TheFuture wrote:Camden wrote:So what's the name of our defense-playing, dribble driving, high potential, gifted athlete of a basketball prospect? Such a player has to be there at 13 for the Wolves to take. So let's hear it, what's his name?
The only player that fits that description a little bit is KJ McDaniels.
Tier 1
Gary Harris
KJ McDaniels
PJ Hairston
Rodney Hood
Zach Lavine (Based on huge potential alone)
Tier 2
James Young
Cleanthony Early
Markel Brown
Tier 3
Thanasis Antetokounmpo
Glenn Robinsion III
To name a few... not saying all of these players are first rounders, or should be picked at #13, but there are quite a few good players out there not named Stauskas, some of which I believe will impact a game more overall than he will.
Adding Stauskas to our lineup gives us a younger Martin imo. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I don't want to watch us constantly try to outshoot teams to win, much like this year. Yeah, our bench didn't score well, but they were much worse on the defensive end (positions 1-3). Rubio-(Tier 1 Player from above)-Muhammad-Love-Dieng is a lineup I'd like to see in the 4th quarter. A good Defensive lineup with enough Offense to keep or extend a lead. That whole lineup would also be tenacious on the glass.
Gary Harris and McDaniels are the only players in any one of your tiers that I'd be good with at 13. Hairston/Hood if we traded down a bit, though neither are better on defense than Stauskas. Keep that in mind. LaVine has no legitimate case to be a first-rounder this year, but he'll get picked up as a lottery ticket by someone late first round. Again, he's not better on defense than Stauskas either.
Tier 2 looks super mehh. Late first rounders with capped potential. In Tier 3 I think GRIII should/will go back to school.
Ahh, I realize your biggest problem. You're thinking he's going to be a young Kevin Martin when he's actually way more skilled than Martin. Stauskas is a better facilitator, ball-handler, shot-creator and arguably a better overall shooter than Martin was at a young age. I also think he's much better on defense too. Fights through screens, understands spacing and help defense, doesn't commit dumb fouls, etc. He's no stopper on defense, but he won't get tagged with a "defensive liability" title like Martin has over most of his career.
"And yes Cam, I have watched him play plenty. I see a 3-point specialist in the NBA at the least, and an offensive spark plug off the bench at the very best in 2-3 years. That is a nice asset, but not what I would say is our biggest need. Everyone here talks about moving Pekovic or packaging a few players in a trade to get a much needed 2-way player on the wing (moving Martin to the bench to fill that spark plug role talked about previously), but yet those same people are also fine with settling for a potential role player who scores at a nice clip in college? I don't get it. I understand the desire to play it safe with the horrendous drafting in the past, but is this what the fans of our franchise have come to? Settling for a 1-way player just because you know he is good at something? Don't we have enough of those already? Love - Offense. Pekovic - Offense. Martin - Offense. Budinger - Offense. Barea - Offense. Turiaf - Defense. LRMAM - Defense. etc. The closest thing we have to a 2-way player is Dieng (Muhammad we can't be sure of, curse you Adelman.) and he was drafted last year by Flip. I trust Flip to get us another this year and his name is not Stauskas.
Cam, you compare him to Hayward from Utah, and I won't deny that he could potentially be that in 2-3 years. Hayward is a few inches taller though, and never seemed to get completely shutdown from more athletic players. Hayward also plays on a team in Utah that can cover his deficiencies on the defensive end, as many of their players are highly athletic, especially in the interior. We do not have that opportunity here. We already have to do that for our current best players, and have failed miserably."
Spark plug off the bench at best... Thanks for that, MS. I needed a good laugh this afternoon. 3-point specialists don't have the handle/creating abilities Stauskas has. Even if Nik never reaches his highest potential he still projects to be a JJ Reddick except taller, and JJ's more than a specialist in his own right. Though, I see him having a higher ceiling than Reddick to be clear.
People are discussing moving Pekovic because Dieng looks like he's a better fit next to Love and because he's cheaper. They feel like his $12M is better used on a wing player. If Dieng wouldn't have played so well in his starts to finish the season, we might not be talking about trading Pek.
So Minnesota would be settling/playing it safe for Stauskas at 13? He didn't JUST score at a nice clip. He was efficient from the field, 3P and the FT line where last season he averaged more than 5 FTAs per game. He had one of the best AST/TO ratios in college basketball and consistently showed the ability to set up teammates. That's a quality than only Rubio/Love have on this team. We need more outside shooting and players that can create for others. If we could get that (and possibly more) at the SG position, we'd be much closer to being a threat in the West.
This whole one-way, two-way player discussion gets overblown from time to time. Would you rather have a pretty good two-way player or a potential stud one-way player? Steph Curry or Ricky Rubio? Carmelo Anthony or Andre Iguodala? Instead of ruling a player out because their defense isn't game-changing is ridiculous. You're failing to realize what Stauskas could become at the next level.
I said he has some Hayward in him, yes, but he has a splash of Curry in him too. Stauskas has the same bounce off the dribble and ability to get his shot off anywhere like Steph, but the way he's able to play off-ball at his size reminds me a lot of Hayward. I think that's what his potential is: Curry + Hayward.