They took McCollum at 10 which is a bit different. If we were in it and Edwards was there at 10 I would take him too.
Why is it different? Isn't this a discussion on BPA? And how needs, draft picks or rostered players should or should not effect that? Isn't Edwards a
value as high as 3-4 in a draft like this? If that is where you are headed here?
Edwards is 2 inches taller than Sexton, but with similar but worse college numbers. People said the path for Sexton to be a good player, it would take unbelievable improvement, which I guess he defied the odds a bit. His weaknesses are remarkably similar, can't pass, can't shoot efficiently, terrible shot selection, needs the ball in his hands, off ball game sucks.
Let's set aside the height thing as it is a guess at this point. We'll assume he's only 2 inches taller..... that pegs him at 6'3" with no shoes. At 225 LBS, that is a MASSIVE size gap. IMO, It is a different tier of athlete when factoring size, weight and Edwards being more vertically explosive than Sexton is.
I also think the way you describe his weaknesses are a bit of hyperbole.
Shot selection, absolutely.......it needs to improve but that is coachable. His shooting efficiency is drug down by long mid range shooting as well. That is something the NBA will wring out of him. It was one of Collin's flaws too and it went away pretty quickly with some coaching.
Players like Edwards just flat out need to learn how to play off the ball. He's been the best player on the court his whole life.......those kinds of guys generally don't find themselves off the ball very often. He has a smooth shot with good lift and he's a good FT shooter.......I'm sure he will be fine. I'd imagine you can turn him in to a plus cutter off the ball too, given his size and athleticism.
Edwards is more project than most traditional guard projects but I think his flaws, to this point, are very coachable......or will simply get better with reps / age.
Fine to think KPJ and Garland aren't worth considering, but even then you have 2 guards that are your best prospects that fit worse than Garland and Sexton. I disagree on Porter though, I think he is a better player than Edwards. I do think Edwards fits the grind culture that Sexton exemplifies, and I think they have similar trajectories where they work on their weaknesses their whole career. Personally, I would take Haliburton over him. I think it would make the team fit better and function better.
I'd wager a lot of money that KPJ won't be a better NBA player than Edwards.......but can revisit that in a few years. For now, we can agree to disagree there.
I like Haliburton a lot, I just don't understand why we would be in favor of drafting Haliburton but not Edwards. I think offensively, both provide so much more value with the ball in their hands. Do they do different things with those possessions? Sure.......but if we are giving them to Haliburton, I'm trying to understand why we would not additionally give them to Edwards? Edwards is a near 1.00 PPP player in isolation. Relative to his volume, that puts him right in the middle of what guys do at the NBA level who are impact scorers. Haliburton is more ready made off the ball, relative to how he has evolved as a player and shooter......but I think that is a waste of his talent, if the argument is he can be stuck off the ball and provide value. At that point, just bypass him too for a better rostered fit if you don't plan on carving out a role that will maximize his playmaking talent.