Draft Day GDT

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

icky/Russel/Edwards/Culver/Okogie/J Mac. You got 96 minutes for 6 players at their best positions. Could you play some of them at the 3? Maybe, but you are creating a mismatch for the other team just as much as you are trying to create one playing with 3 guards on the floor at a time. It will work some of the time and probably get torched just as much as well. Even if you just played that group exclusively 1-3 while ignoring the rest of the roster, some guys would be missing out on minutes

Ricky will play the 1
Russell will combo 1-2
Culver/Okogie/Edwards will all rotate on the wings (the NBA is going smaller, positionless basketball is becoming the norm, and I am pretty sure Okogie's numbers are actually better at SF than SG)
That leaves JMac. He'll be end of bench, and cheap. Not the worst thing in the world and gives us good depth.

I agree our frontcourt is a problem outside of KAT. I'm assuming that either they have confidence in someone stepping up such as Vanderbuilt, or they will make a trade involving either Okogie or Culver. If there's one thing we should have learned by now, it's that Rosas probably understands we need to reshape the roster further, and to my knowledge, he didn't say this is our opening day roster yet.

"The league is getting smaller"...and yet the starting 3's in the Western Conference are:

Wiggins 6'7
Paul George 6'9
Lebron James 6'9
Cam Johnson 6'8
Harrison Barnes 6'8
Michael Porter Jr 6'10
Oubre 6'7
Ariza or Melo 6'8
Bogdanovic 6'8
Finney-Smith 6'7
House 6'6
Anderson 6'9 or Clarke at 6'8
Ingram 6'7
Gay 6'8

and us...Culver 6'6, Okogie 6'4 or Edwards at 6'5.

The "position-less" guys are more of these 6'7, 6'8, 6'9 forwards playing multiple positions than guys like our 6'4, 6'5, 6'6 guards. The league isn't full of a bunch of 6'4, 6'5 guys playing up a weight class. It's full of bigger, stronger and in some cases even faster guys who fill that role and we just don't have that guy on the team.

[mrhockey89]

Ricky will play the 1
Russell will combo 1-2
Culver/Okogie/Edwards will all rotate on the wings (the NBA is going smaller, positionless basketball is becoming the norm, and I am pretty sure Okogie's numbers are actually better at SF than SG)
That leaves JMac. He'll be end of bench, and cheap. Not the worst thing in the world and gives us good depth.

I'm actually pretty worried that J-Mac won't be retained, and that would be a misstep by this front office. He could easily be an MLE target by some of these playoff teams needing a moderate usage bench PG. I've already seen members of the media link the Lakers to him to replace Rondo.

I liked JMac, especially at his price, but if the Wolves take a step forward with or without him, he isn't going to be the reason. I wouldn't lose too much sleep.

[Lipoli390]

icky/Russel/Edwards/Culver/Okogie/J Mac. You got 96 minutes for 6 players at their best positions. Could you play some of them at the 3? Maybe, but you are creating a mismatch for the other team just as much as you are trying to create one playing with 3 guards on the floor at a time. It will work some of the time and probably get torched just as much as well. Even if you just played that group exclusively 1-3 while ignoring the rest of the roster, some guys would be missing out on minutes

Ricky will play the 1
Russell will combo 1-2
Culver/Okogie/Edwards will all rotate on the wings (the NBA is going smaller, positionless basketball is becoming the norm, and I am pretty sure Okogie's numbers are actually better at SF than SG)
That leaves JMac. He'll be end of bench, and cheap. Not the worst thing in the world and gives us good depth.

I agree our frontcourt is a problem outside of KAT. I'm assuming that either they have confidence in someone stepping up such as Vanderbuilt, or they will make a trade involving either Okogie or Culver. If there's one thing we should have learned by now, it's that Rosas probably understands we need to reshape the roster further, and to my knowledge, he didn't say this is our opening day roster yet.

"The league is getting smaller"...and yet the starting 3's in the Western Conference are:

Wiggins 6'7
Paul George 6'9
Lebron James 6'9
Cam Johnson 6'8
Harrison Barnes 6'8
Michael Porter Jr 6'10
Oubre 6'7
Ariza or Melo 6'8
Bogdanovic 6'8
Finney-Smith 6'7
House 6'6
Anderson 6'9 or Clarke at 6'8
Ingram 6'7
Gay 6'8

and us...Culver 6'6, Okogie 6'4 or Edwards at 6'5.

The "position-less" guys are more of these 6'7, 6'8, 6'9 forwards playing multiple positions than guys like our 6'4, 6'5, 6'6 guards. The league isn't full of a bunch of 6'4, 6'5 guys playing up a weight class. It's full of bigger, stronger and in some cases even faster guys who fill that role and we just don't have that guy on the team.

I agree Kahns. I'll add that winning teams are filled with mentally tough, highly competitive players. Those aren't words anyone would use to describe Edwards or McDaniels. While Edwards seems to have the ability to play bigger, he failed to show any sign of doing so, instead settling for hotly contested perimeter jumpers on the offensive end and generally showing indifference on the defensive side of the ball. I don't know what to say about McDaniels. I just see him as an eventual train wreck. In addition to a penchant for disappearing in games, both Edwards and McDaniels share the distinction of barely hitting only 40% of their field goal attempts.

Edwards strikes me as a nice, fun-loving guy who relishes the thought of spiking the ball and doing an end-zone dance after a touchdown. Actually, that's how he strikes me because that's what he said. :) McDaniels strikes me as a mercurial guy who checks out as much as he checks in. I think he'll be out of the League in two years. Edwards still has a chance because he is so gifted and seems to be a solid person. So let's hope there's a switch in Edwards that gets turned on and stays on. Who are the veterans on this team who are going to push him to flip that switch? Towns? Russell? Then again, usually at young player either has it in him or he doesn't and no external force will make a difference.

Maybe Balmaro is the next Manu.

[mrhockey89]

icky/Russel/Edwards/Culver/Okogie/J Mac. You got 96 minutes for 6 players at their best positions. Could you play some of them at the 3? Maybe, but you are creating a mismatch for the other team just as much as you are trying to create one playing with 3 guards on the floor at a time. It will work some of the time and probably get torched just as much as well. Even if you just played that group exclusively 1-3 while ignoring the rest of the roster, some guys would be missing out on minutes

Ricky will play the 1
Russell will combo 1-2
Culver/Okogie/Edwards will all rotate on the wings (the NBA is going smaller, positionless basketball is becoming the norm, and I am pretty sure Okogie's numbers are actually better at SF than SG)
That leaves JMac. He'll be end of bench, and cheap. Not the worst thing in the world and gives us good depth.

I agree our frontcourt is a problem outside of KAT. I'm assuming that either they have confidence in someone stepping up such as Vanderbuilt, or they will make a trade involving either Okogie or Culver. If there's one thing we should have learned by now, it's that Rosas probably understands we need to reshape the roster further, and to my knowledge, he didn't say this is our opening day roster yet.

"The league is getting smaller"...and yet the starting 3's in the Western Conference are:

Wiggins 6'7
Paul George 6'9
Lebron James 6'9
Cam Johnson 6'8
Harrison Barnes 6'8
Michael Porter Jr 6'10
Oubre 6'7
Ariza or Melo 6'8
Bogdanovic 6'8
Finney-Smith 6'7
House 6'6
Anderson 6'9 or Clarke at 6'8
Ingram 6'7
Gay 6'8

and us...Culver 6'6, Okogie 6'4 or Edwards at 6'5.

The "position-less" guys are more of these 6'7, 6'8, 6'9 forwards playing multiple positions than guys like our 6'4, 6'5, 6'6 guards. The league isn't full of a bunch of 6'4, 6'5 guys playing up a weight class. It's full of bigger, stronger and in some cases even faster guys who fill that role and we just don't have that guy on the team.

The Rockets actually traded their 1 true player with size and were starting a 6'3" SF (Eric Gordon) with only 1 guy in their starting lineup over 6'6". You could argue it didn't work and that's fine, but the point is that there was also a time when fast-paced 3 point shooting dominant teams were said to be good for regular season wins but bad for playoff basketball when defenses tightened up and/or a team hit a shooting slump during a series. In 2020, it's tough to argue for a twin towers approach (part of why people think Towns and Wiseman weren't a fit).

I don't think Rosas is done dealing, personally. We had plenty of length with Wiggins, but it didn't help him get rebounds or take better shots, or get beat on the defensive end.

My real point here is that there's more than 1 way to skin a cat.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

We disagree which is fine. In my opinion he was a player with very little value, and using him to move up was way more value then I believed he had.

Duke, I agree with you. Any time you can use a player nearing the end of their contract that isn't in your long term plans to move up in a draft it's a solid move. The Wolves used Mike Miller and Randy Foye which got us #5 to draft Rubio (that was the forgotten genius part of Kahn's move, he just completely botched it when he took Flynn over Curry/DeRozan at 6).

Culver is still an unknown, but very few people felt he would be drafted outside the top 7, so it's not like we moved up to 'reach' for a pick, regardless of if he turns out. There are more NBA busts than success stories, and I think people often forget that when it's their own team striking out.

You just don't get the benefit of the doubt for following the herd and being wrong. When you are 1 of 30 GM's your job is to make the right pick, not make excuses for why you made the wrong pick (like everyone had that guy going that high). Both Garland and Culver proved to not be in a tier above the rest of the guys taken below them which is a misevaluation from our front office (Rosas claimed Culver was the bottom of that tier and that just was incorrect). I don't expect anyone to be right every pick but you don't get the benefit of hindsight to say everyone had that guy slotted there so it's an acceptable miss especially at that high in the draft. Those are the misses that keep teams stuck in the lottery and not only was it a miss relative to what was taken after Culver, but it was a miss that we traded an additional asset to pick when there were better players taken around the time we would have picked had we not traded up. I just don't know how that trade can be defended after seeing how that class did in year 1. Garland was the worst pick in the top 10 and Culver was also in the bottom 4-5.

[mrhockey89]

Okay, you guys are right. There's no reason to watch the games, let's all give up on the team before they've even played a minute together.

[Monster]

Ok I just got back from watching the draft and hanging out with a good friend of mine. The draft coverage didn't exactly do a very good job of keeping up with the various moves so I did a bit of research about the later of the 2 picks. There are my thoughts about the moves and then I'm gonna go to bed and check out this thread tomorrow.

Edwards...we already discussed this guy a bunch. At least he isn't Ball lol


When the Knicks picked Bolmaro and they showed this guy I admit I was a bit intruiged by him. I watched some highlights and the guy looks like he is a pretty good ball handler passer especially for his size. He looks like he gives a shot on defense so I kinda like him. He has some creativity to his game. They said on the draft coverage he was bad at FTs. We don't have a ton of data but what I found he looks like he hits them at a pretty high rate. Idk if he can make 3's but he is interesting. I'm not sure I liked trading up 2 spots by using #33 but I do like some of what this guy brings. I wonder if he stays in Europe another year or so. That might be good all the way around and may add to the value of him as a pick.

McDaniels...I'm REALLY intrigued with this guy. Obviously he has holes in his game or he wouldn't have lasted this long but there are some really nice looking highlights. I'm

What I liked about this draft is they added a possible guy to every position they had a need SG, SF and PF.

Other thoughts...it's interesting how little movement there was with the top few picks. I was expecting waaaaay more to happen. Teams seemed to just take what was there and Patrick Williams was the surprise although he had been rising so not a total shock but it was surprising. Haliburton dropping to the Kings was really surprising to me.

The trade adding Rubio I think could be a really good move for a few reasons. First of all I like James Johnson and everything but Rubio is more valuable. This team currently has no vet leaders and Rubio is a vet that turned 30 a few weeks ago and still can play. He is familiar with people in the organization and aligns perfectly with the type of organization etc when it comes to the people and philosophy. Rubio has been around and he can play. I think adding a guard like him makes me feel a lot better about some of the other guys including Edwards. Rubio could be a guy that really helps this young group. On the court we suddenly have a legit starting level PG on the court at all times. Rubio can play with a guy like McLaughlin also because he is big enough to play against SGs. He defends. If the Wolves want to do load management which in this season might be more worthwhile than a more typical season they could just put Rubio as the starter and go from there. It's a smart play to bring him back people are gonna be THRILLED. That's a nice bonus. Meanwhile the Wolves have a bunch of guards and signed another 2-way guy. Some of those guards can play SF. When I first considered getting on the Edwards bandwagon months ago I said let him come off the bench and be the mom on the 2nd unit. That might work even better now as he could be playing next to Rubio who could help him out and get him some easy buckets. Make Edwards earn his time which Wiggins sometimes didn't deserve.

With Johnson gone the Wolves have Juancho as like the most experienced PF on the roster. I'm sure they still like Vanderbilt but I wonder if maybe now they keep Spellman around as a guy that's actually kinda proven to be an NBA player. That's what I would do unless someone gave me something of value for him. Really the only proven "Big" they have on the roster is Towns. They may sign someone In FA maybe even cheap but yeah I'd be keeping Spellman around.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

icky/Russel/Edwards/Culver/Okogie/J Mac. You got 96 minutes for 6 players at their best positions. Could you play some of them at the 3? Maybe, but you are creating a mismatch for the other team just as much as you are trying to create one playing with 3 guards on the floor at a time. It will work some of the time and probably get torched just as much as well. Even if you just played that group exclusively 1-3 while ignoring the rest of the roster, some guys would be missing out on minutes

Ricky will play the 1
Russell will combo 1-2
Culver/Okogie/Edwards will all rotate on the wings (the NBA is going smaller, positionless basketball is becoming the norm, and I am pretty sure Okogie's numbers are actually better at SF than SG)
That leaves JMac. He'll be end of bench, and cheap. Not the worst thing in the world and gives us good depth.

I agree our frontcourt is a problem outside of KAT. I'm assuming that either they have confidence in someone stepping up such as Vanderbuilt, or they will make a trade involving either Okogie or Culver. If there's one thing we should have learned by now, it's that Rosas probably understands we need to reshape the roster further, and to my knowledge, he didn't say this is our opening day roster yet.

"The league is getting smaller"...and yet the starting 3's in the Western Conference are:

Wiggins 6'7
Paul George 6'9
Lebron James 6'9
Cam Johnson 6'8
Harrison Barnes 6'8
Michael Porter Jr 6'10
Oubre 6'7
Ariza or Melo 6'8
Bogdanovic 6'8
Finney-Smith 6'7
House 6'6
Anderson 6'9 or Clarke at 6'8
Ingram 6'7
Gay 6'8

and us...Culver 6'6, Okogie 6'4 or Edwards at 6'5.

The "position-less" guys are more of these 6'7, 6'8, 6'9 forwards playing multiple positions than guys like our 6'4, 6'5, 6'6 guards. The league isn't full of a bunch of 6'4, 6'5 guys playing up a weight class. It's full of bigger, stronger and in some cases even faster guys who fill that role and we just don't have that guy on the team.

The Rockets actually traded their 1 true player with size and were starting a 6'3" SF (Eric Gordon) with only 1 guy in their starting lineup over 6'6". You could argue it didn't work and that's fine, but the point is that there was also a time when fast-paced 3 point shooting dominant teams were said to be good for regular season wins but bad for playoff basketball when defenses tightened up and/or a team hit a shooting slump during a series. In 2020, it's tough to argue for a twin towers approach (part of why people think Towns and Wiseman weren't a fit).

I don't think Rosas is done dealing, personally. We had plenty of length with Wiggins, but it didn't help him get rebounds or take better shots, or get beat on the defensive end.

My real point here is that there's more than 1 way to skin a cat.

There actually is only one way to truly skin a cat right now and it's that you have to have one of the 5 best players in the league if you want to win a title so this is all probably mute anyway. But regardless of that, the Lakers ran twin towers with AD and Dwight/McGee. They also had the versatility to play small ball. Same for Denver with Millsap/Jokic and then Porter Jr (or Grant)/Jokic in the playoffs. The Heat could play big with Olynyk/BAM or they could play small with Jimmy/BAM. The Clippers would start Morris/Zubac and then when they needed to they would shift to Kawhi/Morris (or Harrell). And of course the Warriors had Draymond/Boogie or Draymond/Looney and then when they needed would go small with KD/Draymond and Barnes/Draymond for the death lineup. The point being that none of these teams are grinding through the regular season solely playing small ball and wearing down their position-less guys. They have the versatility to play big or small based on what they need against their opponent. That's the real NBA trend going on right now because there are just too many good big men in the league to not have an answer for them. When AD/Jokic/BAM are 3 of the 4 big men that made it to the final four you can see that you can't just abandon the position as some experts would have you believe and all 3 of those teams have big lineups that can punish small ball or they can go small to match your small ball as well.

[TheFuture]

Why does noone even want to give some sort of benefit of the doubt to our front office when they literally broke down not only the analytics for months, but watched every minute of game tape from each of these guys, and surely more than all of us. Like I said, wasn't my dream draft, but we're talking as if we already know the result of all of their careers. Step back from the cliff gentlemen.

Pretty sure there were a lot of people excited about Derrick Williams, pissed at trading OJ Mayo for Love+Mike Miller, and on cloud 9 when we were able to land Maple Jordan for Love. With that said, while I think it's fair to feel disappointment right now if they didn't draft your guy, that doesn't mean they won't end up being the right guys. Right now we should be in the "what will the team look like" mode, and get some anticipation going for the upcoming season.

Because Rosas isn't the guy. He is the guy attempting to emulate a guy.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Okay, you guys are right. There's no reason to watch the games, let's all give up on the team before they've even played a minute together.

We're just trying to look at this team with a lens of realism. We have 6 guards who need minutes and 1 quality big on the roster. Those are all the quality pieces on the team. That's the reality of the team today, right now. Playing the what if trade game to fix all our problems on paper is just a tough sell right now especially when all of our tradeable pieces play guard and the only one who makes any meaningful money to make a deal is Ricky...who we just traded for. If you want to be optimistic then by all means go for it. I'll just say that's a tough sell at this juncture with how completely odd this team has been built with non-shooting guards paired with non-defending guards, 1 quality big on the roster and basically no true wing players in a league dominated by those kind of players.