I thought the point was that his shooting could improve. From that aspect, I don't understand why playing different positions is especially relevant, otherwise why would you have mentioned Westbrook in the first place?
How do we not know what Presti has in mind for Huestis? Is it really going out on a limb to suggest that he expects him to be a really good wing defender who can hopefully knock down some shots? He's expected to be a role player, "fill a niche," whatever you want to call it--and there's nothing wrong with that. If you get a quality role player late in the first round, that's a win. No one, whether they like the pick or not, should expect a late first rounder to develop into something more than that.
If people love the Huestis pick, that's fine. I wasn't adamantly opposed to it, but I am a bit skeptical. He could very well develop into a decent role player. However, I take issue with the justification for the pick. The support for this pick seems almost solely driven by the fact that Sam Presti made it. If anyone other than the Thunder or Spurs picked Huestis in the first, would OKC fans think it was a smart pick? You could put a rumor out there in June that Presti was thinking about taking Tyler Neal in the first round, and there would be Thunder fans talking themselves into how it makes sense solely because Presti likes him.
