Minnesota Sports Forum

Dunn at 5 to me. My only concern with him is the turnovers, but every player has warts that will be there at 5. His athleticism and defense are great. He has nice offensive potential as well. Not a perfect prospect, but it's not the greatest draft either.

khans2k5 wrote:Can Murray supporters talk about why they like him at 5? I see a 1 trick spot up shooting pony who has question marks defensively which is what our team needs more than offense.

I'm not big on Murray being the choice for us either, but there is a lot to like about him. Quick release, crafty with the ball, very good body control when driving/finishing at the rim, and he's 19. His pg/ball handling skills are in question but it seems to be only because that wasn't his role at Kentucky playing off the ball next to Ulis. His defense is suspect, and I agree, that's what we need first. That's the same reason I don't want Buddy as well. Both are less than stellar athlets, both lack defensively or have "potential" to improve on defense in the NBA, I doubt it.

If we're picking a wing, they have to play defense to best fit next to our current wing set of LaVine, Wiggins, and Bazz.

As you all are aware, i'm on the trade down bandwagon. Though, if we stay at 5 then Dunn is my favorite there. Rubio going down and having to watch a platoon of LaVine and Jones run the team for any significant stretch is nauseating to me. It will be an instant lost season, or at least an instant run of losses. We have not had a real promising backup/eventual starter behind Ricky ever. Dunn can be that guy. I'd liken it to the Thunder/Lightning RB combo football teams use. A very athletic Dunn, who can get to the rim at will and rise up over people, comes in for the High BBiQ offensive facilitator in Ricky. Both are excellent defenders as well, which would do wonders for our second unit after having the likes of andre miller, lavine, and jones play there last year.

If Dunn develops as expected, then you definitely have a very nice trade piece in 2+ years in either him or Rubio. Depending on who the front office decides to stick with. (I'm assuming that Dunn panning out = they both deserve a starting job.)

TheFuture wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:Can Murray supporters talk about why they like him at 5? I see a 1 trick spot up shooting pony who has question marks defensively which is what our team needs more than offense.

I'm not big on Murray being the choice for us either, but there is a lot to like about him. Quick release, crafty with the ball, very good body control when driving/finishing at the rim, and he's 19. His pg/ball handling skills are in question but it seems to be only because that wasn't his role at Kentucky playing off the ball next to Ulis. His defense is suspect, and I agree, that's what we need first. That's the same reason I don't want Buddy as well. Both are less than stellar athlets, both lack defensively or have "potential" to improve on defense in the NBA, I doubt it.

If we're picking a wing, they have to play defense to best fit next to our current wing set of LaVine, Wiggins, and Bazz.

As you all are aware, i'm on the trade down bandwagon. Though, if we stay at 5 then Dunn is my favorite there. Rubio going down and having to watch a platoon of LaVine and Jones run the team for any significant stretch is nauseating to me. It will be an instant lost season, or at least an instant run of losses. We have not had a real promising backup/eventual starter behind Ricky ever. Dunn can be that guy. I'd liken it to the Thunder/Lightning RB combo football teams use. A very athletic Dunn, who can get to the rim at will and rise up over people, comes in for the High BBiQ offensive facilitator in Ricky. Both are excellent defenders as well, which would do wonders for our second unit after having the likes of andre miller, lavine, and jones play there last year.

If Dunn develops as expected, then you definitely have a very nice trade piece in 2+ years in either him or Rubio. Depending on who the front office decides to stick with. (I'm assuming that Dunn panning out = they both deserve a starting job.)

The problem is that we still have holes all over....we had 19 wins. I just don't love the idea of drafting a backup for a team that just won 19 games. Unfortunately, with the strength of the draft up top being mostly guards, this seems to be inevitable. I am not typically a "trade down" guy in the NBA because I believe in quality over quantity. BUT, I would be OK moving down for a specific big the Wolves front office likes (i.e. Sabonis, Ellenson, Davis). Better yet, we find a solid PF/C to get in a trade for our pick.

Hicks123 wrote:

TheFuture wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:Can Murray supporters talk about why they like him at 5? I see a 1 trick spot up shooting pony who has question marks defensively which is what our team needs more than offense.

I'm not big on Murray being the choice for us either, but there is a lot to like about him. Quick release, crafty with the ball, very good body control when driving/finishing at the rim, and he's 19. His pg/ball handling skills are in question but it seems to be only because that wasn't his role at Kentucky playing off the ball next to Ulis. His defense is suspect, and I agree, that's what we need first. That's the same reason I don't want Buddy as well. Both are less than stellar athlets, both lack defensively or have "potential" to improve on defense in the NBA, I doubt it.

If we're picking a wing, they have to play defense to best fit next to our current wing set of LaVine, Wiggins, and Bazz.

As you all are aware, i'm on the trade down bandwagon. Though, if we stay at 5 then Dunn is my favorite there. Rubio going down and having to watch a platoon of LaVine and Jones run the team for any significant stretch is nauseating to me. It will be an instant lost season, or at least an instant run of losses. We have not had a real promising backup/eventual starter behind Ricky ever. Dunn can be that guy. I'd liken it to the Thunder/Lightning RB combo football teams use. A very athletic Dunn, who can get to the rim at will and rise up over people, comes in for the High BBiQ offensive facilitator in Ricky. Both are excellent defenders as well, which would do wonders for our second unit after having the likes of andre miller, lavine, and jones play there last year.

If Dunn develops as expected, then you definitely have a very nice trade piece in 2+ years in either him or Rubio. Depending on who the front office decides to stick with. (I'm assuming that Dunn panning out = they both deserve a starting job.)

The problem is that we still have holes all over....we had 19 wins. I just don't love the idea of drafting a backup for a team that just won 19 games. Unfortunately, with the strength of the draft up top being mostly guards, this seems to be inevitable. I am not typically a "trade down" guy in the NBA because I believe in quality over quantity. BUT, I would be OK moving down for a specific big the Wolves front office likes (i.e. Sabonis, Ellenson, Davis). Better yet, we find a solid PF/C to get in a trade for our pick.

Backup PG is one of our largest holes. We could use a true stretch PF, or defensive stalwart big, but I highly doubt any big we draft is starting over Dieng or Towns. I don't see any player we draft being a starter anyhow. If we stay at #5 I also am much more confident in Dunn reaching close to his potential in the NBA than a Ellenson, Sabonis, Poeltl, Davis, Chriss, Labisserie will, who are the next set of bigs slated to be drafted. And realizing potential is the whole reason we draft right? Maybe Dunn isn't the best fit for our team, but at that spot he has the best potential to turn into a star or trade chip than anyone else left on the board.

I'm curious where everyone stands on Skal Labisserie?
Would you draft him at all? At #5? Later?

He's a bit older, and far away with his BBIQ, but I can't say I am not intrigued by his skillset. A Channing Frye type with better rim protection? That'd be nice here.

My Blue Print:
Sign Cole Aldrich, Luol Deng and Mario Chalmers
Trade #5 with Celtics for three picks and draft Luwawu, McCaw and Thon Maker
Trade Bazz for McLemore
Buyout Pek
Cut Smith, Payne, Rudez
Incoming: Deng, Aldrich, Chalmers, McLemore, Luwawu, McCaw and Maker
Outgoing: Payne, Smith, Rudez, Pek, Prince, Bazz & OpenSpot

PG: Rubio, Chalmers, Jones
SG: LaVine, McLemore, McCaw
SF: Wiggins, (Deng/Bjelica) Luwawu
PF Deng, Dieng, Bjelica, KG
C: KAT, (Dieng) Aldrich, Maker

That gives us good positional versatility and lots of two way players who can defend, pass and shoot 3s. Plus the rookies all are hardworking high upside guys who could payoff big down the road.

I'd rather have Bazz than McLemore. Even if he can be extremely frustrating to watch.

I would like the idea of trading down for 2 picks and a vet/role player type, or for 1 pick and a better vet. Yet drafting 3 rookies is extremely unlikely for this team, and likely means we are trading completely out of the lottery. I'm not a fan of that. I also think Maker is trash, and would prefer to draft many players late in the draft before him.

Cole Aldrich and Luol Deng have been talked about here a lot, and I would love to get both of them. Chalmers is okay, though i'd be more inclined to just let Jones play more this next season if Chalmers was the choice.

I'd love for us to just make a decision on Pekovic. Just get it over with. But I fully expect to see him on the bench next year in a jersey or a suit.

Phoenix is another interesting trade partner. They have #13 and #28 as well as some vets that may not be in their rebuilding plan. Tyson Chandler, John Leuer, and P.j. Tucker.

Tyson Chandler, #13, #28? Tyson has expressed his disinterest with the direction Phoenix is headed, and is expected to push to get moved to someone looking to push to the playoffs. We may not be a good fit for that, and could inherit a disgruntled Tyson because of that, but I would like his fit here to help push is into the playoffs.

Leuer, Tucker, #13,#28, and a future 2nd? is another option. Both players would have 1 year left on their contract. Tucker is a very good defender, and capable 3 pt shooter. Leuer is a bench big stretch 4, with defensive issues.

Adding the #4 and #5 picks to the likes of Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, Warren, and Len would have to be very appealing to them. Brown and they secure their choice of Big after Bender. At #13 they would get the scrap of the top big prospects.

TheFuture wrote:I'd rather have Bazz than McLemore. Even if he can be extremely frustrating to watch.

I would like the idea of trading down for 2 picks and a vet/role player type, or for 1 pick and a better vet. Yet drafting 3 rookies is extremely unlikely for this team, and likely means we are trading completely out of the lottery. I'm not a fan of that. I also think Maker is trash, and would prefer to draft many players late in the draft before him.

Cole Aldrich and Luol Deng have been talked about here a lot, and I would love to get both of them. Chalmers is okay, though i'd be more inclined to just let Jones play more this next season if Chalmers was the choice.

I'd love for us to just make a decision on Pekovic. Just get it over with. But I fully expect to see him on the bench next year in a jersey or a suit.

My reasons for McLemore is that he was a very good college player (better than Bazz) that was super efficient scorer (42% on threes, 55% on twos, and 87% free throws) and had the athleticism to a be a good defender. He has the quiet demeanor of Wiggins but under the right coaching I think he could be a pretty good player. He's a better defender and passer than Bazz and based on his college numbers he has the potential to be a more efficient scorer. Since we are trusting Thibs to bring out the best in Wiggins, I think its worth taking a shot that Thibs could get McLemore (a similar tempermented guy) to play at a high level.

Hicks123 wrote:

TheFuture wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:Can Murray supporters talk about why they like him at 5? I see a 1 trick spot up shooting pony who has question marks defensively which is what our team needs more than offense.

I'm not big on Murray being the choice for us either, but there is a lot to like about him. Quick release, crafty with the ball, very good body control when driving/finishing at the rim, and he's 19. His pg/ball handling skills are in question but it seems to be only because that wasn't his role at Kentucky playing off the ball next to Ulis. His defense is suspect, and I agree, that's what we need first. That's the same reason I don't want Buddy as well. Both are less than stellar athlets, both lack defensively or have "potential" to improve on defense in the NBA, I doubt it.

If we're picking a wing, they have to play defense to best fit next to our current wing set of LaVine, Wiggins, and Bazz.

As you all are aware, i'm on the trade down bandwagon. Though, if we stay at 5 then Dunn is my favorite there. Rubio going down and having to watch a platoon of LaVine and Jones run the team for any significant stretch is nauseating to me. It will be an instant lost season, or at least an instant run of losses. We have not had a real promising backup/eventual starter behind Ricky ever. Dunn can be that guy. I'd liken it to the Thunder/Lightning RB combo football teams use. A very athletic Dunn, who can get to the rim at will and rise up over people, comes in for the High BBiQ offensive facilitator in Ricky. Both are excellent defenders as well, which would do wonders for our second unit after having the likes of andre miller, lavine, and jones play there last year.

If Dunn develops as expected, then you definitely have a very nice trade piece in 2+ years in either him or Rubio. Depending on who the front office decides to stick with. (I'm assuming that Dunn panning out = they both deserve a starting job.)

The problem is that we still have holes all over....we had 19 wins. I just don't love the idea of drafting a backup for a team that just won 19 games. Unfortunately, with the strength of the draft up top being mostly guards, this seems to be inevitable. I am not typically a "trade down" guy in the NBA because I believe in quality over quantity. BUT, I would be OK moving down for a specific big the Wolves front office likes (i.e. Sabonis, Ellenson, Davis). Better yet, we find a solid PF/C to get in a trade for our pick.

Just to make the record correct, this team won 29 games last year (perhaps your 19 was a typo, Hicks). And even more significant, the team played .500 ball the last 1/4 of the year, and clearly showed that is was a team on the rise. We have some potential stars, but we lack depth...that's why I lean toward trading down for multiple picks.