Draft Discussion Part 3

[thamadkant]

In reality, Suns need another top shooter on the lineup. Hence why Monk draws interest and so does Isaac... And hence why Ball is ideal.

Jackson is also ideal... I see him developing his 3pter in the league.



Lets face it... Booker is not an elite 3pt shooter, he can nail them but ever since the Suns gave him all round responsibility it has affected his development as a sharp shooter. He's between OK to good as a 3pter compared to today's standards.

I can see McD pushing for Ball, maybe offering pick 4 and a player or future pick to move top 2.

[bwgood77]

Basically. If you truly believe Jackson is going to be a star and he's there, you take him. If you don't feel sure though, and if you, like me, feel that some of the guys at 5 and 10 may have the highest upside in the draft (Isaac, Smith for instance), then you make the trade. If Jackson or Ball don't fall to 4, I can't see a guy Phoenix would value enough to not trade for 5 and 10.

It doesn't really matter who they believe will be available. None of these trades would be made until teams are on the clock. For all Sac knows, LA could take Fox. We will know who is available if that trade is offered. The more I think about such a trade though, is that with all point guards likely being gone at 10 and the top sf prospects as well, who do you take first if you want one of each? It makes me start to realize why the Kings might pull the trigger if they feel they are set with bigs. Because they could take Isaac or Tatum at 5 and then not have a PG left, or take a pg at 5 and not have a wing at 10. They have tons of bigs.

But they still won't know anything until the draft is happening...and probably have contingency plans if there are certain people taken at certain positions.

I was saying if you believe Jackson is a star, not if you believe Jackson will be available. Obviously the trade wouldn't occur unless Sac knew the Phoenix pick would get them Fox.

Yeah, understand take Jackson if he is there, but the way you wrote the post was about how sure they would be about him being there and whether or not a trade would occur based on what you felt might happen. So I don't think any of that matters. They are going to need to be in the moment....which in this subsequent post you seem to agree with.

[MrMiyagi]

In reality, Suns need another top shooter on the lineup. Hence why Monk draws interest and so does Isaac... And hence why Ball is ideal.

Jackson is also ideal... I see him developing his 3pter in the league.



Lets face it... Booker is not an elite 3pt shooter, he can nail them but ever since the Suns gave him all round responsibility it has affected his development as a sharp shooter. He's between OK to good as a 3pter compared to today's standards.

I can see McD pushing for Ball, maybe offering pick 4 and a player or future pick to move top 2.

I'd disagree with that. This season, I felt that Booker was taking more tough 3s than open 3s. Off the dribble, step back, contested, etc... and hit 36% of them. I just think he needs more around him. Bender should be part of that, and so should whoever we draft (Jackson, Ball, Tatum at least). I won't be surprised to see him flirting with 40% from deep next season.

[mikefly3113]

Very obvious...no one needs shooting and athleticism. I agree.....

If he was in the mold of c.j. McCollum then I might agree with you. Bit he's more of a shooter straight line driver that's pretty undersized for the position.

Where would he get minutes? He's not a combo gaurd.

Good point and question?

I'd (in his first year) use him as a pure catch and shoot 2 and play Booker at the 3 and Bledsoe at the 1 with Chriss and Bender...

Start there. What are we going to do lose?

We'd lose out on a better player in Jackson or even Tatum

[mikefly3113]

I can see the appeal of Monk but just don't think he fits. The guy is a tremendous scorer and shooter, nobody is doubting that I just don't think he is a good backcourt pairing with Booker. Also I'd be shocked if Philly passes on him. I think Bryan is gonna try and build a competitive roster and he's ideal with a point forward like Simmons going forward.

[AtheJ415]

It doesn't really matter who they believe will be available. None of these trades would be made until teams are on the clock. For all Sac knows, LA could take Fox. We will know who is available if that trade is offered. The more I think about such a trade though, is that with all point guards likely being gone at 10 and the top sf prospects as well, who do you take first if you want one of each? It makes me start to realize why the Kings might pull the trigger if they feel they are set with bigs. Because they could take Isaac or Tatum at 5 and then not have a PG left, or take a pg at 5 and not have a wing at 10. They have tons of bigs.

But they still won't know anything until the draft is happening...and probably have contingency plans if there are certain people taken at certain positions.

I was saying if you believe Jackson is a star, not if you believe Jackson will be available. Obviously the trade wouldn't occur unless Sac knew the Phoenix pick would get them Fox.

Yeah, understand take Jackson if he is there, but the way you wrote the post was about how sure they would be about him being there and whether or not a trade would occur based on what you felt might happen. So I don't think any of that matters. They are going to need to be in the moment....which in this subsequent post you seem to agree with.

Yeah. Could have been clearer, but I meant if you don't feel sure he will be a star, not if you don't feel sure he will be there.

I actually have Jackson 2nd or 3rd on my board (hard for me to pick between him and Ball) but still would probably make the trade if it was on the table. I like Isaac a LOT and many of the guys at 10 who may be there (Lauri, Collins, Smith Jr., Ntilikina).

[bwgood77]

I was saying if you believe Jackson is a star, not if you believe Jackson will be available. Obviously the trade wouldn't occur unless Sac knew the Phoenix pick would get them Fox.

Yeah, understand take Jackson if he is there, but the way you wrote the post was about how sure they would be about him being there and whether or not a trade would occur based on what you felt might happen. So I don't think any of that matters. They are going to need to be in the moment....which in this subsequent post you seem to agree with.

Yeah. Could have been clearer, but I meant if you don't feel sure he will be a star, not if you don't feel sure he will be there.

I actually have Jackson 2nd or 3rd on my board (hard for me to pick between him and Ball) but still would probably make the trade if it was on the table. I like Isaac a LOT and many of the guys at 10 who may be there (Lauri, Collins, Smith Jr., Ntilikina).

I agree. I actually wrote up more on an earlier post saying that if I knew I could get Isaac at 5 and one of those pgs at 10 then it would be ideal, and went into the fact that if we did take Isaac and the pgs were gone, then we could take Collins at 10 (or Markkanen) and run a 5 guy frontcourt rotation of Warren, Isaac, Chriss, Bender and Collins/Lauri and there would be an avg of 29 mpg per player and would allow us to dispose of our traditional centers and let the RFA's walk, or keep maybe Williams or something...and chances are one either wouldn't pan out or one may have issues and people would earn their time. And we would still have Bledsoe to either offer straight up for DS Jr or Ntilikina to the Knicks or Mavs if they were willing and if we wanted to sell high on him.

That would be our risk of trading for the 5 and 10 IF we wanted Isaac. All this is assuming the first three gone are Fultz, Ball, Jackson. Otherwise you better take your favorite PG at 5 and take whoever is left of Colllins and Markkanen or possibly Anunoby if all are gone. The biggest problem is if we took Isaac as 5 I'm guessing there is a very good chance the point guards are all gone at 10. Maybe not, but it's a risk. To keep Bledsoe and add a PG and Isaac would be nice.

[JMac1]

If he was in the mold of c.j. McCollum then I might agree with you. Bit he's more of a shooter straight line driver that's pretty undersized for the position.

Where would he get minutes? He's not a combo gaurd.

Good point and question?

I'd (in his first year) use him as a pure catch and shoot 2 and play Booker at the 3 and Bledsoe at the 1 with Chriss and Bender...

Start there. What are we going to do lose?

We'd lose out on a better player in Jackson or even Tatum

Damn....and you know this for sure? Impressive.

[JMac1]

I can see the appeal of Monk but just don't think he fits. The guy is a tremendous scorer and shooter, nobody is doubting that I just don't think he is a good backcourt pairing with Booker. Also I'd be shocked if Philly passes on him. I think Bryan is gonna try and build a competitive roster and he's ideal with a point forward like Simmons going forward.

A lot of people are saying he isn't BPA at 4 let alone 3, but you say Philly would be crazy to pass on him!?!

No, If Jackson is BPA like most here believe, then Philly will take him and go from there.

Our choice is Tatum Monk or Issac. After watching tonight's game, I think we are leaning Monk.

He is the only person who would have made a difference in tonight's game.

Saying defense and the NBA in the same sentence is laughable.

[AtheJ415]

In reality, Suns need another top shooter on the lineup. Hence why Monk draws interest and so does Isaac... And hence why Ball is ideal.

Jackson is also ideal... I see him developing his 3pter in the league.



Lets face it... Booker is not an elite 3pt shooter, he can nail them but ever since the Suns gave him all round responsibility it has affected his development as a sharp shooter. He's between OK to good as a 3pter compared to today's standards.

I can see McD pushing for Ball, maybe offering pick 4 and a player or future pick to move top 2.

I'd disagree with that. This season, I felt that Booker was taking more tough 3s than open 3s. Off the dribble, step back, contested, etc... and hit 36% of them. I just think he needs more around him. Bender should be part of that, and so should whoever we draft (Jackson, Ball, Tatum at least). I won't be surprised to see him flirting with 40% from deep next season.

Yeah. I feel very safe saying Booker is an elite shooter despite the numbers. He's adjusting to being the go-to scorer of an awful team. It isn't easy. And he is taking tougher shots than he ever has and probably than he should be. He will learn to take smarter/better shots and also should improve his skill as a shooter as he gets more reps in those situations. I am not worried about Booker's shooting in the slightest.

[AtheJ415]

If I was GM, based on rumors (and I know they probably aren't true), I would do the following:

Trade pick 4 for pick 5 and 10.

Take Isaac at 5, take Ntilikina or Smith at 10.

Trade Bledsoe for a 2018 or 2019 pick to balance out our future picks. If not possible, trade him for 2017 (let's say 12 to Detroit). Take Collins (though I'd prefer Lauri because I think he's the best shooter in the draft and is a rarity at 7'. Also I think he can add 20 pounds and play the 5).

Take Swanigan at 32.

Take Kobi Simmons at 54 as a combo guard project (D-League for a couple years).

Basing this off of Draftexpress's current mock and the Sac and Det rumors being true (though they probably aren't).

Still, interesting to think about. Would love to somehow get Semi on our team but Draftexpress has him moving into the late 1st now.

[JMac1]

Whats the word on Tatum working out anywhere?

[JMac1]

If I was GM, based on rumors (and I know they probably aren't true), I would do the following:

Trade pick 4 for pick 5 and 10.

Take Isaac at 5, take Ntilikina or Smith at 10.

Trade Bledsoe for a 2018 or 2019 pick to balance out our future picks. If not possible, trade him for 2017 (let's say 12 to Detroit). Take Collins (though I'd prefer Lauri because I think he's the best shooter in the draft and is a rarity at 7'. Also I think he can add 20 pounds and play the 5).

Take Swanigan at 32.

Take Kobi Simmons at 54 as a combo guard project (D-League for a couple years).

Basing this off of Draftexpress's current mock and the Sac and Det rumors being true (though they probably aren't).

Still, interesting to think about. Would love to somehow get Semi on our team but Draftexpress has him moving into the late 1st now.

Would you trade 5 and 10 for 4? I would not. I think it's BS. Sac is trying to test the market. Same reason why Boston said they weren't 100 percent on Fultz, they don't want to close anyone out; hoping for an insane offer.

What if Boston does take Ball to screw the Lakers and help themselves. Ball could play well with IT.

[Sunzgunz]

Yeah, understand take Jackson if he is there, but the way you wrote the post was about how sure they would be about him being there and whether or not a trade would occur based on what you felt might happen. So I don't think any of that matters. They are going to need to be in the moment....which in this subsequent post you seem to agree with.

Yeah. Could have been clearer, but I meant if you don't feel sure he will be a star, not if you don't feel sure he will be there.

I actually have Jackson 2nd or 3rd on my board (hard for me to pick between him and Ball) but still would probably make the trade if it was on the table. I like Isaac a LOT and many of the guys at 10 who may be there (Lauri, Collins, Smith Jr., Ntilikina).

I agree. I actually wrote up more on an earlier post saying that if I knew I could get Isaac at 5 and one of those pgs at 10 then it would be ideal, and went into the fact that if we did take Isaac and the pgs were gone, then we could take Collins at 10 (or Markkanen) and run a 5 guy frontcourt rotation of Warren, Isaac, Chriss, Bender and Collins/Lauri and there would be an avg of 29 mpg per player and would allow us to dispose of our traditional centers and let the RFA's walk, or keep maybe Williams or something...and chances are one either wouldn't pan out or one may have issues and people would earn their time. And we would still have Bledsoe to either offer straight up for DS Jr or Ntilikina to the Knicks or Mavs if they were willing and if we wanted to sell high on him.

That would be our risk of trading for the 5 and 10 IF we wanted Isaac. All this is assuming the first three gone are Fultz, Ball, Jackson. Otherwise you better take your favorite PG at 5 and take whoever is left of Colllins and Markkanen or possibly Anunoby if all are gone. The biggest problem is if we took Isaac as 5 I'm guessing there is a very good chance the point guards are all gone at 10. Maybe not, but it's a risk. To keep Bledsoe and add a PG and Isaac would be nice.

I thought the same thing.....i actually did fox...but I would roll the dice with 5 and 10 if it meant isaac and Smith in a heartbeat.

[MathiasPW]

Here is the thing about Sacramento:

First, I doubt they offer both picks to move up one or two spots. Much more likely that they offer one of their bigs who they have too many of anyway. To us, that would still be ok as WCS, Papagianis and even Skal might be able to play at 5.

Secondly, they are (supposedly) aiming at a specific player (Fox), not just a better pick. Since they pick immediately after us, they can wait for us to pick to see if he will be available. So, to get that trade to work out, we would actually HAVE to select Fox first to make the threat of losing him real. Now suppose they were bluffing or whatever and we picked a player we didn´t want and end up stuck with him.

We would be put under pressure to deal Bledsoe ON DRAFT NIGHT to fix the roster and would have to settle on a player who was not our projected BPA. terrible scenario

[Qwigglez]

For all those who want as much information as possible. This guy made decent scouting videos last year I believe...

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[bwgood77]

Here is the thing about Sacramento:

First, I doubt they offer both picks to move up one or two spots. Much more likely that they offer one of their bigs who they have too many of anyway. To us, that would still be ok as WCS, Papagianis and even Skal might be able to play at 5.

Secondly, they are (supposedly) aiming at a specific player (Fox), not just a better pick. Since they pick immediately after us, they can wait for us to pick to see if he will be available. So, to get that trade to work out, we would actually HAVE to select Fox first to make the threat of losing him real. Now suppose they were bluffing or whatever and we picked a player we didn´t want and end up stuck with him.

We would be put under pressure to deal Bledsoe ON DRAFT NIGHT to fix the roster and would have to settle on a player who was not our projected BPA. terrible scenario

That's true. Of course (unless they are really dumb) they would make us draft Fox first before pulling the trigger on a trade, so we very likely couldn't just take Jackson (if he's there) if they turn it down, because they wouldn't offer the trade and it may not even be consummated until after all three picks were made.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

I doubt Sacto does 5 and 10 for 4 straight up. I'm guessing our FO intends to be cagey about their preferences - there's nothing we clearly need, so it isn't obvious. Make other teams sweat. If they think there's a clear #4 in this draft, maybe we receive some pretty damn good offers.

[carey]

Did anyone hear Simmons talking about the Suns taking on Mozgov's (or Deng's) deal to move from 4 to 2 in order to select Ball? What do you think?

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Did anyone hear Simmons talking about the Suns taking on Mozgov's (or Deng's) deal to move from 4 to 2 in order to select Ball? What do you think?

I've been thinking about this or something like it. I think it's a great idea. Would want to move Chandler elsewhere in that scenario, but I'd be down. 100%.