RealGM Consensus Mock - #9

[clyde21]

1 Orlando: Jabari Smith Jr.
2 Oklahoma City: Chet Holmgren
3 Houston: Paolo Banchero
4 Sacramento: Jaden Ivey
5 Detroit: Shaedon Sharpe
6 Indiana: Keegan Murray
7 Portland: Dyson Daniels
8 New Orleans: Bennedict Mathurin
9 San Antonio:

who are you taking here if you're the Spurs?

[clyde21]

Mark Williams for me here for the Spurs

[pad300]

I figure SAS would go with 1 of the SF/PF big wing types - Eason or Sochan (or maybe Dieng). I voted Eason, but the choice would likely be made on how well each candidate interviewed...

[Hal14]

I like Duren here. Spurs have good young players at each position except C.

They have Poeltl, who's good but long term not a major difference maker at C. Duren is.

Having Poeltl there, it allows them to ease Duren into the starting C spot. Keep Poeltl starting initially, with Duren off the bench. Then ease Duren into starting lineup - eventually moving Poeltl into the backup C spot.

Then you've got a core (all 25 or under) of Murray, Keldon Johnson, Duren and Primo. A PG, a wing, a combo forward and a C. Kind of like the core Boston has (PG Smart, wing Brown, combo forward Tatum, Center robert williams)

[G R E Y]

Help I've fallen for too many prospects and I can't decide!

[G R E Y]

p.s. Please don't think of fit but BPA. Unless it's a situation like that of GSW, for example, where a team has a true franchise player, no lotto team is good enough to draft for fit unless it also happens to be BPA.

[LofJ]

I voted for Ousmane Dieng. The Spurs need a high ceiling skilled forward with size and he fits the profile of guys they like. I think they'll pick him or Sochan.

[Norm2953]

SAS (like the Rockets) are a franchise that always seems to have had a center. Mark Williams made
millions with his measurements coming out of the combine should be the pick.

[G R E Y]

From that list I'm currently torn between Williams and Dieng. Though I'm almost sure we'll draft neither. And in a couple of hours (or reading posts from others here) I'll have changed my mind.

[clyde21]

p.s. Please don't think of fit but BPA. Unless it's a situation like that of GSW, for example, where a team has a true franchise player, no lotto team is good enough to draft for fit unless it also happens to be BPA.

no such thing as BPA at this point

[G R E Y]

Fwiw team reps are reportedly raving about Sochan (might be some smoke screening attempts) but I just can't get my enthusiasm genuinely there and I can't put my finger on why...

[G R E Y]

p.s. Please don't think of fit but BPA. Unless it's a situation like that of GSW, for example, where a team has a true franchise player, no lotto team is good enough to draft for fit unless it also happens to be BPA.

no such thing as BPA at this point

Why?

[clyde21]

p.s. Please don't think of fit but BPA. Unless it's a situation like that of GSW, for example, where a team has a true franchise player, no lotto team is good enough to draft for fit unless it also happens to be BPA.

no such thing as BPA at this point

Why?

because there just isn't, the idea that someone is available at 9 that's so much better than everyone else available doesn't exist.

[clyde21]

the concept of BPA in general is a lie mostly

you create tiers of similarly talented players, and you pick the best fit for your team.

only time BPA applies is if a player in a higher tier drops into a range where you had expected lower tier players to be available, then that's your BPA. but at this point at 9, if it it's not Jabari, Paolo or Chet, no such thing as BPA here.

the Spurs here likely have 3-4 guys that they have ranked closely, and will take the guy they think is the best fit on/off court for them.

[PhilBlackson]

Eason or Dieng.

[G R E Y]

no such thing as BPA at this point

Why?

because there just isn't, the idea that someone is available at 9 that's so much better than everyone else available doesn't exist.

Not so much better than anyone else, but better than the others on that list (or 'other').

I'm looking for someone to make a case for a player they love and why, not necessarily just for us as fit.

And as we've seen from so many previous drafts, plenty of even non-lotto players grew into franchise players.

I guess it's the teams' work to dig deep and to recognize a long term ceiling.

Like right off the bat Williams is a beast but not a modern C without 3s or even very good FT's. Exploitable in modern O.

So players without such an obvious limitation, for instance, despite his incredible physical attributes.

[G R E Y]

the concept of BPA in general is a lie mostly

you create tiers of similarly talented players, and you pick the best fit for your team.

only time BPA applies is if a player in a higher tier drops into a range where you had expected lower tier players to be available, then that's your BPA. but at this point at 9, if it it's not Jabari, Paolo or Chet, no such thing as BPA here.

the Spurs here likely have 3-4 guys that they have ranked closely, and will take the guy they think is the best fit on/off court for them.

But we've also taken guards in consecutive drafts so that does not follow. You take the guy with the best character fit as strong consideration, especially all other things being equal, but if another player at same position is deemed as a higher ceiling, that's who you take.

[clyde21]

the concept of BPA in general is a lie mostly

you create tiers of similarly talented players, and you pick the best fit for your team.

only time BPA applies is if a player in a higher tier drops into a range where you had expected lower tier players to be available, then that's your BPA. but at this point at 9, if it it's not Jabari, Paolo or Chet, no such thing as BPA here.

the Spurs here likely have 3-4 guys that they have ranked closely, and will take the guy they think is the best fit on/off court for them.

But we've also taken guards in consecutive drafts so that does not follow. You take the guy with the best character fit as strong consideration, especially all other things being equal, but if another player at same position is deemed as a higher ceiling, that's who you take.

are you talking about Vassell/Primo? i don't think that is proof of BPA at all. yea you might make a high ceiling play or you might make a high floor player but that's not BPA.

again, rarely are you in a position to draft a player that is a TIER above everyone else outside the top3-5 depending on the draft.

[G R E Y]

the concept of BPA in general is a lie mostly

you create tiers of similarly talented players, and you pick the best fit for your team.

only time BPA applies is if a player in a higher tier drops into a range where you had expected lower tier players to be available, then that's your BPA. but at this point at 9, if it it's not Jabari, Paolo or Chet, no such thing as BPA here.

the Spurs here likely have 3-4 guys that they have ranked closely, and will take the guy they think is the best fit on/off court for them.

But we've also taken guards in consecutive drafts so that does not follow. You take the guy with the best character fit as strong consideration, especially all other things being equal, but if another player at same position is deemed as a higher ceiling, that's who you take.

are you talking about Vassell/Primo? i don't think that is proof of BPA at all. yea you might make a high ceiling play or you might make a high floor player but that's not BPA.

again, rarely are you in a position to draft a player that is a TIER above everyone else outside the top3-5 depending on the draft.

Well even beyond them if you look back at our drafts the majority of players we've taken are guards. So there's Lonnie Walker, Tre Jones, Weatherspoon, Murray, Derrick White.

The point I was making is that despite having a glut at the position we still drafted players at the position so it's not necessarily going to stop us, nor should it, if we think the next guy is better than whomever we have or, in other words, BPA.

If there wasn't potential outside the top then players wouldn't keep emerging outside of it. They may not be in those tiers right now but again it's up to FO's to find those diamonds.

I just don't buy the idea that everyone else is pretty much set at notbbeing better than lotto guys. We've seen it time and again.

And to reiterate - right now, I'm not talking about guys on that particular list being better than the projected top 3, but which stands out from the others among that list for #9

[clyde21]

But we've also taken guards in consecutive drafts so that does not follow. You take the guy with the best character fit as strong consideration, especially all other things being equal, but if another player at same position is deemed as a higher ceiling, that's who you take.

are you talking about Vassell/Primo? i don't think that is proof of BPA at all. yea you might make a high ceiling play or you might make a high floor player but that's not BPA.

again, rarely are you in a position to draft a player that is a TIER above everyone else outside the top3-5 depending on the draft.

Well even beyond them if you look back at our drafts the majority of players we've taken are guards. So there's Lonnie Walker, Tre Jones, Weatherspoon, Murray, Derrick White.

The point I was making is that despite having a glut at the position we still drafted players at the position so it's not necessarily going to stop us, nor should it, if we think the next guy is better than whomever we have or, in other words, BPA.

If there wasn't potential outside the top then players wouldn't keep emerging outside of it. They may not be in those tiers right now but again it's up to FO's to find those diamonds.

I just don't buy the idea that everyone else is pretty much set at notbbeing better than lotto guys. We've seen it time and again.

And to reiterate - right now, I'm not talking about guys on that particular list being better than the projected top 3, but which stands out from the others among that list for #9

well yea, that proves my point, Spurs play a lot of 3-guard lineups and rotations, it's not surprising they've doubled down on more guards than combo forwards or bigs. which is why I have them now taking Williams, a combination of value+fit, which is pretty much what every pick is.

again, rarely is a player draft that is so much better than everyone else on the board where you don't look at a schematic or cultural fits on your roster. it just doesn't really happen all that often.

who at #9 can be considered a consensus best player available? i don't see it. i think you have a group of players you can argue warrant the pick, and from there you look at which of these players fits X team the best.

the concept of BPA in general is pretty dumb imo. GMs often use it just as a catch all so they don't tip their hand or their board, but again, unless you have a Zion staring you in the face, no such thing as BPA where nothing else even matters.