The draft is one week away, rank the 3 probable targets:

[Monster]

The dream draft is Denver decides there is a guy they have to have at 5 and you get the 7 and 19 and at 7 a guy drops to you that you want (depending on who you want this could happen based on some mock drafts) and then you get a 2nd guy at 19 (or even trade down and pick up various picks) and get a nice secondary guy. T Prince would be a nice player in that range (there are others worth considering) and would give us that classic combo SF this team has needed for years. Of course the Wolves could end up sticking at #5 and find a nice player buying into the 2nd round which is what I think they are probably leaning towards compared to trading down based on the feel I got from yesterday's PC. It's going to be an interesting draft which may resemble the middle of the NFL draft the way teams move around. It should be fun to watch even if the Wolves just pick 5 and end up making no other moves but I actually will be a little surprised if the Wolves don't make a move to get a 2nd rounder unless it's impossible to just buy a pick.

Agree. Who would Denver be targeting?

Great question. You would think that Denver would be targeting a perimeter player. I am listening to the vertical podcast and Woj has Givony on an they say a number of teams that have these multiple picks have no interest in having a bunch of young kids show up at training camp etc. Maybe they decide to move up to get Buddy? It seems like Denver is in a good spot to just take a nice player that drops to them at 7 but if a run goes on the guards maybe that changes things. But then would the Wolves be willing to trade down?

[Hicks123 [enjin:6700838]]

I just can't see how Murray goes before the 5th pick without a trade. I would rather have Russel and Okafor then Murray. I think I might take Bender before them all. He has the highest upside as a 2-way player in that group.

I hear this a lot on this board. Why do we feel this way? Because he is tall and fairly agile? I ask because he has played so little, I don't know if he is even a capable '1 way player' let alone a 'two-way guy'. In his 10 Euro games he shot 40% from 2 and 25% from 3, and averaged 1 rpg. He is a 100% upside guy that has shown ZERO at this point. My opinion, but if the Zinger would have failed last year, Bender would probably be looked at as an early 2nd round stash type player. His performance to date certainly warrants nothing higher. An 18 year old player with little experience that has a chance to be good or bad....that's what I see. That, to me, is not worth anything near the top half of a fairly solid draft.

People keep saying it's just Porzongas that's causing this euro-love in the draft and it's not. Saric was a lottery pick a few years ago before Porzingas. Valanciunas was a top 5 pick before Porzingas. The euro-love is there regardless of Porzingas because it's always been there when the right prospects come along. An agile 7 footer with a handle is a top 5 prospect because that's crazy to be that big with a handle and real agility. Porzingas isn't that player. He was a 7'3 shooter who was also a defender coming into the draft. They're two different types of players. The love for Bender is not because of Porzingas. It's because he has an intriguing skill set for a 7 footer.

But all of those players (albeit a bit older) had more success than Bender last year. And more importantly, they received some meaningful minutes which scouts and analysts were able to review. To say that Bender and KP had the same stats (as LST states) doesn't seem accurate to me. Both players put up limited stats due to minutes, but on a per minute basis, KP was WAY more productive in every stat.

I was not trying to compare KP and Bender as players, but rather Euro guys. And again, what exactly is this intriguing skillset for Bender? He's tall. In games, he has shown nothing else as of yet. When I think crazy handle, I come to Simmons. Now he has a crazy handle not only for a 6' 10" player....but for any basketball player. And he should be agile, he is skinny as a rail. Athletically, I like his quick feet and seeming ability to guard on the perimeter. But he will get killed initially on interior defense (which is where we need him)....he is just extremely weak. And I am also surprised how little lift he gets. He lays a lot of balls in around the basket that should be easy dunks. And his dunks seem to make it barely over the rim. Again, for a 7'0 player, this gives me a bit of pause. I get it...he is 18. He will certainly get stronger and better as a player. I just think it is risky to take a guy like this in the top 5 when we know virtually nothing. I understand those that like the 'idea' of him as a player....but I personally wouldn't take the risk.

[Monster]

The dream draft is Denver decides there is a guy they have to have at 5 and you get the 7 and 19 and at 7 a guy drops to you that you want (depending on who you want this could happen based on some mock drafts) and then you get a 2nd guy at 19 (or even trade down and pick up various picks) and get a nice secondary guy. T Prince would be a nice player in that range (there are others worth considering) and would give us that classic combo SF this team has needed for years. Of course the Wolves could end up sticking at #5 and find a nice player buying into the 2nd round which is what I think they are probably leaning towards compared to trading down based on the feel I got from yesterday's PC. It's going to be an interesting draft which may resemble the middle of the NFL draft the way teams move around. It should be fun to watch even if the Wolves just pick 5 and end up making no other moves but I actually will be a little surprised if the Wolves don't make a move to get a 2nd rounder unless it's impossible to just buy a pick.

If we could get Bender at 7, and then Dejounte Murray at 19, that would be a tremendous take. But with the way Murray has been rising that might be a little far fetched.

Givony said on the podcast that the PG position is basically likely backup talents after Dunn and some people are probably going to end up reaching too high (so yeah he may not be there at 19) for a guy like Murray. I'm not saying that just to trash on Murray I actually like him and see why his is rising but I think 20's or late teens MIGHT be a more appropriate spot for him. I certainly wouldn't hate him at 19.

[Monster]

I just can't see how Murray goes before the 5th pick without a trade. I would rather have Russel and Okafor then Murray. I think I might take Bender before them all. He has the highest upside as a 2-way player in that group.

I hear this a lot on this board. Why do we feel this way? Because he is tall and fairly agile? I ask because he has played so little, I don't know if he is even a capable '1 way player' let alone a 'two-way guy'. In his 10 Euro games he shot 40% from 2 and 25% from 3, and averaged 1 rpg. He is a 100% upside guy that has shown ZERO at this point. My opinion, but if the Zinger would have failed last year, Bender would probably be looked at as an early 2nd round stash type player. His performance to date certainly warrants nothing higher. An 18 year old player with little experience that has a chance to be good or bad....that's what I see. That, to me, is not worth anything near the top half of a fairly solid draft.

People keep saying it's just Porzongas that's causing this euro-love in the draft and it's not. Saric was a lottery pick a few years ago before Porzingas. Valanciunas was a top 5 pick before Porzingas. The euro-love is there regardless of Porzingas because it's always been there when the right prospects come along. An agile 7 footer with a handle is a top 5 prospect because that's crazy to be that big with a handle and real agility. Porzingas isn't that player. He was a 7'3 shooter who was also a defender coming into the draft. They're two different types of players. The love for Bender is not because of Porzingas. It's because he has an intriguing skill set for a 7 footer.

But all of those players (albeit a bit older) had more success than Bender last year. And more importantly, they received some meaningful minutes which scouts and analysts were able to review. To say that Bender and KP had the same stats (as LST states) doesn't seem accurate to me. Both players put up limited stats due to minutes, but on a per minute basis, KP was WAY more productive in every stat.

I was not trying to compare KP and Bender as players, but rather Euro guys. And again, what exactly is this intriguing skillset for Bender? He's tall. In games, he has shown nothing else as of yet. When I think crazy handle, I come to Simmons. Now he has a crazy handle not only for a 6' 10" player....but for any basketball player. And he should be agile, he is skinny as a rail. Athletically, I like his quick feet and seeming ability to guard on the perimeter. But he will get killed initially on interior defense (which is where we need him)....he is just extremely weak. And I am also surprised how little lift he gets. He lays a lot of balls in around the basket that should be easy dunks. And his dunks seem to make it barely over the rim. Again, for a 7'0 player, this gives me a bit of pause. I get it...he is 18. He will certainly get stronger and better as a player. I just think it is risky to take a guy like this in the top 5 when we know virtually nothing. I understand those that like the 'idea' of him as a player....but I personally wouldn't take the risk.

Your position and reasoning is valid and probably nothing anyone said is going to change your mind. Quite frankly there is only so much to debate about him because as fans we have a limited context with Bender. I'll add that Givony who watches all these prospects as much as anyone says he thinks teams are going to regret passing on Bender.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

I just can't see how Murray goes before the 5th pick without a trade. I would rather have Russel and Okafor then Murray. I think I might take Bender before them all. He has the highest upside as a 2-way player in that group.

I hear this a lot on this board. Why do we feel this way? Because he is tall and fairly agile? I ask because he has played so little, I don't know if he is even a capable '1 way player' let alone a 'two-way guy'. In his 10 Euro games he shot 40% from 2 and 25% from 3, and averaged 1 rpg. He is a 100% upside guy that has shown ZERO at this point. My opinion, but if the Zinger would have failed last year, Bender would probably be looked at as an early 2nd round stash type player. His performance to date certainly warrants nothing higher. An 18 year old player with little experience that has a chance to be good or bad....that's what I see. That, to me, is not worth anything near the top half of a fairly solid draft.

People keep saying it's just Porzongas that's causing this euro-love in the draft and it's not. Saric was a lottery pick a few years ago before Porzingas. Valanciunas was a top 5 pick before Porzingas. The euro-love is there regardless of Porzingas because it's always been there when the right prospects come along. An agile 7 footer with a handle is a top 5 prospect because that's crazy to be that big with a handle and real agility. Porzingas isn't that player. He was a 7'3 shooter who was also a defender coming into the draft. They're two different types of players. The love for Bender is not because of Porzingas. It's because he has an intriguing skill set for a 7 footer.

But all of those players (albeit a bit older) had more success than Bender last year. And more importantly, they received some meaningful minutes which scouts and analysts were able to review. To say that Bender and KP had the same stats (as LST states) doesn't seem accurate to me. Both players put up limited stats due to minutes, but on a per minute basis, KP was WAY more productive in every stat.

I was not trying to compare KP and Bender as players, but rather Euro guys. And again, what exactly is this intriguing skillset for Bender? He's tall. In games, he has shown nothing else as of yet. When I think crazy handle, I come to Simmons. Now he has a crazy handle not only for a 6' 10" player....but for any basketball player. And he should be agile, he is skinny as a rail. Athletically, I like his quick feet and seeming ability to guard on the perimeter. But he will get killed initially on interior defense (which is where we need him)....he is just extremely weak. And I am also surprised how little lift he gets. He lays a lot of balls in around the basket that should be easy dunks. And his dunks seem to make it barely over the rim. Again, for a 7'0 player, this gives me a bit of pause. I get it...he is 18. He will certainly get stronger and better as a player. I just think it is risky to take a guy like this in the top 5 when we know virtually nothing. I understand those that like the 'idea' of him as a player....but I personally wouldn't take the risk.

Your position and reasoning is valid and probably nothing anyone said is going to change your mind. Quite frankly there is only so much to debate about him because as fans we have a limited context with Bender. I'll add that Givony who watches all these prospects as much as anyone says he thinks teams are going to regret passing on Bender.

Hicks, I don't dispute your main point that (based on what we know) Bender has to be deemed a risk in the top 5. My excitement about him is more based on the multiple workouts Wolves' personnel have put him through, and what conclusions they might be coming to.

I was commenting on how Kristaps' and Dragan's stats compared as Euro 18-year-olds...granted Kristaps became more productive in Europe because he chose to stay one more year and play as a 19-year-old. But here are their comparative stats in their respective 18-year-old years (Porzingis' numbers listed first):

Game: 32, 26
MPG: 14.9. 13.5
PPG: 6.7, 5.4
RPG: 2.8, 2.7
APG: .3, .6
BPG: .9, .8

There you have it...almost identical stats as 18-year-olds (neither very impressive playing against grown men) . And I would actually give the nod to Dragan as he played for Maccabi Tel Aviv in a tougher league than Kristaps.

[mrhockey89]

C'mon LST, you're trying to apply the Wes Johnson rule to Buddy Hield but it just can't hold up. Hield was a super high volume 3 point shooter this season, and he was doing this despite being the sole star on his team in which other teams had to focus. Just watch a few of his games and it becomes completely obvious how easy shooting is for him. It's similar to watching Steph Curry and Klay Thompson when it comes to shooting 3s. And he shot at that high rate despite the fact that he, again like Curry/Thompson, was behind the line by several feet on many of those shots.

I also don't think the age thing should hold up when talking drafting these guys. Why is Buddy Hield being called old while Kris Dunn is not? I like both players quite a bit, but they're similar ages. Murray is younger, but he's also not as polished yet.

I like all 3 prospects, but I remember this year after watching Oklahoma games and after watching Kentucky games...the difference was that I thought Murray looked like a very nice prospect, while Buddy's shooting and competitiveness was something of legend that left me drooling a bit.

[MikkeMan]

Mikkeman, thanks for providing a couple examples of NCAA players who dramatically improved their 3-point shooting as seniors and are also competent 3-point shooters in the pros. I find it interesting that both of them have been primarily reserves in the NBA, and still think a big uptick in 3-point success as a senior has to be taken with a grain of salt.

While I am not opposed to selecting Hield with the first pick, I am also wary. There's a big difference, both physically and mentally, between 22 year-old seniors and 18 year-old freshman, and we should expect 22 year olds to dominate teenagers. That's why NBA executives are cautious about 4-year players, especially when their numbers jump up in their senior year.

I don't agree with those who say Hield was anything better than an average 3-point shooter his junior year (and then admittedly jumped way up his senior year)...the numbers just don't support that assertion. While 36% 3-point shooting sounds really good from a Wolves standpoint :) , it's really quite average at best in college with less effective defenses and a shorter line. One red flag for me is how Buddy shot the final 8 games of the season, in the conference and NCAA tournaments when defenses get much tougher...38% is respectable but not much above average in college, and a big drop from his 46% regular season rate. Case in point...there were 115 teams, not players, who shot better than 36% (Buddy's junior year percentage) last season. JJ Reddick is a 4-year player who has become an effective player in the NBA, but it must be noted that he was 40% or better on threes all 4 years at Duke.

Before selecting Hield, I want Thibs to fully understand how Hield jumped 10 percentage points (36% to 46%) from his junior year to his senior year, and to be confident that the improvement is sustainable. Did he change his form? Did Oklahoma change their offense to give him better looks? Did he dedicate himself to shooting in the offseason before his senior year, and spend much more time in the gym? Or since so much of shooting is a confidence thing, did Buddy's coach tell him before his senior year that he was the man on offense, and to have no qualms about putting up a shot every time he got the ball? I don't know the answer, but I suspect Thibs will. If we are looking for pure 3-point shooting though, Murray and Russell seem like safer options to me.

About bolded part, I think both of the players I gave as examples have been primarily starters even tough they have not been stars. Jared Dudley and George Hill are also pretty good examples about guys that shot well three pointers only in their last college season but were still really successful in that are in NBA.

I wouldn't put too much stock on college three point percentages since there are many examples about players that have struggled a lot with three point shooting in college but still turned out much better three point shooters in NBA. Khris Middleton, Kawhi Leonard and Michael Finley are good examples about players that struggled badly with three point shooting in their last college season but they still turned out to be clearly above average three point shooters in NBA.