Minnesota Sports Forum

Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis, Danilo Gallinari, Kristaps Porzingis, Paul Millsap, John Collins, Kevin Love...

These are successful power forwards in the NBA that play next to another big. For some reason, pundits think Karl-Anthony Towns wouldn't be able to. That's odd to me. He's either more skilled or more athletic than just about everyone named above.

It isn't a matter of can Towns play the four because I think it's obvious that he could and might even be better there. It's a matter of will the Wolves front office have tunnel vision on what they keep referring to as their "system" or will they be willing and able to adjust as new pieces are incorporated.

Camden0916 wrote:Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis, Danilo Gallinari, Kristaps Porzingis, Paul Millsap, John Collins, Kevin Love...

These are successful power forwards in the NBA that play next to another big. For some reason, pundits think Karl-Anthony Towns wouldn't be able to. That's odd to me. He's either more skilled or more athletic than just about everyone named above.

It isn't a matter of can Towns play the four because I think it's obvious that he could and might even be better there. It's a matter of will the Wolves front office have tunnel vision on what they keep referring to as their "system" or will they be willing and able to adjust as new pieces are incorporated.

As long as the 2nd big can sit in the dunker spot and have no issue not having sets run for him on offense it will work with Towns. I think Wiseman could work, but I could also see it getting really crowded on offense. I think defensively its clear that Towns needs a lot of help down low. A long center that could clog up the middle would be nice. I guess the real question is whether Wiseman as a #1 pick would be ok being Dallas Tyson Chandler?

Camden wrote:Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis, Danilo Gallinari, Kristaps Porzingis, Paul Millsap, John Collins, Kevin Love...

These are successful power forwards in the NBA that play next to another big. For some reason, pundits think Karl-Anthony Towns wouldn't be able to. That's odd to me. He's either more skilled or more athletic than just about everyone named above.

It isn't a matter of can Towns play the four because I think it's obvious that he could and might even be better there. It's a matter of will the Wolves front office have tunnel vision on what they keep referring to as their "system" or will they be willing and able to adjust as new pieces are incorporated.

I see it more KAT is more of a liability in space defensively. Either getting blown by or letting an uncontested 3 go up. He certainly can get better still and if Wiseman is head and shoulders the number 1 guy, then I go that route.

I believe the analytics are saying two bigs is a thing of the past, even one possibly. So like I said before, unless Wiseman plays more like a 4 then a 5, then I don't see him being a Rosas guy.

Now wether you agree with Rosas' strategy is another story. His career is basically on the line with what comes out of this draft. He's got to make the right moves.

I would take Wiseman, but let me go on record saying Rosas will take Ball if he keeps the pick.

WolvesFan21 wrote:

Camden wrote:Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis, Danilo Gallinari, Kristaps Porzingis, Paul Millsap, John Collins, Kevin Love...

These are successful power forwards in the NBA that play next to another big. For some reason, pundits think Karl-Anthony Towns wouldn't be able to. That's odd to me. He's either more skilled or more athletic than just about everyone named above.

It isn't a matter of can Towns play the four because I think it's obvious that he could and might even be better there. It's a matter of will the Wolves front office have tunnel vision on what they keep referring to as their "system" or will they be willing and able to adjust as new pieces are incorporated.

I see it more KAT is more of a liability in space defensively. Either getting blown by or letting an uncontested 3 go up. He certainly can get better still and if Wiseman is head and shoulders the number 1 guy, then I go that route.

I believe the analytics are saying two bigs is a thing of the past, even one possibly. So like I said before, unless Wiseman plays more like a 4 then a 5, then I don't see him being a Rosas guy.

Now wether you agree with Rosas' strategy is another story. His career is basically on the line with what comes out of this draft. He's got to make the right moves.

I look at this draft in somewhat the same way that I did when Flip all in on Okofor. Eventually he realized Towns was the best player he listened to the people around him too. I do think if Rosas and the people around him believe Wiseman is the best player they will eventually take him. Idk if he is the best player. The most proven of the top possible picks is Edwards...because he played the most games. That obviously doesn't mean he is the best player or the safest pick. It gets old saying it but it really is a weird/unusual draft.

WolvesFan21 wrote:

Camden wrote:Anthony Davis, Pascal Siakam, Domantas Sabonis, Danilo Gallinari, Kristaps Porzingis, Paul Millsap, John Collins, Kevin Love...

These are successful power forwards in the NBA that play next to another big. For some reason, pundits think Karl-Anthony Towns wouldn't be able to. That's odd to me. He's either more skilled or more athletic than just about everyone named above.

It isn't a matter of can Towns play the four because I think it's obvious that he could and might even be better there. It's a matter of will the Wolves front office have tunnel vision on what they keep referring to as their "system" or will they be willing and able to adjust as new pieces are incorporated.

I see it more KAT is more of a liability in space defensively. Either getting blown by or letting an uncontested 3 go up. He certainly can get better still and if Wiseman is head and shoulders the number 1 guy, then I go that route.

I believe the analytics are saying two bigs is a thing of the past, even one possibly. So like I said before, unless Wiseman plays more like a 4 then a 5, then I don't see him being a Rosas guy.

Now wether you agree with Rosas' strategy is another story. His career is basically on the line with what comes out of this draft. He's got to make the right moves.

If Towns is a liability defending in space at center, then he'll still be a liability defending in space at the four. But as I've mentioned before, Wiseman would be a much better complimentary piece next to him than Hernangomez or any other available player, which should theoretically have a positive effect regardless.

And I don't really care what some analytics say because I just watched the Lakers pummel the Rockets with size. There's still a place for that style in the NBA whether people like it or not -- similar to how people hype the passing game in football but ignore the importance of the run game.

Also, there are likely analytics that argue that the team that wins the rebounding margin wins XX percentage of the time; the team that defends the rim the best wins XX percentage of the time; the team that wins points in the paint or second chance points margins wins XX amount of the time. But because those stats don't jive with the fast-paced, run and gun methodology we just ignore it for some reason. It doesn't fit the style most seem to want from an aesthetic standpoint.

monsterpile wrote:I look at this draft in somewhat the same way that I did when Flip all in on Okofor. Eventually he realized Towns was the best player he listened to the people around him too. I do think if Rosas and the people around him believe Wiseman is the best player they will eventually take him. Idk if he is the best player. The most proven of the top possible picks is Edwards...because he played the most games. That obviously doesn't mean he is the best player or the safest pick. It gets old saying it but it really is a weird/unusual draft.

Oddly enough, I see this draft closer to the 2011 class. All we heard was that it was a two-player draft. "Oh, it's Kyrie Irving and Derrick Williams and everybody else. What a weak draft class. Those top picks just don't have much value." Blah, blah, blah.

We hear that shit every other year when there's not a hyped-up prospect like Zion Williamson and then there turns out to be like three or four All-Stars and plenty of starters or role players in that same draft that pundits claimed was awful. Guys are too talented and coaching staffs are too good, usually, to not pump out productivity. It's all about evaluating the talent and determining what can stick at the next level, what's correctable, and what just needs a few tweaks. Supposedly, the front office and scouting department gets paid millions to nail those decisions, though they often miss.. sometimes on no-brainer decisions, but that's neither here nor there.

Look at that 2011 class. Sorted by win shares:

- Jimmy Butler ?
- Kawhi Leonard ?
- Kyrie Irving ?
- Kemba Walker ?
- Jonas Valan?i?nas
- Nikola Vu?evi? ?
- Klay Thompson ?
- Tobias Harris
- Isaiah Thomas ?
- Enes Kanter
- Tristan Thompson
- Kenneth Faried
- Marcus Morris
- Reggie Jackson
- Chandler Parsons
- Bismack Biyombo
- Markieff Morris
- Cory Joseph
- Bojan Bogdanovi?
- Nikola Miroti?
- Alec Burks
- E'Twaun Moore

That sure looks like more than a two-player draft to me. These so-called experts absolutely whiffed on what quality prospects were in this class. Now, am I saying that there's going to be seven All-Stars in this 2020 draft? Not exactly, but I'm very tired of hearing year after year that a draft class is awful and that the picks don't hold much value. If the scouts do their job, and the decision-makers make the right picks, and the coaching staff develops said picks, then we see what's actually there. Plain and simple: do your fucking job.

Edit: ? denotes an All-Star appearance in that player's career.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I would take Wiseman, but let me go on record saying Rosas will take Ball if he keeps the pick.

My gut feeling, my eyes, and my brain all tell me that would be a big mistake. Let's hope you're wrong on what Gersson Rosas does because I think that'll be a pick we look back on in disgust.

According to The Ringer, LaMelo Ball was in the 4th percentile in defending spot-up shot attempts and below the 1st percentile in defending pick-and-rolls during his 12-game stretch in the NBL. How is it possible to be that fucking atrocious on defense? That's not just bad. That's downright unplayable, especially when you consider the talent level over there is a fraction of what exists in the NBA.

That along with his completely broken shot is enough to turn me away from him altogether. How is he going to be successful in the NBA let alone become a star player? He can't consistently beat defenders off the bounce because he lacks above average athleticism. He can't make shots from the perimeter because he has the mechanics of a middle schooler. He can't defend on ball or off ball. He's a good rebounder for his position thanks to his 6'7 frame and he's a quality facilitator/passer albeit a less valuable skill if he's unable to present himself to be a viable scoring threat.

I can't understand why he's considered one of the top prospects in this draft class. Is it the high school hype? Is it the social media fame? Is it the family name? It must be one of those factors because if we're judging him off of what he's done on a basketball court even in a limited sample size he's not worthy of being in that discussion.

Edit: Ball is a 6'7 Ricky Rubio that can't defend or a 6'7 Trae Young that can't shoot. Either way, you won't be winning m(any) games if he's one of your best players.

Also, it's obviously not mandatory or anything, but if you vote for the "trade down" option as many of you have, I think it would be beneficial to know what player you're targeting in that move and what asset you could realistically expect in return.

Trading down always sounds nice in theory, but you have to have a plan in place and a partner that it makes sense for. I'd like to hear those cases. I might have a counterargument for some of them.