2018 Draft Thread #6

[bigworld2017]

The way things are going I think we would be happy as hell to be able to draft Mikal. If we keep winning meaningless games he'll be gone before we pick. I really don't want Young or Sexton but if either is BPA I guess we'd have to take one of them and find ways to dump Grant and/or Payne. I don't want to carry 4 PGs on the roster. While GarPax is at it I hope we can package Felicio out of town too. He has no future roll with this team. He's not developed one iota since last season, and in fact has regressed to the point that he is not really an NBA level player. Asik, Vonleh and Portis can all play the "5" off the bench next year.

[biggestbullsfan]

This is ESPN (aka DX)'s latest mock -

1. Deandre Ayton

2. Luka Dončić

3. Jaren Jackson, Jr.

4. Marvin Bagley, III

5. Mohamed Bamba

6. Wendell Carter, Jr.

7. Michael Porter, Jr.

8. Collin Sexton

9. Trae Young

10. Mikal Bridges

11. Miles Bridges

Carter at 6.. it's a big call but they have been talking him up a fair bit. I like Carter but I would consider this a win if he goes before us.

I don't see Sexton at 8, I think it's a bit reactionary, but again, in the case of both he and Young, if they go before us, that benefits us. I wouldn't want us taking either.

Give me Mikal in this outcome, but the larger hope should be that we can get someone like Bamba or Porter to fall to us.

We might be drafting 9th or so at this point. Which is basically like whatever now.

My dream is that Carter has an amazing tourney and continues to climb. I would be dissapointed if our tank season ended up with an Ave Center.

[Lauri_Legend]

I really hope we get a top 4 pick. I'm not sure I can handle another cringe season. The second half of this season is brutal.

[DanTown8587]

Mikal could certainly just end up a 3 and D. But “length” isn’t his problem.

He doesn’t have freakshow length like Kawhi but he’s 6’7 with a 7’0.5 wingspan.

That profile isn't that rare.

Snell - 6'7 with 6'11
Covington - 6'7.5 with 7'2
Porter - 6'8.5" with 7'1
Roberson - 6'7 with 6'11

I think he'll be a good defender but he won't be lock down and he won't be a great scorer because I don't think he has the dribble game to do it. If you want to take a risk he's the next underdeveloped wing who's game would greatly transform if they improve their dribbling that's one argument to make but he really doesn't have the vertical game or the frame that lends you to believe he can finish at or near the rim consistently enough to be a NBA guy that can help an offense.

Mikal is an elite finisher at the rim and his calling card his entire college career has been as a lockdown defender. I think you should look into him a bit more because it doesn't seem like you know too much about him besides his name. To your point on the player profiles of the four above players not being rare, I'm not sure what you're point is? Three of the players you chose to highlight make their teams wayyyy better when they are on the court. Snell would too if he wasn't so passive as a player. Mikal is a great NBA basketball prospect.

I guess the question is what career trajectory do you see for him in terms of future role and fit? I think he's a Danny Green type and I don't know if I'd take Green for this team considering their needs.

[NDave79]

Mikal Bridges seems like a guy who is good at a lot of things but lacks the true length + athleticism to really impact a game at the NBA level. To me, Bridges seems like he'll end up a Justin Holliday now type pro which is probably not a bad career at the number nine pick but not something this team needs to get.

Mikal could certainly just end up a 3 and D. But “length” isn’t his problem.

He doesn’t have freakshow length like Kawhi but he’s 6’7 with a 7’0.5 wingspan.

I hope his wingspan measures out a little better than that. A big aspect to why I like him as a prospect is that hopefully he does have a fairly freaky wingspan.

That wingspan measurement was taken around 4 years ago. I keep see it being written as 7'2" in articles and on websites, but I have no idea if that is accurate.

To my eyes, his arms do look pretty freaking long. His mother describes his arms as "ridiculous, stupid long arms".

They used to call him Noodles. Inspector Go Go Gadget. String Bean. Brittle (short for Brittle Bones). Praying Mantis.

Mikal Bridges was so skinny and lanky and his arms were so long—"freakishly long," Bridges tells me—that his Villanova teammates roasted him with a range of nicknames. The 6'7'' swingman was an easy target then: a freshman. A young freshman (17 years old). About 185 pounds. Gangly shoulders, little head (they called him "Pea-head," too).

His mother, Tyneeha Rivers, sympathizes. "My wingspan is the same as World B. Free," Rivers tells me, referring to the wiry 76ers legend, as we sip tea at a Starbucks in Philadelphia in February. Mikal has a 7'2'' wingspan. "He's always had ridiculous, stupid-long arms."

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2762774-introducing-cbb-breakout-star-mikal-bridges-the-kawhi-leonard-clone

[Chi town]

That profile isn't that rare.

Snell - 6'7 with 6'11
Covington - 6'7.5 with 7'2
Porter - 6'8.5" with 7'1
Roberson - 6'7 with 6'11

I think he'll be a good defender but he won't be lock down and he won't be a great scorer because I don't think he has the dribble game to do it. If you want to take a risk he's the next underdeveloped wing who's game would greatly transform if they improve their dribbling that's one argument to make but he really doesn't have the vertical game or the frame that lends you to believe he can finish at or near the rim consistently enough to be a NBA guy that can help an offense.

Mikal is an elite finisher at the rim and his calling card his entire college career has been as a lockdown defender. I think you should look into him a bit more because it doesn't seem like you know too much about him besides his name. To your point on the player profiles of the four above players not being rare, I'm not sure what you're point is? Three of the players you chose to highlight make their teams wayyyy better when they are on the court. Snell would too if he wasn't so passive as a player. Mikal is a great NBA basketball prospect.

I guess the question is what career trajectory do you see for him in terms of future role and fit? I think he's a Danny Green type and I don't know if I'd take Green for this team considering their needs.

I think he's better than Danny Green.

I see him similar to Otto Porter.

[Chi town]

I think the top 3 are a lock... some combo of Luka Ayton and Bagley.

Hawks and MEM probably take Luka #1 overall IMO due to their style of play and Gasol.

I think the rest of the draft if fluid. JJJ, MPJ, Bamba, Young, Bridges... all in the eye of the beholder stuff.

[biggestbullsfan]

I think the top 3 are a lock... some combo of Luka Ayton and Bagley.

Hawks and MEM probably take Luka #1 overall IMO due to their style of play and Gasol.

I think the rest of the draft if fluid. JJJ, MPJ, Bamba, Young, Bridges... all in the eye of the beholder stuff.

I don't think Carter has a high ceiling imo. Sexton looks ok. Id pass on him for one of the Bridges or Knox even. We need a 3&D wing at worst. But preferably someone with star potential. I'm coming around on Young.

[Red Larrivee]

Justin Holiday and Danny Green weren't as good as Bridges at the same point in their careers. Bridges is one of the top defenders in the NCAA. He can guard 3-4 positions, has excellent lateral quickness, and a strong motor. His wingspan is at least 7'0 and he's an above-average athlete. Offensively, the only category where he's not good is isolation scoring. That's a big category, but he's efficient everywhere else.

Realistically, you're probably aiming for a super role player in the Otto Porter mold. That's not very exciting, but when you're talking about the 7th-9th pick, at minimum you're really just trying to hit on a draft pick.

[biggestbullsfan]

Justin Holiday and Danny Green weren't as good as Bridges at the same point in their careers. Bridges is one of the top defenders in the NCAA. He can guard 3-4 positions, has excellent lateral quickness, and a strong motor. His wingspan is at least 7'0 and he's an above-average athlete. Offensively, the only category where he's not good is isolation scoring. That's a big category, but he's efficient everywhere else.

Realistically, you're probably aiming for a super role player in the Otto Porter mold. That's not very exciting, but when you're talking about the 7th-9th pick, at minimum you're really just trying to hit on a draft pick.

I have been looking at Young in more of the Ben Gordon mold more recently. 6th man scorer for us. We could use more scoring and a better backup PG. And if his passing is as good as advertised. He could work well with Lauri.

[DanTown8587]

Justin Holiday and Danny Green weren't as good as Bridges at the same point in their careers.

And OJ Mayo was vastly superior at similar ages to Bridges so what are we doing here? Obviously players aren't analogous in terms of development; I only think that Bridges role in the NBA will mirror the roles those players have had with maybe slightly more.

Bridges is one of the top defenders in the NCAA. He can guard 3-4 positions, has excellent lateral quickness, and a strong motor.

I'd say the idea he's guarding NBA fours is quite ridiculous. I think he's a really good defender at the 2/3 spot and can handle 1s in a switch but against fours, long arms hurts because it means you're easy to move.

His wingspan is at least 7'0 and he's an above-average athlete. Offensively, the only category where he's not good is isolation scoring. That's a big category, but he's efficient everywhere else.

I don't love his jumper, I question the ability to stretch it out consistently to the NBA depth. He makes/takes a lot of his threes in the corners and at the college line so it's a good jumper but I think he's more a spot up in the corner than create the offense type of guy. I also think he can attack poor closeouts and make the right play but again, I have no problem with Bridges the prospect but rather how he'd fit with this team and what they're trying to do.

Realistically, you're probably aiming for a super role player in the Otto Porter mold. That's not very exciting, but when you're talking about the 7th-9th pick, at minimum you're really just trying to hit on a draft pick.

I'd definitely take him and try and amass as many future guys to throw in trades as possible; I just question if he ever even able to do what Porter does since I think Porter has a little more height and lift than Bridges to get stuff done against more NBA fours than say Bridges could.

I think it's quite possible he ends up where Porter is but I think people tend to assume there's a safety in guys like Bridges simply because they don't have high potential but I think there's still some downside to him.

[Red Larrivee]

Justin Holiday and Danny Green weren't as good as Bridges at the same point in their careers. Bridges is one of the top defenders in the NCAA. He can guard 3-4 positions, has excellent lateral quickness, and a strong motor. His wingspan is at least 7'0 and he's an above-average athlete. Offensively, the only category where he's not good is isolation scoring. That's a big category, but he's efficient everywhere else.

Realistically, you're probably aiming for a super role player in the Otto Porter mold. That's not very exciting, but when you're talking about the 7th-9th pick, at minimum you're really just trying to hit on a draft pick.

I have been looking at Young in more of the Ben Gordon mold more recently. 6th man scorer for us. We could use more scoring and a better backup PG. And if his passing is as good as advertised. He could work well with Lauri.

I'd probably take Young over Bridges, purely because a PG has a chance to have a higher impact than a wing with mediocre ball skills.

[TheSuzerain]

I think Mikal is in the vein of the elite 3/D guys like Otto, RCov, and Green with the significant difference that you're not going to be able to play him at the 4 like you can with Otto/RCov. That's a definite hit to his value, but he's still a nice prospect.

You don't rebuild to land a guy like Mikal Bridges. But that's more of a draft slot problem than a Mikal Bridges one.

[Axolotl]

I'd probably take Young over Bridges, purely because a PG has a chance to have a higher impact than a wing with mediocre ball skills.

Also, it's possible that Young has far greater impact than your average PG. True, we have a need in the wing. But we have even greater need of a star quality player. Markkanen may develop into one, but one star does not much light make.

To me the question is which available player has the greater potential to win us games, and I think out of Bridges and Young, its Young. If the question was which player has the greater potential to not lose us games, it'd be Bridges.

With Young there's a possibility of something special, with Bridges you probably get a good role player.

[Red Larrivee]

And OJ Mayo was vastly superior at similar ages to Bridges so what are we doing here? Obviously players aren't analogous in terms of development; I only think that Bridges role in the NBA will mirror the roles those players have had with maybe slightly more.

I'd say the idea he's guarding NBA fours is quite ridiculous. I think he's a really good defender at the 2/3 spot and can handle 1s in a switch but against fours, long arms hurts because it means you're easy to move.

I don't love his jumper, I question the ability to stretch it out consistently to the NBA depth. He makes/takes a lot of his threes in the corners and at the college line so it's a good jumper but I think he's more a spot up in the corner than create the offense type of guy. I also think he can attack poor closeouts and make the right play but again, I have no problem with Bridges the prospect but rather how he'd fit with this team and what they're trying to do.

I'd definitely take him and try and amass as many future guys to throw in trades as possible; I just question if he ever even able to do what Porter does since I think Porter has a little more height and lift than Bridges to get stuff done against more NBA fours than say Bridges could.

I think it's quite possible he ends up where Porter is but I think people tend to assume there's a safety in guys like Bridges simply because they don't have high potential but I think there's still some downside to him.

I wasn't the one who brought up Green and Holiday as career arcs. I just think it's a weird comparison when Bridges is very clearly better than both players were before the draft. Green was a second round pick and Holiday went undrafted. Sure, Bridges could end up being worse than them; anything is possible. Hell, Marvin Bagley could end up being Stromile Swift. But, on paper and eye-test, he is a stronger prospect than both. I think Bridges can guard certain NBA fours in small ball lineups.

Bridges fits the team well because of his off-ball ability and defensive versatility. He plays within his game and rarely tries to do more. I'm really not worried about his shooting. He's a good shooter, as evidence by his spot up numbers and free throw percentage.

[TheSuzerain]

I think the ideal we should be building toward is the following:

Dynamic PG - ???
Dynamic Wing - ???
Dynamic Big - Lauri Markkanen

With the rest of the team being complementary pieces.

I do believe that Young can fill the "Dynamic PG" role. While I'd peg Mikal as a good bet to be a very nice complement, I have no faith in him becoming a dynamic wing.

[shakes0]

I would take SGA over both Bridges quite easily.

[DanTown8587]

And OJ Mayo was vastly superior at similar ages to Bridges so what are we doing here? Obviously players aren't analogous in terms of development; I only think that Bridges role in the NBA will mirror the roles those players have had with maybe slightly more.

I'd say the idea he's guarding NBA fours is quite ridiculous. I think he's a really good defender at the 2/3 spot and can handle 1s in a switch but against fours, long arms hurts because it means you're easy to move.

I don't love his jumper, I question the ability to stretch it out consistently to the NBA depth. He makes/takes a lot of his threes in the corners and at the college line so it's a good jumper but I think he's more a spot up in the corner than create the offense type of guy. I also think he can attack poor closeouts and make the right play but again, I have no problem with Bridges the prospect but rather how he'd fit with this team and what they're trying to do.

I'd definitely take him and try and amass as many future guys to throw in trades as possible; I just question if he ever even able to do what Porter does since I think Porter has a little more height and lift than Bridges to get stuff done against more NBA fours than say Bridges could.

I think it's quite possible he ends up where Porter is but I think people tend to assume there's a safety in guys like Bridges simply because they don't have high potential but I think there's still some downside to him.

I wasn't the one who brought up Green and Holiday as career arcs. I just think it's a weird comparison when Bridges is very clearly better than both players were before the draft. Green was a second round pick and Holiday went undrafted. Sure, Bridges could end up being worse than them; anything is possible. Hell, Marvin Bagley could end up being Stromile Swift. But, on paper and eye-test, he is a stronger prospect than both. I think Bridges can guard certain NBA fours in small ball lineups.

Bridges fits the team well because of his off-ball ability and defensive versatility. He plays within his game and rarely tries to do more. I'm really not worried about his shooting. He's a good shooter, as evidence by his spot up numbers and free throw percentage.

The arc is not the intention of the point of naming them; it's saying what role I think Bridges will reach because trying to find a perfect compliment to a guy's career is hard because everyone develops at their own pace and their own opportunities but it's much easier to say "guy X will be able to do what guy Y does".

[TheSuzerain]

Mikal easily over SGA.

[Red Larrivee]

The arc is not the intention of the point of naming them; it's saying what role I think Bridges will reach because trying to find a perfect compliment to a guy's career is hard because everyone develops at their own pace and their own opportunities but it's much easier to say "guy X will be able to do what guy Y does".

And guy X may do what guy Y does at a much, much higher level. That's significant.