Eric Bledsoe or Trey Burke

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Yeah, I'm still rolling with Burke.

---

I call and raise you a Marcus Smart!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eclOw60dITg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

I was going to type the same exact thing.

But either way, you draft BPA (Best Prospect Available). As a prospect, I'm more inclined towards Smart over Burke.

---

I think Burke is the best player in this draft. In fairness I've followed his career closer than any other player in recent memory. Last player in college I followed this much was probably Chris Paul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are an poor pairing. They would be a very under sized backcourt and both guys are better when they dominate the ball.

---

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are a great pairing haha. They can both shoot off the ball, and they are both good passers. Are they undersized? Sure, a little, but they both have monster wingspans to make up for it. Gordon has no problem at all guarding NBA SGs, and I think Burke will fare much better defensively in the NBA where he won't be asked to do so much offensively. He can focus a little more defensively, and with a coach like Monty, I think he can become a really solid defensive player - just look at what coach did for Rivers.

Call me crazy, whatever, but I'd have to think really hard about taking him #1 overall. He has it all. Can shoot the 3, mid-range game, best PnR guy in the draft, great passer, floor general, plays with great pace, great anticipation, holds his teammates accountable, top-notch leader, fierce competitor, heart of a champion. I think he is the pick, honestly I do. Wherever we draft, I think he is the guy.

I agree, Burke and Gordon are a bad pairing, so I would move Gordon and either Lopez or GV for a starter that won't spend a lot of time injured, and let Burke, Anderson, Davis, and players X and Y (guy you trade Gordon for, and player you sign with FA cap), and move forward. Next year we are a fringe 8th seed, lat lotto team, the year after we are a 5th or 4th seed.

Looking at both Burke and Smart I feel so much more comfortable giving the ball to Burke. Aww this is truly what make sports great IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

I call and raise you a Marcus Smart!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eclOw60dITg

---

Haha I watched it man, and I just don't see it with Smart like I do with Burke. I think Burke is going to be a special player.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9163993

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are a great pairing haha. They can both shoot off the ball, and they are both good passers. Are they undersized? Sure, a little, but they both have monster wingspans to make up for it. Gordon has no problem at all guarding NBA SGs, and I think Burke will fare much better defensively in the NBA where he won't be asked to do so much offensively. He can focus a little more defensively, and with a coach like Monty, I think he can become a really solid defensive player - just look at what coach did for Rivers.

Call me crazy, whatever, but I'd have to think really hard about taking him #1 overall. He has it all. Can shoot the 3, mid-range game, best PnR guy in the draft, great passer, floor general, plays with great pace, great anticipation, holds his teammates accountable, top-notch leader, fierce competitor, heart of a champion. I think he is the pick, honestly I do. Wherever we draft, I think he is the guy.

---

Your not alone.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9163993

Looks like we have our DWill CP3 battle.

Crazy, a year ago, had somebody said that this draft would have two solid pg's everyone would have laughed at you. Now saying we will have 2 pg's in the top 5 isn't far fetched. Crazy how similar this draft might turn into the 06 draft Bogut, Williams, Williams, Paul, Felton then 13' Noel, Porter, Smart, Burke, Bazz.

I'm not understanding all of this talk about drafting a G. A SF that can score is our BIGGEST need. If we do draft a G what happens to Austin Rivers? Monty said himself that he and the FO envisions Austin as their future starting PG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Looks like we have our DWill CP3 battle.

Crazy, a year ago, had somebody said that this draft would have two solid pg's everyone would have laughed at you. Now saying we will have 2 pg's in the top 5 isn't far fetched. Crazy how similar this draft might turn into the 06 draft Bogut, Williams, Williams, Paul, Felton then 13' Noel, Porter, Smart, Burke, Bazz.

---

I would replace Muhammad with McElmore.

Completely forgot about McLemore.

Rivers can be a pg, just a pg on our bench. I wouldn't trust him as a starting pg any more than I would trust Anderson to play center. Maybe in spurts (if at all) but not as a starter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TPDG22

I'm not understanding all of this talk about drafting a G. A SF that can score is our BIGGEST need. If we do draft a G what happens to Austin Rivers? Monty said himself that he and the FO envisions Austin as their future starting PG.

---

It would be foolish of the organization to pass on Burke or Smart based solely on the premise of developing Rivers. Whenever you can greatly up grade a position you do it without question if our front office has great faith in either Smart or Burke you pull the trigger and don't give it a second thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9163993

Your not alone.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9163993

---

Nice find. I agree with the premise that I would gladly take an undersized, more skilled guard over an oversized, less skilled guard. The undersized guys have had to compensate over their careers, so they develop their game more, whereas bigger guys get by on their athletic domination, and as a result, their game is usually underdeveloped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TPDG22

I'm not understanding all of this talk about drafting a G. A SF that can score is our BIGGEST need. If we do draft a G what happens to Austin Rivers? Monty said himself that he and the FO envisions Austin as their future starting PG.

---

You NEVER draft for need in the top 10. Also, if we draft Burke, Rivers will still get a ton of minutes. Gordon can play some 3 during stretches, and they could all 3 play on the court at the same time during our small ball lineups. And I'm a huge Rivers fan, but I don't see how you could pass on a talent like Burke, especially if Noel is off the board.

Don't get me wrong though. I'd be happy with guys like Shabazz and Porter, but I think Burke is better than both, so that's what I'm basing my pick off of.

I also don't get why people think our number one concern should be drafting a rookie to fill a need. As in something we need right now, you take a person whose payoff won't happen until another three seasons or so when we could easily have a brand new coach and GM by then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Completely forgot about McLemore.

Rivers can be a pg, just a pg on our bench. I wouldn't trust him as a starting pg any more than I would trust Anderson to play center. Maybe in spurts (if at all) but not as a starter.

---

And this is why I don't love him. He's completely forgettable at times. He's a slasher and a jump shooter. Which is a commodity in the league just not somebody to build around IMO.

Also I agree about Austin. Think he'll be the optimal 6th man. Which is a very under valued role. Let's face it super/mega stars flock to the glamour teams. We're likely to need to be strong from 1-5 with one or two good players off the bench.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TPDG22

I'm not understanding all of this talk about drafting a G. A SF that can score is our BIGGEST need. If we do draft a G what happens to Austin Rivers? Monty said himself that he and the FO envisions Austin as their future starting PG.

---

Who cares about Austin Rivers? He was the 10th pick in the draft, not the top pick. And he has a long way to go before ever becoming a starter. He's probably a 6th man type long-term anyway. The team has a lot of needs, not just SF. A center who can rebound, a point guard who can actually run the point, and a SF who can shoot and defend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

I also don't get why people think our number one concern should be drafting a rookie to fill a need. As in something we need right now, you take a person whose payoff won't happen until another three seasons or so when we could easily have a brand new coach and GM by then.

---

Agreed. That's why I'm big on the BPA method. Just take the best player, and play with your roster afterword.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

Who cares about Austin Rivers? He was the 10th pick in the draft, not the top pick. And he has a long way to go before ever becoming a starter. He's probably a 6th man type long-term anyway. The team has a lot of needs, not just SF. A center who can rebound, a point guard who can actually run the point, and a SF who can shoot and defend.

---

You shut your dirty mouth!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Agreed. That's why I'm big on the BPA method. Just take the best player, and play with your roster afterword.



You shut your dirty mouth!

---

I care about Austin Rivers, but I'm not gonna pass up a talented Burke just because of Rivers.

Lucky for us, outside of PF and SG, everything is a need (and that is looking last Gordon's injury history which shows that sg really is a need).

I think there's some situations where drafting for need even in the top 10 has merit. Cleveland, Washington, or Charlotte aren't taking Burke no matter where they have him ranked in this draft(unless it's to trade him). Also If you have a need and the BPA is graded slightly higher than the guy who fits the need you draft the guy who fits the need. However if you are in the top 5-10 picks you usually have a gang of needs and BPA is most often the way to go.

The Burke love is getting thick around here. Jeez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shelbywmccarty

The Burke love is getting thick around here. Jeez.

---

Flavor of the month. The pre draft process will shake out the truth.

Remember the Lillard love? "He played against inferior competition. He'll falter against NBA talent." Was the gist of the comments against the Lillard love.

Had a damn good rookie campaign. To me, Burke has Lillard beat as a passer while having not to dissimilar offensive games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Remember the Lillard love? "He played against inferior competition. He'll falter against NBA talent." Was the gist of the comments against the Lillard love.

Had a damn good rookie campaign. To me, Burke has Lillard beat as a passer while having not to dissimilar offensive games.

---

Burke is the superior passer, floor leader, and has much better pace. He is also a better decision maker off the PnR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are an poor pairing. They would be a very under sized backcourt and both guys are better when they dominate the ball.

---

Well a couple things, while they are both short they both have long wing spans, especially gordan and are both quick, plus the nba is getting smaller and smaller so im fine with it. Another thing is with burke on the court, it spreads the court out, not having gordon double teamed every freaking time, with smart they wont respect his 3 game, with burke it isn't an option, gordon and burke are both good with the ball and both good without the ball, both good shooters, both willing passers, which is why i think it would be great to have them both, it makes the defense play honest. Burke has unlimited range and can drive, same for gordon. I just think it makes us very hard to defend. If we go Smart, we had better get a sharp shooting SF to space the court or we are in trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are a great pairing haha. They can both shoot off the ball, and they are both good passers. Are they undersized? Sure, a little, but they both have monster wingspans to make up for it. Gordon has no problem at all guarding NBA SGs, and I think Burke will fare much better defensively in the NBA where he won't be asked to do so much offensively. He can focus a little more defensively, and with a coach like Monty, I think he can become a really solid defensive player - just look at what coach did for Rivers.

Call me crazy, whatever, but I'd have to think really hard about taking him #1 overall. He has it all. Can shoot the 3, mid-range game, best PnR guy in the draft, great passer, floor general, plays with great pace, great anticipation, holds his teammates accountable, top-notch leader, fierce competitor, heart of a champion. I think he is the pick, honestly I do. Wherever we draft, I think he is the guy.

---

LOL! dude i swear on everything i didn't read ur reply before i posted mine but if u look at mine we basically said the same thing about gordon and burke on the floor together and saw ur post when i went back and read through the thread. Burke also throws alley oops, which will help AD and aminu a lot more than GV did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shelbywmccarty

The Burke love is getting thick around here. Jeez.

---

I know you are a huge MM fan, and that's cool because I like a lot of his stuff too, so I'm guessing that's where the source of your Burke dislike comes from. Moreover, we are Burke fans because we have eyes, and he stands out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GESWhoseBack

Flavor of the month. The pre draft process will shake out the truth.

---

I know you have only been on the forum for a month or so, but some of us have been high on Burke since the beginning of the season. I think the pre-draft process only helps Burke because it will feature his athleticism which is highly underrated because he plays the game with such poise and pace that it doesn't always show. If he was running around like a chicken with his head cut off, you guys would think he was a top notch athlete. Did you happen to see his block of Peyton Siva in the championship game? Kid probably has a 40 in vertical leap (or close to it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

That's funny because I think Gordon and Burke are a great pairing haha. They can both shoot off the ball, and they are both good passers. Are they undersized? Sure, a little, but they both have monster wingspans to make up for it. Gordon has no problem at all guarding NBA SGs, and I think Burke will fare much better defensively in the NBA where he won't be asked to do so much offensively. He can focus a little more defensively, and with a coach like Monty, I think he can become a really solid defensive player - just look at what coach did for Rivers.

Call me crazy, whatever, but I'd have to think really hard about taking him #1 overall. He has it all. Can shoot the 3, mid-range game, best PnR guy in the draft, great passer, floor general, plays with great pace, great anticipation, holds his teammates accountable, top-notch leader, fierce competitor, heart of a champion. I think he is the pick, honestly I do. Wherever we draft, I think he is the guy.

---

oh ya and burke is clutch and a winner's mentality, i miss that, ill say it again, cp3...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

LOL! dude i swear on everything i didn't read ur reply before i posted mine but if u look at mine we basically said the same thing about gordon and burke on the floor together and saw ur post when i went back and read through the thread. Burke also throws alley oops, which will help AD and aminu a lot more than GV did.

---

You liar!!!

Haha jk, that's pretty weird though. It also happens to be true ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Remember the Lillard love? "He played against inferior competition. He'll falter against NBA talent." Was the gist of the comments against the Lillard love.

Had a damn good rookie campaign. To me, Burke has Lillard beat as a passer while having not to dissimilar offensive games.

---

The Lillard comments were very logical.

The Burke stuff are too -- he's small, projects to be a non-impact defender. Same with the Smart stuff -- depending too much on his physical abilities.

I understand the Burke love. For someone who loves non-OMG athletic but high basketball IQ players like Love, Curry, Irving, Anderson, BROOK Lopez and Horford, believe me, I do.

But I think everybody is under-estimating Smart's basketball IQ. Sure, it's not present in ways that you normally associate (smart shot selection, low turnovers, nice pace to their game, etc...). But you watch him play and you'll notice so many little things:

1. He knows how to leverage his frame to get good position on postups and rebounds.
2. He also knows how to read space. I personally feel like he's an incredible off-the-ball cutter.
3. He also makes a lot of "good intentioned" passes at the right time. He just over shoots or undershoots the pass.
4. He's also a REALLY smart defender. Rarely gambles and always has his hands in a "vertical-side" combo, which if I remember my HS coaching right, is a good habit to have when defending from the perimeter (one hand is up, the other hand is to the side of the dribbling hand). He also looks like he understands how an offense work, in the framework of a team defense. That's an important skill for someone who wants to be a defensive "anchor".

If Rivers' shot selection can be remedied by Monty, then heck, so can Smart's.

And if you think Rivers slowly became a good defender, then I shudder at the possibility of Monty getting a more defensively equipped player in Smart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I think there's some situations where drafting for need even in the top 10 has merit. Cleveland, Washington, or Charlotte aren't taking Burke no matter where they have him ranked in this draft(unless it's to trade him). Also If you have a need and the BPA is graded slightly higher than the guy who fits the need you draft the guy who fits the need. However if you are in the top 5-10 picks you usually have a gang of needs and BPA is most often the way to go.

---

Hmm only situation "BPA" doesn't apply (IMO) is if you think they are equals. Rarely does that happen (well, for me, anyway). Otherwise, you always go BPA.

NEVER draft on need in the lotto, say rivers does become a good player and we end up drafting lets say shabazz, lets say rivers turns into a 15-8 point guard and bazz turns into a 17-4 SF and burke turns into a 20-10 guy, u passed on him for a decent SF, u dont know how any of these players will turn out but u go the player u think is the best and u find a way to make it work, rivers will have no problem getting minutes at PG and SG, u play them both for years and whoever develops better u keep and the other u trade, or say they both look incredible u trade the one who doesnt fit ur team and get a great return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

You liar!!!

Haha jk, that's pretty weird though. It also happens to be true ;)

---

Ya i think burke might be the best player in the draft, the only reason smart has a chance is cuz burke had a year in college before smart so it would only be fare to look at their college numbers but if my team was in need of a PG or a leader u get both with burke, he can do everything and anything, creat, shoot, drive, pass, PnR, he is a true complete PG and like it was said he is super quick, and with monty he would be above average on D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Well a couple things, while they are both short they both have long wing spans, especially gordan and are both quick, plus the nba is getting smaller and smaller so im fine with it. Another thing is with burke on the court, it spreads the court out, not having gordon double teamed every freaking time, with smart they wont respect his 3 game, with burke it isn't an option, gordon and burke are both good with the ball and both good without the ball, both good shooters, both willing passers, which is why i think it would be great to have them both, it makes the defense play honest. Burke has unlimited range and can drive, same for gordon. I just think it makes us very hard to defend. If we go Smart, we had better get a sharp shooting SF to space the court or we are in trouble.

---

/Cue another discussion on SFs like Budinger and Brewer

how mad would u be if 1 year u drafted lebron and the next year u passed on kevin durant for freaking hasheem thabeet because he was a position of "NEED" lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Well a couple things, while they are both short they both have long wing spans, especially gordan and are both quick, plus the nba is getting smaller and smaller so im fine with it. Another thing is with burke on the court, it spreads the court out, not having gordon double teamed every freaking time, with smart they wont respect his 3 game, with burke it isn't an option, gordon and burke are both good with the ball and both good without the ball, both good shooters, both willing passers, which is why i think it would be great to have them both, it makes the defense play honest. Burke has unlimited range and can drive, same for gordon. I just think it makes us very hard to defend. If we go Smart, we had better get a sharp shooting SF to space the court or we are in trouble.

---

/Cue another discussion on SFs like Budinger and Brewer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

[/B]

/Cue another discussion on SFs like Budinger and Brewer

---

haha i was thinking of budinger as i typed it lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

[/B]

/Cue another discussion on SFs like Budinger and Brewer

---

haha i was thinking of budinger as i typed it lmao

The NBA draft is a crapshoot. Whether its BPA or for Need, you'll likely bust as much going either direction. For some reason, it's really hard to project prospects into NBA players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

The NBA draft is a crapshoot. Whether its BPA or for Need, you'll likely bust as much going either direction. For some reason, it's really hard to project prospects into NBA players.

---

Bust in terms of the players? Yes.

Bust in terms of value? Probably not.

I agree, it's hard to project prospects into NBA players but there are certain key identifiers that tell you something about the translateability of their skills.

- Rebounding is one of the most commonly translated skills
- Scoring (in general) is hardest
- Very high steals numbers are also commonly translated
- blocking isn't among the most commonly translated

those are some things I think I've researched on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

The NBA draft is a crapshoot. Whether its BPA or for Need, you'll likely bust as much going either direction. For some reason, it's really hard to project prospects into NBA players.

---

Bust in terms of the players? Yes.

Bust in terms of value? Probably not.

I agree, it's hard to project prospects into NBA players but there are certain key identifiers that tell you something about the translateability of their skills.

- Rebounding is one of the most commonly translated skills
- Scoring (in general) is hardest
- Very high steals numbers are also commonly translated
- blocking isn't among the most commonly translated

those are some things I think I've researched on.

FRESHMAN YEAR STATS:
Trey Burke: MPG 36 - PPG 14.8 - APG 4.6 - RPG 3.5 - FG% .433 - 3P% .348 - FT% 74.4 - Steals 0.9 - Blocks 0.4
Marcus Smart: MPG 33.5 - PPG 15.5 - APG 4.2 - RPG 5.8 - FG% .404 - 3P% .290 - FT% 77.7 - Steals 3.0 - Blocks 0.7

ADVANCED FRESHMAN STATS:
Trey Burke: PER 19.4 - TS% .538 - eFG% .502 - TRB% 6.2% - AST% 28.7% - Off. Rating 107.4 - Def. Rating 102.3 - Win Shares 4.4 - TOV% 16.7 - USG% 26.4
MArcus Smart: PER 24 - TS% .532 - eFG% .455 - TRB% 9.9 - AST% 26.8 - Off. Rating 105.3 - Def. Rating 86.1 - Win Shares 5.5 - TOV% 18.9 - USG 27.2

What these stats show us:

Burke is the better AND more efficient shooter
Smart slightly better FT shooter
Burke is a slightly better passer
Smart is a much better rebounder
Smart is a much better on ball defender
Smart is a much better off ball defender
Burke has better ball security and less turn overs but Smart did have a higher usage rate.
If you combine both players offense and defense you are projected to win 1.1 more games with smart as ur PG than Burke, if u believe in advanced stats.
It really depends on your team.

But i should add Burke tremendously increased his advanced stats in every single category this year as a sophmore and had an INSANE 123.5 OFFENSIVE RATING! and also improved his defensive rating to 99.1 and had a win share of 8.8

Could Smart have the same jump? sure, could he have a better jump? sure, could he have a worse jump? definitely. I'd go with the proven product TREY BURKE!

Now if u really wanna be impressed go look up Otto Porter with a super low turnover ratio and an offensive rating of 122.25 AND a defensive rating of 85.0.
Even though he had a usage rate of 24.1% his TOV% was only 10.0

Its basically the same offensive rating as burke and a better defense than Smart while porter was their only weapon and got schemed for. Thats like having an elite offensive and defensive player, and he is younger than burke too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

But i should add Burke tremendously increased his advanced stats in every single category this year as a sophmore and had an INSANE 123.5 OFFENSIVE RATING! and also improved his defensive rating to 99.1 and had a win share of 8.8

Could Smart have the same jump? sure, could he have a better jump? sure, could he have a worse jump? definitely. I'd go with the proven product TREY BURKE!

---

LOL I'd be wary of using individual DRTG as a measure of "defensive impact"

but eh, to each his own. To me, it comes down to which of the following do you feel is more probable to happen:

a. Burke becomes an impact defender

b. Smart becomes an impact offensive player

I'm with b.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Now if u really wanna be impressed go look up Otto Porter with a super low turnover ratio and an offensive rating of 122.25 AND a defensive rating of 85.0.
Even though he had a usage rate of 24.1% his TOV% was only 10.0

Its basically the same offensive rating as burke and a better defense than Smart while porter was their only weapon and got schemed for. Thats like having an elite offensive and defensive player, and he is younger than burke too.

---

I love Porter, but I don't feel like he can create his own shot. I think he will be an elite role player, so I'd be very happy if we drafted him. He is such a Monty player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

LOL I'd be wary of using individual DRTG as a measure of "defensive impact"

but eh, to each his own. To me, it comes down to which of the following do you feel is more probable to happen:

a. Burke becomes an impact defender

b. Smart becomes an impact offensive player

I'm with b.

---

It's much easier to learn defense than it is offense. Not only that, but Monty has proven he can develop players' defensive capabilities. Rivers improved dramatically, and Davis improved a lot as well this season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

It's much easier to learn defense than it is offense. Not only that, but Monty has proven he can develop players' defensive capabilities. Rivers improved dramatically, and Davis improved a lot as well this season.

---

I disagree with this one. I think alot of people will. Defense requires an acute understanding of space, angles, rotation and couple of other innate attributes like quickness, speed, wingspan, etc...

A lot of things about offense boils down to individual repetition -- especially shooting. Most especially shooting.

Smart will likely be taken in the top 3 so unless the team somehow lands ahead of Orlando, I don't see the point of comparing burke with smart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

I disagree with this one. I think alot of people will. Defense requires an acute understanding of space, angles, rotation and couple of other innate attributes like quickness, speed, wingspan, etc...

A lot of things about offense boils down to individual repetition -- especially shooting. Most especially shooting.

---

I learned how to play defense at the age of 12. Now, I had a truly great basketball coach who was a legend in the Biddy basketball circuit. I picked up a lot of the same principles that Monty preaches to his guys as a child, so I know that fully grown men can do it. It's about desire and selflessness. Defense won't show up in the box score, and you certainly won't get praised for it by the media. People don't want to improve their defense because they are working on their offense all the time.

I would say Burke certainly has the quickness, speed, and wingspan to improve as a defender (which he really isn't a bad defender at all). Mostly, he wants to win, and he is rumored to be very coachable, so I would expect him to take in everything Monty can give him (just like Rivers did).

Moreover, if offense were as easy to develop as you say it is, then why aren't most of the players in the league good offensive players? Why don't most/all guards shoot 40% from 3 if it's so easy to develop a shot? I'm pretty firm in my stance that defense is easier to develop than offense.