Dyson Daniels - 2022 NBA Draft Prospect

[timvp]

Complete Dyson Daniels scouting report and Spurs outlook (https://www.spurstalk.com/dyson-daniels-scouting-report-strengths-weaknesses-san-antonio-spurs/)


https://i.imgur.com/OjG1JCW.jpg
Dyson Daniels
Age: 19.3
Country: Australia via G League
Height w/ Shoes: 6-foot-7.5
Height w/o Shoes: 6-foot-6
Wingspan: 6-foot-10.5
Position: SF/SG/PG

Strengths
+Perimeter defense
+Passing
+Basketball IQ

Weaknesses
-Shooting
-Scoring volume
-Remaining upside

Complete Dyson Daniels scouting report and Spurs outlook (https://www.spurstalk.com/dyson-daniels-scouting-report-strengths-weaknesses-san-antonio-spurs/)

[duncan2150]

i love this player. Big defense, good playmaker, really nice touch offensively... needs to work on his shoot tough...


He's on my final list for the pick 9

[DesignatedT]

A low three ball percentage is one thing but 52% from the free throw line as a guard? Ouch.

[KingKev]

He absolutely screams San Antonio. A Derrick White / Kyle Anderson hybrid? HARD PASS at 9.

[Dejounte]

Brandon Roy-esque tbh. Would be a great pick.

[PhantomDashCam]

A low three ball percentage is one thing but 52% from the free throw line as a guard? Ouch.

One thing to be known about the low FT% is that the G-League has a "One for Two" policy to speed up games, meaning you only get one free throw which is worth two points if made (Except the final two minutes of a game).
Daniels still has to work on shooting but he did shoot 63% in U-19 International competition (again, not great), however, I do think he's improved since then.

[BatManu20]

Been calling him as our pick for like a month now. Could easily see him going 6 or 7 though. Good young player that I’m sure the Spurs would love to get their hands on. Definitely has some things he needs to work on (particularly his 3-pt shooting), but he’s got a solid future in the league as a two-way, playmaking point-forward imo.

[slick'81]

Another d white? No thanks

[Chinook]

I think you have to pick whether you use in-shoes or barefoot height and then stick with it. You can't list Primo as 6-4 and Daniels at 6-7.5.

Anyway, Daniels' value to me would solely be in his ability to defend guys like Morant and Young. The NBA doesn't have dominant scoring wings right now. The value of defending 6-6 guys isn't there. Might it be there in a few years as guys like Edwards, Green and Suggs grow up? I guess. But the issue right now is that they have a number of team defenders who can't hold up at the point of attack against the current guys dominating the league. Being able to defend your position is nice in terms of win-later value. But in terms of win-now value for the Spurs, they have too many holes.

[Robz4000]

How large is his forehead?

[Dejounte]

I think you have to pick whether you use in-shoes or barefoot height and then stick with it. You can't list Primo as 6-4 and Daniels at 6-7.5.

Anyway, Daniels' value to me would solely be in his ability to defend guys like Morant and Young. The NBA doesn't have dominant scoring wings right now. The value of defending 6-6 guys isn't there. Might it be there in a few years as guys like Edwards, Green and Suggs grow up? I guess. But the issue right now is that they have a number of team defenders who can't hold up at the point of attack against the current guys dominating the league. Being able to defend your position is nice in terms of win-later value. But in terms of win-now value for the Spurs, they have too many holes.

One of the best strengths pointed out by scouts on Dyson is that he’s one of the best point of attack defenders (along with Eason, I think) in the draft. White left a hole in that area. Vassell is more of a team defender than an individual one. Murray is one (if we separate POA defenders into two categories: field goal defender and ball handler attacker). Murray is the only one. Would help our defense immensely to have another. Or two.

[Russ]

If you want to profile G League guys, timvp, you might consider Jaden Hardy, a fallen angel with perhaps a bit more potential.

[The Truth #6]

So there are two players I’m comparing in my mind.

Both are multi-positional defenders. Both are hard workers. Both have solid BBIQ. Both are good passers. Both have significant issues with shooting.

One is about 6’10”, a good athlete, and plays a position of need, power forward.
The other is about 6’7”, a poor athlete, and likely plays the two guard, where, admittedly, we have a logjam of players.

One is Sochan. The other is Dyson. Why would I prefer Dyson?

I know, I’m generalizing and over simplifying their differences, but Sochan seems like the obvious pick over Dyson to me.

[duncan2150]

Daniels is a good athlet too, more of a lateral athlet than vertical.

But you're right Sochan is more a need at the position, i would'nt mind Daniels tough. They both are really good defender but daniels is more polished offensively actually imo, he has a lot of nice floaters, touch near the basket. He can score from 4-5 ft naturally.

Overall i still go with Sochan over the two.

[lmbebo]

Meh ...

Would still need someone to create and put the ball in the hole.

[The Truth #6]

Daniels is a good athlet too, more of a lateral athlet than vertical.

But you're right Sochan is more a need at the position, i would'nt mind Daniels tough. They both are really good defender but Daniels is more polished offensively actually imo, he has a lot of nice floaters, touch near the basket. He can score from 4-5 ft naturally.

Overall i still go with Sochan over the two.

Solid points. I was happily surprised to see Daniels' combine stats to be better than thought. But I suppose they need to be utilized in game; his quick feet seem to help on defense but maybe no on offense as much? But you're right about his floater shot...maybe he leans on that because he doesn't have the vertical to finish at the rim. So I guess I'd be ok with Daniels at 9, but they'd have to get rid of Walker for sure if they go this route, or with any backcourt player at 9.

[The Truth #6]

Meh ...

Would still need someone to create and put the ball in the hole.

I agree in that I think that is our biggest need. But who would be available at 9? That's why I've come back to Johnny Davis: solid defender with experience being a 1-1 scoring option. If Hardy slips to 20 I'd want to consider him there if we go with a defender at 9. I guess the other options are Wesley, Dieng, maybe a few others, but mostly very young, inexperienced players with risk.

[TD 21]

One of the best strengths pointed out by scouts on Dyson is that he’s one of the best point of attack defenders (along with Eason, I think) in the draft. White left a hole in that area. Vassell is more of a team defender than an individual one. Murray is one (if we separate POA defenders into two categories: field goal defender and ball handler attacker). Murray is the only one. Would help our defense immensely to have another. Or two.

Agreed, but if they can't shoot then it's all for naught.

He's exactly what this team doesn't need. Another choir boy combo guard/wing who not only can't shoot, but also isn't dynamic/explosive enough to be a primary option on ball.

[duncan2150]

Agreed, but if they can't shoot then it's all for naught.

He's exactly what this team doesn't need. Another choir boy combo guard/wing who not only can't shoot, but also isn't dynamic/explosive enough to be a primary option on ball.

Not agree with that as i really think the Spurs must need is Defense. I understand the point about the shooting, if he can't hit them it will be difficult because i think he is not an off the ball player.

Like i said i have other players before him in my list but if you want D, playmaking plus some offensive ability inside the arc he's a good choice.

[John B]

I’m not a fan at 9th pick. Spurs need a go-to scorer, and if they are not trading for one, they need to address on this draft before anything else. Dyson is not.

[duncan2150]

I’m not a fan at 9th pick. Spurs need a go-to scorer, and if they are not trading for one, they need to address on this draft before anything else. Dyson is not.

You'll take a go to scorer who is not a good defender ? we focus a lot on scoring and it's legit but last year the spurs problem were on D mostly.

[John B]

You'll take a go to scorer who is not a good defender ? we focus a lot on scoring and it's legit but last year the spurs problem were on D mostly.

Of course we’re not talking Forbes/Beli category :lol:lol. And lack of D at PF is the suspect imo. I agree athletic guards do tend to rout the Spurs, but again it’s the hole at PF position and Jak tend to over help is the problem. And yes, I think the Spurs were there many times at the end, but found themselves short because they don’t have a go-to guy to finish.

[rjv]

not that either is ideal but at this point and time i'd prefer to see the spurs go with a player that is already solid on the offensive side of the ball but has questions about his defense than the other way around.

[duncan2150]

Of course we’re not talking Forbes/Beli category :lol:lol. And lack of D at PF is the suspect imo. I agree athletic guards do tend to rout the Spurs, but again it’s the hole at PF position and Jak tend to over help is the problem. And yes, I think the Spurs were there many times at the end, but found themselves short because they don’t have a go-to guy to finish.

I hope so for Beli and Forbes lol

I agree that the hole is at the PF position. The thing at 9 imo except Davis who also has some flaws, i don't see a player who has a high floor offensively and defensively.

[John B]

I hope so for Beli and Forbes lol

I agree that the hole is at the PF position. The thing at 9 imo except Davis who also has some flaws, i don't see a player who has a high floor offensively and defensively.

Now Davis who can score and assist a bunch, and one of the best point-of-attack defensive guards in this draft, I don’t have a problem with.

I just don’t see Dyson as the #1 priority at 9th.

[TD 21]

Not agree with that as i really think the Spurs must need is Defense. I understand the point about the shooting, if he can't hit them it will be difficult because i think he is not an off the ball player.

Like i said i have other players before him in my list but if you want D, playmaking plus some offensive ability inside the arc he's a good choice.

Nah, they need two-way players. When you're constantly having to choose one at the expense of the other, you end up with the jumbled mess that is the Spurs of the past half decade.

Also, in the playoffs, players who are either liabilities when it comes to floor spacing (minus vertical spacers) or defense can't play more than a marginal role, unless they provide superstar or star level offensive impact.

[exstatic]

not that either is ideal but at this point and time i'd prefer to see the spurs go with a player that is already solid on the offensive side of the ball but has questions about his defense than the other way around.

That’s exactly the opposite of what you should do. It’s FAR easier getting a defensive player interested and coached up on offense than an offensive oriented player interested and coached up on D.

[rjv]

That’s exactly the opposite of what you should do. It’s FAR easier getting a defensive player interested and coached up on offense than an offensive oriented player interested and coached up on D.

i should have been more specific. i was describing someone with limitations on the defensive end, physical limitations, as opposed to a player who just refuses to try and become a two-way player.

[The Truth #6]

Nah, they need two-way players. When you're constantly having to choose one at the expense of the other, you end up with the jumbled mess that is the Spurs of the past half decade.

Also, in the playoffs, players who are either liabilities when it comes to floor spacing (minus vertical spacers) or defense can't play more than a marginal role, unless they provide superstar or star level offensive impact.

I agree with needing two way players. It's been a bad transition from Marco to Forbes to back to Marco again and now McDermott. As for two way players for the 9th pick, who are you seeing, at any position? For me it's, I guess, Johnny Davis and Jalen Williams. Maybe Dyson Daniels if you talk yourself into his floater being a legit offensive skill. Osmane Dieng possibly but he needs to grow more to be effective with that skinny ass frame.

[rascal]

I agree with needing two way players. It's been a bad transition from Marco to Forbes to back to Marco again and now McDermott. As for two way players for the 9th pick, who are you seeing, at any position? For me it's, I guess, Johnny Davis and Jalen Williams. Maybe Dyson Daniels if you talk yourself into his floater being a legit offensive skill. Osmane Dieng possibly but he needs to grow more to be effective with that skinny ass frame.

Ogbaji is a good two way player. Would be a nice target with a trade with Charlotte.

[TD 21]

I agree with needing two way players. It's been a bad transition from Marco to Forbes to back to Marco again and now McDermott. As for two way players for the 9th pick, who are you seeing, at any position? For me it's, I guess, Johnny Davis and Jalen Williams. Maybe Dyson Daniels if you talk yourself into his floater being a legit offensive skill. Osmane Dieng possibly but he needs to grow more to be effective with that skinny ass frame.

Williams is the only one who might be a two-way player. Davis, Daniels and Dieng can't shoot and like many will have an uphill climb to be able to do so.

Though not known for their defense, Griffin and Mathurin have the physical tools (if the former regains some athleticism/mobility) to be two-way players. Agbaji is already considered as such. Branham is another possibility.

[duncan2150]

Nah, they need two-way players. When you're constantly having to choose one at the expense of the other, you end up with the jumbled mess that is the Spurs of the past half decade.

Also, in the playoffs, players who are either liabilities when it comes to floor spacing (minus vertical spacers) or defense can't play more than a marginal role, unless they provide superstar or star level offensive impact.

Yes and I don't see this two way player at 9 except maybe davis. That's why i made the statement about defense first.

[Ariel]

Williams is the only one who might be a two-way player. Davis, Daniels and Dieng can't shoot and like many will have an uphill climb to be able to do so.
Johnny Davis is a legit 2 way player. He CAN shoot, he just needs better looks, which will come once he's not the focal point of the offense, and to add a little range. But otherwise he'll be fine.

[CGD]

This is going to be the guy whether I like it or not, lol

[Degoat]

Would people say he’s a smaller Ben Simmons? Lol hate to bring that name up but seems to have a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses

[Chomag]

Another guard and this is one that cant shoot ? Nah Hard pass fellas .

[mystargtr34]

Pretty funny how Australia has produced 3 similar type lottery picks in the last 6 years (Simmons, Giddey, Daniels). Three jumbo sized playmakers who can’t shoot. Although Simmons is in a category all on his own there.

[SAGirl]

I think you have to pick whether you use in-shoes or barefoot height and then stick with it. You can't list Primo as 6-4 and Daniels at 6-7.5.

Anyway, Daniels' value to me would solely be in his ability to defend guys like Morant and Young. The NBA doesn't have dominant scoring wings right now. The value of defending 6-6 guys isn't there. Might it be there in a few years as guys like Edwards, Green and Suggs grow up? I guess. But the issue right now is that they have a number of team defenders who can't hold up at the point of attack against the current guys dominating the league. Being able to defend your position is nice in terms of win-later value. But in terms of win-now value for the Spurs, they have too many holes.
What do you consider Boston stars Tatum and Brown, and in the West, Doncic? Add Jimmy Butler there too.

I actually had forgotten about Edwards bc he's so young and I don't watch the Wolves but he's already looking like their best offensive player and is only 20. He's going to be problematic in future years.

[TD 21]

Yes and I don't see this two way player at 9 except maybe davis. That's why i made the statement about defense first.

Mathurin and Griffin (if he regains some athleticism/mobility) at least have the physical tools to be two-way players.



Johnny Davis is a legit 2 way player. He CAN shoot, he just needs better looks, which will come once he's not the focal point of the offense, and to add a little range. But otherwise he'll be fine.

Maybe, but that's speculative. At this writing, he's yet to prove he can shoot.

I also don't know how much better his looks would be on a team where Murray and Jones are the only creators.

[rascal]

That’s exactly the opposite of what you should do. It’s FAR easier getting a defensive player interested and coached up on offense than an offensive oriented player interested and coached up on D.

Disagree The top draft picks are the players with high offensive potential and especially bigs with offensive potential.

The best defensive players are not as high in demand because you can't teach God given athleticism/ quickness/ jumping ability which the high offensive guys have.

[dubross]

https://twitter.com/draftexpress/status/1528133530932346881?s=21&t=hdLBvBzaSLdKSResnJf5PA

[C-Dub]

YouTube the Ignite vs Austin Spurs G-league game from this past season. Primo made Dyson Daniels and Hardy look like high schoolers. Primo used Dyson throughout the game. Primo looked like he was another level when he played against them. Nice put back dunk as well. Primo is way better than both. Spurs won the game by a landslide.

[RC_Drunkford]

https://twitter.com/draftexpress/status/1528133530932346881?s=21&t=hdLBvBzaSLdKSResnJf5PA

I hope somebody is dumb enough to draft him in the top 5 :lol

[tonight...you]

YouTube the Ignite vs Austin Spurs G-league game from this past season. Primo made Dyson Daniels and Hardy look like high schoolers. Primo used Dyson throughout the game. Primo looked like he was another level when he played against them. Nice put back dunk as well. Primo is way better than both. Spurs won the game by a landslide.
Interesting.

[BatManu20]

I said a few days ago that I think Dyson eventually goes before 9. Same with Mathurin. That’d push AJ Griffin right into our laps. Just what our fan base wants tbh.

[Mr. Body]

YouTube the Ignite vs Austin Spurs G-league game from this past season. Primo made Dyson Daniels and Hardy look like high schoolers. Primo used Dyson throughout the game. Primo looked like he was another level when he played against them. Nice put back dunk as well. Primo is way better than both. Spurs won the game by a landslide.

Yeah but because Primo was reworking his shot and trying to learn the sets late in the year, he's the worst player ever.

[Mr. Body]

I said a few days ago that I think Dyson eventually goes before 9. Same with Mathurin. That’d push AJ Griffin right into our laps. Just what our fan base wants tbh.

It's the reason why I think Keegan Murray could and possibly will drop.

[PhantomDashCam]

1528141229489377288

I maintain he’s a better overall prospect than Josh Giddey was last year.
If N.O believes in his shot, you can run him next to CJ without an issue.

CJ, Daniels, Ingram, Jones, Val…. If I’m N.O, you could shake this draft up completely by dangling Zion to Houston for some combination of assets including #3…Jabari Smith would be the perfect fit for that team.

[CGD]

YouTube the Ignite vs Austin Spurs G-league game from this past season. Primo made Dyson Daniels and Hardy look like high schoolers. Primo used Dyson throughout the game. Primo looked like he was another level when he played against them. Nice put back dunk as well. Primo is way better than both. Spurs won the game by a landslide.

Interesting. The whole theory of Josh is that he’s supposed to be a playmaking guard with lots of upside, so in someways it would make the Dyson pick redundant, no? Could see it tilting in the favor of a Sochan at 9 (which still feels like a reach to me) to get that size at the 3/4, or a Johnny Davis who can be a “gets his own shot” type from the wing.

[Mr. Body]

As a note, Josh Primo is actually younger than Dyson Daniels.

[CGD]

For a reminder of how not to get too up or down about these video packages heading into the draft or the players themselves, here is a Primo interview from last year.

For those putting Primo in the trash bin already, the kid presented impressively with high bbiq. He needs time but is gonna be solid.

https://youtu.be/V3UrRwP13Kk

[KingKev]

For a reminder of how not to get too up or down about these video packages heading into the draft or the players themselves, here is a Primo interview from last year.

For those putting Primo in the trash bin already, the kid presented impressively with high bbiq. He needs time but is gonna be solid.

https://youtu.be/V3UrRwP13Kk


Schmitz is a clown.

[CGD]

Maybe, but he must be credible enough to get access to all these guys…

But to me that’s less important than how Josh presented in the interview. Was impressed by how an 18 year old explained reads and had that level assertiveness and confidence in his play. Not saying he doesn’t have a way to go, but to me helps put these more recent interviews in Perspective.

[Ariel]

It's the reason why I think Keegan Murray could and possibly will drop.
It's possible, but not likely IMO for a few reasons:
1) Indiana @ 6 looks like a natural fit, he fits their roster and culture and he's the kind of sound, ready now, high floor pick that appeals to Carlisle.
2) Portland @ 7 is also a natural fit, they seem invested in making the most of Lillards remaining prime (foolish, IMO). If they can't work a trade for Jerami Grant or some other athletic forward, he's their likely choice.
3) NO @ 8 might also be an alternative. I know it wouldn't seem like an option at first glance, but considering everything they're going through with Zion, that relationship might be nearing its final chapter.
First of all there's his incredibly worrisome growing injury history, which can only worsen with time, given his equally concerning weight and conditioning issues. Lets also keep in mind that at times he seemed alienated, failing to so much as text CJ McCollum when he joined the Pelicans, being described as a "detached teammate" (by former teammate JJ Redick), and being omitted from promotional actions such as emails for season ticket renewals.
If we put all of this together, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to have a backup plan in case things go sour (if they haven't already), in which case Keegan Murray would seem like a perfect replacement, sound, 2 way, versatile, plug & play forward who will instantly fill in his shoes seamlessly and make sure they don't skip a beat, while putting pressure on Zion to cut the nonsense, and either he complies and gets back on track, or he can be shopped around for assets.

With all of this in mind, I'm thinking chances Keegan Murray fall to no. 9 are slim at best. Not impossible, though.

[CGD]

^ the other player is Houston. I can see a world where POR-DET get something done for 7 and Grant, and then DET trades 5 + 7 for 3 if Banchero is their guy.

Then you can see Houston going Murray at 5 to bear out Indy, and then reaching on a Duren at 7 to shore up their front court of the future. They then dump their two head cases for value.

[Mr. Body]

Fair points of course. Givony suggests Dyson is getting top 5 buzz. I don't think he'll go that high, but can see him up pretty high.

Like if Sacramento takes him instead of Ivey, I can see Pacers taking home state guy Ivey.

I can see Portland taking a flashy scoring pick in Mathurin.

I can see teams dislike Murray's age and let him pass.

[mo7888]

It's possible, but not likely IMO for a few reasons:
1) Indiana @ 6 looks like a natural fit, he fits their roster and culture and he's the kind of sound, ready now, high floor pick that appeals to Carlisle.
2) Portland @ 7 is also a natural fit, they seem invested in making the most of Lillards remaining prime (foolish, IMO). If they can't work a trade for Jerami Grant or some other athletic forward, he's their likely choice.
3) NO @ 8 might also be an alternative. I know it wouldn't seem like an option at first glance, but considering everything they're going through with Zion, that relationship might be nearing its final chapter.
First of all there's his incredibly worrisome growing injury history, which can only worsen with time, given his equally concerning weight and conditioning issues. Lets also keep in mind that at times he seemed alienated, failing to so much as text CJ McCollum when he joined the Pelicans, being described as a "detached teammate" (by former teammate JJ Redick), and being omitted from promotional actions such as emails for season ticket renewals.
If we put all of this together, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to have a backup plan in case things go sour (if they haven't already), in which case Keegan Murray would seem like a perfect replacement, sound, 2 way, versatile, plug & play forward who will instantly fill in his shoes seamlessly and make sure they don't skip a beat, while putting pressure on Zion to cut the nonsense, and either he complies and gets back on track, or he can be shopped around for assets.

With all of this in mind, I'm thinking chances Keegan Murray fall to no. 9 are slim at best. Not impossible, though.

I think Indiana is a real threat to take Murray and I wouldn't discount Sacramento either... I really expect Portland to trade #7 to get a more nba ready player to pair with Dame....that new team is a wildcard since we don't know who may try to move up...it could even be us...

[DPG21920]

It's possible, but not likely IMO for a few reasons:
1) Indiana @ 6 looks like a natural fit, he fits their roster and culture and he's the kind of sound, ready now, high floor pick that appeals to Carlisle.
2) Portland @ 7 is also a natural fit, they seem invested in making the most of Lillards remaining prime (foolish, IMO). If they can't work a trade for Jerami Grant or some other athletic forward, he's their likely choice.
3) NO @ 8 might also be an alternative. I know it wouldn't seem like an option at first glance, but considering everything they're going through with Zion, that relationship might be nearing its final chapter.
First of all there's his incredibly worrisome growing injury history, which can only worsen with time, given his equally concerning weight and conditioning issues. Lets also keep in mind that at times he seemed alienated, failing to so much as text CJ McCollum when he joined the Pelicans, being described as a "detached teammate" (by former teammate JJ Redick), and being omitted from promotional actions such as emails for season ticket renewals.
If we put all of this together, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to have a backup plan in case things go sour (if they haven't already), in which case Keegan Murray would seem like a perfect replacement, sound, 2 way, versatile, plug & play forward who will instantly fill in his shoes seamlessly and make sure they don't skip a beat, while putting pressure on Zion to cut the nonsense, and either he complies and gets back on track, or he can be shopped around for assets.

With all of this in mind, I'm thinking chances Keegan Murray fall to no. 9 are slim at best. Not impossible, though.

I think trading up to 6 though should be relatively easy if SA values Keegan though…should not be that hard to move up. Especially if its with POR at pick 7. You can trade Doug McDermott or Richardson + 9 for pick 7 + filler and that gets POR a win now piece and still a lottery pick for now/future for example.

[Ariel]

I think trading up to 6 though should be relatively easy if SA values Keegan though…should not be that hard to move up. Especially if its with POR at pick 7. You can trade Doug McDermott or Richardson + 9 for pick 7 + filler and that gets POR a win now piece and still a lottery pick for now/future for example.
9 + Richardson is probably not enough to get you 7th. But if the Blazers can't trade for someone better and are not enamored with anyone in particular, it's doable, give or take a pick or two.
9 + McDermott will push you back, not forward. He's a burden, and the cap space has much more value than his presence on the court.

[Ignazzz]

Doug plus 9 for 7? Hahaha

[RC_Drunkford]

I think trading up to 6 though should be relatively easy if SA values Keegan though…should not be that hard to move up. Especially if its with POR at pick 7. You can trade Doug McDermott or Richardson + 9 for pick 7 + filler and that gets POR a win now piece and still a lottery pick for now/future for example.

exactly. Moving up 3 spots shouldn't cost much and if that's on the table the Spurs should absolutely pull the trigger. Keegan Murray is the perfect fit at the 4 for the type of offense we are trying to run

[Mr. Body]

We could get Drew Eubanks back!

[Ignazzz]

exactly. Moving up 3 spots shouldn't cost much and if that's on the table the Spurs should absolutely pull the trigger. Keegan Murray is the perfect fit at the 4 for the type of offense we are trying to run

POR knows that 7 pick is perfect for taking Murray. It’s not cheap move imo

[DPG21920]

9 + Richardson is probably not enough to get you 7th. But if the Blazers can't trade for someone better and are not enamored with anyone in particular, it's doable, give or take a pick or two.
9 + McDermott will push you back, not forward. He's a burden, and the cap space has much more value than his presence on the court.

Lol the difference in 9 and 7 is literally negligible in a draft widely considered to be flat. Richardson easily fills that value void or 9 + 25 would do it.

Now, whether or not POR wants to use some of their space on someone like Richardson is one thing, but from a value perspective Richardson EASILY moves you up two spots IMO

POR would lhave to value whomever is at 7 so wildly higher than their next 2 best players on their board in order to pass on moving back - especially if they dont think they can land someone like Richardson or better in FA for the money.

Do you think POR has 7 players in tier 1 or 2 and a huge drop off starting tier 3 for players 8 or 9?

[DPG21920]

Doug plus 9 for 7? Hahaha

What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion

[DPG21920]

POR knows that 7 pick is perfect for taking Murray. It’s not cheap move imo

Do they or is that in your head? Look at Timvps board for example and where he has Murray. You dont think its conceivable that they have Paolo, Chet, Ivey and Smith as tier 1, then tier 2 Bennedict Mathurin, Dyson Daniels, Johnny Davis, Murray, Sochan, Duren?

How much would you have to value Murray over any one of Mathurin, Daniels, Davies, Sochan or Duren to not take a player that helps Dame stay happy / increase odds of winning now (whether that is Richardson or someone from another team with picks 8-10)?

[rascal]

What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion

Those two spots from 7 to 9 can make a huge difference in a player.

McDermitt doesn't have the value to move up those two spots.

[DPG21920]

Those two spots from 7 to 9 can make a huge difference in a player.

McDermitt doesn't have the value to move up those two spots.

Youre making that up. HUGE value is very subjective, especially in a draft like this. I agree that Richardson has more value than Doug - no doubt about that. I dont know that Doug has negative value (he does to me and I would value him that way lol, but not sure every team does)

Again, do the exercise: do you have Murray in his own tier over these guys: Mathurin, Daniels, Davis, Sochan or Duren?

[Degoat]

Am I the only person who likes Doug McBuckets? Lol I thought he’d played his role really well this past season

[Ariel]

Lol the difference in 9 and 7 is literally negligible in a draft widely considered to be flat. Richardson easily fills that value void or 9 + 25 would do it.

Now, whether or not POR wants to use some of their space on someone like Richardson is one thing, but from a value perspective Richardson EASILY moves you up two spots IMO
Consensus means squat if Portland thinks the guy at 7 is not worth risking over. And even if they don't see much of a difference, you're also competing with everyone else who might have a better offer.
So no, if the Celtics had to throw in a first rounder and a future (almost) unrestricted swap on top of Richardson for just Derrick White, all of a sudden he's not likely to be enough to jump up 2 draft slots in the top 10.

[DPG21920]

Am I the only person who likes Doug McBuckets? Lol I thought he’d played his role really well this past season

Yes, lol, you are literally the only one. Get that guy and his contract out of here ASAP. Such a dumb signing.

[DPG21920]

Consensus means squat if Portland thinks the guy at 7 is not worth risking over. And even if they don't see much of a difference, you're also competing with everyone else who might have a better offer. So no, if the Celtics had to throw a first and a future (almost) unrestricted swap on top of Richardson for Derrick White, all of a sudden he's not likely to be enough to jump up 2 draft slots in the top 10.

That does not make any sense. 1) Richardson played lights out with SA so his value is up. 2) It’s not about Spurs having best offer, but the value in moving back 2 or 3 spots for POR. Going from pick 7 back a few spots, whether with SA or not, is not a huge deal unless POR for some reason values someone so much higher at 7 than picks 8-10 which would be odd considering how majority of people view them.

So making the argument that moving from 7 to 9 is a HUGE deal is just wrong from the jump imo. It frames it as unrealistic and its just not.

[rascal]

Youre making that up. HUGE value is very subjective, especially in a draft like this. I agree that Richardson has more value than Doug - no doubt about that. I dont know that Doug has negative value (he does to me and I would value him that way lol, but not sure every team does)

Again, do the exercise: do you have Murray in his own tier over these guys: Mathurin, Daniels, Davis, Sochan or Duren?

I have Murray clearly over Sochan, Duren and Daniels. Duren is closer in tier level as he has two way potential and can play at 5.

Mathurin is in the same tier as Murray both would fill an offensive scoring need on the Spurs, both are likely gone by the Spurs pick, that's why moving up two spots to 7 can get you Murray or Mathurin.

[rascal]

Do they or is that in your head? Look at Timvps board for example and where he has Murray. You dont think its conceivable that they have Paolo, Chet, Ivey and Smith as tier 1, then tier 2 Bennedict Mathurin, Dyson Daniels, Johnny Davis, Murray, Sochan, Duren?

How much would you have to value Murray over any one of Mathurin, Daniels, Davies, Sochan or Duren to not take a player that helps Dame stay happy / increase odds of winning now (whether that is Richardson or someone from another team with picks 8-10)?

Don't go by Timvp's board. He has Sharpe at 14.

[DPG21920]

Don't go by Timvp's board. He has Sharpe at 14.

I am not going by Timvps board (and timvp board is SA specific, he fully expects Sharpe to be way gone before SA picks despite having him 14th for SA). I am making the point that teams likely have differing boards. And when you factor in both people like you and people like timvp + consensus from all the people that do this for a living, it paints a pretty clear picture overall that 7 to 9 is not some wide chasm to cross.

Does not mean that SA has the best offer or that a team will do a deal; just conceptually

[Ariel]

That does not make any sense. 1) Richardson played lights out with SA so his value is up. 2) It’s not about Spurs having best offer, but the value in moving back 2 or 3 spots for POR. Going from pick 7 back a few spots, whether with SA or not, is not a huge deal unless POR for some reason values someone so much higher at 7 than picks 8-10 which would be odd considering how majority of people view them.
1) Richardson outperformed expectations from Spurs fans, but you make it seem like he just earned finals MVP. He might have shot better from 3 pt range (in a limited sample) than he did before (although he was shooting almost 40% when the Celtics traded him to us), but otherwise he didn't do anything he hadn't done before. Plus it's a one year rental we're talking about, since he's a FA in a year.
2) Consensus would have had us trading back if we wanted to grab Primo, yet the FO took him at 12. So just because "consensus" says the draft is flat, doesn't mean it is to Portland. And, more often than not, the team picking doesn't want to risk their preferred choice.
Also, the value of your offer is relative to what the others are offering, because even if they like 9+Richardson, they might like 10/11 + something else better, and I don't think it's that difficult for someone to put together a better offer than that.

So all in all, for that offer (9 + Richardson) to be successful, all of these would have to happen:
1) Portland not trading the pick away for an established big forward like Jerami Grant. Good chance they do.
2) Portland willing to risk their preferred choice by trading back. Who knows, but history says they may not.
3) Portland not receiving a better offer than that. Speculative, IMO they can do better than a 1 year rental of Richardson.
So yes, considering there's a good chance at least one of those premises don't hold true, I'd say it's quite unlikely that scenario could come to fruition.

[DPG21920]

1) Richardson outperformed expectations from Spurs fans, but you make it seem like he just earned finals MVP. He might have shot better from 3 pt range (in a limited sample) than he did before (although he was shooting almost 40% when the Celtics traded him to us), but otherwise he didn't do anything he hadn't done before. Plus it's a one year rental we're talking about, since he's a FA in a year.
2) Consensus would have had us trading back if we wanted to grab Primo, yet the FO took him at 12. So just because "consensus" says the draft is flat, doesn't mean it is to Portland. And, more often than not, the team picking doesn't want to risk their preferred choice.
Also, the value of your offer is relative to what the others are offering, because even if they like 9+Richardson, they might like 10/11 + something else better, and I don't think it's that difficult for someone to put together a better offer than that.

So all in all, for that offer (9 + Richardson) to be successful, all of these would have to happen:
1) Portland not trading the pick away for an established big forward like Jerami Grant. Good chance they do.
2) Portland willing to risk their preferred choice by trading back. Who knows, but history says they may not.
3) Portland not receiving a better offer than that. Speculative, IMO they can do better than a 1 year rental of Richardson.
So yes, considering there's a good chance at least one of those premises don't hold true, I'd say it's quite unlikely that scenario could come to fruition.

Those are two different arguments: the main one is acting like moving back from 7 to 9 is a massive deal. I dont think it is specifically for a team like POR that wants to balance winning now + future. There are not many teams with picks so close to theirs that can also offer a win now player. So if they are willing to just outright dump their pick 7 for Grant, they likely dont value the player at 7 all that much. They may want to hedge (help win now while still getting a lottery pick).

I agree that the second argument, will SA be the best offer, is way more up for debate.

[mo7888]

What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion

Lots of differing opinions on Doug here...I'm in the smallest minority though...I think Doug has value ...its just that it is for a contending team needing shooting off the bench....that isn't us but it's value to some teams...

[Ocotillo]

I am all for moving McBuckets but I don't see it as the end of the world if we don't get any takers. Before injury he was starting and he has no business starting with his weakness at defense. Add to the mix Keldon is in theory your power forward and the combination of McBuckets and Keldon create a lot to be desired by your forwards since they are not producing the defense and boards you want/need from those positions. Go get an NBA 4 and bring McBuckets of the bench and other than being an overpaid Steve Kerr, he fits nicely into the role of spread the floor shooter coming off the bench.

[Ocotillo]

And who knows, if he is in the right role, maybe a contender sees they could use someone in that role and you end up moving him.

[TD 21]

I think trading up to 6 though should be relatively easy if SA values Keegan though…should not be that hard to move up. Especially if its with POR at pick 7. You can trade Doug McDermott or Richardson + 9 for pick 7 + filler and that gets POR a win now piece and still a lottery pick for now/future for example.

Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15

[rascal]

Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15

I like that trade

[DPG21920]

Lots of differing opinions on Doug here...I'm in the smallest minority though...I think Doug has value ...its just that it is for a contending team needing shooting off the bench....that isn't us but it's value to some teams...

I don’t like anymore one dimensional vets on long term deals. If he made 1 year 40m I wouldn’t have cared. But signing tall Marco to multiple years was very dumb

[DPG21920]

Murray is tailormade for both the Pacers and Trail Blazers and projected firmly in the second tier unlike whoever is projected to be available at 9. Neither, especially the latter who are win now, would pass that up for Richardson.

My guess is it would take something like this to get them to contemplate, if not execute . . .

To Hornets: Poeltl, 25
To Pacers: Washington Jr., 9, 20
To Spurs: Jones, 6, 15

So Poetl, 9, 20 and 25 to move up 3 spots from 9 and to 15 from 25? No way. I’d move Poetl + 25 for picks 13 AND 15 (we keep 20). But no way I move Jakob + 20 + 25 for 15 that’s awful.

[RC_Drunkford]

lol @ people here thinking NBA teams value a 21 year old draft pick so much that you can only move up 3 spots in the draft by trading Dejounte Murray for him :lmao

[lmbebo]

More I think about, less I'm enamored with him based on current roster make up.

[Ignazzz]

What’s funny? Plenty of teams may view Doug as a + shooter on a team trying to win now. Moving from 7 to 9 is literally nothing….I agree Doug sucks but this board does not represent the entirety of the NBA opinion
Funny? Tragic.
his salary
3x13.750.000
it is minus asset

[Ignazzz]

2 years left

[XDT76]

To be fair McD would not be a major consideration for most teams in off season. They might consider him at trade deadline if they deemed that they need a shooter to improve their post season chance.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Message board folks always vastly overrate or vastly underrate the value of players from the teams they support. McDermott isn't negative value unless the Spurs are in a hurry to clear cap space for FAs in early july. Lots of people thought the Spurs would have done well to simply salary dump White or DDR - both brought back a good return.

I don't think there is a huge difference between picks 6 and 9, or between 6 and 14 for that matter. It's a flat draft. Now, perhaps the Spurs fall in love with some prospect but we can't know or speculate about such things.

[Dejounte]

Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?

[KobesAchilles]

Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?
It’s fun to surmise

[mo7888]

Why do folks insist on pretending to know what will happen when they don’t?

Exactly...the only thing that's certain around the draft right now is that the mocks will change between now and draft day...

[rascal]

Message board folks always vastly overrate or vastly underrate the value of players from the teams they support. McDermott isn't negative value unless the Spurs are in a hurry to clear cap space for FAs in early july. Lots of people thought the Spurs would have done well to simply salary dump White or DDR - both brought back a good return.

I don't think there is a huge difference between picks 6 and 9, or between 6 and 14 for that matter. It's a flat draft. Now, perhaps the Spurs fall in love with some prospect but we can't know or speculate about such things.

I think there is a big difference in this draft between 6 and 9 unless a team or two makes a surprise pick and reaches for a player but that is unlikely to happen the higher you go in the draft.

I'd rather the Spurs had the option to draft Murray, Sharpe or Mathurin than Sochan, Davis, Daniels.

[TD 21]

So Poetl, 9, 20 and 25 to move up 3 spots from 9 and to 15 from 25? No way. I’d move Poetl + 25 for picks 13 AND 15 (we keep 20). But no way I move Jakob + 20 + 25 for 15 that’s awful.

Coming from a guy who thinks Richardson could get you from 9 to 7 and it'd be wise to trade a quality starter for two picks likely to yield mediocrity (when they already have two further down likely to do so), that's a compliment.

You're consumed with the differential in spots, but the draft is about tiers and for a team with quantity of prospects and in dire need of quality of them, my goal would be to come out of this draft with two quality pieces (one could be a prime or young veteran).

[CGD]

I think Indiana is a real threat to take Murray and I wouldn't discount Sacramento either... I really expect Portland to trade #7 to get a more nba ready player to pair with Dame....that new team is a wildcard since we don't know who may try to move up...it could even be us...

I agree with this. Can see SAC trading the pick OR pairing Murray with Sabonis. I suppose DET then jumps at Ivy. Can also potentially see them landing another top 10 pick at 7 in a deal with POR for Grant. Totally agree that POR is aggressively shopping that one.

[DPG21920]

Coming from a guy who thinks Richardson could get you from 9 to 7 and it'd be wise to trade a quality starter for two picks likely to yield mediocrity (when they already have two further down likely to do so), that's a compliment.

You're consumed with the differential in spots, but the draft is about tiers and for a team with quantity of prospects and in dire need of quality of them, my goal would be to come out of this draft with two quality pieces (one could be a prime or young veteran).

Yes. Richardson + 9 for 7 is far more realistic than what you just said. Don’t take it personal lol.

[TD 21]

Yes. Richardson + 9 for 7 is far more realistic than what you just said. Don’t take it personal lol.

Not even close. Your fake trades are always slanted in favor of the Spurs.

[rascal]

Not even close. Your fake trades are always slanted in favor of the Spurs.

I don't know why people think Richardson has so much value.

[Mr. Body]

Yeah, I don't think Richardson has incredible value right now. We just saw what the market suggests he's worth -- it took him, a first round draft pick, and a nearly unprotected swap, to get Derrick White. I treat Langford as a salary throw in.

[Slippy]

Dyson Daniels shooting threes at nba combine. Looked impressive.

https://mobile.twitter.com/draftexpress/status/1528133530932346881

[mo7888]

Top 5 pick buzz huh... good...that could push Murray or Mathurin lower...

[rjv]

Top 5 pick buzz huh... good...that could push Murray or Mathurin lower...

yeah, i'm trying to figure out who daniels would bump out of the top five. my guess would be sharpe or ivey, who would both go before mathurin but not necessarily before murray.

[The Truth #6]

His shot was even't touching the rim. But yeah, who is he pushing down? I'd have to think Keegan Murray, but probably not to 9. But yeah, if so, given the domino effect , maybe Mathurin would still be around at 9 in this hypothetical scenario.

[duncan2150]

yeah, i'm trying to figure out who daniels would bump out of the top five. my guess would be sharpe or ivey, who would both go before mathurin but not necessarily before murray.

i really think the top 8 is not set, the only sure thing is that holmgren smith banchero and ivey will be top 4-5, other than that eveything is possible.

Imo Murray will slide.

[BatManu20]

I said it last week that I predict Daniels will be gone by the time we pick. He goes top 7 imo. NOLA at 8 is where things get juicy. Mathurin would likely be their target imo. They need another off-ball shooter and he provides just that, along with great athleticism. Johnny Davis and AJ Griffin are also potential targets there. Gotta think it’d be one of those 3. Should be interesting.


My top-10 prediction right now:

1. HOU — Chet Holmgren
2. OKC — Jabari Smith Jr.
3. HOU — Paulo Banchero
4. SAC — Jaden Ivey
5. DET — Keegan Murray
6. IND — Shaedon Sharpe
7. POR — Dyson Daniels
8. NOL — Ben Mathurin
9. SAS — Jeremy Sochan
10. WAS — Johnny Davis

[BatManu20]

First pick was supposed to say ORL*

[Ariel]

I said it last week that I predict Daniels will be gone by the time we pick. He goes top 7 imo. NOLA at 8 is where things get juicy. Mathurin would likely be their target imo. They need another off-ball shooter and he provides just that, along with great athleticism. Johnny Davis and AJ Griffin are also potential targets there. Gotta think it’d be one of those 3. Should be interesting.


My top-10 prediction right now:

1. HOU — Chet Holmgren
2. OKC — Jabari Smith Jr.
3. HOU — Paulo Banchero
4. SAC — Jaden Ivey
5. DET — Keegan Murray
6. IND — Shaedon Sharpe
7. POR — Dyson Daniels
8. NOL — Ben Mathurin
9. SAS — Jeremy Sochan
10. WAS — Johnny Davis
There's a good chance Sacramento & Detroit don't make their picks. But if they do, I'd swich 1&2 and 5&6, but other than that yours is a very sound scenario. Daniels seems like a good complement to Lillard, helping them on defense while not needing him to be a threat from 3. Mathurin to NO seems like a good fit with his outside shooting and ability to contribute right away, we get that big 3/4 we're longing, and Davis to Washington would seem reasonable.

[JPB]

Dyson Daniels shooting threes at nba combine. Looked impressive.

https://mobile.twitter.com/draftexpress/status/1528133530932346881

Now try with an NBA defender's hand in front of you... Not joking when saying I could sometimes hit 10 threes in a row alone in the gym, back in the day.

Besides, look again and you'll see his shot motion is pretty slow (in that workout anyway) with little lift and low release... Not saying it couldn't translate into pro ball but he just looks like "cool and shooting" out there.. And yet again let's be very wary with these workout vids, show me some in game stuff where he pilled up threes like that and we'll talk.

[The Truth #6]

^ That’s definitely true. In general, these workout videos feel like a pregame warmup. I guess coaches can videotape for shooting mechanics but mostly fluff. Having said that, the assumption was that Dyson was a horrible shooter, so with low expectations, I can see how buzz is quickly created given the nature of these things.

[rascal]

1. Orlando - J Smith
2. OK City - Holmgren
3. Houston - Banchero
4- Sacramento - Ivey
5. Detroit - Sharpe
6. Indiana - Murray
7. Portland - Daniels (Mathurin if they can work a trade with Chicago)
8. N O - Mathurin (Daniels if Mathurin is gone)
9. Spurs - Sochan
10. Wash - Williams
11. Knicks - J Davis

Spurs at 9 are in a tough spot. Just outside the game changers in this draft.

[Drom John]

Back before most of y'all were born, I was the best shooter in the gym/asphalt. Because I was the best FT shooter around, or the best top of the key shooter around, and also could call bank for consecutive made half court hook shots, I got to play with next up teams often, and with four good other players, quite a few winners teams . I played in games with future NBA players, and for one week with the then current NBAer Horace Grant.

In those games, my only open shots were extra long rebounds, and I made my share.

I almost never made a shot otherwise.

Defense matters.

[Slippy]

Now try with an NBA defender's hand in front of you... Not joking when saying I could sometimes hit 10 threes in a row alone in the gym, back in the day.

Besides, look again and you'll see his shot motion is pretty slow (in that workout anyway) with little lift and low release... Not saying it couldn't translate into pro ball but he just looks like "cool and shooting" out there.. And yet again let's be very wary with these workout vids, show me some in game stuff where he pilled up threes like that and we'll talk.

That wasnt the point. The talk is his shooting is a weakness. Low and slow release wont matter, If he can hit the open three. His stock is rising.

Did ya watch Dwhite yesterday. Good thing the celtics built up a big lead because he couldnt hit the open three. Think he went 1 of 8.

[Mr. Body]

I said it last week that I predict Daniels will be gone by the time we pick. He goes top 7 imo. NOLA at 8 is where things get juicy. Mathurin would likely be their target imo. They need another off-ball shooter and he provides just that, along with great athleticism. Johnny Davis and AJ Griffin are also potential targets there. Gotta think it’d be one of those 3. Should be interesting.


My top-10 prediction right now:

1. HOU — Chet Holmgren
2. OKC — Jabari Smith Jr.
3. HOU — Paulo Banchero
4. SAC — Jaden Ivey
5. DET — Keegan Murray
6. IND — Shaedon Sharpe
7. POR — Dyson Daniels
8. NOL — Ben Mathurin
9. SAS — Jeremy Sochan
10. WAS — Johnny Davis

Most mocks still have AJ Griffin in the top 10. Although we've slagged on him here, teams may still see a lot of potential. Jalen Duren is still in the mix, or even Mark Williams.

Also, I can see Sacramento taking Dyson Daniels if they talk themselves out of Ivey. I'm not sold on Detroit picking Murray. I can see them going Sharpe, Murray going to Indiana.

Teams also do unexpected things every year, some good, some bad. Minnesota took Mike Flynn before Stephen Curry, even though they had just selected Ricky Rubio. The Knicks picked Obi Toppin earlier than expected.

So... conventional wisdom on this board is that Indiana goes with Murray, Griffin drops, we've lost interest in Duren so think others have lost interest, too, etc. But things will get mixed up more than we think.

[TD 21]

I said it last week that I predict Daniels will be gone by the time we pick. He goes top 7 imo. NOLA at 8 is where things get juicy. Mathurin would likely be their target imo. They need another off-ball shooter and he provides just that, along with great athleticism. Johnny Davis and AJ Griffin are also potential targets there. Gotta think it’d be one of those 3. Should be interesting.


My top-10 prediction right now:

1. HOU — Chet Holmgren
2. OKC — Jabari Smith Jr.
3. HOU — Paulo Banchero
4. SAC — Jaden Ivey
5. DET — Keegan Murray
6. IND — Shaedon Sharpe
7. POR — Dyson Daniels
8. NOL — Ben Mathurin
9. SAS — Jeremy Sochan
10. WAS — Johnny Davis

1. Magic - Smith
2. Thunder - Holmgren
3. Rockets - Banchero
4. Kings - Murray
5. Pistons - Ivey
6. Pacers - Mathurin
7. Trail Blazers: Sharpe
8. Pelicans - Griffin
9. Spurs - Daniels
10. Wizards - Davis

[mo7888]

Most mocks still have AJ Griffin in the top 10. Although we've slagged on him here, teams may still see a lot of potential. Jalen Duren is still in the mix, or even Mark Williams.

Also, I can see Sacramento taking Dyson Daniels if they talk themselves out of Ivey. I'm not sold on Detroit picking Murray. I can see them going Sharpe, Murray going to Indiana.

Teams also do unexpected things every year, some good, some bad. Minnesota took Mike Flynn before Stephen Curry, even though they had just selected Ricky Rubio. The Knicks picked Obi Toppin earlier than expected.

So... conventional wisdom on this board is that Indiana goes with Murray, Griffin drops, we've lost interest in Duren so think others have lost interest, too, etc. But things will get mixed up more than we think.

I think Griffin's place in the draft coming down to medical evaluation. If they don't think there's anything chronic with his injury history I could see a team like Indiana looking hard at him as a 3 and small ball 4 and his shooting might...I say might make them prefer him to Murray.