The Pacific Division Season Preview

The Warriors are the only sure thing, with the Clippers flailing into bottom of the playoffs. The Lakers, Kings, and Suns are going to fight for the worst record in the league.

Golden State Warriors (Crevice Predicted Wins: 68)

Projected starting lineup: Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, Kevin Durant, Draymond Green, Zaza Pachulia
Most intriguing lineup: Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, Patrick McCaw, Kevin Durant, Draymond Green
Best case scenario: Every single thing goes right and the Warriors win 72+ wins and sweep the playoffs 16–0
Worst case scenario: The Warriors deal with nagging injuries during the season, win 64 games, and flounder in the Conference Finals to the Rockets

I’m going to run through these questions as quickly as possible. We know the Warriors are going to repeat.

When’s the last time betting the field was an underdog to betting on the favorite at the start of the season?

Let’s look back at the best teams in NBA history: the Boston Celtics in the 60s played in an NBA with 7 other teams. The 70s were about coke, and there wasn’t really a dominant team ever. So we’re up to the 80s, where the Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, and Pistons were all dominant enough that the field was an overwhelming favorite over any of the single teams. That brings us to the 90s and the Bulls teams. But they had to contend against Barkley’s Suns, the rising Blazers, the Payton-Kemp Sonics, and Ewing’s Knicks. The Shaq-Kobe Lakers had to deal with the Duncan-Robinson Spurs and the Kings team that would’ve won a title if not for Donaghy. The Celtics Big 3 teams and LeBron’s Heat teams were never favored this heavily. There literally has never been such an overwhelming favorite as Golden State this year. Ever.

Which is why I’d to bet against them, if I had money.

How many distinct lineups do the Warriors have that can beat any other lineup in the NBA?

It’s a simple combinatorics problem. Here’s how the math works: you take three of the four All-NBA performers, then pick two of the remaining eleven on the roster, and then shuffle them all around. So that’s

such lineups. There’s probably more, but that’s the lower bound. I’m sure of it.

Who is the most important player on the Warriors?

It’s definitely one of the big four. Here’s the case for each:

1. Steph Curry — best shooter in the world
2. Kevin Durant — best scorer in the world in the body of a center
3. Draymond Green — most versatile defender in the world and the team’s best facilitator
4. Klay Thompson — most instinctual off-ball scorer in the league and the third-best perimeter defender in the league

The best way to think about it is redundancy. Durant’s defense, in addition to Green’s, is stellar. But Iguodala+Green and Iguodala+Durant is good enough. If Durant sits, Thompson and Green can pick up some slack, and Iguodala and Livingston and McCaw can hit some open shots.

Green’s defense is amazing, but see above. Durant can be a lesser version of him at the stretch four or small-ball five. The facilitation Green provides can also be made up by Curry and Durant.

Now, Thompson’s amazing off-the-ball, but with Durant, McCaw, Iguodala, and Nick Young, the offense and defense can still be there.

Curry, however… the gravity he provides, the ball-handling, and the facilitation. It’s hard to replace that with any of the vast pieces this team’s got. Steph Curry is still the most important player on this team, and everyone on the team knows it.

Los Angeles Clippers (Crevice Predicted Wins: 46)

Projected starting lineup: Patrick Beverley, Austin Rivers, Danilo Gallinari, Blake Griffin, DeAndre Jordan
Most intriguing lineup: Patrick Beverley, Milos Teodosic, Sam Dekker, Blake Griffin, DeAndre Jordan
Best case scenario: Teodosic is instantly an All-Star caliber point guard, and Blake is healthy and back to MVP Blake form. The Clips win 54 games and get to a second round series.
Worst case scenario: Blake’s unhealthy, Teodosic is a sieve, Gallinari is both unhealthy and a sieve, and the Clippers struggle to 0.500.

Can Blake and DeAndre coexist? Have they ever truly coexisted?

The latter of these two questions is actually the easier question. Of lineups that played more than 100 minutes together last year, here are the ones that featured both All-Star bigs:

The Clippers starters: Paul, Redick, Mbah a Moute, Griffin, Jordan. Net rating of 15.8 over 871 minutes. That was one of the best lineups in the league last year.

The closers: Paul, Redick, Crawford, Griffin and Jordan. Net rating of 11.9 over 163 minutes. One of the best offensive lineups in the league.

The Chris Paul is injured starters: Rivers, Redick, Mbah a Moute, Griffin, Jordon. Net rating of -2.2 over 131 minutes. There’s no real point guard in this lineup, with Griffin probably doing most of the facilitation.

The other closers: Paul, Redick, Rivers, Griffin, and Jordan. Net rating of 16.9 over 130 minutes. Rivers and Crawford are essentially the same player, so it makes sense this lineup is also very good.

The easy answer to that second question above is yes. The easier answer is yes, but only because of Chris Paul.

But if we expand our search to all Clippers lineups from last year, this lineup was also pretty good, albeit a tiny sample size: Rivers, Crawford, Redick, Griffin, and Jordan. That’s Griffin and Jordan with “shooters,” getting a net rating of 10.2 over 55 minutes. Here’s another lightly used lineup that yielded a net rating in the positive double digits with both bigs and no Paul: Felton, Redick, Rivers, Griffin, and Jordan (10.8 over 44 minutes).

So, here’s my answer: yes, Griffin and Jordan definitely work together, especially when they have an elite point guard like Paul, finding them for easy buckets.

I talked about what makes this offense and defense tick over the past few years here: a lot of elevator pick-and-rolls with shooting and duck-ins surrounding them, and great point of attack defense from Paul and interior defense from Jordan.

This is the most quintessential reason the Clippers were a great offensive team with this awkward looking set of bigs, both of whom aren’t great shooters: Paul and Griffin are transcendent passers.

Here’s the sneaky truth though: Griffin isn’t actually a bad three point shooter (33.6% on 2 attempts a game), and he’s actually great at long twos (43.6% on 4.5 a game). That’s good, if not great, spacing, from your bull-strong power forward.

Here’s probably the best lineup the Clippers can throw out there this year: Patrick Beverley and Milos Teodosic in the backcourt, with Danilo Gallinari, Griffin, and Jordan shoring up the frontcourt in what can only be the largest frontcourt in the league next year. That’s Griffin and Jordan with shooters, last time I checked. Beverley is a 38% (or better) shooter from deep, Gallinari is 39%, and Teodosic should pan out to around a 40% three-point shooter. And on top of it all, it’s not inconceivable that Teodosic provides 70% (maybe 80 or 90%) of the pick-and-roll prowess that Paul provided.

46 wins doesn’t seem like a lot, but that’s my estimate that accounts for injuries to Griffin, Beverley, and Gallinari. If those three players combine of 210 games this season, I’m bullish, very bullish. This will be a lethal offense that should feature the Griffin/Jordan duo more, with the facilitation load falling squarely on Griffin’s shoulders. Here’s to more big-to-big lobs.

How good is Milos Teodosic going to be?

According to Patrick Beverley, Teodosic “might be the best passer in the NBA right now.” And using the rules of logic, he’s not wrong. He might be. But by the rules of probability, he probably isn’t.

Check this video out of young Milos:

This is still applicable for present day Milos because he’s never used any form of athleticism to excel. He has some of the best pace in the game, with perfect timing on the pick-and-roll, and enough hesitation in his game to keep his man off-kilter, a sense that leads to easy pull-up jumpers.

He’s coming off his two best seasons in Europe, averaging 16.1 points and 6.8 assists on 44.4/38.1/89.7 shooting splits. But adjusting for time to per 36 minutes, he’s up to 21.0 points and 8.9 assists on 9 three pointers a game.

Yes, the following will be a shitty comparison, since the competition in the NBA and in Europe are definitely not equivalent, but the playing style in Europe leads to depressed stats. So, quid pro quo, and it’s a decent comparison.

Dragic’s stats last year, per 36 minutes: 21.7 points, 6.2 assists on 40.5% 3PT
Lowry’s stats last year, per 36 minutes: 21.6 points, 6.7 assists on 41.2% 3PT
Paul’s stats last year, per 36 minutes: 20.7 points, 10.6 assists on 41.1% 3PT

If Teodosic produces at that rate, he’s being underpaid. If he puts up something like 14 and 6 in 24 minutes, that’s a win for the Clippers. And that’s totally possible! Sure, the point guards in the NBA are unequivocally at an entirely different level than in Europe. But, if the idea is to play Teodosic off the bench a lot against backups, he can use his veteran savvy and height (6'5") to be lethal in pick-and-roll situations with whoever of Jordan and Griffin is still out there with the bench unit. And on top of it all, Teodosic isn’t running pick-and-roll schemes with Kyle Hines and Nikita Kurbanov anymore. I wouldn’t be surprised if Teodosic is in contention for Sixth Man of the Year by the end of the season.

I’ll leave you with this marvelous video.

What’s the stepping stone for this team to contention?

Blow it up. Hope the Griffin doesn’t injure himself further this season, and throw him in a trade for first round pick(s). Don’t resign DeAndre Jordan, and just accrue first-round picks and young prospects from the scrap-heap. It’ll be a slog, but it’s the only way to get a championship from this point A.

However, it’s much more likely the Clippers start at the point A of mediocrity and stay here for a few years. They have enough good players to be in the playoffs for years to come, but nothing more. The sooner the Clippers can recognize that the fastest way to point C for championship is to go to the intermediary point B for blow it up as soon as possible, the sooner the Clippers will be back in contention.

And yes, they were contention for a solid three years there.

Los Angeles Lakers (Crevice Predicted Wins: 30)

Projected starting lineup: Lonzo Ball, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Brandon Ingram, Julius Randle, Brook Lopez
Most intriguing lineup: Lonzo Ball, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Brandon Ingram, Julius Randle, Brook Lopez
Best case scenario: Lonzo’s ROY, Brandon Ingram takes a massive step, and Julius Randle gets traded for a great asset, 34–36 wins, and there’s a lot of buzz that attracts free agents
Worst case scenario: Lonzo struggles, Ingram is still a skinny teenager, and the Lakers lose their pick.

How many of the young pieces on the Lakers are actually valuable?

Let’s take this one-by-one:

1. Lonzo Ball — 9/10 on the value scale. He’s not just a transcendent passer with the potential to be a top ten shooter in the league. He brings with him a brand, and that, in itself, is beyond valuable.
2. Jordan Clarkson — 3/10 on the value scale. First, Clarkson isn’t quite young anymore. He’s 25 years. Secondly, he’s a combo guard who can’t shoot or create for others or defend either guard position. And he still has $37.5 million over the next three years.
3. Kentavious Caldwell-Pope — 7/10 on the value scale, especially playing aside Lonzo in the backcourt. We’ll talk about this later, but if the Lakers can land two big fishes and retain both Ball and Brandon Ingram, KCP is the perfect role player, but only at a reasonable price. If not, he’s the ideal backcourt mate for Lonzo, at any price.
4. Brandon Ingram — 10/10 on the value scale, independent of who else is on this team. Ingram’s skill set is the most malleable of those of the 20 and younger players. Theoretically, he’s a good shooter, a decent facilitator (great for his age), and a versatile defender. That’s an underrated facet of his game: Ingram knows how to leverage his length to be a good on-ball defender and an even better weakside help defender.
5. Julius Randle — 3/10 on the value scale, with or without the right players. He’s a four who needs to stretch but can’t. He doesn’t rebound nearly as vociferously as he needs to. He can’t defend fours or fives. But he can facilitate well. So he’s one for four on the Draymond Green blueprint.
6. Kyle Kuzma — 6/10. Yes, but as a complementary piece, not a piece to develop.
7. Josh Hart — 5/10. Yes, but as a role player, an eighth man, at best.
8. Alex Caruso — LOLJK

Can this Lakers team be sneaky good?

Let’s first define sneaky good. I don’t mean playoff contention by this. I’m saying a win total in the high 30s, and I don’t think that’s unreachable for the Lakers.

The performance of the Lakers hinge mainly on their two untouchables, and as an Indian, I really hate myself for using that terminology. Here’s the best case scenario for Ball and Ingram: they get along and have great chemistry.

Say Ball comes in and learns exactly where Ingram likes to catch the ball and Ingram gets a feeling for Ball’s timing when he comes off screens.

Say Ingram starts to figure out when exactly to duck in and when exactly to come off a off-ball screen to get a pinpoint pass from Ball.

Say Lonzo is actually a 40% three point shooter overall and a 35–37% pull-up shooter.

Say Ingram gains some upper body strength and figures out how to use his length to extend over smaller wings to score from the high block.

Say Lonzo isn’t a complete sieve on defense and Ingram takes a leap as a defensive pivot.

Surrounding those two, say Randle scores only when he can bully second units and facilitates from the four in the starting lineup, KCP improves his shooting and picks up for Lonzo’s defensive slack, and Brook Lopez (oh yeah… he’s on this team now) continues to be a 20 point scorer.

If all that occurs, this is a good offensive team, maybe even top 10. The defense will be the limiting factor. But it’s not out of question the Lakers can show promise this year.

What are the Lakers’s best outcome for the 2018 summer?

These are the things that need to happen this season to set up the perfect 2018 summer.

1. Lonzo is a first team All-NBA rookie.
2. Brandon Ingram cracks 15 points a game on 45% overall shooting and 35% three point shooting.
3. Julius Randle gets traded away from some kind of low-end asset, maybe a couple second rounders or a usable role player.
4. Jordan Clarkson either gets traded away for a usable backup point guard or has his salary dumped.
5. Luol Deng gets Mozgov’d.

If all that happens, here’s a conceivable free agent class for the Lakers in the 2018 summer: LeBron, Paul George, and DeMarcus Cousins. Pair that with Lonzo, KCP, and Ingram, that’s a top six that rivals (in theory) the Warriors best six. Throw in a two veteran minimum (maybe Brook Lopez if he really wants to win, or Wilson Chandler, or maybe even Dwyane Wade).

In five years, Brandon Ingram is ____________, Lonzo Ball is _____________, and Julius Randle is ____________.

I have a bunch of these questions for the Pacific Division, so I won’t belabor these fill-in-the-blanks with a lot of explanation.

In five years, Brandon Ingram is Paul George. Maybe not the ball-handler that George is, but I fully believe that Ingram’s destiny is an option 1B type of offensive player — good to great shooter, good facilitator, great defender.

In five years, Lonzo Ball is literally what he is right now, just on steroids. He’ll learn how to push the pace more, leading to more assists, his three-point shot will improve, and his finishing will improve.

In five years, Julius Randle is an seventh man on a middling 38–42 win teams. I really don’t like Randle’s game.

Sacramento Kings (Crevice Predicted Wins: 24)

Projected starting lineup: De’Aaron Fox, Buddy Hield, Garrett Temple, Skal Labissiere, Willie Cauley-Stein
Most intriguing lineup: De’Aaron Fox, Bogdan Bogdanovic, Justin Jackson, Skal Labissiere, Willie Cauley-Stein
Best case scenario: The youngsters improve and the veterans are okay with the little play they get, and they get another top pick for their core
Worst case scenario: The veterans play too much and the Kings can’t fit in enough reps for Fox, Jackson, Hield, Skal, and Giles. On top of it all, the Kings wins too many games and gets a bad lottery pick.

How many of the young pieces on the Kings are actually valuable?

Holy fuck, they’ve stacked this roster with weirdly-fitting, middle-ceiling prospects. Let’s take this one-by-one:

1. De’Aaron Fox — 9/10. The ball needs to be in Fox’s hands and he has to run pick-and-roll after pick-and-roll. He needs to run in transition every instance he gets, and he needs to try to get in the lane whenever he can. The minute George Hill or Buddy Hield takes the ball out of Fox’s hands, Fox’s value drops.
2. Frank Mason III — 5/10. As a heady backup point guard who will probably hit a few clutch three pointers in a long twelve year career, he’s the perfect foil to Fox, pacey, good shooter, and already a veteran leader. But he’ll never be a solid starter, and that drops his value.
3. Buddy Hield — 7/10 if he embraces being a Tim Hardaway, Jr.-esque catch-and-shoot role player but probably 4/10 because he wants to the ball in his hands. See above: Fox needs the ball in his hands, but Buddy’s Kobe complex might drop both his and Fox’s value.
4. Malachi Richardson — 3/10. An athlete who can’t do athlete things like get rebounds and defend his position, and a “shooter” who can’t shoot.
5. Justin Jackson — 6/10, independent of his teammates. I’ll delve a little deeper into this below, but Justin Jackson will be an above-average role player from his first game, and he’ll be an excellent 3-and-D role player by his prime. That player is immensely valuable (i.e. Jae Crowder or prime Wesley Matthew).
6. Bogdan Bogdanovic — 6/10, independent of his teammates. See Justin Jackson.
7. Harry Giles — 7/10 if he regains his explosion, 2/10 otherwise. See my mock drafts. Giles with his hop is a rim-running big with excellent rebounding instincts. Without it, he’s putting up 8 and 6 per 36 minutes.
8. Georgios Papagiannis — 3/10. Though he’s still young, Papagiannis still needs to improve his finishing around the rim, his rebounding, and how he rolls to the rim. And even if he does, his foot speed and leaping ability limits him.
9. Skal Labissiere — 8/10, but the Kings need to choose between him and Cauley-Stein. I’m high on these Kentucky bigs. But I project them as both starting caliber centers. They’re both going to be good rim protectors, but Skal will be a pick-and-pop big and Willie is a pick-and-roll big. And they’ll get expensive and possibly disgruntled if they’re both on the roster and sharing the court.
10. Willie Cauley-Stein — 8/10, but the Kings need to choose between him and Skal. See above.

What’s the value of the trio of veterans?

The Kings surprisingly signed George Hill, Zach Randolph, and Vince Carter for $40 million this year. Then over the 2018–19 and 2019–20 seasons, they’ll be paying George Hill a total of $37 million. That’s a lot of money for a team that should being doing everything in their power to give minutes to their youth and lose this year.

Vince Carter may be the only one of the veterans that make any sense for this team. At 40, he’s best suited to play entirely off-ball at the small forward position, sitting the corner and shooting threes when the kids mess up. Given the dearth of wings who can play the small forward on this team, it makes sense to have Carter come in and mentor and play 15 minutes a game. Obviously, defensively you can’t expect much from Carter. He can probably give a little hedge on bigger small forwards, but he’s the best suited to complement these young players.

That brings us to Zach Randolph and George Hill, two players who may be good veteran leaders (doubtful for Randolph) and good theoretical fits, but probably won’t pan out in practice.

Let’s start with Randolph. Last year, as the Grizzlies number one option off the bench, he poured in 14.1 points and 8.2 rebounds in 24.5 minutes. That’s pretty great, because per 36 minutes, that production was on par with his production when he was the first or second option for the 50+ wins Grizzlies teams. But here’s the hitch: his effective field goal percentage was 46.0%, his lowest since his age 24 season. There are two reliable explanations for this: he was the only scoring threat off the bench for a shallow roster, or he’s lost a step, which made it difficult to loft up those high arcing midrangers and layups that he’s known for. For a player who projects as a stretch(-ish) center, he won’t be as effective anymore.

And that brings us to the problem. Randolph is going to take minutes away from Labisierre and Cauley-Stein, the two bigs the Kings need to figure out if they can coexist. Sure, a four-man big rotation of Skal, Cauley-Stein, Randolph, and Papagiannis and/or Giles when he’s healthy might make sense, but that’s four players who are all centers in today’s game. That’s a log-jam. Luckily, Randolph’s contract can be shed after this year.

That’s the best game Randolph had last year, beating fat Boris Diaw off the dribble, bothering Rudy Gobert with multiple head fakes, and dropping midrange shots off Marc Gasol or Mike Conley dump offs. If he can duplicate that in short bursts, he can play with the cavalcade of bigs the Kings have stashed.

But if Randolph is hoisting bad shots and awkward floaters that have no chance of going in and not allowing the youth to develop their own skills with in-game reps and if Randolph is being the less than ideal model example that he can be, then he’s might turn out to be detrimental to the team. If he’s a Randolph that embraces an entirely marginal teaching role, then he’ll be a net positive.

Now, we turn to George Hill. The Utah Jazz were better with him on the court, that’s for sure. But he was only on the court for 49 games last season, averaging 19.3 points and 4.8 assists per 36 minutes. Hill’s best utilized as an off-ball scorer, especially since he’s never been a great facilitator, given that he’s only had one season with an assist rate of greater than 25%. Sure, that means he can play next to Fox are an undersized two-guard, but that’s probably a liability on defense. And that’s also taking away minutes from Hield and Jackson and Bogdanovic and even Mason.

Here’s the bottom line: if the Kings wanted to lose and have veteran leadership, Vince Carter alone would’ve worked. Signing Hill and Randolph to eight figure salaries may have been overkill.

Which of the best prospects in the 2018 draft is the best fit for the Kings?

I possess the belief that Justin Jackson is a future starter for the Kings. Fox is the future point guard and one of Cauley-Stein and Skal is the center of the future. That’s giving you some kind of pick-and-roll scheme between a point guard that projects to be a great penetrator, a big that projects to fit that scheme, and a wing that should be a good off-ball scorer.

That leaves a wing and a stretch big to fill. Here are the prospects that best work with this team, ranked:

Luke Doncic — Imagine throwing a playmaking, three-point sniping wing next to Fox and Jackson in the perimeter. That’s another ball-handler, a wing with great size. His three-point shooting will make him a good enough off-ball player to space the floor for Fox. But as a secondary playmaker off kick-outs, he can be lethal.

Marvin Bagley — Bagley projects as a power forward who should develop a three-point shot but has the ball skills to put the ball on the deck and make a play for himself or others. Even if his shot doesn’t improve quite to the point where he’s above average from deep, he can be a scoring Draymond type. That’s valuable, both as a pick-and-roll mate for Fox and a weakside scorer.

Michael Porter, Jr. — If the Kings embrace a futuristic offense, they could draft Porter and stash him at the power forward position. He’ll be undersized at first, but his length and size is enough to play a position that is essentially for oversized small forwards. And given his “get buckets” mentality, he’ll be the perfect foil to the rest of the team, as a first scoring option.

In five years, De’Aaron Fox is _______________, Justin Jackson is _______________, Harry Giles is _______________, Buddy Hield is _______________, and Skal Labissiere is _______________.

In five years, De’Aaron Fox is who Dennis Schröder should be right now — an ultra quick, defensive, heady, penetrating guard who has limitations from the perimeter who’s averaging 18–20 points a game and 8–9 assists a game in an up-tempo offense.

In five years, Justin Jackson is a shooting guard who’s averaging 16 points on 6 three point attempts a game and a 55% effective field goal percentage, primarily on off-ball screen action and curls. That’s his destiny. He’s the modern day Rip Hamilton, and that’s such a useful player, especially next to a shooting deficient point guard.

In five years, Buddy Hield is Jodie Meeks, a bucket-wanting seventh man. That’s a useful player, but if Sacramento and Vivek Ranadive expect him to be the starting shooting guard of the future, they’ll be disappointed.

In five years, Skal Labissiere is an entirely unique big man, a rim-protecting, stretch five.

Here’s the ideal future for the Sacramento Kings: Fox falls somewhere between John Wall and Rajon Rondo, Buddy Hield and Justin Jackson become entirely off-ball scorers like Bradley Beal and Rip Hamilton, they draft Michael Porter, Jr. as their number one scorer at the power foward, and Skal’s that hybrid of Dewayne Dedmon and Nikola Vucevic. That’s a solid team. That’s a team that should be a perennial playoff team.

Phoenix Suns (Crevice Predicted Wins: 22)

Projected starting lineup: Eric Bledsoe, Devin Booker, T.J. Warren, Alan Willians, Tyson Chandler
Most intriguing lineup: Tyler Ulis, Devin Booker, Josh Jackson, T.J. Warren, Tyson Chandler
Best case scenario: See Sacramento best case
Worst case scenario: See Sacramento worst case

How many of the young pieces on the Suns actually valuable?

Let’s do this one last time:

1. Tyler Ulis — 6/10 if the Suns have a point guard of the future in front of him, 3/10 if he is the point guard of the future. Isaiah Thomas at his height makes Tyler Ulis and his 7.3 points and 3.7 assists in 18.4 minutes last year promising. But there’s a huge difference between Thomas and Ulis — 35 pounds on the frame. If Ulis gains a little strength, he has a spot somewhere as a starting point guard. But pairing him with Devin Booker in a starting backcourt creates defensive liabilities.
2. Devin Booker — 8/10 as a beloved Phoenix icon. He’s a scorer, he’s the franchise leader in points scored in a game. And although Booker can be a lead scorer on an offense, his efficiency needs to greatly improve from the 42.3% shooting he’s averaged the past two seasons. Booker should look to take an efficiency and a playmaking step this year so he can develop to be the lead creator on this offense in the future.
3. Davon Reed — 6/10 as a role player. Reed is a 22 year old who’s going to miss essentially all of his rookie season, that’s the bad. Here’s the good: he projects to be a good defender who possibly guard both wing positions, who had his best year (by efficiency standards) in college as a sixth man off the bench. If he develops his strength and stabilizes his three point shooting at 40%, he’ll be in the league for years.
4. Derrick Jones, Jr. — 3/10. This is an athlete who dunks and runs around. That’s all Derrick Jones does. If he can start guarding ones and twos with some level of success, he might become useful. But a one note offensive player, as in his one note is only on offense and that one note is dunking, is not valuable.
5. Josh Jackson — 9/10 as an Andre Iguodala type starter. It’ll depend on his shot. But even with a subpar 33–35% three point shot, his defense, and passing as a secondary playmaker is going to be useful. Hopefully he doesn’t smash any car windows.
6. T.J. Warren — 6/10. I like T.J. Warren as the heir apparent to Jared Dudley. A small forward who’s better suited to play stretch four and just get buckets. If Warren can improve his three point shooting and his defense, he’s a must keep for the Suns. If not, he’ll be a rich man after next summer.
7. Alan Williams — 4/10. A good backup center who will rebound for you and finish near the rim. What else do you need from your third big of the future?
8. Marquese Chriss — 2/10. I’m out on him. More on Chriss later.
9. Dragan Bender — 5/10. I don’t think Bender should be expected to be a starting center. At best, he should be a third big on a team, a change-of-pace center who can slide to power forward in a pinch. Kelly Olynyk has value in this league. That may be Bender’s future.

Which of the best prospects in the 2018 draft is the best fit for the Suns?

Devin Booker and Josh Jackson are certain pieces in the Suns future, unless there’s some kind of Jackson for young point guard flip out there. But the list of young point guards on the block have shrunk from one to zero with the Kyrie trade.

Anyways, that’s two mainstays who probably shouldn’t be subjected to a positional logjam. So Luka Doncic and perhaps Michael Porter, Jr. are off the board.

Marvin Bagley — This is the best case scenario for the Suns, and it’s possible that Bagley could fall to them even if they have the third pick. Imagine an offense predicated on Devin Booker — Marvin Bagley pick and rolls, with Josh Jackson spotting up in the corner and ducking in when needed. That’s a great start. Bagley’s ball skills would be perfect to mitigate any deficiencies in point guard, after Bledsoe leaves, and he could be the type of power forward Dragan Bender fits next to.

That’s a fucking 6'11' high school senior pulling that off. In transition, no less. It’s insane.

DeAndre Ayton — This may really be the worst option the Suns have in the draft next year, and it’s a great worst option. A huge, rangy center defender who’s trying to add some range to his jump shot. A prototypical, modern-day center for a team with no real centers. Even if the Suns overachieve this year or get super unlucky in the lottery and end up with Mo Bamba, it’s a great piece.

Michael Porter, Jr. — This is secretly my favorite pick for the Suns. I want every team to play four wings with differing skills and an athletic, rim-running center who gives gravity going towards the rim. Booker, Jackson, and Porter is a trio of wings with differing skills. Round it out with T.J. Warren and Bender or Alan Williams and that’s a lineup that’s unique to the NBA. Oh the possibilities are endless.

When can we officially call it on Dragan Bender and Marquese Chriss?

I think I’ve already called it on Chriss. Even though he’s in great shape, he literally has no clue what do on offense or defense. He jumps too much on defense, chasing the block, and that throws off his defensive position. And that’s precisely why he’s a 16.1% defensive rebounder. That video below is a bunch of defensive lowlights from Chriss’s Washington days, and it’s still relevant because the dude has not improved.

Obviously, a year on a putrid team designed to tank is no place to improve defensively. But Earl Watson is an offensive coach. A year of training in that system should be good for his offensive skills. And he still doesn’t understand offensive positioning — that much was clear from his Summer League performance. This is hi 30 second Summer League highlight package (read: this is his Summer League highlight package of only 30 seconds), all of which are plays of him using his athleticism to score or get blocks.

And that’s what he is — an athlete with a semblance of a jumper. Julian Wright, Anthony Randolph, young Marvin Williams. All three of those players were unsuccessful. Williams only became successful when he found a role — help defender and three-point shooter.

Here’s the bright side: Chriss is only 20 years old and has only played maybe six or seven years of organized basketball. He’s athletic and has the ability to shoot threes. The rest might just come when he’s played enough reps. But I don’t see it yet.

The rational part of my brain tells me that I should judge Bender as harshly as I judge Chriss. But I don’t. It’s irrational, and that’s fine. I think Bender needs a few years to strengthen up. But his instincts are attuned to the NBA game. Here are some highlights from a very early November game from last season:

Patience in the pick-and-pop. He recognizes that his role is to be ready to receive the pass and shoot. He can slide his feet, as he does on that block on Lillard.

There’s a lot of room to improve, but it’s things that can be taught and built — his upper body strength, his ball-handling, his shooting stroke. The instincts are there, and that’s the difference between Bender and Chriss.

In five years, Devin Booker is _______________, Tyler Ulis is _______________, and Josh Jackson is _______________.

In five years, Devin Booker is a bigger C.J. McCollum, a 25 point a game scorer who’s the team’s backup point guard. He should develop into a three-level scorer, a term that I’m starting to loathe, and if his playmaking progresses, that’s a 6 assist a game player. That’s a lead playmaker on a good team.

In five years, Tyler Ulis is Jameer Nelson, a year or two after his All-Star year: 13 points and 6 assists a game on good three point shooting and some sneaky defense, extrapolated to a starter’s minutes.

In five years, Josh Jackson is a skinnier Draymond Green, and I mean that as a complement. He’ll be able to guard one through four, he’ll facilitate, and he’ll finish with efficiency and fervor. That’s a leader for a playoff team.