Now that we know the draft order, who do we draft? (New thread)
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
Ball without any hesitation. He's an elite passer, is a capable enough shooter, can play defense, and he's a leader. If he Lakers and others pass on him then I'd take him because this kid has all star potential.
Isaac is an intruiging talent with lots of upside, but if the offensive side of his game doesn't improve and he become more assertive, he'll end up being a Marvin Williams like play - good defensively, that might be able to shoot a 3, and can be a decently piece of the puzzle.
For me, Ball is a safer pick and arguably the better one.
Isaac is an intruiging talent with lots of upside, but if the offensive side of his game doesn't improve and he become more assertive, he'll end up being a Marvin Williams like play - good defensively, that might be able to shoot a 3, and can be a decently piece of the puzzle.
For me, Ball is a safer pick and arguably the better one.
Mock draft by Wes Goldberg, from all u can heat on fansided:
#5 Fox, PG, Kentucky
We trade #10 with Detroit for #12 and Stanley Johnson.
We then trade #12 and Afflalo with Portland for Evan Turner plus #15 and #26.
#15 Justin Jackson, SF, North Carolina
#26 Bam Adebayo, C, Kentucky
So what would your thoughts be on this scenario?
#5 Fox, PG, Kentucky
We trade #10 with Detroit for #12 and Stanley Johnson.
We then trade #12 and Afflalo with Portland for Evan Turner plus #15 and #26.
#15 Justin Jackson, SF, North Carolina
#26 Bam Adebayo, C, Kentucky
So what would your thoughts be on this scenario?
It sounds like Tatum is pretty locked in at 3. If the Suns take Fox I would guess it would be a choice between Jackson and Isaac at 5, which isn't a bad choice. Granted having a can't miss prospect who wasn't supposed to be available to us from Kansas slide to us on draft day brings up some rough memories.... but the questions with Jackson are nothing like the questions with Robinson or Ben Mac.
If we liked living life dangerously I'd offer 5 10 and Richardson for Butler and 16
Than offer 16/Skal for Paul George
We'd have 15mill left for free agency
Collison/Temple
Butler/Hield
George/Bogdan
Milsap/
WCS/KK
I think we'd be a top 5 team in the west with GSW/SAS/Clippers
I know I'm dreaming but
Than offer 16/Skal for Paul George
We'd have 15mill left for free agency
Collison/Temple
Butler/Hield
George/Bogdan
Milsap/
WCS/KK
I think we'd be a top 5 team in the west with GSW/SAS/Clippers
I know I'm dreaming but
I like having more assets in the draft, but I'm getting a little annoyed that we have to trade back AND take on a bad contract to get 2 picks from Portland who is in luxury cap hell. If we're giving them capspace and trading back I would expect all 3 of their picks in return. I'd be fine trading back to 12 for Johnson, and fine trading back a second time. If we're trading back for more picks I'd grab the Harry Giles lotto ticket at least and I'm not really in love with Jackson or Adebayo.
I like the idea here of collecting more assets, just don't like the execution of the Portland trade or the assets we draft after trading back.
I like the idea here of collecting more assets, just don't like the execution of the Portland trade or the assets we draft after trading back.
Turner averaged around a handful of assists per game for Boston, so he's a capable secondary ball handler if the team wanted to ease in someone like Fox or Smith as our new starting PG.
If we came away with Jackson in the draft, plus Turner and Johnson via trades, we'd have a nice trio of small forwards to rotate around. Granted the Turner contract is bad but we have enough cap space to eat it and time on our side to not worry about it.
If we came away with Jackson in the draft, plus Turner and Johnson via trades, we'd have a nice trio of small forwards to rotate around. Granted the Turner contract is bad but we have enough cap space to eat it and time on our side to not worry about it.
I'd tend to agree that the two picks he gave us are not what I'd go with, especially if we are getting a young forward in Johnson and a veteran forward in Turner. I'd rather see us come away with TJ Leaf or even OG Anunoby, but I suppose Justin Jackson does offer 3&D ability and that could appeal since he could become a useful role player and potential starter if the team develops stars at other positions.
Like you, I'd take a punt on Harry Giles with that late pick. He's still on the board at that point. I think he could be a Skal like prospect at that stage in the draft - i.e. Someone with lottery talent that has fallen, granted Skal didn't fall due to knee injuries, but Giles offers a lot of potential if he can/has overcome those knee injuries.
Like you, I'd take a punt on Harry Giles with that late pick. He's still on the board at that point. I think he could be a Skal like prospect at that stage in the draft - i.e. Someone with lottery talent that has fallen, granted Skal didn't fall due to knee injuries, but Giles offers a lot of potential if he can/has overcome those knee injuries.
I could maybe get behind the trade back with Detroit.
I think the Portland deal is lopsided in their favor, regardless of who we picked at 15 and 26.
Portland would be unloading an overpriced contract and turning 15 + 26 into 12, with the only "downside" being Afflalo whom they would cut for 1.5million.
Seems like the scales would be tipped to Portland in that scenario.
I think the Portland deal is lopsided in their favor, regardless of who we picked at 15 and 26.
Portland would be unloading an overpriced contract and turning 15 + 26 into 12, with the only "downside" being Afflalo whom they would cut for 1.5million.
Seems like the scales would be tipped to Portland in that scenario.
The Suns Paid 2 draft picks and a prospect to move up 5 places just last year. Wouldn't moving up 3 spots require at least the 26th pick as well? If that's true, would you trade Afflalo's friendly contract for Turner's ridiculous one straight up? Because there's zero chance I would. I actually think Afflalo for Turner and 20 is a bit in favor of Portland, but I would do that if we got 15, 20, 26, Johnson, and Turner for 10 and cap space. You definitely don't need more coffee!
Yes, exactly this. With the salary cap adjustment yesterday, the Blazers are now poised to pay $39M in luxury tax next year alone if they stand pat. We're talking total salary pushing $175M for a team that struggled to get into the playoffs this year. That's a really undesirable scenario no matter how rosy they're trying to make it look up there. If we took Evan Turner off their hands, that's not only $55M of more or less dead money, but it erases the luxury tax payment this year ($39M!) and for any subsequent years when they would also be in the tax barring some other move. They are trading away a player who isn't even any good and they are easily saving OVER $100 MILLION in the process. And we're supposed to send them a draft pick? They could send 15 and 20 and an unprotected 2019 and unprotected pick swaps in 2018 and 2020 and they should STILL kiss our butts to get us to say yes. They could conceivably net $150-200M for the low price of three non-lotto picks. Note that the Kings' cost would be significantly lower - we would spend "only" $55M and get at least three picks with the chance for two draft position improvements on top of that - could be as low as $11M per pick, which is still steep, but also consider that a good chunk of that is money we might have trouble spending anyway, given the large amount of inexpensive youth on our roster and the salary floor set at 90% of the cap. If say $30M of that is money we would have thrown away anyhow, things become very obviously win-win for both teams. I see no reason why a deal like this shouldn't happen, other than Portland being willing to drop something approaching a fifth of a billion dollars just to avoid admitting they screwed up last year's free agency.
@Capt. Factorial
I mean that's how I see it as well. When I mentioned keeping Olshey on speed dial a few months ago, I think I pointed out that if they stood pat, the 36th( i think) pick they got for "free" from the cavs would cost them over $40 million over the length of his contract. A second rounder, due to being over the luxury threshold .
I am all about adding some picks via our cap space, but with cap space even more valuable today than yesterday, we need to get our moneys worth and be smart.
In just a few short years it will be time again for us to pay the piper. We don't want to be in the same position as Portland.
I mean that's how I see it as well. When I mentioned keeping Olshey on speed dial a few months ago, I think I pointed out that if they stood pat, the 36th( i think) pick they got for "free" from the cavs would cost them over $40 million over the length of his contract. A second rounder, due to being over the luxury threshold .
I am all about adding some picks via our cap space, but with cap space even more valuable today than yesterday, we need to get our moneys worth and be smart.
In just a few short years it will be time again for us to pay the piper. We don't want to be in the same position as Portland.
Agreed, I do like Fox and think he could work well with Buddy. Having a shooter like Buddy can help hide Fox's lacklustre shooting, much like Lowry's shooting ability has managed to hide DeRozan's lacklustre shooting. So as long as Fox can score in other ways, boost his assists (he only had four double digit assist games at Kentucky and averaged under 5 per game), and contribute on the defensive end then I see no reason why him and Buddy cannot form a really good back court.
This significantly undervalues us taking on Turner's albatross contract and how bad Portland's cap sheet is right now that they desperately need to dump him. You hold out for 2 of their first round picks and Turner for Afflalo in return. If they don't want to budge, fine, they can have fun losing Nurkic.
Sure they can, and should. Two examples:
1. If Vlade is 98% sure that Bogdan will sign with us this year, then what happens if Monk slides and is available at the #10? We may select him as the BPA, but it would make sense to at least consider a trade for that pick, or choose need over BPA.
2. If Vlade & co have a good idea what Milos and Bogdan will cost them and you want to be able to make competitive offers, then you'd need to be sure that you don't give away your cap space in a flurry of draft day deals (for albatross contracts).
1. If Vlade is 98% sure that Bogdan will sign with us this year, then what happens if Monk slides and is available at the #10? We may select him as the BPA, but it would make sense to at least consider a trade for that pick, or choose need over BPA.
2. If Vlade & co have a good idea what Milos and Bogdan will cost them and you want to be able to make competitive offers, then you'd need to be sure that you don't give away your cap space in a flurry of draft day deals (for albatross contracts).
if they just want to get to ten so they only take on 1 guaranteed contract and get the guy they want I would trade 10 for all 3 of their firsts this year, but I wouldn't also give them cap relief. In a draft where its widely agreed ten is the cutoff point for top talent I don't think that's exorbitant, and it helps them by limiting guaranteed contracts on the books for them and preserves roster spots. We can talk future picks for cap relief if they find giving up picks on draft night for cap relief un-palatable.
If we keep the pick, Frank Ntilikina or OG Anunoby or Bam Adebayo or Jawun Evans is who I would go with. Other than Ntilikina those would all be considered reaches at 10 though. My preference would be to leverage that spot for multiple players. Try to trade down with Detroit for Stanley Johnson and #12 (we might have to throw in the #34 pick or Malachi Richardson). I can see Detroit willing to trade up for Monk or Markkanen with how desperate they are for solid shooters. I can also see them willing to give up an asset or two to shed salary for next year.
Another possibility that occured to me today... we should call Boston and see if they're interested in trading Jaylen Brown for #10 plus or minus some filler on either end. They might be willing to do it because that would get them even closer to the cap space they need to max out Gordon Hayward. The rookie scale contract for the #10 pick is going to be a lot cheaper than Jaylen's #3 pick rookie scale contract. Then they can draft a big there at #10 and they'd still have Crowder and theoretically Hayward at SF.
If we can get Fox and Jaylen Brown or Fox and Stanley Johnson I think that would accomplish our goal of adding a starting PG and starting SF with our picks while staying young and full of potential. I'm not that high on Zach Collins or Lauri Markkanen because we have so many young bigs already. The only reason to add another big in the draft at this point is if it's a franchise type guy at the top of the draft. Even Sacramento has been able to consistently get role-playing bench bigs in free agency. I guess you could question wanting Bam then but I think he's got upside that's worth gambling on and a package deal of him and Fox carries some additional benefits in terms of developing chemistry.
The other option would be some kind of deal with Portland to absorb one or more of their picks so we can take a flier on more than one of these guys in the mid to late first round. I really like Jawun Evans and I don't think he'll be there at 34. I'm also thinking some of these teams that are looking to shed salary to clear space for free agents might be willing to straight up sell their pick (and the cap space that comes with those rookie contracts) for cash. San Antonio for instance if they're serious about getting Chris Paul or LA if they want to clear as much space as possible for Paul George. That would give us another shot to scoop up a player in that late 20s range. So we could include the #34 pick in a deal with Detroit for instance and maybe buy back into one of those picks in the 26-29 range.
Another possibility that occured to me today... we should call Boston and see if they're interested in trading Jaylen Brown for #10 plus or minus some filler on either end. They might be willing to do it because that would get them even closer to the cap space they need to max out Gordon Hayward. The rookie scale contract for the #10 pick is going to be a lot cheaper than Jaylen's #3 pick rookie scale contract. Then they can draft a big there at #10 and they'd still have Crowder and theoretically Hayward at SF.
If we can get Fox and Jaylen Brown or Fox and Stanley Johnson I think that would accomplish our goal of adding a starting PG and starting SF with our picks while staying young and full of potential. I'm not that high on Zach Collins or Lauri Markkanen because we have so many young bigs already. The only reason to add another big in the draft at this point is if it's a franchise type guy at the top of the draft. Even Sacramento has been able to consistently get role-playing bench bigs in free agency. I guess you could question wanting Bam then but I think he's got upside that's worth gambling on and a package deal of him and Fox carries some additional benefits in terms of developing chemistry.
The other option would be some kind of deal with Portland to absorb one or more of their picks so we can take a flier on more than one of these guys in the mid to late first round. I really like Jawun Evans and I don't think he'll be there at 34. I'm also thinking some of these teams that are looking to shed salary to clear space for free agents might be willing to straight up sell their pick (and the cap space that comes with those rookie contracts) for cash. San Antonio for instance if they're serious about getting Chris Paul or LA if they want to clear as much space as possible for Paul George. That would give us another shot to scoop up a player in that late 20s range. So we could include the #34 pick in a deal with Detroit for instance and maybe buy back into one of those picks in the 26-29 range.
Last edited:
I think whoever wrote that is either reading my posts or we share the same brain. 
That's pretty much my ideal scenario: Get Fox, then get Stanley Johnson, then get one of OG Anunoby or Bam Adebayo, maybe both. Perfect. The picks should be 15 and 20 though if we're taking Evan Turner off their hands. And I probably wouldn't go with Justin Jackson at 15, but that depends who else is on the board.
That's pretty much my ideal scenario: Get Fox, then get Stanley Johnson, then get one of OG Anunoby or Bam Adebayo, maybe both. Perfect. The picks should be 15 and 20 though if we're taking Evan Turner off their hands. And I probably wouldn't go with Justin Jackson at 15, but that depends who else is on the board.
Last edited:
