2019-2020 College/Draft thread (Part 4)

[robillionaire]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

in that range I think I would rather go for more youth or upside with Hayes, Deni, Okoro or even reach for RJ Hampton

[WargamesX]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

To be fair..... the draft just isn’t that great..... it would be different if this was a strong draft at any position and we chose Haliburton.

It’s almost like there is a top 15 tier and everybody else. No one from this draft is guaranteed to be good, let alone great.

[3toheadmelo]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

So, you're enjoying "shoot for the moon", "might develop" Knox, over SGA, right now?

Donovan Mitchell another guy who was thought to have a low ceiling. You never know with these guys.

At the range we are picking in, especially in a weak draft, Haliburton seems like a good pick imo. I see the arguments for someone like Hayes though, but even he has his flaws like Haliburton as well.

[thebuzzardman]

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

So, you're enjoying "shoot for the moon", "might develop" Knox, over SGA, right now?

one example doesn't mean much. there's examples both ways. it's how smart/lucky the guy is who's doing the picking.

Don't come back with logic with I'm trying to irritate you!

[HarthorneWingo]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

When I think of adding Haliburton I think of the old (of course!) sports adage that with excellent teams (particularly basketball, imo) "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." That's what the '69-'70 and '72-'73 teams where all about. I still believe that getting skilled players sharing the ball and being in simpatico is how you Win. Moreover, there isn't any "can't miss" player in this draft. Everyone of them has their issue/question marks or hole(s) in their game which will require time and development. Haliburton can hit long-range 3s at a high percentage which will open up the floor more for RJ and, dare I say, Randle (honestly, maybe that's all Julius needs is some other long range shooters to properly space the floor so that he's not spinning into triple teams as much?).

He's that high IQBB player who plays defense and is all about the team. I think maybe a fair comparison is a Malcolm Brogdan with a higher ceiling. Am I being too generous? But even if he became Brogdan-like, is that so bad? I'd say we did pretty damn good.

EDIT: Moreover, I'm not impressed with that clip. All his teammates are just standing there doing nothing. No one comes over to set a screen/pick, no one is cutting to the hoop, and no one is setting a weak-side screen. This is where the coach calls TO, right?

[god shammgod]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

To be fair..... the draft just isn’t that great..... it would be different if this was a strong draft at any position and we chose Haliburton.

It’s almost like there is a top 15 tier and everybody else. No one from this draft is guaranteed to be good, let alone great.

but someone likely will be. there's almost no draft that doesn't produce an all-star or 2. figuring it out is the hard part.

[TheGreenArrow]

Read on Twitter

It’s going to happen folks one way or another.

[god shammgod]

look, if you think haliburton could be the guy who surprises that's fine. i won't argue against your opinion. but if you go into it thinking, he definitely won't be special but he'll be solid, why bother ?

[HEZI]

People are limiting themselves then if they want franchise level talent but don't want to consider anything other than a guard. Listen, if that is truly what we want then there is no need to limit ourselves to just a guard in this draft. This means, if we seriously want to aim high for a star, you absolutely have to factor in Wiseman and Obi Toppin into the mix. You can't complain about not having franchise talent then at the same time put a scrub like Deni Avdija over Wiseman and Toppin, it makes no sense. Even Killian Hayes doesn't belong ranked ahead of either of those two.

[thebuzzardman]

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

So, you're enjoying "shoot for the moon", "might develop" Knox, over SGA, right now?

one example doesn't mean much. there's examples both ways. it's how smart/lucky the guy is who's doing the picking.

But to this point, I'm glad the Knicks brought in the guy from the Jazz. He has a strong (but not perfect) draft record with the Jazz.

He recognized Mitchell, for a recent example.

I fell a little more comfortable he could make the proper call between Melo and Haliburton, or between these guys and some guy we don't realize is on the Knicks radar.

Again, I'd rather shoot for the stars with Melo, but I might just be buying X amount of hype. And if it's a weak draft, sometimes you have to take the incremental talent win and keep plugging, if that's Haliburton or someone else.

I mean, Lavar knows how to play the modern media. He got Lonzo to the Lakers, and I get the arguments of where Lonzo might be > LaMelo, and he had a good college year at a top school, but Lavar drove a lot of hype around him and got him to the #1 or #2 market, depending on how you look at it.

So, how much of his "confidence" around "LaMelo built for NYC and is a true #1" an honest but bragging assessment, and how much of it is his schtick designed to land one of his sons high in the draft, in a big market, and to make $ off it, which can't blame him if he is.

[Deeeez Knicks]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

I actually love that play. He looks to attack the right side early in the shot clock, the defense shifts over to that strong side, he recognizes that it's sealed off so he swings the ball back over to the other wing who has a lane to attack on the left. Imagine that guy he passed it to is RJ Barrett who now has a lane to go attack left where he loves to go to. Imagine that the guy under the basket is Mitchell Robinson who is waiting to either catch the lob from RJ driving and his man coming over to help or he's waiting to clean up the offensive glass. Easy play, not much clock wasted, no forced shot, just simple ball. Even if RJ gets sealed off on his drive there is plenty of time on the clock left to reset and go into another play. RJ's style is even if that lane gets sealed off he's going to try to attack you or turn around and back you down so if Haliburton's guy drops down even a little bit, there is room to hit Haliburton on the outside for the deep 3 ball. Quick and fast decision making, read and react, floor balance, it's a simple game really. As long as he's not a deer in the headlights and isn't shy to shoot from outside while maintaining a good percentage he's going to be just fine.

He has a mismatch on the perimeter so should be able to take him. Had some room to shoot, but he just doesn't have that mid range game and not a good shooter off the dribble...doesnt get to the rim much either. Just one play, but indicative of his non-aggressive game. He is looking to pass in those plays.

Even in pick n rolls as the ball handler, he was only at .64 PPP in the 36% precentile. He was a great passer, just not a big scoring threat since he doesn't get to the rim much or shoot off the dribble. NBA teams can scout that and play him for the pass.

Unless he becomes a more aggressive scorer and develop a mid range/driving game, it will limit his upside. It is def possible he can develop that type of game. But seems like some parts of that are hard to develop.

Again, i like him as a solid player. He has his strengths and weaknesses like everyone else in the draft. Just doesn't seem like he has big scoring/lead guard potential. Seems more like an off the ball, secondary facilitator...that can still be a good player. Him and RJ might be a good fit.

[mpharris36]

i just don't like this mentality. it's playing it safe. why do that ? we have no franchise players. why draft someone who almost nobody thinks can be one ? i understand, it's not as easy to find 6-10. but teams do. you got to be in it to win it.

So, you're enjoying "shoot for the moon", "might develop" Knox, over SGA, right now?

Donovan Mitchell another guy who was thought to have a low ceiling. You never know with these guys.

At the range we are picking in, especially in a weak draft, Haliburton seems like a good pick imo. I see the arguments for someone like Hayes though, but even he has his flaws like Haliburton as well.

lot of good points here. This draft is very interesting because you can make a case for nearly anyone and every single prospect has some glaring weaknesses. Depends on what you like and what you think they can become in the NBA.

I would say Mtichell had the athleticism he just had concerns about being a combo guard that shot a pretty low % in college with not so great pg skills. Kinda like where was he gong to fit, but he really thrived with more NBA spacing and his athleticism shined.

I think Haliburton is actually very skilled. He's just lacks that pop and NBA frame that could prevent him reaching a ceiling that some other prospects might get too. And nothing is wrong with that because he can play and he will be a very good pro.

[HarthorneWingo]

look, if you think haliburton could be the guy who surprises that's fine. i won't argue against your opinion. but if you go into it thinking, he definitely won't be special but he'll be solid, why bother ?

Because he's the type of player who will (1) make others better on the court; (2) create better spacing for RJ and Randle with his ability to shoot the 3 from long range; (3) he plays both sides of the court; and (4) he's another high character player on the team. We can't afford to bomb this pick at the craps table.

[mpharris36]

look, if you think haliburton could be the guy who surprises that's fine. i won't argue against your opinion. but if you go into it thinking, he definitely won't be special but he'll be solid, why bother ?

thats fair but most guys do have serious flaws in this draft. I mean just because Cole Anthony might have a some upside over haliburton is that worth taking him when he is a significantly more flawed player than Haliburton?

that is where I would draw the line.

I mean if we are shooting for the stars we should be talking about Poku more around here

[god shammgod]

look, if you think haliburton could be the guy who surprises that's fine. i won't argue against your opinion. but if you go into it thinking, he definitely won't be special but he'll be solid, why bother ?

Because he's the type of player who will (1) make others better on the court; (2) create better spacing for RJ and Randle with his ability to shoot the 3 from long range; (3) he plays both sides of the court; and (4) he's another high character player on the team. We can't afford to bomb this pick at the craps table.

i saw your other post. it's not 1972 anymore. you can stop rocking the plaid bell bottoms now too.

[Deeeez Knicks]

Haliburton can shoot and pass with a high IQ, but he does seem more like a glue/role/secondary playmaker type. He may never be a big scorer or put up big numbers..just doesn't seem like the aggressive or attacking type of G. Can do a little bit of everything, play smart with efficiency.

I still like Haliburton. Worth a pick in our 6 to 10 range imo. Just would temper expectations for anyone we draft in that range. Seems like we are looking at more of a solid starter type, which we could certainly use.

You never know though with ceilings.

Read on Twitter

When I think of adding Haliburton I think of the old (of course!) sports adage that with excellent teams (particularly basketball, imo) "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." That's what the '69-'70 and '72-'73 teams where all about. I still believe that getting skilled players sharing the ball and being in simpatico is how you Win. Moreover, there isn't any "can't miss" player in this draft. Everyone of them has their issue/question marks or hole(s) in their game which will require time and development. Haliburton can hit long-range 3s at a high percentage which will open up the floor more for RJ and, dare I say, Randle (honestly, maybe that's all Julius needs is some other long range shooters to properly space the floor so that he's not spinning into triple teams as much?).

He's that high IQBB player who plays defense and is all about the team. I think maybe a fair comparison is a Malcolm Brogdan with a higher ceiling. Am I being too generous? But even if he became Brogdan-like, is that so bad? I'd say we did pretty damn good.

EDIT: Moreover, I'm not impressed with that clip. All his teammates are just standing there doing nothing. No one comes over to set a screen/pick, no one is cutting to the hoop, and no one is setting a weak-side screen. This is where the coach calls TO, right?

yea, i agree with a lot of that. Brogdon might be a decent comparison. I would love to add a player like that so good with him.

[3toheadmelo]

So, you're enjoying "shoot for the moon", "might develop" Knox, over SGA, right now?

Donovan Mitchell another guy who was thought to have a low ceiling. You never know with these guys.

At the range we are picking in, especially in a weak draft, Haliburton seems like a good pick imo. I see the arguments for someone like Hayes though, but even he has his flaws like Haliburton as well.

lot of good points here. This draft is very interesting because you can make a case for nearly anyone and every single prospect has some glaring weaknesses. Depends on what you like and what you think they can become in the NBA.

I would say Mtichell had the athleticism he just had concerns about being a combo guard that shot a pretty low % in college with not so great pg skills. Kinda like where was he gong to fit, but he really thrived with more NBA spacing and his athleticism shined.

I think Haliburton is actually very skilled. He's just lacks that pop and NBA frame that could prevent him reaching a ceiling that some other prospects might get too. And nothing is wrong with that because he can play and he will be a very good pro.

I think I just read that he wants to put on 10-12 lbs. That should help.

If he ever improves his handle, then he’ll be super good. He checks off all the other boxes that I want in a guard.

Even if he doesn’t end up as a star and ends up as a Lonzo/Brogdon type player then I would still be pretty happy.

[god shammgod]

Donovan Mitchell another guy who was thought to have a low ceiling. You never know with these guys.

At the range we are picking in, especially in a weak draft, Haliburton seems like a good pick imo. I see the arguments for someone like Hayes though, but even he has his flaws like Haliburton as well.

lot of good points here. This draft is very interesting because you can make a case for nearly anyone and every single prospect has some glaring weaknesses. Depends on what you like and what you think they can become in the NBA.

I would say Mtichell had the athleticism he just had concerns about being a combo guard that shot a pretty low % in college with not so great pg skills. Kinda like where was he gong to fit, but he really thrived with more NBA spacing and his athleticism shined.

I think Haliburton is actually very skilled. He's just lacks that pop and NBA frame that could prevent him reaching a ceiling that some other prospects might get too. And nothing is wrong with that because he can play and he will be a very good pro.

I think I just read that he wants to put on 10-12 lbs. That should help.

If he ever improves his handle, then he’ll be super good. He checks off all the other boxes that I want in a guard.

Even if he doesn’t end up as a star and ends up as a Lonzo/Brogdon type player then I would still be pretty happy.

nobody cares about your happiness

[3toheadmelo]

People are limiting themselves then if they want franchise level talent but don't want to consider anything other than a guard. Listen, if that is truly what we want then there is no need to limit ourselves to just a guard in this draft. This means, if we seriously want to aim high for a star, you absolutely have to factor in Wiseman and Obi Toppin into the mix. You can't complain about not having franchise talent then at the same time put a scrub like Deni Avdija over Wiseman and Toppin, it makes no sense. Even Killian Hayes doesn't belong ranked ahead of either of those two.

Facts. That’s why I won’t be mad if the Knicks take Toppin if he’s available. He has more star potential than a lot of the guards in this draft.

[Deeeez Knicks]

look, if you think haliburton could be the guy who surprises that's fine. i won't argue against your opinion. but if you go into it thinking, he definitely won't be special but he'll be solid, why bother ?

That's part of what makes the draft so tough. Even things like upside and ceiling are so hard to tell. Agree 100% in preferring to take upside over a role player. Its just so hard to say which players that is in this draft.

I think the odds are just low on a lot of players being stars after the top 5 in this one...Halliburton may have low odds at being a star. Not sure if many players have significantly better odds though.