Draft Discussion Part 3

[bwgood77]

Read on Twitter

I was just going to post if they like Ball they shouldn't trade for him because I think their is a good chance he will be their at 4 anyway. If LA is willing to trade down, then they don't like him that much better than Fox or whoever else. I still think Philly takes Monk or maybe trades down and takes one of Smith or Monk.

[bwgood77]

So despite all the curve balls I think it'll turn out pretty similar to consensus next week:

Boston - Fultz
Lakers - Ball or Jackson
Philadelphia - Ball or Jackson
Phoenix - Isaac or Tatum

With Isaac I think we're going to know very early if he's a boom or bust. If he can handle, move quick, create shots in Summer League the NBA is his, who can stop that? If he can't he might look like rookie Bender for his career.

I think Mc'D should have a good feel on that before we pick him. If we draft him, then he displayed those skills or the likely hood of developing/improving upon those skills; If we pick Tatum, Isaac didn't display those skills.

At the end of the day, I'm betting Fox. Minus his shooting (which my not be as bad as it seems) he is a combination of Tatum (offensive skills and Isaac (defensive skills), which says he has more potential than either of them.

Nah, I think we take one of the guys we worked out twice or Ball if he drops.

[Son of Ra]

Wonder why Jackson cancelled with Boston?

Deep team, very little playing time for rookies? I can't think of any other likely reason.

Lakers worked him out twice. Maybe they gave him the promise (assuming the promise story is true).

[Waylay13]

OK it is a week out so i am going to give my prediction of the first 5...
1. Fultz
2. Ball
3. Monk (This is much higher than most mocks place him at but with the 76ers but if you look at his drawbacks sizes and lack of point guard skills which become non issues for the 76ers)
4. Jackson
5. Fox

[Frank Lee]

Honestly I don't see why we need to give up a pick at all if we're taking on a bad contract. The value difference between #2 and #4 is nowhere near the $53M on Deng's contract or the $48M on Mozgov's. If they want us to take on one of those contracts (especially if it allows them to sign Lebron and/or George), my asking price would be #2 without trading #4 back.

Its because no team is going to use a top 5 pick (Let alone the #2) just to unload a bad contract. Thats just a stupid move.

I don't mean they would take that offer, but paying $50M to get a #2 pick is lot closer to realistic than paying $50M just for the incremental benefit of moving up 2 spots. I think you start at the more reasonable ask, and sweeten with the Mia pick and/or something else. Paying $50M AND giving up another pick just to move up 2 spots just seems crazy to me.

Look at it like a bean counter

We could move up 2 spots and have Mosgov instead of Len. No picks need be involved.

[batsmasher]

Continuing tape watching:

Jackson looks so much like Josh Richardson. They have similar frames and builds (Josh is a couple of inches taller but matching wingspans). As a big fan of JRich, I do like JJ. Fluidity of movement is the biggest selling point. Quick, efficient movements on both ends. He's going to be a pest defensively. Offensively nice, but don't see him as ever being a great 2 way player.

His jumper will need a rework in the NBA as the release is too low. He could get away with it if he was able to play some 4, but that frame will only serve him as a 2/3 IMO. I see him as a TJ/JRich hybrid. Don't see star written all over him and certainly view him as one of the safer lotto picks.

Don't think he'll be #3 on my big board. Liking Fox more at the moment.

[bwgood77]

Updated mocks

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2017/

http://www.nbadraft.net/2017-extended-mock-draft-70

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/report-general-manager-convinced-boston-celtics-will-draft-josh-jackson

[Mulhollanddrive]

Read a report that said Lonzo Ball is considering meeting other teams now.

Wonder if he turns into this year's Ben McLemore, he was touted as the next Ray Allen until workout reports leaked.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Continuing tape watching:

Jackson looks so much like Josh Richardson. They have similar frames and builds (Josh is a couple of inches taller but matching wingspans). As a big fan of JRich, I do like JJ. Fluidity of movement is the biggest selling point. Quick, efficient movements on both ends. He's going to be a pest defensively. Offensively nice, but don't see him as ever being a great 2 way player.

His jumper will need a rework in the NBA as the release is too low. He could get away with it if he was able to play some 4, but that frame will only serve him as a 2/3 IMO. I see him as a TJ/JRich hybrid. Don't see star written all over him and certainly view him as one of the safer lotto picks.

Don't think he'll be #3 on my big board. Liking Fox more at the moment.

Fox is solidly my guy at #4 now. I've got it into my mind that there's a drop from him to Tatum, as Fox's athleticism and energy put him just a notch above. I can see why Vlade's worried. We'll probably take him.

4 really is a fine spot to be in.

[Mulhollanddrive]

I've done more reading on Isaac and am really concerned he's just too lanky for SF, he lacks burst and handling because of his length, there were several videos I saw which highlighted he can't create any seperation or blow by which will be exaggerated by NBA opponents. We can't really play him at PF either.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

http://www.nbadraft.net/2017-extended-mock-draft-70

Read a report that said Lonzo Ball is considering meeting other teams now.

Wonder if he turns into this year's Ben McLemore, he was touted as the next Ray Allen until workout reports leaked.

The nbadraft.net mock is interesting. That site's been better than almost all at mocking the draft going way back (though DX and .net are now usually on the same page by draft night). Now they have us making a choice between Ball and Fox at 4. They have the Pacific Division picking up all three of the draft's top point guards. The western buzzsaw is always spinning.

The next poll should be Fox vs. Ball I guess.

[bwgood77]

Continuing tape watching:

Jackson looks so much like Josh Richardson. They have similar frames and builds (Josh is a couple of inches taller but matching wingspans). As a big fan of JRich, I do like JJ. Fluidity of movement is the biggest selling point. Quick, efficient movements on both ends. He's going to be a pest defensively. Offensively nice, but don't see him as ever being a great 2 way player.

His jumper will need a rework in the NBA as the release is too low. He could get away with it if he was able to play some 4, but that frame will only serve him as a 2/3 IMO. I see him as a TJ/JRich hybrid. Don't see star written all over him and certainly view him as one of the safer lotto picks.

Don't think he'll be #3 on my big board. Liking Fox more at the moment.

Fox is solidly my guy at #4 now. I've got it into my mind that there's a drop from him to Tatum, as Fox's athleticism and energy put him just a notch above. I can see why Vlade's worried. We'll probably take him.

4 really is a fine spot to be in.

That's strange he's solidly your #4. Your big board yesterday had him behind Tatum and Isaac. Is this just because he wants to play here?

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Continuing tape watching:

Jackson looks so much like Josh Richardson. They have similar frames and builds (Josh is a couple of inches taller but matching wingspans). As a big fan of JRich, I do like JJ. Fluidity of movement is the biggest selling point. Quick, efficient movements on both ends. He's going to be a pest defensively. Offensively nice, but don't see him as ever being a great 2 way player.

His jumper will need a rework in the NBA as the release is too low. He could get away with it if he was able to play some 4, but that frame will only serve him as a 2/3 IMO. I see him as a TJ/JRich hybrid. Don't see star written all over him and certainly view him as one of the safer lotto picks.

Don't think he'll be #3 on my big board. Liking Fox more at the moment.

Fox is solidly my guy at #4 now. I've got it into my mind that there's a drop from him to Tatum, as Fox's athleticism and energy put him just a notch above. I can see why Vlade's worried. We'll probably take him.

4 really is a fine spot to be in.

That's strange he's solidly your #4. Your big board yesterday had him behind Tatum and Isaac. Is this just because he wants to play here?

I'm emotional and erratic this time of year, but yeah - I had time to watch a bunch of videos this morning and the difference in athleticism got to me. I've liked Tatum for a while, but I'm backing off a bit. Not that I don't think he's a great talent - I think his floor is extremely high, and he could be an all-star for a few years. Specifically, I was impressed by the demonstrable skills Fox has clearly added to his arsenal with hard work, as well as his mentality. I like Tatum's work ethic as well, which is why I'd been so consistently high on him. I've just come around is all. I have both of them ahead of Isaac.

[Sunzgunz]

Jmo, unless your really sold on someone, be it their talent or ur system, and the asking price is modest, ....I don't think anyone with a top 4 pick should initiate a trade up...too much parity and volatility....we have no idea how this draft will play out.

Trading down I get....but if you receive that call it's a much different mindset....or, if ur guy is not one if the big 4 (fultz, ball, jackson or fox) and you wish to capitalize by stockpiling on the way down.

With our age, I usually wouldn't be an advocate of adding picks and getting even younger....but based on how deep this draft is (guys at the end of the 1st round with end of lottery type potential), also, we've talked about not competiting with G.S. for 2 to 3 years (IF we're lucky). So I got no problem with us stockpiling young assets to have a larger talent pool to select from or to package in a future blockbuster type of deal.

If we're content with one of the big 4....im content being content. If it's not one of the big 4, let's fatten our wallet, diversify our portfolio and stockpile assets.

Hell lets not only trade down for a 5 and a 10 (assuming/metaphorically), let's call Orlando and possibly give them their guy. Let's turn that 4 spot into a 6, 10 and 25 (while potentially still getting our guy). Rumor has it Portland will sell a pick in the 20's and 76ers will sell a 2nd rounder. If there's ever been a year to stockpile and move up in the same draft, trade into future drafts, or package assets for a proving player to lead our other assets..

A see nearly a dozen names, end of 1st, begining of 2nd, that carry weight, possible contributors for years to come..

HOPEFULLY it's a busy week for us and we take full advantage of all opportunity.

*Sorry for the rant ...anticipation has slowly progressed into impatience, which quickly evolved into insanity!

[BobbieL]

Its because no team is going to use a top 5 pick (Let alone the #2) just to unload a bad contract. Thats just a stupid move.

I don't mean they would take that offer, but paying $50M to get a #2 pick is lot closer to realistic than paying $50M just for the incremental benefit of moving up 2 spots. I think you start at the more reasonable ask, and sweeten with the Mia pick and/or something else. Paying $50M AND giving up another pick just to move up 2 spots just seems crazy to me.

Look at it like a bean counter

We could move up 2 spots and have Mosgov instead of Len. No picks need be involved.

Very good point - I never thought of it that way. If you think for the next three years, Mozgov is better than Len, it makes sense. I think a Mozgov and Sauce combo isn't bad

If somehow you can move Chandler and renounce the rights to Len or even take a trade exception for him or a sign&trade - I think I would do Mozgov and the 4 for the 2nd to get Ball

Trade Bledsoe for the 9th pick from Dallas.

[JMac1]

Continuing tape watching:

Jackson looks so much like Josh Richardson. They have similar frames and builds (Josh is a couple of inches taller but matching wingspans). As a big fan of JRich, I do like JJ. Fluidity of movement is the biggest selling point. Quick, efficient movements on both ends. He's going to be a pest defensively. Offensively nice, but don't see him as ever being a great 2 way player.

His jumper will need a rework in the NBA as the release is too low. He could get away with it if he was able to play some 4, but that frame will only serve him as a 2/3 IMO. I see him as a TJ/JRich hybrid. Don't see star written all over him and certainly view him as one of the safer lotto picks.

Don't think he'll be #3 on my big board. Liking Fox more at the moment.

Fox is solidly my guy at #4 now. I've got it into my mind that there's a drop from him to Tatum, as Fox's athleticism and energy put him just a notch above. I can see why Vlade's worried. We'll probably take him.

4 really is a fine spot to be in.

There is a drop. Fox is to PG what Jackson is to SF. Fultz, Jackson, Fox, and DSJ are the only players who have the athleticism to be extra special. Fox shot isn't a threat to open up things at this time, but his penetrating skills are, so it ain't like he'll be obsolete on offense coming in. Again, look at T Parker at 19.


I think we are over thinking it. I can't make up my mind 100 percent between Tatum and Issac, but I can with Fox. I just say "what if he is just a decent shooter in a few years....?"

[JMac1]

I've done more reading on Isaac and am really concerned he's just too lanky for SF, he lacks burst and handling because of his length, there were several videos I saw which highlighted he can't create any seperation or blow by which will be exaggerated by NBA opponents. We can't really play him at PF either.

My fear as well...When they start to say better at PF or he will be crowding our front court with Chriss and Bender when they are our young guys vs a crowded back court of an old guy, a horrible guy and a back up 5'10 guy... Fox fits better than Isaac

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

I don't mean they would take that offer, but paying $50M to get a #2 pick is lot closer to realistic than paying $50M just for the incremental benefit of moving up 2 spots. I think you start at the more reasonable ask, and sweeten with the Mia pick and/or something else. Paying $50M AND giving up another pick just to move up 2 spots just seems crazy to me.

Look at it like a bean counter

We could move up 2 spots and have Mosgov instead of Len. No picks need be involved.

Very good point - I never thought of it that way. If you think for the next three years, Mozgov is better than Len, it makes sense. I think a Mozgov and Sauce combo isn't bad

If somehow you can move Chandler and renounce the rights to Len or even take a trade exception for him or a sign&trade - I think I would do Mozgov and the 4 for the 2nd to get Ball

I'm starting to get pretty comfortable at #4. I think three of the top 4 players will be PGs, and I'm happy with whomever we end up with. Let the Lakers eat those contracts.

Trade Bledsoe for the 9th pick from Dallas.

Dallas says no. I think you could probably move Bled for a pick in the George Hill/Jeff Teague range this year, plus an additional asset. Do we like any of the bigs in the teens?

[bwgood77]

I don't mean they would take that offer, but paying $50M to get a #2 pick is lot closer to realistic than paying $50M just for the incremental benefit of moving up 2 spots. I think you start at the more reasonable ask, and sweeten with the Mia pick and/or something else. Paying $50M AND giving up another pick just to move up 2 spots just seems crazy to me.

Look at it like a bean counter

We could move up 2 spots and have Mosgov instead of Len. No picks need be involved.

Very good point - I never thought of it that way. If you think for the next three years, Mozgov is better than Len, it makes sense. I think a Mozgov and Sauce combo isn't bad

If somehow you can move Chandler and renounce the rights to Len or even take a trade exception for him or a sign&trade - I think I would do Mozgov and the 4 for the 2nd to get Ball

Trade Bledsoe for the 9th pick from Dallas.

Mozgov is not better than Len. They played the nearly identical minutes (20.3 vs 20.4) and Len more than doubled his blocks, almost doubled his steals, averaged 35% more rebounds. On offense they had identical TS%, he almost doubled his WS/48, had a positive DBPM and VORP while Mozgov had a negative one, and had a better ORtg and DRtg.

Len is far better on defense, rim protection, rebounding and steals and is almost identical offensively. AND he is 7 years younger.

To see comparison, go here. http://bkref.com/tiny/jpVZP

[batsmasher]

I think we are over thinking it. I can't make up my mind 100 percent between Tatum and Issac, but I can with Fox. I just say "what if he is just a decent shooter in a few years....?"

Plus, his mechanics are pretty solid- not terribly bad.

He's an absolute blur going to the rim, not just quick but big strides and heaps of balance. Loads of X-Factor.