2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[cjbulls]

Delon Wright and Portis both showed far more in 2 years than any of those Bulls.

I think we should target Delon Wright this year as he could immediately be our best guard.

Yeah you really would have turned this ship around with rookie Delon Wright in the roster this year plus 4 other non-nba players.

At least you recognize adding a vet delon wright makes more sense.

Wrong dumbass

I've wanted Delon Wright since his draft year.

Watch your language. Rookie Delon Wright does nothing to elevate this Bulls team. The point is to say what would happen with those types of rookie picks, as rookies, on this roster. Disaster and you wouldn't be able to tell who to keep and who to get rid of when you pulled the same move the next year.

[cjbulls]

Using #14,#20 and #22 for getting Little,Goga and Cameron Johnson would potentially get you better players than these you were listed and even in that group you could pick Wright which played very well coming from the bench for Toronto ( you certainly remember how many times he torched the Bulls in 2017) and obviously Dinwiddie.

In 2014, you would have said the same thing about adding Warren, Caboclo and Adams.

Probably yes and believing that it would be a good strategy,even failing at least I'd tried it.I like the idea of gambling looking for steals .But you won't see GarPax doing that anyway.Krause maybe did it if he found a potential star at the 2nd round but he was famous for his scouting abilities,some of his choices would work , others not but you could always expect some bold move from him.Garpax have been conservative about it so a trade down is unlikely to happen.

You act as if keeping the current picks and some of those young guys isn't trying. There's a much brighter history of #7 picks making it than 14, 20, 22, and 51.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-7/

[jump]

There is a reason why no NBA GM has ever made a move like this. Because it just doesn’t work. Look at Boston with all of its picks recently. Other than the early picks, how has it helped them? That many young players does turn you into a tank team, as was stated before.

[Jvaughn]

While I get the logic of acquiring multiple picks, how would this ever work? Teams have an 8-9 man rotation. They will have Zach, Lauri, Otto and WCJ plus two veterans, so that's six. Where are these 4 or five rookies going to play?

What happens with Arci, Hutch, Val, Dunn, Shaq?

This move has no regard for team building. Most players, outside of a select few like Zion, develop based on their environment. If the whole team consists of young players on first contracts, how are they going to win? How are they going to develop when they're the equivalent of a G League team with each individual trying to prove themself?

Out of those names, only Hutch should be a priority for the rotation, and that has more to do with the fact that he's still young and the organization is vested in his development.

Arci and Shaq are barely in the league and are very replaceable. Dunn doesn't seem to have a place here anymore and depending on how this off-season goes, he may not even be on the team anymore. Same goes for Val.

That being said, with four draft picks you can afford to bring in 2 or 3 rookies and then use the 2nd rounders for stash picks. There's plenty of options and I wouldn't turn down four draft picks if Boston would be willing to make that move.

The problem isn't that Arci, Shaq, Hutch, Val and Dunn are amazing players, but they are better players right now than whatever 3-5 rookies you are bringing in. How are Lauri or WCJ supposed to get better playing with a bunch of rookies who don't know the game?

Essentially this move is tanking, but instead of tanking with high picks, people now want to tank with a bunch of low picks.

Arci, Shaq, and Hutch weren't making players any better last year. They're fringe NBA players with limited skillsets. I'm one of Dunn's biggest fans but his talents aren't exactly winning us games now, so I don't see the difference. This team isn't winning anything next year outside of some surprise FA haul. May as well give ourselves multiple chances at hitting in the draft and see what happens.

[SfBull]

In 2014, you would have said the same thing about adding Warren, Caboclo and Adams.

Probably yes and believing that it would be a good strategy,even failing at least I'd tried it.I like the idea of gambling looking for steals .But you won't see GarPax doing that anyway.Krause maybe did it if he found a potential star at the 2nd round but he was famous for his scouting abilities,some of his choices would work , others not but you could always expect some bold move from him.Garpax have been conservative about it so a trade down is unlikely to happen.

You act as if keeping the current picks and some of those young guys isn't trying. There's a much brighter history of #7 picks making it than 14, 20, 22, and 51.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-7/

I'm not opposed on keeping #7 ,and if we could ,say,move Dunn and Val for late first rounders or even adding more 2nd rounders to our #38 and keep the #7 it would fine for me.But we never see nobody moving for trading for Dunn and Val so the most likely trading down scenario for us would include #7 for late picks.I can't say it would work but I'd try it if I have a chance.I 'm really done with Dunn and Val.Arci,Shaq and Hutch are role players that you can keep or not depending on what you get from draft and free agency.But I'm on the pessimistic extreme here,I'm not even sold on the idea of Zach,Lauri and WCJ having star ceiling .It's an extremely unpopular view here but believe me,I watched all Bulls games that I could during this rebuilding.I really don't have any enthusiasm for this roster developing into contenders without massive improvement and would jump on any chance of improve them. But I'll always admit my views being biased by my pessimism .

[kodo]

New SI Big Board is out. Interesting only because it strays a little form the usual order. This is the same guy who had an article saying why he didn't think Hunter and Clarke would go as high as people think.

https://www.si.com/nba/2019/nba-draft-big-board-top-100-player-rankings

...

Woo does a solid job in the top 10 for any mock draft writer not named givony.

What's interesting to me is that last draft he was talking about high ceiling guys all the way down to #7.
But in 2019 he talks about the rationale for drafting a certain player being good they'll likely be good roleplayers starting at #3 with Culver, and also applying to RJ and everyone below. At #8, he picks Goga because he has a chance of just "staying on the floor" in the NBA.

Overall, Woo seems to be another writer who is in the camp that this is a terrible draft.

[cjbulls]

Out of those names, only Hutch should be a priority for the rotation, and that has more to do with the fact that he's still young and the organization is vested in his development.

Arci and Shaq are barely in the league and are very replaceable. Dunn doesn't seem to have a place here anymore and depending on how this off-season goes, he may not even be on the team anymore. Same goes for Val.

That being said, with four draft picks you can afford to bring in 2 or 3 rookies and then use the 2nd rounders for stash picks. There's plenty of options and I wouldn't turn down four draft picks if Boston would be willing to make that move.

The problem isn't that Arci, Shaq, Hutch, Val and Dunn are amazing players, but they are better players right now than whatever 3-5 rookies you are bringing in. How are Lauri or WCJ supposed to get better playing with a bunch of rookies who don't know the game?

Essentially this move is tanking, but instead of tanking with high picks, people now want to tank with a bunch of low picks.

Arci, Shaq, and Hutch weren't making players any better last year. They're fringe NBA players with limited skillsets. I'm one of Dunn's biggest fans but his talents aren't exactly winning us games now, so I don't see the difference. This team isn't winning anything next year outside of some surprise FA haul. May as well give ourselves multiple chances at hitting in the draft and see what happens.

You can't hit when you draft them all, that's the point. They all get in each other's way. There's a reason why the Suns and Kings are perpetually bad, yet the Bucks, Spurs, Nuggets, Warriors and Jazz were able to develop star talent from later in the draft. They all mixed vets with a few young players during development.

[Jvaughn]

The problem isn't that Arci, Shaq, Hutch, Val and Dunn are amazing players, but they are better players right now than whatever 3-5 rookies you are bringing in. How are Lauri or WCJ supposed to get better playing with a bunch of rookies who don't know the game?

Essentially this move is tanking, but instead of tanking with high picks, people now want to tank with a bunch of low picks.

Arci, Shaq, and Hutch weren't making players any better last year. They're fringe NBA players with limited skillsets. I'm one of Dunn's biggest fans but his talents aren't exactly winning us games now, so I don't see the difference. This team isn't winning anything next year outside of some surprise FA haul. May as well give ourselves multiple chances at hitting in the draft and see what happens.

You can't hit when you draft them all, that's the point. They all get in each other's way. There's a reason why the Suns and Kings are perpetually bad, yet the Bucks, Spurs, Nuggets, Warriors and Jazz were able to develop star talent from later in the draft. They all mixed vets with a few young players during development.

As I mentioned earlier, you can use some of those picks to stash players. Kind of like the Spurs have been doing for years.

The reason the Kings and the Suns are perpetually bad is because they're awful at scouting talent and much like us, they don't attract top tier FAs. While I hate GarPax, I have way more faith in them hitting in the draft than I do with PHX and SAC.

For vets (as part of our core) right now we basically have Otto and to a lesser extent Zach. You can still go out and get some vet leadership in FA. We have more than enough money for that.

And as it was mentioned earlier, if you can pick up 2-3 players like NAW (who I value higher than White), Little, Bol, Hayes, Langford, Porter, or Gafford in the first, I'd make that deal 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

[BigUps]

Watched some tape and did some research on Bruno Fernando. There is a ton to like about that kid. Big, strong, fast, has a great motor and is projected to have a solid NBA 3 point shot. He's going to be a nice role player in the NBA. He shouldn't be considered at 7, but if you're someone who wants to trade down then he's absolutely in consideration for that scenario. I could see him taken anywhere from 10-25. We'll see if a team falls in love with him.

[cjbulls]

Arci, Shaq, and Hutch weren't making players any better last year. They're fringe NBA players with limited skillsets. I'm one of Dunn's biggest fans but his talents aren't exactly winning us games now, so I don't see the difference. This team isn't winning anything next year outside of some surprise FA haul. May as well give ourselves multiple chances at hitting in the draft and see what happens.

You can't hit when you draft them all, that's the point. They all get in each other's way. There's a reason why the Suns and Kings are perpetually bad, yet the Bucks, Spurs, Nuggets, Warriors and Jazz were able to develop star talent from later in the draft. They all mixed vets with a few young players during development.

As I mentioned earlier, you can use some of those picks to stash players. Kind of like the Spurs have been doing for years.

The reason the Kings and the Suns are perpetually bad is because they're awful at scouting talent and much like us, they don't attract top tier FAs. While I hate GarPax, I have way more faith in them hitting in the draft than I do with PHX and SAC.

For vets (as part of our core) right now we basically have Otto and to a lesser extent Zach. You can still go out and get some vet leadership in FA. We have more than enough money for that.

And as it was mentioned earlier, if you can pick up 2-3 players like NAW (who I value higher than White), Little, Bol, Hayes, Langford, Porter, or Gafford in the first, I'd make that deal 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

You hit on the fallacy of the draft. Everyone gets overhyped because they never played an nba game. For starters, this is a weaker than normal draft. Here is the history of 14, 20 and 22. It’s not pretty. Combined, just going back to 2000, there are ZERO all-star appearances. The vast majority weren’t even nba starters.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-14/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-20/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-22/

[RedBulls23]

Wrong dumbass

I've wanted Delon Wright since his draft year.

You've been on this board long enough to know that name calling is not allowed. Please behave like an adult and leave the name calling out of it.

[Jvaughn]

You can't hit when you draft them all, that's the point. They all get in each other's way. There's a reason why the Suns and Kings are perpetually bad, yet the Bucks, Spurs, Nuggets, Warriors and Jazz were able to develop star talent from later in the draft. They all mixed vets with a few young players during development.

As I mentioned earlier, you can use some of those picks to stash players. Kind of like the Spurs have been doing for years.

The reason the Kings and the Suns are perpetually bad is because they're awful at scouting talent and much like us, they don't attract top tier FAs. While I hate GarPax, I have way more faith in them hitting in the draft than I do with PHX and SAC.

For vets (as part of our core) right now we basically have Otto and to a lesser extent Zach. You can still go out and get some vet leadership in FA. We have more than enough money for that.

And as it was mentioned earlier, if you can pick up 2-3 players like NAW (who I value higher than White), Little, Bol, Hayes, Langford, Porter, or Gafford in the first, I'd make that deal 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

You hit on the fallacy of the draft. Everyone gets overhyped because they never played an nba game. For starters, this is a weaker than normal draft. Here is the history of 14, 20 and 22. It’s not pretty. Combined, just going back to 2000, there are ZERO all-star appearances. The vast majority weren’t even nba starters.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-14/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-20/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-22/

Going back to 2000 in every draft there have been productive pros and all-star level players picked after 14. Just because they weren't picked at 14 doesn't mean there wasn't talent there.

Most agree that after the first few picks there's a huge dropoff, and honestly I don't see much difference in the talent level in this draft from pick 7-25. And if you can get a handful of players of that level for the same price, why not.

[cjbulls]

As I mentioned earlier, you can use some of those picks to stash players. Kind of like the Spurs have been doing for years.

The reason the Kings and the Suns are perpetually bad is because they're awful at scouting talent and much like us, they don't attract top tier FAs. While I hate GarPax, I have way more faith in them hitting in the draft than I do with PHX and SAC.

For vets (as part of our core) right now we basically have Otto and to a lesser extent Zach. You can still go out and get some vet leadership in FA. We have more than enough money for that.

And as it was mentioned earlier, if you can pick up 2-3 players like NAW (who I value higher than White), Little, Bol, Hayes, Langford, Porter, or Gafford in the first, I'd make that deal 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

You hit on the fallacy of the draft. Everyone gets overhyped because they never played an nba game. For starters, this is a weaker than normal draft. Here is the history of 14, 20 and 22. It’s not pretty. Combined, just going back to 2000, there are ZERO all-star appearances. The vast majority weren’t even nba starters.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-14/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-20/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-22/

Going back to 2000 in every draft there have been productive pros and all-star level players picked after 14. Just because they weren't picked at 14 doesn't mean there wasn't talent there.

Most agree that after the first few picks there's a huge dropoff, and honestly I don't see much difference in the talent level in this draft from pick 7-25. And if you can get a handful of players of that level for the same price, why not.

It's nearly universally agreed that up to pick 7 or 8, there is a tier. Bulls pick 7.

[Darius Miles Davis]

I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who does the best draft prospect analysis is Cole Zwicker of thestepien.com and frequent guest of the Game Theory podcast. I believe his top 3 last year were Luka, Trae, and JJJ in that order, which seems spot on. He’s participating in a top 30 big board 3-part podcast series on Game Theory, and they’ve only done 30-21 in reverse order so far. I’m very curious what he says about the players in our range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Hangtime84]

I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who does the best draft prospect analysis is Cole Zwicker of thestepien.com and frequent guest of the Game Theory podcast. I believe his top 3 last year were Luka, Trae, and JJJ in that order, which seems spot on. He’s participating in a top 30 big board 3-part podcast series on Game Theory, and they’ve only done 30-21 in reverse order so far. I’m very curious what he says about the players in our range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Getting hits like that right good exposure for ESPN to take him.

[Leslie Forman]

I just have a really, really strong feeling that this draft will be one of those where everybody looks back on it and says "man we got almost everything wrong on that one."

[Red8911]

I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who does the best draft prospect analysis is Cole Zwicker of thestepien.com and frequent guest of the Game Theory podcast. I believe his top 3 last year were Luka, Trae, and JJJ in that order, which seems spot on. He’s participating in a top 30 big board 3-part podcast series on Game Theory, and they’ve only done 30-21 in reverse order so far. I’m very curious what he says about the players in our range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ayton and Bagley I thought were better than JJJ at least for their rookie seasons.

[Hangtime84]

I just have a really, really strong feeling that this draft will be one of those where everybody looks back on it and says "man we got almost everything wrong on that one."

Yeah reasonable ceiling players will probably out perform the rest.

[Jvaughn]

You hit on the fallacy of the draft. Everyone gets overhyped because they never played an nba game. For starters, this is a weaker than normal draft. Here is the history of 14, 20 and 22. It’s not pretty. Combined, just going back to 2000, there are ZERO all-star appearances. The vast majority weren’t even nba starters.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-14/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-20/

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/history-of-the-nba-draft-by-pick/history-of-the-nba-draft-pick-number-22/

Going back to 2000 in every draft there have been productive pros and all-star level players picked after 14. Just because they weren't picked at 14 doesn't mean there wasn't talent there.

Most agree that after the first few picks there's a huge dropoff, and honestly I don't see much difference in the talent level in this draft from pick 7-25. And if you can get a handful of players of that level for the same price, why not.

It's nearly universally agreed that up to pick 7 or 8, there is a tier. Bulls pick 7.

You think there's a large talent gap between Coby White and Romeo Langford/NAW?

[Darius Miles Davis]

I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who does the best draft prospect analysis is Cole Zwicker of thestepien.com and frequent guest of the Game Theory podcast. I believe his top 3 last year were Luka, Trae, and JJJ in that order, which seems spot on. He’s participating in a top 30 big board 3-part podcast series on Game Theory, and they’ve only done 30-21 in reverse order so far. I’m very curious what he says about the players in our range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ayton and Bagley I thought were better than JJJ at least for their rookie seasons.

I think all three of Luke, Trae, and JJJ project better than Ayton or Bagley. Ayton remains a complete an utter mess on defense, which impacts a team far more than a pg like Trae. JJJ showed elite potential on D and was far better on offense than expected. Bagley came on at the end of the year, but I still don't see enough skills. He's a high level hustle guy right now. But he doesn't show the "I'll run your offense" skills like Luka or Trae or the DPOY potential of JJJ.

Ayton's potential remains otherworldly, but with his horrid defense, he's not conducive to winning yet.