Minnesota Sports Forum

A boom or bust shooter that busts is more likely out of the league sooner than a boom or bust big man. A big man can still rebound and block shots and clog up the lane.
Wiseman is not only the safest pick but has the highest ceiling as well.

PorkChop wrote:A boom or bust shooter that busts is more likely out of the league sooner than a boom or bust big man. A big man can still rebound and block shots and clog up the lane.
Wiseman is not only the safest pick but has the highest ceiling as well.

You could be right but here is the thing even if Wiseman hits the ultimate potential what is hard to do and turns into an embiid type player there is no proof that teams can win consistently with big men in the NBA. I will say it again it has been since 2011 that one of a teams top 2 players was a big man and won a championship. Then the wolves would have 2 of their top 3 players being big men. Also if a big man and a wing or guard player end up having similar the wing/guard are always more valuable. Wiseman would have to be significantly better then any wing or guard to draft a big man.

TheFuture wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Who is this class has the most upside?

Ball. The league is about guys who can handle the ball and not big men any more.

Fit or upside?

For me the answer is both. You need multiple guys who can create off the dribble and Ball with Russell accomplishes that. It'd be ideal if he was 6'9 230 and could be a lockdown defender, but that guys doesn't exist in this class imo so Ball can be that guy who has the size of a 2 with PG skills next to Russell who has PG size. Non-shooting big men are getting played off the floor more and more.

khans2k5 wrote:

TheFuture wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Who is this class has the most upside?

Ball. The league is about guys who can handle the ball and not big men any more.

Fit or upside?

For me the answer is both. You need multiple guys who can create off the dribble and Ball with Russell accomplishes that. It'd be ideal if he was 6'9 230 and could be a lockdown defender, but that guys doesn't exist in this class imo so Ball can be that guy who has the size of a 2 with PG skills next to Russell who has PG size. Non-shooting big men are getting played off the floor more and moreNon-shooting big men are getting played off the floor more and more.

I believe the statement should read...."non-shooting players are getting played off the floor". I just don't see this as a big-man only issue. And I think some of the bigs you talk about are being played off floor due to defensive matchups, not offensive skillset.

The league changes over time, and right now it is a guard heavy league. But it will swing again. I think you take the BPA. Clearly, the issue in evaluating Wiseman is is body of work. Had he continued playing, we simply would have had a much easier time evaluating his value vs a dominating guard type. I do think he offers the BEST solution to our defensive woes. Gobert has shown an elite interior defenders ability to impact the game. Not saying Wiseman is Gobert, just that there is certainly a fit for a dominant, large interior defender type in today's NBA. And they CAN and DO make impacts to good teams.

I haven't seen this added to the thread yet, but if the Wolves had the opportunity to draft Wiseman and actually did so, I think there'd be a clear identity of the team/core moving forward. Fast-paced, run-and-gun pieces (which we already have), but also a legitimate advantage in size on a nightly basis. That should translate to all levels of the game whether it's rebounding, defending, protecting the rim, etc. That Towns/Wiseman duo would absolutely punish teams that tried to go small on them because: a) They have the foot speed to stay with quicker players on the perimeter. b) They can both shoot it from deep -- albeit at different levels of success with Towns being elite of the elite there. c) They'd control the glass nightly, which is something they haven't been able to accomplish since Kevin Love and Nikola Pekovic were still a thing.

I look at the best teams in the league and most of them have something that sets them apart from the middle of the pack teams and it's usually some sort of advantage they bring nightly. I'm not talking about personnel exactly, but more of a style they've implemented. The Rockets play to their threes/frees/layups style and it's definitely an advantage. The Warriors built their success around their three-point snipers in the backcourt. The Raptors won a championship last year by out-defending and out-depth'ing other teams. The Bucks have inverted their offense to where their biggest player also happens to be a predominant ball-handler.

The Wolves were (are) trying to find their identity of using a five-out brand of basketball, which can still be accomplished with Wiseman next to Towns, but they could also become one of the biggest teams in the league if they chose that route. And that would create many mismatches for opposing teams.

1: Russell (6'5)
2: Beasley (6'4)
3: Layman/Hernangomez (6'9)
4: Towns (7'0)
5: Wiseman (7'1)

kekgeek1 wrote:

PorkChop wrote:A boom or bust shooter that busts is more likely out of the league sooner than a boom or bust big man. A big man can still rebound and block shots and clog up the lane.
Wiseman is not only the safest pick but has the highest ceiling as well.

You could be right but here is the thing even if Wiseman hits the ultimate potential what is hard to do and turns into an embiid type player there is no proof that teams can win consistently with big men in the NBA. I will say it again it has been since 2011 that one of a teams top 2 players was a big man and won a championship. Then the wolves would have 2 of their top 3 players being big men. Also if a big man and a wing or guard player end up having similar the wing/guard are always more valuable. Wiseman would have to be significantly better then any wing or guard to draft a big man.

If the league started tomorrow there are 3-4 accomplished NBA vets that are FAs that you could sign to rebound, clog the lane and block shots. That doesn't even count the guys more on the fringes like in the G-league or in other leagues that might be worth having on a roster but teams don't really play guys like that much anymore. Getting a rotation big over a guy that ends up simply out of the league isn't particularly compelling for me to take Wiseman over some perimeter player. There is more to it but Clint Capella basically got Traded for a lottery protected first round pick or a little over half of what It took to get Covington. Wiseman is going to have to be pretty good to have a lot of value and I am not convinced the league isn't going to swing back to bigs especially if they aren't versatile offensively or are really good defensively. Embiid is both. FWIW I don't see Wiseman as the same level of prospect that Embiid was. He does have a more clean slate in terms of health though which isn't a small thing.

monsterpile wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

PorkChop wrote:A boom or bust shooter that busts is more likely out of the league sooner than a boom or bust big man. A big man can still rebound and block shots and clog up the lane.
Wiseman is not only the safest pick but has the highest ceiling as well.

You could be right but here is the thing even if Wiseman hits the ultimate potential what is hard to do and turns into an embiid type player there is no proof that teams can win consistently with big men in the NBA. I will say it again it has been since 2011 that one of a teams top 2 players was a big man and won a championship. Then the wolves would have 2 of their top 3 players being big men. Also if a big man and a wing or guard player end up having similar the wing/guard are always more valuable. Wiseman would have to be significantly better then any wing or guard to draft a big man.

If the league started tomorrow there are 3-4 accomplished NBA vets that are FAs that you could sign to rebound, clog the lane and block shots. That doesn't even count the guys more on the fringes like in the G-league or in other leagues that might be worth having on a roster but teams don't really play guys like that much anymore. Getting a rotation big over a guy that ends up simply out of the league isn't particularly compelling for me to take Wiseman over some perimeter player. There is more to it but Clint Capella basically got Traded for a lottery protected first round pick or a little over half of what It took to get Covington. Wiseman is going to have to be pretty good to have a lot of value and I am not convinced the league isn't going to swing back to bigs especially if they aren't versatile offensively or are really good defensively. Embiid is both. FWIW I don't see Wiseman as the same level of prospect that Embiid was. He does have a more clean slate in terms of health though which isn't a small thing.

Guess well dismiss our own perimeter players in recent drafts as reasons to maybe look in a different direction. I mean come on, Culver and Okogie? Sheesh

PorkChop wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

PorkChop wrote:A boom or bust shooter that busts is more likely out of the league sooner than a boom or bust big man. A big man can still rebound and block shots and clog up the lane.
Wiseman is not only the safest pick but has the highest ceiling as well.

You could be right but here is the thing even if Wiseman hits the ultimate potential what is hard to do and turns into an embiid type player there is no proof that teams can win consistently with big men in the NBA. I will say it again it has been since 2011 that one of a teams top 2 players was a big man and won a championship. Then the wolves would have 2 of their top 3 players being big men. Also if a big man and a wing or guard player end up having similar the wing/guard are always more valuable. Wiseman would have to be significantly better then any wing or guard to draft a big man.

If the league started tomorrow there are 3-4 accomplished NBA vets that are FAs that you could sign to rebound, clog the lane and block shots. That doesn't even count the guys more on the fringes like in the G-league or in other leagues that might be worth having on a roster but teams don't really play guys like that much anymore. Getting a rotation big over a guy that ends up simply out of the league isn't particularly compelling for me to take Wiseman over some perimeter player. There is more to it but Clint Capella basically got Traded for a lottery protected first round pick or a little over half of what It took to get Covington. Wiseman is going to have to be pretty good to have a lot of value and I am not convinced the league isn't going to swing back to bigs especially if they aren't versatile offensively or are really good defensively. Embiid is both. FWIW I don't see Wiseman as the same level of prospect that Embiid was. He does have a more clean slate in terms of health though which isn't a small thing.

Guess well dismiss our own perimeter players in recent drafts as reasons to maybe look in a different direction. I mean come on, Culver and Okogie? Sheesh

Ok do you want to talk about the centers we drafted for the first what like 20 years of this franchise? Lol

Camden0916 wrote:I haven't seen this added to the thread yet, but if the Wolves had the opportunity to draft Wiseman and actually did so, I think there'd be a clear identity of the team/core moving forward. Fast-paced, run-and-gun pieces (which we already have), but also a legitimate advantage in size on a nightly basis. That should translate to all levels of the game whether it's rebounding, defending, protecting the rim, etc. That Towns/Wiseman duo would absolutely punish teams that tried to go small on them because: a) They have the foot speed to stay with quicker players on the perimeter. b) They can both shoot it from deep -- albeit at different levels of success with Towns being elite of the elite there. c) They'd control the glass nightly, which is something they haven't been able to accomplish since Kevin Love and Nikola Pekovic were still a thing.

I look at the best teams in the league and most of them have something that sets them apart from the middle of the pack teams and it's usually some sort of advantage they bring nightly. I'm not talking about personnel exactly, but more of a style they've implemented. The Rockets play to their threes/frees/layups style and it's definitely an advantage. The Warriors built their success around their three-point snipers in the backcourt. The Raptors won a championship last year by out-defending and out-depth'ing other teams. The Bucks have inverted their offense to where their biggest player also happens to be a predominant ball-handler.

The Wolves were (are) trying to find their identity of using a five-out brand of basketball, which can still be accomplished with Wiseman next to Towns, but they could also become one of the biggest teams in the league if they chose that route. And that would create many mismatches for opposing teams.

1: Russell (6'5)
2: Beasley (6'4)
3: Layman/Hernangomez (6'9)
4: Towns (7'0)
5: Wiseman (7'1)

Alright Cam convince me on Wiseman's 3 point shooting ability. I'll hang up and listen. :)

I also see Precious Achiuwa -- James Wiseman's teammate at Memphis -- as a good fit in Minnesota should they look to trade down or up to the 8-14 range. Reminds me a lot of Jerami Grant, who I also like as a free agent target for the Wolves this summer.

Similar size profiles, fluid athletes, and positional versatility. Defends both on the interior and perimeter. Outside shot shows potential. I think he'll be a value pick wherever he goes.