re: Who we picking at 8?

The Pels really needed to move Bledsoe and Adams for JV was a no brainer. So last year they got a lot of value by moving back and still getting a player they liked. There was definitely risk though.

So what do you get for taking the risk of moving back? I don't think getting off Graham is enough. I also have reservations about trading Graham for a 3&D wing that maybe makes you better immediately but stunts the growth of younger players and adds more salary to following year when things will be tight.

As much as I understand trading back can be a good deal again like last draft, I'd rather them take the guy they really want that they know can develop and fit this team.

Between last years draft class, getting CJ cheap, and getting the Lakers pick, Griffin has made up most, if not all of the assets he squandered. There is no reason to trade down unless another team really makes it worth our while and we can still get the player we want.

quote:

---

I still think our team is in need of elite shooting. We have players that we hope can improve when Zion returns and a couple we have eyes on that we hope continue development but we have to have elite shooting around zion for our squad to hit max potential in the near future.

---

I definitely agree with you, but I'm also interested in seeing what steps some of the guys who are currently here take in that department. Does Herb take another step from three? Jose hit 38% of his threes this year and was a 39% three point shooter as a Senior, does he go up or down? If Jax is still here does he continue to add that to his game?

Even guys who are proven reliable from three that struggled this year, BI his first two years here was a 39% shooter from three, he shot 33% this year. Graham his previous two seasons was a 37% shooter, he shot 34% this year. What does having Trey as a actual member of the rotation all year do for your three point shooting? Honestly just having CJ and Trey, plus BI and Graham getting back to their career averages would do wonders for you.

Defensive focus and intensity can be coached.

He has all the tools and has SHOWN the ability to defend at a high level.

I have no doubts Coach Willie can bring out the focus and hunger like he did all of our players last year.

quote:

---

Defensive focus and intensity can be coached.

He has all the tools and has SHOWN the ability to defend at a high level.

I have no doubts Coach Willie can bring out the focus and hunger like he did all of our players last year.

---

I agree to a certain point. I think just about anything can be coached. I also have him 9th or 10ish on my board, so I like him a good bit, so please don’t take that the wrong way.

BUT, with that said, if Sean Miller couldn’t get the focus and intensity out of him consistently, and Tommy Lloyd couldn't do it consistently as a Sophomore, it’s a deserving red flag. It’s a lot harder to get a guy to buy in than we make it out to be, and it’s exceptionally even harder than that to keep a guy bought in. Plus, sometimes it’s not always about focus, intensity, or being bought in. Some guys just don’t have it.

Honestly, from the most simplistic point of view, if Mathurin is the player and prospect this board makes him out to be, he will be off the board before we pick anyway, so it’s all kind of irrelevant. We’ll see.

Im agreeing with you he isn't the best defender.

Only that he has all the tools and has shown glimpses of high level defense.

quote:

---

feel like he is going to measure a bit shorter than his listed height, but he's tall enough to not get abused by 6'3" guards.

---

6’6” in shoes

quote:

---

You don't want Mathurin because his defensive focus (should be coachable) even though he shows glimpses of being a great defender..

---

you can't coach "give a shite". You either care about playing defense or you don't. And you also can't teach instincts on that end of the floor.
Anyone can show a glimpse of good defense.
The point is he obviously doesn't always care about playing defense, although you know he cares about winning. I'd liken it to who Donovan Mitchell is. Great offensive player that wants the ball in the clutch, has all the skills to be a great defender but just doesn't seem to put the same care on that end of the floor as he does on offense, and his team is worst b/c of his defense. Now if Mathurin gives you what Mitchell does offensively, you can live with the lack of defense, but if he doesn't turn into an offensive superstar, what do you have?

quote:

---

but you want to trade down for Branham who I personally love but is arguably the worst defender in the 1st round...

---

The knock on him isn't the effort defensively like with Mathurin. It's more of being young and maybe not knowing where he should be or how to defend certain situations. That's coachable.

Branham's offensive efficiency in his last 20 games was elite, and that's why i'm so high on him. He can knock down open 3's at a 40% rate, he can get his own mid range shot whenever he wants, and he finished at the rim at 70%.
Something you see in all the reports about him, as a 18 year old freshman who started off the season very slow but finished very high, is he's a natural leader and has a high basketball IQ. That's what i'm looking for in someone we draft.

Another thing, you look at these offensive minded guards that go mid-lottery, and how they typically pan out:

Damian Lillard
Austin Rivers
Ben McLemore
Trey Burke
CJ McCollum
Nik Stauskas
Buddy Hield
Jamal Murray
Dennis Smith Jr
Collin Sexton
Coby White

You either hit or you miss, there isn't that much in between on those guys.