Buddy Hield

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

I don't agree with ignoring what our roster currently has. I think people enjoy saying "pick best available player" because it sounds great in theory, but good/great teams pick best available player that fits what they have built already.

Best example off the top of my head is when we picked Derrick Williams in 2011. Yes, Williams was the best available talent at the time (the draft was widely considered a two-player draft). He didn't work out, but taking him No. 2 wasn't a reach in any sense of the word. And yet, we messed up. We took a player No. 2 overall to play behind the team's best player in Kevin Love. We ignored what the team already had. We could have added a player that fit with Love and the rest of that nucleus.

That's what we need to do this year. Pick a high talent that fits with what we have going on. Most of these prospects are going to be ranked closely anyway. So, taking into account the team fit is necessary. For example, I think Jamal Murray is the better talent between him and Jakob Poeltl, but taking Murray is questionable because we have LaVine and Wiggins already. Take Poeltl because we need bigs, and he'd fit perfectly with Towns and Dieng.

[Monster]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

I don't agree with ignoring what our roster currently has. I think people enjoy saying "pick best available player" because it sounds great in theory, but good/great teams pick best available player that fits what they have built already.

Best example off the top of my head is when we picked Derrick Williams in 2011. Yes, Williams was the best available talent at the time (the draft was widely considered a two-player draft). He didn't work out, but taking him No. 2 wasn't a reach in any sense of the word. And yet, we messed up. We took a player No. 2 overall to play behind the team's best player in Kevin Love. We ignored what the team already had. We could have added a player that fit with Love and the rest of that nucleus.

That's what we need to do this year. Pick a high talent that fits with what we have going on. Most of these prospects are going to be ranked closely anyway. So, taking into account the team fit is necessary. For example, I think Jamal Murray is the better talent between him and Jakob Poeltl, but taking Murray is questionable because we have LaVine and Wiggins already. Take Poeltl because we need bigs, and he'd fit perfectly with Towns and Dieng.

Ultimately I sort of agree with Cam but I think of the talent gap is too far you gotta just take a guy but I doubt that's going to be the case if you a re picking putside the top 2.

Cam I thought about Williams but don't like using him as example because the reality was fit didn't matter he just isn't a very good basketball player no matter where you put him. Nice enough bench player is what he is now. A few of us were interested in trading down in that draft or just flat out selecting another player. It seemed like Ronzone was a big fan of Kanter and while he sucks at defense he sure would be nice to have here or as a trade asset. Of course at the time adding a guy like Kanter or even Jonas would have been a problem for fit since we already had Pek. So we went for the theoretical best talent in hopes he could become a SF or Love's replacement I guess. Thank goodness we get to turn the page on all that and hope to get another good player.

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

I don't agree with ignoring what our roster currently has. I think people enjoy saying "pick best available player" because it sounds great in theory, but good/great teams pick best available player that fits what they have built already.

Best example off the top of my head is when we picked Derrick Williams in 2011. Yes, Williams was the best available talent at the time (the draft was widely considered a two-player draft). He didn't work out, but taking him No. 2 wasn't a reach in any sense of the word. And yet, we messed up. We took a player No. 2 overall to play behind the team's best player in Kevin Love. We ignored what the team already had. We could have added a player that fit with Love and the rest of that nucleus.

That's what we need to do this year. Pick a high talent that fits with what we have going on. Most of these prospects are going to be ranked closely anyway. So, taking into account the team fit is necessary. For example, I think Jamal Murray is the better talent between him and Jakob Poeltl, but taking Murray is questionable because we have LaVine and Wiggins already. Take Poeltl because we need bigs, and he'd fit perfectly with Towns and Dieng.

I disagree in your Murray/Poeltl scenario. I feel Murray could backup both G spots. He brings three point shooting off the bench and he has the ability to develop into a very good, starting level player. We can find a role for Murray. While I would rather draft a big, I see a definite role for Murray to get big minutes and help us out. In that instance I take the guy I think will be a better player.

[TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

I don't agree with ignoring what our roster currently has. I think people enjoy saying "pick best available player" because it sounds great in theory, but good/great teams pick best available player that fits what they have built already.

Best example off the top of my head is when we picked Derrick Williams in 2011. Yes, Williams was the best available talent at the time (the draft was widely considered a two-player draft). He didn't work out, but taking him No. 2 wasn't a reach in any sense of the word. And yet, we messed up. We took a player No. 2 overall to play behind the team's best player in Kevin Love. We ignored what the team already had. We could have added a player that fit with Love and the rest of that nucleus.

That's what we need to do this year. Pick a high talent that fits with what we have going on. Most of these prospects are going to be ranked closely anyway. So, taking into account the team fit is necessary. For example, I think Jamal Murray is the better talent between him and Jakob Poeltl, but taking Murray is questionable because we have LaVine and Wiggins already. Take Poeltl because we need bigs, and he'd fit perfectly with Towns and Dieng.

I disagree in your Murray/Poeltl scenario. I feel Murray could backup both G spots. He brings three point shooting off the bench and he has the ability to develop into a very good, starting level player. We can find a role for Murray. While I would rather draft a big, I see a definite role for Murray to get big minutes and help us out. In that instance I take the guy I think will be a better player.

Have you seen Murray play defense? He reminds me of Bazz and not in a good way. My eye test is backed up by his very poor D-Rating, plus even though he's a freshman he lacks the size, reach and lateral quickness to expect dramatic improvement. He's a terrible fit here. There are plenty of other similar talents that will help us better, so let some other team take him. And I agree with Cam that there is no question, Poeltl is a better fit than Murray. And if you don't like Poeltl there is Ingram, Simmons, Bender, Hield, Jaylen Brown, Dunn and Sabonis to choose from.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Putting Tyus, Bazz, and Buddy on the second unit would be a problem on defense. Probably need to trade Bazz.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Putting Tyus, Bazz, and Buddy on the second unit would be a problem on defense. Probably need to trade Bazz.

Makes sense to try and trade regardless of who we draft, IMO. I like the guy and how hard he tries, but he's not an effective basketball player and just as hard to watch. Pre-determined moves on offense and liability on defense. Would love to somehow get a future first.

[The Rage Monster [enjin:8010341]]

I don't think you look at our roster when you make the draft pick. Pick the best guy and work from there. If we have two great young SGs, then so be it. You can always trade good talent for usable assets.

I don't agree with ignoring what our roster currently has. I think people enjoy saying "pick best available player" because it sounds great in theory, but good/great teams pick best available player that fits what they have built already.

Best example off the top of my head is when we picked Derrick Williams in 2011. Yes, Williams was the best available talent at the time (the draft was widely considered a two-player draft). He didn't work out, but taking him No. 2 wasn't a reach in any sense of the word. And yet, we messed up. We took a player No. 2 overall to play behind the team's best player in Kevin Love. We ignored what the team already had. We could have added a player that fit with Love and the rest of that nucleus.

That's what we need to do this year. Pick a high talent that fits with what we have going on. Most of these prospects are going to be ranked closely anyway. So, taking into account the team fit is necessary. For example, I think Jamal Murray is the better talent between him and Jakob Poeltl, but taking Murray is questionable because we have LaVine and Wiggins already. Take Poeltl because we need bigs, and he'd fit perfectly with Towns and Dieng.

I'd have to disagree and sort of agree as well. I'd always want us to take the best player available, if they are able to play then they'll see the court. Williams just wasn't a good player but imagine if he had reached his potential and turned into something like Blake Griffin, there would have been no problem finding a way to play both of them. If our scouts are unable to separate out guys based on talent then I have no problem using fit to break the tie.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Putting Tyus, Bazz, and Buddy on the second unit would be a problem on defense. Probably need to trade Bazz.

Makes sense to try and trade regardless of who we draft, IMO. I like the guy and how hard he tries, but he's not an effective basketball player and just as hard to watch. Pre-determined moves on offense and liability on defense. Would love to somehow get a future first.

This is his 3rd year, right? He's under contract for 4? Player option?

[Monster]

Putting Tyus, Bazz, and Buddy on the second unit would be a problem on defense. Probably need to trade Bazz.

Makes sense to try and trade regardless of who we draft, IMO. I like the guy and how hard he tries, but he's not an effective basketball player and just as hard to watch. Pre-determined moves on offense and liability on defense. Would love to somehow get a future first.

This is his 3rd year, right? He's under contract for 4? Player option?

He is locked in for next year 2016-2017 and after that whatever team he is on would have to make him a qualifying offer to make him a restricted FA. The link below should give you just about all the info you can reasonably desire.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/minnesota-timberwolves-team-salary/