Running list of prospects meeting/working out with Portland

Are you saying it's laughable that Duren could be better than Dyson Daniels?
That is laughable.
I also think Durens floor is higher than Dyson's.
Dyson could be a huge bust worth nothing.
Duren at least will provide an excellent lob threat and good to excellent rim protection.

 

Rebounding, rim running and athleticism from a post defender that makes him less of a liability on the perimeter.

 

I didn't bring up Dyson at all.

My list of BPA at possible #7 that I would take over Duren:

- Ivey or Murray if they drop.
- Davis
- Mathurin
- Sharpe
- Eason
- Agbaji

As I laid out in the other thread, I don't want to take a raw non-top-tier center in the lottery. There is too much opportunity cost by doing so. I'd be fine taking him if we were at 15 or so.

 

did you just equate Jalen Duren to Michael Jordan?

 

Playing devil's advocate....who has? I don't think any of them have shown enough. (maybe the top 4 have but no one we are looking at) It is all about projecting who will be the best. This is when a top talent evaluator comes in handy.

I do agree that drafting a center in the top 7 is risky, but if they think he has big-time potential, especially defensively, then who cares if he goes 7th or 11th? Especially if they think they can still land Grant.

I would prefer to use #7 to get some offense at PF (Collins or Siakam) but if that is not happening I would not be unhappy with adding both Grant and Duren. That would be 2 big needs filled.

 

You tell me. In what way did I equate Jalen Duren to Michael Jordan? Playing style? Career trajectory? Height?

 

We should. If we want to maximize the value of the best pick we've had since Dame, and are desperate for an infusion of talent.

 

Some people think it's impossible or unlikely that Duren could be better than Dyson Daniels or Bennedict Mathurin.

 

Sure if there is a difference in talent. But with all due respect to your talent evaluation, this year is kind of a crap shoot after the top 4. You can't really guarantee that 7 will be better than 8-15. And neither of us will be in the gym when they bring them in for their workouts. It is so hard knowing which of these 18-19-year-olds will improve the most. And it is all about who will be the best long term, not just next year.

 

I love the potential of Duran but he is a the true definition of a boom or bust player cause I think his ceiling could be an All star type player but his floor could be of a player out of the league in 3 to 5 years.

If the Blazers were picking at 12 to 15 range I might be like take a gamble on this type of player and if they were in a true rebuild BUT when the team is looking to get a ring in the next couple seasons then it is a hard sell at this time. Also what would concern me is he looks like a million bucks and if he has workout that blows people in the gym then he could make someone make that gamble AKA if PA were still alive.

 

no i largely agree with you, and even said before 5-12 prolly are in the same boat in the grand scheme of things. But the draft is more about public perception and other teams' perception. If we can get the guy WE identify as BPA at 11 instead of 7 just because other teams are not valuing him as highly, I would hope like anything to extract another asset while landing our guy. It's not unlike Ainge dropping from 1 to 3 to land Tatum. Considering how poorly we did in our previous trades and how many assets we supposedly left on the table, we need to change that mindset now.

I might disagree that Duren is BPA at 7, but I would get on board with drafting him if our evaluators think he's the one. I just don't want to take the lazy route and draft him at 7 and call it a night when our cupboards are so bare.

My guy for a while that has been undervalued in the mocks has been Eason. I still think we should drop back to ~13 to pick up another asset to get him.

 

If Cronin is true to his word about taking a big swing and wants Duren, he should definitely try to trade down, with San Antonio, for example.

 

I disagree about the bust part. If our choices at #7 are limited to Mathurin, Davis, Daniels. Davis has a pretty high floor, but I'd say Duren's floor is higher than Daniels and Mathurin. Duren should from day 1 be a two-way player, being a lob threat on offense and a rim protector than can defend in space on defense. For their floors, Daniels may have problems being valuable on offense, and Mathurin may have problems doing anything well besides shooting 3-pointers.
Of course if Ivey or Shaedon Sharpe are available they probably have high ceilings and floors.

 

If I trade down I would pick Williams over Duren.

 

Not me... Duren has a great chance at being able to cover the perimeter and not get played off the floor by small lineups and I don't see the same kind of athleticism in Williams.

 

Absolutely. Duran can chase a guy down full court and get a block. He is in a different class athletically compared to Williams.

 

Kessler > Williams

 

His stats in that game were impressive, but watching the video I was not impressed. Very good at finishing a lob one handed. That was about it. It seemed the other team lacked some height which allowed him to rebound over their backs.

 

To make it brief, Duren has much higher possible upside on offense (and better skills now), and much better mobility on defense than Williams.
Look at the differences in these highlight videos. Notice how Williams offense is pretty much two-handed dunks. Duren can grab the ball mid-air with one hand and dunk it. Williams is simply not capable of that. Duren is also working on a mid-range jumper. Mark Williams is 2 years older than Jalen Duren, but Duren is the who has the NBA-ready body. Duren is only 18 years old.

 

One handed lob dunks are not easy. Mark Williams is incapable of that.
Rebounding isn't very impressive on highlights. Nobody seems to care about rebounding when evaluating possible draft picks. Very strange to me.