They’re looking for a wing right? 
3 Likes
I did. Good point. Still another shooter or two.
Speaking the Kings taking Murray into existence.
Bingo.
Look I get why he’s not a lock in peoples minds at this point but he’s a baby. He has traits that can be successful and I have no doubt he will reach his potential from the people who know him well around here.
Even if that’s serviceable big that makes more sense than Ayton on a huge contract imo ( I like Ayton too).
Stewart moves his feet much better than anyone expected, he has decent touch and potential for a face up game down the line , he’s extremely strong and a better athlete than given credit for in general , he’s extremely physical and long for his height, idk. Again I’m pretty sure he’s 20 and if he isn’t he just turned 21.
I’m not sure what was going on that his form was being altered a bit ( he was shooting different when I watched this year , slightly, but noticeable) but imo it wasn’t broken before and just needed reps and polish.
I forgot livers but I didn’t see the pistons down the stretch a lot. I saw he was playing well and that actually is a great wing option off the bench.
If you guys can land , say Sharpe, I’d be very bullish on the pistons in 2-3 years.
1 Like
I’m back on the Ivey train lol Every time I stray away from Ivey, I take a look at his tape and remind myself he is the most electric player I’ve seen on a B1G basketball court in forever. If nothing else does, that ability to attack the rim will translate to the NBA, if anything he will have an easier time doing it with the additional spacing. His shot, while bad, has gotten better from year 1 to year 2.
I’m comfortable in Ivey or Murray, or less likely one of Chet/Jabari/Paolo if one of them slips. Ivey’s shot does worry me a bit, but like you said with his attacking, you just can’t teach that burst he has to get around guys. And he has a ton of off ball highlights at Purdue, so he would fit nicely.
Murray isn’t a sexy pick in terms of being a potential superstar, but he just does everything well. I think he’d be a fine Jerami Grant replacement on a rookie deal, freeing up more cap space to try to find a SG.
I’m completely out on Sharpe. The athleticism is there in terms of jumping, but none of his highlights show anything close to what Ivey can do getting around defenders, and the highlights are all AAU level against players who don’t look like even D1 athletes. He could be a superstar, but I think it will be a slow process where he spends a ton of time in the G-league before he’s ready for the NBA. If the Pistons didn’t have Cade and were clearly in tank mode I’d take a shot at him, but I think they want to compete in games and won’t be comfortable letting Sharpe make a lot of mistakes and living through them. His ideal path would be what happened with Poole, getting a ton of minutes on a team who knows they aren’t winning games and being allowed to play through mistakes even if statistically he’s really bad.
1 Like
Yeah, I realize that while his leaping ability is ELITE, other aspects of his athleticism are an unknown or not that great.
Ivey has functional athleticism that he has showcased time and time again at the collegiate level and will probably take it to another level on a larger NBA court.
Just can’t get on the Murray train. Slow feet, old…there’s several players I would take before him. Ivey, Mathurin, gamble on Sharpe or Dieng, Sochan.
1 Like
I think Murray and Sochan profile similarly in terms of future NBA role. I’d lean Murray personally due to just having shown he can dominate, whereas Sochan is a foggier proposition.
I like Sochan - he’s my dream for the Bulls, but I wouldn’t consider him at this slot.
I’m still out on Ivey. Elite at one thing (downhill finishes going right in transition) and not spectacular at anything else. From Feb 1 on last season he shot 26% from three on 5.3 attempts per game and had a 1:1 assist to turnover ratio, both at 3.2 per game. He doesn’t create well enough for others to be a primary playmaker, he doesn’t defend, he could barely shoot at the college level and I have no idea what he ends up looking like in the half court in the NBA.
2 Likes
I like Mathurin a lot. Good shooter, really good athlete, tough good defender. I think he fits really well with Cade. I wouldn’t mind the Pistons picking him at 5.
Ivey reminds me of Charles Matthews when he got to Michigan in that I think he needs to work on his “brakes.”
You guys are good at convincing me there is nobody good in this draft. Ivey’s shooting sucks, Murray is slow and old, Chet’s going to get broken in half, Jabari can’t finish in the paint at 6-10, Paolo is lazy, Duren is Drummond, Sharpe is afraid of competing because it would show he’s not that good.
I guess time to focus on Mathurin to find some flaws. 
8 Likes
Hahaha Ivey’s the only one I don’t love. I’m higher than most on Chet and Jabari. I like Shaedon’s upside but I’m not familiar enough with him to take a hard stance. I love Keegan like he’s my firstborn son.
I’m fine with anyone not named Keegan Murray.
There is a 26 minute video floating around (I’ll link below) that I haven’t watched, but people who did were not impressed. Basically a lot of really, really awful defense and very questionable ball handling, to go with the lack of burst. It’s all AAU stuff though so I don’t expect any good defense. I’d need to watch the video to see if they describe flaws or if it’s just “wow, that’s bad defense.”
1 Like
Who are y’alls 2nd round darlings? I’m intrigued by David Roddy. I like using 2nd round picks on weird tweener types that could be interesting rotation players or out of the league quickly.
1 Like
If it helps I think Mathurin (solid at lots of things, really good at none) is a reach in the top 10, so we hate everyone.
2 Likes
The thing about the “after 2/1” split is that the other side of the coin is 20 games in which he shot 42% from 3.
I think the most honest way of dealing with it is “he shot 36%”.
2 Likes
I don’t follow this thread closely, but it is humorous to check in and see the following…
- One person loves Ivey
- Some are out on Ivey
- Someone says “anyone but Murray”
- Others love Murray as a safe pick
- Sharpe is high upside…but most want no part of it
- No one can agree what Chet or Paolo is
I think a bunch of it is how different people prioritize a high variance vs. low variance prospect. Most I think agree that Sharpe probably has a larger spread in potential outcomes than, say Mathurin.
I think the question is how people value relative certainty vs upside etc