Minnesota Sports Forum

mrhockey89 wrote:My top 5 draft wish list, in order:

1. Brandon Ingram- Has a lot of Kevin Durant in him, this guy has future all-star written all over him. He can get a shot from anywhere, high release point, and I'd salivate at adding him to what we already have (we'd make it fit).

2. Ben Simmons- Very, very talented player who has ridiculous upside. I do have a big flag with him that wonders if he's the next Lamar Odom..a guy with talent to dominate but instead ends up being just pretty good and the occasional all-star.

3. Kris Dunn- I'm as big of a Rubio believer as there is. I just believe Dunn's the next best talent in the draft, and a pretty elite one. I'm tempted to put him above Simmons because I think he's got a better competitive fire under him. Great skill set, plus defender. Watching him reminds me of some sort of mix between Derrick Rose, Eric Bledsoe, and Chris Paul. I saw nbadraft.net has his comparison as Jordan Clarkson, which I think is a bit weak.

4. Buddy Hield- I've been singing his praises for a while. I think he can be a solid defender, he's got unlimited range, can get to the rim, is a tireless worker, plays to his strengths when it comes to shooting, and dominated in the limelight so much that he was commanding double teams instantly when he'd touch the ball. Reminds me a bit of Steph Curry in college (remember the game where a team actually dedicated two defenders to Curry even when he didn't have the ball, so he went to the corner and left it a 4 vs 3 for his teammates all game?) from the confidence in his game and shot. He also was making plays when he was getting double teamed, which means he's not pressured easily into mistakes.

5. Jamal Murray- He's my equivalent to me to the guard version of Justise Winslow, who I also like(d). Great feel for the game, has good range, a lot of upside, looks very smooth, and could be a bit of a Shawn Marion (poor man's) for our team. Not sure I ever see him being an alpha leader, but could see him being a strong support starter.

Murray is nothing like Winslow or Marion. In fact, almost the exact opposite. I loved Winslow last year and have been a big Marion fan because they are two way players with many tools. Murray is someone I don't want us to draft because he is pretty much a one trick pony and his three point shooting was only 32% (NBA 3 point line) when he played for Team Canada. He is also slow, short armed and didn't seem to put much energy on defense. He also had more turnovers than assists (I'd trust Tyus at PG before him).

I noticed you omitted Dragan Bender. I think he'd be a great fit on this team, but I like 1-4 too. So as long as we get one of Ingram, Simmons, Bender, Hield or Dunn, I'll be happy.

If you want a good laugh Wolfson retweeted this Twitter poll. The guy that did the poll said no way the Wolves would ever do this but it's basically a 50/50 split with a bunch of Sixers fans claiming Embiid is still a better prospect than Towns. Good stuff.

Interested to see what Sixers fans think... If Minnesota offered Karl Towns for Joel Embiid + #1, would you do it?

https://twitter.com/maxrappaport/status/737087288677695488

monsterpile wrote:Future I'm a Murray over Buddy and (Dunn) so I'll offer up my perspective as I don't think Murray over Buddy has been specifically discussed for a while.

To me the thing that makes me consider Murray over Buddy is potential in 2 ways. First of all Murray put up 20ppg as a freshman. That's not bad at all you wonder what he would do even next year much less his Junior year. Of course not everyone builds on early success. His ball handing and passing I think at the very least project to be better than Buddy. He gets knocked for not being a good defender and maybe he won't but he was a young freshman.

Potential to have position flexibility and possibly being able to play PG full-time. I see Buddy as SG maybe a guy that can be a not screw things up too bad if you half to put him at PG type. Murray on the other hand I watched him last summer in that international tourney look pretty good. Sure the competition wasn't amazing but we were talking an 18 year old kid playing against slot of grown men and tearing it up playing with the ball in his hands making teammates look good. This year he played off the ball next to maybe the best all around College PG in Ullis so he didn't get to show off that creative ball handling ability a lot and when he did maybe it didn't go well. I still think there is some creative and playmaking ability there.

The 3 guards Murray, Buddy and Dunn have contrasting and parallel strengths and weaknesses it's both fun and somewhat maddening to compare them. At this point I've changed my position a little and I will be happy if we get any of them. I'm still open to other options but they are good ones.

The bold part is a bit unfair for Buddy as he handled the ball much more often than given credit for this last year. Buddy won't ever be our PG, but his ball-handling is adequate for a SG. I also fail to see how Murray will be our PG, when his skillset is pure SG. The PG experiment at Kentucky went terribly, and he was averaging more TOs than assists. His ballhandling and vision are average. He's talked about as a combo guard because he's a bit small to be a SG. I do not see how Murray will be able to drive around any PG in the NBA, and how he will defend any PG or SG. Go watch some of his tape, he is a sloth when someone crosses him. It often doesnt even take a move to blow by him, a simple straight drive will do the trick. When a screener comes, he acts like he is playing his first ever basketball game defensively. Frankly, Murray is one of the worst on-ball defenders i've ever seen. This lack of agility also worries me on offense for Murray. He has great footwork, but he is rather slow, has a hitch in his shot, and has a low release. I worry about what happens to him when a Wiggins, Butler, etc. is guarding him. If he's shut down offensively then he becomes unplayable with his lack of defensive ability. Go look at what happened to him against Louisville. I agree, Murray was putting up huge numbers as a freshman. He also was playing at Kentucky who, for the first time in awhile, didn't have multiple studs. Coach Cal actually tried to give him more opportunities on offense. He's not some unknown commodity like Devin Booker was. He was in the perfect position to thrive as a scorer. Hield at least showed to be a good defender for 2 seasons, and showed dramatic improvement on his potential over his career. Both are things we are not going to be allowed to see for Murray, and that worries me a bit.

To me, Murray projects to be an outstanding catch and shoot SG, who will be dynamite running off screens, but be a complete liability on defense. Nik Stauskas?
Hield projects to be the same kind of scorer, but has proven he can be at least an average defender in the NBA.

I don't think there is a single franchise in the NBA that would consider trading KAT for any one. What he was able to do as a rookie was so damn impressive. And when you consider the number of years you control his future...

I've gone back and forth for weeks on who I'd like to see us draft if we stay at #5. But I'm ready to throw out my preference. So assuming Simmons and Ingram go 1-2, and the rest at least have a chance of dropping to #5 I would rank them this way:

1) Bender
2) Hield
3) Murray
4) Dunn
5) Ellenson

60WinTim wrote:I don't think there is a single franchise in the NBA that would consider trading KAT for any one. What he was able to do as a rookie was so damn impressive. And when you consider the number of years you control his future...

I agree, KAT likely holds the most value in the NBA. It was amusing seeing 6er fans argue against the trade though. There was a whole lot of people stating that both Embiid and Simmons will be better than Towns. Good luck with that. The post about Philly trading their whole team for Towns was more realistic.

TheFuture wrote:

60WinTim wrote:I don't think there is a single franchise in the NBA that would consider trading KAT for any one. What he was able to do as a rookie was so damn impressive. And when you consider the number of years you control his future...

I agree, KAT likely holds the most value in the NBA. It was amusing seeing 6er fans argue against the trade though. There was a whole lot of people stating that both Embiid and Simmons will be better than Towns. Good luck with that. The post about Philly trading their whole team for Towns was more realistic.

I'm not sure that I would trade Towns for the Sixers who roster AND all those picks (if all that was even possible) they accumulated plus their #1 pick. That's sort of extreme but Towns is that good.

TheFuture wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Future I'm a Murray over Buddy and (Dunn) so I'll offer up my perspective as I don't think Murray over Buddy has been specifically discussed for a while.

To me the thing that makes me consider Murray over Buddy is potential in 2 ways. First of all Murray put up 20ppg as a freshman. That's not bad at all you wonder what he would do even next year much less his Junior year. Of course not everyone builds on early success. His ball handing and passing I think at the very least project to be better than Buddy. He gets knocked for not being a good defender and maybe he won't but he was a young freshman.

Potential to have position flexibility and possibly being able to play PG full-time. I see Buddy as SG maybe a guy that can be a not screw things up too bad if you half to put him at PG type. Murray on the other hand I watched him last summer in that international tourney look pretty good. Sure the competition wasn't amazing but we were talking an 18 year old kid playing against slot of grown men and tearing it up playing with the ball in his hands making teammates look good. This year he played off the ball next to maybe the best all around College PG in Ullis so he didn't get to show off that creative ball handling ability a lot and when he did maybe it didn't go well. I still think there is some creative and playmaking ability there.

The 3 guards Murray, Buddy and Dunn have contrasting and parallel strengths and weaknesses it's both fun and somewhat maddening to compare them. At this point I've changed my position a little and I will be happy if we get any of them. I'm still open to other options but they are good ones.

The bold part is a bit unfair for Buddy as he handled the ball much more often than given credit for this last year. Buddy won't ever be our PG, but his ball-handling is adequate for a SG. I also fail to see how Murray will be our PG, when his skillset is pure SG. The PG experiment at Kentucky went terribly, and he was averaging more TOs than assists. His ballhandling and vision are average. He's talked about as a combo guard because he's a bit small to be a SG. I do not see how Murray will be able to drive around any PG in the NBA, and how he will defend any PG or SG. Go watch some of his tape, he is a sloth when someone crosses him. It often doesnt even take a move to blow by him, a simple straight drive will do the trick. When a screener comes, he acts like he is playing his first ever basketball game defensively. Frankly, Murray is one of the worst on-ball defenders i've ever seen. This lack of agility also worries me on offense for Murray. He has great footwork, but he is rather slow, has a hitch in his shot, and has a low release. I worry about what happens to him when a Wiggins, Butler, etc. is guarding him. If he's shut down offensively then he becomes unplayable with his lack of defensive ability. Go look at what happened to him against Louisville. I agree, Murray was putting up huge numbers as a freshman. He also was playing at Kentucky who, for the first time in awhile, didn't have multiple studs. Coach Cal actually tried to give him more opportunities on offense. He's not some unknown commodity like Devin Booker was. He was in the perfect position to thrive as a scorer. Hield at least showed to be a good defender for 2 seasons, and showed dramatic improvement on his potential over his career. Both are things we are not going to be allowed to see for Murray, and that worries me a bit.

To me, Murray projects to be an outstanding catch and shoot SG, who will be dynamite running off screens, but be a complete liability on defense. Nik Stauskas?
Hield projects to be the same kind of scorer, but has proven he can be at least an average defender in the NBA.

Im a little confused I'm uncertain how we disagree on Buddy's ball handling abilities. I said he wasn't going to be able to play PG much but he was a SG. Seems like the same thing you said.

Let's agree to disagree on Murray's ability to play PG. As you laid out that's not the only issue with him. His athletic traits are worrisome although I do think he is little better athlete than he is given credit for especially vertically. That does effect him on both ends. Like I said with Murray its potential especially compared to the other 2 guards. I think there is some real growth he can make in a number of areas. He may not though. Who would have thought Stauskus (who you brought up) would have been this bad so far? Not me I really liked him both for his potential and likely high floor. Like I've said lately Buddy might fit in as well with this roster as any of these guys. It would be great to get a good player out of this draft even if that meant just a solid starter level talent. That makes me lean more towards Buddy or Dunn and those guys obviously have potential of their own.

TeamRicky wrote:
Murray is nothing like Winslow or Marion. In fact, almost the exact opposite. I loved Winslow last year and have been a big Marion fan because they are two way players with many tools. Murray is someone I don't want us to draft because he is pretty much a one trick pony and his three point shooting was only 32% (NBA 3 point line) when he played for Team Canada. He is also slow, short armed and didn't seem to put much energy on defense. He also had more turnovers than assists (I'd trust Tyus at PG before him).

I noticed you omitted Dragan Bender. I think he'd be a great fit on this team, but I like 1-4 too. So as long as we get one of Ingram, Simmons, Bender, Hield or Dunn, I'll be happy.

I'm not sure you read my post very thoroughly. I didn't say Murray is just like Shawn Marion, I said he could fill a similar type of supporting role on a top team. Marion's not an alpha and I don't see Murray as an alpha in the NBA on a top team either. But I think he's got good upside and can be more than just a decent starter. Both are smooth as well.

I disagree with you that he's not similar to a guard version of Winslow though. I'll concede on the defender aspect to their games however. However you're crazy if you think he's a one trick pony. A guy that can get to the hoop and finish with ease and a silky smooth shooting stroke are two right there. Plus he has a solid basketball IQ. On offense, he resembles Bradley Beal a bit to me, and that's not a bad thing (figured you'd prefer an apples to apples comparison as opposed to my role comparisons from before).

As for Bender, he was left out on purpose. I think if we're going to go after a big, I want to have complete confidence that he'll be dominant on the defensive end. Bender is going to get bullied down low early in his career in my opinion, and if he's not a good rebounder now, he's not likely to become one with the Wolves, and that's something we could use. I also really am not wanting a perimeter big right now, and from what I've seen and read, that's a big part of his game. Going further, unless there's a big that's got all the production and tools to be a surefire stud at the next level, I feel like you can get quality defensive bigs deeper in the draft. (see Marc Gasol, Hassan Whiteside, DeAndre Jordan, Rudy Gobert, etc)

mrhockey89 wrote:

TeamRicky wrote:
Murray is nothing like Winslow or Marion. In fact, almost the exact opposite. I loved Winslow last year and have been a big Marion fan because they are two way players with many tools. Murray is someone I don't want us to draft because he is pretty much a one trick pony and his three point shooting was only 32% (NBA 3 point line) when he played for Team Canada. He is also slow, short armed and didn't seem to put much energy on defense. He also had more turnovers than assists (I'd trust Tyus at PG before him).

I noticed you omitted Dragan Bender. I think he'd be a great fit on this team, but I like 1-4 too. So as long as we get one of Ingram, Simmons, Bender, Hield or Dunn, I'll be happy.

I'm not sure you read my post very thoroughly. I didn't say Murray is just like Shawn Marion, I said he could fill a similar type of supporting role on a top team. Marion's not an alpha and I don't see Murray as an alpha in the NBA on a top team either. But I think he's got good upside and can be more than just a decent starter. Both are smooth as well.

I disagree with you that he's not similar to a guard version of Winslow though. I'll concede on the defender aspect to their games however. However you're crazy if you think he's a one trick pony. A guy that can get to the hoop and finish with ease and a silky smooth shooting stroke are two right there. Plus he has a solid basketball IQ. On offense, he resembles Bradley Beal a bit to me, and that's not a bad thing (figured you'd prefer an apples to apples comparison as opposed to my role comparisons from before).

As for Bender, he was left out on purpose. I think if we're going to go after a big, I want to have complete confidence that he'll be dominant on the defensive end. Bender is going to get bullied down low early in his career in my opinion, and if he's not a good rebounder now, he's not likely to become one with the Wolves, and that's something we could use. I also really am not wanting a perimeter big right now, and from what I've seen and read, that's a big part of his game. Going further, unless there's a big that's got all the production and tools to be a surefire stud at the next level, I feel like you can get quality defensive bigs deeper in the draft. (see Marc Gasol, Hassan Whiteside, DeAndre Jordan, Rudy Gobert, etc)

Bender is the most unknown guy in the top 10 but he doesn't turn 19 till November. Saying the guy can't rebound now he won't ever seems a little quick. What did Porzingis or Pau look like at 18? The guy is a legit 7' and may have grown since 2015. That pretty big for a PF. Just sayin.