Minnesota Sports Forum

What should the Wolves do?

SP this is your year!

I think a trade down scenario Even if it's unlikely should be in the poll.

monsterpile wrote:I think a trade down scenario Even if it's unlikely should be in the poll.

Other is an option.

If you're trading down, you better be getting one of the top four plus a young asset or valuable future first-round pick. Otherwise just take the name at the top of your board and don't get too cute with it.

Camden0916 wrote:If you're trading down, you better be getting one of the top four plus a young asset or valuable future first-round pick. Otherwise just take the name at the top of your board and don't get too cute with it.

I agree a trade down is dicey because you don't really know who will be there. I still think it's something worth considering when I don't feel strongly about...pretty much anyone. Lol

Cam who do you have in your top 4 at this point?

monsterpile wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:If you're trading down, you better be getting one of the top four plus a young asset or valuable future first-round pick. Otherwise just take the name at the top of your board and don't get too cute with it.

I agree a trade down is dicey because you don't really know who will be there. I still think it's something worth considering when I don't feel strongly about...pretty much anyone. Lol

Cam who do you have in your top 4 at this point?

James Wiseman, Anthony Edwards, Devin Vassell, and Deni Avdija round out my top four. Tyrese Haliburton is my honorable mention.

I think the real question is do you think Edwards or Ball could develop into a high level, all-star caliber lead guard? Because if you do, you absolutely must take him as clearly that is the common theme with most elite playoff teams these days. Both are young enough where their holes have time to be filled. The thing most other franchises have done better than us is more accurately predict whether the player can develop, and then if they think the player can, help them along the way.

I'd be interested in reading a Ball vs. Edwards analysis - not just in terms of their past body of work but how their game could translate and develop in the future.

Q12543 wrote:I think the real question is do you think Edwards or Ball could develop into a high level, all-star caliber lead guard? Because if you do, you absolutely must take him as clearly that is the common theme with most elite playoff teams these days. Both are young enough where their holes have time to be filled. The thing most other franchises have done better than us is more accurately predict whether the player can develop, and then if they think the player can, help them along the way.

I'd be interested in reading a Ball vs. Edwards analysis - not just in terms of their past body of work but how their game could translate and develop in the future.

I have more confidence in Edwards than Ball to your point. But there are parts of Edwards game that give me big reason to pump the brakes, especially after going through the Wiggins experience.

I voted for Okongwu, but I did so on the assumption that we could trade down a few slots and get an additional asset or two in addition to Okongwu. To me, he's the safest high-upside choice, although not as high upside as Wiseman, Ball and Edwards. I see Okongwu as more likely than the other top talents to achieve his full potential. He's a great athlete with terrific hops. He has great hands, a terrific shooting touch in the paint, and a nice stroke from the free-throw line. He's 240+ pounds, yet very nimble and light on his feet.

Okongwu's college stats are compelling - 16.2 points, 8.6 rebounds, 2.7 blocks, and 1.2 steals. He hit 61.6% of his FG attempts and 72% of his free throws. That sort of stat line is rare for a freshman. His field goal and free throw percentages indicate a nice shooting touch with the potential to expand his shooting range. His rebounds, blocks and steals show quickness, effort and smarts. It's rare for a big to combine for 2.7 blocks and over 1 steal per game. He's reputed to have a high basketball IQ and a great motor.

Okongwu's been compared to Bam Adebayo. That's an apt comparison. Both are about the same size and both put up comparable stats as freshman. However, Okongwu's stats were significantly better than Bam's overall. Okongwu had 16.2 points compared to Bam's 13, 2.7 blocks compared to Bam's 1.5, 1.2 steals compared to Bam's 0.7, 8.6 rebounds compared to Bam's 8.0 and 61.6% FG accuracy compared to Bam's 59.9%. We don't have official measurements for Okongwu, but he's reputed to have had a 7'2" wingspan before last season, which compares to Bam's official 7'2.75. And given Okongwu's young age and the timing of his last measurement, it's possible he's even longer now. Bam is considered a better passer than Okongwu. But that's a highly subjective account and doesn't reflect Bam's level of play in college. Statistically, Okongwu was a slightly better passer than Bam with 1.1 assists per game compared to Bam's 0.8. The point is that there was no clear evidence from college that Bam would become the quality passer he's become in the NBA. If you put any stock in Draft.net's rating system, you should note that Draft.net gave Okongwu a 96 compared to Bam's 92.

Ask yourself what you'd be willing to give up in a trade for Bam. Then think about the possibility of drafting someone who's a clone of Bam, but a better rim protector. It's hard to predict the NBA success of draft picks. And the comparison to Bam is certainly a lofty one. But at the end of the day, the objective evidence should weigh heavily. The evidence of Okongwu's high potential and comparability to Bam is pretty powerful. After watching a lot of film and video reviews on him, I'd say that the eye test affirms what his stats tell us about his potential overall and his comparability to Bam. If the Wolves can trade down to 3 or 4 and get him while also picking up another valuable asset, then than strikes me as the best use of the Wolves top pick.