What's new
By:

The case for Denzel Valentine

I like him because I do think he can come in immediately and play but part of me wonders if we'd be better served picking a guy who has a higher ceiling but isn't quite ready.

If just rather address our immediate rotation needs by bringing in a veteran like Dudley, jerebko, Tucker.

I've liked Valentine a lot but he'd probably be 15-16 on my draft board right now and I don't think we should consider the guy we draft to be part of the rotation immediately. I'd like the pick to get enough minutes to develop and see what they bring but don't want to tab them as someone that will be relied on immediately.
 
I online watched him play like 4 games. I gotta say he looked legit to me. Good thing I don't get paid to grade players.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
#bern said:
Yes. That has nothing to do with what I said.
Click to expand...

Oh, you meant that he doesn't get to the line enough. I thought when you said "rate" you meant that he didn't shoot well from the line. My bad. FWIW, I share that concern.
 
I've seen zero minutes of this guy play-- but it seems like he'll be drafted around where CJ McCollum was drafted.

Do the two players compare?




/wouldratherhaveBembz
 
dalamon said:
I've seen zero minutes of this guy play-- but it seems like he'll be drafted around where CJ McCollum was drafted.

Do the two players compare?




/wouldratherhaveBembz
Click to expand...

Lol. Completely different games/styles.

Bembry vs Valentine is a pretty interesting debate tho.
 
I suspect if the Jazz pick Valentine it will be on their assessment that his major flaw (defense) will not be as bad as feared. I like him quite a bit, though his defense terrifies me. But as #bern says, if the Jazz saw potential for at least average defense from Rodney Hood, I'll trust their judgment with Valentine.
 
I'm a bit torn on the shoot for the moon vs. a "safe" pick like Valentine. If you believe:

- The numbers that seem to show the Hood/Hayward/Favors/Gobert as a great combo are valid
- That Exum will prove a fine complement to that starting lineup
- That the Jazz's real need in the short term is quality depth

then I think it's hard to argue with Valentine.

If you think that:

- The Jazz can't pass up an even small chance at finding a "star"
- There's someone who has a decent (more than 15%) chance to pass up one of the Jazz's current starters at #12 in the draft and maybe become that star
- The Jazz can find enough quality depth through FAs and trade

Then the swing-for-the-fences approach makes sense.

I'm leaning toward the first, but not very strongly.
 
The argument for him that in the draft world of potential potential potential its easy to go wrong looking into crystals balls.

Especially in this years draft where the pool of potential all star talent out there is very very thin.

You know what Valentine is. And what he is, is a excellent shooter who rebounds well from his position with excellent court vision and high IQ. His defensive problems are well known.

At worst, Valentine will be a solid floor spacing role player in the NBA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top