The Ringer NBA Show - 'High Upside'—Molding the Modern Guard (Ep. 114)

Episode Date: May 22, 2017

The Ringer's Kevin O'Connor and Jonathan Tjarks discuss the lottery-level guards in the 2017 NBA draft. Topics include: Markelle Fultz's defense (5:00), Frank Ntilikina's NBA frame (11:00), Dennis Smith Jr.'s fit on the Mavericks (17:00), Malik Monk's lack of assists (22:00), Donovan Mitchell's foundation of skills (26:00), and the ideal skill set of the modern NBA guard (30:00). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Larry Wilmore here, host of the podcast, Larry Wilmore, Black on the air. Now, in my latest episode, I talked to Senator Bernie Sanders about the state of the Democratic Party and the polarization happening in America and Trump's rise to power. And Trump picked up and he said, you know what? I feel your pain. The establishment is ignoring you. I, Donald Trump, I, of all people, am going to take on the establishment. Well, he lied, of course. But that was his message. So you can hear this episode in full and subscribe to my show by Search. for Larry Wilmore, Black on the Air on Apple Podcast, Stitcher, Spotify, Mobile, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey, welcome to High Upside, the Ringer's new NBA draft podcast. My name's Kevin O'Connor, and I'm joined today, as I will be every week through the NBA draft by fellow Ringer staff writer Jonathan Charks. John, what's up? Nothing much, man. How you doing? Enjoying your big game three win from last night? That was a wild, wild, wild game, dude. That was very wild.

So for the Celtics, they had the number one pick, and last week we talked about on High Upside, the draft lottery and the implications of that. And this week we're going to talk about the guards projected to go in this year's lottery. And to kind of set the table here, before we get into the discussion, there's seven guards, point guards or combo guards that really have a strong chance of going into the lottery. There are Markell Foltz, Monzo Ball, De Aaron Fox, Dennis Smith, Frank Nilly, Kina, Malik Monk, and Dunvin Mitchell. We're not going to go through all those guys because we did some last week.

But to kick it off, we're going to start with the guy who's almost certainly going to go, number one and that's markelle fultz he's first on virtually everybody's board he's number one number one on our 2017 NBA draft guide so jonathan fultz is your top ranked guard and number one overall prospect i have a very simple question for you why uh i got a simple answer he's awesome um i say i saw someone say something along the lines of he's the carl towns of guards like he's just a really easy guy to project he's really good at almost everything you need in a guard to do these days. He has a chance to be a great NBA player. And even a worst case scenario, he should be an above average NBA point guard or shooting guard. He's very versatile. You can play him off the

ball or on the ball. He has everything really well. I mean, I think to me it's pretty, I want to see the person who doesn't have Fultz number one, really. So, you know, with Fultz, I mean, like, we're on the same page. He's number one on my book. I think that's, you know, a pretty cool comparison that he's the towns of point guards. I don't know if I'd go that far, but I do, I do have him as my number one prospect, and I'm just going to play devil's advocate here, okay? Because I think there has to be someone out there who doesn't have Fultz number one. So I'm going to be their voice right now. And one of the concerns, I got you.

One of the concerns I have with Fultz, John, is that, you know, when you watch all his plays and you go through everything, it's really hard to find like super, super explosive moments. And like, I'm talking about, you know, dunks in traffic, you know, tremendous, you know, offhand, at-rim finishes, step-back threes, and, you know, sometimes with watching Fultz, and I'm talking about offense here, not defense. It's hard to get over, like, how passive or sluggish he can be sometimes. And is that concerning at all of you? Does that stand out, Charks? I don't know. I mean, there's that one play against when he was playing, I think he was UNLV or at the UNLV arena, where he stole the ball at half cart, court, brought up the floor, went behind his back and dunked

on someone. Like, he has nice explosive plays. You know what I'm talking? That's transition, though. Like, what about in the half court, though? Half court situations. I mean, he has those great, I guess, those, he has a lot of big chase down blocks. Like, to me, I'm not, maybe he's not like, I don't know, John Wall, athletically, but I don't necessarily think that's the end of the world given his size. To me, the bigger issue is his defense.

How worried about you about how much he plays on defense. That, to me, is the big red flag with Fultz. Not, like, I mean, it's a concern, but, like, Foltz is the number one pick for his offense and not as defense. I mean, like, if he becomes a great defensive player on top of being a tremendous offensive player, I think that that's kind of a rarity in the sense. You look at a lot of the point guards in the top NBA, and they're elite guards for their offense. And so for Fultz, I think early in his career, if he's drafted by the Celtics, he's going to have to defend to stay on the floor.

Fultz will need to defend or Brad Stevens isn't going to keep him out there, especially on the perimeter. But later in his career, if he does become that elite offensive player, you know, if he slacks off a little bit on defense whatever it is what it is all the top guys do that for the most part aside from really i would say chris paul might be like the the best defensive point guard out of the top guys and you know that's where i go back to his offense i mean if there's a hole to pick with his offensive game i think it's the fact that you know compare him to a guy like dennis smith smith is super explosive in the half core and that's despite playing with two bigs on the floor like

Fultz said where it's Fultz, you know, in a sense, I just, you know, watching all his stuff back, sometimes you wonder, why, why doesn't this guy make me go, wow, more often? Like, why, why am I not going nuts, you know, with this guy when I'm watching his highlights? I'm just curious, though, like, when, what are you looking, what is it from him that, like, makes you feel like, it's okay that we don't see that against college level defenders? I mean, I'm looking more for, like, feel of the game than, like, wow. I mean, he makes a lot of wild plays to me. It might just be in the eye of the beholder thing.

Maybe just a millennial. You're a little jaded. You know, you're like big flashy thing. I don't know. I guess, like, our concern maybe is that maybe the free throw shooting. That's another concern you could have. It's only at 65%. I mean, what if he's not a very good three-point shooter in the NBA?

What if he's only an average shooter? Then you combine average shooting with maybe not tip-top athletic ability. Then maybe he doesn't match his ceiling. Like, he's not... John Wall is an average. overshoot it doesn't really matter he's john wall but false isn't that so that's an issue too you're kind of a shot doctor what's your take on his overall form so i i don't i definitely don't think he's the 40% three-point shooter that his statistics show i think he'll be fine i think you know long-term

maybe he'll be a great shooter but anybody who's you know looking at his basic college stats and sees whatever it is 39.1% or 40% 40% 40% okay so 41.3% that's you know even higher than i i thought But it doesn't change the point that I think that's a little bit misleading in the sense that it's only 126 attempts. It's a small sample size. Historically, three-point percentage isn't really the strongest indicator of shooting success in the NBA. I think he's going to be a good shooter. I have no doubt about that. I just don't know if he'll be a knockdown guy, especially early in his career.

And that's, you know, touches again on, like you said earlier, if he doesn't have the elite shot, perhaps that does hurt some of his interior. you're finishing because he's not necessarily an elite athlete. Don't get me wrong. I mean, I think everything we're saying, and this is kind of, you know, where the James Hardin comparison comes from, everything we're saying right now really applied to James Hardin in college and to an extent kind of still does today where with Fultz, the game looks like it comes easy to him like it did for Hardin. Sometimes it looked like they were coasting. You know, there were questions about Hardin's jumper coming out of college too, but really it's the pace they play with that makes them so devastatingly effective.

Yeah, I would say the Harding comparison is little tough because Hardin just so freaking big. He's like a take, like, 6.5, 220. Fultz isn't that kind of side. I mean, he's about 6'4, but doesn't the same kind of frame would take the contact Hardin can. That guy's a tank. And I guess, too, maybe one final thing with Fultz, he feel like he's a guy,

if he's going to be at his best, he needs like 15, 16, 17 shots a game. He's a very high usage player, whereas, like, Lanzook goes somewhere, take like seven shots a game and still be a really impactful player. I'm not sure how good Markell would be in a third or fourth role, which will be in Boston for a few years anyways. You know, that's certainly a possibility, but, you know, the interesting thing with Fultz, look at, look at his game, you know, basically early in games at Washington. He was passing a lot early in games. Like he would try to get guys going. And it was more in the second half of games that I thought he really turned it up offensively. So I do think he came. And, I do think he came

take on more of a complimentary role. And, you know, that's why, you know, in many ways I like him for the Celtics, because they can kind of mold him into the guy that, you know, they would want him to be long term. And early in his career, he could focus on becoming, you know, more of a hard-nosed defender, develop good habits. Hey, Kevin, I got a question for you. Would you trade faults for Paul George straight up,

not knowing if George would come back next year? Not knowing if Paul George is going to resign? Yeah, like if it's a gamble, if it's like a shot in the dark, No. No way. No chance. No. No, no, you wouldn't. And the reason why is, you know, I wrote this in my article today as a quote from Wick Gross Beck, and he basically said, you know, it's hard to give up eight years of a number one pick in the current state of the NBA. It's hard to say no to that. You would have Markell Fultz until 2025 and he'll be 26, 27 years old then. Paul George will be 35 years old. So I think, you know, you really need to think about sustainability. You need to ask yourself, what would Greg Popovich do? What would Bill Belichick do? I think those are the questions you need to ask yourself when making big decisions like that. Yeah, he would outlast Trump's presidency. That's kind of crazy. Yeah, that's a long time. So, you know, as I said, you know, at the beginning of the podcast, we're skipping over Lonsel Ball.

We're skipping over to Aaron Fox. We discussed those guys a lot last week, especially in, in context of the Lakers and what decision they made. Charks and I wrote a piece together. It's titled Finding Lonzo Ball's True NBA Destiny. and you can check that out on the ringer.com but some of the conversation that relates to those guys can also be applied to Deerrant that some of the conversation

that can be applied to Fox does relate to Frank Nili Kina if that last name is hard to pronounce we have three nickname suggestions just Frank because Frank is a great name filthy Frank because he is a filthy player or if you want to pronounce his name like the ringers Jason Concepcion

just go with Frankie Nicotine that's really my preference Frankie Nicotine I guess Francois 6 with 5 God. Frank, 6'5 guard, 18 years old, ranked 10th on my board, 12th on Danny's, 13th on Jonathan's. John, you're a little bit lower on him than I am and slightly lower than Danny. What hesitations do you have about Frankie Nicotine's game?

I think the main thing with him to me, I'm not sure he has like the burst to be a primary option as a point guard. I kind of look at him more as a guy. He's going to settle into, I think he might end up being a shooting guard. I think he's really smart player. Hopefully he can shoot. He's had a good wide frame. He'll put some weight on as he gets older. But to me, I'm not sure you can give him the keys to your offense, let him go. And when I'm drafting a point guard, I want that more than anything else. So, you know, I think with him, and, you know, I think that's a very fair point. I mean, you look at him and you wonder, wait a minute, is this guy quick enough to be a point guard? You know, he looks kind of slow out there on the

offensive end of the floor. Doesn't have the greatest first step, doesn't always really turn the corner, doesn't make the best decisions of the ball. You do find yourself. asking, is this guy actually, you know, going to be a point guard, or is he just a two guard with just certain elements of a point guard's game? But, you know, I kind of look at this as the inverse sometimes of the Michael Carter Williams conversation in 2013. Like, some people looked at him as like a top five pick. And I didn't even honestly view him as a first round talent. I was not a fan of Carter Williams. And like, the good part of what Carter Williams was that he, you know, he has athletic defensive upside length. But.

But, like, I felt like his feel for the game and, like, just poor touch, which is overlooked, whereas with Filthy Frank, like, he has the defensive upside of Carter Williams, but he has tremendously better feel and touch and passing vision and instincts. So, like, I look at that and I'm like, this dude's not even 19 years old yet. So what if, what if in a sense we might be, I guess, overrating just how poor of a ball handler he is right now, instead of thinking like, okay, long term, three, four years from now, if he adds more handles, more moves to his game, all that feel and all that passing ability

will be able to manifest into a really, really good point guard. Because I have him 10th, and I feel comfortable with him there, but I also questioned myself and say, you know, looking ahead, why don't I have this guy higher than I do? Yeah, I mean, that's fair. I just think, I think either way, I'd want to use him with another point guard because one, I think that's probably the biggest selling point with Frank or Francois or whatever

is like you can possibly, play him in a two point guard system because he's big enough to guard off the ball. So, or I guess maybe if you have him within a primary creator, you can have a huge team where Frank plays at the point. I will say there's a lot of roles he could play, which makes him an interesting draft pick for a team like Dallas, because they already have Seth Curry. And so you could have Frank guarding off the ball and then running point and letting Seth kind of guard point guards and take a lot of shots. So he gives you a lot of versatility in terms of how you set him up in a lineup. and that's pretty big too.

Isn't that the case, you know, with a lot of teams, though, now, like the way, the way, I mean, the point guard position has changed in a sense. And we're going to talk about this kind of next with some of the other guys, but there's a lot of teams that run multiple ball handler offenses, and they value having multiple guys who can playmaking handle the ball. I mean, like, even look at, for example, two teams that are probably going to be in the finals, the Cavaliers and the Warriors, they have, I mean, Kyrie Irving is their point guard, but LeBron James is really their point forward on the team.

He's the one who handles, I think, more of the playmaking responsibility. Stefan Curry is the point guard of the Warriors, but they have multiple guys who handle the rock and playmaking the half-court offense. And so in that sense, I think, you know, that's what makes him not necessarily more appealing. I just wonder if that's just the way the game is and that's the way it's going. So for all the point guards, I think, in a sense, maybe that's what you want, I think, in most systems. Kevin, where do you think is the best fit for Frank? If you could pick where he could go, if he was agent, where would you want him to go?

I would like him to go. I mean, I'm not sure about a specific team, but I would like him to go to a situation where he's able to really, I think, get developed along. I would like to see him play behind a more veteran point card early in his career. I'm not sure it would be good for him. If he was just thrust into the starting roll right away, I think he'd get eaten alive. He's not ready. I mean, it was a ball handler. And I think that could be really bad for him and his development.

I hope he falls into a situation wherever. it is that he's able to just develop, you know, behind a starter. I think, you know, you look at it around the league at a couple guys a couple of years ago. Dante X, I'm not ready to give up on him in Utah. I mean, it's, there's possible that he's just going to end up just another guy like he is. And it's possible Nile Keene could too. But at the same time, I think that could be a good path for someone like him. Yeah, reminds me of Eric Bleds of the Clippers, right?

Same kind of thing behind Chris Paul for two years. It really accelerated his growth. Also, I wonder if Frank ends up in New York because, like, all the knocks on Frank don't really apply to a triangle point guard. If you're running the triangle, you want a big guard who can shoot the ball and defend and doesn't have the pench rate into the lane as much.

So maybe he goes as high as seven if Phil is still like triangle all the way. I think New York would be a good fit for him. I know you said last week with one of the guys we discussed. So let's pivot quickly to Dennis Smith. I just want to touch back on something we talked about last week with him. You mentioned with Dennis Smith the last week that you're hoping the Knicks pass on Dennis Smith at the eight spot so Dallas can get him at nine. And, you know, so Dennis Smith,

just to give a little background on him. He's a point guard for NC State freshman point guard. Torr's ACL in high school, but really regained his athleticism at the college level. And you said last week, Charks, that with him, you look at him as a great fit offensively with the Mavers. It's a spaced floor, three out with one rim runner in New Orleans. Dirk spacing the floor, and I totally agree on that. But when scouting these guys and projecting them ahead, how much do you weigh defense? Because I'm thinking back to that, and I'm like, Rick Carlisle is kind of like a no-nonsense head coach, and I don't know how much he would tolerate that level of poor defense

Smith put out on college. Like, he was really bad. And I wonder, you know, would he potentially run out of chances in a Carlisle run team or another team that just doesn't have any tolerance or isn't willing to give opportunities to a young guy who doesn't defend? Well, I mean, I think that's a very fair concern, but it goes back to what you're saying about Fultz, especially at point guard. I mean, Carlisle played Berea a lot his whole career. He understands, like, the give and take.

The thing is though Berea was bad at defense, but he tried hard, whereas Smith could be good at defense, but hasn't tried hard. And that's the kind of thing that really bothers coaches. So that's definitely a concern. I mean, with any of these guys, you have to have, like, buy-in from your coaching staff and your fun office. It has to be, like, integrated smoothly. So the coaching staff knows going in what they're dealing with. If they don't, there could be some issues for sure. How good do you think he can be defensively, though?

I mean, he does have short arms, short wing span. You know, his physical profile is average for a point guard. In his effort, obviously, as you said, is very, very low on the defensive end. So, like, how high is his upside on the defensive end? I mean, he's fast enough. Like, he could be, like, maybe, like, Campbell Walker good at defense because his speed. He's a fast, fast, well-built guy. So he shouldn't be terrible.

Maybe Kempel Walker on offense? Can he be Kenba on offense, though? I think he can. What if he's not? What if he's not Kemba Walker on defense? Would you have significant hesitations with him of the eighth pick in that situation? No, because point guard is not a defensive position anyways, and most likely he's going to be dealing with screens, so he'll have somebody else guard in the point guard a lot.

Maybe he's Jemir Nelson on defense. I don't know. Like, I think if I was drafting the top three or five, the much bigger concern, when I'm at 7, 8, 9, or 10, you got to go in there with your eyes wide open about a player. You can't expect to be perfect. Like, if Smith could defend really well, he'd probably be a top-by pick, right? No, I think that's absolutely possible with Smith. And, you know, the reason why I ask John is because, you know, the flip side of this discussion

is there's guys, you know, in this draft, and in every draft, for that matter, who you look at them and you project them long-term as point guards, but they need to learn how to play the position. Smith knows how to play point guard. He's a good, accurate passer with a score-first mentality. I think he'll be fine playing the position offensively early in this career. But there are other guys that, you know, they're more two guards or combo guards that have more point guard size.

And so you want them to belong in that position long term. Two of those guys are Malik Monk from Kentucky and Dunedman Mitchell from Louisville. Monk is a pure shooter, amazing athlete, but he struggles to defend, whereas Mitchell is an incredible defender and an amazing athlete, but he's an inconsistent shooter. So how do you view these guards in context of the modern NBA when there's really like, anymore there's any more there's not a set definition of what a point guard is yeah uh it's a lot of it is role like we're talking about frank if you have a team with the primary guy on the wing like like the philadelphia is a good example if you already have a primary ball hand like and ben simmons

then monk maybe doesn't have to be a point guard necessarily and you can play them off the ball really easily. I think for Monk, it's easier because it's a great shooter. You can plug them off the ball and not worry about it. Where's Mitchell? If his shot's not there, can he be an offball player? I'm not sure. Like, yeah, I think I have them 13 and 14. I think it's all about fit with those guys. It wouldn't surprise me either way, or they can have been six men. That's my, I think it's a chance to end up six men, which is why I'm going to lower them in you, I think. You have Monk at six, right? Yeah, I have Monk at six and Mitchell at 11. What's your Malik? Monk, why him at six?

I just think shooting is really the most important skill in today's NBA for really any position. And that's where I think Malik Monk excels, never mind the fact that he's a tremendous athlete. And a lot of people compare him with Zach Levine, which is super fair. We have him as a best case scenario for Malik Monk on the Ringer NBA draft guide. And that's a fair comparison. I just think, you know, comparing Monk to Levine, the one thing Monk has, I think, that really exceeds to Levine is, I think, feel. I like his feel, and I don't know if he'll be able to necessarily learn point guard long term. He has a long way to go, but he does show flashes as a passer.

He does show flashes in the pick and roll, whether it's the ability to shoot it over the top or drive and, you know, throw kickout passes to the wing or the corner. And that's what he needs to get better at. I don't think he's going to be a guy where you have him bring the ball up every possession. But, you know, it relates again to Nili Kina, that conversation back a couple of minutes ago, you don't need a guy to do that all the time now. And you wouldn't be drafting him to do that. I think if you plug him into that point guard slot, as long as he can effectively run pick and roll, you're good if you're running a multi-ball handler offense. And that's where I like him so much because of his ability to really do, play the shooting guard role, you know, running off

screen, spotting up, whatever, driving close outs and attacking because he's such a terrific athlete, and occasionally playing that more traditional point guard role. Yeah, I think the biggest argument, too, you look at with Calipari with like Devin Booker. Sometimes guys in Calipari system don't get a chance to show what they can do. And Monk, maybe Monk has more pass more than we realize because he's playing with Deerrin Fox. He's playing off the ball all the time. Fox holds the ball most of the game. And maybe Monk was a little depressed, his like assist statistics in a different system.

I think that is like, if I was drafting Monk High, then the NMasson. It's like maybe he's more than he was shown in Kentucky. Yeah. a good point. That's one of the things I talked to Devin Booker about when I interviewed him for a Phoenix Suns article. And, you know, he basically said, well, I asked him, you know, you had barely any pick and roll opportunities at Kentucky. And he said, well, that's how I played my entire life. You know, and he said, once you got to college, like, if you watch Carl Towns in college, you would think, oh, he can't shoot threes because he didn't get the opportunity to shoot. But obviously now we know Towns is more or less a totally perimeter focused big man. I mean, he's, he is the evolution of a big man in the NBA. So opportunity, for a lot of those guys. And I do think Monk did receive more opportunity running pick and roll, especially in the game's Fox missed. But he still had didn't receive full-time gig at the point guard spot.

And if he had, you know, if he was in a situation where he did, I do wonder how it would view him. I just think my concern with Monk, too, is like, I feel like the guy, it's a valuable role. You're like six three volume shooter, like your Patty Mills essentially. but I wonder if that guy can be found later in the draft. Like someone like Tyler Dorsey, maybe, right? Why are you wanting to stop at Patty Mills, though? I'm just out of curiosity.

Like, you think he's just Patty Mills? He won't be more than that. Patty Mills is a good player. I mean. But like, why not, why can't he be Ray Allen? I'm just saying, why can't he be? Oh, Ray was, I mean, Ray Allen was bigger, first off, much better all-around player to Malik.

I mean, I don't know. I mean, I feel like with Malinkas, I'm more looking at him like Lou Williams than Ray, or Jamal Crawford than Ray Allen. Ray Allen was amazing. I think that's totally realistic. I'm with you. Like, you know,

Lou Williams is a realistic comp. That's the other guy we have for him on the draft guy. I think Lou Williams would be a terrific player, though, if he came into the league today. And I think Monk comes in probably a better shooter as a freshman. And absolutely a more explosive. athlete too. And, you know, that's, that's where, like, I have a hard time with the Williams comp, because I think Monk is just a significantly better athlete at a, at a position.

Yeah, that's probably fair. I mean, I just look at it too. I also feel like a guard who shoots a lot can be, it's hard for them sometimes to impact a team. I think of Lou Williams came to Houston. He kind of replicated Eric Gordon's role. And I feel like he kind of made Gordon a less valuable player because of the shots he took. So with Monk, like, say he goes to Philadelphia, right? he's the third option behind Embeddon Simmons. The next year, they have a top five pick. And all of a sudden, Monk's getting like seven, eight shots a game. It's a good problem to have.

It's a great problem to have. But I'm saying if Monk is getting seven right shots a game, how valuable is he really? I just worry, I mean, maybe he can become a great pass, a good passer. But I worry about his secondary skills if he's not going to be a primary option on offense. I'm drafting him top five, six, seven in that range. You know, I think that's what makes Mitchell, you know, really appealing to me. And I have him, I think, I believe 11th, which is the highest of us three. So with Mitchell, I think he just has a good foundation for early in his career. He's a guy who does need to learn how to play the point guard position. You know, he's an inconsistent shooter. But that dude is incredible on defense. And I think he's someone where I could easily see him playing right away. At the NBA Combine, that's one thing he's he talked about. He's like, I know. I have to learn the position. I know I need to get better as a shooter,

but he realizes that defense is what can allow him to play early in his career. And I don't think he's a bad shooter. He's not a non-shooter. He's not Ben Simmons as a jump shooter. He's solid. And I think if I'm a team in that early lottery range or early teens, I'm looking at Mitchell and I'm thinking of myself, why can't this guy turn into really that modern combo guard?

He's not our primary ball handler, but he's one of our two or three guys. that we lean on to run our offense. I just don't see why he can't become that. And in many ways, like with Neely Keena, I question myself, why don't I put this guy higher because of his elite athleticism, because of his elite defense and because of his, I think, tremendous,

I think, intangibles on both ends of the floor. I mean, that's really fair. I mean, the more you talk about it, the more I might have more Frank and Monk. Yeah, he could be a really, he see the best athlete of all these guys, like some of his plays he's made in his two years of Louisville. He is an unbelievable athlete.

Like he gets way above. I would say he is. I agree. Better than Smith. I mean, I think he might be. He's bigger. He has freakishly long arms too.

Maybe what, 6-9, 6-10 wingspan? If you factor in the physical profile, I mean, like Smith, you know, if you put Mitch, Mitchell and Smith right next to each other,

both of them have, you know, elite leaping ability. But Mitchell does have the better body, better frame, much longer arm, 6-10 wingspan compared to about 6-3 for Smith. So he does have the edge in that sense.

I could see him. maybe being like an Oladipo, maybe, or a Gary Harris, someone in that range of outcomes. It wouldn't stun me. I think Ola Dpo is a really good comp for him. With Mitchell, so with him, what do you feel like is really the hurdle for some of these guys from a developmental standpoint? So with Mitchell, what does he need to do to become, you know, more of a guy that can be leaned on to run an offense? I mean, I think to Mitchell, to me, it's like, how much do you believe in that three-point shot? Because he won't be a primary guy right away start his career.

You look at like your boy, Marcus Smith, or let me say our boy, Marcus Smith. Like, Marcus Smart. Like, if he can't shoot, right? How much. Wait a minute. I'm getting all these names bringing in my mind. Like, he shot 25% from three as a freshman and 35% of three as a sophomore. He was a good free-throw shooter, but team,

he's going to make him shoot the ball from three early in his career. Until he can prove he can make that, it'll kind of limit his game. So how much you give that three points shot, I think will go a long way in his career. Like all these guys, really, you know, you got to get to shoot threes these days. Just have to. I mean, that kind of brings me back to Monk, though. I mean, with him, he has that skill. I mean, he comes to NBA ready.

He's pre-packaged, you know, with a great jump shot and great athleticism. So I guess with him, that's where I just keep going back. to is you're right shooting shooting is ultimately the most important skill for all these guys to develop and monk monk has that ready to go ready to come in right away and just kill it from the three point range and not he didn't he wasn't someone who just straddled to the college line either he can shoot from deep NBA range off the dribble or off the catch yeah i just were like compare with tyler dorsey well like how much better is he than tyler dorsey and you can get him in the what the second round that like six three shooter i would say he's a

significantly better athlete than Tyler Dorsey though yeah and that's fair that's my big concern is like can you find these shooters a little later in the draft if he's just going to be a shooting guy that would be my big concern about drafting monks super high so in other words like for you like if you're a team with two picks right you're thinking early in the draft here i'll grab my versatile forward or my big and then later i'll take my swing at you know at a smaller you know you know two guard, combo guard, like a Dorsey, and hope that he, you know, totally exceeds expectations. It really comes down to draft philosophy for you, John.

Absolutely. I mean, not to get off track, but I think that's why I have some of these bigs lowered most people because I feel like these days you can find your average starting center back up five at like 25 or 35. Don't have to grab them at 15 anymore. So it's all about scarcity. And then obviously this is all in a vacuum.

For each team, it'll be different, what their needs are, what the rest of their young team is. But in a vacuum to me, those kind of players are easier to find and the draft is level of finding unique players who are just skills that are hard to find for agency, basically. That's it for this week's High Upside. Thank you, Jonathan, for coming on. Yeah, it was fun as always, man.

Looking forward to doing it next week. And thank you for listening to High Upside. Please give the Ringer NBA show a rating wherever you're listening to this podcast. Cheers to the band Oso Oso for providing the show's title track. And thank you, Tate Frazier, for producing High Upside. You can follow us on social media to stay plugged in at Ringer, at Kevin O'Connor, MBA, at Jonathan Charks, and at Tate Brazier.

Peace out.