If Minnesota keeps its pick.....

Post #1 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:34 pm

Minnesota is an interesting franchise. National onlookers see a dumpster fire. Local diehards see that too, but also arguably the unluckiest franchise ever. This is the team that fell from 1 to 3 in the lottery when Shaq, Mourning and Laettner were the top three prospects. This is the franchise that has moved up in the lottery ONCE in its history (last year). Minnesota cynics are expecting the team to finish 4th in the lottery draw, because that's what always happens in Minnesota sports history.

But what if they don't? What if they finish in the Top 3? How would you structure your board? How does the current roster factor into things?

Post #2 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:54 pm

I feel like I could make an argument for each of the top guys.

-Cunningham's talent is obvious. I feel like most will say he's the best player. There might be fit questions, but I think they could make it work because of the talent. Can you be the team that passes on him?
-Mobley has a high potential. I think he's a better fit next to Towns on both ends than Wiseman would've been, and the Wolves now have a bigs-friendly coach.
-Kuminga is because the Wolves are lacking in the forward department. Talent is there too.
-I don't know what it is about Suggs, but I just feel like he would be the most seamless fit with the team's core guys of any of these prospects (Towns/Edwards/Russell/Beasley). Not to mention drafting the local kid wouldn't hurt the PR department...

clyde21 · Post #3 » by **clyde21** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:17 pm

Cade
Mobley
Suggs

nolang1 · Post #4 » by **nolang1** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:18 pm

Take Cunningham and avoid repeating the same mistake where they let apparent fit with a player the caliber of D'Angelo Russell overrule taking a better prospect. If fit is really that much of a concern, I would be fine with trading players from a core that's won ~25% of its games over a 2-year span to make room for whoever I felt was the best prospect.

Post #5 » by **ThunderBolt** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:32 pm

I think Minnesota needs to take BPA and not worry about fit. I’m curious why you say there might be fit issues with Cade.

clyde21 · Post #6 » by **clyde21** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:40 pm

D-Lo should not keep you from taking anyone, in fact you should be actively looking to replace him, if Cade is staring you in the face you pull the trigger and run, and he actually synergizes well with Towns and Antman, which are really the only 2 players you should be caring about a fit with at this point

Post #7 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:57 pm

nolang1 wrote:Take Cunningham and avoid repeating the same mistake where they let apparent fit with a player the caliber of D'Angelo Russell overrule taking a better prospect. If fit is really that much of a concern, I would be fine with trading players from a core that's won ~25% of its games over a 2-year span to make room for whoever I felt was the best prospect.

ThunderBolt wrote:I think Minnesota needs to take BPA and not worry about fit. I’m curious why you say there might be fit issues with Cade.

clyde21 wrote:D-Lo should not keep you from taking anyone, in fact you should be actively looking to replace him, if Cade is staring you in the face you pull the trigger and run, and he actually synergizes well with Towns and Antman

Funny thing is, I'd be more concerned about if he fits with Edwards than if he fits with Cunningham. Not positionally, but in skill sets and roles. I feel like Suggs will mesh better. Maybe that's off-base, but that was my early impression.

nolang1 · Post #8 » by **nolang1** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:00 pm

Klomp wrote:
nolang1 wrote:Take Cunningham and avoid repeating the same mistake where they let apparent fit with a player the caliber of D'Angelo Russell overrule taking a better prospect. If fit is really that much of a concern, I would be fine with trading players from a core that's won ~25% of its games over a 2-year span to make room for whoever I felt was the best prospect.

ThunderBolt wrote:I think Minnesota needs to take BPA and not worry about fit. I’m curious why you say there might be fit issues with Cade.

clyde21 wrote:D-Lo should not keep you from taking anyone, in fact you should be actively looking to replace him, if Cade is staring you in the face you pull the trigger and run, and he actually synergizes well with Towns and Antman

Funny thing is, I'd be more concerned about if he fits with Edwards than if he fits with Cunningham. Not positionally, but in skill sets and roles. I feel like Suggs will mesh better. Maybe that's off-base, but that was my early impression.

And as I said Edwards is not some untouchable player either. I mean, if D-Lo getting traded means that Towns would want out, then that should be on the table too. We're talking about a team that is literally last place in the league.

clyde21 · Post #9 » by **clyde21** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:00 pm

Suggs is more portable that Cade, better off-ball and better as a slasher, maybe that's why you think that, which has merit on the surface but with Cade's fit in Minnesota it's not an issue, and Cade is a just a better overall prospect at this point

Post #10 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:20 pm

nolang1 wrote:
Klomp wrote:Funny thing is, I'd be more concerned about if he fits with Edwards than if he fits with Cunningham. Not positionally, but in skill sets and roles. I feel like Suggs will mesh better. Maybe that's off-base, but that was my early impression.

And as I said Edwards is not some untouchable player either. I mean, if D-Lo getting traded means that Towns would want out, then that should be on the table too. We're talking about a team that is literally last place in the league.

I wrote that wrong. Meant to say I'd be more concerned about if Cunningham fits with Edwards than if he fits with Russell.

No-Man · Post #11 » by **No-Man** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 8:11 pm

Klomp wrote:Minnesota is an interesting franchise. National onlookers see a dumpster fire. Local diehards see that too, but also arguably the unluckiest franchise ever. This is the team that fell from 1 to 3 in the lottery when Shaq, Mourning and Laettner were the top three prospects. This is the franchise that has moved up in the lottery ONCE in its history (last year). Minnesota cynics are expecting the team to finish 4th in the lottery draw, because that's what always happens in Minnesota sports history.

But what if they don't? What if they finish in the Top 3? How would you structure your board? How does the current roster factor into things?

Dude you have had multiple top7 picks since 2014 including 3 nº1 picks, what are you talking about with unluckyness

Post #12 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 8:47 pm

Fischella wrote:
Klomp wrote:Minnesota is an interesting franchise. National onlookers see a dumpster fire. Local diehards see that too, but also arguably the unluckiest franchise ever. This is the team that fell from 1 to 3 in the lottery when Shaq, Mourning and Laettner were the top three prospects. This is the franchise that has moved up in the lottery ONCE in its history (last year). Minnesota cynics are expecting the team to finish 4th in the lottery draw, because that's what always happens in Minnesota sports history.

But what if they don't? What if they finish in the Top 3? How would you structure your board? How does the current roster factor into things?

Dude you have had multiple top7 picks since 2014 including 3 nº1 picks, what are you talking about with unluckyness

For the record, Minnesota has drafted No. 1 twice since 2014, not three times.

Some highlights over the years....

1992: No. 1 odds, drop to No. 3 (O'Neal, Mourning, Laettner)
1993: No. 2 odds, drop to No. 5 (Webber, A. Hardaway, Mashburn, Rider)
1994: No. 3 odds, drop to No. 4 (Robinson, Kidd, Hill, Marshall)
1995: No. 3 odds, drop to No. 5 (this one worked out in the end)
2011: No. 1 odds, drop to No. 2 (Irving, Williams)

Again, Minnesota had NEVER moved up in the lottery until last year. They had been in the lottery about 22 times before then I believe. I'd call all of that the very definition of unluckiness. I'm not talking about draft evaluations, I'm talking about the fact that many Minnesota fans are resigned to the fact they feel the Wolves will drop to No. 4 or 5 in the lottery this summer, thereby surrendering their pick to Golden State.

clyde21 · Post #13 » by **clyde21** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:02 pm

i think he's including Wiggins trade in that, which you essentially got by the K-Love trade because of LeBron wanting him in Cleveland, otherwise Minny would've seen K Love just walk away, also two other top 7 guys in Culver and Markkanen.

as a Minny fan, would you rather a top 3 pick in 21 or 22?

Post #14 » by **Duke4life831** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:36 pm

Im in the view point of I can see an argument for any of the top 5 guys to go #1 (I personally have Kuminga #1).

With that said, I think #1 pick should be a pretty easy choice for Minny. I would take Cade with no hesitation really. I think the majority still have him as their #1, he has a high floor and a high ceiling. And is kind of the perfect player youd like to team up with KAT/Edwards.

If I were to rank the top 3 id go probably something along the lines of

Cade: already explained why
Kuminga: a big physical wing is a nice piece to add in with KAT and Edwards
Mobley: Honestly wouldnt hold it against Minny to throw a curve ball to the rest of the league and try to build around 2 current day bigs. Offensively it would work great, defensively it would take some work, but id give it a shot.

Post #15 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:59 pm

clyde21 wrote:i think he's including Wiggins trade in that, which you essentially got by the K-Love trade because of LeBron wanting him in Cleveland, otherwise Minny would've seen K Love just walk away, also two other top 7 guys in Culver and Markkanen.

as a Minny fan, would you rather a top 3 pick in 21 or 22?

I'm aware of our history. Love was never going to walk. We would've found another trade partner.

I'm conceding this year as basically a lost cause, but I still have optimism going forward and think we won't be as high in the 2022 draft.

Baseline81 · Post #16 » by **Baseline81** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 pm

Fischella wrote:Dude you have had multiple top7 picks since 2014 including 3 nº1 picks, what are you talking about with unluckyness

You realize the Wolves have had several lottery picks since then because they've been badly run and coached. Outside of Butler's first year with the team, they've been uncompetitive.

As Klomp stated, Minnesota has only had the first overall pick twice (Towns and Edwards). Cleveland selected Wiggins, later traded for Love.

League standings
2014-15: Worst (first overall pick - Towns)
2015-16: 5th worst (5th overall pick - Dunn)
2016-17: 6th worst (7th overall pick - Traded for Butler)
2017-18: Playoffs (20th overall pick - Okogie)
2018-19: 10th worst (11th overall pick - Traded for Culver)
2019-20: 3rd worst (first overall pick - Edwards)

clyde21 · Post #17 » by **clyde21** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:32 pm

well, Cade just dropped a 40 piece against the #7 team in the country and beat them

that should answer your question.

No-Man · Post #18 » by **No-Man** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:37 pm

I really hope Minnesota doesn't keep their pick

Post #19 » by **Klomp** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:41 pm

clyde21 wrote:well, Cade just dropped a 40 piece against the #7 team in the country and beat them

that should answer your question.

Yeah, the debate at No. 1 is over. Now for No. 2 or 3....

SmokeyPaw · Post #20 » by **SmokeyPaw** » Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:53 pm

clyde21 wrote:i think he's including Wiggins trade in that, which you essentially got by the K-Love trade because of LeBron wanting him in Cleveland, otherwise Minny would've seen K Love just walk away, also two other top 7 guys in Culver and Markkanen.

as a Minny fan, would you rather a top 3 pick in 21 or 22?

I'd take a top 3 pick this year. We are on a clock with Towns and you dont know what that 2022 pick would be.