I post this in full knowledge of the fact that somebody will immediately bitch about starting a thread for every 2-bit draft prospect. But if I post it in a draft thread, nobody will respond, and I have questions. Specifically, what do people think of this guy? Probably the fact that he has two NCAA championships will actually count against him because he's too overexposed. But not to me, because I NEVER watch NCAA basketball. And he's projected as a low first rounder, right around where we'll be picking (unless we unload our pick to a team that takes a bad contract off our hands). And his strengths, defense, clutchness, seem to be areas we're weak in. Anybody got opinions?
Judging by his Wikipedia page, he fits our "culture" - he's super-dedicated academically. Plus I like (a) the fact that he's of NBA stock (I liked his Dad, although he never could shoot worth a damn) and (b) the fact that he's won at every level.
I'm guessing that we'll be losing Napier. Even if we're not, would you prefer Napier? Let's have a detailed compare and contrast.
I like this: This season, as Brunson’s junior season commenced, Reid Forgrave of CBS Sports wrote a profile on him. He called Brunson “the smartest player in college basketball.” Jalen Brunson has unquestionably one of the most advanced basketball minds in the nation. He scores at an elite level, both from 3-point range (he’s shooting above 50 percent this year) and at the rim (he was third in the nation last year at finishing at the rim). We all want a 6-6, ridiculously athletic human being we can turn into an elite point guard. That’s not Jalen Brunson. He’s a basketball savant at a position that values the mind more than any other in basketball.
I like Brunson a lot. I think he's going to have a much longer/better career than most in his draft range. I think Brunson is going to be MUCH, MUCH better than Napier. He's an excellent shooter & extremely smart. He's below average athletically for the NBA - which is why I think most people are not higher on him. I could easily see him having a Derrick Fisher type career. The 3 players that I like that have been mocked in the 20-40 range are Brunson, Shamet, & Hutchinson.
I wouldn’t take him with our pick but I wouldn’t be against buying a pick in the second for him. He can play with Baldwin so I wouldn’t worry about the fit too much.
That would be good for him, but I loathe that name with a passion. I liked the Fred VanVleet comparison (I think it's in the article I linked to). He was also compared with Frank Mason, and incidentally, the top two benches in the league (according to a link provided by dviss in some other thread) are Toronto and Sacramento. But again, I can see Andre Miller - especially as he likes to post up, as well. Of course, worst case scenario is Nolan Smith...
People keep mentioning Baldwin, and I guess I don't mind giving Baldwin more of a chance, but I really wouldn't say "we shouldn't draft ___ because we've got Baldwin" about ANYBODY.
I'm not super high on Brunson. I think he'll carve out a long career as a backup PG but I have a tough time seeing his game translating into an NBA star like in college. He shot a decent percentage from 3 this year but his shot mechanics seem like he could struggle with the longer NBA 3 point line. He's not quick enough to get by people in the NBA and lateral quickness on defense might be an issue. Sure, there is some post up potential against smaller guards. His intangibles are through the roof with BBIQ and good character. I wouldn't mind having him on a 2nd round pick rookie contract but will be kind of upset if they take him at 24. I think we need to take a risk on a boom or bust type player and not someone who is fine but likely never will be great. I'm probably in the minority here but if money was equal I'd take Napier. I prefer quicker guards than prodding guards.
Me too. I'm not entirely sure why either. Maybe it was that era of Blazer basketball that just is depressing to me. Well, more depressing than the rest of the last 26 (out of 28) years.
I am assuming it goes without saying that this player will also be able to handle the ball and shoot from distance? Other wise he will be useless at the end of games.
I hadn't seen much of him and was looking forward to watching a full game of him in the NCAA Championship game. To say they won in spite of him would be an understatement.....he was terrible. Just a really off game in apparently a great season, but what a stinker.
