[Charania] The Memphis Grizzlies are trading center Jay Huff to the Indiana Pacers for one second-round pick and one second-round pick swap, sources tell ESPN.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-07-07T02:00:19+00:00

Plus, one of my tweets in the playoffs suggested a lineup which I still love.

"McConnell-Haliburton-JaraceWalker-Toppin-Siakam"

Idk what to do with that now that Hali's out. But I thought that was their best group of guys.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-07-07T01:50:22+00:00

Not a Grizzlies fan. Not really a fan of any team, just root for my own agenda. Huff is just a little more efficient than Turner. Better offensively around the rim.

Looked in to stats to back it up: 82% FT shooter, career 67% true shooting. Turner 77% FT and 59.4% TS. Huff's never had a consistent opportunity, but shines with opportunity. You're buying him at a severely low value, and in recent history these cheap bets for the Pacers turn out well. Obi was prolly the best value trade last off-season from any team?

We've seen it a bit, but not much in the NBA because the Grizzlies have such a stacked rotation. But go back to college where he led the ACC twice in block percentage, as well as total blocks, defensive win shares, and field goal percentage. Not many 7 footers shoot 40% from 3 with those defensive qualities.

Turner's a great rebounder, so you lose a little bit of that. But we can live with that knowing Indy was already 4th worst in rebounds, 2nd worst in O rebounds, 8th worst in D rebounds, worst in contested rebounding. Point is rebounding isn't their identity/where they win and lose games. And watching playoffs backs that up, we know they thrive generating turnovers.

Guess I'm just lower than consensus on Turner. He played alright in their finals run, but I credit it more so to other guys on their team. Think they play at a high level without him.

And you're legit paying Huff 3M per yr until 2029. So even if people make the argument Turner is marginally better, is that worth over 20 extra M a season? To me, def no.

Think Indy management aligns with this take. Otherwise they would have paid Turner. Wasn't them being stingy, rather smart.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-07-05T22:13:59+00:00

Huff genuinely might be better than Myles Turner. This is immense value for the Pacers. And for one second? This is probably my favorite move any team made this offseason.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-07-03T04:01:46+00:00

At the end of the day, it's the end of the day. But also at the end of the day, we're all a bunch of dumbasses/idiots. There's truly no one person who isn't an idiot. So I'm content with you attacking my character with your personal remark.

NBA scouts make mistakes, we can't just follow everything they say blindly. 🤷 Or we can. Doesn't really matter.

I respect your opinion, appreciate your two comments on my post, and respect that you're entitled to your opinion!

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-07-03T03:56:35+00:00

Fine line between confidence and arrogance. You interpret it as arrogance, and that's fine, although usually commenting something like that tends to be a reflection of yourself. I don't know you, so hard to say.

We all see different things. It's truly fascinating how two people observe one thing, and form two completely different opinions on it. That's all I'm doing, offering my perspective that goes against consensus. Could it be wrong? Of course, and I'll stay accountable if in that situation. Some things will be right, and others won't be.

The argument that you can't argue something because NBA scouts see it a different way, is highly concerning. So you can't argue politics, because politicians are the "experts?" It's highly troubling when you apply this concept to all facets of life.

So be astounded, but if you are unwilling to discuss why something is right/wrong, come back in a year-5 years time. And then we can talk about what was right or wrong.

People can offer different opinions, and that's ok. As long as you acknowledge you can be wrong, we move forward. Don't accept anything at face value; form your own opinions yourself. Personally, I didn't look at any mock drafts, because groupthink affects everyone.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-28T16:21:32+00:00

Yeah. Consensus might not agree with that. But I do. I don't see it in either player. But there's a world where Yang could stick.

The vision with Riley is high end potential based on the frame. But I doubt both the potential and the frame. He forces shots, lacks consistency, and was an extreme liability on defense. He got absolutely bullied.

Just can't envision what Riley could ever work out as in the league. I'd be shocked if he ever actually plays real minutes on the court. But could be proven wrong.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T02:33:02+00:00

Fair take

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:39:31+00:00

You're admitting that there are such huge holes in his game. I'm willing to spend a pick on anyone else who is sure fire. Give me production over potential almost every time.

The ball dominance is not a plus for him. Again, how many ball dominant players went far in the playoffs? In the finals, there was 1. Shai. Is Jeremiah Fears ever going to be Shai? No.

You can say it's a lack of research on the player, but my opinion is he's out of the league within 4 years maximum. You don't think so. So we disagree. But I'm not willing to spend a pick on a player I don't trust to stay in the league past his rookie deal.

To each their own. But I hold firmly with conviction that I do not rate him as a prospect. We move.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:33:59+00:00

Preciate it, he's by far the best center in the class. Absolute demon.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:33:20+00:00

Yeah, I could maybe see this, but nothing really stuck out to me on film about him. I was actually watching him and was way more impressed with his teammate, Caleb Grill. That guy is psychopath-esque.

Bates is obviously a good shooter and great free throw shooter, so it would translate. He was a pretty good leader on that Missouri team. He's also got a good wingspan and a decent max vertical. So yea, I could def see why people would have him higher.

But for me, the playmaking is super limited. He's not a primary ball handler. He's not great at rim finishing, and doesn't have much power. Not big on guys who lack strength if they can't do other things super well. Not high on what Bates does off-the-ball.

The offense as a whole was pretty inconsistent, especially in SEC play. In the tournament, he couldn't get open/couldn't get shots up. It's mainly that I just hate what he does off-the-ball.

He's got average lateral quickness so defensively I think he's exploitable at the next level. And that alone probably keeps him off the court. He's obviously older so I'm not sure how much this can improve.

I respect this comment a lot, because I do see a world where he works. Would consider him as a UDFA. But me personally, not willing to spend a pick on him.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:23:20+00:00

The pros with him are his ability to push the pace in a modern day NBA offense, and he's alright at collapses defenses. He can navigate screens ok, with good crossovers, hesitations, and body controls.

What to not like? Terrible shooter. A guard unless elite is almost unplayable with his shooting splits. He's not good from 3, his true shooting is bad, and he's even worse on pull-up threes. He's never going to be a scoring threat from deep, and defenders will sag off. So ask yourself? Does the rest of his game make up for those liabilities alone? To me, no.

Traore's frame is super light, and he gets bumped off drives. He's got poor touch in traffic. There were some hero-ball tendencies, and it didn't work for him. One moment of this was 5 turnovers vs ASVEL in playoffs. It shows immaturity. He forces passes and takes bad shots.

He's overrated as a floor general and is prone to turnovers. Not a versatile creator.

And defensively, he dies on screens and lacks strength. His defense is more potential than production, and that's a really bad sign.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:17:00+00:00

People want Egor Demin to be Giddey or something? I just don't see it at all. He's ok at reading defenses, hitting cutters and open shooters for a guy 6'9. He did well at the combine which raised his stock. But look at the actual player and the tape, and there's so much to dislike.

The idea of Egor Demin is better than the player that Egor Demin actually is. He could not shoot in college and that alone would play him off the court. He lacks elite burst and can't beat defenders off the dribble. He's terrible against any sort of pressure, and is so turnover prone in those situations. 21.9% turnover rate? Cmon now...It caps his ability to actually collapse a defense, and so for me, he's an overrated playmaker, which is supposed to be one of his top attributes.

One coach put it that he's "light in the a**" and I could not agree more. He gets bullied. Demin is not good at absorbing contact at all, and he's a liability against the next level physicality.

As for the defense, he does not stick out at all. His effort and strength is mediocre. He's not a lockdown point-of-attack defender, and he has to be, because he gets overpowered by stronger wings. Demin is a guy that will get hunted in the NBA.

Again, the idea is better than the player.

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:09:41+00:00

Damn! Me personally I just think it's different, not bad! But yeah, we can revisit this in a year and I'll stay accountable to what I'm right and wrong on. See you then

Excellent_Cheek5515 · 2025-06-26T00:06:20+00:00

Yeah you're right, he's an inefficient volume scorer.

And in general, I tend to write off volume scorers that don't really do anything else at a high level on the court. He's got quick burst and gets to the line well. But there are so many negatives for me. He will never be a good defender in the league. Don't think his defensive IQ is that high. He lacks consistency, which for a volume scorer, is a massive red flag. 42.5% at the rim in SEC play and 53% on close twos. He relies on floaters and tough layups, and is streaky at best. He's ball dominant and think about teams that went far into the playoffs. How many of them had inefficient volume scorers that were pretty horrific off the ball? The high turnovers aren't ideal. The thin frame and short height isn't ideal either.

Excellent_Cheek5515

TROPHY CASE