Reeko wrote:BoyzNTheHood wrote:Reeko wrote:Yeah, that's generally the M.O. of most smart front offices, you go with the BPA. You don't draft for positional need, that's how the Trail Blazers ended up with Sam Bowie instead of Michael Jordan. If our FO thinks that GG Jackson has All NBA potential down the road and think that George, Bufkin, and Coulibaly top out at role players, then guess what? They're probably going to take the forward with the higher upside even if the team does need a guard badly.
That’s untrue. BPA isn’t always the best option. If the BPA is a guy who will be stuck as a backup or on the bench it makes no sense to draft them. If a guy fits into your system like a glove it can be better for the long term than drafting a guy who doesn’t fit at all but has the most talent.
Well I guess it would be true in most instances, except for in your very specific scenario.
My own take is that with the draft at 13, you have to go BPA even if there is positional duplication. Toronto needs talented assets and the lottery is where you usually get a shot at it. Pascal has a year left, OG has signaled at times he wants out, and Scottie hasn't always looked the part of a superstar - so our roster or any roster is changeable.
I remember Denver when they had both Jokic and Nurkic and Nurkic was the starter for a couple years. They tried to play them together and it didn't work. It led to Nurkic being dealt to Portland and Jokic ascended to superstardom.
Imagine if Denver didn't burn their Taco Bell commercial 42 pick on Jokic at the time? Toronto would be even crazier to pass on a guy at 13 who is a much more likely to be a star.
Without hesitation, I would draft Dereck Lively despite Poeltl and Koloko if the front office believed in Lively being the next Gobert. Same with GG Jackson over OG/Pascal/Barnes. If there is real is like GG being the next Paul George, then it finally gives you an out with dealing Pascal or others.
