Haliburton

[clyde21]

tertiary creation and C&S is valuable to a degree, if you add defensive versatility or whatever even more (dubious that's Hali with his frame/strength)

it's just not that valuable in terms of the draft though, esp as a guard, if you think Hali is a wing, maybe, but dunno

Still really don't get it, the reasonable outcomes for him are very much not a player you want to pay a lot for, and is def one that you can replace somewhat easily

Depends on system and personnel, but the easiest way to build a winner si through stars, not motion

lol? show me how many players in the NBA right now can defend 1-3, play off-ball and pass like Haliburton, hit 3s and their FTs

must be a long list.

[SNPA]

tertiary creation and C&S is valuable to a degree, if you add defensive versatility or whatever even more (dubious that's Hali with his frame/strength)

it's just not that valuable in terms of the draft though, esp as a guard, if you think Hali is a wing, maybe, but dunno

Still really don't get it, the reasonable outcomes for him are very much not a player you want to pay a lot for, and is def one that you can replace somewhat easily

Depends on system and personnel, but the easiest way to build a winner si through stars, not motion

lol? show me how many players in the NBA right now can defend 1-3, play off-ball and pass like Haliburton, hit 3s and their FTs

must be a long list.

Haliburton has a skill set that is tailor made for the modern league. What he gets knocked for is not being a superstar first option but that's not why you draft him. You draft him because you want a Malcom Brogdon type Swiss army knife to just go out there and constantly make really solid plays, shoot at a high efficiency and D up. I don't see why every team in the league couldn't use a guy like this.

I hope Vlade trades up to get him, I don't see him lasting till late lotto.

[Senor Chang]

I'm not most interested in how Haliburton gets his points but how he can create for others (his real calling-card), and that he could do easily in a motion-based offense. Haliburton himself is going to be more of an opportunistic scorer and not someone you expect to constantly create for himself in one-on-one or two-on-two situations.

Well, I'm not sure how much creation happens for others when the person who has the ball can't bend the defense. Even coming off screens, I think he struggles to turn the corner and get into the paint and create separation. You'd basically be relying on the real creation to come off-ball at that point and I'm not sure why you wouldn't take Hayes before Haliburton at that point.

Hayes is definitely better at turning the corner but there are flaws he has too. He shoots under 30% from 3. Pretty good from 2 though and he can hit FTs so it'll most likely improve but on day 1 he's a better shot creator who isn't the best shooter himself so what happens when defenses force you to shoot. Whereas what you say is true about Haliburton but stop his penetration and he'll light you up from deep. And in today's NBA (well I appreciate the skills of both players and think fans have this single way to be good mentality.) if you had to pick between the two flaws I think teams take the better long range shooter.

Haliburton i also the longer player. I think it is more likely he fill out his frame than Hayes becomes a decent threat from 3.

[getrichordie]

Well, I'm not sure how much creation happens for others when the person who has the ball can't bend the defense. Even coming off screens, I think he struggles to turn the corner and get into the paint and create separation. You'd basically be relying on the real creation to come off-ball at that point and I'm not sure why you wouldn't take Hayes before Haliburton at that point.

Hayes is definitely better at turning the corner but there are flaws he has too. He shoots under 30% from 3. Pretty good from 2 though and he can hit FTs so it'll most likely improve but on day 1 he's a better shot creator who isn't the best shooter himself so what happens when defenses force you to shoot. Whereas what you say is true about Haliburton but stop his penetration and he'll light you up from deep. And in today's NBA (well I appreciate the skills of both players and think fans have this single way to be good mentality.) if you had to pick between the two flaws I think teams take the better long range shooter.

Haliburton i also the longer player. I think it is more likely he fill out his frame than Hayes becomes a decent threat from 3.

That may be so, but it won't take much for Haliburton to fill out his frame, it's pretty thin and small. He might be able to add 10-15 lbs but that's about it.

And I'm sold on Hayes shot. His form is fluid and his footwork is way better (two key cornerstones to a good shooter), he just needs to shoot more and get reps and I think it comes along. I like his shooting form a whole better than Haliburton who changes the way he shoots depending on the look. It's like there is two different shooters in his body. It's strange. He'd be good in Golden State for sure where Curry and Thompson can hide his offensive flaws.

And I don't think Haliburton is that much longer than Hayes who has a 6'9 wingspan.

[Nazrmohamed]

Hayes is definitely better at turning the corner but there are flaws he has too. He shoots under 30% from 3. Pretty good from 2 though and he can hit FTs so it'll most likely improve but on day 1 he's a better shot creator who isn't the best shooter himself so what happens when defenses force you to shoot. Whereas what you say is true about Haliburton but stop his penetration and he'll light you up from deep. And in today's NBA (well I appreciate the skills of both players and think fans have this single way to be good mentality.) if you had to pick between the two flaws I think teams take the better long range shooter.

Haliburton i also the longer player. I think it is more likely he fill out his frame than Hayes becomes a decent threat from 3.

That may be so, but it won't take much for Haliburton to fill out his frame, it's pretty thin and small. He might be able to add 10-15 lbs but that's about it.

And I'm sold on Hayes shot. His form is fluid and his footwork is way better (two key cornerstones to a good shooter), he just needs to shoot more and get reps and I think it comes along. I like his shooting form a whole better than Haliburton who changes the way he shoots depending on the look. It's like there is two different shooters in his body. It's strange. He'd be good in Golden State for sure where Curry and Thompson can hide his offensive flaws.

And I don't think Haliburton is that much longer than Hayes who has a 6'9 wingspan.

Yeah, I got nothing really bad to say about either player. Both have flaws that I think they'll overcome in thier own ways.

[King Ken]

I strongly believe both are system and fit players. I am not sure the bad teams in the top 10 of the lottery fit them although I am curious about Hayes/Russell fit for MIN.

My ideal fits for Hali is Orlando, Philly, and New Orleans if Lonzo Ball wasn't there.

[No-Man]

Haliburton defending some 2s is going to be a struggle, let alone 3s

He is a good team defender and will be solid on D regardless, but his defensive versatility is overstated, esp when it's painfully obvious that he is never getting strong enough

[No-Man]

Well, I'm not sure how much creation happens for others when the person who has the ball can't bend the defense. Even coming off screens, I think he struggles to turn the corner and get into the paint and create separation. You'd basically be relying on the real creation to come off-ball at that point and I'm not sure why you wouldn't take Hayes before Haliburton at that point.

Hayes is definitely better at turning the corner but there are flaws he has too. He shoots under 30% from 3. Pretty good from 2 though and he can hit FTs so it'll most likely improve but on day 1 he's a better shot creator who isn't the best shooter himself so what happens when defenses force you to shoot. Whereas what you say is true about Haliburton but stop his penetration and he'll light you up from deep. And in today's NBA (well I appreciate the skills of both players and think fans have this single way to be good mentality.) if you had to pick between the two flaws I think teams take the better long range shooter.

Haliburton i also the longer player. I think it is more likely he fill out his frame than Hayes becomes a decent threat from 3.

This is like wrong in so many levels, Hayes is already a decent threat from 3 and he is a surefire bet to shoot

Haliburton filling out? you serious? he got a concave/sunken chest and even though his shoulders/frame is alright, he is terribly narrow everywhere else

[Nazrmohamed]

Hayes is definitely better at turning the corner but there are flaws he has too. He shoots under 30% from 3. Pretty good from 2 though and he can hit FTs so it'll most likely improve but on day 1 he's a better shot creator who isn't the best shooter himself so what happens when defenses force you to shoot. Whereas what you say is true about Haliburton but stop his penetration and he'll light you up from deep. And in today's NBA (well I appreciate the skills of both players and think fans have this single way to be good mentality.) if you had to pick between the two flaws I think teams take the better long range shooter.

Haliburton i also the longer player. I think it is more likely he fill out his frame than Hayes becomes a decent threat from 3.

This is like wrong in so many levels, Hayes is already a decent threat from 3 and he is a surefire bet to shoot

Haliburton filling out? you serious? he got a concave/sunken chest and even though his shoulders/frame is alright, he is terribly narrow everywhere else

This is said every year and it almost never is an issue. You age, you fill out. I can see if we were talking about a 215lb C prospect but we're talking about PGs. At 6'5 he'll fill out. Its literally the silliest reason to assume someone won't do well these days, unless you are also concerned about work ethic.

Are you concerned about his work ethic? Well if not they got nutritionists, trainers. Top of the line. Right now you're probably reminding yourself of some skinny kid......yes, he was lazy. And truth is its less of a pressing flaw at PG anyway.

[No-Man]

No man, def not everyone fills out, I am far from an expert on the matter but I talk to some of them daily, none of them believe in Hali ever filling out well enough

[WargamesX]

The whole fill out argument is also pointless because we’ve seen multiple cases of when a player is tall for their position they don’t need to “fill out”. There are a ton of players in the league who are slim but just but are also sinewy strong

[EvanZ]

Let's just think about skinny guard/wings around Haliburton's height in recent years (looking at the Combine):

SGA 6'6" 179
Landry Shamet 6'5" 189
Edmond Summer 6'6" 176
Terrance Ferguson 6'7" 184
Kobi Simmons 6'4.5" 165
Patrick McCaw 6'7" 180
Caris LeVert 6'7" 191
Delon Wright 6'6" 181
R.J. Hunter 6'6" 185
Jordan McRae 6'5" 179
Zach LaVine 6'6" 181
MCW 6'6" 184
Will Barton 6'6" 174
Jeremy Lamb 6'5" 179

Haliburton is roughly 6'5" 175. People can draw their own conclusions. Just wanted to put the data out there.

[No-Man]

Yeah, only a couple of those guys really got significantly stronger, and one was already clearly bigger in LeVert (the other one is Lamb)

[MemphisX]

Yeah, only a couple of those guys really got significantly stronger, and one was already clearly bigger in LeVert (the other one is Lamb)

None of them are functionally unplayable due to strength though. Hali will be fine long term.

[No-Man]

Nobody is saying that Hali would be unplayable, I have him ranked almost lotto, or around that, otherwise I'd have him like as a curiosity not a prospect, just that it is a limitation and that the upside isn't really there for him

This obsession for find the new Jason Kidd kinda has netted a ton of solid pros but not one stud and they mostly get overdrafted like Lonzo and Rubio

Haliburton is good, he is just not top10 pick good

[clyde21]

Haliburton defending some 2s is going to be a struggle, let alone 3s

He is a good team defender and will be solid on D regardless, but his defensive versatility is overstated, esp when it's painfully obvious that he is never getting strong enough

on-ball defense is overrated, he's projects as an ELITE help defender that can rotate on three positions, can run point in transition, is a legit spot-up shooter who has been a low-usage high-impact player his entire career

he's Lonzo Ball with a most consistent shot, that's a super valuable player to pretend he can be easily replaceable is nonsense.

[clyde21]

outside of a superstar Haliburton's archetype is THE most valuable in the NBA right now

[Jamaaliver]

NBA Draft 2020: Big Board 2.0

8. TYRESE HALIBURTON, Guard, Iowa State



A lanky 6-foot-5 guard who can toggle between either guard spot, Tyrese Haliburton delivered on the hype and then some as a sophomore. He went from a potential first-round pick to a potential top-five pick, and someone who a lot of lottery teams on the verge of contention will value.

Haliburton plays a mistake-free brand of basketball. He limits turnovers, he’s highly efficient, and he plays smart. He doesn’t overextend himself or force the issue, and he has tremendous poise for a college guard. He should adjust nicely to the pace of NBA basketball.

Where Haliburton’s issues come to light is his athletic profile. He’s a slender 175 pounds, and he’s not terribly explosive. His jumper is effective, yes, but he’s not a bonafide pull-up threat due to some strange mechanical quirks. He’s too smart, too efficient, and too well-rounded not to find a role in the NBA, but his ceiling may not reach as high as his other lottery counterparts.

76ers Fansided

[RiotPunch]

I strongly believe both are system and fit players. I am not sure the bad teams in the top 10 of the lottery fit them although I am curious about Hayes/Russell fit for MIN.

My ideal fits for Hali is Orlando, Philly, and New Orleans if Lonzo Ball wasn't there.

I would love him in Milwaukee. Great fit next to Giannis and he's from Wisconsin.

[SNPA]

Bump.