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.