We got the #3 pick. Discuss the possibilities.

Ahh, the old Nickelback technique.

 

Look at this photograph…

 

Sharpe has moved the timeline up. While Thybulle likely starts at SG after an Ant trade, Sharpe isn't far away and hopefully secures the 2 for a long time. Sharpe was so good so quickly that he made Ant tradable, now. Like Ant made CJ tradable. This time the incoming players better be a whole lot better.

 

The Blazers thinking it’s a good idea to pair Dame with Scoot might be the only thing that would make me angrier than trading 3 for Levine, or Some bullshit like that, thinking that will change our fate

 

He can stay in front of his man.

 

"Can" and "Does" are two different things. I believe both of the guys can. The tape from last year would say Sharpe gets lost on defense more than Ant, but debating between which of the two is a better defender is kinda silly since neither have been consistently good.

 

Naturally Ant has a better understanding (experience). But Shae has shown signficantly more potential as a defender.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting pairing Dame and Scoot. Sharpe just turned 20 and Scoot is 19. They probably think it is a good idea to pair those two together after a few years. I see no issue with a Dame, Sharpe, and Scoot backcourt for now. Thybulle can get minutes at both SF and SG depending on the matchups. But Dame is still by far the best player in the group, so I am in no hurry to trade him. And if Scoot is a tier above the others in the draft that some think, do you pass on the BPA....again?

And even when Scoot is on the floor with Dame, it is not like a strong, extremely athletic 196 lb guard with a 6'9" wing span is small. That is longer than Booker and the same as Klay and Edwards. Will he be a good defender? I don't know but it won't be because of his size against the vast majority of SGs.

 

Could be. When Sharpe's potential reaches the point of production, then he should start.

Sharpe could turn into an All-NBA player. He could also turn into JR Smith. If all the young Blazers reached the potential projected by this board over this years, we'd have won 10 of the last 20 championships.

 

Sharpe is a full-court player. Simons is not.
Sharpe might be the best lob catcher in the NBA. Simons isn't.
Sharpe in the starting lineup is different than Simons in the starting lineup.
The reason to start Sharpe over Simons is it makes the starting unit and the team better.
If Sharpe does, then the other arguments are irrelevant.

 

I've read this three times and can't tell if this is done seriously or mockingly. Please clarify.

Spefically points 3, 4, and especially 5.

 

To me, Sharpe brings everything that Simons brings, but a lot more. He had stretches where he was every bit as good as Simons at shooting the three. His play making at the end of the season was vastly improved. He attacks the rim in a way that Simons just never has, despite having very good athleticism. Sharpe is just a bigger physical specimen. He's taller, he's longer, and he's stronger. So yes, I think having Sharpe starting at the two is different from having Simons at the two.

Because I personally think that Sharpe brings more to the table, I agree that he should make the starting unit and the team better.

The last point I think is a typo.

 

He certainly has potential to bring more to the table. I doube he'll be a better pure catch-shoot guy from distance, but that's only one attribute and it would be unreasonable to think he'd be better at everything. How much of his potential will he reach? That's the great unknown.

 

exactly what you hope for when you draft players. They are so good they make the guy in front of him expendable. Think similar thing happened with Paxson and Drexler

 

Could be what he meant, though that seems like a stretch. I wouldn't really agree with the first point.

Yes, every play player is different, though Ant/Sharpe are both offense first guys who have sturggled on defense to this point in their career. Both are high flyers and both have shown they can score in bunches. Neither has shown to be a top notch play-maker for others. So I'm not sure the difference is significant at this point. Could that change? Certainly.

 

sorry Tince, catch-and-shoot may be a bad example

according to NBA spot-up stats, Ant is in the 80th percentile at 1.16 points/spot-up vs Sharpe in the 77th percentile at 1.14 ppp. However, Sharpe has a better eFG on spot-up, 60.1% vs 59.1%; a better FT frequency; a better shooting foul frequency; a better and-1 frequency; and a better scoring frequency (FT's matter). Ant was better at turnover frequency

now spot-up isn't exactly the same as catch-and-shoot, but there are more metrics available at NBA.com for spot-up than for catch-&-shoot

for catch and shoot stats, Ant shot 39.2% on three's and his overall catch-and-shoot eFG was 58.7%. However, Sharpe shot 45.7% on three's and his catch-and-shoot eFG was 66.7%

in fact, for catch-and-shoot, as near as I can tell, Sharpe led the Blazers in both three point conversion rate and eFG%. He was the only Blazer above 40% on three's; and the only Blazer above 60% in eFG% (Jeenathan Williams doesn't count). I'd think if Sharpe was starting with Dame he'd be pretty effective off the ball

 

CJ working on his bloviator credentials by saying something Stephen A has been screaming about for years. When in Rome...