Draft Discussion Part 3

[carey]

Some people focus too much on traditional positions. This is oversimplified but I look at the league much less position based and more of a free flowing spread and roll league so when looking for players I'd find guys who fit that more than trying to put them in a 1-5 positional box. Find guys defensively who can switch a p&r and some guys who can come from the weak side and block a shot. On O you need guys who can shoot well enough to space the floor, a couple good guards who can run the p&r, and a couple rim runners for the roll. Thats why a guy like chriss is valuable because if he reaches his potential he gives you shooting and rolling which opens up the pick and pop game too. Now you still need a couple guys who can play a little iso ball when the game slows down and you need a bucket.

Did you just explain the modern game of basketball to everyone because I said we have 1 Center under contract?

[bwgood77]

There is the consideration that in taking back Pekovics' contract, Minnesota gains much more cap space, Allowing them to chose a veteran of their preference now to bolster their playoff hopes in addition to the boost that Bledsoe will already give them production wise, and in terms of leadership and veteran presence/experience. pretty much assuring them of their goal of making it into the playoffs.

Therefore I believe that no necessary additional compensation would be needed to accomplish this trade. However, Should we have any interest whatsoever in Rubio? I'm fairly sure given the reports of Thibedoughs' desire to move on from him, that he could be added to our returning package.


But overall, I'm certain in that Bledsoe and taking back Pekovics' contract will suffice to acquire the pick from Minnesota. In an extreme circumstance(If necessary) I would be open to sending back Chandler to minnesota in the deal, But I just don't know if they'd want to add back his contract to their cap after gaining so much cap room by moving peks' contract in the deal. But in no way, would I entertain throwing in our # 32 pick as well. That pick is "essential" to our hopes of acquiring potential "steals of the draft" In Bam Edebayo and/or Semi Ojeleye, Or even possibly Jonathan Jeanne.

They can't trade peks contract because hes going to be ruled as a medical retire and his money will clear off their books. Aldridges contract is the one they would probably want to dump.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

I See,Darn espn trade machine .I really wish they would list the important details more. Anyways, Great eye once again Weepaug maybe this adjusted trade? http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=gt6f74q .

This is the most basic trade we can do with them at this point. But it appears to be beneficial for both teams interest in it's entirety

Or If any cap relief is needed to sweeten the deal for Minne, Then we just take Cole Aldrich back to give them an added $ 7 million a yer in savings to use on another veteran to add to their core?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yaetvlg6 .

Whatever we choose to do, We had better hurry up and make some sort of offer to Minne, As it appears that New York is apparantly desiring to capture Minnesotas' high value #7 pick. I would imagine their intent is just to secure the possability of Nitkilina or Dennis Smith Jr. before they might be off the board at their pick.

ESPN trade machine doesn't work very well. The realgm trade checker is better...it probably doesn't account for that but I think it's updated more...the espn one is still based on Hollinger stuff and he hasn't been there in a few years.

[carey]

But bottom line: you'd have to move TJ. Moreso than you'd have to move Bled if you picked Fox, since Fox can theoretically play some off-guard, due to his length, and there's PT to be earned in our backcourt, generally. Not the case in the front court, where we're too damn deep. I'd be keener on this if I thought TJ were properly valued on the trade market, but I don't think that's the case. I suspect, also, that TJ still has another level to reach as a player, and I'd like to see that happen here, if at all possible.

So that's my question. Say we go with Tatum. What's the next move? Because if we do nothing, Bender is locked into a backup 4/5 role, TJ's future and minutes are compromised, and DJJ is all but locked out (and remember, we won't have his RFA rights, so if we squander his development, we squander the opportunity). Suboptimal, in my view. And I have a hard time imagining McD coming up with a workable fix. Can anyone here?

This is the problem with every single potential draftee. The Suns have decent young players at every spot except C (BS and Len are not currently signed) so no matter who they draft there's going to be a log jam of sorts. The Suns are trading someone on draft night. You can bank on it. Bledsoe if they draft Fox. Warren if they draft Jackson or Tatum. Knight if they draft Monk. I guess it's possible that if the Suns take Isaac no one gets moved because he's very raw offensively and they may not be entirely sure how they want to use him yet.

Also, I don't think Fox can theoretically play SG. Maybe in a few years but I don't see a scenario where running him out there with Ulis would work well.

[bwgood77]

Read on Twitter

Pretty sure Schultz is being fed BS by some executive for a while now but this would make the draft interesting.

This would make me cry, that is, if Ball was passed up by the Lakers. I don't want McD to even have an inkling of a thought about drafting Ball. If Ball is there at 4, that likely means McD's target is not, so I hope at that point, there s a team in the next 3 that want to trade up, because I agree with the overall sentiment that after the top 7 or so talent, there is a drop-off to a group of about 10 that are all of similar value, and I'd hate to take a guy at 8 that we likely could've had at 15, if that makes sense.

Oh, and this is coming from a guy that has just briefly reviewed this draft this year, so I could EASILY be wrong about a few things, but I am fairly confident I do not want Ball and his drama on this team; dude is tailor-made for LA.

The good news is that "IF" somehow the Lakers DO pass on ball at #2, Then I just don't see any reasonable way that the 76ers' don't take him(ball) at #3. They have been enamored with the idea of getting a premiere point guard for so long now, That this scenario would then allow them to use their(cap) money on a shooter ( J.J. Reddick?) instead of on Lowry? Which also works out great for us in that, we end up now having Josh Jackson fall into our laps at #4.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

[carey]

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

[Villalobos]

This would make me cry, that is, if Ball was passed up by the Lakers. I don't want McD to even have an inkling of a thought about drafting Ball. If Ball is there at 4, that likely means McD's target is not, so I hope at that point, there s a team in the next 3 that want to trade up, because I agree with the overall sentiment that after the top 7 or so talent, there is a drop-off to a group of about 10 that are all of similar value, and I'd hate to take a guy at 8 that we likely could've had at 15, if that makes sense.

Oh, and this is coming from a guy that has just briefly reviewed this draft this year, so I could EASILY be wrong about a few things, but I am fairly confident I do not want Ball and his drama on this team; dude is tailor-made for LA.

The good news is that "IF" somehow the Lakers DO pass on ball at #2, Then I just don't see any reasonable way that the 76ers' don't take him(ball) at #3. They have been enamored with the idea of getting a premiere point guard for so long now, That this scenario would then allow them to use their(cap) money on a shooter ( J.J. Reddick?) instead of on Lowry? Which also works out great for us in that, we end up now having Josh Jackson fall into our laps at #4.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

Most draft guys I've read/listened to think Ball would be best used off ball, so Philly is the perfect place for him. He can shoot (theoretically, but so is Smith's shooting) and be an amazing secondary creator with quick, smart touch passes. He doesn't have to try and break down defenses on his own, which is his big weakness.

[bwgood77]

I think it would be foolish to trade anyone who is on a rookie contract just because we were concerned with playing time for everyone on a team that was the worst in the west, barring some sort of blockbuster deal.

There is no guarantee any of our picks pan out and most of the guys from the last 2 drafts and this one won't really begin to getting into their early peak years until 3-4 years from now.

Even if we draft Tatum, him and TJ can easily share time. In time, Bender and Chriss can play quite a few minutes in the frontcourt together if they both keep developing. TJ or Tatum could probably play a few minutes at the 4 as well. Even if Tatum is drafted and supplanted Warren in the starting lineup, Warren is the perfect guy to play 25 minutes off the bench and come in and dump in 15-20 points. TJ probably complements Booker better than Tatum anyway given he is not an iso player like Booker. Booker and Tatum both taking turns ISO'ing wouldn't be terribly fun for me to watch. Of course hopefully they would end up moving the ball and taking more open looks (as Booker as shown he can be a willing passer).

Diaw deserved minutes when we had Amare and Marion...we didn't need to trade one.

There will ALWAYS be injuries, so depth is good.

[RaisingArizona]

If Josh Jackson was Philly's pick, but just ensure the trade value of the 3rd pick being maximized. Would the Suns try to beat out other offers for the 3rd overall pick by overpaying to move up 1 spot?

Eric Bledsoe and 4th Overall for Reggie Jackson and 3rd Overall
Reggie Jackson and 12th Overall for Eric Bledsoe
3rd Overall for 4th Overall and 12th Overall

No, we'd take Fox.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

But bottom line: you'd have to move TJ. Moreso than you'd have to move Bled if you picked Fox, since Fox can theoretically play some off-guard, due to his length, and there's PT to be earned in our backcourt, generally. Not the case in the front court, where we're too damn deep. I'd be keener on this if I thought TJ were properly valued on the trade market, but I don't think that's the case. I suspect, also, that TJ still has another level to reach as a player, and I'd like to see that happen here, if at all possible.

So that's my question. Say we go with Tatum. What's the next move? Because if we do nothing, Bender is locked into a backup 4/5 role, TJ's future and minutes are compromised, and DJJ is all but locked out (and remember, we won't have his RFA rights, so if we squander his development, we squander the opportunity). Suboptimal, in my view. And I have a hard time imagining McD coming up with a workable fix. Can anyone here?

This is the problem with every single potential draftee. The Suns have decent young players at every spot except C (BS and Len are not currently signed) so no matter who they draft there's going to be a log jam of sorts. The Suns are trading someone on draft night. You can bank on it. Bledsoe if they draft Fox. Warren if they draft Jackson or Tatum. Knight if they draft Monk. I guess it's possible that if the Suns take Isaac no one gets moved because he's very raw offensively and they may not be entirely sure how they want to use him yet.

Also, I don't think Fox can theoretically play SG. Maybe in a few years but I don't see a scenario where running him out there with Ulis would work well.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

Do you think Monk would work well next to Booker, Ulis, or both? I'm thinking about this in part because I'm starting to come around to your position on Malik - talk about a good fit for the modern game. I think I've been underrating his physical tools, too. I had him at 6 in my first mock attempt, but I could see him going higher, for sure. How do you rank the Top 5?

[JMac1]

But bottom line: you'd have to move TJ. Moreso than you'd have to move Bled if you picked Fox, since Fox can theoretically play some off-guard, due to his length, and there's PT to be earned in our backcourt, generally. Not the case in the front court, where we're too damn deep. I'd be keener on this if I thought TJ were properly valued on the trade market, but I don't think that's the case. I suspect, also, that TJ still has another level to reach as a player, and I'd like to see that happen here, if at all possible.

So that's my question. Say we go with Tatum. What's the next move? Because if we do nothing, Bender is locked into a backup 4/5 role, TJ's future and minutes are compromised, and DJJ is all but locked out (and remember, we won't have his RFA rights, so if we squander his development, we squander the opportunity). Suboptimal, in my view. And I have a hard time imagining McD coming up with a workable fix. Can anyone here?

This is the problem with every single potential draftee. The Suns have decent young players at every spot except C (BS and Len are not currently signed) so no matter who they draft there's going to be a log jam of sorts. The Suns are trading someone on draft night. You can bank on it. Bledsoe if they draft Fox. Warren if they draft Jackson or Tatum. Knight if they draft Monk. I guess it's possible that if the Suns take Isaac no one gets moved because he's very raw offensively and they may not be entirely sure how they want to use him yet.

Also, I don't think Fox can theoretically play SG. Maybe in a few years but I don't see a scenario where running him out there with Ulis would work well.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

Do you think Monk would work well next to Booker, Ulis, or both? I'm thinking about this in part because I'm starting to come around to your position on Malik - talk about a good fit for the modern game. I think I've been underrating his physical tools, too. I had him at 6 in my first mock attempt, but I could see him going higher, for sure. How do you rank the Top 5?

[WeekapaugGroove]

Some people focus too much on traditional positions. This is oversimplified but I look at the league much less position based and more of a free flowing spread and roll league so when looking for players I'd find guys who fit that more than trying to put them in a 1-5 positional box. Find guys defensively who can switch a p&r and some guys who can come from the weak side and block a shot. On O you need guys who can shoot well enough to space the floor, a couple good guards who can run the p&r, and a couple rim runners for the roll. Thats why a guy like chriss is valuable because if he reaches his potential he gives you shooting and rolling which opens up the pick and pop game too. Now you still need a couple guys who can play a little iso ball when the game slows down and you need a bucket.

Did you just explain the modern game of basketball to everyone because I said we have 1 Center under contract?

No man; it wasn't directed at anyone or any post. I was just buzzed up and waxing philosophically on how I see a ton of time spent debating if a player is an X position when it's more productive to talk about how their skills fit the modern game.

[Kerrsed]

If Josh Jackson was Philly's pick, but just ensure the trade value of the 3rd pick being maximized. Would the Suns try to beat out other offers for the 3rd overall pick by overpaying to move up 1 spot?

Eric Bledsoe and 4th Overall for Reggie Jackson and 3rd Overall
Reggie Jackson and 12th Overall for Eric Bledsoe
3rd Overall for 4th Overall and 12th Overall

Nope. Look, I'm all gun-ho for Jackson, but that's just giving up too much value. I mean Bledsoe could net us a good player or two on his own or possibly a mid to late lotto pick. Then on top of that being forced to eat Reggie Jacksons contract, all just to move up one spot to take a player that I don't think the Sixers really want in the 1st place. No thanks, I'd pass and look at other deals.

[bwgood77]

But bottom line: you'd have to move TJ. Moreso than you'd have to move Bled if you picked Fox, since Fox can theoretically play some off-guard, due to his length, and there's PT to be earned in our backcourt, generally. Not the case in the front court, where we're too damn deep. I'd be keener on this if I thought TJ were properly valued on the trade market, but I don't think that's the case. I suspect, also, that TJ still has another level to reach as a player, and I'd like to see that happen here, if at all possible.

So that's my question. Say we go with Tatum. What's the next move? Because if we do nothing, Bender is locked into a backup 4/5 role, TJ's future and minutes are compromised, and DJJ is all but locked out (and remember, we won't have his RFA rights, so if we squander his development, we squander the opportunity). Suboptimal, in my view. And I have a hard time imagining McD coming up with a workable fix. Can anyone here?

This is the problem with every single potential draftee. The Suns have decent young players at every spot except C (BS and Len are not currently signed) so no matter who they draft there's going to be a log jam of sorts. The Suns are trading someone on draft night. You can bank on it. Bledsoe if they draft Fox. Warren if they draft Jackson or Tatum. Knight if they draft Monk. I guess it's possible that if the Suns take Isaac no one gets moved because he's very raw offensively and they may not be entirely sure how they want to use him yet.

Also, I don't think Fox can theoretically play SG. Maybe in a few years but I don't see a scenario where running him out there with Ulis would work well.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

Do you think Monk would work well next to Booker, Ulis, or both? I'm thinking about this in part because I'm starting to come around to your position on Malik - talk about a good fit for the modern game. I think I've been underrating his physical tools, too. I had him at 6 in my first mock attempt, but I could see him going higher, for sure. How do you rank the Top 5?

I don't think Monk would work well next to either. He is a small 2 guard who isn't too good defensively so neither pairing works well.

Hopefully Jackson drops since he works perfectly next to Booker seeing he doesn't need the ball like at Kansas and will do all the little things and can guard the best opposing wing and would also be ideal because he is the wing in the draft most suitable to play 2 when Booker sits. This would probably only work if him and/or Warren can reasonably stretch the floor though, but i imagine those minutes together would be limited anyway.

Even though you quoted me too in this question, I think your second question is more directed at carey, and I assume you pretty much know my top 5 or at least my top 2 and then it constantly changes after that in case you were not aware.

[Kerrsed]

I'm not a Monk man.

I'm sorry, all I see is Ben Gordon. And that's what I believe his ceiling is.

[bwgood77]

The good news is that "IF" somehow the Lakers DO pass on ball at #2, Then I just don't see any reasonable way that the 76ers' don't take him(ball) at #3. They have been enamored with the idea of getting a premiere point guard for so long now, That this scenario would then allow them to use their(cap) money on a shooter ( J.J. Reddick?) instead of on Lowry? Which also works out great for us in that, we end up now having Josh Jackson fall into our laps at #4.

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

Most draft guys I've read/listened to think Ball would be best used off ball, so Philly is the perfect place for him. He can shoot (theoretically, but so is Smith's shooting) and be an amazing secondary creator with quick, smart touch passes. He doesn't have to try and break down defenses on his own, which is his big weakness.

That's kind of why I think the Lakers should take him and keep Russell and play them together. Ball runs fast break but Russell runs half court sets and pick n roll. If Lonzo can just spread the floor in those situations, they would complement each other well, at least offensively. Both can hit the 3, or at least from what we know. I don't see why the Lakers would pass. Even though most fan bases are scared of Ball, I think the Lakers fan base loves him and wants him. I guess they could always use defense and go with Jackson, but given they just took a 3 in Ingram, have Magic who ran showtime (so probably likes the idea of Ball), and Russell who could play either guard spot, and can run half court sets, that works well and just bring Clarkson off the bench as 6th man.

[JMac1]

I'm not a Monk man.

I'm sorry, all I see is Ben Gordon. And that's what I believe his ceiling is.

I disagree. Monk has better athleticism, length, and handles. Also, are you comparing 19year old Monk to 19 year old Gordon?

Edit: you don't think Monk could play off Booker?!? He is a catch and shoot extraordinaire.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Re Zach Collins: I knew it would happen eventually.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2713522-2017-nba-mock-draft-latest-top-prospects-stock-watch-and-1st-round-predictions

[jcsunsfan]

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

I totally agree with this. I think Monk is underrated for the same reason Booker was. His talents were hidden on that Kentucky roster especially with Fox controlling the ball.

[bwgood77]

I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.

The 76ers would be foolish to pass on Monk which means they probably will. No matter who goes 1 & 2 I think he's the best fit with their current roster.

I totally agree with this. I think Monk is underrated for the same reason Booker was. His talents were hidden on that Kentucky roster especially with Fox controlling the ball.

I don't think his talents were hidden as he played a ton and had a ton of big scoring games. Booker's talents were hidden considering he and Ulis were bench players with the Harrison twins starting. He still did well enough to go lottery. I think Monk is pegged about right in draft rankings, and I'm not a fan of him for the Suns, but for the Sixers he makes a ton of sense given all their bigs and already having a point forward and two other forwards that can play the 3 or 4. However they lack shooting and need guards at both spots and having a point forward who can't shoot, they could definitely use a guy that could guard 1s who can flat out score but doesn't need to be a primary ballhandler. Rarely is their an ideal scenario for an undersized shooting guard that isn't a passer, who should ideally play the 1 due to size, but can't. In this case they really just need two shooting guards at 1 and 2.

That one analysis that was posted here a while back REALLY made him look good.

[thamadkant]

If 76ers are serious about making progress into the rankings, they'll draft Monk... but if they plan to tank again, then they'll draft BPA.