2017 Draft Thread

Baseline81 · Post #1821 » by **Baseline81** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:59 pm

Worm Guts wrote:I don't think last year we all agreed on Dunn, at least not here. We're probably as close this year on Isaac, maybe closer.

Though I've lurked here and posted elsewhere, I'll add that I wasn't in favor of drafting Dunn. Murray was my prospect of choice.

As for Thursday night, I would be pleased to see the Wolves draft whichever prospect remains between Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, Fox, Isaac and Smith.

Post #1822 » by **Klomp** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:59 pm

Worm Guts wrote:
Streakers33 wrote:Good year to trade it.. last year we all agreed Dunn was the guy to get at pick 5.. year before we all agreed.. this year we all over.

I don't think last year we all agreed on Dunn, at least not here. We're probably as close this year on Isaac, maybe closer.

Yeah the people who wanted Dunn last year were in the vast minority. Same thing the previous year with LaVine.

fattymcgee · Post #1823 » by **fattymcgee** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:07 pm

Worm Guts wrote:
fattymcgee wrote:
Worm Guts wrote:
He's probably a better shooter than most 3 point shooting SF's, and you can probably post him up on smaller defenders.

1) When did Markkanen get a post game?
2) If you are going to argue that he could post up smaller defenders I'm going to argue the SF playing PF would be able to take the regular PF off the dribble.

How much of a post game do you need against players that are 4 inches shorter? Regardless though, you draft him because he offers more offensively than most PFs or SFs.

Or you draft one of the 3-4 other players available at 7 that are better than him.

Baseline81 · Post #1824 » by **Baseline81** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:12 pm

fattymcgee wrote:Or you draft one of the 3-4 other players available at 7 that are better than him.

In complete agreement, fattymcgee.

Excluding shooting, what else does Markkanen provide the Wolves? It certainly isn't defense, rebounding or shot blocking. If Thibs is convinced he can improve on those weaknesses, the team should trade back with either Dallas or Sacto, assuming the Kings drafted a forward no. 5 overall.

Streakers33 · Post #1825 » by **Streakers33** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:04 pm

So which one of these trade rumors do we actually buy?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post #1826 » by **Klomp** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:06 pm

Streakers33 wrote:So which one of these trade rumors do we actually buy?

All of them. Teams talk often, I'd guess. Doesn't mean a deal is imminent and no report has stated as much.

Krapinsky · Post #1827 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:56 pm

Streakers33 wrote:So which one of these trade rumors do we actually buy?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

None of them.

wildvikeswolves · Post #1828 » by **wildvikeswolves** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:30 am

Read on Twitter

minimus · Post #1829 » by **minimus** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:51 am

DeAngelo Russell for #27 pick... I remember there was a discussion for #1 pick, options between Russell, KAT and Okafor. I think Thibs understands the value of top10 pick, probability of bust. That is why we are shopping #7 pick.

Mrva · Post #1830 » by **Mrva** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:43 am

minimus wrote:DeAngelo Russell for #27 pick...

Not exactly. Lakers gave Russell (positive asset) and Mozgov (negative asset; very large contract for basically unplayable player in the modern game)
for
27th pick and Lopez (I see him as a neutral asset; expiring contract, solid player but not a game changer).

GopherIt! · Post #1831 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:46 am

Been researching the Celtics more and I now think Isaac is Ainge's guy w an outside shot of DSJ.

GopherIt! · Post #1832 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:01 am

Worm Guts wrote:
Streakers33 wrote:Good year to trade it.. last year we all agreed Dunn was the guy to get at pick 5.. year before we all agreed.. this year we all over.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think last year we all agreed on Dunn, at least not here. We're probably as close this year on Isaac, maybe closer.

I want Isaac but dont think we have any chance of getting him.

Last year I wanted Murray but started drinking the Dunn koolaid as soon as the Butler/Chicago and Philly trade talks kicked in.

Feilong · Post #1833 » by **Feilong** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:11 am

Last year i wanted Hield/Murray
Now i want Issac. I will be ok with Monk. I will be happy if Jackson somehow ends at #7.
I don't like that much Markkanen and it will be a big mistake to draft a PG.
So my list is Issac -> trade pick for player -> Monk -> trade down

Foye · Post #1834 » by **Foye** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:53 am

Worm Guts wrote:
Streakers33 wrote:Good year to trade it.. last year we all agreed Dunn was the guy to get at pick 5.. year before we all agreed.. this year we all over.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think last year we all agreed on Dunn, at least not here. We're probably as close this year on Isaac, maybe closer.

Murray was who I wanted.

this year Ntilikina!

karch34 · Post #1835 » by **karch34** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:18 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
Worm Guts wrote:I don't think last year we all agreed on Dunn, at least not here. We're probably as close this year on Isaac, maybe closer.

Though I've lurked here and posted elsewhere, I'll add that I wasn't in favor of drafting Dunn. Murray was my prospect of choice.

As for Thursday night, I would be pleased to see the Wolves draft whichever prospect remains between Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, Fox, Isaac and Smith.

I'm pleased with any of those and I wouldn't have an issue with Monk.

I think I was for Hield early but then switched to Murray. Wasn't upset with Dunn, but with Rubio and Tyus I didn't see it as best use of asset.

wildvikeswolves · Post #1836 » by **wildvikeswolves** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:52 pm

Read on Twitter

SO_MONEY · Post #1837 » by **SO_MONEY** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:15 pm

Feilong wrote:Last year i wanted Hield/Murray
Now i want Issac. I will be ok with Monk. I will be happy if Jackson somehow ends at #7.
I don't like that much Markkanen and it will be a big mistake to draft a PG.
So my list is Issac -> trade pick for player -> Monk -> trade down

Trading for a player is last on my list, not likely to get a superstar for it and to get one we might give up a starter plus #7, so two possible starters and also give up capspace. Trading for a player is a poor decision for the maturation of the team.

I could see taking on a good contract of a role player in a trade down however.

The correct order should be Isaac, Monk or trade down, other pick, trade for a player IMHO.

Sent from my LGMS428 using Tapatalk

Gunny · Post #1838 » by **Gunny** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:20 pm

Keeping my fingers crossed that we trade the pick, especially in a weak draft. The pick will immediately lose its value once a player is selected. If we're trying to compete, the last thing we should do is try to get younger.

Post #1839 » by **Worm Guts** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:26 pm

Gunny wrote:Keeping my fingers crossed that we trade the pick, especially in a weak draft. The pick will immediately lose its value once a player is selected. If we're trying to compete, the last thing we should do is try to get younger.

This isn't supposed to be a weak draft.

I don't know, pretty much everyone out to 10 seems to have some star potential, but everyone also has issues.

SO_MONEY · Post #1840 » by **SO_MONEY** » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:29 pm

Gunny wrote:Keeping my fingers crossed that we trade the pick, especially in a weak draft. The pick will immediately lose its value once a player is selected. If we're trying to compete, the last thing we should do is try to get younger.

Perhaps you are forgetting about FA? Adding cheap controllable talent in never a bad thing and with expanded rosters and our own DL team adding more young talent is as important to this team as any time.

Sent from my LGMS428 using Tapatalk