Draft prospects - Who do we want?

[Monster]

To me Towns moves around and has the same sort of frame as Bynum. I can't compare their games at the same ages obviously but that's were I see the comparison. Like someone else said Bynum (without the injuries and being a bigtime time jerkhole) would be pretty fantastic.

[ahughes53 [enjin:6639223]]

Say we end up with the third pick, Russell is still on the board, do you pull the trigger or try to get cute and maybe take a guy like Justice Winslow (Would also be a pretty damn good pick for us, honestly)? Could a perimeter trio of Russell, LaVine and Wiggins be good enough to carry us? I am a large Rubio supporter, I like his personality a lot, like his spirit and game, love what he brings to the court with intensity and defense... but I can't help but think having three ball handlers that are all capable of shooting, going to the rim and distributing (Wiggins I think will get there someday) could be sooooo good offensively that we might be able to go with a guy like Dieng at PF to make up defense wise with his weak side help defense. Russell, LaVine, Wiggins, Dieng, Pek is pretty big and versatile lineup, and if LaVine can prove to be a solid defender that would be 3 plus defenders. I count Pek and Dieng as 1 of them, because they are about .5 each, Dieng can't defend strength but Pek can, and Pek can't come from the weak side and swat a ball but Dieng can.

I also know this has probably been beaten half to death, but I'm starting to warm to the idea of maybe be able to move Rubio if we get Russell and he pans out.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

If I was GM and selected with Russell or Mudiay, I'd look to get something (top-eight pick, package for established big even though there aren't many available) for Rubio. I see both of those guys best at being point guards. Gives them the most advantage.

[ahughes53 [enjin:6639223]]

That's the only real problem, a lot of the bigs we would need already have winning teams and we don't have anything we could give them they don't already have. Unless somehow we could package Rubio and Martin together, which could be an enticing package. Maybe Henson for Martin and a 2nd rounder would do it, maybe a Euro to sweeten it. Highly doubtful though.

Back to the topic, Russell is a PG, I'm sure he could play the 2, but LaVine has shown he's clearly better playing off ball, so I have a lot of hope. If we end up with Russell, I think he could replicate a lot of Rubio's playmaking. We'd just have to find a perimeter defender to replace Rubio's havoc.

[bleedspeed]

If we get the 3rd pick and land Russell. Then we just need to turn around and trade Rubio, Martin, and the 2nd's to the Thunder for Adams and their first which we draft Frank the Tank with.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

If I was GM and selected with Russell or Mudiay, I'd look to get something (top-eight pick, package for established big even though there aren't many available) for Rubio. I see both of those guys best at being point guards. Gives them the most advantage.

I wouldn't. We know Rubio's value on the court. He's a top 12 PG when healthy (IMO). And if his shooting ever improves he can probably vault into a top 5 or 6 PG. On the other hand, we have no idea how good Russell or Muiday are going to be. If they turn out to be great, than fine, we'll deal with the "problem" of too many good guards on our roster and trade someone.

Russell especially can play off the ball with Rubio. There are all sorts of interesting and versatile combos you could throw out there if we draft him.

[TRKO [enjin:12664595]]

Heard a lot of discussion recently on how the NBA has changed with regarding big men and point guards. People were talking how Rondo not being able to shoot at the PG position kills the mavericks and how zero 7'ers scored over 20 PPG. Does that change how you approach things? Does a PG who can't shoot like Rubio hurt us? Would getting a guy like Russell be better than a big man due to his shooting ability?

Personally I think the reason we have seen teams go away from dumping it down in the post is due to the fact that there aren't too many great post players. This isn't the 90's where guys like Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, and Shaq played. I think great talent wins over style every time. A great post player can open things up for teams just as good as anything else.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Heard a lot of discussion recently on how the NBA has changed with regarding big men and point guards. People were talking how Rondo not being able to shoot at the PG position kills the mavericks and how zero 7'ers scored over 20 PPG. Does that change how you approach things? Does a PG who can't shoot like Rubio hurt us? Would getting a guy like Russell be better than a big man due to his shooting ability?

Personally I think the reason we have seen teams go away from dumping it down in the post is due to the fact that there aren't too many great post players. This isn't the 90's where guys like Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, and Shaq played. I think great talent wins over style every time. A great post player can open things up for teams just as good as anything else.

I think shooting in general is just becoming a big thing again because of the spacing it provides for the offense to operate. If you don't have a stretch 4 and your PG can't shoot you're down to 2 guys who stretch the floor when teams are more and more looking for 4 guys who can stretch the floor to be out there at all times. You can have a PG who can't shoot, but that guy has to be able to do everything else at an elite level. Rondo can't do that anymore which is why they have taken such a big hit with him playing and at his best he still had an elbow jumper and could finish at the rim on top of being a nightly triple-double threat.

That is where Ricky needs to improve or we simply can't keep him. If Ricky is no threat to score he's handicapping the offense and making his life harder because his passing lanes are gone when everyone plays the lanes instead of his shot. If we took Russell I'd still hang on to Ricky one more year to let Russell adapt to the next level as the backup and give Ricky one last chance to stay healthy and improve his game in those areas that he has to improve or he can't be a top 10 PG in the league. Then with the new cap if he doesn't improve you can deal him much more easily to open the spot for Russell to take over in year 2.

I think if Payne and AB get the reps in this summer they can both develop reliable 3pt range so we could have at least 3 shooters on the floor at all times. We just can't have <=2 on the floor or our offense is going to struggle mightily again.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Personally I think the reason we have seen teams go away from dumping it down in the post is due to the fact that there aren't too many great post players. This isn't the 90's where guys like Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, and Shaq played. I think great talent wins over style every time. A great post player can open things up for teams just as good as anything else.

I agree, although I read an article on Canis Hoopus today that was pretty enlightening. The premise of the article was to make a case for drafting Willie Cauley-Stein as high as #2. As part of the argument of taking WCS over Okafor, some numbers were rattled off about the efficiency (or lack thereof) of low post possessions.

The bottom line is that isolation low-post sets aren't very efficient. Not only does it stagnate the rest of the offense, but it more often than not leads to a missed shot or turnover. This reminds me of how Saunders over-used Pekovic in the low post. Pek's at his best when on the move, either as the roller in the pick and roll game or in secondary opportunities where he's quickly sealing someone off for a quick layup or getting a putback rebound. He's simply not that effective of an iso-post player that you pound the ball to time and again.

Now some low-post players are truly virtuosos: McHale, Hakeem, Shaq...Guys who are so efficient and draw so much attention, it makes sense to make them a focal point of your offense. The question is whether Okafor can be this good.

(by the way Al Jefferson is NOT one of these people. While he has a slick repertoire of low post moves, he very rarely draws fouls or gets looks right at the rim. As a result, he's never been that efficient and it makes it difficult to build an offense around him).

[thedoper]

Okafor's college efficiency in the post is among the best ever and not just for freshman. Plus is has good vision similar to Shaq and Olajuwon. I don't see Al Jefferson there. Low post sets can be extremely efficient if the post player can pass and score at High Efficiency. All of those 90s centers knew how to move the ball and that was why you could run an offense through them and basically why the new generation of bigs (Apart from duncan) just haven't had the same impact. This is such an opportune time to exploit the low post. Those 90s centers would dominate in today's NBA, especially with the fouls they call now.