2016 draft thread: Part 2

mkl2021 · Post #41 » by **mkl2021** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 9:22 pm

The more I watch on Dunn the more I like him. If his shoulder tests okay I think he would be the best pick for us in our expected range. If Dunn's gone my second choice is Luwawu. We really need to improve our defense.

Hogified05 · Post #42 » by **Hogified05** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:50 am

If yall get Simmons or Ingram....oh my.

Specially Simmons. I feel like Ingram's game would clash with Wiggins. You can just throw him at PG and have LaVine, Wiggins and Kat running the floor with him. Good grief. Just got to get a knock down shooter to go with those boys.

How is LaVine at PG? Because if that is viable I think Heild would actually be the best fit.

LaVine
Heild
Wiggins
???
KAT

Yikes

ace625214 · Post #43 » by **ace625214** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:32 am

Hogified05 wrote:If yall get Simmons or Ingram....oh my.

Specially Simmons. I feel like Ingram's game would clash with Wiggins. You can just throw him at PG and have LaVine, Wiggins and Kat running the floor with him. Good grief. Just got to get a knock down shooter to go with those boys.

How is LaVine at PG? Because if that is viable I think Heild would actually be the best fit.

LaVine
Heild
Wiggins
???
KAT

Yikes

LaVine is absolutely terrible at PG. Simmons isn't really a good fit with the current team unless you trade Ricky for a downgrade at everything except shooting. A lot of Wolves fans really like the Heild pick if it stays at 5. He'd be a great backup 2 and could come in for a small-ball lineup with the starters.

King Malta · Post #44 » by **King Malta** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:51 am

If we got the #1 (surely we couldn't be THAT lucky) I'd definitely be taking Ingram, or trading down to #2 to take Ingram. As mentioned above, Simmons isn't a great fit for this team and I also have some concerns about some of the gaps in his game.

Post #45 » by **Klomp** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 3:12 am

ace625214 wrote:LaVine is absolutely terrible at PG. Simmons isn't really a good fit with the current team unless you trade Ricky for a downgrade at everything except shooting. A lot of Wolves fans really like the Heild pick if it stays at 5. He'd be a great backup 2 and could come in for a small-ball lineup with the starters.

I get what you're saying and I agree, but I would argue that drafting Simmons would allow a team to run someone like LaVine at "PG"

I probably wouldn't do it though. I think Simmons is the least likely of the Top 3 (Ingram, Bender the others) to be a Thibs pick.

Dleavitt24 · Post #46 » by **Dleavitt24** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 3:22 am

Not sure if it's been mentioned but if we are so lucky enough to get the 1st or 2nd pick I personally would trade it for Jimmy Butler. Not sure how that would work contract wise but of we stay at 5 we surely would have to give up pick 5 + lavine and I'd have to pause on that. But imagine this:
1. Rubio
2. Butler
3.Wiggins
4.Dieng
5. Kat
6th man lavine...yes to play SG and PG. Lavine as part time PG on this team works because u have other playmakers. He'd essentially be a shooting guard playing the 1. Slap Butler with him and your fine.
Then to round out the roster
7. Noah (FA) 6th man of the bigs.
8. Muhammed. Energy wing - if tibs can make him useful on D watch out because now you got a guy u can trust to handle more min if one of your wings go down.

...and that's your 8 man rotation. Might keep Prince for small ball 4 while u develop or wait for 2017 FA to fill that spot.
Bjelica, Garnett, tyus, ect give u great depth.

KG_And1 · Post #47 » by **KG_And1** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 3:36 am

^I would be on board with Jimmy B, even at the expense of the #1 or #2 overall pick.

I would probably start Noah over Dieng, however. Playing KAT at the 4 and have Noah at the 5.

minimus · Post #48 » by **minimus** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 4:09 am

mkl2021 wrote:The more I watch on Dunn the more I like him. If his shoulder tests okay I think he would be the best pick for us in our expected range. If Dunn's gone my second choice is Luwawu. We really need to improve our defense.

Yes, but the biggest concern about Dunn is that he needs ball in his hands to be effective. And I understand that is difficult to maintain the same level of defensive intensity for young player. However if Thibs can turn him into next Rose, I would be totally fine with this selection. All tools are here.

ace625214 · Post #49 » by **ace625214** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 4:11 am

Klomp wrote:
ace625214 wrote:LaVine is absolutely terrible at PG. Simmons isn't really a good fit with the current team unless you trade Ricky for a downgrade at everything except shooting. A lot of Wolves fans really like the Heild pick if it stays at 5. He'd be a great backup 2 and could come in for a small-ball lineup with the starters.

I get what you're saying and I agree, but I would argue that drafting Simmons would allow a team to run someone like LaVine at "PG"

I probably wouldn't do it though. I think Simmons is the least likely of the Top 3 (Ingram, Bender the others) to be a Thibs pick.

Right, but in his lineup he had us picking Heild. If Simmons is playing point forward, then yes Zach could be a secondary ball handler. If you're taking Heild and putting LaVine at PG, then no. I want Bender pretty badly. Earlier in the season I liked Ingram's fit, since he brings shooting and would allow Wiggins to play the 2. After Zach's progression, though, I'm full steam ahead on the Bender train.

King Malta · Post #50 » by **King Malta** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 4:23 am

Maybe the lurking Chicago fans can confirm/deny the legitimacy of this, but there's been a few rumblings that Butler is a bit of a dick and not that popular in the dressing room.

Add that to the fact that the #2 draft pick can net you Simmons or Ingram and I don't see the motivation in giving it up for Butler.

shangrila · Post #51 » by **shangrila** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 4:54 am

Butler and Wiggins seem to have a lot of overlap so I'd probably pass on Jimmy. If I'm trading a #1 or #2 pick it'd be for someone like Favors.

Saltine · Post #52 » by **Saltine** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 5:19 am

Yep, we need a Big that can play D and rebound. Bismack, Deng, Marvin Williams, all would fit, and be reasonable priced. And we need a shooter on the wing, whom we can draft... Butler has some large ego issues of late, is a poor shooter, and wanted Thibs out of Chicago last I heard... he's not quite the fit some of you think he may be.

One of these was Butler;
[tweet]https://twitter.com/dan_bernstein/status/604005635630342144[/tweet]

franckyvinvin12 · Post #53 » by **franckyvinvin12** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 8:11 am

Klomp wrote:Our only pick in the draft right now is the one in the lottery

A 2nd round draft pick is cheap, it can always be done 8-)

LacosteM · Post #54 » by **LacosteM** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:31 am

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/722836513893912576[/tweet]

If Dragan pans out, him and Towns could be a monstrous duo imo.

gopher wolf · Post #55 » by **gopher wolf** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:31 am

King Malta wrote:If we got the #1 (surely we couldn't be THAT lucky) I'd definitely be taking Ingram, or trading down to #2 to take Ingram. As mentioned above, Simmons isn't a great fit for this team and I also have some concerns about some of the gaps in his game.

Simmons is the only guy in this draft that would start right away for this team. Don't know how you could say he isn't a fit even if he isn't able to stretch the floor for KAT with his poor jumper. Would most likely be an immediate upgrade over Dieng.

gopher wolf · Post #56 » by **gopher wolf** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:38 am

LacosteM wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/722836513893912576[/tweet]

If Dragan pans out, him and Towns could be a monstrous duo imo.

If we don't get a top 3 pick and stay at 5, I'll be really hoping the Lakers can fall out of the top 3 and Philly ends up with picks 3 and 4 with the Celtics Suns at one and two in the lottery. That way those two teams can get their PF's with Simmons and Ingram and Philly would hopefully draft two of Murray, Hield, Dunn and Brown. That seems like the best case scenario if the Wolves don't move up and stay at 5. Would give us the best shot for Bender at #5 as i'd like to think Philly wouldn't take him at 3 and 4 with Noel, Okafor and Embiid.

King Malta · Post #57 » by **King Malta** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:45 am

gopher wolf wrote:
King Malta wrote:If we got the #1 (surely we couldn't be THAT lucky) I'd definitely be taking Ingram, or trading down to #2 to take Ingram. As mentioned above, Simmons isn't a great fit for this team and I also have some concerns about some of the gaps in his game.

Simmons is the only guy in this draft that would start right away for this team. Don't know how you could say he isn't a fit even if he isn't able to stretch the floor for KAT with his poor jumper. Would most likely be an immediate upgrade over Dieng.

He can't shoot and his defense is horrible, his main strength at this point is his ability to play as a point forward, something we don't need currently with Rubio on this team. That's why I see him as a poor fit. I'd prefer the skills/upsides that Ingram offers if I had the #1 pick.

rugbyrugger23 · Post #58 » by **rugbyrugger23** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 2:06 am

King Malta wrote:Maybe the lurking Chicago fans can confirm/deny the legitimacy of this, but there's been a few rumblings that Butler is a bit of a dick and not that popular in the dressing room.

Add that to the fact that the #2 draft pick can net you Simmons or Ingram and I don't see the motivation in giving it up for Butler.

Couldn't agree more. If Wolves get 1 or 2, they listen to any and all offers, and Butler is not it. Why anyone should settle for Butler (at cost of 1 or 2) and in doing so sacrifice LaVine in process (by moving him to bench or the ugly thought of him as PG) is just gross.

Here are some deals I would consider:

Simmons/Ingram + LaVine to PHX for (their pick) Bender + Booker
C: Towns
F: Bender
F: Wiggins
G: Booker
G: Rubio
6: Bazz

Simmons/Ingram + Bazz to Magic for Herzonja + Gordon
C: Towns
F: Gordon
F: Wiggins
G: LaVine
G: Rubio
6: Herzonja
***Bonus of dunk contests at every practice with LaVine, Gordon, Wiggins, Herzonja.

Wiggins + Simmons/Ingram to Pelicans for Davis
C: Towns
F: Davis
F: Bazz
G: LaVine
G: Rubio

Post #59 » by **Worm Guts** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 2:18 am

King Malta wrote:
gopher wolf wrote:
King Malta wrote:If we got the #1 (surely we couldn't be THAT lucky) I'd definitely be taking Ingram, or trading down to #2 to take Ingram. As mentioned above, Simmons isn't a great fit for this team and I also have some concerns about some of the gaps in his game.

Simmons is the only guy in this draft that would start right away for this team. Don't know how you could say he isn't a fit even if he isn't able to stretch the floor for KAT with his poor jumper. Would most likely be an immediate upgrade over Dieng.

He can't shoot and his defense is horrible, his main strength at this point is his ability to play as a point forward, something we don't need currently with Rubio on this team. That's why I see him as a poor fit. I'd prefer the skills/upsides that Ingram offers if I had the #1 pick.

I think calling him horrible defensively is a little bit of hyperbole. There are definite questions but he's a good rebounder and gets a ton of steals. He does have a lack of length and doesn't always give great effort, but he has great instincts.

King Malta · Post #60 » by **King Malta** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 2:21 am

Worm Guts wrote:
King Malta wrote:
gopher wolf wrote:
Simmons is the only guy in this draft that would start right away for this team. Don't know how you could say he isn't a fit even if he isn't able to stretch the floor for KAT with his poor jumper. Would most likely be an immediate upgrade over Dieng.

He can't shoot and his defense is horrible, his main strength at this point is his ability to play as a point forward, something we don't need currently with Rubio on this team. That's why I see him as a poor fit. I'd prefer the skills/upsides that Ingram offers if I had the #1 pick.

I think calling him horrible defensively is a little bit of hyperbole. There are definite questions but he's a good rebounder and gets a ton of steals. He does have a lack of length and doesn't always give great effort, but he has great instincts.

It probably is, and don't get me wrong, if we picked him at #1 I wouldn't have nightmares about it, I just think Ingram's a better fit with the current core we have.