The Strange Case Against Trae Young
The “modern” NBA was a major talking point surrounding this draft — except when it came to the class’ most modern player
Trae Young is divisive. He was when he took college basketball by storm last fall, when he slowed down last winter, and when he found himself being projected all over the lottery this spring. Draft night doubled as the beginning of summer, and the league was still split on Young. ESPN projected him to go №12 early in the day, but by around 8:00 p.m., the Atlanta Hawks made him the №5 pick. Given that they traded down from №3 and passed on Luka Doncic in the process, it’s possible that Young sat alone atop their board.
This came as a surprise to some, but don’t count me among that group. It’s not that I have a source close to Travis Schlenk, or anyone in Atlanta for that matter. I just found it hard to believe that, in 2018, following the Warriors third title in four years, a player like Young was going to get by more than a few executives — especially one who spent over a decade with Golden State, helping to draft and build a dynasty around Stephen Curry.
“Trae Young is not Steph Curry” was a common phrase leading up to this draft. In fact, along with questions about his defense, this distinction between him and the best point guard of our time seemed to be the biggest knock against him.
Let’s unpack both of those criticisms. The Curry comps are easy to dismiss as lazy (skinny, light-skinned point guard not on the lottery radar until he swept the nation by storm with deep 3 after deep 3), but are they? We all know Young is not Steph, but why does he have to be to be compared to him?
In retrospect, Curry should have gone №1 overall in 2009. That’s obvious. But here’s a hypothetical: Let’s say we properly understood the value of Steph’s archetype a decade ago, but didn’t know how he specifically would develop. Where should he have been taken? I’d venture to say that he’d still be in contention for №1, and would go no lower than №3 behind Blake Griffin and James Harden. Hasheem Thabeet, Tyreke Evans, Ricky Rubio, Jonny Flynn —these picks were questionable at the time, and it’d be nice to think they simply would not be made with our modern understanding of the game.
Now, let’s look at the biggest strengths of each top-10 pick this year. These are not detailed scouting reports, but rather general archetypes.
DeAndre Ayton is a dominant inside scorer and rebounder. Marvin Bagley is a hyper-athletic, skilled scoring big. Luka Doncic is a wizardly playmaker who can shoot off the dribble. Jaren Jackson Jr. is a versatile, high-ceiling defender. Mo Bamba is a potentially-stretchy prolific shot blocker. Wendell Carter is a better-rebounding Al Horford. Collin Sexton is an athletic, attacking guard. Kevin Knox is a young wing with good size and scoring tools. Mikal Bridges is an NBA-ready 3-and-D specialist.
Trae Young is a triple-threat point guard who can drive, create and shoot from extremely deep. Outside of maybe Doncic and Bagley (the two of whom profile relatively similar to Harden and Griffin), whose basic skill-set description is more appealing?
That doesn’t mean the top three had to go this way. Phoenix already has their shooting playmaker in Devin Booker, making Ayton a terrific fit. Memphis has Mike Conley, so Jackson Jr. is understandably the pick there. Other than that, it’s unclear why a team would not gamble on Young — a guy who has as good a chance at becoming the centerpiece of an elite offense as anybody.
The reason, many will argue, is his defense. Young is roughly 180 pounds, and anywhere between 6'0" and 6'2" depending who you ask. He will be targeted in pick-and-roll and picked on in the switch-heavy NBA.
It is hard not to find this concern ironic, particularly when compared to players like Jackson Jr., Carter, Bamba and Bridges. So much of the appeal with these guys is that they won’t get played off the floor because of their ability to defensively hang with the game’s elite perimeter threats. The Currys, the Hardens — or, by the time this class enters its collective prime, the Youngs. In other words, Trae was seemingly lower on many boards than these other players due to his relative inability to guard himself.
Defense undoubtedly matters, even at point guard. Outside of the disparity in supporting cast, Curry’s ability to hang with Harden on switches (and Harden’s struggles with the roles reversed) played a key role in helping Golden State defeat Houston in this year’s Western Conference Finals. Some are optimistic about Young’s defense, citing his solid “want-to” and imagining that, as the 19-year-old kid fills out and bears less of a burden than he did at Oklahoma, he could become a Curry-type defender. Others have greater concerns, which are equally valid given Curry’s abnormal ability for a player with his measurables.
Still, when it comes to a guard’s impact on winning, offense is far and away the biggest concern. It’s the reason Curry and Harden were essentially facing off for this year’s title, and why they share three of the last four MVPs (and probably should have all four).
Of course, like his defense, Curry’s offense is a 100% ceiling outcome for Young. The further he is from that result, the more the defense matters. Harden can make up for his poor effort on one end with otherworldly play on the other, but D’Angelo Russell and Trey Burke— guys that resemble Young’s offensive floor — cannot. There’s a massive spectrum of offensively-minded lead guards in between, from Lou Williams to Kemba Walker to Kyrie Irving. The Hawks will be disappointed if they’re №5 pick becomes Williams, relatively content if he becomes Walker and thrilled if he becomes Irving.
These are all possible realities for Young. From Burke to Curry and every iteration in the middle. This is nothing unique; every lottery pick has a wide range of potential career paths. Jackson could be anything from a poor man’s Anthony Davis to a rich man’s Noah Vonleh. Bamba might be Rudy Gobert with range, or he might mix John Henson’s skill with Thon Maker’s confidence. Marvin Bagley will be anything from a skinnier DeMarcus Cousins to a taller Derrick Williams.
For those that had Young lower on their boards than these bigs and several more, there seems to be a dismissal of these floors due to, for lack of a better explanation, height. The seemingly better baseline size gives a player due to its usefulness as a defensive and rebounding tool.
This is flawed. Physical distance from the ground does not soften the thud when you hit it. Vonleh is a better defender than Burke, but worse offensively. Neither is a meaningfully better basketball player, mostly because neither is meaningfully good at anything.
Meanwhile, the smallest guy in this lottery has arguably the highest ceiling. In a league where teams are lamented for getting “stuck” in mediocrity, it’s strange that drafting for upside is frowned upon by so many.
Whether the Hawks truly preferred Young to Doncic, we’ll never know. The answer doesn’t matter much, considering that taking Young at №3 without trading down would have still been defensible.
Prospect comparisons are never exact. Curry was a better shooter, a worse driver, a better rebounder and a worse passer coming out of college than Young. He was an inch or so taller and a year or so older. Some said he was the next Steve Nash, while others thought he wasn’t even a point guard. Both turned out to be wrong, and comparisons between Steph and Trae will probably be wrong, too.
Forget all of that. Curry went №7, and he shouldn’t have. Whether you saw him as Nash or an elite-shooting combo guard, what we know now about the game tells us that either player is more valuable than Thabeet, Evans, Rubio or Flynn.
Trae Young was projected to go as low as №12 early on draft day. Letting him fall that far would have been a league-wide mistake. He ended up going №5, which shows that we’ve learned something in the past decade — or that at least one team has.
Follow Simon on Twitter @Simoncgo
