The draft is one week away, rank the 3 probable targets:

[Phenom]

I dont think liking Dunn has much to do with Ricky, honestly. Ricky needs to be here for the forseeable future if Thibs wants to compete. I think one of the more overlooked needs for this team is a guy who can keep leads when Ricky sits. Tyus seemed to be an improvement over Zach running the point but that isn't saying much. Dunn has the potential to make point guard a 48 minute strength for this team on both sides of the ball and I think that is why Thibs like him. Also if Zach isn't up to par on D, he can insert Dunn with Ricky an get that level of D that he desires. Buddy and Murray on D does not have the chops that Dunn has but I think the edge probably goes to Buddy at this point. The upside is there with Murray though and I would not be surprised in the least if the Wolves picked him. Its a tossup really as we dont really know their board

Keep in mind vet PGs are easy and cheap to sign and Thibs has coached a couple of guys that are gonna be available.

Well yea the free agent variable is always part of it but Dunn is cheap and productive (in theory) for at least 4 years and that is tougher to find on the market.

Actually it's very very easy to find. Every year there are 3-4 pretty solid backup Pgs that sign cheap 1-2 year deals. It's a very deep position pn the lower end.

That's my point. Dunn would be cheap for 4 to 5 years, potentially on the higher end. Your scenario becomes a revolving door of hits or misses that may or may not have reached their last legs. Its doable but it also is at the other positions. Look at Cole Aldrich. I see his name brought up frequently now as an enticing option. Who would have said that a year ago?

Those guys are more proven than Dunn. I believe his floor is pretty good but it's possible he isn't good. A lot of the backup PGs that sign these types of deals for just over the vet mon are a former starters legit backups. That's not always the case at other positions. You can get bargains at other positions as well but the argument that it's an advantage to pick Dunn because we would have a cheap competent backup PG isn't really a great point to me. Actually his salary at #5 isn't exactly cheap. I'm being not picky here but seriously the backup PG pool is legit.

I don't disagree there is a competent backup pool out there. There is honestly way too many variable parts to put all the eggs in any basket in this conversation. Bottom line is that if Thibs likes Dunn he ticks a number of boxes, namely price and (hopefully) production that should not be available on the super market we are about to embark on. Rookie deals are highly valuable the rest of the time so I think it applies here.

Ok the reality is this whole back and forth on the backup PGs pool compared to Dunn is me being nit picky especially considering it's very likely any player we pick will start as a backup.

I think the point I am trying to make (no pun intended) is that it seems like a poor argument to say taking Dunn at #5 overall and be happy that he will provide competent backup PG play for the next 4-5 years seems not good enough for me considering he is #5 overall pick and you can almost throw a dart and get a reasonably talented vet PG to be your backup for peanuts. I'm on record as not being a fan of Dunn's upside but I see plenty of merit in him being an important rotation player because of some of his obvious projected abilities. I'd want to have him as a pick assuming he could someday become at least a 6th man type maybe in the impact of Shaun Livingston has for the past few years. That may sounds like a rip on Dunn but I think Linvingston is very valuable. Obviously I would hope for more but that would be pretty good because Livingston is a pretty useful player to say the least.

Does that make more sense?

Oh yea I get what you are saying. I have higher hopes for the 5th pick than a mere backup to Ricky. That is just an overlapping benefit. I would expect him to play big minutes next to Ricky and Zach and be a key defensive piece.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

You pretty much have to sign vet backups to 1-2 years because it is an extremely hit or miss market. We signed JJ for 4 years and found out pretty quick he wasn't the guy we were looking for, but had to keep him longer than we should have because he was on a long-term deal. Mo Williams was moveable because of his contract. He doesn't get moved if he is on a 4 year deal. There is a similar risk with Dunn if he doesn't pan out, but it's generally easier to move a rookie reclamation project than a veteran on a long deal.

[Monster]

You pretty much have to sign vet backups to 1-2 years because it is an extremely hit or miss market. We signed JJ for 4 years and found out pretty quick he wasn't the guy we were looking for, but had to keep him longer than we should have because he was on a long-term deal. Mo Williams was moveable because of his contract. He doesn't get moved if he is on a 4 year deal. There is a similar risk with Dunn if he doesn't pan out, but it's generally easier to move a rookie reclamation project than a veteran on a long deal.

I think your point is valid. On the other hand I am not sure there is significant difference between signing a 3 year deal and a 1st round pick. We got JJ (who actually played well his first year) to take a buyout and we did the same thing with Bennett. Payne is another 1st rounder we can't wait to dump one way or another. Of course that JJ Barea guy went back to Dallas and immediately became a nice player for them. lol

To me the short term deals can work out well for both the team and the player. Mo Williams got a decent chunk of money from the Wolves then got moved to a playoff contending team and got to play a bunch of minutes and then was able to sign wherever he wanted which ended up being with the Cavs. In return the Wolves got a solid vet player for a chunk of the season and then received Gary Neal who played well for a few games plus a 2019 2nd rounder. Not bad. Lets also remember that Andre Miller actually played pretty well when called on for the Wolves.

I think all of us if we had the choice would pick a young promising backup PG over a vet.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

I think we should temper our expectations a bit on what we can expect from the #5 pick. These are the last several #5 picks. Not a bad list. Cousins and Love stand out. Rubio's pretty good. Valanciunas is finally coming into his own. The rest have been kinda *meh.*

Mario Hezonja
Dante Exum
Thomas Robinson
Jonas Valanciunas
DeMarcus Cousins
Ricky Rubio
Kevin Love
Jeff Green
Sheldon Williams
Raymond Felton
Devin Harris

*Side note, check out the baggy suits people wore in the mid 2000s!
http://www.nba.com/history/draft/2004-draft/index.html
http://www.nba.com/history/draft/2005-draft/index.html

The bottom line on Dunn and Hield for me is, do you think Dunn is more likely to replace Rubio and make the team better, or do you think Hield is more likely to replace LaVine as the starter and make the team better? In a sense, deciding between Dunn and Hield is about deciding between Rubio and LaVine.

I like Dunn's versatility, athleticism, and intensity, and if he could become good enough to eventually replace Rubio as the starter, then look out. We could keep LaVine and Wiggins as starters. Will that happen though? I'm not sure.

I think Hield is a safer bet to make an impact because of his three point shooting. If Hield worked out, he'd have to split a lot of time with LaVine at the 2 and we'd probably have to see more LaVine at the point.

In both cases, we have to be open to the possibility, however remote, of trading Rubio or LaVine in a year or two if our draft pick pans out and Rubio or LaVine aren't willing to be bench player. I suspect Rubio would be more willing to be a bench guy, but Dunn will be less likely to replace him. I suspect LaVine would want to start somewhere else, and that Hield will be more likely than Dunn to earn minutes as a rookie.

At this point, I'm seriously torn. I'd say we should take Hield because he's more likely to pan out, but if Dunn did pan out, it could be a better fit for us in the long run (assuming that LaVine continues to develop, especially on the defensive end).

[SameOldNudityDrew]

Good video and story on Hield. I know he's not a 2 way player (yet) and could have some overlap with LaVine, but I just think this guy is going to be a serious difference-maker with his outside shooting and his intangibles look great. He's got the desire and the athleticism to become a solid defender at least. I'd take this guy if he were available.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/Coach16243775/how-high-buddy-hield-nba-ceiling

[TheFuture]

I dont think liking Dunn has much to do with Ricky, honestly. Ricky needs to be here for the forseeable future if Thibs wants to compete. I think one of the more overlooked needs for this team is a guy who can keep leads when Ricky sits. Tyus seemed to be an improvement over Zach running the point but that isn't saying much. Dunn has the potential to make point guard a 48 minute strength for this team on both sides of the ball and I think that is why Thibs like him. Also if Zach isn't up to par on D, he can insert Dunn with Ricky an get that level of D that he desires. Buddy and Murray on D does not have the chops that Dunn has but I think the edge probably goes to Buddy at this point. The upside is there with Murray though and I would not be surprised in the least if the Wolves picked him. Its a tossup really as we dont really know their board

Keep in mind vet PGs are easy and cheap to sign and Thibs has coached a couple of guys that are gonna be available.

Well yea the free agent variable is always part of it but Dunn is cheap and productive (in theory) for at least 4 years and that is tougher to find on the market.

Actually it's very very easy to find. Every year there are 3-4 pretty solid backup Pgs that sign cheap 1-2 year deals. It's a very deep position pn the lower end.

That's my point. Dunn would be cheap for 4 to 5 years, potentially on the higher end. Your scenario becomes a revolving door of hits or misses that may or may not have reached their last legs. Its doable but it also is at the other positions. Look at Cole Aldrich. I see his name brought up frequently now as an enticing option. Who would have said that a year ago?

Those guys are more proven than Dunn. I believe his floor is pretty good but it's possible he isn't good. A lot of the backup PGs that sign these types of deals for just over the vet mon are a former starters legit backups. That's not always the case at other positions. You can get bargains at other positions as well but the argument that it's an advantage to pick Dunn because we would have a cheap competent backup PG isn't really a great point to me. Actually his salary at #5 isn't exactly cheap. I'm being not picky here but seriously the backup PG pool is legit.

I don't disagree there is a competent backup pool out there. There is honestly way too many variable parts to put all the eggs in any basket in this conversation. Bottom line is that if Thibs likes Dunn he ticks a number of boxes, namely price and (hopefully) production that should not be available on the super market we are about to embark on. Rookie deals are highly valuable the rest of the time so I think it applies here.

Ok the reality is this whole back and forth on the backup PGs pool compared to Dunn is me being nit picky especially considering it's very likely any player we pick will start as a backup.

I think the point I am trying to make (no pun intended) is that it seems like a poor argument to say taking Dunn at #5 overall and be happy that he will provide competent backup PG play for the next 4-5 years seems not good enough for me considering he is #5 overall pick and you can almost throw a dart and get a reasonably talented vet PG to be your backup for peanuts. I'm on record as not being a fan of Dunn's upside but I see plenty of merit in him being an important rotation player because of some of his obvious projected abilities. I'd want to have him as a pick assuming he could someday become at least a 6th man type maybe in the impact of Shaun Livingston has for the past few years. That may sounds like a rip on Dunn but I think Linvingston is very valuable. Obviously I would hope for more but that would be pretty good because Livingston is a pretty useful player to say the least.

Does that make more sense?

We've been spoiled the last few seasons with the outcome of the draft. I'll take competent backup PG/SG play for the next 4-5 years and be good with it. That'd still be far better than what we got out of the majority of the last 10 first round draftees. I like Dunn the most for us, but I'll be happy with anyone that turns out better than the derrick Williams' of the world that every other GM here has picked. I think we agree that this draft is not going to kill us if we get it wrong, but man are we going to be good if Thibs and Co. keep the streak going and do get a hit.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I agree with Future. There is ~ 50% chance that the #5 pick never even becomes a multi-year starter. While at the time we pick folks, we certainly HOPE they will become great players, the reality is that most won't be.

I like Dunn because of his size, athleticism, versatility, and he excels in areas that have proven to translate more predictably to the NBA. The reality is that all three of these guys won't displace anyone from our existing starting unit anytime soon.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I agree with Future. There is ~ 50% chance that the #5 pick never even becomes a multi-year starter. While at the time we pick folks, we certainly HOPE they will become great players, the reality is that most won't be.

I like Dunn because of his size, athleticism, versatility, and he excels in areas that have proven to translate more predictably to the NBA. The reality is that all three of these guys won't displace anyone from our existing starting unit anytime soon.

Kinda cool for the team to not have to find its next savior in the draft, huh?

[TheFuture]

I agree with Future. There is ~ 50% chance that the #5 pick never even becomes a multi-year starter. While at the time we pick folks, we certainly HOPE they will become great players, the reality is that most won't be.

I like Dunn because of his size, athleticism, versatility, and he excels in areas that have proven to translate more predictably to the NBA. The reality is that all three of these guys won't displace anyone from our existing starting unit anytime soon.

Kinda cool for the team to not have to find its next savior in the draft, huh?

Very cool. Hard to actually accept as reality though. Until I see real success there's always that lingering worry of something going terrible for us. In 3 years I hope that feeling is a distant memory.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Good video and story on Hield. I know he's not a 2 way player (yet) and could have some overlap with LaVine, but I just think this guy is going to be a serious difference-maker with his outside shooting and his intangibles look great. He's got the desire and the athleticism to become a solid defender at least. I'd take this guy if he were available.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/Coach16243775/how-high-buddy-hield-nba-ceiling

Good find Drew. I like Thorpe's analysis and even said he reminded him of Ray Allen. That's high praise. Again, it's just age discrimination. Thorpe said he's #1 if he were a freshman this year. Good attitude, good worker, awesome shooter. If he overlaps with Lavine, then we'll address that next year, but I think they can co-exist. Start up up the chant again:

Buddy! Buddy! Buddy!