1. If Perry Jones III is a player without a position, is that truly a good thing?
Darnell Mayberry: Depends. Is he any good at any of them? Frankly, I think that's a question we're all still trying to figure out.
John Rohde: The only way this is a good thing is if Jones ends up sharing court time with Kevin Durant, otherwise Jones will be a backup for however long they're teammates. These two are interchangeable at the No. 3 and No. 4 positions.
Berry Tramel: I don't know if it's “truly a good thing,” but I don't think it's a bad thing. I've never looked at Perry Jones and thought, he doesn't have a position. But I've looked at Perry Jones a bunch and thought, does he have a game?
2. Is Jones ahead of schedule, on schedule, or behind schedule after his rookie season?
Mayberry: Given the plight of every rookie the Thunder has had since 2010, he's right on track. Rookies arrive, sit, watch and learn.
Rohde: Can't imagine he'd be considered ahead of schedule with all the fuss made about “stealing” him with the No. 28 pick in last year's NBA Draft. I'll be generous and say he's on schedule because the Thunder has been extremely patient with rookies.
Tramel: Looks behind schedule to me. He looked more lost than any Boomer. Daniel Orton looked like a seasoned veteran compared to Jones. Same with Jeremy Lamb. Of course, that's sort of how Perry Jones looked his sophomore year at Baylor. I thought he regressed at Baylor.
3. Do you foresee the Thunder picking up Jones' option (by Oct. 31, 2013) for his third season?
Mayberry: Yes. Unless he's unexpectedly traded before then.
Rohde: Yes, because of the low cost ($1,129,200). The third-year option is the only benefit to having a late first-round draft pick because Perry's fourth-year option will increase his salary by 80.5 percent.
Tramel: Probably will. No great risk. The Thunder needs cheap labor to finish out those 14 and 15 roster spots. Or even 13 and 14 roster spots. OKC might decide to stick with 14 players.