Countdown to heartbreak (*Draft thread pt.II)

john2jer · Post #241 » by **john2jer** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:50 pm

I never said we did. I agree with you there. The only way I draft a 2 or a 3 in this draft is if they're potential starters/difference makers. Ellington isn't. As far as guys in the last half of the 1st round, Austin Daye is a guy that intrigues me as a 3 because of his ability to block shots, and that helps a Jefferson/Love frontcourt. But as far as the #28 pick, it should go to a center or point guard prospect, or maybve even more so someone like Omri Casspi to stash in Europe for a year.

horaceworthy · Post #242 » by **horaceworthy** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:33 pm

deeney0 wrote:I didn't forget about him, I'd rather have two guards. I don't the Mullens is a good investment; Wolves have a chance to possibly yank a second starter with 18, so that by definition can't be a post player, since Al and Kevin are the starting front court for the next decade. Mullens looked terrible at OSU, there is a reason Thad played him so little. He could go before 18, but I doubt it. I bet he falls on draft night like Jordan did last year - only Jordan is a much better player.

Thad jerked around his NBA bound 7 footer's minutes last year without a valid reason, I don't see why he couldn't have done the same this year.

I can understand you saying Jordan is a much better player, but I don't think Jordan was a much better prospect. There isn't a single player in this draft with his combination of height, frame and athleticism. What he brings to the table in those categories seems right on par with Jordan. Mullens had a ho-hum freshman year, but so did Jordan. Also, coming out of high school Mullens was purported to have a budding perimeter game that Jordan never showed. From Rivals:

"Size, athleticism and skill are the big three that separate Mullens from the rest of this class. It just isn't very often that you find a 7-foot plus center who can run, jump and shoot like Mullens. He has the type of athleticism that makes you think of Bill Walton and then he has the shooting touch that makes you wonder if he could develop into a Dirk Nowitzki type player. Mullens does need to become a tougher defender and rebounder, but the pieces are there for him to be a number one pick in the draft and premiere big man in the League."

I don't see how you could say Mullens is a bad investment at #18. Just looking to last year's draft, there were 3 players that were in a similar situation to Mullens (project big man underclassman whose performance in college didn't match up with his physical tools)- Deandre Jordan, Kosta Koufos and Javale McGee. All three showed a good amount of promise when given an opportunity this year. If you want to get even more specific, throw out McGee and limit it to prospects in nearly the exact same predicament Mullens is in (one and done big man that started the year as a top 5 prospect but dropped out of the lottery due to an inability to make an impact or start every game), then that leaves you with Jordan and Koufos, both who showed promise when they got on the floor.

I get the why draft a backup when we could draft two starters zealotry, but the Wolves will need to add more size to the frontcourt eventually, so if a prospect with the size, athleticism and potential of Mullens is there at #18, it'd be shortsighted to pass on him for some of the other guys that could be available there.

Post #243 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:11 am

Mullins at the miami pick could be a much better value than Thabeet at a top-5.

john2jer · Post #244 » by **john2jer** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:33 am

I think I have to agree with the Mullens at #18 logic. It's just the fear that he wouldn't be there.

deeney0 · Post #245 » by **deeney0** » Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:51 pm

I know we've got like 8 draft threads going, but letting this one fall to the second page? This is how I've got it lined up right now:

Rubio/Harden/Evans/DeRozan/Henderson with the top pick

Lawson/Jennings/Holiday/Maynor/Curry/Teague/Flynn with the Miami pick

Young/Collison/Calathes/Budinger with the Boston pick

James/Green/Price/Meeks in the 2nd

Esohny · Post #246 » by **Esohny** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:07 am

Most wanted to least wanted at each pick:

Harden/DeRozan with the top 1st

Holiday/Mullens/Maynor/Curry with the Miami pick

Collison/Budinger with the Boston pick

Not much opinion on the 2nd rounders, really.

Although hopefully we don't draft this many, but instead make some noise with trading picks and expirings for some help.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #247 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:05 pm

according to nbadraft.net, Derozan is going 4th, Wolves will take Jordan Hill, (Wayne Ellington and Budinger are 11th and 12th.....) Wolves then take yet another PF, Patrick Pattersion at 18, then polish things off at 28 w/ SF/PF Damion James

I don't know which bothers me more, the Wolves taking 3 PF's or Wayne Ellington going 11th.....

Post #248 » by **C.lupus** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:16 pm

Devilzsidewalk wrote:according to nbadraft.net, Derozan is going 4th, Wolves will take Jordan Hill, (Wayne Ellington and Budinger are 11th and 12th.....) Wolves then take yet another PF, Patrick Pattersion at 18, then polish things off at 28 w/ SF/PF Damion James

I don't know which bothers me more, the Wolves taking 3 PF's or Wayne Ellington going 11th.....

That is awful. I think even bleacher report could do a better draft than that.

Here's how I'm leaning as of this morning (subject to change after more coffee):
Rubio/Evans/DeRozan/Harden/Thabeet with the top pick

Mullens/Lawson/Curry/Maynor/Holiday with the Miami pick

Young/Budinger/Collison/Calathes with the Boston pick

A couple Euro stashes in the second round

Post #249 » by **Worm Guts** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:34 pm

Nbadraft.net isn't taking team need into account at this point. It's just a prospect ranking.

Post #250 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:02 pm

nbadraft.net does not take into account team need.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #251 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:43 pm

I know, its a crazy mock draft, I wonder if they take team need into account?

Post #252 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 5:01 pm

(*I did not see Worms post)

theGreatRC · Post #253 » by **theGreatRC** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:37 pm

Draft Harden, trade for Hinrich and Outlaw(seems that both fan bases believe those players will be gone), and we'll have our 1-3 figured out(Outlaw could end up being a 7th man, but for now he would be our best 3)

big3_8_19_21 · Post #254 » by **big3_8_19_21** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:24 pm

What would we have to give up for Outlaw?

big3_8_19_21 · Post #255 » by **big3_8_19_21** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:49 pm

Well...DX has us taking 4 SGs and a PG.
James Harden
Eric Maynor
Marcus Thornton
Jodie Meeks
Jerel McNeal

Maynor/Harden could be a really nice starting back court...After that though, it's just 3 SG's that are 6'4" or under. I'd lean towards DaJuan Summers, Patrick Mills or Nick Calathes instead of Thornton.

hijacktheparade · Post #256 » by **hijacktheparade** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:27 am

NBAdraft.net has the Wolves taking Jordan Hill.

...Why?

Edit: I see that I'm late to this.

Krapinsky · Post #257 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:03 pm

David Thorpe in his chat today, when asked if Thabeet would be a good fit for the Wolves? A: No.

Also, he says Clark is going to be a PF at the pro level, not a SF, so perhaps we can rule him out altogether.

On the Thabeet thing, I can see where he's coming from. On offensive, Thabeet would attract doubles for Jefferson or Love in the post all day long. Thabeet away from the basket = double (Thabs can't hit from more than 6 feet out). Thabeet near the basket = double (Jefferson isn't nifty enough or big enough to pass though or over double teams to the weakside).

PeeDee · Post #258 » by **PeeDee** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:36 pm

Thorpe also has a huge man crush on Calathes. Said he's the closest thing to Steve Nash he's ever seen. Is everyone underrating him?

mandurugo · Post #259 » by **mandurugo** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:45 pm

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:David Thorpe in his chat today, when asked if Thabeet would be a good fit for the Wolves? A: No.

Also, he says Clark is going to be a PF at the pro level, not a SF, so perhaps we can rule him out altogether.

On the Thabeet thing, I can see where he's coming from. On offensive, Thabeet would attract doubles for Jefferson or Love in the post all day long. Thabeet away from the basket = double (Thabs can't hit from more than 6 feet out). Thabeet near the basket = double (Jefferson isn't nifty enough or big enough to pass though or over double teams to the weakside).

But how will that be any different from the situation now on offense for Al? He regularly goes to the basket against double and triple teams (in his defense, with success) because he never passes the ball out. If he touches the ball everyone knows they can run over to him. On the other hand, it might make a big difference on defense.

Krapinsky · Post #260 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:53 pm

mandurugo wrote:
Dr.Krapinsky wrote:David Thorpe in his chat today, when asked if Thabeet would be a good fit for the Wolves? A: No.

Also, he says Clark is going to be a PF at the pro level, not a SF, so perhaps we can rule him out altogether.

On the Thabeet thing, I can see where he's coming from. On offensive, Thabeet would attract doubles for Jefferson or Love in the post all day long. Thabeet away from the basket = double (Thabs can't hit from more than 6 feet out). Thabeet near the basket = double (Jefferson isn't nifty enough or big enough to pass though or over double teams to the weakside).

But how will that be any different from the situation now on offense for Al? He regularly goes to the basket against double and triple teams (in his defense, with success) because he never passes the ball out. If he touches the ball everyone knows they can run over to him. On the other hand, it might make a big difference on defense.

I think the idea is you wouldn't see this if we had a center or power forward playing next to Al that can consistently knock down an 18 foot shot. Love didn't do that this year, but when McHale drafted him I think that was the plan.