2025 Draft Thread - Part 2

[doclinkin]

I’m starting to think doc has a gargantuan fetish. Didn’t he love Edey last year too. Probably has every Godzilla movie ever made on 4K.

No but I saw Godzilla vs Kong at Bengies drive-in, way out in Middle of Nowhere Maryland. That was big dumb fun. And where I grew up as a kid, Sunday afternoon was for kung fu action flicks and Godzilla movies on TV.

Plus Muresan is my 2nd favorite Wizard.

Anyway I know nobody reads it, or possibly agrees, but my rant on the rise of Bigs has been a thing I've been hectoring about since way back in the small ball era. No knock on the 'littles' -- Stef Curry is probably my favorite player ever. Or favorite non-Wizard anyway. (Displacing Charles Oakley and John Starks). I just see an opportunity that has gone overlooked in the era of chuck it and f@ck it.

The quick version:

The longball game is streaky. Even the best 3pt shooting team missed 62% of those shots this year. That's a lot of rebounds. A 2pt dominant team could win by controlling pace, snatching all the bounces, scoring efficiently, waiting for the streaky team to grow cold. Starve them of chances to shoot back into the game.

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

The market inefficiency that is not being exploited lies not in shooting more from outside, but from feeding the post and scoring on the interior. You want to forcefeed the biggest of the bigs. Let them score while being hacked. Then you get +1 opportunities and weaken the opponents interior defense.

That only works if you have a dominant interior scoring big, and can get them the ball. The solution to the 2nd part: get tall skilled passers. Play keep-away from the little guys by exploiting the aerial passing lanes. Big-to-Big passing. And pick and roll. And a point pivot center who can play the hub position or run twin-big pick & roll options. Yes you want a stretch big to open up the paint. Nice if he can also pass well. You also want a power big.

Fun thing is if he is also a good offensive rebounder, all your own 3pt misses are now basically passes to the big man.

We got a mobile wannabe stretch 4/5 who can defend the perimeter. Have other long outside defenders who can force more misses from long range. Now we need a dominant interior scorer and lob finisher. A paint protector who encourages teams to reconsider attacking the middle, try another outside shot instead. Add 2nd line rebounders who can catch long bounces. Control the possession game and the efficiency game at the same time.

Currently Bigs are available and come cheap. But at some point teams will realize it. Especially as the League allows for rougher play, harder perimeter defense. Teams will invest in the position. If we snatch our Giant early, plus our Unicorn stopper, we will be ahead of the metagame. When we are ready to win we can add bench depth in the skilled seniors graduating in a few years. But until then we can develop a couple monsters in the middle with the highest possible upside talent we can land. Later the dominant ones may prove too expensive to find. It is easier to learn to dribble and shoot than it is to grow 7' tall.

[PaulinVA]

https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/i-believe-in-danny-wolf

Reservations about Danny Wolf aren’t unwarranted. He can be turnover prone, he’s a below-the-rim big man, and I’d be stunned if he ever became a high-end defensive anchor. Still, I’d be extremely leery of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. The NBA is leaning back into multiple big lineups, and those require guys who are big, skilled, and comfortable playing alongside another big man.

That’s Danny Wolf. He took on one of the strangest roles we’ve seen a 6’10.5” player take on in college, successfully operating as a pick-and-roll ball-handler. In that role, Wolf posted exceptional assist numbers while self-creating looks for himself in a way few other players his size can. On top of that, he grades out well as a shooter statistically and also put together one of the most diverse beyond-the-arc portfolios we’ve seen from big men. He’s got a pull-up three and he can move into it from deep. Plus, his ability to survive in space defensively paired with the athletic strides he’s made over the past few seasons are encouraging as it pertains to guarding five-out line-ups on the other side of the ball.

There’s a chance I could be wrong. Heck, like I said earlier, I’ve already been wrong about whether Wolf was a 2025 guy. But it’s hard for me to look at Danny Wolf, the role that he played, and the direction the NBA is going in and not see value in what he brings to the table. Double big is in. Five-out is in. Physicality is in. Plus, we know that historically, assist rates and assist-to-turnover ratios have been correlated with success for big men at the NBA level. All of this is too much for me to ignore. For these reasons, I believe in Danny Wolf—a lottery prospect on my board.

[payitforward]

Still my guy (*):

His shooting form is very impressive for a big. Very good rotation and backspin on the release. And I was encouraged by his footwork demonstrated in those videos. I was worried that he was nothing more than a roll man on offense, but it really looks like he is capable of much more than what he showed at Duke. Then factor his age and lack of experience, and he has so much improvement ahead of him.

I'm very comfortable with Maluach at #6, and I'm starting to actually be a little excited. I wonder if he might be a better pick than Tre Johnson even if Johnson slides.

I had the same response to his workout videos. This kid has such an extraordinary upside!

If I could trade our 3 picks for Brooklyn's 4 picks, I'd do it in a minute -- then hold my breath as the top of the draft unrolled. If that trade isn't available, I am prepared to take Maluach at 6. Just too much potential & too much of a unicorn -- not possible to pass on him.

[dobrojim]

Earlier this year when I first got more interested in Tankathon I hadn't paid attention to the differences between their
'big board' and their mock draft. I get what they are trying to do but it's interesting for a team as poor as us how they
pick is different. And different for other teams at least after the first 4 which is always Flagg/Harper/Ace/VJ.
More shuffling than I might've thought. Fears goes from 9th (BB) to 5th in mock.

[dckingsfan]

https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/i-believe-in-danny-wolf

Reservations about Danny Wolf aren’t unwarranted. He can be turnover prone, he’s a below-the-rim big man, and I’d be stunned if he ever became a high-end defensive anchor. Still, I’d be extremely leery of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. The NBA is leaning back into multiple big lineups, and those require guys who are big, skilled, and comfortable playing alongside another big man.

That’s Danny Wolf. He took on one of the strangest roles we’ve seen a 6’10.5” player take on in college, successfully operating as a pick-and-roll ball-handler. In that role, Wolf posted exceptional assist numbers while self-creating looks for himself in a way few other players his size can. On top of that, he grades out well as a shooter statistically and also put together one of the most diverse beyond-the-arc portfolios we’ve seen from big men. He’s got a pull-up three and he can move into it from deep. Plus, his ability to survive in space defensively paired with the athletic strides he’s made over the past few seasons are encouraging as it pertains to guarding five-out line-ups on the other side of the ball.

There’s a chance I could be wrong. Heck, like I said earlier, I’ve already been wrong about whether Wolf was a 2025 guy. But it’s hard for me to look at Danny Wolf, the role that he played, and the direction the NBA is going in and not see value in what he brings to the table. Double big is in. Five-out is in. Physicality is in. Plus, we know that historically, assist rates and assist-to-turnover ratios have been correlated with success for big men at the NBA level. All of this is too much for me to ignore. For these reasons, I believe in Danny Wolf—a lottery prospect on my board.

I don't think he is going higher than say 15. So, he could well be there at 18.

What do you think about his "below the rim" issue. Are you thinking he is a rotational big you could throw in next to our other bigs? If so, then don't you want to take him later?

[dckingsfan]

I’m starting to think doc has a gargantuan fetish. Didn’t he love Edey last year too. Probably has every Godzilla movie ever made on 4K.

No but I saw Godzilla vs Kong at Bengies drive-in, way out in Middle of Nowhere Maryland. That was big dumb fun. And where I grew up as a kid, Sunday afternoon was for kung fu action flicks and Godzilla movies on TV.

Plus Muresan is my 2nd favorite Wizard.

Anyway I know nobody reads it, or possibly agrees, but my rant on the rise of Bigs has been a thing I've been hectoring about since way back in the small ball era. No knock on the 'littles' -- Stef Curry is probably my favorite player ever. Or favorite non-Wizard anyway. (Displacing Charles Oakley and John Starks). I just see an opportunity that has gone overlooked in the era of chuck it and f@ck it.

The quick version:

The longball game is streaky. Even the best 3pt shooting team missed 62% of those shots this year. That's a lot of rebounds. A 2pt dominant team could win by controlling pace, snatching all the bounces, scoring efficiently, waiting for the streaky team to grow cold. Starve them of chances to shoot back into the game.

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

The market inefficiency that is not being exploited lies not in shooting more from outside, but from feeding the post and scoring on the interior. You want to forcefeed the biggest of the bigs. Let them score while being hacked. Then you get +1 opportunities and weaken the opponents interior defense.

That only works if you have a dominant interior scoring big, and can get them the ball. The solution to the 2nd part: get tall skilled passers. Play keep-away from the little guys by exploiting the aerial passing lanes. Big-to-Big passing. And pick and roll. And a point pivot center who can play the hub position or run twin-big pick & roll options. Yes you want a stretch big to open up the paint. Nice if he can also pass well. You also want a power big.

Fun thing is if he is also a good offensive rebounder, all your own 3pt misses are now basically passes to the big man.

We got a mobile wannabe stretch 4/5 who can defend the perimeter. Have other long outside defenders who can force more misses from long range. Now we need a dominant interior scorer and lob finisher. A paint protector who encourages teams to reconsider attacking the middle, try another outside shot instead. Add 2nd line rebounders who can catch long bounces. Control the possession game and the efficiency game at the same time.

Currently Bigs are available and come cheap. But at some point teams will realize it. Especially as the League allows for rougher play, harder perimeter defense. Teams will invest in the position. If we snatch our Giant early, plus our Unicorn stopper, we will be ahead of the metagame. When we are ready to win we can add bench depth in the skilled seniors graduating in a few years. But until then we can develop a couple monsters in the middle with the highest possible upside talent we can land. Later the dominant ones may prove too expensive to find. It is easier to learn to dribble and shoot than it is to grow 7' tall.

That and you are hoping your #1 option is from next year. It is fine to develop your bigs now - they take longer (as do PGs) to develop.

[AFM]

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

[WizarDynasty]

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

Remember, just because you feed a bug doesn't mean they can execute with volume and efficiency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.

The problem with the wiz bullets is building around plays who dont have a history of shooting .50 percent with volume in college. Beal never showed he could shoot.50. Wall never showed volume at .50. Porter...nope... Vesely...Coulibaly?.. How many years has been since we drafted a volume .50 scorer in college or at least close to .50 percent?
Probably Juwan Howard.. how long ago was that 20 plus tears ago? Wall and Beal were fools gold. You cant build around inefficient volume scorers. You tank until you get one ir trade your asserts to get a young one.

[trast66]

Re that Duke was a disappointment in the Tournament
I would say they did well. Their best player had a chance
to put them in the Final game and missed a shot he
probably makes 8/10 times. Nothing to be ashamed of.

They were a loaded team but the tourney is different.
The unexpected happens not infrequently.

Yeah, calling Duke a disappointment is silly. Basketball has a high randomness factor. Sometimes, the worse team just makes more shots than the better team. In a sudden-death tournament format, it's unreasonable to expect the best team to always win.

I think basketball has the lowest randomness factor among the major US team sports. Agree one game result in NCAA tourney is more random than an NBA playoff series, that’s why it’s called March madness.

[AFM]

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

Remember, just because doesn't mean they can execute with volume and effociency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.
Am

Shaq 2350 at 58%

[PaulinVA]

CBS has us going Fears and Wolf:

Watch on YouTube

[gesa2]

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

Remember, just because doesn't mean they can execute with volume and effociency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.
Am

Shaq 2350 at 58%

Alrighty you’ve got me convinced. Let’s draft Shaquille O’Neil

[dckingsfan]

There's an easy way to do that. Get a dominant scoring front line. And feed them.

The average TS% of Centers is 60.8% For PF's its 57.9%.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=average+fg%25+by+position+2025

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

Remember, just because you feed a bug doesn't mean they can execute with volume and efficiency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.

The problem with the wiz bullets is building around plays who dont have a history of shooting .50 percent with volume in college. Beal never showed he could shoot.50. Wall never showed volume at .50. Porter...nope... Vesely...Coulibaly?.. How many years has been since we drafted a volume .50 scorer in college or at least close to .50 percent?
Probably Juwan Howard.. how long ago was that 20 plus tears ago? Wall and Beal were fools gold. You cant build around inefficient volume scorers. You tank until you get one ir trade your asserts to get a young one.

Bigs and bugs, engines and turbines (now my head is spinning)...

But yeah, the Wizards don't have a power plant on the roster. Nor do I see any of the current players ever fitting that mold (IMO). Nor will we get one out of this draft (IMO).

Next year is the year to get our transformer

[AFM]

Remember, just because doesn't mean they can execute with volume and effociency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.
Am

Shaq 2350 at 58%

Alrighty you’ve got me convinced. Let’s draft Shaquille O’Neil

Unfortunately he’s not available but may I interest you in a Derik Queen?? #DDQ

[TheBlackCzar]

You're basically talking about drafting an "engine"--a term I've recently coined.

Remember, just because you feed a bug doesn't mean they can execute with volume and efficiency. 25 points per game for a big is alot body contact in the post over 82 games. What bigs show they have body to handle volume without injury. Thats an engine. Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Healthy Anthony Davis, Durant, maybe Jalen Brown. An Engine can score volume 1800 total at .50 percent.
Only 3 true engines last year. Giannis..2.0k, Jokic..,2.0k and Shai.2.4K.
Kareem in his prime drops 2.8K at .50 Jordan drops 2.900 in 88 shooting 53.8 percent.

The problem with the wiz bullets is building around plays who dont have a history of shooting .50 percent with volume in college. Beal never showed he could shoot.50. Wall never showed volume at .50. Porter...nope... Vesely...Coulibaly?.. How many years has been since we drafted a volume .50 scorer in college or at least close to .50 percent?
Probably Juwan Howard.. how long ago was that 20 plus tears ago? Wall and Beal were fools gold. You cant build around inefficient volume scorers. You tank until you get one ir trade your asserts to get a young one.

Bigs and bugs, engines and turbines (now my head is spinning)...

But yeah, the Wizards don't have a power plant on the roster. Nor do I see any of the current players ever fitting that mold (IMO). Nor will we get one out of this draft (IMO).

Next year is the year to get our transformer

I think we're going to draft Fears and Queen so you're right, were not going to get ONE but TWO out of this draft....

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Fears is young. Fears' FT% could translate well into 3PT%. Fears is still growing. Fears didn't have the teammates (for a high assist ratio).

You are betting on the long-term upside as you are with most of the players after 4 in this year's draft.

Now, is he a better prospect than Nolan Traore? Smh... shmaybe. Dylan Harper is the only guy I give a free pass.

I rate Traore, Richardson (if he can transition to PG) and Fears in the same group. Do I pick any of the 3 at 6? Hmmm... probably because next year's draft doesn't seem to be loaded with PGs.

I run away from Demin (but that is just me).

I also think one of Noa Essengue, Carter Bryant or Nique Clifford will be really good. I wouldn't mind trading down or up to try to get two of them.

This is a really hard draft in this way - I give the FO a pass on this one - although they have been pretty darn good at drafting.

I think team chemistry will be compromised if a young PG is added. None of these guys are on a tier that projects them to be superstars.

Adding any one of Richardson, Traore, or Fears will SURELY set back Bub Carrington and A.J. Johnson.

The elephant in the room: What about Jordan Poole?

He's accustomed to starting minutes. He's a young, talented NBA player whose trade value the Wizards need to maintain high.

Personally, I think drafting a PG after moving up the last draft to draft a PG is STUPID. I could say I don't believe drafting perceived BPA applies in a vacuum without considering that the team needs other players at other positions who are on the same tier.

Fears probably should not be the pick. If he becomes a superstar or multiple all-star, I'm wrong.

Derik Queen makes more sense than Fears

Cameron Murray-Broyles makes sense than Fears.

Healthy Thomas Sorber makes more sense than Fears

ERIC DIXON makes more sense than Fears.

Will Riley makes more sense than Fears. He violates my redundancy Fears/Knueppel argument because I think Riley could become an SGA-lite.

Just a few off the top. THE TEAM NEEDS SCORING EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS inside, BIG TO BIG PASSING, and INTERIOR DEFENSE.

I think Dixon is one of the most underrated players in this draft.

There are players like Ryan Kalkbrenner who can help the Wizards. He's worth a late first, just like Dixon and Kam Jones (he's more of a bucket getter than anyone on the roster, but he would have to ride pine behind Poole.)

I have come to the opposite conclusion on this exact point. Bub is not a Point Guard, the rest of the team can manage ok around his current game, but if the FO sees Fears as a potential star/allstar point guard, he must be seriously considered, this group is going no-where w/o an elite point guard in the drivers seat.

Sorry I didn't respond.

Yes, if they're pretty convinced that Fears is a future star, I see your point. Give up on Bub being the ideal lead.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I would call it a good draft if we end up with Maluach, Sorber, and Powell. Those are who I am gunning for, but not at 6, 18 and 40 - we will need to make some trades. 6 is too high for Maluach, 18 may be too low for Sorber, and 40 is definitely too low for Powell.

The team will be built on defense first:
C: Sorber, Sarr, Maluach, [Holmes]
C/PF: Sarr, Maluach
PF: Champagnie, Powell
SF: Coulibaly, Chanpagnie, [Middleton], [Bey], Martin
SG: [Poole], George, Johnson, [Kispert], Jones
PG: Carrington, [Poole], [Smart]

Players in [brackets] are ones who can be trade assets. Trade them and the deconstruction phase will be done with.
I go back and forth on Champagnie on if we should keep/trade him.
A combination of Sorber and Sarr, or Sarr and Maluach could give us some good versatility in complimentary players who are also able to run the P+R with any of the guards. Sarr can hit the 3-ball, and the other bigs will need to develop that shot. Whats good is that Sorber and Maluach have size to beef with the bigger C's on other teams, and will be good rebounders.

The team will not have a young offensive stud, at least none that I can see in this young group. Thats what the 2026 draft is for...or maybe trades...

Keep Champagnie. Rebounds at position are important.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/champju01.html

Justin's Career On/Off Per 100 Possesions is good: 3.6
(See Play-by-Play)

Champagnie is a good player. PER 15.7, TS% .614, 3PT% .383. 2PT% .624

Per 36 minutes: 14.6 PTS, 9.4 REBS, 1.6 ASTS, 1.7 STLS, 1.0 BLKS, 1.5 TOS

Justin is legitimately good in every category. He's a great SF rebounder.

Definitely keep him.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I would bet my house that we're not drafting Knueppel, Corey would become even more dead weight than he is currently.

I used to live in a house.

Since my divorce and life/health struggles, the ex-wife got the house. I have experienced homelessness and living in a veterans homeless shelter. Now, I live in a group home.

Life's "Box of Chocolates" occasionally serves you a candy-coated marble.

(But it's all good in the hood. "God is good all the time, and all the time, God is good.)...

It's a narrow aperture through which we know one another on this forum.
But we do get to know one another pretty well all the same.

Here's the most important thing I know about you, Ken, after more than a dozen years:
You are a high-quality human being.

I'm 82: I've lived a lot of different ways in a lot of different places.
I've been around. I know whereof I speak.

:)

Thanks, sir. God bless you. I appreciate you and hang on your every word as wisdom.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

My preference, as I've made pretty clear, is to trade down & get Essengue plus an extra pick or two....

I would like Essengue as well. But... I think he goes no lower than 13 (some have him higher along with Fleming). So, trading down becomes risky (IMO)?

I have been puzzling over a trade to make this happen for some time - got nothing that I think actually works

I think the trade is to Brooklyn at 8 + stuff for Fears at 6. If Ainge doesn't beat us to it with the #5 pick.

It was bugging me for a while where I had seen it before, but the player that Fears reminds me of is Rod Strickland. Same control of pace, accel and decel, misdirection, fakey-slow quick to quicker, same below the rim game and ability to play in traffic. I buy his game feel, improved assists with better performers around him, I'll bet heavy on the futures of his jumpshot, improved outside range. He's not going to carry a 30+% usage rate in the NBA, at least not early. I like his confidence and work ethic. People keep saying he is skinny, he's not. Just young. He has a solidity about his game, seeking contact and playing off it, that reads to me as strength in waiting. Still growing but I think he grows into his frame, even adds lift to his jump and finishing ability. He'd be a star in the New York market.

AND it's probably not the best asset management to take another lead guard. I don't see great synergy between Fears and Bub. Not worried about Poole actually, I expect we will trade him, probably mid year if he is playing well and draws offers, but as an offensive mentor to Fears I can see his off court work ethic inspiring the kid to work on his shot range and off the dribble jumper game. We are still hunting a star ourselves. I just think the Wiz brain trust is more likely to stick to their formula: positional length, defense, athleticism, BBIQ, upside. Fears has all of that except positional length. Essengue has all of that. Maluach has all that in the hardest position to get superior length.

If we are not trading up for Bailey, I think we see who wants to jump in at 6. But if nothing materializes I would not be surprised if they took a guy other than Tre or Fears with that 6th pick. Essengue is their usual model, even if we already have that guy a few times on our roster. Carter Bryant has muscle/power in addition to the other qualities. Maluach has some duplication with Sarr but that's not a bad thing, takes wear and tear off him and lets him continue to develop in the stretch big role.

I still want Khaman and his 75% scoring from 2. Our passers need a finisher on the interior. Our weak front court needs an intimidator on defense. If his medicals stay green, I trust him to develop as a deterrent in the paint, banking on his size, smarts, and instinct for physicality. But he does have the achilles heel in a thing that no one can control. Politics and the madness of our foreign policy. So he may skid a few spots.

Which is fine with me. Given that there are 2-4 guys I see as a fit for the front office's mindset, why not slip back a bit and trust they can catch the guy they want. Land additional assets for the other guys they want. It was maddening to me that I couldn't quite decide on a guy at 6, or guess who they would pick. Especially as the young Euro talent rises. But now I see it as a strength. The growing certainty we will get someone good. If the overseas talent displaces a guy at the top, it forces lower players like Sorber (turf toe concerns), CMB (size and shooting), Queen (defense), Maluach (politics and box score stats).

This draft is still deep in an odd way. Young talent stayed in the first round, while the 2nd round is all seasoned and proven upperclassmen.

I won't be surprised with anybody they take at 6, I don't think. If they do pick there. I also have a feeling they will be active in the trade market, and try to jump up a few spots with every pick they have, 6 to 3, 18 into the lottery, 40 up into the 1st round.

Trivia:

In 1987, the Knicks drafted PG Mark Jackson.
Jackson finished 1987-1988 All Rookie

In 1988, the Knicks drafted PG Rod Strickland.
Strickland finished 1988-1989 All Rookie

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/1989.html

The 1988-1989 New York Knicks went 52-30 with 23-year-old Mark Jackson starting and 22-year-old Rod Strickland backing him up.

The Wizards could draft Fears if both he and Bub Carrington can play.

(However, what ended up happening between Jackson/Strickland)

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

When I was a kid, I rooted Baltimore >> DC

O's, Colts, Bullets.

Jim, those were my teams as well.

My father was a Redskins fan. I liked the Colts. Bert Jones and Lydell Mitchell were great.