2020 Draft Thread

[BballIntellect]

Yesterday Myers was asked about the type of player you are looking for in a draft pick. He was asked if you are looking for an 82 game player, or a 16 game player?

Meaning a guy who they will groom throughout the season and maybe play or not in the Playoffs, or a guy who will be part of a playoff rotation. Myers clearly wants a guy who will be a solid contributor in the Playoffs.

To me, Wiseman, if picked by us, will assuredly be needed and used in the Playoffs. We won't be able to handle some of the elite teams without a legit lengthy 7 footer. Wiseman has the agiligty, athleticism, length, and growing skill set, to battle some of the teams with legit big men. Especially in our own division.

He has been posting workout pics on his IG and physically looks stronger than ever.

If we draft Wiseman I wonder how Kerr will play him. 20-25mpg? 30mpg? Wiseman has A LOT to learn about basketball still as he really only has High school & a month of college under his belt. Just hope Kerr would use him in the 82 games to master the basic skills we need: double digit rebounder, block/alter shots, run the floor, and any scoring from C position is huge.

If we draft Wiseman, my guess is he'll play 18/20 mins a game. Same as Chriss. Then you'll have the remaining 8/12 mins a game going to Draymond at center. Notice I didn't include Looney because his health is such an uncertainty at this point that you can't make plans couting on him.

I think Draymond will play a lot more at center going forward for multiple reasons. His offense has gotten so bad that it's tough to get away with him playing power forward along with a five who can't stretch. Also if you want to play Draymond and Paschall together, it better be at the 4 and the 5 because they aren't a great fit together and teams are going to sell themselves on defense towards Steph and Klay if Draymond and Paschall play with a center.

It would be doing a disservice to Steph and Klay. Especially now that they're both in their 30's so you can't anticipate them bailing the offense out and getting the same separation on their jumpshots that they did in 2016. Particularly Steph.

[KevinMcreynolds]

The decision is pretty straight forward to me if we’re #1. If you draft for need you take Wiseman, if you want BPA you go Edwards. Drafting for need almost always seems to be the wrong move so I’m weary of the Wiseman pick.

[Mylie10]

The decision is pretty straight forward to me if we’re #1. If you draft for need you take Wiseman, if you want BPA you go Edwards. Drafting for need almost always seems to be the wrong move so I’m weary of the Wiseman pick.

To me Wiseman is both BPA and need. We need length. And he's going to be an All Star.

[BballIntellect]

BPA is subjective. There isn't a Zion in this draft.

[TB]

I think i'm starting to show my age because I feel like the center position is really underrated in this draft... I see quality rotation C minutes from:

Wiseman - Whiteside with a potentially better IQ/Awareness. Thats enough for the #1 pick in this draft.
Okongwu - some combo of last years Chriss, peak Taj, and Bam
Pokusevski - could be Zarko in a SUV, could be a skinny Jokic. Roll the dice.
Stewart - some elements of a Harrell or old David West in regards to being an impact rotation big
Toppin - the good and bad of kenyon or amare. probably my ROY pick, even if others pass him long-term
Tillman - This guy will be like a big man Jared Dudley, hanging around the nba for a decade helping teams
Azubuike - a better Damian Jones. There are NBA minutes for that.

[KevinMcreynolds]

The decision is pretty straight forward to me if we’re #1. If you draft for need you take Wiseman, if you want BPA you go Edwards. Drafting for need almost always seems to be the wrong move so I’m weary of the Wiseman pick.

To me Wiseman is both BPA and need. We need length. And he's going to be an All Star.

I'd be happy with either one. To me, those two are the only ones on the 1st tier. Hayes, Okoro, Deni and Hali are all intriguing if we drop or trade down.

[KevinMcreynolds]

btw, this 14% chance to win the #1 pick is HORSE****

[The-Power]

Yesterday Myers was asked about the type of player you are looking for in a draft pick. He was asked if you are looking for an 82 game player, or a 16 game player?

Meaning a guy who they will groom throughout the season and maybe play or not in the Playoffs, or a guy who will be part of a playoff rotation. Myers clearly wants a guy who will be a solid contributor in the Playoffs.

To me, Wiseman, if picked by us, will assuredly be needed and used in the Playoffs. We won't be able to handle some of the elite teams without a legit lengthy 7 footer. Wiseman has the agiligty, athleticism, length, and growing skill set, to battle some of the teams with legit big men. Especially in our own division.

I'm generally a fan of Wiseman but he'd be a 82 games player for us. He'd help us get through the RS with his big body but there's no way you can count on a Rookie Big to deliver in the playoffs on a championship contender. And considering the Warriors' desire to go small a lot in the playoffs, I'd think that the other non-Draymond C's on the roster get most of the minutes left in non-small line-ups.

[clyde21]

BPA is only a thing when we're talking about a player on a tier of his own, but when you have a bunch of players in a similar tier you need to look at fit, schematic fit, personnel fit, etc.

[The Maestro]

They should draft whomever has the most trade value, period. Unfortunately I don’t think they’ll do that and instead settle for a solid rotational player like Haliburton.

[KevinMcreynolds]

BPA is only a thing when we're talking about a player on a tier of his own, but when you have a bunch of players in a similar tier you need to look at fit, schematic fit, personnel fit, etc.

I just think about stuff like not taking MJ because of Drexler and I get paranoid, of course that's the most extreme case, but we've been guilty of it too by taking HB because we needed a small forward. Luckily the players after him weren't good so it didn't burn us. All I'm saying is I want them to take Wiseman because they think he's the better player, not because he's the better fit.

[cdubbz]

btw, this 14% chance to win the #1 pick is HORSE****

I agree, but man when it was at 25% teams would tank so hard for that superstar.

[GQ Hot Dog]

BPA is only a thing when we're talking about a player on a tier of his own, but when you have a bunch of players in a similar tier you need to look at fit, schematic fit, personnel fit, etc.

I just think about stuff like not taking MJ because of Drexler and I get paranoid, of course that's the most extreme case, but we've been guilty of it too by taking HB because we needed a small forward. Luckily the players after him weren't good so it didn't burn us. All I'm saying is I want them to take Wiseman because they think he's the better player, not because he's the better fit.

This strikes me as a strange way to look at that draft. We picked Barnes because he was the best player available in a weak draft, not because of fit. Considering Kerr's scheme, Drummond would have been a worse player as a Warrior than Barnes was. After Barnes, the next player that would have been better on our team than Barnes was Khris Middleton in the 2nd round but we weren't the only team to miss on him. The way I see it, Barnes was the second best player available and that's a forgivable miss in my book.

[KevinMcreynolds]

BPA is only a thing when we're talking about a player on a tier of his own, but when you have a bunch of players in a similar tier you need to look at fit, schematic fit, personnel fit, etc.

I just think about stuff like not taking MJ because of Drexler and I get paranoid, of course that's the most extreme case, but we've been guilty of it too by taking HB because we needed a small forward. Luckily the players after him weren't good so it didn't burn us. All I'm saying is I want them to take Wiseman because they think he's the better player, not because he's the better fit.

This strikes me as a strange way to look at that draft. We picked Barnes because he was the best player available in a weak draft, not because of fit. Considering Kerr's scheme, Drummond would have been a worse player as a Warrior than Barnes was. After Barnes, the next player that would have been better on our team than Barnes was Khris Middleton in the 2nd round but we weren't the only team to miss on him. The way I see it, Barnes was the second best player available and that's a forgivable miss in my book.

I mean that’s why I said it ended up not burning us, but it’s obvious we took him because we needed a SF. I didn’t like Drummond at all, and still think he’s really overrated and not a difference maker, but at the time he would have been the BPA pick because he had so much more upside than HB.

[Scoots1994]

I just think about stuff like not taking MJ because of Drexler and I get paranoid, of course that's the most extreme case, but we've been guilty of it too by taking HB because we needed a small forward. Luckily the players after him weren't good so it didn't burn us. All I'm saying is I want them to take Wiseman because they think he's the better player, not because he's the better fit.

This strikes me as a strange way to look at that draft. We picked Barnes because he was the best player available in a weak draft, not because of fit. Considering Kerr's scheme, Drummond would have been a worse player as a Warrior than Barnes was. After Barnes, the next player that would have been better on our team than Barnes was Khris Middleton in the 2nd round but we weren't the only team to miss on him. The way I see it, Barnes was the second best player available and that's a forgivable miss in my book.

I mean that’s why I said it ended up not burning us, but it’s obvious we took him because we needed a SF. I didn’t like Drummond at all, and still think he’s really overrated and not a difference maker, but at the time he would have been the BPA pick because he had so much more upside than HB.

You didn't like Drummond but you they was the BPA? I don't think I've ever thought "that guy's the best one left, I hope we don't take him"

[The-Power]

I mean that’s why I said it ended up not burning us, but it’s obvious we took him because we needed a SF. I didn’t like Drummond at all, and still think he’s really overrated and not a difference maker, but at the time he would have been the BPA pick because he had so much more upside than HB.

Or perhaps the Warriors didn't think he was the BPA and they were right? The way you present it, it's a no-win-situation for teams. If they draft what turns out to be the clear-cut best player/superstar, they just did what they were supposed to do. If they draft someone and players that were selected after him turn out to be better, the team messed up. If they draft someone who's okay/good but not great and nobody else drafted later is significantly better, they just got lucky. Not really how I would view the draft to be honest.

[KevinMcreynolds]

This strikes me as a strange way to look at that draft. We picked Barnes because he was the best player available in a weak draft, not because of fit. Considering Kerr's scheme, Drummond would have been a worse player as a Warrior than Barnes was. After Barnes, the next player that would have been better on our team than Barnes was Khris Middleton in the 2nd round but we weren't the only team to miss on him. The way I see it, Barnes was the second best player available and that's a forgivable miss in my book.

I mean that’s why I said it ended up not burning us, but it’s obvious we took him because we needed a SF. I didn’t like Drummond at all, and still think he’s really overrated and not a difference maker, but at the time he would have been the BPA pick because he had so much more upside than HB.

You didn't like Drummond but you they was the BPA? I don't think I've ever thought "that guy's the best one left, I hope we don't take him"

I didn't really want HB either and Lacob has suggested they weren't high on him and tried to trade down. And here's a quote by Lacob where he basically says that Drummond's physical upside was tempting but they went with the safer pick.

"I'll just say that he's a very, very impressive athlete. He's not an impressive basketball player today. I think if you'll talk, you'll hear that.

There's a reason he slipped from potentially 2 to 9. All the teams he worked out for. I guess, my estimation, watching him, we saw that. That doesn't mean that those people all made the right decisions. He could wind up being great, right?

How often do you get 7-footers that have his physical abilities? So it's hard to say, nobody really knows for sure. He certainly was tempting. We debated him."

[wco81]

But he made key contributions while he was here.

Of course there were HB haters back then too.

Obviously a couple of NBA teams thought he was worth a good starter level salary.

If the Warriors are able to draft a player who can be played 25-30 minutes over the course of his rookie deal, they can't be too unhappy about that.

Of course better if they get a start out of this draft class but there are questions about the talent levels of the class.

[KevinMcreynolds]

HB is a great dude and a decent role player, but all I'll ever remember him for is going 5-32 in games 5-7 on basically all uncontested shots.

[azwfan]

But he made key contributions while he was here.

Of course there were HB haters back then too.

Obviously a couple of NBA teams thought he was worth a good starter level salary.

If the Warriors are able to draft a player who can be played 25-30 minutes over the course of his rookie deal, they can't be too unhappy about that.

Of course better if they get a start out of this draft class but there are questions about the talent levels of the class.

There's plenty of starters in this draft class. Where this class lacks is star level projections.