Moderators: HomoSapien, Ice Man, dougthonus, Tommy Udo 6 , DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, Payt10, RedBulls23, coldfish, fleet, AshyLarrysDiaper, kulaz3000, Michael Jackson
Am2626 wrote:In my opinion at 7 Reddish is worth the risk. The Bulls need a franchise changing talent. They have enough “good but not great” players already. I would rather the Bulls go with someone like Reddish at 7 instead of a Coby White, Culver, or Hunter. I even wouldn’t mind the Bulls trading down and getting Nassir Little.
Am2626 wrote:bigworld2017 wrote:ChicagoSportsFan21 wrote:It looks like Hunter will be the Bulls pick if they keep the pick assuming LA takes Garland, Cavs take Culver, and Suns take White which I think likely is going to happen (unless there are trades). Hunter would be my 4th choice in this group (ideally prefer one of the point guards and then Culver). Hunter is a good overall player who should be a great supporting cast kind of player but that’s it as he is not able to create his own shot at this point. You can take your chances on a Reddish who has more potential but had a rough season in college. I’ll go with the safer pick in Hunter personally.
Thoughts?
Give me Hunter without hesitation. Proven player. Great defensive fundamentals. Good length. Can defend 1-4. Can hit open shots. Not a creator but a high BBIQ glue guy. Makes his teammates better. A lot like Porter in that sense. Almost no bust potential. Ready to contribute in Year 1. If he develops it allows us to shop Porter to free up money next summer when we have to extend Lauri. Hunter would be a strong pick at #7 if he's still on the board.
That description sounds like half the core of this Bulls team. How does Hunter move the needle for the Bulls? Regarding freeing up money for who? What star free agent wants to come to this organization? Right now given the constraints that are created by this ownership group, FO, and coach the draft is really the only realistic way for this team to get better.
panthermark wrote:Am2626 wrote:bigworld2017 wrote:
Give me Hunter without hesitation. Proven player. Great defensive fundamentals. Good length. Can defend 1-4. Can hit open shots. Not a creator but a high BBIQ glue guy. Makes his teammates better. A lot like Porter in that sense. Almost no bust potential. Ready to contribute in Year 1. If he develops it allows us to shop Porter to free up money next summer when we have to extend Lauri. Hunter would be a strong pick at #7 if he's still on the board.
That description sounds like half the core of this Bulls team. How does Hunter move the needle for the Bulls? Regarding freeing up money for who? What star free agent wants to come to this organization? Right now given the constraints that are created by this ownership group, FO, and coach the draft is really the only realistic way for this team to get better.
What draft prospect outside of Zion moves the needle for us (or any team)? Maybe Ja... That's it.
Garland "could"...maybe...but let's be realistic. He would be a rookie PG with only a handful of college games experience. I would not expect much from him for a year or two.
The most "gettable" player that moves the needle the most is Jru (unless Kemba wants to sign). Beyond that, we are looking at small movements regardless.........but at least it is movement. Brodgon moves the needle a touch in two ways (three point shooting in the starting line-up....pushing Dunn to "depth"). Hunter gives up more depth.
I'd be stoked with Hunter/Fall/Brodgon/Taj. We don't take any steps backwards. Every team needs high IQ, 3&D wings, along with interior defense.
Am2626 wrote:panthermark wrote:Am2626 wrote:
That description sounds like half the core of this Bulls team. How does Hunter move the needle for the Bulls? Regarding freeing up money for who? What star free agent wants to come to this organization? Right now given the constraints that are created by this ownership group, FO, and coach the draft is really the only realistic way for this team to get better.
What draft prospect outside of Zion moves the needle for us (or any team)? Maybe Ja... That's it.
Garland "could"...maybe...but let's be realistic. He would be a rookie PG with only a handful of college games experience. I would not expect much from him for a year or two.
The most "gettable" player that moves the needle the most is Jru (unless Kemba wants to sign). Beyond that, we are looking at small movements regardless.........but at least it is movement. Brodgon moves the needle a touch in two ways (three point shooting in the starting line-up....pushing Dunn to "depth"). Hunter gives up more depth.
I'd be stoked with Hunter/Fall/Brodgon/Taj. We don't take any steps backwards. Every team needs high IQ, 3&D wings, along with interior defense.
Besides Zion and Morant this draft will have at least one more franchise changing player. I think everyone can agree that Kawhi Leonard and Stephen Curry are Franchise players and Jimmy Butler is a top 15 player in this league. None of those guys were looked as franchise cornerstones when they were drafted. When you look at raw players like Garland, Reddish, or Little it is way too early to know what they will end up being. My point is at 7 I’m willing to gamble on someone like Reddish than to go with a known commodity that doesn’t have as much upside.
panthermark wrote:Am2626 wrote:panthermark wrote:What draft prospect outside of Zion moves the needle for us (or any team)? Maybe Ja... That's it.
Garland "could"...maybe...but let's be realistic. He would be a rookie PG with only a handful of college games experience. I would not expect much from him for a year or two.
The most "gettable" player that moves the needle the most is Jru (unless Kemba wants to sign). Beyond that, we are looking at small movements regardless.........but at least it is movement. Brodgon moves the needle a touch in two ways (three point shooting in the starting line-up....pushing Dunn to "depth"). Hunter gives up more depth.
I'd be stoked with Hunter/Fall/Brodgon/Taj. We don't take any steps backwards. Every team needs high IQ, 3&D wings, along with interior defense.
Besides Zion and Morant this draft will have at least one more franchise changing player. I think everyone can agree that Kawhi Leonard and Stephen Curry are Franchise players and Jimmy Butler is a top 15 player in this league. None of those guys were looked as franchise cornerstones when they were drafted. When you look at raw players like Garland, Reddish, or Little it is way too early to know what they will end up being. My point is at 7 I’m willing to gamble on someone like Reddish than to go with a known commodity that doesn’t have as much upside.
Using your line of reasoning and examples, let me ask.
Why does Reddish have upside and Hunter does not?
Am2626 wrote:
Reddish is more physically gifted. I think his struggles at Duke were more to do with the system he was in as opposed to his physical ability. He was a can’t miss prospect coming out of high school. Hunter is good at a lot of things but he isn’t necessarily great at any one thing. Can he develop into a star. Sure but his ceiling isn’t as high.
This is why winning meaningless games this year that put us in the spot to drop down to 8 was stupid.Clint Eastwood wrote:I would give our 7th pick and next year top 10 protected for Garland, yes. He is going to be great, and is the perfect fit. This of course is if his medicals check out. With this week talent pool, the 7th has less value this year I believe. Next year may or may not be better, but I’m fine if we give up the 7th this year and 11th next year for garland. I just think he is that high upside a talent to move up for.
Am2626 wrote:Reddish is more physically gifted. I think his struggles at Duke were more to do with the system he was in as opposed to his physical ability. He was a can’t miss prospect coming out of high school. Hunter is good at a lot of things but he isn’t necessarily great at any one thing. Can he develop into a star. Sure but his ceiling isn’t as high.
Jimmy Forums wrote:I don't have enough time to keep up with every single page anymore, can somebody help me with something..?
At this point in the draft discussion I don't see Garland's name being tossed around much in here. If Garland is gone, I agree we really need to be hoping White is there or else the whole night is a disaster. But my question is; why are we so certain Garland won't be there? Is there any real hard evidence we know where that promise might've came from?
I could see the Lakers seeing him as their chance to get a potential star out of this, but at the same time, are the Lakers really in a position to be guaranteeing they'll even be picking for themselves? Then once we get to the Suns, I actually feel like White would be a better fit with Booker than Garland.
I can see reasons why it wouldn't be from those places, so I'm just wondering if I missed something more concrete.
We, like the Lakers, need to see Garland as our one chance to get a real star out of this. White will be a decent guard for somebody, but I've very much bought in to the Garland/Lillard comp.
KevinPandawong wrote:Jimmy Forums wrote:I don't have enough time to keep up with every single page anymore, can somebody help me with something..?
At this point in the draft discussion I don't see Garland's name being tossed around much in here. If Garland is gone, I agree we really need to be hoping White is there or else the whole night is a disaster. But my question is; why are we so certain Garland won't be there? Is there any real hard evidence we know where that promise might've came from?
I could see the Lakers seeing him as their chance to get a potential star out of this, but at the same time, are the Lakers really in a position to be guaranteeing they'll even be picking for themselves? Then once we get to the Suns, I actually feel like White would be a better fit with Booker than Garland.
I can see reasons why it wouldn't be from those places, so I'm just wondering if I missed something more concrete.
We, like the Lakers, need to see Garland as our one chance to get a real star out of this. White will be a decent guard for somebody, but I've very much bought in to the Garland/Lillard comp.
Many people see the constant Lonzo trade rumors as a sign that LA is definitely moving on from him. If they keep the pick, Garland makes much more sense than another wing to fight for minutes with Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, and Caruso. If they trade it to NO, their next goal is to acquire as many shooters as possible to surround Zion, much akin to the Lakers' goals with Lebron.
panthermark wrote:Am2626 wrote:
Reddish is more physically gifted. I think his struggles at Duke were more to do with the system he was in as opposed to his physical ability. He was a can’t miss prospect coming out of high school. Hunter is good at a lot of things but he isn’t necessarily great at any one thing. Can he develop into a star. Sure but his ceiling isn’t as high.
It might have been Fish that nailed this take. "Early bloomer". He has all the physical tools, but isn't very good. He had the chance to show everyone what he could do when Zion went down....but instead he crapped the bed.
He may have been great out of HS because he had been bigger and stronger at an earlier age than everyone else. Dunn has all the physical tools in the world, but look at him. Arch has no physical tools, and he is a better PG than Dunn.
Reddish may (or may not) have a higher ceiling than Hunter, but I know his floor is under the basement.
Red Larrivee wrote:Am2626 wrote:Reddish is more physically gifted. I think his struggles at Duke were more to do with the system he was in as opposed to his physical ability. He was a can’t miss prospect coming out of high school. Hunter is good at a lot of things but he isn’t necessarily great at any one thing. Can he develop into a star. Sure but his ceiling isn’t as high.
I'm confused on this take. Reddish definitely has nice measurements, but you're talking about his measurements like he's potentially dominant because of them. Reddish was not considered a can't-miss prospect a year ago, though he was considered a really good one. He was never at any point considered a potential franchise-changer.
It's odd that some think the player who's very good at a lot of things has little to no chance of mastering those skills. Then we consider the player who isn't as skilled and has more red flags to have a better shot at mastering those same skills. It's the same mistake that makes you take Tyrus Thomas over LaMarcus Aldridge.
cjbulls wrote:Where are you getting these ideas from?
SI: "We’ve already written about the possibilities in terms of fit between lottery-caliber, ball-dominant freshmen R.J. Barrett (presently No. 1 on our board), Cam Reddish (No. 2) and Zion Williamson (No. 5)." ... "Reddish has the best distribution skills and is arguably the most naturally gifted player on the team, but has thus far done little to shake his reputation for turning his effort on and off." - Aug 2018 - https://www.si.com/nba/2018/08/06/2019-nba-draft-questions-duke-zion-williamson-rj-barrett-cam-reddish
Bleacher Report: "It will be fascinating to see how Reddish, R.J. Barrett, and Zion Williamson coexist at Duke. Will Reddish blend in or stand out? Most view Barrett as the alpha dog and the No. 1 player in this class, but we’ll take Reddish’s silky-smooth game by a hair to be the No. 1 pick at this point. He can be as great as he wants to be." - June 2018 - https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2018/6/22/17473998/nba-mock-draft-2019-duke-zion-williamson-rj-barrett-cameron-reddish
Stepien: "Just about everyone agrees that he could end up being the best player in the 2019 draft, but you’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone brave enough to put him number one on their board." ... "Offensively, Reddish is the most gifted in the class. He’s good enough to be a lead guard thanks to his above average feel and ball-handling. He can also create for himself, he takes the right shots, and versatility gives his coaches endless options with how to plug him into their offense." "However, Reddish plays and sees himself as guard: “I am just tall enough to be a small forward. I’m best with the ball in my hands.” It only takes about five minutes of tape to see how true those words ring. Reddish is a strong lead guard who’s mastered the pick and roll game with an ability to thread the needle with either hand." Aug 2018 https://www.thestepien.com/2018/08/05/preseason-thoughts-cameron-reddish/
Red Larrivee wrote:cjbulls wrote:Where are you getting these ideas from?
SI: "We’ve already written about the possibilities in terms of fit between lottery-caliber, ball-dominant freshmen R.J. Barrett (presently No. 1 on our board), Cam Reddish (No. 2) and Zion Williamson (No. 5)." ... "Reddish has the best distribution skills and is arguably the most naturally gifted player on the team, but has thus far done little to shake his reputation for turning his effort on and off." - Aug 2018 - https://www.si.com/nba/2018/08/06/2019-nba-draft-questions-duke-zion-williamson-rj-barrett-cam-reddish
Bleacher Report: "It will be fascinating to see how Reddish, R.J. Barrett, and Zion Williamson coexist at Duke. Will Reddish blend in or stand out? Most view Barrett as the alpha dog and the No. 1 player in this class, but we’ll take Reddish’s silky-smooth game by a hair to be the No. 1 pick at this point. He can be as great as he wants to be." - June 2018 - https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2018/6/22/17473998/nba-mock-draft-2019-duke-zion-williamson-rj-barrett-cameron-reddish
Stepien: "Just about everyone agrees that he could end up being the best player in the 2019 draft, but you’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone brave enough to put him number one on their board." ... "Offensively, Reddish is the most gifted in the class. He’s good enough to be a lead guard thanks to his above average feel and ball-handling. He can also create for himself, he takes the right shots, and versatility gives his coaches endless options with how to plug him into their offense." "However, Reddish plays and sees himself as guard: “I am just tall enough to be a small forward. I’m best with the ball in my hands.” It only takes about five minutes of tape to see how true those words ring. Reddish is a strong lead guard who’s mastered the pick and roll game with an ability to thread the needle with either hand." Aug 2018 https://www.thestepien.com/2018/08/05/preseason-thoughts-cameron-reddish/
You're not quoting anything that says Reddish was viewed as a franchise-changing prospect. I'm familiar with all of Reddish's pre-Duke buzz, because I was a huge fan of his game. He was considered an elite prospect, but that's not the same as being a "can't-miss" prospect.
cjbulls wrote:
#1 or 2 prospect and all those quotes and you're pretending that he's not franchise changing? Get serious.
"He can be as great as he wants to be."
"Reddish has all the tools to be the best player in the draft"
These are franchise changing player quotes, unless you want to set some impossible standard for what franchise changing means.
Red Larrivee wrote:cjbulls wrote:
#1 or 2 prospect and all those quotes and you're pretending that he's not franchise changing? Get serious.
"He can be as great as he wants to be."
"Reddish has all the tools to be the best player in the draft"
These are franchise changing player quotes, unless you want to set some impossible standard for what franchise changing means.
None of those things are the same as calling a player a "franchise-changing" talent. There are a short list of prospects in draft history who have been considered that. There's no way you're telling me that Reddish is one of those players.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
