I Like Burgers

May 17th, 2014 at 12:28 AM ^

How is a lack of lateral quickness and an inability to be a go-to guy in college going to lead to being a high-level complementary player in the NBA?  Generally, you don't hear the "you know that thing that was holding me back in college? Totally not going to matter in the pros" line of logic and reasoning.

I Like Burgers

May 17th, 2014 at 2:59 PM ^

Neither my comment or Nitro's comment had anything to do with playing out of position.  Nitro commented that GRIII's lack of lateral quickness was inhibiting him from being a go to guy in college, but a lack of lateral quickness wouldn't be a limiting factor in the NBA.  To me, that seems odd.  If its bad enough to limit you in the college ranks, the problem is going to be even more glaring at the NBA level.  And to your point, that's going to be an issue wether he's playing out of position or not.  In fact, it would actually be a worse issue playing at the 3 instead of the 4 at the NBA level considering the level of athletes at that position.

Fab and Fresh

May 18th, 2014 at 2:52 AM ^

I can't even begin to count how many times I said to myself while watching a game as GRIII blows by his guy on a drive to the rim "and people hate on you and say you can't get your own shot off without it being an oop or a putback..." People just like to have a stance and stick with it no matter what is actually happening. We had a lot of firepower on the squad both years he was here and the ball was dominated by our PG and our wings. We never really needed him to be the drive and create guy. Yet in spite of that lack of need, he still managed to drive and score numerous times. Maybe not enough to satisfy you, but it happened. That indicates to me that his lateral quickness is fine.

I can think of a couple drives in the Purdue game alone as well as a couple great plays against Kentucky down the stretch. He's a freak of an athlete. His lateral quickness is fine. He was getting in where he was fitting in his entire career here, of which he started every single game I might add.

Mr. Yost

May 16th, 2014 at 8:54 PM ^

He'd be lucky to go 15 IMO, this draft is extremely deep with guys who have shown more than flashes of potential on the basketball court.

I think he'd a first rounder for sure, but I think he's a late first rounder. 20-30.

I think he ends up on a really good team, however, the Bobcats/Hornets have a late first rounder and that may be a good fit in terms of style and PT.

Charlotte, Houston, LAC and OKC...I hope he falls to one of those teams. He'd be very exciting in Houston coming off the bench, same with LA or OKC. Charlotte has Michael Kidd-Gilchrest but he's awful offensively.

Arlo Pear

May 16th, 2014 at 10:01 PM ^

He definitely has some things to improve in his game just like many of the guys that are expected to go in the first round. By coming out this year I think teams will not think he is a finished product and can be developed with basketball being a full time job. I think teams will be intrigued by his athleticism and his ability to shoot the spot up jumper. Teams are often blinded by potential. 15 is probably top end but, I don't think it's out of the question.

Mr. Yost

May 17th, 2014 at 8:55 AM ^

Everyone has potential in such a deep draft.

In most drafts the 15-20 range is where you start seeing the upperclassmen All-American's come off the board.

In this draft you're still going to be seing 1 and done guys in that range. Hell, Stauskas could very easily go in that range he's considered the higher pick between the two.

I would agree in most years, GRIII could easily got 15 off of potential and his flashes...not this year. Not unless he lights it up in predraft workouts, which he may do...but if the draft was today, his measurables alone aren't going to help him like they would in the past.

Especially since he had nothing to gain by them, everyone knew he was athletic, he had more to lose by not testing well than he had to gain by testing well.

Stauskas has WAY more to gain by being athletic and testing well than GRIII does. 

Arlo Pear

May 17th, 2014 at 2:50 PM ^

And some of those one and done guys are being drafted on potential alone. There's nothing production wise that says a guy like Zach Levine is head and shoulders better than GRIII. He did however have a great combine and is said to be a riser. Or the big man from Switzerland, he will be drafted purely on potential, scouts say he didn't perform that well at the Hoops Summit. In the link I provided it says how well GRIII shot the ball in the workouts, if that continues combined with his athleticism I could see a team taking him in that range. I think teams draft over draft potential in every draft. That's how San Antonio can sit in their spot and grab Kawhi Leonard or Jared Sullinger goes to Boston.

I Like Burgers

May 17th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^

I think GRIII either goes in the 15-22 range or slides into the second round.  Like you said, he doens't really bring anything to the table other than athleticism.  And considering the teams drafting at the end of the first round are all good teams, none of them are really looking to add a dude that's just athletic.  They need 3pt shooters, defensive stoppers, high energy guys, or long shots on a big man.  And actually because of that, I could see Mitch going before GRIII.  Mitch could be a good fit in someplace like Miami or San Antonio.  It would be a high reward, low risk type of pick for a team like that.

Its tough to project where GRIII goes since he doesn't have any sort of ++ skills that fit a need for a team.


May 16th, 2014 at 9:56 PM ^

According to my notes, the temporary timeout was over tomorrow anyway, so the points are back for your use and as they were originally. 

As for the topic at hand, I couldn't find specific footage, but here is Glenn speaking yesterday about the Combine:


May 17th, 2014 at 1:12 AM ^

Well, Granger is old and might not be on the Clippers next year, Matt Barnes is even older and Dudley never played.  That's actually one of the few teams who could take a guy like GRIII.  They've got good PGs who score and good SGs who can shoot lights out (Redick and Crawford), and the 3 is the one spot where they really don't have a starter type guy.  And if you don't have that guy on your roster, you might as well fill it with a young guy who is cheap and could develop.

That said, I bet they draft a big.  Outside of DJ and Griffin, their only big was Big Baby.  He's not bad, but that was IT.  They need to draft another 6'10"+ guy who can come in when Griffin or DeAndre are in foul trouble.


May 17th, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^

Granger Granger shot something like 22% from 3 this post-season, and was barely clipping 30% for the year.  He might not be back.  And Barnes is 34 years old and kinda limited; GRIII could certainly push him out.

Nobody is saying that GRIII is going to be a starter fresh out of college, but Hardaway was viewed as a fringe 1st rounder who finished in the top-5 of the Rookie of the Year award.  Guys can surprise, and for all the talk about how stocked this class is there are lots of guys with question marks and "potential."  GRIII isn't as shiny and new as he once was, but the guy has performed reasonably well in college for a couple of years and has lots of raw potential; smart teams may find that he's worth a shot compared to a kid who may be a a little more polished or have more "upside" but who isn't ready to contribute right now.  I can definitely see GRIII getting 4-5 minutes a game on a contender, doing the type of energy plays that young guys do.


May 17th, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^

Sefolosha is a SG (and a free agent), Butler is a FA, Roberson and Jones III don't get PT and Lamb has seen his dwindle as the year progressed.  The Clippers' group is okay, but Granger is a free agent and Bullock hardly played this year.  Also, don't be shocked if Dudley is dealt in the offseason. My point isn't that GR3 is necessarily better than all of these guys, but rather that all of these guys aren't so good that finding PT for Glenn would be impossible.

Mr. Yost

May 17th, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^

I love how so many people say "he wouldn't play a lick" without actually knowing the rosters.

If GRIII can't play over Matt f-ing Barnes in 2 years, he's not a first round NBA player. PERIOD.

There isn't ONE single player you could mention to answer your question that GRIII shouldn't play over in 2-3 years. If there is, he should be a 2nd rounder because you don't take guys in the first round to be the 11th man or 3rd SF on your team.


May 16th, 2014 at 9:30 PM ^

GR3 isn't seeing a minute in Houston without a 3 ball. Same with LAC. 

Isn't seeing a minute in OKC because of defense and Brooks doesn't play young guys. 




May 16th, 2014 at 10:06 PM ^

Brooks doesn't play young guys? Uhhhhhh did you know that 20 yr old big rookie Adams just got around 38 minutes in a series clenching playoff game last night, most of which came before the Ibaka injury? Did you know that last year rookie PG Reggie Jackson started most of last years playoffs? Even before the Westbrook injury, he was still getting substantial minutes.

To be honest with you, if there is one team in the NBA that is not only really good but also plays with a plentiful amount of youth minutes.... OKC would be that team.

GRIII may not be a potential starter anytime soon for them, but he could definitely find a role in their rotation. Athleticism is really important to that team, which GRIII most definitely has.

Mr. Yost

May 17th, 2014 at 9:29 AM ^

Adams is taking over for Perkins in a couple years, hell, maybe next year...it has nothing to do with Jones or Lamb.

Jackson stole Lamb's minutes, but #1, they needed a backup PG over Fisher. And #2...if you don't like it, get better.

That said, if I was the Thunder I would be looking to trade Jackson for a true backup PG who isn't so shootfirst like both he and Westbrook are. Someone like Collison with the Clippers.

I'd also trade Lamb and try like hell to go get STAUSKAS, not GRIII. Stasukas paired with Thabo make a great offense/defense SG combo. You're pretty much set at that position for the entire game.

So in the end, I wouldn't have either Jackson or Lamb. Both good players, but if I'm the Thunder, I want an offensive heavy SG/SF, not backup PG. I also want a "true" backup PG to play Westbrook at SG some or for instance like when Westbrook was hurt, you have someone to get the offense started to take the load off of KD.

Stauskas on the Thunder in a wanna-be Harden like role would be crazy. Then bring him out for Thabo in defensive situations or when his offense isn't going.


May 17th, 2014 at 1:49 AM ^

I hope he ends up going late in the first round.  Contracts are guaranteed for two years, giving him plenty of time to develop into a possible starter or at least a good backup.


May 17th, 2014 at 10:32 PM ^

The other good thing about going late in the first round is it's usually to a good team.  He wouldn't be expected to come in and light the place on fire.  Instead he'd be coming off the bench and hopefully going the team 10-15 good minutes a game. 


May 17th, 2014 at 1:22 PM ^

He always seemed like the type of guy who would succeed in a combine setting, where his athleticism and size would shine.  I am still wondering if he'll sneak into the 1st round, but he definitely could find a place on an NBA roster.


May 17th, 2014 at 2:44 PM ^

I'm a little tired of the negging on our basketball players--like GRIII here--under the guise of "telling it like it is"--or how a player ain't ready for the NBA, but we'd be National Champs if he returned.

That said I think one of the problems is too much familiarity.  Because we have watched GRIII for 2 years, we know well his weaknesses.  But they are magnified IMHO--because we project how good he would be with more energy and a better handle.  We sometimes forget about his strengths and his potential (youth).  

We look at other players on other teams and--unless we hate them--see their strengths but not necessarily their weaknesses--inconsistency, defense, ball skills etc--particularly if they played well against Michigan.  I consider Payne one of those guys.  Payne is hyper-athletic (like GRIII), hustles, can post some, hit a 3 and is, of course, a genuine 6'9"---but his outside shot is extremely slow and mechanical, he is a poor (but improving) ball-handler, he is a terrible passer (out of the post or otherwise), and doesn't appear to be a particularly (basketball) smart player.  Yet I get why he is coveted by the NBA despite these weaknesses.

I was watching parts of the UM-Syracuse semi-final game the other day. GRIII did some nice things in that game--some very nice things. GRIII's draft position will be based on what he has done plus his considerable upside.  NBA GMs know what they are doing---(insert obligatory qualification).

And based on the love (quantity and quality) Steve Kerr gave Mitch in the Syracuse game , it wouldn't surprise me if Mitch ends up at Golden State--he can back up both Lee and Bogut (and I appreciate that Draymond gets some minutes at the 4 at 6'6").



Arlo Pear

May 17th, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^

I agree, there are definitely warts in the games of a lot of other players projected in the 1st round that are ignored by some because they don't see them a lot. GRIII has some limitations but with a great work ethic I think there's enough ability to put him in the 1st round.


May 18th, 2014 at 11:38 PM ^

All the atheletic potential in the world means nothing if you cannot shoot a jumper.  Unless your are a Dwane Wade type who can get to the rim at will the lack of an outside shot is killer.  If I am GR III I take a thousand jumpers a day.  My other big concern with GR III is he may be a tweaner.  Look at the scoring SF's in the league.  James, Durrant, George, etc.  If slow plodding college forwards gave GR III a hard time, what would those mosters do to him much less the Wiggans, and Parkers who are just as atheletic but have perimeter games.  For a super leaper with supposed six nine wing span GR III seemed to be content to let other people dictate to him.  But the nice thing with the NBA is they can work on his flaws 24x7.