2016 draft thread: Part 2

[huesito]

I wonder how Thibs feels about the PF he already drafted...Portis (I assume he drafted Portis). However I have heard a few times he may not have the best working relationship with Bulls organization.

I have seen Lyles mentioned, I think he would be a good fit. Would Bazz + Dieng + Wolves 2017 unprotected work for Lyles + Pleiss + GSW 2017 1st?

Wolves could draft guard of choice at #5 while getting a well fitting PF.

Trey Lyles would be amazing.

[Klomp]

I wonder how Thibs feels about the PF he already drafted...Portis (I assume he drafted Portis).

Nope

[Killboard]

I wonder how Thibs feels about the PF he already drafted...Portis (I assume he drafted Portis). However I have heard a few times he may not have the best working relationship with Bulls organization.

I have seen Lyles mentioned, I think he would be a good fit. Would Bazz + Dieng + Wolves 2017 unprotected work for Lyles + Pleiss + GSW 2017 1st?

Wolves could draft guard of choice at #5 while getting a well fitting PF.

Trey Lyles would be amazing.

would be a good fit. However I don't think we can trade our first due the Payne trade, but I could be wrong.

[Sugarless]

He's a solid project, he's crafty around the basket and very hard working, but not too athletic, which may limit his upside (defensively more than anything). He's projected to be a lottery pick and he could end up being a top-10 depending on his workouts, but there are more interesting prospects at #5, which is why nobody's talking about him for the Wolves.

I hope that Sabonis could improve on defense with Thibs.

Ok, he isn't athletic. So... Are Pau and Marc Gasol athletics? IQ is very important for me, therefore I think Sabonis is our man, because he has the most high IQ of this draft.

What we need? PG, SG? No, a PF. Why not try get that PF in this Draft?

"There are more interesting prospects". Maybe yes. However we already have interesting prospects on SG and SF, a solid PG and one of the best center of the NBA. We only need an interesting PF. A backup PG/SG? I prefer draft player who could be starter and sign FA players to bench.

PS: Thanks for answering.

Pau was much more athletic than Domantas at his age. Remember he played SF for FC Barcelona before making it to the NBA, he could always put the ball on the floor and he was great running end-to-end for a 7'1'' player. He is also much much longer than Sabonis, while Marc is not only longer but also bigger, heavier.

Of course that doesn't mean he's not a good prospect with his talent, work rate and high BBIQ, that's just the reason why he's not ranked higher, and in the NBA it's rare to use such a high pick on a guy that's not projected to be off the board until several spots later, as you can get a bigger reward by trading the pick, moving down a few spots, and get something else in return. But I don't think that's what Thibs and Layden are looking to do with the pick. Of course we know very little about their real plans for the draft, and they may do it if they fall in love with a certain player, but at this point I think it'd be a bit surprising.

PS: They're not identical, but Sabonis right now reminds a bit of a slightly shorter version of Nikola Vucevic without the killer J. I think that could be his ceiling in the NBA (a fully developed Vucevic), which would be excellent news for Arvydas' son.

[Klomp]

Maybe I need to look a little closer at him

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Mike_Schmitz/status/736355010057904128[/tweet]

[Saltine]

Maybe I need to look a little closer at him

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Mike_Schmitz/status/736355010057904128[/tweet]

He's the one that's afraid of the ball;

At 4.1 rebounds per-40, Chriss ranks among the least prolific power forwards in NBA Draft history according to our database. Among first round picks, only Thaddeus Young (who played mostly SF in college) had a worse defensive rebounding rate in the draft's last 30 years. Chriss almost never puts a body on opposing big men in an attempt to box out and prepare for loose balls coming off the glass, and his relatively small standing reach (measured at 8'9, comparable with most small forwards) didn't help matters much. In addition to his instincts, his motor here leaves a lot to be desired as well, as if at times appears he's operating at half speed, and far more focused on his work on the offensive end.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Marquese-Chriss-83240/

[moss_is_1]

Way too much risk to use a top 5 pick on Chris. He has tools, which are interesting but lacks a lot in key areas.

[Mattya]

Chriss looks like a long term project to me. We need rebounders and he is terrible at that.

[Killboard]

I really like Sabonis. He plays efficient basketball. If you take out of the picture the face up game, he has a lot in common with love or zach randolph. Great rebounders, solid post defenders, really efficient scorers in the post. I really dont think he is slower that the other two to defend P&R plays or perimetral players. In fact I think he moves his feet even better.

Obviously the other two has great jumpers in their games, which open a lot of options and make them top scorers in NBA. Sabonis shot isnt broken, but he needs to keep working on that. As a C he dont have the size to be dominant, he could end being a solid backup anyway. He would be a top target to me if we trade down around 10+ pick.

[wildvikeswolves]

No way I take Chriss over Bender/Murray/Dunn. I'd prefer Hield to. Taking Chriss is reaching and drafting for need

Edit: Zero chance were the team that takes Chriss. Apparently we like Dunn and Murray a lot so if someone takes Chriss that means 1 of this 2 or Bender is available and we are golden

[firyGM]

Pau was much more athletic than Domantas at his age. Remember he played SF for FC Barcelona before making it to the NBA, he could always put the ball on the floor and he was great running end-to-end for a 7'1'' player. He is also much much longer than Sabonis, while Marc is not only longer but also bigger, heavier.

Of course that doesn't mean he's not a good prospect with his talent, work rate and high BBIQ, that's just the reason why he's not ranked higher, and in the NBA it's rare to use such a high pick on a guy that's not projected to be off the board until several spots later, as you can get a bigger reward by trading the pick, moving down a few spots, and get something else in return. But I don't think that's what Thibs and Layden are looking to do with the pick. Of course we know very little about their real plans for the draft, and they may do it if they fall in love with a certain player, but at this point I think it'd be a bit surprising.

PS: They're not identical, but Sabonis right now reminds a bit of a slightly shorter version of Nikola Vucevic without the killer J. I think that could be his ceiling in the NBA (a fully developed Vucevic), which would be excellent news for Arvydas' son.

Agree with you. And1.

Do you think there's any chance to get lower picks and draft Sabonis and Luwawu? Could be a good option. Both are undervalued, maybe they falls to 10-15 picks.

[Klomp]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/736741849885380608[/tweet]

[Sugarless]

Pau was much more athletic than Domantas at his age. Remember he played SF for FC Barcelona before making it to the NBA, he could always put the ball on the floor and he was great running end-to-end for a 7'1'' player. He is also much much longer than Sabonis, while Marc is not only longer but also bigger, heavier.

Of course that doesn't mean he's not a good prospect with his talent, work rate and high BBIQ, that's just the reason why he's not ranked higher, and in the NBA it's rare to use such a high pick on a guy that's not projected to be off the board until several spots later, as you can get a bigger reward by trading the pick, moving down a few spots, and get something else in return. But I don't think that's what Thibs and Layden are looking to do with the pick. Of course we know very little about their real plans for the draft, and they may do it if they fall in love with a certain player, but at this point I think it'd be a bit surprising.

PS: They're not identical, but Sabonis right now reminds a bit of a slightly shorter version of Nikola Vucevic without the killer J. I think that could be his ceiling in the NBA (a fully developed Vucevic), which would be excellent news for Arvydas' son.

Agree with you. And1.

Do you think there's any chance to get lower picks and draft Sabonis and Luwawu? Could be a good option. Both are undervalued, maybe they falls to 10-15 picks.

There's always a chance to get a low lottery pick -we see those trades every year-, someone could really like Shabbaz (though I think his overall value is not that high right now), or Thibs and Layden could think Tyus is not the back-up PG they want and they could try to move him (Jones could make sense for someone like the Grizzlies who don't have a great track record with their picks). But they know in order to win we need more veterans, so bringing more than one 1st round rookie will probably be a less interesting option for them.

[jpatrick]

Chriss scares me. He has poor length for a NBA PF but has everything else you'd want athletically, has great form on his shot, great lateral quickness, crazy bouncy, and is very young for his age. What's scary is that despite his athleticism, he was a terrible defensive rebounder and defender. Teams would go right at him. That screams bad effort and bad BBIQ, two very important traits.

He's a boom or bust guy. He's only played organized BB for a few years, so he could put it all together with good coaching. Just too much risk at #5.

[Murphs56]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/736741849885380608[/tweet]

Yup. Honestly we all have no idea what Thibs is thinking but just analyzing Dunn's skill set makes me think he's the type of player that fits with the identity that Thibs wants to establish. Draft week will be interesting. I believe that any trade made for pick 3 or 4 will be for Dunn. I know the Kings have been thrown out there as loving him. There's no way he'll fall that far though.

[sky4it]

McCollum is a much better athlete. Read the Draft express stuff on him, they have Murray down perfectly. By the way Taking bacon, shut the hell up, I wasnt talking to you, you must be a Klomp pal. You got that Klomp boy?

Draft express said this at the combine:
-C.J. McCollum didn't run the best times in the speed drills, but he didn't lag behind the rest of the field either, finishing right around average. His 38.5 inch maximum vertical jump was quite good and, more than anything else, he looked like the same athlete he was prior to injuring his foot and missing the latter portion of the season.

Draft express say this about Murray:
-He has an average combination of height, length, frame and athleticism for a guard prospect, not being particularly impressive in terms of his quickness or vertical explosiveness either.

And before you ask, Im not a Klomp fan, I just post what I think without read too much where is coming from. Helps to stay on topic.

Not that I'm very interested in this discussion, because neither McCollum nor Murray projected to be real NBA PGs during their college days and neither is going to be, IMO, but I think this debate needs some light: the biggest difference between McCollum and Murray is not athleticism, it's ballhandling. McCollum has some tight and crafty handles, he was much better with the ball than Murray throughout his college career and he's gotten better since he entered the league. That ballhandling is what allows him not only to be such a good shooter off the dribble, but also to turn the corner with the ball despite not being very athletic. Murray would have to improve quite a bit to get there (again, he may or may not, I just don't see it right now and even then I don't think that'll make him a real PG, just like McCollum isn't one).

Thank you. For putting down the details, without the empty rhetoric. Now you could have went on and on, about how I was wrong about athletic comparisons, but you didnt because you got class. Appreciated. I think you nailed it too, what you wrote is exactly what I saw on the court when McCollum plays.


Yeah, McCollum, for whatever the case or reason is, is an exceptional shooting guard. I thought he just demolished Zach Lavine, and demolished the Timberwolves defense last year.

I thought the Wolves last year, despite the woeful defensive stats, where ok defending the paint, except when they ran into really solid PG and SG tandems from other teams. Zach Lavine is a horrible defender. Buddy Hield, despite not being a good defender, might actually be an upgrade defensively, which is saying a mouthful.

[Klomp]

Please tell me who plays PG when Damian Lillard sits down?

[Ferulci]

I feel like Hield is the perfect player for the Wolves
- Very good shooter
- Incredible work ethic
- Good upside on both ends
- Will be ready to contribute from Day 1 and fits a need.
If Bender isnt available at 5, he should be the pick.

[Krapinsky]

Watching Klay singlehandedly win games in the playoffs with his 3-point shooting all but locks in my love for Hield. This team needs shooting more than anything else. If Hield is off the board, I'll gladly take Murray.

[Sugarless]

Draft express said this at the combine:
-C.J. McCollum didn't run the best times in the speed drills, but he didn't lag behind the rest of the field either, finishing right around average. His 38.5 inch maximum vertical jump was quite good and, more than anything else, he looked like the same athlete he was prior to injuring his foot and missing the latter portion of the season.

Draft express say this about Murray:
-He has an average combination of height, length, frame and athleticism for a guard prospect, not being particularly impressive in terms of his quickness or vertical explosiveness either.

And before you ask, Im not a Klomp fan, I just post what I think without read too much where is coming from. Helps to stay on topic.

Not that I'm very interested in this discussion, because neither McCollum nor Murray projected to be real NBA PGs during their college days and neither is going to be, IMO, but I think this debate needs some light: the biggest difference between McCollum and Murray is not athleticism, it's ballhandling. McCollum has some tight and crafty handles, he was much better with the ball than Murray throughout his college career and he's gotten better since he entered the league. That ballhandling is what allows him not only to be such a good shooter off the dribble, but also to turn the corner with the ball despite not being very athletic. Murray would have to improve quite a bit to get there (again, he may or may not, I just don't see it right now and even then I don't think that'll make him a real PG, just like McCollum isn't one).

Thank you. For putting down the details, without the empty rhetoric. Now you could have went on and on, about how I was wrong about athletic comparisons, but you didnt because you got class. Appreciated. I think you nailed it too, what you wrote is exactly what I saw on the court when McCollum plays.


Yeah, McCollum, for whatever the case or reason is, is an exceptional shooting guard. I thought he just demolished Zach Lavine, and demolished the Timberwolves defense last year.

I thought the Wolves last year, despite the woeful defensive stats, where ok defending the paint, except when they ran into really solid PG and SG tandems from other teams. Zach Lavine is a horrible defender. Buddy Hield, despite not being a good defender, might actually be an upgrade defensively, which is saying a mouthful.

Yeah I had no intention to antagonize either of you, we can agree or disagree but you both made good points (I think you're a bit too harsh when it comes to all things Klomp, though , and I can tell you Killboard is a very nice poster in my book), but I wanted to add my 2 cents because ballhandling is fundamental to be succesful in basketball and it's probably the aspect most often overlooked by fans. I think Murray needs to work on that if he ever wants to be able to play PG in this league.