Tyrese Haliburton is damn good at basketball. The 21-year-old averaged 13 points, 5.3 assists, 3 rebounds, and 1.3 steals for the Kings last year while shooting 47% from the field and 40.9% from deep. He was one of the Sacramento Kings most important players last season, and played with awareness and confidence far beyond most rookies.
The 2020 NBA Draft class proved to be a deep group, full of a ton of talented youngsters good enough to overcome transitioning to the NBA in the midst of a pandemic – but Haliburton was arguably the most consistent and efficient rookie across the whole messy season, and he proved himself to be outstanding in clutch situations.
It isn’t hyperbole to say that Haliburton exceeded most expectations fans and experts had for him last year. Of course, some of that pre-draft chatter was laughable—anyone who really worried if his funky-looking shooting mechanics would keep him from being a good standstill shooter hadn’t watched enough Iowa State tape—but he overcame both the silly and understandable concerns.
In my prospect profile for Haliburton last November, I worried that he wasn’t a great self-creator (he shot 28.1% on dribble jumpers in his sophomore season), and then when he hit the NBA hardwood, he started popping three pointers off the dribble. I worried about his lack of pick-and-roll success at Iowa State, and then he put on pick-and-roll clinics in the clutch. I worried that he was too skinny to play defense, and then his basketball genius translated almost immediately.
Look at this freaking insane rookie. Grant Williams hasn't even caught the ball yet and Tyrese KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE IT'S GONNA END UP. HOW?! pic.twitter.com/tNi2iaT3OW
— Bryant West (@BSWest5) February 4, 2021
There’s still plenty for Haliburton to improve at – his handle currently limits him as a driving threat, he needs to bulk up to succeed in a three guard lineup, and he only attempted 56 free throws last season. But I’m not going to bet against him figuring out ways to overcome these limitations. I wrote after his draft selection that it would surprise me if Haliburton ever challenged for an All Star spot or became a top scorer on a good NBA team – but also noted “given Haliburton’s truly exceptional basketball instincts and maturity, nothing is out of play.” After a year of watching Haliburton’s exceptional basketball instincts and growth, I’m done putting any ceiling on Tyrese’s NBA outcome. There just aren’t many players with his combination of skills, versatility, and court wizardry. While De’Aaron Fox is the squad’s engine, we shouldn’t be surprised when Haliburton steps out of his shadow and proves just as important to the future of Sacramento Kings.
Yes.
I wanted to note this in my article, but I decided it was too much a non sequitur for my thesis – I would not include Haliburton in any trade discussions for Ben Simmons, full stop. I’m very high on Ben Simmons’ fit in Sacramento and would give up much for him (Mitchell, multiple semi/lightly protected picks and additional pick swaps, and whichever of the three Bs of Barnes, Buddy, or Bagley that Philly desires), but I would rather have Haliburton in a vacuum AND on this roster than Simmons. Simmons’ versatility arguably bests Hali’s by virtue of Ben’s size and physical tools, but Haliburton has the potential to be a more complete offensive player and his shooting makes him a much better fit with Fox. And while I’m trying to avoid playing internet psychologist (because I find many of the conversations surrounding a players’ mental approach disheartening and disingenuous), I absolutely believe that Haliburton will make the most out of every aspect of his game and career. I cannot say that about Simmons with such confidence.
The combo of De’Aaron Fox and Tyrese Haliburton are an ideal guard combo to build around, and both Fox and Hali should be off the table in any trade discussions.
Haliburton is already coveted by many teams, especially a whole bunch of them that declined to draft him. “Star” is something of a nebulous term, but I think that he could have an impact similar to that of CJ McCollum, but as a much better defender. He’ll need to do all of the things that you recommend, and with his smarts and innate feel for the game, he really could be a damned good ballplayer over the course of his career.
And I’m really glad that you added that tweet from the Brooklyn game, because I don’t think that there’s a single better visual representation of what Haliburton is already doing, that so many players have never been able to do. He sees farther down the road, makes quick decisions, and gets himself into position to succeed. Those things are so much more valuable than if he could jump a few inches higher or run a bit faster.
Fascinating- I was going to compare his impact to CJ and you jumped in front. Their games are entirely different but the impact might be the same. Different type of game and different “impact” but similar level of impact. He averaged 13 as a rookie and did not start. Players can bump up 3-4 points per game in second year. ( although Bagley did not) Don’t have the numbers here but I bet that is about the level of the CJ bump up.
Is CJ a star?
Then he could rise to level of Jalen Brown. It took him a couple of years.
He does not have the athleticism to take over a game but he is so diversified that he can influence game for long stretches.
McCollum is a guy that I really loved during the run-up to his draft, for a lot of the same reasons I wanted Haliburton. It was obvious from the start that these guys were effing smart, and I covet smart athletes for my teams.
Fox is not Lillard, but Tyrese can fall into a similar role with him that CJ has in Portland. With his willingness and acumen in playing defense, Haliburton could potentially be better when all is said and done, and that’s an unqualified win when it comes to drafting a guy.
As far as being stars, it’s tough to say. I think with the right roster, where it was CJ’s team, he could be, but I don’t think he gives a damn about whether or not he’s The Man. He seems to want to do whatever will help the team win, without concerning himself about the spotlight. And those guys are key to making a team hum.
It definitely works better when you’ve got a Dame Lillard on your team, though.
don’t see star. I just don’t see the athleticism to take over a game, which to me is what star is all about. But an amazing cog in a winning team? Yes.
The kind of athleticism possessed by, say, Nikola Jokic or Dirk Nowitizki?
Yeah, that Steve Nash dude was a high flyer as well.
Steve Nash was an amazing athlete, but okay. Just googled and saw this: http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-steve-nash-best-athlete-in-nba.html
Luca? Magic? Bird?
Well, if he was 7 feet tall like both of these guys, I suppose that would help. My point is that he doesn’t seem like a guy who can just take over a game. I’m willing to be wrong.
In todays NBA, skill > athleticism. That’s why you see a lot of skilled players in todays game be more successful than just those that relies on athleticism.
It still hurts. 🙁
…And it hurts even more when the accompanying photo is his likely scoring over Bagley on an incredibly Bagley-esque screen.
Yes, setting a screen when the other team is in possession is so Bagley!
He has done it. Not joking…..
Bagley is looking extremely mobile and athletic in this picture. Tough as nails too. Nobody going to get around him without a little pain….
It will always hurt.
Define athleticism?
Because Luka’s body control and ability switch direction and speed is quite extraordinary. I’d call it athleticism.
According to Urban Dictionary:
If I did the mental gymnastics to understand this, does that make me athletic?
It’s saying if you discriminate against people with poor athletic ability then you are an athleticist!
This is humorism!
It’s racism, since I judge you harshly because you can’t beat me in a race.
Sprinterist!
I feel like we’re running in circles here.
Nascarist?
That would be more of coordination/footwork…Ala Tim Duncan or DMC
If you go through the top echelon of the league currently I think you might find more that would be considered average in draft terms “athleticism” than striding bouncy leapers. Maybe from some aging out of those abilities but still. Obviously theres margins to that term be it body control acceleration change of pace etc. But the idea that he cant yam on players as a concern is silly. The same way that not having an ability for elite self creation or off the dribble mastery meaning he cant be a star. These prerequisites are often of a different era IMO.
Regardless of if he becomes a star, I agree with the sentiment that he can be an amazing cog on a team, and feel that is underrated. He feels like a player who can fit in as a valuable piece on almost any team, and his BBIQ makes the players around him better.
Magic and Bird didn’t have elite athleticism, either. But they had a rare court vision and sense. Haliburton has it too.
Who knows. I am just happy to see the infusion of craftiness, BBIQ and intangibles he brings. He’s the kind of player that does the things to make the whole team better, and he’s the guy I am most excited about on the Kings.
I am guarded on placing too high expectations on him, as I can easily see how he won’t take a big leap this season. I’d still be happy to see him play. I mean, you can see him think and judging angles and stuff, and that’s just great to see.
He would have a better chance of making a leap if Luke would start him.
Have to start Bagley because….well its the Kangz.
Buddy will get upset so no way to change that….
I’m not sure he’s ever going to be an all-star, but I think he is going to be a very very good player who makes everyone around him better. So in that sense I think he will be a “star” player. I’ve thought it before, I could see him becoming our Malcolm Brogdon.
I hope better than Brogdon.
I think in two years Haliburton is more important to the team than Fox (they are great together). But whereas Fox is often cited as the “head of the snake” I believe Haliburton will be the heart of the team.
Mitchell will be the attitude.
“Become?”
Wow. TKH shade implying that he isn’t one!
I know, right? WTF
1951 you online right now?
I was on the road yesterday. You on the twitter machine?
Follow this idiot and then we can send private messages!
It says Sactown Tony doesn’t take DM’s.
I see a Yeti!!
Unexpected!
There’s a lot out there currently that suggests he may already be one.
Tyrese brings talent, intelligence and personality to the game and his team. He is constantly being sought out for interviews by media (possibly more-so than any other Kings player right now) and has no shortage of social media followers, the kid is legitimately a star in todays era. Will he ever be an all-star is a whole other question. And to that I say yes, he can be. He has all the tools to be one of the league’s best guards, absolutely.
When Hali is forced to play aggressive, sky’s the limit. When he respects his elders and stands around watching Fox, not so much. One of the reasons I’m not opposed to Fox for Simmons.
There’s a decent enough comparison here in Kings’ history. Fox has the potential to become an uber-talented player ala Webber, while Haliburton can develop into the (also talented) heart and soul of a team like Vlade Divac. Both are fantastic players, but to different degrees and in different ways.
In that same game that the West tweet references, I remember Haliburton won us the game on a foul that was the equivalent of a game winner on Willliams. I cant remember the exact sequence but he read Brown getting free on a Williams pick that would have been an open three for Brown. Being in the the bonus he instantly fouled Williams while Brown was curling open regardless of us having a 3 point lead. It caught the whole game off guard I remember and forced Williams to intentionally miss the 2nd free throw and force a poor 3 in last possession.
Its just one of many examples that Hali’s acumen is comparable to some of the leagues best game managers already. A fact that makes his name included in any Simmons discussion void IMO, as its antithetical to what makes Simmons so far, confounding and flawed. This is a game of nuance at the top echelon and wherever Haliburton ends up in his production is secondary to the fact that his intelligence and skills support winning basketball regardless. Talent’s crucial but he has his fair share of that as well. The combination makes him clearly the most important and engaging player for this team longterm.
My wife keeps calling him Halibut 😁
https://giphy.com/gifs/SportsManias-sports-emoji-sportsmanias-JkpCRhl5jUtUJKIqyb
She thinks he’s just another “fish”?
A more slithery one
King Salmon!
Don’t forget this King fish.
For starters, I really like Tyrese and do not want to trade him. Full stop. I am also not a huge fan of Ben Simmons – his disappearing act vs. Atl concerns me. However, we always seem to overvalue our own guys. I remember when Tyreke was rookie of the year and averaged 20/5/5. He never turned into a star. Far from it. If a star is a do it all, smart glue guy, then yeah, he can be a star (say like a Draymond Green). If Star is a guy that can take over a game from time to time, then I don’t see it. He still has trouble creating a shot for himself, especially with the push shot of his, so that limits him.
on the other hand, while he won’t “take over a game” on offense with one on one athleticism, there are plenty of ways to influence the game- a pass, a steal, a bucket. I think he is capable of that.
Wrong. Ty is a pick and roll savant, endlessly crafty and unpredictable, he credits it partly because he “played with a lot white guys growing up” .
He’s also the rare player who can get away with making jump passes out of the pick and roll, creating unforeseen angles before going airborn.
So if you are always keeping defenders off balance, guessing whether you are going to shoot or give it up, you tend to get quality looks at the basket.
The “push shot”, if you want to call it that, is not a detriment in this context. It is a form that works for him, he gets nice arc on his shot, his mechanics are consistent, translating to 58% TS% and 41% from deep as a 20 year old rookie.
You should not be doubting his shot-making ability prospectively, you should be wondering how much better he can become.
I see a nice 3rd option on a playoff team. You can usually see Star quality in the first year of a player. Even if it’s not consistent. I see Anthony Edwards becoming a star. He has all the intangibles to just take it to another level this year.
Hali has a lot of great qualities. He can definitely improve his game. But, I don’t see see future star when I watched him last year. I see taking his game to another level. But, I don’t think he has a real high ceiling.
No player for the Kings will ever be a star.
…and thank you for coming to my Toilet Talk.
Absoloodle!
I think Haliburton has just as much potential as Fox to be a star. The problem is he needs to play. The Kangz draft Bagley and guarantee him a starting spot for three years and nothing.
Haliburton plays two minutes and shows more real ability than Bagley’s entire career of potential. But the Kangz bring him off of the bench…..
Or maybe Hali played 30 mins a game…2 less than Edwards and two more than Ball. Reigning ROY. Hali closed just about every game…He got important minutes all year.
But sure…Let’s say he hasn’t gotten opportunity as a rookie because he didn’t play the first 6 mins each game.
Should he start this year? Prolly yes. But he wasn’t stunted due to lack of opportunity.
Forgive them, they are a one-trick pony.
No receipts this time?
Not saying he was stunted. I am saying that he is clearly an NBA ready player. Starting him would allow him the opportunity to play more. Yeah he played thirty minutes. Yeah he played in the closing minutes. All good things.
From an organizational stand point…stupid. Start the lowest BBIQ player in the NBA and bring a high BBIQ player off of the bench.
What are they doing? What message are they sending?
That the best players play the most minutes and the most important ones…Bagley played less minutes and sat most 4th quarters.
They literally followed your username when the game was on the line.
Also, not the worst idea in the world to have Hali off the bench most of season when your other main bench players were Joseph, Whiteside, Bjelly and GRIII.
For a team that is either tanking or chasing the first loser spot in the playoffs starting your best players is a good strategy.
Goes a long way towards establishing a winning culture. i am not saying he did not get minutes. i am saying that NBA players want to start. On the Kangz no defense and utter stupidity about the basics gets you a guaranteed start.
It is more than minutes.
In many ways we agree. You are arguing minutes, which i agree are good. I am arguing culture which I think is garbage.
Yeah, probably moot because he is gonna start. I think…
I hope he does. I also hope they have an actual competition for roles.
Just maybe Mitchell gives Haliburton a run for the starting spot?
Might be unlikely but a culture where everybody’s spot is not guaranteed is a step in the right direction.
Kings fans have an absurd attachment to Fox. Much in the same way that Bay Area fans had with Monta. Their games are very very similar especially their lack of efficiency, but both can get you a bucket without winning the game. If Haliburton were to flourish, they would need to trade Fox for a wing or a big, like the dubs traded Monta for Bogut.
Love Tyrese and found his play pleasantly surprising. I think his ceiling is a Doug Christie in Sacramento super role player type.
Uh….as a 22 year old rookie, Doug Christie shot 16% from 3 and had a 1:1 assist to turnover.
As a 20 year old rookie, Ty shot 41% from 3s on a whopping 5 attempts per game and had a 3.5 assist to turnover, almost unheard of as a rookie.
Also Doug was 53% TS for his career. Ty was 58% TS% as a rookie, again two years younger.
Ty is pick and roll savant, and what makes him spectacular is he does not predetermine what he is going to do, and he is one of the few players who can consistently make jump passes and not get burned with nowhere to go with the ball. Jumping as he does helps create deft passing angles, it is a joy to behold and the defense has NO clue what he is going to do next!
Ty has already proven himself to be one of the best pick and roll players in the NBA, and also pure money when he gets clean looks from deep, and even showed some off the ball game.
How does all of this NOT portend stardom? Do fans need to get hit over the head with a 2×4 to know a star when they see one? Not addressing this to you in specific, just the tone of the comments as a whole.
The other thing you can say about Ty is he has moxie, he does not shy from the moment, and he often makes the game look easy, because making the right reads and plays with his skills is relatively easy. And I trust him far more with an open shot than Buddy in the crunch.
Regardless, players who can make the game look easy equate into stardom so when you are wondering whether Player X will be a future star, ask does he or can he make the game look easy and in the case of Ty it is an unequivocal “yes”.
For the life of me, I’ll never understand why people type out “Uh.” If you’re concerned about the rest of your prose being unable to make your point, go ahead and fix it.
And what Doug Christie’s rookie year a couple of decades back has to do with Haliburton’s in the modern game, escapes me entirely. I like DC as a comparison, because in their specific time frames, what each offers is the ability to make teammates better on both ends, and a big ol’ brain. Ty doesn’t have DC’s athleticism, but his shooting ability makes up for a lot of it.
As members of Kings teams in their specific contexts, there are more than enough similarities. DC, a defensive wizard, could have been a twenty points per game guy, but adapted to compliment his teammates, some of whom were great scorers. Haliburton, with his superior shooting, also has his ability to facilitate in the way that DC did, while also having the potential to quarterback a pretty good defense.
Maybe Ty can be a “star,” and maybe circumstances will dictate that his role garners less spotlight. Regardless, I believe that it’s possible that he could be revered one day much as DC is by Kings fans.
Wrong question. I’m not even sure what makes one player a star and another less than a star. Tyrese is an unselfish player who I think would rather win than have the spotlight on him. He’ll step up and make winning plays. So in that sense he’ll be the star of many games. But a high profile perennial all star married to a Kardashian, maybe not.
I still find it baffling… Some, Kings fans making claims/assumptions. In regards to Fox/Hali.
Words like All Star, Special, Spectacular, Incredible, etc..etc..
What is world has either done to deserve those accolades? Please enlighten me.
If you are talking about Doncic, Lebron, Kawhi, Paul, Curry, Lillard, Jokic, et… Even soon to be Special players, Edwards, Trey, etc. These aforementioned deserve to be in the class of special.
Win some games first, then proclaim greatness of either or both. Not before.
what in the world
Badge Legend