Grade The Pick: Gary Trent Jr. (37th Overall)

[BonesJones]

Grade the pick based on the selection (Trent) as well as what it took to get him.

 

[BonesJones]

I hate this pick for many reasons.

The fact that we gave up two future 2nds is crazy, IMO. But aside from that, there were many players I liked on the board. Alize Johnson was the best high-upside pick. Khyri Thomas was the best ready-now pick, and both are two-way players that were being extremely underrated during the draft.

Based on Trent himself, he's undersized (tall, but his height rounds up and he has short arms), he doesn't have basketball athleticism, and he's a horrible defender (who was partly to blame for Duke playing a lot of zone last year) who doesn't have the wingspan to contest shots. I don't see him sliding to SF, and we didn't need a worse version of Allen Crabbe in the lineup. I don't see the upside, or the reasoning.

Grade: F

 

[dviss1]

C+

Why can't he replace Patty?

 

[Gronk Brady]

A... arguably the best shooter in the draft, with a mans body already at 19... and at 6’6” can play SG or SF... can’t think of another SG prospect with that kind of strength at 19

 

[Rastapopoulos]

C+

Why can't he replace Patty?

Patty is a totally different player. For one thing, Patty is a real glue player - the team just runs more smoothly when he's out there.

 

[Propagandist]

F. I don't understand why Olshey hates players that can play defense. And again he doesn't help us now, no matter what Olshey says. And why waste future picks? I'm calling it now that if Pat we bring back, Trent doesn't play at all.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

He's not the player I wanted, and I would prefer Thomas as well, or Melton. BUT: he's fairly likely to turn into an asset somewhere down the line (as Crabbe sort of was, if we'd've traded him before he got the monster contract). The thing he has over Thomas is youth.

Also: presumably we bought the pick just to get him. So it's not really as if there was a pick sitting there. I'd probably rather we kept the TWO second rounders we gave away to get him. Grade: C.

Did NOT like his dad, though.

 

[HailBlazers]

B+
We need shooters badly, and I love a guy with a chip on his shoulder and high character. Here's to hoping he follows the Curry's and Thompson's of the world:

 

[Rastapopoulos]

F. I don't understand why Olshey hates players that can play defense.

Not TOTALLY fair: defense was supposed to be Zach Collins' strong point. And he acquired Aminu and Nurkic, who are top 8 defenders at their positions in the league.

 

[BBert]

C+ Got a guy who fell pretty far from his original projection. Has a skill the Blazers needed to add. Not head and shoulders above several other options. Wish we hadn't given up two picks for him.

 

[Propagandist]

Not TOTALLY fair: defense was supposed to be Zach Collins' strong point. And he acquired Aminu and Nurkic, who are top 8 defenders at their positions in the league.

I meant guards!!! My fault.

 

[KeepOnRollin]

C+ I don't like that we gave up two future 2nds. Those come in handy. But as far as the player, I would have taken him if Khyri was off the board so he isn't horrible from that advantage point. I had a guy I would have taken first so he can't be a super high grade but he is also not near an F for me.

 

[BonesJones]

C+

Why can't he replace Patty?

Because (sadly) Pat is a better defender.

 

[Scalma]

Doesn’t see the reason for adding a shooter.

Lol.

I don’t know how you can say he’s undersized either. Maybe for a small forward. His measurements are ideal for a shooting guard. He’s got a solid build to him as well, especially when you consider he’s the same age as Simons.

As for his game, I see someone in between a Gary Harris and a Dillon Brooks. A good shooter that can also post up. This is a projection because he didn’t consistently get the opportunity to do it, but I see potential in his post up game. He’s not going to consistently beat people off the dribble, but he has shown an ability to score on multiple levels.

And I think most importantly, he’s a DOG. That’s something that can’t be coached. He wants the big stage. He wants the big shots. Frankly, we need more players like that.

As for defense, it’s pretty odd that you’d blame duke playing zone on Trent. Have any actual proof of that? Here’s an article saying the primary reason was to protect Bagley and Carter (https://www.theringer.com/2018/3/26/17163732/duke-zone-marvin-bagley-wendell-carter)

I get that you didn’t want him @BonesJones but that doesn’t mean you should steer points just to fit your narrative.

 

[BonesJones]

A... arguably the best shooter in the draft, with a mans body already at 19... and at 6’6” can play SG or SF... can’t think of another SG prospect with that kind of strength at 19

You know how else has a "mans body", is 6'6, can shoot, and is awful defensively? LiAngelo Ball. Lol.

It's weird that you're the one who approves most of Neil's drafting. Is it opposite day? Haha.

 

[Scalma]

Side note:

Olshey mentioned they had Trent Jr. graded pretty closely with Simons but chose Simons because they didn’t project him to be there in the second. They most likely knew the lakers were gonna take him at 25.

 

[BonesJones]

Doesn’t see the reason for adding a shooter.

Lol.

I don’t know how you can say he’s undersized either. Maybe for a small forward. His measurements are ideal for a shooting guard. He’s got a solid build to him as well, especially when you consider he’s the same age as Simons.

As for his game, I see someone in between a Gary Harris and a Dillon Brooks. A good shooter that can also post up. This is a projection because he didn’t consistently get the opportunity to do it, but I see potential in his post up game. He’s not going to consistently beat people off the dribble, but he has shown an ability to score on multiple levels.

And I think most importantly, he’s a DOG. That’s something that can’t be coached. He wants the big stage. He wants the big shots. Frankly, we need more players like that.

As for defense, it’s pretty odd that you’d blame duke playing zone because Trent was a liability. Have any actual proof of that? Here’s an article saying the primary reason was to protect Bagley and Carter (https://www.theringer.com/2018/3/26/17163732/duke-zone-marvin-bagley-wendell-carter)

I get that you didn’t want him @BonesJones but that doesn’t mean you should steer points just to fit your narrative.

I don't see the reason for adding a shooter that will give up more points than he scores, and hurt else in every other aspect.

He's going to have to play SF if he's going to get minutes, or we'll have to trade C.J. There's only 12mpg at the 2, and he can't play the one, and is extremely undersized for the 3 (8'2 standing reach). Hell, that's undersized for a SG. Most SGs have a standing reach of 8'3+. He's barely bigger than C.J... Simons has a bigger standing reach.

I don't think posting up a SG will be a part of our offense, nor should it. He might have a decent post-up game but the NBA is a different level, and I don't think he'll be able to bully his way into buckets like he did at the college level. He might be decent at it, but I never see it being a difference maker, or relied on much, if at all.

He doesn't have the quickness to beat defenders, nor does he have the handle to shake defenders, so how is he going to be able to create anything if he can't bully his way in?

Proof? Here's one. I've read a couple more articles somewhere saying the same thing. I bet it's due to Bagley and Carter too, point is that none of them were good defenders. Everything I've read about Trent's defense defines it between "bad" and "horrible", as he lacks lateral quickness, dies on picks, and wasn't a good team defender either within his rotations. The consensus is that he's a bad defender.

I'm not twisting anything. Slightly undersized SG who's too small to play SF and doesn't have the ball skills to play SG, awful defender, and can't do much off the dribble. He's extremely limited IMO, and a lot of the things he struggles with aren't easily improved upon and likely never will be.

Could he prove me wrong? Yes, but unlikely. At least Crabbe had decent length and wasn't a horrible defender.

 

[riverman]

I like the kid...I was surprised we got him...he has a high basketball IQ...been around the game his whole life..strong...great shooter...take him a couple years to learn the game just like Simons but in the meantime he'll get you a bucket in the corner faster than ET, Mo or Chief...these kids are bottom of the bench until they're not...they get to go up against our vets and learn. Not really expecting either pick to crack the rotation early anyway...for what his role will be next season, I give the pick an A....no rookie deserves an F without stepping on a court in a Blazer uniform in my view...that's just haters hatin'

 

[riverman]

I'm not twisting anything. Slightly undersized SG who's too small to play SF and doesn't have the ball skills to play SG, awful defender, and can't do much off the dribble. He's extremely limited IMO, and a lot of the things he struggles with aren't easily improved upon and likely never will be.

I watched him play quite a few games with Duke and didn't see any of these deficiencies you're talking about...he's a team player, not a showcase ISO guy..doesn't get winded and stays focused..has a great shooting touch

 

[BonesJones]

I am wondering if his standing reach got messed up (like Pat's did during his combine). Trent's vertical IMO is oversold at 39.5 inches. There's no way his vertical is within 2 inches of Simons. Pat's vertical was messed up too because they measured his standing reach too low (his was more obvious). 6'5.75 with a 6'8 wingspan? Seems like 8'2 is a little short for his standing reach.

I'd be happier with the pick if they did mess it up and he had something like a 8'5/8'6 standing reach. Means he'd be able to contest shots and play some SF.

 

[Gronk Brady]

I don't see the reason for adding a shooter that will give up more points than he scores, and hurt else in every other aspect.

He's going to have to play SF if he's going to get minutes, or we'll have to trade C.J. There's only 12mpg at the 2, and he can't play the one, and is extremely undersized for the 3 (8'2 standing reach). Hell, that's undersized for a SG. Most SGs have a standing reach of 8'3+. He's barely bigger than C.J... Simons has a bigger standing reach.

I don't think posting up a SG will be a part of our offense, nor should it. He might have a decent post-up game but the NBA is a different level, and I don't think he'll be able to bully his way into buckets like he did at the college level. He might be decent at it, but I never see it being a difference maker, or relied on much, if at all.

He doesn't have the quickness to beat defenders, nor does he have the handle to shake defenders, so how is he going to be able to create anything if he can't bully his way in?

Proof? Here's one. I've read a couple more articles somewhere saying the same thing. I bet it's due to Bagley and Carter too, point is that none of them were good defenders. Everything I've read about Trent's defense defines it between "bad" and "horrible", as he lacks lateral quickness, dies on picks, and wasn't a good team defender either within his rotations. The consensus is that he's a bad defender.

I'm not twisting anything. Slightly undersized SG who's too small to play SF and doesn't have the ball skills to play SG, awful defender, and can't do much off the dribble. He's extremely limited IMO, and a lot of the things he struggles with aren't easily improved upon and likely never will be.

Could he prove me wrong? Yes, but unlikely. At least Crabbe had decent length and wasn't a horrible defender.

Dude, give it up man... you think you are a better scout than all the professionals on the Blazers payroll. Trent Jr was a 2nd rd pick... you act like they passed on a garaunteed star to take him... it’s kinda funny how you think your opinion of draftees is fact

 

[BonesJones]

I watched him play quite a few games with Duke and didn't see any of these deficiencies you're talking about...he's a team player, not a showcase ISO guy

So you spun him not being able to do anything with the ball or attack the rim into a positive because that makes him a "team guy"? Haha. Guys can play within a system and be a team player while still possessing the ability to attack which keeps defenses off balance.

 

[Gronk Brady]

I watched him play quite a few games with Duke and didn't see any of these deficiencies you're talking about...he's a team player, not a showcase ISO guy..doesn't get winded and stays focused..has a great shooting touch

I watched him play as well and was really impressed... I don’t think Bones actually watches games... he just rates players on useless advanced stats and measurements as the end all be all

 

[BonesJones]

Dude, give it up man... you think you are a better scout than all the professionals on the Blazers payroll. Trent Jr was a 2nd rd pick... you act like they passed on a garaunteed star to take him... it’s kinda funny how you think your opinion of draftees is fact

You think you're a better GM than Neil Olshey.

It's kinda funny how you think your opinion of moves Olshey should make is fact.

This was a hypocritical post haha. Scouts aren't flawless, just like Olshey isn't. You know that.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

which is why I gave him an A-
Pelton called him the best shooter in the draft. Those guys are usually stick thin white dudes
with no athleticism. He's not, He's got a good body. He's aggressive. He's got a lot of intangibles.
Very hard worker, wants to be great. Has more to show. Limited his game at Duke because
he was surrounded by lotto talent, so that's what the coach asked him to do.

Doesn’t see the reason for adding a shooter.

Lol.

I don’t know how you can say he’s undersized either. Maybe for a small forward. His measurements are ideal for a shooting guard. He’s got a solid build to him as well, especially when you consider he’s the same age as Simons.

As for his game, I see someone in between a Gary Harris and a Dillon Brooks. A good shooter that can also post up. This is a projection because he didn’t consistently get the opportunity to do it, but I see potential in his post up game. He’s not going to consistently beat people off the dribble, but he has shown an ability to score on multiple levels.

And I think most importantly, he’s a DOG. That’s something that can’t be coached. He wants the big stage. He wants the big shots. Frankly, we need more players like that.

As for defense, it’s pretty odd that you’d blame duke playing zone on Trent. Have any actual proof of that? Here’s an article saying the primary reason was to protect Bagley and Carter (https://www.theringer.com/2018/3/26/17163732/duke-zone-marvin-bagley-wendell-carter)

I get that you didn’t want him @BonesJones but that doesn’t mean you should steer points just to fit your narrative.

 

[riverman]

So you spun him not being able to do anything with the ball or attack the rim into a positive because that makes him a "team guy"? Haha. Guys can play within a system and be a team player while still possessing the ability to attack which keeps defenses off balance.

I like him...deal with it...I watched him play.....you can go ahead and knock him and say what he can't do all day....I don't agree. He has a lot to learn and I think he'll be a quick study...you went to great lengths to make him seem like a one trick pony....that's on you.

 

[BonesJones]

I watched him play as well and was really impressed... I don’t think Bones actually watches games... he just rates players on useless advanced stats and measurements as the end all be all

If you're going to try to pose an argument, bring substance instead of making false accusations of me "not watching games".

I watched Duke a lot. Trent was merely a shooter that didn't stand out in any other way, who's defensive deficiencies were hid within the zone defense they played. What advanced stat have I brought to an argument about a college prospect? I never have... And measurements aren't the end all, be all... I've posted a lot about his game and skills (or lack thereof).

 

[BonesJones]

I like him...deal with it...I watched him play.....you can go ahead and knock him and say what he can't do all day....I don't agree. He has a lot to learn and I think he'll be a quick study...you went to great lengths to make him seem like a one trick pony....that's on you.

It's okay to like him, and I hope your right. Honest questions: Do you think he can play PG? Do you think his short standing reach makes it troublesome for him to play SF? Do you not have worries about his defensive ability? Those are my question marks for him.

 

[riverman]

If you're going to try to pose an argument

nah...that's not my way...I posted an opinion and questioned your take on him from my own eye test...you're entitled to that opinion ..as I said, I didn't see what you criticized in detail.

 

[Gronk Brady]

If you're going to try to pose an argument, bring substance instead of making false accusations of me "not watching games".

I watched Duke a lot. Trent was merely a shooter that didn't stand out in any other way, who's defensive deficiencies were hid within the zone defense they played. What advanced stat have I brought to an argument about a college prospect? I never have... And measurements aren't the end all, be all... I've posted a lot about his game and skills (or lack thereof).

He’s 19 years old and you have already concluded who he will be as a finished product... hilarious

And Khiri Thomas is garbage and will be out of the league in 3 years