Q12543 wrote:Watched Michigan State and Valentine today. I can see why his draft value is not in the top tier. He really struggles to create his own shot off the dribble because he's slow and doesn't get much elevation. What he does have is excellent floor vision (10 assists today), a sweet outside shot, and very good handles. He's like a crafty old-school player that should fit in well with any team that drafts him, but he really can't be a top 2 or 3 scoring option from what I can tell.
Yeah, you don't want to burn a top 10 pick on him, but i'd really like to have him. Think he will be a glue guy who you can win with. He could definitely play for us.
Q12543 wrote:Watched Michigan State and Valentine today. I can see why his draft value is not in the top tier. He really struggles to create his own shot off the dribble because he's slow and doesn't get much elevation. What he does have is excellent floor vision (10 assists today), a sweet outside shot, and very good handles. He's like a crafty old-school player that should fit in well with any team that drafts him, but he really can't be a top 2 or 3 scoring option from what I can tell.
Yeah, you don't want to burn a top 10 pick on him, but i'd really like to have him. Think he will be a glue guy who you can win with. He could definitely play for us.
Yes, if he somehow ended up with us, I'd have no problem with that.
Q12543 wrote:Watched Michigan State and Valentine today. I can see why his draft value is not in the top tier. He really struggles to create his own shot off the dribble because he's slow and doesn't get much elevation. What he does have is excellent floor vision (10 assists today), a sweet outside shot, and very good handles. He's like a crafty old-school player that should fit in well with any team that drafts him, but he really can't be a top 2 or 3 scoring option from what I can tell.
Yeah, you don't want to burn a top 10 pick on him, but i'd really like to have him. Think he will be a glue guy who you can win with. He could definitely play for us.
Do you think Valentine lasts til pick 16? If so, would you consider trading our pick (assuming its not a top 4 pick) for both of Boston's later two first round picks plus our second rounders back that they acquired and our pick of two of their bench players among Olynyk, Evan Turner, Mickey, Zeller, Jerebko and Young?
Also, why should we be looking to add multiple rookies again? We have a team stacked with young talent. At some point you're just blocking the development of some of them if you keep adding 2-3 a year because there just isn't minutes for everyone. Rick/Tyus/Lavine/Wiggins/Bazz/Dieng/Belly/Towns. That's 8 guys right there. You shouldn't play more than 10 so that leaves 2 spots. You really wanna spend those spots on rookies and not try to bring in more veteran help to help us win games? I just don't see how trading back for 2 firsts and a couple seconds is a good idea for a team needing players who can help them win next year.
Poeltl dominated Cal yesterday. 29 points on 10-18 shooting, 9-12 from the line, 11 rebounds. I wouldn't be surprised to see his name more and more as we head into the off-season. I'm on board.
Camden wrote:Poeltl dominated Cal yesterday. 29 points on 10-18 shooting, 9-12 from the line, 11 rebounds. I wouldn't be surprised to see his name more and more as we head into the off-season. I'm on board.
I like Poetl in the 5 to 7 range overall after Ingram, Simmons, Brown, Bender and roughly the same as Dunn and Hield. I'd probably rather go Hield than Poetl because I think Hield is a scarcer commodity than Poeltl. I'm not as impressed with scoring and rebounding as I am with good defense, so if you can show me solid evidence that Poeltl is an elite defender then I may come on board the Jakob train.
Camden wrote:Poeltl dominated Cal yesterday. 29 points on 10-18 shooting, 9-12 from the line, 11 rebounds. I wouldn't be surprised to see his name more and more as we head into the off-season. I'm on board.
I like Poetl in the 5 to 7 range overall after Ingram, Simmons, Brown, Bender and roughly the same as Dunn and Hield. I'd probably rather go Hield than Poetl because I think Hield is a scarcer commodity than Poeltl. I'm not as impressed with scoring and rebounding as I am with good defense, so if you can show me solid evidence that Poeltl is an elite defender then I may come on board the Jakob train.
Skilled, two-way seven-footers with above average mobility, length and IQ are a pretty sought after commodity.
Camden wrote:Poeltl dominated Cal yesterday. 29 points on 10-18 shooting, 9-12 from the line, 11 rebounds. I wouldn't be surprised to see his name more and more as we head into the off-season. I'm on board.
Ivan Rabb was 6 of 7 from the field. It looks like Jaylen Brown killed Cal in this game.
khans2k5 wrote:Also, why should we be looking to add multiple rookies again? We have a team stacked with young talent. At some point you're just blocking the development of some of them if you keep adding 2-3 a year because there just isn't minutes for everyone. Rick/Tyus/Lavine/Wiggins/Bazz/Dieng/Belly/Towns. That's 8 guys right there. You shouldn't play more than 10 so that leaves 2 spots. You really wanna spend those spots on rookies and not try to bring in more veteran help to help us win games? I just don't see how trading back for 2 firsts and a couple seconds is a good idea for a team needing players who can help them win next year.
Yeah top 10 pick and maybe a guy in the 2nd round is plenty of young players to add. If this team adds Dubs that would add another Rookie to the mix as well. The Wolves need to add some guys with their open roster spots that have at least been in the league for 3 years or something this offseason. Lol
