Mirjalovic wrote:in a draft that full of good big and lead guard, its very unwise to draft a SF that can't really shoot or playmaking.
SF is a dime a dozen, and i dont think they even an important position in NBA.. just slide someone who tall enough and can defense and shooting and we are golden. in other hand, a good big or a good lead guard is the recipe to success.
we could even draft decent SF with Rockets pick (Rondae, Justin, Dekker)
dont forget Kahwi, Middleton and Caroll will hit FA market.
So SFs are a dime a dozen, as a whole aren't an important position, yet you list Kawhi (someone we won't have a chance at getting for another, what? 5 years) who was the finals MVP last year? And a huge part of the Spur's future....
The reason Kawhi is so important is that he's that perimeter defensive wiz that can guard LeBron and 4 positions. Every elite team has a guy somewhat like that player, so to say they're a dime a dozen is silly, because they're obviously important.
Last year I wanted to draft Gordon for the same reasons, so to me it makes sense that if the brass doesn't see a big or pg diamond in the rough at the 4th or 5th pick, then we absolutely should pick a stud defensive spear.
And sure, Winslow's stock has raised, probably because of the eye test. IDK about you, but when you watch Duke you come in expecting to be blown away by Okafor and then you realize there's this stud right there on his team grabbing just as many or more rebounds, guarding multiple positions.
I'm not saying Winslow or bust, but to dismiss a basketball player because he's in the 6'7"-6'9" range is stupid. So many point guards can't shoot for **** and people say they'll learn. Well, I'm pretty sure forwards can learn to shoot too. I keep thinking of Randle and a physical dude like Winslow or even Stanley Johnson on the boards and I imagine just hammering teams.
What sucks is we'll never get to see the workouts that really will decide who gets picked where.
+ 
= 
