Officlal Prospect thread

NewWolvesOrder · Post #181 » by **NewWolvesOrder** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:13 am

Anybody heard anything about the guy enjoying college ball and not in a hurry going pro, I heard rumors that he may stay for his senior year, apparently to polish his PG skills. that would be disappointing

Krapinsky · Post #182 » by **Krapinsky** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:31 am

james harden wrote:Anybody heard anything about the guy enjoying college ball and not in a hurry going pro, I heard rumors that he may stay for his senior year, apparently to polish his PG skills. that would be disappointing

nah, haven't heard anything about that guy.

NewWolvesOrder · Post #183 » by **NewWolvesOrder** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:23 am

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:
james harden wrote:Anybody heard anything about the guy enjoying college ball and not in a hurry going pro, I heard rumors that he may stay for his senior year, apparently to polish his PG skills. that would be disappointing

nah, haven't heard anything about that guy.

Pardon, I meant Evan Turner.

PeeDee · Post #184 » by **PeeDee** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:12 pm

That's why he came back this year. But I don't see it happening again. He'll be slotted high in the lottery and his team will likely do some things in the tourney this year. I bet he'll feel he accomplished what he could in college and that's it's time for the next step. Plus there's always the idea of suffering an injury and hurting your stock that players think about all the time.

cpfsf · Post #185 » by **cpfsf** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:11 am

I did not see this happening. Draft Express has Lance Stephenson at #49 in their mock draft and NBADraft.net has him listed at #40. I haven't seen a game of his yet (other than a few youtube clips), but the more I read about this guy, the more I think he's a terrible teammate on and off the court.

TheProdigy · Post #186 » by **TheProdigy** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:01 pm

Hmmm if the draft were today we would have Charlotte's pick at #13 and Utah's pick at #19. It's still early, but who knows maybe we'll have 3 picks in the first round.

If we have 3 picks in the first round, does that mean that we won't have enough money leftover to lure a big time free agent in the offseason?

Post #187 » by **Worm Guts** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:04 pm

Charlotte's pick would be #16 right now, not #13.

Esohny · Post #188 » by **Esohny** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:29 pm

At the moment, we would get all three 1st rounders, Charlotte is at 16, and Utah is 18 or 19.

Hopefully Utah treads water where they are for a while. We discussed the Charlotte pick, I expect that we'll get it between 13-18, but they could either make the playoffs or fall off a cliff with Captain Jack.

Vindicater · Post #189 » by **Vindicater** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:23 pm

So who do I see us drafting and where right about now?

Minnesota Pick - Derrick Favours

You take the best player available and Favours is that. Turner would be nice here too but I think Favours is just a can't miss prospect. He either allows us to trade Love for wing help or we can trade down in the draft to get Turner+ somthing else on the day for Favours.

Charlotte pick- Larry Sanders

I know, I know, another power forward but you know what? By trading one of Love//Favours we will then need a backup power forward and sanders projects to be a solid gamechangers off the bench with his athletic ability. The skys the limit with this kid.

Utah Pick - Xaiver Henry

And here is where we add to our guard corps with Henry.

New roster (without any trading)

PG- Flynn/Sessions
SG-Ellington/Henry
SF- Gomes/Brewer
PF- Favours/Love/Sanders
C- Jefferson/Hollins

Rights to: Rubio, Pekovic

princeofpalace · Post #190 » by **princeofpalace** » Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:44 pm

^
In that scenario, I'd probably try to trade Love for an upgrade at SG or SF.

slinky · Post #191 » by **slinky** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 1:26 pm

Vindicater wrote:Minnesota Pick - Derrick Favours

You take the best player available and Favours is that. Turner would be nice here too but I think Favours is just a can't miss prospect. He either allows us to trade Love for wing help or we can trade down in the draft to get Turner+ somthing else on the day for Favours.

Charlotte pick- Larry Sanders

I know, I know, another power forward but you know what? By trading one of Love//Favours we will then need a backup power forward and sanders projects to be a solid gamechangers off the bench with his athletic ability. The skys the limit with this kid.

Rather than trading Love for wing help, and drafting Sanders for backup PF...why dont we just keep Love, and use Love/Favors as our PF combination. And then use the CHA pick to get a wing?

Obviously it all depends on what you could get with KLove. I am not a huge fan of trading Love or Al Jeff. I have no problems rocking a Al/Klove/Favors rotation for a couple of years. But if Love could get us Turner, I think I would jump all over that. What up about Love+UTAH pick for NJ's #1 (1st overall).

I have also been interested to find out how far we could move up in the lottery by combining the CHA and UTAH 1sts. Not saying I would want to, I am big proponent of having a lot of picks, but if someone falls it might be an interesting idea.

Post #192 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 2:48 pm

Vindicater wrote:So who do I see us drafting and where right about now?

Minnesota Pick - Derrick Favours

You take the best player available and Favours is that. Turner would be nice here too but I think Favours is just a can't miss prospect. He either allows us to trade Love for wing help or we can trade down in the draft to get Turner+ somthing else on the day for Favours.

I think there are currently 3 studs in this draft. Wall, Turner, Favours. I think Turner will be a star.

Post #193 » by **Worm Guts** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 2:50 pm

It would be awesome if Wesley Johnson worked his way into a legitimate top 5 pick. The more top flight wings in this draft, the better.

Post #194 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 3:15 pm

If no trades

Ours--Evan Turner No doubt and all day

13th- I hope John Henson comes out and we can get him here. If not I would work out Monroe, Alabi, and Sanders. Personally I would take Monroe right now. I think he has an incredible BBIQ and would be a quality big man. he is a 4 but can play some small ball 5. Alabi is a nice project, but I think Monroe would be a top-10 easily last year and this is where we gain advantage of the deep draft. (I would highly consider Ebanks if he fell)

Utah Pick--I would do BPA here. Try and get a developmental gem. I think due to the depth of this draft someone might slip as teams fall in love with prospects. (Like Holiday slipped last year.) Using DX strictly as a mock I would use the 19th pick for. (Malcolm Lee could be a gem, Singler, Patterson, Lawal, Cousins, ) Take a shot at a prospect that could be a playmaker.

Early in the second I take Dexter Pittman.

Personally, I hope we make some trades and get out of this draft with Turner and Aldrich, 2 of Love/Pekovic/Jefferson, 2 of Sessions, Flynn, Rubio, and Brewer. I can do something with that line-up.

Krapinsky · Post #195 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 6:07 pm

Worm Guts wrote:It would be awesome if Wesley Johnson worked his way into a legitimate top 5 pick. The more top flight wings in this draft, the better.

He's already number 4 in my book.

Post #196 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 6:55 pm

Seems like he has the tools, but how is his ballhandling? How is his attitude with all the moving?

hotshotschamp · Post #197 » by **hotshotschamp** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 6:56 pm

I got wesley johnson at #4 also behind the big 3.

He's the goods, he can flat out shoot the ball too, from mid-range and long-range. Also he's very active on the D, he gets steals and blocks. His vert was measured at over 40 inches.

The kid is a ball player, and I think he and turner, given their age/maturity level are ready to step right in and contribute. When he fills out a little more, dare i say another Danny granger type.

Krapinsky · Post #198 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 7:03 pm

Turner as a 2 and Johnson as a 3 would really be a sick combination in a half court offense. I haven't heard any quarrels about his attitude since his move. Jim Boeheim seems to think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Instead of using our cap space and signing a player like Gay for 5 years, I would be more inclined to trade one or two years of that cap space for another pick for a shot at Turner/Johnson combo. This is where Shrink comes in. What lottery bound teams will be looking to cut salary at the expense of moving a top 10 pick, like Boston and Phoenix of past seasons. Phili? The Wiz?

hotshotschamp · Post #199 » by **hotshotschamp** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 7:29 pm

if we get cats/utah picks id look at packaging up into the top 10.

Also a team like in the top 5 might be willing to move a pick for say a Rubio if they decided to go that route, but that is more likely to happen next year, so that team won't have to wait a year.

If Kahn wanted to get 2 top 5 picks...I'm pretty sure he could do it though, it's def possible. We do need to start winning though soon.

That 2012 pick we give up better not be a top 5 pick, that would be embarassing as hell, to give up for Jaric.

Esohny · Post #200 » by **Esohny** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 7:30 pm

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:Turner as a 2 and Johnson as a 3 would really be a sick combination in a half court offense. I haven't heard any quarrels about his attitude since his move. Jim Boeheim seems to think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Instead of using our cap space and signing a player like Gay for 5 years, I would be more inclined to trade one or two years of that cap space for another pick for a shot at Turner/Johnson combo. This is where Shrink comes in. What lottery bound teams will be looking to cut salary at the expense of moving a top 10 pick, like Boston and Phoenix of past seasons. Phili? The Wiz?

I was actually thinking about that. I was trying to figure out how to swing a deal with the Jazz to get that unprotected Knicks pick. What if we took on AK-47? That's major savings for them.