Minnesota Sports Forum

Cam -- I like your analysis of signing Deng as a PF for the Wolves. That's a move I could support. But it would depend on the price. I think I have more confidence than you in Gorgui as our starting PF and we won't know until we're well into the season whether Pek has anything left in him. Another reason to refrain from acquiring a high-priced guy to start at PF is the fact that we don't know where Pek is at.

If it would up to me, I'd pass on Deng and sign Cole Aldrich who would strengthen our bench up the middle and our rebounding at a very reasonable price. Cole is a terrific rebounder and pretty good shot-blocker. He's smart and a good passer.

Why the FA talk?

Anyway here is a top 60 by SI.
http://www.si.com/nba/2016/05/26/nba-draft-big-board-mock-draft-76ers-lakers-ben-simmons-brandon-ingram


I really like these 4.

BUDDY HIELD, OKLAHOMA

6'5", 212 | GUARD | SR.
LAST BIG BOARD: 7
Hield's elite shooting ability, both off the dribble and spotting up, has firmly established him in this range. He should be an immediate threat to score, but the multidimensionality of his offense is up for debate. If he can attack a closeout against NBA length and make plays off the dribble, he's golden. Though he's 22 already, the development he showed over four college seasons actually plays in his favor with some scouts.

TIMOTHE LUWAWU, SERBIA

6'7", 205 | G/F | 20 YEARS OLD
LAST BIG BOARD: 11
Two-way wings are always a valuable commodity, and Luwawu's one of the best in a thin draft. Physically his appeal is clear, with a wingspan over seven feet and solid leaping ability. He also might be more NBA-ready than you think: two scouts cited his passing and decision-making, he can stick with a few different positions on the perimeter, and he's improved significantly this season playing against solid Adriatic League competition. One scout compared his skill profile to Jimmy Butler: "He's not breaking you down, but he gets to his spots."

DOMANTAS SABONIS, GONZAGA

6'10", 240 | PF/C | SOPH.
LAST BIG BOARD: 17
Sabonis starred in March as the focal point of Gonzaga's team and has established pretty solid mid-first round stock. He's a fairly safe pick with the way he rebounds and finishes around the rim, and he's mobile and plays hard enough to make up for what he lacks in length and explosion. Obviously, there's the NBA pedigree too.

MARQUESE CHRISS, WASHINGTON

6'10", 233 | FORWARD | FR.
LAST BIG BOARD: 10
The ceiling appears quite high for Chriss, who looks like a legit stretch big man with bounce and upside as a shooter. He could become a pick-and-pop weapon as he extends his range, he's working to be more comfortable on the perimeter, and he's still just 18. There's certain to be a learning curve, but on upside, he's right there with the best in this class.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:Guys C'mon now. The #5 pick is worth a lot more than #16 and #23. And Lip for what it's worth, I don't like the idea of signing Deng either.

Cool, I assume your opinion that 5 is much better than 16 and 23 is subjective. But the data says otherwise. 82games.com analyzed 20 years of draft data, and based on the eventual careers of players drafted in various spots, assigned a value to each first round slot. Here's their analysis:

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Their data gives the 5th pick a value of 21.1, but the combined value of 16 and 23 is 23.1. I can assure you that it's not just rubes like us that look at these charts...all GMs (and even owners) know about them, and use them to protect themselves to their bosses on deals. And as I have argued before, in a year like this where there are so many questions about every lottery pick but also consensus that the draft is very deep, the results may be even more skewed than normal. For that reason, Boston may not do the deal, since they are getting back less value. But here's why I think they might:

1) While combined value of 16 and 23 is higher than 5, 5 has a 60% chance of becoming a "star" while 16 and 23 only have a 5% chance of producing a star. Boston doesn't have any likely future stars on their current roster, and they really need one. The Wolves on the other hand have at least 2 future stars, and have a much greater need for depth than more stars.

2) Several pundits think Boston may trade the third pick for Okafor. If they do that, they will be more likely to want to replace that traded pick with another high lottery pick, even if they have to give up more value to get it.

LST - Good stuff. I would be inclined to stay at #5 over those picks.

I look at like this. Would you rather have CJ McCollum or Steven Adams or the combo of Shabzz/Dieng? (I know we could have had Greek Freak instead of Shabazz and Gobert instead of Dieng)

I wouldn't be willing to move past 12. I'm more inclined to sit at 5 and pick one of Dunn, Hield, or Bender than trade down to 16.

bleedspeed177 wrote:LST - Good stuff. I would be inclined to stay at #5 over those picks.

I look at like this. Would you rather have CJ McCollum or Steven Adams or the combo of Shabzz/Dieng? (I know we could have had Greek Freak instead of Shabazz and Gobert instead of Dieng)

I think I was wrong on that one, bleed. I was a big fan of Flip passing on CJ and taking Bazz/G, but CJ has played much better than I would have thought and Bazz has disappointed, and I would prefer CJ/Adams in retrospect. But history still says 16 and 23 has more value than 5. I'm having a difficult time falling in love with anyone at 5. Maybe some of my perception is colored by the Wolves spending so much time with players who are likely to be out of the lottery...there are a lot of signs that we're going to trade out of #5 and I don't want to be upset with the decision!

I don't like going small ball in the West anymore. You still have to play AD, Blake, Aldridge, Favors, Randolph, Ibaka and Faried and while not all of those matchups kill you on defense, they do all kill you on the boards. We get beat on the boards anyways let alone swapping Dieng for a SF. OKC is in the conference finals in large part due to their great rebounding on both ends of the court and they turn those boards into quick points on the other end in transition. We need defense and rebounding and I don't think going small fixes either of those weaknesses for us.

longstrangetrip wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:LST - Good stuff. I would be inclined to stay at #5 over those picks.

I look at like this. Would you rather have CJ McCollum or Steven Adams or the combo of Shabzz/Dieng? (I know we could have had Greek Freak instead of Shabazz and Gobert instead of Dieng)

I think I was wrong on that one, bleed. I was a big fan of Flip passing on CJ and taking Bazz/G, but CJ has played much better than I would have thought and Bazz has disappointed, and I would prefer CJ/Adams in retrospect. But history still says 16 and 23 has more value than 5. I'm having a difficult time falling in love with anyone at 5. Maybe some of my perception is colored by the Wolves spending so much time with players who are likely to be out of the lottery...there are a lot of signs that we're going to trade out of #5 and I don't want to be upset with the decision!

Let's look at the bold over the past several drafts:
Hazonja vs Rozier/Hollis-Jefferson
Exum vs Nurkic/Hood
T. Robinson vs R White/Jenkins
Valanciunus vs Vucevic/Mirotic
Cousins vs Babbitt/Booker
Rubio vs James Johnson/Casspi
Love vs Speights/Koufas
J. Green vs N. Young/W. Chandler
Sheldon Williams vs Carney/Josh Boone

Some good and some bad in both directions. While the #5 is certainly no guarantee, it is the only spot outlined above where you have a a chance at a star+ type player. While I love some of the guys in the 16/23 camp, none are game changers. I stick with 5, regardless of how "deep" this draft is.

longstrangetrip wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:Guys C'mon now. The #5 pick is worth a lot more than #16 and #23. And Lip for what it's worth, I don't like the idea of signing Deng either.

Cool, I assume your opinion that 5 is much better than 16 and 23 is subjective. But the data says otherwise. 82games.com analyzed 20 years of draft data, and based on the eventual careers of players drafted in various spots, assigned a value to each first round slot. Here's their analysis:

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Their data gives the 5th pick a value of 21.1, but the combined value of 16 and 23 is 23.1. I can assure you that it's not just rubes like us that look at these charts...all GMs (and even owners) know about them, and use them to protect themselves to their bosses on deals. And as I have argued before, in a year like this where there are so many questions about every lottery pick but also consensus that the draft is very deep, the results may be even more skewed than normal. For that reason, Boston may not do the deal, since they are getting back less value. But here's why I think they might:

1) While combined value of 16 and 23 is higher than 5, 5 has a 60% chance of becoming a "star" while 16 and 23 only have a 5% chance of producing a star. Boston doesn't have any likely future stars on their current roster, and they really need one. The Wolves on the other hand have at least 2 future stars, and have a much greater need for depth than more stars.

2) Several pundits think Boston may trade the third pick for Okafor. If they do that, they will be more likely to want to replace that traded pick with another high lottery pick, even if they have to give up more value to get it.

LST, I totally disagree with the conclusions you draw from this analysis: It's a star driven league. If one guy can have roughly the same value as two, I'd take that one player every day of the week.

1995: #5 Kevin Garnett, #16 Alan Henderson, #23 Travis Best
2003: #5 Dwayne Wade, #16 Troy Bell, #23 Travis Outlaw
1987: #5 Scottie Pippen, #16 Christian Welp, #23 Greg Anderson
1996: #5 Ray Allen, #16, Tony Delk, #23 Efthimios Rentzlas
1998: #5 Vince Carter, #16 Bryce Drew, #23 Tyronn Lue
1988: #5 Mitch Richmond, #16 Derrick Chievous, #23 Jerome Lane
2010: #5 Demarcus Cousins, #16 Luke Babbitt, #23 Trevor Booker

John Stockton was by far the best pick ever taken at #16. The only other real notable one I can find was Ron Artest. At #23 you have no stars that I can find. AC Green, Bobby Jackson, Nikola Mirotic, and Kosta Koufas are some of the better names you have. In my opinion it's way more valuable to have a chance at a true star than get two guys who combined likely won't produce a high end starter.

Maybe I missed something... too lazy to read it all...

But why would the Wolves want TWO more super young guys? Eventually, this team needs a veteran presence. They won't win nearly as much with all rookies and super young guys.