2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[HomoSapien]

Darius Garland is Nick Van Exel

Lazy comp. first of all, in todays nba, van exel would be much more effective. But second of all, van exel is 2 inches shorter and shot 40% from field for career and only 35% from 3. Garland I suspect will be a much better shooter percentage wise than nick van exel. I actually think Kyrie Irving is a better comp. he is a below the rim scorer who is quick and great shake and bake shooter. Also happened to miss much of his freshman year due to knee issue and got drafted high nevertheless.

But no indications thus far that Garland is a flake like Irving...

When I watch Garland I see Jeff Teague. Kyrie is a premier finisher at the rim and everywhere else, so Garland really has a way to go to get to that level.

Nick Van Exel was a hell of a player, so if he were in this draft we would be smart to trade up for him.

[bearadonisdna]

The same reasons garland is high is the same reason cam could have value.

Basically 1 is glorifi3d for his tools and not the other.

[johnnyvann840]

The same reasons garland is high is the same reason cam could have value.

Basically 1 is glorifi3d for his tools and not the other.

This is just not true. One guys played 5 games extremely well, got hurt and then didn't play anymore. The other played 5 games well and then the next 30 like a complete scrub.

One guy proved he probably isn't good and has very little star potential in the NBA. The other is still very much a total mystery. Sucks for Reddish but the fact is that we got to see him play a whole season at Duke and it was NOT GOOD. It was AWFUL. Maybe Garland would have done the same but he didn't. It is weird (to me anyway) that people are so high on Garland when he really hasn't shown much outside of 5 games, though. I mean he does look dynamic, from what we've seen, something Reddish has never looked in college.

Personally, I would rather take a player who has shown out really well than just guess on somebody we don't know much about at all, like Garland. But when I see a player like Reddish who has already shown me a lot of the things I don't want to see, I stay far away.

[WindyCityBorn]

The same reasons garland is high is the same reason cam could have value.

Basically 1 is glorifi3d for his tools and not the other.

This is just not true. One guys played 5 games extremely well, got hurt and then didn't play anymore. The other played 5 games well and then the next 30 like a complete scrub.

One guy proved he probably isn't good and has very little star potential in the NBA. The other is still very much a total mystery. Sucks for Reddish but the fact is that we got to see him play a whole season at Duke and it was NOT GOOD. It was AWFUL. Maybe Garland would have done the same but he didn't. It is weird (to me anyway) that people are so high on Garland when he really hasn't shown much outside of 5 games, though. I mean he does look dynamic, from what we've seen, something Reddish has never looked in college.

Personally, I would rather take a player who has shown out really well than just guess on somebody we don't know much about at all, like Garland. But when I see a player like Reddish who has already shown me a lot of the things I don't want to see, I stay far away.

This is why I have no problem drafting White. He played well an entire season for a top program. Garland is just hopes.

[JimmyJammer]

The same reasons garland is high is the same reason cam could have value.

Basically 1 is glorifi3d for his tools and not the other.

This is just not true. One guys played 5 games extremely well, got hurt and then didn't play anymore. The other played 5 games well and then the next 30 like a complete scrub.

One guy proved he probably isn't good and has very little star potential in the NBA. The other is still very much a total mystery. Sucks for Reddish but the fact is that we got to see him play a whole season at Duke and it was NOT GOOD. It was AWFUL. Maybe Garland would have done the same but he didn't. It is weird (to me anyway) that people are so high on Garland when he really hasn't shown much outside of 5 games, though. I mean he does look dynamic, from what we've seen, something Reddish has never looked in college.

Personally, I would rather take a player who has shown out really well than just guess on somebody we don't know much about at all, like Garland. But when I see a player like Reddish who has already shown me a lot of the things I don't want to see, I stay far away.

This is why I have no problem drafting White. He played well an entire season for a top program. Garland is just hopes.

Yes, you are right. White played long enough, on every stage and against every competition, for everyone to see his strengths and weaknesses. Meanwhile, Garland called it quit in January so that he could prepare for the draft. Guess what? He is not even doing any workout before the draft. His camp is happy with him being a mystery. Is he even healthy?

[johnnyvann840]

We've been talking about this over the last couple of weeks. How it's almost better to not show anything more than you have to. If you are already regarded as a top 15 pick, why risk hurting your stock when perception is more important, and can be more lucrative than reality in many cases. All it takes is one or two people start talking about a player in a positive light saying they have all this potential and the media does a great job of creating perceptions about players. It's why the draft has become so hit or miss in the early parts lately. I made a post with the draft positions of every top scorer and key player on every team that has gone deep in the playoffs and the results are quite eye opening. There are mostly players taken outside of the top ten and just a handful taken in the top 7. Only one top 5 pick, KD on any of the final four NBA teams this season. It's why I'm saying that we are going to see a couple of , maybe even a few, emerge from this draft that nobody is even talking about now that will be better than half of the top ten.

I mean I see tweets being posted and re-posted that originate from somebody I've never even heard of and then people take what they say about a player as gospel.

[TheHrvReport]

BTW have we interviewed any high profile draft picks yet? I know we had a bunch of camps for potential second round selections, but hadn't heard any bigger names coming to the Advocate Center.

The Bulls are back to the days of Jerry Krause, when they used to have players hide and come through the backdoor at night. They are not even posting much on social media.

Meanwhile the Lakers who probably will trade the pick are posting all about their workout with Culver and others. Come on Bulls! This is a little frustrating.

[MeloRoseNoah]

BTW have we interviewed any high profile draft picks yet? I know we had a bunch of camps for potential second round selections, but hadn't heard any bigger names coming to the Advocate Center.

The Bulls are back to the days of Jerry Krause, when they used to have players hide and come through the backdoor at night. They are not even posting much on social media.

Meanwhile the Lakers who probably will trade the pick are posting all about their workout with Culver and others. Come on Bulls! This is a little frustrating.

Considering that we're picking #7, the lower end of the 2nd tier of prospects, I rather for us to keep our mouths shut and just execute from here on. We, as fans, can wait for the name announcement on draft day.

[SfBull]

If The Bulls draft Hunter, Culver or Reddish do they slowly bring them along? Next year the Bulls will have LaVine, Porter Jr, Chandler Hutchison and Denzel Valentine at the 2 and 3 positions.

Hutch and Denzel being role bench players meaning little for this question.I believe that even a gamble like Reddish would gain minutes ahead both but won't start anyway with Zach and OCP being unquestionable at their spots .

The Bulls should draft the best player they can find and if it's a wing then it's a wing. But you don't think The Bulls should see what they have in Hutchison and Valentine?

They'll certainly will as they won't be traded ,I just not expecting much progress from them, especially from Denzel.Maybe I'm being so hard on Hutch as he played just 44 games but suppose the Bulls draft Hunter,he would have potentially (again ,we keep and need to stay talking just about potential)more skills for fighting for his minutes than a SF that can't shoot like Hutch.But it is today,we don't know if Hutch will work on his outside shot during the offseason.

[HomoSapien]

The Bulls are back to the days of Jerry Krause, when they used to have players hide and come through the backdoor at night. They are not even posting much on social media.

Meanwhile the Lakers who probably will trade the pick are posting all about their workout with Culver and others. Come on Bulls! This is a little frustrating.

Considering that we're picking #7, the lower end of the 2nd tier of prospects, I rather for us to keep our mouths shut and just execute from here on. We, as fans, can wait for the name announcement on draft day.

I'm not saying that I'm looking for the Bulls to leak who they love, but it's no secret that the Bulls will be considering a whole collection of guys and it's always fun to hear those players speak after a workout. Can't recall if we had a publicized meeting with Carter Jr. or not, but perhaps part of the reason we're not talking about it at all is because we are one of the teams who made a promise.

[Clint Eastwood]

Darius Garland is Nick Van Exel

Lazy comp. first of all, in todays nba, van exel would be much more effective. But second of all, van exel is 2 inches shorter and shot 40% from field for career and only 35% from 3. Garland I suspect will be a much better shooter percentage wise than nick van exel. I actually think Kyrie Irving is a better comp. he is a below the rim scorer who is quick and great shake and bake shooter. Also happened to miss much of his freshman year due to knee issue and got drafted high nevertheless.

But no indications thus far that Garland is a flake like Irving...

When I watch Garland I see Jeff Teague. Kyrie is a premier finisher at the rim and everywhere else, so Garland really has a way to go to get to that level.

Garlands ability to get off his 3 pointer and with range and accuracy as a freshman is already than Teague as a veteran. Garland has the chance to be a top shooter in the league from range and likely high volume

[Shill]

Sorry if this was already posted, but promise to Coby White?

Read on Twitter

I supposed I’d be on board.

I think Garland is the better project, but whatever.

White can shooter well enough.

[HomoSapien]

Meanwhile the Lakers who probably will trade the pick are posting all about their workout with Culver and others. Come on Bulls! This is a little frustrating.

Considering that we're picking #7, the lower end of the 2nd tier of prospects, I rather for us to keep our mouths shut and just execute from here on. We, as fans, can wait for the name announcement on draft day.

I'm not saying that I'm looking for the Bulls to leak who they love, but it's no secret that the Bulls will be considering a whole collection of guys and it's always fun to hear those players speak after a workout. Can't recall if we had a publicized meeting with Carter Jr. or not, but perhaps part of the reason we're not talking about it at all is because we are one of the teams who made a promise.

Looks like we did publicize the Carter workout: https://www.nba.com/bulls/gallery/draft-workout-wendell-carter-jr

[Chi town]

Agreed. This draft appears fairly deep but not in the lottery. If this option was available, I'd take this deal.

I would too if...
- I knew Brogdon is staying in MIL
- I could trade 20 or 22 for Conley with Felicio
- I'd look to trade one of the picks for a 1st in next year's draft too

We don't need a 32 year old Conley.

Conley can mentor Dunn or another younger backup or the PG we draft next summer in a much better PG crop.

Conley helps us win and grow the young core we have. He will also resign on the cheap in two years and would be a great backup.

[TheHrvReport]

Sorry if this was already posted, but promise to Coby White?

Read on Twitter

I supposed I’d be on board.

I think Garland is the better project, but whatever.

White can shooter well enough.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit with the Hutchison promise last year. They found a guy they liked early and basically stopped doing their due diligence on some of the other players.

I'm assuming they liked what they saw all year in White and wanted to interview him in person to confirm he was also a high character guy before promising him the pick. Which is surprising because if you listen to White speak, he doesn't seem like the most intelligent guy or a "Garpax type" of player, we'll see.

[Chi town]

If the Phoenix trade for Ball is true that'd make things interesting. If LA sticks with 4 and 6, then Garland will def be one of the picks.

So like a rumored chance of Phoenix trading out of draft.
SMALL chance LA can trade 4+6 to Pels. SMALLER chance that Pels want Colby over Garland?? (fit with Holiday?) Maybe also pair Hunter and Zion? (or maybe even reach on Hayes)

Cavs I read have main interest in Culver. Don't seem big players for Garland.

So 1- Zion (Pels) / 2 - Morant (Mem) / 3 - RJ (NY) / 4 - Hunter (Pels) / 5 - Culver (Cle) / 6 - White or Hayes (Pels) ... Bulls - Garland

So I'm saying there's a chance!

(Personally, I'm really liking Hunter. But Garland has a high high ceiling and if we drafted Garland and signed Rubio that'd be a really good situation for Garland to develop his PG skills)

Link for Ball PHX trade?

If PHX is dumb enough to do that then the Lakers will get AD and I can guarantee you that David Griffin would be taking Garland at one of those picks.

[Chi town]

Sorry if this was already posted, but promise to Coby White?

Read on Twitter

I supposed I’d be on board.

I think Garland is the better project, but whatever.

White can shooter well enough.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit with the Hutchison promise last year. They found a guy they liked early and basically stopped doing their due diligence on some of the other players.

I'm assuming they liked what they saw all year in White and wanted to interview him in person to confirm he was also a high character guy before promising him the pick. Which is surprising because if you listen to White speak, he doesn't seem like the most intelligent guy or a "Garpax type" of player, we'll see.

White fits the Pax profile. I personally would love to have a legit fro on our team.

As for fit and ceiling... lots of questions but White is only 19 and does have a lot of tools, size and quickness and speed going in his favor. If he can learn to pass and at least keep the ball moving he could be a great fit. If we get him I look to get Beverley to coach him on defense. Sam Smith has been saying Brogdon will be back in MIL for sure.

[tedwilliams1999]

Sorry if this was already posted, but promise to Coby White?

Read on Twitter

I supposed I’d be on board.

I think Garland is the better project, but whatever.

White can shooter well enough.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit with the Hutchison promise last year. They found a guy they liked early and basically stopped doing their due diligence on some of the other players.

I'm assuming they liked what they saw all year in White and wanted to interview him in person to confirm he was also a high character guy before promising him the pick. Which is surprising because if you listen to White speak, he doesn't seem like the most intelligent guy or a "Garpax type" of player, we'll see.

Kyler is generally wrong about everything, but I also wouldn't be surprised if this was true.

I don't think I've heard of anyone other than KC report that White was promised by some one earlier than the 7th pick.

[johnnyvann840]

Player A
18.6 PPG, 3.7 RBG, 5.7 APG, 25.3 PER, 43.2 FG%, 35.9 3ptFG%, 78.1 FT%, .573 TS%

Player B
16.1 PPG, 3.5 RBG, 4.1 APG, 19.2 PER, 42.3 FG%, 35.3 3ptFG%, 80.0 FT%, .556 TS%

Spoiler:

Player A is Cameron Payne in two seasons at Murray St.

Player B is Coby White in one season at UNC

Not saying they are the same player, at all, but I thought it was remarkable how close their shooting numbers are....... almost identical. Same with rebs and assists.



Oh, and they kind of had the same hair for a while until Payne cut his off. lol

[RastaBull]

If the Phoenix trade for Ball is true that'd make things interesting. If LA sticks with 4 and 6, then Garland will def be one of the picks.

So like a rumored chance of Phoenix trading out of draft.
SMALL chance LA can trade 4+6 to Pels. SMALLER chance that Pels want Colby over Garland?? (fit with Holiday?) Maybe also pair Hunter and Zion? (or maybe even reach on Hayes)

Cavs I read have main interest in Culver. Don't seem big players for Garland.

So 1- Zion (Pels) / 2 - Morant (Mem) / 3 - RJ (NY) / 4 - Hunter (Pels) / 5 - Culver (Cle) / 6 - White or Hayes (Pels) ... Bulls - Garland

So I'm saying there's a chance!

(Personally, I'm really liking Hunter. But Garland has a high high ceiling and if we drafted Garland and signed Rubio that'd be a really good situation for Garland to develop his PG skills)

Link for Ball PHX trade?

If PHX is dumb enough to do that then the Lakers will get AD and I can guarantee you that David Griffin would be taking Garland at one of those picks.

I saw this, and then someone on the board was referencing how Sarver has always been very very high on Lonzo (I'm guessing one of those situations like Gar's previous praise for Dunn at the time of the draft and later move for him).