasons on hard work and lights out shooting.
Shrug emoji. Rooting for Houstan whatever he decides.
I hear 'ya about possible future potential. But I've never understood why NBA teams spend any first or second round pick on a total "crapshoot" which is what Houstan is. If I were a league GM, I'd be looking only at guys who can come in and at least give the team some kind of contribution their first year, and then gradually get more PT as their experience increases. But Houstan looks like someone who's 3 or 4 years out, at best, from making a contribution. Oh well. It's their money I guess. And I hope he proves me wrong.
Your approach would make sense if you were building a team like the early 2000 Pistons - no superstar but a collection of very good players who all knew their role and performed it well. The problem is that team was the last team to actually win a title without a bonafide superstar and now you need at least two, preferrably three, to actually win anything.
Houston could be (but most likely wont be) "that guy". The tryhard you describe never will. And because teams have to find an alpha either via FA or the draft teams at the back of the draft take swings at finding the needle-in-the-haystack by projecting future growth as a player.
I like your football analysis and maybe my obsession with the NBA colors my take a bit but Caleb has no chance in hell to develop into an all-star. He projects as #justashooter which isn't getting you to the all-star game unless you're one of the best shooters of all time and also a world class defender (pre-injury Klay). Please explain to me which projectable skills Caleb has that would lead him to be a superstar in the absolute best case scenario. Unless you have a generational basketball mind (Luka, Jokic) you're not even becoming an All NBA player with average or less (by NBA standards) athleticism.
If your criteria in the draft is to always select a player who can contribute immediately, you better hope you're picking in the top 10 every year, and in some lean years probably in the top 6 or 8.
The NBA draft is not like the NFL where you can expect to find day 1 contributors in the first three, or even four, rounds. There are only two rounds in the NBA draft for a reason, and once you're out of the lottery, you're almost definitely picking a project who will need a lot of development.
I don't know if he's risky enough to be called a total crapshoot. Certainly not in the high variance way that Moussa is a crapshoot (Moussa has a higher ceiling but higher probability of not making it, IMO).
Houstan is a very good set shooter. That should translate to the NBA with high probability. His defense might hold up there as well, but that's the bigger question mark. And I mentioned it earlier but that's an NBA player immediately if he's not a defensive liability. They'll know within a season or two if his defense can hold up and if it can, just sit him in the corner to spread the floor and let him shoot.
Moussa is a 3-4 year project because he's SO raw offensively and has a lot to learn defensively.
Set shooters do NOT translate into the NBA. If you are a set shooter and you want minutes you have to be able to drive and kick, score on a close out, relocate on a closeout, hit 3's on a fast break and of course defend your position. He could develop all those traits but he hasn't shown much of any of them yet.
On the other hand, a high level set shooter that can defend his position, has good vision for college, and good positional awareness is a plus player in college.
I should clarify that Houstan is at least a jump shooter. It appears to me that he has solid elevation on his jumper and he hits them well in transition. Bit different than merely a set shooter so I revise the previous statement. He does need an opening though, but that's the case for a lot of players. And there are absolutely spots for Just Shooters in the NBA. Like Kyle Korver.
He's also shown a willingness to attack closeouts. If teams are scared of his shooting, he'll be able to do that and at least kick even if he never learns to finish all that well.
I'm certainly not betting that he sticks because I don't think that he'll be an elite enough shooter to make up for less than average athleticism, but I'd put his odds at like 25-30% of "making it" / signing a legit second contract.
Based on people evaluating as a profession, you are wrong.
The NBA is a shooters league now. Everything almost doesn't matter. If the NBA views Caleb as an elite shooter they won't care how high he can jumb or how fast he is or how tall he is. Those things are just bonus points.
He'll be out of the league in 3 years
Not hating
Just making a prediction based on flimsy evidence
More like making a prediction based on a flimsy ability to see potential talent that fits exactly the way the NBA is played these days
Talent that hasn't been demonstrated despite plenty of opportunity? I think Houstan could bea good player worthy of a first round pick but we haven't seen it yet.
I think it's pretty clear that people here haven't seen it yet, but others--people who matter--absolutely have. Sorry, but this one will go down, as with Jordan Poole, as another case where bloviating noodles savaged a guy of extraordinary promise, and then got their figurative hats handed to them.
Houstan wasn't spectacular this season but he started every game as a true freshman and had some really good games. Michigan loses to Colorado State without Houstan shooting us into the lead. Expectations were the problem, not Houstan.
Expectations of Houstan was the problem
"Houstan, we have an expectation problem".
Whatever you say all knowing mgoboardman
Comparing Houstan to Poole is idiotic. Poole showed off very translatable NBA skills but was just a very unrefined product. Off the dribble shot creation, a lightning quick first step, and perimeter shot making (while on some pretty bad shot selection). Houstan has shown that he can hit set wide open 3 pointers and... that's it
I like to argue with you but you can tell we are both basketball junkies and like the NBA. Some people on this board think because he is 19 and he had a high recruiting ranking that Caleb has high NBA upside.
OR some of us think he has high enough upside for a team to take a swing on him as a late draft pick. I don't think that is as absurd as you're making it out to be considering his shot mechanics, size, and age.
He may not have the highest ceiling, but he likely has a high enough floor in the eyes of some teams. If he turns into a serviceable role player as a late first/second round pick, that would be both a definite success and a reasonably plausible outcome.
No one questioned whether Poole had the talents, the shot, or ability to succeed in the NBA. Only whether he was ready.
Similar to Poole no one is blaming Houstan for leaving if he has a first round guarantee. Unlike Poole, people are questioning whether Houstan actually even has the tools to succeed.
I disagree it hasn't been seen. People on this blog are ridiculously critical of Houstan because they are annoyed he didn't live up to expectations. What evaluations see is an 18 year old whose defense got significantly better over the year as he caught up to a new level of basketball and who has pure stroke and shoots almost 50% from a set position and they see that in a legitimate 6'8 player.
So what they see is that a guy who gets the time to adjust and develop to a new level who has the foundation to translate that set shot into being able to hit coming off screens, etc. making him a weapon in the NBA and they think there is a good chance a year in the G league is more liable to get him there than another year in college.
Ok 50% from set position, but like 20% on close-outs. He won't get too many wide open shots in the NBA. Btw, NBA also plays on the road where he is horrible.
There are quite a few wide open shots in the NBA.
I'll admit to saying Poole wasn't ready - and he struggled for a couple of years. But I saw more from Poole than I have from Houstan, a lot more. If Caleb is hand-wavingly wide open, at home, with no pressure on the shot (ie: not a late game cooker), he's pretty good. Remove those variables and he shows nothing. And that's been his pattern all year.
I know nothing about the NBA, but I've seen nothing from Caleb except for size and weight.
Yeah, different positions but Poole is way more athletic and had more playmaking ability. Also, his numbers his last year were just better. FG% .436 to .384. 3p% .369 to .355. FT% .833 to .783. TOs per game same with Poole playing 1 more MPG. Slightly more steals for Poole and slightly more rebounds for Houstan. Poole was known for not playing great defense but Houstan wasn't better.
Without doing a deep dive, in my memory Poole had those numbers with a lot higher volume because he was just in the flow of the game more. Houstan just looked like he was in over his head this year. Which is fine because he was a freshman! The whole draft strategy of the NBA of drafting purely on potential continues to hurt both the NBA and NCAA basketball, not to mention the players themselves. Hopefully Houstan sees Juwan as more capable of developing his talent than the bullshit G League.
Based on your assessment, it seems you would be happy with Caleb moving on to the NBA to open up a scholarship for someone you think will perform better at Michigan.
That, or you think Caleb will be pretty good and you selfishly want that to happen at Michigan instead of the NBA.
Based on this comment I can tell you don't like watching the NBA and/or don't realize they are completely different games. There's a reason Adam Morison was a college superstar and an NBA dud. They're just two completely different games.
I don't like watching the NBA and I do understand the differences. There were many other factors impacting Adam Morrison's success (or lack thereof) in the NBA vs. his college production than "they're just two completely different games".
If the two styles were so different there would be absolutely no value for a kid to go the college route. They would play overseas for a year or go straight to the developmental league.
In the NBA, teams run very different styles. It has always been about players and coaches being able to work together to match the right skill sets with the right style of play. Not all GM's understand this and that is why draft mistakes still happen.
I agree - firing up brick after brick will fit in nicely with today's NBA.
This is dumb.
This is a horrible take.
Has Houstan been killing it predraft work outs? Absolutely.
Could be great in the NBA? 100%
But based on what we saw from him this year that his only discernible skill is hitting wide open set 3 pointers (and being an CBB average 3 pointer shooter in general) while also being probably a lower tier NBA athlete and defender, it's not a crazy prediction
Dude, the vast majority of late picks don’t last three years. He’s hardly making a flimsy prediction in saying Houstan doesn’t make it that long. Houstan could have played significantly better and the odds would still be against 3+ years in the NBA.
Three years in the NBA will still get you $3-5 million. I'd be ok with 3 and out.
Your point, while not well received based on the downvotes, is exactly right IMO. The NBA is not the NCAA and the game is played very differently hence skill sets are valued differently there.
I mean if we're going on college production Hunter Dickenson should be a lottery pick right? Yet none of the mock drafts have him being selected in any round by any team.