Alphawalt wrote:We don’t need Baylor, he needs us. He would be the fifth or sixth best player on the team. He is having serious delusions thinking he can make the NBA. His Jackrabbit predecessor Mike Daum, the “dauminator”, averaged 10 ppg better than Baylor, and was a better rebounder, and a few inches taller, objectively MUCH better than Baylor. Daum did not get drafted and is playing Euro ball. Baylor would be a nice addition but he certainly is not someone I am personally salivating over, he is not “the missing piece”. We would do just fine without him.
Couldn't disagree with this post more any more than I do. Let's break it down.
1.
Baylor needs Creighton more than Creighton needs Baylor. Wrong (IMO). He had or has nearly every blue blood program knocking on his door. Kansas wanted him and he just cut Kansas. The NIL money is likely greater in other situations. Even though our roster is fantastic, Baylor would slot in perfectly on the wing, be the stud shooter we don't really have (unless Ben Shtolzberg or Christofilis are that guy), provide additional quality depth and absolutely take our ceiling as a team up a notch.
2.
He would be the fifth or sixth best player on our team. Wrong (IMO). Watch his tape; he's legit. He's an NBA prospect for a reason. Again, every program wanted/wants him.
3.
Serious delusions about the NBA Wrong (IMO). He's listed in mock drafts as a second round pick. You seem to have some serious delusions about how to evaluate what NBA teams are looking for when you compare him to Mike Daum. Jacob summarized that flawed reasoning well. When you just point to a few stats and a few inches, and ignore all the legit reasons Baylor is a way better NBA prospect than Daum, it's not flattering.
4.
We would do just fine without him. Agree here. But our ceiling/potential is even finer with him.