Sarr, #18 for #2 (and Barnes)

[Saints14]

Yeah I think this would have to be Sarr and 6 for 2, which I don't think the Wizards should do

[ReggiesKnicks]

The Wizards should get off the train at that point. If Harper doesn't work out, they risk setting their rebuild back multiple years. I think people are being way too quick to write off Sarr here. He was a rookie big man on the worst team in the NBA. The Wizards were not particularly concerned with playing winning basketball. He looked better as the season progressed. That first summer after your first season is really important to some prospects.

If Sarr OR #6 doesn't work out they are in the same spot

I'm not writing off Sarr. I'm assigning him a lot of value, moving from #6 to #2 in a perceived two-man draft.

If Sarr OR the player they draft at No. 6 don't work out, they still have the other one. If they trade both for Harper and Harper doesn't work, they have nothing.

But neither Sarr or #6 are likely to be good enough where they can be major franchise building blocks, which means Washington is still trying to find that piece, just as they would be when trading #6 and Sarr for #2 and then #2 not working out.

I'd much prefer to take a swing on Harper than bank on either Sarr or #6 being as good as Harper.

For example, these are odds I have at them being major franchise building blocks which is how I am thinking about this.

Harper: 30% chance of stardom
Sarr: 10% chance of stardom
#6 Pick: 10% chance of stardom

Now you might be thinking about it like this, in which case you value Sarr + #6 over #2.

Harper: 25% chance of stardom
Sarr: 20% chance of stardom
#6 pick: 10% chance of stardom

[ReggiesKnicks]

Yeah I think this would have to be Sarr and 6 for 2, which I don't think the Wizards should do

I do, but I am higher bullish on Harper and lower on whoever is available at #6.

[gswhoops]

If Sarr OR the player they draft at No. 6 don't work out, they still have the other one. If they trade both for Harper and Harper doesn't work, they have nothing.

Obviously if they're 100% sold on Harper, they may do it anyway. I'm not 100% sold on Harper.

I mean this is kind of silly analysis. Should Dallas trade #1 to Washington for #6 and #18 because then they have two chances to draft a guy who doesn't bust instead of one?

I don't think Sarr would go 18 in this draft and the consensus seems to be that Flagg is a much, much better prospect than Harper.

I mean if you think Sarr + 6 is more valuable than 2, that's fine; but the idea that they should do it because 2 chances is more than 1 just strikes me as a weird way to get there.

[jbk1234]

If Sarr OR #6 doesn't work out they are in the same spot

I'm not writing off Sarr. I'm assigning him a lot of value, moving from #6 to #2 in a perceived two-man draft.

If Sarr OR the player they draft at No. 6 don't work out, they still have the other one. If they trade both for Harper and Harper doesn't work, they have nothing.

But neither Sarr or #6 are likely to be good enough where they can be major franchise building blocks, which means Washington is still trying to find that piece, just as they would be when trading #6 and Sarr for #2 and then #2 not working out.

I'd much prefer to take a swing on Harper than bank on either Sarr or #6 being as good as Harper.

For example, these are odds I have at them being major franchise building blocks which is how I am thinking about this.

Harper: 30% chance of stardom
Sarr: 10% chance of stardom
#6 Pick: 10% chance of stardom

Now you might be thinking about it like this, in which case you value Sarr + #6 over #2.

Harper: 25% chance of stardom
Sarr: 20% chance of stardom
#6 pick: 10% chance of stardom

While 30% is better than 10%, that leaves a 70% chance that Harper won't be that guy making it the most likely outcome. Obviously, you have to trust your scouting department and evaluation process. You also have to appreciate that after you get past the Flagg level prospects, this is as much an art as a science and players have a say in how it goes after they're drafted. When I look around the NBA, very few of the best players under 30 were drafted in the top 2.

[williambh3]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

[BigGargamel]

Yeah I think this would have to be Sarr and 6 for 2, which I don't think the Wizards should do

Wizards would do this in a second. I'd much rather have Harper than Sarr/Tre Johnson. Harper has star potential.

[nate33]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I think it's fair to argue that Sarr would go in the 5-7 range in a normal draft and would probably go #6 or so in this draft. But I don't really see why Harper is some kind of generational talent who is better than the #1 prospect in 4 of the last 5 drafts. He would have gone #1 last season to be sure, but in most seasons, I think he is a #2 or #3 pick.

[ReggiesKnicks]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I think it's fair to argue that Sarr would go in the 5-7 range in a normal draft and would probably go #6 or so in this draft. But I don't really see why Harper is some kind of generational talent who is better than the #1 prospect in 4 of the last 5 drafts. He would have gone #1 last season to be sure, but in most seasons, I think he is a #2 or #3 pick.

That's just wrong. When I compare him to previous prospects, he is similar to Cade, better than Paolo/Chet/Green/ANT/LaMelo/Miller.

I think Scoot and Ja are a toss-up along with Cade when compared to Harper.

[williambh3]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I think it's fair to argue that Sarr would go in the 5-7 range in a normal draft and would probably go #6 or so in this draft. But I don't really see why Harper is some kind of generational talent who is better than the #1 prospect in 4 of the last 5 drafts. He would have gone #1 last season to be sure, but in most seasons, I think he is a #2 or #3 pick.

Better than 4 of the past 5 years is definitely not generational

[pipfan]

What about 18/Bilal/#6 for #2
Wash builds around Harper/Sarr

SA adds Malauch/Bilal and get depth with #14 and 18 (or deal one for a future pick?-#14/18 to Chi for #12/Port pick?)

[Blame Rasho]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I think it's fair to argue that Sarr would go in the 5-7 range in a normal draft and would probably go #6 or so in this draft. But I don't really see why Harper is some kind of generational talent who is better than the #1 prospect in 4 of the last 5 drafts. He would have gone #1 last season to be sure, but in most seasons, I think he is a #2 or #3 pick.

In full disclosure, I don’t know why people are rating Harper that high. He could be a DeAngelo Russell, Lonzo Ball level player rather than Ja Morant. People underestimate how often a high pick busts.

[jbk1234]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I would love to hear the case for taking Harper over Ant, Cade, and Paolo.

[jazzfan1971]

5 and Kessler for 2?

[williambh3]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I would love to hear the case for taking Harper over Ant, Cade, and Paolo.

Simple answer is they all looked like their game would translate pretty well, but Harper scored the most points per minute of the group, on the highest TS% with the highest assist rate and the lowest turnover rate.

Ant’s georgia team had a lot more talent and was just as bad as rutgers (Camara, some returning talent, and like four other top 100 guys). He was horribly inefficient and looked like he had a pretty high probability of just being an empty calories volume scorer.

Cade had athleticism questions that showed up in an awful shooting percentage on 2s. He also had an enormous turnover rate and assist to turnover below 1.

Paolo didn’t really have a standout skill. He was on a super talented team, but still couldn’t score all that efficiently.

With Harper the questions are around his team losing and his shooting numbers not being great (they weren’t bad either).

[penbeast0]

What about 18/Bilal/#6 for #2
Wash builds around Harper/Sarr

SA adds Malauch/Bilal and get depth with #14 and 18 (or deal one for a future pick?-#14/18 to Chi for #12/Port pick?)

I'd rather do that than Sarr. I just think Sarr showed healthy Porzingis (who was a very good player when healthy) potential. Last year established that he could play in the NBA and wasn't a bust like some young Euros have been (Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Darko Miličić, Jan Vesely, etc.).

[One_and_Done]

I see Harper as a typical #1 pick. Personally I think he probably gets drafted over Ant the prospect, Cade, Paolo, Risacher. So that's 4 of the past 5 years.

Sarr is more of a #6-10 guy in a typical draft for me, not really sure what the upside is. Poor man's Porzingis? His rookie year didn't help, not many bigs who have had rookie years like that have gone on to become good players...

I also think this draft really falls off after #5. Honestly, not sure the Spurs do Castle for Sarr + #6, much less Harper.

I would love to hear the case for taking Harper over Ant, Cade, and Paolo.

I guess the case would be based on what actually happened, not revisionism.

The 20 draft was seen as a '3 way tie' for 1st until close to the draft. Many mocks had Wiseman or Melo going 1st. Ant has surpassed expectations, but the hype around him was less than Harper.

Paolo was thought to be going #3 until the 11th hour. That's partly because Orlando was very cloak and dagger, but if Paolo was really that highly regarded then there never would have been doubt. Jabari Smith was expected to go #1 until right before the draft.

Cade was the mostly highly regarded of the 3, and yet even he was not seen as much better than Jalen or Mobley. People were disappointed Cade measured 2 inches shorter than listed, and were concerned about his perceived lack of athleticism.

Harper would likely have gone #1 over all 3 based on his hype, and in other years too, e g. 24, 17, 16, 14, 13, etc.

The offers for him in this thread are borderline insulting.