Yesterday, 11:42 AM
(Yesterday, 11:28 AM)mvossman Wrote: Burries may not develop into a true lead guard role, but he would still provide a ton of value as a combo guard. If he turns into a Derrick White, NAW or Josh Hart with better offense I would be more than satisfied.
To further clarify, the point I've been making is not aligned with the above, which seems to suggest that Burries would have to be made into a lead guard. What I've heard some people say that has me excited about him is that he's ALREADY a lead guard who just took a one-year break from that role so that he could attend a particular school and participate in a particular program.
Obviously, he'd still require "development," just like all the other on-ball guys we talk about. Also, this take could be incorrect, but I've encountered it in multiple places, coming from people who've followed him for quite some time. I just want to clarify my feelings on it. IF you (the Mavs decision makers) don't think lead guard is a LIKELY fit for his role, I don't think you should take him at #9 unless all the on-ball guys are gone. I feel pretty strongly about that. But, if you DO believe in him as an on-ball guy, I can see some of his attributes seeming more attractive than some of theirs.
![[-]](https://www.mavsboard.com/images/collapse.png)