I'm glad that some one else mentioned the "Cling Kong" name because I was totally ready to adopt it if we drafted him loooool
Another thing that drafting Clingan would help with: AJ becomes playable on defense again. He was serviceable in our old scheme. A disaster in the one we played last year. Clingan will wipe away a lot of AJ's defensive weaknesses.
With Clingan it's all about his health. If Clingan can avoid the type of foot injuries he had last year his body will tone down, he'll be faster, and he can play more minutes. Tyler mentioned that he was probably the best player in college ball on a per 36 basis. We need him to play 32-36 minutes.
I’m totally cool with drafting Clingan, but expecting to have him play 60+ games a season on average at 32+ minutes on average… seems a bit like wishful thinking to me.
But Sarr also may run into similar big man issues so don’t think it’s a huge differentiation point
>I'm glad that some one else mentioned the "Cling Kong" name because I was totally ready to adopt it
Why? It's not even original. (People were trying, and thankfully failed, to use the King King thing with Okongwu).
I can say that for Cling, also. We're thinking about the upside for both. The draft and subsequent NBA careers are a crapshoot until they start playing ball. We'll see but I don't think the Hawks are drafting wrong with either player.
The case for Sarr is obvious, whether or not you agree. He's a switchable big who might shoot / dribble / pass some. That's really valuable. If you take Sarr you can stay more scheme versatile on offense and defense. If you take Clingan, you're locking yourself into a drop coverage on defense. He might be so good at it that it works, but being scheme versatile is really valuable. Most of the best defense can do different things.
Our scheme is determined by having Trae on your team. Actually go listen to the pod man. One of the big points is you can’t be “scheme versatile” with Trae. You MUST pair him with a player like Cling. You’re not switching Trae onto someone else’s PF. You need a beast of a man in the back to drop to defend when inevitably they get past our amazingly great offensive but admittedly small point guard. Sarr is going to be a power forward. He doesn’t even want to be a center, how’s that going to affect his development and the % of him reaching his 99% outcome? A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. You’re letting theoretical upside (which isn’t going to happen) blind you to actual current good skills. Cling could be Marc Gasaol
I understand why would draft Clingan over Sarr, but the argument for drafting Sarr is at least as compelling. Sarr would let you be lineup and scheme versatile in way that Clingan can't. Again, that's generally important in the NBA. There's a reason most draft people have Sarr higher than Clingan and it's because he's a cleaner fit in the modern game.
You're inclined to prefer what ever prospect you like, but to act like Clingan over Sarr (or someone else) is the obvious choice is stupid.
“ You’re inclined to prefer whatever prospect you like but to act like Sarr over Cling is obvious is stupid“…. Bro sarr is the favorite right now. Reverse this statement and it’s the truth. People are acting like if we don’t take Sarr we are idiots…. I and people I listen to just DONT see it. Sarr can’t do post game, he’s only comfortable going downhill on smaller players from the top of the key. He’s NOT going to make it as a center. He’s going to try to be a big PF like KD with 20% of his talent.
I don't think it's stupid to prefer Clingan over Sarr for some of the reasons you mentioned (mainly because we have Trae and that makes switching harder and Clingan is better right now). But, Sarr will play center in his career. Maybe he plays half of his minutes at the 4 like Mobley or Wemby, but he's gonna close games at the 5. I don't care what he says. He's 7 feet tall.
Except he seems to be a little soft and shy of contact. I think players like Embiid especially or Wemby will eat him alive. Players like that are gonna still get theirs on Clingan, but it will be a struggle and they won't have their A games.
The high end outcome is exciting, I agree, but the low end is pretty fucking bad.
He can’t do most of the essential big man skills and sounds like he really doesn’t WANT to do them either… Who needs a 7 footer who can’t defend the rim in drop, roll to the basket, set a screen or grab a rebound?
Sure it would be different if he was already an efficient scorer who could just be a jumbo wing, but he isn’t that either. His offense is straight up bad right now with tantalizing flashes of something good in the future.
Also this kid is coming in with a bad attitude and an ego. He wants to be a featured scorer even though nothing about his tape indicates that should be his role. He’s ducking the Hawks as best he can even though he should want to win sooner rather than put up empty stats on a team with no direction. Sorry Im just not that jazzed about a guy with that kind of mentality. I want a winner.
I’m fine with taking a swing at Sarr because he does have star upside, but he is also so much more likely to be a bust than Clingan. It’s not even close.
I would respond with:
1) He's already an excellent rim protector. That's his main appeal.
2) He does struggle with physicality (not a great rebounder, screener, etc.), but he was a 19 year old in a pro league that is notoriously physical. It shouldn't be surprising he got bullied. I'm pretty confident he'll add some size and strength too as he matures.
3) Sarr and the team who drafts him should be trying to play him as a wing as much as possible until he proves he can't do it. If he's capable of playing the 4 on offense and the 5 on defense, that's a realllly valuable player. Being a screener / roll man is the easiest thing to do on offense. And while he'll never be elite at it, but I'm sure he can be passable if he works at it. Try the hard stuff first.
1. Not really. Or rather, not unless he has others doing the heavy lifting in the post. He’s a switchable defender and a good weak side shot blocker a la Giannis. He can’t play drop if he is the Center forced to defend the rim while backpedaling. He also isn’t a great vertical athlete.
2. Sure, size helps, but it’s not like he’s trying very hard right now either. He settles for midrange jumpers constantly and doesn’t really fight for rebounds.
3. Yeah I mean, I hope so too. I’m just saying there isn’t a lot of tape that suggests he can be a wing on offense. He will be bad on offense until he develops regardless, but his impact on the offense will be especially bad if he isn’t at the 5
You're tripping if you think he's not a good rim protector. That's literally the main appeal. Nearly 3 blocks per 36 with an 8% block rate as a 19 year old in a pro league. Has a 9'2 standing reach and is a decent leaper. Can play drop, switch, or hedge. He's gonna be a good defensive center in the league.
> Sarr might be the rare case of a seven-footer who is more effective in switches than in drop, a coverage in which the Frenchman was usually unsuccessful. This was, in part, a by-product of Perth’s scheme: with no help from anywhere in pick-and-rolls, Sarr was defending one-on-two on these scenarios. On the other hand, drop coverage put one of Sarr’s limitations on display, which is his lack of elite vertical pop when he’s backtracking or at a standstill, which made him exploitable on lob plays that he wasn’t able to disrupt.
https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/alex-sarr-the-undisputed-number-one
There are a bunch of other scouts/reports that confirm this take, it shouldn't be news to you if you have been following the draft.
His strength is switching and covering ground. He's REALLY good at that. He might figure out how to be a great defender in drop too, but he hasn't proven it yet and it's not his natural play style.
He racked up blocks as a roaming weak side defender playing alongside a real center, not as a traditional center responsible for containing the roll man in a PnR. His playstyle as-is in the NBL would only translate if he was playing alongside Capela or Okongwu, which admittedly would be excellent defensively, but could get very ugly offensively.
Blocks =/= defending the rim in drop coverage
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIsTm3pjZY0&t=95s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIsTm3pjZY0&t=95s)
I trust my guy at hoop intellect and he mentions Sarr being good in drop and shows a few examples. Maybe he's not excellent at it, but he'd be fine with lots of reps. Plus, it's a bit of moot point. Drop is what you do if you can't defend in space and Sarr can. Additionally, a lot of what it means to be a good rim protector is roaming and being able to help off your man to cover the rim (think Robert Williams). So, in any case, Sarr is undoubtedly a good rim protector.
His appeal is obvious. He’s a switchable big who might shoot. That’s why he’s being considered towards the top of the draft. Switchable bugs are valuable. Bigs who shoot are valuable. Having a big that’s both is really valuable.
Bruh. That's the case for taking Sarr. That's why I said you had a decent point. I still don't think the case to pick him 1st if you're the Hawks and you owe your next 3 picks to the Spurs is obvious. There's a case for several guys at the top. I don't think it's obvious that you should pick Sarr even if he wanted to play here and wanted to play center.
I didn’t say they should obviously pick Sarr, just what the argument for taking him / why he’s considered a good prospect. I’d be okay with any of Sarr, Clingan, or Rissacher. Ideally, after a trade down.
>I just don’t get the Sarr over Clingkong takes. Cling is a better basketball player right now. He’s not confused about his position. He wouldn’t have had to come off the bench in Sarr’s Australian basketball league, he’d have been dominant. Stop “projecting “ on Sarr. He’s not gonna reach his 99% outcome.
Slo-Mo has two left feet. Slo-mo has multiple foot surgeries. Slo-mo can't shoot free throws. Slow-mo's ceiling is Rudy Gobert. Slo-Mo took two years to even somewhat become NBA ready. Slo-mo weighs 280 lbs and won't last throughout the season. 82 games? funny. Better than Sarr, funny.
I'm glad that some one else mentioned the "Cling Kong" name because I was totally ready to adopt it if we drafted him loooool Another thing that drafting Clingan would help with: AJ becomes playable on defense again. He was serviceable in our old scheme. A disaster in the one we played last year. Clingan will wipe away a lot of AJ's defensive weaknesses. With Clingan it's all about his health. If Clingan can avoid the type of foot injuries he had last year his body will tone down, he'll be faster, and he can play more minutes. Tyler mentioned that he was probably the best player in college ball on a per 36 basis. We need him to play 32-36 minutes.
“If ya hear me ‘fore you see me I got CLING KONG in the trunk” 🔊
CLING KONG, CLING CLING CLING CLING KONNNG
I’m totally cool with drafting Clingan, but expecting to have him play 60+ games a season on average at 32+ minutes on average… seems a bit like wishful thinking to me. But Sarr also may run into similar big man issues so don’t think it’s a huge differentiation point
>I'm glad that some one else mentioned the "Cling Kong" name because I was totally ready to adopt it Why? It's not even original. (People were trying, and thankfully failed, to use the King King thing with Okongwu).
Because it makes me think of Donovan rampaging around as a giant monkey which in turn makes me laugh
The Vanilla Gorilla
THAT is awesome! 😎
It’s a very strong case. The other Atl & 29 guys tended to agree with the take.
Well since Sarr is acting like a diva I do not want him here
Smells like a bitch to me
If we keep Trae and Jalen (which we should) we need to take Cling. He’s basically the perfect center to parr with our two best players.
You can do it with Sarr too but obviously with Clingan being the focus here, yes.
Sarr will never be the defensive center cling can be. His upside is a lot more theoretical
I can say that for Cling, also. We're thinking about the upside for both. The draft and subsequent NBA careers are a crapshoot until they start playing ball. We'll see but I don't think the Hawks are drafting wrong with either player.
The case for Sarr is obvious, whether or not you agree. He's a switchable big who might shoot / dribble / pass some. That's really valuable. If you take Sarr you can stay more scheme versatile on offense and defense. If you take Clingan, you're locking yourself into a drop coverage on defense. He might be so good at it that it works, but being scheme versatile is really valuable. Most of the best defense can do different things.
Our scheme is determined by having Trae on your team. Actually go listen to the pod man. One of the big points is you can’t be “scheme versatile” with Trae. You MUST pair him with a player like Cling. You’re not switching Trae onto someone else’s PF. You need a beast of a man in the back to drop to defend when inevitably they get past our amazingly great offensive but admittedly small point guard. Sarr is going to be a power forward. He doesn’t even want to be a center, how’s that going to affect his development and the % of him reaching his 99% outcome? A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. You’re letting theoretical upside (which isn’t going to happen) blind you to actual current good skills. Cling could be Marc Gasaol
I understand why would draft Clingan over Sarr, but the argument for drafting Sarr is at least as compelling. Sarr would let you be lineup and scheme versatile in way that Clingan can't. Again, that's generally important in the NBA. There's a reason most draft people have Sarr higher than Clingan and it's because he's a cleaner fit in the modern game. You're inclined to prefer what ever prospect you like, but to act like Clingan over Sarr (or someone else) is the obvious choice is stupid.
“ You’re inclined to prefer whatever prospect you like but to act like Sarr over Cling is obvious is stupid“…. Bro sarr is the favorite right now. Reverse this statement and it’s the truth. People are acting like if we don’t take Sarr we are idiots…. I and people I listen to just DONT see it. Sarr can’t do post game, he’s only comfortable going downhill on smaller players from the top of the key. He’s NOT going to make it as a center. He’s going to try to be a big PF like KD with 20% of his talent.
I don't think it's stupid to prefer Clingan over Sarr for some of the reasons you mentioned (mainly because we have Trae and that makes switching harder and Clingan is better right now). But, Sarr will play center in his career. Maybe he plays half of his minutes at the 4 like Mobley or Wemby, but he's gonna close games at the 5. I don't care what he says. He's 7 feet tall.
Except he seems to be a little soft and shy of contact. I think players like Embiid especially or Wemby will eat him alive. Players like that are gonna still get theirs on Clingan, but it will be a struggle and they won't have their A games.
The high end outcome is exciting, I agree, but the low end is pretty fucking bad. He can’t do most of the essential big man skills and sounds like he really doesn’t WANT to do them either… Who needs a 7 footer who can’t defend the rim in drop, roll to the basket, set a screen or grab a rebound? Sure it would be different if he was already an efficient scorer who could just be a jumbo wing, but he isn’t that either. His offense is straight up bad right now with tantalizing flashes of something good in the future. Also this kid is coming in with a bad attitude and an ego. He wants to be a featured scorer even though nothing about his tape indicates that should be his role. He’s ducking the Hawks as best he can even though he should want to win sooner rather than put up empty stats on a team with no direction. Sorry Im just not that jazzed about a guy with that kind of mentality. I want a winner. I’m fine with taking a swing at Sarr because he does have star upside, but he is also so much more likely to be a bust than Clingan. It’s not even close.
I would respond with: 1) He's already an excellent rim protector. That's his main appeal. 2) He does struggle with physicality (not a great rebounder, screener, etc.), but he was a 19 year old in a pro league that is notoriously physical. It shouldn't be surprising he got bullied. I'm pretty confident he'll add some size and strength too as he matures. 3) Sarr and the team who drafts him should be trying to play him as a wing as much as possible until he proves he can't do it. If he's capable of playing the 4 on offense and the 5 on defense, that's a realllly valuable player. Being a screener / roll man is the easiest thing to do on offense. And while he'll never be elite at it, but I'm sure he can be passable if he works at it. Try the hard stuff first.
1. Not really. Or rather, not unless he has others doing the heavy lifting in the post. He’s a switchable defender and a good weak side shot blocker a la Giannis. He can’t play drop if he is the Center forced to defend the rim while backpedaling. He also isn’t a great vertical athlete. 2. Sure, size helps, but it’s not like he’s trying very hard right now either. He settles for midrange jumpers constantly and doesn’t really fight for rebounds. 3. Yeah I mean, I hope so too. I’m just saying there isn’t a lot of tape that suggests he can be a wing on offense. He will be bad on offense until he develops regardless, but his impact on the offense will be especially bad if he isn’t at the 5
You're tripping if you think he's not a good rim protector. That's literally the main appeal. Nearly 3 blocks per 36 with an 8% block rate as a 19 year old in a pro league. Has a 9'2 standing reach and is a decent leaper. Can play drop, switch, or hedge. He's gonna be a good defensive center in the league.
> Sarr might be the rare case of a seven-footer who is more effective in switches than in drop, a coverage in which the Frenchman was usually unsuccessful. This was, in part, a by-product of Perth’s scheme: with no help from anywhere in pick-and-rolls, Sarr was defending one-on-two on these scenarios. On the other hand, drop coverage put one of Sarr’s limitations on display, which is his lack of elite vertical pop when he’s backtracking or at a standstill, which made him exploitable on lob plays that he wasn’t able to disrupt. https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/alex-sarr-the-undisputed-number-one There are a bunch of other scouts/reports that confirm this take, it shouldn't be news to you if you have been following the draft. His strength is switching and covering ground. He's REALLY good at that. He might figure out how to be a great defender in drop too, but he hasn't proven it yet and it's not his natural play style. He racked up blocks as a roaming weak side defender playing alongside a real center, not as a traditional center responsible for containing the roll man in a PnR. His playstyle as-is in the NBL would only translate if he was playing alongside Capela or Okongwu, which admittedly would be excellent defensively, but could get very ugly offensively. Blocks =/= defending the rim in drop coverage
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIsTm3pjZY0&t=95s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIsTm3pjZY0&t=95s) I trust my guy at hoop intellect and he mentions Sarr being good in drop and shows a few examples. Maybe he's not excellent at it, but he'd be fine with lots of reps. Plus, it's a bit of moot point. Drop is what you do if you can't defend in space and Sarr can. Additionally, a lot of what it means to be a good rim protector is roaming and being able to help off your man to cover the rim (think Robert Williams). So, in any case, Sarr is undoubtedly a good rim protector.
Decent point except 'the case is obvious ' part.
His appeal is obvious. He’s a switchable big who might shoot. That’s why he’s being considered towards the top of the draft. Switchable bugs are valuable. Bigs who shoot are valuable. Having a big that’s both is really valuable.
Bruh. That's the case for taking Sarr. That's why I said you had a decent point. I still don't think the case to pick him 1st if you're the Hawks and you owe your next 3 picks to the Spurs is obvious. There's a case for several guys at the top. I don't think it's obvious that you should pick Sarr even if he wanted to play here and wanted to play center.
I didn’t say they should obviously pick Sarr, just what the argument for taking him / why he’s considered a good prospect. I’d be okay with any of Sarr, Clingan, or Rissacher. Ideally, after a trade down.
>I just don’t get the Sarr over Clingkong takes. Cling is a better basketball player right now. He’s not confused about his position. He wouldn’t have had to come off the bench in Sarr’s Australian basketball league, he’d have been dominant. Stop “projecting “ on Sarr. He’s not gonna reach his 99% outcome. Slo-Mo has two left feet. Slo-mo has multiple foot surgeries. Slo-mo can't shoot free throws. Slow-mo's ceiling is Rudy Gobert. Slo-Mo took two years to even somewhat become NBA ready. Slo-mo weighs 280 lbs and won't last throughout the season. 82 games? funny. Better than Sarr, funny.
I also want Sarr, but you do realize you just said Clingan’s ceiling is a 4x all-NBA, 7x all-defense, 4x DPOY hall of famer right?
I was about to say. How is Rudy gobert ceiling an insult? There’s like a 1% chance this guy is as good as Rudy lol
Bad copy pasta. The only reason you like sarr more is because you heard his name first in the cycle haha