Minnesota Sports Forum

lipoli390 wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:I LOVE both of our picks!

Wild - I love our pick at #43, but I'm not liking the Culver pick. I just can't get beyond his 30% 3-point shooting and his 70% free throw shooting as a sophomore. I might feel better if he were an explosive athlete, but he's not. I might still feel better if he had extraordinary length for a SG, but hie doesn't. Watching him, he looks -relatively slow and mechanical.

I like that he's apparently a really hard worker who loves the game. But that's no different from Kris Dunn. I see no evidence that Culver is any better as a prospect than Alexander-Walker -- who we could have drafted without giving up Saric. Then Saric would have been available either as a very solid player for us next season or as a trade asset. I'm open to your case for the Culver pick because I truly want to feel good about it.

Culver had much more responsibility there that second year. He was the focal point of the offense. Don't worry about the college shooting so much because we saw how he did his freshman year. Tyler Herro is considered another Devin Booker yet he struggles anytime he shoots a contested shot.

Zion, Ja, and Barrett ALL have work to do on their jumpers. Those are the top 3 picks. If they're coachable and they work hard, you'll see results. Same with Culver. He doesn't have to be the best athlete to succeed in the NBA. We drafted plenty of really explosive athletes who suck at basketball. One of them is currently getting $148 million!

As for Saric, he sulked from the moment he got here. He wasn't a great fit. He coulda been better but he wasn't. He wasn't a long term piece and I don't see why we're upset about losing when we entered the day assuming the 11th pick was gonna be used on a Saric replacement. We woke up today scared Rosas would trade RoCo, 11 and more to move up and hoped he'd use Saric instead. Now that he did we're supposed to be upset? I don't get that at all.

I began the day hoping for Garland if the Wolves traded up, or Herro if they stuck at 11, but knowing what we came away with in both rounds of the draft and as an undrafted pickup, I'm pretty pleased overall.

I think Culver could wind up being the best wing defender in this class with a pretty decent offensive game to boot -- albeit not quite as polished as one would hope. He has an improving skill set, good feel for the game, and undeniable intangibles. He's also trending upward in his individual development despite the slip in shooting slashes from his freshman to sophomore year. So, while I was hoping for another prospect to fall, I'm not disappointed in this pick whatsoever. The fit will be a bit interesting due to pieces that are already in place, but in all honesty, everything besides Towns can be rearranged. Culver will be a good NBA player.

PS: Culver shot 38.2% on 3.9 3PA per game his freshman year when his role was that of a 3/D type wing. I wouldn't say he's a natural shooter, but I also wouldn't act like he doesn't have a perimeter shot. His 30.4% as a sophomore shouldn't be ignored necessarily, however, we have to realize that his role in the offense grew from year one to year two and was likely having to create a lot of those looks himself, which is a tough ask for anyone not named Steph Curry at the moment. How good he'll be from 3P-range in the NBA likely falls somewhere in the 36% range, which will be fine considering everything else he's capable of doing.

crazy-canuck wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:It sure sounds like Culver has a lot of heart. So does Kris Dunn. Being really quick and athletic are so important to being an allstar caliber NBA player - unless the player has extraordinary length. I just don't see the quickness or athleticism in Culver that's necessary to be more than a rotation player off the bench. I just don't see the upside to justify taking him at #6 after giving up a good asset in Saric to get that pick.

It looks like Rosa's is planning to play cov at 4 this year. I think they are going to let okogie and Culver fight it out for the 2 spot.

If that was the plan, I don't mind the pick it all. I think he can be a solid player. The lack of shooting scares me though.

That's pretty clear and PF is his best position in today's NBA. Plus a good defender in needed next to KAT and RoCo is as good as it gets.

Brooklyn_Wolves wrote:

crazy-canuck wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:It sure sounds like Culver has a lot of heart. So does Kris Dunn. Being really quick and athletic are so important to being an allstar caliber NBA player - unless the player has extraordinary length. I just don't see the quickness or athleticism in Culver that's necessary to be more than a rotation player off the bench. I just don't see the upside to justify taking him at #6 after giving up a good asset in Saric to get that pick.

It looks like Rosa's is planning to play cov at 4 this year. I think they are going to let okogie and Culver fight it out for the 2 spot.

If that was the plan, I don't mind the pick it all. I think he can be a solid player. The lack of shooting scares me though.

That's pretty clear and PF is his best position in today's NBA. Plus a good defender in needed next to KAT and RoCo is as good as it gets.

I'm not sure about whether I want Covington playing full time as a 4 but it does make some sense. His value defensively is much higher as a team defender than as a point of attack man guy although he is pretty good as a man defender too. Offensively his skill set would be maximized as a stretch 4 who also would be well above average as a grab and go guy. Obviously the Wolves need to have more bigs but if a team starts with a couple players that maybe aren't the best matchup for Covington because they are really big starting Dieng for a few minutes wouldn't be horrible. We already added one young big in Naz Reid I anticipate more. Ultimately if Covington plays even 20 of his 30mpg that opens a lot of minutes up on the wing. KBD would make a lot of sense playing that position also. I can see Cam Reynolds having the ability to play as a small ball 4 also. If Wiggins rebounds at a higher rate again he becomes more interesting there too for short stretches. Obviously the switchability goes way up with a guy like Covington or about her long wing playing PF.

After reflecting overnight if we can get DLO without giving up Culver then I'm ok with the pick. Having multiple guys next to DLO like Okogie and Culver who can always take the better guard on defense is important. If we don't get a guard like DLO though we still don't have that guy who can be an elite creator on offense and I don't think Culver does anything for us. I still think Rosas wanted Garland and the Cavs saw our deal and took the opportunity to try to take the hot commodify for the purposes of a trade rather than the intention of keeping him. Maybe that means they thought Rosas would give up even more to get his guy and he balked which is at least a positive in his favor on a weird night. Time to wait and see where we go from here.

I would have loved Garland. But wings are the most important position to have on a team. You need 4-5 of them. Losing Saric doesn't hurt. Easily replaceable.

So every one is in agreement. The Wolves killed it last night. Plan the parade.

Duke13 wrote:I would have loved Garland. But wings are the most important position to have on a team. You need 4-5 of them. Losing Saric doesn't hurt. Easily replaceable.

It's not that losing Saric as a player hurts. It's the opportunity cost of trading him for a prospect who isn't clearly better than any number of prospects we could have taken at #11. By opportunity cost I mean not having Saric as a trade asset going forward, fir example as an asset that could help clear cap space for D. Russell or someone else.

lipoli390 wrote:

Duke13 wrote:I would have loved Garland. But wings are the most important position to have on a team. You need 4-5 of them. Losing Saric doesn't hurt. Easily replaceable.

It's not that losing Saric as a player hurts. It's the opportunity cost of trading him for a prospect who isn't clearly better than any number of prospects we could have taken at #11. By opportunity cost I mean not having Saric as a trade asset going forward, fir example as an asset that could help clear cap space for D. Russell or someone else.

Culver was definitely better than the guys that coulda been there at 11 since there was no chance Culver could conceivably fall to 11.

Saric wasn't going to be an attractive enough asset to convince someone to take Wiggins off your hands or take Dieng off your hands, and if you really really believe Saric was the key to opening up max cap space to sign D'Angelo Russell, you're the only one. If Saric had that kind of value, he wouldn't have been traded at all because he woulda then been an ideal fixture at PF which he wasn't.