2021 Draft thread. Woo! 15th pick here we come! Hoo. Ray.

[9 and 20]

I'm thinking I should go back to my original instincts - now that we'll likely pick toward the end of the lottery and now that Gafford has arrived. My 2 favorite players all season were Butler of Baylor and Charles Bassey. Usually the best thing is to go with your gut and go after the players you like. With our 1st pick, I'll pick Bassey. That frees us up to trade Bryant for a late 1st and late 2nd (and filler). I use the late 1st on Butler and the late 2nd on Hauser. Reasons I like Bassey - he completely dominated his conference, his offensive game is similar to Bryant's - he's a dominant inside scorer with the makings of 3 point range, he was his conference's DPOY as a freshman, and he worked his way back from a bad injury with perhaps more game left to show.

I +1'd this for the underlying idea of getting another defensive C to go with Gafford and trading Bryant for something. I'm not sure we can rely on a rookie C to play 20+ minutes a game, though.

[Ruzious]

I'm thinking I should go back to my original instincts - now that we'll likely pick toward the end of the lottery and now that Gafford has arrived. My 2 favorite players all season were Butler of Baylor and Charles Bassey. Usually the best thing is to go with your gut and go after the players you like. With our 1st pick, I'll pick Bassey. That frees us up to trade Bryant for a late 1st and late 2nd (and filler). I use the late 1st on Butler and the late 2nd on Hauser. Reasons I like Bassey - he completely dominated his conference, his offensive game is similar to Bryant's - he's a dominant inside scorer with the makings of 3 point range, he was his conference's DPOY as a freshman, and he worked his way back from a bad injury with perhaps more game left to show.

Bassey is being mocked in the 2nd round most places I look. If you were able to get him on a trade back he would be a better value. Or if he is still on the board by round 2 and you can buy a pick.

Sure, if I believed he'd go later, I'd trade down, but I just don't buy the mocks. He's too good to slide past the lottery, imo.

[payitforward]

I'm thinking I should go back to my original instincts - now that we'll likely pick toward the end of the lottery and now that Gafford has arrived. My 2 favorite players all season were Butler of Baylor and Charles Bassey. Usually the best thing is to go with your gut and go after the players you like. With our 1st pick, I'll pick Bassey. That frees us up to trade Bryant for a late 1st and late 2nd (and filler). I use the late 1st on Butler and the late 2nd on Hauser. Reasons I like Bassey - he completely dominated his conference, his offensive game is similar to Bryant's - he's a dominant inside scorer with the makings of 3 point range, he was his conference's DPOY as a freshman, and he worked his way back from a bad injury with perhaps more game left to show.

I +1'd this for the underlying idea of getting another defensive C to go with Gafford and trading Bryant for something. I'm not sure we can rely on a rookie C to play 20+ minutes a game, though.

I agree that Bassey looks like he'll be a good NBA player. A guy as good as he is, at any position but C, would seem likely to be a lock for the lottery.

As to trading Bryant, every player should be available in a trade, no exceptions: it's just a question of what the deal is! So, if we get enough back for Bryant, no problem to move him.

But, overall, the idea ought not to be to find guys who can play certain roles, to get all the roles covered: the idea ought to be a simpler one.

Just get the best players you can possibly acquire no matter what their position is. Draft the bpa, sign the most productive FAs, trade for value not position. Make every decision for value. The more value you have, the more assets you have when you do go out to trade in order to balance across positions & roles.

This team isn't going to contend for a title in the next couple of years. Russ's salary make it impossible. We should be building a young core for when Russ is gone. The best place to start that is picking the bpa in the draft. & get another pick any way we can.

[Ruzious]

I like Bryant a lot, but I think centers like him just don't have a lot of value in the NBA, anymore, and his being injury-prone further lowers his value.

[DCZards]

I agree that Bassey looks like he'll be a good NBA player. A guy as good as he is, at any position but C, would seem likely to be a lock for the lottery.

As to trading Bryant, every player should be available in a trade, no exceptions: it's just a question of what the deal is! So, if we get enough back for Bryant, no problem to move him.

But, overall, the idea ought not to be to find guys who can play certain roles, to get all the roles covered: the idea ought to be a simpler one.

Just get the best players you can possibly acquire no matter what their position is. Draft the bpa, sign the most productive FAs, trade for value not position. Make every decision for value. The more value you have, the more assets you have when you do go out to trade in order to balance across positions & roles.

This team isn't going to contend for a title in the next couple of years. Russ's salary make it impossible. We should be building a young core for when Russ is gone. The best place to start that is picking the bpa in the draft. & get another pick any way we can.

I agree with the principle of drafting the BPA, but I think you take it too far.

Players are not widgets where the more widgets you have the better off you are. You need to identify players with skillsets that complement those players that you already have—no need to target a third PG if you already have an outstanding starter and a very good backup. It’s often more important to draft, sign as a free agent or trade for a player with a skillset that is lacking on your team. Daniel Gafford is an example. The Zards desperately needed someone with the ability to rim protect, rebound and catch lob passes. So they traded for Gafford.

It’s about building a winning combination of players and not simply about collecting assets to later trade or sell for other assets. Fit and need often matter.

[nate33]

I'm thinking I should go back to my original instincts - now that we'll likely pick toward the end of the lottery and now that Gafford has arrived. My 2 favorite players all season were Butler of Baylor and Charles Bassey. Usually the best thing is to go with your gut and go after the players you like. With our 1st pick, I'll pick Bassey. That frees us up to trade Bryant for a late 1st and late 2nd (and filler). I use the late 1st on Butler and the late 2nd on Hauser. Reasons I like Bassey - he completely dominated his conference, his offensive game is similar to Bryant's - he's a dominant inside scorer with the makings of 3 point range, he was his conference's DPOY as a freshman, and he worked his way back from a bad injury with perhaps more game left to show.

Bassey is being mocked in the 2nd round most places I look. If you were able to get him on a trade back he would be a better value. Or if he is still on the board by round 2 and you can buy a pick.

Sure, if I believed he'd go later, I'd trade down, but I just don't buy the mocks. He's too good to slide past the lottery, imo.

I just watched a bunch of videos on Bassey. He truly is a great rebounder who rebounds outside of his area. He also has high shoulders and a short neck so at 6'-10" with a 7'-3.5" wingspan, he'll play like a 7-footer. I liked the way he moved on the court, he has strong legs and good balance, and doesn't jump all over the place unnecessarily. He strikes me as a guy who won't be an injury risk. He might have a pretty lackluster vertical leap, it seems like he doesn't have much room to spare on most of his dunks, but he still manages to get the lob passes thrown his way. Maybe he only jumps as high as he needs to. His 2nd jump is pretty quick though. He doesn't need much time to gather.

He doesn't have much of a post game, but that doesn't matter much in the NBA. Most of his buckets are as a roll man, and he rolls with enthusiasm. He has the makings of a half-decent catch-and-shoot game. He's no Myles Turner or anything, but he might be a guy that you can't afford to just leave out on the perimeter. I saw him make one nice pass to a cutter, but the stats suggest he isn't much of a passer.

Defensively, he is good as a rim protector, showing good instincts on where to be and when. But he didn't look that great out on the perimeter when caught up in a switch. He doesn't have the same quick feet as, say, Bam Adebayo. He'll probably only be able to play drop coverage in the NBA.

Ultimately, he looks a lot like Daniel Gafford. Not quite 7-feet but plays like it. A big physical guy with good balance but without elite footspeed. A great motor. Very good roll man. I think Gafford is a better leaper and therefore a better vertical threat on the lob, but Bassey is probably the better shooter.

I don't think I'd take him in the lottery, but he'd be a good pick in the late teens/early 20's.

[Ruzious]

Bassey is being mocked in the 2nd round most places I look. If you were able to get him on a trade back he would be a better value. Or if he is still on the board by round 2 and you can buy a pick.

Sure, if I believed he'd go later, I'd trade down, but I just don't buy the mocks. He's too good to slide past the lottery, imo.

I just watched a bunch of videos on Bassey. He truly is a great rebounder who rebounds outside of his area. He also has high shoulders and a short neck so at 6'-10" with a 7'-3.5" wingspan, he'll play like a 7-footer. I liked the way he moved on the court, he has strong legs and good balance, and doesn't jump all over the place unnecessarily. He strikes me as a guy who won't be an injury risk. He might have a pretty lackluster vertical leap, it seems like he doesn't have much room to spare on most of his dunks, but he still manages to get the lob passes thrown his way. Maybe he only jumps as high as he needs to. His 2nd jump is pretty quick though. He doesn't need much time to gather.

He doesn't have much of a post game, but that doesn't matter much in the NBA. Most of his buckets are as a roll man, and he rolls with enthusiasm. He has the makings of a half-decent catch-and-shoot game. He's no Myles Turner or anything, but he might be a guy that you can't afford to just leave out on the perimeter. I saw him make one nice pass to a cutter, but the stats suggest he isn't much of a passer.

Defensively, he is good as a rim protector, showing good instincts on where to be and when. But he didn't look that great out on the perimeter when caught up in a switch. He doesn't have the same quick feet as, say, Bam Adebayo. He'll probably only be able to play drop coverage in the NBA.

Ultimately, he looks a lot like Daniel Gafford. Not quite 7-feet but plays like it. A big physical guy with good balance but without elite footspeed. A great motor. Very good roll man. I think Gafford is a better leaper and therefore a better vertical threat on the lob, but Bassey is probably the better shooter.

I don't think I'd take him in the lottery, but he'd be a good pick in the late teens/early 20's.

Thanks for your view. I don't think he'll be the big shot-blocker he was in college, but he'll be adequate defensively. I think his value is as a scorer and wide-bodied manic rebounder without being a poor defender. Like you said, he won't be a major distributor.

[nate33]

Thanks for your view. I don't think he'll be the big shot-blocker he was in college, but he'll be adequate defensively. I think his value is as a scorer and wide-bodied manic rebounder without being a poor defender. Like you said, he won't be a major distributor.

Yeah, I like him, but the adjective that comes to mind when describing him is "competent". I think he'll do most of the things you want your big man to do, but I didn't see anything in his game to suggest that he has the one elite skill that would make him an imposing starter. He isn't quite athletic enough to pan out as a Clint Capela type of elite defender. He isn't quite good enough as a shooter to be feared like a Myles Turner or Karl Anthony-Towns. He hasn't shown the passing skills to be a playmaker in the high post like a Marc Gasol. He doesn't have supernatural foot speed to be a switchable guy like Bam Adebayo. He isn't skilled enough as a shot creator or post scorer to be an go to offensive threat like Sabonis or Vucevic. He isn't a behemoth like Drummond or Valanciunas who can just beat teams up.

If things break right, he'll peak as a good backup or the type of starter you live with but hope to replace with a better guy. Ultimately, I don't think he'll be better than the type of guy you can find for the MLE. So that's why I wouldn't invest a lotto pick on him. I'd rather spend it on a guy who could pan out to be a guy better than the MLE (and is therefore unattainable for a capped out team).

He'd be an absolute steal if he goes in the 2nd round where a lot of mocks have him.

[nate33]

The more I look at Moses Moody, the more I like him for this team. He is 6'-6" with a reported 7'-0" wingspan and has an ideal 3&D skillset. He also rebounds pretty well for his size and gets to the free throw line. He compares pretty well to Devin Vassell, only he is a freshman, not a sophomore. I think the team really needs a wiry 3&D type of guy who can defend 2's and 3's and take some of that responsibility off of Beal.

[Ruzious]

Thanks for your view. I don't think he'll be the big shot-blocker he was in college, but he'll be adequate defensively. I think his value is as a scorer and wide-bodied manic rebounder without being a poor defender. Like you said, he won't be a major distributor.

Yeah, I like him, but the adjective that comes to mind when describing him is "competent". I think he'll do most of the things you want your big man to do, but I didn't see anything in his game to suggest that he has the one elite skill that would make him an imposing starter. He isn't quite athletic enough to pan out as a Clint Capela type of elite defender. He isn't quite good enough as a shooter to be feared like a Myles Turner or Karl Anthony-Towns. He hasn't shown the passing skills to be a playmaker in the high post like a Marc Gasol. He doesn't have supernatural foot speed to be a switchable guy like Bam Adebayo. He isn't skilled enough as a shot creator or post scorer to be an go to offensive threat like Sabonis or Vucevic. He isn't a behemoth like Drummond or Valanciunas who can just beat teams up.

If things break right, he'll peak as a good backup or the type of starter you live with but hope to replace with a better guy. Ultimately, I don't think he'll be better than the type of guy you can find for the MLE. So that's why I wouldn't invest a lotto pick on him. I'd rather spend it on a guy who could pan out to be a guy better than the MLE (and is therefore unattainable for a capped out team).

He'd be an absolute steal if he goes in the 2nd round where a lot of mocks have him.

Fair enough. Ironically, I see his offensive being most comparable to... Thomas Bryant, with him being a more determined rebounder and defender.

[nate33]

Thanks for your view. I don't think he'll be the big shot-blocker he was in college, but he'll be adequate defensively. I think his value is as a scorer and wide-bodied manic rebounder without being a poor defender. Like you said, he won't be a major distributor.

Yeah, I like him, but the adjective that comes to mind when describing him is "competent". I think he'll do most of the things you want your big man to do, but I didn't see anything in his game to suggest that he has the one elite skill that would make him an imposing starter. He isn't quite athletic enough to pan out as a Clint Capela type of elite defender. He isn't quite good enough as a shooter to be feared like a Myles Turner or Karl Anthony-Towns. He hasn't shown the passing skills to be a playmaker in the high post like a Marc Gasol. He doesn't have supernatural foot speed to be a switchable guy like Bam Adebayo. He isn't skilled enough as a shot creator or post scorer to be an go to offensive threat like Sabonis or Vucevic. He isn't a behemoth like Drummond or Valanciunas who can just beat teams up.

If things break right, he'll peak as a good backup or the type of starter you live with but hope to replace with a better guy. Ultimately, I don't think he'll be better than the type of guy you can find for the MLE. So that's why I wouldn't invest a lotto pick on him. I'd rather spend it on a guy who could pan out to be a guy better than the MLE (and is therefore unattainable for a capped out team).

He'd be an absolute steal if he goes in the 2nd round where a lot of mocks have him.

Fair enough. Ironically, I see his offensive being most comparable to... Thomas Bryant, with him being a more determined rebounder and defender.

If he gets as good as Bryant on offense, he will be a top 10 center. Because he already looks like he is better than Bryant defensively. And I do love his rebounding.

I just don't see the smooth, high release that Bryant has. Bryant's pick-and-pop ability coupled with his elite hands as a roll man are a pretty tough combination to defend. It'll be interesting to see how he develops.

[Illuminaire]

This team isn't going to contend for a title in the next couple of years. Russ's salary make it impossible. We should be building a young core for when Russ is gone. The best place to start that is picking the bpa in the draft. & get another pick any way we can.

I agree with the principle of drafting the BPA, but I think you take it too far.

It’s about building a winning combination of players and not simply about collecting assets to later trade or sell for other assets. Fit and need does often matter.

You have good points about how to finish a team, Zards. What PIF is identifying here is how to act while you are acquiring assets, before you try to put together a competitive playoff team.

If you go for fit over pure value/talent while your team isn't good enough to even reach the second round, you will *never* become a championship contender unless the lottery gods throw you a giant Lebron shaped bone.

The idea is to accumulate high value assets first, then move those to create the balanced finish product that you are seeking.

When you are a treadmill team, fit doesn't get you anywhere but a slightly longer run on the treadmill. You need pure talent to break that cycle and become legit. So you take the BPA and figure the rest out later.

[Dark Faze]

At the same time though, if you draft a PF four times in a row having identified them as BPA, then there's potential to have no platform for which these players can develop decently.

That's one issue that we could potentially be approaching at PF. If you identify Giddey as BPA, and he plays the 4 for us, suddenly we've got Bertans, Giddey, Deni, and Rui who I think are all NBA 4's.

The obvious answer is "let em play some 3", which sure, it happens and will happen, but it's possible for too many people to occupy the same floor space that are either attempting to do the same thing or are forced into a role they shouldn't be playing. So suddenly, even though you drafted BPA, that player or someone else similarly valued begins lagging behind. The "Troy Brown" effect.

This isn't an argument against drafting Giddey btw, just that there's a limited amount of opportunity available for certain roles on any given basketball team.

[DCZards]

This team isn't going to contend for a title in the next couple of years. Russ's salary make it impossible. We should be building a young core for when Russ is gone. The best place to start that is picking the bpa in the draft. & get another pick any way we can.

I agree with the principle of drafting the BPA, but I think you take it too far.

It’s about building a winning combination of players and not simply about collecting assets to later trade or sell for other assets. Fit and need does often matter.

You have good points about how to finish a team, Zards. What PIF is identifying here is how to act while you are acquiring assets, before you try to put together a competitive playoff team.

If you go for fit over pure value/talent while your team isn't good enough to even reach the second round, you will *never* become a championship contender unless the lottery gods throw you a giant Lebron shaped bone.

The idea is to accumulate high value assets first, then move those to create the balanced finish product that you are seeking.

When you are a treadmill team, fit doesn't get you anywhere but a slightly longer run on the treadmill. You need pure talent to break that cycle and become legit. So you take the BPA and figure the rest out later.

In acquiring assets it's important to make sure that it's someone whose play can help your team's efforts to build a contender. It's not enough to HOPE that another team will someday want to trade for that asset.

If that player plays a position that you're already loaded in is that really an asset if you can't trade him for a high quality player who plays a position of need?

[nate33]

At the same time though, if you draft a PF four times in a row having identified them as BPA, then there's potential to have no platform for which these players can develop decently.

That's one issue that we could potentially be approaching at PF. If you identify Giddey as BPA, and he plays the 4 for us, suddenly we've got Bertans, Giddey, Deni, and Rui who I think are all NBA 4's.

The obvious answer is "let em play some 3", which sure, it happens and will happen, but it's possible for too many people to occupy the same floor space that are either attempting to do the same thing or are forced into a role they shouldn't be playing. So suddenly, even though you drafted BPA, that player or someone else similarly valued begins lagging behind. The "Troy Brown" effect.

This isn't an argument against drafting Giddey btw, just that there's a limited amount of opportunity available for certain roles on any given basketball team.

This is correct.

People overstate the BPA argument. Obviously, if you have a chance to draft a superstar at a position you don't need versus a role player at a position you do need, you take the superstar. But if guys are on the same general tier, you may need to draft the guy that fits better, even if he is only 98% as good as the BPA, if the BPA plays a position where you have a roster glut.

[Illuminaire]

People overstate the likelihood of acquiring 4 players with equivalent talent at the same position.

[wall_glizzy]

Haven't been super involved in here so far, but did want to mention this guy Kessler Edwards from Pepperdine - liked him for last year's draft, but he returned for another year. He's old (by draft standards), and I have no idea how his hideous jumper has hit as consistently as it has through his college carreer, but it seems likely that he could be had in the mid-to-late second, which I think would be great value (especially for us, given our massive 3-and-D needs).

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/kessler-edwards/

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[NatP4]

Josh Giddey with a triple double on 5-6 shooting.

Read on Twitter

[Ruzious]

Josh Giddey with a triple double on 5-6 shooting.

Read on Twitter

The kid's got a ton of marketability potential - looks like Timothée Chalamet playing a gifted young basketball player. He's the 5th pick.

[NatP4]

I can easily picture Giddey as a 15-7-7 guy on 45/38/75 shooting with above average defense from day 1 in the NBA. All the spacing and pace will only make him better.