Draft prospects - Who do we want?

[Coolbreeze44]

LST you forget, we are going to win the lottery this year.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I don't like the prospect of putting non-shooting wings next to Ricky. It feels like wasted potential with Ricky's passing ability and his play style of driving to the hoop to kick the ball out to the corners for 3's occasionally. I'm honestly just tired of guys who can't shoot (Wes, Johnny, D Will, etc.). Wiggins is a breath of fresh air for an organization that has just been terrible shooters outside of the top 2 typically. There's a reason our recent competitive play has spiked and it is because we are actually utilizing the 3 point shot. That opens everything else up on offense. We don't have our star stretch 4 anymore so our wings need to be able to shoot so we keep our spacing and maximize Ricky and Pek's games.

I agree that long-range shooting is one of our biggest weaknesses as a team, but I find it very hard to identify college prospects where I feel confident it will translate. It's not easy to figure out - and some guys that don't look so good in college turn out to be great in the NBA. Here are some examples, going in both directions:

Corey Brewer - 36% career 3-point shooter in college, 30% in the pros.
Kawhi Leonard - 25% college, 37% pros
Derrick Williams - 51% college, 31% pros
Wes Matthews - 34% college, 39% pros

Players like Steph Curry and JJ Redick are sort of the exception because they were at such an extreme in terms of both 3-point volume and accuracy over multiple college seasons that it would be hard to see them struggle at the next level. Plus they both have really quick releases. But who thought Wes Matthews would become the dead-eye shooter he's become?

In looking at the top of the draft board this year, it's really tough to figure out who will and who won't end up being good shooters, so I've almost discounted it completely and focus on all the other stuff.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I know we have the 2nd worst record in the league right now, but I still see us rallying after our 3 starters (and Muhammad) return, and ending up with a pick more in the 6-8 range...which likely eliminates us from considering Stanley Johnson, as much as I love his game. But I continue to think that Karl-Anthony Towns will be available when we draft, and I think he would fit in great with our current core. Why do I think a guy who has been in the top three in most mocks all year will be available at 6-8? Because his lack of playing time on the loaded Kentucky team is suppressing his stats...only 8.5 and 6.7 currently, and that should keep him out of the top three. Towns is a terrific 2-way player, and I think can play the 4 in the pros...his passing and outside shooting are that good. I don't see him as a starter in 2015-16, but in two years a starting lineup of Rubio, Wiggins, Towns, Dieng and whoever (Martin, Shabazz, etc) will be a formidable defensive lineup...far from what he have been forced to watch this year.

Russell is also someone to keep an eye on. The game just seems to come easily to him, and he also likely to be available when we pick. I mentioned earlier that he had a tendency to put up big numbers against weaker opponents early in this season, and struggle against stronger competition, but that hasn't been the case in Big Ten play...he's putting up big numbers. I haven't been impressed with his defensive intensity the 2 times I have seen him, but he has the potential to be a big time NBA offensive player...both as a scorer and a distributor.

Boy, you are an optimist. The way this team is dragging its feet with bringing back the injured guys, it's clear Flip is in no hurry to compete this year (although I hate this strategy because I don't think competing and development are mutually exclusive goals).

As for Towns, if he were a guard or wing, I could see his lack of minutes dragging him down. But anytime you have a multi-talented legit big man, he will always get the benefit of the doubt by NBA scouts and front offices, especially on a Kentucky team stocked with other talented bigs. I think all he has to do is stay healthy in order to go top 3.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Q, I know you like things from each player's game, but I also know you stress defense and it's surpreme value (I agree). So I ask you: If you were on the clock with the No. 1 overall pick, who would your selection be?

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Cam, I don't think we could pass on Okafor. He isn't perfect by any stretch, but what I like about the guy is that he has a clear identity of a traditional low-post Center. He's literally unguardable right now one on one. It won't be quite so easy in the NBA, but he's not just powering up and dunking over people in college. He has a ton of skill and craft to his game that should translate to the next level.

As for defense, I don't think a player needs to be an elite shotblocker to be solid on that end. In fact, it often makes more sense to stay ground-bound and wall up rather than leave one's feet. That makes it easier to carom the rebound and also avoid biting on pump fakes. He's 7-foot and 270+ lbs, so he won't be moved out of the paint so easily. I ultimately don't know if Okafor will be a good defensive anchor or not, but I don't really know if any of the other Center prospects will be either.

One of my favorite data points for how defense can be impacted by the coach more than player personnel is the Charlotte Hornets. Here is how they compared in 2012-13 (under Mike Dunlap) vs. 2013-14 (under Steve Clifford):

Opponent points per 100 possessions (league rank) - Went from dead last to 5th!
Opponent eFG% - Went from last to 9th.
Def Reb % - Went from 29th to 1st.
Opponent TO% - Went from 21st to 26th


So under Steve Clifford, they dramatically improved their overall defense through much better shot-contesting and defensive rebounding. They actually got worse in creating turnovers, probably because he discouraged gambling in order to minimize uncontested shots.

And the one major player personnel change they made between those two seasons? They added Al Jefferson of all people, hardly known for his defensive chops. Yet he anchored the middle for that 5th ranked NBA defense.

Jahil Okafor is taller and bigger than "Big Al". With the right coach and experience, I'm pretty sure he can learn how to defend.

That's my 25-cents :)

[worldK]

Im agree with Q. We have to take okafor if we got the number 1 pick. We have dieng and pek already but we cant pass up on okafor @1.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I guess what worries me about Okafor is that in the NBA, there will be guys his size that can bang with him down low. His game is 100% low post offense and he does make it look insanely easy at the college level, but what can he provide if he doesn't have that, or at least as dominant? I also worry about the lack of finesse in his game. At the same time, I will give credit in that his footwork is way beyond his years; very impressive for a young man. I'm in no means against Okafor, but that's my big question. He isn't a shooter, he's not terrific as a facilitator. Is he a one trick pony?

(I'd like to add that Big Al has a mid-range stroke, shoots decently for a big man at the line [career 71%] and has a reliable right hook that works against even the best challenge. Okafor doesn't have any of these, though, I'll admit they are skills that can be improved upon.)

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I also think Towns is going to be rewarded by the style of the NBA (not as stuffy/slow as college), and more specifically, the Wolves if he was on this team. Towns is going to get so many buckets just from being mobile as hell. And the kid can shoot. And he's got a 9'5 standing reach. And he has a 36.5" vertical. Those guys don't grow on trees.

[Porckchop]

I know we have the 2nd worst record in the league right now, but I still see us rallying after our 3 starters (and Muhammad) return, and ending up with a pick more in the 6-8 range...which likely eliminates us from considering Stanley Johnson, as much as I love his game. But I continue to think that Karl-Anthony Towns will be available when we draft, and I think he would fit in great with our current core. Why do I think a guy who has been in the top three in most mocks all year will be available at 6-8? Because his lack of playing time on the loaded Kentucky team is suppressing his stats...only 8.5 and 6.7 currently, and that should keep him out of the top three. Towns is a terrific 2-way player, and I think can play the 4 in the pros...his passing and outside shooting are that good. I don't see him as a starter in 2015-16, but in two years a starting lineup of Rubio, Wiggins, Towns, Dieng and whoever (Martin, Shabazz, etc) will be a formidable defensive lineup...far from what he have been forced to watch this year.

Russell is also someone to keep an eye on. The game just seems to come easily to him, and he also likely to be available when we pick. I mentioned earlier that he had a tendency to put up big numbers against weaker opponents early in this season, and struggle against stronger competition, but that hasn't been the case in Big Ten play...he's putting up big numbers. I haven't been impressed with his defensive intensity the 2 times I have seen him, but he has the potential to be a big time NBA offensive player...both as a scorer and a distributor.

I'm less interested on ur thoughts of Towns dropping and more curious of your idea that 3 oft injured , terribly flawed players are gonna start winning games for this team. Maybe consolidate this in to the "cavs lost" thread?

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

Porkchop, I agree with you that this club is going to continue to lose if our 3 starters (plus Shabazz) don't return to the lineup. But I'm assuming that they are going to return, and soon...well at least all except Pek, and I would argue that he is the least needed of the four. I realize that the first 4 1/2 games of the season prior to Rubio's injury isn't a very big sample size, but it's all we really have to go on in evaluating how this roster plays together. And that 4 1/2 game stretch looked very good to me...at least a .500 team. Plus it's logical to conclude that our rookies and second year players are all more proficient than they were early in the season...that's simply the way the NBA learning curve works. So yeah, I think the Wolves end up somewhere in the 6-8 range (unless Cool is correct in his certainty that we win the lottery this year!).