Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:Regardless of who we draft, I'd like to see us sign Ed Davis away from LA. Wonder what it'd take to sign him; couldn't be more than $5M per. PF/C who can provide dunks, defense and dirty work. The three Ds of scrappy big men. Also not bad in P&R as he's pretty mobile and can finish with both hands.

I like him and John Henson for a lot of the same reasons. Davis is the healthier player. Give me that guy.

I agree. I'd love to get Ed Davis provided we're able to get rid of one of Bennett or Payne. He will likely opt out of his contract and should not take that much to sign as a FA. He's a young veteran that knows how to play the game. He rebounds, defends in the post, and stays healthy - all things we need out of the PF slot, especially if we plan to re-sign KG (who won't be a high minutes player). I think he'd fit in nicely next to Dieng+Towns/Okafor and bring some consistency to the lineup.

He's got a .176 WS/48, has a 22% DRB%, and outperforms his counterpart quite handily on most nights. We don't need a star at PF if we get Okafor or Towns to play C, just a lunch pail guy. Ed Davis fits that bill.

zigzag22 wrote:WCS allowed only 20% shooting in perimeter isolation situations this season....

Also, check out this graphic comparing recent draft picks based on lane agility and max vert (reach): http://www.sbnation.com/2015/4/3/8338409/willie-cauley-stein-defense-nba-draft-2015

If you don't think WCS is a LOCK to be a top 10 pick, then I would like to cross you off the list of possible GM candidates when one day I win the lottery and become an NBA owner. Teams DROOL over rim protectors and he is the best one available in the draft hands down.

The reality with his "defensive flexibility" is that this idea of guarding G, F and C is a college application, and not an NBA application. Why? Because an NBA team has all level of players that can damage you offensively (well, not the Wolves). If/when a team deploys WCS on the perimeter to guard Chris Paul, for instance, guess what happens to the guard that has to switch to guard DeAndre Jordan? They get dunked on. Again, very different from college where this Kentucky team is stacked with other defenders, specifically 3-4 other large interior defenders (Lyles, Towns, Lee and Johnson) as well as other teams typically only having maybe 2 plus-type scoring options. The reality is that on his Kentucky team, he can roam at will and the other team then has to contend with everyone else. Not a realistic comparative once he gets to the NBA. This is why I specifically said he is a situational defender. Could he defend a guard in the NBA....absolutely. Will he....not with any regularity. This trait seems to be what has many salivating the most, but I kind of see it on the same plane as JaMarcus Russell being able to throw 80 yards while sitting on his butt. Unfortunately, that play doesn't come up enough to be advantageous. I am being a bit tongue-in-cheek....but there is a small comparative I think fits.

Hicks123 wrote:

zigzag22 wrote:WCS allowed only 20% shooting in perimeter isolation situations this season....

Also, check out this graphic comparing recent draft picks based on lane agility and max vert (reach): http://www.sbnation.com/2015/4/3/8338409/willie-cauley-stein-defense-nba-draft-2015

If you don't think WCS is a LOCK to be a top 10 pick, then I would like to cross you off the list of possible GM candidates when one day I win the lottery and become an NBA owner. Teams DROOL over rim protectors and he is the best one available in the draft hands down.

The reality with his "defensive flexibility" is that this idea of guarding G, F and C is a college application, and not an NBA application. Why? Because an NBA team has all level of players that can damage you offensively (well, not the Wolves). If/when a team deploys WCS on the perimeter to guard Chris Paul, for instance, guess what happens to the guard that has to switch to guard DeAndre Jordan? They get dunked on. Again, very different from college where this Kentucky team is stacked with other defenders, specifically 3-4 other large interior defenders (Lyles, Towns, Lee and Johnson) as well as other teams typically only having maybe 2 plus-type scoring options. The reality is that on his Kentucky team, he can roam at will and the other team then has to contend with everyone else. Not a realistic comparative once he gets to the NBA. This is why I specifically said he is a situational defender. Could he defend a guard in the NBA....absolutely. Will he....not with any regularity. This trait seems to be what has many salivating the most, but I kind of see it on the same plane as JaMarcus Russell being able to throw 80 yards while sitting on his butt. Unfortunately, that play doesn't come up enough to be advantageous. I am being a bit tongue-in-cheek....but there is a small comparative I think fits.

His mobility makes him a candidate to be an elite PnR defender which is the most used play in the game. It also means at the end of games he can switch onto the guard/wing who is not going to go to a guy like DJ for a game winning shot and he's going to be able to get a hand on that shot at a decent rate as well. I'm surprised how many people are trying to downplay his defensive impact when it is elite. His defense is as good as Okafor's offense. Wiggins covering perimeter isos and WCS covering PnR is a recipe for an elite defense and if teams run the PnR against our 4, we now have WCS as a help defender at the rim.

I do think people are downplaying WCS a ability to switch out and D up perimeter guys but I think it's partly because they see the other weaknesses in his game. It's a pretty big strength and it's one of the reasons why KG and Ben Wallace were 2 of the best defensive players of my lifetime. I am not suggesting WCS is going to have that type of impact but let's give him his due in his projected strengths. I think there are plenty of weeknesses to nitpick.

Okafor, Okafor, Okafor. That's who I want. Towns is an interesting prospect. I see a lot of Bynum and maybe a little Deandre Jordan there. Russell too. Just love his court vision.

But Okafor just looks like a sure thing to be a really, really good player. He's had a couple underwhelming tournament games, though people often read too much into those. Statistically and just by the eye test (seriously, just watch him control the ball in the post, he can do whatever he wants with it), it's gotta be him if he's there when we pick.

I feel like there's a strange tendency out there to take Towns over Okafor in part BECAUSE Okafor is a sure thing. It's counter-intuitive, but it seems like people think because he's a sure thing, he somehow has a lower ceiling than somebody who is not as much a sure thing, like Towns. Potential is attractive, because we all want to imagine it works out and then we could say we saw something there before it was fully formed. But I think that's potentially risky thinking, and I think it's why people are wrongly picking Towns over Okafor.

SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Okafor, Okafor, Okafor. That's who I want. Towns is an interesting prospect. I see a lot of Bynum and maybe a little Deandre Jordan there. Russell too. Just love his court vision.

But Okafor just looks like a sure thing to be a really, really good player. He's had a couple underwhelming tournament games, though people often read too much into those. Statistically and just by the eye test (seriously, just watch him control the ball in the post, he can do whatever he wants with it), it's gotta be him if he's there when we pick.

I feel like there's a strange tendency out there to take Towns over Okafor in part BECAUSE Okafor is a sure thing. It's counter-intuitive, but it seems like people think because he's a sure thing, he somehow has a lower ceiling than somebody who is not as much a sure thing, like Towns. Potential is attractive, because we all want to imagine it works out and then we could say we saw something there before it was fully formed. But I think that's potentially risky thinking, and I think it's why people are wrongly picking Towns over Okafor.

I don't think Okafor is a sure thing, he really doesn't have a face up game, and he does have very good post moves and footwork, but he is terrible at FTs and that scares me a lot. Also he does not have the rim protection to anchor our defense, he is more like Pek defensively what is not a bad thing I am just worried how he will translate in the NBA

For almost the entire season, I've been saying to take Okafor and don't look back. I've been wavering lately.

I am still much higher on both of them vs. just about everybody else (although I like Russell as the 3rd guy), I might opt for Towns at this point. The defense. Rebounding. And the 80% ft is a nice element to have.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:For almost the entire season, I've been saying to take Okafor and don't look back. I've been wavering lately.

I am still much higher on both of them vs. just about everybody else (although I like Russell as the 3rd guy), I might opt for Towns at this point. The defense. Rebounding. And the 80% ft is a nice element to have.

Yeah, that's where I'm at too. Towns/Okafor 1A and 1B.

Drew, Towns is not some project big man who we would be drafting on potential alone. If you normalize his numbers on a per 36 or per 40 minute basis, they are really impressive. He isn't necessarily dominant in any one area the same way Okafor is, but you definitely see a guy who is more well rounded.

As for Okafor, I've been watching him very carefully on the defensive end this tournament. I'm not seeing the weakness he apparently displayed earlier in the year. He's been very stout in the paint, walling up and often blocking or deterring shots simply by his sheer size and length. And his pick and roll defense hasn't been that bad either.

I think the two areas I don't like about Okafor is that 1) he doesn't aggressively attack the glass, and 2) he appears somewhat out of shape. Those two might go hand in hand.

Nevertheless, his sheer size and outstanding hands will make it almost impossible for him to average less than 10 rebounds per 36 minutes as an NBA Center, which is solid, but not great.

kekgeek1 wrote:

SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Okafor, Okafor, Okafor. That's who I want. Towns is an interesting prospect. I see a lot of Bynum and maybe a little Deandre Jordan there. Russell too. Just love his court vision.

But Okafor just looks like a sure thing to be a really, really good player. He's had a couple underwhelming tournament games, though people often read too much into those. Statistically and just by the eye test (seriously, just watch him control the ball in the post, he can do whatever he wants with it), it's gotta be him if he's there when we pick.

I feel like there's a strange tendency out there to take Towns over Okafor in part BECAUSE Okafor is a sure thing. It's counter-intuitive, but it seems like people think because he's a sure thing, he somehow has a lower ceiling than somebody who is not as much a sure thing, like Towns. Potential is attractive, because we all want to imagine it works out and then we could say we saw something there before it was fully formed. But I think that's potentially risky thinking, and I think it's why people are wrongly picking Towns over Okafor.

I don't think Okafor is a sure thing, he really doesn't have a face up game, and he does have very good post moves and footwork, but he is terrible at FTs and that scares me a lot. Also he does not have the rim protection to anchor our defense, he is more like Pek defensively what is not a bad thing I am just worried how he will translate in the NBA

I disagree that he doesn't have a face-up game (not that he really needs one anyway). He can take opposing bigs off the dribble and he has a nice little Duncan/Dieng 15 foot bank shot.

If anything, he is going to have more room to operate in the NBA and getting bigs the ball in the post is much easier at the next level. If he stays healthy and plays 30+ minutes per night, he is almost a certain 20 PPG scorer with solid efficiency right off the bat. He's that good offensively.

Whoever drafts him though needs to be prepared to simplify their offense and make him the focus. He'd be a waste of a draft asset if you don't plan on getting him a low post touch almost every time down the floor.

monsterpile wrote:I do think people are downplaying WCS a ability to switch out and D up perimeter guys but I think it's partly because they see the other weaknesses in his game. It's a pretty big strength and it's one of the reasons why KG and Ben Wallace were 2 of the best defensive players of my lifetime. I am not suggesting WCS is going to have that type of impact but let's give him his due in his projected strengths. I think there are plenty of weeknesses to nitpick.

KG and Big Ben could rebound though. He's very one-dimensional right now in what he provides, which is a rangy and versatile big that can guard multiple positions and get a lot of deflections. Granted, that's a pretty damn good skill to have in today's NBA, which is why he'll be in the top 10. On the other hand, we know he won't be much of an offensive player or rebounder. And defensively, we really don't know how he'll do when someone puts a shoulder into his chest. Will he hold his ground or give way for easy looks at the rim?