Dylan “Breaking” Windler is a Laker. How much help does LeBron need!?

[Nathan S]

Kevin Porter Jr. was actually a good man to man defender at USC the issue was off ball. Thats where KPJ really needs to improve his game on both sides of the ball. He's a good with the ball on offense and a gritty on ball defender. But off ball on defense he lacks awareness and effort and off ball on offense he just stands around.

People said pretty much exactly the same thing about Sexton a year ago, and he proceeded to be one of the worst defensive players in the league. KPJ won't be quite as bad just thanks to his size, but the point is good on-ball defense alone doesn't get you very far in the NBA.

 

[NMCav]

People said pretty much exactly the same thing about Sexton a year ago, and he proceeded to be one of the worst defensive players in the league. KPJ won't be quite as bad just thanks to his size, but the point is good on-ball defense alone doesn't get you very far in the NBA.

Depends on the scheme. Last year there really was no defensive scheme. Bickerstaff will cook up something decent scheme wise.

 

[Nathan S]

Depends on the scheme. Last year there really was no defensive scheme. Bickerstaff will cook up something decent scheme wise.

That's true...it's just tough with so many young guys. Ideally with a guy like KPJ you want to bring him into a solid, pre-existing defensive system and integrate him. You expect him to be a negative at first, but hope that he develops into a neutral or positive defender once he has a couple years of experience under his belt. Not sure that'll work the same way on a team where, no matter how good the coaches are, most of the players on the court at any given time don't really know what they're doing. That's sort of what happened to the Suns, where guys like Josh Jackson and TJ Warren who probably had the potential to be decent defenders ended up not developing. Hope we can avoid that here.

 

[NMCav]

That's true...it's just tough with so many young guys. Ideally with a guy like KPJ you want to bring him into a solid, pre-existing defensive system and integrate him. You expect him to be a negative at first, but hope that he develops into a neutral or positive defender once he has a couple years of experience under his belt. Not sure that'll work the same way on a team where, no matter how good the coaches are, most of the players on the court at any given time don't really know what they're doing. That's sort of what happened to the Suns, where guys like Josh Jackson and TJ Warren who probably had the potential to be decent defenders ended up not developing. Hope we can avoid that here.

Suns developed some decent defenders, Markieff was a solid defender in his tenure, Bledsoe was average but got steals and got a decent number of blocks for a PG. Not sure what happened with Warren but I never really saw defensive potential with him coming out of college. I always thought the best case for TJ Warren was Antwan Jamison but at this point hes basically Marcus Morris 2.0. A good role player but not really anything special.

Josh Jackson is/was a head case. I was high on Jackson coming out of Kansas but dude is basically Wiggins-lite. Can't teach a kid who doesn't want to be taught. Amazing athlete, shitty basketball player. Also Suns never had a coach like Bickerstaff who is known for coaching up defense.

 

[Cavatt]

That's true...it's just tough with so many young guys. Ideally with a guy like KPJ you want to bring him into a solid, pre-existing defensive system and integrate him. You expect him to be a negative at first, but hope that he develops into a neutral or positive defender once he has a couple years of experience under his belt. Not sure that'll work the same way on a team where, no matter how good the coaches are, most of the players on the court at any given time don't really know what they're doing. That's sort of what happened to the Suns, where guys like Josh Jackson and TJ Warren who probably had the potential to be decent defenders ended up not developing. Hope we can avoid that here.

For me it is hard to believe that we had a good defensive system. It seemed terrible and the longer it went on the worse it got. Longabardi never improved a defense. It only ever got worse with him as an assistant.

I just think what they asked the players to do wasn't really possible. Each time they "simplified the defense" like after the trade deadline that brought in Clarkson, they looked like capable defenders. The more the implemented the system, it looked like no one knew what to do.

Maybe that means we don't have smart defenders, but I think it was on the coaches. They just can't have a super sophisticated defense theoretically meant to beat the Warriors, there is no point.

As for Porter Jr. As much as people think he is an offense only guy, he can definitely pressure the ball. He might be good at harassing the ball handler with length and lateral speed, which is one of his best attributes. He's the best defensive prospect we have IMO.

I don't know enough about Dylan. I am just hoping he was carrying the offensive load, and now that he isn't I'm hoping he can give more on the defensive end. He seems to have the tools and has a high IQ.

 

[Jordan]

People said pretty much exactly the same thing about Sexton a year ago, and he proceeded to be one of the worst defensive players in the league. KPJ won't be quite as bad just thanks to his size, but the point is good on-ball defense alone doesn't get you very far in the NBA.

Man defense at the college level also just does not translate all that well. I've done some bayesian regression models and also just read Pelton et. al. There is very little evidence that a good college man defender will be one at the NBA.

Part of the translation problem is good man defense is expected for an NBA prospect at the college level because (surprise!) the majority of opponents won't ever make it to the association. This is why Hunter does not project to be nearly as good of a pro defender as he was in college.

 

[Nathan S]

Man defense at the college level also just does not translate all that well. I've done some bayesian regression models and also just read Pelton et. al. There is very little evidence that a good college man defender will be one at the NBA.

Part of the translation problem is good man defense is expected for an NBA prospect at the college level because (surprise!) the majority of opponents won't ever make it to the association. This is why Hunter does not project to be nearly as good of a pro defender as he was in college.

Agree to an extent...I think it's important to note that Hunter isn't just casually described as a good defender the way some players with his approximate dimensions are. He was actually among the very best at the college level. I think of him like a SF/PF version of Brogdon as a prospect, except unlike Brogdon he was massively overhyped going into the draft.

 

[Jordan]

Agree to an extent...I think it's important to note that Hunter isn't just casually described as a good defender the way some players with his approximate dimensions are. He was actually among the very best at the college level. I think of him like a SF/PF version of Brogdon as a prospect, except unlike Brogdon he was massively overhyped going into the draft.

Agreed... sorry if that didn't come through in my post. I like Hunter - I just think the hyping of him as a "great man defender" matters less than other areas of his game. My big concerns are his age and steal percentage. Still, I'd be surprised if he turns out to be anything less than a good rotation player.

 

[Nathan S]

Agreed... sorry if that didn't come through in my post. I like Hunter - I just think the hyping of him as a "great man defender" matters less than other areas of his game. My big concerns are his age and steal percentage. Still, I'd be surprised if he turns out to be anything less than a good rotation player.

Yeah, that's the comparison I'm drawing with Brogdon. Not a spectacular player on either end, but very solid, and the kind of guy who'll have significant value around the league to a lot of different teams. The complete opposite of Garland in a lot of ways, whose value could easily double or halve within the first 5 games of the season.

 

[Jordan]

Yeah, that's the comparison I'm drawing with Brogdon. Not a spectacular player on either end, but very solid, and the kind of guy who'll have significant value around the league to a lot of different teams. The complete opposite of Garland in a lot of ways, whose value could easily double or halve within the first 5 games of the season.

He would be doubling his sample size...

 

[Cavatt]

Does anyone know anything about Windler? Was he beating up on weak teams? I mean his game looks like it will translate to me, and his athletic testing is really surprising and looks fantastic. Is this a case of a guy playing really well in college and then the team sees his combine number sand saying, "looks like he can hang in the NBA", or is it just a guy Beilein is impressed with because he has developed well in college?

 

[Nathan S]

Does anyone know anything about Windler? Was he beating up on weak teams? I mean his game looks like it will translate to me, and his athletic testing is really surprising and looks fantastic. Is this a case of a guy playing really well in college and then the team sees his combine number sand saying, "looks like he can hang in the NBA", or is it just a guy Beilein is impressed with because he has developed well in college?

Had a huge 35/11 game against Maryland in the tournament (kenpom #21 ranked defense) which really boosted his stock. I do think people are reading a little too much into that one game, though. Purdue was the one other top defense he faced, and he scored just 7 points on 3/12 shooting. I think realistically he'll be a solid but not game-changing 3-point shooter, with enough athleticism to be dangerous cutting to the basket. Like a slightly smaller, slightly better shooting Maxi Kleber (yeah, another white guy comparison, cue groans).

 

[CavsFanJapan]

I’ll wait to hold judgment until this good shooter puts on the Kryptonite jersey of the Cavs. Then we’ll know.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Man defense at the college level also just does not translate all that well. I've done some bayesian regression models and also just read Pelton et. al. There is very little evidence that a good college man defender will be one at the NBA.

Part of the translation problem is good man defense is expected for an NBA prospect at the college level because (surprise!) the majority of opponents won't ever make it to the association. This is why Hunter does not project to be nearly as good of a pro defender as he was in college.

Projection on defense is tough but you can give yourself better odds of finding a defender by looking at things like DBPM and ON/OFF numbers. With some certainty, you'd imagine that a player who is above a certain threshold on DBPM and also had good defensive ON/OFF numbers, has a good chance of being an average or better NBA defender......which is the goal with any player who can potentially add plus value on offense. Probably even more certainty if that player plays hard, has a big frame, is athletic as well, etc.

Even if you just assume Hunter is a a 0-1 on DRPM/DBPM, he has value if his shooting translates like it should. He'd effectively be Tobias Harris, which is a valuable player on a rookie scale deal. If he's a 1+ DRPM, you're already creeping in to top 10 SF potential. It just doesn't take that much at the small forward position.....it's just so top heavy right now. Mikal Bridges was almost a DRPM wash as a rookie and Hunter is bigger and longer......they had similar DBPM, DWS numbers in college. Bridges a better DBPM, Hunter a better DWS. It's reasonable to think Hunter's more solidly built frame and added length will allow him to be a bit better than Bridges -.60 on defense....and if that is the case, plus his shooting....that is already a useful player on that end. I think Windler is a notch (or two) below but similarly encouraging.....good DWS numbers, solid DBPM for a #1 offensive option, plays hard, length, athletic. I just think it's a good bet he's average on defense, which would keep him on the floor.

I think translating defense at SF is the easiest position.....just by using cursory stats, gauging effort / physical measurables and some common sense.....because there are so few good NBA SF's. Only like 3 of them even matter on offense and one just blew out their achilles. I think it's harder everywhere else but I would be fairly confident you can look at the SF position and pick out the best defenders on a semi regular basis.

 

[Cavatt]

Had a huge 35/11 game against Maryland in the tournament (kenpom #21 ranked defense) which really boosted his stock. I do think people are reading a little too much into that one game, though. Purdue was the one other top defense he faced, and he scored just 7 points on 3/12 shooting. I think realistically he'll be a solid but not game-changing 3-point shooter, with enough athleticism to be dangerous cutting to the basket. Like a slightly smaller, slightly better shooting Maxi Kleber (yeah, another white guy comparison, cue groans).

He's a number one option which he won't be asked to be at this level. Didn't he get 14 rebounds in that 7 point game? I think his teammate got 29 because he was left alone the whole game. If he can draw that attention on our team Garland or Sexton will cook them

2.5 assists is good too. Seems like he knows how to impact the game if his shot isn't falling. That is nice. Not totally one dimensional. Coming off screens he just looks so good. Could be a late bloomer, I mean he didn't play AAU until his senior year of high school and juts got better every year in college.

Definitely the type of Senior you take a flyer on.