Krap's Wolves Forum Mock Draft

Krapinsky · Post #1 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 9:21 pm

Shall we say first to 10 or best of 20, whichever comes first?

We'll skip Irving at 1.

I'm leaning towards Kanter at 2 right now, as crazy as that sounds. Tomorrow it might be different.

1. Irving
2. Kanter (1)

AQuintus · Post #2 » by **AQuintus** » Wed May 18, 2011 9:30 pm

1. Irving
2. Kanter (1), Williams (1)

Take Williams and then trade him for value. At the moment I'm really partial to a Williams + Darko for BIyombo (4) + Varejao trade.

Foye · Post #3 » by **Foye** » Wed May 18, 2011 9:39 pm

AQuintus wrote:1. Irving
2. Kanter (1), Williams (1)

Take Williams and then trade him for value.

+1

2. Kanter (1), Williams (2)

Krapinsky · Post #4 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 9:45 pm

I was presuming we couldn't magically trade anyone for what we wanted and was taking roster considerations into account.

Esohny · Post #5 » by **Esohny** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:02 pm

Krapinsky wrote:I was presuming we couldn't magically trade anyone for what we wanted and was taking roster considerations into account.

You should probably call out what the rule is. Is this who the Wolves take if they're going to keep the player, or is it basically a big board and you could pick for value with a mind to trade. Because that definitely affects my choice.

TheProdigy · Post #6 » by **TheProdigy** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:10 pm

We already have too many players on this team that don't get enough minutes on the court. Add 2 more first round draft picks to the roster plus Rubio. Isn't it kind of assumed that there will be trade(s) that occur before the start of next season? Instead of saying we'll draft this guy and trade him for so and so... We can just say that we're drafting a guy because he has the best value.

2. Kanter (1), Williams (3)

Williams has the most value with the 2nd pick. If we're worried that Williams won't fit then why would we draft Kanter? Another undersized, unathletic big man = Love/Jefferson part II

Krapinsky · Post #7 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:16 pm

Esohny wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:I was presuming we couldn't magically trade anyone for what we wanted and was taking roster considerations into account.

You should probably call out what the rule is. Is this who the Wolves take if they're going to keep the player, or is it basically a big board and you could pick for value with a mind to trade. Because that definitely affects my choice.

I vote that we should have to keep the player and that the Mock Draft is based on us not trading back. It makes for a more interesting debate.

Krapinsky · Post #8 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:19 pm

DaKidKG wrote:We already have too many players on this team that don't get enough minutes on the court. Add 2 more first round draft picks to the roster plus Rubio. Isn't it kind of assumed that there will be trade(s) that occur before the start of next season? Instead of saying we'll draft this guy and trade him for so and so... We can just say that we're drafting a guy because he has the best value.

2. Kanter (1), Williams (3)

Williams has the most value with the 2nd pick. If we're worried that Williams won't fit then why would we draft Kanter? Another undersized, unathletic big man = Love/Jefferson part II

I haven't read/heard anything about Kanter projecting to be a poor defender at the level. I've heard quite the opposite. I feel like he has the tools to be every bit of effective as Horford, Bogut, or Gasol on the defensive end.

TheProdigy · Post #9 » by **TheProdigy** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:27 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
DaKidKG wrote:We already have too many players on this team that don't get enough minutes on the court. Add 2 more first round draft picks to the roster plus Rubio. Isn't it kind of assumed that there will be trade(s) that occur before the start of next season? Instead of saying we'll draft this guy and trade him for so and so... We can just say that we're drafting a guy because he has the best value.

2. Kanter (1), Williams (3)

Williams has the most value with the 2nd pick. If we're worried that Williams won't fit then why would we draft Kanter? Another undersized, unathletic big man = Love/Jefferson part II

I haven't read/heard anything about Kanter projecting to be a poor defender at the level. I've heard quite the opposite. I feel like he has the tools to be every bit of effective as Horford, Bogut, or Gasol on the defensive end.

He may turn out to be average or above average on d. The question is whether or not you want an average/above average defender next to Love. Ideally you have a guy next to him that can guard opposing teams' best offensive big man.

His defensive potential isn't as great as the other 3 guys you listed. Horford is a better athlete, Bogut is a better athlete with more length, and Gasol has more length and possibly better athleticism as well.

dunkonu21 · Post #10 » by **dunkonu21** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:27 pm

2. Kanter (1), Williams (3), Valanciunas (1)

jpatrick · Post #11 » by **jpatrick** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:33 pm

dunkonu21 wrote:2. Kanter (1), Williams (4), Valanciunas (1)

theGreatRC · Post #12 » by **theGreatRC** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:34 pm

Kanter (1), Williams (4), Valanciunas (1)

Anything can happen with the workouts and combine, but as of right now Williams is the BPA and you take BPA with the #2 pick, no matter how weak the draft may be projected to be.

GopherIt! · Post #13 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:36 pm

RC makes it 5 for Williams

Kanter (1), Williams (6), Valanciunas (1)

theGreatRC wrote:Anything can happen with the workouts and combine, but as of right now Williams is the BPA and you take BPA with the #2 pick, no matter how weak the draft may be projected to be.

Absolutely agree.

Krapinsky · Post #14 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:37 pm

DaKidKG wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:
DaKidKG wrote:We already have too many players on this team that don't get enough minutes on the court. Add 2 more first round draft picks to the roster plus Rubio. Isn't it kind of assumed that there will be trade(s) that occur before the start of next season? Instead of saying we'll draft this guy and trade him for so and so... We can just say that we're drafting a guy because he has the best value.

2. Kanter (1), Williams (3)

Williams has the most value with the 2nd pick. If we're worried that Williams won't fit then why would we draft Kanter? Another undersized, unathletic big man = Love/Jefferson part II

I haven't read/heard anything about Kanter projecting to be a poor defender at the level. I've heard quite the opposite. I feel like he has the tools to be every bit of effective as Horford, Bogut, or Gasol on the defensive end.

He may turn out to be average or above average on d. The question is whether or not you want an average/above average defender next to Love. Ideally you have a guy next to him that can guard opposing teams' best offensive big man.

His defensive potential isn't as great as the other 3 guys you listed. Horford is a better athlete, Bogut is a better athlete with more length, and Gasol has more length and possibly better athleticism as well.

How do you know so much about Kanter? I feel like scouts haven't even had an opportunity to see him enough to make those judgments yet. My feeling was that his athleticism wasn't far off of Horford's and was superior or similar to Bogut and Gasol's.

Krapinsky · Post #15 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:39 pm

GopherIt! wrote:Kanter (1), Williams (5), Valanciunas (1)

theGreatRC wrote:Anything can happen with the workouts and combine, but as of right now Williams is the BPA and you take BPA with the #2 pick, no matter how weak the draft may be projected to be.

Absolutely agree.

What about all the Williams is a tweener talk? Doesn't Ford have Williams a bit further down his board?

GopherIt! · Post #16 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:43 pm

I don't agree with the tweener label. I see no reason he can't guard SF's and then mix it up both inside-outside on offense, especially when he's playing next to Kevlar who doesn't have much of a post game anyway.

as a doctor you know that speaking strictly on medical terms, Ford is a hoopus magnus follis .

Breakdown777 · Post #17 » by **Breakdown777** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:49 pm

Kanter (1), Williams (7), Valanciunas (1)

Tha Juice · Post #18 » by **Tha Juice** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:59 pm

Kanter (1), Williams (8), Valanciunas (1)

LordBaldric · Post #19 » by **LordBaldric** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:59 pm

Kanter (1), Williams (9), Valanciunas (1)

Post #20 » by **revprodeji** » Wed May 18, 2011 11:12 pm

Trade down an option?