How To Defend Cade Cunningham by Davion Mitchell

[CoreyVillains]

I am a proud Davion Mitchell stan so I decided to put together a video of Davion's possessions on Cade from their matchup on 3/12. Cade still finished with an efficient 25 points for the game but there was a clear difference in the shots he was getting when guarded by Davion vs the rest of the Baylor defenders. I chose this game to highlight for Davion as I feel it is a good indicator for his defensive potential as a multi-position defender at the next level regardless of his lack of size.

Watch on YouTube

[VanWest82]

Davion Mitchell is the ultimate eye test prospect. He just looks like an NBA player. His lateral movement and tenacity and competitiveness defensively is off the charts. He'll be one of the best guard defenders in the league from day one. He's also explosive with the ball, can shoot off the dribble, make plays for others, and is very effective at step back threes going to his left. Baylor's offense went from 83rd to 2nd in the country by making Davion co-PG.

And yet...he's 22, had only one good shooting year in college, and only averaged 14/2/5 in that one good shooting year. Some NBA analytics departments will throw themselves in front of him. Old school scouts will defend him to the death. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings.

I would absolutely take him top 10. His game is tailor made for the NBA. He's a late bloomer whose stats were suppressed because he didn't have the ball in his hands as much playing in Baylor's egalitarian guard system, but he's a stud.

[clyde21]

no one is disputing Mitchell is an NBA player...in fact his path to success in the NBA is pretty clear and easy to define...the problem is ceiling and scalability, and how high you are willing to draft a player that will most likely end up being a #3 guard on good team.

another question is does it make more sense to take a guy like Deuce McBride, who can do a lot of the things Mitchell can, in the 2nd round than it is taking Mitchell lotto or top20.

[VanWest82]

no one is disputing Mitchell is an NBA player...in fact his path to success in the NBA is pretty clear and easy to define...the problem is ceiling and scalability, and how high you are willing to draft a player that will most likely end up being a #3 guard on good team.

another question is does it make more sense to take a guy like Deuce McBride, who can do a lot of the things Mitchell can, in the 2nd round than it is taking Mitchell lotto or top20.

I'd say that's a pessimistic projection. McBride might not last until the 2nd round but there's a difference in quality of player between him and Mitchell. McBride isn't the same caliber of defender, and he didn't have to share ball handling duties the way Mitchell did which is why his raw numbers look comparable.

I think it's fair to question whether Mitchell will ever be a perennial all star type, but how many of these guys in the 6-12 range will be? I'd say his most likely outcome is slightly better FVV but given his athletic gifts and proven drive to get better it doesn't make sense to put a hard low ceiling on him.

[clyde21]

no one is disputing Mitchell is an NBA player...in fact his path to success in the NBA is pretty clear and easy to define...the problem is ceiling and scalability, and how high you are willing to draft a player that will most likely end up being a #3 guard on good team.

another question is does it make more sense to take a guy like Deuce McBride, who can do a lot of the things Mitchell can, in the 2nd round than it is taking Mitchell lotto or top20.

I'd say that's a pessimistic projection. McBride might not last until the 2nd round but there's a difference in quality of player between him and Mitchell. McBride isn't the same caliber of defender, and he didn't have to share ball handling duties the way Mitchell did which is why his raw numbers look comparable.

I think it's fair to question whether Mitchell will ever be a perennial all star type, but how many of these guys in the 6-12 range will be? I'd say his most likely outcome is slightly better FVV but given his athletic gifts and proven drive to get better it doesn't make sense to put a hard low ceiling on him.

if your strategy is to draft the safest guy in the lotto...sure, go ahead, I just think it's a dumb one tbh, i'd rather aim much higher when drafting in the lotto, even if the path 2 success is less clear than someone like Mitchell's.

[VanWest82]

no one is disputing Mitchell is an NBA player...in fact his path to success in the NBA is pretty clear and easy to define...the problem is ceiling and scalability, and how high you are willing to draft a player that will most likely end up being a #3 guard on good team.

another question is does it make more sense to take a guy like Deuce McBride, who can do a lot of the things Mitchell can, in the 2nd round than it is taking Mitchell lotto or top20.

I'd say that's a pessimistic projection. McBride might not last until the 2nd round but there's a difference in quality of player between him and Mitchell. McBride isn't the same caliber of defender, and he didn't have to share ball handling duties the way Mitchell did which is why his raw numbers look comparable.

I think it's fair to question whether Mitchell will ever be a perennial all star type, but how many of these guys in the 6-12 range will be? I'd say his most likely outcome is slightly better FVV but given his athletic gifts and proven drive to get better it doesn't make sense to put a hard low ceiling on him.

if your strategy is to draft the safest guy in the lotto...sure, go ahead, I just think it's a dumb one tbh, i'd rather aim much higher when drafting in the lotto, even if the path 2 success is less clear than someone like Mitchell's.

I get that but at some point it has to be about available alternatives and not just the theoretical exercise of saying top 10 = superstar. I like this Sengun kid. He has a chance. Same with Giddey. Both those guys come with huge defensive questions though. Wagner, Kispert, Barnes, Garuba, and Moody all look like role players only they're nowhere near as good as Mitchell atm. Hard to say with the Johnsons: one's super raw and offensively challenged and the other one's a quitter who's apparently soft. There are guys projected to go in the 20s that are interesting (Bouknight, Butler, Springer, etc.) but there are reasons they're down there to begin with.

I don't like Mitchell because he's safe. I like him because he's an elite defender who has ready made NBA skills, IQ, and athleticism.

[clyde21]

I'd say that's a pessimistic projection. McBride might not last until the 2nd round but there's a difference in quality of player between him and Mitchell. McBride isn't the same caliber of defender, and he didn't have to share ball handling duties the way Mitchell did which is why his raw numbers look comparable.

I think it's fair to question whether Mitchell will ever be a perennial all star type, but how many of these guys in the 6-12 range will be? I'd say his most likely outcome is slightly better FVV but given his athletic gifts and proven drive to get better it doesn't make sense to put a hard low ceiling on him.

if your strategy is to draft the safest guy in the lotto...sure, go ahead, I just think it's a dumb one tbh, i'd rather aim much higher when drafting in the lotto, even if the path 2 success is less clear than someone like Mitchell's.

I get that but at some point it has to be about available alternatives and not just the theoretical exercise of saying top 10 = superstar. I like this Sengun kid. He has a chance. Same with Giddey. Both those guys come with huge defensive questions though. Wagner, Kispert, Barnes, Garuba, and Moody all look like role players only they're nowhere near as good as Mitchell atm. Hard to say with the Johnsons: one's super raw and offensively challenged and the other one's a quitter who's apparently soft. There are guys projected to go in the 20s that are interesting (Bouknight, Butler, Springer, etc.) but there are reasons they're down there to begin with.

I don't like Mitchell because he's safe. I like him because he's an elite defender who has ready made NBA skills, IQ, and athleticism.

at the end of the day he's still an undersized 22-year-old rookie PG who doesn't project as an elite shooter at the NBA level, so unless you think he can be your primary playmaker/highest usage guy, he doesn't project as a starter, regardless of what he brings you defensively...so that's why I said long term his path is more a defensive specialist that can run some offense for you off the bench, but i don't see starter on a good team tbh.

so yea, if I am drafting lotto, I am looking at least for a long term starter type, a more premium archetype and just a more scalable skill set overall...like there is no way I am drafting Mitchell over a guy like Jalen Johnson, even tho Mitchell has a much higher floor and a clearer path to contributing in the NBA in the short term.

[VanWest82]

Mitchell might not be an elite shooter at the next level but he'll be a good shooter. He shot 44% on almost 5 3FGAs per game and 56% on 2s. When you look at the types of shots he was taking (e.g. off the dribble, step backs, etc.) it's pretty clear it wasn't a fluke; he just improved. People are making way too big of a deal about his less-than-stellar FT%. I guess Joe Harris isn't a good shooter either because he only shot 64% from the line his senior year.

Mitchell is an NBA starter. He doesn't jump off the screen on offense but he has no real weaknesses. He's like Fred VanVleet.

[Charm]

Sample size is what matters...for players like Mitchell who shoot more 3's than free throws, 3-point percentage is probably more important, and vice versa.

That said, if you want a high-end roleplayer in this draft, I don't think you can do any better than Franz Wagner. He can easily slot into pretty much any lineup, and at 19 he probably still has some untapped potential.

[jman3134]

The Miles McBride strategy might work out well. Both will probably be reliable rotation players at the next level. I would understand if a front office didn't want to take Mitchell top 10. That seems reasonable.

[Onus]

Mitchell may not have no 1 option type ceiling but he can absolutely be a starting pg.

How is his archetype not scalable? He’s an elite defender that can shoot and create his own shot. He can absolutely slot in next to any one.

[BostonCouchGM]

the difference is in the NBA, someone else will be feeding Cade in the post where he'll feast on Mitchell. Mitchell is elite. He'll be a pest against any PG in the NBA let alone a taller point forward like Cade. Cade can always just utilize the illegal moving screen every other high usage offensive initiator does to alleviate the pressure. It's a non-concern given how truly awful most PGs in the NBA are. I love Mitchell btw. I think he can be as impactful in the NBA as Cade. I only have him lower due to his age and limited upside. I would not be surprised if Mitchell is a top 5 PG in five years along with Fox, SGA, Ball and Cade, after the current top five all age and retire.

[p0peye]

Seems like Garry Harris to me.

[CptCrunch]

Mitchell may not have no 1 option type ceiling but he can absolutely be a starting pg.

How is his archetype not scalable? He’s an elite defender that can shoot and create his own shot. He can absolutely slot in next to any one.

Because that is his ceiling, a Patrick Beverly type defensive point guard with a bit more shot creation. Can't pass or dish at high level either much like Bev. No one is projecting him to be an all-star in scoring because to make such a projection is asinine - 22 turning 23 year old senior scoring 14 ppg in college on one year of decent, not great shooting split will somehow scale to a 20+ ppg player in the NBA. Not likely to happen.

Great starter if you team has a superstar at SG/SF (if he pans out), but otherwise limited in 'scalability' and 'ceiling'.

[Onus]

Mitchell may not have no 1 option type ceiling but he can absolutely be a starting pg.

How is his archetype not scalable? He’s an elite defender that can shoot and create his own shot. He can absolutely slot in next to any one.

Because that is his ceiling, a Patrick Beverly type defensive point guard with a bit more shot creation. Can't pass or dish at high level either much like Bev. No one is projecting him to be an all-star in scoring because to make such a projection is asinine - 22 turning 23 year old senior scoring 14 ppg in college on one year of decent, not great shooting split will somehow scale to a 20+ ppg player in the NBA. Not likely to happen.

Great starter if you team has a superstar at SG/SF (if he pans out), but otherwise limited in 'scalability' and 'ceiling'.

You say Patrick Beverly, I say Marcus Smart who can create his own shot. I don't think anyone is saying he has all star ceiling but he can be a 2 or 3 (most likely) option with just about any other superstar. The scalability is the fact that he can fit in with any other type of players.

[Upperclass]

He doesn't appear to have the wingspan of a Marcus smart. He's a very small player that is massively disruptive

[Hal14]

Mitchell may not have no 1 option type ceiling but he can absolutely be a starting pg.

How is his archetype not scalable? He’s an elite defender that can shoot and create his own shot. He can absolutely slot in next to any one.

Mitchell is a bigger, better shooting version of Kyle Lowry.

Average NBA PG height right now is 6'2.5"...Mitchell is. 6'2" with a 6'5" wingspan and a 41 inch vertical leap. I wouldn't call him undersized..

[Hal14]

He doesn't appear to have the wingspan of a Marcus smart. He's a very small player that is massively disruptive

1) Mitchell is a much better outside shooter than Smart. Celtics fans cringe every time Smart shoots the ball from outside the paint.
2) Smart has zero blow-by ability. He catches the ball and literally his only options are shoot it or pass it. He cannot create off the bounce, like Mitchell can.
3) Smart is much better suited to the 2, whereas Mitchell is more of a pure PG who can score and pass very well.
4) Even given all of that, Smart was the 6th pick in the draft and has performed well for the position. You look at the 2014 draft and the only guys clearly better than smart are embiid, jokic, lavine and randle. after that you have a group that is on a tier together of guys who have all been solid players over their first 7 seasons bu none have been truly elite/ star quality (smart, bogdanovic, capela, aaron gordon, jerami grant) so yeah, I don't think top 10 is out of the question for Mitchell. the other guys projected in the 6-13 range don't exactly scream "can't miss talent"..

[Old Man Game]

Where is everyone on him now that he's a confirmed 6'0" not 6'2"?

Sent from my moto g power using RealGM mobile app

[Big J]

He's Marcus Smart. The height won't impact his defensive ability that much. We've seen Pat Bev guard and somewhat limit guys like KD. He'll be able to help a good team like the Warriors right away.