2021 Draft Thread

[azwfan]

Like which? I'm checking NBA.com, espn.com, CBS, that new dean guy who's pretty good, nbadraft.net... I've seen Mitchell mocked to us once. Barnes and Bouknight have been there for quite some time on most.

I did see Mitchell mocked to us at 14 on several sites, but early on. Now mocks like him higher

The ringer has him mocked to us right now.
I know someone at ESPN had him mocked to us.
SI has him mocked to us right now.
I know more than 1 of the podcasts had him mocked to us.
Davion Mitchell was DEFINITELY the early horse out of the gate mocked to the Warriors. The Bouknight stuff has come... I don't know last week or 2?

Disagree there, everyone had Barnes to us early. I think they readjusted once they figured Barnes made it a 6 man draft but post lotto, everywhere had us taking Barnes, all of them reasoning it was a Draymond/Iguodala replacement.

Bouknight stuff came out super early, which is why I'm not worried about it.. we're not going to leak who we really like 3 weeks before the draft. Anyone who we're tied to this early screams smokescreen, especially since I'm not hearing any other team really pushing for him. Or any team really talking about anyone, really

Then the Bouknight stuff must have come out when I wasn't paying attention (which I don't know when that would have been because I listen / read to this basically everyday for the past month+). The folks that have the Warriors taking him aren't claiming he's who the Warriors want. They're claiming he has the most upside / best player. Drafts that have us drafting for need are all up on Mitchell.

The thing is the Warriors like lengthy wings... and I can see them taking someone like Moody (better shooter, better physical profile) over someone like Bouknight (combo guard size, questionable TO's). That said, Bouknight looks like he can be more of a star to me. So that's who I prefer slightly over Moody. But Moody (IMO) is the guy who is most like the kind of player the Warriors would take - outside Giddey due to Giddey's size and passing.

All that said, there's so much information the teams have that we don't, information that likely makes a huge difference in pre-draft evaluation. Fun to argue about it anyways though.

[wco81]

Podcast compared I’m to Bridges after Bridges had a big Finals Game 2.

Can shoot, defend any anything else is a big bonus. Supposedly Mussleman is caping big time for Moody.

Sorry, didn't understand your post.

Who is compared to Bridges?

And who is Mussleman? Arkansas' coach?

PS: I'm not from the US and I don't follow NCAA.

That should be a podcast I listened to compared Moody to Bridges. The podcast hosts were Chris Vernon and Kevin O'Connor.

Musselman is a former Warriors coach -- wasn't too successful here but has done pretty well in college basketball.

[Onus]

The ringer has him mocked to us right now.
I know someone at ESPN had him mocked to us.
SI has him mocked to us right now.
I know more than 1 of the podcasts had him mocked to us.
Davion Mitchell was DEFINITELY the early horse out of the gate mocked to the Warriors. The Bouknight stuff has come... I don't know last week or 2?

Disagree there, everyone had Barnes to us early. I think they readjusted once they figured Barnes made it a 6 man draft but post lotto, everywhere had us taking Barnes, all of them reasoning it was a Draymond/Iguodala replacement.

Bouknight stuff came out super early, which is why I'm not worried about it.. we're not going to leak who we really like 3 weeks before the draft. Anyone who we're tied to this early screams smokescreen, especially since I'm not hearing any other team really pushing for him. Or any team really talking about anyone, really

Then the Bouknight stuff must have come out when I wasn't paying attention (which I don't know when that would have been because I listen / read to this basically everyday for the past month+). The folks that have the Warriors taking him aren't claiming he's who the Warriors want. They're claiming he has the most upside / best player. Drafts that have us drafting for need are all up on Mitchell.

The thing is the Warriors like lengthy wings... and I can see them taking someone like Moody (better shooter, better physical profile) over someone like Bouknight (combo guard size, questionable TO's). That said, Bouknight looks like he can be more of a star to me. So that's who I prefer slightly over Moody. But Moody (IMO) is the guy who is most like the kind of player the Warriors would take - outside Giddey due to Giddey's size and passing.

All that said, there's so much information the teams have that we don't, information that likely makes a huge difference in pre-draft evaluation. Fun to argue about it anyways though.

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

[azwfan]

Disagree there, everyone had Barnes to us early. I think they readjusted once they figured Barnes made it a 6 man draft but post lotto, everywhere had us taking Barnes, all of them reasoning it was a Draymond/Iguodala replacement.

Bouknight stuff came out super early, which is why I'm not worried about it.. we're not going to leak who we really like 3 weeks before the draft. Anyone who we're tied to this early screams smokescreen, especially since I'm not hearing any other team really pushing for him. Or any team really talking about anyone, really

Then the Bouknight stuff must have come out when I wasn't paying attention (which I don't know when that would have been because I listen / read to this basically everyday for the past month+). The folks that have the Warriors taking him aren't claiming he's who the Warriors want. They're claiming he has the most upside / best player. Drafts that have us drafting for need are all up on Mitchell.

The thing is the Warriors like lengthy wings... and I can see them taking someone like Moody (better shooter, better physical profile) over someone like Bouknight (combo guard size, questionable TO's). That said, Bouknight looks like he can be more of a star to me. So that's who I prefer slightly over Moody. But Moody (IMO) is the guy who is most like the kind of player the Warriors would take - outside Giddey due to Giddey's size and passing.

All that said, there's so much information the teams have that we don't, information that likely makes a huge difference in pre-draft evaluation. Fun to argue about it anyways though.

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

[FNQ]

Disagree there, everyone had Barnes to us early. I think they readjusted once they figured Barnes made it a 6 man draft but post lotto, everywhere had us taking Barnes, all of them reasoning it was a Draymond/Iguodala replacement.

Bouknight stuff came out super early, which is why I'm not worried about it.. we're not going to leak who we really like 3 weeks before the draft. Anyone who we're tied to this early screams smokescreen, especially since I'm not hearing any other team really pushing for him. Or any team really talking about anyone, really

Then the Bouknight stuff must have come out when I wasn't paying attention (which I don't know when that would have been because I listen / read to this basically everyday for the past month+). The folks that have the Warriors taking him aren't claiming he's who the Warriors want. They're claiming he has the most upside / best player. Drafts that have us drafting for need are all up on Mitchell.

The thing is the Warriors like lengthy wings... and I can see them taking someone like Moody (better shooter, better physical profile) over someone like Bouknight (combo guard size, questionable TO's). That said, Bouknight looks like he can be more of a star to me. So that's who I prefer slightly over Moody. But Moody (IMO) is the guy who is most like the kind of player the Warriors would take - outside Giddey due to Giddey's size and passing.

All that said, there's so much information the teams have that we don't, information that likely makes a huge difference in pre-draft evaluation. Fun to argue about it anyways though.

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

Yes. Yes yes yes yes yes.

So much more. I'm still waiting for player tracking data to become public. It will make Wiggins look a lot better than metrics do, thats for sure

[Onus]

Podcast compared I’m to Bridges after Bridges had a big Finals Game 2.

Can shoot, defend any anything else is a big bonus. Supposedly Mussleman is caping big time for Moody.

Sorry, didn't understand your post.

Who is compared to Bridges?

And who is Mussleman? Arkansas' coach?

PS: I'm not from the US and I don't follow NCAA.

That should be a podcast I listened to compared Moody to Bridges. The podcast hosts were Chris Vernon and Kevin O'Connor.

Musselman is a former Warriors coach -- wasn't too successful here but has done pretty well in college basketball.

Moody and Wagner should be excellent role players and are exactly the type of players that teams are looking for and will probably make close to 20m/yr after their rookie contracts end. Similarly to bridges. Bridges though is probably on the high end of outcomes. But these are the types of players you can’t have enough of as you can fill your team with multiples of these type of players. Like the Suns have 4 of these type of players that get minutes in bridges, crowder, Johnson and Craig.

[Onus]

Then the Bouknight stuff must have come out when I wasn't paying attention (which I don't know when that would have been because I listen / read to this basically everyday for the past month+). The folks that have the Warriors taking him aren't claiming he's who the Warriors want. They're claiming he has the most upside / best player. Drafts that have us drafting for need are all up on Mitchell.

The thing is the Warriors like lengthy wings... and I can see them taking someone like Moody (better shooter, better physical profile) over someone like Bouknight (combo guard size, questionable TO's). That said, Bouknight looks like he can be more of a star to me. So that's who I prefer slightly over Moody. But Moody (IMO) is the guy who is most like the kind of player the Warriors would take - outside Giddey due to Giddey's size and passing.

All that said, there's so much information the teams have that we don't, information that likely makes a huge difference in pre-draft evaluation. Fun to argue about it anyways though.

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

[FNQ]

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

Evaluators do have more information, the problem is that there is no way to logically use the information in a consistent way. For example, if I said to you that Wiggins covered the most ground (closing out) per minute for a Warrior, you'd say that makes sense - we saw him running around and playing great defense. If I told you that the #2 Warrior per minute was Jordan Poole... ok, what do we do with that info?

Not only that, they have to integrate these people into locker rooms, offensive schemes, defensive schemes.. the amount of variables is paralyzing. But I will say that these evaluators, for the most part, are just as biased to certain player types as any of us would be. They do have more advanced info at every level, but since it can be interpreted so many ways, its not going to move the needle a ton in terms of determining player success.

In fact, I think aside from star players, how well players fit into the team they are drafted is key, which is why I've always been wary of giving a second round pick their next contract, if they come from another team. Take Draymond for example - there are so many teams where he probably would have failed. And maybe if we didn't resign him, another team pays him buku money and they dont make him a primary handler, and he's considered a huge bust? Who knows

[azwfan]

Do teams really have that much more information than die hard fans? Maybe they can get more anecdotally evidence and can interview players but their tape is out there.

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

Think about what you just said.
You think they only get it right 20% of the time because theyre bad at their job or because its hard?
A baseball player has a success rate of 3/10 and hes an all star. Drafting is hard and theyre competing against each other to win.

I think its foolish to think they arent all looking for some sort of edge to make their success rate higher and do it better than the next team. More information, better organized, etc.

The arnchair QBs have no idea the pressure these guys operate under but are quick to assume they dont know what theyre doing. These guys dont work 8 hour days and then watch tv / surf the web for the rest of the night. They are on this all day/ night.

Dont know if its arrogance or ignorance or both that leads some of these folks to think they could do better. Either way I find it highly amusing.

[Scoots1994]

That’s certainly an interesting way to handwave off a 6.5% difference in shooting %. To be sure, it absolutely is a huge difference.

UCONNs offense wasn’t great, nor was Arkansas - especially for Moody, a catch and shoot player who was handling a lot in their weirdly basic Princeton offense.

This argument couldn’t parallel the Klay / Burks discourse any closer.. so many here went all in on Burks - he’s more athletic, more versatile, he’ll shoot better than 29% in the pros because he was his teams offense (seriously - look at Bouk compared to Burks. EERIE stuff. Sophomore, efficiency drop, great defensive tools/little impact)

Here we are 10 years later planting flags for Alec Burks again

It’s weird to see opinions shift so dramatically when not a single game has been played.. so either a workout video changed minds, or people are quite suggestible to whatever mocks tell them

Yeah, thanks for the polite way of telling people that they are dumb. Much appreciated.

Actually, it could be the case that, as the days have passed, each one of us has refined our opinion about certain prospects, no?

Imagine for a second that someone spent time studying certain prospects and realized he had the re-evaluate his linear thinking about them. Might happen, right? Just once in a blue moon.

Plus, Burks is much different to Bouknight. Burks is taller and more of a slasher, and has a better all-around game. Bouknight has advanced shot creation moves and handles, and seems like a better shooter than Burks, technically-wise. Plus what I've written in the posts above.

Suggestible isn't dumb. But you think its a coincidence everyone here's tune is changing on Bouknight ever since he was mocked to the Warriors? Sure, if you want. Happens every year but this year is different!

And I dunno if you were here for it, but those who were know that this exactly parallels Klay and Burks, with all the latecomers switching to the more athletic, higher upside person. I get it - its a lot more fun to do a victory lap if they become a star and making unsexy picks kinda sucks. But there is a pattern here, its pretty easy to see

"Everyone" isn't changing. I didn't trust him before, don't trust him now. If the Warriors draft him at 7 I will cheer for him and hope for the best, but I am not convinced just from the hype.

[NYCbeadyrae]

I really like Bouknight on GSW because the biggest obstacle he faced at UConn was that they had no shooters. With shooters around him, space, he can be dynamic. He is really fun to watch when he has space to create.

[shazam_guy]

Armchair quarterbacks ALWAYS think they have a better eye than the people who do it for a living. Just as they think they would have seen that split-finger coming and wouldn't have swung, but Shohei Ohtani or Buster Posey did, the poor saps. They don't understand the pressure and competition as you move farther up the ladder in sports (or in many professions) that makes minute differences into success or failure.

I don't mind -- sports boards are essentially fantasy refuges for fans -- unless I see people contributing to a groundswell that might actually affect a player's career or a franchise's decisions. Then I get irritated for the same reason as I do at the bull@#@$ political stories that sometimes influence national elections. But as to who the Warriors are going to draft at #7, I don't think there's ever going to be a fan response ahead of time that's going to influence the choice, so have at it.

[azwfan]

I just hope when Mitchell goes to dinner with Bob and Steve, he brings his agent with him.

Moody and Bouk can go solo.

[whatisacenter]

Here is who the consensus mocks have the Warriors drafting.
https://www.nba.com/news/2021-consensus-mock-draft

#7 Davion Mitchell and #14 Usman Garuba

[killmongrel]

Here is who the consensus mocks have the Warriors drafting.
https://www.nba.com/news/2021-consensus-mock-draft

#7 Davion Mitchell and #14 Usman Garuba

Two guys who can't shoot.

[Onus]

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

Evaluators do have more information, the problem is that there is no way to logically use the information in a consistent way. For example, if I said to you that Wiggins covered the most ground (closing out) per minute for a Warrior, you'd say that makes sense - we saw him running around and playing great defense. If I told you that the #2 Warrior per minute was Jordan Poole... ok, what do we do with that info?

Not only that, they have to integrate these people into locker rooms, offensive schemes, defensive schemes.. the amount of variables is paralyzing. But I will say that these evaluators, for the most part, are just as biased to certain player types as any of us would be. They do have more advanced info at every level, but since it can be interpreted so many ways, its not going to move the needle a ton in terms of determining player success.

In fact, I think aside from star players, how well players fit into the team they are drafted is key, which is why I've always been wary of giving a second round pick their next contract, if they come from another team. Take Draymond for example - there are so many teams where he probably would have failed. And maybe if we didn't resign him, another team pays him buku money and they dont make him a primary handler, and he's considered a huge bust? Who knows

Fit and opportunity are huge factors in players careers. I agree there are countless teams where draymond is out of the league.

I think the issue really is that how do you determines someone’s ability to build a team? There’s what 30 jobs of getting a track record on how you would do. The thing is you have to be fluid in team building because each player adds a different dimension, but you have to have an overarching goal of team building and how you want to play. It seems like a lot of teams don’t really have a style of play that they stick to, so there’s a lot of teams that that really don’t do this right. They have these teams in every sport that are just perennial losers and yea they aren’t doing a good job.

[The-Power]

Just to let you know, Moody measured 6'4.5" at the combine and had a whole .5" more standing reach than Bouknight.

You mean 3'5''? Here are their measurements.

Moody | Bouknight
6'4.5'' | 6'3.5'' (height w/o shoes)
7'0.75'' | 6'8.25'' (wingspan)
8'9.0'' | 8'5.5'' (standing reach)
210.6 | 190.0 (weight)

Big difference.

[Onus]

Yeah. Most of what is gonna make these guys a star or a scrub is in their work ethic, personal drive, etc. We dont have that information. Teams interview the players themselves, coaches, teammates, look into their backgrounds. Fans do this for fun. Its their job. Do you think they put millions of dollars on the line and base decisions on the same things we look at after work?

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

Think about what you just said.
You think they only get it right 20% of the time because theyre bad at their job or because its hard?
A baseball player has a success rate of 3/10 and hes an all star. Drafting is hard and theyre competing against each other to win.

I think its foolish to think they arent all looking for some sort of edge to make their success rate higher and do it better than the next team. More information, better organized, etc.

The arnchair QBs have no idea the pressure these guys operate under but are quick to assume they dont know what theyre doing. These guys dont work 8 hour days and then watch tv / surf the web for the rest of the night. They are on this all day/ night.

Dont know if its arrogance or ignorance or both that leads some of these folks to think they could do better. Either way I find it highly amusing.

I agree the pressure can be immense. If you want to succeed at your job you’re going to be putting in more than 8 hours a day. That’s not something that’s only for sports.

Why do they think they can do better most likely because a lot of people can. There just isn’t a lot of opportunity out there. You really think that the nba employs the 30 best gms out of 8 billion people in the world. That’s statistically improbable.

[whatisacenter]

Just to let you know, Moody measured 6'4.5" at the combine and had a whole .5" more standing reach than Bouknight.

You mean 3'5''? Here are their measurements.

Moody | Bouknight
6'4.5'' | 6'3.5'' (height w/o shoes)
7'0.75'' | 6'8.25'' (wingspan)
8'9.0'' | 8'5.5'' (standing reach)
210.6 | 190.0 (weight)

Big difference.

3'5"!!!

yep, my bad, I saw Bouknight as 8'8.5" initially.

[azwfan]

Yea because they get it wrong so often it’s hilarious. If I were only to get something right like 20% of the time I’d be out of a job.

Think about what you just said.
You think they only get it right 20% of the time because theyre bad at their job or because its hard?
A baseball player has a success rate of 3/10 and hes an all star. Drafting is hard and theyre competing against each other to win.

I think its foolish to think they arent all looking for some sort of edge to make their success rate higher and do it better than the next team. More information, better organized, etc.

The arnchair QBs have no idea the pressure these guys operate under but are quick to assume they dont know what theyre doing. These guys dont work 8 hour days and then watch tv / surf the web for the rest of the night. They are on this all day/ night.

Dont know if its arrogance or ignorance or both that leads some of these folks to think they could do better. Either way I find it highly amusing.

I agree the pressure can be immense. If you want to succeed at your job you’re going to be putting in more than 8 hours a day. That’s not something that’s only for sports.

Why do they think they can do better most likely because a lot of people can. There just isn’t a lot of opportunity out there. You really think that the nba employs the 30 best gms out of 8 billion people in the world. That’s statistically improbable.

Probably not. But the ones who are the better NBA GMs? They're already working high level sports management in some fashion. I'd estimate 0.00% of them are on basketball forums and watching YouTube clips. They're busying working their ass off.

Are others capable? Probably? I could probably become a doctor. But alas I didn't go to medical school, and even if I did, I'm not willing to sacrifice the time, money, and work my ass off to become one. So I do what I do. What I don't do is read WebMD and think I know better than my physician... let alone a physician working in the most competitive environments with constant public pressure.

But if you think you, or any of us other clowns could do better, you can continue to think that.