Yesterday, 03:25 PM
(Yesterday, 03:04 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: So you'd have him higher on "that list." That's my point, basically.
IF, as I've recently been led to believe, Burries is an on-ball guy, always has been, and probably will be at the next level, then he'd be higher on the list for me, too. IF he's going to be a better version of Christie, even a much better version, then give me the upside swing on Ament. And either scenario assumes Burries is still there at #9. Just because we haven't seen many (if any) mocks that don't have him available there doesn't mean it's a forgone conclusion.
I am ok with anyone's evaluation/ranking of these guys, especially those making decisions for the Mavs. Where I'm tempted to grab my knife and start blindly stabbing is when I read opinions that suggest targeting guys who clearly don't bring overt offensive initiation value to the table. It's like we've all been watching a different Mavs team this past year and a half.
If Burries is not there then there will be another one of the guard there instead (likely there will be multiple available at 9).
I lean more towards BPA than need. I recognize how limited this team is on creation and I think that should be their top priority in free agency/trades regardless of who they draft. But if these guys think Morez is the next Bam with better shooting I would rather them pull that trigger than take a risky stab because they are valuing offensive initiation above all else.



![[-]](https://www.mavsboard.com/images/collapse.png)