Might as well talk draft....

[Monster]

Yeah, not sure what to make of the Wiseman talk that we haven't reached out. It doesn't make sense on any level. From a Wiseman perspective, he is throwing away like $7MM from potential earnings of #1 pick to #2 pick (even more if GS would pass on him and he makes it to #3). And from the MN side, whether Rosas or anyone else admits talking to him, teams MUST assume there is a chance we take him #1. Heck, more "experts" than not are projecting Ball as our pick, and I honestly just don't believe this is even in Wolves thought process. Certainly could be incorrect here, but I just don't see why there would be interest from Wolves leadership in Ball. Point is, teams can't assume Wiseman slips.

And in the end, a team that wants Wiseman would likely need to jump to #1 to secure him. Let's say the Bulls/GS trade pans out and Bulls trade Carter/#4 for #2. Would that not put Wiseman in play for a team that just traded their starting C? My point would be, Wiseman then becomes a likely option for any team picking #2. So I stand by thought that ANY team that is 100% bought into Wiseman has to jump to #1. That obviously changes as draft unfolds and we make our pick. But at that point, teams are also have limited time to react.

That 7 million he is walking away from he could possibly make up in one way or another playing for GS. Heck he would likely make a few hundred thousand more every year in game checks just from being in the playoffs. Chances of him winning and NBA championship are clearly higher and that can mean $$$. I can't blame him and his people if they wanted to go there or if not GS a place where he would be the star of a team where again he probably makes that money back in one way or another.

[Lipoli390]

Thanks for posting the video, WolvesFan! I feel much better after seeing that interview. It's not just one response, but all of his responses together that point in a positive direction:

1. When asked whether the Wolves would draft based on talent or fit, Rosas was emphatic in his response, stating: "Absolutely, it's the highest level talent. This is a multi-year decision and we want to make sure we have not only the best player but the best person with the most upside."

I'm not sure what he meant by "best person" and whether that excludes anyone, but Gersson seems like a guy who chooses his words carefully, so it must mean something. But bottom line is that he left no room for doubt that the draft decision is all about talent and upside and not about fit.

2. When asked generally whether the Wolves might draft another big with KAT already here, his response was a clear yes, stating that: "[KAT's] versatility allows us to add another big at that spot, especially if it's a guy who can complement him with athleticism and a guy who can be more of a defender and more of a runner and roller."

Beyond unequivocally indicating his comfort with drafting another big to play alongside KAT, what I found interesting was what he said about the type of big who would fit well with KAT. He identified three attributes of a big who would fit: (1) athletic, (2) a defender, and (3) good runner/roller. Who in this draft does that describe? Yes, it describes Wiseman and Okongwu. If true to his word, it suggests that Rosas is not inclined to draft Toppin if he selects a big unless Rosas believes that Toppin is a better talent than Wiseman and Okongwu.

3. Rosas elaborated on how the versatility of the Wolves two best players, KAT and DLO, opens the door to drafting another big or PG: "The versatility of our 1and 5 really leaves all the options open for us. For us it's just the pursuit of the most talented players that we can add to our organization."

This comment underscored his comfort with drafting another big while also indicating his comfort with drafting another PG. He was obviously alluding to Ball and wanted to communicate to other organizations that Ball is definitely on the table for the Wolves to draft and keep. I like that he went there even though he never got a question about Ball. It showed some savvy, taking advantage of an opportunity to communicate publicly to all the GMs who are looking for any and every clue to discern the intentions of their rivals.

4. When Rachel finally went for it and asked specifically whether the Wolves would take Wiseman at #1 if they concluded that he was the best player on their board, Rosas left no room for doubt by responding: "Absolutely. I mean, look at the current NBA champion. They did pretty good with two bigs in their lineup."

5. Then Rachel turned to the issue of trading the #1 pick, Her question was, "how tempted are you to deal the pick?" Gersson's response was candid and revealing, saying: "We're VERY open. We're having open conversations. That's why we want to use every minutes at our disposal. Our boards are set..."

This answer makes it clear to me that the Wolves have a strong preference for trading the pick. Rosas is pretty monotone in his speech, so the inflection in his voice as he emphasized the word "very" really stood out and revealed his thinking. Assuming that he is strategic, Rosas would not have been so obviously emphatic in expressing his enthusiasm for trading the pick. So why would he do that? Why would he suggest to his rival GMs that he really wants to deal the pick? The answer in my mind is that his intent was to generate excitement about the pick among his rival GMs and draw out more or better proposals than they ones they've received to date.

Overall, it was a huge relief to hear Gersson's comments. But it's actions, not words, that will tell the tale and hopefully distinguish him from past Wolves' front office regimes.

By the way, Rachel is a really good interviewer. In fact, I'd say she's the best TV sports interviewer in the Country.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Nevermind how Rosas answered those questions, what's the deal with that lame pseudo-cardigan he ware wearing!? Get some better duds Gersson!

[Lipoli390]

Nevermind how Rosas answered those questions, what's the deal with that lame pseudo-cardigan he ware wearing!? Get some better duds Gersson!

It's its signature. Part of his shtick. Q - You seem to be in good spirits this morning. You must have had a good night's sleep - just like Anthony Edwards. :)

[Wolvesfan21]

Nevermind how Rosas answered those questions, what's the deal with that lame pseudo-cardigan he ware wearing!? Get some better duds Gersson!

It's its signature. Part of his shtick. Q - You seem to be in good spirits this morning. You must have had a good night's sleep - just like Anthony Edwards. :)

He's probably sleeping in till noon today. Played video games all night.

Could you imagine going to an NBA interview and saying you like to party and play video games all night, yeah I wake up around 10 sometimes? lol

[SameOldNudityDrew]

A lot of guys here--seems like the consensus, really--have concluded that Wiseman is the best pick and that if Rosas picks anybody else, especially Edwards, there's an implication he should be fired.

Are you guys really that confident in Wiseman over the field? If Rosas should be fired if he's wrong, should we similarly dismiss your points of view if it turns out Wiseman isn't the best pick?

Personally, I really see the appeal of Wiseman. Physically and athletically, he's a marvel. His upside is sky high. At the same time, there are some legit questions there for me.

1. Can he get strong enough in his lower body and disciplined enough to defend in the paint?

2. Can he handle switches defensively and defend on the perimeter without fouling?

3. And maybe most importantly, can he really develop into the kind of ball handler and shooter he's shown flashes of being, and can he make good decisions with the ball and not settle for weak 2 point jump shots?

How many of those questions do you think he'll need to be able to answer "yes" to in order to be worth the top pick? I think two of them, as long as one is number 3. It is a much more perimeter-oriented game these days, and you can replace most decent centers with a backup much cheaper without really hurting your team that much.

If he fails to get to yes on any of those questions, I think he's a bust. If he can only answer #1, then he's maybe going to become Hassan Whiteside, who will probably get paid less than Wiseman next year. If he only answers #2, then he's a better, more athletic version of Nerlens Noel with some Clint Capela thrown in. Pretty good, but I'm not sure that's worth the #1 pick. Now, if he can answer "yes" to two of those questions, and if one of them is #3 in particular, then, baby, you're talking about an All-Star. And if he can ultimately do all 3, we just got Anthony Davis 2.0! But still, that's 2 or 3 big questions he needs to answer before we can start talking about a guy we couldn't relatively easily replace and who is instead eating up a bunch of cap space.

The league is becoming more of a game of wings and guards, so guys like Ball and Edwards just fit better where the league is going. Okongwu will be a good defensive player because he can guard those guys and bigs, despite his limited offensive game. That doesn't mean any of those guys should absolutely be taken over Wiseman. Edwards and Ball have a ton of questions too. Personally at this point, I'd prefer a good trade-down option, and if not, I'm still kinda torn between Wiseman and Edwards.

But the certainty with which a lot of guys here seem ready to condemn Rosas for not picking Wiseman seems a bit rash to me.

As for the interviewing thing, sure, they should have tried to do it. But let's be honest, how much do they really need to do that to make a decision? If it's absolutely necessary to interview a guy personally before you can tell if he's worth the #1 pick, how exactly did anybody here come to the ironclad conclusion that Wiseman should absolutely be the pick (assuming, of course, that nobody here personally interviewed him)?

[thedoper]

A lot of guys here--seems like the consensus, really--have concluded that Wiseman is the best pick and that if Rosas picks anybody else, especially Edwards, there's an implication he should be fired.

Are you guys really that confident in Wiseman over the field? If Rosas should be fired if he's wrong, should we similarly dismiss your points of view if it turns out Wiseman isn't the best pick?

Personally, I really see the appeal of Wiseman. Physically and athletically, he's a marvel. His upside is sky high. At the same time, there are some legit questions there for me.

1. Can he get strong enough in his lower body and disciplined enough to defend in the paint?

2. Can he handle switches defensively and defend on the perimeter without fouling?

3. And maybe most importantly, can he really develop into the kind of ball handler and shooter he's shown flashes of being, and can he make good decisions with the ball and not settle for weak 2 point jump shots?

How many of those questions do you think he'll need to be able to answer "yes" to in order to be worth the top pick? I think two of them, as long as one is number 3. It is a much more perimeter-oriented game these days, and you can replace most decent centers with a backup much cheaper without really hurting your team that much.

If he fails to get to yes on any of those questions, I think he's a bust. If he can only answer #1, then he's maybe going to become Hassan Whiteside, who will probably get paid less than Wiseman next year. If he only answers #2, then he's a better, more athletic version of Nerlens Noel with some Clint Capela thrown in. Pretty good, but I'm not sure that's worth the #1 pick. Now, if he can answer "yes" to two of those questions, and if one of them is #3 in particular, then, baby, you're talking about an All-Star. And if he can ultimately do all 3, we just got Anthony Davis 2.0! But still, that's 2 or 3 big questions he needs to answer before we can start talking about a guy we couldn't relatively easily replace and who is instead eating up a bunch of cap space.

The league is becoming more of a game of wings and guards, so guys like Ball and Edwards just fit better where the league is going. Okongwu will be a good defensive player because he can guard those guys and bigs, despite his limited offensive game. That doesn't mean any of those guys should absolutely be taken over Wiseman. Edwards and Ball have a ton of questions too. Personally at this point, I'd prefer a good trade-down option, and if not, I'm still kinda torn between Wiseman and Edwards.

But the certainty with which a lot of guys here seem ready to condemn Rosas for not picking Wiseman seems a bit rash to me.

As for the interviewing thing, sure, they should have tried to do it. But let's be honest, how much do they really need to do that to make a decision? If it's absolutely necessary to interview a guy personally before you can tell if he's worth the #1 pick, how exactly did anybody here come to the ironclad conclusion that Wiseman should absolutely be the pick (assuming, of course, that nobody here personally interviewed him)?

Great post. If Wiseman can't learn to make defensive reads our team D could be even worse. Right now he looks like a slightly more athletic DeAndre Jordan with piss poor defensive instincts. I'm not sure this fits a need for our team at present. If he develops on his weaknesses, then absolutely yes what a prize. But he's not there yet. None of these guys are. Which is just the luck of the Wolves to get that top pick in a crap shoot year.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Drew, I think it's clear that Wiseman is not a perfectly refined prospect. I am probably not quite as far over on the pro-Wiseman spectrum as Cam. I'm actually open to taking him and trading down for another pick and assets and it doesn't have to be a star. I'd put it this way....I am MUCH more anti-Edwards and anti-Ball than I am pro-Wiseman. Make sense?

I just think it's incredibly arrogant for a young POBO and coach to believe they can take a guy like Edwards and somehow change his ways in what has been one of the losing-est franchises in the history of professional sports. A franchise like Miami could probably take that risk.

[Crazysauce]

Im not sure if anyone has posted this but it looks like Okongwu has a foot injury. Foot injuries are never q good thing when it comes to big men. May cause his stock to drop a bit tonight.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

Drew, I think it's clear that Wiseman is not a perfectly refined prospect. I am probably not quite as far over on the pro-Wiseman spectrum as Cam. I'm actually open to taking him and trading down for another pick and assets and it doesn't have to be a star. I'd put it this way....I am MUCH more anti-Edwards and anti-Ball than I am pro-Wiseman. Make sense?

I just think it's incredibly arrogant for a young POBO and coach to believe they can take a guy like Edwards and somehow change his ways in what has been one of the losing-est franchises in the history of professional sports. A franchise like Miami could probably take that risk.

Fair points. There's a lot to doubt there regarding Ball and Edwards. At the same time, they are really young. Guys do evolve as players. Ball already has to some degree, and we haven't really seen that much of Edwards--one season of college, basically.

And as for whether our team culture can shape them well, yeah, I'm on the record as being super skeptical of this team's culture going back decades now, and KAT and DLO are, in my mind, really weak leaders. They're not going to inculcate discipline, selflessness, and defensive effort through their example, that's for sure.

Q, you kind of bring up the issue of fit in an interesting way. And it makes me think there are really different kinds of "fit" and it might therefore be worth asking if some kinds of fit should be considered and others not. For example, I think it would be wrong to pass on Wiseman because of concerns about fit, physically and positionally--especially on defense, with KAT), as long as you think he's the best prospect. If you think he's the best, you take him. I'm guessing most people here would agree. But if that's the case, what about this second kind of "fit" that you raise, which is sort of about team culture. Those guys would not fit in terms of culture--or in a perverse way, they potentially WOULD fit our weak, undisciplined team culture. Either way, if it's wrong to pass on Wiseman for positional fit, would it be wrong to pass on Edwards and Ball because of cultural fit? I'm not sure. But I might actually lean toward saying no (and I suspect you'd agree). I think you've identified a different kind of fit that might be worth keeping in mind, specifically because it might prevent a guy from actually reaching his potential. Then again, if Miami should take a guy #1 because they have the team culture to bring out the best in a guy and he has the best potential, then it would feel kind of risky to pass on him for our team.

At the end of the day, I'm just hesitant to conclude that we really know much about these guys other than what we have seen them do. There's so much we don't know here.