Draft Thread Part 2

[bhawk]

Hield is a nice guy and all, but at the end of the day he's just a guard who's allergic to passing and who doesn't have advanced ball-handling skills and explosiveness to create his own shot consistently against top athletes. I don't think he will be anything more than a 6th man in the NBA.

Here is Booker's ball-handling...

"There are also some question marks about Booker's ball-handling ability and how prolific of a shot-creator he will become at the NBA level. Most 3-pointers in today's NBA game come off an assist, and to fully take advantage of Booker's terrific stroke, he will have to be on a team that can manufacture good looks for him. Booker mostly stayed in his lane at Kentucky and played the role he was asked to, which is likely similar to what he will do in the NBA. He was only charted for four isolation possessions all season at Kentucky, and is unlikely to be someone that is asked to shoulder a very heavy load offensively at the next level either."

Here is Buddy's...

His ball-handling skills in general improved as his college career moved on, as evidenced by his career high 55% 2P% this past season. He's able to attack his defender off closeouts with nice footwork and timing, and will mix in some change of speeds, spin moves and side-steps out of pick and rolls and isolations. He drives left almost exclusively, but has started to show some ability to use it to finish inside the paint as well, where he shot 56% this season.

There are some question marks about what type of creator he will be at an NBA level, though, as he at times struggles to turn the corner already against quicker collegiate guards, and can't always create much breathing room against bigger and lengthy wings.


http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Buddy-Hield-58749/

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

No interest in Buddy Hield. The options with our top pick are Simmons, Ingram, Bender, Ellenson, Chriss, and trade.

[gaspar]

Hield is a nice guy and all, but at the end of the day he's just a guard who's allergic to passing and who doesn't have advanced ball-handling skills and explosiveness to create his own shot consistently against top athletes. I don't think he will be anything more than a 6th man in the NBA.

Here is Booker's ball-handling...

"There are also some question marks about Booker's ball-handling ability and how prolific of a shot-creator he will become at the NBA level. Most 3-pointers in today's NBA game come off an assist, and to fully take advantage of Booker's terrific stroke, he will have to be on a team that can manufacture good looks for him. Booker mostly stayed in his lane at Kentucky and played the role he was asked to, which is likely similar to what he will do in the NBA. He was only charted for four isolation possessions all season at Kentucky, and is unlikely to be someone that is asked to shoulder a very heavy load offensively at the next level either."

Here is Buddy's...

His ball-handling skills in general improved as his college career moved on, as evidenced by his career high 55% 2P% this past season. He's able to attack his defender off closeouts with nice footwork and timing, and will mix in some change of speeds, spin moves and side-steps out of pick and rolls and isolations. He drives left almost exclusively, but has started to show some ability to use it to finish inside the paint as well, where he shot 56% this season.

There are some question marks about what type of creator he will be at an NBA level, though, as he at times struggles to turn the corner already against quicker collegiate guards, and can't always create much breathing room against bigger and lengthy wings.


http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Buddy-Hield-58749/

And...?

No one knew what Booker's ball-handling was really like when he played in college, as the only thing he was asked to do at Kentucky was standing in the corner and shooting threes. He was also 4 years younger than Hield. And from the scouting report you quoted:

There are some question marks about what type of creator he will be at an NBA level, though, as he at times struggles to turn the corner already against quicker collegiate guards, and can't always create much breathing room against bigger and lengthy wings

[Saberestar]

After Ingram and Simmons I am really interested in Hield. His shooting, motor and character are great skills.

I am not sure about Bender at #3-#4...but I am absolutely sure that I don't like Dunn and Chriss.

I don't want Dunn because he doesn’t have good basketball IQ/feel, gives inconsistent effort and relies on his athleticism too much, needs the ball in his hands a lot to be effective and he is a mediocre shooter at best after four years in college.

And I don't want Chriss because his bad shot selection/inconsistent effort/bad rebounding instincts and below-average basketball IQ.

[darealjuice]

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

The point is that Dunn, Murray, and Hield aren't that good. The only one of them that is even going to be better than what we already have is Murray. Dunn is going to be 23 in his rookie season and projects to be a poor man's John Wall at best, and in reality he's basically going to be a slightly taller Eric Bledsoe without a decent jump shot. Buddy Hield is also going to be 23 in his rookie season, and he's incredibly one-dimensional. For a player that saw the ball as much as him and got so much attention from the defense to only average 2 assists a game is a huge red flag to me. Buddy Hield's best case to me is going to be JJ Redick's game in Wesley Matthew's body. Great moving off the ball and coming off of screens, a top flight shooter, a serviceable defender, can get his own shot occasionally, but that's about all. I don't want to get rid of Bledsoe to draft his duplicate that is only 3 years younger, and I don't want to trade Knight at his rock bottom value after what we gave up to draft another fringe starter chucker that doesn't offer much outside of scoring like Buddy Hield. We're not passing up on the Adrian Peterson or Carmelo Anthony of talent, we're passing up on the Brandon Knight and Bradley Beal level of prospects. There is no Melo or AD in this draft besides MAYBE Simmons and Ingram, and that's even a bit of a stretch.

[Waylay13]

Drafting for need over the best player available is the worst thing an organization can do. The Suns passed up on Kawhi Leonard in 2010 because they "needed" a power forward. They said they were already set at small forward with Hill, Dudley, Childress, and Turkoglu, and Leonard would have never played. I wonder how that worked out. Hmm. I think it worked out PRETTY AWFUL. Kawhi Leonard has already won a finals MVP and the Suns have missed the playoffs for six straight years.

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

Do you think that Leonard would have developed into the player he is now on the Suns behind Hill and Dudley? Dunn wouldnt beat out Bledsoe or Knight for playing time at the point and Murray and Hield would even get off the bench behind Booker, Knight and Bogdanovich. It is really hard for a player to develop into an NBA player if they dont get playing time and this weak draft only had two players that would get any really minutes outside of the power forward spot in Simmons and Ingram. So who are you joking with to think you are going to spend millions for a player to sit on the bench and do nothing. Also lets face it the Pistons did more with Prince then Melo has ever done on any team he has been on. The key to winning is always having a the best scoring players on the court but it is about having the best team.

[letsgosuns]

Why do some people think being a 21 or 22 year old rookie is a bad thing? How you can hold it against a player that they stayed in college. If anything, I look at their age as a positive because I see so many rookies come into the league now at 19-20 and they are nowhere near ready to make an impact.

[letsgosuns]

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

The point is that Dunn, Murray, and Hield aren't that good. The only one of them that is even going to be better than what we already have is Murray. Dunn is going to be 23 in his rookie season and projects to be a poor man's John Wall at best, and in reality he's basically going to be a slightly taller Eric Bledsoe without a decent jump shot. Buddy Hield is also going to be 23 in his rookie season, and he's incredibly one-dimensional. For a player that saw the ball as much as him and got so much attention from the defense to only average 2 assists a game is a huge red flag to me. Buddy Hield's best case to me is going to be JJ Redick's game in Wesley Matthew's body. Great moving off the ball and coming off of screens, a top flight shooter, a serviceable defender, can get his own shot occasionally, but that's about all. I don't want to get rid of Bledsoe to draft his duplicate that is only 3 years younger, and I don't want to trade Knight at his rock bottom value after what we gave up to draft another fringe starter chucker that doesn't offer much outside of scoring like Buddy Hield. We're not passing up on the Adrian Peterson or Carmelo Anthony of talent, we're passing up on the Brandon Knight and Bradley Beal level of prospects. There is no Melo or AD in this draft besides MAYBE Simmons and Ingram, and that's even a bit of a stretch.

I never said they were better. If they are not the best player available, then do not draft them. Draft whoever you think is the best player available. All I am saying is that if they are the best player available, do not pass them up just because you have a few guards already. Same thing goes with center. If the best player available at your spot is a center, draft him. Do not let the fact that you have Len/Chandler on the team influence your decision to draft the best talent you can.

[darealjuice]

Because it means they weren't as good as the 19 year old prospects were at that age, and after 4 years of staying in school and developing their game, they still aren't so much better than their 19 year old counterpart that they are locks to get picked above them. The draft isn't about who comes in and contributes right away anymore, one-and-done used to be a rare thing and players would only come out when they were developed, but now people finally realized there is no reason to develop for a college program for free when you can get paid to develop with generally better facilities, better training, and no school or other commitments taking their time. The draft has turned into who will be the best player down the road, and bottom line is that it's better to have a 19 year old that will be 23 after 4 years of learning to play in the NBA and still has room to grow than a 22 year old that will be 26 years old in the same scenario who is nearing their physical peak when they are roughly at the same level of skill at the time they are drafted.

* To your other post, I'm saying that best player available doesn't work when that player available is at a position that you already possess more than enough talent that is just as good as or better than them. We're a unique case, if we had just Bledsoe and Booker then I would be all for going for one of the guards. But there is only so much time on the court, and rookies need time on the court develop or they stay the same. Unless we can get good value for a trade for Knight, none of the guys in this draft are going to be worth passing up on a player that is similarly talented and plays at a position that is of more value to us right now.

[letsgosuns]

Drafting for need over the best player available is the worst thing an organization can do. The Suns passed up on Kawhi Leonard in 2010 because they "needed" a power forward. They said they were already set at small forward with Hill, Dudley, Childress, and Turkoglu, and Leonard would have never played. I wonder how that worked out. Hmm. I think it worked out PRETTY AWFUL. Kawhi Leonard has already won a finals MVP and the Suns have missed the playoffs for six straight years.

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

Do you think that Leonard would have developed into the player he is now on the Suns behind Hill and Dudley? Dunn wouldnt beat out Bledsoe or Knight for playing time at the point and Murray and Hield would even get off the bench behind Booker, Knight and Bogdanovich. It is really hard for a player to develop into an NBA player if they dont get playing time and this weak draft only had two players that would get any really minutes outside of the power forward spot in Simmons and Ingram. So who are you joking with to think you are going to spend millions for a player to sit on the bench and do nothing. Also lets face it the Pistons did more with Prince then Melo has ever done on any team he has been on. The key to winning is always having a the best scoring players on the court but it is about having the best team.

You are missing my point. This has nothing to do with me wanting the Suns to draft Dunn, Murray, or Hield because I think they are better. I have no idea if they are better. My point is that if the Suns pick comes up and the best player available is a guard, do not pass him up just because you already have some guards. Even if you have Kobe Bryant in his prime and you are drafting and the clear best player available at your draft spot is a shooting guard, take him anyway. Passing up the most talented guy available at your spot is not a good idea.

I do not know what Leonard would have developed into on the Suns. I am sure he probably would have been awesome. I doubt that the only reason he became a great player is because of the Spurs organization. But what I do know for a fact is that at the time of the draft, Hill was close to retiring and Dudley was a glorified bench player. Turkoglu and Childress were not even on the team yet. So the Suns passed on Leonard because of Hill and Dudley. Imagine if the Suns drafted Leonard. Grant Hill could have mentored him for two years. That could have been amazing.

Also, we will never know what the Pistons could have done with Carmelo on the team. I am sure he would have been a great scorer off the bench at first for them and eventually taken over the team. If anything, they could have at least traded him for probably a huge haul. Instead they got Darko who did nothing but sit on the bench. Plus the one year Denver went to the conference finals with Carmelo was in 2009. It was the year Billups was on the team. So obviously Carmelo and Billups played very well together.

[Walt_Uoob]

Drafting for need over the best player available is the worst thing an organization can do. The Suns passed up on Kawhi Leonard in 2010 because they "needed" a power forward. They said they were already set at small forward with Hill, Dudley, Childress, and Turkoglu, and Leonard would have never played. I wonder how that worked out. Hmm. I think it worked out PRETTY AWFUL. Kawhi Leonard has already won a finals MVP and the Suns have missed the playoffs for six straight years.

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

Do you think that Leonard would have developed into the player he is now on the Suns behind Hill and Dudley? Dunn wouldnt beat out Bledsoe or Knight for playing time at the point and Murray and Hield would even get off the bench behind Booker, Knight and Bogdanovich. It is really hard for a player to develop into an NBA player if they dont get playing time and this weak draft only had two players that would get any really minutes outside of the power forward spot in Simmons and Ingram. So who are you joking with to think you are going to spend millions for a player to sit on the bench and do nothing. Also lets face it the Pistons did more with Prince then Melo has ever done on any team he has been on. The key to winning is always having a the best scoring players on the court but it is about having the best team.

I think it's fair to say (as I think BWGood did a couple pages back) that it's a case-by-case thing and BPA isn't necessarily always the way to go, but these arguments trying to justify Kieff over Kawhi and Darko over Melo are bunk.

Are you arguing Kieff over Kawhi was the right choice even in hindsight!? Maybe Kawhi doesn't develop as well behind Hill and Dudley, but it's hard to imagine he ends up so stunted that he's a worse player today than Kieff. Kieff wasn't good his first two years in the league anyway, so if it took a couple of years to realize we had a special talent in Kawhi, no big difference. Plus Hill only played one more year for us after that draft and we traded Dudley after two more seasons. Bam. Logjam cleared. And one of the most dynamic players in the game is a Phoenix Sun.

And I don't think the point of the Dumars story was that they chose Prince over Melo. It was that they chose Darko over Melo because they had Prince. It's hard to fault them on that based on the way people were drooling over Darko back then, but again, in hindsight, you have to figure they'd take Melo two hundred times out of ten. Again, even a "stunted" Melo and any team discord that might come with that would have been better for that franchise than Darko's career turned out to be.

[bwgood77]

Drafting for need over the best player available is the worst thing an organization can do. The Suns passed up on Kawhi Leonard in 2010 because they "needed" a power forward. They said they were already set at small forward with Hill, Dudley, Childress, and Turkoglu, and Leonard would have never played. I wonder how that worked out. Hmm. I think it worked out PRETTY AWFUL. Kawhi Leonard has already won a finals MVP and the Suns have missed the playoffs for six straight years.

If anyone thinks that drafting a guard like Dunn, Murray, or Hield is a bad idea because of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, or Bogdanovich, all I have to say is are you joking. The team is terrible and in desperate need of a talent upgrade. It is unfathomable to consider passing up the most talented player you can find. Pass up the most talented player available at your spot and you will most likely regret it forever. It does not matter if you are the worst team in the league or the defending champions. You should never pass up the best talent you can find.

Do you think that Leonard would have developed into the player he is now on the Suns behind Hill and Dudley? Dunn wouldnt beat out Bledsoe or Knight for playing time at the point and Murray and Hield would even get off the bench behind Booker, Knight and Bogdanovich. It is really hard for a player to develop into an NBA player if they dont get playing time and this weak draft only had two players that would get any really minutes outside of the power forward spot in Simmons and Ingram. So who are you joking with to think you are going to spend millions for a player to sit on the bench and do nothing. Also lets face it the Pistons did more with Prince then Melo has ever done on any team he has been on. The key to winning is always having a the best scoring players on the court but it is about having the best team.

You are missing my point. This has nothing to do with me wanting the Suns to draft Dunn, Murray, or Hield because I think they are better. I have no idea if they are better. My point is that if the Suns pick comes up and the best player available is a guard, do not pass him up just because you already have some guards. Even if you have Kobe Bryant in his prime and you are drafting and the clear best player available at your draft spot is a shooting guard, take him anyway. Passing up the most talented guy available at your spot is not a good idea.

I do not know what Leonard would have developed into on the Suns. I am sure he probably would have been awesome. I doubt that the only reason he became a great player is because of the Spurs organization. But what I do know for a fact is that at the time of the draft, Hill was close to retiring and Dudley was a glorified bench player. Turkoglu and Childress were not even on the team yet. So the Suns passed on Leonard because of Hill and Dudley. Imagine if the Suns drafted Leonard. Grant Hill could have mentored him for two years. That could have been amazing.

Also, we will never know what the Pistons could have done with Carmelo on the team. I am sure he would have been a great scorer off the bench at first for them and eventually taken over the team. If anything, they could have at least traded him for probably a huge haul. Instead they got Darko who did nothing but sit on the bench. Plus the one year Denver went to the conference finals with Carmelo was in 2009. It was the year Billups was on the team. So obviously Carmelo and Billups played very well together.

Melo was a clear cut star, basically an Ingram to LeBron's Simmons. Bender is like Darko, an unknown with hype. Taking Darko over Melo would be like someone taking Bender over Ingram this year. Melo was higher profile than Ingram too (as was LeBron compared to Simmons) because Melo had just led his NCAA team to a championship as a freshman.

A ton of teams passed up on Kawhi though. He wasn't thought of as a clear cut star in the making by any means or he never would have lasted past 10.

[bhawk]

interesting discussion...

http://www.nbadraft.net/forum/hield-or-booker

[letsgosuns]

Because it means they weren't as good as the 19 year old prospects were at that age, and after 4 years of staying in school and developing their game, they still aren't so much better than their 19 year old counterpart that they are locks to get picked above them. The draft isn't about who comes in and contributes right away anymore, one-and-done used to be a rare thing and players would only come out when they were developed, but now people finally realized there is no reason to develop for a college program for free when you can get paid to develop with generally better facilities, better training, and no school or other commitments taking their time. The draft has turned into who will be the best player down the road, and bottom line is that it's better to have a 19 year old that will be 23 after 4 years of learning to play in the NBA and still has room to grow than a 22 year old that will be 26 years old in the same scenario who is nearing their physical peak when they are roughly at the same level of skill at the time they are drafted.

* To your other post, I'm saying that best player available doesn't work when that player available is at a position that you already possess more than enough talent that is just as good as or better than them. We're a unique case, if we had just Bledsoe and Booker then I would be all for going for one of the guards. But there is only so much time on the court, and rookies need time on the court develop or they stay the same. Unless we can get good value for a trade for Knight, none of the guys in this draft are going to be worth passing up on a player that is similarly talented and plays at a position that is of more value to us right now.

Again I am not saying to draft these guards. You draft the best player available and figure out what to do after. Look at the Orlando Magic in the early 1990's. They won the draft lottery in 1992 and 1993. In 1992, they took Shaq number one. In 1993, they took Chris Webber. They did not want Webber because they already had Shaq so they traded Webber to the Warriors for the third pick in the same draft (selected Penny Hardaway) plus three future first round picks. If they passed on Webber, the top guy in the draft, and took Hardaway instead because they needed a guard, they do not get those three future first round picks.

Let's hypothetically say the Suns get the fourth pick in the draft and the best guy available is Kris Dunn and the Suns take him. Then the Kings call the Suns right after the selection and say we absolutely love Dunn and need a point guard, would you be willing to trade us Dunn for the eighth pick plus two future first round picks as well. Then the Suns say okay sure. They trade Dunn to the Kings for number eight plus two future first round picks. With the eighth pick, the Suns draft a power forward or another player that is the best player available.

Maybe another thing happens. A team calls the Suns and says hey you just took a point guard, are Bledsoe/Knight available. What would it take to get one or both of them. Who knows. The point is that if the Suns pass up on Dunn, a sought after guy around the league because of his talent, they lose the opportunity to either keep him themselves and see if he outperforms what the team already has, or trade him for a package that better serves the team. This is why you do not pass up the best player available.

[darealjuice]

Again I am not saying to draft these guards. You draft the best player available and figure out what to do after. Look at the Orlando Magic in the early 1990's. They won the draft lottery in 1992 and 1993. In 1992, they took Shaq number one. In 1993, they took Chris Webber. They did not want Webber because they already had Shaq so they traded Webber to the Warriors for the third pick in the same draft (selected Penny Hardaway) plus three future first round picks. If they passed on Webber, the top guy in the draft, and took Hardaway instead because they needed a guard, they do not get those three future first round picks.

Let's hypothetically say the Suns get the fourth pick in the draft and the best guy available is Kris Dunn and the Suns take him. Then the Kings call the Suns right after the selection and and say we absolutely love Dunn and need a point guard, would you be willing to trade us Dunn for the eighth pick plus two future first round picks as well. Then the Suns say okay sure. They trade Dunn to the Kings for number eight plus two future first round picks. With the eighth pick, the Suns draft a power forward or another player that is the best player available.

Maybe another thing happens. A team calls the Suns and says hey you just took a point guard, are Bledsoe/Knight available. What would it take to get one or both of them. Who knows. The point is that if the Suns pass up on Dunn, a sought after guy around the league because of his talent, they lose the opportunity to either keep him themselves and see if he outperforms what the team already has, or trade him for a package that better serves the team. This is why you do not pass up the best player available.

Pretty sure we're debating about nothing at this point then. It seems like you're saying to pick the best player available so that we can use him as trade bait to get a later pick in the same draft and future draft picks during the draft. On the other hand, I'm trying to say we don't take anyone with the pick, trade that pick for future draft picks and a later pick in the same draft where the player who fits a need is also the best player available.

BPA is subjective anyways. There's no clear cut way to tell who is the best player at each pick once you get out of the elite talents, or we would never have busts in the draft.

[Saberestar]

The All-Go-Back-To-School Team: Melo Trimble, Nigel Hayes, Caleb Swanigan, Marcus Lee, Dedric Lawson, Troy Williams, Justin Jackson

https://mobile.twitter.com/chadfordinsider/status/731255894449721348

Former Kansas foward Cheick Diallo will sign with an agent and enter the NBA draft, he told ESPN’s Jeff Goodman on Friday.

Diallo is a great option at #28.

We do not have that type of player on our roster...he would be an energy big coming from the bench for hustle, defense and rebounding.

[letsgosuns]

Again I am not saying to draft these guards. You draft the best player available and figure out what to do after. Look at the Orlando Magic in the early 1990's. They won the draft lottery in 1992 and 1993. In 1992, they took Shaq number one. In 1993, they took Chris Webber. They did not want Webber because they already had Shaq so they traded Webber to the Warriors for the third pick in the same draft (selected Penny Hardaway) plus three future first round picks. If they passed on Webber, the top guy in the draft, and took Hardaway instead because they needed a guard, they do not get those three future first round picks.

Let's hypothetically say the Suns get the fourth pick in the draft and the best guy available is Kris Dunn and the Suns take him. Then the Kings call the Suns right after the selection and and say we absolutely love Dunn and need a point guard, would you be willing to trade us Dunn for the eighth pick plus two future first round picks as well. Then the Suns say okay sure. They trade Dunn to the Kings for number eight plus two future first round picks. With the eighth pick, the Suns draft a power forward or another player that is the best player available.

Maybe another thing happens. A team calls the Suns and says hey you just took a point guard, are Bledsoe/Knight available. What would it take to get one or both of them. Who knows. The point is that if the Suns pass up on Dunn, a sought after guy around the league because of his talent, they lose the opportunity to either keep him themselves and see if he outperforms what the team already has, or trade him for a package that better serves the team. This is why you do not pass up the best player available.

Pretty sure we're debating about nothing at this point then. It seems like you're saying to pick the best player available so that we can use him as trade bait to get a later pick in the same draft and future draft picks during the draft. On the other hand, I'm trying to say we don't take anyone with the pick, trade that pick for future draft picks and a later pick in the same draft where the player who fits a need is also the best player available.

BPA is subjective anyways. There's no clear cut way to tell who is the best player at each pick once you get out of the elite talents, or we would never have busts in the draft.

Yes that is basically what I am saying about taking the best player available. However, I also think the option to draft the player and go into training camp with him trying to beat out the other players at his position is okay as well. You can always figure out what you want to do at a later time as long as you actually pick the best player available (even though it is subjective like you said). That gives you the most options that can help the team. Passing up on a better talent in favor of a lesser talent just because he fills a team need limits the overall potential of what your team can become. All that being said, the one thing I trust McDonough most with is the draft, so I think he will make the right call. Free agency and building a balanced roster is another thing entirely. Those are not things he has proven himself capable of doing well yet.

[jcsunsfan]

As expected:
Follow
Adam Zagoria ‎@AdamZagoria
The Knicks and Nets both told players they're trying to buy a late 1st / early 2nd round pick.
4:23 PM - 13 May 2016
12 12 Retweets 13 13 likes

Wonder if Sarver is looking to pick up a little extra cash at the end of the first round. Wouldn't people here love that.

[Waylay13]

Diallo is a great option at #28.

We do not have that type of player on our roster...he would be an energy big coming from the bench for hustle, defense and rebounding.

I think this is one of the reasons that I am so high on Davis because it would be a big time energy player who hustles, rebounds and gets out and plays defense. I would honestly be up to picking up both Davis and Diallo because I think they would play off each other and us a stronger team defense while still getting out and playing at a fast pace.

[saintEscaton]

Zhou Qi goes 25 for 25 from the stationary NBA 3 , a 39 inch moving vertical and tested out well in the agility drills . Malcom Brogdon will also shoot up boards