Haliburton

[SNPA]

Brogdon is also 6'5" with a 6'11" wingspan. I don't think it's a good comp otherwise. Brogdon is incredibly strong but not that athletic.

Definitely go about it differently but the outcome is the same, repeated solid smart basketball plays. They are both combo guards too IMO sharing some skills like great shooting and ball handling.

I think conceiving of Haliburton as solely a PG is missing a lot. To me he would be great next to another guard that handles and attacks the rim.

[CP War Hawks]

Brogdon is also 6'5" with a 6'11" wingspan. I don't think it's a good comp otherwise. Brogdon is incredibly strong but not that athletic.

Definitely go about it differently but the outcome is the same, repeated solid smart basketball plays. They are both combo guards too IMO sharing some skills like great shooting and ball handling.

I think conceiving of Haliburton as solely a PG is missing a lot. To me he would be great next to another guard that handles and attacks the rim.

The length is comparable between the two but what about size. One is 220 pounds while the other is 180 pounds on basically the same frame. Then there is a difference in athletic ability.

[SNPA]

Brogdon is also 6'5" with a 6'11" wingspan. I don't think it's a good comp otherwise. Brogdon is incredibly strong but not that athletic.

Definitely go about it differently but the outcome is the same, repeated solid smart basketball plays. They are both combo guards too IMO sharing some skills like great shooting and ball handling.

I think conceiving of Haliburton as solely a PG is missing a lot. To me he would be great next to another guard that handles and attacks the rim.

The length is comparable between the two but what about size. One is 220 pounds while the other is 180 pounds on basically the same frame. Then there is a difference in athletic ability.

Haliburton looks like Reggie Miller as he moves around the court to me, using strength is never going to be his game. I don't think he needs it (would be nice obviously). His BBIQ is high. He is one of those guys that seems like a natural player, the game is slower for him IMO. Brogdon comp isn't necessarily physical (although similar height/wingspan) it's position, approach, skills and outcome. I like smart players that make their teammates better.

Just the value on shooting in the league today should get Haliburton more attention than he is receiving IMO. It's not how you would teach form to a kid but the outcome is what matters most and he makes shots. The guy also grabs boards at a nice clip, yes NBA players are bigger and stronger but he isn't using size to get them in college and won't be in the NBA either.

[Nazrmohamed]

Brogdon is also 6'5" with a 6'11" wingspan. I don't think it's a good comp otherwise. Brogdon is incredibly strong but not that athletic.

Definitely go about it differently but the outcome is the same, repeated solid smart basketball plays. They are both combo guards too IMO sharing some skills like great shooting and ball handling.

I think conceiving of Haliburton as solely a PG is missing a lot. To me he would be great next to another guard that handles and attacks the rim.

But that could be accomplished at SG. In other words I think what you're doing is identifying that Haliburton isn't ball dominant in a league where the best PGs are ball dominant. So when you state this you sortve have to throw in his offball to make room for that ball dominant PG if need be.

Well it's good for any player to be versatile but I'm just arguing the idea that he has to make this consession. Hes a PG and there are some SGs out there that like the ball in thier hands.

Donovan Mitchell
Levine
Barrett's

Not a ton since the nba has changed its style and you see less on ball SGs but hes a PG and should be developed as a PG who just happens to have the ability to set up a star and then be an off ball shooter at times. I think hes alot more traditional than people believe and it's just that people dont know what to do anymore with those types.

[EvanZ]

I think people want to see SGA in Haliburton but SGA can really attack the basket. Hali is going to play off the ball much more like Lonzo.

[getrichordie]

I think people want to see SGA in Haliburton but SGA can really attack the basket. Hali is going to play off the ball much more like Lonzo.

Haliburton is not close to SGA as a prospect IMO. I was one of the few who thought SGA was top 1-2 in guards in the draft so maybe I’m biased.

Also, why do analytics guys fall in love with Haliburton? It’s not like his college metrics are mind blowing.

[EvanZ]

I think people want to see SGA in Haliburton but SGA can really attack the basket. Hali is going to play off the ball much more like Lonzo.

Haliburton is not close to SGA as a prospect IMO. I was one of the few who thought SGA was top 1-2 in guards in the draft so maybe I’m biased.

Also, why do analytics guys fall in love with Haliburton? It’s not like his college metrics are mind blowing.

Actually they are pretty mind-blowing. The combination of A:TOV, STL%, and 3P% is pretty pretty great. Analytics guys aren't looking for points usually.

[getrichordie]

I think people want to see SGA in Haliburton but SGA can really attack the basket. Hali is going to play off the ball much more like Lonzo.

Haliburton is not close to SGA as a prospect IMO. I was one of the few who thought SGA was top 1-2 in guards in the draft so maybe I’m biased.

Also, why do analytics guys fall in love with Haliburton? It’s not like his college metrics are mind blowing.

Actually they are pretty mind-blowing. The combination of A:TOV, STL%, and 3P% is pretty pretty great. Analytics guys aren't looking for points usually.

Do you weight that more than his overall win shares, though?

[CP War Hawks]

I'm not sure what the argument with Haliburton is. His contemporaries are Murray and SGA. 6-5 to 6-6, 170-180 pound combo guards that are main usage ball handlers. SGA is a less athletic, but taller version of Westbrook to me.

There are a sea of these guards in this draft which lowers his value imo. I'm not sure he's good enough to be a primary ball handler and what is his worth being off ball. I can foresee a Kevin Martin esque career where it just falls off once he reaches his 30s.

[SNPA]

I'm not sure what the argument with Haliburton is. His contemporaries are Murray and SGA. 6-5 to 6-6, 170-180 pound combo guards that are main usage ball handlers. SGA is a less athletic, but taller version of Westbrook to me.

There are a sea of these guards in this draft which lowers his value imo. I'm not sure he's good enough to be a primary ball handler and what is his worth being off ball. I can foresee a Kevin Martin esque career where it just falls off once he reaches his 30s.

Kevin Martin put up over 20 per game 6 times on good percentages. I think if you can get that out of this draft you'd be doing alright. Also, Haliburton is a much more rounded player. Martin was never close in terms of court vision, passing, defense, etc.

His worth off-ball is tremendous IMO. He will be a serious C&S threat with gravity and a quality secondary ball handler who plays defense. A 3&D guy that can run an offense, what's not to like? I think he is a perfect backcourt partner for a PG like Fox and a SG like Mitchell.

I hope you are right that he gets lost in the shuffle of other guards in this draft and slips to my team. He'll be better than a lot of these other guys IMO.

[CP War Hawks]

I'm not sure what the argument with Haliburton is. His contemporaries are Murray and SGA. 6-5 to 6-6, 170-180 pound combo guards that are main usage ball handlers. SGA is a less athletic, but taller version of Westbrook to me.

There are a sea of these guards in this draft which lowers his value imo. I'm not sure he's good enough to be a primary ball handler and what is his worth being off ball. I can foresee a Kevin Martin esque career where it just falls off once he reaches his 30s.

Kevin Martin put up over 20 per game 6 times on good percentages. I think if you can get that out of this draft you'd be doing alright. Also, Haliburton is a much more rounded player. Martin was never close in terms of court vision, passing, defense, etc.

His worth off-ball is tremendous IMO. He will be a serious C&S threat with gravity and a quality secondary ball handler who plays defense. A 3&D guy that can run an offense, what's not to like? I think he is a perfect backcourt partner for a PG like Fox and a SG like Mitchell.

I hope you are right that he gets lost in the shuffle of other guards in this draft and slips to my team. He'll be better than a lot of these other guys IMO.

The main reason Martin could score like that was his craftiness getting to the line. He was Harden before Harden getting these refs to call those fouls. TH is not physical enough or that isn't his style of play. Guys that tall and weigh 175 or less will have a hard time.
So basically for me, I can see TH doing well, but due to some of his physical limitations, he may fall off sooner or as soon as Martin.

[nolang1]

I think people want to see SGA in Haliburton but SGA can really attack the basket. Hali is going to play off the ball much more like Lonzo.

Haliburton is not close to SGA as a prospect IMO. I was one of the few who thought SGA was top 1-2 in guards in the draft so maybe I’m biased.

Also, why do analytics guys fall in love with Haliburton? It’s not like his college metrics are mind blowing.

It’s not like anyone’s college metrics (other than Wiseman’s in a tiny sample) are mind-blowing if that’s the standard. Haliburton was 2nd among sophomores in BPM and is young for his class to boot. The strength of his game is passing and teammates hit something like 30% on the catch-and-shoot jumpers he set up for them; with more competent teammates he’d have been pushing 10 assists per game.

[The-Power]

Haliburton's main strengths are his quick decision making, passing skills and reliable shooting when left open. He also has good size and length for a Guard, and he gets by without seeking much contact and without blowing by defenders a lot. How is that someone prone to fall off a cliff down the line?

Yeah, he's light and maybe that'll be an issue if he can't put on weight but other than that his game is tailor-made to work for a long time. There aren't many prospects in this draft that I'm less worried about having a game that suits a long-term low-usage role while being a plus on the court.

edit: And meanwhile you have Edwards, who probably wouldn't be an NBA player with mediocre athleticism, and Toppin, who definitely wouldn't be one, at the top of many people's mock drafts and big boards.

[getrichordie]

I'm not sure what the argument with Haliburton is. His contemporaries are Murray and SGA. 6-5 to 6-6, 170-180 pound combo guards that are main usage ball handlers. SGA is a less athletic, but taller version of Westbrook to me.

There are a sea of these guards in this draft which lowers his value imo. I'm not sure he's good enough to be a primary ball handler and what is his worth being off ball. I can foresee a Kevin Martin esque career where it just falls off once he reaches his 30s.

Kevin Martin put up over 20 per game 6 times on good percentages. I think if you can get that out of this draft you'd be doing alright. Also, Haliburton is a much more rounded player. Martin was never close in terms of court vision, passing, defense, etc.

His worth off-ball is tremendous IMO. He will be a serious C&S threat with gravity and a quality secondary ball handler who plays defense. A 3&D guy that can run an offense, what's not to like? I think he is a perfect backcourt partner for a PG like Fox and a SG like Mitchell.

I hope you are right that he gets lost in the shuffle of other guards in this draft and slips to my team. He'll be better than a lot of these other guys IMO.

The main reason Martin could score like that was his craftiness getting to the line. He was Harden before Harden getting these refs to call those fouls. TH is not physical enough or that isn't his style of play. Guys that tall and weigh 175 or less will have a hard time.
So basically for me, I can see TH doing well, but due to some of his physical limitations, he may fall off sooner or as soon as Martin.

I think TH's calling card is that he's a glue guy wing that makes the right pass and the right decision. The jury is still out on his shot, IMO. He shot well in college, sure, but how many times have we seen guys who have shot well in college struggle making the adjustment at the next level. This is why mechanics and strength is important. TH isn't the strongest guy and his mechanics are neither sound nor consistent which is a huge red flag for a guard.

The upside on defense is that if he adds some healthy weight, he can be a problem on the perimeter and will be able to guard 1-3 and some smaller 4s. Right now, he could come into the league and give a lot of 1s and some 2s problems, but he's just so skinny he will get bumped off the play by most NBA guys.

[EvanZ]

Haliburton is not close to SGA as a prospect IMO. I was one of the few who thought SGA was top 1-2 in guards in the draft so maybe I’m biased.

Also, why do analytics guys fall in love with Haliburton? It’s not like his college metrics are mind blowing.

Actually they are pretty mind-blowing. The combination of A:TOV, STL%, and 3P% is pretty pretty great. Analytics guys aren't looking for points usually.

Do you weight that more than his overall win shares, though?

I could care less about win shares in college.

[EvanZ]

Haliburton was also 90+ %-ile on spot-ups the last two seasons. That's very rare.

[clyde21]

he's Warriors version Iguodala to me, he can play that role, that's why i want him on on this team

[SNPA]

he's Warriors version Iguodala to me, he can play that role, that's why i want him on on this team

What is the highest you think the Warriors would draft him?

[getrichordie]

Actually they are pretty mind-blowing. The combination of A:TOV, STL%, and 3P% is pretty pretty great. Analytics guys aren't looking for points usually.

Do you weight that more than his overall win shares, though?

I could care less about win shares in college.

What is your reasoning behind that?

[EvanZ]

Do you weight that more than his overall win shares, though?

I could care less about win shares in college.

What is your reasoning behind that?

It's just not a useful stat in my opinion. Probably better off using BPM for one thing. And even that it's more like a threshold. Guys who have low BPM (or WS if you really want to use that) are usually not going to be good prospects. But the reverse is not necessarily true (eg modus ponens). If a guy has high BPM/WS I definitely look at him, but have to dig much deeper than the "all in one" stat like that. Otherwise you end up with guys like Okafor being top picks.