BizarroJerry wrote:If he really is a 7 footer who can hit 3's (according to Simmons) and play solid D, you HAVE to take him, recovering back problems or not. But this will all be a moot point as the best we'll get is Boston's #6 if anything.
Bleed, wouldn't that be fantastic if Bazz became our starting SF next season? Perhaps a new coach that gives Bazz and Dieng more PT, another solid pick this year and all this Love trade talk could also be moot.
Fully agree with both your main points, Lloyd...that Cleveland is not going to give up #1, and Bazz effectively grabbing the starting SF role would go a long way toward allowing us to move past the loss of Love.
BizarroJerry wrote:If he really is a 7 footer who can hit 3's (according to Simmons) and play solid D, you HAVE to take him, recovering back problems or not. But this will all be a moot point as the best we'll get is Boston's #6 if anything.
As I've pointed out to khans already, Embiid does not have NBA 3PT range and I don't care what the great Bill Simmons has to say about it due to the fact he's been on Embiid's jock for a year now. He shot 1-5 at Kansas from three. 1-5. That shows two things to me. First, he made 20% of his attempts, which is poor. Two, he only took five of them, which shows he either isn't truly comfortable that far away from the rim OR his coach knows that he can't shoot 3s and restricted him from doing so. Compare Embiid's 3PT attempts to Love's while he was in college (this was before he was as good of a shooter as he is now). Love took 20-30 of them. Embiid only took five. If Embiid had the potential to have 3PT range, it's fair to say he would have taken a lot more of them. Players and coaches know their capabilities.
Also, keep in mind the NBA three is even farther than the college three. I'll be extremely shocked if Embiid has turned into an NBA three-point range shooter in a matter of just months.
The thing about Dieng is that he got an opportunity and actually put up legit starting Center numbers more than a couple games. Shabazz had a few nice moments but he hasn't proven as much by far. Yep Dieng is older but its pretty widely accepted Bigs particularly centers develop later and Dieng is the classic hasn't played basketball long type guy. Normally that worries me but what I saw of him in college he had a very good grasp on the game much better than many college centers no matter talent or age. It also helps that he played for Pitino who has had a lot of successful players in his program. If Shabazz becomes a legit starter and Dieng becomes a valueable backup Center that can play PF a few minutes as well this team would be nearing contender status. That's a lot to ask but I have faith in Dieng and I do have some hope for Shabazz. It would be nice to see the non-rookies play really well in vegas. We know it only means so much but we don't want to see those guys struggle that's for sure that's not a good sign.
I think it would be good if we could get a coach that sort of let guys get out and play. Rubio and Bazz seem like guys that could really benefit from some freedom. Love can do his thing no matter the system and Rubio is gonna feed Pek plenty. Getting the right coach is no small thing. I think Flip is looking for the right fit. Hopefully he finds it.
If the Wolves somehow end up with the #1 pick from the Cavs in a trade for Love, then in no way should the Wolves be looking to try to fit the #1 pick into our roster, they should be looking to take BPA. If that's Embid, then you take Embid. If it's Wiggins, then you take Wiggins. Sure Wiggins fits better with the current roster, but you're looking for a superstar in this draft if you have that pick, not just a guy who fits.
When you draft for need over talent, you draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan because you have Clyde Drexler on your team...
mrhockey89 wrote:If the Wolves somehow end up with the #1 pick from the Cavs in a trade for Love, then in no way should the Wolves be looking to try to fit the #1 pick into our roster, they should be looking to take BPA. If that's Embid, then you take Embid. If it's Wiggins, then you take Wiggins. Sure Wiggins fits better with the current roster, but you're looking for a superstar in this draft if you have that pick, not just a guy who fits.
When you draft for need over talent, you draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan because you have Clyde Drexler on your team...
When BPA could easily be any one of the three, you start looking for tie-breakers. Plus, Parker's No. 1 on my big board so that's where my argument stems from. Both Wiggins and Embiid have enough issues to where Parker stands out amongst them and there's no denying his NBA-ready skillset.
mrhockey89 wrote:If the Wolves somehow end up with the #1 pick from the Cavs in a trade for Love, then in no way should the Wolves be looking to try to fit the #1 pick into our roster, they should be looking to take BPA. If that's Embid, then you take Embid. If it's Wiggins, then you take Wiggins. Sure Wiggins fits better with the current roster, but you're looking for a superstar in this draft if you have that pick, not just a guy who fits.
When you draft for need over talent, you draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan because you have Clyde Drexler on your team...
When BPA could easily be any one of the three, you start looking for tie-breakers. Plus, Parker's No. 1 on my big board so that's where my argument stems from. Both Wiggins and Embiid have enough issues to where Parker stands out amongst them and there's no denying his NBA-ready skillset.
It's the Wolves FO job to figure out who the best player is. Unless they grade out evenly on their board they need to go BPA. But you always like one player better than another, and I'm confident that each FO will as well...and if they can't figure out who the best of the bunch is, then they don't deserve their paychecks. Might as well hire a rube at 10% of the price.
Cam, thank you for educating me on the NBA three point line being further away. I'm not suggesting Embiid is Dirk Nowitski, but Simmons watches more basketball than anybody I know. Maybe he's expanding his range? I don't know, but it sounds like he can hit the outside jumper, be it the long Beasley 2 or the occasional 3.
I think you can fool yourself at times picking BPA. If you really don't have a spot for that guy and he doesn't fit into your team then you may be better off trading down or picking a guy you think will actually fulfill their promise on your team. Since we have talked hindsight of not taking BPA why not bring up Derrick Williams as the BPA that failed. I know I was an advocate of trading down or even flat out taking another guy because I wasn't sold on him, but I wasn't really familiar with the rest of the guys that were available. I was a fan of Kanter but did we really need another center? Anywho....
Ok yeah if the guy that doesn't fit is far and away better then yeah you probably pick him or hold out for the best deal you can get to trade down, but I don't get the sense that the difference between the top 3 is that big at least right now. Lets see what we can glean in the next couple weeks.
