gswhoops wrote:The Good
Atlanta - LOVE how they've played the draft so far. Filled their biggest need with the Porzingis trade, and picked up a pick with huge upside to move down from 13 to 23 and grab Newell, who they might have taken at 13 anyway. I don't love Newell as a prospect but he's got tools to gamble on and he's a local kid who should be well situated to contribute a little soon while developing the rest of his game.
Washington - lot of sadness on draft night when they ended up with the #6 pick in a five-man draft. But when Charlotte took Kon at #4, they had Tre Johnson fall into their laps and didn't overthink it. Got good value for trading down a few spots and still (I assume) got the guy they wanted in Will Riley, who gives them another high-upside wing option.
Miami - Getting Jakucionis at 20 is a coup. Probably my #1 pick so far for a guy who's likely to outplay his draft position, and soon. He also fits nicely with Herro in the backcourt as a big PG.
The Bad
New Orleans - Fears is a pretty boom or bust prospect, but I can see the logic there. The trade up and selection of Queen though...I can't rationalize that. Giving up a "best of" unprotected pick between two teams that might be lottery-bound is a huge price and it's hard to think of a PF/C pairing that makes less sense than Zion and Queen. The net effect is that they've staked their future on three guys who need the ball in their hands, want to attack the basket, present spacing issues on offense, and are subpar defenders. I don't see how this works unless they're planning on moving on from Zion soon, but in that case giving up an unprotected 1st next year is even more egregious.
The Huh?
Portland - the value to move down from 11 to 16 was good, but Yang was probably the single most "WTF?!?" pick of the first round. I don't see how he and Clingan can operate together, and I find it hard to believe that they didn't have 16 players more highly rated on their board than Yang.
Phoenix - Maluach at 10 is great, but then turning around and trading 2 (admittedly not great) firsts for Mark Williams to stand in his way? This feels like spending significant resources they don't have on a luxury while stunting Maluach's development.
Sacramento - In a vacuum, they got good value both with the trade (a low-upside future 1st for #24) and the pick (Clifford, who I wouldn't have batted an eye if he went top-20). But they appear to be emulating the Phoenix model of building a roster comprised entirely of shooting guards and centers, which seems misguided. Have to give this move an "incomplete" until we see what the rest of the offseason has in store.
Very well put.
I personally am not convinced that Tre Johnson was the best player available at #6 but that is just my subjective opinion which certainly deviates from consensus. So I won't fault them for that (and in this context, it also made a ton of sense to move Poole who plays a similar brand of basketball and would have thus clashed with Tre and his development). I'm also not convinced that Jakučionis and Herro are a natural fit but the value at #20 is indeed awesome.
Fully agreed on Atlanta (though it obviously involved a bunch of luck regarding the trade), New Orleans, Portland, Phoenix and Sacramento. The last three we won't be able to fully judge until their ideas play out but it certainly raises some eyebrows in the meantime.
165bows wrote:Idk if I love the idea of giving up more future firsts (don’t even know where they got those) but I don’t think two young centers get in each other’s way at this point.
4800 minutes of C in a season and there aren’t many C these days that play more than 2-2500 minutes, only the top guys really. Def not an injury prone guy and an inexperienced rookie.
The issue for me is not that there is not enough playing time. It's that you'd ideally want to be able to play different styles (which is hampered by investing in positionally locked Cs with similar profiles), and that for a team like Phoenix it's all about careful and smart asset management (and investing the limited assets they have to acquire two similar players each with notable question marks is at least quite the gamble).
For a similar reason, I'm not really convinced by Portland's approach of adding Hansen to a roster with Clingan. I'm not saying it can't work out fine for them, but it's still an odd choice to invest considerable resources in back-to-back drafts to acquire two players that are positionally locked into the Center position and unlikely to ever be able to share the court for extended minutes.
