Driving to the Basket: A Detroit Pistons Podcast - Episode 22: The Final Four - Hayes, Williams, Haliburton, and Ball

Episode Date: November 17, 2020

This episode, the last in the pre-draft series, explores the four players the hosts have deemed likeliest to be the organization's selection at the 2020 NBA Draft.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello, everybody. Welcome to another episode of Driving to the Basket. I am Mike. I'm here with Tommy. This is going to be our final pre-draft episode. So this time we're pretty much, we've selected four players we believe are the most likely, or the likeliest rather, to be drafted by the Pistons. Of course, there's always the capacity for surprise, but based on where the Pistons are selecting, you know, you can have a fair degree of confidence who is going to be gone before they pitch. and also the guys who would definitely be a reach at number seven. So those guys are going to be, the guys we believe have a shot, the highest probability of going to the Pistons. It's going to be Killian Hayes, Patrick Williams, Tyrese Halliburton, Ann's, yes, though, I personally think this is a very small chance, lamella ball.

Other guys, the Pistons have worked out, Lewis, Neesmith, Hampton. And these guys, I think the pistons, either they work them out just to see, you know, what's there for at least Hampton and Lewis. Otherwise, I would say they probably, this is complete speculation, so I don't know if it's fair to say probably. But I would say otherwise they did so against the possibility of either securing another pick in the middle of the rounds, which is still a possibility. You know, maybe trade canard. That's the ideal situation for me just because I feel he doesn't really have much to offer in a multi-year rebuild. or in the event that they trade down, which I think is pretty unlikely, that the possibility of that trade for Boston's three picks has been brought up,

you know, is not by anybody connected the organization or any insider's anything like that. But, you know, just as a spitballing scenario, though there have been some sources at the national level who have said, I think it was, who was that Tommy, was it Gibney or Schmitz or do you remember? who said which one? One of them said that the likelihood of Boston trading up to number eight, number seven, number six, but that package is pretty low. Yeah, that was given. Yeah.

He said seven or eight, pretty slim. Yeah. So I would say Neesmith in particular, not a guy I think the Pistons would ever look at and say, okay, maybe we'll drop this guy at number seven. Like Neesmith is a guy who certainly has a very valuable skill he can offer at the NBA level. an absolute knockdown three-point shooter, though on a relatively small sample size this season, or this past season in the NCAA, rather. But, you know, not the most athletic guy, not going to be the best defender.

You know, he sees somebody who has a valuable skill, a skill that will always be valuable in the NBA, much like Sveemichaelic, who will probably just based on his lack of defensive IQ, his short arms and his poor lateral mobility and athleticism in general. will probably, I would say, be a poor defender at best in the NBA, if not outright bad as he has been so far. And may never learn to be useful at all within the arc, but he's an excellent shooter from the perimeter. He can come around screens and take threes.

It's just a very valuable skill. That said, that's not a good enough skill to boost you into number seven. So with Neesmith, I would say, if not for the other guys as well, I would say, yeah, he's he's only been worked out, or they have only been worked out against the possibility of either picking again or picking somewhere else in the order. So it's worth noting also Patrick Williams hasn't confirmed that he has worked out with the Pistons. He just declined to say whom he has worked out with, however, just given the degree of interest, just given the degree to which he has been linked to the Pistons, we just find it very hard to believe that they

haven't worked them out. Also worth noting that there are some guys in the draft, like, for example, Anthony Edwards has only worked out for the top three teams. And that's by his choice. Players can decide, they can decide with whom they want to work out. I think that has always been the case, regardless of, you know, well before coronavirus. So in any event, we're going to start with Patrick Williams. It's worth noting, for those of you who have listened to our previous draft previews, that's, we'll be repeating a bit of stuff about, about Ball, about Halliburton, and about Hayes. Maybe you'll want something new. We've done, you know, spent some further time on research and so on and so forth.

There are always some new revelations coming out by draft insiders, guys who have had more of an opportunity to study some material, you know, particularly tape to which we don't really have access. but in any event, Patrick Williams. So this is a guy who has come out of nowhere to suddenly shoot up into the top 10. I would say he was largely mocked in the low teens, you know, from like, I would say like 11 to, I don't know. But he's now somehow in the conversation, even to be picked earlier than number seven. So we went over him a little bit in the last episode. We're going to go considerably more in-depth this time. So who is Patrick Williams?

In the NCAA, he was a sixth man for FSU. FSU the same team I'm which Devin Veself played. And one sixth man of the year in the ACC, respectable conference. He projects as one of those athletic two-way wings. And it's almost become a little bit of a trope, you know, about athletic two-way wings. But the fact is that they are exceptionally valuable in the NBA. guys who, again, are highly athletic. Elite athleticism will always be a substantial asset in the NBA,

which is an incredibly athletic league and becoming even more so, especially with the emphasis on switches on defense, where if you have a guy who's vulnerable, set a pick, get a switch, get an MNTAG's matchup, and then torch the guy. So, yeah, these guys are very important for success in the NBA. The Pistons have been horribly short on them. They've just been horribly short on the, wing for since the going to work distance really.

So with Williams, what are you getting? Yeah, guy who's highly athletic, his defense might not quite be there yet. We'll go over that. I'll go over that a little bit later in the analysis. So a guy who's highly athletic, he's a very enthusiastic offball mover. He's a very good cutter. Pretty strong and crafty finisher when he gets the ball under the rim. Great Leaper. Just really good burst, long, 225. He's already strong. And he's unlikely to be physically bullied, which is nice. When it comes up, when it comes to his shooting, as a spot-up shooter, his form is pretty good, which is encouraging. He only shot 32% in the NCAA. But you have players who do worse, like you think to Jalen Brown, for example, who shot in the 20s. And it's what I believe was a single year in the NCAA.

But he had good form. It's actually really important to look at a player. And is he shooting poorly just because he really hasn't perfected his craft? Or is he shooting poorly because his form is just absolute trash? And in the case of Williams, it's the former. His release doesn't look bad. From the perimeter, he doesn't really have enough elevation. That can be changed, definitely.

But you look at this versus a guy like Okoro who just has a horrible release. And that, needless to say, is a significant problem. Those guys, you really have to worry because they're much less likely to pull it together. He's also got a bit of a pedigree as a shooter off the dribble from mid-range, even a bit on turnarounds, not particularly efficient in these, even at the NBA, excuse me, even at the NCAA level, just, I believe he's shot in the low 40s. That means just not a worthwhile shot to take in the NBA. He'd have to improve that. Also, he does have a habit kind of of giving up drives the basket in favor of a mid-range shot, and that's just something that's not going to

fly in the NBA. But it's nice that he has that, you know, a little bit of that pedigree, that he might be able to do it. He's actually a better, a more efficient shooter off the dribble than he is in spot-up situations, which is not tremendously unusual. It's not, it's not the norm, but it happens. It's the case with Killian Hayes as well. He's also a decent pick and roll ball handler, or he was on a pretty small volume. And decent vision, decent passer. He's got the potential for a driving kick game. We saw in the 2019 playoffs at the Raptors just how valuable it is to have as many players

in the floor as possible who can drive and kick. It really just opens up the offense. Pretty respectable offensive basketball IQ. Could be a reliable all-around score at the NBA level, but as we'll talk about, could also be a role player. As far as defense is concerned, he's got great burst in passing lanes, good transition defender, a surprisingly good interior defender. He's really good at help side at Rim defense because he's just a great leaper.

Very enthusiastic, very tenacious. And unfortunately, though, he's not that great at this stage at, or at least at the NCAA level, which is, of course, incomparably easier than the NBA. not the greatest on-ball defender on switches, particularly against quicker players. Seems like that's more something that could be worked on rather than a fundamental flaw, because given how athletic he is, lateral mobility really shouldn't be an issue. It might just be a matter of footwork. So the chief downsides you're looking at, number one, it's like, what can the guy really do on offense?

Is he going to be somebody who is largely reliant on other people to create his looks? So that was in the vast majority of the case at Florida State. He'd be a guy who would cut. He'd be a guy who would catch alley-ups, you know, uses his excellent leaping to do that. And he'd take threes for the most part. And his ability to create offense was largely just limited to those pull-up jumpers. It's real nice to have guys who can create offense.

If you're taking a guy at number seven, then he, you know, a guy who may project as an offensive role player, then it's, you know, he better be. really good. You know, better be a really good two-way player. It's possible that it was just his role, that he has chob and more chops as an attacker off the dribble, and we just didn't see it in Florida State because that was just the role he was given. The point is that just that we don't know. And I would say that's an issue. It's an issue. I'm sure that has been explored by Troy Weaver and the draft team. If they're going to select him, I have to guess they think that he's more than that on offense.

Another thing that's been brought up by draft analysts is that he defers to a fault. He is not particularly assertive on offense, and he may not have that kind of mentality where, you know, to try to be a takeover score, the guy who tries to take over the game. By all accounts, he's a really good teammate. He's just, he is unselfish to a fault. And it's good to be a good teammate, but sometimes you can be a worse teammate by deferring too much. We saw this with the case of Tobias Harris, who was never really, who was just basically obeyed the system, constantly in Detroit and therefore was really not quite able to bring all of his talents,

considerable talent, as a score to bear. So that's definitely a concern. So also another strike against Williams is just in his overall ball handling. He has a tendency to try to, when he does go to the basket, and in my opinion, he doesn't go to the basket enough. He tends to settle for those pull-ups. when he does get into the paint, often he just loses the ball

or he'll charge over somebody. So seems to have a good degree of potential. It's just what is his potential, is the question. It's always nice to have these two-way athletic wings, but he's not quite there on defense. There are some questions about his on-ball defense on switches.

If you're drafting a guy who might be a role player on offense, at number seven, you better be pretty confident that he's going to be a well above average defender as well. So I'm feeling pretty ambivalent on the guy. I really maybe wouldn't mind the pick in the context of a long-term rebuild. Because maybe this guy could be sort of just a foundational piece, maybe your third best starter, maybe your fourth best starter. That's not ideal. But you always want to have ideally the most athletic lineup you can field. I would be a little bit loath to pass on Hayes for him. But I would say it just really depends on how Weaver projects this rebuild. So just with Williams, very possible that we're looking at a project player if the Pistons draft him,

it's because they think he's got a lot of potential. Tommy, how do you feel about his potential role and his fit with the Pistons? Yeah, it's a lot of what you outlined. he's the guy that we probably know the least about in terms of like what he can be. Like you, I was really surprised that he rose up this high this quickly, seemingly out of nowhere. I imagine it has to be something in his workouts. When you look at him play and you watch him at Florida State, like Florida State's offense is so balanced and he already was playing a pretty small role relative to where he's projected to get drafted.

you imagine that it's an upside pick and that they see the foundation that he has and they think that they can build on it. Like you said, he doesn't take it all the way to the rim when he tries to drive from the perimeter. He's more of a kind of catch the defense sleeping and slash kind of guy. And then his shooting percentages aren't great,

especially from three. I think he shot only like 32%. But it looks good. It's a slower release, but it's very high and it's very consistent. He's shooting mostly with his wrist. It all looks really good. The percentages just aren't quite there yet.

So it seems more like an upside pick to me. Another thing that I think he does really well, and that's going to be fairly important in the future, was his rebound and his play around the rim. At 225, 6-8, it's hard to move him. He figures to put on more weight. He can be a guy that you see is like a team rebounder, guys going up for the tippins and the,

and the offensive rebounds. And since Christian Woods, if he is the center of the future, a guy that the pistons bring back, he's going to need help on the boards. He's going to need help in the paint. And I think Williams can play that role. The only issue is there's kind of a positional overlap with Seku. Saku probably projects to be more of a four.

He's just a little, he really struggles with, his mobility in terms of guarding threes because he's kind of unpolished with his footwork. Williams has a similar issue, but I think he's a much better on-ball defender. He kind of covers for it in that way. But I think that his fit with Christian Wood would be pretty good. I feel okay about this pick. There are other guys that I would prefer to take, but this is kind of one where you have to think like,

all right, there must be something that they see in this guy, just looking in deeper than his percentages. And there are even rumors that other teams are trying to trade above the Pistons, maybe the sixth pick that Atlanta has, to pick up Williams before the Pistons even have a chance. So there's got to be something there. It's just maybe we just don't see it. But at the same time, I see the foundation.

I see how we could project to be a very good player. the percentages and the holes in his game. There's a lot to correct, but there's a lot to like. Yeah, I, here's the issue. So I see with what you're saying with Christian Wood, for example, if the Pistons really are going for that three-year rebuild, and of course this last year would have been year one or year zero, whatever, three draft rebuild will cover that.

Prisham Wood would, but I was, you know, assuming that the Pistons sign him to a four-year contract, I don't know. He might choose to go with the 2 plus 1, whatever the case. So he would be in the third year of his contract by the time this became relevant, by the time the Pistons were looking to win. I'm not sure if the fit with Christian Wood is really that much of an issue. But it's just the Pistons.

Maybe it's just because of the Pistons having loaded the front court with Griffin and Drummond. And they were very weak in the wing. And thanks to injuries to Reggie Jackson. pretty weak at point guard as well. I think maybe that is just pushing me toward really wanting the pistons to draft a wing or a point guard. It just does produce for me a little bit of discomfort, seeing them go for a guy who's probably going to project the power forward. And again, there would be issues, and like I said, with Wood, this would be two years down the line. Could be issues playing with Seku, of course, that would depend on how Seku and how Williams

as well develop. One of them could end up as a bench player. One of them could end up washing out. They could both end up washing out. You know, goodness forbid. So I don't think that's really a fit on which, well, you can also argue that the Pistons just don't need to worry about fit right now. You know, you just, you draft who you think is going to be the best player, and you go from there. I'm just very, very hesitant to see them draft a guy who is not going to play at one of those most important positions, so the guys who can play up and down the lineup. But you saw Jason Tatum, for example, who you could say, oh, yeah, this guy is a wing. You know, shooting guard can, excuse me, the small forward can probably defend a shooting guard,

spent 90% of his minutes of power forward last year and had an excellent season, a guy who can play down the lineup versus Williams, who's probably just going to project as a combo forward, who will tend toward power forward. So I'm feeling real ambivalent about the pick. I wouldn't be super upset, but it's really not what I would prefer. And maybe, again, maybe that's just a product of my desire to see the pistons finally sure up these weaknesses at the most important positions after fielding a completely broken roster as a result of the Griffin trade. I mean, not gainsaying Blake's performance in his first full season with the Pistons. He was great. The team, as we saw in the Milwaukee series, where every weakness was exposed was a mess. You know, a modern NBA team that, sure, they didn't have

enough shooters. That was one big problem. But they also had virtually nobody on the wing. And and point guard was a very weak position, too. And I would argue those are your most important positions in today's NBA. Anything else to add on Williams before we move on to Killian Hayes? Out of these four guys, where would he be on your board? I think out of these four, he's my second favorite. I would rate him as number two also. And number one has to remain, though, I've waffled back and forth on Hayes.

The more I look into him, the more I look into him, the more I love. like him. Like, I'd learned some things, and we went over this in the last podcast, that made me feel a little bit worse about him. But now I feel better about him again. So he'd be my number one of the four players at whom we're going to look today. I know number one, is number one for you, Halliburton, and is number one for you, Ball? It would be a Halliburton for me. Yeah, I thought so. So we're going to be going over Halliburton after Killian Hayes. So Killian Hayes, we went over quite a bit in our draft preview on point guards. I'll speak a little bit further on him, just a shorter summary.

So, Killian Hayes, quick fun fact, actually an American citizen, despite being referred to as a French player and spent as far as I know most of his life in France, born in Florida. So he has been playing for Radio Farm Ome, that is a German team in the Euro Cup. The Euro Cup is one step below the Euro League, which is the second best league in the world. So Euro Cup level of competition isn't so great. So he's the undisputed number one guy in that team. When he's on the floor, they play around him, heavy pick and roll style.

So he has that luxury. And as I said in the last podcast, that sort of counts against him a little bit because, you know, he's in a system in which he is pandered to and he is not playing against great opposition. And he still, you know, makes a lot of mistakes and has, you know, a fair number of faults. That said, the guys, you know, it'll be 19 and a half when next season starts. So he's got a lot of room to grow. But here's what he brings as far as assets. Number one, his shooting is actually a question mark,

but I think he has tremendous potential as a shooter as a three-level shooter, a guy who can score from the three-point line, who can shoot from mid-range and who can score at the basket. Also has, and this is extremely useful in the NBA, as they've shown a good deal of potential as a step-back three-point shooter. A step-back three-point shooter, that means that like Hardin, like Donchitz, you have to absolutely face cover this guy. I mean, you have to face guard him.

You have to be close to him at all times because if you're not at the three-point line, then he can just step back and burn you that way. I mean, that is a huge, if you can learn to do that, that it's just an absolutely awesome thing to have in your toolbox. So like Williams, he's shot worse than Williams, actually, but his shot form looks okay. Could use a little bit of tweaking, but it looks okay. And that's always a promising sign for a shooter who isn't necessarily.

shooting so well that it can be fixed. He, like Williams, actually shoots better off the dribble than he does from the three-point line. Again, it's encouraging that he has, you know, that he's got pedigree as a shooter. And he was actually in the Euro Cup this year an excellent shooter off the dribble, close to one point for possession. That is fantastic. It means he has a lot of potential as a mid-range shooter. If you're a good mid-range shooter, then you have to be covered everywhere. Because if you're not, then we saw this with, with Kennard a bit last year, who was also, you know, Cook Brankan, he didn't shoot so great for mid-range last season, but he's more than good enough that if you don't cover him, he's likely to burn you.

It means that you attract a lot of attention, particularly on the pick and roll, and that opens up opportunities for other guys. As far as scoring at the rim, he's not at the point where he actively looks to draw contact, and he's not very explosive. That's something that counts against him. It is one of the two major strikes against him, that he is not an elite athlete. So he's got to beat people with his footwork and with his smarts. And we'll see if he can do that.

He does have a pretty good floater, but a floater is not an efficient shot. For anybody, if you're not Mike Connolly or very few other people. So he's got great basketball IQ. He's got very good vision. 360, what you call 360 vision, a guy who can pass behind him to open guys. And just a very smart player overall. according to Will Bynum, take this, you know, the former piss, and take those grain of salt because Bynum's the guy training him and you're always going to speak well, the guy you're training. Like, the most notorious example is Kevin Garnett training Thonmaker and saying this guy's future MVP.

But, you know, if you want to listen to Will Bynum, Will Bynum says he has a Kobe-esque work ethic. Of course, Kobe Bryant, may you rest in peace, is at a maniacal work ethic, incredibly hard worker, which often caused some tension between he and any of his teammates. felt we're not working hard enough. He's set a high standard. I think that's probably an exaggeration. You know, if it's even 75% true about Killian Hayes, I mean, then great. So the issue I would say with Hayes, if he's going to be a starter, is that because of his lacking athleticism, really everything has to come together if he's going to be a high level starter. He's got to put that, he's got to put together his craftiness, his basketball IQ, his passing, and his shooting. also has to fix his left-hand dominance.

The guy is just way too reliant on his left-hand right now, and that's a very exploitable weakness. So he's got quite a bit of work to do, though. Again, he'll be very young, and he'll have the opportunity to play and make mistakes in Detroit. I mean, that's just a place Detroit is right now. We don't know how he, you know, really how he'll look in a much more difficult league than the one in which he's played,

but I have confidence. Guy says he models his game for what it's worth after Genobley, manager nobly and to a lesser extent after Hardin. So I like him. This is a guy with whom I would have serious fear of missing out. I mean, that's not a good reason to draft somebody by any means. But I think if he pulls it together, he's not going to be the best guy in a championship team. I don't think he has that capacity.

But he could be your number two. It could be a pretty good point guard. If he gets a shooting together, he could easily play off the ball to whatever degree you would like. and yeah, I just like the guy a lot. I do think that in this draft, excuse me, in a normal draft he might be a guy who would go later on in the lottery. But just based on who is likely to be available when the Pistons pick, I think he might be the best of the bunch.

What are your thoughts, again, on his fit and role, Tommy? Yeah, so if he was... His role was obvious, I suppose, point guard. If he was drafted by the Pistons, he would be their presumed point guard of the future. I'm considerably lower on him than you. This whole time, I was like kind of up and down on him. There are some people who have him as like their number one prospect.

There are others who just don't see it with him. For me, it comes down to two things. The question mark of his shooting and his struggles, I want to say going right, isn't it? Yeah, well, with his right hand. Yeah, if you force him into, if you force him, for example, into the right corner, He's probably going to try to pass the ball with his left hand. And just his tendency to go to the right, this just is very predictable tendency to try to score with his left hand at the rim at all times.

Right. That was, yeah, I just wanted to make sure. But that's a huge problem in the NBA. Primary ball handler, killing his dribble. Like if you force him in one direction, like, teams will scout that. And especially in the NBA where the level of athleticism is so much higher,

if you force a guy in one direction and you know that he's going to, you know that he struggles in that way, they will absolutely force you that direction every single time. And it's really hard to see that guy being the point guard of the future if he can't fix that. And then there's the shooting, you know, you talk about this stepback, and that is absolutely one of the most intriguing things about him. But if it doesn't come together, this is your supposed point guard of the future who's got shooting problems and presumably having a really hard time getting to the basket. So that takes away one of his levels of scoring. And then the other one is he just struggles on the perimeter.

There's just so many question marks there. If he were to put it all together, yes, he could be really, really good because he has all the tools at 6'5, good size to be a very complete player. But I don't think it's strong enough of a case to take that. risk at the start of a rebuild. And then I think part of the reason that everybody likes him so much is that he has that connection with Seku. That's not a factor to me.

I see him as a guy who's going to have iffy shooting. And if either that or the left-hand dominance is an issue, his value is significantly diminished and you can't expect him to be a starter. Yeah, I'd say his number one question mark. I actually have a lot of confidence just looking at his free. Looking at his tape and looking at just his form, I actually have confidence he could develop into a good shooter. I'd say his primary question mark is his left-hand dominance. And again, how he's going to look outside of a system that caters to him in which he's playing primarily off the ball.

If he can shoot, then whatever, you can easily play off the ball and be a very valuable player. We didn't mention his defense. The guy, I don't think, is ever likely to be a very good defender. But he is long. He's fairly strong. He needs to get stronger. But, you know, he could be a basically a neutral level defender, which is fine. He's not a liability.

He's not a liability. And he puts on more strength. He could probably switch to a degree. It helps, again, that he's 6-5, 6-8 wingspan. So, yeah, you do, there are worries about the guy. I just, I think that in this draft, I would go for him. That's basically what it is. I think in your average draft, if the Pissons were picking numbers,

seven you'd be saying they're kind of sure things higher up but i think in this draft you go for it i think again if he can get it together i would say his ceiling is probably like in the low end of the top ten and you know in terms of point guards but that's pretty good i like that the guy seems to have a very good work ethic a very good attitude i don't care about his connection with saku i don't care that they're speak the same language you know speak the same primary language and both from france i don't think that's a factor i mean killian ace has come out in said, oh, yeah, I would make the transition so much easier because, you know, we're friends and he's lift here already for a year and something like that. And, but I would just be really

afraid of missing out on a potentially, you know, potentially a very solid player. And also, and this is largely, you know, this is something I've said this time and time again. Likeability is a factor for me. Probably more of a factor for me than, than for the average person. just because the Pistons teams in the recent future have not been likable. I mean, Drummond, for me, not at all likable. Jackson in his first two seasons, super egotistical and selfish. Jackson matured by the end, he was a model teammate, all the credit to the guy. But for those first couple of years, he was, for me, very unlikable because he was not a team player.

So, yeah, I'd really like to have guys. of whom I think well and just, you know, seem like really good teammates and so on and so forth. So, yeah, Hayes would be my guy if he's available. I think this almost certain that he's available. Like you said, he's a guy has been mocked everywhere, you know, even as high as like number two to the Warriors. I don't remember who did that.

I don't really remember. Just may have been one of those random mock drafts out there. I remember the Schmitz are giving. He's saying that the teams just don't. know where he's going to get selected. Some of them have him hit as low as 12 or 13. You know, again, could be even higher than the Pistons, though unlikely. So I think he'll still be available. I'd be pretty disappointed if at least in the moment, it could be proven wrong in time, but I'd be disappointed if the Pistons were to take Patrick Williams over.

Anything else to add before we move on to your favorite here? I think he's probably my least favorite of the four that we're talking about today, but I think if it's not Patrick Williams, it's most likely him. So I think you'd probably get your wish. Yeah, I think Williams will probably still be available, but you never know. If Atlanta trades that pick, if, just if somebody much higher up really just says we really, you know, says we really like this guy. There have been murmurs from national sources that maybe he could go as high as number four. That would be a shock to me. But stranger things have happened. So now we move on to Tommy's favorite, Tyrese Halliburton.

I actually don't have a lot to say about the guy. They're, he's pretty cut and dry. Super likable, by all accounts, just a very good leader. Great for his teammates, mentality and morale. Just an overall floor razor by that alone. I think, again, one of those guys, one of the big draft guys, was talking about, even in pickup games, his teammates absolutely love to play with him. So he's spoken up very highly in that capacity.

He's a workhorse. In college, he played a ton of minutes. fantastic basketball IQ, always knows what to do. Really top-notch court vision. A solid shooter. He needs to work on his shooting above the break. Also, his form needs help. He has a very low release point.

That might not fly in the NBA where guys are just going to close out on him much faster. And sometimes revamping your shot is difficult. Some guys try it, and it goes very poorly. But I think for Halliburton, maybe this is completely arbitrary. I think he's a guy who could get it together. He just seems to have a lot of aptitude. a shooter, just natural aptitude. And natural aptitude is important. Some guys just don't have that aptitude at all. Guys like Andre Roberson, for example, who could work, and I'm sure it did work very

hard and never became a good three-point shooter, you know, even though the Thunder really needed him to become a reliable three-point shooter. Tony Allen, who could, who have been told could hit his threes in practice, but never in games. So, yeah, that aptitude is important, and it seems that he has it and really has it to a high degree. As far as defense is concerned, he's what you'd call long. He's got a good wingspan. And he's smart. Got good footwork. Just that basketball IQ is there on the defensive end as well. So when we're talking about his minuses, the likelihood is that he doesn't have a very high ceiling. Kind of what you see right now is what he's likely to be. Not that he can improve, but his player type is what he's likely to be. It's not very athletic.

most likely won't really be beating guys in the NBA off the dribble. Didn't really do a very good job of it, even in the NCAA. He's a twig. He's very thin. He needs to put on a considerable amount of strength. And some guys can't do that. I mean, your most notable examples are guys like Thon and bowl bowl. Some players, there are others as well.

Some players just, there's some people, that's certainly even some NBA athletes. have a great deal of trouble adding muscle. They are just naturally thin. Is that Halliburton? Hard to say. But regardless of if he does that or not, he should be good at defending guards just based on his smarts and his footwork.

I think he should be good enough. But you put a guy like Jason Tatum on him, he's just going to get Earl of Bronn James or any number of the stronger wings or combo forwards. He's going to get overpowered. And maybe he's better at stealing the ball or whatever else than the average guy in that situation. But, you know, there's only so much you can do with, what is he, like 175 pounds,

I think. Yeah, if you're 175 pounds and very lanky and you've got Jimmy Butler going at you at like 230 pounds, it's like, sorry, he's just going to shoulder you out of the way. There's only so much you can do so that in that respect, he would be a liability on defense. So a guy who is likely to be a great teammate and overall useful player, but probably not a difference maker. I would say undoubtedly the most cut and dry, save his pick in the top range of the draft period. Might, however, have the lowest ceiling of any of the top 10 guys, though. So I feel like I wouldn't be upset about drafting him.

He's a guy who could be a foundational piece. You hate to think about things this way, but he also probably won't help the Pistons win many games on his own. That's useful for draft position next year, which is going to remain important. There's not much excitement that's going to come with him. He's just he's not a flashy player. He's fundamentally sound, but he's not flashy at all, not athletic. He's not going to be a guy who's going to be making big plays. I would say, however, a 75% chance he's gone before the Pistons pick.

Like I said in the last episode, could easily go to the Warriors. If not, I'm pretty confidence that the Hawks who right now, you know, who drafted only last year Hunter and Reddish, I don't think they're likely to add another wing or backup point guard, I think Halliburton would be a very good fit next to Young, or next to Steph Curry. So just as a guy who for either Young or Curry can maybe wait in the first quarter when it should can just whether he's coming off the bench, you know, which isn't outside the realm of possibility, a guy who can spell one of those guys take on the actual ball handling and facilitating duties. Also, his defense would be pretty welcome next to, next to Tray Young, who is an abominable defender.

So I don't think he'll be available. I know Tommy, you'd be very happy if he were available. And when it comes to fit and roll, I think it's pretty, you know, pretty straightforward. Is there anything in particular you think can be added to what we already know? Yeah. I think it's worth mentioning just like to start that he's only worked out with four teams. I'm just looking right now. It's the Bulls, Timberwolves, and Warriors.

and then the Pistons, of course. So as of right now, and he said he didn't know if he had any more workouts planned. So right now, the only teams he's worked out with are all above us. And I don't think the Timberwolves were taken with the number one overall. I think they would probably trade down to get him. Yeah, that would be one of the great stretches of all time at the number one overall pick. Here's why I think he's got interest from these good teams, though. Yes, like you said, I don't think he's going to.

going to take a bad team and elevate them very much this year. I see him as like a really, really good complimentary player. And I think four to five years down the line, I think that's potentially more valuable than any of the guys really that we were talking about today. His three point percentage, his range actually stems from the fact that he was playing so, he was so skinny. He couldn't he had no choice but to like back up really far and take these shots uh i do disagree though i don't think he has a low release point i think the start point of his shot was low like and even now it's a little bit lower i think he mostly shoots from his chin but before he was shooting like from his waist if he puts on more muscle maybe he can raise that up higher but six five long arms his release

point is still fairly high it looks weird because it's a push shot but it's still not released that far out uh compared to a regular jump shot it's just weird looking. I don't envision him as the point guard of the future. I think he would be your shooting guard, who can also take on some of the ball handling duties. You mentioned Cade Cunningham. I think he'd be a great fit next to him.

Point guards in future drafts, you know, that's kind of the thing you sort of, you wait for that season to play out. Point guards move all over the place. We saw a Coal Anthony stock tank. We saw Halliburton and Tyrol Terry, guys like them shoot up. that's sort of a wait-and-see type deal.

But Halliburton Knight, I really like him as a future guy, and I like him as a culture guy. I talked a lot about culture being mostly worthless in terms of... It was an argument that people would make in previous years when we would sign all these guys, and it was kind of like win now or rebuild on the fly type deal. I was like, well, we're trying to establish a winning culture. That's why we traded for Blake Griffin. and that's why we're not tanking ever. That was garbage to me.

I hated that argument. But here, with this team that's starting from scratch, I think a guy like Halbert who's just universally liked, everybody seems to gravitate towards him, he's well-spoken. I think he would be a great building block. It is a safe pick, I think, and I don't think you would add to the wind columns too much this year. but I think for our long-term plans,

I think he's the best pick available. I mean, I don't really agree with that he's the best pick available. So like I said, I think he's just the super safe pick. He's the guy you know will contribute. That it would be a little bit difficult for me to stomach, I suppose, for the Pistons to take a guy like that and what's likely would it be just a two or three draft rebuild. I'd really like to see them shoot higher than that.

About his shot, maybe seeing as a low release point wasn't, maybe I wasn't entirely clear about that. So his shot starts low. It takes a little while to get up to his final release point, which is right about at his forehead, which isn't super high. And, you know, it's generally high enough, but it's not super high. But an additional issue is that it's more or less a set shot. He gets very little elevation on it.

So by default, that lowers his release point because, you know, the ball is, you know, not very high when it's released. And, you know, that's more than enough for him to have issues with closeouts. You mean much more easily blocked at the NBA level where guys would be closing out much harder, guys who are much quicker and much more explosive and have a much greater wing span on average. So that's how I feel about Halliburton. I just, I don't think he's the best pick for the Pistons. I wouldn't be super upset if he was selected, but I don't think they'll have the opportunity. One thing, this isn't a factor,

just something that comes to mind, but almost certainly push Bruce Brown off the roster because you have, I mean, Brown's, if he doesn't learn to shoot, his primary value in this rebuild is as a character guy, as a leader. If you bring Paliburton on the team, then you have a guy who's a character guy and a leader who is a good passer,

excuse me, just good as a playmaker for others, maybe on a secondary basis and is a good shooter versus Brown who's a leader and a character guy who is a bad shooter and not nearly as good of a playmaker. I like Brown, really like him just because of his attitude and his mindset. And ultimately, I would be a little sad to see him go. That should absolutely, I would never, if I were doing the drafting, hold that as a factor and whether or not to select hell of it enough. All right, moving on to the last guy and the most controversial lamello ball.

as we said in the last episode, and as many of you have probably seen, there has been talk of the Pistons looking into trading up because they want to select them. They have worked them out. As I have said, I don't think that's indicative of anything. I think the Pistons are just really looking to see what's possible. So, and they, it seems, have not used the 10 available workouts. I think that those 10 workouts, taking that full 10 is most useful for 10. teams that are picking later on and when you have much less of an inkling of who's going to be

available. I don't think the Pistons have a package that could allow them to trade up and take Lamello. It's been said widely that he's considered the top talent and the draft. I think that another team would outbid the Pistons. That said, I mean, Lamello, the fact that he is the top talent, it should be said, this is contextual. This draft is weak. There is no surefire top talent. and the fact that Lamello is number one, I think, is just an indication, is considered number one in terms of talent is just an indication of how weak the draft is. So just a quick synopsis of what he brings. Brilliant court vision, top-notch passing is a good handler. It certainly does not lack for confidence, which is a double-edged sword.

That's basically what you're looking at for Lamello what he brings right now. If you look at his minuses, dreadful shot form, he has said, publicly he has no intention of changing it. He is not particularly athletic. Oh, sorry, in the plus column size also. He's really tall for a blinker. So not particularly athletic. He was a lazy defender in Australia.

I don't think he has high-level scoring talent because I don't think he'll ever be very good to get into the basket. I don't think he has it in him to become an elite shooter. What I think is deeply questionable attitude and mental outlook. Guy strikes me as already pretty entitled. This has already been in the spotlight for a long time. time. And I just don't think he has the sort of good teammate and good listener,

good follower attitude when it comes to playing on a team. So a lot of concerning behavior by the accounts of national sources. His interviews with teams have been very unimpressive. Teams seem to have not come out and get said good things about his interviews. As far as further stuff on the courts, right now we can't play off the ball. If he does get his because he can't shoot. If he gets his shooting together, he'll almost certainly always be a great deal better on the ball than off of it. But I don't think he'll ever be a good enough player that he can be the primary handler on a really top-notch team. And that sort of scope-limited contribution really is an ideal. It could easily bust hard. If he does not get his shot and his methodal outlook together, you could easily bust. I've said it before. I think it should be reiterated because this is important. Just having excellent passing and good handles in the same. in today's NBA is not enough. It is just not enough. You have to be able to shoot or defenses will play you by sagging. And then it becomes a great deal more difficult for everybody else. Your offense is much more limited because this guy has to have the ball. And that's a big

problem that could easily bust him out of the league. If you want to look at the non-shooting point guards are left in the league, your absolute best example is Alfred Payton, wrecked up a ton of assists, bad player. Played on the Knicks. He was not even good by the standards in the Knicks. So you've got to be able to be able to. shoot and his form sucks. I don't think unless he revamps that form, I don't think his shot will ever be any better. Your idea, basically your ideal shot is to have as little extraneous movement as possible. You just, you know, to keep that arm to the side and basically just have your main variable be how hard you are flicking your wrist. And Lamello basically his wrist, his, his release comes up from his rib cage and his upper chest, which is just so much extra movement that it is, you know, how are you ever going to control for that?

So I don't feel good about him. Maybe he has the highest ceiling in the draft. I think that's Anthony Edwards personally. But that's not because he's superstar bound again. It's just because of how weak this draft is in elite talent. And so I'm somebody who always looks at somebody's attitude. This has just always been big for me. It's one of the reasons I really found Drummond so aversive.

One of the reasons I found early stage Jackson to be so aversive. Like, you know, the sports figures I really looked up to when I was younger were the likes of, for the Rebbings. Steve Eisenman, Nicholas Lidstrom, you know, Hemrick Zetterberg. Those guys who are all about the team always work hard and were just all about what can I do that is going to help this team win. And how can I be the best leader I can be and set the best example. Also, guys like to go into work pistons, you know, Chonte Billups in particular. So that's always going to inform my viewpoint on players. I also think it has validity because I think those guys, it's very important to have those

qualities and can be a drag on the team if you don't have them. But I don't think he fits the modern game well. I'm not confident he'll be a good teammate. I'm not confident in his maturity. I'm not confident in his scoring talent. And to be an elite point guard these days, you have to be an elite score. And, you know, I'm not confident in his, ability to play in today's increasingly positionless and free-form game.

So I think a great deal one need to go right for him to develop well, and I don't know if he has the mentality and the work ethic to make that happen. So I know, Tommy, you strongly disagree with all of this. It's not that I strongly disagree. I can see the intrigue, and I see why he's kind of the consensus number one among certain, I guess, media outlets. The potential is just sky high with him. his creativity passing, his feel for the game, and his handle as well.

I mean, I would just say his potential is sky high, though, if he probably doesn't have that high-level scoring talent that characterizes. I think he just needs to be league average as a shooter. And I think he can dial his, because his, his shot selection is terrible. Like, he just lets it rip early shot clock, long floaters, like super long threes, off balance. Like he, when he wants to shoot, he will shoot. And he was given free reign in Australia to do pretty much whatever he wanted. His coach said, we believe in you.

Just draw attention to the Australian League. And it worked. I don't think that's going to be the case at all in Detroit. Casey's by what we've seen is... Probably not the NBA regardless of which team he goes to. Yeah, but like, I don't think that shit will fly on any team. Right. But like, in the language.

He, uh, he's going to be held more accountable. He's going to get pulled if... he's playing that type of garbage out on an NBA court. So I think he could boost his three-point percentage just by taking better shots. That alone, I think, would bring him a lot closer to, like, the 30%. I think the magic number for him would be like 32, 33%. That's what Lucas shoots. Oh, well, Lucas shoots much more difficult shots.

Much more difficult shots. You just need to draw the defender and kind of make it so that they want. to go over occasionally. Another thing, I guess, take from this what you will. He apparently shot the ball pretty well in his workout with the Timberwolves. If he fell to seven, would you want to take him? I don't know. I would say, just first a couple of disagreements I have just how much have said.

How do you think he could be, I do think he has a sky high ceiling if, you know, he probably doesn't have elite potential as a shooter? and every one of your elite point guards is an elite score. Because, you know, not just because, you know, that's a super great thing to be able to do, but because it means that they don't need to play on the ball all the time. So, I mean, how do you think he has that sky high ceiling if he doesn't have that potential as a score? He's never going to be a guy that you want playing off the ball. His main thing is that he's a great passer.

And if he, if this is what he was doing with really crappy shooting, if he could just get to league average shooting and he's like drawing defenders and making it so that nobody can sag off him, I think his potential as a pastor gets even higher. Yeah, but we've seen what happens in cases, basically when you have a point guard who's heavily ball dominant and his main skill is passing. And so it's always going to be by far the best

if the ball is in his hands. This is not a characteristic. That is absolutely not a characteristic of the lead guards, who aside from Ben Simmons, who is a problem, you know, because his fit with Embed is really bad. And part of what makes him really good is the fact that he's one of the best defenders in the world also, in addition to just being an absolutely excellent passer. And also he's unstoppable on the way of the basket, which Lamello is not and probably never will be.

So, you know, every other elite point guard, and I'm not sure if I would call Simmons an elite point guard in the offense event. Every other elite point guard can play off the ball. I mean, Curry is a good playmaker, is a good passer for others. also the best shooter of all time. You know, is very able of playing off the ball. Send him her on a screen and, you know, he'll do his thing and he'll shoot and he'll probably make it. And, you know, your other point guards aren't quite that good, but all of them are perfectly capable of playing off the ball.

They'll all lose something when they're not playing on the ball, but it will be much less than in the case of Lamello or somebody like John Wall, for example. John Wall, if you take the ball, he's a fantastic passer. And there have been points in his career, like, I think, I don't remember. two or three seasons ago when he actually shot okay from three. But you have to have the ball in his hands or he loses a ton of utility. Just a ton of utility. He gets a lot worse without it.

And that really limits your options. And it's basically, well, we can give this guy the ball and he's at his best. And he can play off the ball, but he's a lot worse. Like a lot worse. And I think that really limits your options. I think that is a very negative quality. And that's the reason why I would say just being a fantastic passer, even if you're an acceptable shooter is not going to make you in a weight point card

because there is an opportunity cost for having you on the floor. As far as this workout with the Timberwolves, a lot easier to shoot when you're shooting in rhythm and without NBA caliber defenses playing against you and without having to perform in a system. Now, would I take him at number seven? I would say if he fell to number seven, it is because, you know, with all that he's being touted

as is a very good talent and perhaps the best talent in the draft, if he falls to number seven, it is because teams, because teams feel so badly about him in terms of mentality and his ability to develop him to a good shooter that they just said, well, he's got all this talent, but we don't want him. So if you've held on number seven, I would say no. I would absolutely say no. I'd be like, you know, this is, this is most, almost certainly because teams just think horribly of his mental outlook. And I don't see any reason for the pistons to take that risk. Guys like that are inherent drag on their team. And you can say that case you would hold him accountable. Your coach can hold you

accountable and you can still just say, well, I don't care what you have to say. And there are players like that. Your coach, then it's just tension between the player and the coach. Just the fact that you have a guy who will hold you accountable. And we've seen this in many walks of sports. You know, just because you have somebody, many walks, I mean, just various, various team sports, where you, just because you have a coach or even other teammates who are like, I'm not putting up with your crap, it doesn't mean that that's going to make any difference to a guy who just doesn't care what you have to say. So if he drops to seven, no, not taking him.

Because that just means that he is considered by six other teams to have such faults that despite his talent, you know, his amazing talent as a passer, which again is an asset. I'm not downplaying that as an asset. But despite the talent he does have, he's just not worth taking a risk on. And as the Pistons, I would say, not worth it for you either. there are players who drop quite a bit I'm missing on somebody

in the last couple drafts somebody dropped a tremendous amount just based on I believe concerns with his attitude though I might be thinking of a different sport so yeah number seven if he's there six other teams have passed on him not taking him

a million years I don't think he makes it past the Bulls at four and then if he makes it past five and six it's because of his positional or the fact that the calves and the hawks don't need a primary ball handler. And then the other thing I want to talk about is the fact that he does need to learn to

play up to his size. He hasn't been 6-8 for very long. And pretty much all his life, he's been playing a lot smaller than his competition. Like, he's been playing against much older kids. He reclassified in eighth grade so they can play against high schoolers as a freshman starting point guard. And part of the reason that he has all these issues with, like, his shot form and his aversion to going strong to the hoop, I think it's because he's just.

still used to playing that small. It's really hard to get a traditional shot off against somebody's like a foot taller than you. So that's when you start taking really, really long shots. That's when you start shooting from your chest. And that's a problem. And that's certainly something that I think he should fix. And I know that you said that he doesn't intend on doing that. I really don't think he'll be able to go through his entire career without adjusting a shot form in some capacity.

I really, I'm not sticking with the idea that he keeps that shot form for his entire career. Well, the fact that he came out and said, I don't feel like it, so I'm not going to do it. I'd say that's a pretty big red flag. And also, I'd say, I mean, I'm not saying your opinions are incorrect. I think that those are apologies for, because basically almost every, I mean, Seku is an anomaly. You know, he's unusual. Joe L. M. Bid is unusual. They both started playing basketball very late.

A lot of these guys have been playing basketball for their entire lives. They've been highly touted prospects. all of them grew up, you know, basically throwing the ball at the basket from three point range. And all of them, you know, very few of them grew up barreling their weight of the basket and, you know, and going through contact. It's just that they learned over time. They put in the work to, to, you know, keep their shot up to where it needed to be, especially as they got old enough that they, that they were able to actually take three-pointers with proper form. and they focused on scoring through contact because that's what you have to do. I mean, that's a skill at the NBA level, and they're no longer little guys.

These are grown adults who can do it. So, you know, if these things, I think if these were valid apologies, if these were valid excuses for Lamello, then you'd see it a lot more in other players, but you don't because they do that work. I mean, we're talking about high school here. The analytics aren't really as big of a deal here. Chino Hills. I know, the analytic sign is big of a deal. But you see a ton of guys coming out of high school who can shoot threes, you know,

who have an NCAAs at the very least in NCAA ready shot. Guys tour of freshmen in the NCAA who shoot just fine because they have put in that work to have a good shot at the higher level, whereas Lamello's form is crap. And I don't think he's put any work into it. And the fact that he's come out and said, I have no intention of changing it. I think he just hasn't, you know, maybe he's, has been able to just rest on his laurels and everything has been fine, but it's also possible that he just thinks he shouldn't have to do it,

and so he's not going to do it. But I'd say the vast majority of guys you see come in, if they have potential as a shooter, have at least a semblance of a shot form that is going to work in the NBA because they put in that work. And he hasn't, and he says he has no intention of doing it. And I think that's a character flaw.

Yeah, that's a character flaw, but I just, there's just too much talent there to pass on him at seven. I think I'd still take Halliburton over him, but I see the potential there. I still think he has the highest ceiling just based on his passing and if he can just take better shots. And the other thing is he does need to go stronger to the rim, but he's, like I said, he hasn't been 6-8 for very long.

I think he'll eventually learn to go stronger. You don't have to be 6-8. You have guys who are 2-11 in the NCAA who go to the rim hard. Yeah, I mean, I don't think that's a function of size tonight. I'd say that... I think it's a mental thing with him from playing as, like, the youngest kid on those Chino Hills teams. Like I said, you've got plenty of guys who play young and still do these things,

just because these are necessary skills and because they think it's going to give them the best shot. I think Lamello has the attitude that he can rest in his laurels that he doesn't need to work out on these things. I think he hasn't developed them because he says, well, I just don't really need to. You saw how he played in Australia. A lot of the time it was lazy. He didn't do things because he just didn't have to.

You know, you can go out. You have a lot of guys who will go out no matter the league and be the best player they can possibly be, and that's not him. And I think that's a major strike against him. And I think that he's coming into the NBA, coming in to the NBA, and he's saying, well, my shot, I don't care what you think about my shot. I don't really feel like changing it. I think that's a terrible attitude. And I think it reflects very poorly on him that he is not the kind of player who just goes out and strives for excellence. And again, I think if he falls to number seven, it's because.

teams were so unimpressed with his attitude and his mental outlook that they just didn't want him. And I don't think the piston should want any part of a player like that. Also, like I said, I disagree that Cleveland wouldn't take him, though. Partly because it's Cleveland, partly because they just need help everywhere. If they think that this guy, you know what, has star level talent, then they would take him even though they've got Garland and Sexton. I think, I'm not sure if, didn't they play sexton a lot off the bench last year? I couldn't tell you. I don't remember, but Sexton seems pretty suited as a bench score.

It's just sort of a bench flamethrower. Maybe Garland will get it together. I don't think they would feel too bad about having three guards, especially because they're nowhere near competing. I don't know if Gilbert, if Dan Gilbert is the owner of the Cavaliers has dropped that imperative like he fired Tailu. It was a couple of seasons ago, yeah. Yeah, so Flamello drops to number seven.

Yeah, well, if he goes, if he's available at number four, I don't think that the Cavaliers will care. And like I was saying before, who knows if Dan Gilbert will be on the win now train. They don't have the talent for it anyway, but he did fire Tyloo a couple seasons ago very early in the season because the cabs weren't winning the year after LeBron left for L.A. They had a terrible roster. It was kind of the players were like, even the players were like, what? So, but I would say,

he, if he's available for the Hornets, like, I don't think they would ever pass on him. Like, why would they do that? Yeah. As far as ceiling, I think that Anthony Edwards is the highest ceiling in the draft. It's freakish athletes, and he has potential as a superstar score on the wing. I'll put him in number two right now. I think I'd still rather have him over Lamello, but I think Lamello still has a higher ceiling. I don't see how that's, I mean, I don't see how that's possible how a, how a point guard who will probably never be a particularly good score is.

going to be more valuable than, you know, if Edwards really reaches that high ceiling becomes a star-level wing score. I don't see how a Mello could possibly be more relevant than that. I mean, you're, your number one. And I mean, sure, there are ball-stopping scores who, you know, look like they put up a lot of points but really aren't, you know, like Andrew Wiggins, for example, and he's been comped a lot to Andrew Wiggins, excuse me, who's been comped a lot to Anthony Edwards because there are concerns about Anthony Edwards' mentality and his motor and his drive, and those have been issues with Wiggins as well. Well, like Wiggins with Timberwolves was just a not very efficient ball-stopping score,

so it put up a lot of points but it wasn't really great. But if you have an actual good star-level score from the wing, that's about as valuable as they get in the NBA. I don't see how a guy who, you know, who has to be on the ball, who's primarily utility is found just in passing. I don't see how that's nearly as valuable. I mean, why, you know, what would be your reasons for saying that what Lamello can provide to be more valuable?

It's just a matter of getting to league average scoring, honestly. If he can get people going over screens, that really opens up his game. Yeah, it opens up his game and he can pass to other people, but he'll never, I don't think he'll ever be particularly good at scoring the ball. And that is the most important skill in the NBA. I think you can get that. Sure. I mean, do you think he has elite talent to score?

Just the potential, rather stealing as an elite score? I think he just needs to get over these mental blocks about being contact diverse, and he needs to take better shots. Tweek his shot for him at the very least, but probably rebuild it. And I think that eventually they will when he hits some kind of wall. But from what everyone said is that he loves the game of basketball. Like it's not even like a thing that he just does because he's good at it. He loves it and he really enjoys it.

I don't think that's going to be an issue. A lot of guys. I mean, your average, I mean, you have occasionally, you know, very talented guys in any sport who just go into the sport because they're good at it, not necessarily because they love it. Like, there was this notorious draft bust in hockey at some point in the 90s named Alexander Digg, you know, credit to anybody who recognizes that name because he wound up to be pretty obscure and did not have anything like a distinguished NHL career. So he was very talented, but he said later on, he's like, yeah, I just play hockey because I'm good at it.

And he ended up not being particularly good at it. He was absolutely highly touted, consensus number one overall pick and was just not really all that much into hockey. But I think your average guy comes in loving the game. But you can come in loving the game and have a really crappy attitude and be super entitled and not want to listen to anybody. But should Lamello get his scoring abilities to league average? I mean, by definition, he's not an elite score. He doesn't have that sort of explosive that's necessary to blow past people at, blow past people off the dribble.

I don't see any reason to believe that he's going to be an elite score at the rim. I don't think he's going to be beating people with his burst. It would be with his handles. Yeah, but do you look at his handles? I mean, what he has done so far has been against poor competition. The Australian League is a joke. I mean, like NCAA players who were good in the NCAA but failed to be drafted, but are not drafted even in the second round.

there and dominate. Those are the majority of the most dominant players in the Australian league are those guys, guys who are not good enough for the NBA. Or Andrew Bogot, who could no longer play in the NBA and won MVP at a league. So what we've seen so far from Lamello is him playing against really crappy competition and still not doing particularly well. So, but, you know, I don't want to keep coming back to it, but it's like you go for, you know, you go for a, you know, an elite score. You can presumably play on a off the ball. Or you go for a point guard who is not a good, you know, who does not project to be an elite scorer and walks you into a certain style of play. And I just don't think his passing is that

valuable. I don't think his handles will be enough to get him past people in the NBA. So those are my misgivings about Lamello, but my biggest misgivings, you know, if he were a guy who had these issues, because, you know, it was clear he was working super hard on them. It would be a different story, but I don't think he has to work out if you get together. And to be honest, I just don't want somebody with that sort of questionable mentality with the business. So that's my take. I know we've sort of gone around and around here. Who do you think we end up with?

Not Lamello, because I don't think he'll, I think, I agree he won't drop past four. I think he certainly wouldn't even drop past the Cavaliers. The Cavaliers are, is it the balls that calves at four? The Bulls. Bulls, okay. Yeah, I don't think he would, I think it's very unlikely he drops past number three. I would be surprised if the Timber Wolves drafted him to be on. honest, I'd say 75% chance they draft Edwards if they don't trade down, just because you bring in,

you pay a pretty significant price, actually, to bring in DeAngelo Russell, who's a very heavily on ball player. He can shoot, but he's a very heavily on ball player. And then you bring in Lamello. Like, that's a very precarious fit. I mean, you're really going to make Dilo count, too, because you traded away a potentially very high pick for him. I mean, it doesn't mean you have to make him count, but you just out of fear of missing out in that pick, you want to make him, you want to get as much as you can out of him. But it's just like there's that fit is bad. I think that there would be tension there. I think you would, as far as defense goes, that team would be a sieve. It would be awful. But I just, I think the fit is really crappy.

Meanwhile, I think if you can, if Anthony Edwards can get it going and maybe Jared Culver becomes a respectable defender, you know, who knows? I don't think the Warriors would take him, but I think the Hornets of the Bulls would in a second. And Wes, again, unless they just feel so badly about him that they don't want no part of him. And I don't think that's likely. I also don't think it's outside the wrong possibility. So I would say, and Wes Weaver just loves Patrick Williams. And assuming, you know, I'd say really high chances available, but you never know.

I would say Killian Hayes is the likelyest pick. I think Halliburton will be gone anyway. I don't think that'll really be a choice that he has to make. I think it will come down to Killian Hayes or Patrick Williams. And, yeah, I think 60-40, it'll be Hayes. I had it as something like, and basically in descending order, most likely it was like Patrick Williams, Killian Hayes, Tyrese Halliburton. But I have Hayes and Halliburton as like a coin toss for me.

I think they do like Halliburton and the type of player he is. He seems like the type of player that we were. would really like, and then least likely is still lamello, but the fact that we've worked them out, I think there's something there. I mean, the issue with who Weaver really like, I mean, if you look at what's been supposed to be his archetype, and again, I don't think that we really know for sure, because he's never made these decisions, he's never been the ultimate decision maker for a front office before. That was, of course, Sam Presti, that was the GM in Oklahoma City, made the final decisions.

But if we're looking at Weaver's archetype, he says, sure, there are two aspects, really like super athletic players and really likes guys with great personalities. So Lamello fits none of those. None. I mean, sure, really going with two units to see none. He fits neither of those. He is not an athletic player by NBA standards. And there are serious questions about his personality. Halliburton, sure, absolutely winning million dollar personality, not the most athletic player, but I don't think we should hone in too much on what we think Weaver's type is because ultimately we just don't know. We could easily surprise everybody. All right. So that'll be it for today's episode. Draft is on Wednesday and we will be back

shortly after the draft with our feelings and analysis. So thank you all for listening and we'll see you next time.