Your 2022 NBA Draft Prospect

[mattao313]

I think Mathurin gives you all the skill set Ivey has except maybe as a ball handler and gives you a better mentality, more reliable shooting, and more usefulness off-ball.

That's pretty huge tho playmaking/ball handling is really valuable

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[mattao313]

Please don't get too excited about players stroking 3's during shooting drills...It's much different than a game environment where you can't catch a rhythm shooting shot after shot after shot in a row. I remember watching a similar video of Willie Cauley Stein a few years back with him just stroking shots left and right.

Yeah like nypiston said I also commented on the Sharpe vid. These guys are professional basketball players even the 15th man scrub will look like a god in a open gym

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[Manocad]

Please don't get too excited about players stroking 3's during shooting drills...It's much different than a game environment where you can't catch a rhythm shooting shot after shot after shot in a row. I remember watching a similar video of Willie Cauley Stein a few years back with him just stroking shots left and right.

Yeah like nypiston said I also commented on the Sharpe vid. These guys are professional basketball players even the 15th man scrub will look like a god in a open gym

Yep. Plus it's not like there weren't players who were absolute studs in college in tough leagues who busted out in the NBA. Busts happen; there is no guarantee that any player will live up to his draft position.

All the empty gym videos demonstrate is that a player has the capability of shooting a 3, showing a nice crossover dribble/ballhandling, jumping well above the rim, etc. That's no guarantee they can do it against NBA defenses. Granted, that's obviously better than a guy you need to hit 3's and can't hit them at a good clip in an open gym, but as you said it's not really anything to be excited about.

[Moses ShamMoses]

I really hope we don't draft another project in terms of shooting ability. We haven't had much luck developing shooters after guys get to the pros. Stanley Johnson, Hamidou Diallo, or Killian Hayes (so far) come to mind. You need to be able to shoot, period.

[MotownMadness]

Read on Twitter

His explosive athleticism is awesome

This video shows nothing to be honest. He's attacking the rim against nobody.
It's like the QBs in NFL Pro Day throwing a deep ball to a receiver that is uncovered. Like, great, he can throw a ball far in practice.
Not trying to downplay Ivey or anything but I just get a laugh at these draft "experts" that salivate over these practice videos, Givony in this case.

True but Ive also watched him a bunch during the regular college season so i know he can definitely do that once he gets past you.

[The Moose]

Read on Twitter

well written analysis on Mathurin, highlights a lot of my concerns too

[buzzkilloton]

His explosive athleticism is awesome

True but Ive also watched him a bunch during the regular college season so i know he can definitely do that once he gets past you.

Even here you can see how explosive he is with that first step compared to watching a player like Sharpe who is more of a pure vertical guy who everyone questioned the first step on his workouts.

The thing I wonder about Ivey that doesnt get talked about enough is can he dial it on defense. If he can be a Jrue Holiday type defender which he has the skillset to do. If he gets that going with his downhill ability that right there is a valuable player. Now if he can get the defense and he improves the playmaking+3pt shot gets in that 36%+ range thats a guy that can be a #2 next to Cade.

[Drwho17]

I lean further away from Sharpe with every passing day. Call me crazy but a SG who seems to avoid playing basketball at all costs, can't break down High Schoolers off the dribble and shoots poorly from the line just doesn't scream #5 pick. I am reaaaally hoping that the Kings take him at #4, but I very highly doubt it at this point. I fully expect them to trade down and someone else to take Ivey at #4.

Give me Ivey, Murray, Math, and probably Daniels over him in that order.

Why should he play, at this point I think that would be the worst business decision he could make. None of the top prospects are playing at the combine, they will get a feel for him when the private workouts start. Guy is 6'5" with 7ft wingspan with a 49" Vert, that's almost enough to get him in the lottery alone, yet even though you say he can't break down high schoolers and shoot's poorly, he was the #1 prospect for 2022, and #3 for 2021 based on what scouts had seen from his high school career and AAU.

[Drwho17]

I think you may have unrealistic expectations about the level of talent available at #5 in this draft. Sure, maybe we hit the lottery with a Giannis type, but someone in the range of a Barnes or Grant Williams is a much more realistic outcome at #5. As is someone much worse.

Barnes is currently a less-than-his-stats role player on a bad team who plays poor defense, and Williams is a low-usage three-and-D bench player. Either would be an unambiguously poor return on the fifth pick in any draft.

If you're talking Barnes' complete career arc, the same remains true. He was a distant fifth most important starter on those 2014-2016 rosters and did badly in both postseasons. He went on to score many more points for bad Mavericks rosters that could afford to give him high usage that he didn't deserve, before ultimately being eagerly dumped to the Kings when Dallas began moving toward fielding a viable postseason roster.

What are you expecting from #5? Here is a list, lower your expectations I think. Harrison Barnes would be a good outcome based on the #5 pick in the last 25 drafts.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/5th-nba-overall-draft-picks

[7r5ur]

I lean further away from Sharpe with every passing day. Call me crazy but a SG who seems to avoid playing basketball at all costs, can't break down High Schoolers off the dribble and shoots poorly from the line just doesn't scream #5 pick. I am reaaaally hoping that the Kings take him at #4, but I very highly doubt it at this point. I fully expect them to trade down and someone else to take Ivey at #4.

Give me Ivey, Murray, Math, and probably Daniels over him in that order.

Why should he play, at this point I think that would be the worst business decision he could make. None of the top prospects are playing at the combine, they will get a feel for him when the private workouts start. Guy is 6'5" with 7ft wingspan with a 49" Vert, that's almost enough to get him in the lottery alone, yet even though you say he can't break down high schoolers and shoot's poorly, he was the #1 prospect for 2022, and #3 for 2021 based on what scouts had seen from his high school career and AAU.

I don't know, because he likes basketball and has confidence in his abilities? Maybe he wants to improve his game by playing competitively and not just doing solo drills and hiding from scouts? I get the business decision on not playing now because basically his stock can only go down, but not playing for his college squad is a big red flag to me. Feels like he didn't think he was ready and knew his stock would drop.

Plenty of these guard/wing high school phenoms fizzle out at higher levels. Guys like Emoni Bates who was ranked 3rd in his class and is now projected as a mid-2nd round pick next year.

Measurable are nice and all but this dude has MASSIVE risk written all over him.

[Jsindto]

I think you may have unrealistic expectations about the level of talent available at #5 in this draft. Sure, maybe we hit the lottery with a Giannis type, but someone in the range of a Barnes or Grant Williams is a much more realistic outcome at #5. As is someone much worse.

Barnes is currently a less-than-his-stats role player on a bad team who plays poor defense, and Williams is a low-usage three-and-D bench player. Either would be an unambiguously poor return on the fifth pick in any draft.

If you're talking Barnes' complete career arc, the same remains true. He was a distant fifth most important starter on those 2014-2016 rosters and did badly in both postseasons. He went on to score many more points for bad Mavericks rosters that could afford to give him high usage that he didn't deserve, before ultimately being eagerly dumped to the Kings when Dallas began moving toward fielding a viable postseason roster.

What are you expecting from #5? Here is a list, lower your expectations I think. Harrison Barnes would be a good outcome based on the #5 pick in the last 25 drafts.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/5th-nba-overall-draft-picks

Looking at precisely the #5 pick is kind of a narrow view of what a #5 pick can bring. I agree that looking at guys who blossomed at say pick 15+, but were just overlooked/projects who hit isn't fair, but I'd say if you go back in history you should look at guys in contention at #5. So maybe picks 5-10. I bet there are a lot more hits than if you literally look at pick #5, and only pick #5.

[NYPiston]

True but Ive also watched him a bunch during the regular college season so i know he can definitely do that once he gets past you.

Oh, no doubt. I just don't think his Pro Day would have made a difference in terms of that evaluation, we already knew that was his strength.

Things like shooting from deep against live competition, developing a mid range game and basketball IQ which are his weaknesses aren't going to displayed in a scrimmage. Regardless, the videos are fun to watch just to give something to talk about in a few week down period.

[Jsindto]

I lean further away from Sharpe with every passing day. Call me crazy but a SG who seems to avoid playing basketball at all costs, can't break down High Schoolers off the dribble and shoots poorly from the line just doesn't scream #5 pick. I am reaaaally hoping that the Kings take him at #4, but I very highly doubt it at this point. I fully expect them to trade down and someone else to take Ivey at #4.

Give me Ivey, Murray, Math, and probably Daniels over him in that order.

Why should he play, at this point I think that would be the worst business decision he could make. None of the top prospects are playing at the combine, they will get a feel for him when the private workouts start. Guy is 6'5" with 7ft wingspan with a 49" Vert, that's almost enough to get him in the lottery alone, yet even though you say he can't break down high schoolers and shoot's poorly, he was the #1 prospect for 2022, and #3 for 2021 based on what scouts had seen from his high school career and AAU.

I don't know, because he likes basketball and has confidence in his abilities? Maybe he wants to improve his game by playing competitively and not just doing solo drills and hiding from scouts? I get the business decision on not playing now because basically his stock can only go down, but not playing for his college squad is a big red flag to me. Feels like he didn't think he was ready and knew his stock would drop.

Plenty of these guard/wing high school phenoms fizzle out at higher levels. Guys like Emoni Bates who was ranked 3rd in his class and is now projected as a mid-2nd round pick next year.

Measurable are nice and all but this dude has MASSIVE risk written all over him.

I will say that many people didn't realize Emoni's lack of athleticism until he got to Memphis. Memphis had a pro day last October in the pre-season, and he had a 24.5 inch standing vertical, 31.5 inch max vertical. Now, his vertical certainly would be better now after more college physical development and specifically training for a vertical like Sharpe had at UK and did in the pre-draft, but he probably is like an upper 20s standing and mid 30s max type of athlete. So Emoni busting is a very large product of him not being the physical player people thought in HS.

That's not to say Sharpe will be awesome because of his HS rankings, but more so to say that Bates' failure isn't a fair comparison. Because he was just massively misidentified athletically.

[NYPiston]

Read on Twitter

well written analysis on Mathurin, highlights a lot of my concerns too

But it also highlights why he's quite possibly the best fit outside of the top 3 alongside a premier creator like Cade. Things like "Shot making off of movement" "effective cutter and off the ball mover" "will not demand the ball to be most effective" (which is part of the reason why I struggle with Ivey as a fit) and finally, what I mentioned about Mathurin early today which this article now touches on "became a more willing passer, throwing those one handed passes with velocity".

All of this screams ideal fit alongside a premier creator like Cade, an ideal complimentary player. Now, this also reads like a player who will likely never be a primary option on a team but the Pistons don't really need a guy who demands to be a #1 option although it can't hurt to have two of those guys.
Cade is an interesting player in terms of being the type of guy that can blend in with just about anybody because he does everything well. He can score and facilitate at an equally high level, that's a rare type of player to find, so any of these guys could fit but I do think Mathurin provides the best fit because I feel Cade's potential will be maximized as being the guy everything runs through. Mathurin would feed off of that really well IMO.

[mattao313]

Read on Twitter

well written analysis on Mathurin, highlights a lot of my concerns too

But it also highlights why he's quite possibly the best fit outside of the top 3 alongside a premier creator like Cade. Things like "Shot making off of movement" "effective cutter and off the ball mover" "will not demand the ball to be most effective" (which is part of the reason why I struggle with Ivey as a fit) and finally, what I mentioned about Mathurin early today which this article now touches on "became a more willing passer, throwing those one handed passes with velocity".

All of this screams ideal fit alongside a premier creator like Cade, an ideal complimentary player. Now, this also reads like a player who will likely never be a primary option on a team but the Pistons don't really need a guy who demands to be a #1 option although it can't hurt to have two of those guys.
Cade is an interesting player in terms of being the type of guy that can blend in with just about anybody because he does everything well. He can score and facilitate at an equally high level, that's a rare type of player to find, so any of these guys could fit but I do think Mathurin provides the best fit because I feel Cade's potential will be maximized as being the guy everything runs through. Mathurin would feed off of that really well IMO.

Every good team needs 2+ high usage playmakers that's way more valuable than movement shooting and off ball play.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[NYPiston]

Every good team needs 2+ high usage playmakers that's way more valuable than movement shooting and off ball play.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

I don't disagree but there are none of those in this draft outside of Banchero and Daniels I guess (Sharpe? Who the hell knows with him)? so taking that into account, I'm not sure who is a better fit than Mathurin in this 2nd tier with all else being fairly equal.

[mattao313]

Every good team needs 2+ high usage playmakers that's way more valuable than movement shooting and off ball play.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

I don't disagree but there are none of those in this draft outside of Banchero and Daniels I guess? so taking that into account, I'm not sure who is a better fit than Mathurin in this 2nd tier with all else being fairly equal.

Ivey is definitely a playmaker. He'll generate looks off his penetration alone.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[NYPiston]

Ivey is definitely a playmaker. He'll generate looks off his penetration alone.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Actually, Ivey isn't much of a playmaker. He flashes it but it's highly inconsistent. Yes, he'll whip some passes to the perimeter at times when he draws in the defense but one of the biggest issues with him is tunnel vision and getting to dead spots on the floor (no mans' land) because he doesn't know when to stop where he's caught between taking a bad shot or making a bad pass, seen it happen way too many times with him. For this reason, I don't see him being a lead playmaker or even a high level secondary playmaker without significant improvements in decision making.

He's an extremely high level slasher that gets to the rim with high frequency and is almost impossible to stop in transition but has major holes in just about every other aspect of his offensive game especially when the game slows down. The upside is enticing because of his elite of the elite athleticism and "dog" mentality but his overall game needs a lot of work if he wants to reach that high ceiling. I'm fine with taking a swing on him if he's there at 5 because the upside is star potential but I question the fit and the likeliness of reaching that potential.

I'd argue that Hayes is a better playmaker actually (a better passer at least) if you want a better playmaker alongside Cade, it's just that Hayes can't create his own shot or get to the rim.

[mattao313]

Ivey is definitely a playmaker. He'll generate looks off his penetration alone.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

Actually, Ivey isn't much of a playmaker. He flashes it but it's highly inconsistent. Yes, he'll whip some passes to the perimeter at times when he draws in the defense but one of the biggest issues with him is tunnel vision and getting to dead spots on the floor (no mans' land) because he doesn't know when to stop where he's caught between taking a bad shot or making a bad pass, seen it happen way too many times with him. For this reason, I don't see him being a lead playmaker or even a high level secondary playmaker without significant improvements in decision making.

He's an extremely high level slasher that gets to the rim with high frequency and is almost impossible to stop in transition but has major holes in just about every other aspect of his offensive game especially when the game slows down. The upside is enticing because of his elite of the elite athleticism and "dog" mentality but his overall game needs a lot of work if he wants to reach that high ceiling. I'm fine with taking a swing on him if he's there at 5 because the upside is star potential but I question the fit and the likeliness of reaching that potential.

I'd argue that Hayes is a better playmaker actually (a better passer at least) if you want a better playmaker alongside Cade, it's just that Hayes can't create his own shot or get to the rim.

Hayes is a good passer but is not a playmaker. You can give Ivey the ball and he can make something out of nothing Hayes has no ability to do that. I don't see Mathurin being that guy either that's what I mean as a play maker being able to create opportunities whether it's scoring on his own or getting a teammate a good look. But I guess we'll disagree I can definitely see Ivey being able to become a combo guard type of facilitator that can get you 5 or 6 assist like fox, brunson, Reggie Jackson. Mathurin reminds me of KCP who was a underrated passer but can't playmake.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

[Jsindto]

Every good team needs 2+ high usage playmakers that's way more valuable than movement shooting and off ball play.

Sent from my 5087Z using RealGM mobile app

I don't disagree but there are none of those in this draft outside of Banchero and Daniels I guess (Sharpe? Who the hell knows with him)? so taking that into account, I'm not sure who is a better fit than Mathurin in this 2nd tier with all else being fairly equal.

From the (obviously) very limited scouting you can watch, seems like Sharpe isn't expected to be a high usage playmaker. There are expectations that he'll do a fine job of getting the ball to the open man, and isn't flustered when pressured, but that was all at the 3 point line from what I saw. Not a lot of driving to the paint and making something happen for other players.

That's why I like Daniels, but you'd have to be willing to say that Hayes isn't going to work out here. Which may be tough for some (many?).