2021 Draft Thread

[Hoochiscrazy]

Sup everyone. Long time lurker, first post.

Warriors are in a precarious spot. Other than Scotty Barnes, I don’t think we should expect some of these high ceiling players (like Moody, Boughknight, Johnson’s) rather higher floor players ready to contribute. As we learned with Wiseman, it’s near impossible to develop and compete at the same time. No way Steph and Dray are going to risk the end of their prime trying to teach several 19-20 year old dudes to ball.

It’s not sexy but I think we’re going Mitchell @ 7 and Duarte @ 14. Both ready to contribute day 1. Both fit within Kerrs system. 3 and D. I feel like Mitchell fits that Jrue Holiday type comp and Duarte actually has the Klay comp.

I think a trade for a star is unlikely given Wiggins value to the Warriors is higher than any potential team interested.

[FNQ]

Sup everyone. Long time lurker, first post.

Warriors are in a precarious spot. Other than Scotty Barnes, I don’t think we should expect some of these high ceiling players (like Moody, Boughknight, Johnson’s) rather higher floor players ready to contribute. As we learned with Wiseman, it’s near impossible to develop and compete at the same time. No way Steph and Dray are going to risk the end of their prime trying to teach several 19-20 year old dudes to ball.

It’s not sexy but I think we’re going Mitchell @ 7 and Duarte @ 14. Both ready to contribute day 1. Both fit within Kerrs system. 3 and D. I feel like Mitchell fits that Jrue Holiday type comp and Duarte actually has the Klay comp.

I think a trade for a star is unlikely given Wiggins value to the Warriors is higher than any potential team interested.

Your handle is fkn amazing and I know that only a few people will get it.. but Hooch IS crazy

[killmongrel]

Sup everyone. Long time lurker, first post.

Warriors are in a precarious spot. Other than Scotty Barnes, I don’t think we should expect some of these high ceiling players (like Moody, Boughknight, Johnson’s) rather higher floor players ready to contribute. As we learned with Wiseman, it’s near impossible to develop and compete at the same time. No way Steph and Dray are going to risk the end of their prime trying to teach several 19-20 year old dudes to ball.

It’s not sexy but I think we’re going Mitchell @ 7 and Duarte @ 14. Both ready to contribute day 1. Both fit within Kerrs system. 3 and D. I feel like Mitchell fits that Jrue Holiday type comp and Duarte actually has the Klay comp.

I think a trade for a star is unlikely given Wiggins value to the Warriors is higher than any potential team interested.

Warriors can do both. Go for a sure thing in the draft AND get a high potential guy. The reason people like Moody is because he seems to be NBA ready as well as having upside. And with the 14th pick, they can go for a Giddy or a Zaire Williams for a project. If they feel they need a more ready now player, they can go with Wagner at 14, or maybe Mitchell if he makes it there. As for Duarte, you don't draft him at 14. Trade down and get some value. He'll probably be available around 19-early 20s.

[clyde21]

people really need to drop this stigma about rookies that can't contribute right away, that's not the case anymore, and getting 2 extra picks allows us to go for a more ready guy, like a Jared Butler or Joe Wieskamp, at #21 or #32, maybe even both picks.

and there's nothing more valuable than rookie scale contract players that can play, so I disagree that it's a no go for the Warriors adding 3 rookies (at least it shouldn't be).

also disagree that we should only draft 1 rookie. we're getting handed a pretty good situation here by being able to take 2 guys in a strong lotto...i wouldn't do that at all unless it's like trading up for a Mobley or something.

that said, I would only trade down if the guys I want aren't available anyways.

I agree with this. Memphis had two very competent rookies last year in Bane and Tillman for example.

I agree with Clyde and with you agreeing with Clyde, haha.

For me (At least, for the current team), rookies who are seasoned (3-4 years of college bball), multi-skilled and/or have strong intangibles (e.g., established work ethic, shown effort on both sides, wanting it more, etc.) are ones that should be sought after because it shows they know enough to play organized bball, play to their strengths (Aren't forced or force themselves to do something out of ordinary), and actually add value to the team.

For this squad in particular, they can't wait on "projects," "potential" or "upside" right now.

they don't even have to be older rookies, rookies that fit in well within your team with a defined role can do well...look at Tyrese Haliburton or Cole Anthony or Tyrese Maxey etc. etc. etc...the idea that if you draft a rookie you're gonna have to keep him on ice for a few years is an old idea...these guys are drafted to be able to contribute pretty quickly.

but, again, the key is drafting guys that are not only talented but really ones that fit your scheme and personnel.

[Onus]

Spoiler:

The 60 at the end is a big problem, though. If he was an 80+% FT shooter I could see the appeal somewhat. But he isn't, and he's not showing any improvement at the line and that's a concern, especially considering that he has no track record of being a good 3pt shooter either. It's a complete outlier year for him.

So I have two questions. First, how many good shooters in the league are mid-60% FT shooters? Second, how many undersized Guards who aren't good shooters (and also not elite playmakers) are difference-makers in the league? If the answer to both questions is ‘zero’ – or very close to it – then I really don't understand all that confidence you have in Mitchell.

And for the record, besides Mitchell I actually agree a lot with your rankings, which makes this one discrepancy all the more surprising to me and I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from.

IDK is Lonzo ball a good shooter? Didn't he start out at 60%. JR Smith, Frank Kaminsky, Jaden Mcdaniels, Kenrich Williams, Danuel House, Alex Caruso, Mychal Mulder, Marcus Smart etc turns out there's quite a few "shooters" who are sub 70%.

Well, I don't mean players who maybe had a season where they shot sub-70% from the line. Mitchell has done it three seasons in a row with zero improvement. Besides, I would consider none of these guys good shooters besides maybe J.R. Smith. For some of them, shooting is actually a bit of a flaw or concern.

I'm not saying that saying that there aren't some players who don't shoot FTs well but can hit some shots. I'm also not talking about Mitchell as someone who won't be able to hit some 3's. I'm talking about legitimately good shooters which I believe Mitchell would have to become to warrant being picked in the lottery. If he's Smart or Lonzo as a shooter then that's a problem.

2nd question: Bruce Brown? Marcus Smart? Cam Payne, Patrick Beverly, Shroeder IDK there's probably more

Mitchell is 6'0'' in socks with a 6'4.5'' WS.

Brown is 6'3.5'' in socks with a 6'9'' WS.
Smart is 6'2'' in socks with a 6'9.25'' WS.
Schröder is 6'1''/6'2'' in socks with a 6'7.5'' WS (some conflicting measurements but it's in that range).
Beverley says he has a 6'7'' WS (couldn't find any official measurements).
Payne has a 6'7.25'' WS.

None of these players besides Smart are difference makers. None of these players – besides Smart – are worth a mid-lottery pick with hindsight. Yet, every single one of them was still bigger and/or longer than Mitchell.

If those are the players that we have to look at as undersized, non-elite shooters and non-elite playmakers who made an impact then that doesn't bode well for Mitchell at all. Can he be a Patrick Beverley type of player? Sure. Do I want to pick that kind of player at 7? Hell no.

If he was an 80% ft shooter there'd be very little to critique.

He'd still be undersized and limited in his ability to create for himself and others (for a lead Guard). So I still probably wouldn't rate him that highly but I could at least see an argument. Right now, with his track record as a FT shooter and 3pt shooter? I just can't.

I think your issue is that you don't believe in his shot and you believe this was just an outlier year for him. Which very well could be true.

I just happen to believe in his shot.

Okay, so we're just seeing his shooting very differently. I suppose there's nothing left but to agree to disagree and wait to see what happens. Nothing wrong with that, can't see eye to eye on all prospects – and since I've been wrong before, it's entirely possible that I'm wrong again, even though I stand by my logic above.

I never asked you if you were to believe in Davion's shooting where would he be for you? Like say his ft was 75% and he had a track record of shooting 3s at 38% in previous years, so this year would still be an outlier but there was some track record that his shooting may have turned a corner? Where would you put Mitchell if those things were true?

[northoakland510]

Sup everyone. Long time lurker, first post.

Warriors are in a precarious spot. Other than Scotty Barnes, I don’t think we should expect some of these high ceiling players (like Moody, Boughknight, Johnson’s) rather higher floor players ready to contribute. As we learned with Wiseman, it’s near impossible to develop and compete at the same time. No way Steph and Dray are going to risk the end of their prime trying to teach several 19-20 year old dudes to ball.

It’s not sexy but I think we’re going Mitchell @ 7 and Duarte @ 14. Both ready to contribute day 1. Both fit within Kerrs system. 3 and D. I feel like Mitchell fits that Jrue Holiday type comp and Duarte actually has the Klay comp.

I think a trade for a star is unlikely given Wiggins value to the Warriors is higher than any potential team interested.

I do not think it's impossible to develop and compete. The Warriors just didn't have the coaches to do it, and they admitted it with these coaching changes.

[The-Power]

I never asked you if you were to believe in Davion's shooting where would he be for you? Like say his ft was 75% and he had a track record of shooting 3s at 38% in previous years, so this year would still be an outlier but there was some track record that his shooting may have turned a corner? Where would you put Mitchell if those things were true?

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

[Onus]

I never asked you if you were to believe in Davion's shooting where would he be for you? Like say his ft was 75% and he had a track record of shooting 3s at 38% in previous years, so this year would still be an outlier but there was some track record that his shooting may have turned a corner? Where would you put Mitchell if those things were true?

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

[The-Power]

I never asked you if you were to believe in Davion's shooting where would he be for you? Like say his ft was 75% and he had a track record of shooting 3s at 38% in previous years, so this year would still be an outlier but there was some track record that his shooting may have turned a corner? Where would you put Mitchell if those things were true?

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

I can see the appeal, don't get me wrong. For me, however, the problem would remain that Mitchell would still be someone with a CG skill-set in a small-PG body who happens to be quite old compared to almost all other guys in the lottery. It's just difficult for me to see someone of his archetype in terms of size and skill to be a franchise player even with fewer shooting concerns (which definitely helps me to envision an extended role for him, though).

With Suggs, I understand some of the concerns – injury, but also half-court creation to some extent if his shot never becomes very reliable. Still, what Suggs has is the size of a CG and the playmaking instincts of a PG – i.e. the opposite of Mitchell – along with his athleticism. It would be very tough for me to argue Mitchell over Suggs even with a better track-record in terms of shooting unless perhaps I am positive that Suggs will end up being a player teams constantly dare to shoot.

[clyde21]

I never asked you if you were to believe in Davion's shooting where would he be for you? Like say his ft was 75% and he had a track record of shooting 3s at 38% in previous years, so this year would still be an outlier but there was some track record that his shooting may have turned a corner? Where would you put Mitchell if those things were true?

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

insanity

[Onus]

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

I can see the appeal, don't get me wrong. For me, however, the problem would remain that Mitchell would still be someone with a CG skill-set in a small-PG body who happens to be quite old compared to almost all other guys in the lottery. It's just difficult for me to see someone of his archetype in terms of size and skill to be a franchise player even with fewer shooting concerns (which definitely helps me to envision an extended role for him, though).

With Suggs, I understand some of the concerns – injury, but also half-court creation to some extent if his shot never becomes very reliable. Still, what Suggs has is the size of a CG and the playmaking instincts of a PG – i.e. the opposite of Mitchell – along with his athleticism. It would be very tough for me to argue Mitchell over Suggs even with a better track-record in terms of shooting unless perhaps I am positive that Suggs will end up being a player teams constantly dare to shoot.

I agree it’s a difficult archetype and not one that is usually associated with winning championships as a cornerstone. But Suggs archetype isn’t really associated with winning championships either. I just see him struggle too often in the half court, whereas Mitchell’s isolation game is pretty damn elite especially if he gets more space.

Suggs does have a lot of potential though especially since basketball wasn’t always his first sport in high school.

[Onus]

Good question. I haven't really thought about the hypothetical but I'd probably have him somewhere in the late lottery or mid-teens.

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

insanity

It’s ok I don’t have Scottie Lewis no 1

[The-Power]

I agree it’s a difficult archetype and not one that is usually associated with winning championships as a cornerstone. But Suggs archetype isn’t really associated with winning championships either. I just see him struggle too often in the half court, whereas Mitchell’s isolation game is pretty damn elite especially if he gets more space.

Suggs does have a lot of potential though especially since basketball wasn’t always his first sport in high school.

Well, if you want to talk about Suggs maybe not being all that, I'd actually be open to that. I have him 4th on my board still, but as the first of the third tier (first tier: Cade; second tier: Green, then Mobley). Some of it is due to injury concerns, some of it is due to archetype and half-court offense. If you project Suggs to shoot it like, for instance, Westbrook for his career, I'd understand if you'd drop him quite a bit all things considered. Of course, that wouldn't really change anything with regard to Mitchell.

[clyde21]

Interesting ... I'd probably have him over Suggs tbh. I just see his game fitting so well in a playoff game

insanity

It’s ok I don’t have Scottie Lewis no 1

my bb is posted 2 pages back in case u missed it big guy.

[Onus]

I agree it’s a difficult archetype and not one that is usually associated with winning championships as a cornerstone. But Suggs archetype isn’t really associated with winning championships either. I just see him struggle too often in the half court, whereas Mitchell’s isolation game is pretty damn elite especially if he gets more space.

Suggs does have a lot of potential though especially since basketball wasn’t always his first sport in high school.

Well, if you want to talk about Suggs maybe not being all that, I'd actually be open to that. I have him 4th on my board still, but as the first of the third tier (first tier: Cade; second tier: Green, then Mobley). Some of it is due to injury concerns, some of it is due to archetype and half-court offense. If you project Suggs to shoot it like, for instance, Westbrook for his career, I'd understand if you'd drop him quite a bit all things considered. Of course, that wouldn't really change anything with regard to Mitchell.

I agree Suggs evaluation shouldn’t change because of mitchell. I’m just saying if Mitchell didn’t have question marks about his shooting I’d probably take him over Suggs. I’m not sure either is really a no 1 option or franchise player. I was just curious if mitchell didn’t have shooting questions marks how high would that make him rise for you, but it doesn’t seem like it changes much for you.

[Onus]

insanity

It’s ok I don’t have Scottie Lewis no 1

my bb is posted 2 pages back in case u missed it big guy.

It’s ok that people have different opinions is the point

[The-Power]

I was just curious if mitchell didn’t have shooting questions marks how high would that make him rise for you, but it doesn’t seem like it changes much for you.

Well, he would jump a tier for me into late-lottery/mid-teens territory. Right now, I'd have him in the mid 20s, or maybe early 20s? I haven't settled on a final ranking yet.

[clyde21]

It’s ok I don’t have Scottie Lewis no 1

my bb is posted 2 pages back in case u missed it big guy.

It’s ok that people have different opinions is the point

ur more than welcome to have your opinion, but it's still insanity to suggest the difference between Davion and Suggs is FT%

[Onus]

my bb is posted 2 pages back in case u missed it big guy.

It’s ok that people have different opinions is the point

ur more than welcome to have your opinion, but it's still insanity to suggest the difference between Davion and Suggs is FT%

If you could guarantee me that davion would shoot +40% on 5+ 3s a game, which includes self created, step back, side step 3s. Yea I’m taking that over Suggs. That’s the makings of a star offensively, which doesn’t even account for his elite first step.

[shazam_guy]

Not sure I like Jaden Springer for 7, but if he happens to be around for 14 I wouldn't mind seeing him picked.