Minnesota Sports Forum

I don't have my heart set on one guy at this time. All of the guys in the projected range have good qualities that the team needs. I'm more excited to see what Thibs and Layden think. I expect it will be a great decision. But if I had to make the pick now I'd say Buddy.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I think Hield's floor is a lot higher than Dunn's. He has the skillset, great character, and work ethic that would fit in well with Towns, Wig, et al.

I like Hield too and it's pretty clear to me he has one NBA-ready skill out of the gate. However, you didn't address Khan's question about playing time. Just like Dunn is somewhat redundant with Rubio, Hield is very redundant with Zach. Both are pure SGs and really can't play any other position. So wouldn't something have to give if Hield ends up being the 10-year core player you think he might become?

The thing that's striking about this draft for us is that most of the guys we have coalesced around - Dunn, Hield, and Murray - all play positions filled by players that we could argue are "set" for us in terms of starters. Now I know Pork and Duke think Rubio should be in the Chilean or Thai league, but I think most of us believe he's a good starting PG that can quarterback an outstanding team, so long as there are other stars on it. And while LaVine is far from a finished product, I think most of us were very encouraged by his play when he finally played SG full-time.

Does anyone believe we should avoid these three prospects and do everything possible to land a young PF prospect?

(my own view is that we can go in a ton of different directions with this pick, so I don't really have a strong opinion about it).

Q12543 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I think Hield's floor is a lot higher than Dunn's. He has the skillset, great character, and work ethic that would fit in well with Towns, Wig, et al.

I like Hield too and it's pretty clear to me he has one NBA-ready skill out of the gate. However, you didn't address Khan's question about playing time. Just like Dunn is somewhat redundant with Rubio, Hield is very redundant with Zach. Both are pure SGs and really can't play any other position. So wouldn't something have to give if Hield ends up being the 10-year core player you think he might become?

Yeah you both make good points. I guess my answer is that it's easier to incorporate a wing because you play 2 or 3 of them at a time as opposed to a single point guard. And that one skill you mention is something we desperately need on our roster.

Q, I think the point of trading down is to grab the PF we want and pickup an asset. Is there a PF you would take at 5? Chriss (Bender will be gone) is the one guy I could see going for at #5.

Q12543 wrote:The thing that's striking about this draft for us is that most of the guys we have coalesced around - Dunn, Hield, and Murray - all play positions filled by players that we could argue are "set" for us in terms of starters. Now I know Pork and Duke think Rubio should be in the Chilean or Thai league, but I think most of us believe he's a good starting PG that can quarterback an outstanding team, so long as there are other stars on it. And while LaVine is far from a finished product, I think most of us were very encouraged by his play when he finally played SG full-time.

Does anyone believe we should avoid these three prospects and do everything possible to land a young PF prospect?

(my own view is that we can go in a ton of different directions with this pick, so I don't really have a strong opinion about it).

Yes, I'm on record for taking Bender if he's there. Not sure if I would want to select or trade into another position for a PF.

Q12543 wrote:The thing that's striking about this draft for us is that most of the guys we have coalesced around - Dunn, Hield, and Murray - all play positions filled by players that we could argue are "set" for us in terms of starters. Now I know Pork and Duke think Rubio should be in the Chilean or Thai league, but I think most of us believe he's a good starting PG that can quarterback an outstanding team, so long as there are other stars on it. And while LaVine is far from a finished product, I think most of us were very encouraged by his play when he finally played SG full-time.

Does anyone believe we should avoid these three prospects and do everything possible to land a young PF prospect?

(my own view is that we can go in a ton of different directions with this pick, so I don't really have a strong opinion about it).

Always take BPA in the draft and only think of fit as a tie breaker for prospects on equal levels. By the time most guys drafted become good players the teams they are on could look totally differently than when they were drafted. I think outside of Bender there isn't another big in that second tier of players so take BPA and let them beat out the incumbent if they are good enough. You never know what could happen to open up playing time for guys stuck behind other guys. Ricky could tweak his ankle again and be out two weeks. Would we rather have to then rely on Tyus to run the show with who knows who as his backup? Or would we rather have Dunn and Tyus to handle the load? I think if Zach goes down Wiggins is already there to fill in as a good starter option, but then we'd have Wiggins and Hield or Murray to fill in if we landed one of them. That's why I think you take BPA because you never know what could happen to get them an opportunity to prove themselves.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I think Hield's floor is a lot higher than Dunn's. He has the skillset, great character, and work ethic that would fit in well with Towns, Wig, et al.

I like Hield too and it's pretty clear to me he has one NBA-ready skill out of the gate. However, you didn't address Khan's question about playing time. Just like Dunn is somewhat redundant with Rubio, Hield is very redundant with Zach. Both are pure SGs and really can't play any other position. So wouldn't something have to give if Hield ends up being the 10-year core player you think he might become?

Yeah you both make good points. I guess my answer is that it's easier to incorporate a wing because you play 2 or 3 of them at a time as opposed to a single point guard. And that one skill you mention is something we desperately need on our roster.

But I would argue a lot of teams play two point guards at a time for large stretches of time. Dunn has the size to defend either position IMO.

bleedspeed177 wrote:Q, I think the point of trading down is to grab the PF we want and pickup an asset. Is there a PF you would take at 5? Chriss (Bender will be gone) is the one guy I could see going for at #5.

Davis is intriguing to me along with Bender of course, but otherwise, yeah, it feels like we'd probably want to trade out of the slot if we're dead set on a PF since some good ones could be available with later picks.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:We have this one, possibly last shot to grab a young star to supplement our core. To me Dunn would be a waste of that opportunity.
- A 4 year college player who didn't distinguish himself until his junior year.
- Would play behind a point guard who is going to get 35 minutes
- Is a better athlete than basketball player
- Can't shoot free throws

If you want a guy who can REALLY help us for the next 10 years, take Hield. If you want to swing a bit higher and take a little more risk take Bender.

Dunn was injured his freshman and sophomore year, redshirted sophomore year. Split time at PG that freshman year. His 2 full seasons starting were last year and this year. Averaged better than 16pts/5reb/6ast/2stl per 36 mins in both seasons, while shooting better than 35% from the 3pt on more than 3.5 attempts per game over those two seasons. Next, take a look at how horrible his team was at shooting (Dunn was their best 3 pt shooter). If you ever watched any full games you would see how many completely open looks Dunn set up that the team bricked. Dunn was forced to do too much offensively on that team, which led to a lower 2pt% and a higher turnover rate. I can definitely see him thriving in the NBA.

I like how you use "a 4 year college player who didn't distinguish himself until his junior year" as a reason against Dunn, yet you disregard that with Hield. Buddy was healthy all 4 years, a full time starter 3 of those seasons, and was talked about as a late first/2nd round talent last season. Dunn would have been a lottery pick last season after his first full season with the starting job.

I agree it isn't the best scenario to draft a player to be a backup to Rubio, but we have seen that Ricky does get injured and that we are destined for the top 5 in the draft if he ever does. Dunn can also play off the ball with Ricky due to his athleticism/length and ability to create offense off the dribble/keep the defense honest with a shot. A defensive lineup with Ricky/Dunn/Wiggins/Deng/Towns would be a terror even if the floor spacing would suffer. Due to Wiggins and Towns I still see that lineup creating plenty of offense even without a great 3pt shooter.

The free throw shooting is concerning, and I don't ever expect him to be a great shooter, but that is one of few flaws I see.