Minnesota Sports Forum

Guys...I think I've uncovered a hidden gem, and he's only 19...or 30, or something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix4hcy1PdCc

Q12543 wrote:
Go look back at the last 20 to 25 drafts. It's typically 50/50 in terms of the top two picks. One guy turns into a stud and the other guy is anywhere from a total bust to mediocre. It is absolutely not a sure thing.

That is so true. It seems that last years draft might be the first one since Howard, Okafor pair where both players in top two will be able to be successful. Or if you won't think that high about Okafor, you need to go as far as 1999 Draft with Brand, Francis pair. And even in that draft Brand was eventually much better player. 1996 Draft is first one that has both top two players having more than 50 career win shares. In that draft actually everyone in top 5 have had more than 70 win shares.

There has been also some real bad luck for top picks. Car accident with Jay Williams and Oden's injuries.

Even stranger is that it seems that in quite many drafts there has been at least two and sometimes even three better players in range 3-5 than worse player in top 2.

2013: Bennett vs Porter, Zeller and Len
2012: Kidd-Gilchrist vs Beal
2011: Derrick Williams vs Kanter, Thompson and Valenciunas
2010: Turner vs Favors and Cousins
2009: Thabeet vs Harden, Evans and Rubio
2008: Beasley vs Westbook and Love
2007: Oden vs Horford and Conley
2006: Andrea Bargnani vs Brandon Roy (had to go 6th pick since picks between 3 and 5 were even more horrible than Bargnani)
2005: Marvin Williams vs Deron Williams and Paul
2003: Darko vs Melo, Bosh and Wade
2002: Jay Williams vs Dunleavy and Gooden
2001: Kwame Brown vs Gasol and Richardson
2000: Swift vs Miller
1998: Olowokandi vs LaFrentz, Jamison and Carter
1997: Van Horn vs Billups

It seems that most probable recipe for drafting a bust is to count too much on size and potential. I would put Thabeet, Bargnani, Darko, Kwame, Olowokandi for that category. Maybe that is the reason why Cam wanted to stay away from Porzingis even if we would have got 4th pick.

Camden wrote:
I think Bjelica would be a good fit next to either one of them. For Okafor, it's because he's a stretch-forward who could open up more room for Okafor in the low post. Also, Bejlica's a pretty skilled passer so I could see him with drive and dish opportunities there as well. Defensively it probably isn't the best simply because you'd hope for more rim protection next to Okafor. I agree the fit is better next to Towns, but you could probably say that about everyone. Towns' game works with just about anyone... which is a reason why I've liked him so much since the beginning.

I agree this very much. With Okafor and Bjelica, Wolves could play similar offense than Houston had with Hakeem surrounded with 4 shooters (Smith, Maxwell, Elie and Horry). It would give pretty good spacing even with Rubio and since Okafor is offensive rebounding monster they could have pretty many 2nd change points as well.

Pairing Bjelica with Towns would be probably even better even in offense because all the versatility those guys have. They could play Wiggins/Shabazz in post or have them cutting hard to rim while Lavine plays pick and pop with Towns. Or Bjelica could take his man off the dribble with Towns playing outside similar way than Bulls used Kukoc sometimes in PF position.

Even tough Okafor, Bjelica pair would not be good in defense, I think it would not be that bad as people assume. Bjelica would help in defensive rebounding which is one area where Okafor is pretty weak. If Okafor can play at least similar defense than Pek, he even paired with Bjelica would make Wolves defense already much better than it was last year. Last year when Young was paired with Pek, Wolves actually outrebounded their opponents and were outscored only by 0.5 points margin per 100 possessions. (they were outscored overall 9.3 points per 100 possessions) I think Bjelica Okafor combination could be defensively about same level than Young Pek combination was.

One fact about Flip's offense. Wolves used last season 2nd most possessions (12.6%) for post-up plays despite their best post-up options Shabazz and Pek (Even though Pek was horrible last year, he still scored more points per possesion than Wiggins, Dieng or Young) missing majority of the games.

Since Flip likes to use post-up so much as a part of his offense, does this affect his draft selection?

BTW. It is strange that despite using a lot post-ups, Wolves were dead last in spot-up plays. Was this because no one in last years team commanded double team in post or did they were just bad in passing out of post?

The decision for Flip might be easy: http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2015/5/21/8633423/report-jahlil-okafor-doesnt-want-to-play-for-t-wolves

Carlos Danger wrote:The decision for Flip might be easy: http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2015/5/21/8633423/report-jahlil-okafor-doesnt-want-to-play-for-t-wolves

I really hope this rumor is true, because it would make it easy for Flip to make the right decision and would make it even easier to hate the Lakers.

But let's look at the source. This rumor originated from some guy named Chuck Myron, who based his conclusion on a statement Okafor made to SI that it didn't matter much too him whether or not he is picked first. Quite a jump from the actual statement to "Okafor doesn't want to play for the Wolves".

Still, I'm hoping it's true.

longstrangetrip wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote:The decision for Flip might be easy: http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2015/5/21/8633423/report-jahlil-okafor-doesnt-want-to-play-for-t-wolves

I really hope this rumor is true, because it would make it easy for Flip to make the right decision and would make it even easier to hate the Lakers.

But let's look at the source. This rumor originated from some guy named Chuck Myron, who based his conclusion on a statement Okafor made to SI that it didn't matter much too him whether or not he is picked first. Quite a jump from the actual statement to "Okafor doesn't want to play for the Wolves".

Still, I'm hoping it's true.

Agree with you LST. There will be lots of rumors/speculation from now until draft night. I just happened to catch that story on my home page. Wouldn't that be Wolves luck though? The finally get the #1 overall chance and maybe the guy they have rated as #1 says he won't play here. Ugh!

Wow! Zgoda actually put together a nice piece. But that's probably because none of the content comes from himself...

http://m.startribune.com/sports/wolves/304510771.html

60WinTim wrote:

TRKO wrote:Is Flip picking the guy that best compliments Wiggins, or is he going after the best overall player.

That's another whole topic. Flip does not rank guys 1, 2, 3, etc. He projects guys into boxes according to their potential: hall-of-famer, all-star, starter, rotation player, etc. He used the word "all-pro" in one of the interviews today. I don't know if that is another box, or just another name for all-star. When their pick comes around, he looks in highest ranking box that still has players in it. He can then pick the player from that box that is the best fit on the team. Or at least that is how I understand it.

Last year, Burke and Shabazz (and others) were in the same box. He made the trade with Utah because the box with players at #9 would still have players at #13.

This thread has been terrific I am glad I read through it today.

Tim your idea of boxes players fits in is interesting. Based on what has been said about what Flip has said about playera you have to wonder what kind of asset a team like the Sixers or Knicks would have to give up to get #1. It would have to be pretty good obviously. Prozingis could be a guy he would be happy to get as his worst case scenario if he got a worthwhile asset to move down. Like Cam said philly is absolutely unpredictable and you never know for sure what any team will do so I agree you don't get cute but what would be a big enough asset to get for moving down if you knew your guy would be there?

I'll add that Okafor may be a little easier to get excited about because you have something definitive to get excited about. Towns maybe his defense he is just a more all around player and also played fewer minutes so you get less of a read on him.

monsterpile wrote:

60WinTim wrote:

TRKO wrote:Is Flip picking the guy that best compliments Wiggins, or is he going after the best overall player.

That's another whole topic. Flip does not rank guys 1, 2, 3, etc. He projects guys into boxes according to their potential: hall-of-famer, all-star, starter, rotation player, etc. He used the word "all-pro" in one of the interviews today. I don't know if that is another box, or just another name for all-star. When their pick comes around, he looks in highest ranking box that still has players in it. He can then pick the player from that box that is the best fit on the team. Or at least that is how I understand it.

Last year, Burke and Shabazz (and others) were in the same box. He made the trade with Utah because the box with players at #9 would still have players at #13.

This thread has been terrific I am glad I read through it today.

Tim your idea of boxes players fits in is interesting. Based on what has been said about what Flip has said about playera you have to wonder what kind of asset a team like the Sixers or Knicks would have to give up to get #1. It would have to be pretty good obviously. Prozingis could be a guy he would be happy to get as his worst case scenario if he got a worthwhile asset to move down. Like Cam said philly is absolutely unpredictable and you never know for sure what any team will do so I agree you don't get cute but what would be a big enough asset to get for moving down if you knew your guy would be there?

I'll add that Okafor may be a little easier to get excited about because you have something definitive to get excited about. Towns maybe his defense he is just a more all around player and also played fewer minutes so you get less of a read on him.

I thought Philadelphia was going to get pick #11 this year. What happened with that? That is the pick I would want to move down to #3.