2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[JimmyJammer]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

[CoreyVillains]

I really like Talen Horton-Tucker.

- Only turns 19 in November - absolute baby.
- Super versatile defender - SG size but ridiculously long and strong, can guard multiple spots, big time STL/BLK guy.
- Legitimate initiator upside - has handle, quickness and vision as a passer.
- Shot looks projectable enough, don't mind the mechanics despite the percentages, looks comfortable making moves off the dribble
- Elite scorer at the rim, great touch and creativity, uses his body to get there (70% at the rim with only 20% assisted)
- Bit pudgey, he uses his size, but considerable athletic upside if he gets in better shape

The guy gets the game, has some advanced skill flashes, and impacts the game in so many areas. Probably a bit of a reach at 7, but if we're trading back at all I'd be all over him. Think he's a late lottery (10-14) guy.

I kinda feel the opposite. I don't see how a team lets him show off any of his skills that he showed in college in a meaningful way. No team in position to draft him is going to trust him to initiate much of anything and his off ball game has a lot of question marks. He had a really low assist % for someone you'd want to be an initiator, he isnt a good shooter and I don't see him ever becoming better than a spot up corner three guy. I just don't see how a team ever lets him play with the freedoms he had in college and I don't think he has an easy adjustment. Despite his awesome measurements I hate his body type. But he's really young and really long so he has that going for him.

[GimmeDat]

I really like Talen Horton-Tucker.

- Only turns 19 in November - absolute baby.
- Super versatile defender - SG size but ridiculously long and strong, can guard multiple spots, big time STL/BLK guy.
- Legitimate initiator upside - has handle, quickness and vision as a passer.
- Shot looks projectable enough, don't mind the mechanics despite the percentages, looks comfortable making moves off the dribble
- Elite scorer at the rim, great touch and creativity, uses his body to get there (70% at the rim with only 20% assisted)
- Bit pudgey, he uses his size, but considerable athletic upside if he gets in better shape

The guy gets the game, has some advanced skill flashes, and impacts the game in so many areas. Probably a bit of a reach at 7, but if we're trading back at all I'd be all over him. Think he's a late lottery (10-14) guy.

I kinda feel the opposite. I don't see how a team lets him show off any of his skills that he showed in college in a meaningful way. No team in position to draft him is going to trust him to initiate much of anything and his off ball game has a lot of question marks. He had a really low assist % for someone you'd want to be an initiator, he isnt a good shooter and I don't see him ever becoming better than a spot up corner three guy. I just don't see how a team ever lets him play with the freedoms he had in college and I don't think he has an easy adjustment. Despite his awesome measurements I hate his body type. But he's really young and really long so he has that going for him.

He's definitely a project, I concede that, and maybe a project is too less of a proven commodity to justify anywhere close to where we're picking. But I do like his long term potential. He doesn't have the baseline 'roleplayer' skill-set to come in and start in a more limited role to then expand, he has some unique qualities but needs to refine the basics. So he may not be a contributor for a while.

[DuckIII]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

I remember you writing a similar post about how getting the #2 pick is better than the #1 pick because you make the other team make the decision. Your thinking makes absolutely no sense at all.

You always want the higher pick because it increases the likelihood that the player higher on your board is available to be selected. Its never "enviable" to have less options on draft day unless you are terrified you are going to make a terrible pick and then, if you do, you can say "your real guys" weren't available. And that just PR cowardice, not a legitimate team building benefit.

You can put lipstick on a pig all you want, but falling to the 7th pick (falling any degree, to any pick) is always less optimal than not falling. And rising is better than both.

Your rationale is like saying finding $100 is better than winning $5 million, because just think of all the bad expenditures you might make if you had $5 million!!!!

I appreciate your persistent optimism. This board needs that from time to time. But you are way off on this.

[coldfish]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

I remember you writing a similar post about how getting the #2 pick is better than the #1 pick because you make the other team make the decision. Your thinking makes absolutely no sense at all.

You always want the higher pick because it increases the likelihood that the player higher on your board is available to be selected. Its never "enviable" to have less options on draft day unless you are terrified you are going to make a terrible pick and then, if you do, you can say "your real guys" weren't available. And that just PR cowardice, not a legitimate team building benefit.

You can put lipstick on a pig all you want, but falling to the 7th pick (falling any degree, to any pick) is always less optimal than not falling. And rising is better than both.

Your rationale is like saying finding $100 is better than winning $5 million, because just think of all the bad expenditures you might make if you had $5 million!!!!

I appreciate your persistent optimism. This board needs that from time to time. But you are way off on this.

You are way off on this Duck.

Let's think about women. Would you really want to date the hottest women on the planet? Think about all of the guys hitting on them. The maintenance. The stress. I couldn't imagine how much it would suck to date a supermodel, particularly if she was intelligent, fun to be around and great in bed. The pressure to keep her happy would be enormous. What happens if you pick the wrong supermodel and you find out that after months of dating, she can't go left?

I know that this is difficult of me to take on this burden but I love all of you. If anyone here is currently dating a supermodel, send her my way. I'll take that burden off your chests. Y'all can just take the ones I don't want. It will be better for you. Trust me.

[TheSuzerain]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

What a loser mindset.

[JimmyJammer]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

What a loser mindset.

It's not really a loser mentality if regardless of whom we pick there is no winning or losing. We are at a stalemate, where no one has the edge. There is definitely no indication that pick 4 will outshine pick 7 moving forward. Some teams obviously have their needs which they'll be able to address, but in two years they might regret their strategy to draft for needs instead best possible player available. If you ask me today who is the best among this group of 5, I'll be hard-pressed to give you an answer, but I certainly know what we need. For need, we are looking at White or Garland. But, how will you justify that two years down the road when Hunter becomes a perennial all star while our draftee is saddling in mediocrity. Honestly, this is probably the first year I have felt like this, where it is all meh and whatever. Honestly, I have a hunch Reddish might surprise people because his sub-par season at Duke might serve as a catalyst to light some fire under his ass.

[poolshark52]

So, if you look around at a lot of sites, it seems as though Atlanta really really wants Culver. If he is still on the board, maybe they would bite on #7 and #38 for #8 and #10? (or Dunn and #7 if they prefer)

[jStuNNa]

What's the word on Ty Jerome? Starting to wonder if there's a better PG prospect much later in the draft if Garland is gone before the 7th pick.

[JimmyJammer]

Come to think of it, the Bulls organization is
in an enviable position. Since there is no real consensus as far as who the best player is in the range of 4-7, all they have to do is wait it out and let teams 4-6 do the dirty work for them. Some teams will eventually blow it and some may do well, but at this point nothing is guaranteed. Everyone knows the names of the candidates in the range of 4-7, but not everyone knows who is the best or the worst among them. Could it be Hunter? Culver? Garland? White? Reddish? In an uncertain scenario like this, we can certainly expect teams to draft mainly based on needs instead of best player available. It will surely be an interesting time leading to the upcoming draft. I can't wait!

I remember you writing a similar post about how getting the #2 pick is better than the #1 pick because you make the other team make the decision. Your thinking makes absolutely no sense at all.

You always want the higher pick because it increases the likelihood that the player higher on your board is available to be selected. Its never "enviable" to have less options on draft day unless you are terrified you are going to make a terrible pick and then, if you do, you can say "your real guys" weren't available. And that just PR cowardice, not a legitimate team building benefit.

You can put lipstick on a pig all you want, but falling to the 7th pick (falling any degree, to any pick) is always less optimal than not falling. And rising is better than both.

Your rationale is like saying finding $100 is better than winning $5 million, because just think of all the bad expenditures you might make if you had $5 million!!!!

I appreciate your persistent optimism. This board needs that from time to time. But you are way off on this.

You are way off on this Duck.

Let's think about women. Would you really want to date the hottest women on the planet? Think about all of the guys hitting on them. The maintenance. The stress. I couldn't imagine how much it would suck to date a supermodel, particularly if she was intelligent, fun to be around and great in bed. The pressure to keep her happy would be enormous. What happens if you pick the wrong supermodel and you find out that after months of dating, she can't go left?

I know that this is difficult of me to take on this burden but I love all of you. If anyone here is currently dating a supermodel, send her my way. I'll take that burden off your chests. Y'all can just take the ones I don't want. It will be better for you. Trust me.

Coldfish, you can keep the hottest supermodel, and let me have that lady who will be loyal, humble, attentive to me and who will help me grow my fortune, instead of ruining it. Let me have the one who will minimize my risk of having a heart attack.

[cjbulls]

I remember you writing a similar post about how getting the #2 pick is better than the #1 pick because you make the other team make the decision. Your thinking makes absolutely no sense at all.

You always want the higher pick because it increases the likelihood that the player higher on your board is available to be selected. Its never "enviable" to have less options on draft day unless you are terrified you are going to make a terrible pick and then, if you do, you can say "your real guys" weren't available. And that just PR cowardice, not a legitimate team building benefit.

You can put lipstick on a pig all you want, but falling to the 7th pick (falling any degree, to any pick) is always less optimal than not falling. And rising is better than both.

Your rationale is like saying finding $100 is better than winning $5 million, because just think of all the bad expenditures you might make if you had $5 million!!!!

I appreciate your persistent optimism. This board needs that from time to time. But you are way off on this.

You are way off on this Duck.

Let's think about women. Would you really want to date the hottest women on the planet? Think about all of the guys hitting on them. The maintenance. The stress. I couldn't imagine how much it would suck to date a supermodel, particularly if she was intelligent, fun to be around and great in bed. The pressure to keep her happy would be enormous. What happens if you pick the wrong supermodel and you find out that after months of dating, she can't go left?

I know that this is difficult of me to take on this burden but I love all of you. If anyone here is currently dating a supermodel, send her my way. I'll take that burden off your chests. Y'all can just take the ones I don't want. It will be better for you. Trust me.

Coldfish, you can keep the hottest supermodel, and let me have that lady who will be loyal, humble, attentive to me and who will help me grow my fortune, instead of ruining it. Let me have the one who will minimize my risk of having a heart attack.

So is this your way of saying you want DeAndre Hunter?

[CoreyVillains]

Watch on YouTube

First Coby White video. Offense vs NC State. White’s defensive video will probably be up tomorrow.

[tunit213]

I do think Reddish being the 3rd option and having to take mostly catch and shoot 3s hurt his game. I saw a stat where his catch and shoot 3s were 30 percent. But his dribble and shoot 3s were closer to 40 percent. Anyone have this info would be appreciated. I can’t find it anymore. Thanks.

[kodo]

I do think Reddish being the 3rd option and having to take mostly catch and shoot 3s hurt his game. I saw a stat where his catch and shoot 3s were 30 percent. But his dribble and shoot 3s were closer to 40 percent. Anyone have this info would be appreciated. I can’t find it anymore. Thanks.

I do think playing with Zion/RJ hurt his #s quite a bit. But at EYBL he still shot 28% from deep, so it's not like he was a dead eye shooter before he came to Duke.

Most reports have the reason for Cam's disappointment is he's not a very high effort guy, which is a red flag. He's probably the anti-Jimmy Butler.

But Andre Drummond had the exact same criticisms and dropped to #9 (?), and he found his motivation and work effort a few years later in the NBA and became a draft steal. Cousins same story. So taking the "talented but low motor guy" has worked out a few times, even if doesn't most of the time like Wiggins or Beasley.

[Flopper]

I'm talking myself into thinking Reddish has to be in consideration for us at 7. This is a good video breaking him down. It full of optimism, but still a solid review of what Reddish could turn into.

Watch on YouTube

I would be happy with them taking a shot on Reddish at 7. The low statistical productivity is definitely a red flag, but the lack of roster synergy on that Duke squad and the small college season sample size can't be ruled out as contributing factors. His physical tools, ability to handle with his left or right, and projected defensive and shooting capabilities are too tantalizing to pass up, especially when all the other prospects after the projected top 3 are lackluster.

[Leslie Forman]

But Andre Drummond had the exact same criticisms and dropped to #9 (?), and he found his motivation and work effort a few years later in the NBA and became a draft steal. Cousins same story. So taking the "talented but low motor guy" has worked out a few times, even if doesn't most of the time like Wiggins or Beasley.

I honestly think the Pistons would have been better off drafting a complete bust than ending up with Drummond. Middling talents like that who don't check the "high IQ" "high motor" "steady progression" boxes are a waste IMO.

[JohnnyTapwater]

Cam is the home run we need to swing for.

boom or bust 101

[bad knees]

If both Garland and White are off the board at 7, I would call up Ainge and see if he would trade 14, 20 and 22 for 7 and 38. Then take PJ Washington and two of Herro/Cam Johnson/Keldon Johnson/Windler. I think Washington is going to be really good - he does everything you want a PF to do in the modern NBA. And the others add shooting.

[AKfanatic]

I remember you writing a similar post about how getting the #2 pick is better than the #1 pick because you make the other team make the decision. Your thinking makes absolutely no sense at all.

You always want the higher pick because it increases the likelihood that the player higher on your board is available to be selected. Its never "enviable" to have less options on draft day unless you are terrified you are going to make a terrible pick and then, if you do, you can say "your real guys" weren't available. And that just PR cowardice, not a legitimate team building benefit.

You can put lipstick on a pig all you want, but falling to the 7th pick (falling any degree, to any pick) is always less optimal than not falling. And rising is better than both.

Your rationale is like saying finding $100 is better than winning $5 million, because just think of all the bad expenditures you might make if you had $5 million!!!!

I appreciate your persistent optimism. This board needs that from time to time. But you are way off on this.

You are way off on this Duck.

Let's think about women. Would you really want to date the hottest women on the planet? Think about all of the guys hitting on them. The maintenance. The stress. I couldn't imagine how much it would suck to date a supermodel, particularly if she was intelligent, fun to be around and great in bed. The pressure to keep her happy would be enormous. What happens if you pick the wrong supermodel and you find out that after months of dating, she can't go left?

I know that this is difficult of me to take on this burden but I love all of you. If anyone here is currently dating a supermodel, send her my way. I'll take that burden off your chests. Y'all can just take the ones I don't want. It will be better for you. Trust me.

Coldfish, you can keep the hottest supermodel, and let me have that lady who will be loyal, humble, attentive to me and who will help me grow my fortune, instead of ruining it. Let me have the one who will minimize my risk of having a heart attack.

If you pull the hottest woman on the planet, whom is also intelligent, fun to be around and great in bed..... and your concerns are other guys want her, oh my god!!! I have to work to keep her.

Then it says much more about confidence in yourself than being with said woman.

This line of thinking is like saying “well Jordan is pretty high maintenance and really stresses me out”.....”that Sam Bowie guy seems nice”

[R3AL1TY]

What's the word on Ty Jerome? Starting to wonder if there's a better PG prospect much later in the draft if Garland is gone before the 7th pick.

You know, there is very little to dislike about Ty as a PG or even as a SG. He passes well and can shoot from deep. It appears he may be a late 1st pick. If he had great athleticism and leaping abilities, he would be a lotto pick.

I think Nickeil Alexander-Walker would be the best alternative to White and Garland in the lotto if you're drafting solely for need at PG.