New poll: With the #7 pick, you would....

[ChuckDurn]

What do you do?

[Jester_]

I'm losing track of these threads...

[ChuckDurn]

I'm losing track of these threads...

Yeah, sorry Jester. The other thread "malfunctioned" when I tried editing some of the commentary....

[floppymoose]

I'm the "other" vote. So far I'm thinking the UNC PG.

[dray510]

I want Sullinger. I only got a sample size because I dont watch much college ball but every time I watched Barnes play he didnt look very special to me.

[Quazza]

Sully all day

[AdonalFoyle4Prez]

I would go for Barnes, but he just seems to take too many jumpers (which we have in Curry and Thompson) instead of attacking/slashing to the rim at will on a consistent basis.

Sullinger is someone I'd gamble for. He might not be as athletic or quick like some of the other top prospects, but he has the strength/power, post-skills, very high-basketball IQ, and NBA ready.

But, since we want a quality SF like Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Andre Iguodala, or Rudy Gay, here's what I propose in order to get a starting SF:

Option 1: Now, getting MKG will be tricky since some are speculating that Charlotte will go with Barnes due to MJ's love/tie with UNC. So, that leaves us with either Washington and Cleveland to land him. So...

Washington: We trade our #7 pick + Jefferson + Jeremy Tyler + Biedrins for MKG + Blatche + Lewis
WHY: In fairness, we're taking on 2 of their useless (one being really overpaid and one-dimensional, and one that's a headcase/idiot) players in order to land MKG. While they get a promising big in Tyler, a veteran SF who can help teach the young players about team basketball, and a serviceable C who can probably get his head straight in a new situation, and the #7 pick (Whoever they want).

Cleveland: We trade our #7 pick + Jefferson + Jeremy Tyler + Biedrins for MKG + Varejao + Luke Walton
WHY: Cavs get more depth for such a young squad (may even consider throwing in our 30th pick to make the deal happen). We get our guy in MKG, and Varejao may look to move onto a solid team than a rebuilding one.

Option 2: If we want Iguodala, we should draft Sullinger, and package him with Jefferson + Biedrins
WHY: Philly may not get Elton Brand back. So, they can bring in a much younger PF/C to take his place. And they get more help to round out their depth chart. We get Iguodala, who we think can play outstanding defense, rebounds well, attacks the basket, and creates for others. IF we nab him, we'll probably be one of the top (if not--the only team) passing team in the league next season.

Option 3: If we want Rudy Gay, we should draft Barnes, and package him with D.Wrong + Biedrins
WHY: Just works salary-wise (Why are GMs so dumb giving that much money away ?). And Memphis can have more weapons at SF with Barnes and D.Wrong, and a serviceable C who might flourish somewhere else. Dubs get a bonafide, prototypical SF who can shoot it, handle the ball decently, play defense when he's into it, and can be the go-to guy (much like what Ellis was).

[Coxy]

I would go for Barnes, but he just seems to take too many jumpers (which we have in Curry and Thompson) instead of attacking/slashing to the rim at will on a consistent basis.

Sullinger is someone I'd gamble for. He might not be as athletic or quick like some of the other top prospects, but he has the strength/power, post-skills, very high-basketball IQ, and NBA ready.

But, since we want a quality SF like Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Andre Iguodala, or Rudy Gay, here's what I propose in order to get a starting SF:

Option 1: Now, getting MKG will be tricky since some are speculating that Charlotte will go with Barnes due to MJ's love/tie with UNC. So, that leaves us with either Washington and Cleveland to land him. So...

Washington: We trade our #7 pick + Jefferson + Jeremy Tyler + Biedrins for MKG + Blatche + Lewis
WHY: In fairness, we're taking on 2 of their useless (one being really overpaid and one-dimensional, and one that's a headcase/idiot) players in order to land MKG. While they get a promising big in Tyler, a veteran SF who can help teach the young players about team basketball, and a serviceable C who can probably get his head straight in a new situation, and the #7 pick (Whoever they want).

Cleveland: We trade our #7 pick + Jefferson + Jeremy Tyler + Biedrins for MKG + Varejao + Luke Walton
WHY: Cavs get more depth for such a young squad (may even consider throwing in our 30th pick to make the deal happen). We get our guy in MKG, and Varejao may look to move onto a solid team than a rebuilding one.

Option 2: If we want Iguodala, we should draft Sullinger, and package him with Jefferson + Biedrins
WHY: Philly may not get Elton Brand back. So, they can bring in a much younger PF/C to take his place. And they get more help to round out their depth chart. We get Iguodala, who we think can play outstanding defense, rebounds well, attacks the basket, and creates for others. IF we nab him, we'll probably be one of the top (if not--the only team) passing team in the league next season.

Option 3: If we want Rudy Gay, we should draft Barnes, and package him with D.Wrong + Biedrins
WHY: Just works salary-wise (Why are GMs so dumb giving that much money away ?). And Memphis can have more weapons at SF with Barnes and D.Wrong, and a serviceable C who might flourish somewhere else. Dubs get a bonafide, prototypical SF who can shoot it, handle the ball decently, play defense when he's into it, and can be the go-to guy (much like what Ellis was).

We shouldn't be that desperate to land a SF. We have 3-4 to play the role by committee. Backup bigs are what we need, and perhaps a vet backup PG.

I've held off scouting the draft prospects mostly until now as I wasn't confident that we would keep our pick. Even I underestimated that tank threads powers. At my 1st fairly uneducated selection at 7, I think Sullinger makes sense. I do however want to check out a few more guys like Zeller, Lamb and Barnes.

[Onus]

for me its down to henson and sully. tho i would most likely prefer henson who should be able to play with bogut and david lee. whereas sully wouldnt play with dlee for defensive reasons. but i wouldnt be upset with sully as hed provide post scoring to open up our shooters.

henson and bogut could form a dynamic defensive duo, while henson could cover up dlees defensive weaknesses. i think henson can be a young kg defensively with his length and agility to cover pnr. offensively he still has a lot of work to do, but our team needs defense and rebounding.

[bay2hk]

Agreed on Sullinger, he might be the best player available when we pick unless Beal or Barnes drops to us. Sullinger would have been a dream in last year's draft but now we can get a polished post player that can contribute next season right away.

[nle2367]

Sullinger, mainly because Warriors need more beef, toughness.

[Left*My*Heart]

I'm still waiting on the pre-draft camp measurements, as well as some feedback from workouts regarding players that we should be able to draft.

Right now, I'm tossing back and forth between picking the player with the highest ceiling or picking relatively conservatively.

The player with the highest ceiling is Perry Jones III. Yes, he comes with a lot of questions, mainly his desire/heart, but there isn't a more athletic player in this draft for his size. A 6'11" SF(I know this is debatable) that could create all kinds of mismatches.

Henson would probably be my choice right now if I had to make one. Marshall would get a lot of consideration if he can show he has a fairly good jumper. Beal might be available according to some mocks and that might workout trade wise.

I also think there are some opportunities to trade our pick. I would be willing to trade #7 to Houston for 14th and 16th picks. We would probably have to toss something else in, but with those two picks you would be looking at possible Leonard, Sullinger, Marshall and Moultrie. Two of those players could really address some of our needs inside and possible with the point.

[Jester_]

I'm pretty torn between Henson and Sully. Henson gives us a reliable defensive option at both the 4 and 5 spot, so we always have a defensive anchor on the floor. On the other hand, Sullinger gives us a much needed post presence which we haven't had in god knows how long.

For now I'll say Henson. Can't pass up on defensive talent like that.

[Jester_]

I'm starting to warm up to Barnes, though.

[Warriorfan]

If Barnes or Drummand fall I take one of them if not I trade with Houston to get 14 and 16 and take a zellerjones moultrie or marshall rivers.

[Warriorfan]

If Barnes or Drummand fall I take one of them if not I trade with Houston to get 14 and 16 and take a zellerjones moultrie or marshall rivers.

[Left*My*Heart]

I think a trade is in the works and it was contingent on the Warriors keeping their pick.

[Jester_]

Looks like people have been twisting MT's words about wanting to draft a starter. They want someone who will eventually become a starter.

"I think when we’re drafting that high we want to imagine that player as an eventual starter. He might not be a starter out of the gate, but you want to believe the player has an ability to start in the NBA when you’re drafting that high."

http://www.ibabuzz.com/warriors/2012/05 ... pick-ever/

[Jester_]

Some good videos here from DFX about the various prospects: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... fYlN-0VaUw

Starting to consider Perry some more.

[Left*My*Heart]

I have seen Perry play several games. You don't see his size and athletic ability very often. I think he is more suited to play SF than PF and I also think that he didn't like playing center or PF for Baylor. That is the argument coming out of his camp, that he was playing out of position. I think there is more to it that that.

The thing is, I think he has all the skills needed to play SF and if he can show he has the passion and desire, he could really be a force. I think there are a lot of ifs with him, but wow he could really be special. The thing is, you don't see his elite athletic ability for his size very often. Huge risk, but also could be a home run as well.

I would rate him second only to Drummond as far as potential.