How does your realistic, ideal offseason go from here?

[bwgood77]

Sarver sells the team is my ideal scenario.

I'd like to see bender drop to 4 and brown somehow drop to 13.

Pick up a placeholder cheap pf and just roll that team into camp. Be patient and hope knight, Bledsoe, and chandler start out the year well and rehab their trade values and then add another young piece and have another high pick next year. At that point they might have a young core in place and then maybe start taking a win now approach.

I highly doubt they will go this route and fear more impatient moves

That's a Brown I'd like to see, is one with a bit of a chip on his shoulder that he dropped that far. Two boom or bust prospects like that and the potential boom part is intriguing. The one guy that you can point to and hope Brown could follow the path is 15th pick Kawhi Leonard, who shot under 30% from 3 in college (20.5% as a freshman) and had a pretty bad assist/to rate as well, turning it over more than assisting as a freshman and slightly reversed as a soph. And then this year in the nba he led the league in 3 pt % or at least was leading it at one time. http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/kawhi-leonard-1.html

[Kerrsed]

My "Realistic Ideal" Offseason changes weekly (Hell, maybe even daily).

For the time being, here it is:

Trade Bledsoe to Sac for McLemore/#10/future 1st.

Trade Knight to Philly for Noel.

Trade #28 to NY for O'Quinn.

Trade Tucker to MEM for Stephenson



#4 - Jamal Murray
#10 - Skal Labissiere
#13 - ?????????
#34 - Gary Payton II

Murray/Payton
Booker/McLemore/Goodwin
Stephenson/Warren
Labissiere/O'Quinn
Noel/Len/Chandler

Give the youngin's all the minutes they can stand to really develop. If we are a bad team next season, it wont be for naught, as our guys will have real game experience to draw on for the next season, along with what is sure to be a high pick in a loaded draft.

[MrMiyagi]

I just want Denzel Valentine at this point. I don't really care about anything else. Take him at 13 or 4, it doesn't matter, just get him.

[saintEscaton]

I just want Denzel Valentine at this point. I don't really care about anything else. Take him at 13 or 4, it doesn't matter, just get him.

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

[Kerrsed]

I just want Denzel Valentine at this point. I don't really care about anything else. Take him at 13 or 4, it doesn't matter, just get him.

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

I somewhat agree with this. I was discussing my thoughts on players with Vaj via PM and here is my take on Valentine:

Valentine intrigues me....once again as a PG. He played PG this season (His senior season) and showed great court vision and very high BB IQ. His stats are amazing. As a 6'5 PG, he averaged 19 points (48%2PT, 44%3PT), 7.8 Assists, 7.5 Rebounds, and a Steal in 33 MPG. Let those numbers sink in for a second....yeah, pretty damn good. The biggest knocks on him are his athleticism and defense. His high BB IQ and skills help cover his lack of athleticism, but with his size and weight (At PG) it makes him too slow to defend other much smaller and quicker PGs and SG's. In college they nullified this by having him guard the opposing teams SF's, which i cant see him doing in the NBA.

[MrMiyagi]

I just want Denzel Valentine at this point. I don't really care about anything else. Take him at 13 or 4, it doesn't matter, just get him.

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

The dude is a lights out shooter, a very good passer, a good rebounder, a good defender, could probably play 3 positions (2-3 and some 1).... Probably the most complete player in the draft. That's the guy we don't want? Because he's 22? Because he isn't super athletic?

We picked a guy named Archie Goodwin at 29 who was the two things Valentine wasn't hoping he'd become the 7 things Valentine is... And now we're talking Bender and Chriss, who are in the same boat at 4 (make your alterations re: position specific wishlist like shotblocking and post game).... That's sheer lunacy, IMO.

EDIT: I think you can include Murray into this group, who everyone swears he's a point guard, but I don't buy it.

[MrMiyagi]

Denzel Valentine will average 14, 5 and 5 as a rookie with 40% from 3. Book it.

[bwgood77]

If DV is there at 13 I am definitely fine taking him. I agree he is the perfect guy for the 2nd unit on a contender, but he can absolutely play and you don't have to play him at a certain position because he is so versatile. He is high iq...I'm tired of low iq players. I mean we've been talking about Murray at the point, but think about Valentine...him and Booker, both super high iq and can hit over 40% from 3, and Valentine can rebound, is a great passer....I mean no player EVER since they started recording stats put up 19-7-7 in college. EVER.

I don't think he will be a star or anything, but a guy that will be very valuable for a team....like maybe a Boris Diaw type player who can pass, rebound, hit 3's, whatever, and just helps the whole team click better.

Four seems super high taking him so I am not really comfortable with that, but I'm not sure I'm comfortable with anyone else there either if Bender is gone. Bender I'm comfortable with because I think his upside is the highest, and might be the highest in the entire draft. I place the top two well ahead of him because I think they have big upside and far higher floors and will almost certainly be at least legit starters.

[Kerrsed]

I just want Denzel Valentine at this point. I don't really care about anything else. Take him at 13 or 4, it doesn't matter, just get him.

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

The dude is a lights out shooter, a very good passer, a good rebounder, a good defender, could probably play 3 positions (2-3 and some 1).... Probably the most complete player in the draft. That's the guy we don't want? Because he's 22? Because he isn't super athletic?

We picked a guy named Archie Goodwin at 29 who was the two things Valentine wasn't hoping he'd become the 7 things Valentine is... And now we're talking Bender and Chriss, who are in the same boat at 4 (make your alterations re: position specific wishlist like shotblocking and post game).... That's sheer lunacy, IMO.

Not a good defender at all. Also, being un-athletic and 6'5 is a dizaster waiting to happen if you plan on playing him at SF. He is a PG/SG. I think if we did draft him he would serve us best as a PG first and foremost.

This was his breakout season (thank goodness otherwise he would be undrafted). His Freshman season he put up 5 points 4 rebounds, 2.4 assists in 20 minutes. His Sophomore season was the first for him to average 30 minutes, and yet he still only put up 8points/6rebounds/3.8assists. His junior season he improved a little bit more, but took a major jump his senior season once they made him the PG and the ball was in his hands.

[bwgood77]

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

The dude is a lights out shooter, a very good passer, a good rebounder, a good defender, could probably play 3 positions (2-3 and some 1).... Probably the most complete player in the draft. That's the guy we don't want? Because he's 22? Because he isn't super athletic?

We picked a guy named Archie Goodwin at 29 who was the two things Valentine wasn't hoping he'd become the 7 things Valentine is... And now we're talking Bender and Chriss, who are in the same boat at 4 (make your alterations re: position specific wishlist like shotblocking and post game).... That's sheer lunacy, IMO.

Not a good defender at all. Also, being un-athletic and 6'5 is a dizaster waiting to happen if you plan on playing him at SF. He is a PG/SG. I think if we did draft him he would serve us best as a PG first and foremost.

This was his breakout season (thank goodness otherwise he would be undrafted). His Freshman season he put up 5 points 4 rebounds, 2.4 assists in 20 minutes. His Sophomore season was the first for him to average 30 minutes, and yet he still only put up 8points/6rebounds/3.8assists. His junior season he improved a little bit more, but took a major jump his senior season once they made him the PG and the ball was in his hands.

I don't know what he's like as a defender, but I just tried to search for that 3&D prospect chart and he rated higher than most and it surprised me....quite a bit higher than Brown for example....doesn't mean I think he has the potential that Brown or others might defensively, but his rating was higher.....if someone can find that chart, post it. I looked at draft thread 2 a bit to find it but couldn't.

[Kerrsed]

While Valentine doesn't look scared to mix things up on the glass, he's an extremely poor defender that needed to be hidden constantly at the college level in order to not emerge as a liability. While somewhat of a combo guard offensively, he's best suited guarding small forwards who don't have much in the way of ball-handling ability or explosiveness on the other end. His lateral quickness is very poor, he doesn't cover ground well, and his effort really comes and goes, as he often looks fairly lazy closing out on shooters or trying to keep his man in front. Valentine relies heavily on reaching and grabbing his man to try and slow him down, which simply will not work at the NBA level.

[saintEscaton]

The dude is a lights out shooter, a very good passer, a good rebounder, a good defender, could probably play 3 positions (2-3 and some 1).... Probably the most complete player in the draft. That's the guy we don't want? Because he's 22? Because he isn't super athletic?

We picked a guy named Archie Goodwin at 29 who was the two things Valentine wasn't hoping he'd become the 7 things Valentine is... And now we're talking Bender and Chriss, who are in the same boat at 4 (make your alterations re: position specific wishlist like shotblocking and post game).... That's sheer lunacy, IMO.

Not a good defender at all. Also, being un-athletic and 6'5 is a dizaster waiting to happen if you plan on playing him at SF. He is a PG/SG. I think if we did draft him he would serve us best as a PG first and foremost.

This was his breakout season (thank goodness otherwise he would be undrafted). His Freshman season he put up 5 points 4 rebounds, 2.4 assists in 20 minutes. His Sophomore season was the first for him to average 30 minutes, and yet he still only put up 8points/6rebounds/3.8assists. His junior season he improved a little bit more, but took a major jump his senior season once they made him the PG and the ball was in his hands.

I don't know what he's like as a defender, but I just tried to search for that 3&D prospect chart and he rated higher than most and it surprised me....quite a bit higher than Brown for example....doesn't mean I think he has the potential that Brown or others might defensively, but his rating was higher.....if someone can find that chart, post it. I looked at draft thread 2 a bit to find it but couldn't.

Here's the link

http://public.tableau.com/profile/levy2725#!/vizhome/NBADraftProspect3-and-D-ness/Dashboard1

[MrMiyagi]

Denzel is the Swiss Army knife/glue guy who be the missing piece on the second unit of a contender but will be a nobody when he’s featured on a rebuilding team. Considering him at 4 is sheer lunacy

The dude is a lights out shooter, a very good passer, a good rebounder, a good defender, could probably play 3 positions (2-3 and some 1).... Probably the most complete player in the draft. That's the guy we don't want? Because he's 22? Because he isn't super athletic?

We picked a guy named Archie Goodwin at 29 who was the two things Valentine wasn't hoping he'd become the 7 things Valentine is... And now we're talking Bender and Chriss, who are in the same boat at 4 (make your alterations re: position specific wishlist like shotblocking and post game).... That's sheer lunacy, IMO.

Not a good defender at all. Also, being un-athletic and 6'5 is a dizaster waiting to happen if you plan on playing him at SF. He is a PG/SG. I think if we did draft him he would serve us best as a PG first and foremost.

This was his breakout season (thank goodness otherwise he would be undrafted). His Freshman season he put up 5 points 4 rebounds, 2.4 assists in 20 minutes. His Sophomore season was the first for him to average 30 minutes, and yet he still only put up 8points/6rebounds/3.8assists. His junior season he improved a little bit more, but took a major jump his senior season once they made him the PG and the ball was in his hands.

I swear, everyone who isn't an athletic freak is considered "un-athletic" which is crap. Also, if Valentine isn't a good defender, Murray is **** outta luck, being shorter, having a shorter wingspan, not to mention having yet to show point guard skills. And he shot worse than Valentine.

Why is improving over 4 seasons considered a bad thing when that's exactly what you're expecting these young guys to do in a much more difficult environment? Not to mention he IMPROVED AT EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF HIS GAME!

[bwgood77]

Not a good defender at all. Also, being un-athletic and 6'5 is a dizaster waiting to happen if you plan on playing him at SF. He is a PG/SG. I think if we did draft him he would serve us best as a PG first and foremost.

This was his breakout season (thank goodness otherwise he would be undrafted). His Freshman season he put up 5 points 4 rebounds, 2.4 assists in 20 minutes. His Sophomore season was the first for him to average 30 minutes, and yet he still only put up 8points/6rebounds/3.8assists. His junior season he improved a little bit more, but took a major jump his senior season once they made him the PG and the ball was in his hands.

I don't know what he's like as a defender, but I just tried to search for that 3&D prospect chart and he rated higher than most and it surprised me....quite a bit higher than Brown for example....doesn't mean I think he has the potential that Brown or others might defensively, but his rating was higher.....if someone can find that chart, post it. I looked at draft thread 2 a bit to find it but couldn't.

Here's the link

http://public.tableau.com/profile/levy2725#!/vizhome/NBADraftProspect3-and-D-ness/Dashboard1

Thanks. I know he doesn't have ideal nba type elite defensive skills, but just looking at him compared to Hield....slightly worse from 3 but MUCH better on the defensive side, and that's not even considering assists and rebounds. I mean he looks like a far better pick than Hield would be. When you are multidimensional, even if not everything translates great, something probably will...but one dimensional, that is more risky, and while Hield may have a place in the league, it doesn't look like he is nearly as good of a prospect as Valentine is. I still agree he is probably the best type of guy to lead a second unit on an elite team, but if your pg, sg, sf goes down in the season, he is the perfect guy to plug in and probably not have too big of a drop off.

[saintEscaton]

Are you serious? I don't think you understand relative valuation of picks. I'd much rather have Prince,Bembry,Lwuwau or even Brogdon because they can be had much later and are pluses on the other end with some room left to grow

[MrMiyagi]

Are you serious? I don't think you understand relative valuation of picks. I'd much rather have Prince,Bembry,Lwuwau or even Brogdon because they can be had much later and are pluses on the other end with some room left to grow

And I'd rather have Zhou Qi, Stephen Zimmerman, or Thon Maker at 28 over Bender at 4 or Ellensen/Skal/Chriss/Davis at 13. I'd rather have Tyler Ulis at 28 over Jamal Murray at 4. I'd rather have Denzel Washington over everyone but Simmons and Ingram.

Seriously, people only want Bender because he's an unknown quantity, and therefore must have infinite potential. But the reality is, he has the potential of having potential. He hasn't shown jack ****. But he MIGHT BE THE GREATEST BASKETBALL PLAYER EVER. A COMBINATION OF DIRK, OLAJUWAN, DUNCAN, AND MAGIC JOHNSON! I'VE EVEN HEARD HE EJACULATES RAINBOWS AND DEFECATES WORLD PEACE

People want Murray because he MIGHT BE ABLE TO PLAY POINT GUARD. He hasn't shown anything to suggest he actually can.

People want Brown because he MIGHT BECOME A GOOD DEFENDER. He had similar height/wingspan measurements as Valentine, and are we really sure he's an elite athlete? I mean like Russell Westbrook in a SF body elite. Will he actually able to body up Lebron or Paul George or Kevin Durant or Melo or even Rudy Gay? I mean, I don't recall seeing a "Holy ****, how'd he get that high?!" moment or a "Holy ****, how'd he get there so fast?!" moment or a "That dude is twice his size! How's he bodying him up?!" moment. His measurements aren't that freakish, and are not that far off of Valentine's (6'4 vs 6'5.25; 6'10.75 vs. 6'11.75) and when a touted "elite athlete" doesn't even do the vertical leap testing, that's a huge red flag in my book.

Buddy has tunnel-vision, and I'm starting to sour on him now despite wanting him previously.

I'm dead set on Valentine or bust. And I've advocated him at 13, I think he'll still be there because most NBA scouts are like you and want want not just a home run, they want a grand slam without even having runners on base. I'm just saying I'd take him at 4 and sleep like a baby.

[bwgood77]

I have to say I admire the conviction. I'm not too far off on Valentine, but obviously we are worlds apart on Bender.

[MrMiyagi]

Seriously, Bender has shown nothing, but we should take him because he might have everything because we haven't been able to see which areas of basketball he is deficient at. Valentine does pretty **** well in all areas but maybe 1 (defense) but he's a trash player who shouldn't be taken in the top 5 because he has 1 proven deficiency. Seriously, **** that ****.

How do you expect our coaching staff to develop Bender's ENTIRE GAME (lord knows he isn't a complete player, and if you think he is, right now, then I'd like to sell you the all the oxygen on the moon), but not trust them to develop 1 aspect of Valentine's?

EDIT: And if any of you say that you've heard Bender is extremely coachable or some such nonsense, I'd like to point to a guys who has proven to be coachable by improving every single season in college: DENZEL VALENTINE.

For those of you who will actually acknowledge Bender for the project he will actually be, Valentine had the career arc from 18-22 that y'all are hoping Bender has. Only difference is he did it in college and you're expecting Bender to do it in the NBA, which will be way more difficult.

[bwgood77]

You will not be convinced on Bender. But he dominated his age group so ended up playing his first pro game at 15 and has ended up playing in leagues with only guys two years older than him quite a bit. He is a 7 footer who can shoot the 3, defend the perimeter, is a great passer and blocks shots. He was so good he got to the highest level league and team in europe at this young age and just didn't play much because he was new to the team of vets on a high level team who was struggling to stay in the top league.

Much like Booker to start the season. He showed flashes when he did play. Valentine is the better player right now of course. Bender is a guy that has so many positives and upside that you swing for a home run. If we draft role players without huge upside when we get top 5 picks we are not going anywhere. I'm sure you would have been adamant against KG too, or would you have actually taken into consideration is play in HS?

Bender will likely take a little while, but it's not like this team is going to compete for a title any time soon.

[MrMiyagi]

You will not be convinced on Bender. But he dominated his age group so ended up playing his first pro game at 15 and has ended up playing in leagues with only guys two years older than him quite a bit. He is a 7 footer who can shoot the 3, defend the perimeter, is a great passer and blocks shots. He was so good he got to the highest level league and team in europe at this young age and just didn't play much because he was new to the team of vets on a high level team who was struggling to stay in the top league.

Much like Booker to start the season. He showed flashes when he did play. Valentine is the better player right now of course. Bender is a guy that has so many positives and upside that you swing for a home run. If we draft role players without huge upside when we get top 5 picks we are not going anywhere. I'm sure you would have been adamant against KG too, or would you have actually taken into consideration is play in HS?

Bender will likely take a little while, but it's not like this team is going to compete for a title any time soon.

Booker was taken at 13, after a season where he averaged 21 minutes a game in 39 games on a team that went 10 deep. Bender is being talked about as high as 3 after playing 10 minuted a game for 7 games.

And when exactly did he "dominate" against his age group? He didn't play in the FIBA U-18 Worlds in 2015 because of a shoe deal, he played a whopping 28 total minutes in 5 games in the FIBA U-16 European championships in 2012, getting 14 total points, 7 total rebounds, 1 total assist and 6 total turnovers... The more I'm looking, the less I'm seeing...