re: SI’s latest mock, based on rumors and buzz, has Shaedon Sharpe falling to us at 8.

I'll say this.

I'm not really high on Sharpe b/c there's so much unknown with him, just like with Garland even though we at least got to see him play 5 games against crappy college opponents.

Bronc was all about drafting Garland that year, and I was pretty adamant about not drafting him b/c of the unknown.



I'm still very wary about drafting a guy basically straight out of high school. I think a lot of the negatives you hear about him are similar to the negatives heard about Anthony Edwards.
The negative i see with him is that he obviously can jump out the gym, but he really doesn't appear to be that quick with the ball. His handle is ok, but i think he's going to struggle big time getting around defenders in the nba. Now he can without a doubt work through that and become effective, but he's going to be a work in progress. He talks about molding his game around Booker and Beal, and you can definitely see that, and neither of those guys are ultra quick either but they are quick enough, strong enough, and smart enough to get whatever shot they want.


one of those videos pointed out how he improved in high school, trying harder on defense and off the ball, and working on his handle, so as long as he interviews well and we see a guy that is going to obsess over getting better, then i'd gladly take him at 8. He'll have a great mentor in BI for that, although it's still up to Sharpe if he wants to take advantage of that b/c we've already seen one high potential guy in Hayes not care enough about improving his game.


I'm not moving up to draft him though.
I'd move up for Ivey, that's it.
At 8, it should be Dyson Daniels or Sharpe, as i think we are in a good position for either of those guys to develop their game at, and one of them should be there when we pick, and if they aren't, then i'm all for trading back.
I honestly don't see the big difference between Mathurin and Branham. Yeah Mathurin is more athletic, but Branham efficiency as a scorer was elite. There's only 27 guards since 1992 that have shot 49% or better on 10+ shots per game. and at his worst, he's an elite 3 point shooter. If i can get an extra asset to take Branham later in the draft instead of Mathurin at #8, then i'd do it in a heartbeat.

What the FO got wrong with Garland was they chose a high ceiling big over a high ceiling guard. If they were going to swing for the fences they should have done it with the high ceiling guard in this era of the NBA.

If they pass on Sharpe but hit on a role playing starter quality wing/guard, I think that's a much better alternative to take a bet on than a high ceiling big. Now if they miss on that guard/wing and Sharpe becomes a good starter or better, they'll have blown it. That's why I'm not in favor of trading down. Just take the guy you believe in that you think fits that Willie will develop and play.

quote:

---

I'll say this.

I'm not really high on Sharpe b/c there's so much unknown with him, just like with Garland even though we at least got to see him play 5 games against crappy college opponents.

Bronc was all about drafting Garland that year, and I was pretty adamant about not drafting him b/c of the unknown.

---

I do want to make clear though, I have a much, much higher level of skepticism on Sharpe translating to the next level at a high level than I did Garland.

Though I do think Sharpe's ceiling is greater. I think lacking any of that college tape, no matter how small, does hurt in terms of seeing his approach and skills in a non AAU setting.

My reasoning on Sharpe in large part comes down to, if he falls, why not take a shot on a guy that has best-in-class upside when we are in a position of luxury and Sharpe also happens to fit a position of need and long-term importance with CJ's age?

We should be greedy as a franchise right now, we are at a point I can't remember us being in, well, ever. Which is having a strong, deep, and balanced roster, with the strongest culture I can remember, rivaling even the West/CP3 golden years, where we can take on a project like Sharpe and mold him into the culture and the role we need over the next few seasons and hopefully be our Simons.

quote:

---

What the FO got wrong with Garland was they chose a high ceiling big over a high ceiling guard. If they were going to swing for the fences they should have done it with the high ceiling guard in this era of the NBA.

---

100% there. the hit rate for a project big in the lottery is extremely low, and even if they do hit, they have to be able to guard the perimeter adequately enough to stay on the court or they are worthless come playoff time, unless they are such a force offensively, and if they were, then they probably would have gone #1.




i think you can go back and look at that draft and which guys have had success and see a clear point. The only superstars are Zion/Morant. Garland/Herro are the next closest thing, and Barrett is coming around, but that's 4 of the top 5 picks.
Hunter shot 44% from 3 in college, and when he's healthy, he's a good player.
Culver couldn't shoot in college and sucks in the NBA.
Cam Reddish, while his shot looks good, didn't shoot well in college and has been underwhelming in the NBA.
Cam Johnson and PJ Washinton shot over 40% from 3 in college, and both are nice role players.
Herro shot 36% in college (93% from the FT line), and has turned out really well.
Romeo Langford went 1 pick after Herro, shot 27% from 3 in college, and has done nothing in the NBA.
Doumbouya shot 32% in France, and sucks in the NBA.
Okeke shot well in college 39% in two years, but has struggled in the NBA
NAW has been the same way, shooting 38% in 2 years of college but not so well in the NBA.


whats the point i'm making? Draft a proven shooter if you aren't taking someone in the top 4. You're playing with fire with someone like Johnny Davis or Tyty. I want nothing to do with Ousmane Dieng and his terrible 3P and FT shooting. Jalen Williams is intriguing. A guy like Sochan shouldn't be going in the top 10, but i do see more potential with him as opposed to someone like Brandon Clark or Rui or Grant Williams, but i think you've seen that all 3 of those guys, while they may be good role players, took some time to develop and still are just to be a good role player.

Yeah except he was reluctant to workout with the team and only did a few times.

He was not consistently working out and doing 5 on 5s at Kentucky.

8-18?

That’s not a bad thing. It’s to be expected. We all know he’s a work in progress with his 3 point shot. If he shot poorly for both Indiana and Portland, it just makes it a possibility that both teams to pass on him and he makes it to 8.

I’m at the point where I want Sochan, or Daniels. Starting to get off of the Sharpe train.

quote:

---

8-18?

---

Against no one.