Originally posted by Svaniro:
Wisconsin is the media lovechild right now because they don't have any NBA players on their team.(yeah, I'm including Kaminsky on that list)
It's weird that you say that. Chad Ford, whose board is a mash up of what NBA teams and scouts say, has Kaminsky 15 and Dekker 21. So score one for not you.
Jonathan Givony of DraftExpress, whose track record on determining NBA talent is far superior to yours or anyone else's on this board (frankly, he's probably the best publicly available site), has Kaminsky 12 and Dekker 21. Hmm... interesting. That's a late lottery pick and mid to late first rounder right there. Those guys usually get a cup of coffee in the NBA.
Aran Smith of NBADraft.net, who writes like a high school sophomore but is good at evaluating NBA talent, has Dekker 26 and Kaminsky 27. Oh, his Big Board shows a top 100, so Nigel Hayes at 76 (possible, but unlikely NBA player).
The media (because "media lovechild," amiright?) has access to Chad Ford, DraftExpress, and NBADraft.net. Those all have 2 Wisconsin players projected in the first round, and the two most prominent ones pretty comfortably. So the media takes this publicly available and well known information, wipes its butt with it, decides that Wisconsin has no NBA players (despite literally hundreds of snippets to the contrary... I can't even recall all the times I heard that Kaminsky is a great fit in what the NBA is running now), and then says "we love us some Wisconsin because we love the lack of NBA talent." Is that correct?
Look, if you want to say that you think Wisconsin has no NBA talent, sure. Disregard the professionals; they're not perfect. But to claim the media has a boner for Wiscy because the media
collectively believes a minority viewpoint not supported by the commonly accepted experts? That seems dubious.