Article:Best draft fit for Timberwolves? Florida State’s Jonathan Isaac, ESPN’s Fran Fraschilla says

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Speaking of beef (from Khans' earlier comment), you know who I'm liking more and more? OG Anunoby.

His shot mechanics are stiff (so are Josh Jackson's), his FT% is ugly, and that knee injury is a question . . . .

. . . but man, put him in as a small-ball 4 and he can switch anything on D (he can guard 1-4, and probably even 5s). He'd give us some serious strength, quickness, and length on D where he picks up both blocks and steals. He can finish offensively at the rim at a high percentage without demanding a ton of shots (which fits our need for defense). I don't hold out a ton of hope for him as an outside shooter, but he has shot a pretty good percentage from outside in spot-up situations (45% from 3 as a freshman). Plus he's still young.

Given his projections, I wouldn't take him unless we traded down, and I'm not sure what scenario that would happen in. But I think a guy like that could be a good fit, and the kind of young guy Thibs might even play a bit because of his defense.

The dude has a crazy body. He's built like a brick house with a very solid base, he's 6'8" with a wingspan (reportedly) of 7'6"??? That's freaking HUGE. He's 3 inches shorter than Jonathan Isaac, but he has a wingspan 5 inches wider and he's got at least 30 pounds on him, and it looks like all fast-twitch muscle. He's got the weight and wingspan of a center but the quickness of a much smaller player.

He was definitely high on people's radar before the injury, but that knocked him down a bit.

I would not be opposed to trading whoever we pick for a guy like OG and another lower pick like Thornwell. Jordan Bell is another guy that kinda interests me that could be had at a much lower pick.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

[Lipoli390]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

[WildWolf2813]

I'd take him but only because I expect nothing from him for a year or two while he makes Mayo Clinic Square his permanent home

[TheFuture]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

I think its an easy answer. It should be well known here that the draft isn't about where you pick its about who you pick (unless there are one or two guarantees ala shaq/mourning or LeBron/Melo).

I personally like many of the players slated in the 10-20 range, and see no real disparity in potential between them and those expected to go in the 3-9 range. Then I take into account that we have a dleague now, a roster increase to 17, and plenty of non guarantees still on our roster. Now I glance over at GSW, Cavs, Boston, bucks, utah, nuggets, and 76ers ... we need to accumulate more talent and we likely lose our pick next year. I'd do anything I could to get two picks from 10-22 and increase the chances of one panning out for us because I'm certainly not sold on any of Isaac, Collins, Monk, Markannen, or Tatum.

[Mr. Brightside [enjin:16464947]]

Speaking of beef (from Khans' earlier comment), you know who I'm liking more and more? OG Anunoby.

His shot mechanics are stiff (so are Josh Jackson's), his FT% is ugly, and that knee injury is a question . . . .

. . . but man, put him in as a small-ball 4 and he can switch anything on D (he can guard 1-4, and probably even 5s). He'd give us some serious strength, quickness, and length on D where he picks up both blocks and steals. He can finish offensively at the rim at a high percentage without demanding a ton of shots (which fits our need for defense). I don't hold out a ton of hope for him as an outside shooter, but he has shot a pretty good percentage from outside in spot-up situations (45% from 3 as a freshman). Plus he's still young.

Given his projections, I wouldn't take him unless we traded down, and I'm not sure what scenario that would happen in. But I think a guy like that could be a good fit, and the kind of young guy Thibs might even play a bit because of his defense.

The dude has a crazy body. He's built like a brick house with a very solid base, he's 6'8" with a wingspan (reportedly) of 7'6"??? That's freaking HUGE. He's 3 inches shorter than Jonathan Isaac, but he has a wingspan 5 inches wider and he's got at least 30 pounds on him, and it looks like all fast-twitch muscle. He's got the weight and wingspan of a center but the quickness of a much smaller player.

I love me some Anunoby. Really like the idea of a small ball 4. It'll be interesting to see how he measures out at the combine.

[Monster]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

I think its an easy answer. It should be well known here that the draft isn't about where you pick its about who you pick (unless there are one or two guarantees ala shaq/mourning or LeBron/Melo).

I personally like many of the players slated in the 10-20 range, and see no real disparity in potential between them and those expected to go in the 3-9 range. Then I take into account that we have a dleague now, a roster increase to 17, and plenty of non guarantees still on our roster. Now I glance over at GSW, Cavs, Boston, bucks, and 76ers ... we need to accumulate more talent and we likely lose our pick next year. I'd do anything I could to get two picks from 10-22 and increase the chances of one panning out for us.

It really depends on what kind of deal you are offered and how you have evaluated the players you can select with the picks you receive. The classic trade down success story was when the Nets traded 7 to the Rockets who took Griffin (I was not a fan of him though he was really overrated) and ended up with Richard Kefferson and Jason Collins plus another player Brandon's armstrong. They ended up with a really good player in Jefferson (still pretty good) and a below average starting center in Collins. Pretty good. It doesn't always work out that well and Flip's trade down was just ok at this point when they could have taken CJ. I would have been interested in a trade down last year IF I got a good enough offer. With Dunn sitting there my guess is the offers may have been pretty good. Consider some teams have given up their first rounder and a future first to move up a couple picks or whatever trading down sure could be an option but obviously if your guy is there you take him-the end.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

I think its an easy answer. It should be well known here that the draft isn't about where you pick its about who you pick (unless there are one or two guarantees ala shaq/mourning or LeBron/Melo).

I personally like many of the players slated in the 10-20 range, and see no real disparity in potential between them and those expected to go in the 3-9 range. Then I take into account that we have a dleague now, a roster increase to 17, and plenty of non guarantees still on our roster. Now I glance over at GSW, Cavs, Boston, bucks, utah, nuggets, and 76ers ... we need to accumulate more talent and we likely lose our pick next year. I'd do anything I could to get two picks from 10-22 and increase the chances of one panning out for us because I'm certainly not sold on any of Isaac, Collins, Monk, Markannen, or Tatum.

I guess I see a big drop off in that range. Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Tatum, Isaac, Collins, Monk, Fox, Smith, Markannen and Nitilikina is an unknown, but after that there is a big drop off IMO. Sure you could find a guy in that range, but I highly doubt you find two and I think a much higher percentage of the top 10 will be good than from 11-30.

[kekgeek]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

I think its an easy answer. It should be well known here that the draft isn't about where you pick its about who you pick (unless there are one or two guarantees ala shaq/mourning or LeBron/Melo).

I personally like many of the players slated in the 10-20 range, and see no real disparity in potential between them and those expected to go in the 3-9 range. Then I take into account that we have a dleague now, a roster increase to 17, and plenty of non guarantees still on our roster. Now I glance over at GSW, Cavs, Boston, bucks, utah, nuggets, and 76ers ... we need to accumulate more talent and we likely lose our pick next year. I'd do anything I could to get two picks from 10-22 and increase the chances of one panning out for us because I'm certainly not sold on any of Isaac, Collins, Monk, Markannen, or Tatum.

I guess I see a big drop off in that range. Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Tatum, Isaac, Collins, Monk, Fox, Smith, Markannen and Nitilikina is an unknown, but after that there is a big drop off IMO. Sure you could find a guy in that range, but I highly doubt you find two and I think a much higher percentage of the top 10 will be good than from 11-30.

I 100% agree, I think this is a deep draft in terms of top level talent but after 10 it seems like there is a big drop off in talent. Not saying guys won't be productive in later picks but I do see a drop off.

Another thing this is probably the last chance to add top end lottery talent. Also there is no pressure on the pick to come in a carry a franchise like many high picks the player can come in and play a role.

Also with Zach lavine injury we don't know if he will be the same player ever again. We might just have a big 2 now so gaining a chance to gain a high end talent is huge to me.

[Lipoli390]

Why do people want two rookies on this team next year? Why trade down? It makes no sense to me unless you are getting an established player back with a pick. There's real quality talent at 6 where we are picking. I don't get why we'd trade that down for 2 lessor prospects on a team already stacked with young talent. Get a high quality prospect or get established talent back. Those should be the only two options we look at. We need quality on this team now, not quantity.

Kahns -- I was about the write essentially the same post as this one. I absolutely agree with you. When you have a top 6 pick, you take the best player available based on upside or trade the pick for a really, really good vet. You don't trade down for two lesser players.

I think its an easy answer. It should be well known here that the draft isn't about where you pick its about who you pick (unless there are one or two guarantees ala shaq/mourning or LeBron/Melo).

I personally like many of the players slated in the 10-20 range, and see no real disparity in potential between them and those expected to go in the 3-9 range. Then I take into account that we have a dleague now, a roster increase to 17, and plenty of non guarantees still on our roster. Now I glance over at GSW, Cavs, Boston, bucks, utah, nuggets, and 76ers ... we need to accumulate more talent and we likely lose our pick next year. I'd do anything I could to get two picks from 10-22 and increase the chances of one panning out for us because I'm certainly not sold on any of Isaac, Collins, Monk, Markannen, or Tatum.

I agree completely that we should accumulate more talent knowing that we're unlikely to have another lottery pick for some time and might lose next year's first round pick as well. I'll add that we don't have a second round pick this season either. But I see a pretty big drop off after those projected by most to go in the first 8-10. If our front office is convinced they can get as good a talent in the 10-20 range as anyone they could get in the top 8, then by all means they should trade down and get an extra pick. I just don't see it.

So far, the guys I like in the draft are Fultz, Josh Jackson, Tatum, Monk, Isaac and Zach Collins based on talent and fit. I haven't included Ball even though I love his talent because I think he and his daddy would have their eyes on him becoming a Laker the moment we drafted him. His dad is a piece of work. Of all these guys, I think Fultz, Jackson and Monk could contribute significantly as rookies. Isaac and Collins would likely take more time to develop but they appear to have as much upside as Fultz, Ball and Jackson.