2019 NBA Draft Prep

[observer1995]

You people have no Bols.

That's clearly because most of us are not fans of him at all.

[Geaux_Hawks]

I would take Jaxson Hayes over Culver and Hunter. If we could use our 2nds and Cleveland first to move up, then I would take Culver or Hunter though, ad I would probably lean more towards Hunter as he has elite 3 & D written all over him.

[King Ken]

I would take Jaxson Hayes over Culver and Hunter. If we could use our 2nds and Cleveland first to move up, then I would take Culver or Hunter though, ad I would probably lean more towards Hunter as he has elite 3 & D written all over him.

Same boat. I'll take Hayes over those two. I would also take Fernando over those two. That being said, I really like Hunter and if Cam & R.J. is gone, he is clearly the best option. It's hard for me to take Culver. I just don't see it. I've heard taller Caris LeVert from his supporters but I was a Caris college fan as well, Caris shot the ball much better than Culver in college. Both aren't all that quick and more skill based but Caris is at his best when he shooting threes well. When he's not, he is a clear bench player. Caris wasn't as good as Culver is on defense or BBIQ but Caris like I said, shot the ball much better and didn't need a screen to consistently get his shot off.

Evan Turner is the player that keeps coming up for me. Even in the data.

[Spud2nique]

For me it’s easy choices. Hawks pick 1st? Zion all day. 2nd? Ja, then make a team desperate for the next Trae trade you a king’s ransom for him. 3rd? RJ. 4th+? Cam. Then take Culver with Mavs’ pick, Hunter if Culver is already off the board. Good defensive wings.

I’m going straight two wings. I mean throw in the Gonzaga boys and Cam, Culver and Hunter you’re talking 5 guys right there. And we project to have 2 top 10 picks. Trade up, trade down. Get a Keldon at 14, get Jaamal’s boy Sekou D. at 16. We have options for sure.

Can you imagine a Trae to Clarke oop??

What about running in transition for a Culver slam or a Cam pull up 3 from Trae?

We can dream all day. A bunch of prospects now look better due to Trae alone! Thank you Colonel!

[King Ken]

Someone on the Bulls forum literally made me change my mind on Culver as a prospect. Since Feb, I've dropped him from the top 10 to around #13-17 range but maybe he is a top 6-9 prospect if he changes positions. He mentioned it and I've watched a lot of TT games and I can see it. Culver is a primary ballhandling PG used like SGA. This changes everything. All of a sudden, his average first step is not a big deal because all he will get is screens and off the ball actions for mid range and post ups. He can shoot over most PG's so not having is 3 ball is okay at PG if you have that height and length like SGA has. Unlike Evan Turner, he makes great decisions and has very high BBIQ so he will make the right decisions. He can provide defensive versatility. At his height 6'6-6-7 and a 7ft wingspan, he becomes a top end defensive PG. Even with just solid lateral quickness, his length at that position will effect shots as the average PG is around 6'3.

This gives him a high floor and mid-high ceiling which is a potential 1-2 time all star obviously depending on the competition. That's miles better than all of my SG/SF projections which had him peaking as a high end backup.

The question is are you willing to accept a Collin Sexton like playmaker in a better package of SGA overall skill-set as a PG. Culver does a lot of good in off the ball actions in terms of decision making as well so that can lower the sting of him lacking some of the playmaking skills needed from the PG position.

This is a game changer for me. I've always rated him based on being a potential wing. Not a PG. As a PG, his ceiling is much higher. It's similar to Clarke. The reason Clarke is rated highly by me is because I rate him as a SF, not a PF/C. The position I think he is best suited for in the NBA.

[Spud2nique]

Someone on the Bulls forum literally made me change my mind on Culver as a prospect. Since Feb, I've dropped him from the top 10 to around #13-17 range but maybe he is a top 6-9 prospect if he changes positions. He mentioned it and I've watched a lot of TT games and I can see it. Culver is a primary ballhandling PG used like SGA. This changes everything. All of a sudden, his average first step is not a big deal because all he will get is screens and off the ball actions for mid range and post ups. He can shoot over most PG's so not having is 3 ball is okay at PG if you have that height and length like SGA has. Unlike Evan Turner, he makes great decisions and has very high BBIQ so he will make the right decisions. He can provide defensive versatility. At his height 6'6-6-7 and a 7ft wingspan, he becomes a top end defensive PG. Even with just solid lateral quickness, his length at that position will effect shots as the average PG is around 6'3.

This gives him a high floor and mid-high ceiling which is a potential 1-2 time all star obviously depending on the competition. That's miles better than all of my SG/SF projections which had him peaking as a high end backup.

The question is are you willing to accept a Collin Sexton like playmaker in a better package of SGA overall skill-set as a PG. Culver does a lot of good in off the ball actions in terms of decision making as well so that can lower the sting of him lacking some of the playmaking skills needed from the PG position.

This is a game changer for me. I've always rated him based on being a potential wing. Not a PG. As a PG, his ceiling is much higher. It's similar to Clarke. The reason Clarke is rated highly by me is because I rate him as a SF, not a PF/C. The position I think he is best suited for in the NBA.

Someone on the Bulls board and not me?

I kid I kid, as long as you are on board because Culver is very real to me. I also again don’t see the Collin Sexton comparison as a SG for Culver. I see a basketball player willing to do anything to help his team win. On nights when they need scoring he will assist, on other nights he will facilitate as a decoy. He’s an overall basketball player to me and we’d be lucky to get him on the Hawks. I see a very special player here.

[King Ken]

Someone on the Bulls forum literally made me change my mind on Culver as a prospect. Since Feb, I've dropped him from the top 10 to around #13-17 range but maybe he is a top 6-9 prospect if he changes positions. He mentioned it and I've watched a lot of TT games and I can see it. Culver is a primary ballhandling PG used like SGA. This changes everything. All of a sudden, his average first step is not a big deal because all he will get is screens and off the ball actions for mid range and post ups. He can shoot over most PG's so not having is 3 ball is okay at PG if you have that height and length like SGA has. Unlike Evan Turner, he makes great decisions and has very high BBIQ so he will make the right decisions. He can provide defensive versatility. At his height 6'6-6-7 and a 7ft wingspan, he becomes a top end defensive PG. Even with just solid lateral quickness, his length at that position will effect shots as the average PG is around 6'3.

This gives him a high floor and mid-high ceiling which is a potential 1-2 time all star obviously depending on the competition. That's miles better than all of my SG/SF projections which had him peaking as a high end backup.

The question is are you willing to accept a Collin Sexton like playmaker in a better package of SGA overall skill-set as a PG. Culver does a lot of good in off the ball actions in terms of decision making as well so that can lower the sting of him lacking some of the playmaking skills needed from the PG position.

This is a game changer for me. I've always rated him based on being a potential wing. Not a PG. As a PG, his ceiling is much higher. It's similar to Clarke. The reason Clarke is rated highly by me is because I rate him as a SF, not a PF/C. The position I think he is best suited for in the NBA.

Someone on the Bulls board and not me?

I kid I kid, as long as you are on board because Culver is very real to me. I also again don’t see the Collin Sexton comparison as a SG for Culver. I see a basketball player willing to do anything to help his team win. On nights when they need scoring he will assist, on other nights he will facilitate as a decoy. He’s an overall basketball player to me and we’d be lucky to get him on the Hawks. I see a very special player here.

I am not comparing him to Sexton, I am saying his playmaking ability is similar to Sexton. Otherwise he is an unique player. He can actually be good if you just play him at PG. When you starting playing him at other positions, you kill his effectiveness. Basically turn him into a bench player. I like the Shai comparisons. I think he is actually better than Shai but Shai PG skills are just much further along at this stage but he can play if you just use him as a PG (primary ballhandler).

[azuresou1]

My opinion is that every single wing prospect in this class is really flawed in some dimension, and I honestly am not *excited* to draft anyone not named Zion at this point. I see a lot of serviceable players who can certainly contribute in some regards, but very rough paths to stardom.

RJ - poor man's DeRozan, not good enough to be the 'alpha' on a team and too limited to be anything other than the first option. Will have a Rudy Gay type impact.

Cam - has talent but didn't show up at all at Duke, looked super passive. Shades of Wiggins/Marvin Williams/Harrison Barnes

Culver - good but not great offensive skill set, capped by average athleticism. He reminds me the most of Steve Smith, or maybe Khris Middleton

Hunter - 3&D role player

Hachimura - nothing wrong with him... also nothing that jumps out about him. Reminds me of Utah-era Millsap, probably needs to play the 4 in the NBA

Doumbouya - like the fluidity and his skillset at his size, but he's really raw. High risk, and would be at minimum 3 years away from being a net neutral on the court.

Langford - reminds me a lot of Austin Rivers

Little - you love the athleticism and ability to finish around the basket, as well as his potential as a defender... you hate everything else. Best case you get a slightly less athletic Gerald Wallace, worst case he's in China in 3 seasons

Johnson - despite how much I like his skillset, the most accurate comparison I've seen is Xavier Henry, and when you consider how Henry ended up in the league... would not be a promising outcome

Am I missing anyone?

[personanongrata]

For me it’s easy choices. Hawks pick 1st? Zion all day. 2nd? Ja, then make a team desperate for the next Trae trade you a king’s ransom for him. 3rd? RJ. 4th+? Cam. Then take Culver with Mavs’ pick, Hunter if Culver is already off the board. Good defensive wings.

King's ransom? You mean like the top-5 protected pick we got for Luka? If anything we have even less leverage this time because teams know we already have a point guard. I know I'm in the minority, but if you don't get a strong trade offer, I would draft him and let him back up Trae. Could give us a excellent second unit, and give Trae a chance to play off the ball at times. Don't pass on Ja for a mediocre wing, hell no to that.

[observer1995]

Culver’s either a big off PG that can handle like Shai or a SF that can be a complimentary playmaker who takes advantage of defensive attention/space with intelligence/length as a 3rd/4th option. I can’t see him getting past the Bulls if they stay in the top 5, because he honestly fits what they need like a glove in my opinion. They could use a true PG, but if not a true PG, Culver fits them as a guy that LaVine can play off of well off the ball.

Can’t see him getting past the Cavs either tbh. Cavs either draft Barrett or Culver, depending on if they stay at 3 or move up/down.

[King Ken]

My opinion is that every single wing prospect in this class is really flawed in some dimension, and I honestly am not *excited* to draft anyone not named Zion at this point. I see a lot of serviceable players who can certainly contribute in some regards, but very rough paths to stardom.

RJ - poor man's DeRozan, not good enough to be the 'alpha' on a team and too limited to be anything other than the first option. Will have a Rudy Gay type impact.

Cam - has talent but didn't show up at all at Duke, looked super passive. Shades of Wiggins/Marvin Williams/Harrison Barnes

Culver - good but not great offensive skill set, capped by average athleticism. He reminds me the most of Steve Smith, or maybe Khris Middleton

Hunter - 3&D role player

Hachimura - nothing wrong with him... also nothing that jumps out about him. Reminds me of Utah-era Millsap, probably needs to play the 4 in the NBA

Doumbouya - like the fluidity and his skillset at his size, but he's really raw. High risk, and would be at minimum 3 years away from being a net neutral on the court.

Langford - reminds me a lot of Austin Rivers

Little - you love the athleticism and ability to finish around the basket, as well as his potential as a defender... you hate everything else. Best case you get a slightly less athletic Gerald Wallace, worst case he's in China in 3 seasons

Johnson - despite how much I like his skillset, the most accurate comparison I've seen is Xavier Henry, and when you consider how Henry ended up in the league... would not be a promising outcome

Am I missing anyone?

Other than R.J. and Langford, it's pretty damn good in general honestly. Langford is just a much better talent than Rivers. R.J. on the other hand got great talent. He will be a great NBA player in the long run.

I'll say Cam got some Marvin in him in terms of dribbling and finishing in traffic for a wing being quite abysmal. I don't see Marvin in him in terms of the ability to play on the wing. Something I've always doubted for Marvin. Marvin was before his time unfortunately for his pay and career as he was a 3 and D stretch 4. That has tremendous value today sadly not in 2005.

[Geaux_Hawks]

Someone on the Bulls forum literally made me change my mind on Culver as a prospect. Since Feb, I've dropped him from the top 10 to around #13-17 range but maybe he is a top 6-9 prospect if he changes positions. He mentioned it and I've watched a lot of TT games and I can see it. Culver is a primary ballhandling PG used like SGA. This changes everything. All of a sudden, his average first step is not a big deal because all he will get is screens and off the ball actions for mid range and post ups. He can shoot over most PG's so not having is 3 ball is okay at PG if you have that height and length like SGA has. Unlike Evan Turner, he makes great decisions and has very high BBIQ so he will make the right decisions. He can provide defensive versatility. At his height 6'6-6-7 and a 7ft wingspan, he becomes a top end defensive PG. Even with just solid lateral quickness, his length at that position will effect shots as the average PG is around 6'3.

This gives him a high floor and mid-high ceiling which is a potential 1-2 time all star obviously depending on the competition. That's miles better than all of my SG/SF projections which had him peaking as a high end backup.

The question is are you willing to accept a Collin Sexton like playmaker in a better package of SGA overall skill-set as a PG. Culver does a lot of good in off the ball actions in terms of decision making as well so that can lower the sting of him lacking some of the playmaking skills needed from the PG position.

This is a game changer for me. I've always rated him based on being a potential wing. Not a PG. As a PG, his ceiling is much higher. It's similar to Clarke. The reason Clarke is rated highly by me is because I rate him as a SF, not a PF/C. The position I think he is best suited for in the NBA.

SGA has got better body control, and better IQ as a PG. Culver has been more of a 2 guard, that can essentially do everything, but SGA at least played PG at a higher level than what Culver can coming into the draft. Culver just seem to be a 6th man scorer/high end role player. I mean if he can actually learned to play as a PG, it would be an interesting idea. With that said, I don't think he has the lateral quickness to stay with quick, bursty guards to consider him a stud defensive PG.

[King Ken]

Culver’s either a big off PG that can handle like Shai or a SF that can be a complimentary playmaker who takes advantage of defensive attention/space with intelligence/length as a 3rd/4th option. I can’t see him getting past the Bulls if they stay in the top 5, because he honestly fits what they need like a glove in my opinion. They could use a true PG, but if not a true PG, Culver fits them as a guy that LaVine can play off of well off the ball.

Can’t see him getting past the Cavs either tbh. Cavs either draft Barrett or Culver, depending on if they stay at 3 or move up/down.

He is basically a worse offensive Denzel Valentine on the wing. Of course his defense is much better but offensively, Culver just doesn't translate. The whole Steve Smith thing would be ideal in 1992 but not so much in 2019. He would be the wing example of Jahlil Okafor or better yet, the example we have already in Evan Turner to an even lesser degree.

[King Ken]

Someone on the Bulls forum literally made me change my mind on Culver as a prospect. Since Feb, I've dropped him from the top 10 to around #13-17 range but maybe he is a top 6-9 prospect if he changes positions. He mentioned it and I've watched a lot of TT games and I can see it. Culver is a primary ballhandling PG used like SGA. This changes everything. All of a sudden, his average first step is not a big deal because all he will get is screens and off the ball actions for mid range and post ups. He can shoot over most PG's so not having is 3 ball is okay at PG if you have that height and length like SGA has. Unlike Evan Turner, he makes great decisions and has very high BBIQ so he will make the right decisions. He can provide defensive versatility. At his height 6'6-6-7 and a 7ft wingspan, he becomes a top end defensive PG. Even with just solid lateral quickness, his length at that position will effect shots as the average PG is around 6'3.

This gives him a high floor and mid-high ceiling which is a potential 1-2 time all star obviously depending on the competition. That's miles better than all of my SG/SF projections which had him peaking as a high end backup.

The question is are you willing to accept a Collin Sexton like playmaker in a better package of SGA overall skill-set as a PG. Culver does a lot of good in off the ball actions in terms of decision making as well so that can lower the sting of him lacking some of the playmaking skills needed from the PG position.

This is a game changer for me. I've always rated him based on being a potential wing. Not a PG. As a PG, his ceiling is much higher. It's similar to Clarke. The reason Clarke is rated highly by me is because I rate him as a SF, not a PF/C. The position I think he is best suited for in the NBA.

SGA has got better body control, and better IQ as a PG. Culver has been more of a 2 guard, that can essentially do everything, but SGA at least played PG at a higher level than what Culver can coming into the draft. Culver just seem to be a 6th man scorer/high end role player. I mean if he can actually learned to play as a PG, it would be an interesting idea. With that said, I don't think he has the lateral quickness to stay with quick, bursty guards to consider him a stud defensive PG.

I agree, he clearly would be more of a Steve Smith in Miami PG than anything. Both players have very good good BBIQ but like Clarke on the wing, Culver will need time to translate to the PG spot. Like you, I don't think he will ever be able to defend the quick Trae PGs of the NBA. But like the other tall PGs, they tend to do better v. The bigger Bledsoe types that the Traes of the world struggle with.

[Geaux_Hawks]

For me it’s easy choices. Hawks pick 1st? Zion all day. 2nd? Ja, then make a team desperate for the next Trae trade you a king’s ransom for him. 3rd? RJ. 4th+? Cam. Then take Culver with Mavs’ pick, Hunter if Culver is already off the board. Good defensive wings.

King's ransom? You mean like the top-5 protected pick we got for Luka? If anything we have even less leverage this time because teams know we already have a point guard. I know I'm in the minority, but if you don't get a strong trade offer, I would draft him and let him back up Trae. Could give us a excellent second unit, and give Trae a chance to play off the ball at times. Don't pass on Ja for a mediocre wing, hell no to that.

If we have the #2 pick, , having Trae will not put us into a position with less leverage. If anything, it gives us all the leverage if Morant is the consensus #2 best prospect. If he's 80% of Russell Westbrook, teams will be knocking our door down to give us an offer. We would be in a Boston situation with Fultz. Whoever isn't in the top 3, will surely be calling to move up for Ja knowing we don't need him, and could either take RJ or take Morant with the idea that we will auction him off to the highest bidder. If the team picking at #4 doesn't like Cam, or thinks taking Culver/Hunter/White/Garland is to high for them, then of course they're calling.

Let's just assume NYK end up with #1:

Cleveland may want to guarantee themselves RJ since they have Sexton already.

Phoenix & Chicago probably needs Ja more than anybody. Every other position is set for them

Would NOP consider rebuilding with Ja over Tatum? If so, we can facilitate that with us taking Tatum and sending Morant to NOP essentially.

Memphis wants to bet on Morant being a better pro prospect over JJJ?!

Just a few ideas, but get as creative as you want.

[Hazer]

For me it’s easy choices. Hawks pick 1st? Zion all day. 2nd? Ja, then make a team desperate for the next Trae trade you a king’s ransom for him. 3rd? RJ. 4th+? Cam. Then take Culver with Mavs’ pick, Hunter if Culver is already off the board. Good defensive wings.

King's ransom? You mean like the top-5 protected pick we got for Luka? If anything we have even less leverage this time because teams know we already have a point guard. I know I'm in the minority, but if you don't get a strong trade offer, I would draft him and let him back up Trae. Could give us a excellent second unit, and give Trae a chance to play off the ball at times. Don't pass on Ja for a mediocre wing, hell no to that.

If we have the #2 pick, , having Trae will not put us into a position with less leverage. If anything, it gives us all the leverage if Morant is the consensus #2 best prospect. If he's 80% of Russell Westbrook, teams will be knocking our door down to give us an offer. We would be in a Boston situation with Fultz. Whoever isn't in the top 3, will surely be calling to move up for Ja knowing we don't need him, and could either take RJ or take Morant with the idea that we will auction him off to the highest bidder. If the team picking at #4 doesn't like Cam, or thinks taking Culver/Hunter/White/Garland is to high for them, then of course they're calling.

Let's just assume NYK end up with #1:

Cleveland may want to guarantee themselves RJ since they have Sexton already.

Phoenix & Chicago probably needs Ja more than anybody. Every other position is set for them

Would NOP consider rebuilding with Ja over Tatum? If so, we can facilitate that with us taking Tatum and sending Morant to NOP essentially.

Memphis wants to bet on Morant being a better pro prospect over JJJ?!

Just a few ideas, but get as creative as you want.

^Pretty much my line of thinking^

[Hazer]

King's ransom? You mean like the top-5 protected pick we got for Luka? If anything we have even less leverage this time because teams know we already have a point guard. I know I'm in the minority, but if you don't get a strong trade offer, I would draft him and let him back up Trae. Could give us a excellent second unit, and give Trae a chance to play off the ball at times. Don't pass on Ja for a mediocre wing, hell no to that.

If we have the #2 pick, , having Trae will not put us into a position with less leverage. If anything, it gives us all the leverage if Morant is the consensus #2 best prospect. If he's 80% of Russell Westbrook, teams will be knocking our door down to give us an offer. We would be in a Boston situation with Fultz. Whoever isn't in the top 3, will surely be calling to move up for Ja knowing we don't need him, and could either take RJ or take Morant with the idea that we will auction him off to the highest bidder. If the team picking at #4 doesn't like Cam, or thinks taking Culver/Hunter/White/Garland is to high for them, then of course they're calling.

Let's just assume NYK end up with #1:

Cleveland may want to guarantee themselves RJ since they have Sexton already.

Phoenix & Chicago probably needs Ja more than anybody. Every other position is set for them

Would NOP consider rebuilding with Ja over Tatum? If so, we can facilitate that with us taking Tatum and sending Morant to NOP essentially.

Memphis wants to bet on Morant being a better pro prospect over JJJ?!

Just a few ideas, but get as creative as you want.

^Pretty much my line of thinking^

If Schlenk doesn’t land overall #1 and Zion, the dribble-pass-shoot guys he’s targeteing could probably be had with the Dallas pick. So if Hawks pick 2nd, you definitely take Morant there and start fielding phone calls. Hell, I bet they entertain deals even if they land #1/Zion.

[Hazer]

If the basketball draft gods shine on the Hawks and we land #1 overall Zion, halleluyurrr praisss da Lort. However, I’m still fielding these 2 “trade back” phone calls if I’m Colonel Schlenk: Ayton and the Suns pick for Zion, JJJ and the Grizz pick for Zion.

[King Ken]

Not fielding calls for Zion herr

[Spud2nique]

I wouldn’t trade Zion for anything. They’d have to bring something to the table above a Hershel Walker type trade for me to bite. Zion is special.

We have options though let’s see where we draft first.