Draft Thread Part 4

[lolwut]

I wonder how many people are dialing back their Davion Mitchell takes watching Donovan destroy the Clippers

My playoffs/draft hot take for the night is: Mobley will be the best player out of this draft just off his defense alone which is reminiscent of Gobert. The fact he has a jumper too should seal the deal on who the best prospect is

Defense. American spelling beause not in Canada or just internet medial afflicted. Just asking.

I use the American spelling because it's easier to remember.

Defense/Defensive is more consistent than Defence/Defensive

[Badonkadonk]

Would you guys trade our current draft equity for the fifth slot in the draft?

Depends on the deal. Not really excited by the 5th pick, as I think Kuminga is a big step down after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs.

[douggood]

Would you guys trade our current draft equity for the fifth slot in the draft?

closest similar trade was atlanta moving from 8 to 4 to draft deandre hunter 2 years ago.


Atl - gets 4th pick, Solomon hill dead salary (1 year 12 mil), 57th pick in draft

Pelicans - 8th pick, 17th pick, 35th pick, heavy protected future 1st from cavs(turned into 2 cavs seconds 34th pick this year and next year 2nd)

in other years, phx moved up from 15 to 10 with trade with sixers(zaire smith, bridges trade), but had to include future miami 1st.

so by those standard our draft capital is worth nothing unless we add future picks.

[PhilBlackson]

Would you guys trade our current draft equity for the fifth slot in the draft?

Depends on the deal. Not really excited by the 5th pick, as I think Kuminga is a big step down after Cade/Mobley/Green/Suggs.

In our developmental system I'd have full faith Kuminga would be a star -- especially if our management was that high on him to trade up (which wouldn't shock me tbh, that they would want him, not that a team will make that trade) so yes I'd do it although there are several players I really like that might be there in the 2nd round.

He'll need work on his jumper but he's coming into the league miles ahead skillwise of what both Pascal and OG have (actually resembles OG but cleaner ballhandling and even more athletic) so I'd be thrilled to get him too. Can only imagine what they'd get out of him.

But I do agree, I'd be much more comfortable pulling the trigger on a top 4 instead because all of them I'm certain will be good players without as much concern about development. Although I put Cade, Mobley and Green a notch above Suggs.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I have a hunch that trading up (or in) is usually worth whatever cost. There's obviously the notable Fultz fiasco, but I would bet under the microscope that moving up usually indicates organizational confidence and investment. Teams want to make sure their bet paid off. I think in the Fultz case, the Sixers prioritized team success in the moment and sheltered Fultz. Not only did it not pay off in the short term, but they didn't take a long approach either. He's now playing kind of decently in Orlando.

As for this particular draft, I'm leery. For one, I think judging both Green and Kuminga is a challenge because they are playing in a league without any prospect history. There's no statistical background, and in the small sample for both of them they were severe net negatives. Is that the design of a team full of washed vets and young draft eligible prospects, or are both players missing "winning" attributes? While I like them both, I don't have confidence they'll be any better than anything we can get at 7.

And then for Suggs and Cunningham, I'm confident both will be good NBA players and "core pieces." I'm just unsure either will be better than Siakam-level (all-NBA second team at peak). If the cost is presumed to be Siakam + our pick, it's too risky for me.

As for Mobley, I'm most confident in him and would trade anyone to move up.

[CoreyVillains]

https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-draftdaq-nba-draft-podcast/id1479101969?i=1000522487808


Review of Scottie Barnes

Thanks for listening!

[CoreyVillains]

I am not that high on Mitchell's potential as an elite NBA defender. He's small and he lacks strength to battle in the post. Smart teams will absolutely target him in mismatches. He doesn't have the strength of Lowry to be able to battle bigger players down low. If you compare Mitchell to another good defender like Jaden Springer, I think Springer's size and strength will make him a better and more versatile defender in the NBA.

There is no questioning Davion's foot speed and reaction time but elite on ball defense is only a small part of what makes a good defensive guard. Strength is absolutely necessary to be an elite defender as a guard if you don't have length like Dejounte Murray or Lonzo Ball. Part of what makes players like FVV so effective is elite strength for his size, something Davion will have to add over the years.

Disagree about Davion not being strong enough to battle in the post. I did a video on how he guarded Cade and he guarded him about as well as you could.

Watch on YouTube

[tecumseh18]

For one, I think judging both Green and Kuminga is a challenge because they are playing in a league without any prospect history. There's no statistical background, and in the small sample for both of them they were severe net negatives. Is that the design of a team full of washed vets and young draft eligible prospects, or are both players missing "winning" attributes? While I like them both, I don't have confidence they'll be any better than anything we can get at 7.

But what about their high school history? I'm not an expert at this, but you like to delve into these things. A year ago, I assume they were comparable to the top recruits who ended up in the NCAA.

[billy_hoyle]

For one, I think judging both Green and Kuminga is a challenge because they are playing in a league without any prospect history. There's no statistical background, and in the small sample for both of them they were severe net negatives. Is that the design of a team full of washed vets and young draft eligible prospects, or are both players missing "winning" attributes? While I like them both, I don't have confidence they'll be any better than anything we can get at 7.

But what about their high school history? I'm not an expert at this, but you like to delve into these things. A year ago, I assume they were comparable to the top recruits who ended up in the NCAA.

Ya... They were top recruits, but so was BJ Boston. Look what happened to BJ when he went to a league we have alot of data on. He was exposed.

It happens to alot of top 10 highschool recruits. They fizzle in the NCAA. The fact Green and Kuminga didn't go that route makes them harder to gauge IMO.

[PhilBlackson]

I have a hunch that trading up (or in) is usually worth whatever cost. There's obviously the notable Fultz fiasco, but I would bet under the microscope that moving up usually indicates organizational confidence and investment. Teams want to make sure their bet paid off. I think in the Fultz case, the Sixers prioritized team success in the moment and sheltered Fultz. Not only did it not pay off in the short term, but they didn't take a long approach either. He's now playing kind of decently in Orlando.

As for this particular draft, I'm leery. For one, I think judging both Green and Kuminga is a challenge because they are playing in a league without any prospect history. There's no statistical background, and in the small sample for both of them they were severe net negatives. Is that the design of a team full of washed vets and young draft eligible prospects, or are both players missing "winning" attributes? While I like them both, I don't have confidence they'll be any better than anything we can get at 7.

And then for Suggs and Cunningham, I'm confident both will be good NBA players and "core pieces." I'm just unsure either will be better than Siakam-level (all-NBA second team at peak). If the cost is presumed to be Siakam + our pick, it's too risky for me.

As for Mobley, I'm most confident in him and would trade anyone to move up.

I understand some doubts around Kuminga but not Green. He has an elite first step, explosive leaper with already great skillset...not even sure why people talk about him as if he were just some raw prospect. The kid really isn't even that far off in terms of his shot creation from Bouknight but even more physically gifted and shoots better percentages. I'm willing to bet, he'll be better than Suggs. But again agree Kuminga that's bit of a question mark.

I have little to no doubt that all of Cade, Mobley and Green will be stars. I could see a scenario though where Suggs is more so a borderline all-star, not saying he won't reach bona-fide all star like the others but only that I can see it as a possible outcome. He plays a lot more like Billups as a great floor general that will take/make big shots but he's not the dominant takeover scorer like Roy -- at least not yet.

[ATLTimekeeper]

For one, I think judging both Green and Kuminga is a challenge because they are playing in a league without any prospect history. There's no statistical background, and in the small sample for both of them they were severe net negatives. Is that the design of a team full of washed vets and young draft eligible prospects, or are both players missing "winning" attributes? While I like them both, I don't have confidence they'll be any better than anything we can get at 7.

But what about their high school history? I'm not an expert at this, but you like to delve into these things. A year ago, I assume they were comparable to the top recruits who ended up in the NCAA.

That's notable, but unreliable still. I brought this up a few days ago. The top 10 RSCI rankings (the consensus high school recruit rankings) seem to have about a 20% rate of success in terms of NBA stardom. And that's just "star" like a basic "all-star to superstar" range, and we all know that there are levels to that realm. This is just a rough eyeball evaluation by me. There might have been 10 "superstars" in the 20 drafts I looked at that were top 10 high school recruits. And we just can't know how they may have performed in college. For example, Kuminga's cousin, Emmanual Mudiay was RSCI #2 in 2015 (between Jahlil Okafor and Stanimal!)? He went to China, played a few games, didn't do much, and then didn't do much in the NBA. LaMelo Ball played in Lithuania and Australia, didn't really kill it there, and he lit up the NBA in his rookie season.

[OakleyDokely]

Cade
Mobley
Green
Suggs


That's very likely the top 4 order. Then it comes down to preference. If Madais and Bobby really do their home there is a big time gem that will be available at picks 7-9.

I think Cade is going #1, but I think #2 will depend on need. Lets say the Twolves get #2, I doubt they take Mobley with Towns in the mix, unless they think they can play together.

[Jadoogar]

zach lavine? team took its time and developed. Booker? team tooks its time and developed. Donovan Mitchell? team tooks its time and developed.

Why cant we develop bouknight? what doesnt he have that these guys have.

Mitchell was the primary option on a playoff team his rookie season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Donovan Mitchell is an interesting player. Combine measurements were off the charts, some reason drafted 13th. If they redraft 2017, Mitchell would go first for me. Anyone recall why he was taken at 13th and not top5?

You take him over Tatum?
The draft is really weird tho. Fultz was the consensus top pick and we know how that turned out.
Only "good" players in the top 10 were Tatum, Fox, and Lonzo (i guess). However, tons of great players after the top 10:
13 Mitchell
14 Bam
22 Jarrett Allen
23 OG

[Federalies]

I am not that high on Mitchell's potential as an elite NBA defender. He's small and he lacks strength to battle in the post. Smart teams will absolutely target him in mismatches. He doesn't have the strength of Lowry to be able to battle bigger players down low. If you compare Mitchell to another good defender like Jaden Springer, I think Springer's size and strength will make him a better and more versatile defender in the NBA.

There is no questioning Davion's foot speed and reaction time but elite on ball defense is only a small part of what makes a good defensive guard. Strength is absolutely necessary to be an elite defender as a guard if you don't have length like Dejounte Murray or Lonzo Ball. Part of what makes players like FVV so effective is elite strength for his size, something Davion will have to add over the years.

Disagree about Davion not being strong enough to battle in the post. I did a video on how he guarded Cade and he guarded him about as well as you could.

Watch on YouTube

Great video and while Davion does an admirable job, Cade still scored 24 and 25 points on decent efficiency in each of the two games against Baylor. All that to say, I’d suggest that Cade still going off says potentially more about Cade’s “generational “ skill set than Davion’s good defence. Just my two cents though!

[Saciid11]

Man watching Donovan Mitchell warms me up to the idea Raptors drafting Davion Mitchell. I just don't see anyone outside of Cade and Mobley being much better pro then Davion Mitchell. Suggs is great, but is he really that much better .. especially the way Mitchell defends. Green is all about offensive out put, but the guy right is Zack Lavine ... a guy who has potential to great scorer, but can't defend. Kuminga is all about potential and those type of players usual have high bust potential too. At least with Davion is floor is bull dog lock down defender like Smart, but his ceiling is Donovan Mitchell...

[OakleyDokely]

zach lavine? team took its time and developed. Booker? team tooks its time and developed. Donovan Mitchell? team tooks its time and developed.

Why cant we develop bouknight? what doesnt he have that these guys have.

Mitchell was the primary option on a playoff team his rookie season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Donovan Mitchell is an interesting player. Combine measurements were off the charts, some reason drafted 13th. If they redraft 2017, Mitchell would go first for me. Anyone recall why he was taken at 13th and not top5?

His numbers were good but they weren't great. And I think Louisville got kicked out of the tournament early that year so he didn't generate much hype.

[filsor]

Man watching Donovan Mitchell warms me up to the idea Raptors drafting Davion Mitchell. I just don't see anyone outside of Cade and Mobley being much better pro then Davion Mitchell. Suggs is great, but is he really that much better .. especially the way Mitchell defends. Green is all about offensive out put, but the guy right is Zack Lavine ... a guy who has potential to great scorer, but can't defend. Kuminga is all about potential and those type of players usual have high bust potential too. At least with Davion is floor is bull dog lock down defender like Smart, but his ceiling is Donovan Mitchell...

If the Raptors are drafting 7 or 8 and Davion Mitchell is there, if its me, Im taking him.

[Indeed]

Mitchell was the primary option on a playoff team his rookie season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Donovan Mitchell is an interesting player. Combine measurements were off the charts, some reason drafted 13th. If they redraft 2017, Mitchell would go first for me. Anyone recall why he was taken at 13th and not top5?

You take him over Tatum?
The draft is really weird tho. Fultz was the consensus top pick and we know how that turned out.
Only "good" players in the top 10 were Tatum, Fox, and Lonzo (i guess). However, tons of great players after the top 10:
13 Mitchell
14 Bam
22 Jarrett Allen
23 OG

OG was a lottery pick, it was a dream for him to drop that low.
Meanwhile, I suppose those picking late lottery has better scouting and development program. Bam would be like Kai Jones or Isaiah Jackson or Garuba, pretty raw but high upside.

[Saciid11]

Man watching Donovan Mitchell warms me up to the idea Raptors drafting Davion Mitchell. I just don't see anyone outside of Cade and Mobley being much better pro then Davion Mitchell. Suggs is great, but is he really that much better .. especially the way Mitchell defends. Green is all about offensive out put, but the guy right is Zack Lavine ... a guy who has potential to great scorer, but can't defend. Kuminga is all about potential and those type of players usual have high bust potential too. At least with Davion is floor is bull dog lock down defender like Smart, but his ceiling is Donovan Mitchell...

If the Raptors are drafting 7 or 8 and Davion Mitchell is there, if its me, Im taking him.

Same here man, but I would even go as far as thinking about taking him over Suggs, Green and Kuminga. If we end up #1 then the obvious choice is Cade, #2 the obvious choice is Mobley ... after that there is no obvious choice, so taking Mitchell is not a reach. I just don't see what makes Suggs so much better, and Green to me screams one dimensional athletic scorer who can't defend or will have interest to defend. Kuminga all about potential and guys like him come with high risk bust potential too ...besides we already have OG.

[Reeko]

Man watching Donovan Mitchell warms me up to the idea Raptors drafting Davion Mitchell. I just don't see anyone outside of Cade and Mobley being much better pro then Davion Mitchell. Suggs is great, but is he really that much better .. especially the way Mitchell defends. Green is all about offensive out put, but the guy right is Zack Lavine ... a guy who has potential to great scorer, but can't defend. Kuminga is all about potential and those type of players usual have high bust potential too. At least with Davion is floor is bull dog lock down defender like Smart, but his ceiling is Donovan Mitchell...

I don't think Lavine is a legit comparison. Green is a lot better than Lavine at the same age. As for Green's defense, he's a little bit light in terms of weight right now but he exerts effort on that end, once he puts on weight I think he projects to be a good defender.