2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[nomorezorro]

Ferluci, this is exactly the type of over-the-top negative assessment that I’m talking about. This comment makes sense for a second round pick. Perfect example. Thanks, Zorro.

maybe i didn't make the context clear enough or maybe i'm crazy, but i don't think it's "over the top" to describe a guy who shot 35.6% on field goals and put up a sub-.500 ts% *in college* as "incredibly bad" at scoring by the standard of a lottery pick.

he performed objectively terribly in college, and you have to bake that into your projections. if he takes a step forward shooting threes, he's still not a sharpshooter, necessarily. if he takes a HUGE step forward finishing, he's still not a good finisher around the rim by the standards of nba players. if you take him #7, you're not just projecting some improvement. you are projecting an abnormal amount of improvement, because he's starting from a place of inferior production compared to prospects in that range.

[bearadonisdna]

Ferluci, this is exactly the type of over-the-top negative assessment that I’m talking about. This comment makes sense for a second round pick. Perfect example. Thanks, Zorro.

maybe i didn't make the context clear enough or maybe i'm crazy, but i don't think it's "over the top" to describe a guy who shot 35.6% on field goals and put up a sub-.500 ts% *in college* as "incredibly bad" at scoring by the standard of a lottery pick.

he performed objectively terribly in college, and you have to bake that into your projections. if he takes a step forward shooting threes, he's still not a sharpshooter, necessarily. if he takes a HUGE step forward finishing, he's still not a good finisher around the rim by the standards of nba players. if you take him #7, you're not just projecting some improvement. you are projecting an abnormal amount of improvement, because he's starting from a place of inferior production compared to prospects in that range.

What ppl are trying to say is that cam isnt an inferior prospect.

Culver)18.5 ppg
Hunter)15.2 ppg
Cam) 13.5 ppg

The level of separation here isn't drastic considering cam is 1 year younger or 1 year behind in development.
There's an underlying value in his age in comparison to his peers.

Dismissing him as undraftable at 7 is conjecture.
Ppl haven't said it but but cam moves like an NBA player.
The dude appears to be respected in the basketball community , you know stats are stats, they are an indicator of production but ppl see intrinsic value in cam beyond just his current production.

[bearadonisdna]

Ppl say they they see Paul George, I actually do see it on the defensive end but he still has substantiate his value offensively, where he is no Paul george.

[Rose2Boozer]

Trading #7 to the Celtics for additional picks seems like easily the best scenario to me. They badly need to consolidate and we need more talent.

If White is available I'd draft him, but that deal starts to look good if we're left with Hunter or Culver.

[bearadonisdna]

The bulls can be exciting with either of the guys they pick up this draft.

Culver) think he can play a Brandon Roy part for the bulls as a sg that can be an offensive initiator including Ball handling.

Hunter)Can become similar to Jimmy butler if he Can get a better handle. Is probably much more refined than Jimmy was coming in.

Cam) A wing combo of cam and otto isn't particularly defeatist. Cam could also be a Ball handling wing alongside Otto. Maybe his fit in the backcourt will be circumstantial with Otto. If he does become the next Paul George ppl will be kicking themselves. It's hard to pin a practical comparison to him. He isn't close to being a Paul George offensively. Maybe I'm looking at a smaller Harrison barnes. That ceiling isn't particularly that high but Barnes was a major cog and part of a franchise turnaround.

[Red Larrivee]

What ppl are trying to say is that cam isnt an inferior prospect.

Culver)18.5 ppg
Hunter)15.2 ppg
Cam) 13.5 ppg

The level of separation here isn't drastic considering cam is 1 year younger or 1 year behind in development.
There's an underlying value in his age in comparison to his peers.

You know basic PPG doesn't tell a story.

PER 40:

Culver: 22.8 points, .542 TS%, 32.2 USG%
Hunter: 18.8 points, .618 TS%, 24.1 USG%
Reddish: 18.1 points, .499 TS%, 25.3 USG%

Given the usage Reddish had, he posted one of the most inefficient seasons ever for a wing going in the Top 10 of a draft.

[SfBull]

Trading #7 to the Celtics for additional picks seems like easily the best scenario to me. They badly need to consolidate and we need more talent.

But with everyone talking of a weak draft it's unlikely that the Bulls can sell the #7 as an attractive asset.

[SfBull]

Thought I'd give a crack, based on team needs and the intel we've had come out, of who might be going where. Obviously it's really hard to project these things because of possible trades or a guy being taken before another team who liked him, etc.

1. NOP - Zion (didn't take sherlock to guess this one)
2. MEM - Morant (seems overwhelmingly likely)
3. NYK - Barrett (looks like they're at least exploring their options but RJ seems likely if they stay)
4. LAL - Garland (there's been a lot of smoke of Garland to LA and I think it makes sense)
5. CLE - Culver (rumors they like him and he's an obvious pick if he falls to 5 imo)
6. PHO - White (I think they want him? some conflicting reports regarding Suns, but it makes sense)
7. CHI - Hunter (Seems like a very Bulls pick, and I like him. Based on reports Bulls might prefer Reddish here maybe? In which case ATL probably takes Hunter)
8. ATL - Reddish (Again, lot of smoke that ATL like Reddish, and it makes a lot of sense, great spot for him)
9. WAS - Bitadze (Hasn't been a lot of noise surrounding Wiz, but C is a need and he's ready to produce. I think they'll give their core one last crack)
10. ATL - Hayes (suggestion is Hayes might have a promise around this range, ATL need a C, and esp. if Goga is gone this seems obvious)
11. MIN - Hachimura (I mean, Clarke seems like who they should take here imo, but it sounded like Minny promised Rui for some reason here)
12. CHA - Clarke (I've seen a few places suggest that they like him, and they do need defense. Will probably end up playing some small-ball 5 here I reckon)
13. MIA
14. BOS
15. DET - Langford (seems like good fit/value and the rumor is they like him)
16. ORL - Porter Jr. (this is really a guess from me, and he's polarizing so it totally comes down to how their FO perceives him, but I think this is a fair range for him, and Orlando should be looking for a dynamic perimeter type, makes a lot of sense to me)
17. BKN
18. IND
19. SAS - Okeke (seems like a very Spurs-esque pick, and I think this is a good range for him)
20. BOS - Herro (they've been rumored to like Herro. Doubt they keep all 3 picks but assume he goes at 20 or 22)
21. OKC -
22. BOS - Thybulle (he was supposedly promised by Boston, sounds more legit than the rumored OKC promise. Sounds like he'll either go 21 or 22)
23. UTA -
24. PHI - C.Johnson (Brand is on record saying they're looking for older prospects ready to contribute, they have a precedence on shooting, and Johnson and Edwards are the two names that have been linked to them. I think Cam goes here)
25. POR
26. CLE
27. BKN - Claxton (They're rumoured to want a backup big for Allen in the draft but I don't see why you'd waste #17 on it when you'd be reaching on a 5.. Claxton, Fernando, Kab all probably available here)
28. GSW
29. SAS - J.Porter (would be bit surprising to see them draft 2 ACL guys in the first together, but Spurs like him apparently and he's a classic Spurs selection)
30. MIL - Jerome (I think he's a reach here but they apparently like him and he could be a steady poor man's Brogdon replacement if he goes)

The guys that fill the rest of those 1st round gaps?

Little, Doumbouya, Bol (teens?)

NAW, G.Williams, THT (surely all 1st round guys)

Fernando, Samanic, Edwards, K.Johnson (wouldn't be shocked to see them in the 2nd but info suggests 1st round)

That basically covers everyone that would go in the first round.

There are rumours of Charlotte's preference for drafting Little which can make sense with him coming from North Carolina.

[SfBull]

[*]

Plenty of players had, have talent and never put it together. But they could at least do it college. He will likely have the worst ever stats for a top 10 pick.

And yet he is still on every team's board from 3 to 10 and will be taken top 10. Hmmmmm

Because it is a weak draft. Not because he performed like a top 10 pick.

I'm coming for this understanding too

[GimmeDat]

There are rumours of Charlotte's preference for drafting Little which can make sense with him coming from North Carolina.

Could certainly see it, not sure if the NC connection would have much to do with it though. Think Charlotte are really exploring their options. Depends on Kemba staying as well.

[SfBull]

Take the BPA at 7 and roll with it. **** trading down for multiple lesser prospects. We don’t need a bunch of projects. We have good young talent.

It's questionable if you won't end with another project drafting #7.I like the idea of trading down in a supposedly weak draft ,we can find some steal eventually,3 chances of getting it.

[JohnnyTapwater]

I really have a feeling we're gonna trade the pick for Lonzo Ball.

How upset will you guys be? I know I'd love it, and I might be the only one loving it at Dougs Draft party, So that's gonna be fun to see.

[WindyCityBorn]

Take the BPA at 7 and roll with it. **** trading down for multiple lesser prospects. We don’t need a bunch of projects. We have good young talent.

It's questionable if you won't end with another project drafting #7.I like the idea of trading down in a supposedly weak draft ,we can find some steal eventually,3 chances of getting it.

We can definitely draft a non-project #7.

[sco]

I'm fine with any of White, Hunter, Garland or Culver at 7. I don't really want Cam, but if Pax thinks he's good enough to take over others, I could live with that.

The only reason I don't love White/Garland is that it likely means Bulls won't go after Brogdon, who I think would be a transformational player of this roster.

[SfBull]

For me , everyone likely available at #7 can be labeled as projects,even Garland who played only 5 games before injury .I like Hunter, Culver,White too,not so high on Reddish but I wouldn't be ecstatic on drafting any of them so I'd give a try on some trading down possibilities with teams having multiple picks like the Celtics.The more I read and remember from what I watched College games the less optimistic I feel about players potentially available at #7.

[SfBull]

I'm fine with any of White, Hunter, Garland or Culver at 7. I don't really want Cam, but if Pax thinks he's good enough to take over others, I could live with that.

The only reason I don't love White/Garland is that it likely means Bulls won't go after Brogdon, who I think would be a transformational player of this roster.

It's hard to imagine Brogdon leaving a contender like the Bucks for the Bulls unless they overpay him.I don't know if he deserves this investiment.

[cjbulls]

Trading #7 to the Celtics for additional picks seems like easily the best scenario to me. They badly need to consolidate and we need more talent.

14,20,22 straight up.

More like 14, 20 or 22, and 51.

While I get the logic of acquiring multiple picks, how would this ever work? Teams have an 8-9 man rotation. They will have Zach, Lauri, Otto and WCJ plus two veterans, so that's six. Where are these 4 or five rookies going to play?

What happens with Arci, Hutch, Val, Dunn, Shaq?

This move has no regard for team building. Most players, outside of a select few like Zion, develop based on their environment. If the whole team consists of young players on first contracts, how are they going to win? How are they going to develop when they're the equivalent of a G League team with each individual trying to prove themself?

[BigUps]

So wait, Cam Reddish is a polarizing prospect? The debate on Reddish was obviously going to happen the moment the lottery balls gave us the 7th pick.

My Tiers
Zion

Ja
RJ

Hunter
White
Garland
Culver
Hachimura

Little
Reddish
Doumboya
Goga
Bol
Clarke
Cam Johnson
Hayes


Still need to figure out more about Fernando and Kabengele. They have moved up on some mocks and I just don't know enough about them yet.

[TheSuzerain]

14,20,22 straight up.

More like 14, 20 or 22, and 51.

While I get the logic of acquiring multiple picks, how would this ever work? Teams have an 8-9 man rotation. They will have Zach, Lauri, Otto and WCJ plus two veterans, so that's six. Where are these 4 or five rookies going to play?

What happens with Arci, Hutch, Val, Dunn, Shaq?

This move has no regard for team building. Most players, outside of a select few like Zion, develop based on their environment. If the whole team consists of young players on first contracts, how are they going to win? How are they going to develop when they're the equivalent of a G League team with each individual trying to prove themself?

Archi, Hutch, Val, Dunn, Shaq are replacement level scrubs. Maybe 1 of that group can elevate themselves beyond that.

You don't need to play rookies their first year to warrant drafting them. We have 15 roster spots.

[nomorezorro]

the "debate on reddish" is basically Cam Reddish's Historically Bad College Production For A Lottery Prospect Means He's Exceedingly Unlikely To Become A Star NBA Player vs. No It Doesn't