The Backstory on the Wolves Draft

[ItsJustSoSab]

What's the worst case scenario for Culver, though? Does anyone think he won't be a starting-level two-way player? I don't think anyone sees him flaming out of the league or being just a rotation player. I actually think a disappointing scenario for him would be Josh Richardson and I know this board loves him quite a bit.

Yeah, Culver's probably not going to become a Kawhi Leonard or Paul George, but he has a pretty good shot to develop into a Demar DeRozan, Andre Iguodala or Jimmy Butler, and that is more than enough for this team.

I can absolutely see a scenario where he is "just a rotation player" at worst or a "meh" starter that doesn't really impact the game much (good or bad). My biggest concern is that his shooting doesn't improve (hardly an invalid concern considering our horrible history with shooters) and his defense doesn't translate as well to the NBA.

So not a complete bust, but may just end up being a replacement level kind of guy.

Pretty much. Many #6 picks end up just being "a guy."

Somebody like Culver who doesn't really stand out for any one thing could very well be that type of player. We'll know a lot more soon enough...

1. He seems to have more heart than Wiggins
2. He has a stronger work ethic than Wiggins
3. He is getting payed much much much less than Wiggins
4. As of this current moment, he dunks
5. As of this currey moment he doesn't take lonngggggggggggggggggggg 2's
6. He hustles
7. He isn't Wiggins

Great. So if all turns out right, we finally have our beloved Courtney Lee clone?

If it turns out "right" he'll be an All-Star, if it goes wrong he'll be a bust. If he's meh, NOW we have your Courtney Lee clone

[SameOldNudityDrew]

Culver kind of reminds me of a smaller Kyle Anderson or James Johnson--slower wings who can handle the ball and distribute well enough to run the pick and roll and Culver and Johnson can maybe do a bit more to initiate the offensive, but you don't really want them shooting much. Culver can score at the rim better than those guys, and I do really like his hustle even though he's clearly limited in terms of quickness and superstar-level skill. There does seem to be an intangible quality to his play. Just seems to make fairly smart plays. He's clearly got better handles, passing, and IQ than Wiggins and probably Okogie as well, although I really love Okogie's quickness and defense better than those other guys.

I'm just glad we didn't trade away Covington.

[Lipoli390]

What's the worst case scenario for Culver, though? Does anyone think he won't be a starting-level two-way player? I don't think anyone sees him flaming out of the league or being just a rotation player. I actually think a disappointing scenario for him would be Josh Richardson and I know this board loves him quite a bit.

Yeah, Culver's probably not going to become a Kawhi Leonard or Paul George, but he has a pretty good shot to develop into a Demar DeRozan, Andre Iguodala or Jimmy Butler, and that is more than enough for this team.

If he doesn't improve his shooting, then I don't see him as a starting guard or wing in the NBA. His worth ethic and skills should make him a rotation player, but he has a lot of work to do on his game to be more than that. If it were just his 30% 3-point percentage I'd be less concerned. It's the combination of his 3-point shooting, poor (70.7%) free throw shooting and poor shooting mechanics. He doesn't look super quick and he's not particularly long or physically imposing. He's 16 pounds lighter than Okogie was coming out of college last year. Other notable SGs like DeRozan, Wade, Donovan Mitchell and Jimmy Butler were all at least 16 point heavier than Culver. The only elite stat he had in college was his 6.4 rebounds. So I continue to have serious doubts about Culver. However, I know many respected analysts think highly of him as a prospect and he had some other good stats like 46% field goal shooting and 18.5 points per game. I'll also note that DeRozan was a far worse free-throw shooter (64.6%) than Culver in college.

If it had been up to me, I would have given up Covington to the Pelicans for Garland. Longer term, I think we'd be much better off with Garland, Saric and $11M in cap relief next summer (under the Pelicans offer reported by Jon K) than we'll be with Culver and Covington. I see the counter-arguments, but that's my view.

[Duke13]

"something close to Steph Curry..."

So somebody nearly as good as arguably a top 20 player in NBA history with the 4th pick in a weak draft?

Lol. That is pretty funny!!

[Duke13]

I would of probably been inclined to include Cov for the 4th pick but have zero issues with the process Rosas and the front office took with the draft. Thought they played it very smart with the trade up. I have no idea about Garland, pretty hard to evaluate someone on high school tape. Mudiay would of been the #1 pick out of HS, plenty of other examples.

Ive watched a few scouting tapes on Culver, one in particular someone posted, I actually don't think his shot is that bad mechanically as some say. A few minor adjustments and I think his shot mechanics could be very good.

[Lipoli390]

"something close to Steph Curry..."

So somebody nearly as good as arguably a top 20 player in NBA history with the 4th pick in a weak draft?

Lol. That is pretty funny!!

What I wrote doesn't seem particularly funny or controversial if you look beyond Abe's somewhat selective quote, which left out the most important word, "could." What I actually wrote, referred to Garland as someone who "could be something close to a Steph Curry." The operative word is "could." Abe must have thought I wrote that Garland is or will be or is likely to be as good as Curry. It's an understandable misreading given the similarity between the words "could" and "will."

Honestly, I think Garland will likely top out at Lillard's level, which would be great. Garland handles the ball like it's on a string, is tremendously gifted at changing speed and direction with the ball, has a lightning quick release on his shot and is extremely accurate from behind the arc with great range beyond the college arc. So he has some of the elements of Curry's game. I know Steph Curry, Steph Curry is a friend of mind and Garland is no Steph Curry. :) (Some of you will know the origin of that sentence). I'll add that Abe is not Steph Curry either. But unlike Abe, Garland's potential as an NBA PG is very high and intriguing.

By the way, did anyone predict that Curry, when he was drafted, would be as good as he has become? Answer: No, although I think Abe said at the time that Curry could become as great as he's going to be :).

By the way, a lot of analysts don't think this draft was weak at the top. Some saw it as a 3-deep draft and others as a 4-deep draft, including Garland. And I'm not sure it is a weak draft overall.

[Monster]

I always thought that RFA could get us a good price on Saric if we wanted him...then you see this. Maybe it was best to have moved on (whether you thought this was the trade to do it or not) while he had value. I like Bobby Portis but has he proved to be a better player than Saric? I suppose maybe teams will spend all their money this year like they did in 2016.

https://twitter.com/tjonesonthenba/status/1143667005548978177?s=21

Reporting with @FredKatz: Washington Wizards forward Bobby Portis is seeking as much as $16 million in free agency, League Sources tell The Athletic. The Wizards aren't expected to match a huge offer sheet. Portis has interest from multiple teams on the market, sources say

[Lipoli390]

I always thought that RFA could get us a good price on Saric if we wanted him...then you see this. Maybe it was best to have moved on (whether you thought this was the trade to do it or not) while he had value. I like Bobby Portis but has he proved to be a better player than Saric? I suppose maybe teams will spend all their money this year like they did in 2016.

https://twitter.com/tjonesonthenba/status/1143667005548978177?s=21

Reporting with @FredKatz: Washington Wizards forward Bobby Portis is seeking as much as $16 million in free agency, League Sources tell The Athletic. The Wizards aren't expected to match a huge offer sheet. Portis has interest from multiple teams on the market, sources say

Good point, Monster. I think it was probably time to move on from Saric. I would have found a different deal for him and, instead, traded Covington with #11 to get Garland. Saric could potentially have been paired with a bigger contract to help clear cap room or traded for a fairly high second round pick. With Towns still 23 years old and on the front end of a 5-year deal, this is the summer to be bold and possibly take a step back in order to take two steps forward.

I don't see Covington (or Saric for that matter) as players who are critical to the long-term success of this organization. It's all about KAT and surrounding him with young talent. That's why I would favor signing Russell even if it's a max contract and in spite of my misgivings about him. He's young and very talented and he has already played at an allstar level for one season. But signing him has always been a long shot and the latest report on ESPN suggests it's not going to happen. We're a cold, high tax state and the Wolves are a team with no cap room, no winning tradition and no sex appeal. So it's all about the draft and development. Hopefully, Rosas is learning that he's not in Kansas -- I mean Houston - anymore.

[Duke13]

I know the difference between "could" and "would" and still thought it was funny knowing the difference.

[Lipoli390]

I know the difference between "could" and "would" and still thought it was funny knowing the difference.

You're easily amused. :)