Camden wrote:Utah's not trading Favors for a pick outside the top-five.
....and we're likely drafting within the top 5. If Okafor and Russell are off the board, I'd listen carefully to a Favors deal.
(by the way, this is obviously hypothetical fantasyland that was prompted by Carlos asking if any of us would be willing to trade the pick for a vet. Favors is a guy I'd have to think about it).
Camden wrote:Utah's not trading Favors for a pick outside the top-five.
None of us know where we'll pick yet. But, what I'm seeing is that I'm not the only one who would be open to trading our pick for the right deal. One thing about the NBA....players seem to move around a lot. I'm sure there will be guys available. And I think there is a decent chance Flip makes a deal for the pick. Let's not forget our last two shots at picking in the top 5 we pulled Derrick Williams and Wes Johnson. Ugh.
And those last times picking in the top-five we had a dumbass for a GM. I give Kahn a pass for drafting D-Will because after Kyrie the class seemed weak, but passing on Cousins was absurd at the time and even more absurd now.
Flip's at the helm now. Why do we (the board, not me) continue to use Kahn's mistakes against Flip? Makes zero sense.
I'm not blaming anybody. DWill and Wes Johnson were both "safe" picks at the time (Cousins had flags). We can debate that, but that's been done a million times over by now. My point is simply that you can't go into the draft and automatically assume you'll get a good player. You might end up with crap. That's just the way it is - no matter where you get to pick. Because of that, I personally would not be upset if they deal their pick for a player or players that are established. We could all come up with a bunch of names/possibilities, but it's all speculation at this point. I was just curious how many people would be in the "bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" camps assuming a suitable trade could be struck for our pick. The fact that Flip already gave up a 1st to get Thad Young tells me that he might value a vet over more youth at this point. Who knows. Anyway - that's all I was driving at.
Unless 1 prospect is head and shoulders better than the rest when we pick they should go for a PF. I've never been a fan of just going BPA and ignoring everything else. BPA only works to a point before you have to start factoring in need. I agree with Cam that we are good at guard. Center is good depending on what happens at PF b/c we've seen Dieng look decent at PF so far. I personally want to see a PF/C.
TheGrey08 wrote:Unless 1 prospect is head and shoulders better than the rest when we pick they should go for a PF. I've never been a fan of just going BPA and ignoring everything else. BPA only works to a point before you have to start factoring in need. I agree with Cam that we are good at guard. Center is good depending on what happens at PF b/c we've seen Dieng look decent at PF so far. I personally want to see a PF/C.
I totally disagree with this Grey. When you are 8-39, you are not set at any position. I know you will claim injuries are to blame, but injuries tend to be repetitive. We can't assume good health after what we've been through. If we keep the pick, we need to take the top player on our board at the time of the pick. Even if that is Mudiay. You never win a title with a starting 5 anyway.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:
I totally disagree with this Grey. When you are 8-39, you are not set at any position. I know you will claim injuries are to blame, but injuries tend to be repetitive. We can't assume good health after what we've been through. If we keep the pick, we need to take the top player on our board at the time of the pick. Even if that is Mudiay. You never win a title with a starting 5 anyway.
IMO taking someone at PG or SG would be utterly stupid UNLESS they are far and away the best player on the board. That's the key. If you have 3 guys who are very very close, take the one that fits best and has the better chance of being the best of the bunch for your team.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:
I totally disagree with this Grey. When you are 8-39, you are not set at any position. I know you will claim injuries are to blame, but injuries tend to be repetitive. We can't assume good health after what we've been through. If we keep the pick, we need to take the top player on our board at the time of the pick. Even if that is Mudiay. You never win a title with a starting 5 anyway.
IMO taking someone at PG or SG would be utterly stupid UNLESS they are far and away the best player on the board. That's the key. If you have 3 guys who are very very close, take the one that fits best and has the better chance of being the best of the bunch.
I suppose if they really are that close you would have to consider need. But we need everything, We don't have a backup point guard. We play D league level players at the wings during games. We obviously need a power forward. And who can count on Pek to stay healthy. Tell me what we don't need.
Camden wrote:Fill the starting lineup up with best talent possible, then work on the bench. My opinion.
When you draft as high as we will be, you never know what you're going to get. If he's good enough, he will play no matter what. I think it's ridiculous for an 8-39 team to pick for need. It sounds silly just writing it.
