I will keep saying it there is no stud in this draft imo.Bassman wrote:Guys, watching the playoffs and seeing the level of speed, competitiveness, depth and skill on these teams, I’ve come to a serious conclusion:
…WE NEED A LOT MORE OF ALL OF THE ABOVE!
Whomever we pick in this question mark draft better be a hit. Doesn’t have to be a star, but a big swing and miss puts us well behind the recovery plan. So glad Lee is our coach..feel like his acumen for evaluation and development is bound to be sharp. Part of his mission is to identify the biggest potential STUD, and the biggest potential DUD among the top ranked prospects. Let’s all play the game; limit your selections to those players identified as top 10 prospects by the NBA (list is in this thread). My choices as of this date:
> Biggest Potential STUD - Ricacher: As young as he is, he has the length, skill set and shooting touch to be a special player. Is athletic, but needs a better handle to be an elite player. Could fit in very well beside Miller in a Charles Lee scheme.
> Biggest Potential DUD - Alex Sarr: WHAT??? Let me explain. I don’t think Sarr will have a bad career, but for a guy most think will be picked number 1, his offense is pretty limited. Not really big enough to be a center with that thin frame, and not yet skilled enough to play a stretch 4. Does he develop these skills and become a star? Or plays just OK, and joins the list of #1 misses on bigs?
These wings for the most part are 3&D type wings. If you looking for a stud then we are probably better off trading that pick for a guy like Brandon Ingram.
I think defense will be a major part in the decision. Lee mentioned defense and this roster currently doesn't have many defenders. I'm thinking Sarr/Castle/Risacher/Holland are guys who could bring defense.