Some of these comments are pretty off - let me address them. 1) "He doesn't have a left hand" - Do we care? We need him to play defense and shoot 3s. If he can provide any play making that's a big plus. However, we already have 3 (and potentially 4) above average/elite creators, so we don't really need this. Mikal Bridges level 3/D is what we're looking for. 2) "He has limited awareness on offense" - True to a certain extent. His defensive IQ is off the charts, so I don't expect his offensive IQ to be abysmal. As long as he's not Stromile Swift on offense (which he clearly is not), I don't have a problem with this. 3) "Sochan is just as good, so we should draft him" - Sochan has not demonstrated that he can shoot as FT and 3 point percentage are both horrible. It is definitely not guaranteed that players will develop a shot without prior evidence. Unless he is an all-defensive type center or Draymond level player, he would be very limited, especially in the playoffs. Elite defensive players like Gary Payton II and Thybulle can barely get off the bench without a shot. It is only after GPII developed a 3 point shot that he got into the rotation. Sochan may be better than Eason if he has a shot. Eason has already demonstrated improvement in both 3 point and FT percentage. Remember - Eason put up 5.5 3s per 100 possessions, so he is a medium to high level 3 point maker. Bottom line - If Eason had a better feel of the game on offense, adequate left handed penetration, and 2-3 years of average to above average 3 point shooting, he would be a top 5 pick.
Eason's offensive weaknesses are so minor or addressable and his defensive potential is through the roof. If our second pick was in the top ten I could understand being pickier, but at #17 he's a no brainer as a potential 3 and D starter.
Yeah, I don't get the "he can't go left" thing either. He will be used mostly as a spot up shooter, not expected to create his own shot in the NBA. Nobody criticized guys like Battier or Ariza for not being able to dribble penetrate. They aren't supposed to. So who cares whether he can't go left or go right?
Great post and just want to add, while Eason has holes in his game, it is about ROLE on the Rockets. His strengths will be maximized and his weaknesses will be minimized. He will not be high usage. His defensive strengths are what they Rockets would want.
This exactly. Eason's ceiling is Kawhi Leonard. I put the chances of him reaching that max out point at probably 5% or 10%. I think that there is a 50%+ chance that he ends up being a rich mans Robert Covington. That is a solid, solid role player that fits in perfectly with what the Rockets seem to be building here.
RoCo is someone I had in mind as a comp. But with better defense in ISO (RoCo weakness) and better ability to do something off the bounce. RoCo was an amazing weakside defender and I could see the same for Eason here. Eason more explosive as well in transition. This type of player is very valuable in today's NBA.
John Hollinger in his interview a few days ago really ripped Eason. His reply was in one of the comments: "I rated Eason as a top-20 talent but not sure I love the fit here. I think Eason's most likely outcome is as an iffy-shooting small-ball 4, which creates a considerable overlap with Tate and Martin not to mention the likelihood Banchero is the starter." I guess he doesn't see him as able to play the 3. There is no such thing as 4-and-D guy. I do wonder if Eason's lack of range would create problems or if this is just way overblown. As far as the left-hand criticism goes, NBA players are smart. If you can't go full speed and finish with your left hand, they will divide the court in half and you won't drive right. If you are as talented as Eason, you have to diversify your game (even if you're filling a niche role).
Watching the Wizards work out, I did notice his catch and shoot motion a little slow. A fluid shooter would catch, jump, and shoot in one smooth motion. Eason had to take that little right foot step between catching and jumping. I don't know if it's because it not in-game situation so he took his time. If it's a habit, it can give an NBA close out defender enough time to block you.
Not sure if you were being facetious but 3&D doesnt imply position. Its 3 point shooting and defense. If they ever come out with a 4 point shot though then yeah 4&D might be a thing. Kind of awesome to think about.
Watching Eason's highlights and scouting breakdowns, I get more than a little bit of Corey Brewer energy from him. The frantic style of play, how the game becomes instantly more chaotic for both teams when he steps on the court, and how his career will be make-or-break based on his spot-up three pointer. Obviously their body types are completely different, but I tend to think that if Eason can't play as a wing because his shot doesn't get there and he's too turnover prone, his value is severely limited. On his best day, you wondered why Brewer wasn't getting paid more and starting every game, on his worst day, you wonder how the hell Florida actually won two championships with this guy, and shouldn't he have absorbed some tiny amount of basketball sense from playing next to Horford and Noah? Corey Brewer was overdrafted at #7, but he was a pretty good role-player for the better part of a decade; I think outside the lottery, you can't really expect much more from a pick, and I'd pretty gladly take him at #17. But I would be a bit more hesitant giving up significant assets to move up for him. It's probably also my bias that I only see Paolo and Tari as both succeeding at the 4, and thus, they'd conflict in role, while I think many others see them seamlessly switching and pairing perfectly.
