2020 NBA Draft Thread: Bulls pick #7 (probably)

[_txchilibowl_]

I'd say that Zach is the LEAST likely to get traded. He's young, he's cost controlled, he's growing and the team is still growing. He's also probably our best asset. I think you only trade him in a package for a better player and, in reality, I don't think this team is ready for that kind of trade. Not enough depth, not enough assets to build with after a deal like that.

Zach is the only one on this team coming remotely close to fulfilling the expectations of him, flawed as he may be. On the pecking order of problems he's on the lower side for me.

[coldfish]

Man I can’t agree with that. The last thing this team needs is to try to settle into the current talent pool with a “steadying veteran presence.” Unless you mean acquiring one completely separate from the draft.

This team needs to be fortunate landing a high end talent. The way to do that is in the lottery, not by trading for an established solid guy. Any known commodity we could get for a pick in this draft will just be “some guy.” Not a significant difference maker. We need to roll the dice.

People shouldn't forget that no one on the roster was acquired by the current GM and the current GM is high on building through the draft AND has given speeches about making trades.

I wouldn't be surprised if several of the existing young guys see the exit door in exchange for players that either change the culture or fit better. I bet that, unless blown away, we will keep the pick.

Lauri, Wendell, Coby, Lavine, Sato, Thad and Otto should pack lightly.

I feel like Zach is one of the most likely to be traded based on description of high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing, and value of a player. For his contract, he could bring a very good return back.

I don't think that anyone is particularly more likely than others to get traded. If AK has any sense, he places a value on each player. If he can exceed that in trade, I suspect that the player will be gone.

Its almost more up to opposing teams than Chicago as to who gets traded. If someone really likes Wendell or Lauri, I'm sure a deal can be made.

GarPax put way too much value on their own young players to the point where they were always untradeable. Hopefully AK doesn't make that mistake.

[othawhitemeat]

People shouldn't forget that no one on the roster was acquired by the current GM and the current GM is high on building through the draft AND has given speeches about making trades.

I wouldn't be surprised if several of the existing young guys see the exit door in exchange for players that either change the culture or fit better. I bet that, unless blown away, we will keep the pick.

Lauri, Wendell, Coby, Lavine, Sato, Thad and Otto should pack lightly.

I feel like Zach is one of the most likely to be traded based on description of high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing, and value of a player. For his contract, he could bring a very good return back.

I think if you feel that way about Zach then you shouldn't expect much of a return. Every team wants high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing players.

If Zach isn't that...then why would anyone pony up for him?

Sorry, I mean lack of bball IQ for Zach. He is a great scorer, but is a ball stopper. AK seems to want more ball movement.

[sco]

I feel like Zach is one of the most likely to be traded based on description of high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing, and value of a player. For his contract, he could bring a very good return back.

I think if you feel that way about Zach then you shouldn't expect much of a return. Every team wants high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing players.

If Zach isn't that...then why would anyone pony up for him?

Sorry, I mean lack of bball IQ for Zach. He is a great scorer, but is a ball stopper. AK seems to want more ball movement.

I would be surprised if the Bulls traded Zach, Coby, Lauri, Gafford or WCJ this off-season. All of those guys have shown potential, and IMO, the FO would want to see what they can do under a new coach. IMO, the goal will be to add the BPA (in their view) via the draft and a quality vet role player.

[Chi town]

I feel like Zach is one of the most likely to be traded based on description of high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing, and value of a player. For his contract, he could bring a very good return back.

I think if you feel that way about Zach then you shouldn't expect much of a return. Every team wants high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing players.

If Zach isn't that...then why would anyone pony up for him?

Sorry, I mean lack of bball IQ for Zach. He is a great scorer, but is a ball stopper. AK seems to want more ball movement.

Zach also played off ball really well in a couple games when it looked like it was designed that way. Then Otto went down and everything went downhill.

I also think Zack has real value across the league and could be traded to a number of teams for a legit player and picks.

I trust AK will get the right coach and know what to do with Zach and Coby.

[GimmeDat]

I want to stress that Nesmith is a big reach at 7.

He can't dribble and he can't pass - like at all.. and he varies between a below average to average defender.

I totally buy the shooting, I think he's a can't go wrong role player, but at 7, I'm not interested.

If you want a wing, Vassell can shoot (is not as proven as an elite-tier shooter like Nesmith, but still very good), and can do almost everything else on the court at a much higher level.

I'm a Vassell guy at 7, all day.

I think Vassell is a reach as well at 7. Not that he doesnt deserve or he isnt the 7th best player but he gives me Brandon Clarke vibe where he doesnt stand out that much we can snag him by trading back to mid round picks.
As much as I hate Hali, if Ball, Edwards,Wiseman, Okongwu is gone, hes my pick at 7.

I think this is the misnomer of quote/unquote 'role players', because Brandon Clarke is an absolute stud and a massive part of Memphis' rebuild.

I think we get too caught up on guys being lead volume initiators.. reality is some of the most impactful guys in the league are not that, and some that are, are overrated.

[MrSparkle]

Unless some bad GM offers AK more than the player is worth, the fact remains that every single player on this Bulls roster is at a low-point in their value. Literally, every single guy. There is not one player on this roster who you can say "They're value is high! Now's the time to trade!" Everybody is coming off a deflated, poor and inefficient statistical season.

The real question is, who can you afford to dump and not regret?

I do believe this roster needs to be washed. There are way too many young or prime players competing for minutes with duplicate flaws. Note; I didn't say 'skills.' They have duplicate flaws. Which is a major issue. Not even including everyone's general shooting woes and injuries....

Zach, Valentine - can't defend wings or fast guards

Dunn, Shaq - can't shoot/score well, don't have the length to really cover wings (so their defensive value has to be taken with a grain of salt)

Wendell, Gafford, Felicio - not scoring/shooting spacing threats at all, pretty low IQ/experience

Lauri, Kornet - soft on the glass and in the paint (on both ends)

Sato, Arci - good well-rounded players, with below-average athleticism to be much more than low-minute bench guys

Thad, Hutchinson - well-rounded and solid, but still not the type of players who open up your offense.

But if I look at this list, besides Otto (who couldn't stay healthy) and maybe Thad or Zach (on teams depleted at the PF/SG positions), this team really doesn't have anybody who would sniff a starting job on a deep playoff team.

So they need to juggle player value, with potential, with needs. Things you can certainly help improve are Zach's off-the-ball offense, his team defense. You can count Sato, Thad to improve their shooting a bit. Wendell, Gafford can improve defensively (less fouls) and on the glass; become better finishing in paint. Lauri can certainly improve his shooting and rebounding.

I do expect another year of losing, unless Otto, Coby and Lauri have great seasons. Meanwhile, this draft pick must be a high-ceiling forward IMO.

[23-7]

Unless some bad GM offers AK more than the player is worth, the fact remains that every single player on this Bulls roster is at a low-point in their value. Literally, every single guy. There is not one player on this roster who you can say "They're value is high! Now's the time to trade!" Everybody is coming off a deflated, poor and inefficient statistical season.

The real question is, who can you afford to dump and not regret?

I do believe this roster needs to be washed. There are way too many young or prime players competing for minutes with duplicate flaws. Note; I didn't say 'skills.' They have duplicate flaws. Which is a major issue. Not even including everyone's general shooting woes and injuries....

Zach, Valentine - can't defend wings or fast guards

Dunn, Shaq - can't shoot/score well, don't have the length to really cover wings (so their defensive value has to be taken with a grain of salt)

Wendell, Gafford,Felicio - not scoring/shooting spacing threats at all, pretty low IQ/experience

Lauri, Kornet - soft on the glass and in the paint (on both ends)

Sato, Arci - good well-rounded players, with below-average athleticism to be much more than low-minute bench guys

Thad, Hutchinson - well-rounded and solid, but still not the type of players who open up your offense.

But if I look at this list, besides Otto (who couldn't stay healthy) and maybe Thad or Zach (on teams depleted at the PF/SG positions), this team really doesn't have anybody who would sniff a starting job on a deep playoff team.

So they need to juggle player value, with potential, with needs. Things you can certainly help improve are Zach's off-the-ball offense, his team defense. You can count Sato, Thad to improve their shooting a bit. Wendell, Gafford can improve defensively (less fouls) and on the glass; become better finishing in paint. Lauri can certainly improve his shooting and rebounding.

I do expect another year of losing, unless Otto, Coby and Lauri have great seasons. Meanwhile, this draft pick must be a high-ceiling forward IMO.

Not Low IQ guys

[PaKii94]

Unless some bad GM offers AK more than the player is worth, the fact remains that every single player on this Bulls roster is at a low-point in their value. Literally, every single guy. There is not one player on this roster who you can say "They're value is high! Now's the time to trade!" Everybody is coming off a deflated, poor and inefficient statistical season.

The real question is, who can you afford to dump and not regret?

I do believe this roster needs to be washed. There are way too many young or prime players competing for minutes with duplicate flaws. Note; I didn't say 'skills.' They have duplicate flaws. Which is a major issue. Not even including everyone's general shooting woes and injuries....

Zach, Valentine - can't defend wings or fast guards

Dunn, Shaq - can't shoot/score well, don't have the length to really cover wings (so their defensive value has to be taken with a grain of salt)

Wendell, Gafford,Felicio - not scoring/shooting spacing threats at all, pretty low IQ/experience

Lauri, Kornet - soft on the glass and in the paint (on both ends)

Sato, Arci - good well-rounded players, with below-average athleticism to be much more than low-minute bench guys

Thad, Hutchinson - well-rounded and solid, but still not the type of players who open up your offense.

But if I look at this list, besides Otto (who couldn't stay healthy) and maybe Thad or Zach (on teams depleted at the PF/SG positions), this team really doesn't have anybody who would sniff a starting job on a deep playoff team.

So they need to juggle player value, with potential, with needs. Things you can certainly help improve are Zach's off-the-ball offense, his team defense. You can count Sato, Thad to improve their shooting a bit. Wendell, Gafford can improve defensively (less fouls) and on the glass; become better finishing in paint. Lauri can certainly improve his shooting and rebounding.

I do expect another year of losing, unless Otto, Coby and Lauri have great seasons. Meanwhile, this draft pick must be a high-ceiling forward IMO.

Not Low IQ guys

WCJ i'd take out from that but gafford is definitely raw right now.

[MrSparkle]

Unless some bad GM offers AK more than the player is worth, the fact remains that every single player on this Bulls roster is at a low-point in their value. Literally, every single guy. There is not one player on this roster who you can say "They're value is high! Now's the time to trade!" Everybody is coming off a deflated, poor and inefficient statistical season.

The real question is, who can you afford to dump and not regret?

I do believe this roster needs to be washed. There are way too many young or prime players competing for minutes with duplicate flaws. Note; I didn't say 'skills.' They have duplicate flaws. Which is a major issue. Not even including everyone's general shooting woes and injuries....

Zach, Valentine - can't defend wings or fast guards

Dunn, Shaq - can't shoot/score well, don't have the length to really cover wings (so their defensive value has to be taken with a grain of salt)

Wendell, Gafford,Felicio - not scoring/shooting spacing threats at all, pretty low IQ/experience

Lauri, Kornet - soft on the glass and in the paint (on both ends)

Sato, Arci - good well-rounded players, with below-average athleticism to be much more than low-minute bench guys

Thad, Hutchinson - well-rounded and solid, but still not the type of players who open up your offense.

But if I look at this list, besides Otto (who couldn't stay healthy) and maybe Thad or Zach (on teams depleted at the PF/SG positions), this team really doesn't have anybody who would sniff a starting job on a deep playoff team.

So they need to juggle player value, with potential, with needs. Things you can certainly help improve are Zach's off-the-ball offense, his team defense. You can count Sato, Thad to improve their shooting a bit. Wendell, Gafford can improve defensively (less fouls) and on the glass; become better finishing in paint. Lauri can certainly improve his shooting and rebounding.

I do expect another year of losing, unless Otto, Coby and Lauri have great seasons. Meanwhile, this draft pick must be a high-ceiling forward IMO.

Not Low IQ guys

They have a lot of potential, and good attributes, but I can't classify Wendell or Gafford as good IQ players. Not with the number of times they fouled out in 20 minute spurts. Part of it was the team defense and structure, but still, neither of these guys set good screens, play a smooth 2-man game, box out well (to maximize their rebounding ability), they don't anticipate passes well, they don't finish easy baskets around-the-rim.

Taj was a high-IQ rookie. Couldn't really make a jumpshot to save his life, but a great example of a young player who quickly out-classed Tyrus, Noah, Johnson and a few other young guys. Always in the right place at the right time. Moved the ball within the offense. Wasn't a real scoring threat but still made himself available for 10 ppg or so. I realize he was a 24yo rookie though.

IMO big men learn the game after about 3-4 years in the NBA. Until then, unless they're a generational talent like Embiid or Davis, they're generally out-played by run-of-the-mill bargain veterans like RoLo and a declined vet. min. but re-motivated Dwight Howard. Or in the Bulls' case, past-prime vets like PJ Brown, Kurt Big Sexy Thomas, or Antonio Davis, who each out-performed their young replacements. I dare say it, but in those few games where Felicio got off the bench, while his effort is appalling at times, when he does focus and play hard, he actually is a more productive center than WCJ and Gafford. His screens actually block defenders, and he does clean up around the rim and anticipate plays off the ball somewhat decently. He just seems to have the most lackadaisical attitude I've ever seen in a $32m player, and we've seen quite a few of those in our lifetime.

I will say, the verdict is still not out on WCJ. His best month of ball was his rookie debut, and that's always a hard sample size. Was he really good, or were expectations/homer-goggles on full-blast, and was he off of everybody's scouting board? Or did injuries de-rail his game? They didn't de-rail Embiid's. I'm sad to say but I haven't seen intelligent basketball out of Wendell. I've seen a lot of frustration. He definitely hasn't made "easy" plays on either end, the hallmark of a high IQ player IMO. He over-thinks around-the-rim instead of just stuffing the **** out of it, passes up open shots, gets lost in rotations, and gets in foul trouble a lot.

I can only blame a coach so much. He's got a lot of basketball to learn. Wendell is the exact opposite of the player I expected. I thought we'd get a big tough, mobile athlete with soft hands and good instincts. We've had a guy with concrete fingers and a step behind every action.

[Grodoboldo]

Just dropped my Haliburton video on my YouTube that you can watch below! These videos might slow down a bit as I’m working on some other cool draft stuff that I’m not allowed to talk about yet, but I’m gonna try to keep them coming when I can!

Watch on YouTube

Hey man, thanks for the video, really appreciated it.
I think he's my favorite PG among the top ones (the other being Hayes and Ball, in order of preference).

[KevinPandawong]

Taj was a high-IQ rookie. Couldn't really make a jumpshot to save his life, but a great example of a young player who quickly out-classed Tyrus, Noah, Johnson and a few other young guys. Always in the right place at the right time. Moved the ball within the offense. Wasn't a real scoring threat but still made himself available for 10 ppg or so. I realize he was a 24yo rookie though.

I don't think Taj had bad BBIQ, but I think you're overstating it here. He had strong fundamentals coming in to the league and I agree his positioning was great, but I don't think he achieved much outside of his well defined role(which he did wildly successful). I remember Taj in his Bulls years being constantly criticized as a black hole when he got the ball, who crumbled against double teams. Taj's best career AST% is 8.3, rookie Noah reached 8.1% with a career average of 16.1% vs Taj's 6.4%. In terms of defense, I'd say it's a wash between the two but would generally lean towards Noah with his agility and quick hands.

[bulls_troy]

I feel like Zach is one of the most likely to be traded based on description of high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing, and value of a player. For his contract, he could bring a very good return back.

I think if you feel that way about Zach then you shouldn't expect much of a return. Every team wants high IQ, 2 way, ball sharing players.

If Zach isn't that...then why would anyone pony up for him?

Sorry, I mean lack of bball IQ for Zach. He is a great scorer, but is a ball stopper. AK seems to want more ball movement.

While Zach is a "ball stopper", you also need that player in a high ball movement offense. You need that guy who can break down the defense on his own and create his own shot.

Also it hasnt helped with all the injuries to our top players, making any offense difficult, meaning Zach HAD to be ball dominate.

[drosereturn]

I'd say that Zach is the LEAST likely to get traded. He's young, he's cost controlled, he's growing and the team is still growing. He's also probably our best asset. I think you only trade him in a package for a better player and, in reality, I don't think this team is ready for that kind of trade. Not enough depth, not enough assets to build with after a deal like that.

Zach is the only one on this team coming remotely close to fulfilling the expectations of him, flawed as he may be. On the pecking order of problems he's on the lower side for me.

Cost controlled means nothing when the teams is going through rebuild and will contend by the time his next contract starts.
Being the best asset means its most likely to be traded since other teams arent going to trade for our trash. Why would anyone sell Lauri for a quarter when you can get more than a Dollar from Lavine?

Also, the argument that Lavine is untouchable because he is the least flawed is not really constructive when it comes to team building.
It should rather be how challenging would it be to build around Lavine and you dont want to make an entire roster change only for that 1 player.
AK really has been drafting players I have wanted that are usually multi positional and versatile and I can tell he will look to deal Lavine asap unless he can acquire a superstar. I say this because Murray was kept due to Jokic and he was good enough to be a number 2.

Being better than simply others is just one of the factors. You need to factor in fit, leadership, age, future contract etc.
Personally, I want to build around a guy that is in his rookie contract and Lauri, White are the only guy that fits into this category.
Basically, keep adding young talents only with high potential and hope they hit their ceiling. If they dont show improvement after their rookie extension, keep trading and find the next one. I think we have seen enough from Lavine that he is not someone you hand over the keys and build as a number 1 option. Kind of a Ben Gordon situation where he is good but not good enough. AKs goal should be finding that foundational number 1 guy, not assemble a bunch of decent players which Garpax has been doing with this roster to be a perennial treadmill lottery team.

[_txchilibowl_]

I'd say that Zach is the LEAST likely to get traded. He's young, he's cost controlled, he's growing and the team is still growing. He's also probably our best asset. I think you only trade him in a package for a better player and, in reality, I don't think this team is ready for that kind of trade. Not enough depth, not enough assets to build with after a deal like that.

Zach is the only one on this team coming remotely close to fulfilling the expectations of him, flawed as he may be. On the pecking order of problems he's on the lower side for me.

Cost controlled means nothing when the teams is going through rebuild and will contend by the time his next contract starts.
Being the best asset means its most likely to be traded since other teams arent going to trade for our trash. Why would anyone sell Lauri for a quarter when you can get more than a Dollar from Lavine?

Also, the argument that Lavine is untouchable because he is the least flawed is not really constructive when it comes to team building.
It should rather be how challenging would it be to build around Lavine and you dont want to make an entire roster change only for that 1 player.
AK really has been drafting players I have wanted that are usually multi positional and versatile and I can tell he will look to deal Lavine asap unless he can acquire a superstar. I say this because Murray was kept due to Jokic and he was good enough to be a number 2.

Being better than simply others is just one of the factors. You need to factor in fit, leadership, age, future contract etc.
Personally, I want to build around a guy that is in his rookie contract and Lauri, White are the only guy that fits into this category.
Basically, keep adding young talents only with high potential and hope they hit their ceiling. If they dont show improvement after their rookie extension, keep trading and find the next one. I think we have seen enough from Lavine that he is not someone you hand over the keys and build as a number 1 option. Kind of a Ben Gordon situation where he is good but not good enough. AKs goal should be finding that foundational number 1 guy, not assemble a bunch of decent players which Garpax has been doing with this roster to be a perennial treadmill lottery team.

Kind of a strange response considering I didn't say half of what you've asserted. A lot of assumptions on your part so allow me to address them individually...

- By cost control I mean cost certainty. I think most people would agree that Zach is appropriately paid for his level of production. Guys like Lauri, Wendell, Otto...who knows what they'll command or frankly if they're even any good.

- Lavine has two years left on his deal. Locked in at a reasonable cost. I'm not at all worried about his next contract right now.

- Nobody said he was untouchable. What I said was he was our best asset, as you noted, but that now specifically is not the time I would deal him. As I said, Lavine should be traded for an upgrade. There's no point in trading him for spare parts or mideling draft picks. That probably means attaching other assets. Assets that we either don't have or can't afford to give up currently. Likely some of the players on the current roster will have to improve enough that they are considered valuable again. At that point you can make a deal without leaving the cupboards bare.

- Nobody said he's a number one option, either now or in the future. But currently he's our best player and I think this new management group wants to win sooner than later. That alone makes him valuable to us right now.

- I like Lauri as much as the next guy but I'm not sure how you can consider building around him a smart plan at this point. Too much to prove. And if you recall I was advocating giving him 15 million per season. Having said that, Zach at 20 million per is better than Lauri at 15 million per...and who knows if Lauri would even accept that.


I'm no longer comfortable with this organization putting all of its eggs in the lottery basket. I doubt AK and Co are either. We need internal development and we need to walk before we can run. Waiting to draft a superstar is looking more and more like a fool's errand....

[JohnnyKILLroy]

Unless some bad GM offers AK more than the player is worth, the fact remains that every single player on this Bulls roster is at a low-point in their value. Literally, every single guy. There is not one player on this roster who you can say "They're value is high! Now's the time to trade!" Everybody is coming off a deflated, poor and inefficient statistical season.

The real question is, who can you afford to dump and not regret?

I do believe this roster needs to be washed. There are way too many young or prime players competing for minutes with duplicate flaws. Note; I didn't say 'skills.' They have duplicate flaws. Which is a major issue. Not even including everyone's general shooting woes and injuries....

Zach, Valentine - can't defend wings or fast guards

Dunn, Shaq - can't shoot/score well, don't have the length to really cover wings (so their defensive value has to be taken with a grain of salt)

Wendell, Gafford,Felicio - not scoring/shooting spacing threats at all, pretty low IQ/experience

Lauri, Kornet - soft on the glass and in the paint (on both ends)

Sato, Arci - good well-rounded players, with below-average athleticism to be much more than low-minute bench guys

Thad, Hutchinson - well-rounded and solid, but still not the type of players who open up your offense.

But if I look at this list, besides Otto (who couldn't stay healthy) and maybe Thad or Zach (on teams depleted at the PF/SG positions), this team really doesn't have anybody who would sniff a starting job on a deep playoff team.

So they need to juggle player value, with potential, with needs. Things you can certainly help improve are Zach's off-the-ball offense, his team defense. You can count Sato, Thad to improve their shooting a bit. Wendell, Gafford can improve defensively (less fouls) and on the glass; become better finishing in paint. Lauri can certainly improve his shooting and rebounding.

I do expect another year of losing, unless Otto, Coby and Lauri have great seasons. Meanwhile, this draft pick must be a high-ceiling forward IMO.

Not Low IQ guys

They have a lot of potential, and good attributes, but I can't classify Wendell or Gafford as good IQ players. Not with the number of times they fouled out in 20 minute spurts. Part of it was the team defense and structure, but still, neither of these guys set good screens, play a smooth 2-man game, box out well (to maximize their rebounding ability), they don't anticipate passes well, they don't finish easy baskets around-the-rim.

Taj was a high-IQ rookie. Couldn't really make a jumpshot to save his life, but a great example of a young player who quickly out-classed Tyrus, Noah, Johnson and a few other young guys. Always in the right place at the right time. Moved the ball within the offense. Wasn't a real scoring threat but still made himself available for 10 ppg or so. I realize he was a 24yo rookie though.

IMO big men learn the game after about 3-4 years in the NBA. Until then, unless they're a generational talent like Embiid or Davis, they're generally out-played by run-of-the-mill bargain veterans like RoLo and a declined vet. min. but re-motivated Dwight Howard. Or in the Bulls' case, past-prime vets like PJ Brown, Kurt Big Sexy Thomas, or Antonio Davis, who each out-performed their young replacements. I dare say it, but in those few games where Felicio got off the bench, while his effort is appalling at times, when he does focus and play hard, he actually is a more productive center than WCJ and Gafford. His screens actually block defenders, and he does clean up around the rim and anticipate plays off the ball somewhat decently. He just seems to have the most lackadaisical attitude I've ever seen in a $32m player, and we've seen quite a few of those in our lifetime.

I will say, the verdict is still not out on WCJ. His best month of ball was his rookie debut, and that's always a hard sample size. Was he really good, or were expectations/homer-goggles on full-blast, and was he off of everybody's scouting board? Or did injuries de-rail his game? They didn't de-rail Embiid's. I'm sad to say but I haven't seen intelligent basketball out of Wendell. I've seen a lot of frustration. He definitely hasn't made "easy" plays on either end, the hallmark of a high IQ player IMO. He over-thinks around-the-rim instead of just stuffing the **** out of it, passes up open shots, gets lost in rotations, and gets in foul trouble a lot.

I can only blame a coach so much. He's got a lot of basketball to learn. Wendell is the exact opposite of the player I expected. I thought we'd get a big tough, mobile athlete with soft hands and good instincts. We've had a guy with concrete fingers and a step behind every action.

Taj is a hard comparison. He was a 30yr old rookie.

[MrFortune3]

I think the notion of Zach being a ball stopper is highly overrated.
He's the only guy who can consistently create his own offense and get a shot off. Coby hasn't gotten enough run as a PG yet to help ease the load off LaVine in that regard but I think next season we will see Coby with more confidence in his game and he along with Zach making a lot of decisions and getting open for shots.

Back to the subject of the thread. I am hoping we land one of Avdija, Hailburton, Okoro or Hayes.

[MrSparkle]

Not Low IQ guys

They have a lot of potential, and good attributes, but I can't classify Wendell or Gafford as good IQ players. Not with the number of times they fouled out in 20 minute spurts. Part of it was the team defense and structure, but still, neither of these guys set good screens, play a smooth 2-man game, box out well (to maximize their rebounding ability), they don't anticipate passes well, they don't finish easy baskets around-the-rim.

Taj was a high-IQ rookie. Couldn't really make a jumpshot to save his life, but a great example of a young player who quickly out-classed Tyrus, Noah, Johnson and a few other young guys. Always in the right place at the right time. Moved the ball within the offense. Wasn't a real scoring threat but still made himself available for 10 ppg or so. I realize he was a 24yo rookie though.

IMO big men learn the game after about 3-4 years in the NBA. Until then, unless they're a generational talent like Embiid or Davis, they're generally out-played by run-of-the-mill bargain veterans like RoLo and a declined vet. min. but re-motivated Dwight Howard. Or in the Bulls' case, past-prime vets like PJ Brown, Kurt Big Sexy Thomas, or Antonio Davis, who each out-performed their young replacements. I dare say it, but in those few games where Felicio got off the bench, while his effort is appalling at times, when he does focus and play hard, he actually is a more productive center than WCJ and Gafford. His screens actually block defenders, and he does clean up around the rim and anticipate plays off the ball somewhat decently. He just seems to have the most lackadaisical attitude I've ever seen in a $32m player, and we've seen quite a few of those in our lifetime.

I will say, the verdict is still not out on WCJ. His best month of ball was his rookie debut, and that's always a hard sample size. Was he really good, or were expectations/homer-goggles on full-blast, and was he off of everybody's scouting board? Or did injuries de-rail his game? They didn't de-rail Embiid's. I'm sad to say but I haven't seen intelligent basketball out of Wendell. I've seen a lot of frustration. He definitely hasn't made "easy" plays on either end, the hallmark of a high IQ player IMO. He over-thinks around-the-rim instead of just stuffing the **** out of it, passes up open shots, gets lost in rotations, and gets in foul trouble a lot.

I can only blame a coach so much. He's got a lot of basketball to learn. Wendell is the exact opposite of the player I expected. I thought we'd get a big tough, mobile athlete with soft hands and good instincts. We've had a guy with concrete fingers and a step behind every action.

Taj is a hard comparison. He was a 30yr old rookie.

Ha. He was 23 coming in. But I did make that point.

I have no doubt Wendell, Gafford and Lauri can be good in 3-4 years. The question is whether they’re worth the wait and investment, when you see the league has cheap replaceable big men available every summer at this point. The answer imo is a big “NO.” Maybe Lauri if he goes through a post-punch Niko revitalization.

Gafford is by far the most intriguing “investment.” If he can cut down on his fouls, improve his rebounding and rotations, he’d be a bargain center until 2022, at which point he’d become an overpaid Capella.

[MrFortune3]

They have a lot of potential, and good attributes, but I can't classify Wendell or Gafford as good IQ players. Not with the number of times they fouled out in 20 minute spurts. Part of it was the team defense and structure, but still, neither of these guys set good screens, play a smooth 2-man game, box out well (to maximize their rebounding ability), they don't anticipate passes well, they don't finish easy baskets around-the-rim.

Taj was a high-IQ rookie. Couldn't really make a jumpshot to save his life, but a great example of a young player who quickly out-classed Tyrus, Noah, Johnson and a few other young guys. Always in the right place at the right time. Moved the ball within the offense. Wasn't a real scoring threat but still made himself available for 10 ppg or so. I realize he was a 24yo rookie though.

IMO big men learn the game after about 3-4 years in the NBA. Until then, unless they're a generational talent like Embiid or Davis, they're generally out-played by run-of-the-mill bargain veterans like RoLo and a declined vet. min. but re-motivated Dwight Howard. Or in the Bulls' case, past-prime vets like PJ Brown, Kurt Big Sexy Thomas, or Antonio Davis, who each out-performed their young replacements. I dare say it, but in those few games where Felicio got off the bench, while his effort is appalling at times, when he does focus and play hard, he actually is a more productive center than WCJ and Gafford. His screens actually block defenders, and he does clean up around the rim and anticipate plays off the ball somewhat decently. He just seems to have the most lackadaisical attitude I've ever seen in a $32m player, and we've seen quite a few of those in our lifetime.

I will say, the verdict is still not out on WCJ. His best month of ball was his rookie debut, and that's always a hard sample size. Was he really good, or were expectations/homer-goggles on full-blast, and was he off of everybody's scouting board? Or did injuries de-rail his game? They didn't de-rail Embiid's. I'm sad to say but I haven't seen intelligent basketball out of Wendell. I've seen a lot of frustration. He definitely hasn't made "easy" plays on either end, the hallmark of a high IQ player IMO. He over-thinks around-the-rim instead of just stuffing the **** out of it, passes up open shots, gets lost in rotations, and gets in foul trouble a lot.

I can only blame a coach so much. He's got a lot of basketball to learn. Wendell is the exact opposite of the player I expected. I thought we'd get a big tough, mobile athlete with soft hands and good instincts. We've had a guy with concrete fingers and a step behind every action.

Taj is a hard comparison. He was a 30yr old rookie.

Ha. He was 23 coming in. But I did make that point.

I have no doubt Wendell, Gafford and Lauri can be good in 3-4 years. The question is whether they’re worth the wait and investment, when you see the league has cheap replaceable big men available every summer at this point. The answer imo is a big “NO.” Maybe Lauri if he goes through a post-punch Niko revitalization.

Gafford is by far the most intriguing “investment.” If he can cut down on his fouls, improve his rebounding and rotations, he’d be a bargain center until 2022, at which point he’d become an overpaid Capella.

Too late! You will now never be able to convince me that Taj was not in fact a 30 year old rookie.

[CoreyVillains]

Just dropped my Haliburton video on my YouTube that you can watch below! These videos might slow down a bit as I’m working on some other cool draft stuff that I’m not allowed to talk about yet, but I’m gonna try to keep them coming when I can!

Watch on YouTube

Hey man, thanks for the video, really appreciated it.
I think he's my favorite PG among the top ones (the other being Hayes and Ball, in order of preference).

Thanks for watching! I don’t love him for our team but he’s gonna be a good player for sure!