Official #2 Pick Thread - BP says it's down to AW/JP

WEFFPIM · Post #281 » by **WEFFPIM** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 7:27 pm

DanoMac wrote:Cavs gonna Cavs--

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/baske ... 6962052016

Zeezprah · Post #282 » by **Zeezprah** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 7:31 pm

Profound23 wrote:Ironic that we could have the same draft as 1994

Parker=Big Dog
Wiggins=Grant Hill
Exum= JKidd

and we probably end up with the same caliber player from that draft.

yeeeeaaaa... no freaking way is wiggins a healthy grant hill

and no way is exum jason kidd

cinematographer · Post #283 » by **cinematographer** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 7:56 pm

Yeah, screw Exum. He only has a brilliant first step, sensational passing and Ginobli guile getting to and at the rim. Who cares about a guy killing it against kids his own age, that's why Larkin was a better pick than Giannis.

Zeezprah · Post #284 » by **Zeezprah** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:10 pm

kind of weird we're not at least considering exum. gotta believe philly wants one of wiggins/parker. nice to get something from them.

Chuck Diesel · Post #285 » by **Chuck Diesel** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:13 pm

This Jabari/Big Dog comparison is hack. Much different dudes.

MrPerfect1 · Post #286 » by **MrPerfect1** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:15 pm

Parker struggled shooting the ball, according to an account by Yahoo Sports, but the Cavs admired his passion and overall skill level.

I find this quite funny. I guess Parker was passionate about missing shots lol. If accurate, sounds like pretty backhanded compliments "Ummm, we liked that he Tried Hard and just liked his Overall skill....."

Zeezprah wrote:
yeeeeaaaa... no freaking way is wiggins a healthy grant hill

Wiggins and Hill share many similarities. The difference is mainly between replacing Hill's Dribbling/Passing with Wiggins far superior shooting. Hill was an awful shooter when he was drafted, he made Desmond Mason look like Ray Allen

MadBlueEdwards · Post #287 » by **MadBlueEdwards** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:16 pm

Zeezprah wrote:kind of weird we're not at least considering exum. gotta believe philly wants one of wiggins/parker. nice to get something from them.

Nothing against Exum, but in my mind he's the third best player in the draft now. I don't want to pass on someone better just so we can get something out of Philly.

Bucks_MacGyver · Post #288 » by **Bucks_MacGyver** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:24 pm

If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

SupremeHustle · Post #289 » by **SupremeHustle** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:31 pm

Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

No.

pilprin · Post #290 » by **pilprin** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:33 pm

MadBlueEdwards wrote:
Zeezprah wrote:kind of weird we're not at least considering exum. gotta believe philly wants one of wiggins/parker. nice to get something from them.

Nothing against Exum, but in my mind he's the third best player in the draft now. I don't want to pass on someone better just so we can get something out of Philly.

As others have said before...two players are significantly better than the rest...we can get one of them...why over think this?

Everyday I waffle back and forth between Parker and Wiggins. Never has Exum crossed my mind as a possibility.

cinematographer · Post #291 » by **cinematographer** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:33 pm

Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

There are so many problems with this...

RRyder823 · Post #292 » by **RRyder823** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:36 pm

Profound23 wrote:Ironic that we could have the same draft as 1994

Parker=Big Dog
Wiggins=Grant Hill
Exum= JKidd

and we probably end up with the same caliber player from that draft.

Every time something comes up I find it ironic that so many people use it as a knock on Robinson. Yes Hill was a great player and Kidd is going to the HoF but quite honestly when you factor in that Hills career derailed fast when injurys started to hit him after he left the team that drafted him in the pistons and Kidd wasn't in Dallas for too long before he got shipped out we actually got more production out of Big Dog then either Detroit or Dallas got with Hill and Kidd. Just saying.

Also I think Parker is going be a significantly better player then Robinson and considering I was a big Robinson fan back in the day i'll be excited is he's the pick..... Same goes for Wiggins also but I'm in the Parker camp as of right now

Baddy Chuck · Post #293 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:39 pm

Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

No.

Frank Nova · Post #294 » by **Frank Nova** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:41 pm

Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

Absolutely not.

MrPerfect1 · Post #295 » by **MrPerfect1** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:42 pm

Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

I have never seen a person claim the strategy is 100% Fool Proof. No strategy is 100% Perfect. However, it is definitely the best strategy, especially for Non FA destinations like us.

bigkurty · Post #296 » by **bigkurty** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:45 pm

Exum is still an amazing prospect so tanking still works. Chad Ford said Exum was basically a borderline tier 1/2 prospect so it's not like he is viewed that much lower than Wiggins or Parker as a prospect league wide. Kevin Peltons statistical analysis has him being better than Wiggins or Parker too. His physical gifts compared to those he will face at his position are actually far and away better than Parker. He will probably be the fastest player in the NBA the day he steps on the court and he already knows how to change speeds and use that to his advantage. That is something most speedy point guards don't learn until they have been in the league a few years. Oh and he gets to the free throw line at a crazy elite level.

RRyder823 · Post #297 » by **RRyder823** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:48 pm

SupremeHustle wrote:
Bucks_Pre wrote:If Philly doesn't get Wiggins or Parker does this prove tanking isn't always successful.

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

No.

No "this" isn't what proves "tanking isn't allways sucsesfull". That's already been shown before. It isn't allways sucsessfull. Sometimes it works out. Sometimes it doesn't. To say tanking is a time tested model isn't correct and to say it absolutely never works is wrong also. Just look at where it's gottin the Cavs. It worked when they tanked for Lebron and it's failed for them ever since he left.

When you get the high draft pick you still gotta get lucky that it was in the right year with guys declaring and lucky again with the player you draft fulfilling his potential. It's not about tanking or not tanking it's about selecting the correct players no matter where your drafting and then developing them.

ChuckBros4Life · Post #298 » by **ChuckBros4Life** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:55 pm

Sneakerpants wrote:Giannis/Wiggins would be a pretty sick foundation for a running team if you could find a PG to make that work. And if Giannks learns to shoot consistently they could even play the 3 and 4 in a small ball lineup without giving up too much on D.

Not saying that's a championship formula, but it would be fun to watch.

Add Zach LaVine at point guard and that team would be as exciting as they come.

Frank Nova · Post #299 » by **Frank Nova** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:01 pm

Ken Berger from NBA insider said earlier today the Cavs are 'leaning toward' Parker. Get ur "I'm Wiggin' It" tee shirts ready.

xTitan · Post #300 » by **xTitan** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:02 pm

Chuck Diesel wrote:This Jabari/Big Dog comparison is hack. Much different dudes.

Disagree

Parker or Wiggins?