RealGM

It's a week old now, and there's been a combine, but this listing still mainly holds true...



I don't want Hayes, but he's a pretty popular guy among the mockers, 5 sending him here @ 8, and 7 sending him here @ 10.

I think he'll be a good NBA player, but I just don't even see him as anything but that.

Same for Langford. Same for White. Same for Porter.

Some of the others like Culver and Hunter, I'll just be content with, but don't really want.

Probably Reddish but I could be wrong

Of those being mocked to us Hayes is the one I dont want. But of all the players, Little is the guy I would be upset with. Just dont want him at all.

bol, hayes, fernando

I don’t want Culver, Reddish, Little, or Bol.

Hayes or Bol. Did I mention Hayes?

Culver to be honest. I am not sold on his upside and fit. I still think Kevin is just a SG and i am convinced so is Culver who really is an oversized PG

King Ken wrote:Culver to be honest. I am not sold on his upside and fit. I still think Kevin is just a SG and i am convinced so is Culver who really is an oversized PG

Not challenging you, but just asking for elaboration.... and is oversized PG a bad thing?... why so?

Only one for me........
Bol Manute Bol: Son of Manute Bol, Grandson of Madute Bol and Bol Chol Bol.

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:

King Ken wrote:Culver to be honest. I am not sold on his upside and fit. I still think Kevin is just a SG and i am convinced so is Culver who really is an oversized PG

Not challenging you, but just asking for elaboration.... and is oversized PG a bad thing?... why so?

No, its not.

The question is who do I not want at 8. He is my answer. I would rather Reddish then Hunter.

King Ken wrote:

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:

King Ken wrote:Culver to be honest. I am not sold on his upside and fit. I still think Kevin is just a SG and i am convinced so is Culver who really is an oversized PG

Not challenging you, but just asking for elaboration.... and is oversized PG a bad thing?... why so?

No, its not.

The question is who do I not want at 8. He is my answer. I would rather Reddish then Hunter.

So, if I'm getting you correctly, it's more about "not sold on his upside" than it is about being an oversized PG then... the second part isn't actually material.

Don't want Reddish. He's a homeless mans Rudy Gay

After my reaction to the trade for Trae Young, whoever Travis drafts I'm good with!

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:

King Ken wrote:

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:

Not challenging you, but just asking for elaboration.... and is oversized PG a bad thing?... why so?

No, its not.

The question is who do I not want at 8. He is my answer. I would rather Reddish then Hunter.

So, if I'm getting you correctly, it's more about "not sold on his upside" than it is about being an oversized PG then... the second part isn't actually material.

I took it as him seeing a conflict with Huerter and Culver vying for the same minutes.

Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:

King Ken wrote:No, its not.

The question is who do I not want at 8. He is my answer. I would rather Reddish then Hunter.

So, if I'm getting you correctly, it's more about "not sold on his upside" than it is about being an oversized PG then... the second part isn't actually material.

I took it as him seeing a conflict with Huerter and Culver vying for the same minutes.

Exactly, neither can really defend SFs and the offensive fit isn't seamless either.

Culver is clearly a better player at this stage than Reddish but Reddish is a better SF as far as the NBA is concerned, fit, talent and a bigger need for us.

Supes/Ken... it's not actually the topic of this thread, but I'm increasingly curious about this focus on "fit," given that (a) Schlenk has made an explicit attempt to persuade everyone that he's genuinely only at this point trying to draft BPA and accumulate talent (e.g., to the point of even saying he'd not blink at drafting Morant) and (b) as I recall anyhow, you have been one to say explicitly that you have great confidence that we can rely on what Schlenk tells us that he's thinking.

How do you reconcile those two seemingly disparate things?

I think: again I THINK:

I don’t want Hayes and Bol.

Hayes seems like a wonderful athlete with a tremendous wingspan and somebody that can be elite on the defensive end and catch great lobs from Trae. Having said that, I think he isn’t a born basketball player. He would be better fit to play volleyball, that’s his ideal body to me.

I love Bol (Manute). Got his autograph from the mall in 88 when he was with the scrubs. Nicest guy ever. His son has a lot of “unicorn” to his game where he can put it on the floor, go between the legs and prolly even nutmeg a 7 footer which would be like watching something in the circus due to freakiness alone. Having said that, he’s sooooo light. Manute didn’t put on weight and something tells me Bol won’t either. He CAN’T play small forward because he’s not fast enough, can’t play 4/5 cuz he isn’t strong enough. Worried about his game translating to the pros with ease. Not saying he can’t but it might take a minute. Having said that, we draft him and I’m getting a jersey that literally says BOL BOL on the back...once ain’t enough!

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:Supes/Ken... it's not actually the topic of this thread, but I'm increasingly curious about this focus on "fit," given that (a) Schlenk has made an explicit attempt to persuade everyone that he's genuinely only at this point trying to draft BPA and accumulate talent (e.g., to the point of even saying he'd not blink at drafting Morant) and (b) as I recall anyhow, you have been one to say explicitly that you have great confidence that we can rely on what Schlenk tells us that he's thinking.

How do you reconcile those two seemingly disparate things?

If you believe everything that flies out of a GM's mouth during the predraft time, I have some beach front property to sell you in Utah.

There are also plenty of reports, including the Athletic, that suggest that yes, the Hawks would have selected Ja Morant, but they would have immediately traded him too. The Hawks WILL NOT draft a point guard with one of their lottery picks, unless it's to trade with another tream.

_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:Supes/Ken... it's not actually the topic of this thread, but I'm increasingly curious about this focus on "fit," given that (a) Schlenk has made an explicit attempt to persuade everyone that he's genuinely only at this point trying to draft BPA and accumulate talent (e.g., to the point of even saying he'd not blink at drafting Morant) and (b) as I recall anyhow, you have been one to say explicitly that you have great confidence that we can rely on what Schlenk tells us that he's thinking.

How do you reconcile those two seemingly disparate things?

Our BPA is based on fit as well.

at 8 as long as we get one of Culver, Reddish, or Hunter i'm fine. At 10 i'm avoiding Bol at all costs. He very well may make me eat crow but for the time being i'm just not sold on his health going forward. Langford, Hayes, Fernando, Doumbouya, Hachimura, Little are all guys I'm looking at with 10.