Official #2 Pick Thread - Ford #7: Parker

[drew881]

On the other hand, why are we always so quick to bash posters from other boards? This guy is not trolling us, is giving us links to local Philly papers, and is giving us a fuller picture from other media which we do not read. That to me is better than someone telling me for the umpteenth time that they like Embiid over Parker and Wiggins. Why do we always have to assume everyone has an agenda when their ideas don't agree with ours?

[Mr Anonymous]

What are you trying to accomplish in this thread?

It's almost as though he's convinced that if he gets us to believe that there's no way Philly would use #10 to move up, then it will diminish the real life chances of it happening. I wouldn't even say it's likely Philly does it, but it surely can't be ruled out. He should go beboppin and scattin back to the Philly board (where he'll get a much more receptive audience) and sell it's impossibility to them.

Yes - yes it can be ruled out.

I'm so embarrassed, this entire time I didn't realize I was going back and forth with the 76ers GM.

[craig]

Exum has a chance of being just as good of any pick in the draft just because of his size and his athletic ability.

Yup. The board has analyzed what's wrong with Parker and with Wiggins. Perhaps Exum has more problems that haven't had forum to be exposed yet.

But's possible he'll be the biggest, most well-rounded superstar of the three. With his quickness and length, he might become a terrific defender, keeping opposing ball-handlers out of the lane and with his long arms really obstructing the passing lanes and the outside shot. Offensively, his shot looks nice but with work/practice could be improved in terms of accuracy and release time. With his combo of size and quickness, defenders may need to pick their poison, between giving some space so they don't drive past but playing tight enough so that he can't jump-shoot over them. His driving quickness and shooting could both make him a great scorer, but also provide the opportunity to be a great creator. AS a ball-handler he'll have great opportunities to make plays. In his interviews he impressed as being very smart, composed, and with perhaps outstanding leadership qualities. Having your best player running the offense and running the team makes good sense. He may end up as the perfect playmaker/creator on offense, a super defender, and a great teammate/chemistry guy. Who knows.

Most likely once he's playing vs NBA talent, we'll find that his D isn't that great, and quick points and strong shooting guards both give him trouble; and that his shooting really isn't that great either, that he's not that great as a ball-handler/distributor, and that he's got as many flaws each way as either Parker or Wiggins have one way. But, given how little he's played against competition, it's hypothetically possible that he'll be more flawless than either Parker or Wiggins.

[Aaron It Out]

On the other hand, why are we always so quick to bash posters from other boards? This guy is not trolling us, is giving us links to local Philly papers, and is giving us a fuller picture from other media which we do not read. That to me is better than someone telling me for the umpteenth time that they like Embiid over Parker and Wiggins. Why do we always have to assume everyone has an agenda when their ideas don't agree with ours?

I thought it was hilarious when everyone here was basically calling a poster dumb for not wanting to trade #3+10 for #2. On the flip side if we were in the position with 3+10 we would be furious if a member from a different board suggest we package both for 2. Makes no sense.

[MrPerfect1]

^^^^^You only do it if you see little difference in Wiggins and Parker, since you may end up with Parker if you trade w/Philly. But then you've bluffed Philly out of pick 10.

What in Sam Hinkie's background or history (either last year with the Sixers or before that with Houston) leads you to believe that there is ANY shot that he will give up the numbe 10 pick in this draft to move up one slot? Was it the deal he did last summer with the Pelicans that tells you that he is an idiot?

Have you watched NBA drafts before? O_o Moving up 1 spot at the top is often highly, highly important(from 3 to 2, 2 to 1). Contrastingly, odds are that the player selected will never reach a Brandon Jennings level of Play. For comparison, here are the last 10 #10 Picks:


2013-CJ McCollum
2012-Austin Rivers
2011-Jimmer Fredette
2010-Paul George
2009-Brandon Jennings
2008-Brook Lopez
2007-Spencer Hawes
2006-Mohamed Saer Sene
2005-Andrew Bynum
2004-Luke Jackson

Only 2 players on that list have been better than Jennings. Yes, there is a tiny chance a Paul George type could slip to you. However, most likely this pick ends up as a bench player longterm or a below average starter. Not giving up #10 to get a player you covet would be like a team backing out of a Kevin Love Deal because MIN wants Middleton included.

[raferfenix]

It looks like Carmelo Anthony very well might be on the move...provided Chicago or Houston can clear enough cap space to make it so:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--c ... 06919.html

This could really shake up draft day considering the Bulls might trade Taj Gibson for a pick while the Rockets have to drop the salaries of Asik and Jeremy Linn.

Unfortunately I could see all this coming into play with potential Lakers or Kings trades for the #7 or #8 picks.

[Aaron It Out]

I see enough damn good players on that list and knowing how deep this draft is I wouldn't give up 10 to move up 1 spot when I'm going to get likely a stud with my pick already.

I realize we really want the Sixers to trade us 10 to move up but can we stop acting like they wouldn't be dumb to do so?

[MiltownHawkeye]

On the other hand, why are we always so quick to bash posters from other boards? This guy is not trolling us, is giving us links to local Philly papers, and is giving us a fuller picture from other media which we do not read. That to me is better than someone telling me for the umpteenth time that they like Embiid over Parker and Wiggins. Why do we always have to assume everyone has an agenda when their ideas don't agree with ours?

I'm not bashing him, but when you're on another board and you're replying to every innocuous comment you disagree with with snark or hostility I just don't see the point.

[JayMKE]

I think it the whole trading back and getting #10 is a pipe dream and has been talked about to excess really. I'd be shocked if Philly trades up, they need both picks. Philly basically fielded a d-league team last year and it pretty much took an act of God to out-tank them. The gamble of them getting Parker or Embiid while hoping for Wiggins PLUS #10 is well worth it, why would they ever trade up? Way more upside for them to stay where they're at.

I'm pretty resigned to the fact that we'll be picking #2 and that we likely won't trade for another pick. Whatever, I'll be happy as long as we get one of Parker/Embiid/Wiggins. We have a good track record on 2nd round picks too so I'm hoping Hammond can find some gems.

[MrPerfect1]

I see enough damn good players on that list and knowing how deep this draft is I wouldn't give up 10 to move up 1 spot when I'm going to get likely a stud with my pick already.

I realize we really want the Sixers to trade us 10 to move up but can we stop acting like they wouldn't be dumb to do so?

You realize you are wrong then in that a good majority of us think it would be an Awful trade for us to drop a spot to pick up likely a marginal starter/bench player.

This draft is considered Deep not because it has Stars through spot 10 but because picks 10-20 or so are seen as basically equal.

[Wise1]

Smart over Wiggins is crazy.

We'll certainly see.

[buckboy]

I for one have Smart over Exum. I have him over Wiggins as well for that matter. If I'm Philly, it's Smart or Exum for me.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400498367

And that was against 3' tall guards.

[Aaron It Out]

I see enough damn good players on that list and knowing how deep this draft is I wouldn't give up 10 to move up 1 spot when I'm going to get likely a stud with my pick already.

I realize we really want the Sixers to trade us 10 to move up but can we stop acting like they wouldn't be dumb to do so?

You realize you are wrong then in that a good majority of us think it would be an Awful trade for us to drop a spot to pick up likely a marginal starter/bench player.

This draft is considered Deep not because it has Stars through spot 10 but because picks 10-20 or so are seen as basically equal.

So the players around the #10 spot aren't any better prospects than those available at #18. Got it. Again, if you have convinced yourself that either Wiggins or Parker is going to be that much better than the other then you are trying too hard to play NBA scout.

I also didn't see the poll where the majority of the board decided it would be a good idea to trade 2 lottery picks to move up 1 spot. Maybe I could be directed to that.

[MrPerfect1]

I see enough damn good players on that list and knowing how deep this draft is I wouldn't give up 10 to move up 1 spot when I'm going to get likely a stud with my pick already.

I realize we really want the Sixers to trade us 10 to move up but can we stop acting like they wouldn't be dumb to do so?

You realize you are wrong then in that a good majority of us think it would be an Awful trade for us to drop a spot to pick up likely a marginal starter/bench player.

This draft is considered Deep not because it has Stars through spot 10 but because picks 10-20 or so are seen as basically equal.

So the players around the #10 spot aren't any better prospects than those available at #18. Got it. Again, if you have convinced yourself that either Wiggins or Parker is going to be that much better than the other then you are trying too hard to play NBA scout.

I also didn't see the poll where the majority of the board decided it would be a good idea to trade 2 lottery picks to move up 1 spot. Maybe I could be directed to that.

-If you consult Tier rankings for this draft for example, you will generally see that you are selecting from the same tier with either pick. Within a tier, 1 may be marginally better of a prospect, but overall are pretty similar. For an easy example I will use the NFL. The #8 pick in the 4th Round may be a marginally better prospect than the #17 pick in the 4th Round but basically they are the same tier of prospect and more differentiated by team need.

-The odds are quite good that between Parker and Wiggins 1 ends up being significantly better than the other. It would be more surprising if 5 years from now people are still debating who is better because it i not obvious by then

-There are lots of threads where people direct their individual comments. I can provide you threads but you would have to click on hundreds of pages and thousands of posts to read them.

[JayMKE]

I for one have Smart over Exum. I have him over Wiggins as well for that matter. If I'm Philly, it's Smart or Exum for me.

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400498367

And that was against 3' tall guards.

The agenda driven idiocy of some on this board is astounding, one bad game is so relevant to proving why the player they don't like sucks but they don't have the self awareness of knowing that the player they like laid some pretty big turds as well. Single games mean pretty much jack squat and there is no consistency with you guys that do this either.

[Aaron It Out]

Using the NFL as an example makes no sense because in the NBA you don't have the luxury of picking 7 other players when you drop back. There is way less room for margin of error. Apples to oranges.

Yes, I agree that one is likely to be better than the other. But by trading 10 you are essentially giving up the opportunity to draft a Paul George, Brook Lopez, or Andrew Bynum on top of your stud at 3 for nothing more than a bet. It's stupid.

You don't need to provide me with threads because unfortunately I read them all. I see a lot of Bucks fans who are so dead set that their guy is the best and everyone else is a bust that they aren't using logic.

[MrPerfect1]

Using the NFL as an example makes no sense because in the NBA you don't have the luxury of picking 7 other players when you drop back. There is way less room for margin of error. Apples to oranges.

Yes, I agree that one is likely to be better than the other. But by trading 10 you are essentially giving up the opportunity to draft a Paul George, Brook Lopez, or Andrew Bynum on top of your stud at 3 for nothing more than a bet. It's stupid.

You don't need to provide me with threads because unfortunately I read them all. I see a lot of Bucks fans who are so dead set that their guy is the best and everyone else is a bust that they aren't using logic.

-I wasn't using the NFL in regards to dropping back, I was using the NFL analogy about the quality of player of what one would suspect in that range. A #10 overall pick I equate to a 4th or so Round Value in the NFL Draft. In both those spots, you are realistically hoping for either a soso starter or a decent role player. Going into a Packers draft, a 4th Round Pick is nice but far from an untouchable treasure, that is how a #10 pick in an NBA Draft should be viewed.

-I disagree with that logic. Saying it is stupid to give up an extra opportunity for star is pretty odd. I suspect MIA would have loved to give up another chance/pick to draft Rose over Beasley, or CHA for Davis over MKG. Even in football, I bet most teams in a heartbeat would have given up Griffin + a 4th Round pick (even though it could become Tom Brady or Bart Starr) to draft Luck even though Griffin was a super prospect too.

I assume you regard all 3 top prospects as basically exactly the same quality in regards to prospects? That seems to be the only way that giving up a likely middling player to move up does not make sense.

-Most seem to have Embiid as the Clear #1 if that is what you are referring to. Most debate I see comes if Embiid is not on the board.

[SupremeHustle]

Momma, there goes that man again!

Zach LaVine in case you can't tell.

[giraldo5]

http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400498367

And that was against 3' tall guards.

The agenda driven idiocy of some on this board is astounding, one bad game is so relevant to proving why the player they don't like sucks but they don't have the self awareness of knowing that the player they like laid some pretty big turds as well. Single games mean pretty much jack squat and there is no consistency with you guys that do this either.

The post went way over your head apparently. Or you just didn't read the thread where Wise discounted Wiggins 39 pt game vs West Virginia because there midget Defenders were so bad that even Wise1 "could put up 40 vs them". Yet his guy laid an egg vs them.

[giraldo5]

Wiggins or Exum please.