For those who didn't read this post, here's a decent intro to the discourse: https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=2763533&mesg_id=2763533&listing_type=search

The discourse has boiled down to "guys who watched Chet play consistently in both HS and college" vs. "guys who saw 2 or 3 Gonzaga games." And while the former group is happy to acknowledge the concerns (as I am), the former group is also acutely aware of his upside as an NBA prospect. So I thought, for people who are genuinely interested as to why NBA scouts and executives are so excited about Holmgren, I'd dive a little deeper on him, since I think he's where most of the discourse of the draft will center.

- The best defender in the draft. You're talking about one of the most elite weak side shot blockers I've ever seen in college basketball, a guy who'd be an elite NBA weak side shot blocker the second he steps on the court. Anyone who questions his rim protection-- at minimum on the weak side-- just hasn't seen him play.

- I don't think he's truly switchable-- I think he got burned by faster guards in iso in college a couple too many times for me to feel completely confident about that, and people don't *really* talk about that enough imo-- but he's easily more switchable than the majority of NBA bigs his size. His speed and functional athleticism is terrific. He's got good lateral quickness, fantastic length, and, again, his shot blocking timing is elite among prospects of the last decade plus. People will say things like "All-Defense upside"... and while I maybe wouldn't go *that* far based on one year of game tape, I understand the enthusiasm and agree that there are reasons to be excited.

- shot 39% from 3 on more than 3 attempts per game, 72% from the FT line, 74% from 2. And while those numbers are inflated from his weak conference slate, he still made 66% from 2 and 30% from 3 against Tier A and B opponents, per KenPom. The guy can shoot from 3 and from midrange, and he can complete at the rim against stronger bigs. Superb touch and scoring feel for a big man.

- He has skills with the ball that a guy his size rarely ever has. He'd be a better-than-average big man ballhandler and big man passer in the NBA from Day 1. He's not a point guard or anything, but we will absolutely see Chet grab a board, take it all the way on his own in transition, and put it on someone's head. At least once a game last year, you'd see him do something ball in hand where you'd go, "Oh, guys this size just aren't supposed to do that."

- We'll discuss the frame in a minute, because I have concerns, but what I'm *not* concerned about is toughness. This is *not* a skinny big man who can shoot who chooses to float on the perimeter. He's happy to bang in the post, even with stronger players. I've no doubt he'll get dunked on, especially the first couple of years, but you'll absolutely see him contest those dunks. He's a shit talker out there. And I imagine he'll continue to be empowered in that regard at the next level. A real chip-on-the-shoulder sort of dude. I love betting on those types.

So the frame. Let's talk about it. He's skinny right now, and I imagine he'll remain skinny. Even when he puts on weight, the shoulders and hips just aren't that wide. So you have to wonder if he can be a true post-up post defender against the bigger NBA bigs without getting bullied. It also could diminish some of his terrific efficacy inside if he can't adjust to the physicality of the NBA-- I think he'll fight hard to do so, but physical limitations sometimes are what they are. So I imagine there's a good chance you'll see Holmgren struggle years 1 and 2 some-- to the point where the usual suspects will party that he was never going to succeed. He's just got to put on muscle and adjust to the strength of the next level. I've heard injury concerns for a big man this slight... but I've also heard compelling arguments that perhaps his frame/lack of muscle will actually *help* with career longevity, because big men just start to wear out from putting mileage on their sheer size in a way that Chet maybe won't. Ultimately, I'm not a doctor, and he doesn't have injury history to speak of, so I'm not factoring that in.

I think a perfect world would involve pairing him with a true big man with size early on, so Chet can be a pick-and-pop mega-sized 4 on offense and a weak-side rim protector on defense (where he thrives), while he figures out the NBA level-- this is more or less what Cleveland did by taking Mobley, and it worked out beautifully (in part because Mobley was even more immediately ready for the NBA than even I thought). Which is why I think Orlando is going to at least kick the tires-- not just because Suggs and Holmgren played together and would have immediate chemistry, but because pairing Holmgren with Wendell Carter early could be a nice way to allow Holmgren to settle in.

So ultimately, what's Chet's upside? Something like "Porzingis with better passing and better mobility." Which, of course, would be a franchise-changing talent. He could become one of these guys that's a struggle to figure out how to guard, because he can shoot, he's mobile, he's a good passer, and he's fucking huge. And that's not to say anything about his elite defensive upside.

But his downside... is probably a guy that can't play more than back-up minutes because he struggles with efficiency on one or both ends due to frame. There's a very real outcome in which that happens. It's just... not the one I'd bet on due to Holmgren's personality. He's just too much of a son of a bitch to let that happen imo. Zero chance he escapes the top three on draft day-- maybe if the top three picks were teams looking to win today rather than invest in developing the high upside guy, he could slip, but that's not where we are.