Pelicans Centric 2022 Top-10 Prospects

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Upper Decker

With Chet, how much weight do you put into his injury risk?

Do we hedge and pick a guy with a less injury-prone body type? Obviously, he's his own guy and should not be judged by the injury history of other tall, skinny guys. But we already have our own injury-prone super-prospect. Do we go for a safer pick because Zion is so injury prone? Or does that not factor in?

---

Chet has a perimeter game so he doesn't even need to put on massive muscle. If he can reach Durant's size that'd be fine. You don't pass up talent like that and assume the worst.

The most interesting guy to me right now is Dyson Daniels. I could really see it becoming a debate between him, Johnny Davis, and Mathurin for that next guard off the board after Sharpe and all 3 guys have a good case to make. Davis probably has the highest floor and lowest ceiling, Daniels the lowest floor and highest ceiling and Mathurin has the middle of the two.

Daniels really is a jumpshot away from being an elite prospect. Super long and fluid, super high IQ, high defensive potential, cares a lot, multi positional on both sides.

People watched Mathurin in the tourney and have probably never watched Daniels, so they will lean that way. But I am actually starting to lean Daniels. He might be 7th on my board when all is said and done

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

The most interesting guy to me right now is Dyson Daniels. I could really see it becoming a debate between him, Johnny Davis, and Mathurin for that next guard off the board after Sharpe and all 3 guys have a good case to make. Davis probably has the highest floor and lowest ceiling, Daniels the lowest floor and highest ceiling and Mathurin has the middle of the two.

Daniels really is a jumpshot away from being an elite prospect. Super long and fluid, super high IQ, high defensive potential, cares a lot, multi positional on both sides.

People watched Mathurin in the tourney and have probably never watched Daniels, so they will lean that way. But I am actually starting to lean Daniels. He might be 7th on my board when all is said and done

---

I liked what I saw out of Daniels in the ASG weekend game but those are glorified pickup games so it's tough for me to gauge but the tools are there.

Don't sleep on Agbaji. I know that he's projected to go towards the middle of the first but he should at least get a workout as I could see him rising up the board a bit.

Usually risers are raw, underclassmen. Pretty raw a safe, low upside upperclassman rises into the top 10. My guess for risers are Daniels, Branham, and John Butler. Relative where most project those guys now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Me too, but I'd rather see them just put the assets in and get the best player they can. Think of NAW and Trey and Kira and Hayes -- thats more often than not what you get in late lotto/mid first. You would trade all four of those for LaMelo or Ant or Mobley or Cade or Scottie, right? Go find the guy you think is that and give up 8, 2023, and the Lakers 2024/25 pick and just get a major piece

---

Sellers are rare, tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

Sellers are rare, tho.

---

Its rare. What you gotta hope for is a team seeing their top tier go in front of them. Like, if Orlando or OKC get 4 and Ivey is there, would they be better served trading back to 8 and picking up the Lakers 24/25 pick or taking another guard in already crowded, young backcourts? The other possibility is if a top 4 team wants to hit the gas and its actually a three way. So, say New York lands #3 and wants to go for Donovon Mitchell. Maybe Utah would prefer a bunch of picks to just 1 in this draft where they dont love anybody. So, they get 8 and the Lakers pick and another one, whatever.

But yeah, its rare. And it costs a lot more than fans usually put in their fake trades. Cost Dallas the 10th pick to move up from 5 to 3. And both guys turned out to be tier 1 guys, but going into that draft, most didnt have Trae as Tier 1. Cost Atlanta #17, three high 2nds and taking on a bad contract to move from 8 to 4 and really that was just moving up to what people thought was the top of Tier #2. Prior to those, I cant think of an example of someone moving up from Tier 2 to Tier 1 until you get all the way back to Utah moving up for Deron Williams in 2005.

Long story short, if Griff wants to get into that Tier 1, he is gonna have to "overpay" -- but that is what the assets are there for.

Do you think Daniels ceiling higher than Giddey? They seem pretty similar to me, with giddey being a lil bigger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coreylaron

Do you think Daniels ceiling higher than Giddey? They seem pretty similar to me, with giddey being a lil bigger

---

I would say Daniels has higher potential as a scorer and defender, Giddey has higher potential as a playmaker

How would Ben Mathurin do here? If we were to land him, who?s mins is he taking?

He reminds me of a Malcolm Brogdon, but with more upside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

How would Ben Mathurin do here? If we were to land him, who?s mins is he taking?

He reminds me of a Malcolm Brogdon, but with more upside.

---

I don't see Malcom Brogdon at all in his game lol.

Me either. He lands somewhere on the spectrum between Ben McLemore and Ray Allen. That’s his game. Just a question where he lands on that spectrum

Does anyone think the NBA will mess with the protection rules? It's amazing we were able to trade the same pick twice and still end up with a % chance of keeping the pick ourselves too. Was this just a unique situation and getting two separate teams to agree to the protections won't happen again especially since both teams will end up with 2 seconds if a FRP doesn't convey.

Not at all. Nobody is being deceived. The GMs are all smart and understand risk/reward

What Griff did wasn’t really that genius or rare. It just so happened that the Lakers had the most disappointing season of all time that almost nobody anticipated. As for our own pick, it looks complicated but it really wasn’t. Long story short, no, NBA won’t fix any of that because nobody will complain. They all completely went in with eyes open and are fine with the outcomes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

How would Ben Mathurin do here? If we were to land him, who?s mins is he taking?

He reminds me of a Malcolm Brogdon, but with more upside.

---

I say he starts at the 2 and they go back to bringing Herb off the bench or if they keep Herb in the starting lineup, Mathurin would be the 6th man of sorts. I really like how either he or Sharpe would fit with this team.

Dyson as well. Whereas Giddey is a lead ballhandler, I could see Dyson playing off the ball some. I'm just hesitant about wasting what could be the 8th pick in the draft on him. If Sharpe or Matthurin are there then you would think that they would be the pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Century City

I say he starts at the 2 and they go back to bringing Herb off the bench or if they keep Herb in the starting lineup, Mathurin would be the 6th man of sorts. I really like how either he or Sharpe would fit with this team.

Dyson as well. Whereas Giddey is a lead ballhandler, I could see Dyson playing off the ball some. I'm just hesitant about wasting what could be the 8th pick in the draft on him. If Sharpe or Matthurin are there then you would think that they would be the pick.

---

Starting? Mathurin or Daniels wouldn’t even start the season in the rotation IMO. Now, if you are talking about down the road, yeah he is a starter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Me either. He lands somewhere on the spectrum between Ben McLemore and Ray Allen. That’s his game. Just a question where he lands on that spectrum

---

I was thinking of current Eric Gordon minus the finishing at the rim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Starting? Mathurin or Daniels wouldn’t even start the season in the rotation IMO. Now, if you are talking about down the road, yeah he is a starter

---

Long term is what matters so that's what I'm thinking. Still, if he knocks everyone's socks off in training camp and they think that he's a good fit in the starting lineup, anything's possible.

There is a guy on the Pels top 10 that is not in this thread at all......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

There is a guy on the Pels top 10 that is not in this thread at all......

---

Ochai Agbaji? Or Jalen Duren?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rocketfox

Ochai Agbaji? Or Jalen Duren?

---

Both are mentioned in this thread. So, nope.

The whole thread? I ain't going back, so I'm gonna take a stab in the dark.

Blake Wesley?

Griffin reminds of Saddiq Bey shooting 3's, and we all are sorry we passed on Bey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

The whole thread? I ain't going back, so I'm gonna take a stab in the dark.

Blake Wesley?

---

No, but he is an interesting name. I wouldnt hate him in a scenario we trade back

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

No, but he is an interesting name. I wouldnt hate him in a scenario we trade back

---

It's either Tyty, Hardy, or Montero

Btw Jaden Hardy is another NAW which terrifies me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverfoxx

It's either Tyty, Hardy, or Montero

---

No. No. And......No.

Start studying the name Ousmane Dieng. Really interesting prospect if you have the gonads to take that home run swing

I've been off the scouting stuff for a few months now so I'm pretty behind late developments. Any late risers in the season for you guys that I need to pay particular attention to? I'm going to be catching up on a lot of film and some stat stuff over the next few days.

Glad to see Ousmane Dieng's name coming up again - he was in my sig at the start of the season. I think he's neat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Start studying the name Ousmane Dieng. Really interesting prospect if you have the gonads to take that home run swing

---

That's too much of a gamble for where we are as a team imo. I get swinging for the fences and going for upside, but the team is ready to win and I'm not down for using a top 10 pick on someone THAT raw. If it was outside the lottery, maybe. Not for picks 8 or 9.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

That's too much of a gamble for where we are as a team imo. I get swinging for the fences and going for upside, but the team is ready to win and I'm not down for using a top 10 pick on someone THAT raw. If it was outside the lottery, maybe. Not for picks 8 or 9.

---

I couldnt disagree more. Here is what I would research if I were you: How many top 8 picks are on the team that drafted them in their 2nd contract and DIDNT get a max contract.

I will let you know it is a very small list. So, when you think about it through that spectrum, you almost have to go for the home run when you are picking that high. You dont draft guys that help your core and will be a nice piece, a solid starter. The Hawks did that and my buddy is telling me they were in a no win situation with Cam Reddish and are about to be in one with De'Andre Hunter. Reddish wasnt going to consider an extension under 22-25 mil per year. Hunter's people are talking 25. Not because they deserve it, but because that is what the market says a wing with potential can get for their 2nd deal.

When you draft that high, you gotta assume the 2nd contract will be the max or darn close. And either you overpay a role player that to keep that or you sell lower than what you used to get him. Or......you draft a guy that you are more than happy to hand a max over to.

If you believe what you believe, then you should be arguing for the Pels to trade back. In the teens, you can take a role player and re-sign him to a reasonable contract. That simply doesnt happen in the top 8

Huh. Okay. Yeah. I was never gonna guess someone overseas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

The Hawks did that and my buddy is telling me they were in a no win situation with Cam Reddish and are about to be in one with De'Andre Hunter. Reddish wasnt going to consider an extension under 22-25 mil per year. Hunter's people are talking 25. Not because they deserve it, but because that is what the market says a wing with potential can get for their 2nd deal.

---

Mac, if Reddish wouldn't consider an extension under 22KK what would you suppose JAX' 2nd contract (drafted two slots after JAX) to be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

Mac, if Reddish wouldn't consider an extension under 22KK what would you suppose JAX' 2nd contract (drafted two slots after JAX) to be?

---

Jax is a little different because he is a big and that isnt a position of need around the league unless you are elite. Also, he wont get the minutes or the starts to have a high QO, most likely. But still, his people will ask 15-20, and Griff would be dumb to give that. So, I fully expect him to be a restricted FA and see how it plays out, if he isnt traded first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Huh. Okay. Yeah. I was never gonna guess someone overseas.

---

Overseas players are people too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Jax is a little different because he is a big and that isnt a position of need around the league unless you are elite. Also, he wont get the minutes or the starts to have a high QO, most likely. But still, his people will ask 15-20, and Griff would be dumb to give that. So, I fully expect him to be a restricted FA and see how it plays out, if he isnt traded first.

---

OH-OH!!! I was thinking around 12KK; but thanks.

I mean, I am sure that is in the ballpark of what we will offer, but you cant find a guy taken in the top 8 who takes a 12 mil per year type of extension. That is what he is probably worth, but history says it would be an outlier if he signs that extension

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I couldnt disagree more. Here is what I would research if I were you: How many top 8 picks are on the team that drafted them in their 2nd contract and DIDNT get a max contract.

I will let you know it is a very small list. So, when you think about it through that spectrum, you almost have to go for the home run when you are picking that high. You dont draft guys that help your core and will be a nice piece, a solid starter. The Hawks did that and my buddy is telling me they were in a no win situation with Cam Reddish and are about to be in one with De'Andre Hunter. Reddish wasnt going to consider an extension under 22-25 mil per year. Hunter's people are talking 25. Not because they deserve it, but because that is what the market says a wing with potential can get for their 2nd deal.

When you draft that high, you gotta assume the 2nd contract will be the max or darn close. And either you overpay a role player that to keep that or you sell lower than what you used to get him. Or......you draft a guy that you are more than happy to hand a max over to.

If you believe what you believe, then you should be arguing for the Pels to trade back. In the teens, you can take a role player and re-sign him to a reasonable contract. That simply doesnt happen in the top 8

---

I'm familiar with the argument for it, I just disagree. Youre acting like there's options A and B, when it comes to high ceiling or high floor. I think you can get guys that have a similar ceiling, that have shown more at a similar age. I'm not down taking a guard simply because he's 6'10 and had a few big games in the NBL. Mathurin has potential, Sharpe has potential, Murray, Griffin, etc.. they have all shown some skills that are ready to translate now. I'm not down to draft someone that is 99% potential. Just because he's all potential, doesn't mean he's got more potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

I'm familiar with the argument for it, I just disagree. Youre acting like there's options A and B, when it comes to high ceiling or high floor. I think you can get guys that have a similar ceiling, that have shown more at a similar age. I'm not down taking a guard simply because he's 6'10 and had a few big games in the NBL. Mathurin has potential, Sharpe has potential, Murray, Griffin, etc.. they have all shown some skills that are ready to translate now. I'm not down to draft someone that is 99% potential. Just because he's all potential, doesn't mean he's got more potential.

---

Agree - it doesnt have to be one or the other. But I think its wrong to think about next year. So few rookies impact winning early in their career for good teams. If you want to win more next year, get the best possible guy on the MLE. Dont depend on a rookie to help with that. Personally, I want Dyson Daniels, but if their scouts think Dieng has a 5% chance of being a future 1st or 2nd NBA guy and nobody else on the board has even a 1% chance, then I would advocate for Dieng.

Remember, Milwaukee wasnt garbage when they took Giannis. They had just been in the playoffs as the 8 seed the year before. Had aspirations for more. Could ahve easily taken a guy who helped the following year. Not comparing the players, but I would personally always go highest ceiling with a top 8 pick and I would consider anything I got from any 19 year old in year 1 and year 2 gravy, not something I need and expect

I was catching up on some AJ Griffin film earlier today and I'm surprised that there hasn't been more discussion about him, honestly.

6'6, 230lbs, great frame, shot 49/44/79 splits (63% TS) on 25/10/2 per 100 while acting as arguably the third wheel on that Duke team, and whenever he got more opportunities they thrived. Duke was 32-7 overall on the season, but 12-1 in games where Griffin got over 10 shot attempts and 9-2 in games where he got at least 30 minutes. He's incredibly young as well. For example, he's more than 3 full years younger than Keegan Murray, who is a guy who is getting a lot of talk: that's got to be significant when trying to project out into the future, especially when you consider that this year's freshmen are essentially a year behind in development due to COVID.

Combine this with his pre-college stuff (I had him top 5 coming into the college season) and I really find it a bit surprising that his name seems to have cooled off so much. The latest ESPN mock has him going 8th - funnily enough to us, via the Lakers pick - but the talk seems to be relatively minor. I could be wrong but the few games I've binged seem to be reconfirming my view of him as a top 5 guy in the class.

I have never seen a perimeter shooter have as wide of a base as he does on a jumper. And yeah, he hit his 3's in a small sample size this year, but so did Justise Winslow for one year. Griffin wasnt seen as a shooter, and didnt hit at a high level in HS. The combination of the potential that its a one year wonder, small sample and the look of his shot - and I cant just assume that part of his game will be good in the pros. And then if you take that away, what are you 100% sure he will do at an above average level in the pros? And thats before we even get into the worries about durability and if that will continue.

I wouldnt hate if the Pels took him at 8, but there is no way he will be atop my board when the Pels pick. I see him as a solid starter, but as I have laid out in this thread, you create a problem for yourself when you take a "solid starter" in the top 10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I have never seen a perimeter shooter have as wide of a base as he does on a jumper. And yeah, he hit his 3's in a small sample size this year, but so did Justise Winslow for one year. Griffin wasnt seen as a shooter, and didnt hit at a high level in HS. The combination of the potential that its a one year wonder, small sample and the look of his shot - and I cant just assume that part of his game will be good in the pros. And then if you take that away, what are you 100% sure he will do at an above average level in the pros? And thats before we even get into the worries about durability and if that will continue.

I wouldnt hate if the Pels took him at 8, but there is no way he will be atop my board when the Pels pick. I see him as a solid starter, but as I have laid out in this thread, you create a problem for yourself when you take a "solid starter" in the top 10

---

I'm honestly not worried about durability for him, at least not more than I am about Paolo for example, or Chet, who are consensus top 3 in this class and also have concerns about health. So for me that doesn't really change too much - yes, AJ had durability concerns but it's not like he had multiple surgeries or anything and at least part of his missing time pre-college was family politics stuff. Obviously the teams will get physicals on guys and if his medicals come back with big red flags then that changes things.

As for his jumper having a wide base, I do agree that it is wide but at the same time I don't think it looks awkward or unstable or anything like that. The question is though, is that a problem or is it just something we don't like? It's not the most picturesque shot in the world of course, but a shot doesn't have to be aesthetic for it to work and it doesn't seem to be causing big mechanical issues: he's not taking huge leaps when he shoots, he doesn't seem to have big knee-flex issues, the shot transfers up his body nicely. It's just wide. Not optimal but it's not a huge dealbreaker for me, especially not on someone who is as young as he is.

You mention it's a small sample size but given the minutes he played, not really. He was taking 10 attempts per 100 this season: the exact same 3point attempt rate as CJ McCollum in the NBA this year, funnily enough, and a higher 3pAr than college Harden or Lillard had. His attempt rate is entirely commensurate with someone being a high volume shooter who just didn't get that many minutes.

You can argue that his shooting is a college only skill that doesn't date back to years before that, and there's some truth to that (though some people were projecting him as a positive shooting prospect prior to college: see, for example, me iirc) but it's also true to say that a lot of his best pre-college skills were skills that Coach K simply didn't allow him to show off. Which isn't surprising as Coach K frequently played guys outside of their optimal roles: maybe the reason this was Griffin's breakout 3pt year is because this was the year he was forced to stand in a corner and shoot threes all game. Worth considering, at least.

I got Griffin at 10, so I dont hate him. But my draft philosophy says that I would rather a guy with a 10% chance to be an All NBA guy and a 40% chance to be a bust than a guy who has a 2% chance to be All NBA and only a 10% chance to bust. I think most people would disagree with that philosophy, but its how I would draft. And I dont see the high, high ceiling for Griffin. I see a good floor if he stays healthy. I can see Jerami Grant, but if you take 19 year old Grant at #8, you are in the impossible position I always talk about when it comes to 2nd contract time at 22 or 23. Why I go higher upside that early in the draft every time.

That's fair, and I certainly understand that logic. I think his likelihood of being a star is perhaps a little higher than you do, though. His pre-college stardom was all based on being a pretty nifty passer with great on-ball self creation, which is something we still saw a little bit of in college (the vast majority of AJ's 2pt jumpers were unassisted and he shot over 40% on them), and if he can combine that with his newfound frame and maintain even just solid shooting - which, again, I believe is a real possibility - then that adds up to being a very very strong NBA player imo. Not top 5 in the NBA but then, I don't know anyone in this class that I'd feel confident assuming will be a top 5 in the NBA guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Start studying the name Ousmane Dieng. Really interesting prospect if you have the gonads to take that home run swing

---

If you are going for the home run swing, why not target Sharpe, Hardy, or Duren?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverfoxx

If you are going for the home run swing, why not target Sharpe, Hardy, or Duren?

---

I would be shocked if Sharpe is available at 8. If he is, you take him. Duran is a big who cant shoot -- that guy cant be worthy of a max in any universe. Hardy is a home run swing candidate. Like, my philosophy is you should take him over Johnny Davis. But the Pels scouts would tell you Dieng has a higher ceiling that Hardy when you factor in the maturity and intangibles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I was catching up on some AJ Griffin film earlier today and I'm surprised that there hasn't been more discussion about him, honestly.

6'6, 230lbs, great frame, shot 49/44/79 splits (63% TS) on 25/10/2 per 100 while acting as arguably the third wheel on that Duke team, and whenever he got more opportunities they thrived. Duke was 32-7 overall on the season, but 12-1 in games where Griffin got over 10 shot attempts and 9-2 in games where he got at least 30 minutes. He's incredibly young as well. For example, he's more than 3 full years younger than Keegan Murray, who is a guy who is getting a lot of talk: that's got to be significant when trying to project out into the future, especially when you consider that this year's freshmen are essentially a year behind in development due to COVID.

Combine this with his pre-college stuff (I had him top 5 coming into the college season) and I really find it a bit surprising that his name seems to have cooled off so much. The latest ESPN mock has him going 8th - funnily enough to us, via the Lakers pick - but the talk seems to be relatively minor. I could be wrong but the few games I've binged seem to be reconfirming my view of him as a top 5 guy in the class.

---

His lateral speed, injury history and lack of explosion is worrisome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverfoxx

If you are going for the home run swing, why not target Sharpe, Hardy, or Duren?

---

That's a pretty wide range of people. I had Duren top 10 coming into the year, as did most people whose evals I trust, and those people still have Duren top 10. Several of them have Hardy out of the first round completely at this point, for contrast, despite starting the year with him top 20.

The problem with Hardy is that if your best skill is being an iso off-the-dribble self creation guy, and you're 6'3, you better be either an explosive athlete or a generational shooter and he's neither. And it's not like he's a super raw prospect who comes from overseas or played in some no-name league, he's had the pedigree. 35%FG in the G League, 27% from 3, negative AST:TO ratio. Ouch.

Putting him in the same list as Duren who - despite being a bit of an old fashioned archetype - actually had a very strong season is a bit strange imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

That's fair, and I certainly understand that logic. I think his likelihood of being a star is perhaps a little higher than you do, though. His pre-college stardom was all based on being a pretty nifty passer with great on-ball self creation, which is something we still saw a little bit of in college (the vast majority of AJ's 2pt jumpers were unassisted and he shot over 40% on them), and if he can combine that with his newfound frame and maintain even just solid shooting - which, again, I believe is a real possibility - then that adds up to being a very very strong NBA player imo. Not top 5 in the NBA but then, I don't know anyone in this class that I'd feel confident assuming will be a top 5 in the NBA guy.

---

I have never seen a future star be a total no show in a Final Four game. Like, sure, have an off shooting night. But he did nothing. No impact anywhere. And that happened more than once at Duke. Its fine to not score if you arent a guy getting a lot of plays drawn up for you, but if you are a top 5/top 8 pick, go do winning things other place. Guy had 17 games with 0 assists. Never had a double digit rebounding game. 26 games with 0 steals. 20 games where he didnt take a single FT. Another 10 games where he had 2 or less FT's.

Like, how does that happen when you are that much bigger and more physically gifted than almost everyone on the court? I just find it so hard to imagine a guy going from THAT to a star. Solid starter, maybe. Star? That would be the outlier of all outliers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I would be shocked if Sharpe is available at 8. If he is, you take him. Duran is a big who cant shoot -- that guy cant be worthy of a max in any universe. Hardy is a home run swing candidate. Like, my philosophy is you should take him over Johnny Davis. But the Pels scouts would tell you Dieng has a higher ceiling that Hardy when you factor in the maturity and intangibles

---

I live for hidden gems in drafts. I will look into Dieng. Any other prospects that's under the radar you would like to share would be appreciated. Thanks for the homework assignment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

That's a pretty wide range of people. I had Duren top 10 coming into the year, as did most people whose evals I trust, and those people still have Duren top 10. Several of them have Hardy out of the first round completely at this point, for contrast, despite starting the year with him top 20.

The problem with Hardy is that if your best skill is being an iso off-the-dribble self creation guy, and you're 6'3, you better be either an explosive athlete or a generational shooter and he's neither. And it's not like he's a super raw prospect who comes from overseas or played in some no-name league, he's had the pedigree. 35%FG in the G League, 27% from 3, negative AST:TO ratio. Ouch.

Putting him in the same list as Duren who - despite being a bit of an old fashioned archetype - actually had a very strong season is a bit strange imo.

---

But you gotta consider position value. Like, who has more league value -- Jonas, who is probably the 7th best center or OG, who might be the 20th or 25th best wing? Duran could become Clint Capela, but people arent knocking down the doors to get Capela. If Hardy hits and becomes say more explosive Terry Rozier, that has more value than Duran at his likely median outcome.