Draft Discussion Part 3

RaisingArizona · Post #781 » by **RaisingArizona** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:17 pm

It's going to be Isaac/Tatum/Ball/Monk? Crazy change of events.

RaisingArizona · Post #782 » by **RaisingArizona** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:23 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Hmmmm dinner with personnel. I seem to remember 2 prospects last year dining with McD.

RaisingArizona · Post #783 » by **RaisingArizona** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:26 pm

Welcome to team Isaac, everyone. He is legit!

edurham88 · Post #784 » by **edurham88** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:33 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
Spoiler:
NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Hmmmm dinner with personnel. I seem to remember 2 prospects last year dining with McD.

Although they also traded for Chriss. So it's possible that they are looking at Isaac as a target if they trade for another top-10 pick or if they trade down from 4. If you remember from the draft last year, they decided on Bender and then made a move to try to get Chriss afterwards.

Villalobos · Post #785 » by **Villalobos** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:34 pm

WeekapaugGroove wrote:
ATTL wrote:Gambo saying Fox will not work out for Phoenix either.
No JJ
No fox

Only options are Isaac and Tatum?

One of Ball, Jackson, or Fox will be there at 4 (assuming Fultz doesn't rob a bank in the next two weeks). There's no rule saying you can't draft a guy who doesn't work out for you. I find Fox not coming in interesting. You would think that might mean he's confident he'll be gone by 4 or I guess he could want to play in Sacramento so bad he's trying to force his way there... seems far fetched.

I can see why he'd really want to go there if the Lakers pass on him. He has zero playing time competition in Sacramento. In Phoenix there's a minuscule theoretical chance they could keep Bledsoe and have Fox come off the bench for a year or two. Plus Ulis and even plus the uncertainty with Knight. And if he's really good he'd have a better chance for a megamax franchise contract in Sac.

DirtyDez · Post #786 » by **DirtyDez** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:39 pm

ginobiliflops wrote:It's going to be Isaac/Tatum/Ball/Monk? Crazy change of events.

Post #787 » by **bwgood77** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:40 pm

edurham88 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Spoiler:
NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Hmmmm dinner with personnel. I seem to remember 2 prospects last year dining with McD.

Although they also traded for Chriss. So it's possible that they are looking at Isaac as a target if they trade for another top-10 pick or if they trade down from 4. If you remember from the draft last year, they decided on Bender and then made a move to try to get Chriss afterwards.

Yeah, but I guess my point was they couldn't decide on who they liked...they liked them both so much they were dining with them and stuff. So that leads to my point with Isaac. They must really like him. Sure they could trade for another pick too or whatever. Doubt he drops too far though...may not make it past five or six if we don't take him.

edurham88 · Post #788 » by **edurham88** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:47 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
edurham88 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Spoiler:

Hmmmm dinner with personnel. I seem to remember 2 prospects last year dining with McD.

Although they also traded for Chriss. So it's possible that they are looking at Isaac as a target if they trade for another top-10 pick or if they trade down from 4. If you remember from the draft last year, they decided on Bender and then made a move to try to get Chriss afterwards.

Yeah, but I guess my point was they couldn't decide on who they liked...they liked them both so much they were dining with them and stuff. So that leads to my point with Isaac. They must really like him. Sure they could trade for another pick too or whatever. Doubt he drops too far though...may not make it past five or six if we don't take him.

Right. I agree with you. It does seem to point to them being a big fan of Isaac. I guess my only point is that if they weren't able to get Sacramento to agree to that trade for Chriss, then maybe he is on the Kings. So maybe Isaac is one of 2-3 guys that they really like, and whether he ends up on the Suns depends on if they like other people more who are available when their pick comes up.

NTB · Post #789 » by **NTB** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:20 pm

Read on Twitter

carey · Post #790 » by **carey** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:27 pm

NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

Shot better than Monk? Pat Connelly said Monk put on the best display of shooting he'd seen in several years. So did Tatum put on the best?

Damkac · Post #791 » by **Damkac** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:28 pm

No Monk please and I will be happy.

DRK · Post #792 » by **DRK** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:29 pm

McD has stated we are looking for defence and length in this draft, obviously as well as BPA who fits that bill otherwise we would be drafting OG.

I just dont see Tatum as a McD pick. I think hes a great player, but not a great fit next to Book and Chriss.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

LukasBMW · Post #793 » by **LukasBMW** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:30 pm

Haha. Here comes the smokescreens.

Source 1: Issac has a private workout and a romantic dinner with Suns
Source 2: Tatum is the best fit and creates a future 1-2 punch
Source 3: Fox refusing to workout for the Suns because the Suns are already taking him.

ImNotMcDiSwear · Post #794 » by **ImNotMcDiSwear** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:32 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
edurham88 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Spoiler:

Hmmmm dinner with personnel. I seem to remember 2 prospects last year dining with McD.

Although they also traded for Chriss. So it's possible that they are looking at Isaac as a target if they trade for another top-10 pick or if they trade down from 4. If you remember from the draft last year, they decided on Bender and then made a move to try to get Chriss afterwards.

Yeah, but I guess my point was they couldn't decide on who they liked...they liked them both so much they were dining with them and stuff. So that leads to my point with Isaac. They must really like him. Sure they could trade for another pick too or whatever. Doubt he drops too far though...may not make it past five or six if we don't take him.

Pretty sure they also took Sabonis to dinner, fwiw.

Saberestar · Post #795 » by **Saberestar** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:34 pm

Gambo said that Fox doesn't work for us because of fit, too much competition.

Regarding Josh Jackson, he has cancelled a workout with a high team picking in the draft (probably Sacto or Orlando) because he has a promise. We are not that team. Gambo thinks that is Lakers (first option), Philly or a team that has a trade with Philly.

Jackson has scheduled a workout with us later this week and he hasn't cancelled that workout yet, we will see.

Gambo said that we are leaning to pick Tatum. Next Ball. Third option Isaac. But those three players are really close and we like all three.

JMac1 · Post #796 » by **JMac1** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:40 pm

NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

If between He and Isaac..

Villalobos · Post #797 » by **Villalobos** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:45 pm

carey wrote:
NTB wrote:

Read on Twitter

Shot better than Monk? Pat Connelly said Monk put on the best display of shooting he'd seen in several years. So did Tatum put on the best?

TOO · Post #798 » by **TOO** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:47 pm

Give me Tatum all day. ALL. DAY.

Saberestar · Post #799 » by **Saberestar** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:51 pm

Read on Twitter

YouTube · Post #800 » by **Kerrsed** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:55 pm

So somehow Ball went from #1 on our board (above Fultz) to now #2 behind Tatum? What kind of world do we live in????

Who would you rather have, Jackson or Tatum?