SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Personally, I really like Haliburton.
I'm aware that most of my favorite guys are not stars but usually role players, specifically, unselfish dudes who vastly outperform their physical and skill limitations and leave everything on the court every game, driven both by a desire to win and joy at the opportunity to play. Brewer has long been one of my favorite guys. Okogie is up there. Sadly, Jimmy was too.
Haliburton seems like more of a cerebral player than those guys, and not quite the "dog" I love, where you can tell they're dialed up to 100 on every play. But man, he's close. I do think if Wiseman, Ball, or Edwards actually reach their potential, they'd be better picks. But the relatively high chance they won't and the possibility of trading down a bit and getting another asset would make a trade-down in which we pick up Haliburton and another asset (a first rounder next year would be awesome) kind of exciting to me, even though positionally, I know we really need a switchable 4 who can stretch the floor most of all (who doesn't?).
I've loved Haliburton as a prospect for a long time. Most analysts agree he has a high floor, but believe he doesn't have a particularly high ceiling. I agree he has a high floor, but I also think he has a really high ceiling. As I reflect on current and past NBA stars, I see nearly all of them having the following four characteristics: (1) really high basketball IQs; (2) extreme competitive drive; (3) highly developed skills for their position; and (4) either elite athleticism or good size for their position. Magic Johnson and Larry Bird are the two best examples, but there are others like Steve Nash, John Stockton, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan, etc. None of those players were elite athletes, although most of them had good or very good size for their respective positions. Steve Nash is at least one example of an NBA star who just had the first three characteristics. I don't think he had particularly good size for his position.
Haliburton strikes me as a guy who fits the mold of the players I listed. He appears to have at least three of the four main characteristics I mentioned - i.e., an extremely high basketball IQ, high level skill set (passing, ball-handling and stationary perimeter shooting), and very good size for his position. I don't have a full sense of his competitive drive and that's the only thing holding me back so far from putting him in my top 3. The good news, however, is that there are absolutely no reports questioning his motor or competitiveness. So he might end up in my top three by tomorrow when I post my draft board.
