'14 Draft Thread - Now With a Poll: VOTE OR DIE.

Ron Swanson · Post #921 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 4:54 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Wiggins is legit. He's taken all the hype he's gotten, and still managed to play extremely under control on offense. People are acting like nearly 17 ppg at insane efficiency on a really damn deep team at age 18 is somehow a disappointment. Frankly, it's really damn stupid. I give him credit for actually showing his talent while also fitting into a team concept and not taking terrible shots. He's going to be a stud.

And this is why he's still the consensus #1 on most people's boards. Not only does he have the talent to match the hype, but he buys into the team concept and isn't concerned about "getting his", at least from what we've seen so far. I laughed at the few scouts that were questioning his motor and motivation earlier in the year. Why? Because he doesn't scream and demand the ball every possession?

Nebula1 · Post #922 » by **Nebula1** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 5:58 pm

I haven't seen a lick of college ball outside OKST... what's the big board looking like these days?

I see Ford has

Wiggins
Randle
Parker
Exum
Smart

I'm still hoping Exum lands with the Bucks with the Aussie connect.

CanadaBucks · Post #923 » by **CanadaBucks** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:03 pm

Nebula1 wrote:I haven't seen a lick of college ball outside OKST... what's the big board looking like these days?

I see Ford has

Wiggins
Randle
Parker
Exum
Smart

I'm still hoping Exum lands with the Bucks with the Aussie connect.

DX agrees with Chad

yoshii8 · Post #924 » by **yoshii8** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:07 pm

I love every player in that top 4, and really like Smart too. I'd be thrilled to get any of them.

jakecronus8 · Post #925 » by **jakecronus8** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:09 pm

I have visions of '94 all over again running through my head. I still haven't forgiven the Bucks for passing on a great all around player in Grant Hill for a better scorer in Big Dog. While I feel Parker will certainly be a good player, Wiggins' all around potential is out of this world. The parallels are there. Just like Duke's system masked how great hill would ultimately be, I feel the same is happening at Kansas. Passing on Wiggins would be teh suck.

randy84 · Post #926 » by **randy84** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:54 pm

jakecronus8 wrote:I have visions of '94 all over again running through my head. I still haven't forgiven the Bucks for passing on a great all around player in Grant Hill for a better scorer in Big Dog. While I feel Parker will certainly be a good player, Wiggins' all around potential is out of this world. The parallels are there. Just like Duke's system masked how great hill would ultimately be, I feel the same is happening at Kansas. Passing on Wiggins would be teh suck.

I thought you were going to say taking Glenn Robinson over a perennial All-Star PG like Jason Kidd.

I could see that happening this year when someone passes over Marcus Smart.

mattg · Post #927 » by **mattg** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:40 pm

The 1994 comparisons are dumb. They all keep drawing parallels between Parker and big dog despite the fact that personality wise they're polar opposites. Big dog was lazy and never worked on his game ever, Parker eats, sleeps and breathes basketball and works hard.

machu46 · Post #928 » by **machu46** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:48 pm

My big board for Milwaukee is still:
1. Wiggins
2. Randle
3. Parker
4. Embiid
5. Exum
6. Smart

Post #929 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:50 pm

In his chat today, Ford said he thought Milwaukee would be leaning with Randle if they got the #1.

mattg · Post #930 » by **mattg** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:53 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:In his chat today, Ford said he thought Milwaukee would be leaning with Randle if they got the #1.

Figures.

Post #931 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:54 pm

He'd be a nice fit in the front court next to Giannis and Henson, but I'd prefer Wiggins at this point.

Turk Nowitzki · Post #932 » by **Turk Nowitzki** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:55 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:In his chat today, Ford said he thought Milwaukee would be leaning with Randle if they got the #1.

I like Randle a lot but if they picked him over Parker and Wiggins I would vomit.

mattg · Post #933 » by **mattg** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:00 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:He'd be a nice fit in the front court next to Giannis and Henson, but I'd prefer Wiggins at this point.

It'd be beyond disappointing to take randle over wiggins or Parker. It'd be like thinking you're about to get head from a smoking hot girl, only for her to pull your pants down and hit you in the balls instead.

Post #934 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:02 pm

I can't say I'd be overly disappointed adding a guy many consider to be a perennial all-star big.

mattg · Post #935 » by **mattg** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:07 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:I can't say I'd be overly disappointed adding a guy many consider to be a perennial all-star big.

In a vacuum, no. If we could have taken Parker or wiggins and we took randle instead it would be very disappointing.

Baddy Chuck · Post #936 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:10 pm

If you want to draft Randle you almost have to trade down to #3.

bizarro · Post #937 » by **bizarro** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:16 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:I can't say I'd be overly disappointed adding a guy many consider to be a perennial all-star big.

It's an interesting interesting debate for sure. Randle is on the tube right now versus Eastern Michigan. I'm going to give it a look.

Ron Swanson · Post #938 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:16 pm

Baddy Chuck wrote:If you want to draft Randle you almost have to trade down to #3.

This. I'd be ecstatic if we got the #3 pick and drafted him there. But if we had #1 and passed on both Parker and Wiggins.....I'd be disappointed to say the least.

emunney · Post #939 » by **emunney** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:21 pm

If we get the top pick, I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth. I'd certainly have my preferences but if one of Randle, Wiggins, Parker, Exum or Smart is on the roster this time next year, I'm not going to split hairs on how he got there.

Post #940 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:23 pm

emunney wrote:If we get the top pick, I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth. I'd certainly have my preferences but if one of Randle, Wiggins, Parker, Exum or Smart is on the roster this time next year, I'm not going to split hairs on how he got there.

I'd even add Embiid to that list. Maybe Gordon too.

Who would you pick?