Poll: Which Available Player Would You Have Taken At 17?

[JayMKE]

I think it is wrong to say Dekker has no upside, he is very skilled for a guy with his size/athleticism and what held him back at UW was his inconsistency especially when it came to shooting from range. Guys can improve their shooting, I didn't watch Dekker in high school but I remember the highlight vids and he didn't seem hesitant to shoot from deep. I think Bo prepared him well for the next level while at the same time I think he'll benefit from playing in a more open system too.

[fansinceforever]

I find it funny how the same people that criticize the Vasquez trade, claiming it's a "Herb Kohl move" are completely fine with taking Dekker. Drafting Sam Dekker is as Herb Kohl as it can get. Hometown hero, high floor, low ceiling.

Dekker is going to be a solid roleplayer in this league for a long time at worst. Size, athleticism, versatility, IQ, if he can start hitting the 3 he'd be a guy every team would want.

I Honestly can't get there with Sam. It took him a while to figure out he could dominate the college game... What is the learning curve going to be when everyone on the floor is as athletic or more athletic than he is.

[fansinceforever]

I also really don't like him with Giannis and Jabari... They have to develop some similar skills to Sam yet they're younger and further along than he is.

[Bernman]

Many non Wisconsin fans were surprised Dekker was still around when we picked. Most mock drafts had him going above our pick. That makes him theoretically a value pick.

I liked Dekker more than most neutral people, disliked Kaminsky more than most neutral people (had Dekker 9th, Kaminsky 16th, and they about flipped). There is a balance. Being a Badger had nothing to do with my opinion of him as a prospect personally. He'd have been among 3 I'd have strongly considered for the pick, along with Grant and Portis. But I would have taken Grant, while hoping Dekker could be snared (for Henson) with another pick around the same range. Once again, he was perceived good value by the neutral analyst, and I liked him as a prospect independently.

What skill does he have that translates? Possibly every one. Every single one. At one point or another during his college career for an extended period he did something well, be it driving, cutting, shooting, passing, rebounding, or defending. Driving, cutting, versatile defense, and offensive rebounding are all things an NBA team could count on him for because he did them pretty consistently his final two years and has the physical tools to translate. Now it's a matter of putting everything he's shown at different points altogether if he wants to be really good. And I'm confident he'll add consistent shooter to his traits given how he shot before the growth spurt, now he needs to adjust to that, and it appears he's doing so. Muscle memory takes time develop after physical growth. See our very own Giannis. You're probably throwing Dekker under the bus to some degree to make the guy we did ultimately take look better.

Only thing I agree with you is he's a questionable fit. But so is Vaughn, if Middleton is back. How would he improve our shooting/team discernibly if he takes our one really good shooter in Middleton off the floor or has him move up to bump Giannis/Parker out? And it's not like he's reasonably ready to step in to the starting lineup to temporarily replace Jabari while he recovers. At least Dekker had that potential going for him. Then you could have possibly flipped him if a log jam was created, after he hopefully proved he can be a viable starter in this league.

[Bernman]

Vaughn should be at about 3 votes. Because that's around the # who even suggested here he was a good option before the draft. Many didn't weigh in, but putting him above several of these guys who did actually have traction is blatant homerism. Hunter had more traction, and I disliked him more than Vaughn.

[bigbucksfan1234]

Im happy with the pick and just so everyone knows Sam Dekker was hoping that the bucks wouldn't pick him if you watched the draft they his dad didn't want the bucks to take him and when he got interviewed he basically said thank god he's leaving Wisconsin

[MickeyDavis]

Maybe I'm forgetting someone but which UW or MU guy did we reach for in the first round under Kohl that would have made taking Dekker a Kohl move?

I'm fine with who we took. I do think Dekker will be a very good NBA player

[mattg]

Wanted Tyus or RHJ, had them ranked much higher than they went. Think they're both better today and have more potential going forward.

[AussieBuck]

Poll results remind me of this:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf4nlIEHfaU[/youtube]

[ChuckBros4Life]

I really liked Delon Wright going into the draft and after seeing the Bucks trade for Vasquez it makes me even more frustrated. Wright gives you all the benefits of a Grevis Vasquez without the negatives.
- Big point guard
- excellent distributor
- can shoot the 3 a little
- 5 years younger
- much better defender
- much cheaper
- oh and we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd and future 1st to get him.

[Buckrageous]

I liked Wright, Portis, and Anderson in that spot but am fine with Vaughn. I was hoping (posted it here a couple times not hindsight) that they would go big at 17 with Portis and then acquire a second 1st and take Vaughn or Anderson. Everyone needs shooters, especially the Bucks. I like the potential from limited knowledge of him (DX and all the clips I could find leading up to the draft).

[Buckrageous]

I really liked Delon Wright going into the draft and after seeing the Bucks trade for Vasquez it makes me even more frustrated. Wright gives you all the benefits of a Grevis Vasquez without the negatives.
- Big point guard
- excellent distributor
- can shoot the 3 a little
- 5 years younger
- much better defender
- much cheaper
- oh and we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd and future 1st to get him.

Yeah, I'd of been ecstatic to trade #46 and the Clips picks for Wright. (Not that that was possible)

[Jez2983]

I voted Tyus. That said I know virtually nothing about the prospects, and he seemed the best available talent at a position that's not sorted for us.

[Jez2983]

Poll results remind me of this:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf4nlIEHfaU[/youtube]

How about: "What did your mother say?"

[Buckrageous]

Poll results remind me of this:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf4nlIEHfaU[/youtube]

Thank you for that. It actually made me feel good for some reason to see politicians in other countries looking as ridiculous as my own.

[ChuckBros4Life]

I really liked Delon Wright going into the draft and after seeing the Bucks trade for Vasquez it makes me even more frustrated. Wright gives you all the benefits of a Grevis Vasquez without the negatives.
- Big point guard
- excellent distributor
- can shoot the 3 a little
- 5 years younger
- much better defender
- much cheaper
- oh and we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd and future 1st to get him.

Yeah, I'd of been ecstatic to trade #46 and the Clips picks for Wright. (Not that that was possible)

I'm more suggesting that we should have selected Wright at #17 and got a shooter in the 2nd, but yah if we could have gotten both him and Vaughn that would have been pretty cool.

[VooDoo7]

I wanted Portis or Hunter. But I ain't mad at this pick at all. Lot's of upside here. My biggest concern (even before the draft) was his knee injury. Hopefully that becomes a non-issue.

[Stoltz3]

I probably would have gone with Portis or Vaughn. Dekker would have had extreme pressure to be a star right out of the gates if we had drafted him.

[El Duderino]

I really liked Delon Wright going into the draft and after seeing the Bucks trade for Vasquez it makes me even more frustrated. Wright gives you all the benefits of a Grevis Vasquez without the negatives.
- Big point guard
- excellent distributor
- can shoot the 3 a little
- 5 years younger
- much better defender
- much cheaper
- oh and we wouldn't have had to give up a 2nd and future 1st to get him.

I paid zero attention to Wright before the draft and only watched Utah once, that being in the tournament. After the draft and seeing he was chosen around the Bucks pick, he was pretty impressive in the clips i saw, but obviously highlight clips can be misleading. Looked like a guy who could have a really long NBA career if he can develop a fairly consistent three point shot, which certainly isn't a given when you consider he's a four year senior. Don't think i'd have picked him over Vaughn though.

As for Vaughn, probably would have chosen Portis, but my unlike the Bucks scouting staff, my extent of seeing Vaughn play were a few youtube clips and the video on DraftExpress. During the college season, i can't fathom a reason why i'd have wanted to spend time watching a UNLV game this year. They did play Arizona right before Christmas, but if the game was on TV, no chance i'd have wasted my free time to watch that game.

[El Duderino]

I find it funny how the same people that criticize the Vasquez trade, claiming it's a "Herb Kohl move" are completely fine with taking Dekker. Drafting Sam Dekker is as Herb Kohl as it can get. Hometown hero, high floor, low ceiling.

Come on, Dekker has plenty of upside. He's really good in transition, but rarely was allowed to use that ability in Ryan's system because Bo resisted having his teams push the ball. The NBA won't be like that and especially so with the Rockets who play at such a fast place.

He's like a number of players in the draft though with a questionable jumper. Sam has that really high arcing shot and is inconsistent with it. Same with his free throw shooting. If he gets to a point where he's say a 35ish percent three point shooter, Sam will have the chance to really thrive in the NBA, much more than he was able to do a Wisconsin.

You act as if he was only a 2nd round talent and fans here were rating him worthy of the Bucks pick only because he played for the Badgers, even though he was picked only one spot after us and by a well respected GM.