JasonIsDaMan wrote:You're entitled to your opinion. But I have to say: I find it odd that we celebrate Rick Spielman for trading down for more picks but seem to be against the Wolves doing it. And how many picks and/or whole drafts did we and/or the media disparage and then turn around and acted like we didn't? I don't remember anybody that upset about not getting Kawhi Leonard or Klay Thompson. Or the opposite? I can quote chapter and verse of how everybody thought Johnny Flynn would turn out to be Bob Cousey's illegitimate son, and it turned out he was Danny Devito's.
I'd trade down. I think this draft may be the worst in top tier talent in a while.
The NFL draft and the NBA draft are VERY VERY different I just don't think that's a fair comparison.
I think it's fair because you want the end result to be the same: The guy you draft has a better career than the 30 guys taken after him or AT LEAST a strong argument can be made (can a QB be quantified against a DE? Or a SP against a RF?). That's all. That is why people thinking watching these drafts is so boring. Who is besides Kiper in either draft will lay it out there in terms of team X screwing up?
The MAJOR difference is that historically, many more superstar/star NBA players come from top 10, and even top 5 picks. NFL and MLB are both very different. Mike Piazza was the last player drafted (1,390 player selected). In both those sports, you are just as likely to get a superstar in round 2-4 as round 1. The NBA just doesn't work that way. That is why 1 quality guy is worth more than 2-3 in quantity....even if you are moving from pick 2 to 3 in this case. I think this draft is very similar to the one Cam lays out where Shaq and Zo went 1-2, and we were left holding the bag with Laettnar. I don't want Laettnar.
JasonIsDaMan wrote:You're entitled to your opinion. But I have to say: I find it odd that we celebrate Rick Spielman for trading down for more picks but seem to be against the Wolves doing it. And how many picks and/or whole drafts did we and/or the media disparage and then turn around and acted like we didn't? I don't remember anybody that upset about not getting Kawhi Leonard or Klay Thompson. Or the opposite? I can quote chapter and verse of how everybody thought Johnny Flynn would turn out to be Bob Cousey's illegitimate son, and it turned out he was Danny Devito's.
I'd trade down. I think this draft may be the worst in top tier talent in a while.
The NFL draft and the NBA draft are VERY VERY different I just don't think that's a fair comparison.
I think it's fair because you want the end result to be the same: The guy you draft has a better career than the 30 guys taken after him or AT LEAST a strong argument can be made (can a QB be quantified against a DE? Or a SP against a RF?). That's all. That is why people thinking watching these drafts is so boring. Who is besides Kiper in either draft will lay it out there in terms of team X screwing up?
The MAJOR difference is that historically, many more superstar/star NBA players come from top 10, and even top 5 picks. NFL and MLB are both very different. Mike Piazza was the last player drafted (1,390 player selected). In both those sports, you are just as likely to get a superstar in round 2-4 as round 1. The NBA just doesn't work that way. That is why 1 quality guy is worth more than 2-3 in quantity....even if you are moving from pick 2 to 3 in this case. I think this draft is very similar to the one Cam lays out where Shaq and Zo went 1-2, and we were left holding the bag with Laettnar. I don't want Laettnar.
Agreed. But there have also been for "30-for-30" level busts at the top of the draft as well.
Once again, I do not see O'neal/Mourning in Simmons/Ingram, and not just because they aren't bigs.
monsterpile wrote:"and we were left holding the bag with Laettnar. I don't want Laettnar."
This sounds like it was lifted from a discarded don't get Cable get Direct TV commercial script. Lol
And speaking of Laettner, how about his "30-for-30". "Well, if I would have been a good pro, that would have upset people"(!!?!?!) I certainly would have gotten over it.
I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Carlos Danger wrote:I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Funny story: I was actually against that deal because I was really anti-Bazz at the time. Shows what I know LOL.
Can we change VORP to VONE (Victories over Ndubi Ebi)? That's a young hip reference going out to Q12345 lol. If you'll excuse me, I have to order my selfie-stick from Amazon now.
I think two good rookies and one monster F/A, with any combination being a good PG and two good C's, is just what this team needs.
Carlos Danger wrote:I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Lip might make the argument you could just stay there pick CJ and be set. Of course someone would come back with taking Greek Freak (hope Jason knows who that is) and Dieng or Gobert etc but we can play this game all day.
If Hason's main point is trading down and stil getting the best or really good player yeah then do that. The Wolves did that a few years ago basically trading down from #3 to #5 plus saving money and getting miller and that turned out brilliantly. Really trading down or not trading down is based on how you value guys at the top and on down. That's gonna vary.
Carlos Danger wrote:I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Funny story: I was actually against that deal because I was really anti-Bazz at the time. Shows what I know LOL.
Can we change VORP to VONE (Victories over Ndubi Ebi)? That's a young hip reference going out to Q12345 lol. If you'll excuse me, I have to order my selfie-stick from Amazon now.
I think two good rookies and one monster F/A, with any combination being a good PG and two good C's, is just what this team needs.
Jason, no need to be young and hip. Perhaps try moving up to the late 1990s first and then go from there. Or even throw in a 1970s reference for some of the older fellas. I think you've got '80-'95 pretty well covered.
Carlos Danger wrote:I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Lip might make the argument you could just stay there pick CJ and be set. Of course someone would come back with taking Greek Freak (hope Jason knows who that is) and Dieng or Gobert etc but we can play this game all day.
If Hason's main point is trading down and stil getting the best or really good player yeah then do that. The Wolves did that a few years ago basically trading down from #3 to #5 plus saving money and getting miller and that turned out brilliantly. Really trading down or not trading down is based on how you value guys at the top and on down. That's gonna vary.
Carlos Danger wrote:I think good points are being made on both sides of trading down. There is one recent example of it which I think was successful. 2013 we traded the #9 (Burke) for #14 (Bazz) and #21 (Dieng). While none of those players are stars, we seemed to get better value:
I guess it just comes down to where we end up picking and what type of drop off they feel there is later in the draft. That said, I think we are already pretty young...so, adding two more rookies may not be ideal for our specific situation.
Funny story: I was actually against that deal because I was really anti-Bazz at the time. Shows what I know LOL.
Can we change VORP to VONE (Victories over Ndubi Ebi)? That's a young hip reference going out to Q12345 lol. If you'll excuse me, I have to order my selfie-stick from Amazon now.
I think two good rookies and one monster F/A, with any combination being a good PG and two good C's, is just what this team needs.
Jason, no need to be young and hip. Perhaps try moving up to the late 1990s first and then go from there. Or even throw in a 1970s reference for some of the older fellas. I think you've got '80-'95 pretty well covered.
Well, Spurgeon Wynn was late 90's. And the 70's were pretty cool. Tarkenton, Page, Blyleven, Carew, Goldsworthy, Herb Brooks, Mchale/Saunders, Marion Barber. Not much comedy to be mined there. But I'll look for my shots.
