ImageImageImage

2014 Draft Prospects Thread

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

User avatar
Krapinsky
RealGM
Posts: 20,712
And1: 1,952
Joined: May 13, 2007
Location: Los Angeles

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1261 » by Krapinsky » Tue Jun 3, 2014 11:21 pm

AQuintus wrote:
Klomp wrote: Just because Love did it doesn't mean the next guy has to.


Especially since when Love did it, it failed miserably and was a big part of the reason the team was so bad in close games.

It's another point against Adelman as head coach this last year. For some reason, despite it not working, the team consistently tried to iso Love late in close games. If we would have just stuck with trying to run the regular offense (like the Spurs tend to do), we would have been much better off.


Have to wonder if the reason they did that was partially to satisfy Love by getting him the ball at all costs. If we run the offense and Brewer clunks a corner 3, Love probably would have pouted.
FinnTheHuman wrote: Your post is just garbage.

NewWolvesOrder wrote:Garbage post, indeed.
C.lupus
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 30,827
And1: 8,857
Joined: Nov 02, 2007

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1262 » by C.lupus » Tue Jun 3, 2014 11:30 pm

Klomp wrote:
AQuintus wrote:
Klomp wrote:I wouldn't draft Gordon expecting him to be a go-to player in the fourth quarter though. I realize that probably won't be his game, but thats not why I'm drafting him.


We (or any team really) shouldn't be drafting a big man with the expectation that they'll be the go-to guy in the 4th. And that's not just Gordon, but also Vonleh, Randle, Love, Griffen, Duncan, Garnett, and Shaq, etc.

Exactly.

We need to get out of that mindset. Just because Love did it doesn't mean the next guy has to. Its actually better if he isn't that guy because its much easier for a defense to scheme against a post player.

Agreed. It would be nice to break some new ground and have the best player on the team be a wing instead of a pf.
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1263 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 1:55 am

The more I watch Gordon the more I see him as a 3 in the NBA. He can certainly play both but I see him more on the Small Forward side of the spectrum..While being able to easily play PF in smaller line-ups. He is a liability in many different ways as a PF, especially defensive rebounding which is HUGE for a big.



[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbHJg8glkN4[/youtube]


This was an interesting game to watch. UCLA never gives Lavine the ball :/


BTW The channel that uploaded this vid uploaded a bunch of college games this year
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1264 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 2:05 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:The more I watch Gordon the more I see him as a 3 in the NBA. He can certainly play both but I see him more on the Small Forward side of the spectrum..While being able to easily play PF in smaller line-ups. He is a liability in many different ways as a PF, especially defensive rebounding which is HUGE for a big.


This is the classic Tweener trap. You play them at PF, and they'll be successful. You play them at SF, they bust.

Edit: And really, that's the problem. There's no such thing as a "Tweener Forward." There's only undersized PFs forced to play out of position and failing.

Outside of rebounding, his athleticism and skillset make him more of a weapon at PF than SF, and luckily for us, Dieng is a very good defensive rebounder who can make up for Gordon's shortcomings there.
Image
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1265 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 2:34 am

AQuintus wrote:
Sakuragi_ wrote:The more I watch Gordon the more I see him as a 3 in the NBA. He can certainly play both but I see him more on the Small Forward side of the spectrum..While being able to easily play PF in smaller line-ups. He is a liability in many different ways as a PF, especially defensive rebounding which is HUGE for a big.


This is the classic Tweener trap. You play them at PF, and they'll be successful. You play them at SF, they bust.

Edit: And really, that's the problem. There's no such thing as a "Tweener Forward." There's only undersized PFs forced to play out of position and failing.

Outside of rebounding, his athleticism and skillset make him more of a weapon at PF than SF, and luckily for us, Dieng is a very good defensive rebounder who can make up for Gordon's shortcomings there.



Gordon is a unique tweener cause he can actually defend both positions.


He just scares me.... Whoever drafts him is going to have to be creative with him. Something the wolves dont have.
User avatar
Takingbaconback
Head Coach
Posts: 6,952
And1: 2,625
Joined: Jun 22, 2013
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1266 » by Takingbaconback » Wed Jun 4, 2014 2:56 am

Klomp wrote:
Takingbaconback wrote:Even Dwight Howard, Josh Smith, and Blake Griffin can't over come their FT shooting to be a trustworthy efficient player in the fourth quarter, how are you so sure Gordon will? When he misses easy bunnies in the paint, he is a passive player who has to force aggression, he isn't a good shooter, and when he can't post up anybody in college basketball.

I wouldn't draft Gordon expecting him to be a go-to player in the fourth quarter though. I realize that probably won't be his game, but thats not why I'm drafting him.


Once again you are addressing his flaws one by one. I never said thats why he is far from a sure thing, it is a collection of many reasons and you always ask yourself if a pick that high can close games or take over in the4th. Bring all his liabilities to the table and you see that this guy is a very risky prospect like everyone after the first four guys. Which is why do many lottery teams want to trade out
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1267 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 3:07 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:Gordon is a unique tweener cause he can actually defend both positions.


He just scares me.... Whoever drafts him is going to have to be creative with him. Something the wolves dont have.


I disagree. All you have to do is use him like a face-up PF (basically the same way Blake Griffin is used or Kenneth Faried). Pick-and-roll/pop, cutting to the basket, and the occasional spot-ups, post-ups, and iso drives should be all you have to do with him on offense. Really, it should be easy to get him involved in the offense at PF, especially with Rubio at PG. At SF, his offense becomes much more of an issue. Edit: Also, he should be good for 4-6 points per game on just outrunning his defender in transition alone. Edit 2: Also, while not great on the D-boards, he is very good on the O-boards. That should help him get a few more solid looks per game, as well.

He's not now, nor will he likely ever be, the all-around offensive force that Love is, but a smart coach won't try to use him like one.
Image
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1268 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 3:11 am

Takingbaconback wrote:Bring all his liabilities to the table and you see that this guy is a very risky prospect like everyone after the first four guys. Which is why do many lottery teams want to trade out


I don't think that anyone is denying that. If he was a perfect prospect, he'd be a lock for number 1 overall.
Image
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1269 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 3:12 am

AQuintus wrote:
Sakuragi_ wrote:Gordon is a unique tweener cause he can actually defend both positions.


He just scares me.... Whoever drafts him is going to have to be creative with him. Something the wolves dont have.


I disagree. All you have to do is use him like a face-up PF (basically the same way Blake Griffin is used or Kenneth Faried). Pick-and-roll/pop, cutting to the basket, and the occasional spot-ups, post-ups, and iso drives should be all you have to do with him on offense. Really, it should be easy to get him involved in the offense at PF, especially with Rubio at PG. At SF, his offense becomes much more of an issue. Edit: Also, he should be good for 4-6 points per game on just outrunning his defender in transition alone. Edit 2: Also, while not great on the D-boards, he is very good on the O-boards. That should help him get a few more solid looks per game, as well.

He's not now, nor will he likely ever be, the all-around offensive force that Love is, but a smart coach won't try to use him like one.



True.

Still wouldnt take him over Randle or Vonleh though.
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1270 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 3:30 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:
True.

Still wouldnt take him over Randle or Vonleh though.


Personally, I'm more concerned about either of those two transitioning than Gordon. Randle is pretty much strictly a low post player but lacks the length or explosiveness to be a sure thing. In order to be a great player, he'll have to become much more crafty, ala Zach Randolph, or develop his shot, ala Love. Right now, his game is largely based on overwhelming his defender with his strength. That won't work nearly as well in the NBA. He's also horrible on defense.

Vonleh's measurements are great, and he's a top notch shooter for a PF already, but he doesn't pass the eye test. His athletic ability (37 inch vertical, etc) does not show, up at all, on the court. He's a below the rim player on both sides of the court. His length, while great, also doesn't translate very well since he tends to get completely lost on offense and defense. He just doesn't know how to utilize that length at all yet. He'll need a few years, at least, to learn the game.

Personally, I like Gordon the best, but I wouldn't hate a Vonleh pick since he's got a very high ceiling. I also expect, based on what the local writers have said the Wolves are looking for, that Vonleh would be at the top of their list due to his shooting and defensive upside.

Sakuragi_ wrote:[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbHJg8glkN4[/youtube]


Also, thanks for posting this. I'm about 10 minutes into the game, and I've noticed a few things:

1) I think a lot of Gordon's defensive rebounding problems come about because he wants to get out and run. There's been a few rebounds I've noticed that he could have gotten, but he backed up and let a teammate get so he could start running up the court faster.

2) Arizona's offensive system sucks. Very little cutting, very few screens set on or off the ball. A lot of movement, but not for any real reason or purpose. I think the problem of Gordon becoming invisible at times could be helped a lot by an actual system that runs actual plays for him or others.

3) He had one really nice alley-oop (which should be a staple for him in the NBA), but he also had a really ugly blocked shot. When he isn't going up for a dunk, he needs to go up stronger and use his body to shield the ball/draw fouls. This is something that could be a problem going forward but that could also be fixed fairly easily with more experience and with more body development/strength training.

I'll keep watching, and if I notice anything else, I'll probably edit this post.

Edit 2:

I've watched a few more minutes, and I've noticed a few times that he's tried to slap at the ball when a teammate's man is driving to the hoop instead of going for the block. With his explosive athleticism, he should always go for the block. That's an issue to me, but it's something that should be easily correctable with coaching.

Edit 3:

Something else that doesn't get talked about much in regards to Gordon's offense is his passing. He's had a few good passes so far in this game (about 20 minutes in). Another way to use him is to put him and Dieng in Horns and let them pass from the high post.

Edit 4:
@ 1:06:20 Gordon shoots a free throw. As far as I can tell, his form is fine. It's certainly not completely broken like Shaq's or Dwight's. Unfortunately, crappy camera work makes it tough to see the whole thing, so maybe something else is wrong. It was a pretty ugly miss (off the back iron).

Edit 5:
Another example of his free throw shooting at 1:09:30. Another miss, and once again, I don't know why. As far as I can tell, his form his absolutely fine. He lines up his lead foot (right, since he's right handed) with the basket, his left foot is shoulder width apart and slightly back, he lines up his elbow with his lead foot and the basket, he bends his knees, and he follows-through. Both shots were just a little strong.

I've noticed too, that his touch around the basket (when not dunking) isn't very good for much the same reason, he tends to rush things and force up his shots too strong. It seems to be a mental thing. It something that can, and hopefully will, improve with time, experience, and practice. (And the touch around the basket should improve with added weight and upper-body strength, allowing him to absorb contact without having to overpower his shot by fighting through it).

Edit 6:
Another example at 1:16:24. Took his time, had softer touch, and made both easily.

Edit 7:
Last update, probably. I wasn't watching the game for LaVine, but just catching him a few times out of the corner of my eye, I'll say that I see the Westbrook comparisons in terms of quickness and explosiveness which is intriguing, but LaVine has terrible shot selection.

Edit:

As an addendum to my above post + this one, I don't think I've seen Gordon set a screen yet in this game. His offense is going to be based largely on pick-and-roll/pop at the NBA level, so if he's not any good at setting screens, that could be a huge problem and a reason to pass on him.
Image
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1271 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 4:51 am

Randle actually has the best offensive game out of the three. He often took his guy off the dribble and finished at the rim, usually drawing fouls.


He also has a mid range jumper that he didn't get to utilize in college. I think he will end up reaching 3 point range..thats me being hopeful though. His jumper is far more viable that Gordon's at the very least. He showed improvement in man to man defense, hes not an above rim player (for the most part) but he still is very athletic. Has quick feet and is strong as a bull. He also showed nice potential as a man defender in the post and perimeter but where he needs work is off-ball defense. Thats where the bball IQ of defense comes in and I think he will learn how to position his body.



Im starting to lean back to Chicago's package though...
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1272 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 4:54 am

And I don't think Gordon will ever be able to set good screens...Which hurts his fit with Rubio. On the other hand Vonleh and Randle both set nice screens.
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1273 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 4:58 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:Randle actually has the best offensive game out of the three. He often took his guy off the dribble and finished at the rim, usually drawing fouls.


I guess I just really question how this kind of game will translate when he's not bigger, stronger, and quicker than 99% of the defenders he goes against.

At least with Gordon, we can be fairly sure that he'll still have the athletic advantage most of the time in the NBA.

He also has a mid range jumper that he didn't get to utilize in college. I think he will end up reaching 3 point range..thats me being hopeful though.


This worries me. If he didn't utalize his jumper, how do we know if it will translate against college-level defenders, much less NBA defenders? And if we don't even know if his mid-range game will translate, 3-point range definitely seems like wishful thinking.

His jumper is far more viable that Gordon's at the very least.


How so? In what ways?

He showed improvement in man to man defense, hes not an above rim player (for the most part) but he still is very athletic. Has quick feet and is strong as a bull.


He's quick and he's strong, yes, but we have a guy like that already in Pek. We need team/help defenders more, especially from the PF position which is increasingly becoming a perimeter spot.

Im starting to lean back to Chicago's package though...


If we could move Mirotic and 13 for 7, I'm all for it. If not, then Boston's deal still wins for me.

Edit:

Sakuragi_ wrote:And I don't think Gordon will ever be able to set good screens


Why not? Because he lacks bulk? Have you seen the pictures of his brother? I have zero doubts that Gordon should be able to add 20-25 pounds of muscle over the next 3-4 years. You have to remember when evaluating Gordon that he's the youngest (or 2nd youngest) guy in the draft. He won't even turn 19 until just before the season starts.
Image
Feilong
Veteran
Posts: 2,872
And1: 1,029
Joined: Jan 26, 2014

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1274 » by Feilong » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:04 am

I read about Randle that he uses only his left hand/side.
He needs to develop going to the right otherwise he will struggle in the NBA.
I haven't watched any game of him playing, just a few clips so i might be wrong.
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1275 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:14 am

Feilong wrote:I read about Randle that he uses only his left hand/side.
He needs to develop going to the right otherwise he will struggle in the NBA.
I haven't watched any game of him playing, just a few clips so i might be wrong.


DraftExpress's video for Randle goes over this a bit (starting at 13:40):

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7oLRl6NVDU[/youtube]

His strengths start at: 0:43
Weakness start at: 9:55
Image
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1276 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:15 am

I think it was due to the system. Kentucky had no other low post threats, which is huge in college game because everything is so cramped. But whenever he took a jumper he looked confident and the form was good. He had a jumper in high school so I'm not too worried.

And I guess Gordon's screen setting ability can improve over time, its just he has skinny legs and high hips so he doesn't have a strong base.. which will limit him in the post and as a rebounder. He just doesn't have much potential on that end.

Im just curious to see how his body will fill out and how his game will evolve. Feels like I'm just assuming all of these things will come together, but with Randle I know what to expect.


Lets not forget Randle can get up and receive lobs for Rubio as well.. I feel like theres a notion going around that he isn't athletic. Dude can get up and down.




And as for trading some of the Bulls assets back to the Kings for the 8th pick would send them over the edge. Getting Jimmy Butler, Gordon/Randle, plus two other rookies coming in would be a nice young nucleus. I would be intrigued in keeping Taj Gibson though if we wanted to compete, hes a great fit next to Pek defensively.
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1277 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:23 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:I think it was due to the system. Kentucky had no other low post threats, which is huge in college game because everything is so cramped. But whenever he took a jumper he looked confident and the form was good. He had a jumper in high school so I'm not too worried.


I see the same thing with Gordon. His form looks fine to me, so I expect that the results will come in time.

And I guess Gordon's screen setting ability can improve over time, its just he has skinny legs and high hips so he doesn't have a strong base.. which will limit him in the post and as a rebounder. He just doesn't have much potential on that end.


Fair enough. The same can be said about a guy like Garnett, though, and he's a very good screener (and rebounder). Also, again, he's only 18 and won't turn 19 until September. Compared to most of the guys in college, he's underdeveloped physically simply due to age. He will get bigger and stronger. Heck, there's even a decent chance that he'll get taller and longer. A year ago, at team USA, he measure out at 6'6" in socks with a 6'11" wingspan. This year, at the combine, he measured in at 6'7.5" with a 6'11" wingspan.

Im just curious to see how his body will fill out and how his game will evolve. Feels like I'm just assuming all of these things will come together, but with Randle I know what to expect.


I don't get this. With Randle, you're also just assuming that those things will come together. Unless you can see the future but only for certain people.

Lets not forget Randle can get up and receive lobs for Rubio as well.. I feel like theres a notion going around that he isn't athletic. Dude can get up and down.


He can, just like Love could, but he's primarily a below the rim player. The video I just posted above goes over it (starting at 12:42). Finishing lobs (and dunking in general) will likely never be a strength for Randle (much like Love).


And as for trading some of the Bulls assets back to the Kings for the 8th pick would send them over the edge. Getting Jimmy Butler, Gordon/Randle, plus two other rookies coming in would be a nice young nucleus. I would be intrigued in keeping Taj Gibson though if we wanted to compete, hes a great fit next to Pek defensively.


I definitely agree with this. Taj, Butler, and Gordon (or Randle) + 16 + 19 + cap relief is better than what Boston can give us (unless Brooklyn completely falls apart between now and the draft and we can safely project their picks as being top 5 or 10).
Image
User avatar
MinneOOPalis
Analyst
Posts: 3,457
And1: 1,415
Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Location: Minneapolis
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1278 » by MinneOOPalis » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:29 am

With Randle you are taking less of a chance because he has a better foundation. He has a nice touch around the rim and isnt a bad FT shooter. As well as more favorable size for a PF.

At times its hard for me to even picture Gordon as a starter, I just see him as being an energy guy off the bench for a lot of his career. I'm worried he will end up being a slightly better Thomas Robinson.
User avatar
AQuintus
RealGM
Posts: 10,425
And1: 2,458
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Location: But let me speak for the weak, I mean the rookies
   

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1279 » by AQuintus » Wed Jun 4, 2014 5:35 am

Sakuragi_ wrote:With Randle you are taking less of a chance because he has a better foundation. He has a nice touch around the rim and isnt a bad FT shooter.


Agree to disagree I guess. Gordon's foundation, while not great for a traditional PF, is fine for today's game. Randles' touch is better with his left hand, but might actually be worse with his right.

I can't argue with the FT shooting, numbers are numbers, but to paraphrase the great Kurt Rambis in regards to Gordon's FT shooting, "You're making a bigger deal out of it than it is."

As well as more favorable size for a PF.


They're the same height and length. Gordon weighs less but should be expected to add good weight as he gets older and gets into an NBA strength and conditioning training program (again, his brother was 6'9", 240 when he was a Senior). If anything, Randles' size scares me since he's primarily a low-post guy but doesn't have the length to be great there, and he has the kind of body type that can easily add bad weight.

At times its hard for me to even picture Gordon as a starter, I just see him as being an energy guy off the bench for a lot of his career. I'm worried he will end up being a slightly better Thomas Robinson.


I don't see that comparison at all. If anything, Kenneth Faried is better.

Thomas Robinson makes much more sense as a comparison to Randle - undersized, low post player that got by (and got drafted) by bullying guys in the post in college.
Image
User avatar
Antrim
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,774
And1: 703
Joined: Jul 28, 2010

Re: 2014 Draft Prospects Thread 

Post#1280 » by Antrim » Wed Jun 4, 2014 2:15 pm

AQuintus wrote:Thomas Robinson makes much more sense as a comparison to Randle - undersized, low post player that got by (and got drafted) by bullying guys in the post in college.


Randle is NOT undersized, give me a break. He's a 6'9" 250 freshman PF. If Julius Randle is undersized Karl Malone was too.

This notion that he's a tweener or that he can only bully college players is wrong, in my opinion. The guy is an athletic freak. If you think he's built like Thomas Robinson I have to question if you've ever watched either guy play. Junior Thomas Robinson was smaller than freshman Randle. Randle has legit PF size and he's stronger and/or faster than 90% of NBA PFs.

Randle's scoring instincts are in a different planet than Robinson's, too. Since the beginning of the season defenses have been collapsing on him and he's still managed to produce at a very high level. Robinson never earned that much attention from defenses.

I can understand people having 3 questions with Randle, because he does struggle with the following:

-off hand
-jumpshot
-ability to read defenses

I would ask these people: how many freshmen are completely proficient in all of those? He's got plenty of time to learn, and I think he's shown to be a very competitive guy. I expect him to work hard and learn. He's got elite physical tools that you can't teach. There aren't that many people that strong and that fast in the NBA, I can think of a couple. Give this guy a jumpshot and an off hand and he'll score 20 a game. And no way he's going to be a defensive liability. If he figures it out, he's got the physique to keep up with pretty much anyone. I actually think defense could be one of his strengths down the road.

This is not a response to you, more like a rant regarding what I'm reading lately: Wiggins should be a #1-#3 pick because of his unlimited potential, since he obviously will get better at his weakness. However, Randle will bust or become a roleplayer because he's got weaknesses. One is expected to improve but the other one isn't, although they're exactly the same age. I don't get the double standard.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves