Page 24 of 26
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:41 am
by KG4Ever
Who do I want: Doumbouya
If he's gone at 11, I'd probably try to trade 11 for two first rounders in this year's draft.
I think the value is in the bigs or wings and not in the guards. I'd like to end up with two of the following: PJ Washington, Goga Bitadze, Kabengele, Brandon Clarke, Rui Hachimura, Claxton, Hayes, Windler, NAW, Thybulle.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:45 am
by AbeVigodaLive
For knowing next to nothing (take that for what it's worth)... I like Thybulle and Windler.
For very different reasons. For the record, I'm choosing Windler in any HORSE contest between the two.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:44 am
by kekgeek
AbeVigodaLive wrote:For knowing next to nothing (take that for what it's worth)... I like Thybulle and Windler.
For very different reasons. For the record, I'm choosing Windler in any HORSE contest between the two.
Let's go Abe welcome to the Windler fan club
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:25 pm
by Monster
lipoli390 wrote:Monster - We just disagree on White. I don't think he'll be a good NBA player -- certainly not good enough to trade up for, giving up assets in addition to our #11 pick. Langford is an excellent ballhandler. His limitation is that he nearly always goes right and finishes with his right hand. But that's not a reflection on his ballhandling. He seems very comfortable and smooth dribbling with both hands. I have three concerns with Langford. First, is his tendency to always go right. That's very fixable. Second, is his 3-point shooting percentage. I cut him some slack on that based on his broken hand nearly all season. And he shot a ver respectable 47% from the field overall. Third, it what's been described as his somewhat passive nature. That's the concern that troubles me the most. He has great length with a 6'11 wingspan and 8'7 overhead reach. And watching him play, he looks so smooth and fluid. My eye test tells me he has huge NBA upside. Porter is another other guy who my eye test tells me is a potentially elite NBA wing. But yes, that guy must have serious character issues. Another guys who really impresses me based on my eye test is Nic Claxton.
My eye test put Brandon Roy #1 on my draft board years ago. And it (along with his rebounding stats) put John Collins high on my board a couple years ago. That same eye test is telling me that Langford, Porter and Claxton have huge NBA upside. That same eye test has me less than enthusiastic about White and Little.
Lip I think we end up in the same place with White but got different reasons. I'm always bringing g up stats that reflect he had a much better freshman season than you give him credit for. I think he is a guy that can get you buckets but what if that's just Jamal Crawford clone? That's nice and would possibly be a nice trade asset (if you traded him young) but not good enough for what you are going after. I don't really believe he is enough to jump up to get as a total package but ai do see him being able to be a shot creator but like Crawford or a less efficient LaVine...that's not really that compelling right? Let's remember LaVine and Crawford are both good dudes that work hard so it's not exactly a bad attitude thing with either guy.
Personally if I was going to take a real gamble at a shot creator i'd Just go all in on Porter. Obviously it seems risky and the weird thing is I've read/heard he isn't a bad kid etc. There must be some issues we don't know about or some other talent things teams are worried about (never know though he might get picked higher when the draft actually happens) so who knows. I'm not saying that's the guy I would pick but yeah.
I forgot to mention your guy Claxton about the upside/creators for his position.
The rumor is the Wolves are looking to move up to get to 4 and Garland. I don't know how they get there but maybe the Pels and Griffin would rather have a guy like Saric that can play now than more draft picks etc.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:02 pm
by KG4Ever
I can't believe how much love Darius Garland gets. Sure, his 3 point percentage was excellent at 47.8%, but it was 5 games against weak competition. He also had 3 turnovers per game vs. 2.6 assists. His scoring average was decent at 16.2 pts per game but none of his other stats are all that impressive, despite playing a soft schedule. Add in fact, he ended the season injured and has a short wingspan (6"5) and I really don't understand the hype. Keep in mind Derrick Williams shot 3s at even a higher clip (56.8%) and so I would not trade up for a guy based on a small sample size that may or not translate, especially when he hasn't shown much of an all around game.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:42 pm
by kekgeek
KG4Ever wrote:I can't believe how much love Darius Garland gets. Sure, his 3 point percentage was excellent at 47.8%, but it was 5 games against weak competition. He also had 3 turnovers per game vs. 2.6 assists. His scoring average was decent at 16.2 pts per game but none of his other stats are all that impressive, despite playing a soft schedule. Add in fact, he ended the season injured and has a short wingspan (6"5) and I really don't understand the hype. Keep in mind Derrick Williams shot 3s at even a higher clip (56.8%) and so I would not trade up for a guy based on a small sample size that may or not translate, especially when he hasn't shown much of an all around game.
He has almost identical numbers as Kyrie had in college. Also 16.2 pts per game would be higher if he didn't get hurt in the first 2 minutes of the game. Of course the mystery of Garlund helps his case but he has a good case on being the 4th best prospect.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:14 pm
by KG4Ever
kekgeek1 wrote:KG4Ever wrote:I can't believe how much love Darius Garland gets. Sure, his 3 point percentage was excellent at 47.8%, but it was 5 games against weak competition. He also had 3 turnovers per game vs. 2.6 assists. His scoring average was decent at 16.2 pts per game but none of his other stats are all that impressive, despite playing a soft schedule. Add in fact, he ended the season injured and has a short wingspan (6"5) and I really don't understand the hype. Keep in mind Derrick Williams shot 3s at even a higher clip (56.8%) and so I would not trade up for a guy based on a small sample size that may or not translate, especially when he hasn't shown much of an all around game.
He has almost identical numbers as Kyrie had in college. Also 16.2 pts per game would be higher if he didn't get hurt in the first 2 minutes of the game. Of course the mystery of Garlund helps his case but he has a good case on being the 4th best prospect.
Not really close in my opinion unless you are only looking at points and three points. Kyrie's other stats are much better and he faced better competition. Also, Kyrie's net rating was elite and Garland has one of worst net ratings of lottery slotted guys. Also, I don't put as much weight in Garland's three point prowess when it is in 4 or 5 games against soft competition.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:27 pm
by kekgeek
KG4Ever wrote:kekgeek1 wrote:KG4Ever wrote:I can't believe how much love Darius Garland gets. Sure, his 3 point percentage was excellent at 47.8%, but it was 5 games against weak competition. He also had 3 turnovers per game vs. 2.6 assists. His scoring average was decent at 16.2 pts per game but none of his other stats are all that impressive, despite playing a soft schedule. Add in fact, he ended the season injured and has a short wingspan (6"5) and I really don't understand the hype. Keep in mind Derrick Williams shot 3s at even a higher clip (56.8%) and so I would not trade up for a guy based on a small sample size that may or not translate, especially when he hasn't shown much of an all around game.
He has almost identical numbers as Kyrie had in college. Also 16.2 pts per game would be higher if he didn't get hurt in the first 2 minutes of the game. Of course the mystery of Garlund helps his case but he has a good case on being the 4th best prospect.
Not really close in my opinion unless you are only looking at points and three points. Kyrie's other stats are much better and he faced much better competition. Also, Kyrie's net rating was elite and Garland has one of worst net ratings of lottery slotted guys. I will give you a more thorough breakdown if you like.
Garland average 16.2/3.8/2.6 with 3 TO a game on 53/47/75 with a strength of schedule of 7.76 also points skewed because he played 2 minutes in one game.
Irving average 17.5/3.4/4.3 with 2.5 TO a game on 52/46/90 with a strength of schedule of 8.31
Pretty darn close. Once again Irving was a better prospect but in a weak draft at the top I can see why Garland is considered the 4th best prospect. I get it.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:30 pm
by crazy-canuck [enjin:18955461]
Re: Garland.
He has some talent; upside.
Not a great draft for upside.
Hes an unknown, so people are picturing that upside more than his downside.
Re: Timberwolves Draft Prospect Analysis Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:35 pm
by crazy-canuck [enjin:18955461]
Gersson Rosas said the Timberwolves organization does not promise players they will be selected -- debunking a rumor that the Wolves have promised someone at 11.