NBA draft chatter from NBA general managers, scouts and agents is arriving constantly via phone, text and email.
And what I'm hearing are provocative comments -- from GMs I trust with strong track records of truth-telling this time of year -- that will help decide how the draft is shaping up.
That includes the latest on the Lakers, Celtics, Brandon Ingram, Jamal Murray and much more
Here are some of the quotes I've been given this week:
"The Lakers should take Marquese Chriss at No. 2."
First Kevin Pelton says the Lakers should take Dragan Bender at No. 2. Now this?
Chriss was at No. 8 on our Big Board for quite a while, and moved up to No. 6 in our latest Big Board. We are currently projecting him to go No. 4 to the Suns in our latest mock draft.
But No. 2? Over Brandon Ingram? Is the hype going overboard?
Chriss' elite athleticism, combined with size, length and the ability to both stretch the floor and protect the rim make him a unique prospect. Few players have a similar combination of physical tools and basketball skills.
In the past few weeks I've heard comparisons to Shawn Marion and Shawn Kemp. As we've been saying in this space for a while, he has highest ceiling in the draft after Ben Simmons and Ingram.
But does he have a higher ceiling than Ingram? Perhaps. He's a better athlete, and given his body type, he might be a better defender (if he can learn how to stay out of foul trouble).
That said, he's not the shooter Ingram is and his floor is also much lower. Ingram is more of a sure thing. Chriss is much more raw, and while he is clearly competitive, his decision-making on the court is a lot further behind compared to Ingram.
Talking to Lakers sources, I think Ingram is the pick for L.A. at No. 2. He has similar upside to Chriss without the risks.
But after that? The Celtics, Suns and Wolves all will be very tempted. I'm still betting on the Suns at No. 4. But the Celtics taking him at No. 3 is a real possibility.
"Jamal Murray may be the best scorer in the draft, but he can't guard anybody."
Shooting is at an all-time premium in the league right now. After Murray broke a Celtics record in a workout on Wednesday, hitting 79-for-100 from NBA 3, and John Calipari stating it's Murray -- not Simmons, Ingram or Chriss -- that should be the No. 1 pick, should Murray actually be considered for the top spot?
His strengths as a scorer are obvious. Not only can he really shoot it, but Murray has more to his game than just a jump shot. He can put the ball on the deck, get to the rim, and see the floor well enough to be a playmaker.
Multipositional, playmaking shooters are the rage right now. So why isn't he No. 1?
One GM nailed it by saying there are serious concerns about who Murray guards at the next level. The effort is there, but the lateral quickness is not. That probably keeps him in the No. 3-6 range.
"If Dejounte Murray played at North Carolina or Duke, he'd be a top-five pick."
We've been high on Murray for a while and it seems as if the league is catching up to that point of view. His length, quickness, toughness and ability to play multiple positions make him one of the highest upside guards in the draft.
As I wrote in my workout confidential on Thursday, if you compare Kris Dunn to Murray at the same age, I think Murray probably would get the nod over Dunn in this year's draft.
But top-five pick? His lack of shooting probably keeps him from hitting that range. Dunn is ahead of Dejounte Murray on virtually every draft board in the league and I think it will stay that way. But after Dunn is off the board (and Jamal Murray, if you count him as a point guard), I think Dejounte Murray has moved into the consensus spot as the next-best PG in the draft.
There are teams, particularly the Wolves and Pelicans, that could take him in the top six. But I think his landing spot is more likely in the No. 8-17 range, with the Kings, Bucks, Jazz, Bulls and Grizzlies the most likely candidates to draft him.
"Malachi Richardson canceled his workout with us."
This was relayed to me by a team in the mid-first round. It was confirmed by another team in the early 20s. What's going on? It looks as if his agent is confident that Richardson is going somewhere in the late lottery or slightly later. The Jazz (No. 12), Suns (No. 13), Nuggets (No. 15 and No. 19) and Hawks (No. 21) have gotten workouts. It sounds as if the Bucks (No. 10) will get one as well.
Agents do this all the time. They get what are called "soft promises" from teams that basically say, "If the draft plays out the way we think it will and if we keep the pick, we'll take your guy." If agents get multiple soft promises, they often choose to limit a player's workouts.
It's not clear exactly why the workouts were canceled, but the evidence suggests that Richardson's range is No. 10 to No. 21.
"Shooting is obviously really important in our league, but I think the ability to make plays for others is even more important."
I spoke about this on David Locke's podcast recently. The trend this year is to prioritize playmaking, and that trend is influenced greatly by a Golden State team that puts four great passers -- Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, Andre Iguodala and Draymond Green -- on the floor together. More and more teams are looking for players who can defend multiple positions and also make their teammates better.
Who is it helping? Ben Simmons, obviously. It's why his lack of shooting is less of a concern than people think. But it's also really helping Jamal Murray, Dragan Bender, Dejounte Murray, Domantas Sabonis, DeAndre Bembry, Denzel Valentine, and Patrick McCaw.
"Isaiah Cousins will be the guy that falls into the second round that should've been a first-rounder."
Every year there's a guy who goes in the second round that's a head-scratcher two or three years down the road. International picks and one-and-dones get a pass, because often teams are drafting with limited information.
But college seniors? After four years of scouting? It feels a bit inexcusable. Draymond Green is an obvious example. But the list is long. Paul Millsap, Chandler Parsons, Isaiah Thomas, Khris Middleton, Danny Green and Kyle Korver all raise major questions about teams' draft decisions.
This year it sounds as if that player might be Oklahoma's Isaiah Cousins. I've heard multiple teams over the past week refer to him as a guy who probably doesn't get taken in the first, but probably will outperform many of the players taken ahead of him.
"He's a good athlete and defender," one GM said. "He can play and defend both backcourt positions. He can really shoot it. He's been killing it in workouts. I think he's going to have a long career."
So why not take him in the first?
"You take guys like that for granted a bit," the GM said. "You feel like you can always find them. So you reach for more upside or sexier picks in the first. I'm not saying it's right. It's just how things are."